IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i7p2136-d221464.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Turkey’s 2023 Energy Strategies and Investment Opportunities for Renewable Energy Sources: Site Selection Based on ELECTRE

Author

Listed:
  • Ceren Erdin

    (Yildiz Technical University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration, 34220 Istanbul, Turkey)

  • Gokhan Ozkaya

    (Yildiz Technical University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration, 34220 Istanbul, Turkey)

Abstract

In Turkey, current energy generations are not sufficient for the existing energy needs and besides, energy demand is expected to increase by 4–6 percent annually until 2023. Therefore, the government aims to increase the ratio of renewable energy resources (RES) in total installed capacity to 30 percent by 2023. By this date, total energy investments are expected to be approximately $110 billion. Turkey is the fastest growing energy market among the OECD countries. Therefore, Turkey is an attractive market for energy companies and investors. At this stage, site selection and deciding appropriate RES are the most important feasibility parameters for investment. In this study, “Site Selection in Turkey” issue for RES (solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, biomass) is evaluated by the ELECTRE which is one of the Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods. In addition, the reasons for choosing this method are explained according to the literature. The study emphasizes the importance of energy generation from renewable and sustainable sources and is concerned with improving the position of the country. The Turkish government offers many purchasing guarantees and high incentives, especially in the renewable energy sector. As a result of the analysis, the most suitable energy sources are presented according to the geography and energy potential of the regions. The study aims to inform energy firms and everyone related with RES about Turkey’s RES opportunities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ceren Erdin & Gokhan Ozkaya, 2019. "Turkey’s 2023 Energy Strategies and Investment Opportunities for Renewable Energy Sources: Site Selection Based on ELECTRE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:2136-:d:221464
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/2136/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/2136/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Madlener, Reinhard & Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid, 2007. "New ways for the integrated appraisal of national energy scenarios: The case of renewable energy use in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6060-6074, December.
    2. Govindan, Kannan & Kadziński, Miłosz & Ehling, Ronja & Miebs, Grzegorz, 2019. "Selection of a sustainable third-party reverse logistics provider based on the robustness analysis of an outranking graph kernel conducted with ELECTRE I and SMAA," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-15.
    3. 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.
    4. Nigim, K. & Munier, N. & Green, J., 2004. "Pre-feasibility MCDM tools to aid communities in prioritizing local viable renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1775-1791.
    5. Arnette, Andrew & Zobel, Christopher W., 2012. "An optimization model for regional renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 4606-4615.
    6. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, March.
    7. Haralambopoulos, D.A. & Polatidis, H., 2003. "Renewable energy projects: structuring a multi-criteria group decision-making framework," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 961-973.
    8. Ernest H Forman & Mary Ann Selly, 2001. "Decision by Objectives:How to Convince Others That You are Right," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 4281, December.
    9. Cetinay, Hale & Kuipers, Fernando A. & Guven, A. Nezih, 2017. "Optimal siting and sizing of wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 51-58.
    10. Zeki Ayag, 2016. "AHP-Based Approach to evaluate solar power plant location alternatives," Proceedings of Business and Management Conferences 3405942, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    11. Beccali, M. & Cellura, M. & Mistretta, M., 2003. "Decision-making in energy planning. Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 2063-2087.
    12. Sánchez-Lozano, Juan M. & Henggeler Antunes, Carlos & García-Cascales, M. Socorro & Dias, Luis C., 2014. "GIS-based photovoltaic solar farms site selection using ELECTRE-TRI: Evaluating the case for Torre Pacheco, Murcia, Southeast of Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 478-494.
    13. Wang, Xiaoting & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2008. "Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-63, February.
    14. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid & Nemery, Philippe, 2016. "Which energy mix for the UK (United Kingdom)? An evolutive descriptive mapping with the integrated GAIA (graphical analysis for interactive aid)–AHP (analytic hierarchy process) visualization tool," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 602-611.
    15. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    16. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    17. Ankita Ray & Arijit De & Pranab Kr. Dan, 2015. "Facility location selection using complete and partial ranking MCDM methods," International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 19(2), pages 262-276.
    18. Kaya, Tolga & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2010. "Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: The case of Istanbul," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 2517-2527.
    19. Melikoglu, Mehmet, 2017. "Pumped hydroelectric energy storage: Analysing global development and assessing potential applications in Turkey based on Vision 2023 hydroelectricity wind and solar energy targets," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 146-153.
    20. Şengül, Ümran & Eren, Miraç & Eslamian Shiraz, Seyedhadi & Gezder, Volkan & Şengül, Ahmet Bilal, 2015. "Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 617-625.
    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. Acaroğlu, Hakan & García Márquez, Fausto Pedro, 2022. "High voltage direct current systems through submarine cables for offshore wind farms: A life-cycle cost analysis with voltage source converters for bulk power transmission," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    2. Gokhan Ozkaya & Ceren Erdin, 2020. "Evaluation of Sustainable Forest and Air Quality Management and the Current Situation in Europe through Operation Research Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Nazim Hajiyev & Klaudia Smoląg & Ali Abbasov & Valeriy Prasolov, 2020. "Energy War Strategies: The 21st Century Experience," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Selçuklu, Saltuk Buğra & Coit, D.W. & Felder, F.A., 2023. "Electricity generation portfolio planning and policy implications of Turkish power system considering cost, emission, and uncertainty," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    6. Or, Bartu & Bilgin, Gozde & Akcay, Emre Caner & Dikmen, Irem & Birgonul, M. Talat, 2024. "Real options valuation of photovoltaic investments: A case from Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    7. Riaz Uddin & Abdurrahman Javid Shaikh & Hashim Raza Khan & Muhammad Ayaz Shirazi & Athar Rashid & Saad Ahmed Qazi, 2021. "Renewable Energy Perspectives of Pakistan and Turkey: Current Analysis and Policy Recommendations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-28, March.
    8. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    9. Osman Taylan & Rami Alamoudi & Mohammad Kabli & Alawi AlJifri & Fares Ramzi & Enrique Herrera-Viedma, 2020. "Assessment of Energy Systems Using Extended Fuzzy AHP, Fuzzy VIKOR, and TOPSIS Approaches to Manage Non-Cooperative Opinions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-27, March.
    10. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    11. Yücenur, G. Nilay & Maden, Ayça, 2024. "Sequential MCDM methods for site selection of hydroponic geothermal greenhouse: ENTROPY and ARAS," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    12. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    13. Li, Tao & Li, Ang & Guo, Xiaopeng, 2020. "The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry——A comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    14. Deveci, Muhammet & Pamucar, Dragan & Oguz, Elif, 2022. "Floating photovoltaic site selection using fuzzy rough numbers based LAAW and RAFSI model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    15. Horasan, Muhammed Bilal & Kilic, Huseyin Selcuk, 2022. "A multi-objective decision-making model for renewable energy planning: The case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 484-504.
    16. Ali M. Jasim & Basil H. Jasim & Florin-Constantin Baiceanu & Bogdan-Constantin Neagu, 2023. "Optimized Sizing of Energy Management System for Off-Grid Hybrid Solar/Wind/Battery/Biogasifier/Diesel Microgrid System," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-34, March.
    17. Ateekh Ur Rehman & Mustufa Haider Abidi & Usama Umer & Yusuf Siraj Usmani, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Selecting Wind Energy Power Plant Locations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-20, November.
    18. Dongqing Sun & Fanzhi Wang & Nanxu Chen & Jing Chen, 2021. "The Impacts of Technology Shocks on Sustainable Development from the Perspective of Energy Structure—A DSGE Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, August.
    19. Burak Erkut, 2022. "Renewable Energy and Carbon Emissions: New Empirical Evidence from the Union for the Mediterranean," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, June.
    20. Gokhan Ozkaya & Mehpare Timor & Ceren Erdin, 2021. "Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Indicators and Comparisons of Countries through a Hybrid Model of Data Mining and MCDM Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-49, January.

    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. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    2. 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.
    3. Dongxiao Niu & Hao Zhen & Min Yu & Keke Wang & Lijie Sun & Xiaomin Xu, 2020. "Prioritization of Renewable Energy Alternatives for China by Using a Hybrid FMCDM Methodology with Uncertain Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-26, June.
    4. Abbas Mardani & Ahmad Jusoh & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Zainab Khalifah, 2015. "Sustainable and Renewable Energy: An Overview of the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Techniques and Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-38, October.
    5. Songrui Li & Yitang Hu, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria Framework to Evaluate the Sustainability of Renewable Energy: A 2-Tuple Linguistic Grey Relation Model from the Perspective of the Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-24, April.
    6. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    7. Sellak, Hamza & Ouhbi, Brahim & Frikh, Bouchra & Palomares, Iván, 2017. "Towards next-generation energy planning decision-making: An expert-based framework for intelligent decision support," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1544-1577.
    8. 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.
    9. Wu, Yunna & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Ting, 2018. "Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: A case in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1227-1239.
    10. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    11. Mousavi, M. & Gitinavard, H. & Mousavi, S.M., 2017. "A soft computing based-modified ELECTRE model for renewable energy policy selection with unknown information," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 774-787.
    12. Jamal, Taskin & Urmee, Tania & Shafiullah, G.M., 2020. "Planning of off-grid power supply systems in remote areas using multi-criteria decision analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    13. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    14. Abteen Ijadi Maghsoodi & Arta Ijadi Maghsoodi & Amir Mosavi & Timon Rabczuk & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2018. "Renewable Energy Technology Selection Problem Using Integrated H-SWARA-MULTIMOORA Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, November.
    15. Esra Karaka & Ozan Veli Y ld ran, 2019. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Alternatives for Turkey via Modified Fuzzy AHP," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(2), pages 31-39.
    16. Cayir Ervural, Beyzanur & Evren, Ramazan & Delen, Dursun, 2018. "A multi-objective decision-making approach for sustainable energy investment planning," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 387-402.
    17. Long, Yilu & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2022. "Renewable energy source technology selection considering the empathetic preferences of experts in a cognitive fuzzy social participatory allocation network," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    18. Wang, Ni & Heijnen, Petra W. & Imhof, Pieter J., 2020. "A multi-actor perspective on multi-objective regional energy system planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    19. Sitorus, Fernando & Brito-Parada, Pablo R., 2020. "A multiple criteria decision making method to weight the sustainability criteria of renewable energy technologies under uncertainty," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:2136-:d:221464. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.