IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/kitiip/6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Energieautarkie: Definitionen, Für- bzw. Gegenargumente, und entstehende Forschungsbedarfe

Author

Listed:
  • McKenna, Russell
  • Herbes, Carsten
  • Fichtner, Wolf

Abstract

Ambitionierte europäische und nationale Zielvorgaben in der Energiepolitik führen in den letzten Jahren zu einem Umbruch der Energiewirtschaft, der vor allem durch den Ausbau von erneuerbaren Energien geprägt ist. Die Charakteristika dieser Energieträger bedingen, dass ihre Erschließung wenigstens teilweise dezentral erfolgen muss. Der Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien ist somit stark lokal und regional geprägt, wie z.B. in Deutschland durch die hohe Investition privater Personen in erneuerbare Energieanlagen und der Trend der Bürgerenergie deutlich wird. Das Letztgenannte resultiert aus diversen sozioökonomischen Motivationen wie dem Bedürfnis, eine aktive Rolle in der Energieversorgung zu übernehmen und sich unabhängiger von zentralen Strukturen zu machen. Der Begriff der Energieautarkie hat sich in diesem Kontext etabliert und Forschungsfragen aufgeworfen, von denen dieser Beitrag einigen nachgeht. Die Ziele dieses Artikels sind, die sozialen und ökonomischen Motive der Akteure sowie die technischen Für- und Gegenargumente für Energieautarkie zu identifizieren und zu hinterfragen. Dabei werden Definitionen und Bewertungsmethoden diskutiert und konkrete Forschungsbedarfe abgeleitet. Die Auswertung zeigt einen mangelnden Konsens in der Literatur auf, weswegen eine Arbeitsdefinition von Energieautarkie vorgeschlagen wird. Unter den sozialen Motivationen und Voraussetzungen für Energieautarkie werden diverse Aspekte thematisiert und es zeigt sich, dass viele Konsumenten bereit sind, mehr für lokale Energie zu bezahlen. Die techno-ökonomischen Aspekte sind ausschlaggebend: der Grad der möglichen Energieautarkie ist durch die technischen Gegebenheiten bestimmt, insbesondere müssen ausreichende erneuerbare Energien-Potenziale vorhanden sein. Anderseits gibt es drei wesentliche technische Gegenargumente für die Energieautarkie, nämlich der Größendegressionseffekt, der Glättungseffekt und die Versorgungssicherheit. Forschungsbedarfe werden in mehreren Bereichen identifiziert. Empirische Forschung zu der Frage der Übertragbarkeit von Energieautarkie-Ansätzen und standardisierte Rahmenwerke sind notwendig, um die Vergleichbarkeit zwischen und Übertragbarkeit von diversen Projekten zu ermöglichen. Vor allem bei der Erschließung von nachfrageseitigen Potenzialen zur Lastverschiebung und Energieeffizienz scheinen die hier diskutierten Energieautarkieprojekte noch nicht so weit zu sein. Die Eignung und das Zusammenspiel zwischen unterschiedlichen Kommunen sowie die Frage nach dem optimalen Aggregationsgrad sind noch zu klären. Schließlich ergibt sich ein Forschungsbedarf für Bewertungsmethoden und Indikatoren, um Energieautarkie auf der Ebene von einzelnen Kommunen und ihre Auswirkungen auf das übergeordnete Energiesystem flächendeckend zu bewerten.

Suggested Citation

  • McKenna, Russell & Herbes, Carsten & Fichtner, Wolf, 2015. "Energieautarkie: Definitionen, Für- bzw. Gegenargumente, und entstehende Forschungsbedarfe," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 6, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:kitiip:6
    DOI: 10.5445/IR/1000047347
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/176732/1/kit-iip-wp-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5445/IR/1000047347?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jürgen Hauber & Chantal Ruppert-Winkel, 2012. "Moving towards Energy Self-Sufficiency Based on Renewables: Comparative Case Studies on the Emergence of Regional Processes of Socio-Technical Change in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-40, March.
    2. Schmidt, J. & Schönhart, M. & Biberacher, M. & Guggenberger, T. & Hausl, S. & Kalt, G. & Leduc, S. & Schardinger, I. & Schmid, E., 2012. "Regional energy autarky: Potentials, costs and consequences for an Austrian region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 211-221.
    3. Panagiotidou, Maria & Fuller, Robert J., 2013. "Progress in ZEBs—A review of definitions, policies and construction activity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 196-206.
    4. Wirth, Steffen, 2014. "Communities matter: Institutional preconditions for community renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 236-246.
    5. Boon, Frank Pieter & Dieperink, Carel, 2014. "Local civil society based renewable energy organisations in the Netherlands: Exploring the factors that stimulate their emergence and development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 297-307.
    6. Anselm Mattes, 2012. "Grüner Strom: Verbraucher sind bereit, für Investitionen in erneuerbare Energien zu zahlen," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(7), pages 2-9.
    7. Jenssen, Till & König, Andreas & Eltrop, Ludger, 2014. "Bioenergy villages in Germany: Bringing a low carbon energy supply for rural areas into practice," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 74-80.
    8. Walker, Gordon, 2008. "What are the barriers and incentives for community-owned means of energy production and use?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4401-4405, December.
    9. Herbes, Carsten & Ramme, Iris, 2014. "Online marketing of green electricity in Germany—A content analysis of providers’ websites," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 257-266.
    10. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Financing renewable energy infrastructures via financial citizen participation – The case of Germany," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 677-685.
    11. Akcura, Elcin, 2015. "Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electricity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 84-94.
    12. Rogers, J.C. & Simmons, E.A. & Convery, I. & Weatherall, A., 2008. "Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4217-4226, November.
    13. Stigka, Eleni K. & Paravantis, John A. & Mihalakakou, Giouli K., 2014. "Social acceptance of renewable energy sources: A review of contingent valuation applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 100-106.
    14. Müller, Matthias Otto & Stämpfli, Adrian & Dold, Ursula & Hammer, Thomas, 2011. "Energy autarky: A conceptual framework for sustainable regional development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 5800-5810, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fleck, Ann-Katrin & Anatolitis, Vasilios, 2023. "Achieving the objectives of renewable energy policy – Insights from renewable energy auction design in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Natascha Eggers & Torsten Birth & Bernd Sankol & Lukas Kerpen & Antonio Hurtado, 2023. "A Literature Review on Existing Methods and Indicators for Evaluating the Efficiency of Power-to-X Processes," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-23, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Engelken, Maximilian & Römer, Benedikt & Drescher, Marcus & Welpe, Isabell, 2016. "Transforming the energy system: Why municipalities strive for energy self-sufficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 365-377.
    2. McKenna, Russell, 2018. "The double-edged sword of decentralized energy autonomy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 747-750.
    3. Curtin, Joseph & McInerney, Celine & Ó Gallachóir, Brian, 2017. "Financial incentives to mobilise local citizens as investors in low-carbon technologies: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 534-547.
    4. Weinand, Jann Michael & Scheller, Fabian & McKenna, Russell, 2020. "Reviewing energy system modelling of decentralized energy autonomy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    6. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    7. Salm, Sarah & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2016. "What are retail investors' risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 310-320.
    8. McKenna, Russell & Merkel, Erik & Fichtner, Wolf, 2017. "Energy autonomy in residential buildings: A techno-economic model-based analysis of the scale effects," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 800-815.
    9. Chiara Candelise & Gianluca Ruggieri, 2017. "Community Energy in Italy: Heterogeneous institutional characteristics and citizens engagement," IEFE Working Papers 93, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    10. Berka, Anna L. & Creamer, Emily, 2018. "Taking stock of the local impacts of community owned renewable energy: A review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3400-3419.
    11. McKenna, Russell & Merkel. Erik & Fichtner, Wolf, 2016. "Energy autonomy in residential buildings: a techno-economic model-based analysis of the scale effects," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 12, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    12. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Baležentis & Artiom Volkov & Mangirdas Morkūnas & Agnė Žičkienė & Justas Streimikis, 2021. "Barriers and Drivers of Renewable Energy Penetration in Rural Areas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-28, October.
    13. Grashof, Katherina, 2019. "Are auctions likely to deter community wind projects? And would this be problematic?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 20-32.
    14. Hecher, Maria & Vilsmaier, Ulli & Akhavan, Roya & Binder, Claudia R., 2016. "An integrative analysis of energy transitions in energy regions: A case study of ökoEnergieland in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 40-53.
    15. Weinand, J.M. & McKenna, R. & Fichtner, W., 2019. "Developing a municipality typology for modelling decentralised energy systems," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 75-96.
    16. Romero-Castro, Noelia & Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & Pérez-Pico, Ada, 2021. "Dealing with heterogeneity and complexity in the analysis of the willingness to invest in community renewable energy in rural areas," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    17. Koirala, Binod Prasad & van Oost, Ellen & van der Windt, Henny, 2018. "Community energy storage: A responsible innovation towards a sustainable energy system?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 570-585.
    18. Herbes, Carsten & Friege, Christian & Baldo, Davide & Mueller, Kai-Markus, 2015. "Willingness to pay lip service? Applying a neuroscience-based method to WTP for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 562-572.
    19. Conradie, Peter D. & De Ruyck, Olivia & Saldien, Jelle & Ponnet, Koen, 2021. "Who wants to join a renewable energy community in Flanders? Applying an extended model of Theory of Planned Behaviour to understand intent to participate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    20. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:kitiip:6. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.iip.kit.edu/ .

    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.