IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v35y2010i12p5230-5240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which is the best solar thermal collection technology for electricity generation in north-west India? Evaluation of options using the analytical hierarchy process

Author

Listed:
  • Nixon, J.D.
  • Dey, P.K.
  • Davies, P.A.

Abstract

This study of concentrating solar thermal power generation sets out to evaluate the main existing collection technologies using the framework of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). It encompasses parabolic troughs, heliostat fields, linear Fresnel reflectors, parabolic dishes, compound parabolic concentrators and linear Fresnel lenses. These technologies are compared based on technical, economic and environmental criteria. Within these three categories, numerous sub-criteria are identified; similarly sub-alternatives are considered for each technology. A literature review, thermodynamic calculations and an expert workshop have been used to arrive at quantitative and qualitative assessments. The methodology is applied principally to a case study in Gujarat in north-west India, though case studies based on the Sahara Desert, Southern Spain and California are included for comparison. A sensitivity analysis is carried out for Gujarat. The study concludes that the linear Fresnel lens with a secondary compound parabolic collector, or the parabolic dish reflector, is the preferred technology for north-west India.

Suggested Citation

  • Nixon, J.D. & Dey, P.K. & Davies, P.A., 2010. "Which is the best solar thermal collection technology for electricity generation in north-west India? Evaluation of options using the analytical hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5230-5240.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:35:y:2010:i:12:p:5230-5240
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.07.042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544210004172
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2010.07.042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buragohain, Buljit & Mahanta, Pinakeswar & Moholkar, Vijayanand S., 2010. "Biomass gasification for decentralized power generation: The Indian perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 73-92, January.
    2. Van Den Honert, R. C. & Lootsma, F. A., 1997. "Group preference aggregation in the multiplicative AHP The model of the group decision process and Pareto optimality," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 363-370, January.
    3. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    4. Grover, R.B. & Chandra, Subhash, 2006. "Scenario for growth of electricity in India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2834-2847, November.
    5. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1995. "Energy resource allocation incorporating qualitative and quantitative criteria: An integrated model using goal programming and AHP," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 197-218, September.
    6. Marttunen, Mika & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 1995. "Decision analysis interviews in environmental impact assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 551-563, December.
    7. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    8. Jyrki Wallenius & James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Stanley Zionts & Kalyanmoy Deb, 2008. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent Accomplishments and What Lies Ahead," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1336-1349, July.
    9. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L.S., 1995. "Energy alternatives for lighting in households: An evaluation using an integrated goal programming-AHP model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 63-72.
    10. Dey, Prasanta Kumar, 2006. "Integrated project evaluation and selection using multiple-attribute decision-making technique," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 90-103, September.
    11. Subhes Bhattacharyya, Prasanta Kumar Dey, 2003. "Selection of power market structure using the analytic hierarchy process," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 20(1), pages 36-57.
    12. Sniezek, Janet A. & Henry, Rebecca A., 1989. "Accuracy and confidence in group judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-28, February.
    13. Belton, Valerie & Gear, Tony, 1983. "On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 228-230.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Q. & Poh, K.L., 2014. "A survey of integrated decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 691-702.
    2. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    3. Chinese, Damiana & Nardin, Gioacchino & Saro, Onorio, 2011. "Multi-criteria analysis for the selection of space heating systems in an industrial building," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 556-565.
    4. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    5. Kulisic, Biljana & Dimitriou, Ioannis & Mola-Yudego, Blas, 2021. "From preferences to concerted policy on mandated share for renewable energy in transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    6. Ahadi, Pedram & Fakhrabadi, Farbod & Pourshaghaghy, Alireza & Kowsary, Farshad, 2023. "Optimal site selection for a solar power plant in Iran via the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    7. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    8. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    9. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    10. Punia Sindhu, Sonal & Nehra, Vijay & Luthra, Sunil, 2016. "Recognition and prioritization of challenges in growth of solar energy using analytical hierarchy process: Indian outlook," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 332-348.
    11. Nasrollahi, Sadaf & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Jahangir, Mohammad-Hossein & Aryaee, Sara, 2023. "Selecting suitable wave energy technology for sustainable development, an MCDM approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 756-772.
    12. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    13. Karatas, Mumtaz & Sulukan, Egemen & Karacan, Ilknur, 2018. "Assessment of Turkey's energy management performance via a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 890-912.
    14. Şengül, Ümran & Eren, Miraç & Eslamian Shiraz, Seyedhadi & Gezder, Volkan & Şengül, Ahmet Bilal, 2015. "Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 617-625.
    15. Papapostolou, Aikaterini & Karakosta, Charikleia & Nikas, Alexandros & Psarras, John, 2017. "Exploring opportunities and risks for RES-E deployment under Cooperation Mechanisms between EU and Western Balkans: A multi-criteria assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 519-530.
    16. Singh, Rhythm, 2018. "Energy sufficiency aspirations of India and the role of renewable resources: Scenarios for future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2783-2795.
    17. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    18. Patel, Sameer & Khandelwal, Anish & Leavey, Anna & Biswas, Pratim, 2016. "A model for cost-benefit analysis of cooking fuel alternatives from a rural Indian household perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 291-302.
    19. Rogna, Marco, 2020. "A first-phase screening method for site selection of large-scale solar plants with an application to Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Li, Tao & Li, Ang & Guo, Xiaopeng, 2020. "The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry——A comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:35:y:2010:i:12:p:5230-5240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.