Smart Users for Energy and Societal Transition E-Book

Benoît Robyns

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 441

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023

Beschreibung

Climate change and the loss of biodiversity are now realities. Their causes and origins stem from the energy, goods and resources relied upon by the lifestyle of a growing part of humanity.

Smart Users for Energy and Societal Transition presents this much needed transition, as well as the scenarios and paths essential to mitigating the impacts of climate change. It deals with transitions experimented in the form of ecosystems in universities, cities and territories, as well as with concepts of smart buildings, smart grids and smart cities, addressed to smart users – or not – in an interdisciplinary research context. Sociological issues related to the role of smart building users are discussed, ranging from acceptance to the appropriation of the technologies made available to them.

The book highlights the ethics of this essential transition and the importance of individual behaviors in safeguarding humanity on a preserved planet.

Leseprobe

Smart Users for Energy and Societal Transition

Benoît RobynsClaude LengletHervé BarryMalik Bozzo-Rey

First published 2023 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:

ISTE Ltd  

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  

27-37 St George’s Road  

111 River Street  

London SW19 4EU  

Hoboken, NJ 07030  

UK  

USA  

www.iste.co.uk

www.wiley.com

© ISTE Ltd 2023The rights of Benoît Robyns, Claude Lenglet, Hervé Barry and Malik Bozzo-Rey to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2022951689

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA CIP record for this book is available from the British LibraryISBN 978-1-78630-735-4

Foreword by Pierre Giorgini

When it comes to climate issues and the changes imposed by its challenges, few comprehensive works exist. Combining technologies and social sciences is a feat in a university context, which tends to separate disciplines. We believe that this work, which is of high scientific rigor, is based above all on experience. We feel that it is this experience that lends itself to a transdisciplinary vision.

However, it is a common sentiment that when the disciplines converge, in part the right solutions can be found. Indeed, when creating representations and conceptions about the challenges to be met and the solutions to be implemented, we come across two extremes: on the one hand, a radical return to an energy sobriety imposed from above in the form of a dictatorship of the general interest, and on the other hand, a “techno-centric” headlong rush that places bets on future solutions, while allowing us to avoid fundamentally questioning our lifestyles, our consumption patterns and our relationship to happiness, which leads to the depletion of natural resources.

In this way, the path toward the common good arises as a third path. This path is enlightened and guided by this book. It becomes clear that we ought to invest and act in three directions that complement each other, but which are most importantly not exclusive. The first is the path to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible while maintaining a global vision of socioeconomic impact. The second concerns proactively repairing systems wherever possible (biodiversity, natural ecosystems), and the third is about adaptation and limitation of the consequences of collapses, made possible due to human intelligence.

In these three ways, technology will be called upon as it plays an important role, but a role which can be constantly reexamined within the framework of a reconfiguration of technosciences based on use cases, symbiosis, and integrating both ethical questions and those that concern the common good. The approach must be fully integrated, meaning that each designer will constantly have to question themselves with each design they create, asking questions like “What am I trying to solve?” “Why exactly does my solution not generate more external problems externalities than it solves?” “Is this well defined?” “Does it serve the long-term interests of those I’m designing for or other interests which are economic, geopolitical, etc. in nature?” and “What ethical blindspots might I have for the future?”

The hope is to “build on” and enable an ongoing epistemic metamorphosis. Here, we can refer to the concept of metamorphosis described by anthropologist Alain de Vulpian, as well as the emergence of endo-contributivity connection and homo holopticus1, which dominate new ideas in all scientific, technical and social fields. These point to a hope that a new paradigm of cooperation will open us to a more desirable future. Endo-contributory requirements [GIO 21a], or co-elaboration, appear frequently. Systems can no longer be controlled from the outside because they are too complex. Intelligence must be distributed and embedded at the center of the components which will offer the agility and the capacity for a bifurcation that is necessary, because of a more flexible dynamic and the ability to simultaneously combine the local and the global (holopticism).

Alain de Vulpian, who passed away in 2021, worked for almost 70 years on the weak metamorphosis signals whose beginning he dated to a century ago in the West. He speaks of anthropological metamorphosis. A follower of Rogers, he identifies and analyzes through tens of thousands of interviews a fundamental evolution of human cognitive and social behavior. A follower of contemporary theses surrounding mankind, he suggests a striking analogy with the principles of functioning and evolution. For him, everything is alive in a holistic approach to reality. He applies the approaches of Francisco Varela and Ilya Prigogine to constantly refine his vision of this mutation which he describes as a humanist bifurcation. Then, in the recent discoveries of neuroscience, he confirms his analysis and discovers that there are tools to characterize this mutation from a cognitive point of view. He uses the concept of neural plasticity to suggest that cognitive bifurcation signals a new era relating to the relationship of the human brain to its environment.

According to de Vulpian, a process of reversal has taken place because of the growing perception of the catastrophes engendered by an essentially technoscientific and rationalist vision of our relationship to nature. These are relationships with nature, other species and other humans which are dominated by competition, exploitation and the myth of progress, particularly technoscientific in nature. The progressive emergence of a global ecological consciousness is at the source of this new neural adaptation. Homo sapiens have relearnt to simultaneously mobilize the four dimensions of brain activity in the same way as Natufian hunter-gatherers did, a group which had a more holistic relationship with nature, other living beings and other humans which allowed them to survive. De Vulpian spoke of a “society-like-a-brain” using a single term, as well as a “citizen strategist”. The strategic development of the community no longer involves permanent intermediary bodies. Hence, the crisis of trade unions, political parties and intermediary bodies in general.

In his two works [DEV 16, DEV 19], he defends the idea that the networking of socioperceptive brains develops a thin layer of “connected thinking” which can be brought out on a global scale, or a humanist noosphere (in reference to Teilhard de Chardin). Why humanist? Because it is similar to the phenomena of the living whose mechanisms have led to both constant hominization with the contingent purpose of survival, as well as to a constant process of humanization by a life force.

But, as with the evolution of living things, this evolution is not linear in nature. It can lead to phases of regression and of resistance from the powers that be, like those we are witnessing today. Indeed, this bifurcation disturbs all of our conceptions as well as all of our traditional hierarchies. It frightens many, appearing as a threat. This leads one’s creative, empathetic and intuitive capacities to narrow, as well as to the phenomenon of humanity searching for a set of new certainties which are simple, radical and non-complex. According to de Vulpian, threat and fear lead to the activation of the retrograde brain, that of fight, flight and anger.

But, according to de Vulpian, this could be temporary if everyone took care to cultivate a level of humanist metamorphosis, to monitor it and above all to effectively educate young people about the four dimensions of their brain’s capacities: spiritual, emotional-relational, sensorial and rational.

For this, it is necessary to encourage the current emergence of hybrid, heterarchic collectives2: to open and network self-organized communities, to promote learning about self-regulation in hybrid communities and encourage them to find a sense of balance. Thus, without sharp regression, a new type of rationality may emerge, which is in any case part of our process of long-term cognitive evolution. Because it is, according to de Vulpian, the structure that allowed mankind to thrive in its sense of adventure. This book, which should be read without delay, masterfully invites us to do just this.

Pierre GIORGINI

Essayist, associate researcher in technology ethics

ETHICS laboratory, Université Catholique de Lille

Notes

1

Homo holopticus would come to designate the emergence of an “extended man” or “space man” in a network made up of humans, and the extension of the human through technology, the global architecture of which would dramatically accelerate its transition toward a holopticism that is integral, horizontal and vertical, temporal and spatial. The perception of the whole, of the global (produced by the entire network) and of its interactions with singular and local action is therefore what characterizes homo holopticus.

2

Heterarchy is an organizational system which differs from hierachy because it promotes interrelation and cooporation between members rather than a bottom-up structure (Wikipedia).

Foreword by Xavier Bertrand

Ten years have passed since the rev3 dynamic was implemented in Hauts-de-France. It has also been 10 years since the Université Catholique de Lille launched its energy and societal transition program called “Live TREE” (Lille Vauban-Esquermes for energy, ecological and economic transition). The advent of these two concurrent anniversaries is not by chance. Rev3 was able to serve as a general framework, both “inspiration” and integration, for Live TREE, while Live TREE became from the outset one of the most ambitious and more interesting projects linked to rev3. Both approaches address the same issues, they share the same major objectives and they adhere to the same principles of action.

If the collective work Smart Users for Energy and Societal Transition largely describes the impressive initiative Live TREE, what can be said about rev3?

Rev3 is first and foremost the name given to a model, that of the “Third Industrial Revolution” (TIR), which was created by the American economist Jeremy Rifkin. According to Rifkin, industrial revolutions arise when a type of energy and a type of communication are articulated while in the process of domination. The First Industrial Revolution, which significantly marked our beautiful region, was triggered by the combined emergence of coal and railways. The Second Industrial Revolution came about due to the rise of oil and large networks (roads, electricity, fixed telephone infrastructure, etc.). The Third Industrial Revolution, which is now taking place, is marked by the emergence of renewable energies and the Internet. A prelude to a new development, it also aims to provide a major response to the major threat of climate change by describing the paths toward a low-carbon society. Rifkin’s model is built on five pillars: development of renewable energies, buildings that “produce” electricity, energy storage solutions, smart energy networks and sustainable mobility, based in particular on electromobility. To a degree, we highlight these pillars in the work that follows. They are also present, to varying degrees, in the Live TREE program.

But in Hauts-de-France, rev3 goes further than Rifkin’s original model. Due to the desire to apply the TIR to the regional territory, the two co-pilots, the regional council and the regional CCI (Chamber of Commerce and Industry), immediately wished to add a significant economic component to the “five pillars” previously stated, including more specifically the circular economy and the functional economy. When enhanced in this way, rev3 constitutes a development approach that is capable of responding to three major challenges that our societies face:

– energy transition, by promoting renewable energies within an effective energy mix which includes nuclear energy (an energy that is also carbon free);

– technological transition, by promoting research and innovation, thus ensuring that new products and new industrial processes are created;

– economic transition, with the establishment of new activities and the creation of new jobs.

Since 2013, rev3 has also become a real human adventure. It organizes a group of actors, which is quite remarkable, particularly in light of the multiplicity of projects in flight, the diversity of the partners involved and the durability of the undertaking, which we can claim without doubt. Rev3 is an illustration that is as concrete as the installation of three gigafactories of batteries, a technological platform dedicated to improving the energy efficiency of motors, the creation of a new financial tool (e.g. the “rev3 booklet”), student initiatives in the field of energy transition, etc. The projects are vast: it is estimated that there have been more than 1,500 of them between 2013 and 2022.

In fact, rev3 allows for the combined efforts of three distinct “worlds”:

– first, the world of companies and their representatives. The company is the main player in rev3. They are at the origin of new activities and they create new jobs;

– next, the world of local authorities. It encourages initiatives and supports them with the appropriate technical and/or financial support;

– finally, the world of training and research.

We will reflect a little longer on the third category of actors, insofar as the work that follows highlights it with more attention.

Research and training are essential rev3 levers. Innovation is at the heart of rev3, whether technical or “societal” in nature (innovation in behavior, in organizations, in procedures, etc.). Therefore, research, both public and private, is to be mobilized so that flows of innovation can be generated which are able to maintain the dynamic. This should occur in connection with companies and within the framework of innovative ecosystems. The role of training is also crucial. In 2017, it was estimated that 85% of jobs in 2030 would not exist in 2017. Thus, it follows that the issue of new skills is particularly acute and requires implementing the various forms of training: initial, professional and, of course, higher, for the most qualified jobs. Universities and schools are therefore key players in the process.

This is why in 2018 Philippe Vasseur, former president of the Rev3 Mission, took the initiative to create a network of actors working in higher education and research on topics surrounding rev3. The name of this network is Unirev3, which has 33 members who signed an agreement that rallies them together around common ambitions and projects. It is important to note that the seven universities located in Hauts-de-France are part of this network, thus demonstrating their intent and their mobilization in favor of maintaining regional dynamics.

For its part, the Université Catholique de Lille has shown itself to be at the forefront of commitments and achievements, and in this respect, the Live TREE program is quite exemplary. First, in terms of actions, Live TREE uses the “fundamentals” created by rev3: that is to say, the reduction of energy consumption, the development of the Internet of energy, the production of renewable energy, the storage of electrical energy, the soft mobility, etc. In this case, the various projects are applied to the building stock of the university, in particular the “Rizomm” building, which really exemplifies rev3. Second, in the same way that rev3 is not limited to a “technicalist” approach, but rather incorporates a strong societal component, Live TREE is especially open to human and social sciences and thus seeks to develop an interdisciplinary approach in the most effective way through the design and implementation of operations. The ethical dimension of design is also constantly questioned. Finally, and this is also a characteristic that complements rev3, Live TREE attaches considerable importance to the partnership of actors for the various projects carried out: not only between internal university actors (students, teachers, researchers, administrative staff and university technicians), but also in connection with the inhabitants of the district, businesses and local authorities. This of course includes the region which is associated with the program and which supports it financially.

And now, how ought we to move forward? Faced with the magnitude of challenges ahead, we cannot be satisfied with the status quo. Moreover, in recent months which have been marked by a health crisis and uncertain geopolitical contexts, particularly important issues have been highlighted: namely, the resilience of our territories, and the sovereignty of industry and energy. However, rev3 is a promising way to respond to all of these concerns. We therefore need to reinforce and accelerate rev3. The region wants to contribute as effectively as possible and with all means at its disposal to the necessary transitions: economic, ecological and societal. Rev3 has already permeated regional policies to a large extent. My wish is that rev3 becomes a sort of backbone, to become a real “marker” for the regional mandate which began in 2021. Frédéric Motte, who is the new president of Mission rev3, has been working hard in collaboration with the regional services and our partners, in particular the regional CCI, to implement these new resolutions. A 2022–2027 “roadmap” has been submitted for the approval of regional advisers. It specifies the projects to prioritize in terms of sectors: energy mix, decarbonization, sustainable building, sustainable mobility, agriculture/bioeconomy and circular economy. It provides for an even wider deployment of rev3 in Hauts-de-France. It aims to strengthen relations between companies and universities and schools, whether on research/innovation or training topics. Finally, this new roadmap intends to prioritize developing the “citizenship” aspect of rev3, definitely not to give it additional evidence, but because the scale of the transformations to be carried out does indeed mean that everybody involved needs to mobilize. To achieve this, broad awareness-raising through various channels while reaching various audiences is essential. Students and the university community constitute one of these audiences. All in all, we believe that this book, Smart Users for Energy and Societal Transition, makes a significant contribution to current reflections, to the dissemination of ideas and, all in all, to progress toward our ambitions.

Xavier BERTRAND

President of the Hauts-de-France region

Introduction

The world and planet Earth are experiencing a serious ecological crisis, brought about by unprecedented energy and material consumption by humanity, which impact the climate and biodiversity in an irreversible way. This evolution, which is increasingly impacting the living conditions of humans, can be slowed down in order to allow for a more controlled energy and societal transition. The key is to adapt the consumption patterns of humans and their habitats so that less energy and materials extracted from the earth are consumed, and so that consumption is undertaken more intelligently.

The consumption of fossil fuels since the 18th century has undeniably allowed industry to develop, along with transport and standards of living, particularly in more industrialized countries. It has also contributed to an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, causing global warming. This phenomenon continues; if emissions of these gases are not quickly and drastically reduced, global warming will negatively impact the planet and our lifestyles, which will become increasingly unavoidable and increasingly difficult to live with. Though fossil fuels are the main source of CO2 emissions, they are not the only one.

Energy and societal issues are linked, with energy occupying a very important place in our lifestyles. We may consider energy that is directly consumed (for heating, lighting, food, transport, running all electrical, digital and other devices), or energy needed to make the products we consume (to extract and transform materials, for crops, livestock, etc.), but also the impact of our lifestyles, which for example cause deforestation which reduces natural sinks of CO2, which then lead to it being stored in the atmosphere.

The buildings in which we live, work, make our purchases or even those intended for leisure and sport are primary CO2 emitters. The technologies used to build and operate them play an important role in how significant carbon emission levels are. However, the way we live with them and how we use them also contributes to these emissions. Buildings which are equipped with devices can better control energy. They can produce energy and store it, because of the new materials used to build these buildings but also increasingly because of new energy and digital technologies which work while ensuring that their occupants remain comfortable. Buildings therefore become smart building. However, technology alone is not enough to optimize the operation of a building and reduce its carbon footprint. Those who use a building also play an important role, due to their activities and their need for comfort, which vary from one individual to another. The question then arises as to whether in order for smart buildings to achieve their low carbon footprint objectives, they should not be used or inhabited by smart users1, who are adapted or integrated into the building’s intelligence. This provocative question will be one of the topics discussed in this book.

In this way, buildings are set to become intelligent, as are energy networks (smart grids), due to increased user involvement. These buildings interact with energy networks, integrating new practices of self-production and self-consumption of energy. All of these systems are interconnected by information systems which generate a technological convergence of energy between smart buildings, smart grids, the Internet of things and people.

Buildings and more broadly habitats associated with energy networks which are becoming more respectful of the environment and lower in carbon emissions constitute the foundations of a city in the future. If we associate quality of life with the return of nature to the city (or even urban agriculture), low-carbon transport such as public transport (transport is another major emitter of CO2), spaces and organizations promoting living together, democratization of the means of information allowing inhabitants to be partners of the city and no longer only consumers, we will be able to formulate a smart city. The evolution of cities is important, because if cities today occupy 2% of the surface of the globe, they are home to 50% of the world’s population, consume 75% of the energy produced and generate 80% of CO2 emissions2 [ROB 19]. The challenge for cities to become more sustainable, carbon neutral and resilient is therefore considerable.

Smart buildings, smart grids, smart cities – Are these concepts that implicate many promising technologies in the fight against climate change, especially if they are inhabited and used by smart users? We could optimize everything with appropriate algorithms. Why do not we use artificial intelligence, which with a lot of data (big data) [GIO 21a] could control all of the smart components of the system and thus help us to achieve optimal behaviors (of materials and humans) to save the planet? This is a “Big Brother” dream that actors in technosciences could seek to solidify soon. If technological solutions will form part of the solutions of the future, it is becoming increasingly clear that these solutions will not be optimal, or even that they may generate negative effects for the planet. This will be particularly true if they are not accepted by populations who appropriate them, because when technologies are desirable and economically viable, they can be transmitted and enriched with their creativity. Human rationality does not relate to the machine; individual and social acceptability are not automatic [ROB 19]. To the extent that the energy and societal transition becomes more than necessary to ensure decent living conditions for our children and grandchildren (current generations have a responsibility toward future generations that do not yet exist), the question of influencing lifestyles through information, new standards, the encouragement of new modes of consumption (energy and otherwise), coercive methods (laws and penalties) or various techniques of more subtle influences pose new ethical questions. We find ourselves at a crossroads between technosciences and societal issues.

Therefore, to succeed in the energy and societal transition, different scientific disciplines must work together, in order to develop interdisciplinary approaches between human and social sciences and engineering sciences, which are essential for a transition to be successful for all.

This work, after reviewing the necessary transition and the scenarios and possible solutions to mitigate the impact of climate change, will address:

– the development of ecosystems in cities, territories and universities to experiment with new solutions that enable energy and societal transition;

– elements that constitute future smart cities, with smart buildings and smart grids, by opening up interdisciplinary research perspectives;

– sociological questions related to the role of users in smart buildings, ranging from acceptance to involvement, assuming the implication of technologies and an environment that can be appropriated by users;

– the ethics of energy and societal transition or influencing behavior so that everyone works together to save the planet.

These subjects are covered in this book by an interdisciplinary team of authors: two engineers (an electrician, a building expert), a sociologist and a philosopher-ethicist.

Chapter 1 presents the connection between energy and societal issues. It allows us to set the context and explore the challenges of the energy and societal transition. Some perspectives which relate to climate change are identified, from denial and inaction to sustainable development expressed in particular by the 17 objectives identified by the UN, which pass through technosciences and the economy. One highlights a series of scenarios which can be imagined for the next 30 years to limit global warming by aiming for carbon neutrality by 2050 (assuming that carbon emitted by human activities is completely absorbed by plants, soil and the seas, or by technologies for capturing and storing the CO2 that are being developed). These stories offer many solutions that have varying degrees of technological maturity and social acceptability, such as sobriety. Conditions inherent to the success of these scenarios and obstacles to their deployment are also identified. In short, a discussion is initiated which will be continued throughout this work.

Chapter 2 presents examples of cities and territories that have embarked on proactive energy transition by not hesitating to experiment with new technologies and lifestyles, which highlight a few key results. These examples are Copenhagen, Manchester, the Swiss project of the 2000 watt society and the Third Industrial Revolution in the Hauts-de-France region. Bringing these approaches together makes it possible to learn many lessons and provide some concrete answers to the questions raised considering the urgency of the environmental transition. In particular, it makes it possible to identify the “foundations bricks” and the cross-functionalities that are necessary for any energy and societal transition process.

Universities are ideal places for experimentation at scale and in real conditions of different axes of energy and societal transition. This is due to the support of interdisciplinary research, but also because of information, awareness and involvement of students and staff, as well as the populations within the territories in which they are anchored, through training and education missions. Chapter 3 gives some examples of universities around the world that are specifically targeting carbon neutrality and that aim to reach UN Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs). These examples include the universities in Manchester, Stockholm, Boston, Reading, and the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. Since 2014, in the Hauts-de-France region in the wake of the Third Industrial Revolution, the Université Catholique de Lille has been engaged in the “Live TREE” program (Lille Vauban-Esquermes in energy, ecological and economic transition). This program aims to support university establishments to achieve carbon neutrality, to develop a living laboratory on a real scale (via a living lab) as well as other challenges. This is achieved via experimental buildings in a sustainable and desirable district, which enable one to experiment and implement green mobility strategies, bring nature back to the city, develop the student experience by encouraging the active involvement of students in the transition, and develop transdisciplinary research between human and social sciences and engineering sciences, etc.

Energy is a fundamental issue when thinking about the transition. This is why energy networks are set to evolve strongly toward smart grids, just as buildings are set to evolve toward smart buildings. Chapter 4 introduces the concept of smart buildings as the nodes of smart grids. The challenge that comes from this aims to position the users, operators and owners of buildings at the heart of the approach, through modeling and dynamic supervision of buildings and blocks of mixed tertiary and residential buildings, integrating use cases and actors, with a view to transform them into intelligent nodes of a smart grid. This concept is a step toward developing smart cities, raising research questions (associating energy, buildings, transport, urban farms, digital technologies, citizen participation, etc.) which will be discussed in this chapter.

Chapter 5 asks a fundamental question about the buildings of the future: is an economical smart building without the cooperation of the occupants at all possible? The name smart building refers to the concrete modification of the technical contents of buildings, and therefore the way they function from a socio-technical perspective, using a very technical logic. Under these conditions, the appropriate designation of smart users, which was introduced previously, appears ambiguous, even paradoxical. This is because if the tendency inherent in the model is to ask nothing of the occupants themselves, what intelligence are we talking about, considering that occupants are never passive when they produce actions in accordance to their needs in a given moment? The paradox between the technicality of smart buildings and an impossible neutrality of the occupants is at the heart of the socio-technical problem of this new construction model, and so it should be questioned. Having said this, the paradox is ultimately very long-standing. The advent of smart buildings only serves to reconfigure the difficulty that those who design construction models face when integrating the parameters of use cases. Does the model of smart buildings more effectively overcome this genre of difficulty? This is the central socio-technical issue addressed in this chapter. The analysis developed in this chapter leverages the feedback that came from two buildings at the Université Catholique de Lille which were renovated and transformed into examples of smart building as part of the Live TREE program: the Rizomm building devoted to the faculties, and the HEI building of Junia, graduate school of science and engineering. Both share the same academic vocation, but radically differ when it comes to their socio-technical philosophies. These buildings have different ages: the oldest, HEI, dates back to 1885. Transforming such old buildings into smart buildings is thus obviously a challenge.

Chapter 6 discusses the ethical challenges inherent in the energy and societal transition. Climate issues and the necessary transition raise immense challenges such as the conflict between the interests of people living currently and those who will live in the future, as well as the prospect of a less prosperous future and/or with lives that are different from those lived by people today. This forces us to reassess what we understand by a “good life” or a “full life” (or a “more sober life”). Finally, if the basic needs of the majority of the world’s population cannot be met in the future, then we are bound to face tragic situations where the choice between life and death will no longer simply be hypothetical. In other words, thinking about the ethics of the energy and societal transition involves rethinking and questioning three assumptions that have structured modern ethical thinking: first, the interests of present generations coincide with those of future generations, future people will be better off than us and favorable living conditions will continue indefinitely into the future. This chapter also deals with the way in which we can influence the behavior of individuals, in particular through public policies that target the greatest number of people. These have experienced a major turning point in recent years following the development of nudges (gentle encouragement given to an individual to modify their behavior without constraining or hindering them) and the integration of behavioral sciences in their creation. Finally, once the means have been identified, the question of their ethics and legitimacy can be raised. It will be shown that the energy and societal transition requires the unification of private ethics (individual) and public ethics (institutional). It presents a major modern challenge for our democracies: combining ethics and politics with respect to individuals while protecting their interests and those of future generations.

The issues are such that our way of seeing the world (the planet, humanity and biodiversity) and our relationship to the world must be transformed. Imaginations have to be modified, so that sources of happiness other than those that have a negative impact on the world are made more attractive, and sources of joy are sought out and rediscovered [GIO 20].

Notes

1

According to the

Le Robert

dictionary, an intelligent person is someone who has the ability to know and understand, who is to a variable degree endowed with intelligence. According to Wikipedia, intelligence is the set of processes found in systems with varying levels of complexity, which are either living or not, which make it possible to understand, learn or adapt to new situations. In English, smart means intelligent, shrewd (

Cambridge

dictionary).

2

Available at:

www.smartgrid-cre.fr

.

1The Necessary Transition of the 21st Century

1.1. Introduction

The consumption of fossil fuels since the 18th century has undeniably enabled the development of industry, enhanced transport and increased the standard of living, particularly in the most industrialized countries, but it has also contributed to an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, provoking global warming in our planet. This phenomenon continues to worsen, so much so that if these gas emissions are not quickly and drastically reduced, global warming will impact the planet and our lifestyles even more, an issue that will become increasingly significant and difficult to live with. Though fossil fuels are the main source of CO2 emissions, they are not the only one.

The first section of this chapter presents the connection between energy and societal issues. This will allow us to set the context, present the issues and bring out some initial aspects for reflection.

The second section presents some perspectives relating to climate change, from denial and inaction, to sustainable development, which includes technosciences and economics.

Finally, the last section brings out some scenarios that can be imagined for the next 30 years with the aim of limiting global warming. These scenarios offer many solutions that have varying levels of technological maturity and social acceptability. We will also identify a few conditions for these scenarios to be successful, as well as some obstacles to their deployment. A discussion will then be initiated which will continue throughout this book. The issue is so serious that our way of seeing the world (the planet, humanity and biodiversity) and our relationship to the world must be transformed. The way we imagine the world has to be modified, and other sources of happiness other than those that have a negative impact on the world are to be promoted, by seeking or rediscovering sources of joy [GIO 20].

1.2. Connection of energy and social issues

1.2.1. Living energy

It is undeniable that energy has enabled a tremendous amount of development within human societies, particularly in terms of food, health, education, technology, mobility, etc.

The use of energy that comes from nature – such as fire for food and heating, wind for mobility through turbines or water to drive motors – has always brought about a considerable pace of evolution within the societies that it has impacted.

Humanity has also used animals as a driving force, such as horses, as well as humans. However, the hydraulic energy brought about by water mills, which appeared in Antiquity, caused a reduction in slavery. By milling up to 150 kg of wheat per hour, a single mill cut down the work of about 40 slaves [BAR 14]. However, a decisive leap was to be made by humanity when it started exploiting fossil fuels in combination with ever more sophisticated technologies. According to the historian Jean-François Mouhot, the emergence of steam was most likely a necessary condition for the abolition of slavery. This is because the exploitation of fossil fuels led to an energy transition that made slave labor appear more superfluous. This has led to machines all but replacing forced labor in modern societies [MOU 11]. Reflecting on our current conditions, supplying the equivalent of only 4 € of daily food to a slave who supplies 100 W for 10 h of work, which is exhausting for any human being, or 1 kWh every day at the price of 4 €/kWh, means that the kWh price is 27 times higher than the 2019 value of public electricity in France [CAS 20]. The average French citizen currently contains the energy potential equivalent to 500 humans!

1.2.2. Fossil fuel, deforestation, cattle rearing and climate

For hundreds of thousands of years, the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere remained stable due to a balanced carbon cycle: the CO2 emitted was essentially equivalent to the CO2 absorbed, which leads to carbon neutrality. People are increasingly practicing deforestation and fossil combustion, that is to say, when what is emitted exceeds what is being absorbed, and the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere is increasing [GRA 16].

The increase in the greenhouse effect makes the global surface temperature of the planet rise. However, due to human activity, the concentration of greenhouse gases has exploded since the pre-industrial period (1750–1800). The concentration of CO2, which is the main greenhouse gas, has increased by more than 30% since the pre-industrial era. The combined effects of all greenhouse gases (CO2, methane, ozone, etc.) that we are seeing today amount to an increase of more than 50% in CO2 since this period [ROB 21].

Between 1860 and 2010, the Earth’s average surface temperature increased by 0.6°C, and 1.2°C if we extend the period until 2022. Different future scenarios predict that by 2100, if current energy sectors and consumption habits are not modified, we can expect temperatures to increase by another 1.5 to 7°C. This considerable increase would be accompanied, more specifically, by a rise in sea level of 20 cm to 1 m. Though the evolution of the climate appears to be irreversible, it is however possible to slow down this evolution by significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Natural CO2 sinks such as soil, trees and oceans would only be able to absorb a little less than half of the CO2 produced by humans (produced in 2000). In order to stabilize the concentration of CO2 at its current level, it would therefore be necessary to immediately reduce emissions of this gas by 50%–70%. Even though this immediate reduction is seemingly impossible, it is urgent to act, because we are faced with a cumulative problem. Considering that the lifetime of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is around a century, it will take several generations to make CO2 levels stabilize to an acceptable level. In 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimated that in order to limit global warming to 1.5°C in 2100, CO2 emissions would have to decrease by 45% in 2030 compared to 2010, and by 91% in 2050 [INT 18].

CO2 is produced when all fossil fuels are combusted: oil, gas and coal. CO2 emissions are about twice as high for coal as for natural gas, those related to oil situated between the two [ROB 21].

Global warming, and more broadly human activities, have an impact on biodiversity. Rates of extinction of species are predicted to be 50–560 times higher than when compared with those of a stable biodiversity. Here, we are talking about the sixth extinction. In addition to this, 11% of greenhouse gas emissions are due to deforestation and change relating to land use, as we are seeing uses that store less carbon such as producing palm oil [GRA 16].

Livestock is also a major emitter of greenhouse gases, constituting around 9% of CO2 emissions worldwide. These emissions can mainly be attributed to the production and transportation of food; a production use case that requires agricultural land which as a consequence contributes to deforestation. The second source of emissions is the gastric fermentation of roaming animals. According to the IPCC, beef farming emits five times more CO2 globally than pig or chicken farming.

Figure 1.1 highlights how CO2 concentrations have increased (in parts per million, or ppm) in the atmosphere since 1700, with a dotted line which projects up to the year 2100, according to the worst-case scenario which has been provided by the IPCC scenario 8.5. This scenario implies business as usual, where a lack of intentional action to reduce CO2 emissions leads to CO2 concentrations above 700 ppm in 2100, compared to 400 ppm in 2014.

Figure 1.1Evolution of CO2 concentrations (in parts per million, or ppm) in the atmosphere since 1700, with a dotted line to predict levels up to 2100 according to the worst-case scenario provided by the IPCC scenario 8.51 (based on NOAA/ASRL/SIO/IPCC)

Figure 1.2 illustrates how global CO2 emissions evolve (in gigatons, or Gt) between 1960 and 2020 (shown in red), distinguishing those produced due to fossil fuels and industry (shown in gray), from those produced due to occupation soils (shown in green). It can be concluded that the emissions growth is essentially due to the consumption of fossil fuels and industrial activity. We can also note the effect of the 2009 economic crisis, which reduced industrial activity overall. In 2020, we can see that CO2 emissions drop to 39.94 Gt compared to the 43.06 Gt emitted in 2019, that is, a drop of more than 8%. This is mainly due to the slowdown in economic activity induced by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Figure 1.2Evolution of global CO2 emissions (in gigatons, or Gt) between 1960 and 2020 (shown in red), those due to fossil fuels and industry (shown in grey) and those due to land use (shown in green)2.

1.2.3. Renewable energies, or almost renewable energies

Energy has always been present in the universe in two ways: nuclear energy contained in matter and kinetic energy created by the movements of stars and other particles moving in space.

The atoms that make up all matter possess enormous energy proportional to their mass. The sun and nuclear power plants harness this energy. Part of the heat in the center of the Earth results from nuclear reactions which allow for deep geothermal energy.