AbstractMulti-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is widely used to solve various decision problems through alternative evaluation. MCDA methods can be used in every field that can define a problem, alternatives and criteria. However, finding the appropriate method can influence the results, in this research five MCDA methods have been tested on the renewable energy sector in Latvia to find the best alternative. The main results showed that TOPSIS, VIKOR and PROMETHEE-GAIA have similar priority selection and the highest ranking was selected for hydropower plant, but MULTIMOORA and COPRAS results were beneficial to Solar PV.

No abstract

The blind spot can be defined as the area around the vehicle where the driver cannot see through the mirrors without turning their head or taking their eyes off the road. Similar blind spots occur in energy policy. Blind spots can occur in forecasting economic development and creating policy documents. This study uncovers potential blind spots and controversies in the sustainability assessment of energy supply technologies. A composite sustainability index was constructed to compare district heating with four individual heating technologies—wood pellet boilers, natural gas boilers, solar collectors, and heat pumps. A total of 19 indicators were selected and grouped into four dimensions of sustainability—technical, environmental, economic, and social. The results reveal that district heating can compete with individual heating technologies in all dimensions of sustainability; however, a possible blind spot lies in evaluating environmental performance indicators of the different heating technologies. This study provides a novel decision-making tool that policy-makers could use to identify and avoid potential blind spots and uncertainties in energy policy at an early stage.

Energy efficiency policy has been one of the European Union top priorities for decades and will continue to play a vital role in the next 10 years with the introduction of The Clean energy for all Europeans. Likewise, in Latvia energy efficiency has been given high priority; however, the energy efficiency targets for industry has lacked ambitions. This research focuses on evaluating the Latvian industrial energy efficiency policy using top-down approach and benchmarking energy intensity of Latvian industry to the average of the European Union’s. Results confirm that on average Latvian industry consumes 2.6 times more energy to produce the same amount of value added compared to the average in the European Union; however, every saved energy unit in Latvia would save twice less CO2 emissions considering already largely decarbonized energy mix. In the spotlights of the Green Deal proposed by the European Commission, much higher contribution in terms of CO2 reduction and energy efficiency will be expected from the industry. Nevertheless, energy efficiency targets for Latvian industry should be sector-specific, separately addressing CO2 intensive sectors, and non-intensive CO2 sectors with low added value.

It is the responsibility of each member state of the European Union, to prepare a national energy and climate plan and set achievable climate targets and meaningful measures and policies to achieve the targets set. Annex 4 of the Latvian National Energy and Climate Plan for 2030 (hereinafter – NECP) provides an overview of policies and measures to achieve the climate targets. The NECP does not provide information on the impact of the policies or which measures are more important and which are less crucial Similarly, the measures in Annex 4 of the NECP were not determined by industry experts but by ministry officials, therefore, it is not clear whether the proposed measures will achieve the set climate targets, a point also made by European Commission in its evaluation report on NECP. The aim of the study is to develop a tool for the early assessment of the impact of energy and climate policy measures. The study developed a methodology to pre-assess the impacts of the policies identified in the NECP, impacts were described by measures effectiveness and stage of development. With this methodology, it is possible to assess the impact of energy policies using indicators to characterize the effectiveness of the policy and the level of development. The study confirmed that both the multi-criteria analysis and composite index method can be used as methods. The results showed that high impact measures were related to the promotion of energy efficiency in buildings, but low impact measures were comprehensive horizontal measures such as measures related principle ‘energy efficiency first’ and review of energy efficiency obligation schemes. The indicators with the highest impact on sustainability rate were possible side effects and transparency of policies.