Energy efficiency, the overlooked climate emergency solution

In practice, energy communities or cooperatives would allow a more significant number of households to participate in the production and distribution of renewable energies, while in some cases, it would lower the network costs by making the grid smaller and more fit-for-purpose. The EU guarantees that energy communities will have a right to share energy, while network operators will be required to help facilitate this activity. Even though many technical and practical details vary at the national level, energy sharing provides numerous opportunities for citizens living in the same areas (e.g. apartment or shared buildings, neighborhoods etc.) to innovate with renewables and other flexible, clean energy technologies like storage. In particular, energy sharing could allow communities to create solidarity mechanisms for benefit sharing to make participation easier for vulnerable and low-income households, and those living in social housing. They can also embed strategies of sufficiency and efficiency, since their primary vocation is not to seek profit.

The rise of energy communities could encourage more fairness in the electricity system. Citizens and energy consumers should take ownership of electricity production and related strategic choices, creating a more sustainable and resilient energy market. Energy democracy might offer new spaces for collaboration between ecology, social, economic and justice movements. Almost half of EU households could produce renewable energy by 2050, 37% of which could come through involvement in a renewable energy cooperative²⁶. Still, it is unclear for now whether, in the European context, the impact will be as significant for the most vulnerable groups and those affected by energy poverty.

A reassessment of human interests, priorities, resources, and means could allow more people to engage in renewable energies and join the momentum toward greater efficiency and sufficiency as well as better sharing of resources if more countries start to consider energy communities better.

Conclusion: Sufficiency Could Make Societies More Resilient to Climate and Social Emergencies

The first victims of the fragmented responses to energy poverty and climate emergencies are the most vulnerable elements of our societies. If lucky enough to have been identified as such, in Western countries, they will be sent from one social service to another and from one technical measure to another, without the benefit of a signposted pathway. Social workers, NGOs, construction and healthcare professionals, and all stakeholders in the field can get too overwhelmed by social emergencies to deal with the climate crisis. Vulnerable and energy-poor communities must therefore create their own resilience schemes, in particular by learning to reuse products and materials.

The collaborative or sharing economy can be a good start to combine the social and climate emergency agendas with the resiliency and sufficiency requirements. For instance, leasing appliances and electronics could enhance product repairing and upgrading, and limit the waste of energy and resources. New trends such as “repair cafes” for small electronics are also noticeable. However, it would be useful to study the inclination of the most deprived to engage in these approaches rather than seek a particular status symbol through the ownership of specific devices.

Europe has launched a fundamental review through the Circular Economy Package (2015-2019). Ecodesign standards will gradually be broadened to require greater resource efficiency in the way products such as white goods are designed (as opposed to just energy efficiency at present). However, there is still a lot to be done from a regulatory point of view, not only in Europe but also in the rest of the world. Perhaps the energy poor have a more sustainable attitude in essence, and they would undoubtedly have a lot to teach in creating a more resilient, sufficient and sustainable society.

References

1. Anagnostopoulos F., De Groote M. Energy Performance of the Housing Stock. Energy Poverty Handbook, Brussels, European Union, 2016.

2. Angel J. Strategies of Energy Democracy: A Report. Brussels, Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung, 2016.

3. Artola I., Rademaekers K., Williams R., Yearwood J. Boosting Building Renovation: What Potential and Value for Europe? European Parliament, 2016. http://www.europarl.europa. eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/587326/IPOL_STU(2016)587326_EN.pdf.

4. Bennis S., Mettetal L. La precarite energetique en Europe: des approches et des dispositifs varies. IAU IdF, 2019. http://www.fnau.org/fr/publication/la-precarite-energetique-en-eu- rope-des-approches-et-des-dispositifs-varies/

5. Bouzarovski S. Energy Poverty: (Dis)AssemblingEurope's Infrastructural Divide. L., Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.

6. Bouzarovski S., Petrova S. A Global Perspective on Domestic Energy Deprivation: Overcoming the Energy Poverty-Fuel Poverty Binary, 2015. https://www.research.manchester. ac.uk/portal/en/publications/a-global-perspective-on-domestic-energy-deprivation-over- coming-the-energy-povertyfuel-poverty-binary(8fb42ff6-28fb-4444-a463-fc7210a18ba7)/ export.html.

7. Buchs M., Bardsley N., Duwe S. Who Bears the Brunt? Distributional Effects of Climate Change Mitigation Policies. Critical Social Policy, 2011, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 285-307.

8. Claeys G., Fredriksson G., Zachmann G. The Distributional Effects of Climate Policies. Bruegel Blueprint Series, 2018, vol. 28.

9. Gonzalez-Eguino M. Energy Poverty: An Overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015, vol. 47 (C), pp. 377-385.

10. Halff A., Sovacool B. K., Rozhon J. Energy Poverty: Global Challenges and Local Solutions. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014. http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/a cprof:oso/9780199682362.001.0001/acprof-9780199682362.

11. Jacobson M. Z., Delucchi M., Bauer Z. 100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World. Joule, 2017, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 108-121.

12. Karekezi S., Mcdade S., Boardman B., Kimani J. Energy, Poverty and Development. In: Global Energy Assessment: Toward a Sustainable Future. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 2012, pp. 151-190.

13. Milne G., Boardman B. Making Cold Homes Warmer: The Effect of Energy Efficiency Improvements in Low-Income Homes. A Report to the Energy Action Grants Agency Charitable Trust. Energy Policy, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2000, vol. 28 (6-7), pp. 411-424.

14. Pepermans G. European Energy Market Liberalization: Experiences and Challenges. International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, 2018, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3-26.

15. Politt H., Alexandri E., Anagnostopoulos F., De Rose A., Farhangi C., Hoste T., Markkanen

S., Theillard P., Vergez C., Voogt M. The Macro-Level and Sectoral Impacts of Energy Efficiency Policies. European Commission, 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/ documents/the_macro-level_and_sectoral_impacts_of_energy_efficiency_policies.pdf.

16. Telfar-Barnard L., Preval N., Howden-Chapman P., Arnold R., Young C., Grimes A., Denne

T.The Impact of Retrofitted Insulation and New Heaters on Health Services Utilisation and Costs, Pharmaceutical Costs and Mortality. Evaluation of Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart. Report to the Ministry of Economic Development, 2011. http://motu.org.nz/assets/Docu- ments/our-work/urban-and-regional/housing/The-Impact-of-Retrofitted-Insulation- and-New-Heaters-on-Health-Services-Utilisation-and-Costs-Pharmaceutical-Costs-and- Mortality-Evaluation-of-Warm-Up-New-Zealand-Heat-Smart.pdf.

17. Victor D., Elias R. Energy Transitions in Developing Countries: a Re-view of Concepts and Literature. Program on Energy and Sustainable Development Working Paper, no. 40, 2005.

Размещено на Allbest.ru