4.7 Article

Comprehensive evaluation of coal-fired power plants based on grey relational analysis and analytic hierarchy process

期刊

ENERGY POLICY
卷 39, 期 5, 页码 2343-2351

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.01.054

关键词

Multi-objective evaluation; Improved grey relational analysis; Coal-fired power plant

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation [51025624]
  2. National Major Fundamental Research Program of China [2009CB219801]
  3. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [PCSIRT0720]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In China, coal-fired power plants are the main supplier of electricity, as well as the largest consumer of coal and water resources and the biggest emitter of SOx, NOx, and greenhouse gases (GHGs). Therefore, it is important to establish a scientific, reasonable, and feasible comprehensive evaluation system for coal-fired power plants to guide them in achieving multi-optimisation of their thermal, environmental, and economic performance. This paper proposes a novel comprehensive evaluation method, which is based on a combination of the grey relational analysis (GRA) and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), to assess the multi-objective performance of power plants. Unlike the traditional evaluation method that uses coal consumption as a basic indicator, the proposed evaluation method also takes water consumption and pollutant emissions as indicators. On the basis of the proposed evaluation method, a case study on typical 600 MW coal-fired power plants is carried out to determine the relevancy rules among factors including the coal consumption, water consumption, pollutant, and GHG emissions of power plants. This research offers new ideas and methods for the comprehensive performance evaluation of complex energy utilisation systems, and is beneficial to the synthesised consideration of resources, economy, and environment factors in system optimising and policy making. (C) 2011 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