• Energy Research

Coal use—and thus investment—is expected to grow considerably in the Russian Federation over the next few decades. Projections suggest that at least $200 billion of investment will be needed to modernize existing coal-fired power plants by 2030, but the bulk of this financing is to come from the private sector or foreign enterprises. This study asks: what are the possible investment risks and rewards of pursuing this expansion of coal in the Russian power sector? To provide an answer, the study uses a mixed methods approach consisting of elite semi-structured interviews and a review of English and Russian peer-reviewed literature. The study provides a brief overview of the Russian electricity sector before discussing five distinct rewards to investing in coal such as low production costs, competitive returns on investment, rural modernization, expansion of exports, and the acceleration of innovation. These benefits however are offset by five risks: inferior performance to investments in oil and gas, development challenges, air pollution and climate change, social degradation from mining, and a tradeoff with existing policies incentivizing renewable energy and energy efficiency. The study concludes by analyzing what these disparate risks and rewards mean for policymakers and energy analysts.

Consisting of two parts, this article explores the history and challenges facing the Gobitec project in China, Japan, Mongolia and South Korea, an ambitious proposal to build a multibillion dollar solar power system in the Gobi desert that then exports electricity throughout Northeast Asia. After detailing its primary methods of data collection—research interviews, site visits, and a literature review—this first part of the study details the history of the Gobitec concept and its close relation to the Desertec concept in North Africa and Europe. It then discusses the “promise” of very large solar systems in deserts, namely improved security of supply and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. However, the second part of our study finds that such projects also face a list of serious – and perhaps insurmountable – technical, economic, political, and social barriers. That second part concludes by drawing implications for large-scale energy projects and energy policymaking more broadly.

AbstractDespite the immense environmental, technical, and financial promise of distributed generation (DG) technologies, they still constitute a very small percentage of electricity capacity in the United States. This manuscript answers the apparently paradoxical question: Why do technologies that offer such impressive benefits also find the least use? Going beyond technical explanations of problems related to system control, higher capital costs, and environmental compliance, this paper focuses on sociotechnical barriers related to utility preferences, business practices, regulatory bias, and consumer values. The approach helps us understand the glossing over of DG technologies, and identifies the impediments that policymakers must overcome if they are to find wider use.

The continuous development of onshore wind farms is an important feature of the European transition towards an energy system powered by distributed renewables and low-carbon resources. This study assesses and simulates potential for future onshore wind turbine installations throughout Europe. The study depicts, via maps, all the national and regional socio-technical restrictions and regulations for wind project development using spatial analysis conducted through GIS. The inputs for the analyses were based on an original dataset compiled from satellites and public databases relating to electricity, planning, and other dimensions. Taking into consideration socio-technical constraints, the study reveals 52.5 TW of untapped onshore wind power potential in Europe - equivalent to 1 MW per 16 European citizens – a supply that would be sufficient to cover the global energy demand from now through to 2050. The study offers a more rigorous, multi-dimensional, and granular atlas of onshore wind energy development that can assist with future energy policy, research, and planning.

From farm to fork, food and beverage consumption can have significant negative impacts on energy consumption, water consumption, climate change, and other environmental subsystems. This paper presents a comprehensive, critical and systematic review of more than 350,000 sources of evidence, and a short list of 701 studies, on the topic of greenhouse gas emissions from the food and beverage industry. Utilizing a sociotechnical lens that examines food supply and agriculture, manufacturing, retail and distribution, and consumption and use, the review identifies the most carbon-intensive processes in the industry, as well as the corresponding energy and carbon “footprints”. It discusses multiple current and emerging options and practices for decarbonization, including 78 potentially transformative technologies. It examines the benefits to sector decarbonization—including energy and carbon savings, cost savings, and other co-benefits related to sustainability or health—as well as barriers across financial and economic, institutional and managerial, and behavioral and consumer dimensions. It lastly discusses how financing, business models, and policy can be harnessed to help overcome these barriers, and identifies a set of research gaps.

This article deals with the nexus between energy policymaking and ideology. The article builds and expands upon a theoretical social constructivist analytical strategy, or framework, put forth for the purposes of conducting energy policy analysis. It then addresses criticism that this strategy constitutes “postmodern mush” that has no place in energy analysis before concluding with a review of why social constructivism has a significant role to play in building consensus and enhancing understanding between competing energy policy perspectives. The main contribution made by this paper stems from application of this ontological construct to the analysis of policies targeting wicked energy problems. The study cuts to the core about how energy problems are defined, interpreted, communicated, planned for, and potentially implemented via policy. Put another way, our study offers a timely critique or a call for reconceptualizing the process and practice of energy policy itself.