Integrating life-cycle assessment and multi-criteria decision analysis to compare alternative biodiesel chains

被引:0
作者
Luis C. Dias
Carolina Passeira
João Malça
Fausto Freire
机构
[1] University of Coimbra,CeBER and Faculty of Economics
[2] INESC Coimbra,ADAI
[3] University of Coimbra,LAETA, Department of Mechanical Engineering
[4] ISEC,Department of Mechanical Engineering
[5] Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra,undefined
来源
Annals of Operations Research | 2022年 / 312卷
关键词
Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA); Stochastic multi-criteria acceptability analysis (SMAA); Robust conclusions; VIP analysis; Life-cycle assessment (LCA); Weighting; Rapeseed; Biodiesel; Biofuel;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The transport sector is highly dependent on fossil fuels with significant environmental impacts. This motivates the environmental assessment of alternative fuel options, including biodiesel based on agricultural crops. The assessment of biofuel alternatives for transportation can be facilitated by the integration of Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). In this article, we compare four Rapeseed Methyl Ester biodiesel production chains, corresponding to four different feedstock origins. The environmental impact of each chain is assessed in the context of a LCA encompassing cultivation, transportation to Portugal, extraction and transesterification. We apply two different MCDA additive aggregation methodologies to aggregate various impact categories resulting from the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) phase of the LCA. The chosen MCDA methodologies, Stochastic Multicriteria Analysis and Variable Interdependent Parameter Analysis, are two complementary approaches to address one of the main difficulties of MCDA: setting the relative weights of the evaluation criteria. Indeed, weighting the various impacts in the LCIA phase is a controversial issue in LCA research and studies. The LCIA–MCDA approach proposed in this work does not require choosing a specific weighting vector, seeking to assess which conclusions are robust given some freedom allowed in the choice of weights. To study further the robustness of the conclusions concerning the choice of the criteria, the effects of removing one criterion are analyzed, one at a time.
引用
收藏
页码:1359 / 1374
页数:15
相关论文
共 117 条
  • [1] Brans JP(1986)How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method European Journal of Operational Research 24 228-238
  • [2] Vincke P(1997)Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models European Journal of Operational Research 103 531-546
  • [3] Mareschal B(2011)Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: State of the art and future challenges Bioresource Technology 102 437-451
  • [4] Butler J(2015)Environmental life cycle impacts of cellulosic ethanol in the Southern US produced from loblolly pine, eucalyptus, unmanaged hardwoods, forest residues, and switchgrass using a thermochemical conversion pathway Fuel Processing Technology 138 164-174
  • [5] Jia J(2014)On multi-criteria sustainability assessment: Spider-gram surface and dependence biases Applied Energy 113 159-163
  • [6] Dyer J(2009)Sustainability evaluation of biodiesel production using multicriteria decision making Environmental Progress Sustainable Energy 28 38-46
  • [7] Cherubini F(2015)Applying multi-criteria decision analysis to the life-cycle assessment of vehicles Journal of Cleaner Production 107 749-759
  • [8] Strømman AH(2012)Integrated evaluation of biofuel production options in agriculture?: An exploration of sustainable policy scenarios International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy 8 173-188
  • [9] Daystar J(2005)Multi-criteria analysis for technique assessment: Case study from industrial coating Journal of Industrial EcologyTechnology 9 127-142
  • [10] Reeb C(2014)A holistic sustainability assessment tool for bioenergy using the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) sustainability indicators Biomass and Bioenergy 66 70-80