A major challenge for disaster scholars and policymakers is to understand the power dimension in response networks, particularly relating to collaboration and coordination. We propose a conceptual framework to study interests and negotiations in and between various civic and professional, response networks drawing on the concepts of “programming” and “switching” proposed by Manuel Castells in his work on the network society. Programming in disaster response refers to the ability to constitute response networks and to program/reprogram them in terms of the goals assigned to the network. Switching is the ability to connect different net-works by sharing common goals and combining resources. We employ these concepts to understand how the US Federal Emergency Management Agency organized its response in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy. Our conceptual framework can be used both by disaster scholars and policymakers to understand how networked power is constructed and utilized.
DOCUMENT
Battery energy storage (BES) can provide many grid services, such as power flow management to reduce distribution grid overloading. It is desirable to minimise BES storage capacities to reduce investment costs. However, it is not always clear how battery sizing is affected by battery siting and power flow simultaneity (PFS). This paper describes a method to compare the battery capacity required to provide grid services for different battery siting configurations and variable PFSs. The method was implemented by modelling a standard test grid with artificial power flow patterns and different battery siting configurations. The storage capacity of each configuration was minimised to determine how these variables affect the minimum storage capacity required to maintain power flows below a given threshold. In this case, a battery located at the transformer required 10–20% more capacity than a battery located centrally on the grid, or several batteries distributed throughout the grid, depending on PFS. The differences in capacity requirements were largely attributed to the ability of a BES configuration to mitigate network losses. The method presented in this paper can be used to compare BES capacity requirements for different battery siting configurations, power flow patterns, grid services, and grid characteristics.
DOCUMENT
With the effects of climate change linked to the use of fossil fuels, as well as the prospect of their eventual depletion, becoming more noticeable, political establishment and society appear ready to switch towards using renewable energy. Solar power and wind power are considered to be the most significant source of global low-carbon energy supply. Wind energy continues to expand as it becomes cheaper and more technologically advanced. Yet, despite these expectations and developments, fossil fuels still comprise nine-tenths of the global commercial energy supply. In this article, the history, technology, and politics involved in the production and barriers to acceptance of wind energy will be explored. The central question is why, despite the problems associated with the use of fossil fuels, carbon dependency has not yet given way to the more ecologically benign forms of energy. Having briefly surveyed some literature on the role of political and corporate stakeholders, as well as theories relating to sociological and psychological factors responsible for the grassroots’ resistance (“not in my backyard” or NIMBYs) to renewable energy, the findings indicate that motivation for opposition to wind power varies. While the grassroots resistance is often fueled by the mistrust of the government, the governments’ reason for resisting renewable energy can be explained by their history of a close relationship with the industrial partners. This article develops an argument that understanding of various motivations for resistance at different stakeholder levels opens up space for better strategies for a successful energy transition. https://doi.org/10.30560/sdr.v1n1p11 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
INEDIT creates an open innovation European DIT ecosystem for sustainable furniture co-creation. It channels the creativity of consumers, shapes it through designers' professional skills, and makes it viable by leveraging on the expertise of production specialists in order to deliver sustainable, smart and personalized new products in a shorter time to market. INEDIT intends to demonstrate the capacity to turn the well-known 'Do It Yourself' (DIY) approach applied by individuals within FabLabs into a professional approach named 'Do It Together' (DIT).The DIT approach will be applied by customers and professional producers, especially SMEs, for conveying higher customer satisfaction through customer-driven production. DIT is a novel approach capitalizing on the knowledge, creativity and ideas of design and engineering conceptualized by interdisciplinary stakeholders and sometimes even new actors. It is powered by existing European innovation ecosystems shaping new products across EU countries.INEDIT demonstrates the approach through four cross use cases with high societal impact: sustainable wood panels manufacturing and 3D-printing of wood, 3D printing of recycled plastic and 'smartification'.Sustainability and consideration of individual preferences, especially of women and men, will be our guiding thread. INEDIT addresses societal challenges such as contribution to reduce the amount of produced CO2 in focusing on European-wide production, creation and maintenance of EU-wide job opportunities. This will lead to new business opportunities supported by business model innovation.Moreover, these innovative networked local manufacturing competences and production facilities across the EU will solve ethical concerns within the manufacturing network. INEDIT intends to demonstrate, through its twin - digital and physical - platform, the potential innovation around social manufacturing within the circular economy in designing globally while producing locally.
