An application of the extended exergy accounting ...

Energy 40 (2012) 151e163

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

An application of the extended exergy accounting method to the Turkish society, year 2006 C. Seckin a, *, E. Sciubba b, A.R. Bayulken a a b

Energy Institute, Istanbul Technical University, Ayazaga Campus, Istanbul 34469, Turkey Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Roma La Sapienza, Roma 00184, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 10 July 2011 Received in revised form 8 February 2012 Accepted 11 February 2012 Available online 15 March 2012

The Turkish society is analyzed, on the basis of a 2006 database, by means of the EEA (Extended Exergy Accounting) method. A brief synthesis of EEA is also presented, with the purpose of clarifying some of the issues related to its accounting technique. The system to be analyzed is assumed to be at steady state, and the input and output fluxes of matter and energy are expressed in terms of their respective exergy content. This study is intended to provide support for possible structural interventions aimed at the improvement of the degree of sustainability of the Country: since EEA allows for the conversion of the so-called “externalities”, i.e., of the immaterial fluxes of labour, capital and environmental remediation, into their exergetic equivalents, a more comprehensive and deeper insight of the resource consumption and of the environmental impact becomes possible. As usual in EEA analyses, the Turkish society has been modelled as an open thermodynamic system interacting with two “external” systems, namely “Environment” and “Abroad”, and consisting itself of seven internal subsystems: Extraction-, Conversion-, Transportation-, Agricultural-, Industrial-, Tertiary- and Domestic sector. Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Extended exergy accounting EEA Ecological accounting Resources consumption Turkey

1. Introduction In today’s world, it is necessary to moderate the conflict between industrial development and excessive depletion of the limited natural resources, to improve the degree of sustainability while maintaining the current pace of development and ensuring the survival of the human race in the future. For a less unsustainable development, natural resources used to supply and circulate goods and services in a social system should not be wasted and pollutant generation from anthropic processes should not permanently affect the environment. The use of thermodynamic methods to assess sustainability indicators is motivated by the fact that all -biotic and abioticactivities on earth require some energy input, its conversion into different energy types and often some form of work generation. Exergy is defined as the maximal amount of work that can be extracted from a system in the process of reaching equilibrium with a conventional environment, while remaining closed to any other system except this environment [8,26,52]. Exergy is a widely accepted and well defined concept in the evaluation of energy systems, since it allows for a clear insight of resource use efficiency and energy degradation: some problems arise though when * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 2122856385; fax: þ90 2122853884. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Seckin). 0360-5442/$ e see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2012.02.018

applying exergy analysis to measure the environmental impact of discharges and waste flows [3,48,53]. “Societal” exergy analysis is a physical accounting of the exergy flows within a society: it is an engineering procedure that leads to the calculation of the destruction of primary exergy resources within each societal sector and thus measures how effectively resources have been used in sectoral processes. This approach is firmly rooted on Second Law, and constitutes a useful decision support tool in the energy planning and environment policymaking of a society [76,88]. In the literature, with several (often non minor) differences in methodology, exergy analyses of different societies have been reported: Finland [84], Canada [39], Brazil [42], Sweden [86], Ghana [14], Japan [85], Italy [83], Norway [12], the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, non-OECD countries, and the world [27], One of the major unresolved problems of exergy analysis is its acknowledged inability to treat externalities (resource depletion, labour, capital, environmental effects). To cure this weakness, a first extended form of Exergy Analysis, “CExC” (Cumulative Exergy Consumption) was proposed by Szargut: the CEC is the sum of “all amounts of exergy used in the production of a commodity from the mining of the raw materials to the final distribution and disposal”, and is expressed in purely exergetic terms (J/unit) [50]. But the CEC method, useful as it is, is still unable to convert non-energetic expenditures (like capital and labour) into resource consumption indices. The ‘EEA’ (extended

152

C. Seckin et al. / Energy 40 (2012) 151e163

exergetic accounting), introduced by Sciubba [49] is the first theory to provide a unified treatment of these issues [47]. In EEA, the CEC is augmented by encompassing also the externalities (capital, labour and environmental remediation), properly converted into their exergy equivalents: this leads -among other things- to the positing of an ”extended exergy efficiency” invariably lower than the previous, “classical”, definitions [10]. Thus, the global problem of resources depletion, environment damage and sustainability can be tackled by EEA, which is in essence a carefully and rigorously defined extension not of the concept of exergy but of its application to measure fluxes of different types [44]. Once the numeraire “extended exergy” (a strictly thermodynamic quantity that expresses the amount of equivalent primary exergy “embodied” in a commodity) is adopted as the sole measure of resource consumption, it automatically follows that minimization of exergy use and destruction are essential for augmenting the degree of sustainability [37]. EEA has been applied to different societies in the literature: Norway [13], Italy [25], Siena province of Italy [43], United Kingdom (UK) [15], the Dutch energy sector [30] and China [9]. Applications of societal and sectoral exergy analysis to the “system Turkey” abound in the literature [16,18,28,76e79], but the study presented in this paper is the first EEA application to Turkish society. 2. Methodology The ee (extended exergy content) of a specific flux 4 resulting from a productive process (material, kg/s or units/s, or immaterial, J/s, V/s, work h/s), is defined as follows [10]:

ee ¼ em þ ephys þ eeK þ eeL þ eeEnv

½kW=4

2.1. Environment The exergy fluxes from the ENV to the EX-, CO-, AG-, IN-, TE- and DO- sectors are shown in Table 1. The AG sector has the largest exergetic input since all the solar energy directly used by all types of coltures in Turkey is taken as an exergetic input into it. Because all of the EX-sector inputs come from ENV, this sector has the second largest exergetic input in Table 1. To produce heat and electricity, the exergy of wind, hydropower and geothermal energy is transferred from ENV to CO. Solar energy used in each sector and water supplied directly from ENV are also accounted for as net exergetic input. The annual average precipitation in Turkey is 643 mm/m2 [29] and AG sector has 358,050 km2 of agricultural (excluding fallow land) and 211,890 km2 of forest area [67]. In Table 1, solar exergy flux from ENV to AG is the solar exergy received by “agricultural area” of Turkey. Although a portion of the forest-covered contributes to wood production in AG, the corresponding impinging solar exergy is neglected in this study. Water transferred from ENV to AG

(1)

where, em (material exergy) is the sum of the physical and chemical exergy contents of the raw materials used in the fabrication of the item; ephys (physical exergy) indicates the algebraic sum of the exergy of energy flows used in the fabrication of the item (heat, mechanical work, electrical energy, chemical energy, etc.); eeK (capital equivalent exergy) is the exergetic equivalent of the total net monetary influx into the process; eeL (labour equivalent exergy) is the exergetic equivalent of the sum of the labour contributions; eeEnv (environmental remediation equivalent exergy) is the total extended exergetic “cost” (i.e., the total amount of primary exergy resources) necessary to bring the effluents to a state of equilibrium with the environment (Fig. 1). The Turkish society is conventionally subdivided into the following sectors: Extraction, EX: Mining and quarrying Conversion, CO: Heat and power plants, oil refining and processing, other refinery activities

Fig. 1. Constituent fluxes of EEA.

Agriculture, AG: Agriculture, forestry, husbandry, and fisheries Industrial, IN: All manufacturing industry except oil refineries Transportation, TR: All transportation services Tertiary, TE: Commercial, financial and all kind of service activities (including government, school and health system, etc) Domestic, DO: Households The “surroundings” of the system are: Environment, ENV: The Lytho-, Hydro- and Atmosphere Abroad, A: Other countries/societies.

Table 1 Input fluxes from ENV. Specific exergy (MJ/unit) EX Fuels Ores Minerals Water (m3) TOTAL CO Wind (TJ) Geothermal heat for electricity Generation (TJ) Geothermal heat for direct use (TJ) Hydropower (TJ) Water (m3) TOTAL

1.78E þ 08

50

Total exergy (TJ) 705,814.87 5801.74 267,795.71 8900 988,312.32

1151 7520

1,000,000 199,700

1151.37 1501.74

45,259

132,132

5980.20

252,823 2.304E þ 07

1,000,000 50

252,822.86 1152 262,608.18

AG Solar energy (TJ) Water (m3) TOTAL

1.741E þ 09 9.44E þ 07

930,000 50

1.619E þ 09 4.7E þ 03 1.619E þ 09

IN Solar energy (TJ) Water (m3) TOTAL

5108 1.14675E þ 09

930,000 50

4750.34 57,337.50 62,087.84

TE Solar energy (TJ) Water (m3) TOTAL

5882 5.164E þ 09

930,000 50

5470.68 258,200 263,670.68

DO Solar energy (TJ) TOTAL

5882

930,000

5470.68 5470.68

C. Seckin et al. / Energy 40 (2012) 151e163 Table 2 Production of fuels in EX.

Hard coal (ton) Asphaltite (ton) Lignite (ton) Crude Oil (ton) Natural Gas (TJ) TOTAL

Table 4 Production of minerals in EX.

Amount

Specific exergy (MJ/unit)

Total exergy (TJ)

2,319,000 452,000 61,484,000 2,160,000 33,707

27,860.36 18,604.40 8259.27 43,506.45 920,000

64,608.18 8409.19 507,813.13 93,973.93 31,010.44 705,814.87

is estimated on the basis of net water content of AG products. The remaining of water used for agricultural production (not available in the product) is transferred to land or the atmosphere by evaporation (i.e., turning back to the environment). Water consumption of animals is not included since it is assumed to return almost totally to the environment in the detritus. An average water content of agricultural products is taken to be 85% (wt%) [4]. The total amount of produced wood for fuel and industrial wood is assumed to have a density of 420 kg/m3 [55] and 8.8% of water content (wt%) [5]. This amounts to 93,480,437.25 ton water from 109,976,985 ton total harvested products [67] and 960,960 ton water from 26,000,000 m3 wood [24]). For all other sectors, the water received from ENV is obtained from [59]. Renewable energy use and energy generation within the related sector is also an exergy transfer from ENV to the sectors. 2.2. Extraction sector, EX The inputs of energy carriers to EX including fossil fuels (coal, crude oil and natural gas), ores and minerals (extracted raw materials) are listed in Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4, respectively. Data on the inland extraction of fossil fuels were retrieved from [19,64], those for minerals and ores from [65]. For ease of accounting, it was stipulated here that all extracted products are transferred to TE and from it to the consuming sectors. 2.3. Conversion sector, CO Electricity and heat production, oil refining/processing and all refinery activities fall within CO. The main outputs of this sector are refined petroleum products and electricity (Table 5). Data for CO products are extracted from [19,58,64]. Coke production is also included in this sector, as well as distribution losses occurring in electrical lines and pipelines. Because refineries are included in CO, their products represent a sectoral net outflow. Due to lack of sufficiently disaggregated data, it was necessary to construct an approximate database that includes only a simplified sample the great variety of CO products. The approximation is based on the data in [61], which make clear that the majority of these byproducts are asphalt (bitumen) and engine oil. “Others” include for instance waxes, solvents, clarified

Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

3,785,121 4,293,530 879,214 554,425 1,849,864

79.77 523.09 1114.16 1237.83 496.58

301.96 2245.90 979.58 686.28 918.60 669.41

5801.74

Total exergy (TJ)

oil, sulfur, heavy vacuum gas oil etc. [66]: in this study, all the “Others” are assumed to be wax: the resulting approximate list of refinery products is presented in Table 6. 2.4. Agricultural sector, AG This sector comprises harvesting, forestry, animal husbandry, and fishery. The main inputs to the sector are the natural resources made available by the environment. Products of the AG sector are divided into three parts: the first is transferred to TE for food processing and raw food to be sold to the public and exported abroad (Table 7), a second portion is transferred to DO and consumed by people in rural areas, and the remaining are AG products for industrial use which are also transferred to TE to be dispatched to the IN sector. Table 5 Products of CO. Amount

Amount (ton)


Bentonite 1,134,251 909.34 1031.42 Boron 3,955,574 58,135.23 229,958.20 Feldspar 5771892 358.92 2071.63 Kaolinite 1,064,107 766.19 815.31 Ceramic clay 3,034,560 747.29 2267.69 Quartz sand 2608260 131.49 342.96 Quartzite 1,463,162 131.49 192.39 Magnesite 466193 449.53 209.57 Montmorillonite 428,756 514.63 220.65 Olivine 191,298 1079.97 206.60 Perlite 474,966 754.83 358.52 Rottenstone 3,515,644 862.56 3032.45 Peat 185,944 20,117.05 3740.65 Rock salt (Halite) 2,223,173 244.70 544.00 176,351,412 9.99 1761.93 Limestone (%90 CaCO3) Greywacke 2,505,875 131.49 329.50 Marl 10,831,766 521.53 5649.14 Clay 4,515,870 697.99 3152.02 Trass 2,222,058 687.03 1526.61 Dolomite 14,239,473 81.88 1165.96 clay for brick and roof tile 4,785,094 747.29 3575.85 Gypsum 4,369,771 49.95 218.27 Andesite 2,485,956 601.79 1496.02 Basalt 2,909,031 977.06 2842.31 Granite 320,069 820.96 262.76 Alunite, Baryte, Diatomite, Chert, 823.28 Chalcedony, Quartz, Sepiolite, Silex, Talc, Trona, Grindstone, Carbon monoxide, Serpentine, Onyx, Dressing stone, Mosaic, Slate, Travertine, Marble, ignimbrite, Pyrophyllite, Sodium Sulfate, Sodium Chloride, Calcite, Illite, Dolomite TOTAL 267,795.70

Table 3 Production of ores in EX.

Iron ore Copper ore Bauxite ore Zinc ore Chrome ore Gold, Silver, Cadmium, Lead, Manganese, Nickel, Pyrite, Antimony Ore TOTAL

153

Coke (ton) Motor gasoline (ton) Gas/diesel (ton) Heavy fuel oil (ton) Other petroleum products Electricity (TJ) Biofuel (solid, liquid and gas) CHP heat (TJ) Geothermal heat (TJ) Others TOTAL

3,213,000 3,659,000 7,549,000 7,281,000 545,360.4 40,109.5 45,259.3

Specific exergy (MJ/unit) 30,430.4 44,350.77 46,366.72 39,791.35 1E þ 6 670,000 132,132.13

Total exergy (TJ) 97,772.88 162,279.48 350,022.34 289,720.81 307,483.43 545,360.4 435.4728 26,873.39 5980.20 42,485.14 1,828,413.56

154


Table 6 Exergy of other refinery products.

Asphalt Engine Oil Others TOTAL

Table 8 AG products transferred to TE (2).

Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

3,103,257 696,895.7 192,822

38,029.11 44,350.77 45,303.6

118,014.1 30,907.86 8735.532 157,657.5

Wood for industrial purposes and biomass for energy production (including agricultural waste and wood scraps) are also products of AG.AG transfers products through TE such as poppy, lupine, hop etc. for chemical industry; silk cocoons, wool, cotton, flax etc. and also hide for textile industry; sainfoin, wild vetches, maize etc. for mixed fodder and other fodder production; seeds for industrial seed production and agricultural product consumption for other industrial processes [67]. These exergy flows are shown in Table 8. The exergy of the cumulative mass flux from the AG to TE sector is the sum of the above mentioned industrial consumptions. The exergy of agricultural products directly transferred to DO is shown in Table 9.

Wood (m3) Solid Biomass (TJ) Agricultural waste for biogas production (ton) Agricultural waste for liquid biofuel production Hide (ton) Chemical industry materials (poppy, lupine, hop, etc.) Textile industry materials (wool, cotton, flax, etc.) Fodder industry materials Seed industry materials Other industrial processes TOTAL

Amount


14,221,000 214,924 4E þ 5

8676.44 10.5E þ 5 18,108.13

Table 7 AG products transferred to TE (1).

Fruit Tea Cereal Leguminous seeds Potato Sunflower Cotton Sugar beet Vegetable Olive Tobacco Meat Poultry Milk Egg Honey Beeswax Fishery Products TOTAL

Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

6,663,841 741,846 18,165,220 1,969,714 2,952,707 1,902,805 1,361,165 13,743,812 16,268,930 1,413,399.2 98,137 438,530 934,732 9,561,680 586,678.4 67,073.6 3483.646 661,991

1900 10,700 17,260 19,000 4200 19,000 16,700 4200 1900 19,000 10,700 10,000 4500 4900 7000 15,200 15,200 5750

12,661.3 7937.75 313,590 37,602.26 12,401.4 36,153.3 22,731.5 57,724 30,911 26,854.6 1050.07 4385.3 4206.29 46,852.2 4106.75 1019.52 52.9514 3806.45 624,046.7

123387.71 225670.2 7243.25 87.92

106,875,851

20,847.6

2,228,108.3 3379.64 59,280.02 338,606.95 5782.86 8235.84 2,999,782.66

Table 9 Products of AG transferred to DO. Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

1,665,960 185,461 434,939 738,177 4,067,232 353,350 2,390,420 146,670 16,768

1900 10,700 19,000 4200 1900 19,000 4900 7000 15,200

3165.32 1984.44 8263.84 3100.34 7727.74 6713.65 11,713.1 4106.75 1072.47 47,847.6

2.5. Industrial sector, IN The industrial sector includes a large number of sub-sectors, the largest being food processing, textile, wood and paper, iron and steel, nonferrous metal and chemical industry. The approximate amounts of raw materials used in food processing are shown in Table 10. In this study, seed processing is included in the food processing industry. Since sufficiently disaggregated data about the internal flows within the sector were not available, it was assumed that the unit specific exergy input in a single technological line (textile, food, etc.) be equal to the unit specific exergy of the products of that line. This is tantamount to charging the process only with the mass flow rate losses (material waste), and to additionally assume that the production lines imply no treatment of the inputs that substantially modifies their chemical or physical exergy. As an example, imagine that X ton/year of cotton is delivered to the textile industry: the total input exergy will be X*ecotton J/year. If the cumulative mass flow rate of cotton apparel (shirts, jeans, cloth, skirts, towels etc.) is gX (1-g being the wasted material), then the total exergy assigned to the output is gX*ecotton. It is clear that use of such a grossly approximate

Total exergy (TJ)

Fruit Tea Leguminous seeds Potato Vegetable Olive Milk Egg Honey TOTAL

procedure is granted only in cases where the infra-sub-sectoral fluxes are not completely known. In this study, the g factor for food processing and textile industries is estimated to be equal to 0,9 [13]. Raw materials for textile industry from AG are listed in Table 11. All chemical fibres used by the textile industry are considered as a product of the chemical industry, so that this is an internal flow to IN. A non-negligible amount of raw materials for textile industry was imported and exported in 2006. The difference between import and export is assumed to constitute the consumption of this sector and is also reported in Table 11 [75]. For the chemical industry, the products accounted for in this study are the basic chemicals, fertilizers and nitrogen compounds, plastics & synthetic rubber in primary forms, synthetic fibres. Manufactured synthetic fibres are already included in Table 11. Other products of IN are listed in Table 12 with their exergetic content. When computing the exergy of manufactured chemicals, which would be complicated if done according to the standard procedures [51] because of the wide variety in products and chemical compositions, their production cost is converted into exergetic equivalent by introducing a “shortcut” in the EEA method: since both the monetary costs and the mass flow rates are known, the latter were converted into exergy equivalents by using the “capital conversion” factor, discussed in Section 3 in this article.1

1 This approximation has several consequences, the most important being that of distorting the total primary exergy “balance” and leading to a possibly erroneous value of the monetary circulation, and therefore of the eeK. If it cannot be avoided, as in the present case, an iteration ought to be performed at the end of the EEA balance, until eeK converges.

C. Seckin et al. / Energy 40 (2012) 151e163 Table 10 Exergy in main products of food processing industry.

Meat Poultry Fish Milk Fruit Vegetable Cereal Leguminous seeds Potato Sunflower Tea Cotton Sugar beet Olive Egg Honey Beeswax Tobacco Mixed fodder Other fodder Seed TOTAL

Table 12 Exergy in main products of chemical industry.

Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

394,677 841,259 51,300 8,605,512 581749 3,489,502 16,348,698 1,163,227.46 132,871.82 1,224,455.02 667,661.04 1,225,049 12,369,431 1,064,430 26,401 30,183 3135 88,323.30 7,467,081 11,820,361 414.015

10,000 4500 5750 4900 1900 1900 17,260 19,000 4200 19,000 10,700 16,700 4200 19,000 7000 15,200 15,200 10,700 16,400

3946.77 3785.66 294.98 42,167.01 1105.32 6630.05 282,231.13 23,541.23 558.06 23,264.65 7143.97 20,458.31 51,951.61 20,224.16 184.80 458.78 47.66 945.06 1,22,460.13 1,79,251.57 5782.86 796,433.78

Table 13 reports the outputs of metal (iron, steel and nonferrous), wood and paper and non-metallic mineral industries. Products of other industries (manufacture of fabricated metal, of electrical, electronic and optical parts, of machinery and equipment, etc.) are assumed to have been assembled using parts produced in one of the above mentioned “main” sectors. All such “internal flows” are not included in the overall sectoral balance. In addition to the above mentioned sub-sectors, 1,346,685 ton of recycled materials and 24,648 ton of compost contribute 23,027 TJ and 1471 TJ exergy respectively to the output balance. Furthermore, the industrial sector produces blast furnace gas and solid scrap as byproducts. In this work, the exergy of recycles and scraps is computed with reference to the published national data [63]. Blast furnace gas produced in the iron and steel industry is transferred to TE and accounts for 36,648 TJ in energy and 35,548 TJ in exergy [19] (following the practice adopted in this study, distribution losses are assigned to the sector that generates it, so that both the transferred mass flow rates and the energy/exergy values are “net” quantities). Scrap metal consists mainly of steel (2,400,000 tons) and carries a total of 19,096 TJ exergy [63]. The total exergy transferred from IN to TE amounts to 6,333,498 TJ. Table 11 Exergy in main products of textile industry. Amount (ton) Silk cocoons, wool, angora wool, etc. Cotton Flax, Hemp Synthetic fibre Hide Net flux from abroad: Silk Wool Cotton, cotton yarn and cotton fabric Natural fibre Synthetic fibre Other fabric Hide TOTAL

44,892 3,173,886 61.2 1,273,500 96,188,266 429 31,003.76 627,184.63 129,488.58 346,195.02 4235.32 134,237,458


Total exergy (TJ)

7732.30

347.12

16,700 16,400 18,484.54 20,847.63

53,003.9 1 23,540.06 2,005,297.45

4560 5850 16,500 4.93 18,485 4.16 20,848

155

1.95 181.37 10,348.54 0.64 6399.25 0.018 2,798,532.95 4,897,654.25

Manufacture of basic chemicals Fertilizer (Nitrogen equivalent) Fertilizer (Phosphate equivalent) Fertilizer (Potash equivalent) Plastic Synthetic rubber TOTAL

Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

699,525 384,832 65,965 638,000 40,000

25.71 2899.08 4385.21 32,502.16 32,502.16

68,053.64 17.99 1115.66 289.27 20,736.38 1300.09 91,513.02

Table 13 Exergy in main products of iron and steel industry, nonferrous metal industry, wood and paper industry and non-metallic mineral industry.

Steel Aluminium Copper Zinc Other metals Industrial wood (m3) Paper and cupboard Cement Plaster Other non-metallic mineral products TOTAL

Amount (ton)


Total exergy (TJ)

23,044,000 130,000 312,000 20,000 65,103.96 12,599,000 2,118,000 47,400,000 1.8E þ 9 24,002,943.7

6800 32,903.7 2111.72 5178.63

127,241.60 4277.48 658.86 103.57 534.33 109,314.52 36,006.00 71,100.00 89,911.13 148.24

8676.44 17,000 1500 49.95

468,753.33

2.6. Transportation sector, TR Transportation of passengers and goods (both public and private) is included in the transportation sector. Other “secondary” transportation (internal movimentation of materials and goods in all other Sectors) is allocated to the relevant sector. Notice that, by contrast, statistics reporting energy consumption in transportation [19,64] offer no detailed information about this differentiation. As a result, a careful data screening is necessary to make exergy studies comparable with each other. In the energy balance of Turkey [19,64], 6 modes of transportation are considered: rail, marine, air, road transportation, pipeline transport and “unspecified transportation activities” (cableway, tram etc.). The efficiency of road transportation is taken to be 12% on average (on an engine-to-wheels power basis)2 [6,27] For marine and air transportation, efficiency is assumed to be 31% and 26%, respectively [27]. For rail transportation, 75.8% efficiency for electric traction and 25% efficiency for diesel traction are assumed [27]. Pipeline transport (operation of pipelines transporting gases, liquids and other commodities; pumping stations) is attributed efficiencies of 29% and 90%, for natural gas and electricity respectively [22]. For non specified transportation, the prevailing energy carrier is electricity and the efficiency is assumed to be 75%. In the present work, again for the lack of data, non specified transportation is assigned to the DO sector, and the energy dissipation of pipeline transport are allocated evenly overall 7 sectors. In TR, use of electricity or fossil fuel produces shaft work, and the exergy transfer by work interaction is associated with shaft power, by definition equal to exergy. For electrical vehicles, shaft work output has been calculated from Eq. (2) and for gas, gasoline and oil

2 This efficiency is more easily related to the “classical” thermodynamic definition, and can be easily translated into the often adopted “power per passenger per km” or “power per kg of transported good per km” once the performance characteristic of the transporting mode are known.

Exery outputb

2234.62 288.30 1095.75 26,196.54 1134.00 283.66 31,232.86 7671.65 929.99 4214.41 218304.47 1512.00 821.29

fuelled vehicles, from Eq. (3). Further discussion is available in [11,21,41]. For electrically propelled vehicles:

W ¼ h Ene

W ¼ h EnF mF

0.00 0.00 92.43 1675.68 0.00 264.17 2032.28

Exery output Energy

a

0.00 0.00 355.49 13,963.99 0.00 754.08

All service activities such as finance, real estate, wholesale, retail, hotels, and all public services including governmental agencies, hospitals, schools etc. but excluding transportation are covered in TE. In our model TE is considered as a sort of storageand-distribution hub for the system: most products of all other sectors are first transferred to TE and then distributed to consuming sectors (including exports). The energy required for the distribution of all commodities is allocated to the sectors of origin of each commodity. Both processed(from IN) and raw food (from AG) are transferred to DO. Basic materials for agricultural use such as fertilizer, seeds, fodders are transferred to AG. The whole mineral and ore production from EX, refinery products except petroleum fuels (asphalt, wax etc., Section 2.3 above), scrap and waste for compost and recycling are transferred to IN. Agricultural products for food processing industry, chemical industry, textile industry, fodder and seed industry, industrial wood and hide also transferred to IN as raw materials for production. To map the distribution of industrial products (textiles, wood & paper products etc.) from TE to other sectors, data about material transfer between the sectors would be necessary: such data are though unavailable for Turkey, and thus we assumed that the exergy of industrial products are allocated to the sectors proportionally to the sectoral “fixed capital investment þ purchases of goods and services” for which accurate data exist [68,74]. Imported and exported materials contribute 22,089,324 TJ and 1,450,254 TJ respectively to the TE balance. The exergy content of “importexport” (except fuels) is allocated among sectors with the same method explained above. Water supplied by mains (which is in TE) is also considered a transfer from TE to the other sectors. Table 15 reports the exergy transfer from TE to EX, CO, and TR. The exergy transfers between AG, DO and IN are presented in Tables 16e18.

0.00 0.00 19.47 74.51 0.00 264.17 358.16 0.00 0.00 74.89 620.95 0.00 754.08

Energy Energy

317.31 2668.46 8785.01 16,172.7 0.00 264.17 28,207.64 1089.34 8607.92 33,788.48 134772.51 0.00 754.08 3.96 33.34 162.42 403.56 0.00 264.17 867.45 13.61 107.55 624,68 3362.99 0.00 754.08

Energy

AG

a

Exery output

b

IN

a

Exery output

b

TR

a

Exery output

b

TE

2.7. Tertiary sector, TE

Energy

25.33 213.01 698,67 1281.07 0.00 264.17 2482.25 86.96 687.12 2687.19 10,675.60 0.00 754.08

Exery output

b a

CO

322.08 2708.59 8871.41 16,241 0.00 264.17 28,407.25

A peculiar novelty of EEA is to include into the system balance three additional “production factors”: human labour, capital and

1105.72 8737.38 34,120.82 135341.65 0.00 754.08

Table 15 Exergy transfer between TE and EX, CO and TR (TJ).

a

TJ. TJex.

EX sector

b

Exery output

2.8. Domestic sector, DO

Rail Marine Air Road Other Transportation Pipeline transport TOTAL

Energy

(3)

where, h is the first law efficiency; W [J] the shaft work; Ene [J] the electrical energy; EnF [J/ton] the lower fuel heating value; mF [ton/ year] the fuel consumption. Table 14 reports the energy consumption for each transportation mode and the exergy output from TR to the remaining sectors.

b a

EX

Table 14 Transportation sector outputs.

(2)

For fossil fuel propelled vehicles:

b

Energya


DO

156

Energy carriers for sectoral activities Industrial products consumption Commodities from abroad Waste for energy generation Water TOTAL

CO sector

TR sector

6166.80

2,581,920.23

278,719.98

31,318.43

213,835.99

400,435.18

99,988.36

682,700.50 1209.6 13 3,479,679.32

137,473.60

1,278,443.8

1,957,598.99

C. Seckin et al. / Energy 40 (2012) 151e163 Table 16 Exergy transfer between TE and AG (TJ). Energy carriers for sectoral activities Fertilizer Seed Fodder Industrial products consumption Commodities from abroad TOTAL

Table 18 Exergy transfer between TE and IN (TJ). 160,794.18 3133.03 5782.86 301,711.70 52,963.51 224,776.807 749,162.08

Table 17 Exergy transfer between TE and DO (TJ). Energy carriers for sectoral activities Processed food & tobacco Raw food Industrial products consumption Commodities from abroad Water TOTAL

157

782,513.78 488,939.22 92,493.95 936,178.24 2,982,896.09 158,533.70 5,441,554.99

environmental remediation cost. One of the consequences is that the domestic sector is considered as the “producer” of all of the society’s working hours, and can thus be attributed an efficiency (ratio of the EEL to the global EEinput,DO) that would be impossible to evaluate with any other energy- or exergy-based method [43]. DO receives exergy flows from AG (47,847 TJ) and TE (5,441,554.99 TJ), as detailed above in Tables 9and 17. Exergy flows from ENV (5470.68 TJ) and TR (31,232.86 TJ) are also reported in Tables 1and 14, respectively. There are two types of DO sector outputs: waste and labour. In this study, 1,537,549 tons of waste have been calculated to be generated in DO, and are “recycled” in different ways: waste transferred to composting (1473 TJ), to recycling (28791 TJ) and to energy generation process in CO (1209 TJ). In the available database for Turkey, solid waste of all sectors is collected at one centre and then allocated to recycling, composting and incineration: the source of waste is not known. Therefore, we assumed that the total exergy of these wastes (31,474 TJ) is transferred to TE from DO and from the former to CO. As detailed in Section 3.1 below, the exergy equivalent of the labour generated by DO is 4,351,691.8 TJ.

Energy carriers for sectoral activities Waste for recycling and composting Scrap Ag sector products for food processing industry Ag sector products for chemical, textile, fodder and seed and other industry Industrial wood Refinery products (engine oil, asphalt etc.) Ores and minerals Industrial products consumption Commodities from abroad Water TOTAL

123,387.71 157,657.50 273,597.45 1,371,191.64 4,377,715.98 2503.50 14,137,752.76

In 2006, there were 29.4 working weeks and the amount of weekly working hours are available in [67] and [72] for regular and part-time, seasonal and occasional employees and self-employed labourers. Since exact data are not available for all self-employed workers (both blue and white collar), the assumption was made that their average work load is 35 h/week. The exergy fluxes embodied in the labour transferred to the sectors are presented in Fig. 2. 3.2. Monetary fluxes In this study, under “C” (capital flows) we include: capital investment, capital sales [68], financial credits (including credit cards) & their pay back [70], social security payments [31,34,68], taxes [32], subsidies [31], financial turnover [68], wages & salaries, daily wages [68,69], entrepreneurial incomes, rental income, interest-dividend income, transfer incomes from government to household [69,87], transfer incomes from abroad to household [7], total consumption expenditure of household [87], sectoral purchases of goods and services [68], government pay back [36], privatization cost [33], import & export payments for goods and services, current and other transfers (direct investment, credits etc.) between Turkey and abroad [7]. Financial and agricultural

3. Exergy equivalent of externalities In this work, the exergetic equivalents of labour (eeL), of capital (eeK), and of environmental remediation (eeEnv), are calculated on the basis of two country-specific (and time dependent) exergoeconometric factors: the detailed calculation procedure and the values of eeL and eeK for the Turkish society 2006 are presented in the Appendix. 3.1. Labour fluxes The global amount of exergy embodied in labour is obtained by multiplying the sectoral working hours by the exergetic equivalent of labour (eeL). Since domestic labour (housekeeping, laundrying, cooking, etc.) is an internal flow within the DO sector, it is not taken into account in this analysis.3 The number and status of people working in each sector have been extracted from [35,67,71].

3 Considering domestic labour as an “internal flow” within DO may distort both Labour statistics and monetary balances, because the real monetary flow corresponding to the retribution of such labour is neglected: this is one of the open problems in EEA, and while it is often negligible in OECD Countries, its importance cannot be a priori discounted in less industrialized societies.

1,348,084.38 24,500.44 146,041.92 543,265.80 5,769,806.44

Fig. 2. Labour fluxes within the society (PJ).

158


Fig. 3. Capital fluxes (PJ).

sectors’ economic indicators are found in [67,70]. A specific distinction between the two possible ways of money transfer (virtual transfer or cash payment) was not necessary, because banks and both wholesale and retail activities are included in TE, and money is always transferred through TE from other sectors and abroad. The amount of exergy embodied in capital is obtained by multiplying the monetary flux by the exergetic equivalent of capital (eeK). The equivalent primary exergy of input and output monetary fluxes (EEK) of each sectors are presented in Fig. 3. 3.3. Environmental remediation cost Exergy is not a direct measure of pollution [50], but it provides a clear qualitative indication of the potential of a pollutant to cause environmental damage, because it measures the “thermodynamic distance” of the released substance from its environmentally neutral (equilibrium) state. In the literature, exergy is evermore often introduced in the calculation of the environmental impact of processes [2,23,40]. Though many researchers agree that exergy can be seen as an objective indicator capable of providing significant insight into potential environmental impact [38], it must be considered that exergy -per se- is not a measure of what we call “environmental impact”, because it does not measure, for instance, toxicity [50]. But, if one considers for example the release of hot CO2 into the atmosphere, its chemical and physical exergy can give an idea of what measures one must take to neutralize it, i.e., of how much will it cost to “buffer” the pollution.

In EEA, as an “extended” version of exergy analysis, the remedial action needed to cancel the (toxic or not) “environmental impact” is quantified in terms of the primary exergy resources equivalent to the sum of the capital, labour, material, energy expenses required to annihilate the difference in physical and chemical exergy between the effluent and the reference environment (zero environmental impact). The EEEnv required to convert an emitted pollutant into a set of substances with zero environmental impact is calculated by considering a virtual treatment process capable of cooling the effluent to environment temperature and breaking it up into its constituents such that each one of them is at equilibrium conditions with the environment [46]. The net extended exergetic equivalent of this (fictitious or real) cleanup process is the environmental remediation cost of the effluent. For further discussion see [46,50]. In the present analysis, the lack of sufficiently disaggregated data about the different types of effluents made it impossible to find out the “exact” environmental remediation cost for all pollutants. Instead, as an alternative method [10] which is applied in some previously published EEA analyses [9,30,43], the actual cost of cleanup processes was converted into extended exergy equivalent by means of the capital eek.4

4 Notice that this procedure, in addition to providing an obviously approximate value of EEnv, distorts the overall extended exergy calculations, because EENV indirectly enters in the global National balance: therefore, an inaccurate calculation of EENV results in a proportional inaccuracy in Ein, that is finally reflected in a corresponding inaccuracy in eeK. Therefore, this practice ought to be avoided whenever possible.


159

Table 19 Environmental remediation cost (EEEnv) of gas emissions.

EX CO AG IN TR TE DO

CO2 (ton)

CO2 (TJ)

CH4 (ton)

CH4 (TJ)

N2O (ton)

N2O (TJ)

Total (TJ)

9,092,354.01 95,173,565.93 75,815,549.76 98,566,074.82 17,318,816.66 9,196,925.74 44,165,812.60

5837.02 61,098.59 48,671.32 63,276.48 11,118.16 5904.15 28,353.13

77,719.92 1681.80 772,027.28 10,360.54 40,517.16 1,474,375.58 19,117.72

32.43 0.70 322.15 4.32 16.91 615.23 7.98

158.43 847.91 481.55 10,657.07 1488.19 238.71 948.15

0.07 0.35 0.20 4.45 0.62 0.10 0.40

5869.52 61,099.64 48,348.97 63,285.25 11,135.69 6519.48 28,361.51

Table 20 Environmental remediation cost (EEEnv) of sectoral wastewater discharge.


Wastewater (m3)

Exergy (TJ)

2.1E þ 8 12,163,000 0 625,593,000 0 1,252,549,140.64 3,145,284,938.41

37,485.71 2171.14 0 111,670.46 0 223,584.24 561,443.96

Table 21 Environmental remediation cost (EEEnv) of solid waste.


Solid waste (ton)

Exergy (TJ)

16,700,000 124,218 29,600,000 17,373,264 379,883.43 3,363,561.75 17,522,634.25

5360.45 39.87 9501.16 5576.56 121.94 1079.65 5624.50

Gas emissions of Turkish sectors (including emissions caused by sectoral transportation) are computed, on the basis of data provided by [1,57]. The cost of CO2 treatment is taken as 20 V/ton) [20,82]. For CH4 and NO2 treatment, the cost is 10e13 V/ton: following [56], 13 V/ton has been assumed in this study. Approximated wastewater effluents from sectors are found in [73] and cost of wastewater treatment is taken to be 5.55 V/m3 [17]. (the average $/V exchange rate was 1.26 in 2006). Environmental remediation costs of gas and liquid effluents are shown in Table 19 and Table 20, respectively. The negative sign in CO2 emission of AG comes from its capture and sequestering ability. Waste generation by sector and environmental remediation costs are shown in Table 21. Readers are cautioned that the amount of sectoral waste is estimated by interpolating the somewhat scanty data of waste generation in Turkey [62]. Table 21 does not include waste used in composting, recycling, energy generation, etc. The cost of pretreatment and landfilling of solid waste is estimated at 10 V/ton [54].

Fig. 4. Exergy fluxes (Em þ Ephys) between sectors, ENV and A (PJ).

160


4. Results and discussion Fig. 4 displays the net exergy fluxes (exergy transfer via “material þ energy sources” and exergy of transportation service outputs) between sectors and surroundings in Turkey. In Fig. 5, exergy transfers are augmented by adding fluxes of externalities (exergetic equivalents of capital, labour and environmental remediation). Because waste and emissions are considered as having being “remedied” by our treatment of the environmental remediation cost, the only exergetic out flux to the environment consists of untreated EDH (discharge exergy) (flue-gas, combustion gases, thermal discharge including radiated heat etc.) that are assumed to amount to 10% of the total energy use of each sector and shown in Fig. 5. EEENV and EDH flows are input flows of the sectors, because they represent a cost. As such, they have a positive sign (as all other incoming flows). Since they are shown as outgoing fluxes from the sectors in Fig. 5, they carry though a negative sign in the figure, to maintain congruency in the EEA balance of the sectors. For AG sector, as stated in Section 3.3, the sign is opposite of that of other

sectors’ EEENV as a result of sector’s capture and sequestering ability. Finally, the EEA efficiency of a sector is formulated as:

P EEA efficiencysector ¼ P

output

Em þ Ephys þ EEK þ EEL

Em þ Ephys þ EEK þ EEL þ EEEnv þ EDH

input

(4) The EEA efficiencies of EX and TE are 0.82 and 0.83 respectively: very high for all standards. The EX sector has the advantage of low energy consumption and low environmental cost due to low emission generation within the sector. A high amount of primary exergy flows from ENV to EX, but the Sector’s production is also high and manages to keep the balance between inputs and outputs. The Tertiary sector, TE, has the highest EEA efficiency in the society. In spite of relatively high environmental remediation cost and high labour input to the sector, its sectoral output (since it supplies all the material and service fluxes to the other sectors) has very high exergetic content which results in a high EEA efficiency. Recall that

Fig. 5. Extended exergetic fluxes between sectors, ENV and A (PJ).


in our model the overwhelming part of the added value is attributed to TE. For CO and IN sectors, the efficiencies are 0.64 and 0.60, respectively. The reasons of the relatively low EEA efficiency for these sectors are their respective high energy intensities, high exergy influx from TE and high environmental remediation costs. High labour influx also contributes to lower somewhat the EEA efficiency of the IN sector. EEA efficiency of TR sector is 0.53. As a result of the unfortunate unsustainable pattern of Turkish transportation policy, the most active transportation mode is road transportation which results in extensive use of fossil fuels (exergetically very ”expensive”) and high greenhouse gas emissions (in other words, low EEA efficiency). A relatively high exergy flux (that includes fuels) is transferred from TE to TR. Additionally, processes occurring in TR sector have per se low efficiencies. The only advantage of TR sector which raises the sectoral efficiency is its producing no liquid waste and a small amount of solid waste, which reduces its EEEnv. AG has a very low EEA efficiency (0.0027) results from two concurring factors: the very large input from the ENV (inputs from ENV to AG includes solar energy received by the agricultural area which is almost %45 of the total land of the country) and the very low exergy content of the agricultural products. A rather high amount of labour input is another factor which contributes to the low EEA efficiency. Turkey’s economy is largely based on agriculture, and thus the AG has the biggest share in governmental subsidies which results in a high capital input into the sector and lower EEA efficiency. The sector has though a negative environmental cost. Another sectoral advantage is that the percent share of workers in AG is high (24.8% of the total workforce [74]) but salaries and wages are low and this reduces the Coutput. These special and unique advantages are not sufficient to raise the efficiency because of the high amount of “free” inputs from ENV. Turkish DO sector displays a high EEA efficiency (0.85). Sector looks like quite “balanced” in terms of extended exergy. Indeed, the accuracy of the computed efficiency is limited by the assumptions made in the specific application. As stated earlier, societal EEA analyses are available in the literature for Norway [13], Italy [25], Siena province of Italy [43], UK [15] and China [9]. Table 22 shows the results of these societies and the present study. It is seen that eeL is much lower for China and much higher for Norway than other countries. Although eeL depends on several factors, it is estimated that these results stem from the high population of Chinese society and low population of Norwegian society [80]. High population causes in high working hours which lowers eeL and vice versa. Except UK, eeK of countries are closed to each other. Extended exergy efficiencies of different sectors for above mentioned societies have a great variation. For EX sector, Siena province of Italy has a notably low efficiency though the other societies have high efficiency values. For Italy, UK and China, efficiency of CO sector is low which can be assigned to the

EX CO AG IN TR TE DO eeL (MJ/hours) eeK (MJ/$)

Siena (2000)

0.86 0.34 0.7 0.76 0.39 0.79 0.87 235.5 18.2

0.33 0.54 0.61 0.64 0.26 0.85 0.83 253 16.9

Norway (2000) 0.95 0.76 0.61 0.69 0.63 0.74 e 525.85 20.08

UK (2004) 0.91 0.39 0.49 0.39 0.31 0.8 e 248.3 6

low efficiency of power generation and heating supply systems. The EEA efficiency of Turkish AG sector is remarkably low as a result of the different approach applied in this study to calculate input flows of AG (water and solar energy). For IN sector, China and UK have very low efficiencies. For Turkish IN sector, EEA efficiency is relatively lower than Italy, Siena and Norway. Considering that IN sector is the most energy and material consuming sector of Turkey, a little higher efficiency may results in considerably lower extended exergy consumption through the country. For TR sector, Italy, UK and China have very low efficiencies. For DO sector, efficiencies of different societies (including Turkey) are high and quite similar. For TE sector, it is not scientifically meaningful to compare the results of Turkey with other countries since in this present study, TE sector is functioning as a material distribution and storage centre of the country. This changes the considered input and output flows of the sector in the present model. For TE sector of societies except Turkey, China has a particularly low efficiency which shows that commercial and financial activities are not very strong in the society.

5. Conclusion EEA is founded on a combination of the exergy concept with the production factors of capital and labour (which are also generated by resource consumption). To calculate the exergetic equivalent of labour and capital, country-specific economic and societal data are necessary, and have been reported and discussed here. We argue that EEA provides an objective and multidimensional metric for assessment of resource use. The environmental remediation cost is also included in this analysis as a measure of the equivalent primary resource consumption required by the treatment of the emitted pollutants. As a result, EEA can be considered as a proper candidate to be used as an indicator to analyze all types of systems and processes in terms of resource consumption. This study presents and discusses an EEA of the Turkish society. Its purpose was to investigate how effectively the society uses its natural resources. Our results make very clear that, except for the EX, TE and DO sectors, a rational and carefully planned effort is needed to improve the exergy utilization in Turkey. On the basis of the study presented in this paper, future work ought to be focused on the development and comparative assessment of alternative strategies to improve the societal resource consumption quality. It should also be noticed that not only the EEA efficiency but also the total extended exergy consumption of each sector should be taken into account, since it is reasonable attack to the problem might well be that of striving for a little improvement in a high consumption sector: it is to be expected that such a strategy may require more immediate and less expensive (in an extended exergy sense) investments than making a global attack to other sectors with a lower extended exergy throughput.

Appendix. Calculation of the exergy equivalent of externalities

Table 22 Summarizing results of earlier societal EEA applications and Turkey. Italy (1996)

161

China (2005)

Turkey (2006)

0.87 0.29 0.62 0.44 0.29 0.57 0.96 71.9 23.7

0.82 0.64 0.0027 0.6 0.53 0.83 0.85 153.95 25.5

The exergetic equivalent of labour is the exergy “used” to generate one work hour (eeL):

eeL ¼ a

Ein Nwh

(A.1)

where, eeL (MJ/work hour) is the exergetic equivalent of labour; a is the fraction of the primary exergy embodied into labour; Ein (MJ/ year) is the total exergy influx into the society and Nwh is the cumulative number of work hours in a year [45].

162


In the calculation of Ein, all exergy fluxes from ENV to the system is accounted for, with the exception of the fluxes already taken into account in sectoral analysis such as extracted fuels, minerals, etc. in EX, solar energy received by AG, renewable energy sources received by CO, etc. Total amount of rain, surface reaching ground water minus evaporation of water is the net flux of water from ENV to the system. Water received by the sectors from ENV is not included in Ein to avoid double accounting. The exergetic equivalent of capital (eeK) is defined as the exergy “embodied” in one monetary unit:

eeK ¼

a b Ein M2 S

(A.2)

where, eeK (MJ/$) is the exergetic equivalent of capital; b is an amplification factor that accounts for the creation of wealth due to exclusively financial activities [45]; M2 ($/year) is the money þ quasi-money indicator; S ($/year) is the global monetary amount of wages and salaries in a society. The econometric factors a and b can be computed as [45]:

Eused ¼ 365 f esurv Nh

(A.3)

f ¼

HDI HDI0

(A.4)

a ¼

Eused Ein

(A.5)

b¼

M2 S S

(A.6)

where, Eused (MJ/year) is the global exergy used by the society for survival, esurv (1.05 107 J/(person$day)) is the exergy consumption for survival [54]; Nh is the number of inhabitants; HDI is the Human Development Index; HDI0 (0.055) is a conventional reference HDI [54]. A more detailed discussion is presented in [45]. The values for M2, S, Nh, HDI for Turkey are obtained from [74], [68], [60] and [81] respectively. A list of the numerical values of all of the above defined variables is shown in Table A1. Table A1 Exergy equivalents, eeL and eeK and the econometric factors a and b. Ein (TJ) HDI M2 ($) S ($) Nwh (hours) Nh

a b

eeL (MJ/hours) eeK (MJ/$)

1.932Eþ09 0.798 2.082Eþ11 1.708Eþ11 2.827Eþ10 78,259,264 0.0022 0.219 153.95 25.50

References [1] Ari I. Emission trading for combating with the climate change and its implementation in Turkey [in Turkish] Planning Expertise Thesis in Turkish Prime Ministry State Planing and Organization, Ankara [accessed 03.11], http:// www.dpt.gov.tr/DocObjects/View/9840/tez-iari.pdf; 2010. [2] Ayres RU, Ayres LW, Martinas K. Exergy, waste accounting, and life-cycle analysis. Energy 1998;23:355e63. [3] Ayres, RU. Waste exergy as a measure of potential harm In: Ulgiati, S, Brown, MT, Giampietro, M, Herendeen, RA, Mayumi, K, editors. Conference waste exergy as a measure of potential harm, Porto Venere, Italy. [4] Bastin S, Henkel K. Water content of fruits and vegetable, http://www.ca.uky. edu/enri/pubs/enri129.pdf; [accessed 06.11].

[5] Bilgen S, Kaygusuz K, Sari A. Second law analysis of various types of coal and woody biomass in Turkey. Energy Sources 2004;26:1083e94. [6] Canadian Automobile Association. Primer on automobile fuel efficiency and emissions, http://caaneo.ca/about/pdf/advocacy-primer-report.pdf; [accessed 01.11]. [7] Central bank of the republic of Turkey statistical data, http://evds.tcmb.gov.tr/ yeni/cbt-uk.html; [accessed 09.10]. [8] Chen GQ. Exergy consumption of the earth. Ecological Modelling 2005;184: 363e80. [9] Chen GQ, Chen B. Extended-exergy analysis of the Chinese society. Energy 2009;34:1127e44. [10] Corrado A, Fiorini P, Sciubba E. Environmental assessment and extended exergy analysis of a ‘‘zero CO2 emission’’ high-efficiency steam power plant. Energy 2006;31:3186e98. [11] Ediger V, Camdali U. Energy and exergy efficiencies in Turkish transportation sector, 1988e2004. Energy Policy 2007;35(2):1238e44. [12] Ertesvag IS, Mielnik M. Exergy analysis of the Norwegian society. Energy 2001;25:957e73. [13] Ertesvag IS. Energy, exergy, and extended-exergy analysis of the Norwegian society 2000. Energy 2005;30:649e75. [14] Ertesvag IS. Society exergy analysis: a comparison of different societies. Energy 2001;26:253e70. [15] Gasparatos A, El-Haram M, Horner M. Assessing the sustainability of the UK society using thermodynamic concepts: part 2. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13:1074e81. [16] Hepbasli A, Utlu Z. Evaluating the energy utilization efficiency of Turkey’s renewable energy sources during 2001. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2004;8(3):237e55. [17] Hernandez-Sancho F, Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R. Cost modelling for wastewater treatment processes. Desalination 2011;268:1e5. [18] Ileri A, Gurer T. Energy and exergy utilization in Turkey during 1995. Energy 1998;23:1099e106. [19] International Energy Agency (IEA). Energy statistics of OECD countries. Paris: IEA; 2008. [20] IPCC. Special report on carbon capture and storage. Cambridge, UK, New York. In: Metz B, Davidson O, Coninck de H, Loos M, Meyer L, editors. Working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change; 2005. [21] Ji X, Chen GQ. Exergy analysis of energy utilization in the transportation sector in China. Energy Policy 2006;34(14):1709e19. [22] Johnson A. A discussion of natural gas pipeline system efficiency, http:// www.gaselectricpartnership.com/BBPipeline%20Efficiency%20ATJ.pdf; [accessed 01.11]. [23] Jorgensen SE, Svirezhev YM. Towards a thermodynamic theory for ecological systems. Oxford: Elsevier; 2004. [24] Kaplan E. Assessment of demand for forest products and supply resources and the place of industrial plantations in Turkey, www.ogm.gov.tr/yukle/ekaplan. doc; [accessed 03.10]. [25] Milia D, Sciubba E. Exergy-based lumped simulation of complex systems: an interactive analysis tool. Energy 2006;31:100e11. [26] Morris DR, Szargut J. Standard chemical exergy of some elements and compounds on the planet earth. Energy 1986;11:733e55. [27] Nakicenovic N, Gilli PV, Kurz R. Regional and global exergy and energy efficiencies. Energy 1996;21:323e37. [28] Ozdogan S, Arikol M. Energy and exergy analyses of selected Turkish industries. Energy 1995;20(1):73e80. [29] Ozturk M, Bezir NC, Ozek N. Hydropowerewater and renewable energy in Turkey: sources and policy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009; 13:605e15. [30] Ptasinski KJ, Koymans MN, Verspagen HHG. Performance of the Dutch energy sector based on energy, exergy and extended exergy accounting. Energy 2006;31:3135e44. [31] Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry Undersecretariat of Treasury. Statistics, http:// www.hazine.gov.tr/irj/portal/anonymous?NavigationTarget¼navurl:// ca8a5b252efea63752b1cb4e1cc81997&InitialNodeFirstLevel¼true; [accessed 09.10]. [32] Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry. General directory of public accounts. Statistics [in Turkish], www.muhasebat.gov.tr; [accessed 09.10]. [33] Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry, Privitization Administration. Privatization endeavor in Turkey, privatization in Turkey, http://www.oib.gov.tr/yayinlar/ publications.htm; [accessed 09.10]. [34] Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry, State Personnel Presidency. General balance of public sector [in Turkish], http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/ekonomi/rip/tr/ kamu_kesimi_genel_dengesi.pdf, [accessed 09.10]. [35] Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry, State Personnel Presidency. Statistics of workers distribution in government [in Turkish], http://www.dpb.gov.tr/spp_ statics.html, [accessed 10.10]. [36] Republic of Turkey, Presidency of The Revenue Administration. Pay back (1989e2010), http://www.gib.gov.tr/fileadmin/user_upload/VI/CVI3.htm; [accessed 09.10]. [37] Rosen MA, Dincer I. Exergy analysis of waste emissions. International Journal of Energy Research 1999;23:1153e63. [38] Rosen MA. Indicators for the environmental impact of waste emissions: comparison of exergy and other indicators. Transactions on the Canadian Society of Mechanical Engineering 2009;33(1):145e60.

C. Seckin et al. / Energy 40 (2012) 151e163 [39] Rosen MA. Evaluation of energy utilization efficiency in Canada using energy and exergy analyses. Energy 1992;17:339e50. [40] Rosen MA, Dincer I. On exergy and environmental impact. International Journal of Energy Research 1997;21:643e54. [41] Saidur R, Sattar MA, Masjuki HH, Ahmed S, Hashim U. An estimation of the energy and exergy efficiencies for the energy resources consumption in the transportation sector in Malaysia. Energy Policy 2007;35(8):4018e26. [42] Schaeffer RM. An exergy analysis for the Brazilian economy: from energy production to final energy use. Energy 1992;17:841e55. [43] Sciubba E, Bastianoni S, Tiezzi E. Exergy and extended exergy accounting of very large complex systems with an application to the province of Siena, Italy. Journal of Environmental Management 2008;86:372e82. [44] Sciubba E. From engineering economics to extended exergy accounting: a possible path from monetary to resource-based costing. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2004;8:19e40. [45] Sciubba E. A revised calculation of the econometric factors a- and b for the extended exergy accounting method. Ecological Modelling 2011;222(4): 1060e6. [46] Sciubba E. Cost analysis of energy conversion systems via a novel resourcebased quantifier. Energy 2003;28:457e77. [47] Sciubba E. Exergo-economics: thermodynamic foundation for a more rational resource use. International Journal of Energy Research 2005;29:613e36. [48] Sciubba E. Exergy as a direct measure of environmental impact. In: Aceves SM, Garimella S, Peterson R, editors. AESdProc. of the ASME advanced energy systems division. New York: ASME; 1999. p. 573e81. [49] Sciubba E. Extended exergy accounting: towards an exergetic theory of value. Tokyo, Japan. In: Proc. of the ECOS ’99; 1999. p. 85e94. [50] Sciubba E. Exergy-based ecological indicators: a necessary tool for resource use assessment studies. In: Keynote address to IEEES. Sharjah, UAE: A.U.S.; 2009. [51] Szargut J, Morris DR, Steward FR. Exergy analysis of thermal, chemical and metallurgical processes. New York: Hemisphere Publ. Corp; 1988. [52] Szargut J. International progress in second law analysis. Energy 1980;5: 709e18. [53] Szargut J. Exergy methoddtechnical and ecological applications. Boston, MA, USA: WIT Press; 2005. [54] Talens Peiró L, Villalba Méndez G, Sciubba E, Gabarrell i Durany X. Extended exergy accounting applied to biodiesel production. Energy 2010;35:2861e9. [55] Torgovnikov G, Vinden P. High-intensity microwave wood modification for increasing permeability. Forest Products Journal 2009;59:84e93. [56] Tuhkanen S, Lehtilä A, Savolainen I. The role of CH4 and N2O emission reductions in the cost-effective control of the greenhouse gas emissions from Finland. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 1999;4(2): 91e112. [57] Turkish General Directorate of Forestry. TURKEY greenhouse gas inventory 1990 to 2008, national inventory report land use land use change and forestry, http://web.ogm.gov.tr/birimler/merkez/egitim/disiliskiler/Dokumanlar/ seragazi/lulucf-2010.pdf; [accessed 06.10]. [58] Turkish Geothermal Association. Geothermal in Turkey [in Turkish]. http:// www.jeotermaldernegi.org.tr/; [accessed 01.10]. [59] Turkish Industrialists’ and Businessmen’s Association (TUSIAD). Water management in Turkey: problems and suggestions report. Istanbul: TUSIAD; 2008. [60] Turkish Ministry of the Interior Affairs. General directorate of civil registration and nationality. Statistic of population in Turkey [in Turkish], http://www.nvi. gov.tr; [accessed 01.10]. [61] Turkish Petroleum Refineries Corporation (TUPRAS). TUPRAS annual report 2006. Ankara: TUPRAS [accessed 03.11]. See also: http://www.tupras.com.tr/ detailpage.tr.php?lPageID¼12; 2007. [62] Turkish Republic Ministry of Environment and Forestry. Environmental indicators 2008, http://www.cedgm.gov.tr/CED/Files/tr_2008_son.pdf; [accessed 07.10]. [63] Turkish Republic Ministry of Environment and Forestry. Waste recycling statistics, www.atikyonetimi.cevreorman.gov.tr/Ambalaj/istatisitkler/ 2006yili_ist.doc; [accessed 01.11]. [64] Turkish Republic Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources. Energy balance table of Turkey (2006). http://www.enerji.gov.tr/index.php?dil¼tr&sf¼webpages&b¼y_ istatistik&bn¼244&hn¼244&id¼398; [accessed 03.11]. [65] Turkish Republic Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources-General Directorate of Mining Affairs. Mining products of Turkey, http://www.migem.gov. tr/; [accessed 01.10]. [66] Turkish State Planning Organization (DPT). Petroleum products specialization commission report. Ankara: DPT; 2000. [67] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Agricultural structure-production, price, value, 2007. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2009. [68] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Annual industry and service statistics 2006. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2007. [69] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Economic indicators 2009. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2010. [70] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Financial intermediary institution statistics 2006. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2008. [71] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Household labour force statistics 2006. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2007.

163

[72] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Labour cost survey 2004e2008. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2009. [73] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Sectoral water and wastewater statistics [in Turkish]. www.tuik.gov.tr; [accessed 03.11]. [74] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). Statistical indicators 1923e2007. Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute; 2010. [75] Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT). www.tuik.gov.tr; [accessed 03.11]. [76] Ultu Z, Hepbasli A. A review on analyzing and evaluating the energy utilization efficiency of countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2007; 11:1e29. [77] Utlu Z, Hepbasli A. A study on the evaluation of energy utilization efficiency in the Turkish residentialecommercial sector using energy and exergy analyses. Energy and Buildings 2003;35(11):1145e53. [78] Utlu Z, Hepbasli A. Comparison of Turkey’s sectoral energy utilization efficiencies between 1990 and 2000: part 1. utility and industrial sectors. Energy Sources 2004;26(14):1345e55. [79] Utlu Z, Hepbasli A. Turkey’s sectoral energy and exergy analysis between 1999 and 2000. International Journal of Energy Research 2004;28:1176e91. [80] Unite Nations. Department of economic and social effects, population division, http://esa.un.org/wpp/unpp/panel_population.htm; [accessed 09.11]. [81] United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human development indices report. United Nations development programme; 2008. [82] Van Lier JB. High-rate anaerobic wastewater treatment: diversifying from end-of-the-pipe treatment to resource-oriented conversion techniques. Water Science & Technology 2008;57(8):1137e48. [83] Wall G, Sciubba E, Naso V. Exergy use in the Italian society. Energy 1994;19: 1267e74. [84] Wall G. Exergy conversion in the Finnish, Japanese and Swedish societies, report, Turku school of economics, Turku, Finland; 1991. [85] Wall G. Exergy conversion in the Japanese society. Energy 1990;15:435e44. [86] Wall G. Exergy conversion in the Swedish society. Resource Energy 1987;9: 55e73. [87] Yukseller Z, Turkan E. Turkiye’de Hanehalki: Is¸gucu, Gelir, Harcama ve Yoksulluk Acisindan Analizi [in Turkish]. Istanbul: TUSIAD; 2008. [88] Zhang B, Chen GQ. Physical sustainability assessment for the China society. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2010;14:1527e45.

Glossary A: Abroad, Other countries/societies AG: Agriculture sector C: Capital flow CExC: Cumulative exergy consumption, J/ton CO: Conversion sector DO: Domestic sector (Households) EDH: Exergy of untreated discharge, J/year EEA: Extended exergy accounting eeEnv: Exergetic equivalent of environmental remediation, J/kg EEEnv: Exergy embodied in environmental remediation, J/year eeK: Exergetic equivalent of capital, J/$ EEK: Exergy embodied in capital, J/year eeL: Exergetic equivalent of labour, J/hour EEL: Exergy embodied in labour, J/year Ein: Global exergy influx, J/year em: Specific exergy of material, J/kg Em: Eexergy embodied in material, J/year Ene: Electrical energy, J EnF: Lower heating value of fuel, J/ton ENV: Environment ephys: Specific exergy of energy carriers, J/kg Ephys: Exergy embodied in energy carries, J/year esurv: Exergy consumption for survival, J/(person day) Eused: Global exergy used by the society for survival, J/year EX: Extraction sector f: Exergy consumption amplification factor HDI: Human development index HDI0: Human Development Index of a primitive society IN: Industrial sector M2: Money þ quasi-money circulation, $/year mF: Fuel consumption, ton/year Nh: Population Nw: Number of workers Nwh: Number of working hours, work hours/year S: Global wages in the Country, $/year TE: Tertiary sector TR: Transportation sector W: Work, J h: First law efficiency a: First econometric factor b: Second econometric factor $: Dollar V: Euro