Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

GIS-based site selection methodology for hybrid renewable energy

systems: A case study from western Turkey
Nazli Yonca Aydin a, Elcin Kentel b,⇑, H. Sebnem Duzgun c
a
Institute of Urban Water Management, University of Kaiserslautern, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University, 06800 Ankara, Turkey
c
Geodetic and Geographic Information Technologies, Middle East Technical University, 06800 Ankara, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Renewable energy sources are presently being considered as alternatives to fossil fuels, because they are
Received 29 October 2012 perpetual, environmentally friendly, and release negligible amounts of greenhouse gases to the atmo-
Accepted 4 February 2013 sphere while producing energy. A disadvantage of renewable energy systems, however, is that continu-
Available online 29 March 2013
ous energy generation is not possible by using only one type of renewable energy system, since
renewable energy resources depend on climate and weather conditions. Two or more renewable energy
Keywords: systems can be integrated into a hybrid system to overcome this problem so that when one resource is
Site selection
not available, the other can continue producing energy. Another disadvantage of renewable energy
Hybrid renewable energy systems
Fuzzy decision-making
sources is that they are not available at every geographic location. Their use is mostly advantageous at
remote locations that often are of high ecological value. Thus, identification of preferable locations for
renewable energy systems is a decision-making problem that requires evaluation of the potential of
the resource together with economic and environmental limitations. This paper introduces a methodol-
ogy for site selection of hybrid wind solar–PV renewable energy systems. First, environmental acceptabil-
ity and economic feasibility objectives are identified through a comprehensive review of the literature,
current Turkish laws and legislations, and interviews with the General Directorate of Electrical Power
Resources Survey and Development Administration of Turkey. Second, viable locations in terms of envi-
ronmental acceptability and economic feasibility are determined through a fuzzy decision-making pro-
cedure that uses ordered weighted averaging algorithm for aggregating multiple objectives. Then,
priority sites are identified separately for wind and solar energy systems by using Geographic Informa-
tion System (GIS) and finally associated maps are overlaid to obtain the most feasible locations for hybrid
wind solar–PV systems.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction solar–PV are intermittent; therefore, it would be difficult to pro-

As energy demand is increasing around the world, renewable
energy resources such as solar and wind have become more impor-
tant [1]. Currently, there are many renewable energy applications
in developed and developing countries and renewable energy re-
sources are expected to become a significant component of the to-
tal energy supply in the future [2]. Renewable energy systems are
environmentally friendly compared to conventional energy sys-
tems. They do not produce any physical pollution especially green-
house gases [3]. They do not exhaust any natural resource and the
inputs they use are abundant in nature [4,5].
One main drawback of stand-alone renewable energy systems
is their dependence on short and long-term weather and climatic
conditions. According to [6] renewable power from wind and
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 312 2105412; fax: +90 312 2107956.
E-mail address: ekentel@metu.edu.tr (E. Kentel).
vide a stable energy supply using only one renewable energy
source. For example, Kitaneh et al. [7] found that monthly wind
power density increases in summer and gets lower during winter
in Palestine. However, combining two or more renewable energy
sources into a hybrid system often helps to overcome this limita-
tion and reduces reliance on conventional energy resources. In hy-
brid systems, the weakness of one source is compensated by the
strengths of the other source(s) [8]. Hybrid energy systems can
either be standalone or grid-connected [9]. In this study, a grid-
connected hybrid renewable energy system is evaluated.
There are many studies in the literature emphasizing the impor-
tance of hybrid renewable energy systems rather than single
renewable energy systems [10–17]. Solar–wind energy systems
are among the most widely studied hybrid systems. Kaldellis
et al. [18] proposed an integrated techno-economic methodology
to reduce the cost of a standalone wind–PV based power system
for remote consumers. It is emphasized that costs of PV and wind

0196-8904/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.02.004
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106 91

Identification of environmental objectives & economic feasibility objectives STEP 1

Data collection & processing

Solar and wind energy potentials & Study area boundaries and geographic features Environmental objectives STEP 2
economic feasibility objectives

WIND ENERGY SOLAR ENERGY WIND ENERGY SOLAR ENERGY

Representation of economic feasibility criteria as fuzzy sets Representation of environmental objectives as fuzzy sets STEP 3

Computation of the individual satisfaction degrees of each fuzzy Computation of individual satisfaction degrees of each fuzzy
objective for each grid location objective for each grid location

Calculation of overall wind
energy performance index
(OWEPI)
STEP 4
Calculation of overall Calculation of overall
Calculation of overall solar
environmental performance environmental performance
energy performance index
index for wind energy (OEPIW) index for solar energy (OEPIS)
(OSEPI)

SITE SELECTION OF WIND TURBINES SITE SELECTION OF SOLAR POWER PLANTS STEP 5

SUITABLE LOCATIONS FOR HYBRID SOLAR AND WIND ENERGY

STEP 6

Fig. 1. Methodology for site selection process.

Table 1
Environmental objectives and associated criteria for wind energy [42].

Environmental objectives Criteria Reference

F-1. Acceptable in terms of natural reserves 1000 m away from areas of ecological value [3]
400 m away from water bodies [3]
250 m away from ecologically sensitive areas [52]
F-2. Acceptable in terms of safety and aesthetics for airports 2500 m away from airports [59]
2500 m away from airports [60]
F-3. Acceptable in terms of safety and aesthetics for town centers Minimum 1000 m away from towns [60]
F-4. Acceptable in terms of safety and aesthetics for large city centers 2000 m away from large settlements [3]
2000 m away from cities, urban centers [59]
F-5. Acceptable in terms of noise 500 m away from nearest habitat [61,62,52]
400 m away from nearest habitat [63]
F-6. Acceptable in terms of bird habitat At least 500 m away from wildlife conservation areas [52]
300 m from nature reserves to reduce risk to birds [64]

systems are still considered relatively high however; hybrid sys-
tems may reduce the energy storage need and improve economic
feasibility. Paska et al. [19] designed a hybrid wind solar–PV power
system and in doing so identified a new problem: the integration of
hybrid power plants with the existing power network. Neverthe-
less, they concluded that hybrid power systems increase flexibility
in power supply. In a recent study, Chen et al. [20] suggested var-
ious success criteria for hybrid wind solar–PV power systems. Ana-
lytical hierarchy process was used to investigate the benefits,
opportunities, costs, and risks of hybrid systems. Finally, an inte-
grated framework was proposed in order to evaluate power system
projects. Practical applications of hybrid solar–wind energy sys-
tems on international markets are promoted by well-known en-
ergy companies as well. For example, Vic Abate, who runs
General Electric Co.’s (GE) renewables unit, said that GE is trying
to convince developers that have bought wind turbines to purchase
solar panels as well in an interview on January 20, 2012 [21]. He
stated that winds are stronger at night and solar panels produce
power only during the day, thus installing both at one project loca-
tion will lower costs for both and make forecasting output more
predictable.
Spatial analyses of renewable energy suitability became a pop-
ular research area in the past decade. Mann et al. [22] used a logis-
tic regression approach to determine spatial factors driving wind
energy development in Iowa. They conducted a fully empirical
analysis to establish a relationship between wind energy and its
spatially-varying explanatory factors such as wind speed and
resulting wind energy density, land use, demographic characteris-
tics, and spatial relationship to transmission lines, roads, and elec-
tricity customers. In another study, Punt et al. [23] integrated an
economic model and an ecological model to spatially allocate off-
shore wind farms to maximize revenues while accounting for other
environmental concerns such as protecting bird and fish popula-
tions. They formulated the integrated model as a constrained
92 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

Table 2
Environmental objectives and associated criteria for solar energy.

Environmental objectives Criteria Reference

C-1. Acceptable in terms of natural reserves Only the constructions for public interest are allowed if activities are highly necessary to build on forest [65]
areas
Only the constructions that are compatible with the nature are allowed [66]
The structures that have adverse impacts on habitat cannot be built [67]
F-7. Acceptable in terms of agricultural areas Agricultural area must be protected in order to sustain natural functions of the land [68]
Cultivable land might be damaged by large scale installations thus must be protected [54]
F-8. Acceptable in terms of flight security Minimum distance to airports is 3000 m and maximum distance to airports is 6000 m [44]
F-9. Acceptable in terms of lakes and At least 2.5 km buffer zone to protect ecologic and topographic features [69]
wetlands
F-10. Acceptable in terms of coastline or river Minimum distance is 100 m from the coastline [50]

Table 3
Economic feasibility objectives for wind energy.

Economic feasibility objectives Criteria Reference

F-11. Acceptable slope Slope up to 10% [3]
Slope up to 30% [70]
Slope up to 20% [71]
Slope up to 30% [72]
F-12. Acceptable proximity to transmission lines At most 10 km from national grid [3]
At most 2 km from national grid [70]
F-13. Acceptable proximity to main roads Minimum distance is required for operation and maintenance purpose [73]
Maximum distance to major roads should be 10 km [3]
Maximum distance to major roads should be 2.5 km [70]
Maximum distance to major roads should be 240 m [71]
F-14. Sufficient potential for wind energy generation Economically feasible power values are between 300 w/m2 and 400 w/m2 in Turkey [47,48]
Economically feasible power values starts from 200 w/m2 in Europe

Table 4
Economic feasibility objectives for solar energy.

Economic feasibility objectives Criteria Reference

2
F-15. Sufficient Potential for Solar Minimum solar radiation value is 4.5 kW h/m day [57]
Energy Generation
F-16. Acceptable slope Slope up to 3%, 1% most economic [74]
Less than 3% [53]
F-17. Acceptable proximity to For grid-connected systems, if the distance to transmission line is more than 0.5 miles, then additional costs [75]
transmission lines associated with connecting the system to the nearest grid must be considered
F-18. Acceptable proximity to urban Minimum distance to urban areas should be 5 km. Maximum distance to urban areas should be 10 km [53]
areas Electrical production plants need to be located near urban area to avoid transmission loss
Proper site selection and design of large PV installations due to the visual impact [5]

optimization problem. They concluded that careful spatial plan-
ning of turbines may prevent the turbines from causing major
harm to bird populations, while increasing local fish stocks.
Most of the environmental impacts of renewable energy tech-
nologies are directly related with the geographic location of the
renewable energy systems and can be reduced by proper site selec-
tion. For example, Morrison and Sinclair [24] stated that bird hab-
itat can be affected by wind power development if wind farms are
installed on bird migration paths or near bird habitats. Another
environmental problem is that wind turbines may cause noise pol-
lution and visual intrusion. Similarly, solar–PV systems that re-
quire large amount of land have negative visual impact if they
are located near the areas of natural beauty [5]. These studies indi-
cate that site selection of renewable energy systems influence de-
gree of environmental impacts, thus need to be considered
together with economic feasibilities of solar and wind energies in
identifying proper sites for hybrid systems.
In order to reduce negative environmental and social impacts,
proper site selection analysis has to be conducted before adopting
renewable energy systems. Identification of environmentally and
geographically favorable locations that are associated with highest
potentials at the same time is a complex decision-making process.
GIS provides wide range of spatial analysis capabilities for site
selection problems [25]; thus, the alternative locations can be eval-
uated using GIS tools.
Many GIS applications have been developed for site selection
problems in various research areas such as natural resources man-
agement, environmental pollution and hazard control, regional
planning, urban development, and utilities management [26–30].
These complex decision-making problems require simultaneous
evaluation of conflicting criteria for a given site. Multi-Criteria
Decision-Making (MCDM) provides a systematic tool for decision
makers in selecting the best alternative [31]. There are many
examples of GIS-based MCDM applications and renewable energy
system evaluation studies in the literature. For example, Quijano
et al. [32] proposed a tool named MODERGIS to simulate current
and future renewable energy plans according to various sustain-
ability criteria. GIS is used to identify suitable areas for solar and
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106
Fig. 2. Fuzzy membership functions for environmental objectives for wind energy [42].
wind energy power plants. Possible combinations of renewable en-
ergy projects were evaluated using Multi-Criteria Analysis method
VIKOR in order to find the optimal combination. In another study,
Janke [33] applied multi-criteria GIS modeling in Colorado. They
first classified the study area according to the solar and wind en-
ergy potentials and then identified the most feasible locations for
wind and solar farms.
GIS-based MCDM has been used together with Fuzzy Set Theory
to model imprecise objectives in various research areas [34–36].
Ordered weighted averaging is a widely used tool of Fuzzy Set The-
ory which was first proposed by [37]. Ordered weighted averaging
operator provides an alternative aggregation algorithm for decision
makers by adjusting the degree of ‘‘anding’’ (satisfaction of all the
desired criteria) and ‘‘oring’’ (satisfaction of any of the desired cri-
teria) [37]. Combination of ordered weighted averaging and GIS to-
gether with Fuzzy Set Theory has been subject to several
applications [38–40] however, there are limited examples in the
renewable energy field. In one example, Charabi and Gastli [41]
used ordered weighted averaging in ArcGIS environment in order
to find suitable locations for large PV farms in Oman. Authors sug-
gested that uncertainty due to expert opinion can be handled by
the fuzzy quantifiers. A GIS-based site selection MCDM methodol-
ogy for site selection of wind turbines, considering environmental
constraints together with wind potentials, was developed by [42].
The methodology of [42] is modified and extended in this study to
93
identify economically and environmentally feasible locations for
hybrid wind solar–PV systems. Then proposed methodology is ap-
plied to a study area located in the western part of Turkey includ-
ing Usak, Aydin, Denizli, Burdur, and Mugla provinces.
Economic feasibility objectives and environmental objectives
are identified for the case study application through a comprehen-
sive review of the literature, current Turkish laws and legislations,
and interviews with the General Directorate of Electrical Power Re-
sources Survey and Development Administration (EIEI) of Turkey.
According to official gazette dated November 2, 2011 and num-
bered 28103, General Directorate of Renewable Energy is estab-
lished and replaced the EIEI [43]. While the research of this
study was conducted this office was named as ‘‘the General Direc-
torate of Electrical Power Resources Survey and Development
Administration’’, thus we prefer to use the former name. GIS to-
gether with MCDM helps to determine suitable locations of hybrid
wind solar–PV systems according to the identified criteria. Ordered
weighted averaging aggregator is used to combine environmental
objectives and economic feasibility objectives.
2. Methodology
The proposed methodology for the site selection process of hy-
brid wind solar–PV energy system is given in Fig. 1. In this study,
suitable locations for wind turbines and solar–PV power plants
94 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

Fig. 3. Fuzzy membership functions for environmental objectives for solar energy.

Fig. 4. Fuzzy membership functions for economic feasibility objectives related with wind energy.

are identified separately; then these priority sites are overlaid to
obtain feasible locations for hybrid wind solar–PV energy systems.
The proposed methodology has six main steps (Fig. 1). Details of
the each step in Fig. 1 are explained in the following subsections.
2.1. Identification and quantification of environmental objectives
As can be seen from Fig. 1, the first step is the identification and
quantification of environmental objectives and economic feasibil-
ity criteria. Environmental objectives related with wind and solar
energy generations are identified by searching the literature,
current Turkish laws and legislations, and interviews with EIEI.
For example, environmental objective related with flight security
is formed according to the legal notice of General Directorate of
Civil Navigation [44]. Structures with shine effects are not allowed
in the first 3000 m zone, while buildings higher than 45 m are not
allowed in the second 3000 m zone [44]. The detailed review of
environmental objectives for wind energy generation and
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106 95

Fig. 5. Fuzzy membership functions for economic feasibility objectives related with solar energy.

Fig. 6. MCDM steps for hybrid wind solar–PV energy systems.

associated criteria from regulations and previous studies can be
found in [42]. A summary of these environmental objectives is gi-
ven in Table 1.
Environmental objectives related with solar energy generation
differ from those related with wind energy. For example, Turkish
legislation of renewable energy generation allows construction of
wind farms on forest areas [45]. However, solar power plants re-
quire large areas for installations (i.e. up to 60 ha) [46]. This means
that installation of solar power plants will result in loss of mass
forest areas. Environmental restrictions related with construction
of solar power plants on forest areas or natural reserves enforced
by Turkish legislation are used to develop a fuzzy objective named
‘‘Acceptable in terms of natural reserves’’. This and other environ-
mental objectives related with solar power plants are provided in
Table 2. The environmental objective called ‘‘Acceptable in terms
of natural reserve’’ in Table 2 is marked as C.1 indicating that this
objective is treated as a crisp objective instead of a fuzzy objective.
How this crisp objective is treated in the decision-making frame-
work is explained in Section 2.4.
2.2. Identification and quantification of economic feasibility objectives
In addition to environmental objectives, economic feasibility of
wind and solar power plants need to be considered for optimal site
selection of hybrid power plants. Since, economic feasibility highly
depends on the energy potential, most important economic feasi-
bility objectives are existence of sufficient wind and solar energy
potentials within the study area. Sufficient wind energy potential
96 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

Table 5 2.3. Data collection and processing

Site selection rules for wind, solar or hybrid wind solar–PV energies.

Degree of satisfaction for Degree of satisfaction for Priority sites (for Geographical features of the study area such as administrative
the first component the second component wind or solar or boundaries, locations of residential areas, boundaries of natural
(OEPIW or OEPIS or (OWEPI or OSEPI or hybrid wind solar– parks, natural protection zones, lakes, wetlands, and forest area
OPIWIND) OPIWIND) PV)
are gathered as the second step (see Fig. 1). In addition, wind
0.0–0.5 0.0–0.5 0 and solar energy potential atlases of the study area are obtained.
0.0–0.5 0.5–1.0 0
After that, the study area is divided into 250 m  250 m grids, each
0.5–1.0 0.0–0.5 0
0.5–1.0 0.5–1.0 1 representing an alternative location for the hybrid wind solar–PV
energy system. Each criterion associated with environmental
objectives and economic feasibility objectives for solar and wind
criterion is identified according to interviews with EIEI experts. energies (Tables 1–4) are represented as separate layers. For exam-
Economically feasible wind energy potential of Turkey is identified ple, in order to calculate overall solar energy performance index,
as 300–400 W/m2 [47,48]. Economic feasibility objectives for wind ‘‘Sufficient Potential for Solar Energy Generation’’, ‘‘Acceptable
energy are given in Table 3. slope’’, ‘‘Acceptable proximity to transmission lines’’, and ‘‘Accept-
Currently, there are seven wind farms in the study area and able proximity to urban areas’’ (see Table 4) layers are prepared.
more are expected to be built in the future. However, solar energy
is not as popular as wind energy in Turkey. Legislation related with
the construction of solar power plants was approved in 2011 [49] 2.4. Representation of environmental objectives as fuzzy sets
and it is expected to increase solar energy investments in the near
future. Economic feasibility objectives for solar energy are identi- Third step of Fig. 1 is the representation of objectives as fuzzy
fied through the literature review and given in Table 4. sets. As can be seen in Tables 1–4 environmental objectives and
Fuzzy sets representing environmental and economic feasibility economic feasibility objectives contain fuzziness and vagueness
objectives used in this study are formed based on the literature re- that are the common characteristics of many decision-making
views conducted and background knowledge of the authors. These problems [20]. In this study, mathematical tools of Fuzzy Set The-
fuzzy objectives may be revised if new information becomes avail- ory are used to treat vagueness or ambiguity by representing pre-
able or based on special requirements and characteristics of spe- viously identified economic feasibility and environmental criteria
cific projects. The proposed methodology is applicable for new for wind and solar energy systems as fuzzy sets. Membership func-
projects with different sets of environmental and economic feasi- tions associated with fuzzy environmental objectives summarized
bility objectives. in Tables 1 and 2 for wind and solar energies are given in Figs. 2

Fig. 7. Wind energy potential atlas of Turkey [58].

Fig. 8. Solar energy potential atlas of Turkey [58].

 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106
Fig. 9. Study area.
and 3, respectively. For instance, construction of water contami-
nating structures near a coastline is forbidden by Turkish Legisla-
tion of Coastlines. No large-scale structure within 100 m of the
coastline or river is allowed [50]. Construction of energy structures
may have potential impact on coastal species [51]. At least a sepa-
ration distance of 500 m from wildlife areas is suggested for
renewable energy constructions [52]. This information is used in
constructing the membership function of ‘‘Acceptable in terms of
coastline or river’’ objective (see F-10 in Fig. 3).
‘‘Acceptable in terms of natural reserves’’ is one of the environ-
mental objectives of solar energy systems (see C-1 in Table 2). For-
est areas, national parks, and natural protection zones are
considered as natural reserves in this study. Since these areas are
highly protected by Turkish laws and legislations, structures that
may result in the loss of habitat and ecological values are not al-
lowed within natural reserves. Therefore, instead of using a fuzzy
membership function for ‘‘Acceptable in terms of natural reserves’’
layer, a crisp objective is implemented: it is not acceptable to con-
struct solar power plants inside natural reserves.
97
2.5. Representation of economic feasibility objectives as fuzzy sets
In order to perform site selection of hybrid wind solar–PV sys-
tems, environmental objectives need to be evaluated together with
economic feasibility objectives. A selected location that has high
environmental satisfaction degree may not be a priority site for
wind and solar energy systems unless the energy potentials and
other economic feasibility objectives are satisfied. Fuzzy member-
ship functions of economic feasibility objectives related with wind
and solar power plants are generated using the information sum-
marized in Tables 3 and 4 and given in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively.
Even though it seems like a ‘‘slope of the area’’ criterion is com-
mon for both solar and wind energies, the boundaries of their
membership functions are different due to varying requirements
of different technologies. For example, while wind turbines can
be located in areas having slopes up to 10% according to [3], solar
energy technologies require rather milder slopes in order to utilize
sunlight [53]. Depending on the specific requirements of the pro-
ject, suggested economic feasibility criteria and environmental
98 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

Fig. 10. OEPIW for ‘‘Satisfaction of most of the environmental feasibility objectives’’ for wind energy.

Fig. 11. OWEPI for ‘‘Satisfaction of most of the economic feasibility objectives’’ for wind energy.

objectives can be omitted, modified or new ones can be included
into the analysis. For example, in this study, a grid-connected hy-
brid system is evaluated. But if there is an option to run PV mod-
ules as standalone in the future, ‘‘proximity to transmission
lines’’ for solar and wind energies can be omitted from the objec-
tives. Since the only information found in the literature states that
for grid-connected systems additional costs associated with con-
necting the system to the grid should be considered if the distance
is more than half a mile the fuzzy ‘‘proximity to transmission lines’’
criterion for solar energy is formulated as follows. To be able to as-
sign priorities to nodes that are close to the nearest transmission
line, first the nearest distance from each alternative location to
the closest transmission line is calculated. Results showed that
the maximum distance from an alternative location to a transmis-
sion line is approximately 44 km. Then, a fuzzy membership func-
tion is constructed so that 45 km gets a satisfaction value of zero
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106 99

Fig. 12. Priority sites for wind energy generation within the study area.

Fig. 13. OEPIS map for ‘‘Satisfaction of most of the environmental objectives’’ for solar energy.

(see F-17 in Fig. 5). This means that alternative locations that are
closer to transmission lines get higher satisfaction degrees.
Fuzzy sets allow incorporation of expert knowledge, incomplete
and vague information into models. In this study, information col-
lected from previous researches and author’s knowledge is used in
representing the environmental and economic feasibility objec-
tives as fuzzy sets. The membership functions of the fuzzy sets
can be revised when new information or expert knowledge be-
comes available.
2.6. Computation of individual satisfaction degrees
As mentioned before, separate layers are created in the GIS
environment to represent each criterion associated with environ-
100 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

Fig. 14. OSEPI for ‘‘Satisfaction of most of the economic feasibility objectives’’ for solar energy.

Fig. 15. Priority sites for solar power plants within the study area.

mental and economic feasibility objectives. Membership functions
of the identified environmental and economic feasibility objectives
enable us to evaluate individual satisfaction degrees for each
alternative location (Step 4 of Fig. 1). ArcGIS software is used in
order to store the corresponding information in a database.
Individual satisfaction degrees of environmental and economic
feasibility objectives for both wind and solar energies are stored
in separate columns of the associated layers. For example, in
treating the fuzzy objective ‘‘acceptable in terms of slope of the
area’’, slope of each alternative location (i.e. grid point) is used
together with the associated membership functions given as F-11
in Fig. 4 and as F-16 in Fig. 5 to calculate individual satisfaction
degrees for wind and solar energies, respectively. If the slope of
an alternative location is 4% then the individual satisfaction degree
for ‘‘acceptable in terms of slope of the area’’ of wind energy is 1.0
while the individual satisfaction degree for solar energy is 0.75.
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106 101

Fig. 16. OPIHWS map.

Fig. 17. Priority sites for hybrid wind solar–PV systems within the study area.

Individual satisfaction degrees of all the other criteria are calcu-
lated in the same manner.
Individual satisfaction degrees of all environmental objectives
for wind energy and solar energy are aggregated into an Overall
Environmental Performance Index for Wind Energy (OEPIW) and
an Overall Environmental Performance Index for Solar Energy
(OEPIS), respectively. Similarly, individual satisfaction degrees of
economic feasibility objectives for wind and solar energies are
aggregated into an Overall Wind Energy Performance Index (OWE-
PI) and an Overall Solar Energy Performance Index (OSEPI), respec-
tively. Thus, for each alternative location (i.e. grid point) an OEPIW,
an OEPIS, an OWEPI and an OSEPI index is calculated. Details of the
multi-criteria decision-making methodology are provided in the
following section.
102 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106
Fig. 18. Current wind farm locations and potential areas for hybrid wind solar–PV plants.
2.7. Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM)
Overall environmental and energy performance indices are cal-
culated using the ordered weighted averaging aggregator as shown
in Fig. 6. For example, all environmental objectives identified for
wind (i.e. F-1, F-2, F-3, F-4, F-5, and F-6) are aggregated using the
ordered weighted averaging aggregator and an OEPIW is obtained
for each grid. OEPIW values calculated for each grid of the study
area is used to generate the associated OEPIW map. Then, an OWE-
PI (by aggregating F-11, F12, F-13, F-14), an OSEPI (by aggregating
F-15, F-16, F17, F-18), and an OEPIS (by aggregating C-1, F-7, F-8, F-
9, F-10) is generated for each grid of the study area and they are
used to generate the associated maps. Next, for wind energy, OE-
PIW and OWEPI maps are overlaid by the ‘‘and’’ operator to gener-
ate the OPIWIND map. Then decision rules given in Table 5 are
used to identify the priority sites for wind energy systems.
In Table 5, the first and the second columns represent two dif-
ferent criteria used to identify the priority site. For example, for the
wind energy systems, the first column and the second column are
OEPIW and OWEPI, respectively. Sites having higher than 0.5 mem-
bership function values for both OEPIW and OWEPI are identified
as priority sites for the wind energy system. The same procedure
is applied for solar energy to generate the OPISOLAR map and
the priority sites for solar energy systems. Finally, OPIWIND and
OPISOLAR maps are overlaid by the ‘‘and’’ operator to generate
the OPIHWS map. Then same decision rules given in Table 5 are
used to identify priority sites for hybrid wind solar–PV systems:
grids having higher than 0.5 for both OPIWIND and OPISOLAR
are identified as priority sites for hybrid wind solar–PV.
The ‘‘and’’ operator requires satisfaction of all the criteria with-
out allowing any tradeoff among them. The other commonly used
operator is the ‘‘or’’ operator that permits high tradeoff among the
criteria. However, in real world problems, decision makers have to
compromise among various objectives. Certain criteria may be
more important than the others. Yager [37] proposed the ordered
weighted averaging function that corresponds to somewhere
between two extreme cases (i.e. ‘‘satisfaction of all the desired cri-
teria’’ – ‘‘satisfaction of any of the desired criteria’’) by combining
‘‘and’’ and ‘‘or’’ operators and refers to it as the ‘‘orand’’ operator.
The ordered weighted averaging operator combines various crite-
ria with certain weights. The weights are assigned to the criteria
according to their ordered position [37]. In this study, a regular
increasing quantifier ‘‘most’’ is used to aggregate environmental
and economic feasibility objectives. The details of the calculations
of weights for the quantifier ‘‘most’’ is given in [42] and omitted
here to conserve space. The details of the ‘‘and’’, ‘‘or’’ and ordered
weighted averaging aggregators can be found in [54].
3. Example application
The proposed methodology for the site selection of a hybrid
wind solar–PV energy system is applied to a study area in the wes-
tern part of Turkey. Turkey is located at an advantageous geo-
graphical location in terms of renewable energy resources
availability (see Figs. 7 and 8). Turkey has limited fossil fuel re-
sources and major air quality problems due to fossil fuel consump-
tion; therefore, shifting from fossil fuels to renewable energy
systems might be a good alternative for Turkey [55]. Currently,
there are 41 operating wind farms in Turkey [56]. In addition,
new legislation associated with solar energy generation is expected
to enhance the interest in solar power plant installations in the
near future [57]. Hybrid wind solar–PV systems are more reliable
in providing continuous energy than standalone renewable energy
systems. Thus, identification of feasible locations for hybrid wind
solar–PV power plants will provide guidance for future renewable
energy investments.
Fig. 7 shows that the western part of Turkey has relatively high
wind energy potential while the southern part of Turkey has high
solar radiation values (see Fig. 8). Areas with high solar and wind
potentials offer better opportunities for installation of new renew-
able energy projects. Therefore, the study area chosen from the
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106 103

Fig. 19. Detailed view of current wind farm locations and potential areas for hybrid wind solar–PV power plants.
104 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106
southwestern part of Turkey is composed of Aydin, Usak, Burdur,
Denizli, and Mugla provinces. A detailed map of the study area
and location of the study area within Turkey are given in Fig. 9.
First, the study area is divided into 250 m by 250 m grids each
representing an alternative location for an hybrid wind solar–PV
system. As explained in Section 2, priority sites for wind and solar
energy systems are evaluated separately. The results of the site
selection process for solar and wind energy systems are given in
the following sections.
3.1. Site selection for wind energy systems
Economic feasibility and environmental acceptability are con-
sidered as decision criteria for the site selection of wind energy
systems as well. Table 1 provides detail information about the
environmental fitness of wind power while Fig. 2 provides associ-
ated fuzzy membership functions. Similar to solar energy, both OE-
PIW and OWEPI maps are aggregated using ‘‘satisfaction of most of
the objectives’’ quantifier and ordered weighted averaging aggre-
gator. OEPIW and OWEPI maps are given in Figs. 10 and 11,
respectively.
Individual satisfaction degrees for ‘‘Satisfaction of most of the
economic criteria’’ (i.e. OWEPI) and ‘‘Satisfaction of the most of
the environmental criteria’’ (i.e. OEPIW) are combined into an OPI-
WIND using the ‘‘and’’ operator. Then priority sites for wind energy
(i.e. grids having a membership value of 0.5 and higher on OPI-
WIND map) are identified and given in Fig. 12.
3.2. Site selection for solar energy systems
Environmental objectives for solar energy systems are given in
Table 2 and associated fuzzy membership functions are given in
Fig. 3. Fuzzy membership functions are used to calculate the indi-
vidual satisfaction degrees of each environmental criterion. The
satisfaction degree is an indicator that demonstrates the fulfill-
ment degree of each alternative location with respect to the pro-
posed decision criteria. For example, after applying fuzzy set in
‘‘Acceptable in terms of coastline or river’’ layer, each grid gets a
value between zero and one; zero representing an unsuitable site
and one representing a suitable site. Then individual satisfaction
degrees associated with each environmental objective are aggre-
gated using the ordered weighted averaging operator to create
the OEPIS map representing the ‘‘Satisfaction of most of the envi-
ronmental objectives for solar energy’’ (Fig. 13).
In the second stage, each alternative location is evaluated with
respect to economic feasibility objectives including solar energy
potential, slope of land, proximity to transmission lines and urban
areas. These criteria are given in Table 4 and corresponding fuzzy
membership functions are provided in Fig. 5. Fuzzy sets are used
to obtain individual satisfaction degrees of economic feasibility
objectives. Ordered weighted averaging aggregator is used to com-
bine all of the economic feasibility objectives into an OSEPI map in
the GIS environment. Final OSEPI map for the study area is given in
Fig. 14.
OEPIS and OSEPI maps provide information about environmen-
tally and economically feasible locations, respectively. In order to
obtain both environmentally and economically feasible locations
(i.e. OPISOLAR), OEPIS and OSEPI are aggregated using the ‘‘and’’
operator. Hence, each grid gets a single individual satisfaction de-
gree representing its overall performance for a solar energy sys-
tem. Identification of priority sites for solar energy generation is
a decision-making process. In this study, decision rules given in Ta-
ble 5 are applied for site selection. Grids with an overall perfor-
mance of at least 0.5 are identified as priority sites for solar
energy generation and those with an individual satisfaction degree
of less than 0.5 are eliminated due to insufficient energy potential
or lack of environmental acceptability. A final priority map for so-
lar–PV power plants is given in Fig. 15.
3.3. Hybrid wind solar–PV energy systems
Priority sites for solar and wind energies are identified sepa-
rately in the previous sections. As presented earlier, hybrid wind
solar–PV systems are more advantageous than a single renewable
energy system. Hybrid wind solar–PV systems provide continuous
energy and reduce cost [18]. OPIWIND and OPISOLAR maps are
aggregated using the ‘‘and’’ operator to generate the OPIHWS
map (Fig. 16). Then the priority sites for hybrid wind solar–PV sys-
tems are identified using decision rules provided in Table 5. Fig. 17
shows the priority sites for hybrid wind solar–PV systems. Hybrid
systems installations in the identified priority sites may assist to
minimize the continuity problem of a single renewable application
and maximize the energy efficiency.
4. Conclusions
Today it is well accepted that renewable energy systems can re-
duce environmental degradation due to energy consumption.
Drawbacks of renewable energy systems have been investigated
in previous studies. One major problem associated with stand-
alone renewable energy system is discontinuous energy generation
due to changing weather and climatic conditions. In other words,
constant energy generation from wind turbines is only possible if
a minimum wind speed is maintained at all times. However this
is not realistic. In order to maintain stability in electricity genera-
tion two or more renewable energy systems should be integrated
into a hybrid system. The goal of this study is to develop a GIS-
based methodology to identify the preferred locations for hybrid
wind solar–PV systems using mathematical tools of Fuzzy Set The-
ory. A MCDM approach is used to evaluate environmental factors
together with economic feasibility objectives of wind and solar
energies.
A map showing the priority sites for hybrid wind solar–PV sys-
tems is provided in Fig. 17. Currently, within the study area there
are six wind farms some of which are already constructed and
the others have licenses to produce energy by using wind power.
To increase the efficiency of energy generation on these locations,
integration of solar–PV systems may be considered. Fig. 18 shows
the current wind turbine locations within the study area, and
Fig. 19 gives a detailed view of current wind farm locations and
identified potential areas for hybrid wind solar–PV systems. As
can be seen from Fig. 19, wind farm numbers 3 and 4, and wind
farm number 6b are close to potential locations of hybrid wind so-
lar–PV systems. Solar power plants can be planned at these loca-
tions so that solar–PV power plants can produce electricity when
wind turbines fail due to weather conditions.
Currently, there are no hybrid wind solar–PV plants or large-
scale solar power plants in Turkey. The new legislation [49] re-
leased in 2011 is expected to accelerate solar power plant invest-
ments. In addition, solar energy technologies are improving and
the cost of solar–PV modules are expected to decrease in the fu-
ture. Hybrid wind solar–PV power plants will become more
appealing for investors, since hybrid wind solar–PV power plants
are beneficial in terms of renewable energy efficiency and cost.
The proposed hybrid wind solar–PV site selection methodology
may assist decision makers and investors to identify both econom-
ically and environmentally feasible locations. Even though only
wind and solar–PV systems are considered in the current applica-
tion, this site selection approach can easily be adapted for other
types of alternative energy resources. For effective application,
necessary data must be collected and environmental objectives
and economic feasibility objectives must be identified carefully.
 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106 105

References [32] Quijano R, Botero S, Dominguez J. MODERGIS application: integrated

simulation platform to promote and develop renewable sustainable energy
plans, Colombian case study. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:5176–87.
[1] Ahmed NA, Miyatake M, Al-Othman AK. Hybrid solar photovoltaic/wind
[33] Janke JR. Multicriteria GIS modeling of wind and solar farms in Colorado.
turbine energy generation system with voltage-based maximum power point
Renew Energy 2010;35:2228–34.
tracking. Electr Power Comp Syst 2009;37:43–60.
[34] Chang NB, Parvathinathan G, Breeden JB. Combining GIS with fuzzy
[2] Liu L, Wang Z. The development and application practice of wind–solar energy
multicriteria decision-making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban
hybrid generation systems in China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:
region. J Environ Manage 2008;87:139–53.
1504–12.
[35] Chen VYC, Lien HP, Liu CH, Liou JJH, Tzeng GH, Yang LS. Fuzzy MCDM approach
[3] Baban SMJ, Parry T. Developing and applying a GIS-assisted approach to
for selecting the best environment-watershed plan. Appl Soft Comput
locating wind arms in the UK. Renew Energy 2001;24:59–71.
2011;11:265–75.
[4] Asif M, Muneer T. Energy supply, its demand and security issues for developed
[36] Tavares G, Zsigraiova Z, Semiao V. Multi-criteria GIS-based siting of an
and emerging economies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007;11:1388–413.
incineration plant for municipal solid waste. Waste Manage (Oxford)
[5] Tsoutsos T, Frantzeskaki N, Gekas V. Environmental impacts from the solar
2011;31:1960–72.
energy technologies. Energy Policy 2005;33:289–96.
[37] Yager RR. On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-
[6] Nakata T, Kubo K, Lamont A. Design for renewable energy systems with
criteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 1988;18(1):183–90.
application to rural areas in Japan. Energy Policy 2005;33:2009–219.
[38] Makropoulos CK, Butler D. Planning site-specific water-demand management
[7] Kitaneh R, Alsamamra H, Aljunaidi A. Modeling of wind energy in some areas
strategies. Water Environ J 2004;18(1):29–35.
of Palestine. Energy Convers Manage 2012;62:64–9.
[39] Jiang H, Eastman JR. Application of fuzzy measures in multi-criteria evaluation
[8] Hongxing Y, Wei Z, Chengzhi L. Optimal design and techno-economic
in GIS. Int J Geograph Inform Sci 2000;14(2):173–84.
analysis of a hybrid solar–wind power generation system. Appl Energy
[40] Gorsevski PV, Donevska KR, Mitrovski CD, Frizado JP. Integrating multi-criteria
2009;86:163–9.
evaluation techniques with geographic information systems for landfill site
[9] Dali M, Belhadj J, Roboam X. Hybrid solar–wind system with battery storage
selection: a case study using ordered weighted average. Waste Manage
operating in grid-connected and standalone mode: control and energy
(Oxford) 2012;32:287–96.
management – experimental investigation. Energy 2010;35:2587–95.
[41] Charabi Y, Gastli A. PV site suitability analysis using GIS-based spatial fuzzy
[10] Jocobus H, Lin B, Jimmy DH, Ansumana R, Malanoski AP, Stenger D. Evaluating
multi-criteria evaluation. Renew Energy 2011;36:2554–61.
the impact of adding energy storage on the performance of a hybrid power
[42] Aydin NY, Kentel E, Duzgun S. GIS-based environmental assessment of wind
system. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52:2604–10.
energy systems for spatial planning: a case study from Western Turkey. Renew
[11] Ray PK, Mohonty SR, Kishor N. Proportional–integral controller based small-
Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:364–73.
signal analysis of hybrid distributed generation systems. Energy Convers
[43] OJ No: 28103, 02.11.2011.
Manage 2011;52:1943–54.
[44] General Directorate of Civil Navigation. Notice of construction criteria around
[12] Celik AN. Optimization and techno-economic analysis of autonomous
the airports; 2007. <www.shgm.gov.tr/doc3/maniagen.doc> [Accessed
photovoltaic–wind hybrid energy systems in comparison to single
07.10.11].
photovoltaic and wind systems. Energy Convers Manage 2002;43:2453–68.
[45] OJ No. 25819, 18.05.2005.
[13] Reichling JP, Kulacki FA. Utility scale hybrid wind–solar thermal electrical
[46] World electric power plants data base. Solar power plants in Europe. <http://
generation: a case study for Minnesota. Energy 2008;33:626–38.
www.industcards.com/solar-europe.htm> [Accessed 28.06.12].
[14] Ulgen K, Hepbasli A. A study on evaluating the power generation of solar–wind
[47] EIEI, Personal communications: Cobancıoglu, B.T. Ankara, Turkey; 17 February,
hybrid systems in Izmir, Turkey. Energy Sources 2003;25:241–52.
2009.
[15] Türkay BE, Telli AY. An economic analysis of grid connected hybrid
[48] EIEI, Personal communications: Malkoc, M.Y. Ankara, Turkey; 17 February,
energy systems. Energy Sources, Part B: Econom Plann Policy 2011;6(3):
2009.
228–41.
[49] OJ No: 27969, 19.06.2011.
[16] Askari IB, Ameri M. The effect of fuel price on the economic analysis of hybrid
[50] OJ No. 21374, 13.10.1992.
(photovoltaic/diesel/battery) systems in Iran. Energy Sources Part B: Econom
[51] Gill AB. Offshore renewable energy: ecological implications of generating
Plann Policy 2011;6(4):357–77.
electricity in the coastal zone. J Appl Ecol 2005;42:605–15.
[17] Ahmed NA, Miyatake M, Al-Othman AK. Power fluctuations suppression of
[52] Yue CD, Wang SS. GIS-based evaluation of multifarious local renewable energy
stand-alone hybrid generation combining solar photovoltaic/wind turbine and
sources: a case study of the Chigu area of southwestern Taiwan. Energy Policy
fuel cell systems. Energy Convers Manage 2008;49:2711–9.
2006;34:730–42.
[18] Kaldellis JK, Zafirakis D, Kavadias K. Minimum cost solution of wind–
[53] Carrion JA, Estrella AE, Dols FA, Toro MZ, Rodriguez M, Ridao AR.
photovoltaic based stand-alone power systems for remote consumers.
Environmental decision-support systems for evaluating the carrying capacity
Energy Policy 2012;42:105–17.
of land areas: optimal site selection for grid-connected photovoltaic power
[19] Paska J, Biczel P, Klos M. Hybrid power systems – an effective way of utilizing
plants. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2008;12:2358–80.
primary energy sources. Renew Energy 2009;34:2414–21.
[54] Aydin NY. GIS-based site selection approach for wind and solar energy
[20] Chen HH, Kang H, Lee AHI. Strategic selection of suitable projects for hybrid
systems: a case study from Western Turkey. Thesis (M.Sc.), Middle East
solar–wind power generation systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
Technical University. Ankara, Turkey; 2009.
2010;14:413–21.
[55] Kaygusuz K. Sustainable energy, environmental and agricultural policies in
[21] Martin C. GE courts turbine customers for solar before wind ‘Crash’. <http://
Turkey. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:1075–84.
www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-25/ge-courts-turbine-customers-for-
[56] EIEI, Wind energy in Turkey. <http://www.yegm.gov.tr/yenilenebilir/
solar-before-wind-crash-.html> [Accessed 30.12.12].
ruzgar.aspx> [Accessed 30.12.12].
[22] Mann D, Lant C, Schoof J. Using map algebra to explain and project spatial
[57] EIEI, Personal communications: Caliskan, M. Ankara, Turkey; 31 March, 2009.
patterns of wind energy development in Iowa. Appl Geography
[58] Caliskan M. Wind and solar energy potential in Turkey. <http://
2012;34:219–29.
www.ttmd.org.tr/userfiles/file/TTMD_calistay_mcaliskan.pdf> [Accessed
[23] Punt MJ, Groeneveld RA, van Ierland EC, Stel JH. Spatial planning of offshore
17.12.12].
wind farms: a windfall to marine environmental protection? Ecol Econ
[59] Nguyen KQ. Wind energy in Vietnam: resource assessment, development
2009;69:93–103.
status and future implications. Energy Policy 2007;35:1405–13.
[24] Morrison ML, Sinclair K. Wind energy technology, environmental impacts of.
[60] Voivontas D, Assimacopoulos D, Mourelatos A, Corominas J. Evaluation of
Encyclop Energy 2004;6:435–48.
renewable energy potential using a GIS decision support system. Renew
[25] Pokharel S. Spatial analysis of rural energy system. Int J Geograph Inform Sci
Energy 1998;13(3):333–44.
2000;14(8):855–73.
[61] Tester JW, Drake EM, Driscoll MJ, Golay MW, Peters WA. Sustainable energy;
[26] Gómez Delgado M, Tarantola S. GLOBAL sensitivity analysis, GIS and multi-
choosing among options. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2005.
criteria evaluation for a sustainable planning of a hazardous waste disposal
[62] Ramirez-Rosado IJ, Garcia-Garrido E, Fernandez-Jimeneza A, Zorzano-
site in Spain. Int J Geograph Inform Sci 2006;20(4):449–66.
Santamaria PJ, Monteiro C, Miranda V. Promotion of new wind farms based
[27] Li X, He J, Liu X. Intelligent GIS for solving high-dimensional site selection
on a decision support system. Renew Energy 2008;33:558–66.
problems using ant colony optimization techniques. Int J Geograph Inform Sci
[63] International Energy Agency (IEA). Renewable sources of energy. Paris, France:
2009;23(4):399–416.
IEA; 1987.
[28] Anane M, Bouziri L, Limam A, Jellali S. Ranking suitable sites for irrigation with
[64] Clarke A. Wind energy progress and potential. Energy Policy 1991;19:742–55.
reclaimed water in the Nabeul-Hammamet region (Tunisia) using GIS and
[65] OJ No. 9402, 08.09.1956.
AHP-multicriteria decision analysis. Resour Conserv Recycl 2012;65:36–46.
[66] OJ No. 20341, 13.11.1989.
[29] Bunruamkaew K, Murayama Y. Site suitability evaluation for ecotourism using
[67] OJ No. 19309, 12.12.1986.
GIS & AHP: a case study of Surat Thani province, Thailand. Procedia Social
[68] OJ No. 25880, 03.07.2005.
Behav Sci 2011;21:269–78.
[69] OJ No. 21937, 17.05.1994.
[30] Omitaomu OA, Blevins BR, Jochem WC, Mays GT, Belles R, Hadley SW, et al.
[70] Tegou L, Polatidis H, Haralambopoulos DA. Environmental management
Adapting a GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis approach for evaluating
framework for wind farm siting: methodology and case study. J Environ
new power generating sites. Appl Energy 2012;96:292–301.
Manage 2010;91:2134–47.
[31] Jankowski P. Integrating geographical information systems and multiple
[71] Grassi S, Chokani N, Abhari RS. Large scale technical and economical
criteria decision-making methods. Int J Geograph Inform Sci 1995;9:
assessment of wind energy potential with a GIS tool: case study Iowa.
251–73.
Energy Policy 2012;45:73–85.
106 N.Y. Aydin et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 70 (2013) 90–106

[72] Zhou Y, Wu WX, Liu GX. Assessment of onshore wind energy resource and
wind-generated electricity potential in Jiangsu, China. Energy Procedia
2011;5:418–22.
[73] Van Haaren R, Fthenakis V. GIS-based wind farm site selection using spatial
multi-criteria analysis (SMCA): evaluating the case for New York State. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:3332–40.
[74] Hang Q, Jun Z, Xiao Y, Junkui C. Prospect of concentrating solar power in
China—the sustainable future. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;12:
2505–14.
[75] Environmental protection agency, solar decision tree. <http://www.epa.gov/
oswercpa/docs/solar_decision_tree.pdf> [Accessed 10.01.13].