Decision-making based on sustainability analysis using GREENSCOPE

被引:0
|
作者
Dias, Ricardo N. [1 ]
Filipe, Rui M. [2 ,3 ]
Matos, Henrique A. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lisbon, Ctr Quim Estrutural, IMS, Inst Super Tecn, Ave Rovisco Pais 1, P-1049001 Lisbon, Portugal
[2] Inst Super Engn Lisboa, Inst Politecn Lisboa, R Conselheiro Emidio Navarro 1, P-1959007 Lisbon, Portugal
[3] Univ Lisbon, CERENA, Inst Super Tecn, Ave Rovisco Pais 1, P-1049001 Lisbon, Portugal
关键词
Decision-making; Life cycle assessment; Topsis; Greenscope; Sustainability; HIERARCHY PROCESS; INDICATORS;
D O I
10.1007/s10098-023-02647-4
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Current economic and environmental pressure encourages companies to invest and reform processes in a sustainable way. However, the decision on the best sustainable investment in a given industry may not be as straightforward as given by the independent economic and environmental indicators. Analyzing such indicators for investment in process alternatives is a complex multi-objective decision-making process. Many methods can help solve multi-objective problems, GREENSCOPE suggests using the Addictive Utility Method, which may have some shortcomings. In this work, the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) are applied to the indicator scores obtained with the GREENSCOPE methodology. The Analytical Hierarchy Process is applied with Marginal Rate of Substitution, to obtain the priority matrices. MATLAB was used to apply the methods and through an algorithm, to determine the adequate number of indicators to be used. Three cases were studied, namely a biorefinery plant, and two academic case studies on the production of acetaldehyde from ethanol and propylene glycol from glycerol. The two academic cases were modeled in Aspen Plus, to obtain process data, and linked to GREENSCOPE using MATLAB. The methodology was applied to some proposed alternatives where the sustainability improvement of energy integration and material recycling was tested. The new methodology was able to identify the more sustainable case among the alternatives. This methodology based on TOPSIS proved to be the best choice, avoiding the weighting of indicators, and providing an expected analytical decision among alternatives.
引用
收藏
页码:755 / 770
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Robust decision-making based on exploratory analysis
    Zhou Shao-ping
    Li Qun
    Wang Wei-ping
    Proceedings of 2006 Chinese Control and Decision Conference, 2006, : 1238 - 1242
  • [22] Decision-making based on incident data analysis
    Roedder, Nico
    Karaenke, Paul
    Knapper, Rico
    Weinhardt, Christof
    2014 IEEE 16TH CONFERENCE ON BUSINESS INFORMATICS (CBI), VOL 1, 2014, : 46 - 53
  • [23] Decision-making in the ICU: An analysis of the ICU admission decision-making process using a '20 Questions' approach
    Gopalan, P. D.
    Pershad, S.
    Pillay, B. J.
    SOUTHERN AFRICAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, 2020, 36 (01) : 28 - 34
  • [24] Evidence-Based Decision-Making is Individualized Clinical Decision-Making
    Gordon Guyatt
    中国循证医学杂志, 2007, (02) : 85 - 92
  • [25] Simulation decomposition for environmental sustainability: Enhanced decision-making in carbon footprint analysis
    Deviatkin, Ivan
    Kozlova, Mariia
    Yeomans, Julian Scott
    SOCIO-ECONOMIC PLANNING SCIENCES, 2021, 75
  • [26] Sustainability decision-making in poultry slaughterhouses: A comparative analysis of AHP and fuzzy AHP
    Asih, Hayati Mukti
    Sutrisno, Agung
    Wuisang, Cynthia E. A.
    Faishal, Muhammad
    METHODSX, 2025, 14
  • [27] Positional Analysis: A Multidimensional and Democracy-Oriented Approach to Decision-Making and Sustainability
    Soderbaum, Peter
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (14)
  • [28] Assessment of Influence Factors of Infrastructure Sustainability Based on Group Decision-making Model
    Meng J.
    Pei Y.
    Quan L.
    Xu Y.
    Pei, Yongjie (peiyongjie@tju.edu.cn), 2018, Science Press (46): : 996 - 1002
  • [29] Target Systems and Decision-Making to Increase Production Sustainability
    Putz, Matthias
    Goetze, Uwe
    Stoldt, Johannes
    Franz, Enrico
    23RD CIRP CONFERENCE ON LIFE CYCLE ENGINEERING, 2016, 48 : 34 - 39
  • [30] Sustainability optimization for global supply chain decision-making
    Bhinge, Raunak
    Moser, Raphael
    Moser, Emanuel
    Lanza, Gisela
    Dornfeld, David
    12TH GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING - EMERGING POTENTIALS, 2015, 26 : 323 - 328