Search

In the age of digitalization, data centers are critical facilities that help people and businesses in many sectors. Data centers, like other assets requiring high investment, face several risks during their operation. Also, data centers seek sustainable sources to boost their operations when selecting the most appropriate location. Therefore, the location of a data center is chosen based on sustainability and risk assessment. To the best of our knowledge, no study has been conducted for data center risk evaluation with environmental and sustainability assessment. This paper evaluates the eight main criteria and the forty-five sub-criteria for selecting the most appropriate location for the data center when considering the fifty different economies in different business regions. For this particular purpose, the continuous intuitionistic fuzzy sets (CIFS)-based analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is presented to define the weights of each criterion and sub-criterion. Then, the CIFS-based technique for order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS) is developed to rank the fifty economies integrated with the weights from the CIFS-based AHP. Moreover, eight different scenarios were conducted, and comparison studies were presented. Finally, Denmark, Switzerland, and The Netherlands are the top three selections based on the criteria. [Display omitted] • Fuzzy multi-criteria methods are developed to evaluate data center locations. • Natural, energy, and infrastructure risks are the top three pillars. • Economies are ranked based on the eight scenarios with sustainability and risks. • Denmark tops the charts with the highest score associated with fifty economies. • Based on each income level, Denmark, Brazil, and Tunisia are suitable locations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Steel is the most common industrial material worldwide due to its numerous applications, high strength and recyclability. Steel production involves alloying iron with various amounts of carbon and other elements to produce thousands of different grades and types of steel for various purposes. However, the intensive use of carbon in steel production is one of the factors contributing to global climate change. To use of hydrogen and renewable energy sources in steel production has emerged as a significant solution to reduce carbon emissions. The aim of this study is to obtain green hydrogen for the production of green steel. The focus is on utilizing offshore wind energy as a renewable energy source to give us the energy we need to electrolyze seawater. The study uses the seas of Turkiye for case analysis. In this paper, an integrated Multi-criteria decision-making method is used to integrate hybrid energy systems and their application for green industry and to select a location for a power generation plant. The study is a new contribution to the literature in terms of its scope. Green steel's location selection is addressed for the first time in the literature. The weights of the criteria are determined by employing the Best-Worst Method (BWM) as a multi-criteria decision-making technique, and the alternatives are evaluated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). By using the BWM method, decision makers can have a clear understanding of the evaluation range for pairwise comparisons of criteria, which reduces potential biases. According to the study, the northern part of the Aegean Sea in Turkiye is the most suitable alternative for green steel production, with offshore wind energy being used for hydrogen production. The study also revealed that the most important main criterion for this hybrid system is "natural factors", and the sub-criteria are "wind speed and power density" by far compared to other sub-criteria. The fact that the area determined for the facility is suitable for construction and the possibility that the customer of the energy produced is other industrial establishments here is the most important indicator that the methods applied give good results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The construction industry has been criticised for consuming high amounts of materials and generating high volumes of waste while creating several environmental problems. Material circularity refers to the systemic approach of retaining, recovering and reusing materials to minimise waste and reduce the consumption of resources, thereby promoting a sustainable economy. However, there is a notable gap in understanding and research regarding the necessary criteria to evaluate material circularity in building construction. This paper addresses this gap by developing a framework for evaluating material circularity in building construction. This was achieved by identifying the 15 sub-criteria used to evaluate material circularity and their respective significance levels. The material circularity criteria were identified through a literature review and expert interviews. Then, the finalised criteria were used to create a questionnaire survey in which respondents were asked to rate the criteria through pairwise comparisons. The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) was employed to prioritise these criteria. Subsequently, the material circularity evaluation framework for building construction (M-CEF BC) was developed, revealing that adherence to design for disassembly and adaptability principles and avoidance of hazardous materials are the most significant criteria, accounting for a weightage of 10.4% and 9.2%, respectively. M-CEF BC also links material circularity criteria with the actions described in the ReSOLVE framework. Overall, M-CEF BC aids in selecting appropriate construction materials, methods, and technologies. Further, it helps to increase material circularity while achieving emissions reduction targets, financial benefits, and meeting Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in building construction projects. Additionally, it provides valuable guidance for developing policies that enhance material circularity. [Display omitted] • Develops a framework for evaluating material circularity in building construction. • The three main criteria for evaluating material circularity are identified. • The fifteen sub-criteria are identified under three main criteria. • The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is employed to prioritise the criteria. • The framework aids in elevating the degree of material circularity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) is a performance management tool that analyzes the relationship between tangible and intangible assets. Its ability to render business strategy visible has earned it the distinction of being a strategic management model. Sustainability has become an important part of daily and business life today. With the increasing importance given by stakeholders to environmental and social issues, companies find it necessary to evaluate sustainability activities in their performance evaluations. In order to meet this need, the Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) emerged with the addition of a sustainability perspective or parameters to BSC. The number of academic studies pertaining to the application of BSC, which numerous companies and subjects to research have utilized, is inadequate. Due to its hierarchical structure and the necessity to evaluate numerous criteria, BSC is suitable for using multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. In this paper, an integrated approach consisting of SBSC, the Picture Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (PF-AHP), and the Objective Matrix (OMAX) method is proposed for the performance measurement of companies. The PF-AHP method has been reorganized for ease of application in determining the perspectives, strategic objectives, and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) weights within SBSC. Additionally, the OMAX method has been employed for calculating the performance scores. This proposed approach was implemented in a factory operating in the glass industry. The SBSC created for the company includes five perspectives, 16 strategic objectives, and 34 KPIs. PF-AHP method was used to determine the weights of perspectives, strategic objectives, and KPIs to be used in the performance score calculation with OMAX. The weight of financial perspective is 0.267, the weight of the customer perspective is 0.247, the weight of the internal process perspective is 0.191, the weight of the learning and development perspective is 0.161, and the weight of the sustainability perspective is 0.134. The evaluations made by the decision-makers indicate that the company's performance measurement still adheres to the traditional framework. The performance score of the company is 6.14 out of 10. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the increasing availability of tools and methods for sustainable and circular product design (DfS), their uptake in practice is slow. This is also true in the automotive industry, where DfS is an important measure for addressing the industry's negative environmental and social impacts. To facilitate DfS implementation, this paper uses an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and offers, for the first time, a classification and prioritisation of the barriers that need to be overcome when implementing DfS into vehicle development processes. Based on a systematic literature review and on an expert workshop, the top 15 DfS barrier factors were derived and divided equally into five groups, following a multi-level structure. These factors and groups formed the input for a survey-based analytic hierarchy process with 38 European industry experts. The results show that strategic issues are the most important barriers, followed by the group of operational, personal, external, and tool-related barriers. Among the 15 barrier factors identified, the top five were (1) an unclear link to profitability, (2) lack of top management support, (3) difficulties in handling trade-offs, (4) high operational costs, and (5) a lack of integration of DfS into corporate strategy. The results indicate that while external constraints already exert pressure on automotive companies, they still face particular challenges when attempting to integrate sustainability into corporate strategies and in transferring such strategies to DfS activities at the operational level. The study results may be used to inform managerial policy and further research. • The 15 main Design for Sustainability (DfS) barriers are compiled from literature. • They are grouped and empirically ranked in an AHP with automotive experts. • Five groups of barriers rank by strategic, operational, personal, external and tools. • Unclear profitability and lacking top management support are prime individual barriers. • Handling trade-offs, high costs and lacking strategy integration rank third to fifth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]