Research on Potential Evaluation and Sustainable Development of Rural Biomass Energy in Gansu Province of China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Overview of Study Region
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Data Sources
3.2. Index System Establishment
3.3. Research Ideas and Methods
3.3.1. Research Ideas
3.3.2. Methodology
4. Results
4.1. Biomass Energy Resources
4.2. Evaluation of Biomass Energy Development Potential
4.2.1. Weight Calculation Results
4.2.2. Ci Values Calculation and Sorting Results
4.2.3. Ci Value Interannual Variation
4.3. Spatial and Temporal Analysis
4.3.1. Global Autocorrelation Analysis
4.3.2. Local Autocorrelation Analysis
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1. Conclusions
5.2. Recommendations
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zhao, X.; Luo, D. Driving force of rising renewable energy in China: Environment, regulation and employment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 68, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samuel, A.; Edem, K.M.K.; Alfred, A. Renewable and non-renewable energy, regime type and economic growth. Renew. Energy 2018, 125, 755–767. [Google Scholar]
- Guozhu, M.; Ning, H.; Lu, C.; Hongmei, W. Research on biomass energy and environment from the past to the future: A bibliometric analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 635, 1081–1090. [Google Scholar]
- Víctor, C.G.; Stefano, M.; Emanuela, P.; Marco, N.; François, M. Optimal use of biomass in large-scale energy systems: Insights for energy policy. Energy 2017, 137, 789–797. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, X.J.; Lu, X.G.; Yang, G.H. Development process and probable future transformations of rural biogas in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 55, 703–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franziska, S.; Siwa, M.; Manfred, Z. Policies for a Sustainable Biomass Energy Sector in Malawi: Enhancing Energy and Food Security Simultaneously. World Dev. 2018, 103, 14–26. [Google Scholar]
- International Energy Agency (IEA). World Energy Outlook 2016; OECD/IEA: Paris, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- IPCC. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Special Reports on Renewable Energy Sources. Summary for Policy Makers. In Proceedings of the 11th Session of Working Group III of the IPCC, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 10–13 May 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Nikola, B.; Neven, V.; Barbara, J.; Vanja, J.; Ana, M.; Mateja, G.; Tajana, K. Evaluation of Croatian agricultural solid biomass energy potential. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 93, 225–230. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, X.L.; Chen, H.H. Examining the efficiency of biomass energy: Evidence from the Chinese recycling industry. Energy Policy 2018, 119, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AEBIOM: Biogas Roadmap for Europe; The European Biomass Association: Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
- Nicolae, S.; Fernando, F.; Jean-François, D.; Fabio, M.; Vicenzo, M. A spatial analysis of biogas potential from manure in Europe. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 94, 915–930. [Google Scholar]
- Lauri, P.; Havlík, P.; Kindermann, G.; Forsell, N.; Böttcher, H.; Obersteiner, M. Woody biomass energy potential in 2050. Energy Policy 2014, 66, 19–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toklu, E.; Kalogirou, S.A.; Christodoulides, P. Biomass energy potential and utilization in Turkey. Renew. Energy 2017, 107, 235–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozturk, M.; Saba, N.; Hakeem, K.R.; Jawaid, M.; Ibrahim, F.H. Biomass and Bioenergy: An Overview of the development potential in Turkey and Malaysia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 79, 1285–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suzuki, K.; Tsuji, N.; Shirai, Y.; Hassan, M.A.; Osaki, M. Evaluation of biomass energy potential towards achieving sustainability in biomass energy utilization in Sabah, Malaysia. Biomass Bioenergy 2017, 97, 149–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, T.; Yang, Y.; Xie, D. Insights into the production potential and trends of China’s rural biogas. Int. J. Energy Res. 2015, 39, 227–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X.; Chang, H.; Peng, S. China’s biomass gas production capacity and carbon emission reduction potential. China Environ. Sci. 2018, 38, 3151–3159. [Google Scholar]
- Qin, Z.C.; Zhuang, Q.L.; Cai, X.M.; He, Y.; Huang, Y.; Jiang, D.; Lin, E.; Liu, Y.; Tang, Y.; Wang, M.Q. Biomass and biofuels in China: Toward bioenergy resource potentials and their impacts on the environment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 2387–2400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Wu, X.H.; Tong, X.G. Life cycle assessment of large-scale and household biogas plants in northwest China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 192, 221–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Javad, S.; Fereydoon, S.; Ali, A.J.; Mohammad, A.G.; Farzin, S. Application of SAW, TOPSIS and fuzzy TOPSIS models in cultivation priority planning for maize, rapeseed and soybean crops. Geoderma 2018, 310, 178–190. [Google Scholar]
- Mohammad, Y. Risk assessment based on novel intuitionistic fuzzy-hybrid-modified TOPSIS approach. Saf. Sci. 2018, 110, 438–448. [Google Scholar]
- Han, H.; Silvana, T. A fuzzy TOPSIS method for performance evaluation of reverse logistics in social commerce platforms. Expert Syst. Appl. 2018, 103, 133–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mateusz, P.; Danuta, M.; Małgorzata, Ł.; Mariusz, B.; Kesra, N. TOPSIS and VIKOR methods in study of sustainable development in the EU countries. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 126, 1683–1692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dan, Y.; Lan, Z.; Caihong, Z. Evaluation of Regional Development potential of Forest Biomass Energy based on Entropy weight TOPSIS. J. Beijing For. Univ. (Soc. Sci.) 2016, 15, 50–55. [Google Scholar]
- Bruno, M.S.; Leoni, P.G.; Lucila, M.S.C. Performance Evaluation of Green Suppliers using Entropy-TOPSIS-F. J. Clean. Prod. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zyoud, S.H.; Fuchs-Hanusch, D. A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Syst. Appl. 2017, 78, 158–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, G.; Guan, X.; Yi, X.; Zhou, Z. An innovative TOPSIS approach based on hesitant fuzzy correlation coefficient and its applications. Appl. Soft Comput. 2018, 68, 249–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, D.; Shao, C.; Zhu, L. Ethylene Cracking Furnace TOPSIS Energy Efficiency Evaluation Method Based on Dynamic Energy Efficiency Baselines. Energy 2018, 156, 620–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, E.; Alp, N.; Shi, J.; Wang, C.; Zhang, X.; Chen, H. Multi-criteria building energy performance benchmarking through variable clustering based compromise TOPSIS with objective entropy weighting. Energy 2017, 125, 197–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hossny, A.; Valid, H. Dataset normalization for low carbon cities in a multi-criteria evaluation model. Data Brief 2018, 18, 1111–1116. [Google Scholar]
- Jing, R.; Zhu, X.; Zhu, Z.; Wang, W.; Meng, C.; Shah, N.; Li, N.; Zhao, Y. A multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria evaluation integrated framework for distributed energy system optimal planning. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 166, 445–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Liang, L.; Fang, C.; Zhuang, R. Spatial and temporal Evolution characteristics and influencing factors of Ecological Security pattern of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban agglomeration. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2018, 38, 4132–4144. [Google Scholar]
- Yuan, J.; Zhang, J.; Wang, T.; Du, J. Comprehensive Evaluation and weight sensitivity Analysis of Energy Saving in Thermal Power Plant based on TOPSIS Grey correlation projection method. J. Chin. Soc. Power Eng. 2015, 35, 404–411. [Google Scholar]
- Ümran, Ş.; Eren, M.; Shiraz, S.E.; Gezder, V.; Şengül, A.B. Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey. Renew. Energy 2015, 75, 617–625. [Google Scholar]
- Balducci, F.; Ferrara, A. Using urban environmental policy data to understand the domains of smartness: An analysis of spatial autocorrelation for all the Italian chief towns. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 89, 386–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melecky, L. Spatial Autocorrelation Method for Local Analysis of The EU. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2015, 23, 1102–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Xu, C.; Song, M.; Liu, X. Driving factors of China’s energy productivity and its spatial character: Evidence from 248 cities. Ecol. Indic. 2018, 90, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Index System | Items | Indexes | Units |
---|---|---|---|
Evaluation content system | Agricultural development foundation | Primary industry output value | CNY |
Agricultural population | People | ||
Per capita disposable income in rural areas | CNY | ||
Agricultural acreage | mu | ||
Total power of agricultural machinery | kw | ||
Biomass energy resource endowment | Grain total output | t | |
Cash crops total output | t | ||
Pig total output | Pigs | ||
Sheep total output | Sheep | ||
Cow total output | Cows | ||
Evaluation impact system | Physical geographical elements | Unit altitude difference | m |
Annual precipitation | mm | ||
Annual mean temperature | °C | ||
Annual sunshine duration | h |
The Hexi Area *1 | The Longzhong Area *2 | The Longdong Area *3 | The Longnan Area *4 | The Gannan Area *5 | Total or Average | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total reserves (t) | 2.57 × 107 | 1.55 × 107 | 1.30 × 107 | 1.06 × 107 | 8.15 × 106 | 7.28 × 107 | |
Biogas equivalent (m3) | 6.81 × 109 | 3.89 × 109 | 3.50 × 109 | 2.92 × 109 | 2.34 × 109 | 1.95 × 1010 | |
Per capita reserves (m3) | 1398.11 | 484.57 | 700.32 | 447.26 | 784.36 | 748.77 |
County | Ci | Rank | County | Ci | Rank | County | Ci | Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liang Z | 0.7385 | 1 | Jing N | 0.4316 | 31 | Xi H | 0.3725 | 61 |
Gan Z | 0.5702 | 2 | Zhuang L | 0.4296 | 32 | Lin X (co-) | 0.3724 | 62 |
Hui N | 0.5557 | 3 | Shan D | 0.4292 | 33 | Gao L | 0.3721 | 63 |
Su Z | 0.5207 | 4 | Xi F | 0.4266 | 34 | Jin C | 0.3720 | 64 |
Min Q | 0.5152 | 5 | Lin Z | 0.4242 | 35 | Xia H | 0.3698 | 65 |
Zhen Y | 0.5111 | 6 | Yong D | 0.4240 | 36 | Cheng G | 0.3632 | 66 |
Jing Y | 0.4995 | 7 | Zheng N | 0.4234 | 37 | Guang H | 0.3595 | 67 |
Jin T | 0.4956 | 8 | Qing S | 0.4218 | 38 | Yong J | 0.3570 | 68 |
Kong T | 0.4951 | 9 | Gua Z | 0.4217 | 39 | Die B | 0.3546 | 69 |
Huan | 0.4905 | 10 | Gao T | 0.4207 | 40 | Su B | 0.3541 | 70 |
Ning | 0.4834 | 11 | Li | 0.4191 | 41 | Zhuo N | 0.3519 | 71 |
An D | 0.4812 | 12 | Ma Q | 0.4160 | 42 | Liang D | 0.3505 | 72 |
Lin T | 0.4796 | 13 | He S | 0.4144 | 43 | Tian Z | 0.3501 | 73 |
Jing T | 0.4730 | 14 | Hui | 0.4142 | 44 | Bai Y | 0.3480 | 74 |
Ling T | 0.4694 | 15 | Min | 0.4125 | 45 | He Z | 0.3479 | 75 |
Jing C | 0.4625 | 16 | Yu M | 0.4096 | 46 | Jia Y G | 0.3463 | 76 |
Qin A | 0.4607 | 17 | Hua C | 0.4015 | 47 | Ji S S | 0.3405 | 77 |
Gu L | 0.4568 | 18 | Wei Y | 0.4009 | 48 | Ping C | 0.3378 | 78 |
Gan G | 0.4551 | 19 | Chong X | 0.4006 | 49 | Xi G | 0.3361 | 79 |
Wu S | 0.4509 | 20 | Kang | 0.3970 | 50 | A K S | 0.3346 | 80 |
Wu D | 0.4472 | 21 | Cheng | 0.3929 | 51 | Zhou Q | 0.3343 | 81 |
Mai J | 0.4439 | 22 | Dong X Z | 0.3902 | 52 | Zhang | 0.3342 | 82 |
Qing C | 0.4426 | 23 | Kang L | 0.3859 | 53 | He Z | 0.3268 | 83 |
Yu Z | 0.4410 | 24 | Hua T | 0.3857 | 54 | Lin T | 0.3232 | 84 |
Yong C | 0.4409 | 25 | Su N | 0.3843 | 55 | Qi L H | 0.3168 | 85 |
Tong W | 0.4404 | 26 | Wen | 0.3794 | 56 | Lin X (ci-) | 0.2990 | 86 |
Min L | 0.4396 | 27 | Lu Q | 0.3784 | 57 | An N | 0.1934 | 87 |
Qin Z | 0.4354 | 28 | Zhang J C | 0.3757 | 58 | -- | -- | -- |
Long X | 0.4342 | 29 | Dang C | 0.3753 | 59 | -- | -- | -- |
Dun H | 0.4316 | 30 | Hong G | 0.3735 | 60 | -- | -- | -- |
Year | Global Moran’s I | E[I] | SD | p-Value | Z-Score |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1997 | 0.2240 | −0.0116 | 0.0446 | 0.003 | 5.3215 |
1998 | 0.2383 | −0.0116 | 0.0464 | 0.003 | 5.3795 |
1999 | 0.2188 | −0.0116 | 0.0436 | 0.002 | 5.3017 |
2000 | 0.2430 | −0.0116 | 0.0455 | 0.002 | 5.5394 |
2001 | 0.2183 | −0.0116 | 0.0455 | 0.002 | 5.1219 |
2002 | 0.1903 | −0.0116 | 0.0437 | 0.003 | 4.6302 |
2003 | 0.1918 | −0.0116 | 0.0454 | 0.002 | 4.4970 |
2004 | 0.1945 | −0.0116 | 0.0439 | 0.001 | 4.6523 |
2005 | 0.1827 | −0.0116 | 0.0445 | 0.002 | 4.3858 |
2006 | 0.1804 | −0.0116 | 0.0446 | 0.001 | 4.3255 |
2007 | 0.1805 | −0.0116 | 0.0427 | 0.001 | 4.4982 |
2008 | 0.1668 | −0.0116 | 0.0431 | 0.002 | 4.1407 |
2009 | 0.1767 | −0.0116 | 0.0438 | 0.001 | 4.2892 |
2010 | 0.1720 | −0.0116 | 0.0454 | 0.002 | 4.0990 |
2011 | 0.1742 | −0.0116 | 0.0460 | 0.003 | 4.0056 |
2012 | 0.1718 | −0.0116 | 0.0444 | 0.002 | 4.1692 |
2013 | 0.1708 | −0.0116 | 0.0450 | 0.003 | 3.9575 |
2014 | 0.1621 | −0.0116 | 0.0447 | 0.002 | 3.9047 |
2015 | 0.1726 | −0.0116 | 0.0454 | 0.003 | 3.9679 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhong, S.; Niu, S.; Wang, Y. Research on Potential Evaluation and Sustainable Development of Rural Biomass Energy in Gansu Province of China. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3800. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su10103800
Zhong S, Niu S, Wang Y. Research on Potential Evaluation and Sustainable Development of Rural Biomass Energy in Gansu Province of China. Sustainability. 2018; 10(10):3800. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su10103800
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhong, Sheng, Shuwen Niu, and Yipeng Wang. 2018. "Research on Potential Evaluation and Sustainable Development of Rural Biomass Energy in Gansu Province of China" Sustainability 10, no. 10: 3800. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su10103800