IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p12548-d931821.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selection of Renewables for Economic Regions with Diverse Conditions: The Case of Azerbaijan

Author

Listed:
  • Mahammad Nuriyev

    (Department of Economics and Management, Khazar University, 41 Mahsati Str., Baku AZ1096, Azerbaijan)

  • Jeyhun Mammadov

    (Department of Economics and Management, Khazar University, 41 Mahsati Str., Baku AZ1096, Azerbaijan)

  • Aziz Nuriyev

    (Joint MBA Program, Azerbaijan State Oil and Industrial University, 20 Azadliq Ave., Baku AZ1010, Azerbaijan)

  • Joshgun Mammadov

    (Department of Economics and Management, Khazar University, 41 Mahsati Str., Baku AZ1096, Azerbaijan)

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to study the specifics of the selection of renewables for regions of Azerbaijan with diverse conditions. Information is obtained through the analysis of the regions’ conditions and experts’ opinions. Analysis reveals that geographical position, diversity of natural resources, and a variety of other factors of the five economic regions of the country require subdivision of these regions in the selection of renewables. Given that the selection of renewables is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) task under a high degree of uncertainty, Z-number-based models have been developed, and Z-extension of the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method has been used. Solutions have been derived based on direct calculations with Z-numbers. In this paper, results obtained for two regions are presented. In the case of one region, for the first part (mountains and foothill) of the Karabakh economic region, renewables are ranked as hydro, solar, and wind. For the second part (plain), the ranking is as follows: solar, hydro, and wind. For the Guba-Khachmaz economic region, the rankings of renewables for parts of the region are also different: the wind is preferable for the seaside, and solar is more appropriate for the foothills. Results show that in the case of uneven distribution of renewables and significant differences in factors influencing decision-making, it is necessary to subdivide economic regions and use different models for the selection of renewables.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahammad Nuriyev & Jeyhun Mammadov & Aziz Nuriyev & Joshgun Mammadov, 2022. "Selection of Renewables for Economic Regions with Diverse Conditions: The Case of Azerbaijan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12548-:d:931821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12548/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12548/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mahammad Nuriyev, 2020. "Z-numbers Based Hybrid MCDM Approach for Energy Resources Ranking and Selection," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(6), pages 22-30.
    2. Chia-Nan Wang & Jui-Chung Kao & Yen-Hui Wang & Van Thanh Nguyen & Viet Tinh Nguyen & Syed Tam Husain, 2021. "A Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for the Selection of Suitable Renewable Energy Sources," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, June.
    3. He-Yau Kang & Meng-Chan Hung & W. L. Pearn & Amy H. I. Lee & Mei-Sung Kang, 2011. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for Evaluating Wind Farm Performance," Energies, MDPI, vol. 4(11), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    5. Şengül, Ümran & Eren, Miraç & Eslamian Shiraz, Seyedhadi & Gezder, Volkan & Şengül, Ahmet Bilal, 2015. "Fuzzy TOPSIS method for ranking renewable energy supply systems in Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 617-625.
    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. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    2. Wu, Yunna & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Ting, 2018. "Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: A case in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1227-1239.
    3. Diemuodeke, E.O. & Addo, A. & Oko, C.O.C. & Mulugetta, Y. & Ojapah, M.M., 2019. "Optimal mapping of hybrid renewable energy systems for locations using multi-criteria decision-making algorithm," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 461-477.
    4. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin & Yue, Wen Long & Zou, Xin, 2019. "Multi-criteria analysis of policies for implementing clean energy vehicles in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 826-840.
    5. 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).
    6. Gezen, Mesliha & Karaaslan, Abdulkerim, 2022. "Energy planning based on Vision-2023 of Turkey with a goal programming under fuzzy multi-objectives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PA).
    7. Abteen Ijadi Maghsoodi & Arta Ijadi Maghsoodi & Amir Mosavi & Timon Rabczuk & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2018. "Renewable Energy Technology Selection Problem Using Integrated H-SWARA-MULTIMOORA Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Songrui Li & Yitang Hu, 2022. "A Multi-Criteria Framework to Evaluate the Sustainability of Renewable Energy: A 2-Tuple Linguistic Grey Relation Model from the Perspective of the Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-24, April.
    9. Esra Karaka & Ozan Veli Y ld ran, 2019. "Evaluation of Renewable Energy Alternatives for Turkey via Modified Fuzzy AHP," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(2), pages 31-39.
    10. Long, Yilu & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang, 2022. "Renewable energy source technology selection considering the empathetic preferences of experts in a cognitive fuzzy social participatory allocation network," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    11. Bortoluzzi, Mirian & Correia de Souza, Celso & Furlan, Marcelo, 2021. "Bibliometric analysis of renewable energy types using key performance indicators and multicriteria decision models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    12. Sitorus, Fernando & Brito-Parada, Pablo R., 2020. "A multiple criteria decision making method to weight the sustainability criteria of renewable energy technologies under uncertainty," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Pratibha Rani & Jabir Ali & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "An Integrated Single-Valued Neutrosophic Combined Compromise Solution Methodology for Renewable Energy Resource Selection Problem," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, July.
    16. Chiranjib Bhowmik & Sumit Bhowmik & Amitava Ray, 2021. "Selection of optimum green energy sources by considering environmental constructs and their technical criteria: a case study," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(9), pages 13890-13918, September.
    17. Ceren Erdin & Gokhan Ozkaya, 2019. "Turkey’s 2023 Energy Strategies and Investment Opportunities for Renewable Energy Sources: Site Selection Based on ELECTRE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, April.
    18. Dongxiao Niu & Hao Zhen & Min Yu & Keke Wang & Lijie Sun & Xiaomin Xu, 2020. "Prioritization of Renewable Energy Alternatives for China by Using a Hybrid FMCDM Methodology with Uncertain Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-26, June.
    19. 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.
    20. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Bączkiewicz, Aleksandra & Sałabun, Wojciech, 2022. "New multi-criteria method for evaluation of sustainable RES management," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12548-:d:931821. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.