Abstract
Engineering practitioners and critics of technology alike frequently claim that core values informing the structure and operation of the engineering profession in the U.S., such as mathematical problem-solving and analytic reasoning, are in conflict with values of social justice. However, there is hardly any documented evidence to measure the presence and practice of social justice in Renewable Energy Engineering (REE), a burgeoning field, whose development is essential to building a sustainable future. This chapter presents information regarding the identification of key engineering skills presently required in the U.S. REE context, drawing on 30 open-ended, semi structured, interviews conducted with educators and professionals who are involved with solar or wind energy engineering. This chapter aims to explore questions of why, how, by whom, and for whom assumptions about the attributes of solar and wind energy engineers are built into the engineering curriculum. Specifically, it invites reflection on the design of teaching strategies and technical methodologies used to integrate these attributes within engineering education and practice. Having outlined the social justice challenges of REE, I argue for the importance of a procedural justice framework for REE projects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The term “farm” communicates a sense of idyllic, green and pastoral setting—the exact opposite of the industrial scenery connoted by the term “plant” (e.g. solar or wind plant). In this chapter I have chosen to use the term “project” to describe both solar and wind facilities.
- 2.
Walker et al. (2010) note that “…narratives [of energy policy in the United Kingdom] are clearly predicated on the basis that ‘communities’ can and do exist in an unproblematic form and within many of the positive qualities with which they are readily associated.” Such considerations, however, are in fact problematic: “[w]hilst appearing inclusive, community can also be deeply exclusionary, marginalizing those who are seen as not fitting.” Also, what in each case counts as “affected community” may be contingent on the very type of RE technology at stake. I am thinking particularly about off-shore wind projects. Does “community,” in that case, simply mean “coastal community,” or must the term be broadened to include the mainland, too?
- 3.
Otherwise, when generally directing attention to the term/idea, the convention of italicizing social justice is used, rather than its referent.
- 4.
A 2009 press release by the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) was lamenting over the finding that “local council approvals of wind farm applications have fallen to a shocking new low of just 25 % (BWEA 2009).” In addition, according to a recent news report (Derbyshire 2011), data obtained by the British law firm McGrigors shows a growing percentage of wind farms being turned down by planners in the last 5 years (29 % in 2005, 33 % in 2009 and 48 % in 2010). The fact that the increase in the percentage of opposition is partly due to the increase in the number of project applications does not negate that project opposition suggests a significant concern in RE development internationally. I could not find a good source of aggregate data showing combined (solar and wind) opposition against RE projects in the U.S. The best source for community resistance to wind energy in North America is Phadke’s (2011) work, which uses GIS technology to plot the wind oppositional movement in the U.S. in the last 5 years. Finally, the reader must note that many proposed projects do not get built, and may not go forward for financial or other reasons.
- 5.
For instance, in February 2012, San Francisco based non-profit organization “The Vote Solar Initiative” released a public opinion poll on what communities in the desert counties of Southern California think about solar–project development (http://votesolar.org/2012/02/polls-california-desert-communities-support-solar-development-care-about-climate-change/). Vote Solar says respondents “overwhelmingly” support solar project development in the desert (75 % voted in support of solar projects). However, the study does not account for the proximity of respondents to proposed projects (Vote Solar 2012).
- 6.
Wolsink (1994) notes that in some cases RE proponents have likened NIMBY with a social disease (e.g. “NIMBY syndrome”).
- 7.
Throughout the nineteenth century, American engineers like Claudius Crozet, Andrew Humphreys and James Eads were individualists; that is, independent consultants or owner-engineers who built the nation’s early transportation infrastructure (Reynolds 1991). These engineers were both culturally visible and socially praised, often celebrated as heroes, whose “values entered the national literature… once the national landscape burgeoned with engineering achievements” (Tichi 1987). By the beginning of the twentieth century, though, engineering in the United States had been transformed into a profession which was fully integrated into America’s corporate system and whose practitioners were “organizational men” par excellence. This meant that engineers became largely invisible. In that sense, the concept of “the engineer’s social responsibility”—an idea invented by American technocrats—is part of the effort by engineers to remedy the ever-increasing cultural invisibility of their profession.
- 8.
Although the literature on social responsibility as it pertains to science is extensive, the appropriation of the concept by engineers and their communities deserves attention in its own right; such investigation, nevertheless, goes beyond the scope of this chapter. See Layton (1971), Moore (2008), and Wisnioski (2012). Wisnioski, who is primarily interested in what he calls the intellectual crisis of technology (1957–1973) in the U.S., uses historical evidence to document that since the progressive era, a technocratic conceptualization of social responsibility has been part of the American engineering culture.
- 9.
Kahn (2011).
- 10.
For Beyond Nimbyism see http://geography.exeter.ac.uk/beyond_nimbyism/ and for “Community Energy Initiatives” see: http://geography.lancs.ac.uk/cei/communityenergyproject.htm
- 11.
See Wüstenhagen et al. (2007).
- 12.
The initial plan for a proposed wind project in Spanish Fork, Utah, for example, was objected to by a local city-engineer who thought that “the construction might interfere with the city’s nearby springwater collection system” (Hartman et al. 2011). However, an alternative plan, which required that the turbines be located closer to people’s homes, was resisted by community members. Finally, an independent consultant engineer’s determination that the project would not harm the local water supply re-qualified the initial siting plan.
- 13.
The list does not include programs in community colleges.
References
Allen, D., Allenby, B., Bridges, M., Crittenden, J., Davidson, C., Hendrickson, C., et al. (2009). Benchmarking sustainable engineering education: Final report. Austin: University of Texas at Austin, Carnegie Mellon University, Arizona State University.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1953, December 11). Society for social responsibility in science. Science, 118(3076), 3.
American Wind Energy Association and Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2009). Wind turbine sound and health effects: An expert panel review. Washington, DC: AWEA.
AWEA. (2011). U.S. wind industry annual market report. Washington, DC: AWEA.
Bell, D., Gray, T., & Haggett, C. (2005). The ‘Social Gap’ in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics, 14(4), 460–477.
Boyle, G., & Harper, P. (Eds.). (1976). Radical technology. London/New York: Pantheon/Random House.
Breukers, S., & Wolsink, M. (2007). Wind power implementation in changing institutional landscapes: An international comparison. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2737–2750.
Burningham, K. (2000). Using the language of NIMBY: A topic for research, not an activity for researchers. Local Environment, 5(1), 55–67.
BWEA. (2009). Wind farm planning approvals by local councils slump to record new low of 25%. http://www.bwea.com/pdf/press/PR20091020_25pc_approval.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov 2011.
Cass, N., & Walker, G. (2009). Emotion and rationality: the characterisation and evaluation of opposition to renewable energy projects. Emotion Space and Society, 2(1), 62–69.
Cha, A. E. (2008, March 8). Solar firms leave waste behind in China. The Washington Post, p. A1.
Cooke, M. L. (1916, November 14). Public engineering and human progress. Paper presented before the Cleveland Engineering Society, p. 8.
Derbyshire, D. (2011, July 11). The wind turbine backlash: Growing public opposition thwarts green energy drive. Mail Online. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013233/The-wind-turbine-backlash-Growing-public-opposition-thwarts-green-energy-drive.html#ixzz1jUo8QMZa. Accessed 8 Dec 2011.
Devine-Wright, P., et al. (2009). Beyond Nimbyism: A multidisciplinary investigation of public engagement with renewable energy technologies: Full Research Report, ESRC End of Award Report, RES-152-25-1008-A. Swindon: ESRC.
Downey, G. L., & Lucena, J. C. (2004). Knowledge and professional identity in engineering. History and Technology, 20(4), 393–420.
EuPD. (2011). Economic impact of extending the Section 1603 Treasury Program. Miami: EuPD.
Farrell, J. (2010). Community solar power: Obstacles and opportunities. Minneapolis: New Rules Project.
Gewirtz, S. (1998). Conceptualizing social justice in education: Mapping the territory. Journal of Education Policy, 13(4), 469–484.
Gordon, U. (2008). Anarchy alive!: Anti-authoritarian politics from practice to theory. London: Pluto Press.
Goswami, D. Y. (2001). Present status of solar energy education. In Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exhibition. Session 1433.
Gross, C. (2007). Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2727–2736.
Harding, J. (1995). Social policy and social justice: The NDP government in Saskatchewan during the Blakeney years. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Hartman, C., Stafford, E., & Reategui, S. (2011). Harvesting Utah’s urban winds. Solutions, 2(3). http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/930. Accessed 27 Dec 2011.
Hawken, P., Lovins, A., & Lovins, L. H. (1999). Natural capitalism: Creating the next industrial revolution. New York: Back Bay Books.
Hoen, B., Wiser, R., Cappers, P., & Thayer, M. (2011). An analysis of the effects of residential photovoltaic energy systems on home sales prices in California. Berkeley: Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Huijts, N. M. A., Midden, C. J. H., & Meijnders, A. L. (2007). Public acceptance of carbon dioxide storage. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2780–2789.
Kahn, D. (2011, July 26). Calif. Governor vows to ‘crush’ foes of renewable energy. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/07/26/26greenwire-calif-governor-vows-to-crush-foes-of-renewable-22698.html. Accessed 21 Nov 2011.
Kingsnorth, P. (2004, May 3). Nimbys are the true democratic heroes. The New Statesman, 17, 22–24.
Krogh, C. M. E. (2011). Industrial wind turbine development and loss of social justice? Bulletin of Science Technology Society, 31(4), 321–333.
Lantz, E., & Tegen, S. (2009). Economic development of community wind projects: A review and empirical evaluation. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy09osti/45555.pdf. Accessed 14 Dec 2011.
Layton, E. T. (1962a). Frederick Haynes Newell and the revolt of the engineers. Midcontinent American Studies Journal, 3(2), 17–26.
Layton, E. T. (1962b). Veblen and the engineers. American Quarterly, 14(1), 64–72.
Layton, E. T. (1971). The revolt of the engineers: Social responsibility and the American engineering profession. Cleveland: Press of Case Western Reserve University.
Lovins, A. B. (1977). Soft energy paths: toward a durable peace. San Francisco: Friends of the Earth International.
Marshall, S. B. (2011, November). Cultural resources can connect wind project developers with local communities. enerG, 6(6), 28.
Mitcham, C. A. (2009). Historico-ethical perspective on engineering education: From use and convenience to policy engagement. Engineering Studies, 1(1), 35–53.
Moore, K. (2008). Disrupting science: Social movements, American scientists, and the politics of the military, 1945–1975. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mulvaney, D. (forthcoming). Are green jobs, just jobs? Innovation, environmental justice, and the political ecology of photovoltaic (PV) life cycles.
Nath, I. (2010). Cleaning-up after clean energy: Hazardous waste in the solar industry. Stanford Journal of International Relations, 11(2), 6–15.
Online Ethics Center. (2010). Results from APPE mini-conference: Engineering towards a more just and sustainable World National Academy of Engineering, 2010. http://www.onlineethics.org/Topics/Enviro/EnviroResources/APPE2010/23243.aspx. Accessed 10 Dec 2011.
Owen, G. (2004). Community engagement in energy through energy mutuals. London: Mutuo.
Parkinson, S. (2010). Engineers and social responsibility: The big issues. In UNESCO, Engineering: Issues, challenges and opportunities for development (pp. 44–46). Paris: UNESCO.
Pellow, N. D., & Park, L. (2002). Environmental justice, immigrant workers, and the high-tech global economy. New York: New York University Press.
Phadke, R. (2011). Resisting and reconciling big wind: Middle landscape politics in the New American West. Antipode, 43(3), 754–776.
Reynolds, T. S. (1991). The engineer in 19th-century America. In T. S. Reynolds (Ed.), The engineer in America: A historical anthology from ‘technology and culture’ (pp. 7–26). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Schatzberg, E. (2006). Technik comes to America: Changing meanings of technology before 1930. Technology and Culture, 47(3), 486–512.
Schumacher, E. F. (1974). Small in beautiful: A study of economics as if people mattered. London: Abacus.
Solarbuzz. (2011). North America PV markets quarterly: Quarterly analysis and data of North American PV markets. San Francisco: Marketbuzz.
The Vote Solar Initiative. (2012). California desert communities say yes to solar, no to climate change.http://votesolar.org/2012/02/polls-california-desert-communities-support-solar-development-care-about-climate-change/. Accessed 25 Mar 2012.
Tichi, C. (1987). Shifting gears: Technology, literature, culture in modernist America. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
Tsoutsos, T., Frantzeskaki, N., & Gekas, V. (2005). Environmental impacts from the solar energy technologies. Energy Policy, 33(3), 289–296.
UNESCO. (2010). Engineering: Issues, challenges and opportunities for development. Paris: UNESCO.
Unger, S. H. (2010). Victor Paschkis versus Werner von Braun: Responsibility in engineering. IT Professional, 12(3), 6–7.
Upreti, B. R., & Van Der Horst, D. (2004). National renewable energy policy and local opposition in the UK: The failed development of a biomass electricity plant. Biomass and Bioenergy, 26(1), 61–69.
Veblen, T. (1921). The engineers and the price system. Kitchener: Batoche Books, 2001. (First edition: 1921.)
Walker, G. P., et al. (2007). Harnessing community energies: Explaining and evaluating community-based localism in renewable energy policy in the UK. Global Environmental Politics, 7(2), 64–82.
Walker, G. P., et al. (2010). Trust and community: exploring the meanings, contexts and dynamics of community renewable energy. Energy Policy, 38(6), 2655–2663.
Walter, G., & Gutscher, H. (2010). Public acceptance of wind energy and bioenergy projects in the framework of distributive and procedural justice theories: Insights from Germany, Austria and Switzerland. http://www.sozpsy.uzh.ch/forschung/energieumobilitaet/Public_Acceptance_Renewable_Energy.pdf. Accessed 23 Sept 2011.
Winner, L. (1986). The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wisnioski, M. H. (2003). Inside ‘the system’: Engineers, scientists, and the boundaries of social protest in the long 1960s. History and Technology, 19(4), 313–333.
Wisnioski, M. H. (2012). Engineers for change: Competing visions of technology in 1960s America. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Wolfson, M. (2011, October 21). Residential solar farms face growing opposition. The Windsor Star. http://www.windsorstar.com/business/Residential+solar+farms+face+growing+opposition/5584930/story.html. Accessed 6 Dec 2011.
Wolsink, M. (1994). Entanglement of interests and motives: Assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on facility siting. Urban Studies, 31(6), 857–866.
Wolsink, M. (2000). Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: Institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy, 21(1), 49–64.
Wolsink, M. (2006). Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY. Transactions Institute of British Geographers, 31(1), 85–91.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2000). Eco-efficiency: Creating more value with less. North Yorkshire: Fairfax House.
Wright, D., Foster, C., Amir, Z., Elliott, J., & Wilson, R. (2010). Critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in research. Health Expectations, 13(4), 359–368.
Wüstenhagen, R., et al. (2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2683–2691.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A
Appendix A
Preliminary overview of renewable energy technical education in the United States:
Renewable energy-related programs, degrees and certificates at universities (engineering, engineering technology, and other)Footnote 13
Institution | Affiliation | Degrees Offered |
|---|---|---|
1. Alfred University | Inamori School of Engineering | Minor in “REE” (the school is also working to add an REE major in Fall 2012 that is pending approval from the New York State Department of Education). |
2. Appalachian State University | College of Fine and Applied Arts Appropriate Technology Program | BS, minor and MS in “Appropriate Technology”. |
3. Arizona State University | College of Technology and Innovation | BS in “Electronics Engineering Technology” with a concentration in “Alternative Energy Technologies”. |
4. Arkansas State University | College of Agriculture and Technology | Bachelor’s in Applied Science (BAS) in “RE Technology,” with emphasis courses in wind and bioenergy. |
5. Colorado School of Mines | Geoscience and Resource Engineering | Minor in “Energy” with a curricular track in “RE”. |
6. DeVry University | College of Engineering and Information Sciences | BS in “Electronics Engineering Technology” with a specialization in “RE”. |
7. Ecotech Institutea | Solar/Wind Energy Technology | Associate’s degrees in “Solar Energy Technology,” and “Wind Energy Technology”. |
8. Illinois State University | Department of Technology | BS in “RE”. |
9. John Brown University | Department of Renewable Energy | BS in “RE”. |
10. Lawrence Tech University | Alternative Energy Engineering | Undergraduate Concentration and Certificate in “Alternative Energy Engineering”. |
11. Oregon Institute of Technology | Renewable Energy Engineering | BS and MS in “REE”. |
12. Penn State University | Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering/Undergraduate Program in Energy Engineering | BS in “Energy Engineering” and minor in “Energy Engineering” with coursework in RE. The department also offers an on-line BA in “Energy and Sustainability Policy”; it is also developing online courses for University-wide Professional Masters in “RE and Sustainability Systems”. |
13. San ta Clara University | Engineering School | MS in “Sustainable Energy”. |
14. Stanford University | Department of Energy Resources Engineering | BS, MS, and PhD in “Energy Resources Engineering”. |
15. State University of NY, Canton | Alternative and Renewable Energy Systems Program | BS in “Alternative and RE Systems Technology”. |
16. Texas Tech University | Texas Tech’s Wind Department | BS in “Wind Energy” (for non-engineers), “Wind Energy” Undergraduate Certificate, “Wind Energy” Minor or Area of Concentration, “Wind Energy” Graduate Certificate (Technical or Managerial Track). A doctoral degree program in “Wind Science and Engineering” has operated since 2007. |
17. University of California at Berkeley | Energy and Resources Group | Minor in “Energy and Resources”. |
18. University of Delaware | Department of Mechanical Engineering | Research area in “Clean Energy” as part of the BS in mechanical engineering. This includes a course in wind energy. |
19. University of Maine | College of Engineering/College of Natural Sciences, Forestry and Agriculture | Minor in “REE”. |
20. University of Massachusetts at Lowell | Graduate Program in Energy Engineering | MS in “Energy Engineering” (Solar Engineering Option) |
21. University of Massachusetts at Amherst | The University of Massachusetts in Amherst Wind Energy Center | MS and doctoral degrees in “Wind energy” plus a 15-credit graduate certificate in wind energy. |
22. University of Nevada at Reno | College of Engineering | Minor in “RE” (Two tracks: one for engineering students, another for non-engineering students). |
23. University of North Texas | Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering | BS in Mechanical and Energy Engineering with a Research Cluster in “RE and Conservation”. |
24. University of Northern Iowa | Department of Electrical Engineering Technology | BS in Electrical Engineering Technology with coursework in “Wind Energy Engineering”. |
25. University of Texas at Austin | Renewable Energy Program to be launched in the Spring semester of 2012. | |
26. University of Toledo | Department of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering | Minor in “RE”, BS in Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering. |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sakellariou, N. (2013). A Framework for Social Justice in Renewable Energy Engineering. In: Lucena, J. (eds) Engineering Education for Social Justice. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 10. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6350-0_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6350-0_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6349-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6350-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)