Assessment of Wind Power Plant Potentials via MCDM Methods in Marmara Region of Turkey | ||
| Renewable Energy Research and Applications | ||
| دوره 2، شماره 2، مهر 2021، صفحه 157-163 اصل مقاله (755.66 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22044/rera.2021.10922.1057 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| E. Guler* ؛ S. Yerel Kandemir | ||
| Industrial Engineering Department, Bilecik Şeyh Edebali University, Bilecik, Turkey. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Today, the use of renewable energy sources is increasing day by day. The essential advantages of wind energy are that it is clean, low cost, and unlimited. In this paper, the wind energy potential of provinces of the Marmara region in Turkey was evaluated by multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods. In the study, TOPSIS and PROMETHEE methods were used for analysis criteria weights were determined by two different approaches. In the first approach, the criteria weights were taken equally. In the second approach, the criteria were weighted using the AHP method. When the methods were applied by taking the criteria weights equally, Balıkesir and Çanakkale were determined as wind priority provinces in potential, while Kocaeli and Sakarya took the last rank. After the criteria weights were determined via AHP when TOPSIS and PROMETHEE methods were applied, Balıkesir ranked first, and Kocaeli ranked last. Spearman's Correlation Coefficient determined the level and direction of the relationship between the rankings obtained from TOPSIS and the PROMETHEE method. When the methods were applied, the value of “0.636” indicated that the relationship between the rankings was “positive” and “moderate”. When the criteria were weighted with AHP and the methods were applied, the correlation coefficient was obtained as “0.909”. This value indicated a “positive” and “very high” level of relationship. It was determined that the ranking results obtained when the methods were applied after the criterion weights were calculated with AHP were more supportive of each other. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| AHP؛ TOPSIS؛ PROMETHEE؛ Wind energy؛ Wind power plant | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1] Takan M.A. and Kandemir S.Y. (2020). Evaluation of geothermal energy in Turkey in terms of primary energy supply. European Journal of Science and Technology, Special issue, pp. 381-385. [2] Kandemir S.Y. (2016). “Assessment of coal deposit using multivariate statistical analysis techniques. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 1002-1006. [3] Guler E., Kandemir S.Y., and Acikkalp E. (2020). Evaluation of the efficiencies of the energy distribution companies in Turkey with DEA. Bilecik Seyh Edebali University Journal of Science, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 66-79. [4] Degirmenci S., Bingol F., and Sofuoglu, S.C. (2018). MCDM analysis of wind energy in Turkey: decision making based on environmental impact. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, Vol. 25, No. 20, pp. 19753-19766. [5] Taner T. (2018). Economic analysis of a wind power plant: A case study for the Cappadocia region. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 1379-1389. [6] Gokcek M., Bayulken A., and Bekdemir, S. (2007). Investigation of wind characteristics and wind energy potential in Kirklareli, Turkey. Renewable Energy, Vol. 32, No.10, pp. 1739-1752. [7] Aras H. (2003). Wind energy status and its assessment in Turkey. Renewable Energy, Vol. 28, No. 14, pp. 2213-2220. [8] Türkiye, Rüzgâr Enerjisinde Dünyanın En Büyük 10 Ülkesinden Biri, (2020), Available: https://temizenerji.org/2020/12/31/ [9] Elmahmoudi F et al. (2020). GIS based Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process for wind energy sites selection in Tarfaya Morocco. In 2020 IEEE International conference of Moroccan Geomatics (Morgeo) pp. 1-5. IEEE. [10] Supciller A.A. and Toprak, F. (2020). Selection of wind turbines with multi-criteria decision-making techniques involving neutrosophic numbers: A case from Turkey. Energy, Vol. 207, 118237. [11] Moradi S. et al. (2020). Multi-criteria decision support system for wind farm site selection and sensitivity analysis: Case study of Alborz Province, Iran. Energy Strategy Reviews, Vol. 29, pp. 1-17. [12] Rehman A.U. et al. (2019). Multi-criteria decision-making approach for selecting wind energy power plant locations. Sustainability, Vol. 11, No. 21. [13] Coban V., Guler E., Kilic T., and Kandemir S.Y. (2021). Precipitation forecasting in Marmara region of Turkey. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, Vol 14, No. 2, pp. 1-10. [14] Türkiye Rüzgar Enerjisi Potansiyeli Haritası, (2021), Available: https://www.enerjiatlasi.com/ruzgar-enerjisi-haritasi/turkiye [15] Orman ve Su İşleri Bakanlığı Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü, (2021), Available: http://www1.mgm.gov.tr/FILES/resmi-istatistikler/Turkiye-Ortalama-Ruzgar.pdf [16] Chakraborty S. and Chatterjee P. (2017). A developed meta-model for selection of cotton fabrics using design of experiments and TOPSIS method. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India) Series E, Vol. 98, No. 2, pp. 79-90. [17] Albadvi A., Chaharsooghi S.K., and Esfahanipour A. (2007). Decision-making in stock trading: An application of PROMETHEE. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 177, No. 2, pp. 673-683. [18] Saaty T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York. [19] Aktepe A. and Ersoz S. (2014). AHP-VIKOR ve MOORA yöntemlerinin depo yeri seçim probleminde uygulanması. Journal of Industrial Engineering, Vol. 25, No.1, pp. 2-15. [20] Teker S.C. (2017). The implementation of analytic hierarchy process in pharmaceutical industry for selection process of 3rd party logistics service provider. Oneri Journal, Vol.12, No.48, pp. 107-124. [21] Saaty T.L. and Tran L.T. (2007). On The Invalidity of Fuzzifying Numerical Judgments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 46, No. 7-8, pp. 962- 975. [22] Mukaka M. (2012). Statistics corner: A guide to appropriate use of correlation in medical research. Malawi Med. J., Vol 24, No. 3, pp. 69-71. [23] Guler E., Kandemir S.Y., Acikkalp E., and Ahmadi M.H. (2021). Evaluation of sustainable energy performance for OECD countries. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 1-24. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,457 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 440 |
||