Next Article in Journal
Thermal Performance Improvement of Cross-Flow Double-Layered Microchannel Heat Sinks through Proper Header Design
Previous Article in Journal
A Doublet State Palladium(I) N-Heterocyclic Carbene Complex as a Dopant and Stabilizer for Improved Photostability in Organic Solar Cells
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 17
Issue 15
10.3390/en17153789
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Energy Communities in the Transition to Renewable Sources: Innovative Models of Energy Self-Sufficiency through Organic Waste

by
Francesco Bellini
,
Paola Campana
*,
Riccardo Censi
,
Matteo Di Renzo
and
Anna Maria Tarola
Department of Management, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2024, 17(15), 3789; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153789
Submission received: 30 May 2024 / Revised: 19 July 2024 / Accepted: 26 July 2024 / Published: 1 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Section G: Energy and Buildings)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This paper presents the evolution and role of energy communities in the context of the transition to renewable energy sources. Such communities are presented as an innovative and resilient response to the challenges posed by climate change. Their importance emerges from their ability to decentralize energy production, increasing local security and reducing dependence on non-renewable energy sources and external suppliers. However, despite the obvious benefits, this contribution highlights several challenges, such as the need for significant upfront investment and the presence of regulatory barriers that may hinder the integration of these solutions into existing energy systems. A detailed bibliometric analysis is used, focusing on specific research areas and using tools to map the most relevant keywords and emerging trends. The results of the bibliometric analysis highlight how energy communities are emerging as key players in the sustainability landscape, capable of addressing and overcoming contemporary environmental challenges. The research reaffirms the transformative potential of energy communities in promoting a more sustainable and resilient future.

1. Introduction

The transition to a sustainable energy system is imperative, amplified by the growing scientific evidence linking the intensive use of fossil fuels to global warming and climate change [1,2]. This energy transition is not only an environmental goal but is also of strategic importance to ensure a sustainable global future. However, this process is characterized by considerable challenges, including the volatile nature of renewables [3].
Energy communities emerge as significant players, not only as a decentralized model of energy production and consumption but also as an example of the energy resilience of local communities exploiting local resources and promoting sustainability. According to the International Energy Agency’s report (2021) [4], the growing production of organic waste on a global scale, estimated at more than 2 billion tons per year, poses a significant environmental challenge but also offers a unique opportunity for renewable energy production. If not properly managed, waste can cause environmental problems related to greenhouse gas emissions, soil and water pollution, and the loss of potentially recyclable resources. The use of appropriate technologies such as anaerobic digestion, gasification, or pyrolysis is important to convert organic waste into biogas, thermal, or electrical energy and promote sustainable development. Organic waste-based energy communities contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, improve waste management, and increase local energy security, resulting in less dependence on external suppliers and fossil fuels. This leads to greater energy autonomy and increased resilience of local communities to external energy shocks.
However, despite the benefits, the full integration of biowaste-based energy communities into national and global energy systems is hindered by several challenges, such as initial investment and infrastructure needs, regulatory barriers, equitable access to technologies, and the development of technical skills at the local level. There is also a need for cultural and societal change that recognizes the value of waste as an energy resource. Overcoming these challenges requires transversal collaboration between different actors, including governments, the private sector, the scientific community, and civil society. Public policies can play a crucial role in facilitating this process through economic incentives, support for research and development, and the creation of favorable regulatory frameworks. Integrating biowaste-based energy communities into national and international energy planning can accelerate the transition to a more sustainable, resilient, and inclusive energy system.
This paper aims to explore the role and potential of organic waste-based energy communities in the energy transition. It seeks to highlight the benefits and challenges associated with their implementation. Specifically, this document will examine how these communities can contribute to sustainable energy practices. Additionally, it will identify the economic and technological obstacles that must be addressed to integrate organic waste-based energy solutions into energy community systems. Through an analysis, this document aims to provide insights on optimizing these communities for a sustainable future.

The Role of Energy Communities in the Energy Transition

To provide a comprehensive understanding, it is essential to clarify the concept of ‘energy communities’, which can have multiple interpretations based on the context. Generally, the term refers to groups or collectives that collaborate to produce, manage, and consume energy locally, often with a focus on renewable sources and sustainability. According to the European Commission (2020) [5], energy communities are defined as ‘legal entities based on open and voluntary participation, effectively controlled by shareholders or members who are located in proximity to the renewable energy projects owned and developed by that community’ [1]. This definition underscores the legal and participatory aspects, emphasizing local control and benefits. In contrast, the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2021) [6] provides a broader definition, describing energy communities as ‘community-driven initiatives focused on the generation, distribution, storage, and supply of energy’ [2]. This definition encompasses a wider range of activities, including technological and operational aspects.
Energy communities have successfully integrated renewables into their local energy mix, positively influencing national energy policies [7]. However, although they represent a sustainable and autonomous model of energy production, their implementation and operation are not without difficulties [8]. Affordability is one of the main challenges, in addition to the high cost of installing the necessary infrastructure. According to the World Bank’s 2018 report [9], the initial investments required for the implementation of medium-sized biogas plants are substantial, varying from USD 1 million to USD 3 million. This highlights the need for sustainable financial strategies, such as government subsidies, tax incentives, or innovative financing models, to make these initiatives more affordable and feasible. Developing rural energy communities, for example, face difficulties related to the maintenance and operation of biogas plants [10].
The shortage of skilled labor can hinder not only the efficiency but also the long-term sustainability of these projects, indicating the importance of investing in training and local skills development. The sustainability aspect is crucial to ensure that the use of organic waste as an energy source is beneficial in the long run. Approximately 30% of energy communities face increased costs associated with the collection and transport of organic waste. This situation underlines the importance of careful waste planning and management to ensure that the practices adopted remain sustainable and economically beneficial [11]. Table 1 shows the factors that hinder the adoption of energy communities.
Organic waste-based energy communities therefore offer a promising prospect for energy sustainability. Only through a coordinated effort between governments, non-governmental organizations, the private sector, and local communities will it be possible to overcome the obstacles and exploit the full potential of these sustainable energy initiatives. Holistically addressing financial viability, availability of technical expertise, and environmental sustainability can help maximize the benefits of biowaste-based energy communities.

2. Materials and Methods

The methodology employed a detailed bibliometric analysis on two separate platforms: Scopus and Web of Science. The search focused on specific research areas, which were subsequently highlighted and motivated. We then proceeded by mapping the most relevant keywords to isolate emerging trends, using VOSviewer software version 1.6.20.
For the search on the Scopus platform, the string <‘Energy Community’> was used. An increase from 2018 emerges, showing an increasing interest over the years with a total of 2645 publications. The trend is shown in Figure 1.
Italy stands out as a leader in academic research on this topic, with a significant number of publications in this area (Figure 2).
The survey was restricted to the following areas: energy, social sciences, business, management and accounting, environmental science, economics, econometrics, and finance. The decision not to include other areas, such as engineering and agricultural and biological sciences, was motivated by the sector-specific nature of these topics, which were considered irrelevant to the research objectives. This sectoriality emerged from the results of the literature search. The type of documents investigated was restricted to articles and conference papers, as these were sources subject to the peer-review process. This selective phase generated a total of 1558 titles.
The role of Horizon in this context is particularly relevant, as it has established itself as the main sponsor of this line of research, supporting 317 publications. Horizon is the European Union’s flagship research and innovation program, designed to support and promote scientific research, technological development, and innovation. Running from 2014 to 2020 as Horizon 2020, and continuing as Horizon Europe from 2021 onwards, this program funds various projects aimed at addressing global challenges, including energy sustainability and climate change. Horizon has played a key role in funding projects to promote innovation and scientific research at the European level (Figure 3).
Horizon’s financial support has enabled the development of advanced research and the deepening of crucial topics within the ‘Energy Community’. Its initiatives have provided essential resources to explore new perspectives, advance our understanding of sustainable energy dynamics, and promote innovative solutions to emerging energy challenges. The presence of Horizon as a main sponsor underlines the strategic importance recognized in this research area, contributing not only to scientific progress but also to the definition of energy policies and strategies for a more sustainable future.
On the Web of Science (WoS) platform, the topic of ‘Energy Communities’ has a total of 121,698 publications. This figure reflects a steady interest over the years, as shown by the increase in publications over the last six years (2018–2024), which reached 60,290. This upward trend underscores the growing importance attached to researching and understanding the dynamics of energy communities in the context of environmental sustainability and development. The trend of publications is shown in Figure 4.
The search was restricted to environmental sciences; green sustainable science technology; environmental studies; energy fuels; ecology; and economics. This choice was guided by the desire to maintain consistency with previous research on Scopus, excluding specific areas deemed not relevant to the subject of investigation. Furthermore, the analysis was limited to articles only. This selective step resulted in a total of 18,656 articles identified as relevant for analysis.
The analysis conducted on Web of Science (WoS) clearly indicated the European Community, with particular emphasis on the Horizon project, as the main promoter and funder of research in the field of energy communities. This figure reveals the European Community’s far-reaching and incisive commitment to fostering development and innovation in the energy sector. Among the numerous papers reviewed, as many as 950 were identified as particularly relevant to our study. These documents, supported by European Community funding through the Horizon project, constitute a significant body of work in the field of energy communities. The identification of these articles underlines the importance and impact of EC policies and investments in promoting energy research and sustainable development. The bibliographic analysis conducted focused on the top 20 most cited articles, to reveal the state of the art in energy communities. The selection of these articles was based on citation counts from two major databases. To ensure a comprehensive review, searches were conducted on both Scopus and WoS using the keyword ‘Energy Community’. The articles were then sorted by citation count, a common bibliometric indicator of the impact and relevance of a publication. Citation counts were obtained directly from the databases. The top 20 articles with the highest number of citations were selected for further analysis. These selected articles were cross-verified between the two databases to ensure consistency and relevance. The final list of the top 20 most cited articles, including details such as title, authors, year of publication, database source, and citation count, is presented in Table 2.

Bibliometric Analysis

From a bibliometric point of view VOSviewer, a software widely used in bibliometrics, supports the visualization and analysis of bibliographies and datasets containing bibliographic information such as title, author, keywords, etc. [12,13]. Its versatility makes it possible to capture the trends, impact and evolution of topics through the recurrence of citations [14]. In the scientific research landscape, VOSviewer emerges as a valuable tool for visualizing bibliometric data [15], revealing research opportunities in specific fields and identifying the most frequently used references [16].
The software focuses on aggregate-level analysis in the context of cluster analysis [17]. This tool was employed to examine and visualize the relationships between keywords; in particular, the VOS clustering method was applied to keyword occurrences, assigning each cluster a distinctive color [18]. The interpretation of this approach is as follows: the size of the circles reflects the frequency of use, while the colors identify the clusters [19]. It should be noted that the x- and y-axes have no special significance; therefore, the maps can be freely rotated and flipped [19]. The results obtained from Scopus were exported in .CSV and .txt for Web Of science, formats to make them compatible with VOSviewer. Subsequently, a map was generated based on the bibliographic results, using both author and indexed keywords. In order to ensure meaningful representation, a minimum threshold of three occurrences was set to filter the keywords. This methodology aimed to identify the most relevant keywords in the field of study, thus providing a comprehensive and accurate overview of the key concepts emerging from the scientific literature.

3. Results

The bibliographic analysis conducted analyzed the top 20 most cited articles, shown in Table 2, which revealed the state of the art of energy communities.
Energy communities represent fertile ground for innovation and transformation in the energy sector, demonstrating how collaboration and the adoption of new technologies can lead to more sustainable and democratic energy systems [39]. These communities are emerging as key players in Europe and other parts of the world, highlighting a conjunction of regulatory challenges and innovative governance with benefits ranging from cost savings to increased social cohesion [37].
At the technological level, innovation is a key pillar for energy communities, with the adoption of advanced solutions such as energy storage systems, electric vehicles, the use of digital twin technology, and machine learning algorithms [24]. These technologies not only optimize energy consumption and distribution but also enable community members to participate actively and more knowledgeably in the management of energy resources [29,34]. Key aspects include peer-to-peer energy sharing, which allows for users to exchange energy without the mediation of large suppliers. This is often facilitated through advanced battery management systems and community microgrids [20].
From a governance perspective, energy communities explore various models that may include cooperative, state, and market elements. These models must effectively balance participatory democracy and operational efficiency to facilitate not only the growth and scalability of the communities themselves but also to ensure a fair distribution of economic and social benefits among their members [22]. Regulation plays a crucial role, with the European legislative framework still evolving to provide consistent support for energy communities. The absence of a uniform legal definition and varying interpretations of what constitutes an energy community highlight the need for greater clarity and harmonization at the policy level to facilitate the expansion of these initiatives [23,33].
Finally, the educational and awareness-raising role that institutions are beginning to play is crucial in promoting understanding and support for energy communities [31]. This awareness is essential to promote greater adoption and to educate citizens about the energy and environmental implications of their daily choices [38].
Based on the data retrieved and the methodologies and tools presented, some results from the bibliometric analysis can be discussed. In the context of the topic ‘Energy Community’ on Scopus, the relationships between central keywords, such as ‘electric energy storage’, highlight their cross-cutting relevance in various research contexts. This term underscores the importance of electrical energy storage technologies, which are crucial in addressing the challenges related to the variability of renewable energy sources and ensuring a continuous and reliable supply of electricity.
Publications associated with this keyword drive the exploration and development of innovative solutions to store electricity efficiently and sustainably. This may include the study of different storage technologies, such as advanced batteries, thermal storage systems, mechanical storage, and other emerging technologies. Figure 5 illustrates the analysis conducted using VOSviewer for the results on Scopus.
Interest in ‘electric energy storage’ spans several research areas, including optimizing the performance of storage systems, assessing their environmental sustainability, integrating them into electricity grids, and applying them practically in sustainable energy communities. The analysis of publications and connections within the ‘Energy Community’ context shows how this keyword plays a transversal role, acting as a node between various other keywords and relevant topics. Its centrality in research underscores the scientific community’s recognition of the fundamental importance of electricity storage in promoting the transition to a more sustainable and resilient energy system.
In the right-hand section of the mapping (Figure 6), a perspective oriented towards a more sustainable and ecological approach clearly emerges, where the keywords ‘renewable energies’ and ‘renewable energy resource’ are identified as paramount. This evidence translates into a significant commitment to research aimed at exploring, developing, and optimizing renewable energy sources. The presence of the construct ‘renewable energies’ emphasizes the centrality of sustainable energy sources, such as solar, wind, hydropower, and others. In parallel, the focus on ‘renewable energy resource’ underscores the need to investigate the natural resources used to generate renewable energy specifically. This approach aims to understand the availability, variability, and potential of these resources, helping to outline more effective strategies for their utilization.
These keywords are correlated with others, such as ‘community energy’, ‘power markets’, ‘clean energy’, and ‘energy transitions’, outlining the direction of research towards current issues of crucial environmental importance. In particular, energy communities, represented by the keyword ‘community energy’, indicate a paradigm of active participation and decentralization in the production, distribution, and sharing of energy. This concept emphasizes the importance of local involvement and collaborative management of energy resources, pushing towards a more inclusive and responsible view of energy consumption.
In the context of the keyword ‘power markets’ (Figure 6), the presence of commercial mechanisms regulating the buying and selling of energy emerges. These markets provide energy communities with the opportunity to participate directly in energy production and consumption decisions, creating a dynamic environment where informed choices actively influence the local energy landscape. The keyword ‘clean energy’ highlights the shift towards clean energy sources and low environmental impact technologies. In energy communities, this implies the adoption of renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, and the integration of technological solutions that promote environmental sustainability, helping to mitigate negative impacts on the ecosystem. The transition to new energy models is associated with the keyword ‘energy transitions’. This concept denotes the shift from traditional systems to more modern, decentralized models based on renewable energy sources. In energy communities, ‘energy transitions’ embody a significant change, moving energy practices towards sustainability and reducing dependence on polluting sources.
In the left-hand section of Figure 6, the focus is on the more practical aspects through keywords such as ‘investments’ and ‘commerce’, highlighting the economic and commercial aspects of energy communities. Interestingly, other keywords reflect the concept of energy communities and the need for a holistic approach to their full implementation.
Energy communities represent an innovative paradigm where local groups actively collaborate to generate, consume, and share energy. These communities play a crucial role in creating a sustainable, decentralized, and participatory energy model, promoting a transition to more energy-conscious practices. The keyword ‘Renewable Energy Communities’ deepens this vision, focusing exclusively on the use of renewable energy sources. In this context, the keyword ‘Battery Energy Storage Systems’ represents a strategic theme. These energy storage systems, primarily batteries, optimize the storage phase of electricity when it is abundant, making it available later when needed. This contributes to a more efficient and flexible management of energy resources. The analysis and application of ‘Linear Programming’ models emerge as fundamental tools for planning and optimizing energy resources within communities. This advanced mathematical approach aims to maximize energy efficiency and minimize costs, promoting rational and economic management of available resources. Profitability plays a key role in the long-term sustainability of energy communities. Profitability analysis assesses whether community energy initiatives are economically viable over time, ensuring the autonomy and growth of the communities themselves.
Ultimately, these keywords paint a complete picture of the dynamics and goals of modern energy communities. Furthermore, note how the keywords reflect the diversity of aspects considered in energy communities, from renewable energy production to intelligent resource management to financial optimization. The combination of these components contributes to sustainable, resilient, and technologically and economically advanced energy community models.
Next, a visualization was created based on the bibliographic results, using both authors’ keywords and those indexed by the platform. To obtain a meaningful representation, a minimum threshold of three occurrences was set to filter the keywords. Figure 6 shows the analysis conducted via VOSviewer for the WoS results.
Replicating the procedure already described, this time on the WoS results, two keywords emerge, ‘energy communities’ and ‘renewable energy’, which represent fundamental pillars of the scientific and social debate on the energy future. Energy communities are local groups that work together to manage and share energy in a sustainable and inclusive manner, promoting the adoption of decentralized and participatory practices. Renewable energy’ refers to renewable energy sources, such as sun and wind, which are essential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting sustainable energy development. Several thematic areas are developed in the mapping in an articulated manner. The first area, which concerns energy transition, is structured around keywords such as ‘power’, ‘transition’, ‘initiatives’, ‘energy transitions’, and ‘business model’. Each term has a precise meaning and impact: ‘Power’ represents the driving force behind our energy system, while ‘Transition’ indicates the fundamental change we are experiencing towards cleaner and more sustainable energy sources. Both highlight the importance of adopting new perspectives and approaches to energy use. ‘Initiatives’ highlights the concrete action of communities and actors involved in the energy transition, while ‘Energy transitions’ embodies the transformational path we must take to adapt to the environmental and energy challenges of our time. Finally, the ‘Business model’ represents the financial basis on which energy initiatives are built, highlighting the need for economic sustainability to ensure the longevity and effectiveness of energy projects.
It is then possible to identify a section that can be traced back to social aspects; thus, ‘benefits’, ‘projects’, ‘participation’, ‘impacts’, ‘renewable energy communities’, ‘energy justice’, ‘local energy’. These keywords share a common focus on the social, participatory, and fair aspect of the energy transition.
‘Benefits’ refers to the advantages of adopting sustainable energy practices, such as economic savings, improved air quality and job creation in the renewable energy sector. ‘Projects’ represents initiatives and interventions aimed at implementing innovative and sustainable energy solutions, involving both public and private entities, and aiming to improve energy efficiency and promote the adoption of renewable energy sources. ‘Participation’ emphasizes the active involvement of local communities in decisions concerning energy management and production, promoting a democratic and inclusive approach that values citizens’ opinions and needs. ‘Impacts’ indicates the effects, positive or negative, that energy policies and infrastructure projects may have on local communities, including environmental, social, and economic aspects. ‘Renewable energy communities’ represents the convergence of the renewable energy and community concept, highlighting the potential of community initiatives in promoting the adoption of sustainable energy sources and fostering local development. ‘Energy justice’ recalls the importance of fair and equitable access to energy for all people, regardless of socioeconomic or geographical status, and promotes inclusive energy policies that take into account the needs of all members of society. ‘Local energy’ refers to the production and consumption of energy at the local level, promoting decentralization and diversification of energy sources to foster the security and resilience of the energy system. A further section deals with energy perspectives, conveying keywords such as ‘acceptance’, ‘performance’, ‘future’, and ‘design’, a comprehensive picture of energy transformation and its implications emerges.
‘Acceptance’ recalls the importance of social acceptance, indicating that energy policies must be accepted and supported by the community to ensure a successful transition. ‘Performance’ highlights the need for efficient performance in energy systems, emphasizing the importance of constantly evaluating and improving performance to maximize efficiency. ‘Future’ indicates the need to consider the long-term impacts of current energy decisions and to adopt strategies that promote a sustainable and resilient future. ‘Design’ draws attention to purposeful design, emphasizing the importance of an integrated design approach in defining energy solutions. These elements converge to emphasize the urgent need for a holistic approach to energy transformation. In the rightmost section, key aspects contributing to shaping the future of energy emerge, highlighted by the following keywords: ‘energy transition’, ‘cooperatives’, ‘innovation’, ‘electricity’, ‘social acceptance’, and ‘choice experiment’. ‘Energy transition’ represents the shift from conventional to renewable and sustainable energy sources, highlighting the need for a structural change in the energy sector to address environmental challenges. ‘Cooperatives’ refers to energy cooperatives, which involve citizens and local communities in the production and distribution of renewable energy, promoting democratic participation and sustainability. ‘Innovation’ indicates the importance of technological and social innovation in the energy sector, which is needed to develop more efficient, clean and affordable solutions. ‘Electricity’ emphasizes the crucial role of electricity as a primary source of energy in the modern world, highlighting the need for resilient management of electricity grids. ‘Social acceptance’ again reflects the importance of social acceptance of energy policies and infrastructure, highlighting the need to actively involve communities. ‘Choice experiment’ refers to research methodologies used to assess the preferences and decisions of individuals regarding energy policies, enabling a better understanding of the dynamics of choice and the adaptation of energy transition strategies to the needs of the population. These keywords reflect a complex picture of energy transition, emphasizing the importance of democratic participation, technological and social innovation, and adaptation to societal needs and preferences in shaping the future of energy.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

This study underscores the potential of energy communities in utilizing organic waste to enhance energy self-sufficiency and promote sustainability [40]. However, it is crucial to note that the results primarily highlight bibliometric trends and emerging themes rather than providing direct evidence from empirical data. Consequently, the findings are based on an analysis of the existing literature. Our analysis suggests that energy communities can effectively manage organic waste and convert it into a valuable energy resource [41], thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on non-renewable energy sources. This aligns with the transformative potential of decentralized energy models reported by studies such as Nolden (2013) and the International Energy Agency [4,7].
The proposed strategies to facilitate the expansion of energy communities include promoting active community participation through favorable policies and educational initiatives, providing incentives for technological investments, offering regulatory support through the creation of regulations that favor energy communities, addressing technological implementation issues to overcome technological barriers, providing financial support to cover the initial costs of projects, ensuring careful planning and waste management to guarantee sustainability and economic benefits, developing local technical skills through investments in training, and fostering collaboration among governments, the private sector, the scientific community, and civil society to facilitate resource and knowledge sharing, as shown in Table 3.
The main benefits of organic waste-based energy communities, shown in Table 4, are manifold and include economic, environmental, and social advantages. On the economic side, these communities can reduce dependence on non-renewable energy sources and lead to energy cost savings. Environmentally, they help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote renewable energy, thus contributing to climate change mitigation. Socially, they promote community participation and sustainability through decentralized energy models.
Intervention policies could facilitate the expansion of energy communities by providing incentives for technology investment and regulatory support [42]. This could enhance the scalability of these initiatives [43,44]. Challenges such as technological barriers, upfront financial costs, and regulatory complexities are significant hurdles to the implementation of biowaste-based energy communities [45]. The terms ‘upfront financial’ and ‘technological barriers’ are issues already identified in Table 1. Additionally, the regulatory complexity, reflecting a broader view of ‘waste management’, underscores the crucial role of institutions in legislating and regulating this sector. While our bibliometric analysis reaffirms the role of community-based energy systems in promoting renewable energy and mitigating climate change, the active participation of communities, supported by favorable policies and educational initiatives, is essential for the success and sustainability of these models [46,47,48]. Energy communities, supported by appropriate frameworks, offer a promising path towards a more sustainable and resilient energy future, as discussed in the broader literature [36].

5. Research Agenda

Future lines of research on energy communities based on organic waste should commence with a comprehensive literature review to identify key enabling factors, incorporating both theoretical perspectives and empirical study analyses. It is crucial to investigate the integration of advanced technologies such as anaerobic digestion and energy storage to enhance the stability and efficiency of biogas. Cost–benefit analyses should assess the economic impact of energy communities compared to traditional systems, exploring sustainable financial strategies like government subsidies and crowdfunding. Additionally, research should address social acceptance and inclusivity by developing methodologies to increase community participation and ensure equitable access to technologies. Life cycle assessments and comparative and studies are essential to understand the long-term sustainability and economic feasibility, as well as the potential of complementary renewable energy sources. Finally, the analysis of governance models and institutional frameworks should explore how different structures influence the success of energy communities, promoting collaboration between governments, the private sector, and communities. Moreover, it is necessary to explore community transition pathways and energy citizenship contracts to support citizen participation and rights. This integrated approach can optimize community energy systems for a sustainable and resilient future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.C.; methodology, R.C.; software, R.C.; validation, F.B., P.C. and A.M.T.; formal analysis, M.D.R.; investigation, M.D.R.; data curation, R.C.; writing—original draft preparation, R.C.; writing—review and editing, M.D.R.; visualization, F.B.; supervision, P.C. and A.M.T.; project administration, P.C.; funding acquisition, F.B., P.C., M.D.R. and A.M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Koirala, B.P.; van Oost, E.; van der Windt, H. Community energy storage: A responsible innovation towards a sustainable energy system? Appl. Energy 2018, 231, 570–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mutani, G.; Santantonio, S.; Brunetta, G.; Caldarice, O.; Demichela, M. An energy community for territorial resilience: Measurement of the risk of an energy supply blackout. Energy Build. 2021, 240, 110906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Heldeweg, M.A.; Saintier, S. Renewable energy communities as ‘socio-legal institutions’: A normative frame for energy decentralisation? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 119, 109518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2022; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris, France, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  5. European Commission. Clean Energy for all Europeans; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  6. International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook 2021; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris, France, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  7. Nolden, C. Governing community energy-Feed-in tariffs and the development of community wind energy schemes in the United Kingdom and Germany. Energy Policy 2013, 63, 543–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Maswabi, M.G.; Chun, J.; Chung, S.Y. Barriers to energy transition: A case of Botswana. Energy Policy 2021, 158, 112514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. World Bank. World Development Report 2019: The Changing Nature of Work; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  10. Afridi ZU, R.; Qammar, N.W. Technical challenges and optimization of biogas plants. ChemBioEng Rev. 2020, 7, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Neri, E.; Passarini, F.; Cespi, D.; Zoffoli, F.; Vassura, I. Sustainability of a bio-waste treatment plant: Impact evolution resulting from technological improvements. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 171, 1006–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Al Husaeni, D.F.; Nandiyanto, A.B.D. Bibliometric using Vosviewer with Publish or Perish (using google scholar data): From step-by-step processing for users to the practical examples in the analysis of digital learning articles in pre and post COVID-19 pandemic. ASEAN J. Sci. Eng. 2022, 2, 19–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Orduña-Malea, E.; Costas, R. Link-based approach to study scientific software usage: The case of VOSviewer. Scientometrics 2021, 126, 8153–8186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Salgado-Cruz, M.d.l.P.; Salgado-Cruz, J.; García-Hernández, A.B.; Calderón- Domínguez, G.; Gómez-Viquez, H.; Oliver-Espinoza, R.; Fernández-Martínez, M.C.; Yáñez-Fernández, J. Chitosan as a coating for biocontrol in postharvest products: A bibliometric review. Membranes 2021, 11, 421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wang, X.; Xu, Z.; Škare, M. A bibliometric analysis of economic research-ekonomska istrazivanja (2007–2019). Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživanja 2020, 33, 865–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nandiyanto, A.B.D.; Biddinika, M.K.; Triawan, F. How bibliographic dataset portrays decreasing number of scientific publications from Indonesia. Indones. J. Sci. Technol. 2020, 5, 154–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Eck, N.; Waltman, L. Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics 2017, 111, 1053–1070. [Google Scholar]
  18. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L.; Dekker, R.; Van Den Berg, J. A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2010, 61, 2405–2416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Khalil, G.M.; Crawford, C.A.G. A bibliometric analysis of US-based research on the behavioral risk factor surveillance system. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2015, 48, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Long, C.; Wu, J.; Zhou, Y.; Jenkins, N. Peer-to-peer energy sharing through a two-stage aggregated battery control in a community Microgrid. Appl. Energy 2018, 226, 261–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Huang, M.; Piao, S.; Ciais, P.; Peñuelas, J.; Wang, X.; Keenan, T.F.; Peng, S.; Berry, J.A.; Wang, K.; Mao, J.; et al. Air temperature optima of vegetation productivity across global biomes. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2019, 3, 772–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lowitzsch, J.; Hoicka, C.E.; van Tulder, F.J. Renewable energy communities under the 2019 European Clean Energy Package-Governance model for the energy clusters of the future? Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 122, 109489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Inês, C.; Guilherme, P.L.; Esther, M.G.; Swantje, G.; Stephen, H.; Lars, H. Regulatory challenges and opportunities for collective renewable energy prosumers in the EU. Energy Policy 2020, 138, 111212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lüth, A.; Zepter, J.M.; Del Granado, P.C.; Egging, R. Local electricity market designs for peer-to-peer trading: The role of battery flexibility. Appl. Energy 2018, 229, 1233–1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Arora, V.K.; Katavouta, A.; Williams, R.G.; Jones, C.D.; Brovkin, V.; Friedlingstein, P.; Schwinger, J.; Bopp, L.; Boucher, O.; Cadule, P.; et al. Carbon-concentration and carbon-climate feedbacks in CMIP6 models and their comparison to CMIP5 models. Biogeosciences 2020, 17, 4173–4222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Dornelas, M.; Antão, L.H.; Moyes, F.; Bates, A.E.; Magurran, A.E.; Adam, D.; Akhmetzhanova, A.A.; Appeltans, W.; Arcos, J.M.; Arnold, H.; et al. BioTIME: A database of biodiversity time series for the Anthropocene. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2018, 27, 760–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lezama, F.; Soares, J.; Hernandez-Leal, P.; Kaisers, M.; Pinto, T.; Vale, Z. Local energy markets: Paving the path towards fully transactive energy systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2018, 34, 4081–4088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Soong, J.L.; Fuchslueger, L.; Marañon-Jimenez, S.; Torn, M.S.; Janssens, I.A.; Penuelas, J.; Richter, A. Microbial carbon limitation: The need for integrating microorganisms into our understanding of ecosystem carbon cycling. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2020, 26, 1953–1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jacob, D.; Teichmann, C.; Sobolowski, S.; Katragkou, E.; Anders, I.; Belda, M.; Benestad, R.; Boberg, F.; Buonomo, E.; Cardoso, R.M.; et al. Regional climate downscaling over Europe: Perspectives from the EURO-CORDEX community. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2020, 20, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Olivella-Rosell, P.; Lloret-Gallego, P.; Munné-Collado, Í.; Villafafila-Robles, R.; Sumper, A.; Ottessen, S.Ø.; Rajasekharan, J.; Bremdal, B.A. Local flexibility market design for aggregators providing multiple flexibility services at distribution network level. Energies 2018, 11, 822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zepter, J.M.; Lüth, A.; del Granado, P.C.; Egging, R. Prosumer integration in wholesale electricity markets: Synergies of peer-to-peer trade and residential storage. Energy Build. 2019, 184, 163–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Azarova, V.; Cohen, J.; Friedl, C.; Reichl, J. Designing local renewable energy communities to increase social acceptance: Evidence from a choice experiment in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland. Energy Policy 2019, 132, 1176–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hoicka, C.E.; Lowitzsch, J.; Brisbois, M.C.; Kumar, A.; Camargo, L.R. Implementing a just renewable energy transition: Policy advice for transposing the new European rules for renewable energy communities. Energy Policy 2021, 156, 112435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gravagnuolo, A.; Angrisano, M.; Fusco Girard, L. Circular economy strategies in eight historic port cities: Criteria and indicators towards a circular city assessment framework. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lilla, S.; Orozco, C.; Borghetti, A.; Napolitano, F.; Tossani, F. Day-ahead scheduling of a local energy community: An alternating direction method of multipliers approach. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2019, 35, 1132–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hanke, F.; Lowitzsch, J. Empowering vulnerable consumers to join renewable energy communities-towards an inclusive design of the clean energy package. Energies 2020, 13, 1615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Perger, T.; Wachter, L.; Fleischhacker, A.; Auer, H. PV sharing in local communities: Peer-to-peer trading under consideration of the prosumers’ willingness-to-pay. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 66, 102634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Gregg, J.S.; Nyborg, S.; Hansen, M.; Schwanitz, V.J.; Wierling, A.; Zeiss, J.P.; Delvaux, S.; Saenz, V.; Polo-Alvarez, L.; Candelise, C.; et al. Collective action and social innovation in the energy sector: A mobilisation model perspective. Energies 2020, 13, 651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Frieden, D.; Tuerk, A.; Roberts, J.; D’Herbemont, S.; Gubina, A.F.; Komel, B. Overview of emerging regulatory frameworks on collective self-consumption and energy communities in Europe. In Proceedings of the 2019 16th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), Ljubljana, Slovenia, 18–20 September 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  40. Barnes, J.; Hansen, P.; Kamin, T.; Golob, U.; Darby, S.; van der Grijp, N.M.; Petrovics, D. Creating valuable outcomes: An exploration of value creation pathways in the business models of energy communities. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2024, 108, 103398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Igliński, B.; Kiełkowska, U.; Piechota, G.; Skrzatek, M.; Cichosz, M.; Iwański, P. Can energy self-sufficiency be achieved? Case study of Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship (Poland). Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2021, 23, 2061–2081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Blanco, E.C.; Martín, M.; Vega, P. Achieving energy self-sufficiency in wastewater treatment plants by integrating municipal solid waste treatment: A process design study in Spain. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 110673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Busch, H.; Ruggiero, S.; Isakovic, A.; Hansen, T. Policy challenges to community energy in the EU: A systematic review of the scientific literature. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 151, 111535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Qadir, S.A.; Al-Motairi, H.; Tahir, F.; Al-Fagih, L. Incentives and strategies for financing the renewable energy transition: A review. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 3590–3606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hille, E.; Althammer, W.; Diederich, H. Environmental regulation and innovation in renewable energy technologies: Does the policy instrument matter? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 153, 119921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gjorgievski, V.Z.; Cundeva, S.; Georghiou, G.E. Social arrangements, technical designs and impacts of energy communities: A review. Renew. Energy 2021, 169, 1138–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kılkış, Ş.; Krajačić, G.; Duić, N.; Rosen, M.A. Effective mitigation of climate change with sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022, 269, 116146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Pena-Bello, A.; Parra, D.; Herberz, M.; Tiefenbeck, V.; Patel, M.K.; Hahnel, U.J. Integration of prosumer peer-to-peer trading decisions into energy community modelling. Nat. Energy 2022, 7, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 17 03789 g001
Figure 1. Current trends limited to published articles and conference papers in the period 2009–2024. Source: Scopus.
Figure 1. Current trends limited to published articles and conference papers in the period 2009–2024. Source: Scopus.
Energies 17 03789 g001
Energies 17 03789 g002
Figure 2. Countries with most research activity in the ‘Energy Community’ theme in the period 2009–2024. Source: Scopus.
Figure 2. Countries with most research activity in the ‘Energy Community’ theme in the period 2009–2024. Source: Scopus.
Energies 17 03789 g002
Energies 17 03789 g003
Figure 3. Major research sponsors without country limits in the period 2009–2024. Source: Scopus.
Figure 3. Major research sponsors without country limits in the period 2009–2024. Source: Scopus.
Energies 17 03789 g003
Energies 17 03789 g004
Figure 4. Current trends of documents (articles and conference papers) from 2018 to 2024. Source: Web of Science.
Figure 4. Current trends of documents (articles and conference papers) from 2018 to 2024. Source: Web of Science.
Energies 17 03789 g004
Energies 17 03789 g005
Figure 5. Bibliometric keyword analysis of articles and conference papers. Source: Our elaboration.
Figure 5. Bibliometric keyword analysis of articles and conference papers. Source: Our elaboration.
Energies 17 03789 g005
Energies 17 03789 g006
Figure 6. Bibliometric analysis of article keywords. Source: our elaboration.
Figure 6. Bibliometric analysis of article keywords. Source: our elaboration.
Energies 17 03789 g006
Table 1. Barriers to the implementation of energy communities. Sources: our elaboration.
Table 1. Barriers to the implementation of energy communities. Sources: our elaboration.
FactorDescriptionData or Statistics
Initial investmentStart-up cost for biogas plantsUSD 1–3 million per medium-sized plant
Skilled laborNeed for technical personnel for operation and maintenance40% of rural communities have skills shortages
Waste managementCosts and logistics associated with the collection and transport of organic waste30% of the communities increased management costs
Table 2. State-of-the-art analysis of energy communities. Source: our source.
Table 2. State-of-the-art analysis of energy communities. Source: our source.
TitleAuthorsYearDatabaseCit
Peer-to-peer energy sharing through a two-stage aggregated battery control in a community Microgrid[20]2018WOS317
Air temperature optima of vegetation productivity across global biomes[21]2019WOS300
Renewable energy communities under the 2019 European Clean Energy Package-Governance model for the energy clusters of the future?[22]2020Scopus294
Regulatory challenges and opportunities for collective renewable energy prosumers in the EU[23]2020Scopus256
Local electricity market designs for peer-to-peer trading: The role of battery flexibility[24]2018WOS254
Carbon-concentration and carbon-climate feedbacks in CMIP6 models and their comparison to CMIP5 models[25]2020WOS226
BioTIME: A database of biodiversity time series for the Anthropocene[26]2018WOS223
Local Energy Markets: Paving the Path Toward Fully Transactive Energy Systems[27]2018Scopus220
Microbial carbon limitation: The need for integrating microorganisms into our understanding of ecosystem carbon cycling[28]2020WOS218
Regional climate downscaling over Europe: perspectives from the EURO-CORDEX community[29]2020WOS212
Local flexibility market design for aggregators providing multiple flexibility services at distribution network level[30]2018Scopus179
Prosumer integration in wholesale electricity markets: synergies of peer-to-peer trade residential storage[31]2019WOS139
Designing local renewable energy communities to increase social acceptance: Evidence from a choice experiment in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland[32]2019Scopus113
Implementing a just renewable energy transition: Policy advice for transposing the new European rules for renewable energy communities[33]2021Scopus103
Circular Economy Strategies in Eight Historic Port Cities: Criteria and Indicators Towards a Circular City Assessment Framework[34]2019WOS91
Day-Ahead Scheduling of a Local Energy Community: An Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers Approach[35]2020Scopus87
Empowering vulnerable consumers to join renewable energy communities-towards an inclusive design of the clean energy package[36]2020Scopus65
PV sharing in local communities: Peer-to-peer trading under consideration of the prosumers’ willingness-to-pay[37]2021Scopus57
Collective action and social innovation in the energy sector: A mobilisation model perspective[38]2020Scopus51
Overview of emerging regulatory frameworks on collective self-consumption and energy communities in Europe[39]2019Scopus48
Table 3. Proposed strategies to facilitate the expansion of energy communities. Sources: our elaboration.
Table 3. Proposed strategies to facilitate the expansion of energy communities. Sources: our elaboration.
Proposed StrategyStrategy Description
Promoting active community participationThrough favorable policies and educational initiatives
Incentives for technological investmentsIncentives to encourage the adoption of new technologies
Regulatory supportCreating regulations that support energy communities
Overcoming technological barriersSolving technology implementation issues
Tackling initial financial costsProviding financial support to start up projects
Planning and waste managementCareful planning to ensure sustainability and economic benefits
Collaboration between different actorsCollaboration between governments, the private sector, the scientific community, and civil society
Table 4. Main benefits of energy communities based on organic waste. Sources: our elaboration.
Table 4. Main benefits of energy communities based on organic waste. Sources: our elaboration.
Category BenefitsBenefits Description
EconomicReducing dependence on non-renewable energy sources, saving on energy costs
SocialPromotion of community participation, sustainability through decentralized energy models
EnvironmentalReducing greenhouse gas emissions, promoting renewable energy, mitigating climate change
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bellini, F.; Campana, P.; Censi, R.; Di Renzo, M.; Tarola, A.M. Energy Communities in the Transition to Renewable Sources: Innovative Models of Energy Self-Sufficiency through Organic Waste. Energies 2024, 17, 3789. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153789

AMA Style

Bellini F, Campana P, Censi R, Di Renzo M, Tarola AM. Energy Communities in the Transition to Renewable Sources: Innovative Models of Energy Self-Sufficiency through Organic Waste. Energies. 2024; 17(15):3789. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153789

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bellini, Francesco, Paola Campana, Riccardo Censi, Matteo Di Renzo, and Anna Maria Tarola. 2024. "Energy Communities in the Transition to Renewable Sources: Innovative Models of Energy Self-Sufficiency through Organic Waste" Energies 17, no. 15: 3789. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153789

APA Style

Bellini, F., Campana, P., Censi, R., Di Renzo, M., & Tarola, A. M. (2024). Energy Communities in the Transition to Renewable Sources: Innovative Models of Energy Self-Sufficiency through Organic Waste. Energies, 17(15), 3789. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17153789

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop