IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i4p806-d1335531.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposal of Multicriteria Decision-Making Models for Biogas Production

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela M. Yamaji

    (Postgraduate Program in Administration Department, Londrina State University, Londrina 86057-970, Brazil)

  • Saulo F. Amâncio-Vieira

    (Postgraduate Program in Administration Department, Londrina State University, Londrina 86057-970, Brazil)

  • Reginaldo Fidelis

    (Production Engineering Department, Federal Technological University of Paraná, Londrina 86036-370, Brazil)

  • Eduardo A. do R. Contani

    (Postgraduate Program in Administration Department, Londrina State University, Londrina 86057-970, Brazil)

Abstract

While biogas production offers promising solutions for waste management, energy diversification, and sustainable development, effective project implementation requires comprehensive evaluation criteria that encompass diverse aspects, such as the problem to be addressed, biodigester technology selection, business model development, investment considerations, and final product utilization. A preliminary study involving an integrative review of 58 articles yielded 499 unique criteria. These criteria were categorized into four groups: economic, environmental, social, and technical, encompassing a total of 39 subcriteria. Six stages of the biogas production cycle were considered in the analysis: project, initiation, biodigester type selection, location determination, operational cycle definition, and final product utilization. The analysis revealed that existing decision-making models often prioritize technical and economic considerations while neglecting broader social and environmental perspectives. This paper addresses this gap by proposing, for the first time, stage-specific, multicriteria decision-making (MDCA) models tailored to each phase of a biogas production cycle. These models empower project managers and policymakers to optimize resource allocation, minimize the environmental impact, maximize social benefits, and ensure project viability and profitability. The models’ adaptability allows for tailored prioritization based on specific project requirements and contexts. This groundbreaking research fills a critical void in biogas decision making by bridging the gap between existing technical and economic model limitations and the growing need for truly sustainable project development.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela M. Yamaji & Saulo F. Amâncio-Vieira & Reginaldo Fidelis & Eduardo A. do R. Contani, 2024. "Proposal of Multicriteria Decision-Making Models for Biogas Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:4:p:806-:d:1335531
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/4/806/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/4/806/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arodudu, Oludunsin Tunrayo & Helming, Katharina & Voinov, Alexey & Wiggering, Hubert, 2017. "Integrating agronomic factors into energy efficiency assessment of agro-bioenergy production – A case study of ethanol and biogas production from maize feedstock," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 426-439.
    2. Rupf, Gloria V. & Bahri, Parisa A. & de Boer, Karne & McHenry, Mark P., 2017. "Development of an optimal biogas system design model for Sub-Saharan Africa with case studies from Kenya and Cameroon," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 586-601.
    3. Zhang, Weishi & Wang, Can & Zhang, Long & Xu, Ying & Cui, Yuanzheng & Lu, Zifeng & Streets, David G., 2018. "Evaluation of the performance of distributed and centralized biomass technologies in rural China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 445-455.
    4. Sadhukhan, Jhuma, 2014. "Distributed and micro-generation from biogas and agricultural application of sewage sludge: Comparative environmental performance analysis using life cycle approaches," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 196-206.
    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. Xinxin Liu & Nan Li & Feng Liu & Hailin Mu & Longxi Li & Xiaoyu Liu, 2021. "Optimal Design on Fossil-to-Renewable Energy Transition of Regional Integrated Energy Systems under CO 2 Emission Abatement Control: A Case Study in Dalian, China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, May.
    2. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    3. Nancy Diaz-Elsayed & Jiayi Hua & Nader Rezaei & Qiong Zhang, 2023. "A Decision Framework for Designing Sustainable Wastewater-Based Resource Recovery Schemes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, February.
    4. Li, Mo & Fu, Qiang & Singh, Vijay P. & Liu, Dong & Li, Jiang, 2020. "Optimization of sustainable bioenergy production considering energy-food-water-land nexus and livestock manure under uncertainty," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    5. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    6. Zhang, Weishi & Xu, Ying & Wang, Can & Streets, David G., 2022. "Assessment of the driving factors of CO2 mitigation costs of household biogas systems in China: A LMDI decomposition with cost analysis model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 978-989.
    7. Egorov, Aleksei V. (Егоров, Алексей В.) & Borzykh, Olga A. (Борзых, Ольга А.), 2018. "Asymmetric Interest Rate Pass-Through in Russia [Асимметрия Процентного Канала Денежной Трансмиссии В России]," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 1, pages 92-121, February.
    8. Ingrao, Carlo & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Adamczyk, Janusz & Ferrante, Valentina & Messineo, Antonio & Huisingh, Donald, 2019. "Investigating energy and environmental issues of agro-biogas derived energy systems: A comprehensive review of Life Cycle Assessments," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 296-307.
    9. Zi, Cao & Qian, Meng & Baozhong, Gao, 2021. "The consumption patterns and determining factors of rural household energy: A case study of Henan Province in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    10. Tanveer, Waqas Hassan & Abdelkareem, Mohammad Ali & Kolosz, Ben W. & Rezk, Hegazy & Andresen, John & Cha, Suk Won & Sayed, Enas Taha, 2021. "The role of vacuum based technologies in solid oxide fuel cell development to utilize industrial waste carbon for power production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    11. Christian Moretti & Blanca Corona & Viola Rühlin & Thomas Götz & Martin Junginger & Thomas Brunner & Ingwald Obernberger & Li Shen, 2020. "Combining Biomass Gasification and Solid Oxid Fuel Cell for Heat and Power Generation: An Early-Stage Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, June.
    12. Qiang Wang & Thomas Dogot & Xianlei Huang & Linna Fang & Changbin Yin, 2020. "Coupling of Rural Energy Structure and Straw Utilization: Based on Cases in Hebei, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, January.
    13. Cui, Yuanzheng & Zhang, Weishi & Wang, Can & Streets, David G. & Xu, Ying & Du, Mingxi & Lin, Jintai, 2019. "Spatiotemporal dynamics of CO2 emissions from central heating supply in the North China Plain over 2012–2016 due to natural gas usage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C), pages 245-256.
    14. Indre Siksnelyte & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene & Deepak Sharma, 2018. "An Overview of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Dealing with Sustainable Energy Development Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, October.
    15. Stanisław Bielski & Renata Marks-Bielska & Paweł Wiśniewski, 2022. "Investigation of Energy and Economic Balance and GHG Emissions in the Production of Different Cultivars of Buckwheat ( Fagopyrum esculentum Moench): A Case Study in Northeastern Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-24, December.
    16. Abiodun O. Jegede & Grietje Zeeman & Harry Bruning, 2019. "Development of an Optimised Chinese Dome Digester Enables Smaller Reactor Volumes; Pilot Scale Performance," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-15, June.
    17. Marta Gandiglio & Fabrizio De Sario & Andrea Lanzini & Silvia Bobba & Massimo Santarelli & Gian Andrea Blengini, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of a Biogas-Fed Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) Integrated in a Wastewater Treatment Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-31, April.
    18. Khaled M. A. Salim & Ruhanita Maelah & Hawa Hishamuddin & Amizawati Mohd Amir & Mohd Nizam Ab Rahman, 2022. "Two Decades of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Solid Oxide Fuel Cells (SOFCs): A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    19. Lam, Chor Man & Hsu, Shu-Chien & Alvarado, Valeria & Li, Wing Man, 2020. "Integrated life-cycle data envelopment analysis for techno-environmental performance evaluation on sludge-to-energy systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    20. Jiang, Lu & Yu, Lu & Xue, Bing & Chen, Xingpeng & Mi, Zhifu, 2020. "Who is energy poor? Evidence from the least developed regions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(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:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:4:p:806-:d:1335531. 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.