Taking a Micro-Perspective on the Global Challenge of Climate Change: The “Microenergy Systems” Research Focus at the Technische Universität Berlin

  • Jonas Van der StraetenEmail author
  • Kathrin Friederici
  • Sebastian Groh
Part of the Climate Change Management book series (CCM)


In the past, fuel-based economies have led the way in economic growth, resulting in emissions that are now understood to cause climate change, having a major impact on countries of the Global South. It has become clear that effective climate change mitigation and adaptation not only require restrictions on energy consumption in the industrialized world, but also a decoupling of economic development from greenhouse gas emissions in the South. But can developing countries take a less carbon-intensive path, even though its outcome is highly uncertain? In many scenarios for a sustainable future energy supply, decentralized solutions play a crucial role. Such solutions are often based on renewable energies and can help to avoid lock-in effects based on fuel intensive energy systems. However, they are characterized by various aspects that conventional research paradigms have given little attention to, until now. These research challenges are reflected in the concept of Microenergy Systems, which serves as a theoretical basis for the Research Focus and Ph.D. program at the Technische Universität in Berlin. It brings together academics from various disciplines to take a micro-perspective on the idea of decentralized energy supply. This chapter introduces and discusses the concept of Microenergy Systems. It summarizes the development of the relatively young research group—the experiences of engineers, social and political scientists, economists and planners partaking in joint research and education in the field of decentralized sustainable energy solutions. Furthermore it highlights the attempt to establish an international scientific community concerned with Microenergy Systems amongst academics who are scattered throughout different institutions and numerous universities worldwide.


Decentralized energy supply User perspective Transdisciplinary research Knowledge transfer Education 



The authors thank Prof. Dr. Dr. Martina Schäfer, Noara Kebir, Daniel Philipp, Ariane Krause, Bettina Barthel, Klara Lindner and Alexander Batteiger from the postgraduate program Microenergy Systems for their contributions to this chapter, Richard Kunert from Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics and Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour and Daniel Hinchliffe from Microenergy International GmbH in Berlin for their comments and corrections.


  1. Ahmad B (2001) Users and disusers of box solar cookers in urban India: implications for solar cooking projects. Sol Energy 69:209–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barthel B (2013) Developing a small-scale biogas digester in rural Tanzania. An ethnographic approach for the analysis of an untypical innovation journey. In: Schäfer M, Kebir N, Philipp D (eds) Micro perspectives in decentralized energy supply. Conference Proceedings 2013, pp 133–136Google Scholar
  3. Department for International Development (DFID) (2002) Energy for the poor. Underpinning the Millennium Development Goals, Glasgow (UK), Future Energy Solutions. Available (March 2013)
  4. Devine-Wright H, Devine-Wright P (2009) Social representations of electricity network technologies: exploring processes of anchoring and objectification through the use of visual research methods. Br J Soc Psychol 48:357–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gibbons M, Nowotny H (2000) The potential of transdisciplinarity. In: Klein HTh et al (eds) Transdisciplinarity: joint problem solving among science, technology and society. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 67–80 Google Scholar
  6. Groh S (2013) The synergy potential of financial and energy inclusion. Accion-center for financial inclusion blog, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  7. Groh S, Philipp D, Edlefsen B, Kirchhoff H (2013) Swarm electrification-suggesting a paradigm change through building up microgrids bottom-up. Conference “Energy Systems in Transition: Inter-and transdisciplinary contributions”. 9th–11th of October 2013 in Karlsruhe, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  8. Groh S (2014) The role of energy in development processes-The Energy Poverty Penalty: Case study of Arequipa (Peru).  Energy for Sustainable Development. Vol 18, February 2014, Pages 83–99Google Scholar
  9. Hammond AL, Kramer WJ, Katz RS, Tran JT, Walker C (2007) The next 4 billion: market size and business strategy at the base of the pyramid. World Resources Institute and International Finance Corporation, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Hankins M (1993) Solar rural electrification in the developing world. Four case studies: Dominican Republic, Kenya, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, Solar Electric Light Fund (SELF), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  11. Hazeltine B, Bull C (1999) Appropriate technology: tools, choices and implications. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoffmann U, Wilson B (2000) Requirements for, and benefits of, environmentally sound and economically viable management of battery recycling in the Philippines in the wake of Basel Convention trade restrictions. J Power Sources 88:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. IDCOL (2013) Infrastructure Development Company Limited. Available: (June 2013)
  14. Jacobson A (2004) Connective power: solar electrification and social change in Kenya. University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson O (2013) Universal energy access: moving from technological fix to poverty reduction. Briefing Paper 6/2013, German Development Institute. Available (June 2013)$FILE/BP%206.2013.pdf
  16. Kaufmann S, Duke R, Hansen R, Rogers J, Schwartz R, Treler M (2000) Rural electrification with solar energy as a climate protection strategy. Renewable Energy Policy project, No. 9. Available (January 2013)
  17. Kebir N, Blessing L (2009) Development of a certification process for microenergy systems. In: Proceedings, international conference on engineering designGoogle Scholar
  18. Kebir N, Müller P (2010) Energy product-service systems. E-PSS design guideline. GTZ and MicroEnergy International, TU BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Kirubi C, Jacobson N, Kammen D, Mills A (2009) Community-based electric micro-grids can contribute to rural development: evidence from Kenya. World Dev 37(7):1208–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krause A (2011) Hydrothermal carbonization as innovative technology in sustainable sanitation in Tanzania. In: Schäfer M, Kebir N, Philipp D (eds) Micro perspectives in decentralized energy supply. Conference Proceedings 2013, pp 238–240Google Scholar
  21. Lal R (2010) Managing soils and ecosystems for mitigating anthropogenic carbon emissions and advancing global food security. Bioscience 60(9):708–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Laufer D, Schäfer M (2011) The contribution of microenergy systems towards poverty reduction: case study of an implementation strategy for solar home systems in Sri Lanka. Energy Sustain Dev 15(3):330–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lay J, Ondraczek J, Stoever J (2012) Determinants of renewable energy use: solar home systems and lighting fuel choice in Kenya. Energy EconGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindner K (2011) Quality Issues in the market based dissemination of solar home systems. In: Schäfer M, Kebir N, Philipp D (eds) Micro perspectives in decentralized energy supply. Conference Proceedings 2013, pp 220–228Google Scholar
  25. Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF) (2012) Climatescope 2012: assessing the climate for climate investing in Latin America and the Caribbean. MIF in collaboration with Bloomberg New Energy Finance, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  26. Mills E (2005) The specter of fuel-based lighting. Science 308(5726):163–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Müller P, Kebir N, Stark R, Blessing L (2009) PSS layer method—Application to microenergy systems. In: Sakao T, Lindahl M (eds) Introduction to product/service-system design, pp 3–30Google Scholar
  28. Nussbaumer P, Bazilian M, Modi V (2012) Measuring energy poverty: focussing on what matters. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(1):231–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. OECD/IEA (2011) Energy for all. Financing access for the poor, special early excerpt of the World Energy Outlook 2011, ParisGoogle Scholar
  30. Payne J (2010) Survey of the international evidence on the causal relationship between energy consumption and growth. J Econ Stud 37(1):53–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Philipp D, Schäfer M (2009) Interdisziplinärer Forschungsansatz zur Analyse von Mikroenergie Systemen, ZTG/TU Berlin. Available (June 2013) Downloads/Diskussionspapier_zu_Mikroenergie-Systemen.pdf
  32. Rose DA (2001) Reconceptualizing the user(s) of—and in—technological innovation: the case of vaccines in the United States. In: Coombs R, Green K, Richards A, Walsh V (eds) Technology and the market, demand, users and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing Inc, Cheltenham/Northampton, pp 68–88Google Scholar
  33. Schäfer M, Kebir N, Neumann K (2011) Research needs for meeting the challenge of decentralized energy supply in developing countries. Energy Sustain Dev 15(3):324–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schäfer M, Kebir N, Philipp D (eds) (2013) Micro perspectives in decentralized energy supply. Conference Proceedings 2013Google Scholar
  35. Schumacher EF (1973) Small is beautiful: economics as if people mattered. Blond & Briggs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Schweizer P (1996) Psychologische Faktoren bei der Nutzung regenerativer Energien: Eine Studie zum Einsatz von Solartechnik im zentralen Himalaya. Aktuelle Psychologische Forschung (Bd.19), Pabst, LengerichGoogle Scholar
  37. Stadler I et al (2002) Use of appliances in stand alone PV power supply systems. International Energy Agency, Photovoltaic Power ProgrammeGoogle Scholar
  38. Steckel J, Brecha RJ, Jakob M, Strefler J, Luderer G (2013) Development without energy? Assessing future scenarios of energy consumption in developing countries. Ecol Econ 90:53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tillmanns A, Schweizer-Ries P (2011) Knowledge communication regarding solar home systems in Uganda: the consumers’ perspective. Energy Sustain Dev 15(3):337–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. UNEP Collaborating Centre Frankfurt School of Finance and Management (2013) Global trends in renewable energy investment 2013, Frankfurt. Available (September 2013)
  41. WHO (2007) WHO household energy database. Available: (June 2013)
  42. World Bank (2011) Household Cookstoves, environment, health and climate change: a new look at an old problem, Washington DC. Available (August 2013)
  43. Yonazi E, Kelly T, Halewood N, Blackman C (eds) (2012) The transformational use of information and communication technologies in Africa. Available (September 2013)
  44. Ybema JR, Battjes JJ, Jansen JC, Ormel FT (2000) Burden differentiation: GHG emissions, undercurrents and mitigation costs. Netherlands Energy Research Foundation ECNGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonas Van der Straeten
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kathrin Friederici
    • 1
  • Sebastian Groh
    • 1
  1. 1.MES Research GroupTechnische Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations