IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v376y2024ipbs0306261924017215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A novel multi-objective decision-making model to determine optimum resource and capacity configuration for hybrid electricity generation systems: A comparative case study in Türkiye

Author

Listed:
  • Yalılı, Mehmet
  • Menlik, Tayfun
  • Boran, Fatih Emre

Abstract

The rapid depletion of fossil fuels, their negative environmental impacts due to harmful carbon emissions, and the drawbacks of the sole use of intermittent renewable energy resources on system reliability necessitate the use of more advanced energy system technologies. As a result, hybrid electricity generation systems offer an innovative alternative to conventional energy systems. However, the technical complexity and variability of these systems require the application of multi-objective optimization techniques to determine the optimal sizing and system design. Therefore, in this study, we suggest a multi-objective decision-making (MODM) model that involves five conflicting objectives to find the optimal resource configuration and auxiliary source capacity allocation within the framework of the multi-source electricity production method in Türkiye. The MODM model aims to maximize the utilization of resource potentials and the jobs created, while simultaneously minimizing the levelized cost of energy (LCOE), construction duration, and carbon emissions. The MODM model was solved using fmincon and fgoalattain multi-objective optimization algorithms using the Goal Attainment Method in MATLAB and the model results were subsequently compared to the real-world data. According to the model results, the optimal capacity to be allocated for the auxiliary source units is 13,749.58 MWm, while the capacity allocated according to the real-world data as of March 2024 is 2495.49 MWm. In contrast to the model's prediction of 90.8 % solar-based auxiliary unit installations, 99.8 % of auxiliary units are based on solar PV in the actual case. Furthermore, hydro or geothermal-based auxiliary sources are not allocated any capacity, which is consistent with the actual situation. The capacity allocated for the wind (primary source) + solar (auxiliary source) configuration is 76.2 %, whereas in reality, it accounts for 65.6 % of the total installations. Consequently, the model findings suggest that the maximum capacity allocation is for the wind (primary source) + solar (auxiliary source) type hybrid electricity generation system.

Suggested Citation

  • Yalılı, Mehmet & Menlik, Tayfun & Boran, Fatih Emre, 2024. "A novel multi-objective decision-making model to determine optimum resource and capacity configuration for hybrid electricity generation systems: A comparative case study in Türkiye," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 376(PB).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:376:y:2024:i:pb:s0306261924017215
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261924017215
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124338?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mahdavi, Meisam & Jurado, Francisco & Ramos, Ricardo Alan Verdú & Awaafo, Augustine, 2023. "Hybrid biomass, solar and wind electricity generation in rural areas of Fez-Meknes region in Morocco considering water consumption of animals and anaerobic digester," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 343(C).
    2. Peng, Qiao & Liu, Weilong & Shi, Yufeng & Dai, Yuanyuan & Yu, Kunjie & Graham, Byron, 2024. "Multi-objective electricity generation expansion planning towards renewable energy policy objectives under uncertainties," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    3. Shao, Meng & Han, Zhixin & Sun, Jinwei & Xiao, Chengsi & Zhang, Shulei & Zhao, Yuanxu, 2020. "A review of multi-criteria decision making applications for renewable energy site selection," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 377-403.
    4. Ekren, Orhan & Ekren, Banu Y., 2010. "Size optimization of a PV/wind hybrid energy conversion system with battery storage using simulated annealing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 592-598, February.
    5. Rodrigo A. Estévez & Valeria Espinoza & Roberto D. Ponce Oliva & Felipe Vásquez-Lavín & Stefan Gelcich, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Renewable Energies: Research Trends, Gaps and the Challenge of Improving Participation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-13, March.
    6. Beccali, M. & Cellura, M. & Mistretta, M., 2003. "Decision-making in energy planning. Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 2063-2087.
    7. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    8. Deveci, Kaan & Güler, Önder, 2020. "A CMOPSO based multi-objective optimization of renewable energy planning: Case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 578-590.
    9. Mourmouris, J.C. & Potolias, C., 2013. "A multi-criteria methodology for energy planning and developing renewable energy sources at a regional level: A case study Thassos, Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 522-530.
    10. Jichang Xiao & Jianfeng Cai & Xiaodong Wang, 2017. "A Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Multicriteria Decision-Making Method with Interactive Criteria and Its Application to Renewable Energy Projects Selection," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-15, December.
    11. Iqbal, M. & Azam, M. & Naeem, M. & Khwaja, A.S. & Anpalagan, A., 2014. "Optimization classification, algorithms and tools for renewable energy: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 640-654.
    12. Li, Jinze & Liu, Pei & Li, Zheng, 2020. "Optimal design and techno-economic analysis of a solar-wind-biomass off-grid hybrid power system for remote rural electrification: A case study of west China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    13. Stein, Eric W., 2013. "A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 640-654.
    14. Cayir Ervural, Beyzanur & Evren, Ramazan & Delen, Dursun, 2018. "A multi-objective decision-making approach for sustainable energy investment planning," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 387-402.
    15. Lee, Hsing-Chen & Chang, Ching-Ter, 2018. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 883-896.
    16. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Dalia Streimikiene, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) for the Assessment of Renewable Energy Technologies in a Household: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, March.
    17. Bajpai, Prabodh & Dash, Vaishalee, 2012. "Hybrid renewable energy systems for power generation in stand-alone applications: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2926-2939.
    18. Zhang, Zhiying & Liao, Huchang & Tang, Anbin, 2022. "Renewable energy portfolio optimization with public participation under uncertainty: A hybrid multi-attribute multi-objective decision-making method," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Horasan, Muhammed Bilal & Kilic, Huseyin Selcuk, 2022. "A multi-objective decision-making model for renewable energy planning: The case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 484-504.
    2. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    3. Bilgili, Faik & Zarali, Fulya & Ilgün, Miraç Fatih & Dumrul, Cüneyt & Dumrul, Yasemin, 2022. "The evaluation of renewable energy alternatives for sustainable development in Turkey using ‌intuitionistic‌ ‌fuzzy‌-TOPSIS method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 1443-1458.
    4. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos & Livanos, Georgios A., 2017. "Evaluation of future sustainable electricity generation alternatives: The case of a Greek island," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 775-787.
    5. Rivero-Iglesias, Jose M. & Puente, Javier & Fernandez, Isabel & León, Omar, 2023. "Integrated model for the assessment of power generation alternatives through analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy inference system. Case study of Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 563-581.
    6. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    7. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Evaluation of energy alternatives for sustainable development of energy sector in India: An integrated Shannon’s entropy fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 58-74.
    8. Saraswat, S.K. & Digalwar, Abhijeet K., 2021. "Empirical investigation and validation of sustainability indicators for the assessment of energy sources in India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    9. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Shahabaddin & Firoozabadi, Bahar, 2022. "A new application of measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS) in solar site location for electricity and hydrogen production: A case study in the southern clim," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    10. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    11. Alkan, Ömer & Albayrak, Özlem Karadağ, 2020. "Ranking of renewable energy sources for regions in Turkey by fuzzy entropy based fuzzy COPRAS and fuzzy MULTIMOORA," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 712-726.
    12. Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Chih-Jou Chen & Ho-Chin Yang, 2021. "Using Porter’s Diamond Model to Assess the Competitiveness of Taiwan’s Solar Photovoltaic Industry," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    13. Karunathilake, Hirushie & Hewage, Kasun & Mérida, Walter & Sadiq, Rehan, 2019. "Renewable energy selection for net-zero energy communities: Life cycle based decision making under uncertainty," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 558-573.
    14. José Carlos Romero & Pedro Linares, 2021. "Multiple Criteria Decision-Making as an Operational Conceptualization of Energy Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    15. Ali Mostafaeipour & Seyyed Jalaladdin Hosseini Dehshiri & Seyyed Shahabaddin Hosseini Dehshiri & Mehdi Jahangiri & Kuaanan Techato, 2020. "A Thorough Analysis of Potential Geothermal Project Locations in Afghanistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    16. Jha, Sunil Kr. & Bilalovic, Jasmin & Jha, Anju & Patel, Nilesh & Zhang, Han, 2017. "Renewable energy: Present research and future scope of Artificial Intelligence," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 297-317.
    17. Pablo Benalcazar & Adam Suski & Jacek Kamiński, 2020. "Optimal Sizing and Scheduling of Hybrid Energy Systems: The Cases of Morona Santiago and the Galapagos Islands," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Ogunjuyigbe, A.S.O. & Ayodele, T.R. & Akinola, O.A., 2016. "Optimal allocation and sizing of PV/Wind/Split-diesel/Battery hybrid energy system for minimizing life cycle cost, carbon emission and dump energy of remote residential building," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 153-171.
    19. Li, Tao & Li, Ang & Guo, Xiaopeng, 2020. "The sustainable development-oriented development and utilization of renewable energy industry——A comprehensive analysis of MCDM methods," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    20. Thirunavukkarasu, M. & Sawle, Yashwant & Lala, Himadri, 2023. "A comprehensive review on optimization of hybrid renewable energy systems using various optimization techniques," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:376:y:2024:i:pb:s0306261924017215. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.