AHP TOPSIS Analysis in Selecting Waste Processing Technology Based on Energy Justice
Abstract
The amount of waste in Bantul Regency increased by 4.96% from 2020 to 2021, indicating that the capacity of final disposal sites (FDS) in Piyungan District, Bantul Regency, was decreasing. The peak occurred from 23 July 2023 to 5 September 2023, during which the Piyungan FDS could not provide waste disposal services. The high poverty rate in Bantul Regency forces the government to process waste into energy as a sustainable waste management effort. However, numerous criteria make it difficult to determine which technology is most suitable for this purpose. Energy justice criteria need to be considered when choosing technology and efforts to improve the welfare of Bantul Regency's residents. This research aimed to present an assessment of each alternative technology for processing waste into energy and decide one suitable alternative for sustainable waste management in Bantul Regency using a combination of AHP and TOPSIS methods based on energy justice. AHP was used to assess the level of importance of each criterion, while TOPSIS was used to determine the optimal alternative based on the criteria by considering costs and benefits. The findings showed that the preference value for three alternatives was 0.579, 0.414, and 0.341 for incineration, pyrolysis, and gasification, respectively. According to these preference value, incineration was identified as the foremost viable alternative technology for implementation in Bantul Regency. Gasification and pyrolysis ranked as the subsequent and third alternatives, respectively.
References
“Laporan Kinerja 2021,” Dinas Lingkungan Hidup Kabupaten Bantul, 2022, [Online], https://dlh.bantulkab.go.id/storage/dlh/document/18/Laporan-Kinerja-DLH--Tahun-2021.pdf
A. Fetanat, H. Mofid, M. Mehrannia, and G. Shafipour, “Informing energy justice based decision-making framework for waste-to-energy technologies selection in sustainable waste management: A case of Iran,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 228, pp. 1377–1390, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.215.
B.K. Sovacool and M.H. Dworkin, “Energy justice: Conceptual insights and practical applications,” Appl. Energy, vol. 142, pp. 435–444, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.002.
“Buku Panduan Sampah Menjadi Energi,” Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral Republik Indonesia, 2015, [Online], https://ebtke.esdm.go.id/post/2016/05/08/1221/buku.panduan.sampah.menjadi.energi
M.A. Alao, O.M. Popoola, and T.R. Ayodele, “Selection of waste-to-energy technology for distributed generation using IDOCRIW-weighted TOPSIS method: A case study of the City of Johannesburg, South Africa,” Renew. Energy, vol. 178, pp. 162–183, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.06.031.
A.E. Torkayesh, B. Malmir, and M.R Asadabadi, “Sustainable waste disposal technology selection: The stratified best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method,” Waste Manag., vol. 122, pp. 100–112, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2020.12.040.
M.G. Kharat et al., “Fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis for environmentally conscious solid waste treatment and disposal technology selection,” Technol. Soc., vol. 57, pp. 20–29, May 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.005.
S.A. Mousavi, A. Hafezalkotob, V. Ghezavati, and F. Abdi, “An integrated framework for new sustainable waste-to-energy technology selection and risk assessment: An R-TODIM-R-MULTIMOOSRAL approach,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 335, pp. 1–24, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130146.
S. Afrane et al., “Integrated AHP-TOPSIS under a fuzzy environment for the selection of waste-to-energy technologies in Ghana: A performance analysis and socio-enviro-economic feasibility study,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 19, no. 14, pp. 1–31, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.3390/ijerph19148428.
X.-H. Pan, S.-F. He, Y.-M. Wang, and K.-S. Chin, “Multi-granular hybrid information-based decision-making framework and its application to waste to energy technology selection,” Inf. Sci., vol. 587, pp. 450–472, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2021.12.034.
H. Li et al., “Establishing an interval-valued fuzzy decision-making method for sustainable selection of healthcare waste treatment technologies in the emerging economies,” J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 501–514, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10163-019-00943-0.
T. Adar and E.K. Delice, “New integrated approaches based on MC-HFLTS for healthcare waste treatment technology selection,” J. Enterp. Inf. Manag., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 688–711, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1108/JEIM-10-2018-0235.
M.A. Alao, T.R. Ayodele, A.S.O. Ogunjuyigbe, and O.M. Popoola, “Multi-criteria decision based waste to energy technology selection using entropy-weighted TOPSIS technique: The case study of Lagos, Nigeria,” Energy, vol. 201, pp. 1–14, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.117675.
R. Krishankumar et al., “A new decision model with integrated approach for healthcare waste treatment technology selection with generalized orthopair fuzzy information,” Inf. Sci., vol. 610, pp. 1010–1028, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2022.08.022.
Q. Mao et al., “Selection of plastic solid waste treatment technology based on cumulative prospect theory and fuzzy DEMATEL,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 30, no. 14, pp. 41505–41536, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-25004-2.
R.-L. Huang et al., “Cloud decision support framework for treatment technology selection of health-care waste,” J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 5565–5590, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.3233/JIFS-212065.
A. Rafiee et al., “Assessment and selection of the best treatment alternative for infectious waste by modified sustainability assessment of technologies methodology,” J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–14, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1186/s40201-016-0251-1.
S.I. Ahmad et al., “Development of quantitative SHE index for waste to energy technology selection,” Energy, vol. 191, pp. 1–9, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2019.116534.
R.W. Saaty, “The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used,” Math. Model., vol. 9, no. 3–5, pp. 161–176, 1987, doi: 10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8.
R. Likert, “A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes,” Archives Psychol., vol. 22, no. 140, pp. 5–55, 1932.
Sudarman, Pengantar Statistik Pendidikan. Samarinda, Indonesia: Mulawarman University Press, 2015.
W.E. Sari, Muslimin B., and S. Rani, “Perbandingan metode SAW dan TOPSIS pada sistem pendukung keputusan seleksi penerima beasiswa,” J. Sisfokom (Sist. Inf. Komput.), vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 52–58, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.32736/sisfokom.v10i1.1027.
© Jurnal Nasional Teknik Elektro dan Teknologi Informasi, under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
1.png)
