Sector coupling of renewable energy in an experimental setting

Findings from a smart energy pilot project in Austria

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.29.2.38

Keywords:

sectoral integration, energy transitions, smart grids, pilot and demonstration projects (PDPs), green buildings

Abstract

The integration of previously unconnected sectors of the energy system is considered one of the most important strategies for reducing CO2 emissions. Many studies on technological innovations that deal with the transition to a sustainable energy system focus on innovation niches as a favorable environment within which new solutions can be tested and made ready for the market. This paper examines how protection in such a niche, in combination with organizational path dependency, supports the integration of renewable energy in residential buildings. The results presented are based on a case study on the integration of the electricity, heat, and gas sectors in a housing pilot project, in which local energy needs are met and electricity is fed into the grid in a flexible way. Our findings indicate that favorable conditions for inter-sectoral innovation can be achieved through niche protection, complemented by path dependency in organizational routines and culture.

References

BDEW – Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e. V. (2017): Positionspapier. 10 Thesen zur Sektorkopplung. Available online at https://www.bdew.de/service/stellungnahmen/10-thesen-sektorkopplung/, last accessed on 27. 01. 2020.

bmvit – Austrian Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (ed.) (2010): Smart grids showcase region: Salzburg. Integrated infrastructure in Salzburg. Vienna: Austrian Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology.

Bossink, Bart (2017): Demonstrating sustainable energy. A review based model of sustainable energy demonstration projects. In: Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 77, pp. 1349–1362.

Brown, Halina; Vergragt, Philip (2008): Bounded socio-technical experiments as agents of systemic change. The case of a zero-energy residential building. In: Technological Forecasting and Social Change 75 (1), pp. 107–130.

Büscher, Christian; Sumpf, Patrick (2015): “Trust” and “confidence” as socio-technical problems in the transformation of energy systems. In: Energy, Sustainability and Society 5 (1), p. 13.

Büscher, Christian (2018): Framing energy as a sociotechnical problem of control, change, and action. In: Christian Büscher, Jens Schippl and Patrick Sumpf (eds.): Energy as a sociotechnical problem. An interdisciplinary perspective on control, change and action in energy transitions. London: Routledge, pp. 14–38.

Coombs, Rod; Hull, Richard (1998): ‘Knowledge management practices’ and path-dependency in innovation. In: Research Policy 27 (3), pp. 237–253.

Dosi, Giovanni (1982): Technological paradigms and technological trajectories. A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technological change. In: Research Policy 11 (3), pp. 147–62.

Eymannsberger, Helmut; Kurtz, Klemens (2017): Salzburg AG. Regionalwirtschaftliche Bedeutung und Wertschöpfungsanalyse. Available online at https://www.salzburg-ag.at/content/dam/web18/dokumente/presse/Wertschoepfungsstudie_Salzburg%20AG.pdf, last accessed on 12. 05. 2020.

Frishammar, Johan; Söderholm, Patrik; Bäckström, Kristoffer; Hellsmark, Hans; Ylinenpää, Håkan (2015): The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technological development: synthesis and directions for future research. In: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 27 (1), pp. 1–18.

Geels, Frank; Schot, Johan (2007): Niches in evolutionary theories of technical change. In: Journal of Evolutionary Economics 17 (5), pp. 605–622.

Hansen, Niles (1992): Competition, trust, and reciprocity in the development of innovative regional milieu. In: Papers in Regional Science 71 (2), pp. 101–102.

Hodgson, Geoffrey (1993): Corporate culture and the nature of the firm. In: Judge Institute of Management Studies Working Paper No. 14, 1993–94. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

Hoogma, Remco; Kemp, René; Schot, Johan; Truffer, Bernard (2002): Experimenting for sustainable transport. The approach of strategic niche management. London: Spon Press.

Huguenin, Ariane; Jeannerat, Hugues (2017): Creating change through pilot and demonstration projects. Towards a valuation policy approach. In: Research Policy 46 (3), pp. 624–635.

Kemp, Rene (1994): Technology and the transition to environmental sustainability, In: Futures 26 (10), pp. 1023–1046.

Klima- und Energiefonds (2010): Geschäftsbericht 2009. Available online at https://www.klimafonds.gv.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/Geschaeftsbericht2009.pdf, last accessed on 12. 05. 2020.

Leisen, Robin; Steffen, Bjarne; Weber, Christoph (2019): Regulatory risk and the resilience of new sustainable business models in the energy sector. In: Journal of Cleaner Production 219, pp. 865–878.

Luhmann, Niklas (1991): Soziologie des Risikos. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Lund, Henri; Østergaard, Poul Alberg; Connolly, David; Mathiesen, Brian Vad (2017): Smart energy and smart energy systems. In: Energy 137, pp. 556–565.

Maskell, Peter; Malmberg, Anders (1999): Localized learning and industrial competitiveness. In: Cambridge Journal of Economics 23 (2), pp. 167–185.

Nelson, Richard; Winter, Sidney (1982): An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Raven, Rob; Kern, Florian; Verhees, Bram; Smith, Adrian (2016): Niche construction and empowerment through socio-political work. A meta-analysis of six low-carbon technology areas. In: Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 18, pp. 164–180.

Schot, Johan (1992): Constructive technology assessment and technology and technology dynamics. The case of clean technologies. In: Science, Technology, & Human Values 17 (1), pp. 36–56.

Rip, Arie; Kemp, René (1998): Technological change. In: Steve Rayner and Elizabeth Malone (eds.): Human choice and climate change. Vol. 2. Columbus: Battelle Press, pp. 327–399.

Rosenberg, Nathan; Steinmueller, W. Edward (2013): Engineering knowledge. In: Industrial and Corporate Change 22 (5), pp. 1129–1158.

Rycroft, Robert; Kash, Don (2002): Path dependence in the innovation of complex technologies. In: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 14 (1), pp. 21–35.

Salzburg AG (ed.) (2015): Resultate & Erkenntnisse aus der Smart Grids Region Salzburg. Zusammenfassung. Available online at http://www.smartgridssalzburg.at/content/dam/websites/smartgrids/Downloads/SG_Erkenntnisbericht.pdf, last accessed on 12. 05. 2020.

Schot, Johan; Geels, Frank (2008): Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys. Theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. In: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20 (5), pp. 537–554.

Sengers, Frans; Wieczorek, Anna; Raven, Rob (2019): Experimenting for sustainability transitions. A systematic literature review. In: Technological Forecasting and Social Change 145, pp. 153–164.

Smith, Adrian; Raven, Rob (2012): What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability. In: Research Policy 41, pp. 1025–1036.

Wietschel, Martin et al. (2018): Sektorkopplung. Definition, Chancen und Herausforderungen. Diskussionspapier im Rahmen des Kopernikus-Projekt „Systemintegration“. Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.

Downloads

Published

17.07.2020

How to Cite

1.
Ornetzeder M, Sinozic T. Sector coupling of renewable energy in an experimental setting: Findings from a smart energy pilot project in Austria. TATuP [Internet]. 2020 Jul. 17 [cited 2024 Mar. 28];29(2):38-44. Available from: https://www.tatup.de/index.php/tatup/article/view/6814

Most read articles by the same author(s)