IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v27y2025i6d10.1007_s10668-024-04491-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban integrated energy system construction plan selection: a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making framework

Author

Listed:
  • Haoran Zhao

    (Beijing Information Science & Technology University)

  • Sen Guo

    (North China Electric Power University)

Abstract

Urban integrated energy system (UIES) differs significantly from the park-level integrated energy system (IES) due to its proximity to residents’ daily lives and the constraints imposed by energy resources. Hence, UIES should be paid more attention on energy utilization efficiency and environment issues. Therefore, a scientific UIES construction plan should contribute more to the enhancement of economic benefit, energy utilization efficiency, and environmental protection. However, it is difficult to finding studies researching on UIES construction plan evaluation. Therefore, our study constructed a framework for selecting UIES construction plans utilizing multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). The Fuzzy-Delphi is applied to build an evaluation indicator system, considering economic benefit, energy utilization efficiency, environmental protection, and social recognition perspectives. This system consists of 9 sub-criteria. Afterward, this study introduces a unique approach to weighting by combining the objective weights determined via the anti-entropy weight (AEW) technique with the subjective weights assessed through the best–worst method (BWM), following the fundamental principle of moment estimation. Furthermore, MARCOS model is used to thoroughly assess alternative UIES construction plans by measuring the alternatives and sorting them in terms of a compromise solution. This model takes both positive and negative ideal solutions into account. Ultimately, case analysis and comparison discussion are executed to testify the applicability and robustness of the established MCDM framework. The findings reveal that energy utilization efficiency and the performance of environmental protection significantly impact the determination of the best construction plan for UIES. The MCDM framework, which integrates Fuzzy-Delphi, AEW, BWM, and MARCOS methodologies, proves to be effective and reliable in choosing the optimal UIES construction plan.

Suggested Citation

  • Haoran Zhao & Sen Guo, 2025. "Urban integrated energy system construction plan selection: a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 14223-14252, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s10668-024-04491-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-024-04491-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-024-04491-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-024-04491-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sotiropoulou, Kalliopi F. & Vavatsikos, Athanasios P., 2021. "Onshore wind farms GIS-Assisted suitability analysis using PROMETHEE II," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Yuan, Jiahang & Luo, Xinggang & Li, Yun & Hu, Xiaoqing & Chen, Wenchong & Zhang, Yue, 2022. "Multi criteria decision-making for distributed energy system based on multi-source heterogeneous data," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PD).
    3. Arnaudo, Monica & Topel, Monika & Puerto, Pablo & Widl, Edmund & Laumert, Björn, 2019. "Heat demand peak shaving in urban integrated energy systems by demand side management - A techno-economic and environmental approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    4. Oleg Nikolaevich Dmitriev, 2019. "Anti-Entropy Resolving of Uncertainty of Estimations Within Scope of Intelligent DMSS," International Journal of Decision Support System Technology (IJDSST), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 11(2), pages 48-71, April.
    5. 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.
    6. Zhao, Huiru & Li, Bingkang & Lu, Hao & Wang, Xuejie & Li, Hongze & Guo, Sen & Xue, Wanlei & Wang, Yuwei, 2022. "Economy-environment-energy performance evaluation of CCHP microgrid system: A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    7. Jing, Rui & Kuriyan, Kamal & Lin, Jian & Shah, Nilay & Zhao, Yingru, 2020. "Quantifying the contribution of individual technologies in integrated urban energy systems – A system value approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    8. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    9. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    10. Zhao, Haoran & Guo, Sen & Zhao, Huiru, 2019. "Comprehensive assessment for battery energy storage systems based on fuzzy-MCDM considering risk preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 450-461.
    11. Wu, Linfei & Sun, Liwen & Qi, Peixiao & Ren, Xiangwei & Sun, Xiaoting, 2021. "Energy endowment, industrial structure upgrading, and CO2 emissions in China: Revisiting resource curse in the context of carbon emissions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    12. Simone Di Zio & Mara Maretti, 2014. "Acceptability of energy sources using an integration of the Delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2973-2991, November.
    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. Haoran Zhao & Sen Guo, 2024. "Risks assessment on island micro-grids construction schemes employing a fuzzy-MCDM framework," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 13185-13216, May.
    2. Mevlut Uyan & Jarosław Janus & Ela Ertunç, 2023. "Land Use Suitability Model for Grapevine ( Vitis vinifera L.) Cultivation Using the Best Worst Method: A Case Study from Ankara/Türkiye," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Nan Li & Haining Zhang & Xiangcheng Zhang & Xue Ma & Sen Guo, 2020. "How to Select the Optimal Electrochemical Energy Storage Planning Program? A Hybrid MCDM Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Gholamreza Haseli & Reza Sheikh & Jianqiang Wang & Hana Tomaskova & Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, 2021. "A Novel Approach for Group Decision Making Based on the Best–Worst Method (G-BWM): Application to Supply Chain Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-20, August.
    5. Liu, Aijun & Zhao, Yingxue & Meng, Xiaoge & Zhang, Yan, 2020. "A three-phase fuzzy multi-criteria decision model for charging station location of the sharing electric vehicle," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    6. Haoran Zhao & Huiru Zhao & Sen Guo, 2018. "Comprehensive Performance Evaluation of Electricity Grid Corporations Employing a Novel MCDM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Hashem Omrani & Arash Alizadeh & Ali Emrouznejad & Tamara Teplova, 2024. "Data envelopment analysis model with decision makers’ preferences: a robust credibility approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 339(3), pages 1269-1306, August.
    8. Zhao, Haoran & Guo, Sen & Zhao, Huiru, 2019. "Comprehensive assessment for battery energy storage systems based on fuzzy-MCDM considering risk preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 450-461.
    9. Haoran Zhao & Sen Guo & Huiru Zhao, 2018. "Comprehensive Performance Assessment on Various Battery Energy Storage Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-26, October.
    10. James J. H. Liou & Perry C. Y. Liu & Huai-Wei Lo, 2020. "A Failure Mode Assessment Model Based on Neutrosophic Logic for Switched-Mode Power Supply Risk Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Halil Ibrahim Cicekdagi & Ertugrul Ayyildiz & Mehmet Cabir Akkoyunlu, 2023. "Enhancing search and rescue team performance: investigating factors behind social loafing," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 119(3), pages 1315-1340, December.
    12. Junnan Wu & Xin Liu & Dianqi Pan & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Kai Ke, 2023. "Research on Safety Evaluation of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant Based on Improved Best-Worst Method and Fuzzy Comprehensive Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, May.
    13. Liu, Xinglei & Liu, Jun & Ren, Kezheng & Liu, Xiaoming & Liu, Jiacheng, 2022. "An integrated fuzzy multi-energy transaction evaluation approach for energy internet markets considering judgement credibility and variable rough precision," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    14. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Pushparenu Bhattacharjee & Syed Abou Iltaf Hussain & V. Dey & U. K. Mandal, 2023. "Failure mode and effects analysis for submersible pump component using proportionate risk assessment model: a case study in the power plant of Agartala," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(5), pages 1778-1798, October.
    16. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    17. Yuanxin Liu & FengYun Li & Yi Wang & Xinhua Yu & Jiahai Yuan & Yuwei Wang, 2018. "Assessing the Environmental Impact Caused by Power Grid Projects in High Altitude Areas Based on BWM and Vague Sets Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh, 2023. "Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 616-655, June.
    19. Ghadimi, Pezhman & Donnelly, Oisin & Sar, Kubra & Wang, Chao & Azadnia, Amir Hossein, 2022. "The successful implementation of industry 4.0 in manufacturing: An analysis and prioritization of risks in Irish industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    20. Zhao, Huiru & Li, Bingkang & Lu, Hao & Wang, Xuejie & Li, Hongze & Guo, Sen & Xue, Wanlei & Wang, Yuwei, 2022. "Economy-environment-energy performance evaluation of CCHP microgrid system: A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(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:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s10668-024-04491-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.