Analysis of the Factors Hindering the Widespread Use of Renewable Energy Resources in Turkey Using Multi Criteria Decision Making Techniques and House of Quality

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1, 1 - 12, 31.01.2020

Mehmet Ali Ilgın Elifnur Alkan

https://doi.org/10.29137/umagd.469519

Öz

Turkey has a great potential for the production of renewable energy. However, a substantial portion of Turkey’s energy needs is fulfilled by using non-renewable energy sources. The factors hindering the widespread use of renewable energy sources in Turkey are analyzed in this study. First, the factors are determined through literature review and a survey. Next, the importance levels of the factors are determined using DEMATEL and Analytical Network Process multi criteria decision making methods. Finally, alternative solutions which lessen the impact of the factors are presented using house of quality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Renewable Energy, Multi Criteria Decision Making, House of Quality

Yenilenebilir Enerji Kaynaklarının Türkiye’de Yaygın Kullanımını Engelleyen Faktörlerin Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Teknikleri ve Kalite Evi ile Analiz Edilmesi

Öz

Türkiye, yenilenebilir enerji üretimi için
yüksek bir potansiyele sahiptir. Buna karşın, Türkiye’nin enerji ihtiyacının önemli
bir kısmı yenilenemeyen enerji kaynakları kullanılarak karşılanmaktadır. Bu
çalışmada yenilenebilir enerji kaynaklarının Türkiye’de yaygın kullanımını
engelleyen faktörler analiz edilmiştir. İlk olarak, literatür taraması ve anket
yoluyla faktörler belirlenmiştir. Daha sonra DEMATEL ve analitik ağ süreci çok
kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ile faktörlerin önem düzeyleri belirlenmiştir.
Son olarak, Kalite Evi kullanılarak faktörlerin etkilerini azaltacak çözüm
önerileri sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yenilenebilir Enerji, Çok Kriterli Karar Verme, Kalite Evi

Kaynakça

• Aktaş, R., Doğanay, M.M., Gökmen, Y., Gazibey, Y.,Türen, U. (2015). Sayısal Karar Verme Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Beta Yayıncılık.
• Armaroli, N.,Balzani, V. (2007). The Future of Energy Supply: Challenges and Opportunities. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 46, 52-66.
• Beddoe, M.,Chamberlin, A. (2003). Avoiding confrontation: securing planning permission for on-shore wind energy developments in England: comments from a wind energy developer. Planning Practice & Research, 18 (1), 3-17.
• Bezir Çiçek, N., Öztürk, M.,Özek, N. (2009). Renewable energy market conditions and barriers in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13 (6), 1428-36.
• Carley, S. (2009). State renewable energy electricity policies: An empirical evaluation of effectiveness. Energy Policy, 37 (8), 3071-81.
• Eleftheriadis, I.M.,Anagnostopoulou, E.G. (2015). Identifying barriers in the diffusion of renewable energy sources. Energy Policy, 80, 153-64.
• Foxon, T.,Pearson, P. (2008). Overcoming barriers to innovation and diffusion of cleaner technologies: some features of a sustainable innovation policy regime. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16 (1, Supplement 1), S148-S61.
• Fthenakis, V., Mason, J.E.,Zweibel, K. (2009). The technical, geographical, and economic feasibility for solar energy to supply the energy needs of the US. Energy Policy, 37 (2), 387-99.
• Fuchs, D.A.,Arentsen, M.J. (2002). Green electricity in the market place: the policy challenge. Energy Policy, 30 (6), 525-38.
• Gabus, A.,Fontela, E. 1972. "World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL." In. Geneva, Switzerland: Battelle Geneva Research Center.
• Guerin, T.F. (2001). Transferring Environmental Technologies to China: Recent Developments and Constraints. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67 (1), 55-75.
• Kaya, D. (2006). Renewable energy policies in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 10 (2), 152-63.
• Kumar, A., Kumar, K., Kaushik, N., Sharma, S.,Mishra, S. (2010). Renewable energy in India: Current status and future potentials. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14 (8), 2434-42.
• Liu, M.F.M.,Pistorius, T. (2012). Coping with the energy crisis: Impact assessment and potentials of non-traditional renewable energy in rural Kyrgyzstan. Energy Policy, 44, 130-9.
• Luthra, S., Kumar, S., Garg, D.,Haleem, A. (2015). Barriers to renewable/sustainable energy technologies adoption: Indian perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 762-76.
• Mondal, M.A.H., Kamp, L.M.,Pachova, N.I. (2010). Drivers, barriers, and strategies for implementation of renewable energy technologies in rural areas in Bangladesh - An innovation system analysis. Energy Policy, 38 (8), 4626-34.
• Onat, N. (2018). Türkiye’de yenilenebilir kaynaklardan elektrik enerjisi üretimi: Mevcut durum ve gelecek beklentileri Akıllı Ulaşım Sistemleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 1 (1), 8-15.
• Özbek, A. (2017). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ve Excel ile Problem Çözümü. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Paksoy, S. (2017). Çok Kriterli Karar Vermede Güncel Yaklaşımlar. Adana: Karahan Kitabevi.
• Reiche, D.,Bechberger, M. (2004). Policy differences in the promotion of renewable energies in the EU member states. Energy Policy, 32 (7), 843-9.
• Saaty, T.L. (1996). Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback:The Analytic Network Process. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications
• Tsoutsos, T., Frantzeskaki, N.,Gekas, V. (2005). Environmental impacts from the solar energy technologies. Energy Policy, 33 (3), 289-96.
• Uğurlu, A.,Gokcol, C. (2017). An overview of Turkey's renewable energy trend. Journal of Energy Systems, 1 (4), 148-58.
• Veziroğlu, T.N.,Şahin, S. (2008). 21st Century's energy: Hydrogen energy system. Energy Conversion and Management, 49 (7), 1820-31.
• White, W., Lunnan, A., Nybakk, E.,Kulisic, B. (2013). The role of governments in renewable energy: The importance of policy consistency. Biomass and Bioenergy, 57, 97-105.
• Zhang, X., Shen, L.,Chan, S.Y. (2012). The diffusion of solar energy use in HK: What are the barriers? Energy Policy, 41, 241-9.