Agricultural Residues Potential of Hatay

Yıl 2019, Cilt 24 Özel Sayı: 1st Int. Congress on Biosystems Engineering 2019, 9 - 15, 27.12.2019

Cengiz Karaca

Öz

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the biomass
potential and the energy value, being produced from agricultural residues in Hatay
province

Methods and Results: The amounts of residues
from the agricultural crops cultivated in Hatay province were calculated using
production data of crops with Turkish Statistical Institute for the 2018
seasonal years. The annual gross potential of agricultural residues was
determined by using residue to product ratio or residue
per tree or residue per area. The total amount of agricultural residues was
approximately 652.8 kt.year^-1. The total heating value of the
agricultural residues was around 13.36 PJ.year^-1. The top four
districts of Hatay according to the amount of agricultural residues are
Kırıkhan (181.6 kt), Center (158.8 kt), Reyhanlı (111.3 kt) and Kumlu (65.2
kt). The major crops included in the ratio of the total residues amount were cotton
(65.5%), maize (14%), olive (13.3%) and citrus (10.9%).

Conclusions: The
potential of agricultural residues concentrated
in the Kırıkhan and Center districts. However, there are also significantly
different crop residues in other districts. Hatay have a great agricultural residues potential for conversion to energy. Such
a large potential necessarily has to be
evaluated by establishing modern facilities.

Significance and Impact of the Study: In this paper, the produced maps were
provided to see more clearly in the differences of data among the districts.
The mapping can provide the rise of public awareness, policy-makers’ reference
and investor's guide about these subjects.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Biomass energy, agricultural residues, Hatay

Agricultural Residues Potential of Hatay

Öz

Aims: The aim of this study
was to determine the biomass potential and the energy value, being produced
from agricultural residues in Hatay province

Methods and Results: The amounts of residues
from the agricultural crops cultivated in Hatay province were calculated using
production data of crops with Turkish Statistical Institute for the 2018
seasonal years. The annual gross potential of agricultural residues was
determined by using residue to product ratio or residue
per tree or residue per area. The total amount of agricultural residues was
approximately 652.8 kt.year^-1. The total heating value of the
agricultural residues was around 13.36 PJ.year^-1. The top four
districts of Hatay according to the amount of agricultural residues are
Kırıkhan (181.6 kt), Center (158.8 kt), Reyhanlı (111.3 kt) and Kumlu (65.2
kt). The major crops included in the ratio of the total residues amount were
cotton (65.5%), maize (14%), olive (13.3%) and citrus (10.9%).

Conclusions: The potential of agricultural residues concentrated in the Kırıkhan and Center
districts. However, there are also significantly different crop residues in
other districts. Hatay have a great agricultural
residues potential for conversion to energy. Such a large potential necessarily has to be evaluated by establishing
modern facilities.

Significance and Impact of the Study: In this paper, the produced maps were
provided to see more clearly in the differences of data among the districts.
The mapping can provide the rise of public awareness, policy-makers’ reference
and investor's guide about these subjects.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Biomass energy, agricultural residues, Hatay

Kaynakça

• Anonymous (2018a) TUIK Statistical Table of Agricultural Land. Retrieved August 6, 2019, from https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=92&locale=tr
• Anonymous (2018b) TUIK Crop Production Statistics: All districts of Hatay province. Retrieved May 6, 2019, from https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=92&locale=tr Başçetinçelik A, Karaca C, Öztürk HH, Kaçıra M, Ekinci K (2005) Agricultural Biomass Potential in Turkey. Proceedings of the 9. International Congress on Mechanization and Energy in Agriculture & 27. International Conference of CIGR Section IV: The Efficient Use of Electricity and Renewable Energy Sources in Agriculture, September 27-29, İzmir, Turkey. pp 195-199.
• Başçetinçelik A, Öztürk HH, Karaca C, Kaçira M, Ekinci K, Kaya D, Baban A, Komitti N, Barnes I, Nieminen M (2006) A Guide on Exploitation of Agricultural Residues in Turkey. AGRO-WASTE - Exploitation of Agricultural Residues in Turkey. EU Life Program Project, Project No: LIFE03 TCY/TR/000061.
• Bilandzija N, Voca N, Kricka T, Matin A, Jurisic V (2012) Energy potential of fruit tree pruned biomass in Croatia. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 10:292-298Karaca C, Başçetinçelik A (2014) Economic Analysis of Selected Combine Heat and Power (CHP) Plant Based on Cotton Ginning Residue Combustion in Adana. Proceeding of 12th International Congress on Mechanization & Energy in Agriculture, September 3-6, Cappadocia, Turkey. pp 308-313.
• Karaca C (2015) Mapping of energy potential through annual crop residues in Turkey. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 8: 104-109.
• Karaca C (2017) Hatay İlinin Hayvansal Gübre Kaynağından Üretilebilir Biyogaz Potansiyelinin Belirlenmesi. MKÜ Ziraat Fakültesi Derg., 22: 34-39.
• Karaca C, Gürdil GAK, Öztürk HH (2017) Determining and Mapping Agricultural Biomass Energy Potential in Samsun Province of Turkey. Proceedings of 3rd. International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology (ICOEST), October 19-23 Budapest, Hungary. pp 190-194.
• Karaca C, Öztürk HH (2017) The Biomass Energy Potential of Osmaniye Province from Agricultural Residues. Proceedings of International Advanced Researches and Engineering Congress 2017 (IAREC’ 17) November 16-18, Osmaniye, Turkey. pp 2297-2301.
• Karaca C (2018) The Biomass Energy Potential of Balıkesir Province from Agricultural Residues. Proceedings Book III of International Symposium of Bandırma and Its Surroundings, September 17-19, Bandırma, Turkey. pp 469-477.
• Velázquez-Martí B, Fernández-González E, López-Cortés I, Callejón-Ferre AJ (2013) Prediction and evaluation of biomass obtained from citrus trees pruning. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment. 11: 1485-1491