Skip to main content

Multi Criteria Decision Support for Conceptual Integral Design of Flex(eble)(en)ergy Infrastructure

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems ((LNE,volume 634))

  • 2369 Accesses

Abstract

The use of sustainable energy will soon be the major guiding principle for building and spatial planning practice. This asks for new sustainable energy infrastructures which need new design approaches. Design tools for the energy infrastructure of the built environment in the conceptual phase of design combined with MCDM methods are presently lacking. Integral Design methodology is meant to help by providing methods to communicate the consequences of design steps on the building level for the energy infrastructure. In particular the use of Morphological Overviews, combined with the Kesselring method as a decision support tool, will support the early conceptual steps within the design process and make decisions taken during the design process more transparent. The main objective of this article is not so much identifying and exhaustively summarizing all MCDM methods useful for energy planning, than as a way of examining what to look for in judging the merit of a decision making approach in connection with the design processes within the energy infrastructure of the built environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akkermans, H. (2002). Being smart in information processing. Technological and social challenges and oppertunities, Proceedings IFIP IIP2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alley, R. et al. (2007). Climate change 2007: The physical science basis summery for policymakers, Paris, France: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blessing, L. T. M. (1993). A process-based approach to computer supported engineering design, Proceedings International Conference on Engineering design, ICED’93, The Hague, August 17–19, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blessing, L. T. M. (1994). A process-based approach to computer supported engineering design. PhD thesis Universiteit Twente.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boer, S. J. de (1989). Decision Methods and Techniques in Methodical Engineering Design, PhD-thesis, University Twente, ISBN 90–72015–3210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derelöv, M. (2004). On Conceptual Design Reliability, Linköpings University, Thesis No.1121, Licentiak.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doukas, H., Patlitzianas, K. D. and Psarras, J. (2006). Supporting sustainable electricity technologies in Greece using MCDM, Resources Policy, 31, 129–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greening, L. A. & Bernow, S. (2004). Design of Coordinated Energy and Environmental Policies: Use of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making”, Energy Policy, 32(6), 721–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, B. F. & Meier P. M. (1994) Multicrerion methods for resource planning: an experimental comparison. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 9(4), 1811–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J. P., Poh, K. L. & Ang, B. W. (1995). Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling. Energy, 20(9), 843–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacquet-Lagreze, E. and Siskos, Y. (2001). Preference disaggregation: 20 years of MCDA experience. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(2), 233–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski, K., Stagl, S., Madlener, R. & Omann, I. (2008). Sustainable energy futures: methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis, European Journal of Operational Research, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2007.12.049.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahdelma, R., Salminen, P. & Hokkanen, J. (2000). Using multicriteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environmental Management, 26(6), 595–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Løken, E. (2007). Multi-Criteria Planning of Local Energy Systems with Multiple Energy Carriers, PhD Thesis Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, April 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Løken, E., Botterud, A. & Holen, A. T. (2008). Use of the Equivalent Attribute Technique in Multicriteria Planning of Local Energy Systems, European Journal of Operational Research, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2007.12.050.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matos, M. A. (2007). Decision under risk as a multicriteria problem, European Journal of Operational Research, 181, 1516–1529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Felhusen, J. & Grote, K. H. (2006). In Wallace K, Blessing L (Translators and Eds.), Engineering Design, A systematic Approach, Third Edition, Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papadopoulos, A. & Karagiannidis, A. (2008). Application of the multi-criteria analysis method Electre III for the optimisation of decentralised energy systems, Omega, 36, 766–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peniwati, K. (2007). Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46, 935–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M. (2004). Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Making to Sustainable Energy Planning - a Review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 8(4), 365–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchey, T. (2002). General Morphological Analysis, A general method for non-quantified modeling, 16th EURO Conference on Operational Analysis, Brussels 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roozenburg, N. F. M. & Cross, N. G. (1991). Models of design process: integrating across the disciplines, Design Studies, 12, 215–220. *

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1990) How to make a decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process, European Journal of Operational Research, 48, 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VDI-Richlinie 2225 (1977) Technisch-wirtschaftliches Konstruieren. Düsseldorf: VDI-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwicky, F. & Wilson, A. G. (eds.) (1967) New Methods of Thought and Procedure. Contributions to the Symposium on Methodologies, May 22–24, Pasadena, New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Kropman bv and the foundation “Stichting Promotie Installatietechniek (PIT)” support the new research. Flexergy project is partly financial supported by SenterNovem, project partners are Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, ECN and Installect.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wim Zeiler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Zeiler, W., Savanovic, P., van Houten, R., Boxem, G. (2010). Multi Criteria Decision Support for Conceptual Integral Design of Flex(eble)(en)ergy Infrastructure. In: Ehrgott, M., Naujoks, B., Stewart, T., Wallenius, J. (eds) Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol 634. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04045-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics