4.6 Article

External Benefit Evaluation of Renewable Energy Power in China for Sustainability

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 7, 期 5, 页码 4783-4805

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su7054783

关键词

renewable energy power; external benefit evaluation; hybrid MCDM method; China; sustainability

资金

  1. Humanities and Social Science project of the Ministry of Education of China [11YJA790217]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71373076]
  3. Beijing Sino-foreign Joint Postgraduate Training Co-construction Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

China's renewable energy power has developed rapidly in recent years. Evaluating the external benefits of renewable energy power can provide a reference for the Chinese government to set diverse development goals and to implement differentiated supporting policies for different renewable energy power types, which can promote their sustainable development. In this paper, a hybrid MCDM method was applied to evaluate the external benefits of China's renewable energy power. Firstly, the impacts of renewable energy power accessing the power grid for multiple stakeholders in the electric power system were analyzed. Secondly, the external benefit evaluation index system for renewable energy power was built from the economic, social and environmental factors, based on the concept of sustainability. Then, the basic theory of the hybrid MCDM method employed in this paper was introduced in two parts: the superiority linguistic ratings and entropy weighting method for index weight determination and the fuzzy grey relation analysis for ranking alternatives. Finally, the external benefits of wind power, solar PV power and biomass power were evaluated. Taking a regional electric power system as an example, the results show that PV power has the greatest external benefit, followed by wind power and biomass power. Therefore, more policies supporting PV power should be put in place to promote the harmonious and sustainable development of the whole renewable energy power industry.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据