IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/renene/v31y2006i11p1827-1838.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utility assessment of parabolic solar cooker as a domestic cooking device in India

Author

Listed:
  • Pohekar, S.D.
  • Ramachandran, M.

Abstract

The needs of cooking energy in households can be supplemented by parabolic solar cooker (PSC). Policy for energy substitution by renewables has to consider many conflicting socio-economic issues. To know the perceptions of decision-makers and users, a survey is conducted to evaluate nine cooking energy devices available in India. Energy technology issues, economics, environmental/social, behavioral and commercial issues are considered for the evaluation. Thirty criteria are considered under these five aspects for pair-wise comparison of the devices. Additive Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) is employed to evolve ranking of selected devices. It is found that Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) stove is the most preferred cooking device, followed by microwave ovens and kerosene stoves. PSC has occupied fifth rank amongst the devices. A sensitivity analysis is also carried out for identifying potential areas of improvement for PSC, which forms a basis for policy interventions required for its better dissemination in India.

Suggested Citation

  • Pohekar, S.D. & Ramachandran, M., 2006. "Utility assessment of parabolic solar cooker as a domestic cooking device in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(11), pages 1827-1838.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:31:y:2006:i:11:p:1827-1838
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2005.09.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148105002697
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.renene.2005.09.014?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. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834.
    2. Mladineo, N. & Margeta, J. & Brans, J.P. & Mareschal, B., 1987. "Multicriteria ranking of alternative locations for small scale hydro plants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 215-222, August.
    3. Pohekar, S.D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Multi-criteria evaluation of cooking energy alternatives for promoting parabolic solar cooker in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1449-1460.
    4. Kamal Golabi & Craig W. Kirkwood & Alan Sicherman, 1981. "Selecting a Portfolio of Solar Energy Projects Using Multiattribute Preference Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 174-189, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yaqoot, Mohammed & Diwan, Parag & Kandpal, Tara C., 2016. "Review of barriers to the dissemination of decentralized renewable energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 477-490.
    2. Indora, Sunil & Kandpal, Tara C., 2019. "Financial appraisal of using Scheffler dish for steam based institutional solar cooking in India," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 1400-1411.
    3. Szántó, Richárd, 2012. "Több szempontú részvételi döntések a fenntarthatósági értékelésekben. A legnépszerűbb módszerek összehasonlítása [Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis. A comparison of methodologies]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1336-1355.
    4. Indora, Sunil & Kandpal, Tara C., 2018. "Institutional cooking with solar energy: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 131-154.
    5. Prasanna, U.R. & Umanand, L., 2011. "Optimization and design of energy transport system for solar cooking application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 242-251, January.
    6. Prasanna, U.R. & Umanand, L., 2011. "Modeling and design of a solar thermal system for hybrid cooking application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(5), pages 1740-1755, May.
    7. Vaccari, Mentore & Vitali, Francesco & Tudor, Terry, 2017. "Multi-criteria assessment of the appropriateness of a cooking technology: A case study of the Logone Valley," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 66-75.
    8. Cuce, Erdem & Cuce, Pinar Mert, 2013. "A comprehensive review on solar cookers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1399-1421.
    9. Khatri, Rahul & Goyal, Rahul & Sharma, Ravi Kumar, 2021. "Advances in the developments of solar cooker for sustainable development: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    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. San Cristóbal, J.R., 2011. "Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in spain: The Vikor method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 498-502.
    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. Pohekar, S.D. & Ramachandran, M., 2006. "Multi-criteria evaluation of cooking devices with special reference to utility of parabolic solar cooker (PSC) in India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 1215-1227.
    4. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    5. 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.
    6. San Cristóbal, José Ramón, 2012. "A goal programming model for the optimal mix and location of renewable energy plants in the north of Spain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 4461-4464.
    7. Sehatpour, Mohammad-Hadi & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Sehatpour, Hesam-eddin, 2017. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for light-duty vehicles in Iran using a multi-criteria approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 295-310.
    8. 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.
    9. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    10. Abbas Mardani & Ahmad Jusoh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Zainab Khalifah, 2015. "Sustainable and Renewable Energy: An Overview of the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Techniques and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-38, October.
    11. Kayakutlu, Gulgun & Daim, Tugrul & Kunt, Meltem & Altay, Ayca & Suharto, Yulianto, 2017. "Scenarios for regional waste management," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1323-1335.
    12. 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.
    13. KARRI PASANEN & MIKKO KURTTILA & JOUNI PYKÄlÄINEN & JYRKI KANGAS & PEKKA LESKINEN, 2005. "Mesta — Non-Industrial Private Forest Owners' Decision-Support Environment For The Evaluation Of Alternative Forest Plans Over The Internet," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(04), pages 601-620.
    14. Vilkkumaa, Eeva & Liesiö, Juuso & Salo, Ahti, 2014. "Optimal strategies for selecting project portfolios using uncertain value estimates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(3), pages 772-783.
    15. Gerd Gigerenzer, 1997. "Bounded Rationality: Models of Fast and Frugal Inference," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 133(II), pages 201-218, June.
    16. Shuang Liu & Kirsten Maclean & Cathy Robinson, 2019. "A cost-effective framework to prioritise stakeholder participation options," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 221-241, November.
    17. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    18. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    19. Perrels, Adriaan & Molarius, Riitta & Porthin, Markus & Rosqvist, Tony, 2008. "Testing a Flood Protection Case by Means of a Group Decision Support System," Discussion Papers 449, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Ahrens, Heinz & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2007. "Integrating Ecological And Economic Aspects In Land Use Concepts: Some Conclusions From A Regional Land Use Concept For Bayerisches Donauried," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7986, Agricultural Economics Society.

    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:renene:v:31:y:2006:i:11:p:1827-1838. 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/renewable-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.