Making Energy Grids Smart. The Transition of Sociotechnical Apparatuses Towards a New Ontology

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)

Abstract

The analysis of the assemblages and the functioning of conventional energy grids is the starting point of any process of smartness. Even if smarter elements already exist in energy grids, a full transition towards smartness is still far away. To investigate the starting conditions of a claimed process towards smartness, we realized an investigation in the city of Turin exploring the socio-technical development of its district heating network. The social elements it is composed of have been the object of an empirical investigation, based on 38 interviews and 3 focus groups and aimed at depicting its features from the various perspectives of the many roles that are played in it, from the professionals of the energy utility to the end users. We use two main perspectives. The first one is to conceive energy grids as technological zones, in which metering standards, communication infrastructures, and social evaluation assemble. The second one is to conceive energy grids as apparatuses or dispositives in which asymmetric lines of power, knowledge, information, decision-making, intensity and artefacts, constitute the ontology of the grid itself. An apparatus is an assemblage or a hybrid of technical and social elements, which has the strategic function to respond to an urgency. Foucault refers to the apparatus as a device consisting of a series of parts arranged in a way so that they influence the scope. This device exerts a normative effect on its “environment” because it introduces certain dispositions. In their effectiveness, energy networks are apparatuses made of variable and disparate assemblages of natural, technical, and social elements, a continuous process fostering differences and repetitions. Based on our outcomes, we can consider thermal grids as a kind of complex system or network of agents in which energy power circulates in a way very similar to the circulation of social power.

Keywords

Thermal Comfort Smart Grid Corporate Actor District Heating Final User 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Agamben, G. 2009. What is an Apparatus? Translated by David Kishik and Stefan Pedatella. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ansell-Pearson, K. 1997. Deleuze Outside/Outside Deleuze: On the Difference Engineer. In Deleuze and Philosophy: The Difference Engineer, ed. Ansell-Pearson K. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Barad, K. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barad, K. 1998. Getting Real: Technoscientific Practices and the Materialization of Reality. Differences 10 (2):87–128.Google Scholar
  5. Barry, A. 2006. Technological Zones. European Journal of Social Theory 9 (2): 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brounen, D., N. Kok, and J.M. Quigley. 2012. Residential Energy Use and Conservation: Economics and Demographics. European Economic Review 56 (2012): 931–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bussolini, J. 2010. What is a Dispositive? Foucault Studies (10):85–107.Google Scholar
  8. Cakici, B., and M. Bylund. 2014. Changing Behaviour to Save Energy: ICT-Based Surveillance for a Low-Carbon Economy in the Seventh Framework Programme. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference ICT for Sustainability, vol. 2, 165–170.Google Scholar
  9. Coleman, J. 1974. Power and Structure of Society. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  10. Coleman, J. 1982. The Asymmetric Society. Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Crockett, C. 2013. Deleuze Beyond Badiou. Ontology, Multiplicity and Event. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  12. DeLanda, M. 2006. A New Philosophy of Society. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Deleuze, G. 1992. What is a Dispositif? In Michel Foucault Philosopher, ed. J. Timothy, 159–168. Armstrong. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Deleuze G. 1994. Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press (or. ed. 1968).Google Scholar
  15. Ehrhardt-Martinez, K., K. Donnelly, and J.A. “Skip” Laitner. 2010. Advanced Metering Initiatives and Residential Feedback Programs: A Meta-Review for Household Electricity-Saving Opportunities. Washington, DC: ACEEE.Google Scholar
  16. European Commission. 2011. “Definition, expected services, functionalities and benefits of smart grids”, Accompanying documents to communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, “smart grids: from innovation to deployment”, com (2011) 202 final Brussels, 12.4.2011 sec (2011) 463 final.Google Scholar
  17. European Environment Agency. 2013. Achieving energy efficiency through behaviour change: What does it take? EEA Technical report No 5/2013.Google Scholar
  18. Flam, H. 1990. Corporate Actors: Definition, Genesis, and Interaction, Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung, MPIFG Discussion Paper 90/11.Google Scholar
  19. Foucault M. 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977, 194–196. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  20. Foucault M. 2003. Society Must Be Defended, Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, Picador, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Garfinkel, H. 1998. Evidence for Locally Produced, Naturally Accountable Phenomena of Order, Logic, Reason, Meaning, Method, etc. in and as of the Essential Quiddity of Immortal Ordinary Society (I of IV): An Announcement of Studies, Sociological Theory 6 (1):103–109.Google Scholar
  22. Gram-Hanssen, K. 2009. Standby consumption in households analysed with a practice theory approach. Journal of Industrial Ecology 14: 150–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hargreaves, T., M. Nye, and J. Burgess. 2010. Making Energy Visible: A Qualitative Field Study of How Householders Interact with Feedback from smart Energy Monitors. Energy Policy 38 (10): 6111–6119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lund, H., et al. 2012. From Electricity Smart Grids to Smart Energy Systems. A Market Operation Based Approach and Understanding. Energy 42: 96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lund, H., S. Werner, R. Wiltshire, S. Svendsen, J.E. Thorsen, F. Hvelplund, and B.V. Mathiesen. 2014. 4th Generation District Heating (4GDH). Integrating Smart Thermal Grids into Future Sustainable Energy Systems. Energy 68: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mengolini A., and J. Vasiljeska. 2013. The Social Dimension of Smart Grids. Consumer, Community, Society. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Energy and Transport, Report EUR 26161 EN.Google Scholar
  27. Mitchell, T. 2011. Carbon Democracy. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  28. Nyborg S., and I. Røpke. 2011. Energy impacts of the smart home—Conflicting visions, ECEEE 2011 SUMMER STUDY. Energy efficiency first: The foundation of a low-carbon society.Google Scholar
  29. Padovan, D. 2015a. Assembling Societal Metabolism and Social Practices: The Dynamics of Sustainable and Unsustainable Reproduction. In The Consumer in Society. A Tribute to Eivind Sto, ed. Pal Strandbakken, and Jukka Gronow, 335–362. Oslo: Abstrakt Forlag AS.Google Scholar
  30. Padovan, D. 2015b. Metabolic Exchanges and Practices of Regulation. The Assemblage of Environment and Society in Early Social Sciences. Ecological Informatics, 6–17.Google Scholar
  31. Padovan, D., F. Martini, and A.K. Cerutti. 2015. Social Practices of Ordinary Consumption: An Introduction to Household Metabolism. Journal of Socialomics 4 (2): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pullinger, M., H. Lovell, and J. Webb. 2014. Influencing Household Energy Practices: A Critical Review of UK Smart Metering Standards and Commercial Feedback Devices. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 26 (10): 1144–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Raffnsøe, Sverre. 2008. Qu’est-ce qu’un dispositif? L’analytique sociale de Michel Foucault, Symposium (Canadian Journal of Continental Philosophy/Revue canadienne de philosophie continentale): vol. 12, pp. 44–66.Google Scholar
  34. Russell, B. 2004. Power. A New Social Analysis. London & New York: Routledge (or. ed. 1938).Google Scholar
  35. Schatzki, T. 2011. Where the Action Is (On Large Social Phenomena Such as Sociotechnical Regimes), Sustainable Practices Research Group, Working Paper 1, University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
  36. Schatzki, T. 2015. Spaces of Practices and of Large Social Phenomena. EspacesTemps.net, Works, 24.03.2015.Google Scholar
  37. Schmidt, R.-R., N. Fevrier, and P. Dumas. 2013. Key to Innovation Integrated Solution. Smart Thermal Grids. European Commission, Smart Cities and Communities.Google Scholar
  38. Schwartz, T., G. Stevens, L. Ramirez, and V. Wulf. 2013. Uncovering Practices of Making Energy Consumption Accountable: A Phenomenological Inquiry. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 20 (2), Article 12 (May 2013).Google Scholar
  39. Shove, E. 2010. Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change. Environment and Planning 42: 1273–1285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shove, E., and G. Walker. 2014. What Is Energy For? Social Practice and Energy Demand. Theory, Culture & Society 31 (5):41–58 (September 2014).Google Scholar
  41. Smil, V. 2010. Energy Transitions. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.Google Scholar
  42. Strengers, Y. 2012. Peak Electricity Demand and Social Practice Theories: Reframing the Role of Change Agents in the Energy Sector. Energy Policy 44: 226–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tyfield, D. 2014. ‘King Coal is Dead! Long Live the King!’: The Paradoxes of Coal’s Resurgence in the Emergence of Global Low-Carbon Societies. Theory, Culture & Society 31 (5):59–81). Google Scholar
  44. Weber, M. 2005. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Culture, Politics and SocietyUniversity of TurinTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations