Research Article
Quantitative Analysis of Japan’s Energy Security Based on Fuzzy Logic: Impact Assessment of Fukushima Accident
Table 14
The result of Fuzzy-DEMATEL analysis for Acceptability (Case
).
| Indicator | | | | | Total-influenced relation matrix | AP1 | AP2 | AP3 | AP4 | AP5 |
| Consumption of fossil fuels (AP1) | 1.26 | 0.95 | 2.23 | 0.22 | 0.091 | 0.349 | 0.206 | 0.386 | 0.213 | CO2 emission from energy sources (AP2) | 1.12 | 0.81 | 1.94 | 0.21 | 0.094 | 0.065 | 0.231 | 0.422 | 0.275 | Radioactive waste (AP3) | 2.21 | 1.99 | 4.18 | 0.17 | 0.377 | 0.169 | 0.414 | 0.669 | 0.596 | Supporting ratio for nuclear energy (AP4) | 1.77 | 2.46 | 4.20 | −0.66 | 0.185 | 0.103 | 0.558 | 0.398 | 0.510 | Voice and accountability (AP5) | 1.87 | 1.96 | 3.81 | −0.10 | 0.190 | 0.104 | 0.578 | 0.615 | 0.364 |
|
|