Page 398 - Biofuels for a More Sustainable Future
P. 398

354   Biofuels for a More Sustainable Future


          Acknowledgment
          This method used in this study was based on Wang, Z., Xu, G., Ren, J., Li, Z., Zhang, B.,
          Ren, X., 2017. Polygeneration system and sustainability: multi-attribute decision-support
          framework for comprehensive assessment under uncertainties. J. Clean. Prod. 167,
          1122–1137.



          References
          Benayoun, R., Roy, B., Sussman, B., 1966. ELECTRE: Une m ethode pour guider le choix
             en pr esence de points de vue multiples. Note de travail. p. 49.
          Brans, J.P., Vincke, P., Mareschal, B., 1986. How to select and how to rank projects: the
             PROMETHEE method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 24 (2), 228–238.
                         ¸
                       ¸
          B€uy€uk€ozkan, G., Cifci, G., 2012. A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMA-
             TEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. Expert Syst. Appl.
             39 (3), 3000–3011.
          Bohlender, G., Kulisch, U., 2011. Defnition of the arithmetic operations and comparison
             relations for an interval arithmetic standard. Reliab. Comput. 15, 36–42.
          Deng, J.L., 1989. Introduction to grey system. J. Grey. Syst. 1 (1), 1–24.
          Dymova, L., Sevastjanov, P., Tikhonenko, A., 2013. A direct interval extension of TOPSIS
             method. Expert Syst. Appl. 40, 4841–4847.
          Giove, S., 2002. Interval TOPSIS for multicriteria decision making. In: Italian Workshop on
             Neural Nets. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 56–63.
          Hao, H., Liu, Z., Zhao, F., Ren, J., Chang, S., Rong, K., Du, J., 2018. Biofuel for vehicle use
             in China: current status, future potential and policy implications. Renew. Sust. Energ.
             Rev. 82, 645–653.
          He, C., Zhang, Q., Ren, J., Li, Z., 2017. Combined cooling heating and power systems:
             sustainability assessment under uncertainties. Energy 139, 755–766.
          Ho, W., Xu, X., Dey, P.K., 2010. Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier
             evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 202 (1), 16–24.
          Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K., 1981. Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In: Multiple
             Attribute Decision Making. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 58–191.
          Jahanshahloo, G.R., Lotfi, F.H., Izadikhah, M., 2006. An algorithmic method to extend
             TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval data. Appl. Math. Comput.
             175 (2), 1375–1384.
          Kahraman, C. (Ed.), 2008. Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making: Theory and Applications
             With Recent Developments. In: vol. 16. Springer, Science & Business Media.
          Larkum, A.W., Ross, I.L., Kruse, O., Hankamer, B., 2012. Selection, breeding and engi-
             neering of microalgae for bioenergy and biofuel production. Trends Biotechnol.
             30 (4), 198–205.
          Lee, S.K., Mogi, G., Kim, J.W., 2009. Decision support for prioritizing energy technologies
             against high oil prices: a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach. J. Loss Prevent Proc.
             22 (6), 915–920.
              e
          Le T no, J.F., Mareschal, B., 1998. An interval version of PROMETHEE for the compar-
             ison of building products’ design with ill-defined data on environmental quality. Eur. J.
             Oper. Res.. 109 (2), 522–529.
          Liang, H., Ren, J., Gao, Z., Gao, S., Luo, X., Dong, L., Scipioni, A., 2016. Identification of
             critical success factors for sustainable development of biofuel industry in China based on
             grey decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL). J. Clean. Prod.
             131, 500–508.
   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403