IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i18p5727-d633503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Analysis of Solar Panels with Determination of Local Significance Levels of Criteria Using the MCDM Methods Resistant to the Rank Reversal Phenomenon

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandra Bączkiewicz

    (Institute of Management, University of Szczecin, ul. Cukrowa 8, 71-004 Szczecin, Poland
    Doctoral School of University of Szczecin, ul. Mickiewicza 16, 70-383 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Bartłomiej Kizielewicz

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Andrii Shekhovtsov

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Mykhailo Yelmikheiev

    (Machine Learning Group, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Volodymyr Kozlov

    (Machine Learning Group, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Wojciech Sałabun

    (Research Team on Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Department of Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland)

Abstract

This paper aims to present an innovative approach based on two newly developed Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods: COMET combined with TOPSIS and SPOTIS, which could be the basis for a decision support system (DSS) in the problem of selecting solar panels. Solar energy is one of the most promising and environmentally friendly energy sources because of the enormous potential of directly converting available solar radiation everywhere into electricity. Furthermore, ever-lower prices for photovoltaic systems make solar electricity more competitive with power from conventional energy sources, increasing interest in solar panels among companies and households. This fact generates the need for a user-friendly, objective, fully automated DSS to support the multi-criteria selection of solar panels. Both MCDM methods chosen for this purpose are rank-reversal-free and precise. First, the objective entropy weighting method was applied for determining criteria weights. Final rankings were compared by two ranking correlation coefficients: symmetrical r w and asymmetrical W S . Then the sensitivity analysis providing local weights of alternatives for decision criteria was performed. The obtained results prove the adequacy and practical usefulness of the presented approach in solving the problem of solar panels selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandra Bączkiewicz & Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Andrii Shekhovtsov & Mykhailo Yelmikheiev & Volodymyr Kozlov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2021. "Comparative Analysis of Solar Panels with Determination of Local Significance Levels of Criteria Using the MCDM Methods Resistant to the Rank Reversal Phenomenon," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:18:p:5727-:d:633503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/18/5727/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/18/5727/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    2. Finn, Thomas & McKenzie, Paul, 2020. "A high-resolution suitability index for solar farm location in complex landscapes," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 520-533.
    3. Nesticò, Antonio & Elia, Cristina & Naddeo, Vincenzo, 2020. "Sustainability of urban regeneration projects: Novel selection model based on analytic network process and zero-one goal programming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Valentinas Podvezko, 2016. "Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 267-283, March.
    5. Seker, Sukran & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2021. "Socio-economic evaluation model for sustainable solar PV panels using a novel integrated MCDM methodology: A case in Turkey," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Jarosław Wątróbski & Krzysztof Małecki & Kinga Kijewska & Stanisław Iwan & Artur Karczmarczyk & Russell G. Thompson, 2017. "Multi-Criteria Analysis of Electric Vans for City Logistics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-34, August.
    7. Xiaomin Xu & Dongxiao Niu & Jinpeng Qiu & Meiqiong Wu & Peng Wang & Wangyue Qian & Xiang Jin, 2016. "Comprehensive Evaluation of Coordination Development for Regional Power Grid and Renewable Energy Power Supply Based on Improved Matter Element Extension and TOPSIS Method for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Dragan Pamučar & Ljubomir Gigović & Zoran Bajić & Miljojko Janošević, 2017. "Location Selection for Wind Farms Using GIS Multi-Criteria Hybrid Model: An Approach Based on Fuzzy and Rough Numbers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-23, July.
    9. Padmanathan K. & Uma Govindarajan & Vigna K. Ramachandaramurthy & Sudar Oli Selvi T., 2017. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Based Economic Analysis of Solar PV System with Respect to Performance Investigation for Indian Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, May.
    10. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    11. Paweł Ziemba & Jarosław Wątróbski & Magdalena Zioło & Artur Karczmarczyk, 2017. "Using the PROSA Method in Offshore Wind Farm Location Problems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Sindhu, Sonal & Nehra, Vijay & Luthra, Sunil, 2017. "Investigation of feasibility study of solar farms deployment using hybrid AHP-TOPSIS analysis: Case study of India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 496-511.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. van de Kaa, Geerten & Rezaei, Jafar & Kamp, Linda & de Winter, Allard, 2014. "Photovoltaic technology selection: A fuzzy MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 662-670.
    16. Andrii Shekhovtsov & Volodymyr Kozlov & Viktor Nosov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Efficiency of Methods for Determining the Relevance of Criteria in Sustainable Transport Problems: A Comparative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.
    17. Antonio Nesticò & Piera Somma, 2019. "Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Methods for the Enhancement of Historical Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Ayşegül Tuş & Esra Aytaç Adalı, 2019. "The new combination with CRITIC and WASPAS methods for the time and attendance software selection problem," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 56(2), pages 528-538, June.
    19. Lee, Hsing-Chen & Chang, Ching-Ter, 2018. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 883-896.
    20. Şengül, Ümran & Eren, Miraç & Eslamian Shiraz, Seyedhadi & Gezder, Volkan & Şengül, Ahmet Bilal, 2015. "Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 617-625.
    21. Alao, Moshood Akanni & Popoola, Olawale M. & Ayodele, Temitope Rapheal, 2021. "Selection of waste-to-energy technology for distributed generation using IDOCRIW-Weighted TOPSIS method: A case study of the City of Johannesburg, South Africa," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 162-183.
    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. Nguyen Van Thanh & Nguyen Thi Kim Lan, 2022. "Solar Energy Deployment for the Sustainable Future of Vietnam: Hybrid SWOC-FAHP-WASPAS Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-11, April.
    2. Pedro Ponce & Citlaly Pérez & Aminah Robinson Fayek & Arturo Molina, 2022. "Solar Energy Implementation in Manufacturing Industry Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Fuzzy TOPSIS and S4 Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Syed Hammad Mian & Khaja Moiduddin & Hisham Alkhalefah & Mustufa Haider Abidi & Faraz Ahmed & Faraz Hussain Hashmi, 2023. "Mechanisms for Choosing PV Locations That Allow for the Most Sustainable Usage of Solar Energy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Changlu Zhang & Jian Zhang & Qiong Yang, 2022. "Identifying Critical Risk Factors in Green Product Certification Using Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Paweł Ziemba, 2023. "Selection of Photovoltaic Panels Based on Ranges of Criteria Weights and Balanced Assessment Criteria," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Beriro, Darren & Nathanail, Judith & Salazar, Juan & Kingdon, Andrew & Marchant, Andrew & Richardson, Steve & Gillet, Andy & Rautenberg, Svea & Hammond, Ellis & Beardmore, John & Moore, Terry & Angus,, 2022. "A decision support system to assess the feasibility of onshore renewable energy infrastructure," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    7. Mohsen Ramezanzade & Hossein Karimi & Khalid Almutairi & Hoa Ao Xuan & Javad Saebi & Ali Mostafaeipour & Kuaanan Techato, 2021. "Implementing MCDM Techniques for Ranking Renewable Energy Projects under Fuzzy Environment: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-38, November.

    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. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Bączkiewicz, Aleksandra & Sałabun, Wojciech, 2022. "New multi-criteria method for evaluation of sustainable RES management," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    2. Pratibha Rani & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Abbas Mardani & Fausto Cavallaro & Dalia Štreimikienė & Syed Abdul Rehman Khan, 2020. "Pythagorean Fuzzy SWARA–VIKOR Framework for Performance Evaluation of Solar Panel Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Syed Hammad Mian & Khaja Moiduddin & Hisham Alkhalefah & Mustufa Haider Abidi & Faraz Ahmed & Faraz Hussain Hashmi, 2023. "Mechanisms for Choosing PV Locations That Allow for the Most Sustainable Usage of Solar Energy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Mateusz Piwowarski & Mariusz Borawski & Kesra Nermend, 2021. "The Problem of Non-Typical Objects in the Multidimensional Comparative Analysis of the Level of Renewable Energy Development," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-24, September.
    6. Wojciech Sałabun & Krzysztof Palczewski & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2019. "Multicriteria Approach to Sustainable Transport Evaluation under Incomplete Knowledge: Electric Bikes Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, June.
    7. Paweł Ziemba & Marta Szaja, 2023. "Fuzzy Decision-Making Model for Solar Photovoltaic Panel Evaluation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-19, July.
    8. 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).
    9. Vanegas-Cantarero, María M. & Pennock, Shona & Bloise-Thomaz, Tianna & Jeffrey, Henry & Dickson, Matthew J., 2022. "Beyond LCOE: A multi-criteria evaluation framework for offshore renewable energy projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    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. Salis Deris Artikanur & Widiatmaka & Yudi Setiawan & Marimin, 2023. "An Evaluation of Possible Sugarcane Plantations Expansion Areas in Lamongan, East Java, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-17, March.
    12. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    13. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    14. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Chih-Jou Chen & Ho-Chin Yang, 2021. "Using Porter’s Diamond Model to Assess the Competitiveness of Taiwan’s Solar Photovoltaic Industry," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    16. Fang, Hong & Wang, Xu & Song, Wenyan, 2020. "Technology selection for photovoltaic cell from sustainability perspective: An integrated approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1029-1041.
    17. Seker, Sukran & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2021. "Socio-economic evaluation model for sustainable solar PV panels using a novel integrated MCDM methodology: A case in Turkey," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    18. Dragan Pamučar & Ibrahim Badi & Korica Sanja & Radojko Obradović, 2018. "A Novel Approach for the Selection of Power-Generation Technology Using a Linguistic Neutrosophic CODAS Method: A Case Study in Libya," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-25, September.
    19. Nebiyu Kedir & Phuong H. D. Nguyen & Citlaly Pérez & Pedro Ponce & Aminah Robinson Fayek, 2023. "Systematic Literature Review on Fuzzy Hybrid Methods in Photovoltaic Solar Energy: Opportunities, Challenges, and Guidance for Implementation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-38, April.
    20. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin & Yue, Wen Long & Zou, Xin, 2019. "Multi-criteria analysis of policies for implementing clean energy vehicles in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 826-840.

    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:14:y:2021:i:18:p:5727-:d:633503. 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.