Beyond climate change. Multi-attribute decision making for a sustainability assessment of energy system transformation pathways

H. Hottenroth, C. Sutardhio, A. Weidlich, I. Tietze, S. Simon, W. Hauser, T. Naegler, L. Becker, J. Buchgeister, T. Junne, U. Lehr, O. Scheel, R. Schmidt-Scheele, P. Ulrich and T. Viere

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2022, vol. 156, issue C

Abstract: A multitude of pathways for decarbonizing energy systems have been formulated. In the development of these scenarios, the focus is often only on system costs at a given CO2 emission reduction. However, when assessing the sustainability of energy systems in a broader sense, many more aspects need to be considered: In addition to greenhouse gas emissions, energy systems induce further environmental and socio-economic impacts and must meet requirements for security of supply and cost efficiency. For assessing the compatibility of a future energy system with sustainability concepts, alternative pathways must be compared holistically using dedicated assessment methods, which is facilitated by multi-attribute decision making methods (MADM). With the target of identifying sustainable transformation pathways, we assess ten transformation scenarios for the example of Germany, using the three MADM methods weighted sum method, PROMETHEE II and TOPSIS. We find that top ranks are not completely stable across methods, but there are scenario clusters which rank high, medium and low for all methods. In the top ranks, there are both less ambitious scenarios that aim at reducing direct CO2 emissions by 80%, and more ambitious scenarios with a reduction by at least 95%. We conclude that scenarios with more ambitious climate protection goals are not necessarily more (or less) sustainable than scenarios that aim for a reduction of 80% only.

Keywords: Multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA); Sustainability; Decarbonization; Energy system; Multi-attribute decision making (MADM); Sustainability assessment; Energy system analysis; Energy transformation pathway; Impact assessment; Life-cycle assessment (LCA); TOPSIS; PROMETHEE; Weighted sum (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032121012594
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:rensus:v:156:y:2022:i:c:s1364032121012594

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/bibliographic
http://www.elsevier. ... 600126/bibliographic

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.111996

Access Statistics for this article

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews is currently edited by L. Kazmerski

More articles in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().