SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sürdürülebilir Mühendislik Uygulamaları ve Teknolojik Gelişmeler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1

Carbon Footprint in Mining Activities: A Conceptual Framework

Madencilik Faaliyetlerinde Karbon Ayak İzi: Kavramsal Bir Çerçeve

Deniz Akbay(ÇANAKKALE ONSEKİZ MART ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-7794-5278
Murat Sert(AFYON KOCATEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6595-1681
Gökhan Ekincioğlu(AHİ EVRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9377-6817
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-04-03
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It has been observed that carbon footprint methods alone are not sufficient for calculating the carbon footprint from mining activities, and that multiple methods must be used together.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Global warming and climate change are among the most urgent environmental issues that need to be addressed in this century.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Global warming is caused by the rapid increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere due to human activities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It has been observed that carbon footprint methods alone are not sufficient for calculating the carbon footprint from mining activities, and that multiple methods must be used together.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2021 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Karbon ayak izi · madencilik sektörü · sera gazı emisyonları

Abstract

Global warming and climate change are among the most urgent environmental issues that need to be addressed in this century. Global warming is caused by the rapid increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere due to human activities. While carbon emissions were previously considered reasonable as a result of production processes, today they have become a concept that must be combated due to their environmental impact. The future of the world has become proportional to how well carbon emissions are controlled. In this study, based on information in the literature, the carbon footprint in Turkey and priority sectors were analyzed. Specifically for the mining sector, one of the first sectors that comes to mind when talking about carbon emissions, methods to be followed in terms of carbon sources and reducing the carbon footprint have been interpreted. In addition, the suitability of carbon footprint calculation methods for the mining sector has been analyzed. Turkey's carbon footprint has increased systematically since 1990, when data collection began, but has started to decline, albeit slowly, as a result of carbon footprint reduction policies implemented since 2021. The energy and industrial production sectors have been identified as the sectors with the highest carbon footprint in Turkey. In the mining sector specifically, operational activities using fossil fuels have been identified as the main source of carbon footprint. Electrification, renewable energy integration, and the use of energy-efficient technologies have been recommended as the main measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from mining activities. It has been observed that carbon footprint methods alone are not sufficient for calculating the carbon footprint from mining activities, and that multiple methods must be used together.

Özet

Küresel ısınma ve iklim değişikliği bu yüzyılda çözülmesi gereken en acil çevresel sorunlardan biridir. Küresel ısınma, insan faaliyetleri nedeniyle atmosferdeki sera gazı konsantrasyonlarının hızla artmasından kaynaklanmaktadır. Daha önceleri üretim süreçlerinin bir sonucu olarak karbon salınımı makul karşılanırken, günümüzde neden olduğu çevresel etkilerden dolayı mücadele edilmesi gereken bir kavram haline gelmiştir. Dünyanın geleceği karbon salınımının ne kadar kontrollü olduğu ile orantılı hale gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada literatürde yer alan bilgilere dayanılarak karbon ayak izinin Türkiye’deki durumu ve öncelikli sektörler analiz edilmiştir. Karbon salınımı deyince ilk alan sektörlerden biri olan madencilik sektörü özelinde ise karbon kaynakları ve karbon ayak izinin azaltılması hususunda izlenecek yöntemler yorumlanmaya çalışılmıştır. Ayrıca karbon ayak izi hesaplama yöntemlerinin madencilik sektörüne uygunluğu analiz edilmiştir. Türkiye’de karbon ayak izi, verilerin tutulmaya başlandığı 1990 yılından itibaren sistematik olarak artmış, 2021 yılından devreye alınan karbon ayak izi azaltma politikaları sonucunda yavaş da olsa azlamaya başlamıştır. Türkiye’de karbon ayak izi en yüksek sektörlerin enerji ve endüstriyel üretim sektörleri olduğu görülmüştür. Madencilik sektörü özelinde ise fosil yakıt kullanılan operasyonel faaliyetlerin karbon ayak izinin ana kaynağı olduğu belirlenmiştir. Madencilik faaliyetlerinden kaynaklı sera gazı salınımı azaltmada elektrifikasyon, yenilenebilir enerji entegrasyonu ve enerji verimli teknolojilerin kullanımı başlıca alınacak önlemler olarak önerilmiştir. Karbon ayak izi yöntemlerinin ise madencilik faaliyeti kaynaklı karbon ayak izini hesaplamada tek başına yeterli olmayacağı, birden fazla yöntemin birlikte kullanılması gerekliliği görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akbay, D., Sert, M., Ekincioğlu, G. (2026). Carbon Footprint in Mining Activities: A Conceptual Framework. Sürdürülebilir Mühendislik Uygulamaları ve Teknolojik Gelişmeler Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1. https://doi.org/10.51764/smutgd.1863112

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (46)

  1. Azapagic, A. (2004). Developing a framework for sustainable development indicators for the mining and minerals industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(6), 639-662. https://doi:10.1016/S0959-6526(03)00075-1
  2. Bozoğlu, B., Keskin, B., & Çavdar S. (2003). Küresel Isınma. 6. Çevre Sorunları Öğrenci Yaklaşımları Sempozyumu, Nisan 2003, Mersin.
  3. Canadian Wind Energy Association (CANWEA) (2013). Diavik Wind Farm: Wind energy helps reduce carbon footprint (Case Study). Canadian Wind Energy Association.
  4. Çolak, G., & Atılgan Türkmen, B. (2023). Kurumsal Karbon Ayak İzi Analizi: Bir Kimya Fabrikası için Örnek Hesaplama. Doğal Afetler ve Çevre Dergisi, 9(1), 191-201. https://doi.org/10.21324/dacd.1120858
  5. Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Muntean, M., Schaaf, E., Dentener, F., Van Aardenne, J. A., & Janssens-Maenhout, G. (2018). Gridded emissions of air pollutants for the period 1970–2012 within EDGAR v4. 3.2. Earth System Science Data, 10(4), 1987–2013.
  6. Dell, C. (2023). Understanding Carbon Footprint: Taking Steps towards a Sustainable Future. Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography 13(7), 1000421. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7625.1000421
  7. Demir A.S. (2025). Tekstil Sektöründe Karbon Ayak İzi Hesabı ve Analizi [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi.
  8. Dindar, G. (2021). Otomotiv Yan Sanayinde Karbon Ayak İzinin Hesaplanması Bursa İli Örneği [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi.
  9. Enemuo, M., & Ogunmodimu, O. (2025). Transitioning the mining sector: A review of renewable energy integration and carbon footprint reduction strategies. Applied Energy, 384, 118766.
  10. Erol, Y. (2025). Karbon ayak i̇zi̇ hesaplama yöntemleri̇ni̇n sürdürülebi̇li̇rli̇k i̇lkeleri̇ kapsamında i̇ncelenmesi̇ ve Türki̇ye'de uygulanabi̇li̇rli̇ği̇ni̇n araştırılması [Yüksek lisans tezi]. Yıldiız Tekni̇k Üni̇versi̇tesi̇.
  11. Feio, A. D., da Silva, F. C., Teixeira, M. A., Lopes Maria, A. C., & da Silva, G. B. S. (2024). Viability of renewable energy integration in isolated systems in Brazil – A case study at Trindade Island (Espírito Santo, Brazil). Renewable Energy, 222, 119805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119805
  12. Fenner, A. E., Kibert, C. J., Woo, J., Morque, S., Razkenari, M., Hakim, H., & Lu, X. (2018). The carbon footprint of buildings: A review of methodologies and applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 94, 1142-1152.
  13. Filonchyk, M., Peterson, M. P., Zhang, L., Hurynovich, V., & He, Y. (2024). Greenhouse gases emissions and global climate change: Examining the influence of CO₂, CH4, and N2O. Science of The Total Environment, 935, 173359. Hertwich, E. G., & Wood, R. (2018). The growing importance of scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions from industry. Environmental Research Letters, 13(10), 104013.
  14. Hong, C., Burney, J. A., Pongratz, J., Nabel, J. E., Mueller, N. D., Jackson, R. B., & Davis, S. J. (2021). Global and regional drivers of land-use emissions in 1961–2017. Nature, 589(7843), 554–561.
  15. International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) (2021). Innovation for cleaner, safer vehicles. https://www.icmm.com/en-gb/our-work/cleaner-safer-vehicles
  16. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2021). The role of critical minerals in clean energy transitions. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-product/the-role-of-critical-minerals-in-clean-energy-transitions-2
  17. Kim, D. G., Thomas, A. D., Pelster, D., Rosenstock, T. S., & Sanz-Cobena, A. (2016). Greenhouse gas emissions from natural ecosystems and agricultural lands in sub-Saharan Africa: synthesis of available data and suggestions for further research. Biogeosciences 13 (16), 4789–4809.
  18. Kircher, M. (2021). Reducing the emissions Scope 1-3 in the chemical industry. Journal of Business Chemistry, 18(1), 2-8.
  19. Lamb, W. F., Wiedmann, T., Pongratz, J., Andrew, R., Crippa, M., Olivier, J.G., Minx, J. (2021). A review of trends and drivers of greenhouse gas emissions by sector from 1990 to 2018. Environmental Research Letters, 16(7), 073005.
  20. Li̇, Z., Li̇u, J., Wang, M., Li̇, Z., Lyu, T., Shi̇, A., Ji̇n, T., & Wang, W. (2025). Study on the impact of mining activities on carbon emissions in coalfields. Journal Of Cleaner Producti̇on, 523, 146389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146389
  21. Liu, L. L., Feng, T. T., & Kong, J. J. (2023). Can carbon trading policy and local public expenditures synergize to promote carbon emission reduction in the power industry? Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 188, 106659.
  22. Liu, T., Wu, Z., Chen, C., Chen, H., & Zhou, H. (2024). Carbon emission accounting during the construction of typical 500 kV power transmissions and substations using the carbon emission factor approach. Buildings, 14(1), 145. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/buildings14010145
  23. Liu, Z., Guan, D., Wei, W., Davis, S.J., Ciais, P., Bai, J., Peng, S., Zhang, Q., Hubacek, K., Marland, G., Andres, R.J., Crawford-Brown, D., Lin, J., Zhao, H., Hong, C., Boden, T.A., Feng, K., Peters, G.P., Xi, F., Liu, J., Li, Y., Zhao, Y., Zeng, N., &
  24. He, K. (2015). Reduced carbon emission estimates from fossil fuel combustion and cement production in China. Nature 524(7565), 335–338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature14677
  25. Lombardi, M., Laiola, E., Tricase, C., & Rana, R. (2017). Assessing the urban carbon footprint: An overview. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 66, 43-52.
  26. McKinsey & Company (2020). Decarbonization of metals and mining: Pathways to net zero. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/metals-and-mining/our-insights/creating-the-zero-carbon-mine
  27. Menegat, S., Ledo, A., & Tirado, R. (2022). Greenhouse gas emissions from global production and use of nitrogen synthetic fertilisers in agriculture. Scientific Reports 12 (1), 1–13.
  28. Mudd, G. M. (2010). The environmental sustainability of mining in Australia: key mega-trends and looming constraints. Resources Policy, 35(2), 98-115.
  29. Nayak, D., Saetnan, E., Cheng, K., Wang, W., Koslowski, F., Cheng, Y. F., & Smith, P. (2015). Management opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from Chinese agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 209, 108–124.
  30. Norgate, T., & Haque, N. (2010). Energy and greenhouse gas impacts of mining and mineral processing operations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(3), 266-274.
  31. Northey, S. A., Mudd, G. M., Saarivuori, E., Wessman, H., & Haque, N. (2016). Water footprinting and mining: Where are the limitations and opportunities? Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 1098-1116.
  32. Öztürk K. (2002). Küresel İklim Değişikliği ve Türkiye’ye Olası Etkileri. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 47-65.
  33. Pandey, D., Agrawal, M., & Pandey, J. S. (2011). Carbon footprint: current methods of estimation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 178(1-4), 135-160.
  34. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapi̇n, F. S., Lambi̇n, E., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H., Nykvi̇st, B., Wi̇t, C. A. D., Hughes, T., Leeuw, S. V. D., Rodhe, H., Sörli̇n, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R. W., Fabry, V. J., Hansen, J., Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., & Foley, J. (2009). Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2), 32. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/
  35. Seymenler, E., & Yamankaradeniz, N. (2025). Bursa İlinde Bir Boya Fabrikasının Karbon Ayak İzinin Hesaplanması. Journal of Economic Research Foundation, 2(2), 176-190.
  36. Shan, Y., Liu, J., Liu, Z., Xu, X., Shao, S., Wang, P., & Guan, D. (2016). New provincial CO2 emission inventories in China based on apparent energy consumption data and updated emission factors. Applied Energy, 184, 742–750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.073
  37. Sheng, X., Chen, L., Liu, M., Wang, Q., Ma, Q., Zuo, J., & Yuan, X. (2025). Input-output models for carbon accounting: A multi-perspective analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 207, 114950. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2024.114950
  38. Tokac, B., Zhang, Q., & Sari, Y. A. (2025). Environmental and economic comparison of diesel and electric trucks in open-pit mining operations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 507, 145540.
  39. Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT) (2025). Greenhouse Gas Emissions Statistics, 1990-2023. Release Date: 26 March 2025. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Sera-Gazi-Emisyon-Istatistikleri-1990-2023-53974
  40. Ulusal A. (2021). Tarımda Karbon Ayak İzimiz. Toros İnovasyon Bülteni, Haziran 2021, Sayı 19.
  41. Vásquez, L., Iriarte, A., Almeida, M., & Villalobos, P. (2015). Evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions and proposals for their reduction at a university campus in Chile. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 924-930.
  42. Wang F., Harindintwali J.-D., Wei K., et al., (2023). Climate change: Strategies for mitigation and adaptation. The Innovation Geoscience 1(1), 100015. https://doi.org/10.59717/j.xinn-geo.2023.100015
  43. Wiedmann, T., & Minx, J. (2008). A definition of “carbon footprint”. Durham: ISAUK Research Report 07-01.
  44. Wright, L. A., Kemp, S., & Williams, I. D. (2011). Carbon footprinting: towards a universally accepted definition. Carbon Management, 2(1), 61-72.
  45. Zhong, J., Bollen, M., & Rönnberg, S. (2021a). Towards a 100% renewable energy electricity generation system in Sweden. Renewable Energy, 171, 812–824.
  46. Zhong, X., Hu, M., Deetman, S., Steubing, B., Lin, H. X., Hernandez, G. A., & Behrens, P. (2021b). Global greenhouse gas emissions from residential and commercial building materials and mitigation strategies to 2060. Nature Communications, 12 (1), 6126.