Studies on the Effects of Plant Growing for Biomass Energy I. Eco-ecological Efficiency Potential for Turkey in the Light of Current Knowledge

Öz

In the light of the facts related to the current conditions, developments and planned projects on energy forestry, agriculture and agroforestry practices around the globe, and the current conditions in Turkey, biomass production for utilization of its energy in Turkey has been evaluated, in order to reveal its potential in environmental, social and economical cost/benefit analysis. The extreme versatility of modern biomass energy, in terms of sources, storage, transportability, and processes used in conversion to different forms of energy, in addition to the ecological and socio-economic considerations for biomass energy crop production have been taken into account in the present study. In order to provide a wide-angle perspective on the impact of energy plant growing, use of biomass energy in terms of ecological and socioeconomic costbenefit analysis has been performed. Assessments indicate that, despite of their complexity, development of projects and their applications are made on scientific basis by following the path to developing successful biomass energy projects, very beneficial results can be held in Turkey. The level of complexity can be taken as the reflectance of the current environmental pressure of the human race on the planet, as well as the society on the local environment

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biomass, Bioenergy, Energy production, Sustainable rural development

Biyokütle Enerjisi İçin Yetiştiriciliğin Etkileri Konusunda Araştırmalar I. Bilgi Birikimi Işığında Türkiye’deki Eko-Ekolojik Etki Potansiyeli

Öz

Yeryüzünde geçerli koşullar, gelişmeler ve enerji ormancılığı, tarımı ve agroforestrisi ile ilgili projeler ışığında, Türkiye’deki koşullar da göz önüne alınarak, enerjisinden yararlanmak üzere biyokütle yetiştiriciliğinin Türkiye’de uygulanmasının değerlendirilmesiyle çevresel, sosyal ve ekonomik etki/yarar analizi yoluyla potansiyelinin ortaya çıkartılması amaçlanmıştır. Bu çalışmada değerlendirme, modern biyokütle enerjisinin hammadde kaynakları, depolanabilirliği, taşınabilirliği ve farklı enerji türlerine dönüştürülmesinde kullanılan yöntemlerin çeşitliliği ile sağladığı olanaklara ek olarak, bu amaçla enerji bitkisi yetiştiriciliğinin sağlayabileceği ekolojik ve sosyoekonomik yönlerinin hesaba katılması ile yapılmıştır. Enerji bitkisi yetiştiriciliği ve biyokütle enerjisinin ekolojik, sosyoekonomik etki/yarar analizinin geniş bir bakış açısıyla ele alınmasına çalışılmıştır. Değerlendirmelerin sonucunda, her ne kadar karmaşık özellikte olmalarına karşın, bilimsel temellere dayanarak yapılacak projeler ve gerçekleştirilecek uygulamaların Türkiye’de çok yararlı sonuçlar verebileceği kanısına varılmıştır.Uygulamaların karmaşıklık düzeyi, insanlığın gezegenimiz üzerindeki ve toplumumuzun yerel çevre üzerindeki mevcut baskısının yansıması olarak ele alınmalıdır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biyokütle, Biyoenerji, Enerji üretimi, Sürdürülebilir kırsal kalkınma

Kaynakça

1. Abdalla, K. 2008. Global food crisis could have been avoided, www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=26578&Cr=food&Cr1=crisis.
2. Amos, W.A. 1998. Report on Biomass Drying Technology. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, www.osti.gov/energycitations/servlets/purl/9548-3enE35/webviewable/9548.pdf.
3. Andrews, S. ve Aschmann, S. 2005. Conservation Issue Brief Resource Effects of Biomass Energy Production,www.soils.usda.gov/sqi/management/files/Biomass_Conservation_Issue_Brief.pdf
4. Anonim, 2002a. T.C. Ulusal Kalkınma Raporu.
5. Anonim, 2002b. National Report Of Turkey, II. UNCCD, http://www.unccd.int/cop/ reports/northmed/national/2002/.
6. Anonim, 2005. Environmental Sustainability Index, www.yale.edu/esi/ESI2005_ Main_Report.pdf.
7. Anonim, 2006a. 1.Çevre ve Ormancılık Şurası Kararları, T.C. Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı, Strateji Geliştirme Başkanlığı, http://www.sgb.cevreorman.gov.tr/depo/kararlar.aspx.
8. Anonim, 2007. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti İklim Değişikliği 1. Ulusal Bildirimi, T.C. Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı, http://www.cevreorman.gov.tr.

9. Anonim, 2008a. Biyoenerji, EİE, http://www.eie.gov.tr/biyoenerji/biyoenerji.html.
10. Anonim, 2008b. http://www.agm.gov.tr/faaliyetler8.asp.
11. Anonymous, 2003a. External Costs, www.ec.europa.eu/research/energy/pdf/externe_en.pdf.
12. Anonymous, 2003b. Global Footprint Network - Advancing the Science of Sustainability: Turkey’s footprint 1961- 2003, www.footprintnetwork.org/webgraph/graphpage.php?country=turkey.
13. Anonymous, 2006a. EurActiv.com - Biomass Action Plan, EU - European Information on the Plan,
14. www.euractiv.com/en/energy/biomass-action-plan/article-155362.
15. Anonymous, 2006b. Green shoots of growth - Energy from biomass is an idea whose time has returned, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7120/full/444654a.html.
16. Anonymous, 2007a. EU renewable energy policy, Euroactive, http://www.euractiv.com/en/energy/eu- renewable-energy-policy/article-117536.
17. Anonymous, 2007b. Renewable energy roadmap, http://ec.europa.eu/energy/climate_actions/ doc/2008_res_directive_en.pdf.
18. Anonymous, 2007c. China Renewable Energy and Sustainable Development Report, www.renewableenergyworld.com/assets/documents/2007/September_2007_China_Renewable _Energy_and_Sustainable.
19. Anonymous, 2008a. http://www.solarbuzz.com/StatsMarketshare.htm.
20. Anonymous, 2008b. Renewable Energy Trends 2005, Energy Information Administration (EIA), http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/trends/rentrends.html.
21. Anonymous, 2008c. 27. Enerji Verimliliği Haftası Sonuç Bildirgesi, http://www.eie.gov.tr/duyurular/EV/EV_etkinlik/2008_bildiriler/enver_sonuç_bildirgesi.doc.
22. Anonymous, 2008d. UNEP Risoe Centre on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development, www.uneprisoe.org/.
23. Anonymous, 2008e. Environmental and Energy Study Institute, EESI focuses on renewable energy, energy efficiency, climate change, smart growth, alternative fuels, Woody Biomass: Scale and Sustainability, www.eesi.org.
24. Anonymous, 2008f. Çevre Sorunlarının Kaynakları, www.cevreorman.gov.tr/co_03.htm.
25. Anonymous, 2008g. UNEP Finance Initiative: Innovative financing for sustainability, Environmental & Social Risk Analysis, www.unepfi.org/.
26. Anonymous, 2008h. Conclusions and messages for policy-makers, www.oecd.org/dataoecd/ 16/59/40340098.pdf.
27. Anonymous, 2008i. Environmental performance index, http://epi.yale.edu/Turkey.
28. Bozkurt, G., 2007. Turkey faces long-term desertification threat. http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=68487.
29. Buffington, D., E. ve Wilson T. O. 2006. Agricultural and Biological Engineering Biomass Energy, www.abe.psu.edu/extension/factsheets/h/H82.pdf.
30. Cushman, J. H., Cooper, L.S. ve Anderson, 2003. Bibliography on Biomass Feedstock Research:1978- 2002, www.osti.gov/energycitations/servlets/purl/814118QtM1oj/native/814118.pdf.
31. Dregne, H., E. ve Chou, N. T. 1992. Global desertification dimensions and costs, In Degradation and restoration of arid lands, Lubbock: Texas Tech. University.
32. El Bassam, N. 1998. Energy Plant Species, Their Use and Impact on Environment and Development, James & James (Science Publishers) Ltd. London, U. K.
33. Esty, D. C., Srebotnjak, T., Goodall, M., et al. 2005. Environmental sustainability index 2005, http://www.yale.edu/esi/ESI2005_Main_Report.pdf.
34. Faber, D., 2008, The political ecology of global capitalism sociology, www.socant.neu.edu/faculty/faber/documents/SOC_G230_Syllabi.pdf.
35. Fleming, J. R. 1998. The carbon dioxide theory of climate change: emergence, eclipse, and reemergence, http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/31525.pdf.
36. Guo, X. ve Li, G. 2007. Evaluation on the Eco-Economic Benefits of Rural Energy Construction Project in West Qinling Mountains Region, China.
37. Hultberg, T. 2008. Forest continuity and human impact: vegetation history, www.essays.se/essay/def9a0364e/.
38. Ilavsky, J. ve Oravec, M. 2000. Utilization of biomass in Slovakia Ecological Engineering, sf., 83-89
39. www.linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0925857400000562.
40. Karaçal, İ. 2005. Gübrelemede çevreci yaklaşımlar, Verim Bülteni Yıl 1, Sayı 3, 4, 8, Gübre Fabrikaları T.A.Ş., İstanbul.
41. Karlsson, M. 2007. UN-Energy, Sustainable Bioenergy: A Framework for Decision Makers, http://esa.un.org/un-energy/pdf/susdev.Biofuels.FAO.pdf.
42. Lehmann, 2007. An excellent introduction to biochar, Nature, Vol 447, sf., 143-144, http://www.biochar-international.org/images/Lehman_Handful_of_C_-_Nature_5.9.07.pdf.
43. Levy, M. A. 2002. Environmental sustainability index 2002, http://www.ambiente.gov.ar/archivos /web/MERCOSUR/File/SGT%20N6%20Ordinaria%20XXII/1d2.pdf.
44. Maibach, M., Schreyer C., Sutter, D., Essen H., P., Boon, B., H., Smokers, R., Schroten, A., Doll, C., Pawlowska, B. ve Bak, M. 2008. Hata Köprü başvurusu geçerli değil.Mirza, M. 2008. Growing the Margins: Energy, Bioproducts and Byproducts From Farm and Food Sectors, Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, www.agric.gov.ab. ca/$Department/newslett.nsf/all/ghb13561.
45. Ohara, H. 2003. Biorefinery, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, Volume 62, 74-7, http://www.springerlink.com/content/ln4gqymd27laqhnr/fulltext.pdf
46. Perlack, R. D. ve Wright L., L. 1995. Environmental and Social Benefits/Costs of Biomass Plantations, Biofuels Feedstock Development Program, Energy Div., Environmental Sciences Div. ORNL-6871, www.bioenergy.ornl.gov/reports/fuelwood/chap4.html.
47. Petersen, J-E., Elbersen, B., Wiesenthal, T., Feehan, J. ve Eppler, U. 2007. Estimating the environmentally compatible bioenergy potential from agriculture, www.reports.eea.europa.eu/technical_report_2007_12/en/Estimating_the_environmentally_co mpatible_bio-energy_potential.
48. Pimentel, D., Harvey, C., Resosudarmo P., Sinclair, K., Kurz, D., McNair, M., Crist, S., Shpritz, L., Fitton, L., Saffouri, R. ve Blair, R. 1995. Environmental and Economic Costs of Soil Erosion and Conservation Benefits, Science 267: 1117-1123.
49. Purchase, B. 2007. The Future of Coal in Ontario? Towards a Clean, Secure and Competitive Energy Portfolio, http://www.queensu.ca/qieep/files/Future_of_Coal-Summary_ReportNEW.pdf.
50. Rosenthal, E. 2008. Biofuels Deemed a Greenhouse Threat, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/science/earth/08wbiofuels.html.
51. Samson, R., Helwig, T., Stohl, D., De Maio, A. ve Duxbury, P. 2001. Strategies for Enhancing Biomass Energy Utilization in the Philippines, www.reap-canada.com//Reports Newsletters/InternationalDevelopment/Strategiesfor.pdf.
52. Skinner, R., 2007. Biodiversity Management in Northeastern Grazing Lands, Journal of Environmental Quality, http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publications.htm. SEQ_NO_115=211939.
53. Santa, A., T. 2004. The Major Transitions in the History of Human Transformation of the Biosphere, Human Ecology Review, 11: 52.
54. Seart, W. 2007. The discovery of climate change. Introduction. A Hyperlinked History of Climate Change Science, http://www.aip.org/history/climate/summary.htm.
55. Stupak, I., Clarke, N. ve Lunnan, A.,2007. Sustainable use of Forest Biomass for Energy, Proceedings of the WOOD-EN-MAN Session at the Conference Nordic Bioenergy 2005, Trondheim, Norway, Biomass and Bioenergy 31, 665.
56. Takada, M., et al. 2007. A Review of Energy in National MDG Reports, UNDP, Environment and Energy: Sustainable Energy, www.undp.org/energy.
57. Tilman, D., Hill, J., Clarence, L. 2006. Carbon-Negative Biofuels from Low-Input High-Diversity Grassland Biomass Science, 314, 1598 – 1600, http://www.sciencemag.org/.
58. Xiaodong G, Li1, G., ve Niu, C. 2007. Evaluation on the Eco-economic Benefits of Rural Energy Construction Project in West Qinling Mountains Region, China, Ecological Economics, 5071- 75.
59. Ziegler, J. 2008. Biofuel production is ‘criminal path’ leading to global food crisis, www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=26478&Cr=food&Cr1=ziegler.