PMID- 37822638
OWN - NLM
STAT- PubMed-not-MEDLINE
LR  - 20231031
IS  - 2405-8440 (Print)
IS  - 2405-8440 (Electronic)
IS  - 2405-8440 (Linking)
VI  - 9
IP  - 10
DP  - 2023 Oct
TI  - Optimal evaluation of crop residues for gasification in Ghana using integrated 
      multi-criterial decision making techniques.
PG  - e20553
LID - 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20553 [doi]
LID - e20553
AB  - Lack of sustainable feedstock quantity and quality has been reported to be one of 
      the major challenges confronting operations of gasifier plants in Ghana. In this 
      paper, TOPSIS (Technique for order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) 
      COPRAS (Complex Proportional Assessment) and VIKOR (Multi-criteria Optimisation 
      and Compromise Solution) were used to select optimal crop residues for 
      sustainable gasification in Ghana among thirteen residue types. The Analytical 
      Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used as weighting criteria for the three 
      Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques. Thirteen criteria based on 
      particle size, proximate, ultimate analysis, calorific values, and quantity of 
      residues were used. Five scenarios were considered; ranking of individual 
      feedstock, consideration of the combination of the feedstock grouped under four 
      categories. The ultimate and proximate analysis of the various crop residues as 
      determined were generally within recommended levels as reported in the 
      literature. Cashew shells and cassava peels have the highest heating value and 
      annual technical residue potential of 23.4 MJ/kg and 880,750 tonnes respectively. 
      Ranking of the individual crop residues confirmed cassava peels as the best 
      alternatives of all the three MCDM techniques. The average rankings of the 
      alternatives from the three MCDM in the order of best to worst are cassava peels, 
      maize stalk, cocoa pod husk, maize cobs, rice straw, shea nut husk, groundnut 
      husk, Palm kernel shells, EFB, rice husk, coconut husk/shells, cashew shells, and 
      shea nut cake. Rankings of the alternatives under the four categories considered 
      showed that feedstock blends containing four residues or more offer better 
      opportunities for sustainable gasification than individual feedstock. Statistical 
      analysis shows that there is a very strong, positive correlation between VIKOR, 
      COPRAS, and TOPSIS. The strongest correlation is between VIKOR and TOPSIS with 
      spearman's rank correlation index of 0.98. The analysis was sensitive to the 
      weight of the strategy of group utility, recoverability ratio, residue-to-product 
      ratio and annual crop production figures. It is recommended that optimal gasifier 
      design and operational conditions taken into consideration the various feedstocks 
      and their combination as determined from this study must be studied.
CI  - (c) 2023 The Authors.
FAU - Osei, Isaac
AU  - Osei I
AD  - Department of Renewable Energy Engineering, University of Mines and Technology, 
      Tarkwa, Ghana.
AD  - The Brew-Hammond Energy Center, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana.
AD  - Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana.
FAU - Addo, Ahmad
AU  - Addo A
AD  - The Brew-Hammond Energy Center, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana.
AD  - Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana.
FAU - Kemausuor, Francis
AU  - Kemausuor F
AD  - The Brew-Hammond Energy Center, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana.
AD  - Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, KNUST, Kumasi, Ghana.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20230929
PL  - England
TA  - Heliyon
JT  - Heliyon
JID - 101672560
PMC - PMC10562923
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - COPRAS
OT  - Crop residues
OT  - Gasification
OT  - MCDM
OT  - TOPSIS
OT  - VIKOR
COIS- The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or 
      personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in 
      this paper.
EDAT- 2023/10/12 06:43
MHDA- 2023/10/12 06:44
PMCR- 2023/09/29
CRDT- 2023/10/12 04:07
PHST- 2023/03/20 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2023/08/30 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2023/09/28 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2023/10/12 06:44 [medline]
PHST- 2023/10/12 06:43 [pubmed]
PHST- 2023/10/12 04:07 [entrez]
PHST- 2023/09/29 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - S2405-8440(23)07761-7 [pii]
AID - e20553 [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20553 [doi]
PST - epublish
SO  - Heliyon. 2023 Sep 29;9(10):e20553. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20553. 
      eCollection 2023 Oct.