Planning task F: Decision making. Realisation of the preferred alternative
Example: Local energy planning in Hylkje

The case study presented here has been completed to the point when the decision makers had to make the final decision, based on the data presented to them during the decision support process. Therefore we cannot include here a discussion about the implementation of the decision based on the planning framework developed.

However it is perhaps interesting for the user to get an evaluation of the tools used.

The main tools used for decision support in this case study where an energy system model (eTRANSPORT) and a preference model (based on MAUT). The complexity of analysis was increased by the fact that both uncertainty and multiple criteria (economic criteria and criteria describing the environmental impacts (non-monetized)) have been considered in the analysis.

The use of the two models brought invaluable insight into the problem. First of all the decision-maker gained more knowledge about the problem and the alternatives analysed. For example, when running the eTRANSPORT model, the decision-maker had the opportunity to simulate how the system can be operated in one system configuration (system alternative) during different time-periods and under various price or load scenarios.

We found out that it is important that the decision makers are involved this stage, especially when it comes to deciding on which attributes and uncertainties to consider.

Published August 3, 2012

Contact: Gerd Kjølle, SINTEF Energy Research