4.7 Article

Biofuel logistics network scheme design with combined data envelopment analysis approach

期刊

ENERGY
卷 209, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.118342

关键词

Biofuel logistics network scheme; Biomass stocks; Biofuel producing; Multi-objective programming; Cross efficiency; Multiple criteria data envelopment analysis

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Transportation [69A3551747117]
  2. National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Evans-Allen project [SCX-313-04-18]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper studies the biofuel logistics network scheme (BLNS) design problem dealing with several decision variables, such as the biofuel facility location, allocation, delivering harvested biomass stocks to biofuel producing facilities, and distributing biofuels to the stations. Since building the biofuel facilities requires a huge amount of investments, designing an efficient BLNS will be essential to attract potential investors. We formulate the design problem as a multi-objective programming (MOP) model. Solving the MOP model would yield various network schemes based upon the weight given to each objective/goal. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) method could be applied to evaluate the efficiency of each BLNS generated by solving the MOP model. Several approaches based on the traditional DEA method emerge to overcome a critical weakness regarding discriminating power. This paper combines three well-known DEA methods to make the most use of each method's strengths and to evaluate and identify the more efficient network schemes. Through a case study for South Carolina, we observe that the proposed procedure performs well in terms of designing efficient and robust BLNSs. The proposed procedure would enable the decision-makers to have more choices for BLNSs to consider before finally selecting the best scheme regarding efficiency, practicality, and feasibility. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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