Elazığ ilinde çok kriterli karar verme analizi ve coğrafi bilgi sistemleri kullanılarak katı atık depolama sahası seçiminin değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Katı atık depolama sahası seçimi nispeten karmaşık bir süreçtir ve çeşitli kriterlere ve resmi düzenlemelere bağlıdır. Bu çalışmada, Elazığ ilinde için katı atık depolama sahası seçiminin uygunluğu, Çok Ölçütlü Karar Analizi (ÇÖKA) ve Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri (CBS) ile belirlenmiştir. Bu amaçla, yerleşim alanlarına uzaklık, yollara uzaklık, akarsulardan uzaklık, kaynak suyu kuyularından uzaklık, jeoloji, eğim, bakı, arazi kapasite sınıflandırması ve arazi kullanımı olmak üzere dokuz farklı kriter göz önünde bulundurulurak ÇÖKA ile göreli önem dereceleri tanımlanmış ve her bir kriter için şematik haritalar CBS uygulamaları ile hazırlanmıştır. Çalışma alanı için son depolama sahası uygunluk haritası, ArcGIS 9.3'ün yer paylaşımı analiz aracı ile elde edilmiştir. Çalışma sonuçları, seçilen saha için dolgu uygunluk indeksi değerlerinin 2.64 ile 6.10 arasında olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Depolama sahasının önemli bir kısmı, seçilen alanın katı atık düzenli depolama için uygun olduğunu ima eden nispeten düşük endeks değerlerine sahiptir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Katı atık depolama sahası,Çok ölçütlü karar,Depolama sahası uygunluk endeksi,Coğrafi bilgi sistemleri,Analitik hiyerarşi süreci,Elazığ

Evaluating solid waste landfill site selection using multi-criteria decision analysis and geographic information systems in the city of Elazığ, Turkey

Abstract

Solid waste landfill site selection is a relatively complex process and depends on several criteria and official regulations. In this study, the suitability of solid waste landfill site selection for the city of Elazığ, Turkey, was determined by Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS). For this purpose, nine different criteria, namely distance from residential areas, distance from roads, distance from rivers, distance from spring wells, geology, slope, aspect, land capability classification and land use, were taken into consideration and their degrees of relative importance were defined via MCDA and the schematic maps for each criterion were prepared with GIS applications. The final landfill site suitability map for the study area was obtained by the overlay analysis tool of ArcGIS 9.3. The study results reveal that the landfill suitability index values for the selected site range between 2.64 and 6.10. The major part of the landfill site has relatively low index values implying that the selected site is suitable for solid waste landfill.

Keywords

• Solid waste landfill site,multi-criteria decision,Landfill site suitability index,Geographic information systems,Analytic hierarchy process,Elazığ

Kaynakça

1. Linkov I, Varghese A, Khurshid S, Seager TP, Kiker GA, Bridges T. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: A Framework for Structuring Remedial Decisions At Contaminated Sites. Editors: Linkov I, Ramadan A. Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental Decision Making, 15-54, New York, NY, USA, Springer-Verlag New York Inc., 2004.
2. Mozafar SM, Hadidi M, Vessali E, Mosstafakhani P, Taheri K, Shahoief S, Khodamoradpour M. “Integrating multi-criteria decision analysis for a GIS-based hazardous waste landfill siting in Kurdistan Province, western Iran”. Waste Management, 29(10), 2740-2758, 2009.
3. Nas B, Cay T, Iscan F, Berktay A. “Selection of MSW landfill site for Konya, Turkey using GIS and multi-criteria evaluation”. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 160, 491-500, 2010.
4. Baban SJ, Flannagan J. “Developing and implementing GIS-assisted constraints criteria for planning landfill sites in the UK”. Planning Practice and Research, 13(2), 139-151, 1998.
5. Gbaniea SP, Tengbe PB, Momoh JS, Medo J, Kabba VTS. ”Modelling landfill location using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA): Case study Bo, Southern Sierra Leone”. Applied Geography, 36, 3-12, 2013.
6. Moeinaddini M, Khorasani N, Danehkar A, Darvishsefat AA, Zienalyan M. “siting MSW landfill using weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in GIS environment (case study: Karaj)”. Waste Management, 30(5), 912-920, 2010.
7. Şener Ş, Şener E, Nas B, Karagüzel R. “Combining AHP with GIS for landfill site selection: A case study in the Lake Beyşehir catchment area (Konya, Turkey)”. Waste Management, 30(11), 2037-2046, 2010.
8. Usman AA, Kumar M. “Site suitability analysis for waste disposal in Kano Metropolis, Nigeria (using multi-criteria evaluation, AHP, and GIS techniques)”. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 6(11), 1072-1081, 2015.

9. Khan D, Samadder SR. “A simplified multi-criteria evaluation model for landfill site ranking and selection based on AHP and GIS”. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 23(4), 267–278, 2015.
10. Yildirim U, Guler C. “Identification of suitable future municipal solid waste disposal sites for the Metropolitan Mersin (SE Turkey) using AHP and GIS techniques”. Environmental Earth Sciences, 75(2), 101-101, 2016.
11. Bilgilioğlu SS. “Selection of suitable site for municipal solid waste disposal sites for the Aksaray (Turkey) using AHP and GIS methods”. The Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 4(11), 36-45, 2017.
12. Şener Ş, Şener E, Nas B. “Selection of landfill site using GIS and multi-criteria decision analysis for Beysehir Lake catchment area (Konya, Turkey)”. Journal of Engineering Science and Design, 1(3), 134-144, 2011.
13. Malczewski J. Propagation of Errors in Multi Criteria Allocation Analysis: A case study. Editors: Fandel G, Gal T. Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Berlin, 154-155, Springer, 1997.
14. Vucijak B, Kurtagic SM, Silajdzic I. “Multicriteria decision making in selecting best solid waste management scenario: a municipal case study from Bosnia and Herzegovina”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 130, 166-174, 2016.
15. Qazi WA, Abushammala MFM, Azam MH. “Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Waste-To-Energy Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Sultanate of Oman”. Waste Management and Research, 36(7), 594-605, 2018.
16. Şener B. Landfill Site Selection by Using GIS. MSc Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, 2004.
17. Eldi N, Sui D. “A COM-based spatial decision support system for industrial site selection”. Journal of Geographic Information and Decision Analysis, 7(2), 72-92, 2003.
18. The Municipality of Elazığ (The Department of Environment Protection and Control). http://www.projeelazig.com/proje.php?id=54 (25.02.2018).
19. Gedik F. Constituting an integrated waste management for the city of Elazığ (in Turkish). MSc Thesis, Namık Kemal University, Edirne, Turkey, 2008.
20. Siddiqui MZ, Everett JW, Vieux BE. “Landfill siting using geographic information systems: A demonstration”. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 122(6), 515-523, 1996.
21. Muttiah RS, Engel BA, Jones DD. “Waste disposal site selection using GIS based simulated annealing”. Computers and Geosciences, 22(9), 1013-1017, 1996.
22. Zamoranoa M, Molerob E, Hurtado A, Grindlayb A, Ramos A. “Evaluation of a municipal landfill site in Southern Spain with GIS-aided methodology”. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 160, 473-481, 2008.
23. Kontos TD, Komilis DP, Halvadakis CP. “Siting MSW landfills with spatial multiple criteria analysis methodology”. Waste Management, 25, 818-832, 2005.
24. Sadek S, El-Fadel M, Freiha F. “compliance factors within a GIS-based frame work for landfill siting”. Journal of Environmental Studies, 63(1), 71-86, 2005.
25. Saaty TL. Analytical Planning, RSW Publications, 1985.
26. Wang G, Qin L, Li G, Chen L. “Landfill site selection using spatial information technologies and AHP: A case study in Beijing, China”. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(8), 2414-2421, 2009.
27. Burnaz S, Topcu YI. “A multiple-criteria decision-making approach for the evaluation of retail location”. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 14, 67-76, 2006.
28. Bollinger D, Pictet J. “Multiple criteria decision analysis of treatment and land-filling technologies for waste incineration residues”. Omega, 36(3), 418-428, 2008.
29. Barredo IJ, Sendra JB. “Comparison of multi-criteria evaluation methods integrated in Geographical Information Systems to allocate urban areas”. Geographical Systems, 125, 313-327, 1999.
30. Rezaei-Moghaddam K, Karami E. “A multiple criteria evaluation of sustainable agricultural development models using AHP”. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10, 407-426, 2008.
31. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry of Turkey (The General Directorate of Environment Management). “The Criteria Check List for Waste Disposal Site Selection (in Turkish)”. https://webdosya.csb.gov.tr/db/destek/editordosya/Duzenli_Depolama_Tesis_Saha_Yon_ve_isletme_kilavuzu.pdf (15.07.2014).
32. Lin HY, Kao JJ. “Enhanced spatial model for landfill siting analysis”. ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering, 125, 845-851, 1999.
33. The Regulation for Sanitary Disposal of Wastes (in Turkish). “The Official Gazette, No: 27533”. http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2010/03/20100326-13.htm (25.02.2018).
34. Şener B, Suzen ML, Doyuran V. “landfill site selection by using Geographic Information Systems”. Environmental Geology, 49, 376-388, 2006.
35. Dorhofer G, Siebert H. “The search for landfill sites-requirement sand implementation in lower Saxony, Germany”. Environmental Geology, 35(1), 55-65, 1998.
36. Küçükönder M, Karabulut M. “A Study on site selection for waste storage in Kahramanmaraş with multi-criteria analysis method (in Turkish)”. Geographic Sciences Journal, 5(2), 55-76, 2007.
37. Kontos TD, Komilis DP, Halvadakis CP. “Siting MSW landfills on Lesvos Island with a GIS-based methodology”. Waste Management and Research, 21(3), 262-278, 2003.
38. The CORINE Project. “The Ministry of Forestry and Water Management of Turkey”. http://corine.ormansu.gov.tr/corineportal/turkiyecalismalar.html (24.02.2018).
39. Yildirim U, Guler C. “Identification of suitable future municipal solid waste disposal sites for the Metropolitan Mersin (SE Turkey) using AHP and GIS techniques”. Environmental Earth Sciences, 75(2), 101-101, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4948-8.