Volume 4 • Issue 2 • PP: 11–16 • 2024
Evaluating the Onshore Wind Farms Based on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model under Neutrosophic Set
Open Access & Copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by ASPG. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
View PDF Abstract
This work comprehensively evaluates onshore wind farms, focusing on their technological efficiency, environmental impact, economic viability, and societal implications. Onshore wind energy has emerged as a prominent renewable energy source, leveraging the kinetic power of wind to generate electricity on a substantial scale. The evaluation encompasses a detailed analysis of wind resource assessment, turbine technology, grid integration, environmental considerations, economic feasibility, and stakeholder engagement. Findings reveal that onshore wind farms exhibit commendable technological advancements, with modern turbines showcasing higher efficiency and capacity. Envi-ronmental assessments highlight their lower carbon footprint compared with conventional energy sources, albeit with considerations for land use and wildlife impacts. Economic evaluations emphasize the decreasing costs of wind energy, yet challenges persist concerning upfront investment and intermittency. Stakeholder engagement emerges as a crucial aspect, stressing the importance of community acceptance and regulatory compliance. The assessment illuminates the multifaceted aspects of onshore wind farms, underscoring their potential as a sustainable energy source while acknowledging the need to address technological, economic, and social barriers to widespread adoption. We use a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model to evaluate onshore wind farms. The Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique (MACBETH) method is used to rank the alternatives. The MCDM method is applied under a single-valued neutrosophic set (SVNS), which addresses uncertainty in the evaluation process.
Keywords
References
[1] J. M. Sánchez-Lozano, M. S. García-Cascales, and M. T. Lamata, “Identification and selection of potential sites for onshore wind farms development in region of mur-cia, spain,” Energy, vol. 73, pp. 311–324, 2014.
[2] B. K. Sovacool, P. Enevoldsen, C. Koch, and R. J. Barthelmie, “Cost performance and risk in the construc-tion of offshore and onshore wind farms,” Wind Energy, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 891–908, 2017.
[3] F. Haces-Fernandez, M. Cruz-Mendoza, and H. Li, “On-shore wind farm development: Technologies and lay-outs,” Energies, vol. 15, no. 7, p. 2381, 2022.
[4] P. Enevoldsen and S. V. Valentine, “Do onshore and off-shore wind farm development patterns differ?” Energy for Sustainable Development, vol. 35, pp. 41–51, 2016.
[5] X. Wu, W. Hu, Q. Huang, C. Chen, M. Z. Jacobson, and Z. Chen, “Optimizing the layout of onshore wind farms to minimize noise,” Applied Energy, vol. 267, p. 114896, 2020.
[6] D. Astolfi, F. Castellani, A. Garinei, and L. Terzi, “Data mining techniques for performance analysis of onshore wind farms,” Applied Energy, vol. 148, pp. 220–233, 2015.
[7] S. Grassi, S. Junghans, and M. Raubal, “Assessment of the wake effect on the energy production of onshore wind farms using GIS,” Applied Energy, vol. 136, pp. 827–837, 2014.
[8] X. Wu, W. Hu, Q. Huang, C. Chen, Z. Chen, and F. Blaabjerg, “Optimized placement of onshore wind farms considering topography,” Energies, vol. 12, no. 15, p. 2944, 2019.
[9] S. Carlos, A. Sánchez, S. Martorell, and I. Martón, “On-shore wind farms maintenance optimization using a stochastic model,” Mathematical and Computer Mod-elling, vol. 57, no. 7–8, pp. 1884–1890, 2013.
[10] S. Wang, S. Wang, and P. Smith, “Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 52, pp. 1424–1428, 2015.
[11] G. Ren, J. Liu, J. Wan, F. Li, Y. Guo, and D. Yu, “The analysis of turbulence intensity based on wind speeddata in onshore wind farms,” Renewable Energy, vol. 123, pp. 756–766, 2018.
[12] P. W. Saługa, K. Zamasz, Z. Dacko-Pikiewicz, K. Szczepa´nska-Woszczyna, and M. Malec, “Risk-adjusted discount rate and its components for onshore wind farms at the feasibility stage,” Energies, vol. 14, no. 20, p. 6840, 2021.
[13] J. R. F. Diógenes, J. Claro, J. C. Rodrigues, and M. V. Loureiro, “Barriers to onshore wind energy implemen-tation: A systematic review,” Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 60, p. 101337, 2020.
[14] J. R. F. Diógenes, J. Claro, and J. C. Rodrigues, “Bar-riers to onshore wind farm implementation in brazil,” Energy Policy, vol. 128, pp. 253–266, 2019.
[15] J. Ye, S. Du, and R. Yong, “Multi-criteria decision-making model using trigonometric aggregation opera-tors of single-valued neutrosophic credibility numbers,” Information Sciences, vol. 644, p. 118968, 2023.
[16] S. Debnath, “Single-valued neutrosophic covering-based rough set model over two universes and its ap-plication in MCDM,” Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, vol. 53, no. 1, p. 29, 2023.
[17] X. Luo, Z. Wang, L. Yang, L. Lu, and S. Hu, “Sustain-able supplier selection based on VIKOR with single-valued neutrosophic sets,” PLOS ONE, vol. 18, no. 9, p. e0290093, 2023.
[18] H. Ran, “MABAC method for multiple attribute group decision making under single-valued neutrosophic sets and applications to performance evaluation of sustain-able microfinance groups lending,” PLOS ONE, vol. 18, no. 1, p. e0280239, 2023.
[19] K. M. Sallam and A. W. Mohamed, “Single valued neu-trosophic sets for assessment quality of suppliers under uncertainty environment,” Multicriteria Algorithms with Applications, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2023.
[20] G. Ramya, “Trigonometric similarity measures of pythagorean neutrosophic hypersoft sets,” Neutrosophic Systems with Applications, vol. 9, pp. 91–100, 2023.
[21] P. K. Singh, “Uncertainty analysis in document publica-tions using single-valued neutrosophic set and collabo-rative entropy,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 2785–2809, 2023.
[22] Y. Li, Q. Cai, and G. Wei, “PT-TOPSIS methods for multi-attribute group decision making under single-valued neutrosophic sets,” International Journal of Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Engineering Systems, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 149–166, 2023.
[23] T. R. Bastos, A. A. Longaray, C. M. dos Santos Machado, L. Ensslin, S. R. Ensslin, and A. Dutra, “Fuzzy-MACBETH hybrid method: Mathematical treat-ment of a qualitative scale using the fuzzy theory,” Inter-national Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, vol. 16, p. 21, 2023.
[24] S. O. Adebiyi, E. O. Kupolati, and O. G. Oyenuga, “Measuring attractiveness by a categorical based evalua-tion technique (MACBETH) for churn and retention of decision of subscribers in the nigeria telecommunication industry,” International Journal of Applied Operational Research—An Open Access Journal, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 33–44, 2023.
[25] N. Kundakcı, “Combined multi-criteria decision making approach based on MACBETH and MULTI-MOORA methods,” Alphanumeric Journal, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 17–26, 2016.
[26] P. Karande and S. Chakraborty, “A facility layout selec-tion model using MACBETH method,” in Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Industrial En-gineering and Operations Management, Bali, Indonesia, January 7–9 2014.
[27] N. Kundakcı, “An integrated method using MACBETH and EDAS methods for evaluating steam boiler alter-natives,” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, vol. 26, no. 1–2, pp. 27–34, 2019.
[28] M. Mohamed, “Toward smart logistics: Hybrization of intelligence techniques of machine learning and multi-criteria decision-making in logistics 5.0,” Multicriteria Algorithms with Applications, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 42–57, 2023.
[29] E. Phimister and D. Roberts, “The role of ownership in determining the rural economic benefits of on-shore wind farms,” Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 331–360, 2012.
[30] K. F. Sotiropoulou and A. P. Vavatsikos, “Onshore wind farms GIS-assisted suitability analysis using PROMETHEE II,” Energy Policy, vol. 158, p. 112531, 2021.
[31] S. Wharton and J. K. Lundquist, “Assessing atmospheric stability and its impacts on rotor-disk wind character-istics at an onshore wind farm,” Wind Energy, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 525–546, 2012.
[32] J. F. Unnewehr, E. Jalbout, C. Jung, D. Schindler, and A. Weidlich, “Getting more with less? why repowering onshore wind farms does not always lead to more wind power generation—a german case study,” Renewable Energy, vol. 180, pp. 245–257, 2021.
[33] K. B. Oebels and S. Pacca, “Life cycle assessment of an onshore wind farm located at the northeastern coast of brazil,” Renewable Energy, vol. 53, pp. 60–70, 2013.
Cite This Article
Choose your preferred format
Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions, and data presented in this article are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of ASPG, the journal, or its editors. ASPG and the editors disclaim responsibility for any harm arising from the use of any ideas, methods, instructions, or products described in this article, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.