IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v27y2025i5d10.1007_s10668-025-06107-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biogas potential estimation and geospatial decision-making: a hybrid MCDA approach to optimizing biogas facility locations

Author

Listed:
  • Tolga Kaynak

    (Nigde Omer Halisdemir University)

  • Münevver Gizem Gümüş

    (Nigde Omer Halisdemir University)

Abstract

Biogas stands out among renewable energy sources with its environmental and economic advantages that support sustainable development. Despite Turkey’s rich biomass resources, the underutilization of biogas potential has resulted in insufficient investments in this field. The main objective of this study is to determine the most suitable locations for establishing biogas energy facilities in Şanlıurfa province, which is in the Southeastern Anatolia Region of Turkey. The total biogas potential of Şanlıurfa province, calculated from plant and animal waste, means that 4 biogas plants with an installed capacity of 40 MW can be built. Using an integrated approach that combines Remote Sensing, Geographical Information Systems, and Multi-Criteria Decision-Analysis methods, the study assessed 24 alternative locations for facility establishment. The Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process was used to weight 13 criteria reflecting environmental, economic, and technical considerations. Then, the obtained criteria weights were analyzed by the Technique for Order Preference Ranking Technique by Similarity to Ideal Solution method, and the most suitable alternative areas for biogas facilities were ranked. As a result of the study, the four most suitable areas for establishing biogas facilities were identified out of 24 alternative areas based on environmental sustainability, economic efficiency, and technical feasibility. These results can guide the decision-making processes of local governments and investors in the strategic planning of biogas facilities and contribute to the effective utilization of Şanlıurfa's biogas potential. Thus, the region's energy supply security will be strengthened, and a sustainable contribution will be made to Turkey's overall energy policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Tolga Kaynak & Münevver Gizem Gümüş, 2025. "Biogas potential estimation and geospatial decision-making: a hybrid MCDA approach to optimizing biogas facility locations," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 12193-12232, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s10668-025-06107-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-025-06107-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-025-06107-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-025-06107-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Yücenur, G. Nilay & Çaylak, Şeyma & Gönül, Gözde & Postalcıoğlu, Melike, 2020. "An integrated solution with SWARA&COPRAS methods in renewable energy production: City selection for biogas facility," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 2587-2597.
    2. Cheng, Ching-Hsue, 1997. "Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 343-350, January.
    3. Sekeroglu, Ahmet & Erol, Demet, 2023. "Site selection modeling of hybrid renewable energy facilities using suitability index in spatial planning," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 219(P1).
    4. Cebi, Selcuk & Ilbahar, Esra & Atasoy, Aylin, 2016. "A fuzzy information axiom based method to determine the optimal location for a biomass power plant: A case study in Aegean Region of Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 894-907.
    5. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    6. Adl, Mehrdad & Sheng, Kuichuan & Gharibi, Arash, 2012. "Technical assessment of bioenergy recovery from cotton stalks through anaerobic digestion process and the effects of inexpensive pre-treatments," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 251-260.
    7. Zareei, Samira, 2018. "Evaluation of biogas potential from livestock manures and rural wastes using GIS in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 351-356.
    8. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    9. Thompson, Ethan & Wang, Qingbin & Li, Minghao, 2013. "Anaerobic digester systems (ADS) for multiple dairy farms: A GIS analysis for optimal site selection," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 114-124.
    10. 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.
    11. Larissa Batrancea & Marcel Ciprian Pop & Malar Maran Rathnaswamy & Ioan Batrancea & Mircea-Iosif Rus, 2021. "An Empirical Investigation on the Transition Process toward a Green Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-12, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    14. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    15. Bostancı, Bülent & Kaynak, Tolga & Çapkurt, Zeynep, 2024. "Location selection for solar power plants by using support vector machines: Adıyaman province, Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    16. Vural, Gulfer, 2021. "Analyzing the impacts of economic growth, pollution, technological innovation and trade on renewable energy production in selected Latin American countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 210-216.
    17. Gao, Jing & Wang, Chao & Wang, Zhanwu & Lin, Jin & Zhang, Runkai & Wu, Xin & Xu, Guangyin & Wang, Zhenfeng, 2024. "Site selection decision for biomass cogeneration projects from a sustainable perspective: A case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    18. Melo, M.T. & Nickel, S. & Saldanha-da-Gama, F., 2009. "Facility location and supply chain management - A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(2), pages 401-412, July.
    19. Gital Durmaz, Yeşim & Bilgen, Bilge, 2020. "Multi-objective optimization of sustainable biomass supply chain network design," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    20. Afsana Akther & Tofael Ahamed & Ryozo Noguchi & Takuma Genkawa & Tomohiro Takigawa, 2019. "Site suitability analysis of biogas digester plant for municipal waste using GIS and multi-criteria analysis," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 61-93, February.
    21. Zubaryeva, Alyona & Zaccarelli, Nicola & Del Giudice, Cecilia & Zurlini, Giovanni, 2012. "Spatially explicit assessment of local biomass availability for distributed biogas production via anaerobic co-digestion – Mediterranean case study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 261-270.
    22. Larissa M. Batrancea & Malar Maran Rathnaswamy & Mircea-Iosif Rus & Horia Tulai, 2023. "Determinants of Economic Growth for the Last Half of Century: A Panel Data Analysis on 50 Countries," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(3), pages 2578-2602, September.
    23. Chukwuma, Emmanuel Chibundo & Okey-Onyesolu, Faith Chinenye & Ani, Kingsley Amaechi & Nwanna, Emmanuel Chukwudi, 2021. "GIS bio-waste assessment and suitability analysis for biogas power plant: A case study of Anambra state of Nigeria," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1182-1194.
    24. Larissa M. Batrancea & Horia Tulai, 2022. "Thriving or Surviving in the Energy Industry: Lessons on Energy Production from the European Economies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-16, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tsai, Pei-Hsuan & Tang, Jia-Wei & Chen, Chih-Jou, 2022. "Partnerships that go places: How to successfully market products from vendor partners at retail stores from the vendors’ perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Nitidetch Koohathongsumrit & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2022. "An integrated FAHP–ZODP approach for strategic marketing information system project selection," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1792-1809, September.
    3. Alev Taskin Gumus & A. Yesim Yayla & Erkan Çelik & Aytac Yildiz, 2013. "A Combined Fuzzy-AHP and Fuzzy-GRA Methodology for Hydrogen Energy Storage Method Selection in Turkey," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-16, June.
    4. Harsha Cheemakurthy & Karl Garme, 2022. "Fuzzy AHP-Based Design Performance Index for Evaluation of Ferries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-27, March.
    5. Keon Chul Park & Dong-Hee Shin, 2017. "Security assessment framework for IoT service," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 193-209, January.
    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. Sekeroglu, Ahmet, 2024. "Site selection for biomass-solar hybrid renewable energy facilities: Spatial modelling based on fuzzy logic-geographic information systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(PB).
    8. Kahraman, Cengiz & Ertay, Tijen & Buyukozkan, Gulcin, 2006. "A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(2), pages 390-411, June.
    9. Song, Yongze & Thatcher, Dominique & Li, Qindong & McHugh, Tom & Wu, Peng, 2021. "Developing sustainable road infrastructure performance indicators using a model-driven fuzzy spatial multi-criteria decision making method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    10. Rekha Goyat & Mahipal Singh, 2025. "Analyzing the Barriers of Industry 4.0 Adoption in Indian Healthcare Sector Using Best–Worst Method," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 1-21, June.
    11. Soha, Tamás & Papp, Luca & Csontos, Csaba & Munkácsy, Béla, 2021. "The importance of high crop residue demand on biogas plant site selection, scaling and feedstock allocation – A regional scale concept in a Hungarian study area," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Yun-hong Zheng & Kai Li, 2009. "The research of ecological security evaluation for mineral-resource enterprises-a case of China," Fuzzy Information and Engineering, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 329-341, September.
    14. Ehsan Khanmohammadi & Maryam Azizi & HamidReza Talaie & Fatih Ecer & Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, 2024. "A novel hybrid decision-making framework based on modified fuzzy analytic network process and fuzzy best–worst method," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 1-32, December.
    15. Thanuja Gelanigama Mesthrige & Prasad Kaparaju, 2025. "Decarbonisation of Natural Gas Grid: A Review of GIS-Based Approaches on Spatial Biomass Assessment, Plant Siting and Biomethane Grid Injection," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-35, February.
    16. Amir Hossein Salimi & Amir Noori & Hossein Bonakdari & Jafar Masoompour Samakosh & Ehsan Sharifi & Mohammadreza Hassanvand & Baharam Gharabaghi & Mehdi Agharazi, 2020. "Exploring the Role of Advertising Types on Improving the Water Consumption Behavior: An Application of Integrated Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy VIKOR Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-33, February.
    17. Diego Díaz-Vázquez & Susan Caroline Alvarado-Cummings & Demetrio Meza-Rodríguez & Carolina Senés-Guerrero & José de Anda & Misael Sebastián Gradilla-Hernández, 2020. "Evaluation of Biogas Potential from Livestock Manures and Multicriteria Site Selection for Centralized Anaerobic Digester Systems: The Case of Jalisco, México," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-32, April.
    18. Chatterjee, Kajal & Bandyopadhyay, Abhirup & Ghosh, Amitava & Kar, Samarjit, 2015. "Assessment of environmental factors causing wetland degradation, using Fuzzy Analytic Network Process: A case study on Keoladeo National Park, India," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 316(C), pages 1-13.
    19. Ehsan Khanmohammadi & Mostafa Zandieh & Talieh Tayebi, 2019. "Drawing a Strategy Canvas Using the Fuzzy Best–Worst Method," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 20(1), pages 57-75, March.
    20. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.

    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:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s10668-025-06107-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.