NÜKLEER ENERJİ TÜKETİMİNİN MAKRO EKONOMİK BELİRLEYİCİLERİ: SEÇİLMİŞ OECD ÜLKELERİ ÜZERİNE PANEL VERİ ANALİZİ

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 51, 18 - 37, 09.02.2019

Hüseyin Önder , İbrahim Gündüz

https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.vi.522036

Cited By: 5

Öz

Enerji iç ve dış siyasetin şekillenmesinde, milli sanayinin ve ekonominin gelişiminde oldukça önemli bir yer tutmaktadır. Bu nedenle enerjinin hangi kaynaklardan üretildiği oldukça önemlidir. Fosil yakıtlar açısından zengin olmayan pek çok ülke için nükleer enerji önemli bir alternatiftir. Bu çalışmada nükleer enerjinin makro ekonomik belirleyicileri incelenmiştir. Bunu gerçekleştirirken literatürde yer alan benzer çalışmalar titizlikle taranarak değişkenler tespit edilmiştir. 2000-2015 yılları arasında OECD ülkelerinin örneklem olarak alındığı analizde nükleer enerjinin makro ekonomik belirleyicileri olarak sivil iş gücü, toplam karbon dioksit emisyonu, ham petrol fiyatları, Enerji yoğunluğu, Fosil yakıt tüketimi (toplam içindeki %’lik payı), yenilenebilir enerji tüketimi (toplam nihai enerji tüketimi içindeki %’lik payı) ve kişi başına sabit fiyatlarla GSYİH değişkenleri kullanılmıştır. Dengeli panel veri analizinin rassal etkiler tahmincisiyle yapılmasına karar verilmiştir. Yapılan analiz sonucunda; CO2, enerji yoğunluğu, fosil, yenilenebilir enerji, petrol fiyatları ve GSYİH değişkenlerinin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olduğu görülmektedir. Bu değişkenlerden CO2 ve enerji yoğunluğu değişkenleri, nükleer enerji tüketimi değişkeni ile pozitif ilişkilidir. Fosil, yenilenebilir enerji, petrol fiyatı ve GSYİH değişkenleri ise nükleer enerji tüketimi değişkeniyle negatif ilişkilidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Nükleer Enerji, OECD Ülkeleri, Panel Veri Analizi

MACROECONOMIC DETERMINANTS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY CONSUMPTION: A PANEL DATA ANALYSIS ON SELECTED OECD COUNTRIES

Öz

Electricity supply from coal, natural gas and petroleum is an energy supply security problem because of both the price of fuel and the supply of oil and derivative products from the regions with political instability such as the Middle East. Moreover, it is a current issue to search for alternatives to these sources because of the environmental damage caused by the greenhouse gases released to the atmosphere due to the burning of coal, natural gas and oil in electricity generation plants. Energy has an important place which not only shapes domestic and national policy, but also improves national industry and economy. In case, it is quite important the energy is produced from different sources. Nuclear energy is an important alternative in terms of most countries which has little fossil fuel sources. Nuclear power plants do not only contribute to the economy by generating electricity. It collaborates with many sectors and contributes to different areas of employment and economy. Nuclear power plants; Iron-steel contributes to the development of chemistry and machinery equipment industries. The development of nuclear technology triggers the development of other sectors and establishes back and forth connections with sectors such as IT, space industry, food and medicine. Nuclear energy has some disadvantages as well as these benefits. For example, nuclear power plants are not economically and technically flexible. In other words, the decommissioning of nuclear power plants is not an economic practice. Nuclear power plants, which require the most capital among all power generation plants, are the most demanding. Nuclear power plants require very high investment capital. It is extremely difficult for this high investment capital to emerge without government incentives. Although there are some critics about nuclear energy security, it is used intensively in countries which have completed industrialization process. In addition to the work of physicists related to nuclear energy, studies on determinants of nuclear energy consumption continue to increase by social scientists. In this article, macroeconomic determinants of nuclear energy have been examined. For the period of 2000-2015, civil labor, total emission of carbon dioxide, prices of crude oil, energy density, consumption of fossil fuel (% of total), consumption of renewable energy and variables of gross domestic product including fixed prices per person has been used as macroeconomic setters of nuclear energy in the analysis in which OECD countries are been taken as sample countries. In OECD countries, the need for energy is constantly increasing due to economic development. The way in which OECD countries meet the growing energy needs can have a significant impact on energy prices in the world energy market. On the other hand, the concentration of these countries in different areas in the energy sector also affects the technological developments in these areas to a significant extent. Therefore, these countries are an important actor in the world energy market. Investigation of the relationship between nuclear energy and macroeconomic variables of these countries will explain how the interaction in both the energy market and the economic sphere occurs. In this study, 480 country / year data are analyzed. As a result of the balanced panel data analysis; CO2, energy density, fossil, renewable energy, oil price and GDP are statistically significant indicators. From these variables, CO2 and energy intensity variables are positively related to the nuclear energy consumption. Fossil, renewable energy, oil price and GDP variables are negatively associated with nuclear energy consumption. When the coefficients of meaningful variables are interpreted individually; a 1 unit increase in total carbon dioxide emission increases the nuclear energy consumption by 0.79 units. Again, a 1 unit increase in energy density increases nuclear energy consumption by 0.0003 units. A 1 unit increase in fossil fuel consumption reduces nuclear energy consumption by 0.081 units. Moreover, an increase in renewable energy consumption by 1 unit reduces nuclear energy consumption by 0.22 units. The 1 unit change in the oil prices variable reduces the nuclear energy consumption by 0.0015 units. Finally, a 1-unit increase in GDP at fixed prices per capita decreases nuclear energy consumption by 0.00002 units. The biggest impact on nuclear energy consumption is the carbon dioxide variable. The reason for the negative relationship between the renewable energy consumption and the nuclear energy consumption may have been due to the fact that the countries that have reached a certain level of welfare have moved away from the nuclear energy consumption and turned to renewable energy. Results from the econometric analysis are compatible with the previous studies such as Apergis and Payne (2010a), Apergis et al. (2010b), Omri and Chaibi (2014), Menyah and Wolde-Rufael (2010).

Anahtar Kelimeler

Nuclear Energy, OECD Countries, Panel Data Analysis

Kaynakça

• Andreev, L. (2011). The Economics of The Russian Nuclear Power Industry. Bellona Report, S.t. Petersburg. Akhmat, G & Zaman K. (2013). Nuclear energy consumption, commercial energy consumption and economic growth in South Asia: Bootstrap panel causality test. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, (25), 552-559. Apergis, N & Payne, J. E. (2010a). A panel study of nuclear energy consumption and economic growth. Energy Economics, (32), 545-549. Apergis, N., Payne J. E., Menyah K &Yemane, W., R. (2010b). On the causal dynamics between emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy and economic growth. Ecological Economics, (69), 2255-2260. Baltagi, B. H. (1995). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, New York: Wiley Pub. Bilgin, M. (2009). Fosil, yenilenebilir ve nükleer yakıtların neopolitik anlamı – Türkiye’nin durumu ve gelecek alternatifleri. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, (20), 57-88. Breusch, T &Pagan, A., (1980). The LM test and ıts applications to model specification in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, (47) 239-254. Chang, T., Gatwabuyege, F., Gupta,R., Inglesi-Lotz,R., Manjezi, N.C & Simo-Kengne, B.D. (2014). Causal relationship between nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in g6 countries: Evidence from panel granger causality tests. Progress in Nuclear Energy, (46), 187-193. Chu, H. P & Chang, T. (2012). Nuclear energy consumption, oil consumption and economic growth in G-6 countries: Bootstrap panel causality test. Energy Policy, (48), 762-769. Civan, A & Köksal, B. (2010). Factors that affect the decision of having nuclear energy and predictions for Turkey. Uluslararası İlişkiler (International Relations), 6(24), 117-140. Comby, B. (2006). ‘The benefits of nuclear energy’, Association of Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy, Working Paper No:06. Houilles, France. Çetin, M & Ecevit E. (2010). Sağlık harcamalarının ekonomik büyüme üzerine etkisi: OECD ülkeleri üzerine bir panel regresyon analizi, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 11(2), 166-182. Demir, M. (2013). Enerji ithalatı cari açık ilişkisi, var analizi ile Türkiye üzerine bir inceleme. Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 5(9), 2-27. Dwivedi, D.N. (1980). Managerial Economics, 8. Baskı, Vikas Publishing House. Eral, M. (2015). Nükleer güç santralleri ve ülkemiz. Ege Üniversitesi Nükleer Bilimler Enstitüsü, Nükleer Teknoloji Anabilim Dalı, İzmir, http://www.meslekiyayin.com/images/111_0016. pdf, (Erişim tarihi:09.06.2017). Esen, Ö. & Bayrak, M. (2015). Enerji açığının belirleyicilerinin teorik perspektiften incelenmesi. Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1), 45-61. Feyzioğlu, O. (2013). Matris Cebiriyle Ayrıntılı Teori ve Uygulamalar, İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul. George, D & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.) Boston: Pearson. Göçer, İ. (2013). Türkiye’de cari açığın nedenleri, finansman kalitesi ve sürdürülebilirliği: Ekonometrik bir analiz. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 8(1), 213-242. Güriş, S. & Kızılarslan, Ş. (2017). Dengesiz panel veri modeli ile EM algoritması sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması. Öneri Dergisi, 12(47), 15-30. Hsiao, C. (1986). Analysis of panel data (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge). Hsiao, C. (2014). Analysis of Panel Data. Cambridge University Press, New York. Hwang, J. H., Min, S. H & Hoon Yoo S. (2015). Nuclear energy consumption and economic growth: A panel data analysis. Innovation Studies, 10(1), 61-72. Joskow, P & Parsons, J. (2016). The Economic Future of Nuclear Power. Massachusetts Instıtute of Tecnology (MIT). USA. Korkmaz, T., Yıldız, B & Gökbulut R.,İ. (2010). FVFM’nin IMKB ulusal100 endeksindeki geçerliliğinin panel veri analizi ile test edilmesi. İstanbul Üniversitesi, İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(1), 95-105. Lee, C. C., & Chiu, Y. B. (2011). Oil prices, nuclear energy consumption and economic growth: New evidence using a heterogeneous panel analysis. Energy Policy, 39(4), 2111-2120. Lee, M.K., Nam, K.Y., Jeong, K.H & Min, B.J. (2009). Contribution of nuclear power to the national economic development in Korea, Nuclear Engineering And Technology, 41(4):549-560. Menyah, K & Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2010). CO2 emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy and economic growth in the US. Energy Policy, 38(6), 2911-2915. MIT. (2003). The Future of Nuclear Power. Massachusetts Instıtute of Technology, Cambridge. Muradov, E. (2012). Almanya’nın nükleer enerji politikasını etkileyen faktörler. Öneri Dergisi, 38:105-111. Nazlıoğlu, S., Lebe F & Kayhan S. (2011), Nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in OECD countries: Cross-sectionally depend heterogeneous panel causality analysis. Energy Policy, 39(10), .6615-6621. Netzer,N & Steinhilber, J. (2011). Nükleer enerjinin sonu mu? Fukuşima’dan Sonra Alternatif Enerji Politikalarına Uluslararası Bir Bakış, (Çev., Kaplan, F. ve Ulusoy, D.) Sena Ofset, İstanbul. Nuclear Energy Agengy, (1993). Broad impacts of nuclear power,https://www.oecd-nea.org/ brief/brief-09.html (Erişim Tarihi: 04.03.2017). Nuclear Energy Agengy. (2017). Nuclear Energy Data 2017, OECD. Omri A & Chaibi A., (2014). Nuclear Energy, Renewable Energy, And Economic Growth in Developed And Developing Countries: A Modelling Analysis From Simultaneous-Equation Models, No 2014-188, Working Papers, Department of Research, Ipag Business School. Omri, A., Mabrouk, N. B &Tmar A. S. (2015). Modeling the causal linkages between nuclear energy, renewable energy and economic growth in developed and developing countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, (42), 1012-1022. Saidi, K & Mbarek M. B. (2016). Nuclear energy, renewable energy, CO2 emissions, and economic growth for nine developed countries: Evidence from panel granger causality tests. Progress in Nuclear Energy, (88), 364-374. Torres-Reyna, O. (2007). Panel Data Analysis Fixed and Random Effects Using Stata V.4.2, Princeton University, New Jersey. Thomas, S. (2005). The Economics of Nuclear Power. Heınrıch Böll Stıftung, Berlin. Türkiye Atom Enerji Kurumu. (2010). Günümüzde Nükleer Enerji, Temmuz, Ankara. World Nuclear Association. (2016). The Economics of Nuclear Power. July 2016, http://www. world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power. aspx (Erişim Tarihi:04.03.2017). ETKB (2017). Enerji ve Tabii Kaynaklar Bakanlığı, Nükleer Enerji, Ankara, http://www.enerji. gov.tr/tr-TR/Sayfalar/Nukleer-Enerji (Erişim Tarihi: 03.03.2017). Winkler, R.L & Hays, W. L. (1975). Statistics: Probability, Inference and Decision (2d ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Yaşar, E., Açikalin, S & Gezer, M. A. (2014). CO2 Emission, composition of energy consumption and GPPPC classification of OECD countries, Global Journal on Advances in Pure & Applied Sciences, 3:38-45. Yüksel, M. (2010). Nükleer Enerji ve Türkiye. Türk Asya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi, İstanbul, http://www.tasam.org/tr-TR/Icerik/1261/nukleer_enerji_ve_turkiye (Erişim Tarihi: 03.03.2017).