IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i17p4469-d1730522.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Multi-Criteria Land Suitability Analysis for Community-Scale Biomass Power Plant Site Selection

Author

Listed:
  • Athipthep Boonman

    (The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok 10140, Thailand
    Center of Excellence on Energy Technology and Environment (CEE), Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (MHESI), Bangkok 10140, Thailand)

  • Suneerat Fukuda

    (The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok 10140, Thailand
    Center of Excellence on Energy Technology and Environment (CEE), Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (MHESI), Bangkok 10140, Thailand)

  • Agapol Junpen

    (The Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok 10140, Thailand
    Center of Excellence on Energy Technology and Environment (CEE), Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (MHESI), Bangkok 10140, Thailand)

Abstract

Community-scale biomass power plants (CSBPPs) offer a decentralized approach for electricity generation by utilizing locally available biomass while delivering socioeconomic benefits. Site selection plays a critical role in the success of CSBPPs and requires the consideration of diverse spatial and non-spatial factors. This study presents a spatial decision-support tool for identifying suitable CSBPP sites in Thailand’s Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC), which comprises the Chachoengsao, Chonburi, and Rayong provinces. A geoprocessing workflow integrating Geographic Information Systems (GISs), Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM), and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was developed using ModelBuilder tools in ArcGIS Pro (version 3.0.2). Thirteen sub-criteria related to geographical, infrastructural, and socioeconomic–cultural dimensions, along with exclusion zones, were evaluated by 15 experts from diverse stakeholder groups. Biomass availability from five major economic crops was combined with other spatial data layers, incorporating expert-assigned weights and suitability scores. The findings indicated a remaining biomass energy potential was 34,156 TJ, with sugarcane residues contributing over 80%. Approximately 20% of the EEC area (about 0.262 million hectares) was classified as highly suitable for CSBPP development, revealing several viable site options. The proposed model offers a flexible and replicable framework for regional biomass planning and can be adapted to other locations by adjusting the criteria and integrating optimization techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Athipthep Boonman & Suneerat Fukuda & Agapol Junpen, 2025. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Land Suitability Analysis for Community-Scale Biomass Power Plant Site Selection," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-22, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:17:p:4469-:d:1730522
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/17/4469/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/17/4469/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ali, Shahid & Taweekun, Juntakan & Techato, Kuaanan & Waewsak, Jompob & Gyawali, Saroj, 2019. "GIS based site suitability assessment for wind and solar farms in Songkhla, Thailand," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1360-1372.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    3. Avinash Bharti & Kunwar Paritosh & Venkata Ravibabu Mandla & Aakash Chawade & Vivekanand Vivekanand, 2021. "GIS Application for the Estimation of Bioenergy Potential from Agriculture Residues: An Overview," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Sekeroglu, Ahmet, 2024. "Site selection for biomass-solar hybrid renewable energy facilities: Spatial modelling based on fuzzy logic-geographic information systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(PB).
    5. Musolino, Monica & Maggio, Gaetano & D'Aleo, Erika & Nicita, Agatino, 2023. "Three case studies to explore relevant features of emerging renewable energy communities in Italy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 540-555.
    6. Elkadeem, M.R. & Younes, Ali & Sharshir, Swellam W. & Campana, Pietro Elia & Wang, Shaorong, 2021. "Sustainable siting and design optimization of hybrid renewable energy system: A geospatial multi-criteria analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 295(C).
    7. Saeed Khojaste Effatpanah & Mohammad Hossein Ahmadi & Pasura Aungkulanon & Akbar Maleki & Milad Sadeghzadeh & Mohsen Sharifpur & Lingen Chen, 2022. "Comparative Analysis of Five Widely-Used Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Evaluate Clean Energy Technologies: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-33, January.
    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. Lv, Furong & Tang, Haiping, 2024. "Sustainable photovoltaic power generation spatial planning through ecosystem service valuation: A case study of the Qinghai-Tibet plateau," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. Dimitris Ioannidis & Dimitra G. Vagiona, 2024. "Optimal Wind Farm Siting Using a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process: Evaluating the Island of Andros, Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-25, May.
    3. Elkadeem, Mohamed R. & Younes, Ali & Mazzeo, Domenico & Jurasz, Jakub & Elia Campana, Pietro & Sharshir, Swellam W. & Alaam, Mohamed A., 2022. "Geospatial-assisted multi-criterion analysis of solar and wind power geographical-technical-economic potential assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    4. Fida Ali & Adul Bennui & Shahariar Chowdhury & Kuaanan Techato, 2022. "Suitable Site Selection for Solar-Based Green Hydrogen in Southern Thailand Using GIS-MCDM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, May.
    5. V ctor Olivero-Ort z & Carlos Robles-Algar n & Julie Viloria-Porto, 2021. "An AHP-GIS Based Approach for Site Suitability Analysis of Solar-Wind Projects in Santa Marta, Colombia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(5), pages 211-223.
    6. Md Rabiul Islam & Md Rakibul Islam & Hosen M. Imran, 2022. "Assessing Wind Farm Site Suitability in Bangladesh: A GIS-AHP Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    7. Elkadeem, Mohamed R. & Younes, Ali & Jurasz, Jakub & AlZahrani, Atif S. & Abido, Mohammad A., 2025. "A spatio-temporal decision-making model for solar, wind, and hybrid systems – A case study of Saudi Arabia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 383(C).
    8. Nagababu, Garlapati & Puppala, Harish & Pritam, Kocherlakota & Kantipudi, MVV Prasad, 2022. "Two-stage GIS-MCDM based algorithm to identify plausible regions at micro level to install wind farms: A case study of India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    9. Fang, Lei, 2022. "Measuring and decomposing group performance under centralized management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 1006-1013.
    10. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    11. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    12. Athanasios Zisos & Dimitrios Chatzopoulos & Andreas Efstratiadis, 2024. "The Concept of Spatial Reliability Across Renewable Energy Systems—An Application to Decentralized Solar PV Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    14. Yuan-Wei Du & Wen Zhou, 2019. "DSmT-Based Group DEMATEL Method with Reaching Consensus," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(6), pages 1201-1230, December.
    15. Barbón, A. & Fortuny Ayuso, P. & Bayón, L. & Silva, C.A., 2023. "Experimental and numerical investigation of the influence of terrain slope on the performance of single-axis trackers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    16. Carmen Herrero & Antonio Villar, 2022. "Sports competitions and the Break-Even rule," Working Papers 22.13, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    17. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    18. Mohamed Abdel-Basset & Abduallah Gamal & Ibrahim M. Hezam & Karam M. Sallam, 2024. "Sustainability assessment of optimal location of electric vehicle charge stations: a conceptual framework for green energy into smart cities," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 11475-11513, May.
    19. Jiabin Liu & Ji Han, 2017. "Does a Certain Rule Exist in the Long-Term Change of a City’s Livability? Evidence from New York, Tokyo, and Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, September.
    20. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:18:y:2025:i:17:p:4469-:d:1730522. 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.