Capacity Expansion of Electricity Sector Using Multiple Sustainability Indicators

  • Sheetal Jain
  • Shreya Gupta
  • Neenu Thomas
  • Santanu BandyopadhyayEmail author
Original Research Paper


The fast-paced growth in electricity demand across the globe raises the question of availability and sustainability of the electricity sector. This paper considers five different sustainability indicators: the risk to human lives, carbon footprint, water footprint, land footprint, and energy return on energy investment (EROI), for planning the capacity expansion of different power plants to fulfil the electricity demand sustainably and cost-effectively. A method is developed for the capacity expansion planning of power sector using Pinch Analysis approach. Different sustainability indicators are combined into an aggregated sustainability indicator by using different methods: p-norms (grid norm, Euclidean norm, and infinity norm) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The prioritisation for commissioning of new power plants, to assure the future electricity demand, is accomplished using the concepts of prioritised cost. It is shown in this paper that the aggregate sustainability indicator and the prioritising sequence of different power plants help in achieving sustainable electricity demand in a cost-effective (both capital cost and overall annualised cost) way. Physical insights of Pinch Analysis help in explaining the optimisation results and optimal energy mix. The proposed method, developed for capacity expansion, is demonstrated in this paper through a case study of the Indian electricity sector.


Pinch Analysis Aggregate sustainability indicator p-norms Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Prioritised cost Indian electricity sector 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. Abraham M (2017) Encyclopedia of sustainable technologies. ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  2. Agrawal V, Shenoy UV (2006) Unified conceptual approach to targeting and design of water and hydrogen networks. AIChE J 52(3):1071–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkins MJ, Morrison AS, Walmsley MR (2010) Carbon emissions pinch analysis (CEPA) for emissions reduction in the New Zealand electricity sector. Appl Energ 87(3):982–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baležentis T, Štreimikienė D, Melnikienė R, Zeng S (2019) Prospects of green growth in the electricity sector in Baltic States: Pinch analysis based on ecological footprint. Resour Conserv Recycling 142:37–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bandyopadhyay S (2011) Design and optimization of isolated energy systems through pinch analysis. Asia-Pacific J Chem Eng 6(3):518–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bandyopadhyay S, Desai NB (2016) Cost optimal energy sector planning: a Pinch Analysis approach. J Cleaner Prod 136:246–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandyopadhyay S, Sahu GC, Foo DCY, Tan RR (2010) Segregated targeting for multiple resource networks using decomposition algorithm. AIChE J 56(5):1235–1248Google Scholar
  8. Ba-Shammakh M, Elkamel A, Douglas P, Croiset E (2007) A mixed-integer non-linear programming model for CO2 emission reduction in the power generation sector. Int J Environ Pollution 29:254–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Central Electricity Authority (2018a) Executive summary report. [Accessed 24-03-2019]
  10. Central Electricity Authority (2018b) National electricity plan report. [Accessed 24-03-2019]
  11. Central Electricity Authority (2018c) Annual generation target report. [Accessed 24-03-2019]
  12. Chandrayan A, Bandyopadhyay S (2014) Cost optimal segregated targeting for resource allocation networks. Clean Technol Environ Policy 16(3):455–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crilly D, Zhelev T (2008) Emissions targeting and planning: an application of CO2 emissions pinch analysis (CEPA) to the Irish electricity generation sector. Energy 33:1498–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de Lira Quaresma AC, Francisco FS, Pessoa FL, Queiroz EM (2018) Carbon emission reduction in the Brazilian electricity sector using Carbon Sources Diagram. Energy 159:134–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Environmental Protection Agency (2018). Sources of greenhouse gas emissions. [Accessed on April 16, 2019]
  16. Francisco FDS, Pessoa FLP, Queiroz EM (2014) Carbon Sources Diagram—a tool for carbon-constrained energy sector planning. Chem Eng Trans 39:1495–1500Google Scholar
  17. Ho WS, Khor CS, Hashim H, Macchietto S, Klemeš JJ (2014) SAHPPA: a novel power pinch analysis approach for the design of off-grid hybrid energy systems. Clean Technol Environ Policy 16(5):957–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ilyas M, Lim Y, Han C (2012) Pinch based approach to estimate CO2 capture and storage retrofit and compensatory renewable power for South Korean electricity sector. Korean J Chem Eng 29(9):1163–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jain S, Bandyopadhyay S (2019) Multi-objective optimisation for segregated targeting problems using Pinch Analysis. J Cleaner Prod 221:339–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jia X, Li Z, Wang F, Foo DC, Tan RR (2016) Multi-dimensional pinch analysis for sustainable power generation sector planning in China. J Cleaner Prod 112:2756–2771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krishna Priya GS, Bandyopadhyay S (2013) Emission constrained power system planning: a pinch analysis based study of Indian electricity sector. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15(5):771–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krishna Priya GS, Bandyopadhyay S (2017) Multiple objectives pinch analysis. Resour Conserv Recycling 119:128–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lim XY, Foo DC, Tan RR (2018) Pinch analysis for the planning of power generation sector in the United Arab Emirates: a climate-energy-water nexus study. J Cleaner Prod 180:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Malekpoor H, Chalvatzis K, Mishra N, Mehlawat MK, Zafirakis D, Song M (2018) Integrated grey relational analysis and multi objective grey linear programming for sustainable electricity generation planning. Ann Operat Res 269(1-2):475–503MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ministry of Power (2002) [Accessed 24-03-2019].
  26. Muis ZA, Hashim H, Manan ZA, Taha FM, Douglas PL (2010) Optimal planning of renewable energy-integrated electricity generation schemes with CO2 reduction target. Renew Energy 35(11):2562–2570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Norbu S, Bandyopadhyay S (2017) Power Pinch Analysis for optimal sizing of renewable-based isolated system with uncertainties. Energy 135:466–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ouedraogo NS (2017) Modeling sustainable long-term electricity supply-demand in Africa. Appl Energy 190:1047–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Patole M, Bandyopadhyay S, Foo DC, Tan RR (2017) Energy sector planning using multiple-index pinch analysis. Clean Technol Environ Policy 19(7):1967–1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Salman B, Nomanbhay S, Foo DCY (2019) Carbon emissions pinch analysis (CEPA) for energy sector planning in Nigeria. Clean Technol Environ Policy 21(1):93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Shenoy UV (2010) Targeting and design of energy allocation networks for carbon emission reduction. Chem Eng Sci 65(23):6155–6168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shenoy UV, Bandyopadhyay S (2007) Targeting for multiple resources. Indust Eng Chem Res 46(11):3698–3708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Streimikiene D, Balezentis T, Krisciukaitienė I, Balezentis A (2012) Prioritizing sustainable electricity production technologies: MCDM approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(5):3302–3311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tan RR (2011) A general source-sink model with inoperability constraints for robust energy sector planning. Appl Energy 88(11):3759–3764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tan RR, Foo DCY (2007) Pinch analysis approach to carbon-constrained energy sector planning. Energy 32(8):1422–1429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tan RR, Foo DCY, Aviso KB, Ng DKS (2009a) The use of graphical pinch analysis for visualizing water footprint constraints in biofuel production. Appl Energy 86(5):605–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tan RR, Ng DKS, Foo DCY (2009b) Pinch analysis approach to carbon-constrained planning for sustainable power generation. J Cleaner Prod 17(10):940–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thengane S, Tan RR, Foo DCY, Bandyopadhyay S (2019) A Pinch-based approach for targeting of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) systems. Indust Eng Chem Res 58:3188–3198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. United Nations, Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) (2016) Report of the Conference of the Parties on its twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015 (Vol. FCCC/CP/20). [Accessed on October 13, 2019]
  41. United Nations. (2019). The sustainable development goals report 2019. United Nations. New York. [Accessed on October 13, 2019]
  42. Valasai GD, Uqaili MA, Memon HR, Samoo SR, Mirjat NH, Harijan K (2017) Overcoming electricity crisis in Pakistan: a review of sustainable electricity options. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 72:734–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Walmsley MR, Walmsley TG, Atkins MJ (2015) Achieving 33% renewable electricity generation by 2020 in California. Energy 92:260–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Walmsley MR, Walmsley TG, Atkins MJ, Kamp PJ, Neale JR (2014) Minimising carbon emissions and energy expended for electricity generation in New Zealand through to 2050. Appl Energy 135:656–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yadav A, Pal N, Patra J, Yadav M (2018) Strategic planning and challenges to the deployment of renewable energy technologies in the world scenario: its impact on global sustainable development. Environment, Development and Sustainability: 1-19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Energy Science and EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BombayMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Centre for Urban Science and EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BombayMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations