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
  • [11] Gonzalez R(2007)Bias in normalization: Causes, consequences, detection and remedies The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12 211-216
  • [12] Venditti R(2013)Robust multi-criteria ranking with additive value models and holistic pair-wise preference statements European Journal of Operational Research 228 169-180
  • [13] Kelley SS(2013)Process design accompanying life cycle management and risk analysis as a decision support tool for sustainable biodiesel production Green Chemistry 15 463-477
  • [14] Dias LC(1998)SMAA---Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis European Journal of Operational Research 106 137-143
  • [15] Domingues AR(2001)SMAA-2?: Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making Operations Research 49 444-454
  • [16] Dinh LTT(2006)Alternatives to incorporate uncertainty and risk attitude in multicriteria evaluation of forest plans Forest Science 52 304-312
  • [17] Guo Y(2016)Multi-level multi-criteria analysis of alternative fuels for waste collection vehicles in the United States The Science of the Total Environment 550 349-361
  • [18] Mannan MS(2014)Environmental life-cycle assessment of rapeseed-based biodiesel: Alternative cultivation systems and locations Applied Energy 114 837-844
  • [19] Domingues AR(2009)Development of a multi-criteria assessment model for ranking of renewable and non-renewable transportation fuel vehicles Energy 34 112-125
  • [20] Marques P(2012)Assessing environmental impacts of biomass production chains - application of life cycle assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) Journal of Cleaner Production 29–30 238-245