Abstract
The production and consumption systems (PACS) of electricity provide broad insights into possible actions and interventions in pursuit of sustainable development at different points in the life cycle from production and supply to consumption. More importantly for the context of the present book, electricity PACS allow particularly relevant insights regarding knowledge-to-action-gaps in sustainable development. Considerable knowledge exists on the sustainability challenges of electricity production and consumption. Not all of this knowledge is uncontroversial, of course, but in many respects we notice a sufficiently broad agreement among scientists on necessary and desirable changes. Knowledge on the various actors’ and stakeholders’ opportunities in improving the sustainability of electricity production and consumption is somewhat less precise. Still, even here, a substantial amount of information exists. Action, however, is missing, in many cases.
Knowledge-to-action gaps are particularly noticeable when it comes to consumers. Individuals can play a range of roles with respect to the composition of the electricity supply. Reisch and Micklitz’s (2006) analysis of consumers’ activities in the deregulated electricity market in Germany proposes a three-role model of consumers as market players, as citizens, and micro-producers in households and networks. In these roles, consumers take on different social and political identities; they are affected in different ways by (de)regulation of essential services and have different options for reacting to quality and price issues. In Chapter 3 in this volume, Reusswig concentrates on the power and influence of consumers working as citizen networks and organizing market power through investing in alternative (wind) energy production. In this chapter, however, we will concentrate on consumer choice in energy supply.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In the interest of space and given the complex dynamics at play we neglect the question of impact, that is the broader socio-economic consequences and implications of the policy here. For the analytical distinction between policy output, outcome, and impact see Easton 1965.
- 2.
The possibilities of carbon dioxide capture and storage are still in the early phases of technological development and their potential for improving the sustainability of electricity generation from fossil fuels is highly controversial at this point.
- 3.
This is only the most serious risk associated with nuclear energy, of course.
- 4.
With the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, the European Union committed itself to a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of 8 percent of the 1990 level by 2012. Germany’s internal targets are even more ambitious.
- 5.
For example: Directive 2001/77/EG; Directive 2003/54/EG; Green Paper KOM(2005) 265; Directive 2006/32/EG
- 6.
The lines between the “decision makers within the production and consumption system” and the “knowledge providers” frequently are blurred, of course.
- 7.
Of course, regulators themselves also are susceptible to the influence of social forces, for example from business and civil society. Chapter 3 in this book written by Fritz Reusswig analyzes this relationship and its importance in pushing electricity production and consumption systems towards sustainability.
- 8.
See: EnWG § 42 and EU Directive 2003/54/EG
- 9.
Die von der Stromversorgung Aggertal GmbH im Jahr 2005 gelieferte elektrische Energie setzt sich aus folgenden Energieträgern zusammen (Durchschnittswerte Deutschland zum Vergleich – Quelle VDEW):
Eighteen percent (29%) Kernkraft, 65% (60%) fossile und sonstige Energieträger (z.B. Steinkohle, Braumkohle, Erdgas) und 17 % (11%) Erneuerbare Energien. Damit sind folgende Umweltauswirkungen verbunden: 0.0005 g/kWh (0.0008 g/kWh) radioaktiver Abfall sowie 413 g/kWh (514 g/kWh) CO2-emission.
[Electricity provided by Aggertal GmbH in 2005 was from the following sources (German average): 18% (29%) nuclear energy, 65% (60%) fossil sources (e.g. coal, brown coal, natural gas), and 17% (11%) renewable energy. This caused the following environmental burden: 0.0005 g/ kWh (0.0008 g/kWh) nuclear waste and 413 g/kWh (514 g/kWh) CO2 emissions].
- 10.
The use of the AIDA concept is controversial in marketing today, due to its simplification of the psychological and social determinants of consumption. It is useful for our purposes, however, in that it draws our attention to the intermediate steps necessary before action is to be expected.
- 11.
Likewise, empirical research has shown that consumers faced with a task of reducing their energy consumption, for instance, are willing to make small sacrifices only and generally fail to achieve the required level (Gatersleben and Vlek, 1998).
- 12.
See Fuchs and Lorek 2005 for a discussion on the even larger obstacles to sustainable consumption in the context of sufficiency issues.
- 13.
The situation is different in the case of food scares and associated health concerns, which have caused (frequently temporary) changes in food consumption patterns in some countries.
- 14.
Empirical studies on sustainable consumption have identified a range of consumption styles, which are characterized by different consumer preferences and abilities resulting from the combination of subjective and societal determinants of consumption (Prose 2000; Villiger et al 2000). Schultz (2000a, b), for example, distinguishes between four target groups for policy intervention with respect to the sustainability characteristics of household consumption choices: an environmentallyoriented consumption style, the status oriented elite, a consumption style that is not responsive to environmental or social messages, and a large remaining group of consumers, who will include environmental criteria in their consumption choices under certain conditions.
- 15.
Reducing transaction costs for consumers means also the reduction of uncertainty and perceived risk. Thus, consumers need to be assured of consumer protection, especially with respect to contract reliability and consequences of supplier failure. Likewise, consumers need to know to what extent they can trust information on producer “performance characteristics” such as the environmental impact of the generation of that electricity. Note, however, the complex relationship between credibility and accessibility of information.
- 16.
In other cases, they also transmit “environmental” messages quite successfully, selling “water power,” which is produced by old, large scale water power projects and does not improve the current energy supply mix, at a premium.
- 17.
There have, however, been efforts to achieve such experiences of participation in the form of concerted actions fostered by a German TV soap, for instance.
- 18.
The “traditionals” in Schultz’ (2000a, b) studies, for instance, tended to respond to messages of health, regional context, and specific rather than general environmental benefit (Fuchs and Arentsen 2002). Likewise, “the privileged,” as Schultz calls them, can potentially be convinced to switch to green electricity, if they perceive the latter as valuable in providing status due to its high tech quality and expensiveness (e.g. solar power) (ibid.).
References
Bentley, M (2000) Global consumer class report: in search of common ground for common good. United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), Paris
Bentley M, de Leeuw B (2000) Sustainable consumption indicators. Report for UNEP DTIE. United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), Paris
Boardman B et al (2003) Consumer choice and carbon consciousness for electricity (4CE). Final report. Environmental Change Institute, UK
Bundesnetzagentur (2008) Monitoringbericht 2008 [Monitoring report 2008], Bonn
Easton D (1965) A systems analysis of political life. Wiley, New York
European Commission (2001) Directive 2001/77/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market, Brussels
European Commission (2003) Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity, Brussels
European Commission (2005) Green Paper on energy efficiency or doing more with less. COM(2005) 265 final, Brussels
European Commission (2006a) Directive 2006/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on energy end-use efficiency and energy services, Brussels
European Commission (2006b) Attitudes about energy. Special Eurobarometer 247, Brussels
Europressedienst (2005) Akzeptanz Erneuerbarer Energien in Deutschland im Rahmen der Energiepolitik der Zukunft [acceptance of renewable energies in Germany in the context of an energy policy for the future], Bonn
Forsa (2006) Einschätzung der Sicherheit der Energieversorgung in Deutschland [estimations on energy security in Germany], Berlin
Fuchs D, Arentsen M (2002) Green electricity in the market place: the policy challenge. Energy Policy 30(6):525–538
Fuchs D, Lorek S (2005) Sustainable consumption governance – a history of promises and failures. J Consum Policy 28(3):261–288
Gatersleben B, Vlek C (1998). Household consumption, quality of life, and environmental impacts: a psychological perspective and empirical study. In: Noorman KJ, Schoot Uiterkam T (eds) Green households? Domestic consumers, environment, and sustainability. Earthscan, London, pp 141–183
Georg S (1999) The social shaping of household consumption. Ecol Econ 28:455–466
German Ministry of Justice (2005) Energiewirtschaftsgesetz (EnWG) [Energy Industry Act], Berlin
Greenpeace (2006) Stromkennzeichnung – Tranzparenz oder Verbrauchertäuschung [Electricity disclosure – transparency or deception of consumer]. Greenpeace, Hamburg
International Energy Agency (2005) World Energy Technology Outlook to 2050. OECD/IEA, Paris
Lorek S (2001) Household energy and water consumption and waste generation – German Case Study. Overath, OECD, p 134
Lorek S, Lucas R (2003) Towards sustainable market strategies – a case study on eco-textiles and green power. Wuppertal Institute, Wuppertal
Maniates M (2002) In search of consumptive resistance: the voluntary simplicity movement. In: Princen T, Maniates M, Conca K (eds) Confronting consumption. MIT Press, Cambridge
Michaelis L, Lorek S (2004) Consumption and the environment in Europe: trends and futures. Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen
Prose, F (2000) Auswirkungen von Konsumstilen im Energiebereich. Paper presented at the BAUM workshop, Berlin, 15–16 February 1999
Reisch L, Scherhorn G (1999) Sustainable consumption In: Dahiya SB (ed) The current state of economic science, vol 2. Spellbound, Rhotak, pp 657–690
Reisch L, Micklitz HW (2006) Consumers and deregulation of the electricity market in Germany. J Consum Policy 29(4):399–415
Røpke I (1999) The dynamics of willingness to consume. Ecol Econ 28:399–420
Røpke I (2001) New technology in everyday life – social processes and environmental impact. Ecol Econ 38:403–322
Scholte JA (2000) Globalization: a critical introduction. Macmillan, Basingstoke
Schor J (1998) The overspent American; upscaling, downshifting, and the new consumer. Basic Books, New York
Schultz I (2000a) Nachhaltige Konsummuster: Bilanz und Perspektiven aus Sicht der Sozialwissenschaften. Paper presented at the BAUM workshop Nachhaltige Konsummuster. Möglichkeiten der Umweltkommunikation, Berlin, 15–16 February 2000
Schultz I (2000b) Entwicklung von zielgruppen- und konsumstilspezifischen Ökologisierungstrategien/neuen ‘Öko’-Angeboten. Paper presented at the BAUM workshop Nachhaltige Konsummuster Möglichkeiten der Umweltkommunikation, Berlin, 15–16, February 2000
Truffer B, Markard J, Wustenhagen R (2001) Eco-labeling of electricity strategies and tradeoffs in the definition of environmental standards. Energy Policy 29(11):833–945
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (1999) UNEP News Release NR 99-90. Klaus Töpfer, 23 August 1999, Nairobi
Utilitias (2004) Stromkennzeichung–Überprüfung verschiedener Gestaltungsvorschäge. Utilitas Forschung, Darmstadt
Villiger A, Wüstenhagen R, Meyer A (2000) Jenseits der Öko-Nische [Beyond the eco-niche]. Birkhäuser, Basel
Wiser R, Fang J, Porter K, Houston A (1999) Green power marketing in retail competition: an early assessment. Working Paper LBNL-42286. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fuchs, D., Lorek, S. (2009). Sustainability in the Electricity Production and Consumption System – A Consumers’ Perspective. In: Lebel, L., Lorek, S., Daniel, R. (eds) Sustainable Production Consumption Systems. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3090-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3090-0_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3089-4
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-3090-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)