A Multi-Criteria Evaluation Framework for Siting Fusion Energy Facilities: Application and Evaluation of U.S. Coal Power Plants

TL;DR

The paper develops a structured, multi-criteria framework for siting fusion energy facilities at retiring U.S. coal plant sites, integrating expert judgment, geospatial data, and MCDM tools. Using STAND to prepare 220 coal-site inputs and FUCOM-based weights with WSM for ranking, it reveals that connectivity-spatial factors and federal incentives are highly influential in site suitability. The analysis yields a national ranking of candidate sites and highlights attribute-specific trade-offs, illustrating the need for a holistic, transparent decision-support tool. The work lays groundwork for practical deployment with emphasis on stakeholder engagement and outlines directions for incorporating dynamic market factors and lifecycle-cost analyses.

Abstract

This paper proposes a comprehensive methodology for siting fusion energy facilities, integrating expert judgment, geospatial data, and multi-criteria decision making tools to evaluate site suitability systematically. As a case study, we apply this framework to all currently operational coal power plant sites in the United States to examine their potential for hosting future fusion facilities at a time when these coal plants are shut down on reaching their end of life - timelines which are expected to coincide with the potential deployment of fusion energy facilities. Drawing on 22 siting criteria - including state and federal policies, risk and hazard assessments, and spatial and infrastructural parameters - we implement two MultiCriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods: the Fuzzy Full Consistency Method (F-FUCOM) to derive attribute weights and the Weighted Sum Method (WSM) to rank sites based on composite suitability scores. By focusing on fusion-specific siting needs and demonstrating the framework through a coal site application, this study contributes a scalable and transparent decision-support tool for identifying optimal fusion energy deployment locations.

Figures (8)

• Figure 1: Flowchart of research methodology.
• Figure 2: List of attributes and sub-attributes for coal-to-fusion siting.
• Figure 3: Weights of the sub-attribute.
• Figure 4: All the studied coal sites and their corresponding suitability scores (normalized).
• Figure 5: Suitability score of the coal sites based on only SP (normalized).