% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Wulf:893316,
      author       = {Wulf, Christina and Zapp, Petra and Schreiber, Andrea and
                      Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm},
      title        = {{S}etting thresholds to define indifferences and
                      preferences in {PROMETHEE} for life cycle sustainability
                      assessment of {E}uropean hydrogen production},
      journal      = {Sustainability},
      volume       = {13},
      issn         = {2071-1050},
      address      = {Basel},
      publisher    = {MDPI},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2021-02690},
      pages        = {7009},
      year         = {2021},
      abstract     = {The Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) is a proven
                      method for sustainability assessment. However, the
                      interpretation phase of an LCSA is challenging because many
                      different single results are obtained. Additionally,
                      performing a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is one
                      way—not only for LCSA—to gain clarity about how to
                      interpret the results. One common form of MCDAs are
                      outranking methods. For these type of methods it becomes of
                      utmost importance to clarify when results become preferable.
                      Thus, thresholds are commonly used to prevent decisions
                      based on results that are actually indifferent between the
                      analyzed options. In this paper, a new approach is presented
                      to identify and quantify such thresholds for Preference
                      Ranking Organization METHod for Enrichment Evaluation
                      (PROMETHEE) based on uncertainty of Life Cycle Impact
                      Assessment (LCIA) methods. Common thresholds and this new
                      approach are discussed using a case study on finding a
                      preferred location for sustainable industrial hydrogen
                      production, comparing three locations in European countries.
                      The single LCSA results indicated different preferences for
                      the environmental, economic and social assessment. The
                      application of PROMETHEE helped to find a clear solution.
                      The comparison of the newly-specified thresholds based on
                      LCIA uncertainty with default thresholds provided important
                      insights of how to interpret the LCSA results regarding
                      industrial hydrogen production.},
      cin          = {IEK-STE},
      ddc          = {690},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013},
      pnm          = {1112 - Societally Feasible Transformation Pathways
                      (POF4-111)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-1112},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000671216900001},
      doi          = {10.3390/su13137009},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/893316},
}