4.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Multi-criteria integrated evaluation of distributed energy system for community energy planning based on improved grey incidence approach: A case study in Tianjin

Journal

APPLIED ENERGY
Volume 229, Issue -, Pages 352-363

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.08.016

Keywords

Community energy planning; Multi-criteria integrated evaluation; Rank correlation analysis; Entropy information method; Grey incidence evaluation

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China during the Thirteenth Five-year Plan [2016YFB0601700]
  2. National Nature Science Foundation of China (NSFC) Project [51678396]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Community energy planning is necessary for sustainable development of energy systems. However, given a series of energy sources and energy utilization technologies, it is crucial to select the optimal energy supply system to obtain the maximum comprehensive benefits. This study attempts to extend a multi-criteria integrated evaluation method that considers the aspects of technology, economy, environment, and society for evaluating the planning schemes of distributed energy supply systems. First, the rank correlation analysis and entropy information method are adopted to obtain subjective and objective weights, respectively. A combination of the maximum entropy principle and the minimized weighed generalized distance to the ideal scheme are employed to obtain optimal weighting coefficients. Second, based on the different priorities of evaluation indexes, the optimal schemes are established based on the improved grey incidence evaluation method, and under the integrated evaluation, the optimized combined cooling/heating and power system is proven to be the best option for the given case study. The results show that the proposed multi-criteria integrated evaluation method is a simple and practical tool for community energy planning.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available