Determining Multi-Criteria Priorities in the Planning of Electric Power Generation: The Development of an Analytic Hierarchy Process for Using the Opinions of Experts

By Kim, Sung Chul; Min, K. Jo | International Journal of Management, June 2004 | Go to article overview

Determining Multi-Criteria Priorities in the Planning of Electric Power Generation: The Development of an Analytic Hierarchy Process for Using the Opinions of Experts


Kim, Sung Chul, Min, K. Jo, International Journal of Management


The electric power industry in the United States is undergoing substantial changes in power gene ration business as well as in environmental regulation. Under these changes, it is highly desirable for the electric power industry to objectively and quantitatively examine generation planning, which often involves a multiple number of different experts with multi-criteria for decision making. In this paper, we consider these two key aspects in generation planning (multi-experts/multi-criteria), and integrate an analytic hierarchy process for multi-criteria decision making and a Bayesian approach for combining experts' opinions. Our efforts lead to a comprehensive numerical example that illustrates multi-experts/multi-criteria generation planning for the electric power industry. Managerial insights and economic implications are provided throughout this paper.

1. Introduction

In the United States, there have been fundamental changes in how electric power businesses are conducted and regulated (see e.g., Wang and Min (2000)). These fundamental changes are often directly related to the growing importance of market-based economics/finance as well as environmental concerns in the electric power industry.

From the economics/finance perspective, the increasing emphasis on market competition often implies that the fair rate of return on investment may no longer be guaranteed (see e.g., Subramaniam and Min (2000)). In such circumstances, for electric power generation planning, it is highly desirable to carefully consider important economic/financial criteria such as net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), and variance in cash flow (VCF) prior to making any significant commitment (e.g., construction of a new generation unit).

From the environmental concern perspective, the current trend toward stringent environmental protection standards and sophisticated implementation mechanisms is expected to continue (see e.g., Jorgenson and Wilcoxen (1994)). This implies that the emission of critical pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SO^sub 2^), nitrogen oxides (NO^sub x^), and carbon dioxide (CO2) must also be carefully considered in electric power generation planning prior to any significant financial commitment.

We note that there are diverse attributes to be considered within the economics/finance concerns such as NPV, IRR, and VCF and within the environmental concerns such as SO^sub 2^, NO^sub x^, and CO2. In addition, we note that these attributes should be simultaneously considered across the two main concerns of economics/finance and environments. Under these circumstances, a multi-criteria analysis for generation planning will be both logical and intuitive for decision support purposes.

In a recent paper by Son and Min (1998), an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach that simultaneously considers both economic/financial and environmental concerns is presented. In particular, this paper shows how the priority weights for the two main criteria (economics/finance and environments) as well as the priority weights for the subcriteria such as NPV, IRR, VCF, SO^sub 2^, NO^sub x^, and CO2 can be computed. These priority weights can then be used for various decision support purposes such as capital budgeting.

Even though Son and Min (1998) provides a basic framework for multi-criteria decision making in generation planning, the model in the paper implicitly assumes that there is a single expert whose estimation is far superior to other experts' estimation. On the other hand, if there is no single authoritative expert, but a group of experts, then the model can not be directly utilized for generation planning. This observation is the motivation for the model and analysis in this paper.

In this paper, we propose a major extension of Son and Min (1998) by introducing steps to combine opinions of experts in computing priority weights of the competing criteria. In this way, we hope to provide the necessary concrete steps to apply the basic framework in Son and Min (1998) in generation planning when there is a group of experts (instead of a single authoritative expert). …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Determining Multi-Criteria Priorities in the Planning of Electric Power Generation: The Development of an Analytic Hierarchy Process for Using the Opinions of Experts
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.