An integrated multi-criteria decision making model for evaluating wind farm performance

Energies

Volumn 4, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 2002-2026

  Kang, He Yau ^a   Hung, Meng Chan ^b   Pearn, W L ^b   Lee, Amy H I ^c   Kang, Mei Sung ^d  

^a NATIONAL CHIN YI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c CHUNG HUA UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^d KAO YUAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Benefits, opportunities; Costs and risks (BOCR); Fuzzy analytic network process (FANP); Interpretive structural modeling (ISM); Wind farm performance

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; ELECTRIC UTILITIES; ENERGY RESOURCES; FOSSIL FUELS; FUZZY LOGIC; NATURAL RESOURCES; RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES; SOLAR ENERGY; WIND POWER;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY RESOURCES; BENEFITS, OPPORTUNITIES; COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION MODEL; ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTIC; FUZZY ANALYTIC NETWORK PROCESS; INTERPRETIVE STRUCTURAL MODELING; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING MODELS; WIND FARM;

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY;

EID: 82755190708     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19961073     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/en4112002     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Lenzen, M. Current state of development of electricity-generating technologies: A literature review. Energies 2010, 3, 462-591.
2. Takuno, T.; Kitamori, Y.; Takahashi, R.; Hikihara, T. AC power routing system in home based on demand and supply utilizing distributed power sources. Energies 2011, 4, 717-726.
3. Deng, Y.; Yu, Z.; Liu, S. A review on scale and siting of wind farms in China. Wind Energy 2011, 14, 463-470.
4. Probst, O.; Cárdenas, D. State of the art and trends in wind resource assessment. Energies 2010, 3, 1087-1141.
5. Kahraman, C.; Kaya, I.; Cebi, S. A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Energy 2009, 34, 1603-1616.
6. San Cristóbal, J.R. Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in Spain: The Vikor method. Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 498-502.
7. Kaya, T.; Kahraman, C. Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul. Energy 2010, 35, 2517-2527.
8. Warfield, J.N. Developing interconnected matrices in structural modeling. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1974, 4, 51-81.
9. Warfield, J.N. Toward interpretation of complex structural modeling. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1974, 4, 405-417.
10. Warfield, J.N. Societal Systems: Planning, Policy and Complexity; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1976.
11. Huang, J.J.; Tzeng, G.H.; Ong, C.S. Multidimensional data in multidimensional scaling using the analytic network process. Pat. Recogn. Lett. 2005, 26, 755-767.
12. Sahney, S.; Banwet, D.K.; Karunes, S. An integrated framework for quality in education: Application of quality function deployment, interpretive structural modelling and path analysis. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. 2006, 17, 265-285.
13. Agarwal, R.S.; Tiwari, M.K. Modeling agility of supply chain. Ind. Market. Manag. 2007, 36, 443-457.
14. Thakkar, J.; Deshmukh, S.G.; Gupta, A.D.; Shankar, R. Development of a balanced scorecard: An integrated approach of interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and analytic network process (ANP). Int. J. Product. Perf. Manag. 2007, 56, 25-59.
15. Faisal, M.N.; Banwet, D.K.; Shankar, R. Information risks management in supply chains: An assessment and mitigation framework. J. Ent. Inform. Manag. 2007, 20, 677-699.
16. Kannan, G.; Haq, A.N. Analysis of interactions of criteria and sub-criteria for the selection of supplier in the built-in-order supply chain environment. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2007, 45, 831-852.
17. Qureshi, M.N.; Kumar, D.; Kumar, P. Modeling the logistics outsourcing relationship variables to enhance shippers' productivity and competitiveness in logistical supply chain. Int. J. Product. Perf. Manag. 2007, 56, 689-714.
18. Singh, R.K.; Garg, S.K.; Deshmukh, S.G.; Kumar, M. Modelling of critical success factors for implementation of AMTs. J. Model. Manag. 2007, 2, 232-250.
19. Upadhyay, R.K.; Gaur, S.K.; Agrawal, V.P.; Arora, K.C. ISM-CMAP-Combine (ICMC) for hierarchical knowledge scenario in quality engineering education. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 2007, 32, 21-33.
20. Thakkar, J.; Kanda, A.; Deshmukh, S.G. Evaluation of buyer-supplier relationships using an integrated mathematical approach of interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and graph theoretic matrix. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2008, 19, 92-124.
21. Vivek, S.D.; Banwet, D.K.; Shankar, R. Analysis of interactions among core, transaction and relationship-specific investments: The case of offshoring. J. Oper. Manag. 2008, 26, 180-197.
22. Yang, J.J.; Tzeng, H.N.; Yeh, R.H. Vendor selection by integrated fuzzy MCDM techniques with independence and interdependence. Inf. Sci. 2008, 178, 4166-4183.
23. Wang, G.H.; Wang, Y.X.; Zhao, T. Analysis of interactions among the barriers to energy saving in China. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 1879-1889.
24. Chidambaranathan, S.; Muralidharan, C.; Deshmukh, S.G. Analyzing the interaction of critical factors of supplier development using Interpretive Structural Modeling-an empirical study. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2009, 43, 1081-1093.
25. Kannan, G.; Pokharel, S.; Kumar, P.S. A hybrid approach using ISM and fuzzy TOPSIS for the selection of reverse logistics provider. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2009, 54, 28-36.
26. Mukherjee, K.; Mondal, S. Analysis of issues relating to remanufacturing technology of an Indian company-a case of an Indian company. Technol. Anal. Strategy. Manag. 2009, 21, 639-652.
27. Feng, C.M.; Wu, P.J.; Chia, K.C. A hybrid fuzzy integral decision-making model for locating manufacturing centers in China: A case study. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2010, 200, 63-73.
28. Lee, A.H.I.; Wang, W.M.; Lin, T.Y. An evaluation framework for technology transfer of new equipment in high technology industry. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 2010, 77, 135-150.
29. Lee, A.H.I.; Chen, H.H.; Kang, H.Y. A model to analyze strategic products for photovoltaic silicon thin-film solar cell power industry. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2011, 15, 1271-1283.
30. Lee, A.H.I.; Kang, H.Y.; Chang, C.C. An integrated interpretive structural modeling-fuzzy analytic network process-benefits, opportunities, costs and risks model for selecting technologies. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 2011, 10, 843-871.
31. Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1980.
32. Saaty, T.L. Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process; RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1996.
33. Meade, L.M.; Sarkis, J. Analyzing organizational project alternatives for agile manufacturing processes: An analytical network approach. Int. J. Prod. Res. 1999, 37, 241-261.
34. Saaty, R.W. Decision Making in Complex Environment: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for Decision Making and the Analytic Network Process (ANP) for Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback; Super Decisions: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2003.
35. Lee, A.H.I. A fuzzy AHP evaluation model for buyer-supplier relationships with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2009, 47, 4255-4280.
36. Yager, R.R. A procedure for ordering fuzzy subsets of the unit interval. Inf. Sci. 1981, 24, 143-161.