IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis for energy production processes (EPPs): Sustainable energy futures for Turkey


  • Talinli, Ilhan
  • Topuz, Emel
  • Uygar Akbay, Mehmet


This study presents a comparative analysis of three different energy production process (EPP) scenarios for Turkey. Main goal is to incorporate the prioritization criteria for the assessment of various energy policies for power alternatives, and evaluating these policies against these criteria. The three types of EPPs reviewed in this study are: electricity production from wind farms in the future, existing coal-based thermal power plants and planned nuclear power plants. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is utilized to assess the main and sub-factors of EPPs. Main factors such as economic, technical, social and environmental are assigned in first level of the AHP. The importance weights of factors are produced and priority values with realistic numbers are obtained using Fuzzy-AHP Chang's Model. Priority value for wind energy was determined as two times higher than the others when making the ultimate decision. On aggregate, importance weights of environmental (0.68) and social (0.69) factors make wind power leader. Sub-factors such as public acceptance, waste-emission and environmental impacts cause both nuclear and thermal power to have the lowest priority numbers. Additionally, the CO2 emissions trade was determined to be a very important criterion associated with both economic and environmental factors according to Kyoto Protocol. This study concludes that Turkey's existing thermal power stations should gradually be substituted by renewable energy options according to a schedule of Turkish energy policies in future.

Suggested Citation

  • Talinli, Ilhan & Topuz, Emel & Uygar Akbay, Mehmet, 2010. "Comparative analysis for energy production processes (EPPs): Sustainable energy futures for Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4479-4488, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:8:p:4479-4488

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Fiore, Karine, 2006. "Nuclear energy and sustainability: Understanding ITER," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3334-3341, November.
    2. Sarkis, Joseph & Talluri, Srinivas, 2004. "Evaluating and selecting e-commerce software and communication systems for a supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(2), pages 318-329, December.
    3. Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid & Madlener, Reinhard & Omann, Ines, 2009. "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1063-1074, September.
    4. Vaillancourt, Kathleen & Labriet, Maryse & Loulou, Richard & Waaub, Jean-Philippe, 2008. "The role of nuclear energy in long-term climate scenarios: An analysis with the World-TIMES model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 2296-2307, July.
    5. Nel, Willem P. & Cooper, Christopher J., 2009. "Implications of fossil fuel constraints on economic growth and global warming," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 166-180, January.
    6. Greening, Lorna A. & Bernow, Steve, 2004. "Design of coordinated energy and environmental policies: use of multi-criteria decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 721-735, April.
    7. Lee, Young Eal & Koh, Kyoo-Kun, 2002. "Decision-making of nuclear energy policy: application of environmental management tool to nuclear fuel cycle," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(13), pages 1151-1161, October.
    8. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    9. Say, Nuriye Peker, 2006. "Lignite-fired thermal power plants and SO2 pollution in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2690-2701, November.
    10. Leung, L. C. & Cao, D., 2000. "On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 102-113, July.
    11. Boyd, Roy & Ibarraran, Maria E., 2002. "Costs of compliance with the Kyoto Protocol: a developing country perspective," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 21-39, January.
    12. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2007. "Nuclear power in open energy markets: A case study of Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 3061-3073, May.
    13. Crawford, R.H., 2009. "Life cycle energy and greenhouse emissions analysis of wind turbines and the effect of size on energy yield," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2653-2660, December.
    14. Georgopoulou, E. & Sarafidis, Y. & Mirasgedis, S. & Zaimi, S. & Lalas, D. P., 2003. "A multiple criteria decision-aid approach in defining national priorities for greenhouse gases emissions reduction in the energy sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 199-215, April.
    15. Kahraman, Cengiz & Cebeci, Ufuk & Ruan, Da, 2004. "Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: The case of Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 171-184, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Prasad, Ravita D. & Bansal, R.C. & Raturi, Atul, 2014. "Multi-faceted energy planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 686-699.
    2. Karaca, Ferhat & Raven, Paul Graham & Machell, John & Camci, Fatih, 2015. "A comparative analysis framework for assessing the sustainability of a combined water and energy infrastructure," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 456-468.
    3. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2017. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Resources in Turkey using an integrated MCDM approach with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 149-163.
    4. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    5. Haddad, Brahim & Liazid, Abdelkrim & Ferreira, Paula, 2017. "A multi-criteria approach to rank renewables for the Algerian electricity system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 462-472.
    6. repec:eee:rensus:v:82:y:2018:i:p3:p:3808-3823 is not listed on IDEAS


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:8:p:4479-4488. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.