Table Of ContentTackling Long-Term Global Energy Problems
ENVIRONMENT & POLICY
VOLUME 52
Forfurthervolumes:
http://www.springer.com/series/5921
Tackling Long-Term Global
Energy Problems
The Contribution of Social Science
Editedby
Daniel Spreng
ETHZurich,Switzerland
Thomas Flüeler
ETHZurich,Switzerland
David L. Goldblatt
ETHZurich,Switzerland
and
Jürg Minsch
minschsustainability affairs,Zurich,Switzerland
123
Editors
Prof.Dr.DanielSpreng Dr.ThomasFlüeler
EnergyScienceCenter(ESC) InstituteforEnvironmentalDecisions
ETHZurich (IED)
Zürichbergstrasse18 ETHZurich
8032Zurich Universitätsstrasse22
Switzerland 8092Zurich
[email protected] Switzerland
thomas.fl[email protected]
Dr.DavidL.Goldblatt Dr.JürgMinsch
DepartmentofManagement,Technology, minschsustainabilityaffairs
andEconomics(D-MTEC) Wehntalerstrasse3
CentreforEnergyPolicyand 8057Zurich
Economics(CEPE) Switzerland
ETHZurich [email protected]
Zürichbergstrasse18
8032Zurich
Switzerland
[email protected]
ISSN1383-5130
ISBN978-94-007-2332-0 e-ISBN978-94-007-2333-7
DOI10.1007/978-94-007-2333-7
SpringerDordrechtHeidelbergLondonNewYork
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2011943627
©SpringerScience+BusinessMediaB.V.2012
Nopartofthisworkmaybereproduced,storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorby
anymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,microfilming,recordingorotherwise,withoutwritten
permissionfromthePublisher,withtheexceptionofanymaterialsuppliedspecificallyforthepurpose
ofbeingenteredandexecutedonacomputersystem,forexclusiveusebythepurchaserofthework.
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Foreword
Thisbookmakesthecaseforplacingthesocialsciences
onanequalfootingwithengineeringandnaturalsciences
withinenergyresearch.
(Chapter1,thisvolume)
‘Yet another book on energy!’ So may a potential reader say to himself, bearing
inmindthesurgeofarticlesandbooks,mostofthemintelligentandconvincingly
written,whichfordecadeshavepresenteddoomsdayscenariosonenergy,resources,
environmentandclimate.Butthegeneralpublicandmostpoliticiansseemtotake
littlenotice.Wehavebecomeusedtothecoexistenceofparallelworlds,onewhere
scientists and engineers strive to develop accurate analyses based on sophisticated
mathematical models, and the other of the majority of citizens and consumers led
by short-sighted politicians, though the latter like to pretend they are carrying out
thewishesoftheformer.
Why is that so? This book attempts to find answers from two different angles.
The first refers to the research system itself, i.e., to the question of how scientific
knowledgeistraditionallyproducedandwhythissystemispartiallyblindandthus
bothered by black spots where problems resist proper analysis and solution. The
centralmessageofthisbookisthatinenergyresearchthesocialsciencesbelongtoa
blackarea.Socialstudiesonenergypersearenotnecessarilybetterthanthestudies
of engineers. What is missing is an interdisciplinary approach in which scientists
of different disciplines engage in a true mutual cooperation that goes beyond the
usual side-by-side pseudo-multidisciplinarity and requires that each discipline try
to understand the approach and arguments of the others. The contributing authors
present various case studies that demonstrate the failure of solutions in which just
thisproperengagementismissing.
Inthecitationthatstartedthisforewordthereaderwillnoticehoweveraremark-
ableasymmetrybetweennaturalsciencesandengineeringononesideandthesocial
sciencesontheother.Talkingaboutthelackoftruecooperationbetweendifferent
hemispheres of the scientific world is one thing, but pointing out that one hemi-
sphere is not (yet) on equal footing with the other may suggest the arrogance of
natural sciences and engineering vis-à-vis the social sciences. Perhaps arrogance
reallydoesplayapart,asthephysicistinmeistemptedtoadmit,butself-criticism
seemstobeinvolvedaswell.Indeed,theasymmetryinthetrackrecordsofproblem
v
vi Foreword
solvingbetweenthetwoareasissalient.Inasuperficialsenseengineersseemtobe
muchmorereliableintheiraccomplishmentsthaneconomists,sociologists,political
scientistsorpsychologists.Ifeconomistswereabletogiveadvicetonationalgov-
ernments with the same certitude as engineers calculate and design bridges, we
would live in paradise. It is true that bridges, buildings and machines sometimes
failaswell,butthesefailurescanusuallybetracedbacktosomeviolationofgood
engineeringpractice.Unfortunately,itisnotsosimpleforthesocialsciences.1
Are the social sciences just lagging behind the natural sciences? Yes and no.
Yes, because social scientists do not dispose of an undisputed set of laws and
rules like physicists and engineers, the laws of classical mechanics, the Maxwell
Equations, etc. No, because they never will, not because they are lazy and less
giftedthanphysicistsandengineers,butbecausetheydealwithpeopleratherthan
with concrete, brick, stones and steel pipes, i.e., with well-defined materials and
precisely designed pieces of machinery like integrated circuits that (almost) com-
pletely lack individual properties. Since the industrial revolution we have become
so used to the reliability of objects designed by engineers that we have forgotten
that this has come at a considerable cost, i.e., the cost of separating the world
of engineers from the world of humans composed of individuals, families clans
and states, which interact and which lack the unique properties of the lifeless
world.
Alittleoveradecadeago,whenIwasinchargeofaprojectoftheSwissFederal
InstitutesofTechnologycalledthe2000Watt-Society,togetherwithCarolineRoggo
Voegelin I dubbed the project the moon flight of the 21st century.2 We argued
that while the grand challenges of the 20th century were mainly of the type of
the moon mission, that is, predominantly a challenge for the natural sciences and
engineering – like so many other great achievements of that century – the great
challenges of the 21st century will no longer allow us the luxury to simply ignore
themuchmorecomplexissuesofthesocialsciences.Theestablishmentofasustain-
ableenergysystem,forwhichthe2000Watt-Societystands,isnotataskforenergy
engineersalone(infact,mostofthenecessarytechnicaltoolsalreadyexist)butpri-
marilyforsocialscientistswhohavetodevelopnewsocietalandeconomicsystems
in which people can enjoy the achievements of modern society such as freedom,
socialjusticeandsecurityatasignificantlylowerlevelofconsumptionofmaterial
andenergyresources.Weexpressedtheviewthatthenewtypeofcomplexityholds
1Threeepochalevents,eitherrecentorstillunfoldingasthisbookgoestoprint,demonstratethe
fragilityof‘engineered’solutions–intermsofclassicalengineering,riskmanagement,aswell
asgeopoliticalstrategy–toproblemsofenergysupply,access,supplysecurityandenvironmental
protection:the2010DeepwaterHorizondrillingrigexplosionandoilspillintheGulfofMexico,
the2011post-earthquakeJapanesenuclearplantcatastropheandpopularrevolutionsandrebellions
againstdictatorialregimesacrosstheArabworldin2011.Allthreechallengeconventionalthinking
andplanningforenergyscientistsinboththehardandsoftsciences.
2ETHBulletinNr.276(2000),pp.24–27.
Foreword vii
not only for the energy problem but for all other great challenges of the future –
includingpoverty,politicalstabilityandaccesstoessentialresourcessuchaswater
and land – where any scientific discipline alone would be hopelessly lost. This, it
seemstome,isexactlythemessageofthisbook.
Thereisyetanotheranglefromwhichtheauthorsarelookingattheglobalenergy
problem,themetaphoroftheinvisible.Thisbookcouldnotstartwithamoreapttale
than that of Gyges and the ring of invisibility from Plato’s dialogue The Republic,
whichtellsaboutthepoweroftheinvisibleanditsuseandmisuse.InPlato’stale,
Gygesusestheringofinvisibilitytooverthrowthekingandusurppower.Thelesson
ofthestoryisthatinvisibilityproducessecretpowerandthusthreatensthefreedom
of those who are not aware of this power. In essence, the idea and value of scien-
tific research is to make the invisible visible and thus to make it part of generally
availableknowledge.Academicresearchanddemocracyarecorrelative:thisisthe
lessontodrawfromPlato’sstory.
Formostpeopleasignificantportionoftheenergyproblemhasremainedinvisi-
blesofar,eitherbecauseitishiddeninthefutureorbecauseitonlymanifestsitself
inotherpartsoftheworldoramongothersocietalgroups.Onlyafewseemtoknow
oftheinvisible,ofthehiddenpartoftheswimmingiceberg,andamongthosewho
knowarecleverpoliticiansandbusinesspeoplewhousetheinvisibilityoftheprob-
lemtotheirownadvantage.Again,thesocialsciencesplayacrucialroleinmaking
theinvisiblevisible,sincetheiroccupationwithhumannatureandwiththehistory
of man provides them with a kind of X-ray that can bring out structure and shape
thatwouldotherwiseremaininvisible.
It is to be hoped that the message of this book will be heard by all of us, nat-
ural scientists and engineers, social scientists, politicians and, most importantly,
responsiblecitizens.
MissiontotheMoon
Four years after the Sputnik shock of 1957, the cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin
became the first human being to travel into space on April 12, 1961, greatly
embarrassingtheUnitedStates.InanaddresstoajointsessionofCongresson
May25,1961intendedtodeliveraspecialmessageonurgentnationalneeds,
President Kennedy asked for an additional $7 to 9 billion over the next five
yearsforthespaceprogramme,proclaimingthat‘thisnationshouldcommit
itselftoachievingthegoal,beforethedecadeisout,oflandingamanonthe
moon and returning himsafely tothe earth’. President Kennedy did not jus-
tifytheneededexpenditureonthebasisofscienceandexploration.‘Ibelieve
wepossessalltheresourcesandtalentsnecessary.Butthefactsofthematter
arethatwehavenevermadethenationaldecisionsormarshalledthenational
resources required for such leadership. We have never specified long-range
viii Foreword
goalsonanurgenttimeschedule,ormanagedourresourcesandourtimeso
astoinsuretheirfulfillment.’
OnJuly20,1969theApollo11missionsawtherealisationofthisgoal.3
Zurich,November2011 DieterM.Imboden
PresidentoftheResearchCouncilofthe
SwissNationalScienceFoundation,Berne
3Sources: http://history.nasa.gov/moondec.html, http://www.jfklibrary.org (>JFK>Historic
Speeches>AddresstoJointSessionofCongress25May,1961).WeblinksaccessedNovember
16,2011.
Contents
PartI
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
DavidL.Goldblatt,JürgMinsch,ThomasFlüeler,andDanielSpreng
2 Energy-RelatedChallenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
ThomasFlüeler,DavidL.Goldblatt,JürgMinsch,andDanielSpreng
3 TheIndispensableRoleofSocialScienceinEnergyResearch . . . 23
JürgMinsch,DavidL.Goldblatt,ThomasFlüeler,andDanielSpreng
PartII
InvitedContributions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
DavidL.Goldblatt,ThomasFlüeler,JürgMinsch,andDanielSpreng
4 What About Social Science and Interdisciplinarity?
A10-YearContentAnalysisofEnergyPolicy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
BenjaminK.Sovacool,SaleenaSaleem,
AnthonyLouisD’Agostino,CatherineRegaladoRamos,
KirstenTrott,andYanchunOng
5 TowardsanIntegrativeFrameworkforEnergyTransitions
ofHouseholdsinDevelopingCountries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
ShonaliPachauriandDanielSpreng
6 A Socio-Cultural Analysis of Changing Household
ElectricityConsumptioninIndia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
HaroldWilhite
7 TheChangingContextforEffortstoAvoidthe‘CurseofOil’ . . . 115
JillShankleman
8 ContributionsofEconomicsandEthicstoanAssessment
ofEmissionsTrading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
AdrianMuller
ix
