Week 5
2.19.2018
Framing: What has inhibited the transition to renewables?
Focus: What is stakeholder/public opinion regarding renewable energy generation as a method to combat climate change?
Skylar Golleher and I have previously worked on a project focusing on what promotes renewable generation in our Fall 2018 Environmental Analysis class. We plan to work together again to expand on our previous project. We focused on renewable and nuclear energy generation because it is one way to combat climate change by reducing carbon emissions in the electricity industry. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] published a report stating, “[h]uman activities are estimated to have caused approximately 1.0°C of global warming above pre-industrial levels, with a likely range of 0.8°C to 1.2°C. Global warming is likely to reach 1.5°C between 2030 and 2052 if it continues to increase at the current rate” (IPCC 2018). As of 2013, electricity and heating accounted for 31% of carbon emissions, while the energy industry as a whole accounted for 72% of carbon emissions (Friedrich 2017). There are many different ways to reduce carbon emission but this is one reason why the energy industry, more specifically the electric industry, has been called upon to reduce pollution levels.
Global scholarship and discussion has focused on effective and efficient ways to transition to low carbon sources of energy. One method, as we researched in France, is nuclear power. “Nuclear power…can therefore be part of a global decarbonization process, with some countries depending on nuclear more heavily than others to cut their emissions. The 10 largest emitters of greenhouse gases globally all have plans to use nuclear power in some way to reduce their carbon footprint. Nuclear is currently the largest source of low-carbon electricity in OECD countries.” (London… 2018). In addition to nuclear there has been a movement to another type of generation: renewables.
Academic literature provides a conglomerate of studies attempting to explain the best way to reduce carbon emissions in the energy industry ranging from the risks of carbon emissions from the energy industry to human health, why renewables are necessary to combat carbon emissions, and what the drivers are. Authors like Markandya emphasize how “electricity generation from fossil fuel—resources of which could sustain their continued dominant role in electricity production well beyond this century—is also a cause of substantial adverse health burdens (Markandya 2007, 979).” While “[a]n accelerated switch to renewable sources has the potential to deliver appreciable health benefits, though a major switch will pose (superable) challenges particularly in relation to the intermittency of renewable production, land use requirements, and cost (Markandya 2007, 979).” As an attempt to combat carbon emissions, a variety of policies from different countries have set goals to reduce carbon emissions from certain sectors, often the energy industry. In sum, “[g]lobal, Europe-wide, and country-specific scenarios show 10% to 50% shares of primary energy from renewables by 2050. By 2020, many targets and scenarios show 20% to 35% share of electricity from renewables, increasing to the range 50% to 80% by 2050 under the highest scenarios” (Martinot 2007, 205). This type of research suggests that countries are pursuing a reduction in carbon emissions. In this project Skylar and I will reach out to stakeholders to determine what they believe has inhibited as well as promoted the transition to renewables.
Love Your Monsters by Bruno Latour discusses the importance of following through on one’s creation. Specifically, they focus on the many benefits of technological creations, but only if you remember to love them. Technology has the power to change the world but this will not happen in one easy step; confronting consequences is necessary in order for these tools to become effective. This can be directly applied to the energy sector and electricity generation and its respective technology from the past 200 years. With the development of coal power, humanity was able to connect and accomplish like never before. Yet this technology had consequences: coal is a dirty energy, polluting high levels of carbon emissions, mining for coal is extremely dangerous for the workers’ health and safety, and the operation of coal plants is extremely rigid and lacks the flexibility demanded from intermittent renewable energy resources that is demanded today. This required reform and care, demanding the development of new methods of energy generation, specifically nuclear energy. Nuclear power produces almost no carbon dioxide yet can create a surplus of energy. However, this new stage of energy was not perfect; nuclear plant disasters are extremely dangerous and it is not renewable. This lead to a third round of caring for the consequences of energy technology, resulting in a variety of advanced renewable energy methods. Loving the monsters of energy generation was the only way to arrive at where we are today, attempting to reduce carbon emissions through the innovation of renewables.
Figure 1 displays key stakeholders in our project and their relationship to electricity generation. Our stakeholder map ranges from consumers, suppliers, policy makers, and regulators. In our project we will contact a variety of stakeholders with different perspectives to obtain a better understanding of the variety of opinions that exist pertaining to reducing carbon emissions. Yellow colored “confident” stakeholders are individuals we are confident in their participation and our ability to engage with them. “Lofty” Stakeholders are colored red. They are individuals or groups we would like to engage with but there is uncertainty about their participation.
Our first step in engaging with our stakeholders will include a Google Questionnaire that will ask a combination of empirical and opinion questions in order for us to start data collection. Google Surveys are extremely easy and efficient so we believe that we will be able to hear from our “confident” stakeholders, as well as some of those from the “lofty” group. This survey will include questions that ask the participant to rank their answers on a scale of one to five. With these questions, we will be able to produce histograms of the many responses, in order to see where differences and similarities lie within our diverse stakeholder group. Additionally, the survey will also include questions that promote qualitative responses, such as “what is your experience with nuclear energy and how has that shaped your opinion?” Figure 2 displays all of the questions we plan to include in our first round of engagement.
After conducting these surveys, we will analyze our collected data. As stated above, this will include assembling comprehensive graphs but it will also require that we organize the personal responses. One potential tactic to accomplish this would be to create additional concept maps, relating each of the responses to one another to see how they connect and how they differ. By organizing these responses, we will be able to view popular ideas amongst stakeholders, as well as those that will most likely cause contention.
The final stage of our project will be conducted in person, starting a conversation with our stakeholders. We will be able to dive deeper into their answers from the survey but also introduce them to the ideas proposed by other participants. All of these steps are attempting to uncover what has inhibited the transition to renewables, when it is common knowledge that they are extremely efficient in reducing carbon pollution.
Figure 2
| Stage 1: Interview (maybe google forms) with questions ‘what do you believe promotes renewable energy’? |
|
| Stage 2: Analyze collected data
graph/concept map
|
|
| Stage 3: Follow up with information collected from research and interviews and ask if they agree or disagree. As well as if the data collected from the interviews makes sense. If not why. |
|
Our personal goals for this project is to gather a better understanding of the opposing views that influence the integration of diverse resources, such as nuclear and renewables. By this, we are striving to understand what creates separation within the energy industry. It is clear that the creation of energy is vital to the majority of the globe due to its prolific use from the public and private sectors. Yet there is much contention over what method of energy generation is the best for consumers now, and in the future. Additionally, if reducing carbon emissions in the energy sector is the best way to combat climate change. By conducting interviews and starting conversations with stakeholders, we will be able to understand a variety of viewpoints as well as the context behind these arguments. Additionally, by engaging our stakeholders with each other, we hope to start a conversation that extends outside of the realms of our academic project. By creating this dialogue, we hope to open our stakeholders up to new perspectives and potential solutions from their peers, in order to accomplish the shared goal of reducing carbon emissions. Our final, lofty goal is that this dialogue and collaboration between experts in their field would eventually result in policy reform. Embracing compromise is the first step toward creating a messy solution that is required for such a complex problem as energy generation. A willingness to turn to compromise will be easier to foster when there is a foundation of understanding already created through the dialogues our project hopes to facilitate.
Bibliography
https://www.oregon.gov/energy/energy-oregon/pages/electricity-mix-in-oregon.aspx
Friedrich, Johannes. 2017. “CAIT Climate Data Explorer.” April 11, 2017. http://cait.wri.org/.
Latour, Bruno. “Love Your Monsters.” In Love Your Monsters: Postenvironmentalism and the Anthropocene, edited by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, 256–425 [Kindle]. Oakland, CA: Breakthrough Institute, 2011.
London School of Economics and Political Science. 2018. “What Is the Role of Nuclear Power in the Energy Mix and in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions?” Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment (blog). Accessed December 5, 2018. http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/faqs/role-nuclear-power-energy-mix-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions/.
Markandya, Anil, and Paul Wilkinson. 2007. “Electricity Generation and Health.” The Lancet 370 (9591): 979–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61253-7.
Martinot, Eric, Carmen Dienst, Liu Weiliang, and Chai Qimin. 2007. “Renewable Energy Futures: Targets, Scenarios, and Pathways.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 32 (1): 205–39. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.32.080106.133554.
Roy, P. Tschakert, H. Waisman, S. Abdul Halim, P. Antwi-Agyei, P. Dasgupta, B. Hayward, M. Kanninen, D. Liverman, C. Okereke, P. F. Pinho, K. Riahi, A. G. Suarez Rodrigue. 2018. “Sustainable development, poverty eradication and reducing inequalities supplementary material. Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Accessed December 1, 2018. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/summary-for-policy-makers/
Jane's Environmental Explorations 