Energy planning in the built environment increasingly takes place in local settings. Suitable planning models should therefore be able to capture local dynamics, such as stakeholder behaviour, resource availability and building characteristics. In relation to the key challenges of energy transition in the built environment, building efficiency and renewable heating, little attention has been paid to the model characteristics needed to address these challenges. This paper analyses the characteristics of available models from the scientific community and the professional practice. Secondly, the paper reviews modelling approaches for integrating social factors within techno-economic models, as many local dynamics have a non-technical nature. Based on the gaps identified in the analysis, an analytical framework is proposed for local energy planning models for the built environment. Building characteristics, social context factors, temporal dynamics and spatial characteristics have been identified as key building blocks for a new modelling approach. To be able to deal with the socio-technical context, an integrated, socio-technical approach is suggested. This model collaboration, consisting of model calculations and empirical and participatory methods, will be capable of better supporting decision-making in a local, multistakeholdercontext.
LINK
Significant factors in the success or failure of energy transition arise from the spatial potential of places and their communities. Scenario planning appears to be an appropriate design instrument to enable architects to unveil, conceptualise, imagine, test and communicate this potential to stakeholders. This paper critically refelcts on the scenario as an architectural design instrument. Inscribed with political intentions, scenario planning may be a far from neutral design instrument. Instead of triggering communities to explore local energy potential, a scenario may have a normative effect on a community's imagination. The paper aims to define guidelines for the deployment of scenarios in an open, participatory planning process. To mediate in a local participatory planning process, we argue, scenarios should be situational, dynamic and open-ended, allowing or even triggering communities to (re)define the issues relevant to a place during the ongoing process of energy-transition. How, when and where should scenarios be deployed in order to enable communities to understand and develop their local energy potential?
DOCUMENT
Citizen participation in local renewable energy projects is often promoted as many suppose it to be a panacea for the difficulties that are involved in the energy transition process. Quite evidently, it is not; there is a wide variety of visions, ideologies and interests related to an ‘energy transition’. Such a variety is actually a precondition for a stakeholder participation process, as stakeholder participation only makes sense if there is ‘something at stake’. Conflicting viewpoints, interests and debates are the essence of participation. The success of stakeholder participation implies that these differences are acknowledged, and discussed, and that this has created mutual understanding among stakeholders. It does not necessarily create ‘acceptance’. Renewable energy projects often give rise to local conflict. The successful implementation of local renewable energy systems depends on the support of the local social fabric. While at one hand decisions to construct wind turbines in specific regions trigger local resistance, the opposite also occurs! Solar parks sometimes create a similar variation: Various communities try to prevent the construction of solar parks in their vicinity, while other communities proudly present their parks. Altogether, local renewable energy initiatives create a rather chaotic picture, if regarded from the perspective of government planning. However, if we regard the successes, it appears the top down initiatives are most successful in areas with a weak social fabric, like industrial areas, or rather recently reclaimed land. Deeply rooted communities, virtually only have successful renewable energy projects that are more or less bottom up initiatives. This paper will first sketch why participation is important, and present a categorisation of processes and procedures that could be applied. It also sketches a number of myths and paradoxes that might occur in participation processes. ‘Compensating’ individuals and/or communities to accept wind turbines or solar parks is not sufficient to gain ‘acceptance’. A basic feature of many debates on local renewable energy projects is about ‘fairness’. The implication is that decision-making is neither on pros and cons of various renewable energy technologies as such, nor on what citizens are obliged to accept, but on a fair distribution of costs and benefits. Such discussions on fairness cannot be short cut by referring to legal rules, scientific evidence, or to standard financial compensations. History plays a role as old feelings of being disadvantaged, both at individual and at group level, might re-emerge in such debates. The paper will provide an overview of various local controversies on renewable energy initiatives in the Netherlands. It will argue that an open citizen participation process can be organized to work towards fair decisions, and that citizens should not be addressed as greedy subjects, trying to optimise their own private interests, but as responsible persons.
DOCUMENT
The SPRONG group, originating from the CoE KennisDC Logistiek, focuses on 'Low Impact in Lastmile Logistics' (LILS). The LILS group conducts practical research with local living labs and learning communities. There is potential for more collaboration and synergy for nationwide scaling of innovations, which is currently underutilized. LILS aims to make urban logistics more sustainable and facilitate necessary societal transitions. This involves expanding the monodisciplinary and regional scope of CoE KennisDC Logistiek to a multidisciplinary and supra-regional approach, incorporating expertise in spatial planning, mobility, data, circularity, AI, behavior, and energy. The research themes are:- Solutions in scarce space aiming for zero impact;- Influencing behavior of purchasers, recipients, and consumers;- Opportunities through digitalization.LILS seeks to increase its impact through research and education beyond its regions. Collaboration between BUas, HAN, HR, and HvA creates more critical mass. LILS activities are structured around four pillars:- Developing a joint research and innovation program in a roadmap;- Further integrating various knowledge domains on the research themes;- Deepening methodological approaches, enhancing collaboration between universities and partners in projects, and innovating education (LILS knowledge hub);- Establishing an organizational excellence program to improve research professionalism and quality.These pillars form the basis for initiating and executing challenging, externally funded multidisciplinary research projects. LILS is well-positioned in regions where innovations are implemented and has a strong national and international network and proven research experience.Societal issue:Last-mile logistics is crucial due to its visibility, small deliveries, high costs, and significant impact on emissions, traffic safety, and labor hours. Lastmile activities are predicted to grow a 20% growth in the next decade. Key drivers for change include climate agreements and energy transitions, urban planning focusing on livability, and evolving retail landscapes and consumer behavior. Solutions involve integrating logistics with spatial planning, influencing purchasing behavior, and leveraging digitalization for better data integration and communication. Digital twins and the Physical Internet concept can enhance efficiency through open systems, data sharing, asset sharing, standardization, collaboration protocols, and modular load units.Key partners: Buas, HR, HAN, HvAPartners: TNO, TU Delft, Gemeente Rotterdam, Hoger Onderwijs Drechtsteden, Significance, Metropolitan Hub System, evofenedex, Provincie Gelderland, Duurzaam Bereikbaar Heijendaal, Gemeente Alphen aan den Rijn, Radboud Universiteit, I&W - DMI, DHL, TLN, Noorderpoort, Fabrications, VUB, Smartwayz, RUG, Groene Metropoolregio.
When dealing with decarbonisation of regional areas, different stakeholders perceive different social, economic, regulatory and technological barriers which they need to overcome in order to move successfully towards a CO2-neutral region. Major questions concern how different technologies for supplying renewable (low carbon) energy can be utilized in an optimal way in combination with (strongly) increased energy efficiency, flexibility in energy demand, planning of investments and minimization of costs and at the same time taking specific local conditions (e.g. capital stock, energy infrastructure) into account. At the same time not only technology and economics are relevant, but just as important is the social acceptance of the transition steps. Together they determine whether or not a theoretical best step forward in the transition will be feasible in real life. On a regional – local scale, there is currently no comprehensive methodology and analysis framework for dealing with the barriers on the level of detail that is required. Decision making for stakeholders to decide on investments and planning over time is therefore difficult. This easily leads to sub-optimal implementation pathways, ineffective use of capital and incentives and too limited emission reductions. No need to say that this will often lead to stalemate situations and progress for energy transition is limited.
Climate change has impacted our planet ecosystem(s) in many ways. Among other alterations, the predominance of long(er) drought periods became a point of concern for many countries. A good example is The Netherlands, a country known by its channels and abundant surface water, which has listed “drought effect mitigation” among the different topics in the last version of its “Innovation Agenda” (Kennis en Innovatie Agenda, KIA). There are many challenges to tackle in such scenario, one of them is solutions for small/decentralized communities that suffer from dry-up of surface reservoirs and have no groundwater source available. Such sites are normally far from big cities and coastal zones, which impair the supply via distribution networks. In such cases, Atmospheric Water Generation (AWG) technologies are a plausible solution. These systems have relatively small production rates (few m3 per day), but they can still provide enough volume for cities with up to 100k inhabitants. Despite having real scale systems already installed in different locations worldwide, most systems are between TRL 5 and 6. Thus need further development. SunCET proposes an in-situ evaluation of an AWG system (WaterWin) developed by two different Dutch companies (Solaq and Sustainable Eyes) in the Brazilian semi-arid state of Ceará. The cooperation with NHL Stenden will provide the necessary expertise, analytical and technical support to conduct the tests. The state government of Ceará built an infrastructure to support the realization of in-situ tests, as they want to further accelerate technology implementation in the state. Such structure will make it possible to share costs and decrease total investments for the SMEs. Finally, it is also intended to help establishing partnerships between Dutch SMEs and Brazilian end users, i.e. municipalities of the Ceará state and small agriculture companies in the region.
