Stakeholders’ Interests in Developing an Energy Ecosystem for the Superblock—Case Hiedanranta
1.1. Integrated Community Energy System for a Solution to Local-Level Energy Sharing
1.2. Integrated Community Energy System from a Technical Perspective
1.3. Integrated Energy System as a Local Community
1.4. Background and Interpretations of Superblocks
1.5. Superblock as a Platform to Organize ICES in the Case of Hiedanranta
1.6. The Rationale
1.7. Research Question
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. The Interviews
- An architect at the City of Tampere, in a key role in the urban planning of the area;
- An infrastructure planner at the Sitowise consulting company, responsible for the general plan of the municipal infrastructure;
- The Chief Executive of Tampereen Sähkölaitos Oy, the municipal power company;
- The Chief Executive and Planning Manager of Tampereen Sähköverkko Oy, the municipal grid operator;
- A facility development director at the City of Tampere;
- Two directors from the construction company called YIT.
- Potential and risks of ICESs and superblocksAre the concepts of ICESs and superblocks familiar to you, and what kind of thoughts arise from the ideas? What are the expected problems or advantages? What kind of transition will the concept cause in current regimes? What are the issues that need closer research and development?
- Commitment and cooperationWhat are the most important stakeholders in the implementation of superblock-ICESs? Do the stakeholders have the ability to cooperate? Are there any barriers to cooperation between public and private stakeholders?
- The stakeholder’s own organizationHave the concepts of ICESs and superblock been discussed in your organization? What kind of role could your organization have in the implementation of an ICES superblock? Is the organization capable of implementing it? Will the implementation be problematic for your organization or are changes required?
2.2. Background Material for the Interview
2.2.1. Technology and the Energy Economy
2.2.2. Administration and Community
2.2.3. Urban Structure, Planning, and Superblock
3.1. Summary of the Interviews
- Interview 1
- Interview 2
- Interview 3
- Interview 4
- Interview 5
- Interview 6
3.2.1. Drivers and Barriers for ICESs in the Current Scientific Literature
3.2.2. Drivers and Barriers According to the Interviews
Conflicts of Interest
- AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014—IPCC. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/ (accessed on 20 June 2018).
- 2018 Revision of World Urbanization Prospects|Multimedia Library-United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html (accessed on 31 January 2019).
- Elshurafa, A.M.; Albardi, S.R.; Bigerna, S.; Bollino, C.A. Estimating the learning curve of solar PV balance–of–system for over 20 countries: Implications and policy recommendations. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 196, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koirala, B.; Koliou, E.; Friege, J.; Hakvoort, R.A.; Herder, P.M. Energetic communities for community energy: A review of key issues and trends shaping integrated community energy systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 56, 722–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Merei, G.; Moshövel, J.; Magnor, D.; Sauer, D.U. Optimization of self-consumption and techno-economic analysis of PV-battery systems in commercial applications. Appl. Energy 2016, 168, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodrigues, S.; Torabikalaki, R.; Faria, F.; Cafôfo, N.; Chen, X.; Ivaki, A.R.; Mata-Lima, H.; Morgado-Dias, F.J.S.E. Economic feasibility analysis of small scale PV systems in different countries. Sol. Energy 2016, 131, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Uribarri, P.M.Á.; Eicker, U.; Robinson, D. Energy performance of decentralized solar thermal feed-in to district heating networks. Energy Procedia 2017, 116, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Müller, S.C.; Welpe, I.M. Sharing electricity storage at the community level: An empirical analysis of potential business models and barriers. Energy Policy 2018, 118, 492–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mendes, G.; Ioakimidis, C.; Ferrão, P. On the planning and analysis of Integrated Community Energy Systems: A review and survey of available tools. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 4836–4854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koirala, B.; Chaves Ávila, J.; Gómez, T.; Hakvoort, R.; Herder, P. Local Alternative for Energy Supply: Performance Assessment of Integrated Community Energy Systems. Energies 2016, 9, 981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clean Energy for All: Council Adopts Remaining Files on Electricity Market and Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators-Consilium. Available online: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2019/05/22/clean-energy-for-all-council-adopts-remaining-files-on-electricity-market-and-agency-for-the-cooperation-of-energy-regulators/ (accessed on 3 June 2019).
- Orehounig, K.; Evins, R.; Dorer, V. Integration of decentralized energy systems in neighbourhoods using the energy hub approach. Appl. Energy 2015, 154, 277–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Wirth, T.; Gislason, L.; Seidl, R. Distributed energy systems on a neighborhood scale: Reviewing drivers of and barriers to social acceptance. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 2618–2628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pudjianto, D.; Ramsay, C.; Strbac, G. Virtual power plant and system integration of distributed energy resources. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2007, 1, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rathnayaka, A.J.D.; Potdar, V.M.; Dillon, T.; Hussain, O.; Kuruppu, S. Goal-Oriented Prosumer Community Groups for the Smart Grid. IEEE Technol. Soc. Mag. 2014, 33, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Lin, W.; Jin, X.; Mu, Y.; Jia, H.; Xu, X.; Yu, X.; Zhao, B. A two-stage multi-objective scheduling method for integrated community energy system. Appl. Energy 2018, 216, 428–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.; Jin, X.; Jia, H.; Yu, X.; Li, K. Hierarchical management for integrated community energy systems. Appl. Energy 2015, 160, 231–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, Y.; Wei, Z.; Sun, G.; Cheung, K.W.; Zang, H.; Chen, S. A robust optimization approach for integrated community energy system in energy and ancillary service markets. Energy 2018, 148, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, Z.; Yu, H.; Peng, Z.; Feng, Y. Planning community energy system in the industry 4.0 era: Achievements, challenges and a potential solution. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 78, 710–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walker, G. What are the barriers and incentives for community-owned means of energy production and use? Energy Policy 2008, 36, 4401–4405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zenginis, I.; Vardakas, J.S.; Echave, C.; Morató, M.; Abadal, J.; Verikoukis, C.V. Cooperation in microgrids through power exchange: An optimal sizing and operation approach. Appl. Energy 2017, 203, 972–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walker, G.; Simcock, N. Community Energy Systems. In International Encyclopedia of Housing and Home; Smith, S.J., Ed.; Elsevier: San Diego, CA, USA, 2012; pp. 194–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Patricios, N. The Neighborhood Concept: A Retrospective of Physical Design and Social Interaction. J. Archit. Plan. Res. 2002, 19. Available online: https://works.bepress.com/nicholas_patricios/16/ (accessed on 10 June 2018).
- Charmes, E. Cul-de-sacs, Superblocks and Environmental Areas as Supports of Residential Territorialization. J. Urban Des. 2010, 15, 357–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scoppa, M.; Bawazir, K.; Alawadi, K. Walking the superblocks: Street layout efficiency and the sikkak system in Abu Dhabi. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 38, 359–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delso, J.; Martín, B.; Ortega, E. A new procedure using network analysis and kernel density estimations to evaluate the effect of urban configurations on pedestrian mobility. The case study of Vitoria—Gasteiz. J. Transp. Geogr. 2018, 67, 61–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehaffy, M.W.; Porta, S.; Romice, O. The ‘neighborhood unit’ on trial: A case study in the impacts of urban morphology. J. Urban. 2015, 8, 199–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kan, H.Y.; Forsyth, A.; Rowe, P. Redesigning China’s superblock neighbourhoods: Policies, opportunities and challenges. J. Urban Des. 2017, 22, 757–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Charter for the Ecosystemic Planning of Cities. 2018. Available online: http://www.cartaurbanismoecosistemico.com/CHARTER%20FOR%20THE%20ECOSYSTEMIC%20PLANNING%20OF%20CITIES.pdf (accessed on 20 October 2019).
- Ideakilpailun Jatkot-Kaupunkilaisten Visio Tulevaisuuden Hietarannasta. Available online: https://www.e-julkaisu.fi/tampereen_kaupunki/ideakilpailun-jatkot (accessed on 31 January 2019).
- Hiedanranta Structure Plan. City of Tampere. 2017. Available online: https://www.tampere.fi/tiedostot/h/Pq7B5MCph/20171207_Hiedanranta_Structural_Plan_Booklet_Updated_30Mt.pdf (accessed on 20 October 2019).
- Engelken, M.; Römer, B.; Drescher, M.; Welpe, I.M.; Picot, A. Comparing drivers, barriers, and opportunities of business models for renewable energies: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 60, 795–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soshinskaya, M.; Crijns-Graus, W.H.J.; Guerrero, J.M.; Vasquez, J.C. Microgrids: Experiences, barriers and success factors. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 40, 659–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Bellido, M.H.; Rosa, L.P.; Pereira, A.O.; Falcão, D.M.; Ribeiro, S.K. Barriers, challenges and opportunities for microgrid implementation: The case of Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 188, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valta, J.; Makinen, S.J.; Kotilainen, K.; Järventausta, P.; Mendes, G. Comparison of Regulatory Challenges Faced by Different Microgrid Ownership Models. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 21–25 October 2018; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, R.; Ury, W.L.; Patton, B. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In; Penguin: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Geels, F.W. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 2002, 31, 1257–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Gui, E.M.; MacGill, I. Typology of future clean energy communities: An exploratory structure, opportunities, and challenges. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 35, 94–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acosta, C.; Ortega, M.; Bunsen, T.; Koirala, B.; Ghorbani, A. Facilitating Energy Transition through Energy Commons: An Application of Socio-Ecological Systems Framework for Integrated Community Energy Systems. Sustainability 2018, 10, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Susskind, L.E.; McKearnen, S.; Thomas-Lamar, J. The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Ahlava, A.; Edelman, H. Urban Design Management: A Guide to Good Practice; Taylor & Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Rosemann, T.; Löser, J.; Rühling, K. A New DH Control Algorithm for a Combined Supply and Feed-In Substation and Testing Through Hardware-In-The-Loop. Energy Procedia 2017, 116, 416–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bünning, F.; Wetter, M.; Fuchs, M.; Müller, D. Bidirectional low temperature district energy systems with agent-based control: Performance comparison and operation optimization. Appl. Energy 2018, 209, 502–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Perez-Mora, N.; Bava, F.; Andersen, M.; Bales, C.; Lennermo, G.; Nielsen, C.; Furbo, S.; Martínez-Moll, V. Solar district heating and cooling: A review. Int. J. Energy Res. 2018, 42, 1419–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ur Rehman, H.; Hirvonen, J.; Sirén, K. Performance comparison between optimized design of a centralized and semi-decentralized community size solar district heating system. Appl. Energy 2018, 229, 1072–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Superblocks|Ecology, Urban Planning and Mobility. Available online: https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ecologiaurbana/en/what-we-do-and-why/quality-public-space/superblocks (accessed on 1 July 2019).
- Miles, M.B.; Huberman, A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Wolsink, M. The next phase in social acceptance of renewable innovation. EDI Q. 2013, 5, 10–13. [Google Scholar]
- OJL. Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on Common Rules for the Internal Market for Electricity and Amending Directive 2012/27/EU (Text with EEA Relevance.). OJL 2019, L158, 125–199. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/944/oj/eng (accessed on 20 October 2019).
- Ecology, Urban Planning and Mobility|Barcelona City Council. Available online: http://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ecologiaurbana/en/what-we-do-and-why/quality-public-space/superblocks (accessed on 12 June 2019).
|Drivers||Barriers||Questions and Issues|
|Technology and the Energy Economy|
|D1.1 Among the electrical network operators, ICESs have already been discussed/considered.|
D1.2 The ICES may simplify municipal infrastructure and make its construction more economical.
D1.3 Intelligent electrical power management and local storage may decrease the need for reserve power.
D1.4 The 3D system of the environmental division of real estate facilitates new (underground) solutions, e.g., for thermal storage.
D1.5 Through a community microgrid, ICESs avoid duties and energy transfer fees regarding self-consumed electricity.
D1.6 District heating topology following the principles of ICESs and superblocks does not require additional investment, and extra costs compared to conventional topology are minimal.
D1.7 Electricity companies are interested in ICESs as a business opportunity.
|B1.1 Cost efficiency of district heating and medium voltage electric grid may suffer if used less due to ICESs. As a consequence, they would be economically more challenging to integrate with municipal networks.|
B1.2 Renewable energy sources may increase the potential of grid instability and peak loads.
B1.3 Expensive, underperforming, or non-existent technology for ICESs in neighborhood-scale biogas production and bi-directional district heat.
B1.4 Responsibility for electric grid security and quality could bring extra costs for ICESs.
|Q1.1 ICESs should be connected to a medium-voltage electric grid.|
Q1.2 Does this lead to less integrated grids overall?
Q1.3 How should the infrastructure of an ICES be designed and dimensioned at the beginning?
Q1.4 What are the development bodies for ICES-related technical issues? What is the role of network operators with regard to current legislation?
Q1.5 Demand response, different types, different purposes (year cycle, diurnal cycles, spot price optimization, and external energy-need optimization.
Q1.6 Adaptability, life-cycle approach, and maintainability.
Q1.7 The energy economy of superblock-ICESs calls for comprehensive simulation and analysis, as residential costs need to be predicted.
|Drivers||Barriers||Questions and issues|
|Administration and Community|
|D2.1 Collective use of solar panels is possible in a property even today if electricity is included in the rent or maintenance charge.|
D2.2 Building contractors already have experience of collective investment and operation of infrastructure among new housing companies through a case of a pneumatic waste collection system.
D2.3 Planning officials in Hiedanranta encourage constructors to use integrated approaches.
D2.4 Residents desire community-based solutions on new housing areas.
|B2.1 Unclear rights and responsibilities between an ICES and individual consumers in current legislation, e.g., regarding customer choice and the electric market act.|
B2.2 Due to legislation, local energy systems cannot exceed plot boundaries.
B2.3 The municipal planning organization does not share responsibilities optimally in the development process.
B2.4 Current legislation does not allow power generation business for electrical grid operators.
B2.5 ICESs create new responsible parties which increase license bureaucracy.
|Q2.1 Issues with regard to ownership and administration as key factors for an ICES, e.g., company form, governing body, rules, etc. |
Q2.2 Differences in development processes and incentives between city-owned and privately-owned land.
Q2.3 On what terms and economic principles can individual consumers be charged fairly?
Q2.4 Legislation with regard to possible partners, alliances, etc.
Q2.5 Preliminary investments in distributed energy systems call for financing.
|Urban Structure, Planning and Superblock|
|D3.1 Tampere city has adopted the idea of the superblock as a planning concept and has a positive attitude toward related solutions.||B3.1 No established models exist for ICESs, they have to be created. The general plan is just a starting point.|
B3.2 Current planning system does not necessarily support the planning process of an ICES.
B3.3 Housing costs should not rise because of the superblock-ICES.
B3.4 Development of advanced systems calls for public funding and investors with risk-taking capacity.
|Q3.1 The interviewees did not give a clear opinion about whether the ICES and the superblock correspond with each other.|
Q3.2 What are the key methods for the administration and ownership, responsibilities, and rights with regard to land use, easements, distribution of possessions, etc.?
Q3.3 What are the tools for the planning and management of cities to facilitate superblock-ICESs?
Q3.4 Because of the long timespan of urban construction, the superblock-ICES needs to be planned as a system that expands in phases.
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Joensuu, T.; Norvasuo, M.; Edelman, H. Stakeholders’ Interests in Developing an Energy Ecosystem for the Superblock—Case Hiedanranta. Sustainability 2020, 12, 327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010327
Joensuu T, Norvasuo M, Edelman H. Stakeholders’ Interests in Developing an Energy Ecosystem for the Superblock—Case Hiedanranta. Sustainability. 2020; 12(1):327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010327Chicago/Turabian Style
Joensuu, Tuomo, Markku Norvasuo, and Harry Edelman. 2020. "Stakeholders’ Interests in Developing an Energy Ecosystem for the Superblock—Case Hiedanranta" Sustainability 12, no. 1: 327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010327