4.7 Article

Using spatial elimination and ranking methods in the renewable energy investment parcel search process

期刊

ENERGY
卷 285, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.129517

关键词

Renewable energy; Photovoltaic farms; Multi -criteria decision -making; Elimination algorithm; Borda ranking; Geographic information system

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a framework for an elimination algorithm to determine potential investment locations for photovoltaic farms in three separate counties in northeastern Poland. Through a multi-criteria decision support method, ten different location variants were derived, and five critical criteria were highlighted. The analysis revealed that the analyzed counties have optimal locations that satisfy all specified conditions.
The study presents a framework for an elimination algorithm aimed at determining potential investment loca-tions for photovoltaic farms in three separate counties located in northeastern Poland. The research focuses on identifying environmental and economic criteria for solar farm locations, establishing boundary values, and discussing the outcomes of multi-criteria decision support using the Boolean method and Borda ranking methods. Through the amalgamation of the elimination algorithm and a multi-criteria decision-making model, ten different location variants were derived, ranging from the best (Variant 1) to the worst (Variant 10), out of a total of 1024 variants. The results highlight five critical criteria that persisted after the elimination algorithm: distance from medium voltage lines, distance from roads, parcel shape, average parcel width, and average slope. The analysis revealed that the analysed counties have between 150 and 1336 optimal locations (depending on the analysed area) that satisfy all the specified conditions. This method, which enables the swift and reproducible identification of suitable areas for photovoltaic farm construction, can be applied in various European regions.

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