Ranking of G-20 Countries According to Energy Production Sources in the Context of Sustainability by TOPSIS Method

被引:0
作者
Menten, Cem [1 ]
Cekic, Bulent [1 ]
机构
[1] Hacettepe Univ, Ankara, Turkiye
关键词
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis; Energy Sources; G20; Countries; TOPSIS; Renewable Energy; Sustainability; ELECTRICITY-GENERATION; DECISION-MAKING; HIERARCHY PROCESS; MULTICRITERIA; SELECTION; RESOURCES; SCENARIOS; LOCATION; POWER; MIX;
D O I
10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2023.04.19
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The primary purpose of this study is to rank G20 member countries according to different types of energy production at the country level using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques. In this study, G20 countries are ranked according to their energy production using the TOPSIS method, one of the most widely used approaches in the MCDA literature. The alternatives are G20 members, and the criteria consist of electricity generation from fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), renewable energy, nuclear energy, and CO2 emissions. In the 2020-2022 period, G20 countries are evaluated under two scenarios according to different types of energy production. In the first scenario, where all criteria are equally weighted, the United States (USA), European Union (EU), and China ranked highest for each year in the years under evaluation, respectively. In the second scenario, which has an environmental perspective on the weighting of the criteria, similar to the first scenario, the EU and the USA are in the first two places, while France is the third country in the ranking. The most remarkable finding obtained within the scope of the study is that China and Saudi Arabia, which rank highly in the first scenario, are ranked last in the second scenario evaluated from an environmental perspective. Different from the studies in the literature, in this study, evaluations are made with an environmental view by assigning higher weights to the criteria of renewable energy production, nuclear energy production, and emission values.
引用
收藏
页码:387 / 408
页数:22
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [1] Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method
    Alizadeh, Reza
    Soltanisehat, Leili
    Lund, Peter D.
    Zamanisabzi, Hamed
    [J]. ENERGY POLICY, 2020, 137
  • [2] SELECTING A LOCATION FOR A LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS TERMINAL IN THE EASTERN BALTIC SEA
    Bagocius, Vygantas
    Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras
    Turskis, Zenonas
    [J]. TRANSPORT, 2014, 29 (01) : 69 - 74
  • [3] Multi-criteria ranking of energy generation scenarios with Monte Carlo simulation
    Balezentis, Tomas
    Streimikiene, Dalia
    [J]. APPLIED ENERGY, 2017, 185 : 862 - 871
  • [4] Is Nuclear Power an Optimal Option for Electricity Generation in Turkey?
    Boran, F. E.
    Etoz, M.
    Dizdar, E.
    [J]. ENERGY SOURCES PART B-ECONOMICS PLANNING AND POLICY, 2013, 8 (04) : 382 - 390
  • [5] Multi-criteria analysis of electricity generation mix scenarios in Tunisia
    Brand, Bernhard
    Missaoui, Rafik
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2014, 39 : 251 - 261
  • [6] Assessing the Energy and Climate Sustainability of European Union Member States: An MCDM-Based Approach
    Brodny, Jaroslaw
    Tutak, Magdalena
    [J]. SMART CITIES, 2023, 6 (01): : 339 - 367
  • [7] Fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: Recent developments
    Carlsson, C
    Fuller, R
    [J]. FUZZY SETS AND SYSTEMS, 1996, 78 (02) : 139 - 153
  • [8] Chen S.-J., 1992, FUZZY MULTIPLE ATTRI, P289, DOI [DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-46768-4_5, 10.1007/978-3-642-46768-4_5]
  • [9] G20, 2022, About the G20
  • [10] Multi-criteria decision making on the energy supply configuration of autonomous desalination units
    Georgiou, Dimitris
    Mohammed, Essam Sh.
    Rozakis, Stelios
    [J]. RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2015, 75 : 459 - 467