Evaluation of sustainable hydrogen production technologies on an industrial scale using comparative analysis of decision-making methods.
Data uncertainty
Decision support systems
Multi-criteria decision-making
Renewable hydrogen
Sustainability
Technology assessment
Journal
Environmental science and pollution research international
ISSN: 1614-7499
Titre abrégé: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9441769
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 May 2024
04 May 2024
Historique:
received:
08
12
2023
accepted:
27
04
2024
medline:
5
5
2024
pubmed:
5
5
2024
entrez:
4
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Due to its various advantages in different industrial fields, hydrogen can provide energy based on sustainability goals and recreates a critical function in the economy of countries. In this regard, evaluating hydrogen production technologies on an industrial scale is necessary for industrial development and economic growth. Therefore, this study proposes a comprehensive, integrated framework of hybrid fuzzy decision-making for assessing hydrogen production technologies in Iran. In addition to considering sustainability factors, political, technical, and reliability indicators are also assessed in this research to make a comprehensive assessment. The Fuzzy Step-wise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis (F-SWARA) technique determines the importance of indicators, and the Fuzzy Weighted Aggregates Sum-Product Assessment (F-WASPAS) approach ranks technologies. The weighing findings indicated that the sub-indices of investment cost, technical infrastructure development, and implementation costs were introduced as the most significant sub-indices with weights of 0.226, 0.151, and 0.126, respectively. The evaluation findings with the F-WASPAS method and comparative analysis with various decision-making methods revealed that electrolysis based on solar energy and electrolysis based on wind energy technologies had the highest preference. In this regard, the infrastructure and costs of hydrogen production can be improved by presenting various incentives, such as improving financial conditions while attracting investment and increasing cooperation with top companies. So, sustainable development, economic growth, and industrial development are provided.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38703315
doi: 10.1007/s11356-024-33535-z
pii: 10.1007/s11356-024-33535-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Abdel-Basset M, Gamal A, Chakrabortty RK, Ryan MJ (2021) Evaluation of sustainable hydrogen production options using an advanced hybrid MCDM approach: a case study. Int J Hydrogen Energy 46:4567–4591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.10.232
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.10.232
Acar C, Beskese A, Temur GT (2018) Sustainability analysis of different hydrogen production options using hesitant fuzzy AHP. Int J Hydrogen Energy 43:18059–18076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.08.024
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.08.024
Alamri FS, Saeed MH, Saeed M (2024) A hybrid entropy-based economic evaluation of hydrogen generation techniques using multi-criteria decision making. Int J Hydrogen Energy 49:711–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.10.324
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.10.324
Almutairi K, Hosseini Dehshiri SS, Hosseini Dehshiri SJ et al (2022) An economic investigation of the wind-hydrogen projects: a case study. Int J Hydrogen Energy 47:25880–25898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.05.070
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.05.070
Arsad SR, Ker PJ, Hannan MA et al (2024) Patent landscape review of hydrogen production methods: assessing technological updates and innovations. Int J Hydrogen Energy 50:447–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.09.085
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.09.085
Aziz G, Sarwar S, Khan MS, Waheed R (2024) The prospect of green hydrogen in Saudi Arabia: an overview of theoretical and empirical approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 31:6597–6609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-31301-1
doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-31301-1
Chang PL, Hsu CW, Chang PC (2011) Fuzzy Delphi method for evaluating hydrogen production technologies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 36:14172–14179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.05.045
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.05.045
d’Amore-Domenech R, Santiago Ó, Leo TJ (2020) Multicriteria analysis of seawater electrolysis technologies for green hydrogen production at sea. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 133:110166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110166
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110166
Dehshiri SJ, Amiri M, Mostafaeipour A, Le T (2024) Evaluation of renewable energy projects based on sustainability goals using a hybrid pythagorean fuzzy-based decision approach. Energy 297:131272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.131272
doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.131272
Dhumras H, Bajaj RK (2024) On potential strategic framework for green supply chain management in the energy sector using q-rung picture fuzzy AHP & WASPAS decision-making model. Expert Syst Appl 237:121550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121550
doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121550
Dumrul C, Bilgili F, Zarali F et al (2024) The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives in Turkey using intuitionistic-fuzzy EDAS methodology. Environ Sci Pollut Res 31:15503–15524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-31816-7
doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-31816-7
Fetanat A, Tayebi M (2024) Sustainability and reliability-based hydrogen technologies prioritization for decarbonization in the oil refining industry: a decision support system under single-valued neutrosophic set. Int J Hydrogen Energy 52:765–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.08.229
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.08.229
Gorji AA, Martek I (2023) Renewable energy policy and deployment of renewable energy technologies: the role of resource curse. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30:91377–91395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28851-9
doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-28851-9
Heidary Dahooie J, Hosseini Dehshiri SJ, Banaitis A, Binkytė-Vėlienė A (2020) Identifying and prioritizing cost reduction solutions in the supply chain by integrating value engineering and gray multi-criteria decision-making. Technol Econ Dev Econ 26:1311–1338. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2020.13534
doi: 10.3846/tede.2020.13534
Hosseini Dehshiri SJ, Amiri M (2023a) An integrated multi-criteria decision-making framework under uncertainty for evaluating sustainable hydrogen production strategies based on renewable energies in Iran. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30:46058–46073. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25489-5
doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25489-5
Hosseini Dehshiri SJ, Amiri M (2023b) Evaluating the risks of the internet of things in renewable energy systems using a hybrid fuzzy decision approach. Energy 285:129493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.129493
doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.129493
Hosseini Dehshiri SJ, Amiri M (2024) Evaluation of blockchain implementation solutions in the sustainable supply chain: a novel hybrid decision approach based on Z-numbers. Expert Syst Appl 235:121123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121123
doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121123
Hosseini Dehshiri SS, Hosseini Dehshiri SJ (2022) Locating wind farm for power and hydrogen production based on Geographic information system and multi-criteria decision making method: an application. Int J Hydrogen Energy 47:24569–24583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.03.083
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.03.083
Hosseini Dehshiri SS, Hosseini Dehshiri SJ, Firoozabadi B (2023) Evaluation of using solar energy in Iran’s textile industry towards cleaner production: sustainable planning and feasibility analysis. J Clean Prod 421:138447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138447
doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138447
Hosseini Dehshiri SJ, Amiri M, Hosseini Bamakan SM (2024) Evaluating the blockchain technology strategies for reducing renewable energy development risks using a novel integrated decision framework. Energy 289:129987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.129987
doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.129987
Kakavand A, Sayadi S, Tsatsaronis G, Behbahaninia A (2023) Techno-economic assessment of green hydrogen and ammonia production from wind and solar energy in Iran. Int J Hydrogen Energy 48:14170–14191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.12.285
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.12.285
Keršulienė V, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z (2010) Selection of rational dispute resolution method by applying new step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (Swara). J Bus Econ Manag 11:243–258. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.12
doi: 10.3846/jbem.2010.12
Li W, Ren X, Ding S, Dong L (2020) A multi-criterion decision making for sustainability assessment of hydrogen production technologies based on objective grey relational analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy 45:34385–34395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.11.039
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.11.039
Luis F, Moncayo G (2021) Nature-inspired computing paradigms in systems: reliability, availability, maintainability, safety and cost (RAMS+C) and prognostics and health management (PHM). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2020-0-00587-6
Mostafaeipour A, Zarezade M, Khalifeh Soltani SR et al (2022) A conceptual new model for use of solar water heaters in hot and dry regions. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 49:101710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101710
doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2021.101710
Mostafaeipour A, Le T (2024) Evaluating strategies for developing renewable energies considering economic, social, and environmental aspects: a case study. Environ Sci Pollut Res 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32612-7
Nasrabadi AM, Korpeh M (2023) Techno-economic analysis and optimization of a proposed solar-wind-driven multigeneration system; case study of Iran. Int J Hydrogen Energy 48:13343–13361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.12.283
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.12.283
Olabi AG, Abdelkareem MA, Mahmoud M et al (2024) Multiple-criteria decision-making for hydrogen production approaches based on economic, social, and environmental impacts. Int J Hydrogen Energy 52:854–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.10.293
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.10.293
Ourya I, Abderafi S (2023) Clean technology selection of hydrogen production on an industrial scale in Morocco. Results Eng 17:100815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100815
doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100815
Pilavachi PA, Chatzipanagi AI, Spyropoulou AI (2009) Evaluation of hydrogen production methods using the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Hydrogen Energy 34:5294–5303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.04.026
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.04.026
Ren J, Fedele A, Mason M et al (2013) Fuzzy multi-actor multi-criteria decision making for sustainability assessment of biomass-based technologies for hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 38:9111–9120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.05.074
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.05.074
Ren J, Gao S, Tan S et al (2015) Role prioritization of hydrogen production technologies for promoting hydrogen economy in the current state of China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 41:1217–1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.028
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.09.028
Seker S, Aydin N (2022) Assessment of hydrogen production methods via integrated MCDM approach under uncertainty. Int J Hydrogen Energy 47:3171–3184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.07.232
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.07.232
Singh T (2024) Entropy weighted WASPAS and MACBETH approaches for optimizing the performance of solar water heating system. Case Stud Therm Eng 53:103922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2023.103922
doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2023.103922
Statista Research Department (2023) Forecast market size of clean hydrogen worldwide from 2030 to 2050. In: Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1402050/global-market-size-of-clean-hydrogen/ . Accessed 25 Aug 2023
Turskis Z, Zavadskas EK, Antucheviciene J, Kosareva N (2015) A hybrid model based on fuzzy AHP and fuzzy WASPAS for construction site selection. Int J Comput Commun Control 10:873–888. https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2015.6.2078
doi: 10.15837/ijccc.2015.6.2078
Ulutaş A, Karakuş CB, Topal A (2020) Location selection for logistics center with fuzzy SWARA and CoCoSo methods. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38:4693–4709. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-191400
doi: 10.3233/JIFS-191400
Xu D, Li W, Ren X et al (2020) Technology selection for sustainable hydrogen production: a multi-criteria assessment framework under uncertainties based on the combined weights and interval best-worst projection method. Int J Hydrogen Energy 45:34396–34411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.09.030
doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.09.030
Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8:338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
doi: 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Antucheviciene J, Zakarevicius A (2012) Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektron Ir Elektrotechnika 122:3–6. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810
doi: 10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810
Zhao H, Guo S (2014) Selecting green supplier of thermal power equipment by using a hybrid MCDM method for sustainability. Sustain 6:217–235. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6010217
doi: 10.3390/su6010217