Search

To achieve national energy and climate targets across the world, there is a key focus on solar energy development. It is clear from literature that many countries have enormous, under-utilised potentials for solar energy, which can significantly change their energy mix and contribute to the low-carbon ambitions they signed up to under the 2015 Paris Agreement. Our research highlights that there are benefits to solar energy development from a law and economic perspective that are still underexplored. These benefits centre on justice and on how solar energy increases justice within the energy system. From a legal perspective, we review 72 countries and their introduction of energy law with respect to solar energy development. Our analysis illustrates that in some developing countries (new) legislation was not associated with a significant increase in the share of solar energy in the energy mix. We then highlight how to achieve solar energy development through law that can provide certainty for investment. Furthermore, we stress the importance of flexibility that allows the full potential of solar energy to be realised within the energy system. The corresponding form of flexibility justice, combining law and economics, can contribute to increased economic welfare based on market reforms that centre on new market design and market access, while ensuring that it keeps pace with ongoing developments in technology, cost, and ownership.

The recent ruling in a Dutch court that Shell must curb its CO2 emissions is the latest in a series of legal moves bringing human rights concerns to bear on energy activities. This trend will have profound consequences for energy developments and for meeting climate goals.

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.

In terms of funders, we would like to acknowledge the Pufendorf Institute for Advanced Studies at Lund University as well as the St Andrews Sustainability Institute, School of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St. Andrews for their financial support in this initiative. With the dual challenges of reducing emissions from fossil fuels and providing access to clean and affordable energy, there is an imperative for a transition to a low carbon energy system. The transition must take into consideration questions of energy justice to ensure that policies, plans and programmes guarantee fair and equitable access to resources and technologies. An energy justice framework is outlined to account for distributional, procedural and recognition inequalities, as well as emerging themes such as cosmopolitan and non-Western understandings of justice, in decision-making relating to energy systems. The spectrum of research offers critical perspectives on the energy transition as well as tools for decision-making and policy processes. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods all contribute to our understanding of the problems and the success of responses. The studies presented in this special issue illustrate that the field of energy justice is a rapidly growing arena. There is constant innovation taking place in enabling the transition with new structures, processes and metrics being introduced to guide decision-making and a more holistic view of the community emerging where acceptance, mobilisation and empowerment are opening possibilities for a just transition to a low carbon energy system. The importance of introducing the interdisciplinary approach between social sciences and natural sciences as well engineering implementation supported by scientific data and experiments shall be emphasized in future studies. Postprint

The world continues to recover from the global financial crisis of 2007–2009 and consequently project risk continues to be a key concern for lawyers. This is in particular evident in the energy sec...

This Correspondence takes issue with the repeated use of the term “energy bullying” by authors Monyei, Jenkins, Serestina and Adewumi in their paper Energy Policy 119 (2018) pp68-76. Reasons are advanced why the authors' criticism of the global north lacks clear empirical evidence, and risks undermining efforts to combat climate change. A more constructive approach of working together between global south and global north is put forward by the corresponding authors.

Many countries have a clear policy objective of increasing their share of renewable energy sources (RESs). However, a major impediment to higher RES penetration often lies in the historically grown structures of a country’s electricity sector. In Indonesia, policy makers have relied on cheap fossil fuels and state control to provide the population with access to both reliable and affordable electricity. However, this focus on only two of the three horns of the energy trilemma, namely energy security and energy equity (and not sustainability), may put Indonesia at risk of missing its ambitious RES targets. In this context, a number of small-scale reform attempts to promote RES integration in recent years have proved to be relatively unsuccessful. Like many other countries, Indonesia needs clear policy directions to avoid an unsustainable lock-in into a fossil fuel future. In the last decades, several other countries have successfully restructured their electricity sectors, for example by introducing a wholesale market for electricity under different electricity pricing systems, including nodal, zonal, or uniform pricing. These countries may hold valuable experiences of overcoming the historically grown barriers to successful RES integration through a greater role for market mechanisms. We develop three generic models that allow policy makers to analyze the impact of introducing either a nodal, a zonal, or a uniform pricing system on the three horns of the energy trilemma in their country. We evaluate our model using a simplified network representation of the Indonesian electricity sector. Our results indicate that each of the pricing systems is able to foster specific horns of the energy trilemma. Considering that any major reform intended to improve energy sustainability in Indonesia will only be a success if it also addresses energy security and energy equity, we also discuss our results from the perspective of energy justice and the need to balance the country’s energy trilemma. Ultimately, we illustrate a transformation pathway for a more sustainable and just transition to a low-carbon economy in Indonesia.

The ‘social licence to operate’ (SLO) is a construct that has potential to transform the mining sector internationally. The SLO is increasing in importance because it can reduce all risks during the energy project life-cycle that are detrimental to the success of energy projects. This paper analyses how SLO's are at first perceived by interdisciplinary energy scholars before examining the legal nature of an SLO and looking at the effectiveness of such an agreement from the perspectives of both the energy company and the local community. In essence, this research seeks to address what is the legal basis of an SLO. Further, an original case study on Columbia is presented which highlights the SLO in action and its transformative effect. The paper also engages in new debates around the relationship of SLOs to related energy concepts such as the energy justice and environmental impact statements, which are also vital to energy infrastructure development. Postprint

We will report on preliminary results and present plans for the continuation of an international project, ACTOM. The overall objective of ACTOM is to develop internationally applicable capabilities to design and execute adequate, rigorous and cost-effective monitoring of offshore carbon storage projects, aligning industrial, societal and regulative expectations with technological capabilities and limitations.At the core of the project is a web based pre-operational tool-kit that will deliver new abilities to design a site specific marine monitoring program that will ultimately:enable regulators to quantifiably assess that a proposed monitoring strategy delivers an acceptable standard of assurance, enable operators to properly plan, cost and adapt monitoring strategies to site specific circumstances, enable regulators and operators to communicate to the effectiveness of proposed monitoring strategies to enable informed societal consensus in view of marine spatial planning. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is an approach to anticipate and assess implications and expectations of new technologies on the society, a framework increasingly being used in marine environmental studies and in biotechnology and innovation. We use this framework on Carbon Capture Usage and Storage (CCUS), considering the technology in view of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. In an extension of this, potential legal conflicts between storage projects or other uses of the seas, will be addressed in view of marine spatial planning. By viewing CCUS and offshore storage in view of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and in the RRI framework, the aim is to ease communicating the benefits of the technology while addressing the uncertainties and risks in a coherent way.This work is part of the project ACTOM, funded through the ACT programme (Accelerating CCS Technologies, Horizon2020 Project No 294766). Financial contributions made from; The Research Council of Norway, (RCN), Norway, Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO), Netherlands, Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) together with extra funding from NERC and EPSRC research councils, United Kingdom, US-Department of Energy (US-DOE), USA. In-kind contributions from the University of Bergen are gratefully acknowledged.

The development of energy infrastructure in the Arctic poses serious far reaching justice based questions for local, regional and international communities. Oil and gas rigs, renewable energy sites, shipping and transportation all force us to reflect on how fair and equitable infrastructural expansion is locally and globally. We examine the justice claims of business, government and civil society in an attempt to understand current problems, and their likely solutions. The results suggest that we need to replace the current stakeholder-centred approach of energy policy, with one based upon justice. A widening of procedural justice to include not only the co-production of decisions, but also knowledge should be complemented with new ways of recognising the vulnerabilities of mis- and under-represented people, as well as exploring the sensitivities around proximity to new energy infrastructures.

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.

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

This article assesses the legal and political nature of decision-making with regards to nuclear energy policy in Turkey. The main focus is on the choice of nuclear technology and the associated safety and liability issues for Turkey's new nuclear development plans. The article highlights the importance of legal certainty for both safety and liability in the nuclear energy sector. In particular, the liability regime in case of a nuclear accident must be clear and transparent. It also concludes that it is not the environmental impact assessment, safety concerns or liability regime but politics that is the key determinant in the choice of nuclear technology for a new nuclear project. In addition, with the planned use of the new financial model of Build-Own-Operate, this results in legal certainty being even more important for new nuclear development in Turkey.

This article proposes that the International Accounting Standards Board introduce a new International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) to require energy companies to disclose subsidies received by the energy sector. The effect could be transformative among energy sources, and permit the development of a more equitable and informed subsidy system. Low carbon energy technology companies would stand to gain significantly from a redistribution of energy subsidies

This paper examines from a policy perspective nuclear energy policy in the United States (US) from 1990 to 2010 and questions whether it is or has become a Federal or State responsibility. The present study, as befits policy research, engages with many disciplines (for example, in particular, law and politics) and hence the contributions move beyond that of nuclear energy policy literature and in particular to that on nuclear new build and other assessments of large infrastructure projects. Several examples at the Federal level are identified that demonstrate that the nuclear industry has evolved to a stage where it requires a focus on the power of actions at a more localised (state) level in order to re-ignite the industry. The research concludes that there remains a misunderstanding of the issue of project management for complex construction projects, and it is highly arguable whether many of its issues have been resolved. Further, the research asserts that the economics of nuclear energy are not the most influential reason for no nuclear new build in the US.

This research examines nuclear energy policy across three states in the United States (US) – Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Texas – from 1990 to 2010. Therefore, the nuclear energy crisis at Fukushima in Japan March 2011 is beyond the scope of this paper. Nevertheless, the fundamental conclusions of this research remain valid, as the impact of Fukushima is not yet known and in addition the US has experienced its own crisis in Three Mile Island, which has shaped its own nuclear industry to an extent already. Interviews are at the core of the research methodology employed, which is similar to other in-depth studies on nuclear new build. The aim of this paper is to identify and clarify those aspects of the legal, economic, and political requirements of the US that affect prospects for nuclear new build but which, so far, have not been well understood by experts. The research provides these new insights through a unique comparison of US states which have deregulated, regulated and ‘hybrid’ electricity markets. It is evident that law can play a central role in the nuclear energy sector, and the role of state-driven policy in the nuclear energy sector is also demonstrated. Further, the methodology identifies key assumptions within the nuclear sector in the US that are contested, and delivers lessons on how these contested issues may be resolved. The paper adds to the literature in public administration, legal development and nuclear energy policy, and in particular nuclear new build.

This paper advances the application of the methodology, contrast explanation, to energy policy research. Research in energy policy is complex and often involves inter-disciplinary work, which traditional economic methodologies fail to capture. Consequently, the more encompassing methodology of contrast explanation is assessed and its use in other social science disciplines explored in brief. It is then applied to an energy policy research topic—in this case, nuclear energy policy research in the UK. Contrast explanation facilitates research into policy and decision-making processes in energy studies and offers an alternative to the traditional economic methods used in energy research. Further, contrast explanation is extended by the addition of contested and uncontested hypotheses analyses. This research focuses on the methods employed to deliver the new nuclear programme of the UK government. In order to achieve a sustainable nuclear energy policy three issues are of major importance: (1) law, policy and development; (2) public administration; and (3) project management. Further, the research identifies that policy in the area remains to be resolved, in particular at an institutional and legal level. However, contrary to the literature, in some areas, the research identifies a change of course as the UK concentrates on delivering a long-term policy for the nuclear energy sector and the overall energy sector.

This chapter examines the role of nuclear energy on current Scottish energy policy, an underexplored area of value whether Scotland remains in the UK, secures independence or further devolution post Brexit. A recurrent theme in the analysis is that whether one is for, against, or indifferent to new nuclear energy development, it highlights a major gap in Scotland’s energy and environmental policy goals. Too often, the Scottish Government perspective has been reduced to a low-carbon energy development debate between nuclear and renewables, with little reflection on how to reduce fossil fuel dependency. Aspirations to being a low-carbon economy, a global leader in climate change and to decarbonising its electricity market means Scotland needs to tackle the issue of how to stop burning fossil fuels.

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.

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’.

This paper examines the progress of Romanian nuclear new build amidst the turbulence that the country has experienced during the twentieth century. Romania’s transition from communism to democracy during the 1990s was won with bloodshed, unlike the peaceful revolutions across the rest of Central and Eastern Europe. The transition period has not been without controversy, and there still remain question marks over the operation of some of the Romanian democratic institutional structures. Still, despite the political, economic, and social upheaval in Romania, it has successfully established a nuclear power program. Albeit the pace of construction has been very slow, nevertheless it has two reactors with good safety records and ambitious plans to further develop its nuclear power program. This research involved using the methodology of contrast explanation, a methodology used to explore the factors that shape the outcome of events – in this research the outcome being the successful development of the Romanian nuclear power program. The research is based around interview data from leading actors in the Romanian nuclear energy sector. The research on Romania highlights many lessons for emerging civil nuclear energy nations of the problems, issues and considerations that they will have to surmount to develop a safe and operational nuclear energy plant.

This paper describes the nexus of energy justice, supply and security. It advances the case that energy justice is the relatively new concept in this triangle of issues and an area requiring research. There are three central tenets of energy justice: distributional, procedural and recognition justice. Each of these tenets figures at certain stages in the energy supply chain and as a consequence there is an effect on energy supply. An example of the wind energy sector in Denmark is presented which demonstrates how the application and promotion of energy justice can enable the growth of an industry supply chain. This in turn contributes to increased energy security and national economic growth.

This chapter covers three major issues in energy law. First it explains the key energy policy concepts that energy law interacts with. There are many energy policy concepts with competition, energy security and energy waste management being particularly connected with legal development. There is also a discussion on the convergence of energy and environmental law. Second and third this chapter introduces the reader to the legal issues for fossil fuel energy sources and low-carbon energy sources respectively. There is a brief overview of international, national and local issues for different energy sources and also a comparison of environmental, planning, finance and safety issues for each energy source.