选址是否需要民主化?澳大利亚并网微电网案例研究

IF 9.3 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Pierrick Chalaye , Bjorn Sturmberg , Hedda Ransan-Cooper , Kathryn Lucas-Healey , A. Wendy Russell , Johannes Hendriks , Paula Hansen , Matthew O'Neill , Warwick Crowfoot , Phil Shorten
{"title":"选址是否需要民主化?澳大利亚并网微电网案例研究","authors":"Pierrick Chalaye ,&nbsp;Bjorn Sturmberg ,&nbsp;Hedda Ransan-Cooper ,&nbsp;Kathryn Lucas-Healey ,&nbsp;A. Wendy Russell ,&nbsp;Johannes Hendriks ,&nbsp;Paula Hansen ,&nbsp;Matthew O'Neill ,&nbsp;Warwick Crowfoot ,&nbsp;Phil Shorten","doi":"10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>The choice of suitable sites for microgrids is not only a techno-economic process. Many aspects are important in understanding community support (or lack thereof) for the planning and deployment of grid integration. Alongside usual techno-economic considerations, the site selection process </span><em>itself</em><span><span> must be responsive to the local socio-political context and concerns (e.g., multiple values, needs and expectations of energy infrastructure or perceived fairness of technology<span> deployment). In our project, we developed, in close collaboration with our local partners, an integrated site selection method to address these multiple imperatives. To this end, in addition to socio-technical considerations, our method seeks to (further) democratize network integration technology and its deployment so that it takes into account energy vulnerabilities and </span></span>inequalities and fully integrates the views of the most affected (especially the most vulnerable) stakeholders into well-informed, place-based deliberative processes. With the support of the method we detail in this paper, we suggest that researchers and practitioners invest time and resources in developing more democratic and place-based site selection methods for microgrids.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":11672,"journal":{"name":"Energy Policy","volume":"183 ","pages":"Article 113854"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does site selection need to be democratized? A case study of grid-tied microgrids in Australia\",\"authors\":\"Pierrick Chalaye ,&nbsp;Bjorn Sturmberg ,&nbsp;Hedda Ransan-Cooper ,&nbsp;Kathryn Lucas-Healey ,&nbsp;A. Wendy Russell ,&nbsp;Johannes Hendriks ,&nbsp;Paula Hansen ,&nbsp;Matthew O'Neill ,&nbsp;Warwick Crowfoot ,&nbsp;Phil Shorten\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113854\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>The choice of suitable sites for microgrids is not only a techno-economic process. Many aspects are important in understanding community support (or lack thereof) for the planning and deployment of grid integration. Alongside usual techno-economic considerations, the site selection process </span><em>itself</em><span><span> must be responsive to the local socio-political context and concerns (e.g., multiple values, needs and expectations of energy infrastructure or perceived fairness of technology<span> deployment). In our project, we developed, in close collaboration with our local partners, an integrated site selection method to address these multiple imperatives. To this end, in addition to socio-technical considerations, our method seeks to (further) democratize network integration technology and its deployment so that it takes into account energy vulnerabilities and </span></span>inequalities and fully integrates the views of the most affected (especially the most vulnerable) stakeholders into well-informed, place-based deliberative processes. With the support of the method we detail in this paper, we suggest that researchers and practitioners invest time and resources in developing more democratic and place-based site selection methods for microgrids.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Policy\",\"volume\":\"183 \",\"pages\":\"Article 113854\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421523004391\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421523004391","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

选择合适的微电网站点不仅是一个技术经济过程。在理解社区对网格集成的规划和部署的支持(或缺乏支持)时,许多方面都很重要。除了通常的技术经济考虑因素外,选址过程本身还必须对当地的社会政治背景和关注做出回应(例如,能源基础设施的多重价值观、需求和期望或技术部署的公平性)。在我们的项目中,我们与当地合作伙伴密切合作,开发了一种综合选址方法,以解决这些多重需求。为此,除了社会技术方面的考虑外,我们的方法还寻求(进一步)使网络集成技术及其部署民主化,以便考虑到能源脆弱性和不平等,并将受影响最严重(尤其是最脆弱)的利益相关者的意见充分纳入知情的、基于地点的审议过程中。在本文详细介绍的方法的支持下,我们建议研究人员和从业者投入时间和资源,为微电网开发更民主、更基于地点的选址方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does site selection need to be democratized? A case study of grid-tied microgrids in Australia

The choice of suitable sites for microgrids is not only a techno-economic process. Many aspects are important in understanding community support (or lack thereof) for the planning and deployment of grid integration. Alongside usual techno-economic considerations, the site selection process itself must be responsive to the local socio-political context and concerns (e.g., multiple values, needs and expectations of energy infrastructure or perceived fairness of technology deployment). In our project, we developed, in close collaboration with our local partners, an integrated site selection method to address these multiple imperatives. To this end, in addition to socio-technical considerations, our method seeks to (further) democratize network integration technology and its deployment so that it takes into account energy vulnerabilities and inequalities and fully integrates the views of the most affected (especially the most vulnerable) stakeholders into well-informed, place-based deliberative processes. With the support of the method we detail in this paper, we suggest that researchers and practitioners invest time and resources in developing more democratic and place-based site selection methods for microgrids.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Policy
Energy Policy 管理科学-环境科学
CiteScore
17.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
540
审稿时长
7.9 months
期刊介绍: Energy policy is the manner in which a given entity (often governmental) has decided to address issues of energy development including energy conversion, distribution and use as well as reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in order to contribute to climate change mitigation. The attributes of energy policy may include legislation, international treaties, incentives to investment, guidelines for energy conservation, taxation and other public policy techniques. Energy policy is closely related to climate change policy because totalled worldwide the energy sector emits more greenhouse gas than other sectors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信