Table 6 Performance scores of energy alternatives for three cities.
From: A systematic approach for assessment of renewable energy using analytic hierarchy process
Energy alternatives | Experts for three cities and criteria | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chengdu | Eskisehir | Chicago | |||||||||||||
C | MC | EI | JC | S | C | MC | EI | JC | S | C | MC | EI | JC | S | |
Efficiency | 9 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 10 | 2 | 10 | 10 | 7 | 9 | 6 | 10 |
Solar | 10 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 10 | 7 | 6 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 7 | 4 | 10 | 5 | 10 |
Wind | 7 | 3 | 8 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 8.5 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 3 | 5 | 10 | 5 | 9 |
Geothermal | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 5.5 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 7 |
Biomass | 5 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 8.5 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 3 | 8 | 2 | 9 |
Nuclear | 1 | 10 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 5 | 10 | 2 |
Hydroelectric | 3 | 9 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 7 | 6.5 | 0 | 9 | 7 | 9 | 4 |