My recommendations could be and must be on renewable energy sources. Turkey is geographically advantageous land and we could produce an energy from sea; because ¾ of our land surrounded by sea. Also another point could be wind, if Europe and other developed countries could do it around the world, why we cannot? Actually, sustainable solution must be clean, renewable and cheaper but in Turkey’s case, firstly we must care on economical side; we are paying and importing too much for the energy and if we could decrease the dependency and prices, new investments could make for the clean and renewable sources. Primarily, we must use our own national resources, like coal. While we are increasing the use of coal, maybe we could decrease the prices and importance of other resources; so, after a while within a harmony, we could decrease the use of coal instead of clean and renewable energy sources. As an individual and for the individuals, people should use public transport instead of private cars. It will decreases oil consumption and also clean.
solar
Turkey’s Energy Sources
Total installed electricity capacity (2010, source: EPDK): 50,422 MW
– Thermal: 64.3%
– Hydroelectric: 32.8%
– Other RES (Geothermal, Wind): 2.9%
Conventional thermal sources continue to dominate the Turkish generation infrastructure. Considerable changes have taken place in recent years in the distribution of the sources used in the electricity sector. Fuel switching in power generation has been significant over the past two decades as coal-fired plants have increasingly been replaced by gas-fired ones.
Total Primary Energy Supply (2009, source: IEA): 98,502 ktoe
Coal and Peat: 30.5%
Coal , Peat: 30.5%
Natural Gas: 29.6%
Crude Oil: 29.8%
Bio-fuels and Waste: 4.8%
Hydroelectric:3.2%
Geothermal, Solar, Wind: 2.2%
In 2009, Turkey produced 194 TWh of electricity, and consumed 158 TWh. In Turkey, electricity is mainly produced by thermal power plants, by consuming coal, lignite, natural gas, fuel-oil and geothermal energy, wind energy (recently) and hydropower plants (TEIAS web page, 2008).
Cons and Pros Cons of Energy Sources’
IR as a discipline, considers on different subjects and different fields and energy is one of the most important subjects of diplomacy. Energy diplomacy and energy security shapes the Governments’ domestic and foreign policy analysis process. My new post will be about the cons and pros cons of world energy sources. Energy is special for me because my studies and researches are about world energy politics. As a member of the Bilkent Energy Society, this will be my first publish as a kind of report. It is just a beginning part of my energy studies.
PETROLEUM
Pros:
+ Transportation fuel for the world
+ Basis of many products, from prescription drugs to plastics
+ Economical to produce, easy to transport
Cons:
– High C02 emissions
– Found in limited areas
– Supply may be exhausted before natural gas/coal resources
– Possible environmental impact from drilling and transporting
PROPANE
Pros:
+ Yields 60–70% less smog-producing hydrocarbons than gasoline/diesel fuel or propane exhaust
+ Nontoxic and insoluble in water
+ Doesn’t spill, pool, or leave a residue
Cons:
– Uses some fossil fuels in conversion
– Highly flammable
– Less energy in a gallon of propane than in a gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel
NATURAL GAS
Pros:
+ Widely available
+ Burns more cleanly than coal or oil
+ Often used in combination with other fuels to decrease pollution in electricity generation
+ Added artificial odor that people can easily smell the gas in case of a leak
Cons:
– Transportation costs are high
– Burns cleanly, but still has emissions
– Pipelines impact ecosystems
COAL
Pros:
+ Abundant supply
+ Currently inexpensive to extract
+ Reliable and capable of generating large amounts of power
Cons:
– Emits major greenhouse gases and acid rain
– High environmental impact from mining and burning
– Mining can be dangerous for mine-workers
NUCLEAR ENERGY
Pros:
+ No greenhouse gases or C02 emissions
+ Efficiently transforms energy into electricity
+ Uranium reserves are abundant
+ Refueled yearly
Cons:
– Higher capital costs
– Problem of long-term storage of radioactive waste
– Heated waste water from nuclear plants harms aquatic life
– Potential nuclear proliferation issue
SOLAR ENERGY
Pros:
+ Nonpolluting
+ Most abundant energy source available
+ Systems last 15–30 years
Cons:
– High initial investment
– Dependent on sunny weather
– Supplemental energy may be needed in low sunlight areas
– Requires large physical space for PV cell panels
HYDROELECTRIC POWER
Pros:
+ No emissions
+ Reliable
+ Capable of generating large amounts of power
+ Output can be regulated to meet demand
Cons:
– Environmental impacts by changing the environment
– Hydroelectric dams are expensive to build
– Dams may be affected by drought
– Potential for floods
WIND POWER
Pros:
+ No emissions
+ Affordable
+ Little disruption of ecosystems
+ Relatively high output
Cons:
– Output is proportional to wind speed
– Not feasible for all geographical locations
– High initial investment
– Extensive land use
BIOMASS
Pros:
+ Abundant supply
+ Fewer emissions than fossil fuel sources
+ Can be used in diesel engines
+ Auto engines can easily be converted to run on biomass fuel
Cons:
– Source must be near usage to cut transportation costs
– Emits some pollution
– Increases nitrogen oxides, an air pollutant emissions
– Uses some fossil fuels in conversion
ETHANOL
Pros:
+ Easily manufactured
+ Fewer emissions than fossil fuel
+ Carbon-neutral (C02 emissions offset by photosynthesis in plants)
Cons:
– Extensive use of cropland
– Less energy in a gallon of ethanol than in a gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel
– Costs more than gasoline to produce
– Currently requires government subsidy to be affordable to consumers
HYDROGEN
Pros:
– Abundant supply
– Water vapor emissions only
– Excellent industrial safety record
Cons:
– More expensive to produce than fossil fuel Systems
– Currently uses a large amount of fossil fuels in the hydrogen extraction process
– Storage and fuel cell technology still being developed
GEOTHERMAL ENERGY
Pros:
+ Minimal environmental impact
+ Efficient
+ Power plants have low emissions
+ Low cost after the initial investment
Cons:
– Geothermal fields found in few areas around the world
– Expensive start-up costs
– Wells could eventually be depleted
Alp Eren BASER 