Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 19 November 2014
Received in revised form
5 March 2016
Accepted 3 April 2016
Available online 14 April 2016
This paper is to select the best locations to build solar photovoltaic farms (large grid-connected
photovoltaic systems which have more than 100 kWp of installed capacity), with the coast of Murcia
in the southeast of Spain being used as an example. In order to solve the problem, the suitable locations
to implant such facilities will be identied by a Geographical Information System (GIS). To obtain the
weights of the criteria which inuence the proposed problem, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) will
be employed. Then, the suitable locations will be evaluated and classied using two different multicriteria decision methods, the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)
and ELimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE), in this case the version TRI. We are thus also
able to establish a comparison between the two methods. This comparison demonstrates how although
the results do not completely coincide, some similarity can be seen between the two methods.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Solar photovoltaic farms
GIS
Criteria
AHP
TOPSIS
ELECTRE TRI
1. Introduction
Nowadays, the commitment to carrying out sustainable development to satisfy the present needs of the population without
compromising those of future generations is a difcult challenge to
achieve. From an energy point of view, forecasts indicate that world
energy consumption will grow by 56% between 2010 and 2040,
although a gradual increase in prices of both oil and natural gas is
expected (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013). The
required containment of growth in emissions of greenhouse gases
(Arrhenius, 1896), established by the World Meteorological Organization and United Nations (Working Group I-II-III, 1990; United
Nations, 1992/1997/2013) in compliance with the objectives set
out in the various energy policies of the European Union (European
Commission, 1996, 1997; European Parliament, 2009b), were the
main reasons that sustainable development strategies were promoted (Jegatheesan et al., 2009; Engelbrecht et al., 2013; Dov et al.,
2009) and the implementation of renewable energy (RE) installations was endorsed (Espey, 2001; Menz and Vachon, 2006;
Foxon et al., 2005). The current economic and nancial crisis
388
Fig. 1. Global irradiation and solar electricity potential of Spain (European Commission, 2012; Huld et al., 2012; Sri et al., 2007).
389
390
Table 1
Legal restrictions.
N.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Table 2
Random index for different matrix orders.
RI
1e2
10
0.00
0.5247
0.8816
1.1086
1.2479
1.3417
1.4057
1.4499
1.4854
391
392
the concept that the chosen alternative should have the shortest
distance from the positive ideal solution (PIS), and the farthest from
the negative ideal solution (NIS).
The computational steps of the TOPSIS method are the
following:
Step 1 Establish a performance decision matrix
Step 2 Normalize the decision matrix by means of
,v
uX
u m 2
nij xij t
xij ; j 1; ; n; i 1; ; m:
(1)
vij wj 5nij ; j 1; ; n; i 1; ; m;
(2)
o
n
0
max vij ;j2J
i 1;2;;m
A v
max vij ;j2J
1 ;;vn
i
i
o
n
0
max vij ;j2J
i 1;2;;m
max vij ;j2J
A v
1 ;;vn
i
(3)
8
<X
n
:
vij v
j
j1
j1
vij v
j
91
2 =2
;
91
2 =2
;
d
i
P
Cai ; bh
kj $cj ai $bh
P
(7)
kj
j2F
dj ai ; bh 0gj ai gj bh pj
gj bh gj ai pj
v j pj
(8)
; 1 1; ; m
(4)
ss ai ; bh Cai ; bh $
d
i
; i 1; ; m
d
i
Y 1 dj ai ; bh
j2F
1 Cai ; bh
where F
j2F dj ai ; bh > Cai ; bh
d
i
j2F
dj ai ; bh 1gj bh vj bh gj ai
Ri
(6)
cj ai ; bh 1gj bh gi ai qj
; 1 1; ; m
gj ai pj gj bh
pj q j
cj ai ; bh 0pj gi bh gj ai
0 < cj ai ; bh < 1qj < gj bh gj ai pj 0cj ai ; bh
d
i
j1
8
<X
n
(5)
(9)
w2
w3
w4
w5
w6
w7
w8
w9
w10
0.0419 0.0586 0.1271 0.0513 0.0493 0.1449 0.1855 0.1680 0.1195 0.05384
393
Table 7
Measure of PIS and NIS distances and relative closeness to the ideal solution.
Suitable locations
Municipalities
Alternatives
Aguilas
Alcantarilla
Cartagena
Fuente Alamo
n
La Unio
Lorca
zares
Los Alca
n
Mazarro
Murcia
Puerto Lumbreras
San Javier
San Pedro del Pinatar
Torre Pacheco
TOTAL
437
6733
391
286
25,396
148
9243
5634
4371
3144
538
5216
66,845
a2147
a1060
a1266
a445
a2674
a1989
a2754
a705
a800
a994
5308
d
0.004481
0.021591
0.035491
0.036460
0.038009
0.038703
0.038483
0.038485
0.039066
0.038281
0.055206
0.034959
0.021870
0.021141
0.019810
0.019918
0.019803
0.019561
0.018913
0.018305
0.9249
0.6182
0.3813
0.3670
0.3426
0.3398
0.3398
0.3370
0.3262
0.3235
The nal steps of TOPSIS provide the separation of each alternative with respect to the PIS and NIS values (d and
d respectively) and a ranking score of alternatives (Table 7). The
best alternative must have the closest value to 1, therefore in this
case it corresponds to alternative A2147.
Fig. 4 shows all the alternatives to be assessed in the municipality of San Javier (3144), with the top 10 being indicated in blue
(in the web version), according to the TOPSIS method.
Proceeding similarly with other municipalities that comprise
the study area, all of the maps representing the evaluation of locations available will be obtained according to the TOPSIS method.
In order to enable comparisons with other multi-criteria
methodology, the alternatives were also assessed by the ELECTRE
TRI method.
3.2. ELECTRE TRI
The rst step is to dene the references actions that will be
nchez-Lozano et al.
dened in a similar way as described in Sa
(2014) i.e., by an expert who is a promoter of renewable energy
facilities with over 10 years of experience in the sector. All necessary parameters are dened in order to apply the ELECTRE TRI
method (Table 8).
Developing each of the ELECTRE TRI method steps for each
municipality through a spreadsheet, each of the alternatives to
evaluate will be classied into categories (category 1, 2, 3 and 4). As
an example, the values of the degrees of credibility and the category
on the top 10 alternatives of the municipality of San Javier are
represented in Table 9 and the indicative map (Fig. 5) shows the
Table 5
Decision Matrix of the best 10 locations in the municipality of San Javier.
a2147
a1060
a1266
a445
a2674
a1989
a2754
a705
a800
a994
g1 (Classes)
g2 (m2)
g3 (m)
g4 (m)
g5 (m)
g6 (m)
g7 (KJ/m2$da)
g8 (%)
g9 (Classes)
g 10 ( C)
1.85
4.00
3.00
3.00
1.33
5.67
1.50
2.00
2.00
0.67
397301.24
245835.68
139810.84
132862.28
123041.29
117771.77
118080.17
118220.92
114530.21
122049.28
25.00
268.38
63.17
153.11
176.74
25.00
361.88
82.45
120.63
425.17
1.00
2.95
1.00
1.00
94.98
1.00
1.00
1.00
31.57
1162.65
1951.40
5036.51
4343.95
5041.24
2027.28
465.84
361.94
2402.73
2418.71
2961.10
1230.51
1133.57
1302.96
1450.61
209.53
48.74
539.58
574.02
410.66
395.06
2040.69
2048.16
2045.04
2042.97
2043.33
2043.97
2043.25
2042.38
2041.46
2042.59
0.44
1.52
0.94
0.38
0.72
0.49
0.78
0.13
0.64
1.08
4.00
5.00
6.00
6.00
4.00
6.00
4.00
8.00
4.00
8.00
17.42
17.66
17.70
17.70
17.70
17.60
17.59
17.61
17.61
17.70
Table 6
Ideal solution (PIS) and anti-ideal solution (NIS) in the municipality of San Javier.
A
A-
0.00210
0.00000
0.05409
0.00013
0.00002
0.00347
0.00000
0.00883
0.00007
0.00632
0.00713
0.00000
0.00214
0.00211
0.00000
0.00413
0.00195
0.00024
0.00097
0.00093
394
Fig. 4. Representation of the 3144 alternatives of the municipality of San Javier and the top 10 according to TOPSIS.
395
Table 8
Reference actions.
b1
b2
b3
Pj
qj(b)
pj(b)
vj(b)
g1
g2
g3
g4
g5
g6
g7
g8
g9
g10
2
4
7
0.0419
1
4
6
30
20
10
0.0586
5
15
40
25000
50000
100000
0.1271
3
1000
25000
5
8
10
0.0513
4
7
9
1000
500
25
0.0493
100
200
650
10000
1000
100
0.1449
100
300
500
100
500
750
0.1855
100
300
800
6250
2500
500
0.1680
150
3000
10000
1200
1700
2000
0.1195
0
1500
2050
16.00
18.00
20.00
0.05384
17.50
17.60
17.70
Table 9
Top 10 alternatives degrees of credibility and categories.
A2147
A1060
A1266
A445
A2674
A1989
A2754
A705
A800
A994
ss(ai,b1)
ss(ai,b2)
ss(ai,b3)
Category
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.98
0.86
0.90
0.86
0.80
0.81
0.98
0.99
0.99
0.90
0.85
0.74
0.79
0.78
0.28
0.81
0.77
0.78
0.63
0.00
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
Category
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
3
The results show that, although the ELECTRE TRI method works
in a discreet manner and benets those alternatives which are
slightly above each category and is detrimental for those alternatives which are slightly below each category, the weights of the
criteria are fundamental to sort any alternative into its corresponding category. Alternative A1989 is a clear example.
Then, a deep analysis will be carried out with the rest of the
alternatives located in category 3. It should be pointed out that
there is only one alternative (A994) which has veto to achieve the
category 4 in criteria g1 and g6, however this alternative does not
have the lowest credibility degree (its value is 0.90). In comparison
with alternative A2674, it is worth noting that in spite of not having
veto to achieve the best category; the credibility degree value of
alternative A2674 is lower than that of alternative A994. Therefore,
it is demonstrated that although there is veto for some criteria of
one alternative, the weights of the rest of the criteria are able to
compensate this alternative and thus allow it to improve its credibility degree value.
4. Conclusions
From the study conducted it was found that the GIS software are
not only supporting tools that can help to address a PV farm location problem (in particular, site selection), but they can also
generate databases in spreadsheet format which provide an ideal
starting point to address any issues of territorial nature.
In our example it has been concluded that the coast of the Region of Murcia is an optimal place to implement solar photovoltaic
farms because, once all constraints have been considered, it has
obtained a high percentage of suitable surface available (21.25%). In
addition, a very useful database has been obtained for solving
complex locations such as the evaluation and selection of viable
locations, obtained using multi-criteria decision making
methodologies.
A comparison has been made between two methods of multicriteria decision making (ELECTRE TRI and the TOPSIS method)
and, although the results do not completely coincide, some similarity can be seen between the best alternatives ranked with the
TOPSIS method and the best classied with the ELECTRE TRI
method.
It has been demonstrated that although the ELECTRE TRI
method assigns a set of alternatives to previously dened categories, and the TOPSIS method provides a ranking of these alternatives, it is possible to make a more exhaustive comparison
between both methods through the value of the degree of credibility dened by ELECTRE TRI for each of the alternatives.
Regarding future work of this study, economic studies could be
considered such as a viability analysis which allows the alternatives
to be assessed not only from the technical and environmental point
of view but also from an economic point of view. Certain limitations
of this study could also be countered by increasing the number of
renewable technologies to implement (biomass, biogas, etc.) or by
applying other decision methodologies.
396
Fig. 5. Classication by categories in the municipality of San Javier according to ELECTRE TRI.
397
Table 10
Comparative between TOPSIS and ELECTRE-TRI methods.
Alternatives
Coord. X
Coord. Y
Polygon
Subplot
Ranking TOPSIS
Category ELECTRE-TRI
A2147
691494.73
4184050.73
017
Plot
29
0.9249
Category 4 (0.85)
A1060
A1266
A445
A2674
684650.28
685340.94
684587.94
689323.43
4190765.84
4190072.15
4190307.66
4190124.10
001
001
001
008
13
33
13
71
a
a
b
a
0.6182
0.3813
0.3670
0.3426
Category
Category
Category
Category
A1989
689594.93
4185160.10
019
22
0.3398
Category 4 (0.81)
A2754
A705
A800
A994
688625.94
690543.93
692313.95
688005.95
4188111.15
4183132.10
4187014.07
4191037.62
021
016
012
003
178
28
32
25
a
a
a
a
0.3398
0.3370
0.3262
0.3235
Category
Category
Category
Category
4
4
4
3
4
4
3
3
(0.74)
(0.79)
(0.78)
(0.80)
(0.77)
(0.78)
(0.99)
(0.90)
(*) This is the score obtained through the value of the degree of credibility for each category.
Acknowledgement
Authors acknowledge support through projects TIN201455024-P from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, and P11-TIC-8001 from the Consejera de Economa,
n y Ciencia of Junta de Andaluca (both including FEDER
Innovacio
funds from CEE).
References
Al-Yahyai, S., Charabi, Y., Gastli, A., Al-Badi, A., 2012. Wind farm land suitability
indexing using multi-criteria analysis. Renew. Energy 44, 80e87.
Alonso, J.A., Lamata, M.T., 2006. Consistency in the analytic hierarchy process. a new
approach. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. 14 (4), 445e459.
Arrhenius, S., 1896. On the inuence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground. Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 5 (41), 237e276.
Avril, S., Mansilla, C., Busson, M., Lemaire, T., 2012. Photovoltaic energy policy:
nancial estimation and performance comparison of the public support in ve
representative countries. Energy Policy 51, 244e258.
Brer, M.J., Wstenhagen, R., 2009. Which renewable energy policy is a venture
capitalist's best friend? Empirical evidence from a survey of international
cleantech investors. Energy Policy 37, 4997e5006.
Byrne, J., Zhou, A., Shen, B., Hughes, K., 2007. Evaluating the potential of small-scale
renewable energy options to meet rural livelihoods needs: a GIS- and lifecycle
cost-based assessment of Western China's options. Energy Policy 35,
4391e4401.
Cavallaro, F., 2010. Fuzzy TOPSIS approach for assessing thermal-energy storage in
concentrated solar power (CSP) systems. Appl. Energy 87, 496e503.
Charabi, Y., Gastli, A., 2011. PV site suitability analysis using GIS-based spatial fuzzy
multi-criteria evaluation. Renew. Energy 36, 2554e2561.
Chen, S.J., Hwang, C.L., 1992. Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods
and Applications. Springer-Verlng, Berlin.
Domnguez Bravo, J., Garca Casals, X., Pinedo Pascua, I., 2007. GIS approach to the
denition of capacity and generation ceilings of renewable energy technologies.
Energy Policy 35, 4879e4892.
Dov, V.G., Friedler, F., Huisingh, D., Klemes, J.J., 2009. Cleaner energy for sustainable
future. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 889e895.
Engelbrecht, D., Biswas, W.K., Ahmad, W., 2013. An evaluation of integrated spatial
technology framework for greenhouse gas mitigation in grain production in
Western Australia. J. Clean. Prod. 57, 69e78.
EPIA, 2013. Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics 2013-2017. European Photovoltaic Industry Association, Renewable Energy House, Brussels, pp. 12e39.
Espey, S., 2001. Renewables portfolio standard: a means for trade with electricity
from renewable energy sources. Energy Policy 29, 557e566.
European Commission, 1996. Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy.
Green Paper for a Community Strategy, Brussels.
European Commission, 1997. Energy for the Future: Renewable Sources of Energy.
White Paper for a Community Strategy and Action Plan, Brussels.
European Commission, 2010. PV Status Report 2010: Research, Solar Cell Production
and Market Implementation of Photovoltaics. DG Joint Research Centre. Institute for Energy, Renewable Energy Unit, Italy, ISBN 978-92-79-15657-1. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2788/87966. EUR 24344 EN e 2010.
European Commission, 2012. Solar Radiation and Photovoltaic Electricity Potential
Country and Regional Maps for Europe. PVGIS European Union, 2001-2012.
Joint Research Centre, Institute for Energy and Transport, Renewable Energy
Unit. http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/ (accessed 19.11.13).
European Parliament, 2009a. Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. Off. J. Eur. Union.
Brussels.
European Parliament, 2009b. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from
398
Electric Power Production in the Special Regime. BOE N 75. Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism, Madrid.
Royal Decree 661/2007, 2007. Dated 25 May, Regulating the Production of Electricity in the Special Regime. BOE n1 126. Ministry of Industry, Energy and
Tourism, Madrid.
Royal Decree- Law 14/2010, 2010. Dated 23 December, Establishing Urgent Measures to Correct the Tariff Decit in the Electricity Sector. BOE n 312. Ministry of
Industry, Energy and Tourism, Madrid.
Royal Decree-Law 1/2012, 2012. Dated 27 January, in Which Proceeded to Suspend
Pre-allocation Procedures and the Removal of Economic Incentives for New
Facilities of Electricity Production from Cogeneration, Renewable Energies and
Waste. BOE n 24. Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism, Madrid.
Saaty, T.L., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw Hill.
S
anchez-Lozano, J.M., Teruel-Solano, J., Soto-Elvira, P.L., Garca-Cascales, M.S., 2013.
Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Multi-Criteria Decision Making
(MCDM) methods for the evaluation of solar farms locations: case study in
south-eastern Spain. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 24, 544e556.
S
anchez-Lozano, J.M., Antunes, C.H., Garca Cascales, M.S., Dias, L.C., 2014. GIS-based
photovoltaic solar farms site selection using ELECTRE-TRI: evaluating the case
for Torre-Pacheco, Murcia, southeast of Spain. Renew. Energy 66, 478e494.
Sorensen, B., Meibom, P., 1999. GIS tools for renewable energy modelling. Renew.
Energy 16, 1262e1267.
Sri, M., Huld, T.A., Dunlop, E.D., Ossenbrink, H.A., 2007. Potential of solar electricity
generation in the European Union member states and candidate countries. Sol.
Energy 81, 1295e1305.
United Nations, 1992. Report of the United Nations. Conference on Environment and
Development. Rio Declaration on Envorinment and Development, Rio de
Janeiro.
United Nations, 1997. Framework Convention on Climatic Change: Report of the
Conference of the Parties on its Third Session. Adoption of the Kyoto Protocol,
Kyoto.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2013. Message to
Parties: Early Submission of Information and Views. United Nations Climate
Change Secretariat, Bonn.
U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013. International Energy Outlook 2013.
With Projections to 2040. Ofce of Energy Analysis U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, pp. 1e312. DC 20585.
Uyan, M., 2013. GIS-based solar farms site selection using analytic hierarchy process
(AHP) in Karapinar region, Konya/Turkey. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 28, 11e17.
Van Haaren, R., Fthenakis, V., 2011. GIS-based wind farm site selection using spatial
multi-criteria analysis (SMCA): evaluating the case for New York state. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 3332e3340.
ndez, Z., 2007. Solar Radiation and Atmospheric TemVera, F., Garca, J.R., Herna
perature Atlas of the Autonomous Community of the Region of Murcia. Unicnica de Cartagena, Agency for Energy Management in the
versidad Polite
Region of Murcia-ARGEM.
Voivontas, D., Assimacopoulos, D., Mourelatos, A., 1998. Evaluation of renewable
n support system. Renew. Energy 13 (3),
energy potential using a GIS decisio
333e344.
m, S., 2013. To prospect
Wallsten, B., Carlsson, A., Fr
andegrd, P., Krook, J., Svanstro
an urban mine e assessing the metal recovery potential of infrastructure cold
ping, Sweden. J. Clean. Prod. 55, 103e111.
spots in Norrko
Working Group I, 1990. Climate change. In: Houghton, J.T., Jenkins, G.J.,
Ephraums, J.J. (Eds.), The IPCC Scientic Assessment. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
Working Group II, 1990. Climate change. In: McG Tegart, W.J., Sheldon, G.W.,
Grifths, D.C. (Eds.), The IPCC Impacts Assessment. Australian Government
Publishing Service, Camberra.
Working Group III, 1990. Climate change. In: The IPCC Response Strategies. World
Meteorological Organization/United Nations Environment Program. Island
Press.
Wnteshagen, R., Menichetti, E., 2012. Strategic choices for renewable energy investment: conceptual framework and opportunities for further research. Energy Policy 40, 1e10.
Youse-Sahzabi, A., Sasaki, K., Youse, H., Pirasteh, S., Sugai, Y., 2011. GIS aided
prediction of CO2 emission dispersion from geothermal electricity production.
J. Clean. Prod. 19, 1982e1993.
re a
la de
cision dans le cadre de la proble
matique du
Yu, W., 1992a. Aide multicrite
thodes et applications. The
se de doctorat. UER Sciences de
tri. Concepts, me
Paris-Dauphine, p. 201.
lorganisation, Universite
thodologiques et manuel dutilisation.
Yu, W., 1992b. ELECTRE TRI. Aspects me
Paris-Dauphine. Doc. Du. LAMSADE 74, 80.
Universite
Yue, C.D., Wang, S.S., 2006. GIS-based evaluation of multifarious local renewable
energy sources: a case study of the Chigu area of southwestern Taiwan. Energy
Policy 34, 730e742.
Zhang, X., Izaurralde, R.C., Manowitz, D., West, T.O., Post, W.M., Thomson, A.M.,
Bandaru, V.P., Nichols, J., Williams, J.R., 2010. An integrative modeling framework to evaluate the productivity and sustainability of biofuel crop production
systems. GCB Bioenergy 2, 258e277.
Zubaryeva, A., Zaccarelli, N., Del Giudice, C., Zurlini, G., 2012. Spatially explicit
assessment of local biomass availability for distributed biogas production via
anaerobic co-digestion e Mediterranean case study. Renew. Energy 39,
261e270.