4.5 Article

Evaluation of Economic, Social and Environmental Effects of Low-Emission Energy Technologies Development in Poland: A Multi-Criteria Analysis with Application of a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP)

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/en10101550

关键词

low-emission energy technologies; renewable energy; nuclear energy; sustainable development; multi criteria analysis (MCA); fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP); Delphi method

资金

  1. Wroclaw University of Economics [UMO-2011/01/D/HS4/05925, UMO-2011/01/B/HS4/02322]
  2. National Science Centre, Poland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The European Commission as well as the Polish government are promoting sustainable use of energy sources as a part of the dominating sustainable development paradigm. The development of low-emission energy sources engages the challenges of gradual depletion of coal, oil and natural gas reserves, as well as the intensification of the greenhouse effect. The energy policy should take into account development of low-emission energy technologies that contribute mostly to meeting the goals of sustainable development in three dimensions: economic, social and environmental. This study aims to assess the extent to which five low-emission energy technologies contribute to social welfare in the scope of the concept of sustainable development. Heuristic methods, including fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) are used to resolve the multi-goal problem in order to achieve the aim of this research. Research results show that economic goal is still the most important to the development of various low-emission energy technologies in Poland, followed by the social and environmental goals. Secondly, renewable energy technologies should be utilized instead of nuclear energy to meet sustainable development policy goals. Photovoltaics, followed by biomass and biogas are perceived as the most suitable renewable energy sources. Wind on-shore and wind of-shore are on third and fourth place, respectively.

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

4.5
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