Search

Rapid action is needed in the energy sector to respond to the climate emergency. Here we argue for the increased use of ‘realist’ approaches in sociotechnical energy studies to inform this action. Realist approaches ask not just ‘what works?’, but also ‘for whom, in what circumstances and why?’. They place emphasis on understanding the mechanisms by which outcomes of interventions (such as policies) come about and, crucially, how this depends on contextual factors. This can inform action based on existing learning from a wide range of sectors and disciplines—action that is tailored to be effective in specific contexts, and can respond to the potential for unjust outcomes. In this way they can support justice, interdisciplinary working, and urgency in energy research. We consider limitations and drawbacks of the approach (and responses to these), and present a guide to getting started.

Peer-to-peer (P2P) electricity trading is a new data-driven business model currently being trialed within the energy sector. Introducing P2P transactions to an essential service such as energy supply could have far-reaching implications for individuals and the grid. This paper raises considerations and questions from social, market design and regulatory points of view, which should be understood and addressed by societies and policymakers. It does this by considering under what circumstances it is reasonable to conceptualize P2P electricity trading as part of the sharing economy, and drawing parallels to the sharing economy experience in other sectors. In order to reap the full societal benefits, while avoiding considerable risks to infrastructure and individuals, a policy approach promoting dialogue and innovation is necessary. We suggest the regulatory sandbox is the most appropriate tool to achieve this and would help avoid the breakdown of trust between policymakers and platform companies observed in other sectors.

Digital and physical games are now widely used to support learning and engagement, including in the domains of climate change and energy. We believe games have a further, underappreciated role: helping us as researchers to reflect on our own research, generating deeper understanding and, hopefully, more impactful research projects.

Flexibility has increasing value across sectors of the economy, including energy. The ability to be flexible is affected by a wide variety of sociotechnical factors and determines what we term ‘flexibility capital’. Levels of flexibility capital vary in populations, both absolutely and in the extent to which they are primarily derived from technological or social means, which has implications for the (dis)comfort and (in)convenience involved in economising flexibility capital. Furthermore, we argue that freedom of choice over whether and how to economise flexibility capital can be limited by factors such as financial resources, among others. In constrained systems (such as energy networks), the level of service enjoyed by the more affluent may not simply be higher than those who are less affluent, but may be directly enabled by reductions in the latter’s comfort and/or convenience which may not feel fully voluntary. There is a real risk that such injustices could be locked into energy infrastructure and market design and governance for the long term as has already happened in labour markets. We introduce the concept of ‘flexibility justice’ as a frame for these issues of fairness. While the concepts we offer in the paper emerge from longstanding engagements with energy research contexts and they relate directly to the issues currently being debated in the energy research and policy communities, we contend that they can be related to a much broader range of issues in 21st century economies.

While there is extensive research on the technical potential of electric vehicles (EVs) to provide electricity system flexibility, no work has sought to understand how EV manufacturers see their role in this transition. Here we present an interview study with 11 EV manufacturers active in the UK, determining their perceptions on the market potential for demand-side flexibility using EVs. Findings indicate manufacturers view significant potential in this market, but believe time is needed (i.e. in the 2020s) for the EV market to develop before there is enough system/consumer demand for flexibility using EVs. They believe better price signals are needed, and prefer a consumer-led approach (rather than, for example, mandatory smart charging). Most manufacturers recognise they have a role in making flexibility a viable offering, but for it to succeed it needs coordination with other players, notably energy suppliers, aggregators, network operators and consumers. Governments should have a role in encouraging and brokering such partnerships. There was little evidence of concern that network constraints resulting from multiple EVs charging on the same circuit could act as a brake on sales. We identify a risk that EV growth could outpace available infrastructure and flexibility market mechanisms, leading to grid management challenges.

Energy systems globally are becoming increasingly decentralised; experiencing new types of loads; incorporating digital or “smart” technologies; and seeing the demand side engage in new ways. These changes impact on the management and regulation of future energy systems and question how they will support a socially equitable, acceptable, net-zero transition. This paper couples a meta-narrative literature review with expert interviews to explore how socio-technical regimes associated with centralised systems of provision (i.e. the prevailing paradigm in many countries around the world) differ to those of smart local energy systems (SLES). Findings show how SLES regimes incorporate niche technologies, business models and governance structures to enable new forms of localised operation and optimisation (e.g. automated network management across energy vectors), smarter decision making and planning, by new actors (e.g. local authorities, other local stakeholders), and engaging users in new ways. Through this they are expected to deliver on a wide range of outcomes, both within the SLES boundary and to the wider system. However, there may be trade-offs between outcomes due to pressures for change originating from competing actors (e.g. landscape vs. incumbents in the regime); understanding the mapping between different outcomes, SLES elements and their interconnections will be key to unlocking wider benefits.

The purpose of this review is to investigate the nature of privacy concerns in the context of Smart Local Energy Systems (SLES) to understand how SLES providers can minimize both users’ concern, and cause for concern, around privacy. We conducted a rapid realist review and thematic framework analysis against Bronfrenbrenner’s socio-ecological model to understand privacy concerns in different contexts. A common privacy concern was that sharing detailed energy use data had the potential to reveal information about home life, and to intrude upon people’s sense of autonomy, choice and control. Evidence suggests that people are willing to accept newdata sharing technologies if the benefits of doing so are clear, anticipated, and mutually beneficial. Building trust, through increasing knowledge and understanding was a mechanism for overcoming privacy concerns, but this was mediated by the organization providing the information. Non-profit organizations were more trusted to ensure appropriate safeguards to privacy were in place. One key barrier to participation with good supporting evidence was that people can resist perceived intrusions on their privacy. This could be actively resisted by refusing to install data collection technologies or passively by non-participation in adapting energy use behaviors: both of which are necessary for SLES to achieve their goals of managing energy demand and building resilience in smart grids.

Energy use is of crucial importance for the global challenge of climate change, and also is an essential part of daily life. Hence, research on energy needs to be robust and valid. Other scientific disciplines have experienced a reproducibility crisis, i.e. existing findings could not be reproduced in new studies. The ‘TReQ’ approach is recommended to improve research practices in the energy field and arrive at greater transparency, reproducibility and quality. A highly adaptable suite of tools is presented that can be applied to energy research approaches across this multidisciplinary and fast-changing field. In particular, the following tools are introduced – preregistration of studies, making data and code publicly available, using preprints, and employing reporting guidelines – to heighten the standard of research practices within the energy field. The wider adoption of these tools can facilitate greater trust in the findings of research used to inform evidence-based policy and practice in the energy field. Practice relevance Concrete suggestions are provided for how and when to use preregistration, open data and code, preprints, and reporting guidelines, offering practical guidance for energy researchers for improving the TReQ of their research. The paper shows how employing tools around these concepts at appropriate stages of the research process can assure end-users of the research that good practices were followed. This will not only increase trust in research findings but also can deliver other co-benefits for researchers, e.g. more efficient processes and a more collaborative and open research culture. Increased TReQ can help remove barriers to accessing research both within and outside of academia, improving the visibility and impact of research findings. Finally, a checklist is presented that can be added to publications to show how the tools were used.

Peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading – where energy prosumers transact directly between each other – could help enable transition to a low-carbon energy system. If it is to be supported in policy and regulation, it is important to anticipate the distributional impacts (or how it might impact segments of society differently). However, real-world evidence on P2P energy trading is currently extremely limited. To address this challenge in the short- to medium-term, this study aimed to explore what might be learned from the extensive body of research on a comparable offering in the accommodation sector: Airbnb. A realist review approach was employed to maximise transferability of findings, focused on what mechanisms are thought to lead to what distributional outcomes, in what contexts. On the basis of the review, participation in P2P energy trading schemes would be expected to represent disproportionately those living in areas with network management challenges, who are younger and more highly educated. This is likely to be moderated by access to generation assets and the kinds of service it is possible to trade. The review also raised the prospect of discrimination on the basis of characteristics such as race and gender where there are high levels of individual choice over who to trade with. Recommendations include monitoring, incentivising diversity, anonymization, limiting some trading choices, and diversifying what can be traded.

Peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading is a new data-driven business model currently being trialed within the energy sector. Introducing P2P transactions to an essential service such as energy could have far-reaching implications for individuals and the grid. This paper raises considerations and questions from social, economic/markets and regulatory points of view, that should be understood and addressed by societies and policymakers. It does this by considering under what circumstances it is reasonable to conceptualize P2P energy trading as part of the sharing economy, and drawing parallels to the sharing economy experience in other sectors. In order to reap the full societal benefits, while avoiding considerable risks to infrastructure and individuals, a policy approach promoting dialogue and innovation is necessary. We suggest the regulatory sandbox is the most appropriate tool to achieve this and would help avoid the breakdown of trust between policymakers and platform companies observed in other sectors.

Energy use is of crucial importance for the global challenge of climate change but also an essential part of daily life. Hence, research on energy needs to be robust and valid. Other scientific disciplines have experienced a reproducibility crisis, that is, existing findings could not be reproduced in new studies, and energy research might be impacted as well. In this paper, we suggest the ‘TReQ’ approach to improve the research practices in the energy field and arrive at greater Transparency, Reproducibility, and Quality. We acknowledge the specific challenges of energy research and suggest a highly adaptable suite of tools that can be applied to research approaches across this multi-disciplinary and fast-changing field. In particular, we introduce preregistration of studies, making data and code publicly available, using preprints, and employing reporting guidelines to heighten the standard of research practices within the energy field. We argue that through wider adoption of these tools, we will be able to have greater trust in the findings of research used to inform evidence-based policy and practice in the energy field.

Usually consumers have a relationship with a single energy supplier. Increasingly, the option for consumers to retain their current supplier whilst taking on additional contracts with local suppliers is viewed as having the potential to support growth of local renewable energy. This study took a behavioural economic approach and conducted two pre-registered nationally representative survey experiments (n=1042, n=762). The main aims of the study were to assess the attractiveness of a multiple supplier model for British consumers and to understand the role of default effects and associated cognitive biases (loss-aversion, cognitive effort and implied endorsement) in consumers’ decisions to remain with incumbent suppliers. Results showed that participants were significantly more likely to engage with local energy suppliers under a multiple supplier model than the current single supplier model. In one experiment, consumers’ preference for adding a local supplier under a multiple supplier model was so strong that it overcame default effects. The perception that the supplier has been recommended (i.e. implied endorsement) was the most robust mechanism associated with remaining with default suppliers, suggesting that explicit endorsement of local suppliers may encourage engagement with the energy market. These findings suggest findings suggest that multiple supplier models are likely to be a promising avenue for driving the growth of local energy and opening opportunities for innovation in the British energy market.

Sovacool et al. (2017) consider and critique the Smart Metering Implementation Programme (SMIP) in the United Kingdom. In this response we highlight a number of areas where we believe it would have been helpful for readers to see additional information. These relate to three areas: how the authors reported on the methods used in their study; how the Programme is addressing technical challenges; and how the Programme is engaging with people in vulnerable situations. We also point out areas where we see emerging challenges, such as engaging non-traditional stakeholders, and how organizations which want to use smart meter data in the public interest might encounter barriers in meeting the demands of the Smart Energy Code.

Domestic demand response – specifically, changing household electricity usage patterns in response to signals – is an increasingly important part of electricity system decarbonisation. Many forms of demand response exist and there is a live question of the most appropriate and fair way to design it, especially regarding which types of household can participate and how. Using secondary qualitative analysis of published trial documentation, this paper compares two UK based trials in low income households whose headline results – kW peak reduction - differed by two orders of magnitude. Using a framework based on flexibility capital, the contextual factors underlying these different peak reductions are examined, and these headline results are balanced against other outcomes of the trials. The analysis examines the technical and social sources of flexibility capital in each trial, who controlled this capital, and for whom it delivered value. This highlights questions to consider when designing demand response, such as to what extent participants should be expected to understand and actively participate, who should control their energy use and the spread of responsibility and liability across facilitating parties. We argue that critical reappraisals of existing evidence are necessary as the terms for consumer participation in the future energy system are being established. There exist important aspects and consequences of demand response that are overlooked if schemes focus solely on how many Watts can be shifted. This is crucial as governments, the private sector and a growing number of other parties test and implement different demand response strategies.

The purpose of this review is to investigate the nature of privacy concerns in the context of smart local energy systems (SLES) to understand how SLES providers can minimize both user concerns, and cause for concern, around privacy. We conducted a rapid realist review and thematic framework analysis against Bronfenbrenner’s socio–ecological model to understand privacy concerns in different contexts. A common privacy concern was that sharing detailed energy use data had the potential to reveal information about home life, and to intrude upon people’s sense of autonomy, choice, and control. Evidence suggests that people are willing to accept new data sharing technologies if the benefits of doing so are clear, anticipated, and mutually beneficial. Building trust, through increasing knowledge and understanding, was a mechanism for overcoming privacy concerns, but this was mediated by the organization providing the information. Non-profit organizations were more trusted to ensure appropriate safeguards to privacy were in place. One key barrier to participation with good supporting evidence was that people could resist perceived intrusions on their privacy. This could be actively resisted by refusing to install data collection technologies or passively by non-participation in adapting energy use behaviours: both of which are necessary for SLES to achieve their goals of managing energy demand and building resilience in smart grids.

Measures to control the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are having unprecedented impacts on people’s lives around the world. In this paper, we argue that those conducting social research in the energy domain should give special consideration to the internal and external validity of their work conducted during this pandemic period. We set out a number of principles that researchers can consider to give themselves and research users greater confidence that findings and recommendations will still be applicable in years to come. Largely grounded in existing good practice guidance, our recommendations include collecting and reporting additional supporting contextual data, reviewing aspects of research design for vulnerability to validity challenges, and building in longitudinal elements where feasible. We suggest that these approaches also bring a number of opportunities to generate new insights. However, we caution that a more systemic challenge to validity of knowledge produced during this period may result from changes in the kinds of social research that it is practicable to pursue. acceptedVersion

Major policy proposals often require a distributional impact assessment, focusing on differential financial and other impacts across population segments. Such assessments are rare, however, at the multi-decadal scale addressed in long-term (e.g. to 2050) low carbon transition modelling. There is therefore a risk of socially inequitable outcomes, which in turn presents a socio-political risk for decision-makers driving transitions. This paper uses a literature review and expert interviews to identify mechanisms by which low carbon transitions could differentially impact population sub-groups. As well as impacts of policy costs on bills, this includes factors such as ability to connect to heat networks or install onsite generation or storage. An approach to exploring distributional impacts across a range of long term scenarios from a United Kingdom energy model (ESME), is proposed. This sets out how bill changes and other costs associated with low carbon transition could impact different income quintiles in the UK.

While almost 30% of UK households include children, little research has attempted to present children's perspectives on home energy use. This study used focus groups with children and parents at two primary (elementary) schools in London, UK, to explore home energy use and energy feedback. Energy was found to be a little-discussed subject at home. Children derived more motivation to save energy from responsibility conferred by school activities than other (e.g. environmental) concerns, and some connected energy saving with dangers of using electricity (e.g. fire). Material and social constraints (e.g. access to outside space, parents' environmental attitudes) meant that it was sometimes difficult for children to save energy even when motivated. However, parents showed greater inclination to pay attention to energy saving when framed as supporting their child's learning than as a financial or environmental concern. Children were disinclined to reduce energy-consuming activities such as watching television, and while parents complained about children's energy use most saw it as a low priority issue. Policy implications of these findings are considered, and the approach employed is argued to be an effective way of investigating children's perceptions around energy use.

In recent years, numerous studies have explored the opportunities and challenges for emerging decentralized energy systems and business models. However, few studies have focussed specifically on the economic and social value associated with three emerging models: peer-to-peer energy trading (P2P), community self-consumption (CSC) and transactive energy (TE). This article presents the findings of a systematic literature review to address this gap. The paper makes two main contributions to the literature. Firstly, it offers a synthesis of research on the social and economic value of P2P, CSC and TE systems, concluding that there is evidence for a variety of sources of social value (including energy independence, local benefits, social relationships, environmental responsibility and participation and purpose) and economic value (including via self-consumption of renewable electricity, reduced electricity import costs, and improved electricity export prices). Secondly, it identifies factors and conditions necessary for the success of these models, which include willingness to participate, participant engagement with technology, and project engagement of households and communities, among other factors. Finally, it discusses conflicts and trade-offs in the value propositions of the models, how the three models differ from one another in terms of the value they aim to deliver and some of the open challenges that require further attention by researchers and practitioners.