A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Green Hydrogen Production via Renewable Energy Sources

Abstract

The global transition toward cleaner energy systems has intensified interest in green hydrogen as a sustainable and low-emission alternative to fossil-based fuels. However, selecting the most appropriate hydrogen production method remains a complex decision-making challenge due to the interplay of technical, economic, environmental, and social factors. This study applies the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a widely recognized multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach, to systematically evaluate and rank various green hydrogen production technologies. A hierarchical framework was developed incorporating critical criteria such as investment cost, operational efficiency, environmental sustainability, and technological maturity. Expert judgments were used to assign relative weights to each criterion, and competing alternatives were assessed accordingly. The AHP analysis identified RW-Biomass: Bio Photolysis as the most favorable hydrogen production method, achieving the highest overall priority score (0.102), indicating its strong performance across the selected evaluation criteria. These results highlight the method’s potential in aligning sustainability goals with practical energy planning, providing valuable insights for decision-makers in shaping future hydrogen strategies. The study confirms the effectiveness of AHP in delivering structured, transparent, and evidence-based assessments in the context of sustainable energy development.

Keywords

• Green Hydrogen
• Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM)
• Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
• Sustainability
• Hydrogen Production Technologies

References

1. Çetinkaya E, Dinçer I, Naterer GF (2012) Life cycle assessment of various hydrogen production methods. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37:2071–2080
2. Dinçer I, Acar C (2015) Review and evaluation of hydrogen production methods for better sustainability. Int J Hydrogen Energy 40:11094–11111
3. Govindan K, Jepsen MB (2016) ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res 250:1–29
4. International Energy Agency (2022) Global Hydrogen Review 2022. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-hydrogen-review-2022
5. Li W, Ren X, Ding S, Dong L (2020) A multi-criterion decision-making for sustainability assessment of hydrogen production technologies based on objective grey relational analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy 45:34385–34395
6. Macharis C, Springael J, De Brucker K, Verbeke A (2004) PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis. Eur J Oper Res 153:307–317
7. Pohekar SD, Ramachandran M (2004) Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning—A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 8:365–381
8. Peniwati K (2007) Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods. Math Comput Model 46:935–947

9. Russo RFSM, Camanho R (2015) Criteria in AHP: A systematic review of literature. Procedia Comput Sci 55:1123–1132
10. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). J Oper Res Soc 41:1073–1076
11. Valente A, Iribarren D, Dufour J (2016) Life cycle assessment of hydrogen energy systems: A review of methodological choices. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22:346–363
12. Yıldırım B, Kantürk Figen A, Karakılçık M (2024) Hidrojen üretim yöntemleri. Hidrojen Teknolojileri 19