Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of Desalination Technologies Integrated with Renewable Energy Sources in Turkey

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Progress in Exergy, Energy, and the Environment

  • 4354 Accesses

Abstract

In the past few decades, freshwater availability and quality for human consumption in the world has reduced significantly due to rapid population growth along with increasing industrial and agricultural demands, as well as uncontrolled urbanization and climate change. Even though Turkey is surrounded by water, its available freshwater per capita per year is less than the world average and much less that those for countries with developed economies [1]. Meanwhile, available freshwater sources in Turkey are diminishing rapidly due to pollution and overextraction associated with significantly increasing water demands. In order to prevent water scarcity in Turkey over the next decades, desalination is expected to be an important option. Appropriate desalination technologies need to be determined for implementation throughout the country.

In this study, potential desalination technologies, namely, multiple-effect distillation (MED), multistage flash distillation (MSF), and reverse osmosis (RO), using conventional and renewable energy sources (RESs) are evaluated, for various geographical locations and plant capacities, with respect to it overall cost and impact on the environment. Much actual plant data and results of a wide range of prior studies are used to estimate the associated costs. Airborne emissions during the operation phase are evaluated to determine the associated environmental impacts. Alternative energy sources such as waste heat from other processes and Turkey’s abundant renewable energy sources (particularly wind, solar, hydro) are examined, and the integration of these sources with desalination is examined and compared to the conventional methods, using consistent criteria.

It is determined that RO is likely to be the most suitable desalination technology for Turkey, with a midsize desalination plant (around 30,000 m3/day capacity) preferred. This result is in part due to the high cost of fossil fuels in Turkey and the low levels of the Mediterranean seawater feed, which reduce the cost of RO by 13 and 21 % with respect to MED and MSF respectively. RO can also help reduce emissions of CO2, NO x , NMVOC, SO x by up to by 38, 42, 73, 60, respectively, compared to alternative technologies, even when waste heat recovery is used. Moreover, RO technology could be further improved by integrating with hydropower, the most compatible renewable energy source for Turkey, which can further reduce the emissions by 83, 82, 80, and 50 %, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Human Development Report (2006) Beyond scarcity: power, poverty and the global water crisis. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), New York, USA

    Google Scholar 

  2. WHO website. World Health Organization (2010) Facts and figures on water quality and health. www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/facts_figures/en/print.html. Accessed 18 Dec 2010

  3. World Water Council (2000) World water vision, making water everybody’s business. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  4. Erdem Z (2010) The contribution of renewable resources in meeting Turkey’s energy-related challenges. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 14:2710–2722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Environmental Statistics (2001) Fresh water pollution by countries. Based on world development indicators. http://www.nationmaster.com

  6. European Environment Agency Website. Use of freshwater resources (CSI 018). Accessed 28 Jan 2009. http://www.eea.europa.eu

  7. Central Intelligence Agency. The World Factbook. www.cia.gov.tr. Accessed 20 Dec 2010

  8. General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (2009) Turkey Water Report. http://www.dsi.gov.tr. Accessed 18 Dec 2010

  9. Dolnicar S, Schäfer AI (2006) Public perception of desalinated versus recycled water in Australia. J Environ Manag 90:888–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cipollina A, Micale G, Rizutti L (2009) Green energy and technology. Seawater desalination. Conventional and renewable energy processes. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  11. Water Desalination International website. Key desalination facts. http://www.waterdesalination.com/factssample1.htm. Accessed 25 Dec 2010

  12. El-Dessouky T, Ettouney M (2002) Fundamentals of salt water desalination. Elsevier Science B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Khawaji A, Kutubkhanah I, Wie JM (2008) Advances in seawater desalination technologies. Desalination 221:47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Raluy R, Uche J (2005) Life cycle assessment of water production technologies. Desalination 183:81–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Raluy G, Serra L, Uche J (2006) Life cycle assessment of MSF, MED and RO desalination technologies. Energy 31:2361–2372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Borsani R, Rebagliati S (2005) Fundamentals and costing of MSF desalination plants and comparison with other technologies. Desalination 182:29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Koklas P, Papathanassiou S (2006) Component sizing for an autonomous wind-driven desalination plant. Renew Energ 31:2122–2139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Karaghouli A, Renne D, Lawrance L, Kazmerski L (2009) Solar and wind opportunities for water desalination in Arab Regions. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 13:2397–2407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zejli D, Benchrifa R, Bennouna A, Zazi K (2004) Economic analysis of wind-powered desalination in the south of Morocco. Desalination 165:219–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sanden B, Azar C (2005) Near term technology policies for long term climate targets-economy wide versus technology specific approaches. Energ Policy 33:1557–1576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ediger V, Kentel E (1999) Renewable energy potential as an alternative fossil fuels in Turkey. Energ Convers Manag 40:743–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ozgur M (2008) Review of Turkey’s renewable energy potential. Renew Energ 33:2345–2356

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Yuksel I (2008) Global warming and renewable energy sources for sustaining development in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 12:372–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Forstmeier M, Mannerheim F, D’Amato D, Shah M, Liu Y, Baldea M, Stella A (2007) Feasibility study on wind-powered desalination. Desalination 203:463–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Evrendilek F, Ertekin C (2003) Assessing the potential of renewable energy sources in Turkey. Renew Energ 28:2303–2315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Garcia-Rodriguez L, Palmero-Marreroa A, Gbmez-Camachob C (2002) Comparison of solar thermal technologies for applications in seawater desalination. Desalination 142:135–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lamei A, van der Zaag P, von Munch E (2008) Impact of solar energy cost on water production cost of seawater desalination plants in Egypt. Energ Policy 36:1748–1756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Yuksel I (2010) Renewable energy hydropower for sustainable development in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 14:2113–3219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. The Pembina Institute (2010) Sustainable energy solutions. Renewable energy. Hydropower www.pembina.org/re/sources/hydro-power. Accessed 20 Nov 2010

  30. Murakami M (1995) Managing water for peace in the Middle East: alternative strategies experimental seawater reverse-osmosis desalination. United Nations University Press

    Google Scholar 

  31. Raluy RG, Serra L, Uche J (2005) Life cycle assessment of desalination technologies integrated with renewable energies. Desalination 183:81–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kucukali S, Baris K (2009) Assessment of small hydropower (SHP) development in Turkey: laws, regulations and EU policy perspective. Energ Policy 37:3872–3879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Erdogdu E (2009) A snapshot of geothermal energy potential and utilization in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 13:2535–2543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Erdogdu E (2009) On the wind energy in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 13:1361–1371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fiksel J (2009) Design for environment. A guide to sustainable product development. 2nd edn

    Google Scholar 

  36. Karagiannis IC, Soldatos P (2008) Water desalination cost literature: review and assessment. Desalination 223:448–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mohameda E, Papadakis G, Mathioulakis E, Belessiotis V (2005) The effect of hydraulic energy recovery in a small sea water reverse osmosis desalination system; experimental and economical evaluation. Desalination 184:241–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Akgul D, Cakmakci M, Kayaalp N, Koyuncu I (2008) Cost analysis of seawater desalination with reverse osmosis in Turkey. Desalination 220:123–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Turkish Market Case (2012) APS review oil market trends. www.allbusiness.com

  40. Kaya D (2006) Renewable energy policies in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 10:152–163

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Ozyurt O (2010) Energy issues and renewable for sustainable development in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 14:2976–2985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Toklu E, Guney MS, Isik M, Comakli O, Kaygusuz K (2010) Energy production, consumption, policies and recent developments in Turkey. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 14:1172–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Wade NM (2001) Distillation plant development and cost update. Desalination 136:3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Fiorenza G, Sharma VK, Braccio G (2003) Techno-economic evaluation of a solar powered water desalination plant. Energ Convers Manag 44:2217–2240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Frioui S, Oumeddour R (2008) Investment and production costs of desalination plants by semi-empirical method. Desalination 223:457–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Bilgili M, Sahin B, Kahraman A (2004) Wind energy potential in Antakya and Iskenderun regions, Turkey. Renew Energ 29:1733–1745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. GWI Market Profile (2007) Desalination Markets Report. Accessed 12 Dec 2010

    Google Scholar 

  48. Khan WZ (2009) Desalination of raw water using a polyamide hollow fiber membrane. Desalination 244:59–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Murakami M (2008) Hydro-powered reverse osmosis desalination for co-generation. Inaugural ceremony international seminar on efficient water use. Uruguay

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ozturk M, Bezir N, Ozek N (2009) Hydropower-water a renewable energy in Turkey: sources and policy. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 13:605–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Somers B (2010) Energy experts say water use and energy consumption linked, urge conservation. Am Assoc Adv Sci

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe St. North, Oshawa, ON, Canada, L1H 7K4

    Halil S. Hamut, Ibrahim Dincer & Marc A. Rosen

Authors
  1. Halil S. Hamut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ibrahim Dincer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marc A. Rosen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Halil S. Hamut .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

    Ibrahim Dincer

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University, Rize, Turkey

    Adnan Midilli

  3. Department of Mechanical Engineering Energy Division, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University, Rize, Turkey

    Haydar Kucuk

Acronyms

Acronyms

CO2 :

Carbon dioxide

MED:

Multiple-effect distillation

MSF:

Multistage flash distillation

NMVOC:

Non-metal volatile organic compounds

PV:

Photovoltaics

RO:

Reverse osmosis

SO x :

Sulfur oxide

RO:

Reverse osmosis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hamut, H.S., Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A. (2014). Assessment of Desalination Technologies Integrated with Renewable Energy Sources in Turkey. In: Dincer, I., Midilli, A., Kucuk, H. (eds) Progress in Exergy, Energy, and the Environment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04681-5_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04681-5_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04680-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04681-5

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation