The evaluation of electricity generation resources: The case of Turkey

Electricity is the rising force among worldwide end-uses of energy. To meet the increasing demand, accurate policy decisions should be made considering each country's own dynamics. In fact, the selection of appropriate electricity generation resources necessitates the consideration of different aspects of the problem; hence, multi-attribute evaluation should be used. Topcu and Ulengin (2004) conducted a multi-attribute study to select the appropriate electricity generation resource in Turkey. To analyze the potential changes that may occur in electricity generation policy due to the recent dynamics in Turkey, the electricity generation resource selection problem is revisited in this research. Alternatives to be evaluated as well as the criteria to be used for evaluation are initially determined based on the synthesis of a literature survey and expert opinions. The alternatives are identified as solar photovoltaic (PV), wind, hydro, biomass, natural gas, coal, oil, and nuclear. The alternatives were evaluated using a new multiple-attribute decision making (MADM) approach based on the integration of Monte Carlo simulation, entropy, and Borda count methods. Besides updating data of Topcu and Ulengin, this new approach makes a significant contribution to the analysis stage as well. The results reveal that the primary electricity generation resources for Turkey should be a combination of renewable resources.

[1]  Antonio Jiménez-Martín,et al.  Monte Carlo simulation techniques for group decision making with incomplete information , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  H. Gitinavard,et al.  A soft computing based-modified ELECTRE model for renewable energy policy selection with unknown information , 2017 .

[3]  S. M. Sirin,et al.  Overcoming problems in Turkey's renewable energy policy: How can EU contribute? , 2012 .

[4]  Özgür Kabak,et al.  A Demand Forecasting Methodology for Fuzzy Environments , 2010, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[5]  Núria Agell,et al.  Decision making under uncertainty using a qualitative TOPSIS method for selecting sustainable energy alternatives , 2016, International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology.

[6]  Ediz Atmaca,et al.  Evaluation of power plants in Turkey using Analytic Network Process (ANP) , 2012 .

[7]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  A fuzzy multicriteria methodology for selection among energy alternatives , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[8]  G. Mavrotas,et al.  Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method , 1995, Comput. Oper. Res..

[9]  Michael Jefferson,et al.  Renewable and nuclear electricity: Comparison of environmental impacts , 2016 .

[10]  Didem Cinar,et al.  A Cumulative Belief Degree Approach for Prioritization of Energy Sources: Case of Turkey , 2013 .

[11]  Robert J. Budnitz.  Nuclear power: Status report and future prospects , 2016 .

[12]  Atul K. Raturi,et al.  Renewables 2016 Global status report , 2015 .

[13]  Konstantinos Aravossis,et al.  Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review , 2016 .

[14]  Kurtuluş Boran,et al.  An evaluation of power plants in Turkey: Fuzzy TOPSIS method , 2017 .

[15]  Füsun Ülengin,et al.  Energy for the future: An integrated decision aid for the case of Turkey , 2004 .

[16]  M. Balat,et al.  Status of Fossil Energy Resources: A Global Perspective , 2007 .

[17]  Peter Lund.  The link between political decision-making and energy options: Assessing future role of renewable energy and energy efficiency in Finland , 2007 .

[18]  Subhes C. Bhattacharyya,et al.  Review of Alternative Methodologies for Analysing Off-Grid Electricity Supply , 2011 .

[19]  John Psarras,et al.  Supporting sustainable electricity technologies in Greece using MCDM , 2006 .

[20]  Thomas Fend.  Energy and Renewables , 2015 .

[21]  Boris Sučić,et al.  Integrated and realistic approach to energy planning – a case study of Slovenia , 2014 .

[22]  Robert Bacon,et al.  Issues in Estimating the Employment Generated by Energy Sector Activities , 2011 .

[23]  Jutta Geldermann,et al.  Modified PROMETHEE approach for assessing energy technologies , 2010 .

[24]  Fatih Emre Boran,et al.  A Fuzzy Multi Criteria Decision Making to Evaluate Energy Policy Based on an Information Axiom: A Case Study in Turkey , 2012 .

[25]  Selçuk Bilgen,et al.  Contribution on Turkey’s electricity production development of primary green energy resources , 2017 .

[26]  Alessio Ishizaka,et al.  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 , 2016 .

[27]  Fatih Emre Boran,et al.  The Evaluation of Renewable Energy Technologies for Electricity Generation in Turkey Using Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS , 2012 .

[28]  Deepak Sharma,et al.  Selection of India’s energy resources: a fuzzy decision making approach , 2015 .

[29]  Yusuf Alper Kaplan,et al.  The importance of the different kinds of energy sources for energy future of Turkey , 2016 .

[30]  Lijun Yu,et al.  Integrating willingness analysis into investment prediction model for large scale building energy saving retrofit: Using fuzzy multiple attribute decision making method with Monte Carlo simulation , 2019, Sustainable Cities and Society.

[31]  J. Ongena,et al.  Nuclear fusion: Status report and future prospects , 2016 .

[32]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  Multicriteria decision making in energy planning using a modified fuzzy TOPSIS methodology , 2011, Expert Syst. Appl..

[33]  Hüsamettin Bayram,et al.  A simulation based multi-attribute group decision making technique with decision constraints , 2016, Appl. Soft Comput..

[34]  Jian Ma,et al.  A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[35]  M. Balat.  Turkey's Energy Demand and Supply , 2009 .

[36]  Fatih Tüysüz,et al.  An Integrated Grey Based Multi-Criteria Decision Making Approach for the Evaluation of Renewable Energy Sources , 2016 .