Search

The concept of energy democracy has seen a moderate rise in scholarship over the last decade. This article is the first to examine the concept of energy democracy from a critical perspective, and it is advanced here that the concept is limited and narrow. Further, through analysing it through the JUST Framework it is clear that energy democracy fails to deliver real justice. The JUST Framework takes us through core justice issues, such as distributive, procedural, restorative, recognition and cosmopolitanism. Further, it explores the space and time dimensions which bring a more practical perspective on the concept. Energy democracy scholars in the recent past (in 2019 and 2020) have sought to broaden the concept. However, as this article shows, these debates exist in the literature already, and energy justice and just transition issues go much further and are already more developed and utilised by researchers. In addition, the energy democracy concept is limited in the main part to local communities and ignores key issues such as energy extraction activities and indigenous communities. To conclude, and to achieve action, we call on energy democracy scholars to engage in the just energy transition literature and to contribute to the decrease of the language war that is progressively affecting the field of energy studies addressing the challenges of an accelerated transition to a lower-carbon economy.

Highlights • Explores the role of justice in the development of the critical minerals industry. • Utilises the JUST framework from legal geography. • Explores distributive, procedural, restorative, recognition and cosmopolitan justice. • Taxation, EIAs, SLOs, and waste are vital for critical minerals industry. • Critical minerals important for addressing inequality and the just transition., It is a fundamental objective to transition towards a low-carbon economy worldwide which is supported by an international legal agreement – the 2015 Paris Agreement. In order to achieve this ambition, there is a need for new and more mineral extraction which is necessary for the technology for this low-carbon transition. These minerals are known as critical minerals and this article examines the role of justice needed in their development. The literature to-date lacks any holistic yet focused examination of the key elements of justice in the development of this industry. This conceptual article makes an original contribution that utilises an interdisciplinary perspective, legal geography, and explores key issues of justice that include distributive, procedural, restorative, recognition and cosmopolitan. The research identifies the key questions that need to be resolved under each element of justice and the unfortunate limited timeframes for action. Critical justice areas include taxation, environmental impact assessments, waste management, social license to operate, and cross-border actions. Resolving these issues will directly address societal issues of inequality and ensure a just transition to a low-carbon economy. Already there is a global race for critical minerals, and justice needs a stronger role in its development based on evidence to-date.

In many countries, industry is one of the largest consumers of electricity. Given the special importance of electricity for industry, a reliable electricity supply is a basic prerequisite for further industrial development and associated economic growth. As countries worldwide transition to a low-carbon economy (in particular, by the development of renewable energy sources), the increasing fluctuation in renewable energy production requires new flexibility options within the electricity system in order to guarantee security of supply. It is advanced in this paper that such a flexibility transition with an active participation of industry in general has unique potential: It will not only promote green industrial development, but also become an engine for inclusive industrial development and growth as well as delivering a just transition to a low-carbon economy. Given the high potential of industrial demand-side flexibility, a first monitoring approach for such a flexibility transition is illustrated, which bases on a flexibility index. Our flexibility index allows for an indication of mis-developments and supports an appropriate implementation of countermeasures together with relevant stakeholders. Hence, it holds various insights for both policy-makers and practice with respect to how industrial demand-side flexibility can ensure advances towards an inclusive, just, and sustainable industrial development.

The energy sector provides fuel for much of everyday life, particularly economically and socially. Fighting against the COVID-19 pandemic, a well-functioning and resilient energy sector is vital for maintaining the operation of critical infrastructures, including, most importantly, the health sector, and timely economic recovery. Notwithstanding its importance in everyday life and crises, the energy sector itself is currently in a complex and far-reaching transformation to combat climate change whilst supporting the transition to a low-carbon economy and society, mainly through the development of variable renewable energy sources (RES) such as wind and solar photovoltaics. This paper highlights the need for energy resilience as countries face the triple challenge of the COVID-19 health crisis, the consequent economic crisis, and the climate crisis. Focusing on Europe, it is advanced here that with the ability to balance fluctuating electricity generation and demand, flexibility allows the energy sector to utilise low-carbon RES reliably, ensuring a more resilient and sustainable energy future. This paper derives five urgent policy recommendations for Europe that address possible impacts of COVID-19 on the economic and societal prerequisites for flexibility in energy systems.

The societal context in which the system for managing UK petroleum resources developed is analysed in this chapter. The chapter describes British society in terms of its economy, resources and politics and the related consequences for the UK energy sector, with a focus on the UK oil and gas sector. In addition, there is coverage of the different institutions that relate to the oil and gas industry. Finally, there is a brief analysis of some of the early issues that may result from Brexit and may also affect the UK oil and gas sector.

In terms of funders, we thank the ESRC (ES/I001425/1) and EPSRC (EP/I035390/1) and UKERC (http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/news/whole-systems-networking-fund-project-announcement.html) for supporting the development of our work in this area. Just transition is a new framework of analysis that brings together climate, energy and environmental justice scholarships. It was originally coined as a term that was designed to link the promotion of clean technology with the assurance of green jobs. The Paris climate change agreement marks a global acceptance that a more rapid transition is needed to avert disastrous consequences. In response, climate, energy and environmental justice scholarships must unite in assessing where injustices will emerge and how they should be tackled. Just transition offers a new space for developing an interdisciplinary transition sensitive approach to exploring and promoting (1) distributional, (2) procedural and (3) restorative justice, termed here as a new triumvirate of tenets. Postprint

The transboundary transportation of carbon dioxide (CO2) gives rise to international legal issues not faced in other standalone carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects or domestic projects. While the European Union CCS Directive establishes a framework for CCS, it does not address specifically the issue of transboundary transportation. This will require participating Member States to agree a statutory framework for CO2 transport, which addresses issues at the international, national and local levels of law. This paper considers several key issues for developing and resolving legal issues around ownership and risk for CO2 transportation, an area with limited research literature to date. The legal challenges are examined using a ‘pilot’ project to explore and highlight specific examples. The research draws from a series of CCS industry stakeholder meetings and analysis was developed through interdisciplinary perspectives. In addition, the potential partnership arrangements are explored from a law and policy perspective with an examination of the key issues for these partnerships for Member States. Finally, this research presents a timeline for a legal strategy on resolving the issues for risk and ownership for CO2 transport.

This research is a legal analysis concerning four scenarios for cross-border carbon dioxide (CO2) transport that could increase the deployment of carbon-capture and storage (CCS) deployment in Europe. The legal analysis categorizes the law into three levels-international, national and local-and considers the four scenarios in light of these three levels of energy law. Upon reviewing the four scenarios, it is clear that the Rotterdam Nucleus (referred to as the 'Pilot Case') is the leading scenario and as a result it is explored in more detail. The potential Pilot Case is based on the development of Rotterdam (in the Netherlands) as a southern North Sea hub. Under this Rotterdam Nucleus scenario, captured CO2 will be transported through the Port of Rotterdam to depleted gas fields offshore the Netherlands. CO2 will also be transported through further links using CCS infrastructure to facilitate the processing of undeveloped gas fields offshore UK. The Pilot case contemplates further expansion opportunities, increasing the capture clusters through additional pipelines, expanding to further gas fields and using the port of Rotterdam for CO2 shipping-hence the analysis of the other scenarios may be invaluable in the future development of CO2 networks in the EU. Finally, and an original contribution of this article is that it employs the three lawyers of energy law theoretical framework to an energy problem that was examined by an interdisciplinary research team. Furthermore, this research was developed further through two key industry stakeholder meetings with CCS experts in the EU. © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the AIPN. All rights reserved.

Over the last decade, ‘Energy Justice’ is a concept that has emerged in research across many disciplines. This research explores the role and value of the energy justice concept across the disciplines. It provides the first critical account of the emergence of the energy justice concept in both research and practice. A diagrammatical image for examining the energy justice concepts is presented and this is a tool for interdisciplinary engagement with the concept. In this context, restorative justice is introduced and how it results in energy justice applying in practice is detailed. Energy research scholarship at universities is assessed and it is clear that through universities there is a platform for energy justice scholarship to build on the interdisciplinary energy scholarship at universities. Further, the role of education is vital to policy-making, and the understanding and development of the energy justice concept. Finally, in analysing how the energy justice concept can impact on policy-making, there is a critical examination of the energy justice and its relationship with economics, and how it can transfer directly into practice by assisting in balancing the competing aims of the energy trilemma. Postprint

The H2020 GATEWAY project aims to develop a comprehensive model Pilot Case which, intentionally, will pave the ground for CCS deployment in Europe. It will result from the assessment of, technical, commercial, judicial and societal issues related to a future CO2 transport infrastructure. The Pilot Case derived on this basis, will emphasize a gateway for CO2 transport in the North Sea Basin. Four potential pilot cases have been evaluated through a combination of techno-economic modelling of the individual cases and evaluation against more qualitative criteria. The chosen Pilot Case, Rotterdam Nucleus, will be refined and developed during the remaining period of the GATEWAY project. To maximise impact, the GATEWAY project adapts its work to lay the foundation for a future application to a European ‘Project of Common Interest’ (PCI). Continuous dialogue with the most relevant stakeholders is an important part of GATEWAY, as a Coordination and Support Action (CSA) H2020 project.

The ambition of this conference was to deliver a first examination of how policy is delivered in the context of low-carbon energy infrastructure in the UK. The UK has been developing policy in this area since 2002 (Heffron, 2013). Finally, as the decade passed, in November 2012 an Energy Bill was put before the UK Parliament. One of the chief purposes of this Energy Bill is to establish the right environment for new electricity generation infrastructure in the low-carbon sector. There is significant debate on how this will be achieved and, indeed, whether this piece of legislation will actually deliver this outcome. This conference aimed to examine the dynamics of policy delivery. Throughout the day, there was entertaining discussion as a variety of conference presenters provided interesting contributions on how to deliver such policy goals. In total, there were twelve speakers throughout the day representing the UK (University of Oxford, Pinsent Masons Law Firm, University of Stirling, University of Dundee and University of Aberdeen), and also those who provided lessons from abroad from the University of Copenhagen, Central European University, Milieu Ltd., Pillsbury Law Firm (Washington DC, US) and the Conservation Law Foundation (MA, US). © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

Nuclear liability regimes are important as they ensure that potential victims will be compensated promptly and efficiently after a nuclear accident. The accident at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan in 2011 prompted a review of the global nuclear liability regime that remains on-going. Progress has been slow, but over the next few years the European Union is set to announce its new proposals. Meanwhile, in 2015, another global nuclear liability regime, the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage, has entered into force. This paper aims to move the debate in the literature on nuclear liability and focuses on the four following major issues: (1) reviews third-party nuclear liability regimes currently in operation around the world; (2) analyses the international nuclear liability regime following the accident at Fukushima Daiichi; (3) comparatively assesses the liability regimes for nuclear energy and the non-nuclear energy sector; and (4) presents the future outlook for possible developments in the global nuclear liability regime.

All too often, energy policy and technology discussions are limited to the domains of engineering and economics. Many energy consumers, and even analysts and policymakers, confront and frame energy and climate risks in a moral vacuum, rarely incorporating broader social justice concerns. Here, to remedy this gap, we investigate how concepts from justice and ethics can inform energy decision-making by reframing five energy problems — nuclear waste, involuntary resettlement, energy pollution, energy poverty and climate change — as pressing justice concerns. We conclude by proposing an energy justice framework centred on availability, affordability, due process, transparency and accountability, sustainability, equity and responsibility, which highlights the futurity, fairness and equity dimensions of energy production and use.\ud \ud The structure of the global energy system and the pending consequences of climate change are among the central justice issues of our time, with profound implications for human happiness, welfare, freedom, equity and due process1.\ud \ud One global study distinguishing between ‘experienced’ and ‘imposed’ effects of climate change — essentially separating out primary emitters from those suffering from climate change — concluded that people in rich countries impose 200–300 times more health damage on others than they experience themselves as a result of their nation's historical emissions2. Others argue that the costs of climate change will befall the weakest and least developed countries as well as the poorest in developed nations, while the benefits, if there are any, will probably be accrued by the rich and powerful3.\ud \ud Meanwhile, serious environmental burdens can arise from having too much energy (from waste, over-consumption and pollution4) or from not having enough (from lack of access to modern forms of energy, under-consumption and poverty). With increasing wealth, these environmental burdens shift in terms of severity, geographic scope and temporal reach. For instance, a decline in household environmental risks through enhanced access to modern energy services, clean water and better healthcare coincides with an increase in global risks such as climate change and other forms of transboundary environmental pollution. While solutions to some problems, such as poverty, obviously require an increase in energy consumption, solutions to other problems, such as climate change, might well require a decrease in energy consumption.\ud \ud Clearly, the current fossil fuel-based global energy system has many benefits but also many disadvantages, including significant health burdens that shorten lives, undermine the conditions for happiness and impede a more just and equitable society. Yet most of us confront and frame such climate and energy risks within a moral vacuum. It has been argued that our moral systems are ill-equipped to handle the complexity and expansiveness of modern-day energy and climate problems5,6, and that individuals will work to avoid feelings of responsibility for climate change or energy insecurity; some will even have optimistic biases, downgrading any negative information they receive and counterbalancing it with almost irrational exuberance7.\ud \ud In this Perspective, we argue that concepts from ethics and justice provide an important structure to think about, and approach, the world's climate and energy dilemmas. We reframe five contemporary energy problems — nuclear waste, involuntary resettlement, energy pollution, energy poverty and climate change — as justice and ethics concerns. We then synthesize justice elements into a common framework that energy decision-makers can utilize to create a more just and equitable energy future. By ‘decision-makers’, we refer not only to the more traditional notion of policymakers and regulators, but also ordinary students, jurists, homeowners, businesspersons, investors and consumers — essentially, anyone that makes decisions or choices about energy conversion and use8. Admittedly, we take an anthropocentric perspective based on social justice principles, though there are certainly justice claims that arise with how humans interact with non-human forms of life. Some have called this human-centered approach ‘cosmopolitan justice’, as it acknowledges that all ethnic groups belong to a single community based on a collective morality9. Many scholars have taken up modern manifestations of these ideals, and have advanced the core arguments presented in Table 110,​11,​12,​13,​14,​15,​16,​17,​18,​19. These arguments underscore how all human beings have equal moral worth and, as we will argue, are deserving of ‘energy justice’.

The authors would like to thank the ESRC, EPSRC and Carnegie for funding our work in this area, which has allowed us to conceptually reflect individually and collectively on the notion of energy justice. Energy justice has emerged as a new crosscutting social science research agenda which seeks to apply justice principles to energy policy, energy production and systems, energy consumption, energy activism, energy security and climate change. A conceptual review is now required for the consolidation and logical extension of this field. Within this exploration, we give an account of its core tenets: distributional, recognition and procedural. Later we promote the application of this three-pronged approach across the energy system, within the global context of energy production and consumption. Thus, we offer both a conceptual review and a research agenda. Throughout, we explore the key dimensions of this new agenda – its evaluative and normative reach – demonstrating that energy justice offers, firstly, an opportunity to explore where injustices occur, developing new processes of avoidance and remediation and recognizing new sections of society. Secondly, we illustrate that energy justice provides a new stimulating framework for bridging existing and future research on energy production and consumption when whole energy systems approaches are integrated into research designs. In conclusion, we suggest three areas for future research: investigating the non-activist origins of energy justice, engaging with economics, and uniting systems of production and consumption. Postprint

Carbon dioxide emissions continue to increase to the detriment of society in many forms. One of the difficulties faced is the imbalance between the competing aims of economics, politics and the environment which form the trilemma of energy policy. This article advances that this energy trilemma can be resolved through energy justice. Energy justice develops the debate on energy policy to one that highlights cosmopolitanism, progresses thinking beyond economics and incorporates a new futuristic perspective. To capture these dynamics of energy justice, this research developed an Energy Justice Metric (EJM) that involves the calculation of several metrics: (1) a country (national) EJM; (2) an EJM for different energy infrastructure; and (3) an EJM which is incorporated into economic models that derive costs for energy infrastructure projects. An EJM is modeled for China, the European Union and the United States, and for different energy infrastructure in the United Kingdom. The EJM is plotted on a Ternary Phase Diagram which is used in the sciences for analyzing the relationship (trilemma) of three forms of matter. The development of an EJM can provide a tool for decision-making on energy policy and one that solves the energy trilemma with a just and equitable approach. Publisher PDF