IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i8p4479-4488.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

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

Abstract

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
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00271-5
    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

    as
    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. Say, Nuriye Peker, 2006. "Lignite-fired thermal power plants and SO2 pollution in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2690-2701, November.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2007. "Nuclear power in open energy markets: A case study of Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 3061-3073, May.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Yildirim, Mehmet & Erkan, Kadir, 2007. "Determination of acceptable operating cost level of nuclear energy for Turkey's power system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 128-136.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2013. "Evaluating future scenarios for the power generation sector using a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool: The Portuguese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 126-136.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Thushara, De Silva M. & Hornberger, George M. & Baroud, Hiba, 2019. "Decision analysis to support the choice of a future power generation pathway for Sri Lanka," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 680-697.
    6. 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.
    7. Indre Siksnelyte & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene & Deepak Sharma, 2018. "An Overview of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Dealing with Sustainable Energy Development Issues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-21, October.
    8. 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.
    9. S. K. Purwanto & Obsatar Sinaga, 2021. "Exploring the Relationship between Fossil Fuel Energy Consumption, Renewable Energy Consumption and Human Capital Index: A Study From Thailand," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(6), pages 106-113.
    10. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Flores, Yarela, 2018. "Planning in a changing environment: Applications of portfolio optimisation to deal with risk in the electricity sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3808-3823.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    2. Manley, Dawn K. & Hines, Valerie A. & Jordan, Matthew W. & Stoltz, Ronald E., 2013. "A survey of energy policy priorities in the United States: Energy supply security, economics, and the environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 687-696.
    3. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Wang, Q. & Poh, K.L., 2014. "A survey of integrated decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 691-702.
    5. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Range-based Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis: A combined method of Multi-Actor Multi-Criteria Analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to support participatory decision making under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 257-269.
    6. Heo, Eunnyeong & Kim, Jinsoo & Boo, Kyung-Jin, 2010. "Analysis of the assessment factors for renewable energy dissemination program evaluation using fuzzy AHP," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(8), pages 2214-2220, October.
    7. Doukas, Haris Ch. & Andreas, Botsikas M. & Psarras, John E., 2007. "Multi-criteria decision aid for the formulation of sustainable technological energy priorities using linguistic variables," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 844-855, October.
    8. Khishtandar, Soheila & Zandieh, Mostafa & Dorri, Behrouz, 2017. "A multi criteria decision making framework for sustainability assessment of bioenergy production technologies with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets: The case of Iran," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1130-1145.
    9. Supriyasilp, Thanaporn & Pongput, Kobkiat & Boonyasirikul, Thana, 2009. "Hydropower development priority using MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1866-1875, May.
    10. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    11. Mounir Ben Mbarek & Racha Khairallah & Rochdi Feki, 2015. "Causality relationships between renewable energy, nuclear energy and economic growth in France," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 133-142, March.
    12. Henao, Felipe & Cherni, Judith A. & Jaramillo, Patricia & Dyner, Isaac, 2012. "A multicriteria approach to sustainable energy supply for the rural poor," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(3), pages 801-809.
    13. Haji Vahabzadeh, Ali & Asiaei, Arash & Zailani, Suhaiza, 2015. "Reprint of “Green decision-making model in reverse logistics using FUZZY-VIKOR method”," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 104(PB), pages 334-347.
    14. Lee, Chien-Chiang & Chiu, Yi-Bin, 2011. "Nuclear energy consumption, oil prices, and economic growth: Evidence from highly industrialized countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 236-248, March.
    15. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    16. Papapostolou, Aikaterini & Karakosta, Charikleia & Nikas, Alexandros & Psarras, John, 2017. "Exploring opportunities and risks for RES-E deployment under Cooperation Mechanisms between EU and Western Balkans: A multi-criteria assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 519-530.
    17. Tsoutsos, Theocharis & Drandaki, Maria & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Iosifidis, Eleftherios & Kiosses, Ioannis, 2009. "Sustainable energy planning by using multi-criteria analysis application in the island of Crete," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1587-1600, May.
    18. Patlitzianas, Konstantinos D. & Psarras, John, 2007. "Formulating a modern energy companies' environment in the EU accession member states through a decision support methodology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2231-2238, April.
    19. Haji Vahabzadeh, Ali & Asiaei, Arash & Zailani, Suhaiza, 2015. "Green decision-making model in reverse logistics using FUZZY-VIKOR method," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 125-138.
    20. Mavrotas, G. & Georgopoulou, E. & Mirasgedis, S. & Sarafidis, Y. & Lalas, D. & Hontou, V. & Gakis, N., 2007. "An integrated approach for the selection of Best Available Techniques (BAT) for the industries in the greater Athens area using multi-objective combinatorial optimization," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 953-973, July.

    Corrections

    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.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.