IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/engenv/v23y2012i2-3p249-264.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multicriteria Decision Methodology to Select Suitable Areas for Storing Co2

Author

Listed:
  • Bernardo Llamas
  • Pablo Cienfuegos

Abstract

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology is seen as an effective technique to decrease significant amounts of CO 2 from stationary sources. Many efforts are being put towards developing new techniques to capture CO 2 from industrial emitters. However, it is necessary to store CO 2 in a safe manner. Techniques applied to develop a suitable emplacement are well known, since these are similar to that for oil or gas explorations. Nonetheless, successful site selection (screen phase) will decrease the inherent risk in the geological exploration (assessment and select phase). In this process, many criteria should be taken into consideration, including technical and socio-economical aspects. For this purpose, different mathematical algorithms have been developed to solve multicriteria problems and to help the decision-makers. This article describes a methodology for the selection of site areas or structures for storing CO 2 based on a multicriteria algorithm, which will rank the areas under consideration, in order to select the most suitable or promising emplacement.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernardo Llamas & Pablo Cienfuegos, 2012. "Multicriteria Decision Methodology to Select Suitable Areas for Storing Co2," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 249-264, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:engenv:v:23:y:2012:i:2-3:p:249-264
    DOI: 10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.249
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1260/0958-305X.23.2-3.249?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    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. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    2. Guh, Yuh-Yuan, 1997. "Introduction to a new weighting method -- Hierarchy consistency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 215-226, October.
    3. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    4. Xiaoxia Li, 2022. "Research on the Development Level of Rural E-Commerce in China Based on Analytic Hierarchy and Systematic Clustering Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-18, July.
    5. Danijela Tuljak-Suban & Patricija Bajec, 2022. "A Hybrid DEA Approach for the Upgrade of an Existing Bike-Sharing System with Electric Bikes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & Amelia Pérez Zabaleta & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "Dealing with Water Conflicts: A Comprehensive Review of MCDM Approaches to Manage Freshwater Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-32, April.
    7. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    8. Hoene, Andreas & Jawale, Mandar & Neukirchen, Thomas & Bednorz, Nicole & Schulz, Holger & Hauser, Simon, 2019. "Bewertung von Technologielösungen für Automatisierung und Ergonomieunterstützung der Intralogistik," ild Schriftenreihe 64, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management, Institut für Logistik- & Dienstleistungsmanagement (ild).
    9. Sudhakar Yedla & Ram M. Shrestha, 2007. "Application of analytic hierarchy process to prioritize urban transport options: Comparative analysis of group aggregation methods," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2007-011, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    10. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Radojko Lukic, 2020. "Analysis Of The Efficiency Of Trade In Oil Derivatives In Serbia By Applying The Fuzzy Ahp-Topsis Method," Business Excellence and Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(3), pages 80-98, September.
    12. Ya-Qiang Xu & Le-Sheng Jin & Zhen-Song Chen & Ronald R. Yager & Jana Špirková & Martin Kalina & Surajit Borkotokey, 2022. "Weight Vector Generation in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making with Basic Uncertain Information," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-11, February.
    13. Elvan Ender Altay & Diba Şenay & Zeynep Eyüpoğlu, 2021. "Outdoor Indicators for the Healthy Development of Children," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 14(6), pages 2517-2545, December.
    14. Iva Ridjan Skov & Noémi Schneider & Gerald Schweiger & Josef-Peter Schöggl & Alfred Posch, 2021. "Power-to-X in Denmark: An Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.
    15. Baback Vaziri & Shaunak Dabadghao & Yuehwern Yih & Thomas L. Morin & Mark Lehto, 2020. "Crowd-Ranking: a Markov-based method for ranking alternatives," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 279-295, March.
    16. Berumen, Sergio A. & Pérez-Megino, Luis P., 2016. "Ranking Socioeconómico para el Desarrollo de las Regiones Carboníferas en Europa || Socioeconomic Ranking for the Development of coal-mining regions in Europe," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 21(1), pages 39-57, June.
    17. Hsin-Chieh Wu & Toly Chen & Chin-Hau Huang, 2020. "A Piecewise Linear FGM Approach for Efficient and Accurate FAHP Analysis: Smart Backpack Design as an Example," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, August.
    18. Jain, Bharat A. & Nag, Barin N., 1996. "A decision-support model for investment decisions in new ventures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 473-486, May.
    19. Wiebke Mohr & Anika Rädke & Adel Afi & Franka Mühlichen & Moritz Platen & Annelie Scharf & Bernhard Michalowsky & Wolfgang Hoffmann, 2022. "Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care—Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-21, July.
    20. Hartvigsen, David, 2005. "Representing the strengths and directions of pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 357-369, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CO2 storage; site selection; screen; multi-criteria decision; AHP;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    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:sae:engenv:v:23:y:2012:i:2-3:p:249-264. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.