Advertisement

Smart, but is It Sustainable? The Importance of Reconciling Non-Technical Concerns in Grid-Development Policies

  • Ole Andreas Brekke
  • Hogne Leroy Sataoen
Part of the Energy, Climate and the Environment book series (ECE)

Abstract

Electricity grids in Europe are currently undergoing numerous changes. New grid development projects are proposed everywhere. This is partly caused by the Renewable Energy Sources (RES) directive of 2009 that specifies national targets that all countries must achieve by 2020. In Norway the on-shore renewable share is already high — around 60 percent, but as an EEA (European Economic Area) country Norway has agreed to increase this share to 67.5 percent. In Sweden the target is 49 percent, but the government has published the ambition to reach a renewable target beyond 50 percent by 2020. As a consequence, a number of efforts are being made to stimulate renewables. From 2012, a joint certificate market has been established between Norway and Sweden and, for 2020, a target has been set of 26.4 TWh of renewable electricity production. The political commitment to be submitted in accordance with the RES Directive targets will be shared equally between Norway and Sweden, with 13.2 TWh each, but given the market orientation of the policy scheme the actual investment will be located where investors find it most attractive. There are a lot of opinions and much public discussion surrounding renewables (Toke, 2005; Wüstenhagen et al., 2007), but without well-functioning electricity grids, electricity will never reach the market. In the last few years, investments in the upgrade and development of transmission lines have notably increased.

Keywords

Smart Grid Electricity Grid Customer Engagement Central Grid Phasor Measurement Unit 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Angell, S.I. and O.A. Brekke (2011) Frå kraft versus natur til miljøvenleg energi? Rokkan-rapport 3 2011 (Bergen: UNI Research Rokkansenteret).Google Scholar
  2. Arentsen, M., R. Kemp and E. Luiten (2002) ‘Technological change and innovation for climate protection’, in M. Kok, W. Vermeulen, A. Faaij and D. de Jager (eds) Global Warming and Social Innovation (London: Earthscan).Google Scholar
  3. Assefa, G. and B. Frostell (2007) ‘Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment’, Technology in Society, 29, 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell, D., T. Gray and C. Haggett (2005) ‘The “social gap” in wind farm siting decisions’, Environmental Politics, 14, 460–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brekke, O. and H. Sataøen (2012) ‘Fra samkjøring til overkjøring?’, Plan, 06/2012.Google Scholar
  6. Cotton, M. and P. Devine-Wright (2011) ‘Discourses of energy infrastructure development’, Environment and Planning, A43, 942–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Devine-Wright, P. (2011) Renewable Energy and the Public (London: Earthscan).Google Scholar
  8. Economist, The (2013b) ‘Briefing: European Utilities: How to Lose Half a Trillion Euros’, October 12, 2013, http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21587782-europes-electricity-providers-face-existential-threat-how-lose-half-trillion-euros.
  9. Hughes, T.P. (1993) Networks of Power (London: Johns Hopkins Press).Google Scholar
  10. Högselius, P. and A. Kaijser (2007) När folkhemselen blev internationell (Stockholm: SNS Förlag).Google Scholar
  11. Jakobsson, E. (1996) Industrialisering av älvar (Göteborg: Göteborgs Universitet).Google Scholar
  12. Knapp, E .D. and R. Samani (2013) Applied Cyber Security and the Smart Grid (Waltham, MA: Syngress).Google Scholar
  13. Lafferty, W.M., O.M. Larsen and A. Ruud (2008) ‘Norway’, in A. Jordan and A. Lenschow (eds) Innovation in Environmental Policy (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar).Google Scholar
  14. Lafferty, W.M. and A. Ruud (2008) Promoting Sustainable Electricity in Europe (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Meld. St. 14 (2011–2012) Vi bygger Norge — om utbygging av strømnettet . Olje- og energidepartementet. Oslo: White paper no 14.Google Scholar
  16. Miljöbalken (2009) ‘Lag om ändring i miljöbalken’, Svensk författningssamling, 652, http://www.lagboken.se/dokument/Andrings-SFS/362779/SFS-2009_652-Lag-om-andring-i-miljobalken?id=37605, date accessed December 8, 2011.
  17. Rokkan, S. (1967) ‘Geography, religion and social class’, in S.M. Lipset and S. Rokkan (eds) Party Systems and Voter Alignments (New York: The Free Press).Google Scholar
  18. Ruud, A., J.J. Kielland Haug and W.M. Lafferty (2011) ‘“Case Hardanger”’, Rapport TR A7104 and CEDREN DO.4.1, www.cedren.no (home page), date accessed October 23, 2013.
  19. Simon, H.A. (1957) Models of Man (New York: Wiley).Google Scholar
  20. Svenska Kraftnät (2012a) Investerings- och finansieringsplan för åren 2013–2015, http://www.svk.se/Publicerat/Rapporter-remissvar/Rapporter/, date accessed October 23, 2013.Google Scholar
  21. Svenska Kraftnät (2013) Perspektivplan 2025 – en utvecklingsplan för det svenska stam-nätet, http://www.svk.se/Publicerat/Rapporter-remissvar/Rapporter/, date accessed October 23, 2013.
  22. Thue, L. (1995) ‘Electricity Rules: The Formation and Development of the Nordic Electricity Regimes’, in A. Kaijser and M. Hedin (eds) Nordic Energy Systems (Canton, MA: Science History Publications), pp. 11–31.Google Scholar
  23. Toke, D. (2005) ‘Explaining Wind Power Planning Outcomes’, Energy Policy, 33(12), 1527–39.Google Scholar
  24. Unruh, G.C. (2000) ‘Understanding Carbon Lock-in’, Energy Policy, 28(12), 817–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wüstenhagen, R., M. Wolsink, and M.J. Burer (2007) ‘Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Innovation’, Energy Policy, 35, 2683–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Audun Ruud 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ole Andreas Brekke
  • Hogne Leroy Sataoen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations