Abstract
The paper dwells upon the problem of multi-criteria choice of ways to develop generating capacities to supply power to remote consumers. We herein propose a two-step multi-criteria analysis method: choosing promising power-generation technology first, and then specifying the generating-capacity structure. The paper describes the structure of the proposed multi-criteria methods: the interval TOPSIS method for Step 1; for Step 2, an upgraded analytic hierarchy process based on identifying the structure of the decision maker’s preferences. We demonstrate the use of this method with evidence from the Penzhinsky District, Kamchatka Krai. Thermal power plants, hydroelectric power plants, diesel power plants, as well as solar and wind power are analyzed as power sources. Step 1 includes: analyzing the potential power-supply loads in a specific area; formulating alternative power-generation technology; formulating goals and criteria; criterion-based evaluation of alternative options using objective and subjective models; multi-criteria evaluation of alternatives; analyzing the sensitivity of results and the selection of promising technology. Step 2 includes: formulating goals and criteria on the basis of the selected power-generation technologies; formulating the available alternatives; criterion-based evaluation of alternatives; multi-criteria evaluation and final decision-making.
Highlights
Supplying power to remote consumers in North-Eastern Russia is still a problem
We propose a two-step procedure for multi-criteria analysis of the structural development of generating capacities; Fig. 1 presents the main points of the procedure
Step 1 Choosing a promising technology 1.1 Analyzing the potential power-supply loads in a specific area; 1.2 Formulating the available power-supply alternatives; 1.3 Formulating the goals and criteria; 1.4 Criterion-based evaluation of alternatives using objective and subjective models; 1.5 Multi-criteria evaluation of alternatives using the interval TOPSIS method; 1.6 Analyzing the sensitivity of results and choosing a promising technology
Summary
Supplying power to remote consumers in North-Eastern Russia is still a problem. Remote areas have scattered power sources and an underdeveloped infrastructure in general [1]. We propose a two-step procedure for multi-criteria analysis of the structural development of generating capacities; Fig. 1 presents the main points of the procedure. Step 1 Choosing a promising technology 1.1 Analyzing the potential power-supply loads in a specific area; 1.2 Formulating the available power-supply alternatives; 1.3 Formulating the goals and criteria; 1.4 Criterion-based evaluation of alternatives using objective and subjective models; 1.5 Multi-criteria evaluation of alternatives using the interval TOPSIS method; 1.6 Analyzing the sensitivity of results and choosing a promising technology. Step 2 Optimizing the generating-capacity structure 1.1 Formulating the goals and criteria on the basis of the selected power-generation technology; 1.2 Formulating the alternative generating-capacity structure; 1.3 Criterion-based evaluation of the alternatives; 1.4 Multi-criteria evaluation of the alternatives; 1.5. Step 2 included detailed multi-criteria evaluation of the selected technologies as well as finalizing the generating-capacity structure. For Step 2, we chose a modified Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
