Published January 15, 2017 | Version v1
Journal article

Stakeholder-driven multi-attribute analysis for energy project selection under uncertainty

  • 1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155 (United States)
  • 2. Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ (United Kingdom)
  • 3. Department of Civil, Environmental and Construction Engineering, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd, Orlando, FL 32816 (United States)
  • 4. Geophysical Institute and Department of Geosciences, University of Alaska – Fairbanks, 1000 University Ave, Fairbanks, AK 99709 (United States)

Description

In practice, selecting an energy project for development requires balancing criteria and competing stakeholder priorities to identify the best alternative. Energy source selection can be modeled as multi-criteria decision-maker problems to provide quantitative support to reconcile technical, economic, environmental, social, and political factors with respect to the stakeholders' interests. Decision making among these complex interactions should also account for the uncertainty present in the input data. In response, this work develops a stochastic decision analysis framework to evaluate alternatives by involving stakeholders to identify both quantitative and qualitative selection criteria and performance metrics which carry uncertainties. The developed framework is illustrated using a case study from Fairbanks, Alaska, where decision makers and residents must decide on a new source of energy for heating and electricity. We approach this problem in a five step methodology: (1) engaging experts (role players) to develop criteria of project performance; (2) collecting a range of quantitative and qualitative input information to determine the performance of each proposed solution according to the selected criteria; (3) performing a Monte-Carlo analysis to capture uncertainties given in the inputs; (4) applying multi-criteria decision-making, social choice (voting), and fallback bargaining methods to account for three different levels of cooperation among the stakeholders; and (5) computing an aggregate performance index (API) score for each alternative based on its performance across criteria and cooperation levels. API scores communicate relative performance between alternatives. In this way, our methodology maps uncertainty from the input data to reflect risk in the decision and incorporates varying degrees of cooperation into the analysis to identify an optimal and practical alternative. - Highlights: • We develop an applicable stakeholder-driven framework for energy option selection. • We introduce a method to map uncertainty from input to output in a decision tree. • We present an application from a complex energy sourcing problem in rural Alaska.

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.11.030

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.energy.2016.11.030;
PII
S0360-5442(16)31635-8;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Energy (Oxford)
Journal Volume
119
Journal Page Range
p. 744-753
ISSN
0360-5442
CODEN
ENEYDS

INIS

Country of Publication
United Kingdom
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
48086951
Subject category
S29: ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY;
Descriptors DEI
ALASKA; COEFFICIENT OF PERFORMANCE; COMPLEXES; COOPERATION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION TREE ANALYSIS; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY SOURCES; HAZARDS; HEATING; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PERFORMANCE; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES
Descriptors DEC
CALCULATION METHODS; DEVELOPED COUNTRIES; NORTH AMERICA; USA

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2016 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.