IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v11y2018i6p1504-d151509.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Approaches for Solar Power Plant Location Selection in Viet Nam

Author

Listed:
  • Chia-Nan Wang

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 80778, Taiwan
    Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Fortune Institute of Technology, Kaohsiung 83160, Taiwan)

  • Van Thanh Nguyen

    (Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 80778, Taiwan
    Department of Industrial Systems Engineering, CanTho University of Technology, Can Tho 900000, Viet Nam)

  • Hoang Tuyet Nhi Thai

    (Department of Industrial Systems Engineering, CanTho University of Technology, Can Tho 900000, Viet Nam)

  • Duy Hung Duong

    (Department of Industrial Systems Engineering, CanTho University of Technology, Can Tho 900000, Viet Nam)

Abstract

The ongoing industrialization and modernization period has increased the demand for energy in Viet Nam. This has led to over-exploitation and exhausts fossil fuel sources. Nowadays, Viet Nam’s energy mix is primarily based on thermal and hydro power. The Vietnamese government is trying to increase the proportion of renewable energy. The plan will raise the total solar power capacity from nearly 0 to 12,000 MW, equivalent to about 12 nuclear reactors, by 2030. Therefore, the construction of solar power plants is needed in Viet Nam. In this study, the authors present a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) model by combining three methodologies, including fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP), data envelopment analysis (DEA), and the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) to find the best location for building a solar power plant based on both quantitative and qualitative criteria. Initially, the potential locations from 46 sites in Viet Nam were selected by several DEA models. Then, AHP with fuzzy logic is employed to determine the weight of the factors. The TOPSIS approach is then applied to rank the locations in the final step. The results show that Binh Thuan is the optimal location to build a solar power plant because it has the highest ranking score in the final phase of this study. The contribution of this study is the proposal of a MCDM model for solar plant location selection in Viet Nam under fuzzy environment conditions. This paper also is part of the evolution of a new approach that is flexible and practical for decision makers. Furthermore, this research provides useful guidelines for solar power plant location selection in many countries as well as a guideline for location selection of other industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Chia-Nan Wang & Van Thanh Nguyen & Hoang Tuyet Nhi Thai & Duy Hung Duong, 2018. "Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Approaches for Solar Power Plant Location Selection in Viet Nam," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:11:y:2018:i:6:p:1504-:d:151509
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/6/1504/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/6/1504/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Al Garni, Hassan Z. & Awasthi, Anjali, 2017. "Solar PV power plant site selection using a GIS-AHP based approach with application in Saudi Arabia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1225-1240.
    3. Huang, J.P. & Poh, K.L. & Ang, B.W., 1995. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 20(9), pages 843-855.
    4. Golam Kabir & M. Ahsan Akhtar Hasin, 2013. "Integrating modified Delphi method with fuzzy AHP for optimal power substation location selection," International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(4), pages 381-398.
    5. Amy H. I. Lee & He-Yau Kang & You-Jyun Liou, 2017. "A Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Photovoltaic Solar Plant Location Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    7. Lu Gan & Dirong Xu & Lin Hu & Lei Wang, 2017. "Economic Feasibility Analysis for Renewable Energy Project Using an Integrated TFN–AHP–DEA Approach on the Basis of Consumer Utility," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Ehsan Noorollahi & Dawud Fadai & Mohsen Akbarpour Shirazi & Seyed Hassan Ghodsipour, 2016. "Land Suitability Analysis for Solar Farms Exploitation Using GIS and Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP)—A Case Study of Iran," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-24, August.
    9. Pastor, J. T. & Ruiz, J. L. & Sirvent, I., 1999. "An enhanced DEA Russell graph efficiency measure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 596-607, June.
    10. Azadeh, A. & Ghaderi, S.F. & Maghsoudi, A., 2008. "Location optimization of solar plants by an integrated hierarchical DEA PCA approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3993-4004, October.
    11. Yang, Taho & Kuo, Chunwei, 2003. "A hierarchical AHP/DEA methodology for the facilities layout design problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 128-136, May.
    12. Jin-Peng Liu & Qian-Ru Yang & Lin He, 2017. "Total-Factor Energy Efficiency (TFEE) Evaluation on Thermal Power Industry with DEA, Malmquist and Multiple Regression Techniques," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    13. Mohammad Alhuyi Nazari & Alireza Aslani & Roghayeh Ghasempour, 2018. "Analysis of Solar Farm Site Selection Based on TOPSIS Approach," International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), IGI Global, vol. 9(1), pages 12-25, January.
    14. Amy H. I. Lee & He-Yau Kang & Chun-Yu Lin & Kuan-Chin Shen, 2015. "An Integrated Decision-Making Model for the Location of a PV Solar Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-20, September.
    15. Yu-Cheng Tang & Malcolm J. Beynon, 2005. "Application and Development of a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process within a Capital Investment Study," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 1(2), pages 207-230, July.
    16. Alami Merrouni, Ahmed & Elwali Elalaoui, Fakhreddine & Mezrhab, Ahmed & Mezrhab, Abdelhamid & Ghennioui, Abdellatif, 2018. "Large scale PV sites selection by combining GIS and Analytical Hierarchy Process. Case study: Eastern Morocco," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 863-873.
    17. Jangwon Suh & Jeffrey R. S. Brownson, 2016. "Solar Farm Suitability Using Geographic Information System Fuzzy Sets and Analytic Hierarchy Processes: Case Study of Ulleung Island, Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-24, August.
    18. Tsoutsos, Theocharis & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Gekas, Vassilis, 2005. "Environmental impacts from the solar energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 289-296, February.
    19. Candelise, Chiara & Winskel, Mark & Gross, Robert J.K., 2013. "The dynamics of solar PV costs and prices as a challenge for technology forecasting," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 96-107.
    20. Tone, Kaoru, 2001. "A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(3), pages 498-509, May.
    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. Tien-Chin Wang & Su-Yuan Tsai, 2018. "Solar Panel Supplier Selection for the Photovoltaic System Design by Using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Approaches," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Al Garni, Hassan Z. & Awasthi, Anjali, 2017. "Solar PV power plant site selection using a GIS-AHP based approach with application in Saudi Arabia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1225-1240.
    3. Sultan Al-Shammari & Wonsuk Ko & Essam A. Al Ammar & Majed A. Alotaibi & Hyeong-Jin Choi, 2021. "Optimal Decision-Making in Photovoltaic System Selection in Saudi Arabia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Coruhlu, Yakup Emre & Solgun, Necmettin & Baser, Volkan & Terzi, Fatih, 2022. "Revealing the solar energy potential by integration of GIS and AHP in order to compare decisions of the land use on the environmental plans," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    5. Noorollahi, Younes & Ghenaatpisheh Senani, Ali & Fadaei, Ahmad & Simaee, Mobina & Moltames, Rahim, 2022. "A framework for GIS-based site selection and technical potential evaluation of PV solar farm using Fuzzy-Boolean logic and AHP multi-criteria decision-making approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 89-104.
    6. Sofia Spyridonidou & Eva Loukogeorgaki & Dimitra G. Vagiona & Teresa Bertrand, 2022. "Towards a Sustainable Spatial Planning Approach for PV Site Selection in Portugal," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-22, November.
    7. Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Ali Husseinzadeh Kashan & Zahra Shoaei Naeini & Amir Salar Vanaki & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "A Hybrid Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making Aggregation Method and Geographic Information System for Selecting Optimal Solar Power Plants in Iran," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Zhang, Zhengjia & Wang, Qingxiang & Liu, Zhengguang & Chen, Qi & Guo, Zhiling & Zhang, Haoran, 2023. "Renew mineral resource-based cities: Assessment of PV potential in coal mining subsidence areas," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 329(C).
    9. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Shahabaddin & Firoozabadi, Bahar, 2022. "A new application of measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) in solar site location for electricity and hydrogen production: A case study in the southern clim," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    10. BumChoong Kim & Juhan Kim & Jinsoo Kim, 2019. "Evaluation Model for Investment in Solar Photovoltaic Power Generation Using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, May.
    11. Rediske, Graciele & Siluk, Julio Cezar M. & Michels, Leandro & Rigo, Paula D. & Rosa, Carmen B. & Cugler, Gilberto, 2020. "Multi-criteria decision-making model for assessment of large photovoltaic farms in Brazil," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    12. Yulin Lu & Chengyu Li & Min-Jae Lee, 2023. "A Study on the Measurement and Influences of Energy Green Efficiency: Based on Panel Data from 30 Provinces in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Pastor, Jesus T. & Lovell, C.A. Knox & Aparicio, Juan, 2020. "Defining a new graph inefficiency measure for the proportional directional distance function and introducing a new Malmquist productivity index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(1), pages 222-230.
    14. Tone, Kaoru & Tsutsui, Miki, 2009. "Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 243-252, August.
    15. Yu, Ming-Miin, 2010. "Assessment of airport performance using the SBM-NDEA model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 440-452, December.
    16. Vicente J. Bolós & Rafael Benítez & Vicente Coll-Serrano, 2023. "Continuous models combining slacks-based measures of efficiency and super-efficiency," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 31(2), pages 363-391, June.
    17. Yung-ho Chiu & Chin-wei Huang & Chung-te Ting, 2012. "A non-radial measure of different systems for Taiwanese tourist hotels’ efficiency assessment," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 20(1), pages 45-63, March.
    18. Fukuyama, Hirofumi & Weber, William L., 2010. "A slacks-based inefficiency measure for a two-stage system with bad outputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 398-409, October.
    19. Arabi, Behrouz & Munisamy, Susila & Emrouznejad, Ali & Shadman, Foroogh, 2014. "Power industry restructuring and eco-efficiency changes: A new slacks-based model in Malmquist–Luenberger Index measurement," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 132-145.
    20. M. Mozaffari & J. Gerami & J. Jablonsky, 2014. "Relationship between DEA models without explicit inputs and DEA-R models," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 22(1), pages 1-12, March.

    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:gam:jeners:v:11:y:2018:i:6:p:1504-:d:151509. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.