IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v55y2013icp374-385.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A group-based spatial decision support system for wind farm site selection in Northwest Ohio

Author

Listed:
  • Gorsevski, Pece V.
  • Cathcart, Steven C.
  • Mirzaei, Golrokh
  • Jamali, Mohsin M.
  • Ye, Xinyue
  • Gomezdelcampo, Enrique

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the benefits of applying a spatial decision support system (SDSS) framework for evaluating the suitability for wind farm siting in Northwest Ohio. The multiple criteria evaluation (MCE) prototype system is intended for regional planning but also for promoting group decision making that could involve participants with different interests in the development of decision alternatives. The framework integrates environmental and economic criteria and builds a hierarchy for wind farm siting using weighted linear combination (WLC) techniques and GIS functionality. The SDSS allows the multiple participants to interact and develop an understanding of the spatial data for assigning importance values to each factor. The WLC technique is used to combine the assigned values with map layers, which are standardized using fuzzy set theory, to produce individual suitability maps. The maps created by personal preferences from the participants are aggregated for producing a group solution using the Borda method. Sensitivity analysis is performed on the group solution to examine how small changes in the factor weights affect the calculated suitability scores. The results from the sensitivity analysis are intended to aid understanding of compromised solutions through changes in the input data from the participant's perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Gorsevski, Pece V. & Cathcart, Steven C. & Mirzaei, Golrokh & Jamali, Mohsin M. & Ye, Xinyue & Gomezdelcampo, Enrique, 2013. "A group-based spatial decision support system for wind farm site selection in Northwest Ohio," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 374-385.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:55:y:2013:i:c:p:374-385
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.12.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512010580
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Janke, Jason R., 2010. "Multicriteria GIS modeling of wind and solar farms in Colorado," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 2228-2234.
    2. Bishop, Ian D. & Stock, Christian, 2010. "Using collaborative virtual environments to plan wind energy installations," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 2348-2355.
    3. Swofford, Jeffrey & Slattery, Michael, 2010. "Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2508-2519, May.
    4. Steve Carver & Andrew Evans & Richard Kingston & Ian Turton, 2001. "Public participation, GIS, and cyberdemocracy: evaluating on-line spatial decision support systems," Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 28(6), pages 907-921, November.
    5. Gamboa, Gonzalo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2007. "The problem of windfarm location: A social multi-criteria evaluation framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1564-1583, March.
    6. Ramanathan Sugumaran & James C. Meyer & Jim Davis, 2004. "A Web-based environmental decision support system (WEDSS) for environmental planning and watershed management," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 307-322, October.
    7. Rodman, Laura C. & Meentemeyer, Ross K., 2006. "A geographic analysis of wind turbine placement in Northern California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 2137-2149, October.
    8. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Contextualizing avian mortality: A preliminary appraisal of bird and bat fatalities from wind, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2241-2248, June.
    9. Baban, Serwan M.J & Parry, Tim, 2001. "Developing and applying a GIS-assisted approach to locating wind farms in the UK," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 59-71.
    10. Aydin, Nazli Yonca & Kentel, Elcin & Duzgun, Sebnem, 2010. "GIS-based environmental assessment of wind energy systems for spatial planning: A case study from Western Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 364-373, January.
    11. Hao Fanghua & Chen Guanchun, 2010. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Model Based on Weighted Borda Scoring Method for Watershed Ecological Risk Management: a Case Study of Three Gorges Reservoir Area of China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2139-2165, August.
    12. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    13. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    14. Toke, David & Breukers, Sylvia & Wolsink, Maarten, 2008. "Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1129-1147, May.
    15. Hiltunen, Veikko & Kangas, Jyrki & Pykalainen, Jouni, 2008. "Voting methods in strategic forest planning -- Experiences from Metsahallitus," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 117-127, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:enepol:v:55:y:2013:i:c:p:374-385. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.