# 134

Dear Hameedullah Zaheb, Obaidullah Obaidi, Sarban Mukhtar 3, Habiburahman Shirani , Mikaeel Ahmadi

I read your paper:

Comprehensive Analysis and Prioritization of Sustainable Energy Resources Using Analytical Hierarchy Process

My comments

1- In the abstract you state “The novelty of this researchlies in its comprehensive and systematic approach to integrating diverse expert opinions and utilizing AHP; the development of a robust decision-making model that accommodates the diverse criteria and sub-criteria (SCs) influencing the prioritization of energy resources; and its bridging of the gaps through the integration of varied criteria and SCs, region-specific concerns, and stakeholders’ engagement by creating a comprehensive and inclusive prioritization strategy”

There is not a novelty, as you say, in incorporating diverse experts’ opinions in AHP. This has been done during decades, not only in AHP but also in other MCDM methods.

Unfortunatelly, AHP is not robust, it has many times over more detractors than the sum of all the other MCDM methods together. It is however, and by far, the most used method; this appears to be contradictory, but it is not. It is so because AHP frees the DM of the need of reasoning, researching, consulting, and using common sense, by offering just to fabricate a decision matrix according to his/her feelings and intuitions.

Of course, it is very easy to use a method like this, and this is the reason for its diffusion; just put numbers as per your feelings. However, the solution of projects not always respond to the DM wish, but it is subject to many rational technical, economics and environmental established issues, in other words, it is a normative process, not a descriptive one as AHP and ANP. Because both follow the descriptive process, they are irrational (if you do not believe me, please look for the definition of these two processes).

2- Page 1 “The key findings highlight solar energy as the most viable sustainable energy resource, followed by wind and hydro energy”

And they probably are, however, your method seems to ignore that the load factor of PV is scarcely 6/8 hours a day. What happens at night? Similar restrictions are for wind, since the winds does not always blow, and for hydro, because it depends from snow melting, which is becoming scarce due to global warming. Can AHP deal with these real facts? Of course not.

Regarding energy transition that you rightly mention neither AHP nor ANP can deal with this very complex scenario, that involves working at different times, with different criteria values and using precedence.

3- Your article speaks about sensitivity analysis (SA), and using One-at-a Time (OAT) or ceteris paribus principle. It appears that you ignore that you cannot use this principle in SA, because, what you have is a system, and as that, you cannot partition it. that is, you must work with all of them at the same time (AAT).

4- Page 4 “Next, AHP is a structured decision-making approach that allows for systematic examination and prioritization of complex alternatives [34]. Saaty developed AHP, which involves breaking down complex judgements into a hierarchical structure of criteria”

AHP was not built to work with complex alternatives, because it may require to work with binary values (0 or 1), and this makes impossible to consider aspects like ‘If alternative B is selected, alternative A cannot be selected”. It is one or the other. How can you express that in AHP? You can’t.

5- “Meanwhile, AHP is one of the most widely adopted MCDM methods and has been used by many scholars in various scientific fields [30]. AHP is the best solution for complexity and multi-criteria and SC issues”

Sorry, the bold sentence is inexact. I have identified 29 drawbacks in AHP. There are many MCDM methods that are much better suited for that, like PROMETHEE, TOPSIS, ELECTRE, etc. They use reasoning, and can have as many criteria as you like

6- Page 7 “The AHP model’s robustness was assessed using a sensitivity analysis. This phase is critical for evaluating the model’s sensitivity to changes in criteria weights, since it ensures that differences in preferences or data do not disproportionately influence the prioritization conclusion”

Your underlined sentence is correct. However, do you know that subjective criteria weights have no influence in evaluating alternatives? They are only good for determining the relative importance between criteria. This obeys to Shannon’s theorem, where he demonstrates that importance of a criterion for evaluation depends on the discrimination of its values, or entropy, not of the weight of a criterion.

7- Page 8 “Moreover, recognizing the links and dependencies between criteria is critical for achieving nuanced prioritization. For example, a resource may have a favorable environmental impact but face difficulties in gaining societal acceptance. Understanding these interdependencies informs the weighting process, resulting in a balanced and integrated judgement “

If the paper recognizes that are links and dependencies between criteria, which is true, then, YOU CANNOT USE AHP, because this method requires independency between criteria, something that was said by Saaty himself, and with reason. This shows that the authors used a method without taking into account its limitations. Consequently, the results are probably invalid

8- “Also, resource availability considers the geographic distribution and accessibility of renewable energy resources [52]. Regional abundance, accessibility to demand centers, and potential resource extraction or collection issues are all important considerations [5]. Assessing resource availability gives information on the logistical aspects of resource use. Additionally, anticipating future resource availability is crucial for sustainable longterm planning. Climate change, technological advancements, and evolving socioeconomic conditions can impact the availability of certain resources [5]. The prioritization model considers these dynamic factors, ensuring adaptability to changing circumstances. Through the careful consideration of these criteria, this research aims to develop a robust and comprehensive model for prioritizing sustainable energy resources.”

This is absolutely correct, but where the AHP considers available resources, which, of course, are limited? AHP and ANP work with the concept that resources are unlimited.

I hope these comments can be of help

Nolberto Munier