IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v12y2019i22p4391-d288451.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria and Life Cycle Assessment of Wood-Based Bioenergy Alternatives for Residential Heating: A Sustainability Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Martín-Gamboa

    (Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

  • Luis C. Dias

    (CeBER and Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, Av. Dias da Silva 165, 3004-512 Coimbra, Portugal
    INESCC—Institute for Systems Engineering and Computers at Coimbra, 3030-290 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Paula Quinteiro

    (Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

  • Fausto Freire

    (ADAI-LAETA, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Coimbra, Polo II Campus, R. Luís Reis Santos, 3030-788 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Luís Arroja

    (Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

  • Ana Cláudia Dias

    (Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning, University of Aveiro, Campus Universitário de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

Abstract

Moving towards a global bioeconomy can mitigate climate change and the depletion of fossil fuels. Within this context, this work applies a set of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tools to prioritise the selection of five alternative bioenergy systems for residential heating based on the combination of three commercial technologies (pellet, wood stove and traditional fireplace) and two different feedstocks (eucalypt and maritime pine species). Several combinations of MCDA methods and weighting approaches were compared to assess how much results can differ. Eight indicators were used for a sustainability assessment of the alternatives while four MCDA methods were applied for the prioritisation: Weighted Sum Method (WSM), Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE), and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE). Regarding the sustainability performance indicators, the highest environmental impacts were calculated for the fireplace alternatives, and there was not a best environmental option. Also, no clear trend was found for the economic and social dimensions. The application of MCDA tools shows that wood stove alternatives have the best sustainability performance, in particular wood stove with combustion of maritime pine logs (highest scores in the ranking). Regarding the worst alternative, fireplaces with combustion of eucalypt logs ranked last in all MCDA rankings. Finally, a sensitivity analysis for the weighting of the performance indicators confirmed wood stoves with combustion of maritime pine logs as the leading alternative and the key role of the analysts within this type of MCDA studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Martín-Gamboa & Luis C. Dias & Paula Quinteiro & Fausto Freire & Luís Arroja & Ana Cláudia Dias, 2019. "Multi-Criteria and Life Cycle Assessment of Wood-Based Bioenergy Alternatives for Residential Heating: A Sustainability Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:22:p:4391-:d:288451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/22/4391/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/22/4391/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Strzalka, Rafal & Schneider, Dietrich & Eicker, Ursula, 2017. "Current status of bioenergy technologies in Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 801-820.
    2. Giuseppe Munda, 2016. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis and Sustainable Development," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 1235-1267, Springer.
    3. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    4. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, April.
    5. Carlos Henggeler Antunes & Carla Oliveira Henriques, 2016. "Multi-Objective Optimization and Multi-Criteria Analysis Models and Methods for Problems in the Energy Sector," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 1067-1165, Springer.
    6. 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.
    7. Dias, Luis C. & Domingues, Ana Rita, 2014. "On multi-criteria sustainability assessment: Spider-gram surface and dependence biases," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 159-163.
    8. Butler, John & Jia, Jianmin & Dyer, James, 1997. "Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 531-546, December.
    9. Tim Schröder & Lars-Peter Lauven & Beatriz Beyer & Nils Lerche & Jutta Geldermann, 2019. "Using PROMETHEE to assess bioenergy pathways," 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. 27(2), pages 287-309, June.
    10. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    11. Bouyssou, Denis, 1992. "Ranking methods based on valued preference relations: A characterization of the net flow method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 61-67, July.
    12. Nunes, João & Freitas, Helena, 2016. "An indicator to assess the pellet production per forest area. A case-study from Portugal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 99-105.
    13. D. Bouyssou & P. Perny, 1992. "Ranking methods for valued preference relations," Post-Print hal-02920156, HAL.
    14. Chau, J. & Sowlati, T. & Sokhansanj, S. & Preto, F. & Melin, S. & Bi, X., 2009. "Techno-economic analysis of wood biomass boilers for the greenhouse industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 364-371, March.
    15. Bouyssou, D. & Perny, P., 1992. "Ranking methods for valued preference relations : A characterization of a method based on leaving and entering flows," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(1-2), pages 186-194, August.
    16. Domenico Campisi & Simone Gitto & Donato Morea, 2018. "An Evaluation of Energy and Economic Efficiency in Residential Buildings Sector: A Multi-criteria Analisys on an Italian Case Study," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(3), pages 185-196.
    17. García-Gusano, Diego & Espegren, Kari & Lind, Arne & Kirkengen, Martin, 2016. "The role of the discount rates in energy systems optimisation models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 56-72.
    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. Alicja Stoltmann, 2020. "Hybrid Multi-Criteria Method of Analyzing the Location of Distributed Renewable Energy Sources," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    2. Mario Martín-Gamboa & Paula Quinteiro & Ana Cláudia Dias & Diego Iribarren, 2021. "Comparative Social Life Cycle Assessment of Two Biomass-to-Electricity Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Jelena Topić Božič & Urška Fric & Ante Čikić & Simon Muhič, 2024. "Life Cycle Assessment of Using Firewood and Wood Pellets in Slovenia as Two Primary Wood-Based Heating Systems and Their Environmental Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-14, February.
    4. Przemysław Motyl & Marcin Wikło & Julita Bukalska & Bartosz Piechnik & Rafał Kalbarczyk, 2020. "A New Design for Wood Stoves Based on Numerical Analysis and Experimental Research," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-11, February.
    5. Sławomir Francik & Adrian Knapczyk & Artur Knapczyk & Renata Francik, 2020. "Decision Support System for the Production of Miscanthus and Willow Briquettes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-24, March.
    6. Mariana Abreu & Luís Silva & Belina Ribeiro & Alice Ferreira & Luís Alves & Susana M. Paixão & Luísa Gouveia & Patrícia Moura & Florbela Carvalheiro & Luís C. Duarte & Ana Luisa Fernando & Alberto Rei, 2022. "Low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) Energy Crops to Bioenergy and Biofuels—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-68, June.
    7. Martín-Gamboa, Mario & Dias, Ana Cláudia & Iribarren, Diego, 2022. "Definition, assessment and prioritisation of strategies to mitigate social life-cycle impacts across the supply chain of bioelectricity: A case study in Portugal," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 1110-1118.
    8. Olga Porro & Francesc Pardo-Bosch & Núria Agell & Mónica Sánchez, 2020. "Understanding Location Decisions of Energy Multinational Enterprises within the European Smart Cities’ Context: An Integrated AHP and Extended Fuzzy Linguistic TOPSIS Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-29, May.
    9. Janis Edmunds Daugavietis & Raimonda Soloha & Elina Dace & Jelena Ziemele, 2022. "A Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods for Sustainability Assessment of District Heating Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, March.

    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. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Alexandru-Liviu Olteanu & Khaled Belahcene & Vincent Mousseau & Wassila Ouerdane & Antoine Rolland & Jun Zheng, 2022. "Preference elicitation for a ranking method based on multiple reference profiles," 4OR, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 63-84, March.
    6. Maria Rosaria Guarini & Fabrizio Battisti & Anthea Chiovitti, 2018. "A Methodology for the Selection of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods in Real Estate and Land Management Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-28, February.
    7. Leyva López, Juan Carlos & Solano Noriega, Jesús Jaime & Figueira, José Rui & Liu, Jun & Gastélum Chavira, Diego Alonso, 2021. "Non-dominated sorting genetic-based algorithm for exploiting a large-sized fuzzy outranking relation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 615-631.
    8. Tom Waas & Jean Hugé & Thomas Block & Tarah Wright & Francisco Benitez-Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability Assessment and Indicators: Tools in a Decision-Making Strategy for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-23, August.
    9. Schwartz, Michael & Göthner, Maximilian, 2009. "A Novel Approach to Incubator Evaluations: The PROMETHEE Outranking Procedures," IWH Discussion Papers 1/2009, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    10. Tom Waas & Jean Huge & Thomas BLOCK & Tarah Wright & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189410, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Fortemps, Philippe & Greco, Salvatore & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Multicriteria decision support using rules that represent rough-graded preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 206-223, July.
    12. Rene van den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, "undated". "The Degree Ratio Ranking Method for Directed Networks," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-026/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    14. van den Brink, René & Gilles, Robert P., 2009. "The outflow ranking method for weighted directed graphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(2), pages 484-491, March.
    15. van den Brink, René & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2022. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in graphs and digraphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(3), pages 1033-1044.
    16. P. Herings & A. Predtetchinski & A. Perea, 2006. "The Weak Sequential Core for Two-Period Economies," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 34(1), pages 55-65, April.
    17. 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.
    18. Herings, P.J.J. & van der Laan, G. & Talman, A.J.J., 2000. "Cooperative Games in Graph Structure," Discussion Paper 2000-90, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    19. Brink, René van den & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2021. "The degree ratio ranking method for directed graphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(2), pages 563-575.
    20. László Csató, 2019. "An impossibility theorem for paired comparisons," 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. 27(2), pages 497-514, June.

    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:12:y:2019:i:22:p:4391-:d:288451. 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.