IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v181y2023ics0301421523002756.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community response to microgrid development: Case studies from the U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Muttaqee, Mahmood
  • Furqan, Maham
  • Boudet, Hilary

Abstract

Microgrids could improve grid reliability and resiliency, while decentralizing, decarbonizing, and democratizing electricity provision. Recent federal and state level policies and investments have sought to encourage their development. Yet, little research has been done to understand how communities respond to microgrid proposals. We conducted case studies of community response to four different community microgrid proposals in the U.S. – two successful (Hot Springs, NC; Panton, VT) and two unsuccessful (Albany, NY; Carson, CA) – examining relevant media coverage and policy documents (n = 533) and conducting semi-structured interviews with active stakeholders (n = 28). Findings suggest that community leaders and local citizens initially viewed microgrids favorably, particularly those utilizing renewable energy as their primary generation source. Backup generation via fossil fuel sources appeared less problematic. Utility-backed proposals providing multiple component benefits in addition to resiliency – such as peak shaving and/or cost savings for utilities and transmission owners – proved more successful than those proposed by other entities without such benefits. Early, sustained, and responsive community engagement by the developer was also critical to project success – and will likely only become more so as microgrids scale up (both in numbers and size) and touch multiple stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Muttaqee, Mahmood & Furqan, Maham & Boudet, Hilary, 2023. "Community response to microgrid development: Case studies from the U.S," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:181:y:2023:i:c:s0301421523002756
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421523002756
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113690?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:181:y:2023:i:c:s0301421523002756. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.