Abstract
This study investigates the calculation of analyzing solar energy investment decisions applying Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods. With the increasing energy demand all over the world, governments’ policy has changed in recent years to balance the gap between supply and demand. Also, the governments take into consideration decrease external energy dependence by finding alternative energy resources. For this purpose, it is thought that benefitting from renewable energy can be the other alternative solution for balancing the gap between energy demand and supply with low expenses with easy application processes. Solar energy is one of the most preferable renewable energy in the world due to acceptable investment costs and sustainability. Turkey is convenient to set up solar energy power plants in terms of solar energy potential and geographical features. MDCM methods are applied to solve not only basic energy problem but also complex energy management decision problems. For this reason, the purpose of this paper is to decide which area of Turkey would be more appropriate to invest in solar energy power plants by proposing an optimum investment decision plan comparing with the alternative investment fields. To deal with that, 14 important subcriteria in four main criteria (e.g., economic, environmental, technical, and energy) are determined to analyze the investment decision as These criteria are applied in different MDCM methods such as Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), Elimination Et Choix Traduisant la Realité (ELECTRE), and Preference Ranking Organization Method For Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE). By comparing the results of these three methods, the optimum investment decision is determined for the selected districts from Tukey. Also, the solution’s sensitivity is shown with sensitivity analysis. The results of the proposed methods indicate that high flexibility for decision-makers to reach a comprehensive information range for solar energy investment decisions based on real data sets from different sides of Turkey.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
F.H. Abanda, Renewable energy sources in Cameroon: Potentials, benefits and enabling environment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(7), 4557–4562 (2012)
M. Beccali, M. Cellura, M. Mistretta, Decision-making in energy planning:application of the ELECTRE method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology. Renew. Energy 28, 2063–2087 (2003)
F.E. Boran, K. Boran, T. Menlik, The evaluation of renewable energy technologies for electricity generation in Turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Energ. Sources B 7(1), 81–90 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/15567240903
J.P. Brans, P. VinckePh, B. Mareschal, How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 24, 228–238 (1986)
T. Braunschweig, Priority Setting in Agricultural Biotechnology Research: Supporting Public Decisions in Developing Countries with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (s.l.: International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), 2000), p. 16. 92-9118-052-1
J.L. Corner, C.W. Kirkwood, Decision analysis applications in the operations research literature: 1970–1989. Oper. Res. 39, 206–219 (1991)
B. Daneshvar Rouyendegh, S. Erol, Selecting the best project using the fuzzy ELECTRE method. Math. Probl. Eng. 2012, 1–12 (2012)
H. Davoudpour, S. Rezaee, M. Ashrafi, Developing a framework for renewable technology portfolio selection: A case study at a R&D center. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(6), 4291–4297 (2012)
K. Dawood, Hybrid wind-solar reliable solution for Turkey to meet electric demand. Balkan J. Elect. Comput. Eng. 4(2), 62–66 (2016)
H.A. Donegan, F.J. Dodd, T.B.M. McMaster, A statistical approach to consistency in AHP. Math. Comput. Model. 18(6, s.l), 19–22 (1993)
Energy Atlas, Turkey Electricity Generation (2018)
E. Georgopoulou, D. Lalas, L. Papagiannakis, A multicriteria decision aid approach for energy planning problems: The case of renewable energy option. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 103, 38–54 (1997)
S. Gungor, Calculation of Electricity Production Fees (2017)
G.E. Halkos, N.G. Tzeremes, Analyzing the Greek renewable energy sector: A data envelopment analysis approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(5), 2884–2893 (2012)
D.A. Haralambopoulos, H. Polatidis, Renewable energy projects: Structuring a multicriteria group decision-making framework. Renew. Energ. 28, 961–973 (2003)
J.P. Huang, K.L. Poh, B.W. Ang, Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling. Energy 20(9), 843–855 (1995)
International Energy Agency (IEA), Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Turkey 2016 Review (2016). https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/EnergyPoliciesofIEACountriesTurkey.pdf
C. Kahraman, I. Kaya, S. Cebi, A comparative analysis for multiattribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Energy 34(10), 1603–1616 (2009)
K. Kaygusuz, Sustainable development of hydropower and biomass energy in Turkey. Energ. Conver. Manage. 43(8), 1099–1120 (2012)
D.L. Keefer, J.L. Corner, C.W. Kirkwood, Perspectiveon decision analysis applications: 1990–2001. Decis. Anal. 1, 5–24 (2004)
H.C. Metz, Turkey: A Country Study (s.l.: GPO for the Library of Congress, Washington, DC, 1995). U.S. Library of Congress. http://countrystudies.us/turkey/21.htm
Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, 2015–2019 Strategic Plan of Turkish Republic (2014). http://www.sp.gov.tr/upload/xSPStratejikPlan/files/nQbTc+etkb_stratejik_plani.pdf
S.C. Onar et al., Multi-expert wind energy technology selection using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Energy 90, 274–285 (2015)
S.D. Pohekar, M. Ramachandran, Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 8(4), 365–381 (2004)
B. Roy, Me”todologie Multicrite’re d’aide à la de’cision (Economica, Paris, 1985)
T.L. Saaty, Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 1(1), 83–98 (2008)
M. Timor, Analytic Hierarchy Process (Türkmen Kitabevi, İstanbul, 2011)
Turkey Chambers of Mechanical Engineers. Türkiye’nin Enerji Görünümü 2018. 2018. https://www.mmo.org.tr/sites/default/files/EnerjiGorunumu2018_1.pdf
B.H. Ulutaş, Determination of the appropriate energy policy for Turkey. Energy 30(7), 1146–1161 (2005)
T. Yakıcı Ayan et al., Group decision based fuzzy decision making approach in the selection of R&D projects. Atatürk Univ. J. Econ. Admin. Sci. 26(2), 237–255 (2012)
I. Yüksel, Hydropower in Turkey for a clean and sustainable energy future. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 12(6), 1622–1640 (2008)
P. Zhou, K.L. Poh, B.W. Ang, Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update. Energy 31(14), 2604–2622 (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Erdebilli, B., Can, R.N., Yilmaz, İ. (2023). Analyzing the Solar Energy System Investment in Turkey. In: Fathi, M., Zio, E., Pardalos, P.M. (eds) Handbook of Smart Energy Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97940-9_101
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97940-9_101
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-97939-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-97940-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences