D10_WP4_Report of the use of the ESTEEM tool

Document Sample
D10_WP4_Report of the use of the ESTEEM tool Powered By Docstoc
					               SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
                         PRIORITY
                          FP6-2004-Energy-3, SUSTDEV-1.2.8




Proposal/Contract no.: 518351

Project acronym: CREATE ACCEPTANCE

Project full title: Cultural Influences on Renewable Energy Acceptance and Tools for the
development of communication strategies to promotE ACCEPTANCE among key actor groups



SPECIFIC TARGETED RESEARCH OR INNOVATION PROJECT
                          FP6-2004-Energy-3, SUSTDEV-1.2.8




                           Deliverable 10
                Report on the use of the ESTEEM tool and
                  recommendations for improvements

Due date of deliverable: December 2007
Actual submission date: January 2008


Start date of project: 1st February 2006                       Duration: 24 months


Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: Öko-Institut e.V.

final draft

Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme
(2002-2006)
Dissemination Level PU
Contents

1.    Introduction                                                               7
2.    The process of the demo projects                                           8
      2.1   ZEPP                                                                 8
      2.2   ARCHIMEDE                                                            9
      2.3   Jühnde Dissemination                                                10
      2.4   VEP                                                                 11
      2.5   SMART H2                                                            12
      2.6   The South African Case                                              13
      2.7   The counter-partner approach                                        13
3.    The empirical results: Experiences with testing the ESTEEM tool           16
      3.1   The process                                                         16
      3.2   The results                                                         17
      3.3   Lessons learned: Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the
            ESTEEM Tool                                                         35
      3.4   Feedback on ESTEEM of stakeholders                                  37
4.    Perspectives: A Website and the electronic Tool ESTEEM                    39
Appendix A   Demo reports                                                       40
     A.1     Description of demo project Jühnde                                 40
             A.1.1 The process of the Demo project                              40
             A.1.2 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool                           41
             A.1.2.1 Step 0:                                                    42
             A.1.2.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors             42
             A.1.2.3 Step 2: Vision building                                    44
             A.1.2.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                     46
             A.1.2.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                               47
             A.1.2.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                             48
             A.1.2.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action                         49
             A.1.3 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM
                    Tool in achieving acceptance in the region                  49
             A.1.4 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA               49
             A.1.4.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support                 49
             A.1.4.2 Lessons learned                                            50
      A.2    Demo project ZEPP, the Netherlands                                 50
             A.2.1 Description of Demo project                                  50
             A.2.2 The process of the Demo project                              50
             A.2.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool                           51
             A.2.3.1 Step 0:                                                    51
             A.2.3.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors             51
             A.2.3.3 Step 2: Vision building                                    52
             A.2.3.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                     53
             A.2.3.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                               54
             A.2.3.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                             54
             A.2.3.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action                         56
             A.2.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM
                    Tool in achieving acceptance in the region                  56
             A.2.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA               57
             A.2.5.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support                 57
             A.2.5.2 Lessons learnt                                             57
      A.3    Demoproject Archimede, Italy                                       57
             A.3.1 The process of the Demo project                              59



2
          A.3.2 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool                          59
          A.3.2.1 Step 0:                                                   59
          A.3.2.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors            60
          A.3.2.3 Step 2: Vision building                                   60
          A.3.2.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                    61
          A.3.2.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                              62
          A.3.2.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                            63
          A.3.2.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action                        64
          A.3.3 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM
                 Tool in achieving acceptance in the region                 65
          A.3.4 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA              65
          A.3.4.1 Lessons learned                                           65
    A.4   Demoproject Vép, Hungary                                          65
          A.4.1 Description of Demo project                                 65
          A.4.2 The process of the Demo project                             68
          A.4.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool                          70
          A.4.3.1 Step 0:                                                   70
          A.4.3.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors            70
          A.4.3.3 Step 2: Vision building                                   72
          A.4.3.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                    74
          A.4.3.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                              75
          A.4.3.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                            75
          A.4.3.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action                        78
          A.4.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM
                 Tool in achieving acceptance in the region                 80
          A.4.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA              80
          A.4.5.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support                80
          A.4.5.2 Lessons learned                                           81
    A.5   Sustainable Marine and Road Transport, Hydrogen in Iceland        81
          A.5.1 Description of Demo project                                 81
          A.5.2 The process of the SMART-H2                                 84
          A.5.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool                          85
          A.5.3.1 Step 0:                                                   85
          A.5.3.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors            86
          A.5.3.3 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                    90
          A.5.3.4 Step 4: Portfolio of options                              92
          A.5.3.5 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                            92
          A.5.3.6 Step 6: Recommendations for action                        94
          A.5.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM
                 Tool in achieving acceptance in the region                 96
          A.5.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA              97
          A.5.5.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support                97
          A.5.5.2 Lessons learned                                           97
    A.6   The solar water heaters project in South Africa                   98
          A.6.1 Description of the demo project                             99
          A.6.2 The process of the demo project                             99
          A.6.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool                         100
          A.6.3.1 Step1: Project history, context and actors               100
          A.6.3.2 Step 2: Vision building                                  108
          A.6.3.3 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                   110
          A.6.3.4 Step 4: Portfolio of options                             110
          A.6.3.5 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                           112
          A.6.3.6 Step 6: recommendations for action                       113
          A.6.4 Success and limitations of the CA-process and the ESTEEM
                 tool in achieving acceptance in the region                114


3
             A.6.5 Exchange of demos/partners interaction in CA                    114
             A.6.5.1 Experiences with counter partner’s support                    114
             A.6.5.2 Lessons learnt                                                114
             A.6.6 References                                                      114
             A.6.7 Appendices                                                      115
Appendix B   Matrix overview                                                       118
Appendix C   Counter-partner reports                                               134
     C.1     Counter partner - Evaluation report dissemination Jühnde              134
             C.1.1 Short Description of Demo project and Counter partners’
                   activities                                                      134
             C.1.2 Check of project steps                                          134
             C.1.3 Results of the Counter partner Interview                        135
             C.1.4 Experience of Counter partner’s support                         137
      C.2    Counter partner - Evaluation Report ZEPP demo                         137
             C.2.1 Short Description of Demo project and Counter partners’
                   activities                                                      137
             C.2.2 Check of project steps                                          138
             C.2.3 Results of the Counter partner Interview                        139
             C.2.4 Experience of Counter partner’s support                         141
      C.3    Counter partner - Evaluation report Archimede demo                    142
             C.3.1 Check of project steps                                          143
             C.3.2 Results of the Counter partner Interview                        145
             C.3.3 Experience of Counter-partner’s support                         147
      C.4    Counter partner - Evaluation report demoproject Vep, Hungary          147
             C.4.1 Short description of demo project and counter-partner’s
                   activities                                                      148
             C.4.2 Check of project steps                                          149
             C.4.3 Results of the counter-partner’s interview                      152
             C.4.4 Experience of Counter-partner’s support                         154
      C.5    Counter partner - Evaluation report demoproject SMARTH, Iceland       155
             C.5.1 Short Description of Demo project and Counter partners’
                   activities                                                      155
             C.5.2 Check of project steps                                          156
             C.5.3 Results of the Counter partner Interview                        162
      C.6    Counter partner - Evaluation report demoproject solar, South Africa   165
             C.6.1 Introduction                                                    165
             C.6.2 What kind of role did you play                                  166
             C.6.3 The relationship between stakeholders and ‘consultant’          166
             C.6.4 The character and role of stakeholders                          166
             C.6.5 Main conflicts in the demo are the following                    167
             C.6.6 Relationship between stakeholders and ‘consultant’              167
             C.6.7 Socrobust process and consultant                                167
             C.6.8 Socrobust tools                                                 167
             C.6.9 CA: exchange of demos/partners interaction                      167
Appendix D   Tool lists                                                            168
     D.1     List of ESTEEM Tools for Demo Project Biomass, Germany                168
             D.1.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM
                     steps                                                         168
             D.1.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors                     169
             D.1.3 Step 2: Vision building                                         176
             D.1.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                          183
             D.1.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                                    189
             D.1.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                                  192



4
          D.1.7 Step 6: Recommendations for Action                             199
    D.2   ZEPP                                                                 206
          D.2.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM
                  steps                                                        206
          D.2.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors                    209
          D.2.3 Step 2: Vision building                                        226
          D.2.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                         244
          D.2.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                                   250
          D.2.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                                 252
          D.2.7 Step 6: Recommendations for Action                             269
    D.3   List of ESTEEM tools for demo projects Archimede, Italy              291
          D.3.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM
                  steps                                                        291
          D.3.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors                    291
          D.3.3 Step 2: Vision building                                        301
          D.3.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                         309
          D.3.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                                   311
          D.3.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                                 311
          D.3.7 Step 6: Recommendations for Action                             312
    D.4   List of ESTEEM tools for demo project Vep, Hungary                   316
          D.4.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM
                  steps                                                        317
          D.4.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors                    317
    4.1   Actors Table                                                         325
          D.4.3 Step 2: Vision building                                        328
          D.4.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                         337
          D.4.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options                                   343
          D.4.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                                 344
          D.4.7 Step 6: Recommendations for Action                             352
    D.5   List of ESTEEM tools for Demoproject SMART H, Iceland                364
          D.5.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM
                  steps                                                        364
          D.5.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors                    366
          D.5.3 Organisation                                                   368
          D.5.4 Step 2: Vision building                                        381
          D.5.5 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues                         387
          D.5.6 Step 4: Portfolio of options                                   388
          D.5.7 Step 5: Getting to shake hands                                 389
          D.5.8 Step 6: Recommendations for Action                             393




5
Executive Summary
The core aim of the WP 4 in the CA project is testing and refinement of tools and management
practices to involve stakeholders in five demo projects. The task of the demos was the applica-
tion of a preliminary set of instruments, and to recommend improvements which were imple-
mented in the elaboration of the new ESTEEM tool in WP3.

In this report, the experiences from tool application and testing in the five demos (Hydrogen in
Iceland, CCS in the Netherlands, biomass in Germany, wind in Hungary and solar thermal
power in Italy) are documented. The report encompasses the description of the empirical results,
as well as of the process within the CA team.

Besides their different technological background, the demo projects were characterised by very
different initial situations. Due to these different starting points a broad range of experiences
with the social and political networking and with procedures of participation had to be consid-
ered. Additionally, a third category was of importance for the course of the CA process: the re-
lationship between PM and consultant.

Besides the five demos, an additional ‘semi’-demo project in South Africa was included. Here,
our South African partner tested the different tools and steps in a few local projects on solar wa-
ter heating (SWH), and solar PV.

The use of the tool had to face and solve real-world problems. The application in the demos can
be seen as a professional ‘beta testing’ of the tool (steps and sub-steps).

Whilst one half of the CA project team was dealing with the application of the tool steps in their
demo projects, the other half of the team was responsible for the development of the manual.
Furthermore the team supported the demo colleagues and evaluated the ESTEEM application in
the demos. CA created a specific management instrument to address this activity: the counter-
partner model. The reports of the counter-partners were evaluated and the results and recom-
mendations are included in this final document.

The iterative process between WP 4 and WP 3 is documented stepwise and completed by com-
ments and ‘Lessons learned’. A summary of all activities and suggestions gives the very de-
tailed matrix overview which is integrated in this report (D 10 Matrix). Furthermore a list of the
executed tools is added as well as the Demo Reports, which give an elaborated insight into each
of the demo projects.




6
1.     Introduction
The core aim of the WP 4 in Create Acceptance (CA) is the testing and refinement of tools and
management practices to involve stakeholders in the existing project context of five different
demonstration (demo) projects. The selection of the demos, representing different renewable
and new energy solutions, is based on a set of criteria which were elaborated and refined in CA
(see D 6 report).

A further preparatory step was the discussion on the meaning and role of stakeholders in new
energy projects. Experiences of a number of evaluated projects as well as the discussions within
the five demo projects were summarised. One key finding was that active stakeholder groups
differ in their attitudes and expectations, due to the status of projects, type of technology, re-
gional or local customs as well as the project manager’s ‘reputation’ and routine as regards par-
ticipatory practice (see D 7 report).

While asking actors for their visions on the future environment and their expectations regarding
the new technologies, societal (non-)acceptance and potential conflicts might arise and can be
addressed by the project manager (PM) in a targeted manner. In this context, we focus on the
aspects of planning and preparation of the workshop steps as an integrated part of a comprehen-
sive and long-term communication effort (see D 8 report). The participative workshop is a
communication meeting for all the social and economic actors involved in the process of execu-
tion of the energy project. They can share the information obtained up to now and reach agree-
ments on the future of the project. The experiences of the workshops were documented in a
separate report (see D 9 report).

In the report at hand (D 10), the experiences from tool application and testing in the five demos
are documented. The task of the demos was the application of a preliminary set of instruments
and the recommendation of improvements. While Socrobust - the original tool - served as a ba-
sis, a stepwise elaboration of the new ESTEEM tool was carried out in WP3, making use of the
feedback given by the demos.

This report encompasses the description of the empirical results as well as of the process within
the CA team, and a summary of recommendations given back to the team elaborating the man-
ual of the ESTEEM tool. The iterative process between WP 4 and WP 3 is documented stepwise
and summarised in a matrix overview (see Annex II).




7
2.     The process of the demo projects
In the following, a brief review of the CA-specific process of the demo projects is given.
Besides their different technological background, the demo projects can be characterised by
very different initial situations: one extreme is a real start-up (completely new), the other one
can be described as a well-prepared follow-up process (replication/dissemination of previous
project).

Due to these different starting points a broad range of experiences with the social and political
networking and with procedures of participation have to be considered. Additionally, a third
category is of importance for the course of the CA process: the relationship between PM and
consultant.

In some of the cases, the PM already knew the consultant when starting the CA process, or they
were even colleagues who had long-term experience of liaison (SmartH). In other cases, there
was no relationship beforehand. Whilst the Dutch ZEPP project can be characterised as a ‘start-
up’ process which could accompany and support their PM from the ‘real’ start of the project, the
German biomass demo (Jühnde dissemination) is a follow-up project with a network of actors
that is already in place, other consultants and a PM already actively involved in the region and
county of Göttingen. The Italian demo had to explore who their responsible PM was when CA
entered the ongoing discussion at the national level, and when stakeholders had to be taken on
board. In the Hungarian VEP demo, the consultant had to convince the PM when talking about
conflicts and address the actors on a public level.

The use of the tool has to face and solve real-world problems. The application in the demos can
be seen as a professional ‘beta testing’ of the tool (steps and sub-steps). SMARTH2 is an inter-
esting case in this sense because INE has established project management procedures and exten-
sive experience in its field of operation. ESTEEM had to be integrated into those procedures.
On the other hand, because it is a small organisation, the testing of ESTEEM was not be ‘side-
tracked’ to a separate expert function (e.g. in the way environmental management or quality
management can be in a large organisation). Overlaps, contradictions and synergies between
ESTEEM and existing project management tools and procedures became apparent in this demo
project.

Due to the types of projects, different recommendations and tool requirements were given. Be-
sides the five demos, an additional ‘semi’-demo project in South Africa was included. Here, our
South African partner tested the different tools and steps in a few local projects on solar water
heating (SWH), and solar PV. Due to the later entrance of South Africa to the project consor-
tium (end of 2006), the consortium only decided in 2007 that the South African projects can be
interpreted as a ‘semi’-demo project as well. Due to this later start compared to other demo pro-
jects which had already started, and the limited resources to execute all steps of the tool, the
evaluation and testing was less intense than the testing in the five demonstration projects. How-
ever, the results of the South African semi-demo project provide interesting input for the re-
search on the tool.

The more detailed profile of each demo project is documented in Appendix A.


2.1     ZEPP
In Drachten, a town in the North of the Netherlands, the demo project aims to build a Zero
Emission Power Plant (ZEPP) that would be able to generate enough ‘emission-free’ electricity
for a small town of hundred thousand households (68 MW). The climate-neutral power plant


8
has a go/no-go decision point in 2007/2008 and should be operational in 2010. To realise the
project, several innovative technologies are combined.

ZEPP is initiated by the Dutch company SEQ Nederland B.V. Financial support is given by en-
ergy companies, local and national governments and by Energy Valley, a public-private founda-
tion with local, national and European members, which stimulates the economy of the North of
the Netherlands through financing energy activities.

Project manager
From the beginning of the performance of step 1 until the end of the process, the PM of the
ZEPP has been positively involved in the process. No conflicts between the PM and the con-
sultant have occurred. Several interviews and meetings between the consultant and the project
manager took place. As these meetings proofed to be often time consuming, alternatives were
brought up by the consultant to limit the needed time of the project manager as much as possible
by asking questions by email, or other.

A general recommendation to the tool concerning the time needed from the project manager to
put into the process should be limited as much as possible. Project managers are often people
with full agendas that want to spend their time efficiently. In any case it should be communi-
cated in advance very clearly what amount of time is needed from the consultant and the project
manager to perform the whole process.

Stakeholders
Most of the stakeholders involved in the ZEPP have reacted positively on the process and
agreed easily to deliver the needed input. No stakeholder rejected the invitation for an interview
in step 2 and also many stakeholders did show up on the workshop. Disappointing though was
the absence of the three governmental institutions that are responsible for granting the needed
licenses for the ZEPP (the ministry of Economic Affairs, ministry of Environmental issues and
the provincial government) during the workshop.

No mayor conflicts between the stakeholders existed or occurred during the process in this
demo project. Most of the stakeholders were interested in getting to know each other and the
project and used the workshop for example as network opportunity.

When conflicts exist, this might influence the willingness of stakeholders to participate. This
should be taken into account when inviting stakeholders for interviews and the workshop (see
Feenstra et.al., 2007).


2.2     ARCHIMEDE
On December 14, 2006, Enel announced with a press release a research & development pro-
gram for the search of innovative solutions in order to reduce the environmental impact of the
production and distribution of electric power and in particular an investment of approximately
€ 40 mln for the solar thermodynamic project ‘Archimedes’, to be realized in collaboration with
Enea.

On March 26, 2007, Enel and Enea signed an agreement protocol, in order to build the ‘Ar-
chimedes’ plant in Priolo Gargallo. In this second phase of the project, Enel will become the
main contractor. Currently, the question of authorization for the construction of the system in
Sicily Region is in progress.

Archimede is a case in which we have worked with a PM who accompanied all the phases be-
fore the real demo plant; the PM was a researcher in a public institution, who developed rela-
tions with industrial suppliers for the realization of a prototype plant, whose main interest is to


9
support the development of the technology and who is bound to play a minor role in the future
when the industrial partner will take the responsibility of the demo plant.

Given all this, the CA process was easy in all the first part, i.e. from step 1 to step 3; after that
the problem of a near change in the responsibility makes more difficult to work on the portfolio
of options for Archimede. The other specific aspect is that the new (the industrial) PM is a
global player, for whom the solar-thermal powerplant is not a central business. For this reason
the project survives, but it has not the potentiality of creating a sufficient installed basis to com-
pete with the learning brought by other countries’ experience (i.e., Spain). For the same reason,
the project is in some way progressively separated from problem of local acceptance or gov-
ernment support; it is managed as a small niche, as it was more a research activity than an in-
dustrial production one.

During the CA process all this becomes more clear, so as some change in the alignment among
actors, where the future PM and the Ministry of economic development show a same scarce in-
terest towards these technology (of course Enel is interested in realizing the project, but without
a strong commitment ), the present PM (Enea), owner of the patents, manifests a growing inter-
est in applying this technology also out of Archimede , in collaboration with other industrial
partners and also out of Italy. At the same time a strategy of support for this technology by the
Ministry of Environment in agreement with some Regions become evident.

All this has brought us to consider the possibility of applying the ESTEEM tool for finding ac-
tions to support the technology in its differentiated ways of being realized, including initiatives
of communication, which could help the technology to sort out from a very restricted number of
informed actors (see Poti/Di Fiore 2008).


2.3     Jühnde Dissemination
The original bioenergy village project was carried out in the years 2001-06 and consisted of
various biomass investments. The project was considered successful and the district administra-
tion, the County of Göttingen, decided to disseminate the idea. For this purpose the methodol-
ogy and human resources of the Create Acceptance process contributed to the dissemination
since the beginning of 2007.

In the early stages, contacting the PM was very difficult, as a group of academic consultants al-
ready was at hand. The scientists of IZNE who founded the original Jühnde project idea, were
also involved in managing the dissemination phase. Therefore, the relation between IZNE and
Create Acceptance team was ambiguous. If two different consultants are involved within one
project, there is a risk of competition between them. Therefore, the first contact between Öko-
Institut and the bioenergy project as well as the PM can be characterized as cautious, and rather
reluctant. After a number of individual meetings and telephone calls - and a clarification of re-
sponsibilities - Öko-Institut convinced the PM and core stakeholders to support the ESTEEM
tool testing.

The PM is a county staff and responsible for the regional implementation of the European
LEADER+ program. He is an engaged supporter of the project idea. Over the years he gained
many experiences which are important for the development of bioenergy villages. Öko-Institut
presented the advantages of the tool for a successful implementation process of the new bio-
energy villages and CA entered the Jühnde dissemination at a milestone of the process: the
preparation of feasibility studies.

The original project process uses an elaborated set of participation tools. For the reason, that
many villages already were involved in the preparation phase of the Jühnde model, most of the
possible stakeholders of the Jühnde dissemination were known. Nonetheless critical situations



10
like the involvement of farmers came up. This problem was almost externally driven: increasing
world market prices for agricultural products led to a competition between selling the resources
for fodder, food or energy use. A second reason is the potential danger of innovation without
covering economical risks. Farmers are not yet familiar with opportunities and risks of the new
energy business. As the basis idea of the project was meant to support the rural area and small
agro-businesses, these are rather unexpected problems, but they were identified and partially
addressed by the CA process.

The named aspects hampered the engagement of the farmers with the consequence that more
and detailed expertise was needed. Within the Create Acceptance process the project manage-
ment tried to start intense discussions with all relevant key actors. The project manager aimed at
more flexibility in the contracts between farmers and biomass plant owners.

Regarding nature conservation aspects the tool identified another critical stakeholder and his re-
quirements: local nature conservation actors. Within different workshops the consultant gave a
lot of information about solutions to face nature conservation requirements, for example crop
rotation, different kind of plant species as well as the use of landscape preservation material.
The workshops corresponded with the discussion on the different positions and elaborated
common visions and strategies for the dissemination project (see Brohmann/Hünecke 2007).


2.4     VEP
The demo wind project was identified after a television documentary about the site and the
plans of the proposed wind park at the village of Vép. The report suggested that the manage-
ment takes communal relations seriously, so that they are even willing to accommodate to local
concerns, involve residents in the process as well as share some of the benefits of the plant with
them. It was also seen that there are some impediments, mainly on the authorities’ side, that the
management faces.

The consultant traced down the PM, and after a personal conversation with the PM and another
owner they confirmed the intention to work together. The PM, despite their good previous ef-
forts, saw their limitations and weak points, and looked forward with expectations to explore
what the ESTEEM (then still called Create Acceptance) tool can provide. The expectations were
to explore and structure strategies that they can follow in order to be able to continue the pro-
ject, to widen their field of contacts and negotiations from the local level, since locally they
were already quite well ‘embedded’. These directions were taken to non-local authori-
ties/institutions on the one hand, and national non-governmental organizations on the other.
The ESTEEM process entered in the project line when it had already started, the first phase was
implemented, but then further phases were blocked. Thus it was not the most ideal early plan-
ning phase, but still a point of time when ESTEEM had the potential still to contribute. Its value
could actually be quite substantial if it could move further the halted situation, and the wind pro-
ject needed an external aid.

The PM also felt the wind project could utilize the test ESTEEM tool, and was very cooperative
throughout the project. However, time constraints were appreciated, and besides personal meet-
ings, phone conversations and skype discussions have also taken place. Calls and email ex-
changes occurred not only related to the application of the ESTEEM tool itself, but to discuss
news and developments relevant for the progress of the wind project. Both the PM and the con-
sultant initiated such calls and emails and these created a good working atmosphere and trust.
The PM lives near Budapest, which made personal contact easy, but Vép is 3-4 hour drive from
Budapest. The consultant visited the site and had conversation with the local part time opera-
tions manager and some local residents to obtain first hand field experience about the project
and its environment. Formal residential forum was not held in the framework of the Create Ac-




11
ceptance, since before its start the windpark management had already conducted a thorough lo-
cal participation and communication process, which had also included local forums and surveys.
Also, PM concerns arose as to whether if some opposition of one segment of the society (e.g.
concerns of some of the local residents about more than 4 turbines) come to light, another seg-
ment (authorities) can use it as an additional argument to back their own argument and negative
attitude. However, the PM was always ready to face the problems and compromised with the
consultant in a form and extent as to how to present problematic points.

The PM learnt much of the context, the energy policy and economics of his energy project and
the absorbing infrastructure during the discussions. When responding questions he was ‘forced’
to think over some issues he had not been thinking before, discussed these issues with the con-
sultant and realised some new aspects of his project.

Stakeholder relations went smoothly throughout the Create Acceptance process, and they were
appropriately cooperative. This was partly due to the opinion expressed by each stakeholder ap-
proached that renewable energy was an important issue due to environmental and security of
supply pressures. Nonetheless, their cooperation was partly also due to the established profes-
sional relationship with the consultant and the knowledge of its institution, and it is dubious
how it would have gone if a PM alone had applied the tool. Probably, ministries, agencies and
MAVIR would have been very difficult to involve. Even in this test case some incentives had to
be provided; either it was emphasised why participation and reactions are fruitful for the stake-
holder in their work or the consultant did some favour e.g. gave a presentation on a conference
organised by a particular stakeholder or gave minor advice in response to some other energy re-
lated questions by another stakeholder (see Fucsko 2008).


2.5     SMART H2
SMART H2 is a demonstration project for hydrogen fuelled vehicles and vessels. The project
will test various types of hydrogen-fuelled company cars and other equipment that runs on hy-
drogen, including a hydrogen auxiliary power unit for a tour ship run by Elding. The project
also aims to demonstrate the operation infrastructure for compressed hydrogen and develop the
distribution system for hydrogen, for example by organizing and running a small-scale hydro-
gen transport service.

Icelandic New Energy (INE) is the initiator of the project. One of INE’s major shareholders is
Vistorka, a company which serves to unite business venture funds, key energy companies, aca-
demic institutes and the Icelandic government. In the Create Acceptance project, INE represents
both.

In terms of the Create Acceptance process of testing the ESTEEM tool in a demo project, this
demo project has some particular features. Iceland New Energy is both a partner in Create Ac-
ceptance (and thus represents the ‘consultant’ using the ESTEEM tool) and the operator of the
SMART-H2 project. The demo project leader in CA, is also a ‘real life’ project leader of one of
the SMART H2 Research path. She has also been central in the previous project, ECTOS, and is
a central figure in the development of hydrogen systems in Iceland. Thus, from the perspective
of the ESTEEM tool, the demo project leader has something of a dual role.

In the ESTEEM tool testing process, the director of Iceland New Energy is designated as the
‘Project Manager’. There is thus a separate ‘Project Manager’ with whom the tool is tested, but
the relations between the project manager and the ‘Consultant’ are closer than is the case in the
other demo projects. The ‘Project Manager’ and the ‘Consultant’ work in the same organization,
which has some benefits but can also make some things more complicated (see
Maack/Heiskanen 2007).




12
2.6     The South African Case
Implementing solar water heater (SWH) technologies in South Africa can be defined as a broad
programme supported by different stakeholders. Projects within the programme address specific
targets and target groups, eg setting up testing procedures for the poor and mid-to-high income
groups. It follows that there is no single project manager for the programme. Stakeholders on
their own or as a group drive the process initially and once opportune framework conditions are
achieved individual projects are initiated and project managers drive individual projects. It is
important that the stakeholders in such informal programmes act and act together to promote
SWH and the challenge is to get them together and drive the programme.

The phase in which an informal group of stakeholders promotes a RE technology often precedes
the formulation of individual projects. This stage is often necessary to sort out a number of bar-
riers, which the implementation of the new technology faces. It appears that the risk for individ-
ual projects is quite high at this stage. For example, one of the reasons why SWH were not ac-
cepted was the absence of the mark of approval from the South African Bureau of Standards. It
took a long time to set up standards and get testing equipment in place. Individual projects may
not be able to wait years to get their technology and installation approved. A wind project took
eight years before it could start building the foundation for the windmills!

Stakeholder and environmental groups if they exist are generally not very active as compared to
the EU.

SWH for homes are relatively small units and their installation is not a major building project
and is completed in a few days. Their operation does not cause emissions, or noise or additional
traffic, so they do not affect other people in the neighbourhood. The one aspect that neighbours
may not like is the visual impact of SWHs on the roof. But since they may wish to install their
own in the future, they generally accept them.

The PM/consultant approach of the ESTEEM tool requires that a company is introducing a new
RE or RUE technology and a project manager is appointed to manage the project. The South
African SWH is not a specific project with a project manager but a broad programme supporting
SWH.

It is challenging to apply the tool to an early stage of renewable technology dissemination. I am
aware that it is not what was intended at this stage of tool development but it is the situation I
am faced with in both case studies. For these reasons the PM/consultant roles as given in the
present process did not apply to the South African case studies. It may be worthwhile to widen
the PM/consultant roles in a future phase of the ESTEEM tool to include cases such as this (see
Prasad 2007)


2.7     The counter-partner approach
Whilst one half of the CA project team was dealing with the application of the tool steps in their
demo projects, the other half of the team was responsible for the development of the manual.
Furthermore they supported and evaluated the ESTEEM application in the demos. CA created a
specific management instrument to address this activity: the counter-partner model.

The model
The counter-partner approach was created during the course of the CA project. It follows the
idea of a twinning system, ensuring and supporting quality and project management in the test-
ing phase of the chosen demos. Besides the quality aspect, the communication and exchange be-
tween demo partners and the rest of the CA project team was of high importance. For each of
the five demos another partner from the consortium provides assistance.



13
The task of the counter-partner was twofold: supporting the process of the demo project and re-
flecting on the ESTEEM tool and its application. Inter alia the counter-partners explored and
discussed the local context, supported the preparation of the tool steps in line with the demo and
assisted in the application of the tool through a critical reflection on conflicts and solutions.

The experiences
The external evaluation is seen as very useful by consultant and counter partner. The counter
partner process included reading the documents, monitoring the results and elaborating an inter-
view. The application and the role of the counter-partner has been as varied as the demos.
Whilst an intense exchange between consultant and CP along the whole process took place in
one demo, the other case incorporated only one interview for discussing the projects progress
during the counter-partner phase.

The counter-partner phase was not only supportive for the ESTEEM tool, but also for the PM’s
work and the progress of the demonstration project.

An external evaluation and an independent review from counter-partners seemed to be crucial to
ensure the adequate tool implementation under the specific CA conditions. The counter-partner
can motivate the consultant through ‘step-by-step’ assessment and reflective support; confront-
ing interpretations and understanding proved useful.

The mediation in the case of conflicting issues seemed to be very helpful for the work of the
consultant. Providing critical reflections on the process from a distance was seen as helpful, but
it should not lead to being too distant from the process.

An intense exchange between consultant and counter-partner mainly took place during the test-
ing of step 3 and 4. Single demos demanded a temporary ‘counter consultant’ to this end.

After two thirds of the course had passed, an evaluation was carried out by the counter-partners.
On the basis of a common questionnaire, the situation and the CA process within the demos
were recorded (see Annex III).

The recommendations
The counter-partner model within the ESTEEM tool was instrumental in the case of a scientific
context to gain quality management and risk management (see Counter-partner reports, Appen-
dix C).

For the further implementation in a real-world context the model appears too time-consuming
and expensive. Nevertheless recommendations regarding the management abilities of consult-
ants and PM - within the application of the tool - can be drawn: both the consultant and the PM
should have the time and talent of self-reflection, an open-minded and flexible approach as well
as communicative and conflict-solving abilities. The consultant specifically should provide in-
terdisciplinary know-how in a social, economical and technical sense.

Last but not least the PM has to organise tool use in such a way that no arbitrary splitting of sin-
gle steps or instruments is implemented - reflective support of this should be assured by the
consultant.

Based on the experience with the counter-partner evaluation in a politically delicate demo, three
substantial observations regarding the context were made. They can be taken as general precon-
ditions for all kinds of projects:
• It is necessary that the enterprising organisation supports the PM, first in developing the
     project and secondly in applying the ESTEEM process.



14
•    An informative transparency is needed: when applying the ESTEEM toolkit it is crucial that
     the enterprising organisation and the PM can explain the project to the stakeholders. If there
     is no informative transparency, it is very difficult to communicate and to involve actors.
•    The political culture and tradition also needs to be borne in mind and managed: if there is a
     lack of trust in the public institutions, the ESTEEM tool has to reflect and handle this ‘start-
     ing point’ more carefully.

The reflection of context and the existing traditions are crucial for the involvement of stake-
holder and build the core of the ESTEEM approach. The reflective dimension must be first en-
sured by the PM and supported through the assistance of the consultant.
For more information see counter-partner reports of all demos (Appendix C)




15
3.        The empirical results: Experiences with testing the ESTEEM
          tool

3.1       The process
The testing in WP 4 started stepwise on the basis of a preliminary version of a tool manual. The
manual was elaborated by a group of project partners within the scope of WP 3.

Two of the demos began as early as February 2007 - the next version of the manual was elabo-
rated iteratively on the basis of their experiences.

The remaining three demo projects followed, each one after a period of time; they mostly used a
modified form of the manual in the process.

Numerous inspirations came from the partners’ ideas and experiences despite the different char-
acter of each demo project. As testing of the various steps of ESTEEM did not exactly coincide,
the experiences of the pioneer(s) of a given step were presented to the others, and then they
were fed back to the tool, so other partners often used a second modification.

During the application of steps 1 and 2, the CA team decided to develop a kind of pre-testing,
which has been called step 0. This additional step contains a questionnaire and a ranking meth-
odology in order to check if the application of ESTEEM is useful.

In the preparation of the testing phase and in the process of working through the first steps, it
became clear that some of the demo projects are strongly orientated towards the network of lo-
cal actors while the other group of projects is concerned with general actors and decision mak-
ers on the national level, which makes for a different kind of communication and information
strategy. Besides the question of stage, the question of who the initiator is (e.g. in contrast to the
PM) and at what level (i.e. national or local) the project was started seems to be of key impor-
tance. While some of the demo projects were confronted by an already existing formal or in-
formal network on the local level, others had to activate stakeholders in this regard and realise a
basis of participation.

Furthermore, the type of innovation and its dissemination into societies exert great influence on
the usefulness of the ESTEEM tool: for example, for CCS societal positioning is still necessary,
while for biomass, public support is already mainstream, and (some) acceptability exists.
After both of the first steps have been carried out, a very detailed discussion was conducted
within the CA project team as to the further procedure. Step 3 and 4 were carried out very
closely.

The fifth and sixth step were conducted with a considerable delay in the case of several demos.
The SmartH project could not scheduled the realisation of the workshop (step 5.2) during the
processing period of WP 4; step 6 could not therefore be completed1. However, the evaluation,
i.e. sub-step 6.4, was brought forward.

1
    As an explanation for the delayed scheduling, the INE gave the following information: During the period Sept
    2007 - Dec 2007 four major events occurred which influenced the possible timing of a workshop that incorporates
    new stakeholders (step 5).
    a) The key monitor was allocated the task of collecting information and formulating a national strategy in the Ice-
    landic emission policy - which is mostly related to combat erosion, reforestation, exporting geothermal know-how.
    This occupied her for 6 weeks in the period in which the preparations of the workshop (planned in October)
    should have taken place. However, during the September to October period, interviews took place with key per-
    sons in the energy sector as a basis for questions to be used at the workshop.


16
Apart from this case, all demo projects could exhaustively test use of the tool and could finalise
the projects, although the Archimedes project focused on the first and last steps after a delayed
start. In this context, the explanation of the PM as well as the identification and contacting of
local stakeholders represented especially great challenges: the consultant CNR initially assumed
that his project did not have a social dimension.

Whilst the Jühnde dissemination project was faced with a participation practice that has already
been tested, but also another consultant who was already active, ZEPP had to venture into to-
tally unchartered terrain and first of all handle the existing national dialogue on CCS in the
Netherlands.


3.2     The results
The D 10 matrix was developed to show the suggested modifications of the tool and thereby
document the results of the testing phase in WP 4.

Here, information regarding three categories was requested from the demo projects:
• Results (order changed, modification of the contents, appliance modification, omit aspects,
   combine tools, combine aspects).
• Recommendations referring to the demo and its specific requirements and background.
• General recommendations for refining the ESTEEM tool.

After testing and discussion in the CA project group, the demos filled out information on their
experiences and recommendations.

To provide an overview of the different results, the following paragraph is prepared stepwise.

Experiences with Step 1 ‘Project history, context and actors’
In step 1 with its 4 different sub-steps (‘Narrative’, ‘Context analysis’, ‘Critical moments table’
and ‘Actors table’), the preparation of the demo process itself emerges: the previous history and
context of the demo projects are evaluated. The first sub-step, the so-called ‘Narrative’, works
as a smooth starter, helping the PM and consultant to become acquainted with the project con-
text and possible conflicts.

At this stage clear differences became apparent for the first time between the demo projects with
regard to the practicability and usefulness of the individual steps. Whilst the PM of a follow-up
project stated no value added on the basis of the „Narrative’, the newcomers assessed the very
time-consuming instrument as helpful.

The composition of the ‘Context table’ required a categorisation of results and situations into
opportunities and barriers. In several cases this turned out to be difficult in part since some
situations always have two sides. The ‘Critical moments table’ taken from the ‘Narrative’ was



  b) On the 22nd of October the majority within the municipality of Reykjavik lost its power to the minority due to
  energy policies. This called for a restructuring of all energy policy at the administrational level; the new majority
  was not prepared to clarify the state of affairs until mid November.
  c) In November the municipality company who is the largest stakeholder in SMART-H (Reykjavik’s energy ser-
  vice, OR) was reconstructed due to new policies; the fate of SMART was also quite uncertain. As a result the
  ownership of the SMART-H2 project was unclear. Finally a new steering group for the project was re-established
  on the 18th of December.
  d) Christmas: 7 of the ten relevant persons took an extended holiday until 7th January 2008. The preparations on
  behalf of Maria to frame the workshop were accepted but the key persons are participating in meetings abroad
  during 9th - 16th of January, 23rd - 25th January and a conference on the 29th of January. So the only date avail-
  able is 31st of January.




17
evaluated as too negatively cast and was re-named as a ‘Defining moments table’ in the course
of the procedure and the discussion during the CA process.

The allocation of different functions and roles to the actors was somewhat complicated in prac-
tice and the number of categories that are queried in total should be reduced, according to the
recommendation of individual demos.

The experiences of and recommendations for the individual sub-steps are shown in the follow-
ing overview of all demo results

Table 3.1 Results of step 1
              Biomass Germany                ZEPP           Archimede Italy VEP Hungary               SMART H
                                         Netherlands                                                    Iceland
             Using the               narrative longer     time consuming questionnaire was
             questionnaire in a very than recommended meetings with PM helpful but there
                                                                                                 not very helpful in
             active phase of project 2-3 pages (5         necessary to gain were redundant
                                                                                                 getting the PM to
             caused kind of          pages), interview all the information features in the
                                                                                                 talk freely,
             ‘resistance’, tool      (2h) & writing       for the tool,     guiding questions;
                                                                                                 emerged a
             wasn’t regarded very narrative (8h) are Recommendation: tool wasn’t
                                                                                                 resistance as if the
             helpful with respect to time consuming, replacing              regarded very
                                                                                                 questionnaire tried
             the value added, time tool give relevant redundant features helpful with
                                                                                                 to find faults rather
             consuming for pm and input also for actorsof the               respect to the value
                                                                                                 than smooth work,
             consultant, identifying table, critical      questionnaire,    added; time
                                                                                                 made the
             critical moments very moments table and interviewing has to consuming for PM
                                                                                                 conversation
             helpful for consultant, context analysis, be well organised and consultant For
                                                                                                 somehow stiff, less
             handling closely                                               the consultant it is
 Narrative




                                     Recommendation:
                                                                                                 added value within
             linked to context       relevant for filling                   a useful starting
                                                                                                 already existing
             analysis, actors table in other tools, time                    point, and also for
                                                                                                 project,
             and critical moments saving possible if                        writing the present
                                                                                                 Recommendation:
             table,                  consultant fills in                    vision in step 2
                                                                                                 project description
             Recommendation: the tables and pm                              Recommendation:
                                                                                                 or even description
             check project status check afterwards,                         replace redundant
                                                                                                 from applications
             beforehand (--> step at forehand                               features of the
                                                                                                 should be used,
             0), adapt questions     categorisation of                      questionnaire,
                                                                                                 based on the
             and process to already PM's experiences                        adjust questions
                                                                                                 description
             existing information helpful, working                          regarding already
                                                                                                 consultant
                                     with 2 interviewers                    existing
                                                                                                 construct narrative,
                                     practical                              information,
                                                                                                 check results with
                                                                            preparation tables
                                                                                                 PM or stakeholder
                                                                            beforehand save
                                                                            time for PM




18
                                     Biomass Germany                ZEPP            Archimede Italy VEP Hungary                   SMART H
                                                                Netherlands                                                        Iceland
                                    PM has deep and well 2h interview to           PM and consultant context tables          tool well grounded
                                    grounded know-how name opportunities worked in a                    clumsy, but          in societal context,
                                    on the political,       and barriers,          complementary        manageable,          question is whether
                                    economical and          important to           way to draw the requires well             a consultant would
                                    societal environment mention it deals          context analysis, prepared and            set the project in a
                                    through the reflection with present            consultant integrate experienced          different context,
                                    and input of a central context, consultant the whole tool,          consultant, and      Recommendation:
                                    planning group,         cannot fill in table Recommendation: also one with a             reflection of
                                    experiences of a        (too subjective), PM knowledge of good memory                    relevant aspects,
                                    precursor project offer some difficulties in the context can be and/or well              follow a few
                                    valuable information, defining                 focused on its       organised,           keywords here,
                                    quantity and            opportunities and interest and be           prepared notes;      context to human,
                                    specification of        barriers,              partial, necessary useful to identify financial and
Context Analysis




                                    questions depend on Recommendation: consultant's role and organise issues natural capital
                                    projects’ context,      start with             regarding            systematically,
                                    categories of context opportunities:           information          Recommendation:
                                    are very helpful to     frames mind of         sources such as      changing order of
                                    reflect all relevant    PM, fill in barriers content of national the tools and filling
                                    areas,                  and opportunities or local debates, in CMT before
                                    Recommendation: with PM,                       policy initiatives context analysis,
                                    difficult to deal with consultant fills in and laws                 additional
                                    the key question        level and timing                            explanation for the
                                    ‘pressure on the        column, PM                                  tool necessary,
                                    existing energy systemcompletes table,                              ‘social network’
                                    / fit into existing     skip categories, to                         adjust to ‘potential
                                    system’, dynamic        save time PM:                               for social
                                    development has to be define                                        leverage’, constant
                                    reflected, change orderopportunities and                            consultant
                                    of tool use             barriers together                           feedback
                                                            with PM and than                            important,
                                                            let PM fill in rest of
                                                            the table
                                    actors of PM and        CMT taken from tool works well, tool easy to use, CMT important to
                                    stakeholders are        narrative, extended irreversible aspects systematic              understand carriers
                                    reflecting              document,              are important        collection was a and barriers, kind
                                    continuously, high      Recommendation: changes which               good reflecting      of SWOT, risk
                                    level of awareness,     should be made         produce a shift in exercise, PM could assessment,
Defining (Critical) Moments Table




                                    CMT is of high          easier to use (excel the project journey, chose better           Recommendation:
                                    importance and          file), remove          useful for context strategy,              could be linked
                                    interest,               column on              analysis,            Recommendation:more to regular PM
                                    Recommendation: irreversibility,               Recommendation: changing order of tools,
                                    questions has to be     consultant fills in no adjustment           the tools and use understandable
                                    condensed, some         table after                                 CMT before           description, clear
                                    sound very similar and interview for                                context analysis link between tools
                                    aim at similar facts, narrative and let
                                    CMT better linked       PM check (saves
                                    with context analysis, time for PM),
                                    table format shouldn’t changing the name
                                    focus on single dates in defining
                                    because problems are moments, use table
                                    mostly process          to check narrative
                                    dependant, adequate on completeness
                                    format is yet needed




19
                Biomass Germany               ZEPP           Archimede Italy VEP Hungary                 SMART H
                                           Netherlands                                                     Iceland
               adjustment of           key actors table     combined filling in useful for PM to good overview of
               categories and          compiled by actors actors table with take a systematic important actors
               preparation of the      mentioned in         question on         account of players and relationship
               table with already      narrative, actors    potential conflicts and their roles,     between them,
               available information added by               between project     strengths and        actors can have
               was necessary,          consultant,          vision and actors' attitudes,            many roles within
               downsizing from 14 to extended excel file expectations           importance of        a project, how can
               11 categories,          (not user friendly), inclusive           emerging potential that be made
               discussion of the       consultant fill in potentially           actors               clear?,
               actors table is seen as table and let PM influential actors, acknowledged,            Recommendation:
               a good backing for      check (risk for      facilitated context Some points          adjust pm's
               more transparency and subjectivity but       table,              emerged to be        expectations from
               potential role          saves time),         Recommendation: considered for the the stakeholder,
               conflicts, good         Recommendation: adaptation of            PM,                  implementation of
Actors Table




               overview for pm,        consultant fill in questions regarding Recommendation:multidimensional
               Recommendation: table and check by specific project              Interpretation of actor roles
               modification of         pm                                       ‘affinity’ should be
               questions and                                                    clarified, handling
               categories depends on                                            strategy regarding
               projects’                                                        conflicts between
               context/status and                                               actors is missing
               pm’s understanding,
               condense the amount
               of categories (…max
               10), reformulation of
               categories like the
               ‘(re-)positioning’ =>
               ‘conflicts’, ‘resources
               that actors control’ =>
               ‘project activities’,
               etc.

Experiences with Step 2 ‘Vision building’
Step 2, the vision building, includes four main activities and tasks (the construction of the pro-
ject manager’s present vision; the construction of the future vision of the PM, the selection of a
core group of stakeholders and constructing the future visions of the stakeholders), which are
further classified into a number of sub-steps.

The inputs for building a preliminary PM vision are gained from the ‘Project Narrative’, the
‘Context Analysis’ and the ‘Actors Table’ developed in step 1. With this information at hand,
the consultants prepared a social network map in close cooperation with the PM. The mapping
was seen as less helpful by the PM of the follow-up demos.

Two of the demos preferred to collect and evaluate the stakeholders’ visions through a vi-
sion/scenario workshop instead of carrying out individual interviews. As a testing result, the
manual keeps this sub-step more flexible now.

Due to the chosen methodology, the step 2 was more or less time-consuming in the different
demos. The ESTEEM manual was modified with regard to the distinction between future and
present vision - following the recommendation of most of the demos.




20
Table 3.2 Results of Step 2
                      Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy                    VEP Hungary          SMART H
                                                                                                                 Iceland
                     based on the narrative,instead of present      difficult to         more description description
                     context analysis and vision an                 distinguish between of the past and between current
                     actors table, difficult intermediate vision    future and present present than a       and future vision
                     distinction between was compiled (based        vision, no prior     vision, separate comes as a mix,
                     future and present      on context analysis)   experience about intermediate           PM is inside the
                     vision, set of time     by consultant and      this project         vision was         project
PM Present Vision




                     frame for present and checked by PM,                                constructed for constantly
                     future vision,          Recommendation:                             the midterm        preparing for
                     Recommendation: no added value seen                                 future, PM         short and long
                     time frame should be for present vision                             reacted with       term actions,
                     based on expectations (it's all been said in                        minor              Recommendati
                     of the PM, separation narrative already).                           modifications, on: avoid
                     of present and future therefore                                     Recommendatio separation
                     vision might not be intermediate vision                             n: include         between short
                     feasible                made by consultant                          summary of the and long term
                                             to get PM and                               narrative,
                                             stakeholders in                             elaborate
                                             'future thinking                            intermediate
                                             mode'                                       vision
                     based on input of the                          difficult to         elaborated by
                     PM (meetings,                                  distinguish between consultant, based
                     telephone interviews),                         future and present on the narrative,
                     Recommendation:                                vision, based on     context analysis
                     the frame and the                              input from PM and and actors table
                     main factors should                            SH,                  and previous
PM Future Vision




                     be discussed, don't                            Recommendation: discussions with
                     follow the concept of                          timeframe for the PM, PM reacted
                     split visions                                  future visions < 5 with minor
                                                                    years                modifications,
                                                                                         Recommendatio
                                                                                         n: mix qualitative
                                                                                         and quantitative
                                                                                         state-ments to see
                                                                                         the essence,
                                                                                         encourage the
                                                                                         PM
                     input by the           simplified version of   useful for PM to transparently          repetition of the
                     consultant,            network map             visualise present clarified actors actors' table,
                     modification by PM,    compiled by             network of the       and relationships Recommendati
                     Recommendation:        consultant, checked     stakeholders         done by            on: use the
                     reduce complexity,     by PM,                  involved in the      consultant,        actors table to a
Social network map




                     mapping should be      Recommendation:         project; useful to Recommendatio greater extent
                     classified as          clear description of    set a reference on n: drawn by
                     supportive by the PM   map is needed (or       which to build       consultant, easily
                                            keep it simple), use    future network       approved by PM,
                                            different colours to    map,                 relationships
                                            indicate differences    Recommendation: could be shown
                                            between visions,        input by consultant, more
                                            change dimensions       comment and          sophisticatedly
                                            when needed             adjustment by PM and illustratively
                                            according to the
                                            project




21
                      Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy                   VEP Hungary         SMART H
                                                                                                              Iceland
                     input by the                                    input by PM and
                     consultant on the                               stakeholders, tool is
                     basis of workshop                               reflection on
                     discussion,                                     present network
                     modification by PM                              map, useful to
                     (interview),                                    visualize important
Future network map




                     Recommendation:                                 relationships and
                     importance of single                            the future suitable
                     players in the future is                        development,
                     difficult to assume,                            stressing the real
                     reduce complexity;                              expectations of
                     mapping should be                               each actors, tool is
                     rated as supportive                             necessary in order
                                                                     to create future
                                                                     visions and the
                                                                     conflicting issues
                                                                     table,
                                                                     Recommendation:
                                                                     no adjustment
                     description of map,                             modification by       description of   not very helpful
                     correction by PM,                               consultant and        map, minor       for the project
                     Recommendation:                                 discussed with PM correction by        manager, goal is
                     description is crucial                                                PM,              not evident,
                                                                                           Recommendatio Recommendati
                                                                                           n: short         on: remove tool
Synthesis




                                                                                           sentences, short
                                                                                           descriptive
                                                                                           summary because
                                                                                           much
                                                                                           information on
                                                                                           relationships
                                                                                           included already
                                                                                           in visions
                                                                                           description
                     was not of high         Composed together                             no high          not very helpful
                     relevance, but          with PM &                                     importance, done
                     elaborated by           stakeholders,                                 by PM and
                     consultant and PM, sometimes difficult                                consultant
                     Recommendation: to indicate in title the                              together,
                     clarify the concerns of small differences                             Recommendatio
Vision title




                     PM                      between visions,                              n: keep it for
                                             Recommendation:                               short labelling
                                             just title is often not                       visions in
                                             enough to show the                            discussions,
                                             (minor) differences
                                             between visions, not
                                             really useful when
                                             minor differences
                                             between visions can
                                             not be shown in titles




22
                              Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy                 VEP Hungary          SMART H
                                                                                                                      Iceland
                             based on the scenario                         modification not PM's vision          used input from
                             workshop, difficult to                        done,                reacted upon,    project
                             distinguish between                           Recommendation: interview             description and
                             future and present                            difficult to         questionnaire    PM's future
Stakeholder present vision



                             vision,                                       distinguish between was also used, vision,
                             Recommendation:                               present and future Recommendatio Recommendati
                             use storylines to                             vision, we           n: various       on: tool not
                             involve stakeholder in                        recommend to have ‘tricks’ to make important for
                             vision building                               only one             stakeholders     project
                             process, don't follow                         intermediate         interested,      implementation
                             the concept of split                          stakeholder vision feedback offer by
                             visions any longer,                                                consultant,
                             vision implicates the                                              address the
                             future                                                             stakeholders'
                                                                                                sensitive points
                                                                                                to make them
                                                                                                interested
                             See stakeholder        easily written after information            see stakeholder describe visions
                             present vision         interview (6 times obtained from the present vision          that are much
                                                    1,5h), often on 2      interviews was                        broader, not so
                                                    pages, subtitles       extrapolated to a                     much in
                                                    added to structure     short time (5 years),                 practical scale
                                                    text,                  intermediate vision,                  but larger future
                                                    Recommendation: 2 Recommendation:                            vision for the
Stakeholder future vision




                                                    pages are needed to timeframe for                            whole society,
                                                    describe all           future visions < 5                    Recommendati
                                                    dimensions,            years if the project                  on: use tool to
                                                    dimensions used to is new                                    access the
                                                    structure text,                                              stakeholders
                                                    confidential                                                 wishful thinking
                                                    information can                                              and
                                                    easily be used in                                            expectations, use
                                                    future vision format,                                        tool to put
                                                    use dimensions and                                           communication
                                                    subtitles to structure                                       with internal and
                                                    text                                                         external
                                                                                                                 stakeholders in
                                                                                                                 the right scale
                                                                                                                 and context




23
                          Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy                 VEP Hungary         SMART H
                                                                                                                Iceland
                         modification:           structured interview modifications:        Recommendatio
                         combining the           of 2 hours based on many PM                n: interactive
                         feedback on mapping     social network map interviews, focused consultation
                         and visions with        and intermediate       on the inputs       rather than just
                         interviews,             vision,                gained during       having PM to
                         Recommendation:         Recommendation: single interviews modify/approve
                         synchronisation with    handful to work 'live' with stakeholders, visions premade
                         PM's needs and          in social network      interviews were     by consultant
                         timeframe is crucial,   map on laptop with recorded,
PM interviews




                         sub-steps should be     beamer during          Recommendation:
                         linked to avoid time    interview, 2           presence of 2
                         consuming activities    interviewers for       consultants
                                                 interview (one on      enriched the
                                                 laptop and one         outcome, added
                                                 asking questions), questions, before
                                                 use dimensions         interviewing search
                                                 social network map for more
                                                 to structure           information, to
                                                 interviews             obtain more
                                                                        completed and
                                                                        satisfactory
                                                                        answers from PM
                         appliance               social network map individual              done by          workshop was
                         modification due to is base for structure interviews: core         consultant (not used instead of
                         the stakeholders        of interview, can be group interviews PM), single           interviews,
                         schedule: no single worked on during           not feasible due to stakeholder      useful and cost-
                         interviews but group interview, synthesis difficulties to          interviews,      effective,
                         discussion with core writing, PM future organise a joint           interview        Recommendati
                         stakeholders,           vision and PM social meeting,              questionnaire    on: workshop is
                         Recommendation: network map were questionnaire is                  was also used, a good
                         PM important as         read by stakeholders time consuming, stakeholder            alternative to
                         contact person,         before interview,      Recommendation: views elicited, interviews if
Stakeholder interviews




                         consultant needs PM Recommendation: adjustment of                  Recommendatio there are no
                         support and trustful start interview with questionnaire            n: various       large conflicts
                         cooperation; PM         general questions to regarding the         ‘tricks’ to make
                         should submit some get the position of project                     stakeholders
                         competences, keep       the stake-holder, use                      interested,
                         tool flexible and allow social network map                         feedback offered
                         group discussion        for structure and to                       by consultant,
                                                 show differences,                          use also a
                                                 vision 'live' by                           questionnaire to
                                                 drawing on map,                            elicit broader
                                                 stakeholders can                           context views
                                                 easily react on vision                     rather than just
                                                 PM during interview                        react on PM's
                                                 when read the                              vision?, address
                                                 synthesis writing,                         stakeholders
                                                 future vision and                          sensitive issues
                                                 social network map
                                                 of the PM at front




24
       Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy               VEP Hungary       SMART H
                                                                                           Iceland
      consistent scenario, not written as future done by consultant, short scenario  instead of asking
      discussed and          vision and network based on             description,    the PM for a
      reflected with PM and map, but as summary information          discussed and   description of a
      core stakeholder,      (negation of PM     gathered through reflected with     BAU there is the
      Recommendation: vision) integrated in interviews and           PM and core     tendency in
      necessary data have to conflicting issues  context analysis, stakeholders,     critical media to
      be available,          table step 3,       tool not used       stakeholders do refer to different
      stakeholder have to be Recommendation: neither discussed, not agree on         future vision
      included and should no extended future Recommendation: BAU, consultant which then again
      get feedback,          vision and social   tool is done by     decided final   is nearer to a
BAU




      analysing data by      network map of the consultant;          status          BAU,
      observing changes      BAU is needed as document acquired                      Recommendati
      over time              long as summary of by consultant,                       on: use the
                             BAU can be given in regarding the                       media / societal
                             step 3              information                         discourse to find
                                                 gathered through                    out how the
                                                 interviews as well                  project
                                                 as the context                      implications are
                                                 analysis                            reflected against
                                                                                     BAU

Experiences with Step 3 ‘Identifying conflicting issues’
The step 3 contains three sub-steps which handle the documentation and categorisation of im-
portant issues. First of all, the different visions collected from the various stakeholders were
compared in a ‘key issues table’. In a second sub-step, the project manager’s vision and stake-
holders’ visions were juxtaposed and compared with one another. Subsequently, the most de-
bated and conflicting issues as well as strong points of agreements were ranked and visualised
through a ‘Strategic issues graph’.

One demo suggested the supplement of a weighting factor to support the ranking procedure
within the ‘Issues ranking table’. Another demo suggested an automatic ranking procedure by
means of multiplying the categories ‘importance’ and ‘urgency’. The application of the graph
was assessed as helpful in the case of start-up projects but less supportive for follow-up pro-
jects. One of the demos even suggested the removal of the graph.




25
Table 3.3 Results of step3
                             Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy                  VEP Hungary             SMART H
                                                                                                                         Iceland
                           based on the input of issues are divided tool represent a difficult to antici- heading 'conflict-
                           PM present&future         in opportunities and critical review of pate not yet identi- ing issues' is per-
                           vision, stakeholder       controversies, Rec- the whole proc- fied actors and con- haps not very ap-
                           present&future vision, ommendation:            ess                flicting issues,      propriate, issues
                           BAU, devided into 5 change rows and                               Recommendation: were entered as
                           evaluation points (in- columns (visions in                        synergetic points 'doubtful', 'unre-
                           frastructure, environ- columns) to make                           should be stressed/ solved' and 'strong
                           ment, economy, social comparison of vi-                           highlighted           support', stake-
Conflicting Issues table




                           and policy issues),       sions more visible                      more/made more holder views were
                           Recommendation: as                                                explicit, use coloursidentified in a
                           preparation work for                                              for conflicts and workshop, there is
                           the visions very help-                                            agreements, uncer- only one stake-
                           ful, evaluation points                                            tainty is not easily holder vision,
                           should not change dur-                                            visible in print ver- Recommendation:
                           ing the ‘step-process’,                                           sion                  more useful at an
                           classification difficult,                                                               earlier stage of the
                           description necessary                                                                   project, harmonise
                                                                                                                   with project man-
                                                                                                                   agement tools (e.g.
                                                                                                                   risk analysis) but
                                                                                                                   helpful in setting a
                                                                                                                   communication
                                                                                                                   agenda
                           easy to fill on the base ranking difficult     not done           Recommendation: some issues are
                           of key issues from con- when many issues                          instead of ranking more important in
                           flicting issue table,     exist, therefore                        use marking be-       the long than in the
                           ranking without           multiplying impor-                      tween 1-5, some short term (added
                           weighting factors not tance and urgency                           issues can almost to table)
issues ranking table




                           possible, modification: automatically to get                      equally be of high
                           implementation of         ranking, Recom-                         importance, rank-
                           score descriptions and mendation: auto-                           ing them in this
                           weighting factors, Rec-matic ranking by                           case may be mis-
                           ommendation: check multiplying impor-                             leading,
                           if PM gets additional tance and urgency
                           information, necessity
                           depends on the pro-
                           jects' status (step 0 /
                           typology), more inter-
                           esting for new projects
                           visualisation of key      automatically filled not done           visualisation of key graph redundant,
                           issues indicating im- in when ranking                             issues indicating needs more clarifi-
                           portance and urgency, issues                                      importance and ur- cation of the ex-
                           following the manual                                              gency, Recom-         pected value, table
Strategic issues graph




                           and the additional                                                mendation: also is easier to read
                           weighting procedure,                                              include issues an- than the graph,
                           Recommendation:                                                   ticipated from fu- Recommendation:
                           check if PM gets addi-                                            ture, these by na- remove graph
                           tional information (de-                                           ture of the dimen-
                           pends on type of issues                                           sion ‘urgency’ will
                           and existing knowl-                                               be ‘discounted’
                           edge), necessity de-
                           pends on the projects'
                           status, more interesting
                           for new projects

Experiences with Step 4 ‘Portfolio of options’


26
The objective of the Step 4 is to identify the variety of options and solutions. The activity within
this step is closely linked to step 3 and on the basis of the ‘Issues ranking table’ a discussion
with the PM has to be elaborated. To develop the ‘Portfolio of options’ two previous sub-steps
have to be carried out: an ‘Issues/solutions table’ and a ‘Solutions ranking table’.

The testing generated different recommendations from the demos: the ‘Issues/solutions table’
was seen helpful to provide an overview, but there should be an additional column to categorise
the solutions and one demo opted not to further rank the solutions. While two of the demos clas-
sified the ‘Portfolio of options’ as not useful, one demo opted to keep it and use the table in
critical project situations.

For one of the demos it was difficult to keep the PM on track in terms of what was being dis-
cussed because of the many different tables and redundant matters.

It was stated that a modified tool might be very useful for difficult project phases, but like the
‘Issues ranking table’ the ‘Solutions ranking table’ also needs weighting factors for the different
types of action.

Table 4: Results of Step 4




27
                           Biomass Germany ZEPP Netherlands Archimede Italy                  VEP Hungary              SMART H
                                                                                                                        Iceland
                          solutions elaborated 4th column is added clear visualisation of Numerous solution OK. Solutions
                          by consultant and      with 'other' solutions real problems: 3      options grouped in mean that either
                          PM, have to be         for those that didn't main issues which 3 categories were parts of the project
                          ranked; new ideas for fit one of the 3 types rose from conflict- invented to solve will be redesigned
                          common process op- of solutions               ing issues table, all conflicting issues or the old parts
                          tions, detailed infor-                        these issues involve                      will be used but
                          mation on solutions,                          new and peripheral                        explained and
Issues /solution table




                          Recommendation:                               actors that will have                     communicated.
                          positive and suppor-                          an impact on future                       Recommendation:
                          tive in difficult pro-                        strategy, used as in-                     good for keeping
                          ject phases                                   put for WS, valuable                      overview
                                                                        tool of discussion,
                                                                        allowing to partici-
                                                                        pate on a common
                                                                        basis; effective syn-
                                                                        thesis of the main
                                                                        problems which
                                                                        constraint the pro-
                                                                        ject development;
                                                                        clear picture of ‘who
                                                                        is responsible for’
                          ranking with a score not used because we This table has not Not used; there             Not applied. Fur-
                          between 1-4 and a never received back been carried out              was not sufficient ther guidance
                          weighting correction the solution ranking since the present PMand detailed in-          needed.
                          factor, Recommen- table from the PM, cannot wholly con- formation to fill it.
Solutions ranking table




                          dation: definition of tables request too trol the range of so- It was decided to
                          the range (score) is much detailed in- lutions for the de- prioritise options
                          needed, check if       formation that the velopment and             in Step 5 Work-
                          weighting factor is PM does not have commercialisation shop and in Step 6
                          assistant and needed and added value not of the technology action planning
                                                 very clear to the PM,tested through Ar- Rec-
                                                 Recommendation: chimede and cannot ommendation:
                                                 remove table from enter into details. Keep it as an op-
                                                 ESTEEM tool                                  tional tool; it can
                                                                                              be useful for pro-
                                                                                              jects with suffi-
                          input for stake-       not used because       This step seems to Not used; all iden- Not applied. Fur-
                                                                                              cient information
                          holders, new im-       there is overlap be- be redundant since tified solution op- ther guidance
                          pulses for pm and      tween this instru- similar to the capac- tions were decided needed.
                          new possibilities to ment and step 5,         ity for action table. to carry on to the
Portfolio of options




                          solve conflicts sup- where there is also Both are fo-cussed Workshop to dis-
                          port the discussion testing of the solu- on the feasibility of cuss; Recommen-
                          and the motivation to tions and issues with options. Also in this dation: Drop this
                          participate, Recom- a large number of case, like in the ta- instrument from
                          mendation: positive stakeholder, instru- ble before, the PM CA
                          for difficult project ment is time-           Enea was not able of
                          phases                 consuming with lit- giving us a sugges-
                                                 tle added value,       tion in terms of re-
                                                 Recommendation: sources availability
                                                 remove instrument and other details.
                                                 from ESTEEM tool

Experiences with Step 5 ‘Getting to shake hands’
The stakeholder workshop plays an important role within the communication strategy of the
project. It is an important tool and a starting point for creating the ‘right knowledge’ or for dis-
seminating information. The informal situation gives all individuals a suitable place to discuss




28
and, at the same time, to accept opposing views. The preparatory work can be supported by a
partners’ workshop beforehand.

The basis of substantial workshop results and solution-oriented discussions is careful prepara-
tion. The preparation phase of the workshop includes three sub-steps: the selection of stake-
holders, the informative preparation of the participants and the management of logistics.

On the basis of the demo experiences the following suggestions were made: the ESTEEM man-
ual was very detailed and the preparation takes up a lot of time but is worthwhile. Alternatives
for the pair work should be added because working in larger groups can be more efficient in
some cases, for example when many stakeholders don’t have a lot of background information
on the project. The role of the PM should be more explicitly outlined in the manual. It was
somewhat ambiguous to what extent he or she can act as any other participant, but at the same
time should not influence the flow of the workshop and the proposals, but also not miss the op-
portunity to discuss and test his or her own proposals identified in step 4.

The recommendations regarding the application were diverse:
• Try to limit the duration of the workshop as much as possible without decreasing the results.
• Alternatives should be added for the ranking of the strategies and project variations; when
   the voting is not feasible (due to the large amounts of variations or any other cause), an al-
   ternative rating system is needed as the results are a necessary input for step 6, for example
   a digital ranking afterwards by the participants, or a selection of limited amount of strategies
   by the consultant which is voted on during the workshop.
• Even when many stakeholders do participate in the workshop, it should always be taken into
   account that important stakeholders with much power may be absent. These stakeholders
   may influence the project and future discussions in a major way which not appears in the re-
   sults of the workshop.
• Besides the activities of PM and consultants it may be supportive for the workshops to ask
   multiplier and representatives to promote the communicative platform.
• Due to the negative experience with voting, and therefore prioritising, in the following sec-
   tion a simple as well as theoretically well-founded evaluation procedure is recommended.
   According to Donald Saari (in Economic Theory, 2001), the only fair voting system for
   more than two candidates to appropriately reflect preferences is the so-called Borda count.
   It would be a shorter procedure than hand or card voting for each proposal and at the same
   time would provide a more appropriate result. In the case of numerous proposals, the proce-
   dure could also be used for each category of actions (project alteration, information gaps,
   fiscal incentives) separately, but then priority is not set across the categories. Voting can
   also be used not for prioritising the proposed options, but possibly to identify what type of
   participant is against a particular proposal: in the actions in Step 6 they will then need par-
   ticular attention (see Fucsko 2008, Annex I).

The results of the workshop were communicated back in a workshop report which was prepared
by the consultants on the basis of minutes, charts, and the given presentations. The scope of the
report depends on the material which is available beforehand.
The guidance by the ESTEEM manual was seen as substantially helpful for all the sub-steps of
step 5.




29
Table 3.4 Results of step 5
                                 Biomass Germany          ZEPP Netherlands         Archimede Italy VEP Hungary              SMART H
                                                                                                                            Iceland
                                 depends on aim of the invitation of 45 stake- phase is ex-           invitation of 30 peo-
                                 workshop, implementa- holders by Email/phone tremely important ple, represents all
                                 tion of partners and      in cooperation with PM for selecting right relevant segments of
                                 stakeholder workshop and some active stake- people who are society, PM helped
                                 regarding conflicts,      holders, Recommen- not directly in- the consultant with
Selection of WS / participants




                                 Recommendation: one dation: asking for PM'svolved, Recom- selection of stake-
                                 day workshop, selection preferences in partici- mendation: start- holders, Recom-
                                 regarding specific prob- pants, ask every stake- ing from context mendation: invite
                                 lems, be attentive to all holder that might be      analysis, allows several people repre-
                                 relevant stakeholders interested in the work- to widen the so- senting a particular
                                                           shop and invite these as cial dimension in segment/dimension
                                                           well, no balance in gen-the demo project to secure representa-
                                                           der/age; selecting and                     tive and diverse par-
                                                           inviting the stake-                        ticipation unless the
                                                           holders is active proc-                    first place chosen
                                                           ess that changes when                      candidate(s) will
                                                           people confirm their                       surely attend
                                                           presence or non-
                                                           presence and come up
                                                           with other names
                                 instead of a dossier an dossier included the        Recommenda- within a preparatory
                                 elaborated invitation     intermediate vision of tion: different     meeting between
                                 letter was prepared and the PM, the future vi- type of document consultant and PM
                                 a handout was offered sion of the PM, the is- for different par- key issues and solu-
                                 to the participants, Rec- sues list compiled by ticipant group had tion options for the
                                 ommendation: prepara- consultant, route de- been necessary Workshop would be
                                 tion depends on the spe- scription, information due to a confiden- selected and dis-
                                 cific information level booklet ZEPP &              tial matters     cussed, reformula-
                                 of the involved stake- agenda. 1 meeting with                        tion the conflicts into
                                 holders                   PM + 1 meeting with                        more general issues,
                                                           moderators/minute                          dossier contained a
Preparing&Information




                                                           taker, Recommenda-                         brief description of
                                                           tion: not feasible to let                  the situation of the
                                                           stakeholders vote on                       project, the CA pro-
                                                           issues upfront, when                       ject and the aim of
                                                           voting not feasible                        the workshop, - pre-
                                                           (e.g., stakeholders don't                  sent, intermediate
                                                           know enough about                          and future vision of
                                                           project to vote), let                      PM, maps, Recom-
                                                           consultant decide upon                     mendation: phone
                                                           issues to discuss                          call follow up and
                                                                                                      providing informa-
                                                                                                      tion for some impor-
                                                                                                      tant invitees, within
                                                                                                      the workshop mate-
                                                                                                      rial describe shortly
                                                                                                      the role of the work-
                                                                                                      shop in the ESTEEM
                                                                                                      process and also send
                                                                                                      the process chart,




30
                      Biomass Germany          ZEPP Netherlands         Archimede Italy VEP Hungary              SMART H
                                                                                                                 Iceland
                      preparatory meetings one of the stakeholders                          unnecessary to hold
                      and agreements mainly offered their facilities                        such a meeting; the
                      with the project man- to host the workshop (a                         CA consultant was
                      ager are needed, Rec- neighbour of the future                         the facilitator, Rec-
                      ommendation: a pre- plant): rooms & lunch,                            ommendation: keep
                      liminary workshop with Recommendation: be-                            it as an optional sub-
Facilitator meeting




                      partners took place to ing physically close to                        step
                      prepare the stakeholder future plant, made dis-
                      workshop (presenta-      cussion more direct &
                      tions, handout, solu-    helped imaging what
                      tions/options)           project would look like,
                                               informal atmosphere
                                               made networking dur-
                                               ing lunch and breaks
                                               possible, try to create
                                               connection between
                                               project and location of
                                               the workshop
                      25 participants, work- morning session: ple- half day WS, with 17 invitees showed
                      shop took place Friday nary session with pres- a semi structured up, intro presentation
                      afternoon to include all entations on CA, the programme, in- by the consultant (fa-
                      stakeholder groups, so- ZEPP & the aim of the cluding a round cilitator), group
                      lutions and options were workshop. afternoon: 3 table on the main work, proposals were
                      prioritized, the work- groups of 6-7 persons points, discussion presented, discussed,
                      shop helps to build a    (1 moderator + 1 (rep- with all core         then evaluated with
                      new communication        resentative of) PM in stakeholders and voting, WS process
                      platform, Recommen- each group): 2 propos- then open discus- as recommended in
                      dation: a partners       als per person per issue,sion with all the the manual can not
                      workshop beforehand instead of voting, a          other participants, strictly be kept, Rec-
                      supported the execution summary by the mod- Recommenda- ommendation:
                      of the main workshop, erators was given in        tion: state of the workshop process
                      working groups instead final plenary session, project is the          must be taken flexi-
                      of pairs                 Recommendation:          main criterion to ble, aim of the
                                               when possible, add a choose this kind evaluation should be
                                               fun-part to the work- of WS, to over- further qualified,
Execution




                                               shop (excursion, drink, come the lack of evaluation/voting
                                               etc) to facilitate the   right knowledge procedure should be
                                               network-activities       and the awareness improved, to be
                                               among participants,      of the real con- made simpler, faster,
                                               working in pairs not     flicts              include Borda count
                                               feasible, voting is time                     voting method as an
                                               consuming, 3 proposals                       option, more flexibil-
                                               per person too time                          ity for group work,
                                               consuming, add alter-                        clarification of PM's
                                               native for voting, dis-                      role and activity dur-
                                               cussion in small groups                      ing the workshop,
                                               increases the interac-                       allow the process
                                               tion and reaction upon                       more markedly dis-
                                               each other, (representa-                     cussing the Step 4
                                               tive of) PM in each                          solution id
                                               group to provide direct
                                               answers to questions
                                               concerning plans, pro-
                                               vide some networking
                                               time




31
            Biomass Germany          ZEPP Netherlands          Archimede Italy VEP Hungary              SMART H
                                                                                                        Iceland
            to send out a workshop report content: intro- WS report based WS report was sent
            report was supportive duction (step 5 of CA, on a synthesis of to participants and
            for the reflection of par- aim of workshop, date the discussion on interested other peo-
            ticipants and PM, Rec- & location), workshop the three critical ple, presentation
            ommendation: prepara- description (minutes + issues, include a were put on the web-
            tion and availability of results) and appendix short history of site, consultant called
            workshop material be- (list participants, view- the project, Rec- PM to inquiry his
            forehand, the quantity point local NGO, slides ommendation: perception of the WS
            and quality of the work- presentations, pictures, collection of spe- and discuss in gen-
Reporting




            shop report depends on issues list, future + in- cific references to eral the overall re-
            the preparation work: if termediate vision PM), the position of the sults, Recommenda-
            the dossier or a handout Recommendation: re- single stake-             tion: besides partici-
            or a presentation is al- cord the whole work- holders before the pants, send WS re-
            ready at hand of the par-shop on audio / video workshop, fol- port to everyone in-
            ticipants not all the ma- tape to help the reporter lowing the sug- vited and others who
            terial has to be included to recall all details of gestion of the PM are interested
            again                      the discussions          who has been
                                                                contacted by
                                                                some institutional
                                                                stakeholders

Experiences with Step 6: ‘Recommendations for action’
Step 6 includes four sub-steps (‘Identifying acceptance and feasibility’, ‘Capacity for action ta-
ble’, ‘Recommendations and action plans’, ‘Evaluation’). The first sub-step, the acceptance and
feasibility table is based on the outcomes of step 5.

The overview of key issues and types of action was classified as very helpful. Nevertheless it is
suggested that the highlighting of categories should not be implemented within the ‘Acceptance
and feasibility table’. The procedure was rated as time-consuming and no added value was as-
sumed by some of the demos.

The ‘Capacity for action table’ divided the key issues into activities that can be done ‘today’,
ones that can only be undertaken ‘in cooperation with others’ and external dynamics that are
relevant but cannot be controlled by the project stakeholders or the PM.

This overview is generally helpful, but the table might be combined with the following action
and communication plan - due to the number of actions.

The development of recommendations and strategic action is split into four different steps:
while the short-term action plan and the collaboration plan were easy to handle, the long-term
monitoring and capacity-building plan had to be modified. One demo stated that the communi-
cation plan needs further development and explanation.

The questions of the ‘Evaluation’ worked well and were considered helpful in reflecting upon
the process and the value added. The evaluation by the PM provides an opportunity for receiv-
ing feedback, the common reflection was classified as supportive. The questionnaire should be
retain its qualitative character.

In general the step and the manual were assumed to be good and its instructions clear. It is an
important step, but time consuming, so the application should avoid repetition in strategies and
tables. Some of the tools were first pre-filled by the consultant and then a meeting with the PM
ensued to discuss and finalise the proposed actions. Further recommendation was made regard-
ing a summary time table for the actions template; a timing column could alternatively be in-
serted in each table. It was suggested that in a later ESTEEM application the consultant may



32
also have a follow up and helping hand role in the execution phase of the action and communi-
cation plan - in formal terms probably as a separate activity from ESTEEM.

Table 3.5 Results of Step 6
                                   Biomass Germany          ZEPP Nether- Archimede Italy                VEP Hungary            SMART H
                                                                 lands                                                          Iceland
                                   input from stake- as no voting took tool works very              for three key issues ten
                                   holder workshop, place during work- well, at the end we          solution options were
                                   Recommendation: shop, column 3              obtained a clearer   listed and qualified,
                                   colour code might cannot be filled in, vision of how the         Recommendation: ac-
                                   not always be help- column 3 changed project is shaping          ceptance indicated as
                                   ful, the third cate- in strategies col- up                       highly or positively
Acceptance and Feasibility Table




                                   gory is different     umn with 3 possi-                          should be further clari-
                                   from the other two ble combinations:                             fied: who still op-
                                   and might cause       strategy of both                           poses?, allow some
                                   confusion             PM + stakeholders,                         flexibility in marking
                                                         strategy of stake-                         feasibility of/capacity
                                                         holder, strategy of                        for an action to a pro-
                                                         PM, problem: list                          posal with two types at
                                                         becomes long,                              the same time (type
                                                         strategies divided                         1&2, 2&3)
                                                         into 5 key issues
                                                         used in workshop,
                                                         Recommendation:
                                                         if voting is missing,
                                                         it needs to be indi-
                                                         cated whether a
                                                         strategy is from the
                                                         PM, the stake-
                                                         holders or both
                                   helpful in general, 45 strategies left very useful tool          easy to use summary
                                   but the table might over for further                             reorganisation of the
                                   be combined with processing. filled in                           Acceptance and Feasi-
Capacity for Action Table




                                   the following ac- by consultant,                                 bility table, Recom-
                                   tion and communi- sometimes difficult                            mendation: list moni-
                                   cation plan - due to for consultant to                           toring action and moni-
                                   the number of ac- decide what exact                              tored issue together:
                                   tions, Recommen- sub-actions must be                             monitor what issue with
                                   dation: differentia- undertaken                                  what action (what and
                                   tion between action                                              how)
                                   and sub-action dif-
                                   ficult; coloured ac-
                                   tivity allocation not
                                   necessary




33
                          Biomass Germany         ZEPP Nether- Archimede Italy              VEP Hungary             SMART H
                                                       lands                                                         Iceland
                         worked well, iden- 17 strategies          table gives a clear straightforward to se-
                         tification of project pointed out, con- picture of the room lect type 1 actions from
                         specific strategies, sultant filled in    for action at this previous table, Rec-
                         Recommendation: columns, often            project stage, in- ommendation: do not
Short-term action plan




                         the short-term ac- repetition in the      strument involved take ‘actions that PM
                         tion plan and the columns, some-          different institu- can do alone’ always
                         collaboration plan times difficult for tional actors and equivalent with short
                         can be prepared       consultant to de- funds                 term actions - type 2
                         together              cide what exact                         collaboration actions in
                                               sub-actions must be                     particular cases can be
                                               undertaken, Rec-                        more crucial and urgent
                                               ommendation:                            for the success of the
                                               critical review on                      project, clarify question
                                               relevance of 2nd                        of priority with the PM
                                               column

                         worked well and is 17 strategies          clear identification not difficult to use, but
                         supportive in sort- pointed out, some of relevant stake- not that straightforward
                         ing out cooperation,difficulties encoun- holders who can either as the tables
                         helpful to reflect on tered when filling support the real      above because of some
                         cooperation, Rec- in the 2nd and 3rd dissemination of ambiguity in the mean-
                         ommendation: see column, often repe- this technology but ing of headings, con-
                         short-term action tition of answers, also of the condi- sultant decided upon an
                         plan                  sometimes difficult tions which can      interpretation, Recom-
                                               for consultant to support it, helps mendation: insert a
Collaboration plan




                                               decide what exact PM to have higher ‘with whom?’ column,
                                               sub-actions must beawareness             type 2 collaboration
                                               undertaken, Rec-                         actions can be more
                                               ommendation:                             crucial for the success
                                               delete 2nd column                        of the project, in this
                                                                                        case these should be
                                                                                        addressed first as short
                                                                                        term activities, clarify
                                                                                        question of priority
                                                                                        with the PM, table
                                                                                        headings should be fur-
                                                                                        ther clarified in the
                                                                                        guidance, possibly with
                                                                                        example filling of the
                                                                                        table
                         classification of     11 strategies       no modifications ofRecommendation: it
Long-term monitoring and ca-




                         monitoring specific pointed out           the original plan should be planned in an
                         issues difficult, un-                     are envisaged,       economic way to re-
    pacity building plan




                         derstanding and                           awareness of the strict it to such actions
                         definition of long-                       future growing im- that may really bring in
                         term not clear, dif-                      portance of the so- some benefits (termi-
                         ficult to combine                         cial acceptance and nology clarification for
                         with specific future                      of the key role      the checklist is recom-
                         project activities,                       played by the        mended as well as ex-
                         Recommendation:                           communication        amples for filling in the
                         further explanation                                            table
                         in manual; review
                         on relevance




34
                           Biomass Germany            ZEPP Nether- Archimede Italy                VEP Hungary            SMART H
                                                            lands                                                         Iceland
                           it worked well, but      Communication        some suggestion The table calls for the
                           the aim needed ex-       plan written for PM have been done for essential info needed
                           planation, Recom-        by filling in table, communication in and helps rational man-
                           mendation: needs         no accompanying short and long term agement of the task;
                           further develop-         text                                     Recommendation: tool
                           ment and explana-                                                 is well designed if a
Communication plan




                           tion                                                              detailed communication
                                                                                             plan is necessary; if
                                                                                             not, the integration of
                                                                                             this sub-step into the
                                                                                             previous tables near the
                                                                                             actions is recom-
                                                                                             mended. The detailed
                                                                                             format could be left as
                                                                                             optional; the right
                                                                                             channel for the right
                                                                                             target group should be
                                                                                             carefully chosen.
                           the questions                                 Recommendation:it took about 45 min-
                           worked well and                               projects with less utes, straightforward to
                           were seen as help-                            developed aspects do based on the man-
                           ful to reflect the                            (previous experi- ual's guiding questions,
Evaluation of CA process




                           process and the                               ence, social accep- Recommendation: do
                           value added, feed-                            tance) can benefit it on a separate occa-
                           back of the project                           more from           sion, not right when
                           manager regarding                             ESTEEM              having finalised step 6,
                           contacts and ad-                                                  it helps avoid tiredness,
                           vices of the con-                                                 gives time to PM's re-
                           sultant, support of                                               flection on the whole
                           reflection, Rec-                                                  process
                           ommendation: let
                           the questionnaire
                           retain its qualitative
                           character and keep
                           it short


3.3                           Lessons learned: Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the
                              ESTEEM Tool
A challenge of the whole CA process was the parallel testing and developing of the tool in prac-
tice and the application of preliminary elements (instruments) in a real-world context of demo
projects. The evaluation and feedback interaction with the WP 3 team had to be managed effi-
ciently: the team had to receive the suggestions as results of the WP 4 testing, incorporate the
ideas and refine the tool and the manual in more or less real-time.

The most important lesson learned was that the tool can be used without extensive effort. It
helps to gain new knowledge of the project and context, both for the PM and other stakeholders,
and is likely to encourage projects to start communicating with stakeholders earlier on in the
project life cycle.

One demo stated - as a result of the CA process - that the PM has become more responsive to
stakeholders and more aware of the communication needs in society. After a vision building
workshop took place in step 2 of the ESTEEM testing, it seemed that more acceptance has been
developed in the following 2-3 months and that the project actors communicated more in line
with the strategies that had been discussed jointly. Also the PM was communicating in a differ-


35
ent way, making information more accessible and making stakeholders more empowered. The
interest groups involved in the project are broader now and the research and university commu-
nity is more closely linked (see Heiskanen/Maack 2007, Appendix C).

Both research organisations and technology innovators can use the tool. The demos show that
the best application of the ESTEEM tool can be reached in concrete projects with a site and a
concrete plan which stakeholders can react to.

In terms of individual steps and sub-steps in the ESTEEM tool, the following experiences were
gathered as advice for further users:

Parts of the narrative were regarded as very useful in terms of gaining self-understanding, but in
already ongoing projects the ‘Narrative’ should be pre-drafted on the basis of existing docu-
ments and presented to the PM rather than based on an interview with the PM. The ‘Narrative’
could serve the purpose of providing a ‘mirror’ for the company to self-reflect. It should be a
concise description that could start the discussion with the PM to include missing or remove re-
dundant items and develop the ‘Critical moments table’. In this case, the ‘Actors table’ and ‘So-
cial network’ could be developed in the first meeting; it was also suggested that the first parts of
the tool be streamlined and condensed in order to get to the interesting matters sooner. Simi-
larly, the ‘PM vision’ could be developed at the first meeting; this provides the process with a
quick start.

In steps 3-4, the analysis was rated as too detailed and too much focused on the analysis of
problems instead of solutions. Moreover, if there is movement in the project at that stage, the
tools should be kept up to date with these new developments. One of the demos started to solve
some of the issues raised in the meetings with stakeholders immediately after they arose. This
was characterised as typical for small companies, and has to be taken into account in further ap-
plications: the tool shouldn’t hinder the ‘natural’ project flow. Partly, this problem might occur
from the specific CA approach in which certain tools were not quite ready-to-use immediately
after step 2.

The manual in its revised version now provides enough flexibility to adequately react. Thus,
some parts of the tool are ready, for example, to be used in different steps of the process. Be-
sides the project management organisation, the user (consultant) has to take into account the re-
quirements of the local culture, policy context, etc.

The majority of demos stated that it was crucial to motivate the PM to invite a broader but tar-
geted range of stakeholders in addition to the well-known core group of actors. In most cases
the manual only gave a suggestion with regard to the selection in practice.

One substantial lesson learnt has been the fact that when the project, for different reasons, re-
mains in a stand-by position between the pilot and the demo phase, with a PM who is mainly
research-focused, the ESTEEM tool can be used only partially. It can produce awareness to-
wards the relevance of a communication strategy towards stakeholders who have not yet been
involved, such as social associations and the public, but it has less room for producing clear
recommendations for the implementation of the project.

Inter alia it helps to explore adjustment and negotiation options that the PM appreciates and will
take further.

It is stated that it is possible to use the tool for developing projects in developing countries and
under quite different context situations. But, a process like ESTEEM has to handle - and over-
come - the ‘starting point’ problem of different or inadequate context conditions in different
countries or cultural traditions. Therefore step 0 as a pre-test for application is of high impor-



36
tance. If the possible lack of informative and transparency tradition and the lack of trust in the
public institutions is not borne in mind, it can seriously hinder the process.

Due to further perspectives it was assured that at least in one demo the tool will be integrated in
the management routines and used for future applications.


3.4     Feedback on ESTEEM of stakeholders
To measure the degree of satisfaction of the stakeholders involved in the five selected demon-
stration projects, a website survey for stakeholders was planned. However, we felt the need to
ensure qualitatively high responses en to get direct responses instead of responses a long time
after the testing of the tool when many details of the interaction with the tool might have faded.
An addiitonal reason to replace the ex-post websurvey with an ex-durante evaluation was the
extra workload for the stakeholders to fill in the survey after spending allready a lot of time on
the interviews, preparing and participating in the workshop, etc.
Therefore we replaced this survey by face to face, telephonic and Email evaluations. This re-
placement was in addition not taking up much additional time since we were able to interview
the stakeholders during their presence at stakeholder workshops. As such, the ESTEEM tool
was evaluated by stakeholders during the process: during the workshop, in face to face conver-
sations, via telephone and Email. The most important indicator of the positive evaluation of the
stakeholders and the project managers regarding the ESTEEM process was that although the
ESTEEM process asked for considerable efforts and time of the stakeholders none of them
ended their participation before the end of the process. As all participation was on a voluntary
basis, this is an important signal of their positive attitude towards the ESTEEM process. The de-
tailed outcomes of the evaluations were translated into interim documents on how to improve
and refine the tool and as such led to next versions of the tool during WP4. The final ESTEEM
tool as such contains changes that are based on the evaluations of the stakeholders. These
changes are reported in the deliverables D9 and D10.
The project team considered these personal evaluations as sufficient and therefore did not per-
form an additional websurvey. Also many of the stakeholders would not have been reached via
a websurvey, simply because they are not digitised, for example the farmers who were stake-
holders in the Biomass pilot project in Germany.

The feedback of the dissemination of the ESTEEM tool is measured by the statistics of the web-
site www.esteem-tool.eu, statistics of the website www.createacceptance.net and personal, tele-
fonic and Email reactions of the stakeholders to the project partners. The webstie www.esteem-
tool.eu has been put online after the finalisation of the ESTEEM tool in February 2008. This
launch has been disseminated via diverse communication channels including the newsletter of
Create Acceptance, a message on the website www.createacceptance.net, An Email to the
stakeholders involved in the demonstration projects, etc. In March the website had over 3,000
hits with 211 unique visitors. This means that even a broader group than the stakeholders that
had been participating have been reached by the dissemination. The statistics also show that the
ESTEEM website also kept on attracking visitors after the launch. In April 2008 again almost
200 unique visitors were registered and in May, June and July this year even more than 300
unique visitors are counted.
The website www.createacceptance.net also shows a growth in number of hits and unique visi-
tors in the first months of 2008 with the launch of the ESTEEM tool. In the months January un-
till June more than 600 unique visitors were registered in each month. The number of hits was
in this period between 3,000 and 4,000 in each month.

Apart from these impressive numbers of visitors of the websites the project partners were also
contacted by a variety of organisations and individuals who were interested in using ESTEEM
in other projects in Germany, South Africa, Spain, Finland, the Netherlands and on European
level. also the coordinator and other project partners were invited to several meetings, confer-



37
ences and workshops to present ESTEEM to a wider public in the months following to the
launch of ESTEEM. For example at the University of Utrecht, at the Free University in Amster-
dam, at a project meeting of a European project focussing on nucleair issues, at the Helsinki
School of Economics, at the Finnish Foundation for Research and Development, Lumituuli Ltd.
wind power company, as well as to a network of companies using the Norppa-label for green
electricity, etc.




38
4.     Perspectives: A Website and the electronic Tool ESTEEM
After the finalisation of CA, all partners will continue disseminating the results of the project.
For this purpose, the ‘translation’ of the ESTEEM manual into an electronic, web-based tool
(with manual and background material, as well as Excel tables for download), and its publica-
tion on a dedicated website was prepared.

In that regard, the demo projects supported the development of both the ESTEEM web tool, and
of the respective website.

The elements of the web version were jointly developed by the CA team at regular project meet-
ings, and two specific IT meetings. On the basis of a list of technical and aesthetical require-
ments agreed upon by the CA team, a sub-contractor of the WP3 leader prepared draft versions
of the web tool which were critically reviewed by the CA team, and suggestions for improve-
ments were made. The key recommendations were to simplify the first draft, especially regard-
ing non-dynamic elements and less interactive structure to facilitate future adaptations. A ‘flat’
design of static HTML code was preferred by the CA team to allow for independent hosting of
the ESTEEM website, and easy translation of the web tool into other languages.

Furthermore, the demo projects prepared written input for the ESTEEM web pages to present
their cases and experiences.




39
Appendix A Demo reports

A.1        Description of demo project Jühnde
The central idea of the demo project is based on the already existing bioenergy village Jühnde.
The Jühnde model shows a complete shift of energy sources for an entire village, away from
conventional (fossil) energy sources to the renewable biomass ressource. One such community
is the bioenergy village of Jühnde, located in the southern part of Lower Saxony, Germany. The
advantages of bioenergy - such as climate protection and energy supply security - are good
reasons for the project dissemination. The district administration of Göttingen and the EU
LEADER+ Program are financing preparation of the dissemination. The funding supports the
selection of the village and feasibility studies which make up the basis for decision making. The
studies will answer the question as to how and at which locations the implementation of further
bioenergy villages is realistic.

The official decision of the district council was made on November 29, 2006. The district
committee confirmed the preliminary selection of 12 village candidates and is providing
financing for the further process. A consulting firm carried out the feasibility studies. The firm
was responsible for the technical project support of Jühnde, too. The feasibility studies include
basics such as energy demand of households, supply of biomass, willingness for contracts with
the cooperative company, willingness of farmers for contracts to deliver biomass. Furthermore,
the feasibility studies include the calculation of costs for implementing the projects.

The participation structure of the new villages is similar to the participation structure of Jühnde.
There are planning workshops with representatives of IZNE2 - which also serves as moderator
and scientific information resource, the mayors, speaker of the working groups, representatives
of the villages and the village councils. A committed communication process supports the
dissemination of the project idea. Within the villages, four working groups are set up (public
relations, bioenergy, operating company, technical issues). The working groups on technical and
economical questions represent an instrument of public participation. They are developing
village-specific aspects which are necessary for the implementation of the project idea.
Meanwhile, all villages found operating companies. Preliminary contracts secure the further
implementation of the bioenergy system.

The inhabitants play an important role in the successful implementation of the project idea. The
villagers develop and present their own ideas. This participatory approach maintains self-
esteem, and creates acceptance and credibility. The process secures a high compatibility with
local needs and the network of actors, while local competence and know-how can be
established. Apart from the shift from fossil to renewable energy, one of the formulated aims of
the project idea is to support the local cultural heritage and also to strengthen the community
life and identity.


A.1.1 The process of the Demo project
The original bioenergy village project was carried out between 2001 and 2006 and consisted of
various biomass investments. The project was considered successful and the district administra-
tion, the County of Göttingen, decided to disseminate the idea. For this purpose the methodol-
ogy and human resources of the Create Acceptance process has contributed to the dissemination
since the beginning of 2007.

2
    IZNE is an interdisciplinary research group of the University of Göttingen.


40
In the early stages the contact with the project manager (PM) was very difficult. A group of
academic consultants was already at hand. The scientists of IZNE, who founded the original
project idea, were also involved in order to manage the dissemination phase. As a result, the re-
lation between IZNE and Create Acceptance was ambiguous. If two different consultants are
involved in one project, there is a risk of competition between them. Therefore, the first contact
between Öko-Institut and the bioenergy project as well as the project management can be char-
acterized by suspiciousness and rejection. After a number of individual meetings and telephone
calls - and a clarification of responsibilities - Öko-Institut convinced the project manager and
core stakeholders to support the ESTEEM tool testing.

The PM is a county staff member and is responsible for the regional implementation of the
European LEADER+ program. He is a committed supporter of the project idea. Over the years
he has gained much experience which is important for the development of bioenergy villages.
Öko-Institut presented the advantages of the tool for a successful implementation process of the
new bioenergy villages.

The original project process uses an elaborated set of participation tools. Since many villages
were already involved in the preparation phase of the Jühnde model, most of the possible stake-
holders of the Jühnde dissemination were known. Nonetheless critical situations such as the in-
volvement of farmers came up. This problem was almost externally driven: increasing world
market prices for agricultural products led to a competition between selling the resources for
fodder, food or energy use. A second reason is the potential danger of innovation without cover-
ing economical risks. Farmers are not yet familiar with opportunities and risks of the new en-
ergy business. As the basic idea of the project was meant to be the support of the rural area and
small agro-businesses, these are rather unexpected problems, but they were identified and par-
tially addressed by the CA process.

The above-mentioned aspects hampered the engagement of the farmers, with the consequence
that more detailed expertise was needed. Within the Create Acceptance process the project man-
agement tried to develop intense discussions with all relevant key actors. The project manager
aimed at more flexibility in the contracts between farmers and biomass plant owners.

With regarding to nature conservation aspects, the tool identified another critical stakeholder
and his/her requirements: local nature conservation actors. Within different workshops the con-
sultant provided a lot of information about solutions to meet nature conservation requirements,
for example crop rotation, different kind of plant species as well as the use of landscape preser-
vation material. The workshops were linked with the discussion on the different positions and
elaborated common visions and strategies for the dissemination project.


A.1.2 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool
We started testing the ESTEEM tool in February/March 2007. The following figure shows the
order of the different ESTEEM steps. It can be stated that the steps 1 to 4 are very close linked
and partially overlap each other. The success of the ESTEEM tool is based on using the tool
completely without splitting up single steps.




41
Figure A.1 Timeline of the steps


A.1.2.1 Step 0:
Step 0 was elaborated at the end of the testing course of the CA project. The Step 0 question-
naire checks the suitability of ESTEEM for different project types. During the test of step 1+2 it
turned out that a starting project has different requirements regarding the management support
than an ongoing or a follow-up project. The add-on reflection on tool categories in relation to
the project typology identifies recommendations regarding the ESTEEM-tool. The ESTEEM-
tool user receives an indication as to whether the tool is useful in his/her case or if it is of less
importance.

The questionnaire went well; minor modifications were suggested and implemented. The test
with the Jühnde demo recommended a medium usefulness of the tool in this case.


A.1.2.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors
Project Narrative
The narrative has the function of a basic reference. The tool illustrates the history and the pre-
sent status of the project. Writing a narrative requires external support - optimally a consultant
should assume this role. If a project manager wants to use the ESTEEM tool without a consult-
ant, he/her might ask a colleague who is not involved in the project to perform the role of con-
sultancy. The person producing the narrative is required to have, in particular, good interview-
ing and writing skills - and the person should not have been involved previously. Someone who
is not yet part of the project history might be more independent and critical towards the project
history. The Jühnde case showed that the use of the questionnaire in a very active phase of a
project might cause ‘resistance’, because it is time consuming for the project manager and the
consultant. The narrative was not regarded as very helpful with respect to the value added, be-
cause extensive project descriptions were already available. On the other hand it was helpful for
the consultant to identify critical moments. It was suggested that the questions be adjusted with
the help of project information that is already available (e.g. flyers, brochures, tenders) before
writing the narrative. This kind of preparation by the consultant should save time for the project
manager.


42
Context analysis
The context analysis aims at the project manager’s reflection upon the context of the project.
The level of sensitivity which the project manager has with regard to the influence of the con-
text should be identified.

Within the Jühnde case the project manager has extensive and well-grounded know-how on the
political, economical and societal environment through the reflection and input of a central
planning group. Experiences of a precursor project offer valuable information. The quantity and
specification of questions depend on the project’s context (e.g. precursor process). Nevertheless,
the categories of context are very helpful to reflect all relevant aspects. Thereby it is possible to
reflect the dynamic development.

Handling the question ‘pressure on the existing energy system / fit into existing system’ turned
out to be difficult. In the case of biomass, the current project fits into the existing energy sys-
tem. However - with a long-term view and acknowledging the dynamic developments in that
area - the successful widespread dissemination may cause problems for the conventional energy
supply system. While working with the given format, we decided to continue with a qualitative
description because the PM indicated the possibility of confusion and misunderstanding.

Defining critical moments table (CMT)
The critical moments table aims at the extraction of important moments or aspects within the
timeframe of the project narrative. The CMT template contains a list of questions regarding
critical situations/events. The questions are very helpful, but the format of the CMT was consid-
ered ‘not adequate’ because in the given situation the critical moments are not linked to a single
data but are process-driven. The consultant adapted the structure of the CMT. Furthermore, it is
supportive for the CMT to have already prepared the context analysis. Many of the critical as-
pects arise from the external economical development.

In the demo-case the project manager and the stakeholders are engaged in continual reflection.
So there is already a high level of awareness and participation. In general the critical moments
table is of high importance and interest for the PM. The questions would work well for the pro-
ject manager if they are condensed - some sound very similar and are aimed at similar informa-
tion. It is suggested that the CMT be linked with the context analysis. The table format should
not focus on single dates because problems are mostly process-driven. It was recommended that
a suitable format should be provided by the manual.

Actors table
The actors table categorises and describes all relevant or existing stakeholders within the pro-
ject. The adjustment of categories and preparation of the table using already available informa-
tion were necessary. It was suggested that the table be downsized from 14 to 11 categories3. The
discussion of the actors table is seen as a good basis for more transparency and the identification
of potential role conflicts.

In the demo-case the project manager has a good overview of all relevant actors and stakeholder
groups due to a precursor project. He is very sensitive with regard to the different roles of ac-
tors. A modification of questions and categories was suggested as was condensing the amount
of categories to optimise the output of the table. Furthermore it was suggested that categories
like the ‘(re-)positioning’ be reformulated as ‘conflicts’ and ‘resources that actors control’ as
‘project activities’. Last but not least it was suggested to split categories like ‘expectations and
motivation’ into two different categories.

3
    New proposal: 1. Position within the project, 2. Description of actors role, 3. Expectations, 4. Motivation, 5. Pro-
    ject activities, 6. Formal and informal influence on the project, 7. Overlaps in roles, 8. Key actor, 9. Outreach, 10.
    Target group specific communication channels, 11. Which conflicts exist?


43
A.1.2.3 Step 2: Vision building
Project manager’s present vision
The project manager’s present vision is based on the narrative, the context analysis and the ac-
tors table. It turned out to be difficult to make a distinction between the future and present vi-
sion. For this reason we define a time frame for the present (1 year) and the future vision (20
years). Otherwise the time frame should be based on the expectations of the project manager.

The present vision was built on the information about important actors and the historical con-
text, on given opportunities and strategies and on the expectation of different actors as well as
on existing networks - which was pointed out in the actors table. The present vision represents
the elements, which are relevant within the current situation of the project under a specific time
frame. The present vision is dominated by the regional perspective.

In the demo case the project manager disapproved of the definitions of present and future vision
- the dissemination project deals with long-term options. Therefore the differentiation between
present and future vision is confusing in part. The project manager was not interested in map-
ping actors because of his existing knowledge of the different players, so the consultant has to
do this. Mapping the (social) network is a by-product that seems to be of minor interest. The
synthesis writing is well supported by using the actors and context table.

We highly recommended that the concept of split visions not be followed. The word ‘vision’
automatically refers to the future.

The BAU Scenario
In this step the consultant prepared a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario which represents a con-
sistent set of assumptions regarding the future without the demo project. It is intended as a
baseline which the consultant discusses and reflects upon with the project manager and core
stakeholders. To create the BAU scenario, the necessary data have to be available, and the BAU
scenario discussions with stakeholders are meant to provide feedback. The consultant prepares a
draft BAU based on data from national development assumptions, e.g. reference scenarios
available for the country, or region. The BAU results were delivered to project manager and
stakeholders. Special key factors within BAU are: current energy use pattern (heating mix, elec-
tricity demand), greenhouse gas emissions (full life-cycles for CO2, CH4, N2O), costs for in-
vestment and operating of heating systems and electricity from the local grid, based on the na-
tional generation mix. The BAU data include the analysis of existing heating systems in all can-
didate villages (oil, gas, wood, el. heating), and the households’ electricity demand. All of this
‘local’ data was provided by the project manager. Furthermore, the specific heating demand per
village (based on heated floor space) was estimated by the project manager. Within the BAU
scenario, there is no shift to ‘other’ heating systems, i.e. the current situation is taken as given
for the future. A few energy efficiency investments (rural customer behaviour) were assumed.
Finally, the GHG emission factors and the fuel and investment cost figures were projected from
the base year 2005 to the 2020 BAU scenario. The considerations to derive the BAU scenario
are complicated, because of different context frames (projection of current status and future de-
velopments). The appropriate ‘translation’ has to be developed, and made transparent for the
stakeholders to comment.

The Project manager’s future vision
The project manager’s future vision is based on the input from different meetings and telephone
interviews in which the project manager has participated. The future vision aims at a wider per-
spective and a consideration of broader aspects. It reflects a long-term window with major
changes in the future (e.g. 2030).




44
As discussed in above, it was suggested that the concept of split versions be no longer followed.
Therefore, we used an integrated approach - also for gaining the stakeholders visions in the next
steps of the tool.

Selecting the group of core stakeholders
After a number of meetings with the project manager, representatives of the University of Göt-
tingen and of the Jühnde cooperative, the core group of stakeholders became visible. The con-
sultant participated in different village meetings to identify further potential stakeholders.
The synthesis of information from the project manager and from several key stakeholders, as
well as information from village meetings ‘creates’ the stakeholder core group. The final selec-
tion took place on the basis of the criteria given by the tool manual (see below).

Table A.1 Experience Selection Criteria
Criteria                                             Comment
Persons corresponding to more than one profile       easy to identify
Core group should correspond to the social structure depends on the structure of project and
                                                     given participation
Non associated should amplify the social structure   depends on the stage of project
peripheral stakeholders should be included           Yes, but depends on the situation and
                                                     stage of project
balance between different actor’s categories         easy to stick to

On the basis of the core group selection, the consultant could identify the participants of the vi-
sions workshop.

The stakeholder visions
In contrast to the manual’s suggestion, we decided that the Jühnde dissemination would gain the
stakeholder visions not by means of single interviews but in a concerted workshop approach.

After identifying the core group of stakeholders, the project manager and consultant invited the
participants to the visions workshop. For the preparation, the support of the project manager
was very helpful and necessary. The workshop was divided into three phases:
1) Introduction and impulse statement by consultant
2) Preparation of two working groups and
3) A common discussion of the visions and a categorisation of strategies.

Following an integrated concept of visions, we prepared a discussion on the short-term and
long-term aspects of living in the region in the future.

Within the working groups the consultant gathered together questions. Afterwards the group be-
gan the vision building process by introducing a storyline to develop new dimensions of the fu-
ture. To introduce the project manager’s vision to the stakeholders, the consultant elaborated
two different storylines representing the context of the two stakeholder groups ‘farmers’ and
‘customers’. At the end of the workshop the participants evaluated analytical dimensions by as-
signing indicators of relevance through scoring. The results focused on the ‘customers’ and the
‘farmers’ present and future vision.




45
Future Vision: Customers
Future Vision:                                Technological Pole
Farmers                                             5
                                                    4
                                                   3
       Scientific Pole                            2
                                                  1                             Infrastructural Pole
                          5
                              4




                                                            5
                                  3




                                                             4
                                                              3
                                      2




                                                               2
                                                               2
                                          1




                                                                1
                                                                1
                                                            1
                              1                   1




                                                                2
                                                                2
                             2
                            3




                                                                    3
                           4




                                                 2
                          5




                                                                        4
                                                                        4
     Institutional Pole




                                                                            5
                                                 3
                                                4                               Political Pole
                                                5



                                      Socio-Cultural Pole
Figure A.2 Techno-economical network (TEN)

The techno-economical network (TEN) includes six poles which the stakeholders assess with
respect to the importance of their visions. The score description was adapted by the consultant
in order to guarantee a common understanding of each pole.

Table A.2 Assessment of Poles (TEN)
Score Description          Background
1     no importance        No influence on the common vision regarding the four dimensions
2     low importance       Nearly of no importance to realize the vision
3     medium importance Factor of an indifferent influence
4     high importance      Important contribution to realize the vision
5     very high importance High influencing factor and bound to succeed

The TEN also supported the future social network mapping and the development of a key
changes table. The key changes table is a tool that was recommended in the first draft version of
the manual to visualise the differences between present and future visions - but was cancelled in
the following.


A.1.2.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
Identification of conflicting issues and features
Based on the input of the project manager’s present and future vision, stakeholder visions, and
BAU, the consultant divided the table of issues into 5 evaluation points (infrastructure, envi-
ronment, economy, social issues and policy issues). In the case of the Jühnde dissemination, a
successful stakeholder-workshop was supportive to identifying issues and potential conflicts.
The evaluation categories might change during the ‘step-process’. The expected classification
was difficult to understand for the stakeholders. It was suggested that a precise definition and
explanation of the categories be provided.




46
Ranking key actors and issues according to their strategic importance
The issue ranking table has to be filled out on the basis of the key issues from the conflicting
issues table. In the given project context, it became apparent that the ranking only worked when
a weighting factor was inserted. For this reason the consultant implemented a modification by
adding a score description and weighting factor.

Implementation of a weighting step for ranking:
• Score: 1 (low), 2 (medium), 3 (high), 4 (very high)
• Weighting factor: issues on national level (1), issues on regional level (2)


Table A.3 Issue Ranking Table
Issue/Features                               Urgency Importance       Sum     Sum Rank with
                                                                             Weighted Weighting
Farmers supply                                   4           4         8       16         1
NGO/conditions of cultivation /adjustment        2           3         5       10        4
of national standards
Feed-in-tariff                                   2           3         5          5          6
(National) standards of cultivation              2           4         6          6          5
Public funds                                     3           3         6         12          3
Heating system                                   2           4         6         12          3
Farmers and local conflicts                      1           4         5         10          4
Contracts                                        3           4         7         14          2

The ranking table provided less useful information to the project manager. The necessity of the
table depends on the project status. It seems to be more interesting for ‘start-up’ projects.

The same aspects concern the strategic issue graph in which the visualisation of key issues indi-
cating importance and urgency of different project issues is undertaken.
It is suggested that it be checked beforehand whether the project manager accesses additional
information due to this tool step. The usefulness depends on the type of issues, already existing
knowledge and the status of the project: it is mainly supportive for ‘new’ projects.


A.1.2.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options
The portfolio of options includes three main sub-steps which are closely linked to each other. A
list of issues should be specified and categorised by the PM and finally ranked and tested.

Listing and evaluating solutions to major issues
Together with the PM, we began listing issues. Then the possible solutions for existing conflicts
or potential problems were further elaborated by the consultant and the project manager. Subse-
quently, they were ranked and evaluated in a solutions ranking table. Some new ideas for com-
mon process options were generated. The solution-oriented way is very positive for difficult
project phases and can therefore be a helpful tool step.

First testing PM preferred solution for their robustness and resilience
The results of the solutions ranking table were transferred into options (portfolio of options) and
taken as an input for the stakeholder workshop. They provide new impulses to the PM and pre-
sent new ideas for solving conflicts. Furthermore, the discussion and the motivation to partici-
pate in the project were supported.

The modified tool is very useful for difficult project phases, but like the issue ranking table the
solution ranking table also needs weighting factors.



47
A.1.2.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
The preparations of the workshop
The stakeholder workshop plays an important role within the communication strategy of the
project. A careful preparation is the basis of substantial workshop results and solution-oriented
discussions. The aim of the workshop was to provide knowledge for specific problems in view
of mainly long-term economics, conditions of contracts and framework conditions, as well as
the motivation for participation in the project.

Table A.4 Workshop preparation
Design of WS                                                              Cookbook of WS
Partici- Duration   Information   Selection of Preparation      Public    Preparation  Logistics Results
pants                             participants                  WS

20-25 1 day        Different actor Follow      Clearing the     Invitation Feasibility     Reservatio Information
      (divided     groups with general         issues with SH   through studies; dossier n of rooms about
      into two     different       criteria,   and PM -         email and ‘Vision          and        standards,
      parts for    know-how and problems/      results of       personal Building          catering, prices and
      different    interests       conflicts   feasibility      address Paper’;            preparatio feed-in tariffs;
      target       (farmers,       solution    studies define              presentation on n of       closing the
      groups)      associations, oriented      the specific                focus aspects; working information
      with partner NGO)                        issues and                  meeting         tools      gap; rising
      and SH                                   target; select              (optional),     (charts,   motivation,
                                               and book                    conference call metaplan) solving
                                               adequate                    and emails      - press    existing
                                               rooms (PM)                  between         release    conflicts, new
                                                                           facilitator,               stakeholder
                                                                           consultant and             (farmers)
                                                                           PM                         involvement
SH - Stakeholder
PM - Project Manger

Realisation of the workshop
Prior to the stakeholder’s workshop it was necessary to implement a second workshop regarding
different partners. The partner’s workshop aimed at a better preparation of the actual stake-
holder’s workshop. New conflicts which influenced the project process negatively indicated to
adjust the communication strategy. The participants (IZNE, engineering firm, county of Göttin-
gen, NGOs and farmers association of the county) discussed the implementation of additional
stakeholders, especially concerning NGOs and representatives of farmers. On the basis of the
discussions, the consultant prepared an elaborated invitation letter and a workshop handout. In
contrast to the manual no dossier was prepared - due to existing feasibility studies. The handout
provides a common information level to all participants.
The stakeholder’s workshops aimed at the following aspects:
• discussions of present conflicts;
• funded information to selected problems;
• finding of common solutions; and
• next common implementation steps.

The consultant offers three specific presentations as an impulse for the discussion. Strategic as-
pects and short-term activities were ranked by the participants.

The stakeholder’s workshop showed that a common communication strategy based on the ex-
change of information and knowledge is crucial. It is important that attention is given to all
relevant stakeholders and enough time is spent on the preparation and execution.




48
Returning the results of the workshop
A workshop report was prepared by the consultant on the basis of minutes, charts, the handout
and the given presentations. The report documents the discussion and the voting was finally dis-
cussed with the PM. The scope of the report depends on the material which is available before-
hand. The workshop helped to build a new communication platform. The guidance by the
ESTEEM manual was very detailed and was seen as substantially helpful.


A.1.2.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action
Identifying acceptance and feasibility
The acceptance and feasibility table is based on the outcomes of step 5. The overview of key
issues and types of action is very helpful. The concentration of all information helps the con-
sultant to reflect upon possible recommendations. Nevertheless it is suggested that the highlight-
ing of categories not be implemented within the acceptance and feasibility table. It is time-
consuming and the added value is minimal.

Sorting of options: Capacity for action
The capacity for action table divided the key issues into activities that can be done today, ones
that can only be undertaken in cooperation with others and external dynamics that are relevant
but cannot be controlled by the project stakeholders or the project manager. This overview is
generally helpful, but the table might be combined with the following action and communica-
tion plan - due to the number of actions.

Develop the recommendations and action plans
The development of recommendations and strategic action is split into four different steps:
while the short-term action plan and the collaboration plan are easy to handle, the long-term
monitoring and capacity-building plan have to be modified. The classification of monitoring
specific issues is too difficult, the understanding and definition of a long-term action is not
clear. The communication plan needs further development and explanation.

Evaluation of the Create Acceptance process
The questions worked well and were seen as helpful in reflecting upon the process and the value
added. The evaluation by the PM provides an opportunity for receiving feedback. In the Jühnde
dissemination, the PM focused on the new contacts and advices given by the consultant, the
common reflection was seen as supportive.


A.1.3 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM Tool in
      achieving acceptance in the region
Due to the option of different scenarios which were elaborated by the consultant and the support
of discussions with nature protection organisations and farmers associations, the testing of the
tool contributed indirectly to the amount of acceptance in the region. The single steps of the
ESTEEM tool were helpful in reflecting upon the present and future risks.


A.1.4 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA

A.1.4.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support
The external evaluation is seen as very useful by the consultant and the counter partner. The
counter partner process comprised reading the documents, monitoring the results and elaborat-
ing an interview. As a result of this counter partner support, some aspects required clarification.




49
The counter partner process was not only supportive for the ESTEEM tool, but also for the pro-
ject manager and the demonstration project. An external evaluation and an independent view by
the counter partner seemed crucial in ensuring an appropriate tool implementation. The counter
partner can motivate the consultant by ‘step-by-step’-assessment and the reflective support, con-
fronting interpretations and understanding proved useful. Providing critical reflections on the
process from a distance was seen as helpful, but should not become too distant from the process.
The interview and critical reflections within the demo process helped the consultant during the
tool implementation.


A.1.4.2 Lessons learned
Each step of tool testing was presented at the common project meetings. Advice and adjust-
ments were given to the WP3 substep leaders. The exchange of experiences was the basis for
motivating the demo leaders and for criticising the workflow respectively. Both aspects were
helpful in terms of the adaptation of the ESTEEM tool.


A.2     Demo project ZEPP, the Netherlands

A.2.1 Description of Demo project
In Drachten, a town in the North of the Netherlands, a project is executed to build a Zero Emis-
sion Power Plant (ZEPP) that is able to produce enough emission-free electricity for a small
town of hundred thousand households (68 MW). The climate neutral power plant has a go/no-go
decision point in 2007/2008 and should be operational in 2010. To realise the project several
innovative technologies are combined.

The ZEPP will be equipped with an innovative gas generator in which the combustion takes
place with pure oxygen (oxyfuel). To avoid extremely high temperatures, water is injected in
the flame. The exhaust of the generator consists of CO2 and water vapour. After condensation,
the water is re-used for injection and pure CO2 remains. This CO2 is stored in an almost depleted
gas field. The plant produces electricity without any substantial emission. This will result in a
CO2 reduction of one megaton in six years.

The ZEPP will use a gas field which is no longer used but still contains a considerable amount
of natural gas. The injection of CO2 leads to an increased pressure and eases the extraction of
the remaining gas from the field (Enhanced Gas Recovery), which will be used in the power
plant. Additionally the residual heat of the plant will be used for heating nearby buildings on the
industrial area where the ZEPP is planned. In the Netherlands, several gas fields are suitable for
ZEPP technology. After the plant in Drachten has become operational, possibly other fields will
follow. This project will be the first project in the Netherlands with inland underground storage
of CO2.

The ZEPP in Drachten is initiated by the Dutch company SEQ Nederland B.V. Financial sup-
port is given by energy companies, local and national governments and by Energy Valley, a
public-private foundation with local, national and European members, which stimulates the
economy of the North of the Netherlands through financing energy activities.


A.2.2 The process of the Demo project
Project manager
From the beginning of the performance of step 1 until the end of the process, the PM of the
ZEPP has been positively involved in the process. No conflicts between the PM and the con-
sultant have occurred. Several interviews and meetings between the consultant and the project



50
manager took place. As these meetings proofed to be often time consuming, alternatives were
brought up by the consultant to limit the needed time of the project manager as much as possible
by asking questions by email, or other.

A general recommendation to the tool concerning the time needed from the project manager to
put into the process should be limited as much as possible. Project managers are often people
with full agendas that want to spend their time efficiently. In any case it should be communi-
cated in advance very clearly what amount of time is needed from the consultant and the project
manager to perform the whole process.

Stakeholders
Most of the stakeholders involved in the ZEPP have reacted positively on the process and
agreed easily to deliver the needed input. No stakeholder rejected the invitation for an interview
in step 2 and also many stakeholders did show up on the workshop. Disappointing though was
the absence of the three governmental institutions that are responsible for granting the needed
licenses for the ZEPP (the ministry of Economic Affairs, ministry of Environmental issues and
the provincial government) during the workshop.

No mayor conflicts between the stakeholders existed or occurred during the process in this
demo project. Most of the stakeholders were interested in getting to know each other and the
project and used the workshop for example as network opportunity.

When conflicts exist, this might influence the willingness of stakeholders to participate. This
should be taken into account when inviting stakeholders for interviews and the workshop.


A.2.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool

A.2.3.1 Step 0:
The radar which is based on the answers to the questions asked in step 0 indicates that at the
start of the ESTEEM process it was recommended to use the ESTEEM tool for the ZEPP pro-
ject because:
• The project manager and stakeholders are not very familiar with the technology.
• There are still quiet some possibilities to adapt the design, planning and execution of the
     project.
• There is currently limited knowledge about the level of societal acceptance for the technol-
     ogy.
• There is uncertainty about the impact of the project.


A.2.3.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors
The four tools of step 1 complement each other. The PM is elicited to tell the story of the pro-
ject in different ways with different emphasis that complement each other. At the end of step 1
this gives both the consultant and the project manager a complete overview of the project.

The first step is quiet time consuming but necessary as the consultants need to know all the de-
tails of the project to perform the following steps. Time can be saved when the consultant fills
in the tables beforehand and let the PM react by Email or in a face to face interview. Here objec-
tivity of the consultant is needed and the opinion of the project manager should be leading. An-
other alternative is to let the PM fill in the tables at home first and than discuss the results in a
meeting with the consultant.

The experience of the PM with similar projects influences the process (experienced or not, tech-
nical, economic or political background, well known person in context, historical conflicts with


51
stakeholders, etc). An categorization of project managers is recommended (for example in a step
0).

Project Narrative
The narrative of the ZEPP demo project has become longer than the 2-3 pages (5 pages). The
interview (2h) and writing of the narrative (8h) are time consuming but give relevant info for
both the actors table, the context analysis and the defining moments table. The consultant can
fill in the tables beforehand on the basis of the narrative.

Time is saved when defining moments and important actors are pointed out by the project man-
ager during the interviews. It therefore works best to have two interviewers. One person asking
questions, the other making minutes.

The narrative is thus the basis for filling in the other tools of step 1.

Context analysis
Within the ZEPP demoproject we based the context analysis on a 2 hour interview with the pro-
ject manager. During this interview all the opportunities and barriers were defined. Some prob-
lems were encountered when defining the barriers and opportunities as they are often two sides
of the same coin. After the interview the consultant filled in the columns on level and timing.
The project manager filled in the rest of the table at home. It is difficult for the consultant to fill
in complete tables as his or her vision may be too subjective.

Recommended is to start with the opportunities table as it frames the thinking of the project
manager. The column on categories is not really useful (only of importance to the consultant)
and we recommend to skip this one.

Defining moments table
In the ZEPP demo project the consultant filled in the defining moments on the basis of the nar-
rative and the project manager checked it afterwards. This saves time for the project manager. It
becomes an extended document and reading it is easier in Excell. Recommended is to skip the
column on irreversibility.

Because it is difficult to tell what critical moments are, we recommend to change the name in
defining moments. Still a selection of moments has to be made as some moments are very
linked to each other and than only one is chosen.

Another recommendation is to use the defining moments table to check whether the narrative is
complete.

Actors table
The table was filled by naming the actors pointed out in the narrative. This list was extended by
actors the consultant thought were important and were not yet mentioned by the project man-
ager. This elicited the project manager to tell more about the actors that were not mentioned in
the narrative Also this table was filled in by the consultant beforehand and checked by the pro-
ject manager to save time of the project manager.


A.2.3.3 Step 2: Vision building
Subjectivity is less of a problem in step 2 compared to step 1. Also the amount of time needed
can be arranged better (about 2 hours per interview and 2 hours for the writing of each future
vision).




52
Project manager’s present vision
Within the ZEPP demo only a present network was drafted for the present vision. In addition an
intermediate vision was drafted: the ZEPP in 2010 which serves as a basis for the vision on
2020. The intermediate vision was written by the consultant and finalized by the project man-
ager. It served as a starting point for the future vision and framing the mind of the project man-
ager who had never before articulated in this much detail the future of the whole project in de-
tail.

The intermediate vision of the project manager was also used during the interviews with the
stakeholders to get them as well in a future thinking mode.

Recommended is to include the intermediate vision of the project manager in ESTEEM.

The BAU Scenario
Within the ZEPP demo project, the consultants had difficulties in putting together the BAU sce-
nario. Finally only a summary (to be used in step 3) was written after all the other future visions
were compiled. No social network map of the BAU was compiled. The reason for this was that
the consultant did not really know who’s vision the BAU would be and what to put in the mid-
dle when drawing the social network map.

The BAU vision of the ZEPP demo became basically a negation of the future vision of the pro-
ject manager. When he said for example that the project would improve the local economic
situation, the BAU-vision stated that the economic situation would not improve. Recommended
is to remove the BAU from ESTEEM.

The Project manager’s future vision
In a 2 hour interview the consultants of interviewed the project manager to draft his future vi-
sion. The vision was written in the form of a fictional 2 page newspaper article published in
2020, in which the project manager looks back on project development. The title of the future
vision was drafted together with the project manager. Also a social network map was drafted.

Selecting the group of core stakeholders
Together with the project manager the consultant selected the core group of stakeholders. It was
taken into account that at least one stakeholder of each dimension was selected.

The Stakeholder future visions
Each stakeholder of the core group was interviewed by a consultant for 2 hours. The intermedi-
ate and future vision together with the social network map of the future vision of the project
manager were sent to the stakeholders beforehand to prepare them for the interview by giving
information on the project and in the meantime get them in the future thinking mode.
The social network map of the project manager was used to structure the interview and talk
about one dimension at a time. Based on the interview an article was written for a newspaper in
2020 and a title of this article was drafted by the consultant. Also differences in each social
network map of the stakeholders and the project manager were made visible by using different
colours.
All, the article, the title and the social network map were sent back to the stakeholders to check
and validate the documents before they were used in step 3.


A.2.3.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
For the ZEPP demo project 20 issues were identified in step 3. A 2 hour meeting with the pro-
ject manager took place and the consultant spent an additional 4 hours at performing this step.




53
Identification of conflicting issues and features
To make the comparison of visions easier and more visible, it is recommended to change the
columns and rows (visions in the columns, dimensions in the rows). For the ZEPP demo the
colour blue was not used in the table (only green and red for opportunities and possible con-
flicts). The BAU vision did not have an added value as the outcomes of the table didn’t change
when adding this vision to it. 20 issues were identified

Ranking key actors and issues according to their strategic importance
The ranking was experienced difficult in the ZEPP demo as many issues exist. Therefore the
importance and urgency ratings were multiplied automatically to get a more balanced result.
The result of the ranking was transferred into the strategic issues graph. This graph made the
visible which issues were most important and most urgent and which are less of importance and
urgent


A.2.3.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options
Within the ZEPP demo project 30 solutions were identified.
The tools in step 4 can be easily used by the project manager alone. The consultant can just help
with filling in the first rows of each table as an example.

Listing and evaluating solutions to major issues
Recommended is to add a 4th column with ‘other’ to the issues and solution table for the options
that do not fit into the first 3 columns. The solutions ranking table was not used in the ZEPP
demo project. This table asks for too much detailed information that the project manager does
not have and the added value is not clear to both the project manager and the consultant. Rec-
ommended is therefore to skip the solutions ranking table.

First testing PM preferred solution for their robustness and resilience
Within the ZEPP demo project the instrument portfolio of options was not used because there is
too much overlap between this table and step 5. This instrument is too time consuming and it is
recommended to skip this table.


A.2.3.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
The preparation of step 5 costs a lot of time but is really much worth it.

The preparations of the workshop
Together with the project manager and some active stakeholders a group of stakeholders was
selected which was invited for the workshop. We tried to achieve a balance between stake-
holders from different dimensions (market, society, technology, policy, project partners, etc)
and different level (local vs national). 45 stakeholders were invited by Email and mail. When no
reaction was received, they were called by phone.

One of the stakeholders offered their facilities to hold the workshop physically close to the fu-
ture ZEPP plant.

When the stakeholders had confirmed their participation in the workshop a dossier was sent to
them by Email which contained: the agenda, route description, intermediate and future vision of
the project manager, an issues list compiled by the consultant and an information leaflet of the
project. Also every stakeholder was asked to come up with the name of another stakeholder that
should be invited for the workshop. Recommended is to use this via-via way to reach new / all
stakeholders.




54
It was not feasible for stakeholders to vote before the workshop on issues as some of the future
visions were confidential. Therefore it was chosen that the consultant compiled a list of issues to
be discussed during the workshop. Recommended is to add this option to the manual.

During the preparation also a 1 hour meeting with the project manager took place to inform him
about his role during the workshop (listening and being positive towards each proposal of the
stakeholders). It is recommended to put some extra effort in this as it is important that the pro-
ject manager knows how to act during the workshop.

To inform the moderators of the workshop another 1 hour meeting took place with everybody of
the organizing team present: the moderators and the person taking minutes.

Realization of the workshop
A 1 day workshop was organized with project manager, core group stakeholders and other
stakeholders. A 2 day meeting was not feasible and already in the case of a one-day workshop
some stakeholders complained about the duration of the workshop. Recommended is therefore
to limit the duration of the workshop as much as possible without influencing the results nega-
tively. 2 participants that had confirmed their presence did not show up during the workshop. 1
participant that was not invited, but did show up.

Being physically close to the plant helped imaging the local impact and context of the plant. The
informal atmosphere during the workshop made networking between the stakeholders during
lunch and coffee breaks possible. Recommended is thus to have some time for stakeholders to
talk to each other.

The consultant and the project manager first presented the background of the workshop and the
project. The consultant also explained the details of groupsessions in the afternoon. After lunch
the group was split in three subgroups and each discussed the five issues defined by the consult-
ant: economic and technical issues, local impact, local profits, relation with renewable energy.
Every participant was asked to give 2 strategies for each issues and these were grouped in the
solutions table.

Recommended for the tool was to add the option to work in groups instead of pairs. Depending
on difference in the level of stakeholders’ knowledge of the project, it can be helpful to work in
subgroups and have representative of the project manager in each group to answer possible
questions and observe the working of the groups. Also the working in groups increased the in-
teraction between stakeholders that started acting in reaction to each other.

After the group work all participants came together again for the final part of the workshop. As
over 100 strategies and project variations were identified voting for each proposal was not fea-
sible. In stead the moderators of each of the subgoups summarized the results of their group.
Recommended is to add an alternative for the ranking of issues in stead of the voting during the
workshop, for example a summary before voting, the voting digitally afterwards, etc.

Returning the results of the workshop
The person making minutes during the workshop (and recording the workshop) has compiled
the report of the workshop. This report contained: introduction on Create Acceptance and aim of
the workshop, workshop description (minutes of the day), appendix with list of participants,
viewpoint of local NGO that could not be present, slides of the presentation given, pictures, the
issues list, and the intermediate and future vision of the project manager.

After writing the report was first sent to the project manager for a final check and later sent to
all the participants.




55
A.2.3.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action
Step 6 is considered as the most important step but also quiet time consuming.

Identifying acceptance and feasibility
As the voting did not take place in the workshop of the ZEPP demo project, the 3rd column can
not be filled in. Therefore this column was changed into a strategies column with three possible
combinations: strategy of the project manager, strategy of both the project manager and a stake-
holders and strategy of the stakeholders. Only the strategies in the last two columns are included
for further processing.

Sorting of options: Capacity for action
Within this demo project 45 options were included for further processing in the recommenda-
tions and action plans.

Develop the recommendations and action plans
The tables that are the basis for the recommendations and action plans were filled in by the con-
sultant. Often some repetition of actions occurred in the columns. We decided to integrate the
communication plan in the tables for action on short, middle and long term. We added a fourth
column to each of these tables with recommendation on the communication channels that
should be used to fulfill the strategy. After filling in the tables they were sent by email to the
project manager to react on them and discussed in a final meeting. During this final meeting the
PM indicated a few questions he had concerning the strategies and wanted to change a few
words in the action plans.

Evaluation of the Create Acceptance process
The evaluation of the Create Acceptance process with the PM took place in a half an hour meet-
ing with the PM. The nine questions of the manual were asked. Two questions were added: Is
their a balance between your input and the results of the process and would you do it again. In
general the PM was very positive about the Create Acceptance process and did not have many
remarks. The main added value of the process for him was the communication with the local
stakeholders and the knowledge that the project has more impact on people outside the project,
than he realized before.

Suggestion is to add a few words on the evaluation from the side of the consultant. How did the
consultant experience the project, the process and the collaboration with the project Manager?


A.2.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM Tool in
      achieving acceptance in the region
During the stakeholder workshop the project was presented to some new local stakeholders who
were not involved in the project before: a local journalist and a representative of the residential
area close to the plant. Both stakeholders reacted positively to the project. Other local and re-
gional stakeholders that have been involved in the ZEPP and the ESTEEM process before have
also always been reacting relatively positively to the plans. Therefore it can be said that both
new and existing local stakeholders have been reacting relatively positive towards the project
and the ESTEEM process. As the project is still waiting for some important decisions on the fu-
ture of the plant, it can not be said yet, whether the ESTEEM tool also had a positive effect on
these. It can be argued though that by showing the willingness of involving local stakeholders
and thus the importance of societal acceptance for the project, the ZEPP has left a positive feel-
ing at many stakeholders which might influence their future decisions concerning the project.




56
A.2.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA

A.2.5.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support
During the project meetings the consultant has presented all the outcomes of the steps of the
tool performed in this demo project to the consortium of Create Acceptance. Based on the ex-
periences with the tool in this demo project also recommendations were formulated for the tool.
The counter partner of the ZEPP has been involved from a side line. The counter partner has
read all the documents and tables produced in the execution of the tool in this project as well as
the recommendations for the tool. The counter partner has summarized all the results and pre-
sented this to the consortium of Create Acceptance.


A.2.5.2 Lessons learnt
The lessons learned are reported in the previous sections.


A.3     Demoproject Archimede, Italy
In 2000, the Italian Government granted an extra-ordinary contribution to Enea, for a program
of research, development and demonstrative production of electric power at the industrial scale,
by using solar energy as source of heat for high temperatures. The financing was 100 million of
Euros to be distributed on 3 years, from 2001 to 2003; this extraordinary contribution can sup-
port not more then 40% of the total industrial investment. Prof Rubbia was charged with the de-
velopment of the project. He then named Ing. Vignolini as responsible for the plan and dele-
gated to him the choice of the work group that would be dedicated to the development of the
plan. On the 7th of January 2001, this work Group was constituted and the scientific effort for
the choice of the plan began; the team decided to develop one completely innovative technology
instead of doing incremental innovations to the already existing solar technology. The ‘Great
Thermodynamic Solar Plan’ was instituted on July 2001; in August 2001, Prof Rubbia intro-
duced the ‘Archimede’ project to the Ministry of Productive Activities (MAP).

The idea of Prof Rubbia was to build a solar plant formed by a series of parabolic mirrors. He
wanted to introduce a critical innovation in the solar thermal accumulation and in the capability
of reaching high temperatures, in comparison with the existing systems. The existing technolo-
gies, in fact, were not suitable to the type of highly innovative system planned by Rubbia. The
technologies available at that moment used a diathermic oil as a thermo carrier fluid in order to
transport the heat, but they are polluting. The existing solar systems, moreover, can reach tem-
peratures up to 380°; in addition, they do not have the solar thermal accumulation: this means
that when there is not the sun, a gas stove works to produce energy. On the contrary, the Ar-
chimedes project can use the energy produced from the sun that can reach high temperatures up
to 550°, by using a mixture of fused salts to produce energy.

Meantime, the political elections of May 2001 gave room to a centre-right government that in
the field of energy had a different vision, compared to the previous government, more oriented
towards nuclear energy. From 2001 to 2004, Prof Rubbia works very actively to awaken the in-
terest of the industry towards the plan and in order to diffuse, through the mass media, the exis-
tence and the scope of the project. But with the financial law n° 273 of the 2002, the new gov-
ernment reduced the extra-ordinary contributions assigned to Enea, making it altogether
67.139.397 Euro (130 billion Liras), a third of which was to be devoted to a program of efficient
use of the energy. The period after completing the phase of research, 2004-2005, was dedicated
to the realization of a prototype plant at Casaccia, Enea.

The law n°388/2000 had set that the phase of realization of the demo plant Archimede would be
realised by Enea in collaboration with a commercial partner, chosen by it. Prof. Rubbia, there-



57
fore, in 2004 had contacted Enel, in order to involve the company in a joint venture to realize an
experimental plant on industrial scale in one of the Mediterranean regions

Enel was interested in the project, that it considered strongly innovative, but proposed to realize
the plant in Sicily, integrating it with a power plant that already existed, in order to use the ex-
isting competences and saving costs in infrastructures.

Prof Rubbia, who had not considered the possibility of a synergy with an operating power plant,
reacted positively to the proposal, signing an agreement protocol between Enea and Enel. This
agreement, for two years, foresaw two moments: the first one concerned the building and the
working of the prototype plant, with a technical check of its operation, the second one regarded
the opportunity to commercialise this technology.

A feasibility study started, by involving both Enea technicians, for the performance analysis of
the plant in Casaccia, and Enel technicians for the plant design analysis.

At the same time, in 2004, Enel contacted the responsible ministries, informing them of the
agreement protocol signed with Enea, demanding the arrangement of a decree relative to green
certificates providing incentives to the production of solar thermodynamic energy, as stated by
the law n° 388/2001. But they had not and still have not been enacted.

In the meantime, relations became tense between Rubbia and the government: the frontal clash
happened in July 2005: the Enea Board of directors, named by the Government at the beginning
of 2004, in open opposition to the Prof, was discharged, forcing Rubbia to resign.

Therefore, in August 2005, Prof Rubbia left, in a sign of protest. On the 15th of July 2005, the
Council of Ministers put the Enea under compulsory administration and named the Prof. Pa-
ganetto as extraordinary Commissioner.

As a consequence, Enel didn’t continue its collaboration, due also to the lack of the decree by
the Ministry of the Productive Activities, because Enel didn’t have the necessary guarantees of
economic sustainability of the investment. The Prof. Paganetto supported the plan and restarted
the contacts with Enel. Enea technicians proposed to start constructing modules of 5-6 MW
power instead of a modular solution of 20 MW, like initially planned together with Prof Rubbia.

On the 14th December 2006, with a press release, Enel announced a research & development
program for the search of innovative solutions in order to reduce the environmental impact of
the production and distribution of electric power and in particular an investment of approxi-
mately 40 million euros for the solar thermodynamic project ‘Archimedes’, to be realized in col-
laboration with Enea.

On the 26th of March 2007, Enel and Enea signed an agreement protocol, in order to build the
‘Archimedes’ plant in Priolo Gargallo, in the presence of the Minister of the Environment, Al-
fonso Pecoraro Scanio, and Hon. Gianni Silvestrini, from the Ministry of Economic Develop-
ment - of the City council member to the Environment of the Region Sicily, Hon. Rossana Inter-
landi - and the Nobel prize-winner Carlo Rubbia. In this second phase of the project, Enel will
become the main contractor.

Currently, the question of authorization for the construction of the system in Sicily Region is in
progress. The 20th May the documentation has been introduced, so as to be able to open the yard
in January 2008. The first production of energy is forecasted for the end 2009 or beginning
2010.




58
A.3.1 The process of the Demo project
Archimede is a case in which we have worked with a PM who accompanied all the phases be-
fore the real demo plant; the PM was a researcher in a public institution, who developed rela-
tions with industrial suppliers for the realization of a prototype plant, whose main interest is to
support the development of the technology and who is bound to play a minor role in the future
when the industrial partner will take the responsibility of the demo plant.

Given all this, the CA process was easy in all the first part, i.e. from step 1 to step 3; after that
the problem of a near change in the responsibility makes more difficult to work on the portfolio
of options for Archimede. The other specific aspect is that the new (the industrial) PM is a
global player, for whom the thermodynamic solar plant is not a central business. For this reason
the project survives, but it has not the potentiality of creating a sufficient installed basis to com-
pete with the learning brought by other countries’ experience (i.e., Spain). For the same reason,
the project is in some way progressively separated from problem of local acceptance or gov-
ernment support; it is managed as a small niche, as it was more a research activity than an in-
dustrial production one.

During the CA process all this become more clear, so as some change in the alignment among
actors, where the future PM and the Ministry of economic development show a same scarce in-
terest towards these technology (of course Enel is interested in realizing the project, but without
a strong commitment ), the present PM (Enea), owner of the patents, manifests a growing inter-
est in applying this technology also out of Archimede, in collaboration with other industrial
partners and also out of Italy. At the same time a strategy of support for this technology by the
Ministry of Environment in agreement with some Regions become evident.

All this has brought us to consider the possibility of applying the ESTEEM tool for finding ac-
tions to support the technology in its differentiated ways of being realized, including initiatives
of communication, which could help the technology to sort out from a very restricted number of
informed actors.
 

A.3.2 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool

A.3.2.1 Step 0:
Based on step 0, the Archimede Project is a project in a starting phase : it has no similar experi-
ences to which to refer and it is the first industrialization of a pilot project. This demo project
has gone through many adaptations, mainly size reduction and plant combination, and in its last
version, given the present financial constraints, the demo Archimede is no more so adaptable to
new stakeholders’ expectations. The local authorities look at the project positively, even if they
don’t have expectations of a relevant impact in terms of less pollution or more jobs, given its
size; generally speaking, there is a scarce diffusion of information regarding this project
 




59
                             Italy - Demo Archimede


                                  Experience with similar
                                         projects




         Social acceptance                                    Adaptability




                                  Positive project impact


                                                                                


A.3.2.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors
Project Narrative
We met PM many times, gaining a complete vision of the past and present narrative: this helped
consultants to re-elaborate and to check the Narrative result.

Context analysis
The PM knowledge of the context can be focused on its interest and be partial. Therefore, it was
necessary the consultant role, looking for information sources such as content of national or lo-
cal debates, policy initiatives and laws.

Defining moments table
This tool was very useful for PM because it represents a synthetic vision of the past and present
project history. It was a reflection moment on the chronological events and on the internal
changes of this project. Good feedback for the project narrative.

Actors table
Easy to fill. Less easy questions have been the ‘Social organizations’ for our project.
 

A.3.2.3 Step 2: Vision building
Project manager’s present vision
PM present vision is drawn in the Step1
 
The BAU Scenario
 
It was prepared, but not used neither discussed
 
The Project manager’s future visions.
The time considered for the future visions was no more than 5 years, that is the visions concern-
ing the project. The version of the PM future vision benefited a lot of the discussion with con-



60
sultant, becoming less essential and more articulated (our PM is a researcher more than an en-
trepreneur).

Selecting the group of core stakeholders
This selection was made by PM, with a wide help of the consultant. This has been an active
moment of the ESTEEM tool, as it has been for the project context analysis.
 
The Stakeholder future visions
Future visions of stakeholders cannot be compacted in one: we have three main, highly institu-
tionalised core stakeholders: Ministry of Economic Development, Ministry of Environment,
Enel (future PM) Consortium of industrial suppliers (the leader). As result, the stakeholders’ fu-
ture visions are composed by three different future expectations, mainly because all of the key
actors participate with different interests. We use the individual interviews option (see Manual)
in Step 2.


A.3.2.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
Identification of conflicting issues and features
This tool represented a critical review of the whole process applied to Archimede project. Start-
ing from the result obtained from Step 0, it emerged the real room for action towards this pilot
project.

The aspects that had to be examined are mainly related to:
Relevance of social aspects: why no social aspects? Because Archimede is a starting project,
with no previous experience. Notwithstanding this, the PM has prepared an Evaluation of
Environemnt Impact of the project and, after presented it to the technicians and policy
authorities at regional and local level, has set a dossier for future meetings with the local
population, answering to questions linked to the impact of the plant (example, the effect of the
mirrors on the plane fly; the effect of the salt residual on the ground). These dossier will be used
by a team of young expert on behalf of Enel.

The plant should not produce any user problem (variation of cost, continuity of the supply)
because the electricity supply will remain conventional, given the characteristics of the solar
plant (size, combined plant).
\
The critical events, as the reduction of Government support, in terms of financial resources and
also the absence of incentive for industrial suppliers, produced the agreement between Enea and
Enel on a downsizing of demo plant from 20 to 5 MW (from 8000 parabolic mirrors to 2000)
and on a a combined loop plant and solar thermal plant , with a lower impact from the site point
of view

Due to this, currently this project is sustainable, from the perspective of investment , and
doesn’t provoke any real local (negative or positive) impact. This implies that the short term
solution for the project is a convergence of all key actors for very different reasons and
interests.

Technology versus project: Archimede is still a prototype project, asking for further
development: the three possible trajectories, which can complement each other are stand-alone
solar thermodynamic plants, smaller decentralised plants and more conventional solution,
including only partial innovation. Due to this, the problem of the future is mainly the destiny of
the techology and the social problems and opportunity are mostly shifted to the future
(technology).

Short versus long term horizon. From this perspective, the conflicting issues are:



61
1. structural: very low dimension of national industrial supply (size of production processes +
   low risk sustainability)
2. lack of an incentive policy
3. competitive attractiveness of other country localizations, in terms of favorable attitudes of
   governments and/or stronger solar radiations .

All these issues involve new and peripheral actors that will have an impact on future strategy.
To catch the potential opportunities for this technology, the main actors will be the industrial
competitors, asking for collaboration; foreign government, asking for developing the technology
(China, North Africa, Mid East ), or countries with strong incentive policy, attracting Enel (new
PM).

Hence, it has to be considered that the stakeholder core will probably change in the future,
grasping new national and global opportunities. Finally, using the tool for international markets
it is more difficult, because is less easy to include/ involve participants

The first conclusion that we have drawn is that the future strategy could be built on opportuni-
ties coming from peripheral from present core actors, such as new regions in Italy or new coun-
tries in the Mediterranean. At the same time, we think that other scenarios are less realistic for
Archimede, while they are possible for the technology i.e. a strong commitment of a part of the
national government, bringing with it related effect of social conflicts, or long term effect of re-
search activities for small solar thermodynamic plants and distributed systems. This forecast has
been recently confirmed by the latest political developments that overcome this demo plant and
are giving strong economic effort to the solar technology, implementing new projects, in other
sites and with a bigger power capacity (50 MW power).

In sum, while the building of the Archimede plant has started in January 2008, and there are all
the conditions for its realization, many new initiatives are on the table: more conventional
plants, with innovation in the plant components, to be developed in Mediterranean countries by
an engineering company which has associated Enea and the main industrial supplier of Ar-
chimede; investments of the Italian main industrial supplier in more conventional and more in-
novative more equipment for the production of components for different markets around the
world; the agreement between national Government and some regions for feasibility studies for
plants which are mixed solutions compared to Archimede (traditional carrier, but with an inno-
vative storage system); last but not least proposals of collaboration on the solar thermodynamic
technology by large utilities such as Edison and Endesa.
 
Ranking key actors and issues according to their strategic importance: we have realized the ta-
ble 4. 1.1 later, after the last meeting with the PM since we had the impression that Archimede
was loosing its relevance. In fact there has been a positive acceleration in the last two months in
favor of all the solar thermodynamic initiatives, which has brought also to an availability of the
Ministry of Economic development towards a policy of incentive for the promotion of the solar
thermodynamic plants. As to the Archimede project Enel will be the new PM, Enea has
signed a protocol of agreement for collaboration until 2009, the Region Sicilia and the lo-
cal authorities have given the authorization, the Ministry of Economic Development and
the Ministry of Environment have become supportive towards the project.


A.3.2.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options
Listing and evaluating solutions to major issues: also this table has been realized later, since
from the stakeholder interviews we have got the impression that Archimede had only a marginal
position, out of a real national commitment. What has changed? The direct confrontation of ac-
tors during the workshop and a positive acceleration in favor of Archimede and all the possible
application of the solar thermodynamic has allow to revisiting this idea. Some key issues have
been presented and discussed during the workshop and verified in the last meeting with Enea.


62
Some of the discussed issues have been confirmed as relevant, while other ones (sites availabil-
ity) resulted as not significant. This table includes these results.

First testing PM preferred solution for their robustness and resilience
We thought that in our case it was less useful to compare the PM position on options with other
stakeholders’, instead of asking all stakeholders to pronounce themselves freely on some critical
issues during a common discussion. This again because the Project was going into a change of
PM , where the new PM didn’t show a real commitment towards the project. The stakeholder
workshop has allowed the emergence of possible alternatives. We looked at the stakeholder
workshop as a strategic moment to test the commitment towards the project and the feasibility
of new roads for the technology.


A.3.2.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
The preparations of the workshop.
The first step was to call all stakeholders, asking for a confirmation of their presence. At the
same time, we tried to reach by phone also Professor Rubbia, the promoter of Archimede Pro-
ject. After many attempts, we managed to speak with his assistant. The phone call was long and
very interesting; she was interested in this WS. As Prof. Rubbia was very busy in November, we
have agreed to fix the date of WS for the first week of December. This implied a time consum-
ing invitation procedure. Moreover, she asked me to send her information on the CA project and
the list of participants. After 2 weeks she told me that Prof. Rubbia could not be present at the
WS. Only then we selected the room, the WS and sent the program to Ecoinstitut for a check.
Following CA suggestions, we selected a ‘participants WS’, trying to involve representatives of
other social dimensions, especially local representatives and environment and consumer asso-
ciation, together with industrial companies and associations. This choice was made by the con-
sultants, because the PM did not have an enlarged view of the context in which will be put the
demo. The PM asked to be ‘one among the other’ participants and to attend only after a formal
consensus from the Enea President. Core stakeholders gave a positive reaction, but someone
wanted to know more about the program. Our contact person at the Ministry of the Environment
changed: DR. Fabbri was moved to Brussels and we had to contact the technical secretariat to
find a substitute, to whom we presented again the European project and what we did so far.
Contact with the Mayor of Priolo Gargallo, Massimo Toppi, was only by phone. Before talk to
him, we were able to speak with Dr Gianni Attard, Head of Civil Protection in Priolo Gargallo.
He gave us a lot of information on the municipality availability towards Archimede and the per-
ception of the plant at the local level.

Realization of the workshop
The number of participants to the WS was lower then expected. The reasons have been of two
types:
transport problems: delays and reduced activity of Fiumicino airport, due to the bad weather.
The Mayor and the Head of the civil protection service of Priolo Gargallo were not able to reach
us; the same was for the people of the industrial Association ‘Assosolare’ coming from Milano;
grounds of expediency: people from Enel at the last moment communicated that they preferred
not to come, since the WS was not only on technical aspects. The fact is that Enel in this spe-
cific moment is engaged in reducing the national electrical energy dependence from oil in fa-
vour of nuclear, and this is a controversial question for Italy. Therefore at the same time their
interest towards Archimede is less urgent (also because the plant is going to be realised) and
Enel people don’t want to be under examination.

non collaborative position: the representative of the Ministry of Economic Development, who
showed a low interest towards the solar thermodynamic technology and specifically towards
Archimede, sent an email during the WS justifying his absence with another relevant meeting.




63
Notwithstanding these people’s absence, the WS was very lively and constructive, stressing two
aspects:
• There is a smaller group of stakeholders who has a strong will of going on and of promoting
    the technology at national level through new industrial applications and at international
    level, through the participation to bid for new investments broad and through collaborations
    with other countries.
• The needs of communication initiatives for supporting the understanding of this technology
    and for promoting trust.

Returning the results of the workshop
Our expectations were the following:
‘The workshop aims at highlighting the differences among stakeholders' future visions and pro-
ducing a free confrontation. It can produce a much higher awareness of the viability of the alter-
natives, by comparing the critical points regarding the different visions. Another goal is to de-
fine jointly the pathway of the project with regard to: technology development; feasibility and
long term support for the project’.

The WS allowed getting a really free and lively participated confrontation on the technological,
market and political issues related to the project and to the technology. It has been an occasion
for the PM to present some clarification directly to the Government on some critical aspects of
the technology applications. In particular PM showed the role of the Archimede towards rele-
vant technical issues (accumulation and high temperature) and at the same time the existence of
applications matching the capacity of accumulation of Archimede with the more diffused use of
diathermic oil. Moreover the industrial participants (the stakeholder and an engineering com-
pany interested in the high temperature solar technology) showed that they are involved, also
with Enea, in many qualified on going initiatives abroad. The technology, even if in an experi-
mental phase, has found a market and things are developing fast, notwithstanding the delay of
the Government.

The representative of the Ministry of Environment on his side showed a strong commitment to
support this technology and presented an interesting programme for developing a market (sup-
porting the role of the first adopters, see agreements with Regions). He also stressed the neces-
sity of promoting new initiatives of communication, asking for being involved directly or indi-
rectly (through a NGO which was present, Legambiente). Some contrasting vision was pre-
sented by an environmental association, and this was a good occasion for opening a dialogue,
which probably will have further development


A.3.2.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action
Identifying acceptance and feasibility
Step 6, arriving at the end, after the stakeholder workshop and the check with the PM of new
events, has been easily realized. The table works very well and gives value added, since at the
end we got a clearer vision of what the project is going to become or, better, what roads the
technology is going more probably to follow.
 
Sorting of options: Capacity for action
Also this table resulted very useful, designing the paths at short and long term. Table 5.4.1 e
5.4.2. give a coherent design of the possibility for the present PM to sustain the technology, also
beyond Archimede.
 
Develop the recommendations and action plans
The recommendations for actions have been easily derived from the previous table. PM has
helped us to identify the actions that, without a revision of its plan, can better help the success



64
of the project together with that of the new technology. The aim is to work on many different
directions so that the solar thermodynamic technology go out from its niche dimension (accept-
ing also hybrid solutions), so that there be a position of strength for the Italian industrial suppli-
ers and so that there is the development of a large, global market.
 

A.3.3 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM Tool in
      achieving acceptance in the region
The Archimede project did not provoked any opposition, on the local side. When we contacted
the Mayor of Priolo Gargallo, he showed a positive reaction because he supports the Archimede
Project. Moreover, this Municipality is facing huge environmental problems. From this point of
view, the original plant (20 MW) was better, in terms of employment, support to local industry
and could be a best practice for this area. Instead, a plant of 5Mw power is not significant. Due
to this, there is no a debate against this demo plant, there is a neutral position, mainly because
there are other urgent priorities: project on re-gasification plant in Priolo Gargallo, by IONIO
GAS (ERG /Shell). The involvement of local stakeholder was a right choice to widen the de-
bate. At the same time, the participation of the Municipality was motivated mainly by the need
to discuss about the pollution emergency in this area.


A.3.4 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA
Experiences with Counter partner’s support
The relation with the counter partner has been finalized mainly to the realization of the work-
shop. The suggestion to enlarge the discussion to new stakeholders, representing civil society,
even if not yet involved in the project and all the support we received for the organization of the
workshop has been for us very useful.
 

A.3.4.1 Lessons learned
It was fundamental to look at the differences among projects and define the project typology,
who are the main actors of the project (public or private), the position of the PM towards the
core stakeholders, and towards the project. Some project with less developed aspects (previous
experience, social acceptance) can benefit more of CA.

At the same time, even if less developed under some aspect, a project can have become ‘less
flexible’, given its history, i.e. given the time already covered by the project when ESTEEM
tool enter in. If the project started long time before and underwent many changes, probably it
has already found by itself a solution, it has already implemented a reduced process of ‘accep-
tance’, not negotiated in a collective way, but through bi-univocal relationships within a stake-
holder core group. As main consequence, this provokes the reduction of the potential of the pro-
ject, and at the same time the technology embedded in the project can take new paths. This
doesn’t mean that CA is not useful, since it can be used to create a basis for the future projects,
starting with a communication strategy.  


A.4     Demoproject Vép, Hungary

A.4.1 Description of Demo project
Although wind technology can be regarded as mature itself, for a demo project it was selected in
the CA project based on the fact that in Hungary only a few MWs of wind capacity existed in
2005 and 2006, but a boom was expected to ensue. Investor interest suddenly exploded due to
the rather high feed-in tariff, which in turn caused lower level, but blocking regulatory resis-
tance. Infrastructural and regulatory innovations are needed to absorb more wind capacity in the


65
rather inflexible Hungarian electricity infrastructure. Also, the so far usually positive residential
attitudes could change if the number of turbines massively increases. These were the issues that
made it worthwhile to explore the capacities the Create Acceptance process in testing a wind
project in this particular context.

The Hungarian demonstration project is located in Western Hungary, close to the Austrian bor-
der, near the village of Vép (3000 inhabitants). The project company is Szélerő Vép Kht. They
have one 0.6 MW wind turbine already operating, and they have a two step extension plan: first
to install three more turbines of altogether 4.8 MW (second phase), and then 16 turbines of
32 MW (third phase). This would result in altogether a 37.4 MW windfarm.

The company form is special, a so-called public benefit company (so not the classic limited li-
ability company or public limited company). Some of the owners and management have strong
local commitment. The company has a supervisory board, of which the president is the mayor of
the village. At the moment neither the village (nor the mayor), nor the residents are owners, but
the plan is that at the completion of the project 20% of ownership will be transferred free to the
municipality, and some 40% will be sold at preferential prices for residents. Landowners will
receive 5% share (those without turbines on their land, too, to prevent envy). The company even
now, from the revenues of the single already operating turbine pays the public lighting costs of
the village. Landowners, who have a turbine in their land, receive rent.

There had been several forums held and surveys conducted in the village on the proposed wind
plant, and it is mostly supported largely due to dedicated involvement both as regards local par-
ticipation and ownership plans. The municipality has plans to earmark part of the profit on the
20% municipal share for the social support system of the village (local unemployment is high).
The residents are proud of their existing turbine, it is favoured meeting and excursion point. For
all these features of intensive public involvement the project labels itself as ‘communal imple-
mentation’.

A large part of the already installed development was financed from EU support, the rest from
bank credit and some own capital, and similar is the financing strategy for the second and third
phase, also involving Interreg grants and Austrian support. The company has a special priority
option contract with Enercon, a major wind turbine manufacturer, therefore the turbines could
be quickly delivered despite the for a year reserved manufacturing capacities of the supplier.

However, in Hungary the regulatory situation is not favourable for new plans for wind devel-
opments, since the Hungarian Energy Office, on the suggestion of the system operator, put a
330 MW limit on total wind capacities in the spring of 2006 (for an unspecified time). The ar-
gument justifies it on the basis of balancing and security of supply problems that intermittent
energy can cause to the electricity system as it stands now. The 330 MW quota has been allo-
cated among ‘early bird’ applicants for wind power plant licences. There were applications for
more than 1500 MW, thus questions and conflicts of allocating scarce resources arose.

Szélerő Vép Kht. has obtained an Energy Office permit and quota only for the one, already op-
erating unit. However, they have not received from the quota even for the 2nd phase of proposed
extension, although they obtained all other permits, concluded necessary contracts and fulfilled
the conditions of connection of the distribution network operator.

Due to not having obtained from the wind quota, it is uncertain that for this company there will
be further turbines erected in the coming 2-3 years. However, they continue their coordination,
designing and permit acquisition work, and need a structured aid for navigation through the
complex field of interests. The quota is not set for ever, and bringing together the several views
can accelerate the quota revision, which, due to lobby forces, technical and regulatory develop-
ments, may be probable.



66
The rapidly and significantly increased interest in wind developments has raised and will still
raise different concerns and conflicts among stakeholders, including residents, local and re-
gional authorities, traditional generators, distribution network operators and not least also the
system operator and the regulator. The Create Acceptance process was expected to equip the
Project Manager with knowledge and capacities for navigating among stakeholder interests,
help the consolidation process, and in the meantime useful experience could also be gained on
the power/capabilities of the ESTEEM tool to be tested. The company management was very
much looking forward to cooperation and being a demonstration project.




Figure A.3 Location of Vép and the windfarm




Figure A.4 The 0,6 MW turbine at Vép, Hungary




67
Figure A.5 Permanent poster exhibition on the project and wind energy at the feet of the turbine


A.4.2 The process of the Demo project
The demo wind project was identified after a television documentary about the site and the
plans of the proposed wind park at the village of Vép. The report suggested that the manage-
ment takes communal relations seriously, so that they are even willing to accommodate to local
concerns, involve residents in the process as well as share some of the benefits of the plant with
them. It was also seen that there are some impediments, mainly on the authorities’ side, that the
management faces.

The consultant traced down the project manager (PM), and after a personal conversation with
the PM and another owner they confirmed the intention to work together. The PM, despite their
good previous efforts, saw their limitations and weak points, and looked forward with expecta-
tions to explore what the ESTEEM (then still called Create Acceptance) tool can provide. The
expectations were to explore and structure strategies that they can follow in order to be able to
continue the project, to widen their field of contacts and negotiations from the local level, since
locally they were already quite well ‘embedded’. These directions were taken to non-local au-
thorities/institutions on the one hand, and national non-governmental organizations on the other.

The ESTEEM process entered in the project line when it had already started, the first phase was
implemented, but then further phases were blocked. Thus it was not the most ideal early plan-
ning phase, but still a point of time when ESTEEM had the potential still to contribute. Its value
could actually be quite substantial if it could move further the halted situation, and the wind pro-
ject needed an external aid.

The PM also felt the wind project could utilize the test ESTEEM tool, and was very cooperative
throughout the project. However, time constraints were appreciated, and besides personal meet-
ings, phone conversations and skype discussions have also taken place. Calls and email ex-



68
changes occurred not only related to the application of the ESTEEM tool itself, but to discuss
news and developments relevant for the progress of the wind project. Both the PM and the con-
sultant initiated such calls and emails and these created a good working atmosphere and trust.
The PM lives near Budapest, which made personal contact easy, but Vép is 3-4 hour drive from
Budapest. The consultant visited the site and had conversation with the local part time opera-
tions manager and some local residents to obtain first hand field experience about the project
and its environment. Formal residential forum was not held in the framework of the Create Ac-
ceptance, since before its start the windpark management had already conducted a thorough lo-
cal participation and communication process, which had also included local forums and surveys.

The PM felt that some of the actor relations of the Vép project is very sensitive, and diplomatic
finesse was necessary to decide on disclosing conflicting points. Some actors, like the regional
Distribution System Operator (provider of the local grid connection), or the national system op-
erator (MAVIR TSO, responsible for system balance and physical power regulation) are very
important actors in the long term, and manageable relations - must be cultivated and maintained.
A fear was that the process revealing and publicising conflicts could make some actors’ attitude
hostile and unhelpful. Thus a concern of his was what conflicts, to what extent and how to make
public, if at all. It arose not only as a task to think over for the strategy to handle those actors,
but also even in filling the ESTEEM tool tables , as they can also become public. The latter
concern may have distorted some of the results of the tool relative to a non-test situation, where
some of the consultation documents can remain confidential.

Also, PM concerns arose as to whether if some opposition of one segment of the society (e.g.
concerns of some of the local residents about more than 4 turbines) come to light, another seg-
ment (authorities) can use it as an additional argument to back their own argument and negative
attitude. However, the PM was always ready to face the problems and compromised with the
consultant in a form and extent as to how to present problematic points.

The PM learnt much of the context, the energy policy and economics of his energy project and
the absorbing infrastructure during the discussions. When responding questions he was ‘forced’
to think over some issues he had not been thinking before, discussed these issues with the con-
sultant and realised some new aspects of his project.

It was a bit difficult to go ahead with the process parallel with the tool development. It made the
application of the ESTEEM process lengthier than an ideal pace. Sometime long pauses ensued
between steps despite the natural impetus of the process because the next step still had to be
fully elaborated. This is natural in this research project, but it would be useful to recommend a
timeline of the process, even if flexible and adaptable to the particular circumstances of the en-
ergy project to be supported.

Stakeholder relations went smoothly throughout the Create Acceptance process, and they were
appropriately cooperative. This was partly due to the opinion expressed by each stakeholder ap-
proached that renewable energy was an important issue due to environmental and security of
supply pressures. Nonetheless, their cooperation was partly also due to the established profes-
sional relationship with the consultant and the knowledge of its institution, and it is dubious
how it would have gone if a PM alone had applied the tool. Probably, ministries, agencies and
MAVIR would have been very difficult to involve. Even in this test case some incentives had to
be provided; either it was emphasised why participation and reactions are fruitful for the stake-
holder in their work or the consultant did some favour e.g. gave a presentation on a conference
organised by a particular stakeholder or gave minor advice in response to some other energy re-
lated questions by another stakeholder.

A challenge is how to follow up the further progress of the project. In this test case the consult-
ant formally leaves the PM with Step 6, but in later ESTEEM applications the consultant may
also have a follow up and helping hand role also in the execution phase of the action and com-


69
munication plan. Even in the Vép case the good relations with the PM and good experience
gained in working together allow further informal and perhaps formal cooperation in order to
achieve the complete implementation of the windpark project.


A.4.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool

A.4.3.1 Step 0:
Step 0 originally is to be done ex ante so that the PM could assess to what extent the ESTEEM
process can help them to carry out the project. With the Vép wind demo project it was filled in
by the consultant well in the 2nd half of the project (judging the knowledge and thinking of the
PM at the start of his project), and the final score and diagram indicated that there were two di-
mensions in which the process could especially be useful for the PM to enhance acceptance.
These dimensions were indicated as no experience with similar projects and the project being
still in an adaptable phase. The project was ‘predicted’ to be less useful in the other two aspects
as no extreme negative impacts were expected and social acceptance was not particularly low.

The questions are easy to understand and respond (with a good knowledge of the project and
context), and it takes less than half an hour to answer them.

Step 0 can be a useful tool to raise interest in potential users. It is recommended to make it
available also separately on the ESTEEM website - not only as part of the whole ESTEEM
package - so that anyone interested can experiment with it quickly.


A.4.3.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors
In Step 1 the PM deemed it very useful to reflect upon the history, decisive moments, current
status, actors and context of the project in - as he called it - a systematic way.

This step is organised for the delivery of 4 main tools, and it was considered useful and rela-
tively straightforward, but time consuming by both the consultant and the PM. It helped to build
a common understanding between consultant and PM, and the documents were consulted sev-
eral times during steps. The time spent by the PM (about 5 hours of interview altogether) and by
consultants (about 15 hours) was however considered important. The consultant and the PM al-
ready knew each other and some documentation and project background was already collected
during the WP2 case study on Vép.

The consultant elaborated an additional tool, the Innovation Characterisation table (see Appen-
dix of tools as applied to the Vép wind project). The PM filled it in as an add-on to the other
four tables of this step. He was comfortable with it and with explanations it took some addi-
tional 15 minutes. The Context tables are complex enough to incorporate the Innovation Char-
acterisation. It is recommended to keep it as a separate optional add-on table. It is useful for the
PM to reflect on the position of the project and it is a base for strategy elaboration.

All in all: Step 1 provided a good systematic reflection on the project and its context both for
PM and consultant.

Project Narrative
The questionnaire provided by the Manual to guide and structure the process was helpful but
there were redundancies in the questions- The tool wasn’t regarded very helpful with respect to
new knowledge, but it is not its goal. For the consultant it is a useful starting point, and also a
basis for the writing of the PM’s present vision in step 2. It is time consuming for PM and con-
sultant. It was pre-filled by consultant and then amended by PM during a 2 hour interview as a
basis for starting the discussion. After the interview the consultant wrote it up and sent to the


70
PM for a final check, who sent it back with minor corrections. The narrative is relatively short
taking less than three pages.

Recommendations:
• Check if questions are consistent and remove redundancies);
• Check, if project descriptions are already available; reduce and/or adjust questions utilising
   already available project information (e.g. flyers, brochures, tenders). Preparation by con-
   sultant should save time for the PM.

Context analysis
It was pre-filled by consultant and then completed and filled in by PM during a personal inter-
view. The PM and the consultant went through together the various cells. The context tables
took 2.5 hours to go through; it was tiring for PM However, both felt it was a useful tool to sys-
tematize the PM’s view of the context of the project, but the filling process was perceived
somewhat clumsy and long (but also manageable), and it often required guidance and explana-
tions on the consultant part. It Requires a well prepared and experienced consultant, and also
one having a good memory and/or well organised, prepared notes.

Recommendations
• Context tables are a jump in the deep water suddenly for the PM, it is better to put Defining
   Moments before it; DM gives a good warm-up with a feeling of first achievement.
• PM interpreted some headings differently, but easily understood with a few sentence addi-
   tional explanation. It is recommended to make Context Table headings less ambiguous.
• PM Interpretation of expected result was sometimes just the evident ‘success’, some hint
   would be expedient in the guidance for the PM.
• Social networks - let us characterize their significance with the phrase: potential for ‘social
   leverage’, because relationship with actors which have links to other influential actors may
   increase probability of acceptance.
• Continuous consultant feed back/intervention (cell by cell) is recommended;
• If the PM has no ideas - toss up the ball for PM to consider (he can accept or reject it; think
   about it or not).
• Optionally complement the context analysis with the Innovation characterisation table.

Defining moments table
Again, it was pre-filled by consultant, then checked and complemented by PM. This process
was rather straightforward. It was an easy to use, systematic collection and good reflecting ex-
ercise. The PM realised, he could have chosen better strategy for building windpark if Govern-
ment position had been announce earlier.

Recommendations:
• Using the DM table before the Context table (as originally suggested in the Manual) seems
   more appropriate. DM gives a good warm up for the PM with a feeling of first achievement.

Actors table
The Actors table was drafted jointly, from the narrative on the consultant part and then on the
basis of questions asked to the PM like who are the important players. This tool was considered
useful as it helped PM systematically consider the social environment of its project. The actor
table was a synthesising character summing the known actors but enlightening some of their
features that might be important later in the process. Also, the importance of actors with emerg-
ing potential (but not yet influential) was acknowledged. Some points arose to be considered for
the PM, for example to join or not a RES association. A PM concern was to smear or be explicit
regarding conflicts with important actors. Not only as a task to think over the strategy to handle
these conflicts, but also regarding how to present these in the tables, as the tool might be public,



71
and he did not want to impair relationships. Also, the core group of stakeholders for interview
for Step 2 were selected together by PM and consultant.

Recommendations
• Interpretation of ‘affinity’ (response ‘supportive’) was ambiguous, it should be clarified. An
   authority, for example, supportive, hostile or neutral (doing its job impartially) when pro-
   vides or denies a permit?
• Consultant Intervention: if the PM has no ideas - ‘toss up the ball’ for PM to consider (he
   can accept or reject it; think about it or not.

Overall PM perception for Step 1:
He did not feel it as a waste of time despite the fact that not much new information came out of
it (apart from conveying over some consultants knowledge when explaining context headings),
but it was useful to go through the various aspects of context, and also to take a systematic ac-
count of players and their roles, strengths and attitudes.


A.4.3.3 Step 2: Vision building
In this step the PM’s and ‘core’ group stakeholders’ visions about the project and its context
was constructed. This forms the basis of comparisons of visions and analysis in the subsequent
step.

The present, intermediate and future PM visions, as well as the present and future social net-
work maps were drafted by the consultant from Step 1 material and a phone discussion and then
sent to PM for review and amendment. A meeting was then organised with the PM to finalise
the visions and maps. The PM modified them only very slightly. These tools were considered
straightforward by both the consultant and the PM.

The core stakeholders were interviewed to elicit their future visions as well as they were re-
quested to reflect upon the future vision and future map of the PM. Based on this, the consultant
wrote a short synthesis summary for each stakeholder’s vision.

Some problematic points/recommendations related to each map and vision were:
• Interpretation of poles vs needs clarification.
• It is recommended to use the same aspects/dimensions in Step 1 and Step 2.
• Placing actors in one particular pole/dimension is not always easy: poles/dimensions may
   overlap.
• Carry on the same aspects/dimensions to Step 3 Conflicting Issues table.

Project manager’s present vision
The PM’s present and intermediate (around 2015) visions, present social network map were first
drafted by the consultant (based on step 1 and discussions with PM), and then reacted by PM (as
detailed above).

A few specific remarks and recommendations besides the general one in the Step 2 introduction:
• PM Present Vision is More descriptive of the past and present than a vision; -a- separate in-
    termediate vision was constructed for the midterm future so as to make vision more tangible
    and the path explicit.
• Include some sum of the narrative in the present PM vision to make other stakeholders
    know the project when they react to elicit their vision.
• Vision title: no high importance - done by PM and consultant together; they were only cho-
    sen for the PM’s visions, and not for stakeholders’.
• Social network map: it required not always easy pondering which (non-PM) relations to
    represent or ignore.


72
•    Synthesis of the maps should be written in short sentences, sort of a short descriptive sum-
     mary because much information on relationships included already in visions description.

The BAU Scenario
The BAU scenario is necessary to have a ‘the world without the project’ reference point or more
precisely, a reference line ahead in the future relative to which the visions of PM and stake-
holders can be compared and evaluated. A problem can be whose BAU should be taken as any
BAU is coming from a research institute or the state administration (Ministry or an energy
agency). The consultant tried to briefly synthesise the common forecast pieces reflecting no par-
ticular renewable energy policy efforts. As due to its size - apart from the local context - the
project itself makes no much difference, definitely not in the energy mix, the BAU is more a de-
scription of likely major trends of variables, attitudes and policies the development of which in
another way would otherwise provide a friendly background to the Vép project. The BAU was
discussed with the project manager and shown to core stakeholders in Step 2, and also sent to
invitees to the Step 5 Workshop.

Some further guidance to reduce ambiguities in constructing the BAU could be useful.

The Project manager’s future visions
The PM’s future (2020-2030) visions, future map (around for 2020-2030) were first drafted by
the consultant (based on step 1 and discussions with PM). ), and then reacted by PM (as detailed
above).

A few specific remarks and recommendations besides the general one in the Step 2 introduction:
• Future social network map: it required not always easy pondering which (non-PM) relations
    to represent or ignore.
• Vision title: no high importance - done by PM and consultant together; it was only chosen
    for the PM’s vision, and not for stakeholders’.
• It is a mix of qualitative and quantitative statements, but more qualitative statements than
    quantitative to see the essence - not to be lost in numbers.
• Synthesis of the maps should be written in short sentences, sort of a short descriptive sum-
    mary because much information on relationships are included already in visions description.
• It may be a challenge to make the PM contradict with the consultant/expert drafted interme-
    diary view - how to provoke/encourage the PM?
• PM interview should be interactive consultation rather than just having PM to mod-
    ify/approve visions pre-drafted by the consultant.

Selecting the group of core stakeholders
This was done in a discussion with the PM right after Step 1 Actors’ table had been completed.
The PM had earlier contacted, communicated quite professionally with locals - but only with
locals, and it was useful for PM that the CA process widened/opened the world of stakeholders
(e.g. involvement of ministry officials, regulators, system operator, national organisations etc).
From local population only the mayor was involved the ‘standard’ way in the core group. No
other local population representative was selected into the core group due to several reasons.
First of all, previous involvement, interactive communication, exhibitions, forums and surveys
discovered and addressed local concerns; no sharp conflicts remained. Also, the residents of
Vép are not organized into relevant local NGOs - there are no representative residents. In this
respect forums could work, but such forums had been done earlier by PM and a communication
team.

The Stakeholder future visions
Six core stakeholder interviews were conducted. The core stakeholders were made to be inter-
ested: either to show it in itself provides help in their work or sometimes ‘services’ were
given/promised in return (expert advice on an issue intriguing them, presentation by the con-


73
sultant on their event). The interviewees were the expert in charge of Renewable Energy Policy
at the Ministry of Economy, the head of the Economic Department at Hungarian Energy Office,
the expert in charge of climate change strategy at the Ministry of Environment, the head of bal-
ancing services at MAVIR (System Operator), one representative of the Energy Club NGO and
the Mayor of Vép. Local population views were assessed based on former survey results and
informal conversations with residents and the mayor.

Core stakeholders reacted to the PM’s visions and responded questions in the interviews; they
reacted moderately to PM’s materials - questions had to be used to elicit there views. From
these reactions, a synthetic note was drafted for each stakeholder as an input into Step 3. The
stakeholder interviews took approximately 2 hours each. Particular stakeholder present vision
was not drafted, but some stakeholders also reacted upon some points of the PM's present vi-
sion.

Recommendations:
• Use also a questionnaire to elicit broader context views of core stakeholders rather than just
   react on PM's vision.


A.4.3.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
In this step the consultant analysed Step 2 material alone. He compared the PM’s visions with
those of core stakeholders in order to discover in what they contradict and coincide and thereby
to identify and characterize conflicting and synergetic issues. It worked well that it was a con-
sultant’s analysis session; minimization of PM involvement is recommended in this phase and
the consultant should go to the PM well prepared in Step 4 for seeking solution options that are
then can be offered in step 5 for negotiation.

Identification of conflicting issues and features

Conflicting Issues table
The consultant listed numerous issues that characterised the vision of a given stakeholder, then
examined which of these contradict or support the vision of PM. There were only a few conflict-
ing points, and somewhat more synergetic points found that were straightforward to identify for
the stakeholders involved.

Recommendations for the Conflicting Issues table:
• It is recommended to check and in cases to keep the internal consistency column (originally
   included then dropped from the tool manual) to check if there are contradictions within the
   vision of a given stakeholder (across dimensions);
• The chosen approach of core stakeholder interviews in Step 2 and their analysis in Step 3
   does not provide for anticipating potential future actors and conflicting issues (apart from
   future map in Step 2 to some extent).

Ranking key actors and issues according to their strategic importance
In this tool the consultant ranked four conflicting issues according to their impor-
tance/significance to the project and to their solvability. Filling the Issues Ranking Table was
found easy and straightforward.

Recommendations for the Issues Ranking Table:
• Also include issues anticipated from future.
• In some cases instead of ranking, marking between 1 and 5 might be useful - there might be
   close to equal important issues.




74
•    Whether the consultant or PM should judge solvability is a question: should consultant
     come up with her/his hint and then make PM react or PM would judge it first hand (and
     therefore involve PM even in Step 3 or combine this substep with the Step 4 meeting).

Experience with the Strategic Issues Graph:
The Strategic Issues Graph, indicating importance and urgency, is a nice visualisation and
summary of this Step, but adds no additional info or facility.

Recommendation for the Strategic Issues Graph:
• Also include issues anticipated from future, these, by nature of the ‘urgency’ dimension,
   will have a ‘discounted’ urgency.


A.4.3.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options
Listing and evaluating solutions to major issues
In this tool the PM and consultant met in order to seek solution options in three categories (as in
the Manual) for the conflicting issues ranked in Step 3. Before the meeting, the consultant pre-
filled the table with his solution proposals and then discussed them with the PM. Eventually
three of the four conflicting issues were dealt with. The fourth (securing finance for advancing
with the wind project) was dropped as it proved to be trivially solvable once the major conflict-
ing issue (having no permit from the Energy Office) is solved (its solvability is fully conditional
on another issue). The PM accepted the consultant’s solution proposals and also added some
possible solutions. Formal evaluation and ranking - partly on the advice of the CA process
counterpartner - was not carried out. The PM and consultant agreed that all the proposals dis-
cussed are worth putting forward for discussion on the Workshop (in Step 5), and their practical
evaluation and priotising would take place during action planning in Step 6 (after finalisation of
the solution options as a result of the Workshop).

First testing PM preferred solution for their robustness and resilience
According to the testing experience of other partners and discussions at the project meeting in
Budapest, this substep was not done.


A.4.3.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
The workshop was the 5th step out of six in the process of Create Acceptance project. The goals
and procedure of CA had been described in the background material sent earlier to the invitees.
The workshop was held in the meeting room of one of the major opposing stakeholder, MAVIR
Zrt. (Hungarian Transmission System Operator Company Ltd.) on the 16th of November, 2007.

The aim of the workshop was to start discussions - or even negotiation - between stakeholders
with the mutual recognition of their differing future visions, conflicting opinions and to seek for
and compromise possible solution options that could help to overcome the deadlock situation of
the Vép wind project.

The preparations of the workshop
The consultant informed the PM about the form and content of the workshop and his role during
the workshop in a meeting a few days before the workshop. Earlier, the PM had helped the con-
sultant with putting together the list of stakeholders who were to be invited.

The consultant and PM selected and discussed - based on Step 3 and 4 - the key issues and solu-
tion options to put up for discussion on the Workshop. The PM asked to reformulate to a more
general issue one of the selected issues: the results of a local survey on the attitude of residents
towards the rapid growth of the number of wind turbines was not fully supportive. It was refor-
mulated as


75
•    The social impact and general/local acceptance of (expected) rapid growth to large scale in
     the number of wind turbines

This general formulation was a compromise with PM; he did not want to reveal the concrete re-
sult of the earlier survey that approximately 50% would support more than 4 turbines fearing
that other participants (authorities) might use this result as a counter argument against augment-
ing the windpark.

After putting together a first list of some 30 stakeholders to invite for the workshop, an invita-
tion by email was sent. As a follow up, the consultant reacted actively on the reactions of the
invited people: Criteria for the selection of participants in manual were useful and applied, we
tried to invite people from each dimension of society, attempting to achieve more representativ-
ity in scope than what the core group of Step 2 showed. Eventually 17 attendees showed up, but
this did not much affect the aim that each type of stakeholders were represented except science
and consulting.

A dossier was sent by Email to all participants a few days before the workshop. It contained:
• a brief description of the situation of wind projects and Vép wind project, the Create Accep-
   tance project and the aim of the workshop
• present, intermediate and future vision of PM, description and maps
• a chart showing the CA process
• agenda of the workshop.

Printed brochures about the wind project at Vép and printed versions of the agenda and the Cre-
ate Acceptance process scheme were distributed to all participants right before the workshop.

Realization of the workshop
The workshop started with an introductory presentation by József Fucskó (MAKK) - the facili-
tator - describing the aim of the workshop, the Create Acceptance process, the demonstration
projects and in detail the status of the Vép wind project (achievements, obstacles). He described
a summary of stakeholders’ visions, the conflicting and synergetic issues, and proposed the
most burning issues that were selected in previous CA steps to be discussed for the workshop.
These selected issues were carried over to the next part of the workshop so as to find various
solution proposals to them and thereby help Vép wind project PM to step forward with his pro-
ject from the halted situation. The audience did not add further points to discuss.

Participants were then divided into small groups to come up with solution proposals. Working
in small groups of four people rather than pairs (as originally the Manual suggested) worked
well. Then a representative of each group presented its proposals which was then discussed by
the participants. Finally an evaluation of the options ensued by the means of voting.

During the workshop the PM was just one participant among the other ones. It was the consult-
ant who presented the project and answered questions in the plenary phase. During the discus-
sion in smaller groups, the PM took part in the session work in one of the groups, acted as any
other participant, gave some own ideas, reacted positively on inputs given by the stakeholders in
the group, and did not turn down suggestions. It was not the PM who presented the group’s
opinion, was reserved in the plenary discussion of suggestions, but took part in the prioritising
vote.

The role of the facilitator had to be somewhat more active than envisaged, because due to the
numerous general proposals, he had to introduce some more PM focused proposals that were
not raised by stakeholders. However, even the proposals targeting other stakeholders can be in
one way or another utilized, mainly when lobbying, cooperating with allies and negotiating with
opponents. This is something to explore in step 6.



76
The overwhelming majority accepted each solution option. It raises the question for what and
how we want to use the evaluation/voting procedure. In its given form it is not appropriate for
priotising the proposed options, but possibly to identify what type of participants are against a
particular proposal. Even a few opposing stakeholders can be influential and block the advance
of the project, even if PM is going ahead with the implementation of a seemingly widely sup-
ported option. Priotising was not really successful also due to the clumsy, lengthy and after a
while boring, and consequently (after the tiring point) somewhat anarchistic voting procedure.
However questions during voting helped to further interpret some issues/proposals.
These experiences raise the question as to how to simplify or substitute voting in evaluating the
proposed options.

Participants can be a little bit undisciplined - it is difficult to fully follow the instructions of
Manual - for example noting proposals on stickers - it seems immaterial but it causes practical
problems for grouping and ordering the proposals in the next step of the workshop

The focussed objectives that were indicated by the consultants before the workshop were mostly
met during the workshop:
• Evoking a wider scope of stakeholders' view on future of wind integration - mutual under-
   standing of system regulation concerns and prospects.
• Address concerns about rapid growth of wind.
• Evoking suggestions for improvements -discover if there are any conditions under which
   the wind project can go ahead; alterations the wind project can do.
• Attempting the convergence of solution proposals; to start a discussion process.
• Test main possible project variations identified in earlier steps regarding their acceptability.

The workshop also offered a relevant network-facility for the stakeholders that had not met each
other before. New contacts between stakeholders and the project manager with stakeholders
were made in the workshop

Expected results
• New communication space opened for the project and wind energy.
• Conflicts were made explicit - alliance and lobbying strategy can be built on it.
• Conflict resolution potential discussed/discovered/started to do list for stepping ahead in
   step 6.
• Numerous solution proposal discussed, partial agreements achieved - some were new and
   deemed valuable and will be investigated by PM.
   - But even when agreements seem to take shape, understanding is still superficial, when
       the issue cuts materially again, same rooted conflicts may revive.
• The workshop was not really successful in priotising the proposals.
• WS report was made and distributed.

The Vép project manager, for whom many of the issues and proposals were already familiar,
seemed to accept more project adjustments (and consequently costs), and was more ready to
compromise than other wind developers, for whom most of the proposals would need further
‘digestion’. In sum, first steps towards moving out from the deadlock were made.

Recommendations for the ESTEEM tool, Step 5
The role of PM during the Workshop should be more explicitly described and advised on in the
CA Manual. It was somewhat ambiguous to what extent he can act as any other participant, but
at the same time should not interact the flow of the workshop and the proposals, but also not
lose the opportunity to discuss and test own proposals identified in step 4.




77
Due to the negative experience with voting, and therefore priotising, in the following section a
simple, as well as theoretically well-founded evaluation procedure is recommended.

According to Donald Saari (in Economic Theory, 2000), the only fair voting system for more
than two candidates to appropriately reflect preferences is the so called Borda count (proposed
by Jean Charles Borda in 1770 to elect the members of the French Academy of Sciences.). The
Borda procedure is simple as long as there are not too many candidates or, in our case, propos-
als. If there are options X, each voters ranks the options: the most preferred option receives X
points, the second preferred X-1 and so on. Then the points of each option are simply summed
and the number of points gives the preference order. The participants can do it on a slip of paper
and then the papers are collected and points counted. It would be a shorter procedure than hand
or card voting for each proposal and at the same time would give a more appropriate result. In
the case of numerous proposals the procedure could also be done for each category of actions
(project alteration, information gaps, financial incentives) separately, but then priority is not set
across the categories.

Voting or evaluation can also be used not for priotising the proposed options, but possibly to
identify what type of participants are against a particular proposal. Then in the actions in Step 6
those type of actors will need particular attention.

Returning the results of the workshop
The workshop report was prepared by the consultant and was sent to all participants and also to
those who indicated that they wanted to receive it (e.g. some invitees had responded that they
were not able to attend but would like to see the written outcome). On their initiative, the report
and the presentation were also placed on the website of the Hungarian Wind Association from
where anyone (not only members) can download it. There was no particular feed back sent to
the consultant on the report.


A.4.3.7 Step 6: Recommendations for action
In this step the consultant and PM synthesised and turned into action plans what they had learnt
throughout the Create Acceptance process about the adaptation possibilities of the wind project
and its context. The goal of the action plans is to help the PM be able to move the project out of
the current deadlock situation by adjusting its features and operation mode whereby making it
more acceptable for stakeholders.

This step relied heavily on steps 3, 4 and the Workshop (Step 5). As a start, the consultant called
the PM for a phone interview to discuss the results of the Workshop. The PM felt he had learnt
some proposals that he thought were valuable and he would further investigate them

The tools were first pre-filled by the consultant and then a 2 hour meeting with the PM ensued
to discuss and finalise the proposed actions.

In this test case the consultant formally leaves the PM with Step 6, but in later ESTEEM appli-
cations the consultant may also have a follow up and helping hand role also in the execution
phase of the action and communication plan.

Identifying acceptance and feasibility
Based on Step 4 and the Workshop (Step 5) the consultant pre-filled the Acceptance and Feasi-
bility table which was easy and straightforward. For three key issues ten solution options (ten
groups of options) were listed and qualified.

Some ambiguity arose as to when a solution option should qualify as highly accepted. Should
high acceptance be interpreted as accepted by almost every Workshop participant (including the



78
PM and other wind developers) or just ‘outsiders’ only. A recommendation is that it should be
indicated, if for a particular proposal there is high acceptance by other stakeholders, but low by
PM or other developers of similar projects, because it would require too much sacrifice. An-
other possible situation is, if most stakeholders and the PM agree, but developers of other simi-
lar projects’ (in our case wind projects’) do not, but agreement of the developers and concerted
action is necessary.

Also sometimes it is not unambiguous whether the capacity for action for a particular option is
to be marked 1 or 2, or in other cases 2 or 3. As some actions can be done by the PM quickly
but it does not make much sense if he does not cooperate so both 1 and 2 are appropriate. Also
some collaboration actions (type 2) address issues that are important, but chances for influence
are low. So these are also issues to monitor (type 3).

Sorting of options: Capacity for action
It is an easy to use summary reorganisation of the Acceptance and Feasibility table. A remark
here is that in ‘type 3 actions’, which are about monitoring, the essence is not about actions, but
the issues to be monitored. The guidance for this column itself mentions issues as opposed to
the column heading. The actions themselves are certainly easily doable in this category - alone
by PM or with others - but the issues the monitoring actions address are outside the influence of
PM and his allies; only there is some little chance that they lead to changes. It is these issues
that are interesting here, and naturally also their monitoring actions, thus it is recommended to
list them together in this column in a form: monitor what issue with what action (what and
how). The monitoring actions themselves are then detailed in a later substep, in the Long-term
monitoring and capacity-building plan.

Develop the recommendations and action plans
a/ short term action plan
Based on the previous exercises, it is easy to select type 1 actions, here labelled as short term
actions. Problematic can be in some cases that we take ‘actions that PM can do alone’ equiva-
lent with short term actions; just because he can do it alone, should then he also do it now? For
example, in the case of Vép, type 1 (PM can do alone) activities are not the most important and
urgent ones, but type 2 collaboration actions are more crucial for the success of the project, so
these should be addressed first as short term activities (even if some of them may run into the
medium term). For Vép Wind case, only then or at most coincidentally should come type 1. The
consultant kept the Draft Guidance Manual’s categorisation, but clarified this question of prior-
ity with the PM.

b/ collaboration plan
See remark above on priority of collaboration plan.
It is worth noting that in finding collaborative partners, the PM should explore, keep in mind
and utilise synergies! Cultivate liaisons with those with whom some particular common goals
(synergies) exist, communicate and emphasize these synergies to them and the public.

A specific recommendation for the tool: Insertion of a ‘with whom?’ column would be explicit,
make it more transparent and useful. All in all it is a collaboration plan table. The collaborators
otherwise are jammed in the type of action column, and the table is not so transparent that way.

c/ Long-term monitoring and capacity-building plan
A general remark here is that it can easily swell too big, it can be very time and resource con-
suming for the PM to execute an ambitious monitoring plan, so it should be planned in an eco-
nomic way to restrict it to such actions that may really bring in some benefits.

The checklist contain some items that are ambiguous whether they are monitoring actions or
more active initiations, e.g. ‘potentials to exploit’, or ‘pitfalls to avoid’. The latter is explained
as problematic PM behaviour or problems in the company’s organisational structure, which are


79
not external dynamics that the PM cannot influence. Some terminology clarification for this
substep is recommended as well as example filling of the table.
Capacity Building should also be defined, e.g. efforts that make PM better prepared to monitor
and understand ‘big’ issues and if time comes to that also make PM capable to intervene.

d/ Communication plan
The communication plan is an important interface with the target stakeholders and general pub-
lic. It can even easier run out of resources than the monitoring activities, so the important issues,
the right channel for the right target group should be carefully chosen.

The tool is well designed if a detailed communication plan is necessary; if not, the integration of
this substep into the previous tables near the actions is recommended.

e/ For all actions
A summary time span table for the actions template would be useful for the users (either the PM
or consultant). Alternatively a timing column could be inserted in each table, where relevant. It
can include a time interval, a deadline or the word ‘continuous’.

Evaluation of the Create Acceptance process
As the discussion of capacity plans was exhaustive and time consuming, the evaluation was
done in a separate occasion in a phone interview. It took about 45 minutes to go through the
evaluation questions and talk about overall PM experience related to the CA process.

The PM’s general feelings were very positive, he felt CA provided added value to his efforts in
achieving the continuation of the project. However, by the nature of the mostly regulatory im-
pediments, and thereby the necessity of collaborative actions, even in the case of success, it will
be a result of common efforts, therefore the contribution of CA, probably is not separable and
determinable.


A.4.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM Tool in
      achieving acceptance in the region
Local and regional acceptance is not a perceivable problem currently for the wind project due to
the previous efforts of the management. There are some residential concerns anticipated though
(discovered by surveys before the CA process started). The concerns of the minority of the
population about erecting more than 4 turbines, however, are not strong, in tendency decreasing,
and are not the bottleneck now of the project. Despite this, they are addressed in the action
plans, and success or failure of ESTEEM can only be judged if this issue becomes timely and
relevant. The CA process successfully involved the mayor and a few residents in Step 2 and 5.


A.4.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA

A.4.5.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support
The counter partner for this demo was chosen because his extensive experience of acceptance
problems of wind developments in France, and also due to his experience in using the predeces-
sor (SOCROBUST) tool for innovative projects. The particularities of the Hungarian situation
made it somewhat difficult for an outsider to understand every detail of the project, the context
and the problems, but still the counter partner had some essential insights and provided good
recommendations. One was for the consultant to not only focus on the regulatory 330 MW limit
as a hindrance for the project, but also to look behind and address the policy reasons behind it,
as policy (decision makers) can be uncertain as to what direction of the transition of the energy
system should take, and also lobbying of conventional stakeholder forces may push strongly
against making absorption of more RES-E and wind possible. Also, it was recommended to skip


80
the Solutions ranking table, as there was not enough information at the time to fill it in the same
way as the table requires, and on the other hand the necessary basic judgements were also pos-
sible to make without it.


A.4.5.2 Lessons learned
Numerous inspirations came from other partners’ ideas and experiences despite the different
character of each demo project. As testing of the various steps of ESTEEM did not exactly co-
incide, the experiences of the pioneer(s) of a given step were presented to the others, and then
they were fed back to the tool, and other partners often used the modified tool.

The main lesson learnt of applying ESTEEM is that it is doable with non-extensive efforts that
are also tolerable to the PM, it helps to gain new knowledge of the project and context both for
the PM and other stakeholders, it helps to explore adjustment and negotiation options that the
PM appreciates and will take further, and that the PM hopes may lead to higher acceptance and
ultimately contribute to the completion of the project.


A.5     Sustainable Marine and Road Transport, Hydrogen in Iceland

A.5.1 Description of Demo project
SMART H2 is a demonstration project for hydrogen fuelled vehicles and vessels. The project
will test various types of hydrogen-fuelled company cars and other equipment that runs on hy-
drogen, including a hydrogen auxiliary power unit for a tour ship run by Elding. The project
also aims to demonstrate the operation infrastructure for compressed hydrogen and develop the
distribution system for hydrogen, for example by organizing and running a small-scale hydro-
gen transport service.

The project is based on the vision that Iceland can in the future use hydrogen made with local
renewable energy and water as a transport fuel. This will enable the country to cut its carbon di-
oxide emissions and replace imported fossil fuels with a locally made fuel. The tests are an im-
portant learning phase in realizing the large-scale introduction of hydrogen. A shift to hydrogen
fuel will require the development of new equipment and the introduction of a partially new fuel
delivery and production infrastructure.

Icelandic New Energy (INE) is the initiator of the project. One of INE’s major shareholders is
Vistorka, a company which serves to unite business venture funds, key energy companies, aca-
demic institutes and the Icelandic government. In the Create Acceptance project, INE represents
both




81
Figure A.6 The SMART-H2 project encompasses the 2nd and 3rd major hydrogen demonstration
           projects that pave the way for an operational hydrogen energy system in Reykjavik

SMART H2 is the second and third major test project in Iceland. It is rooted in the experience
gained in the use of hydrogen fuelled public buses in the ECTOS and HYFLEET: CUTE pro-
jects also initiated and run by Icelandic New Energy (INE) and run partly on EU funding.
SMART H2 aims to extend the experiences gained in public transportation to other types of cars
and to the shipping fleet. It is also different from the previous projects in the sense that SMART
H2 is funded domestically by Vistorka and the Icelandic government.

The project consists of three paths:
• SMART H2 ICE path focuses on company and rental cars. These cars run on conventional
   internal combustion engines (ICEs), which represent an intermediate step toward the shift to
   fuel cell cars. The cars will be retrofitted Toyota Prius vehicles that use hydrogen instead of
   gasoline. The cars will fill up at Shell Hydrogen’s hydrogen station. The aim of the SMART
   H2 ICE path is to test the hydrogen distribution options, collect data on vehicle and station
   performance, collect drivers’ experiences, and validate the market potential in Iceland.
• SMART H2 FC path focuses on fuel cells. The first demonstration project within this path
   will test an auxiliary power unit based on a hydrogen hybrid engine. This will be done on
   the whale-watching tour boat Elding. The engine will produce the electricity needed on
   board. This demonstration aims to develop the auxiliary power unit into a marketable prod-
   uct for other vessels or other types of users. The path will also create awareness of hydrogen
   based technology among the hospitality industry and tourists. Also fuel cell powered cars
   will be tested within this path at a later stage.
• SMART H2 Research will focus on assessing the economic, environmental and social ef-
   fects of using hydrogen as the main fuel in Iceland compared to other alternative fuels. It
   will also compile data on user experiences, performance, reliability, operational design, and
   operators’ experiences.




82
Figure A.7 Overview of the SMART-H2 paths

INE has been working on projects to prepare for an eventual hydrogen economy in Iceland for
almost a decade, and SMART-H2 represents a natural continuation of previous projects and
promotion activities for hydrogen in Iceland. The project managers are very familiar with the
domestic and international debate surrounding hydrogen and have years of experience in pro-
moting hydrogen. They are fairly well aware of the views of different stakeholders and have
longstanding contacts with many of the stakeholders. But opponents have not been contacted
directly even though their protests appear at times in local and international media.

Currently there are more than 20 organizations participating in the SMART-H2 project. Three
closely co-operating project managers from Iceland New Energy (INE) are in charge of the dif-
ferent paths. The main parties involved are providers of materials and technology (Orkuveitan:
power, Daimler Chrysler, fuel cell cars, Quantum: ICE cars, other vehicle providers, fuel cell
provider, the users of the equipment (e.g., Hertz, Alcoa, Landvirkjun, Orkuveitan, Elding boat
and tour operator), administrators and regulators, and different research institutes and universi-
ties involved in the research. Meetings with users, suppliers and other stakeholders have been
ongoing since September 2006. The companies participating in the tests will need to agree to
provide data for the research conducted by INE.

In terms of the Create Assessment process of testing the ESTEEM tool in a demo project, this
demo project has some particular features. Iceland New Energy is both a partner in Create Ac-
ceptance (and thus represents the ‘consultant’ using the ESTEEM tool) and the operator of the
SMART-H2 project. The demo project leader in the Create Assessment project, Maria Maack,
is also a ‘real life’ project leader of one of the SMART H2 Research path. She has also been


83
central in the previous project, ECTOS, and is a central figure in the development of hydrogen
systems in Iceland. Thus, from the perspective of the ESTEEM tool, the demo project leader has
something of a dual role.

In the ESTEEM tool testing process, the director of Iceland New Energy is designated as the
‘Project Manager’. There is thus a separate ‘Project Manager’ with whom the tool is tested, but
the relations between the project manager and the ‘Consultant’ are closer than is the case in the
other demo projects. The ‘Project Manager’ and the ‘Consultant’ work in the same organization,
which has some benefits but can also make some things more complicated.

This demo project thus provides some insights on the use of the ESTEEM tool in a situation
when the ‘Consultant’ is in-house. It can also give some insights into situations where there is
no particular consultant at all, but the ‘Project Manager’ or some of the project staff use the
ESTEEM tool themselves.


A.5.2 The process of the SMART-H2
The SMART-H2 demo project differs from the other demo projects in a number of ways. These
are discussed in the following in terms of
1. technological maturity,
2. management capabilities of the project manager,
3. governance of the demo project,
4. local context and
5. the stakeholder relations of the demo project. All these characteristics have implications for
    how the ESTEEM process works in the demo project.

(1) Hydrogen is an ‘emerging’ technology, which is probably closest to actual application in
Iceland. Iceland has a number of natural advantages in the use of hydrogen as a transport fuel,
most notably the abundant hydroelectric and geothermal energy resources that can be used to
produce hydrogen, as well as long experience in running community based systems with renew-
able energy only. There are also some natural ‘disadvantages’ that make hydrogen very attrac-
tive as an alternative fuel, most notably the lack of domestic biomass reserves and the distance
of the country from the rest of Europe. Nonetheless, in Iceland as elsewhere, actual market ap-
plications of hydrogen technology have taken longer to materialize than might be expected on
the basis of some of the public/international discussion. Many aspects of market application re-
quire the co-operation of foreign partners, including oil/fuel companies and car manufacturers.
On the other hand, there is a strong economic rationale in Iceland to develop hydrogen-based
transport fuels because this would provide a new product for the domestic energy industry.

(2) The SMART-H2 project represents a fairly mature project in terms of managerial capabili-
ties. INE is a small organization with a very small but very capable staff. The owners of INE are
large companies for which INE is strategically important. Promotion of hydrogen has been the
main mission of INE since the inception of the company. INE has fairly established project
management procedures. The SMART-H2 project has been in a very intensive phase, and test-
ing the different steps of the tool is difficult to integrate into this fast-moving project.

(3) Governance of the demo project is complicated, because it is owned by a number of differ-
ent companies with somewhat different interests. Because SMART-H2 is strategically very im-
portant for the owners of INE, there have been some uncertainties about when to make public
specific aspects of the project. The owners of INE have various roles in the project - they are not
merely financial investors, but also users, producers and stakeholders of the project. This aspect
requires significant sensitivity to context when applying the ESTEEM tool. A partial solution to
the situation was to involve an outsider, the department of natural resources at the University of
Iceland to implement the stakeholder workshop in step 4.



84
(4) Iceland is a small country (about 300 000 inhabitants) where people tend to know each other
and inhabit a number of different roles at the same time. Because of the tight-knit and non-
hierarchical nature of the community, communication routes are quite informal. Also the or-
ganization of social life and the relations between different interest groups follow a similar,
fairly informal pattern. In such a community, highly organized forms of, e.g., stakeholder con-
sultation may be viewed as ‘over-organized’ and may not fit the local traditions.

(5) The stakeholder relations of the demo project reflect some specificity of the project and its
national context. Because hydrogen has raised so much international interest, it has been widely
aired in the international media. Icelanders follow such media (e.g., BBC World, Financial
Times, Newsweek, Stern, le Monde etc) closely, and thus receive communications concerning
‘their’ hydrogen projects ‘from outside’. This has raised large expectations about the materiali-
zation of the hydrogen economy, which are challenging to meet.

The project does not involve notable conflicts between the project manager and the local popu-
lation concerning the design of the project. There are clearly differences of interest among dif-
ferent stakeholders. The most obvious ones are between the different parties that finance (or fail
to finance) the project and governing the institutional environment of the project. Often, such
questions are perhaps perceived of as being different from questions of ‘societal acceptance’
(even though this might not necessarily be the case). In this case, society has accepted and ex-
pects more commitment from the government and municipalities and an official discourse on
the role of the company versus government and other fuel companies. But it is worth raising the
question about the extent to which ESTEEM is suitable for organizing ‘high-level’ negotiation
processes among financial stakeholders and the national government, for example. There are
established procedures for conducting such negotiations and we need to think about whether and
how ESTEEM can contribute to such procedures.

In contrast, the ESTEEM process has contributed to improved communications between the pro-
ject and its stakeholders. A number of communication needs were identified through the
ESTEEM process and the project has developed closer relations with a number of ‘non-core’
stakeholders such as local citizens, academia and other similar organizations.


A.5.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool
The ESTEEM tool was tested in the demo project between April and December 2007. In the fol-
lowing results are presented by step.


A.5.3.1 Step 0:
Step 0, the self-test for whether ESTEEM is useful for the project, was completed in autumn
2007, so the testing had already started. The Step 0 test reveals that SMART-H2 is in the mid-
range of projects - not the ones for which the tool is most suitable, but not the ones which will
benefit least, either (Figure A.3).




85
                        Iceland - SMART
                                 Experience with
                                 similar projects



          Social
                                                                  Adaptability
        acceptance



                                  Positive project
                                      impact

Figure A.8 Score of SMART-H2 from the ESTEEM self test tools


A.5.3.2 Step 1: Project history and context and actors
The project had been in the design and negotiation phase several years before the ESTEEM tool
was applied. Step 1 was conducted in April-May 2007. All Step 1 materials are compiled in a
separate document (17 pp.) delivered to the Create Acceptance team on May 4th.

Project Narrative
In this specific demo, the narrative was more for the use of the Create Acceptance team because
the Consultant is very well acquainted with the history of the project. It was useful, however, to
write down a description of the background, history and context of the project and the narrative
has served as a useful reference document throughout the process as well as description for a
few contact persons. Several comments were though sent to the CAcc team on the frames set for
description whereas the frames were found to be too strict to allow for the project managers free
description and later categorization or analysis of the design and development procedures.

Context analysis
The outline for the context analysis changed somewhat parallel to the SMART-H2 the project
time, so only earlier versions of the ESTEEM tool were used at first. Later the final versions
seemed to worked better in outlining both potential opportunities and barriers. None the less
these emerged as outcome of the first workshop discussions and were used to redesign public
relations.

Defining moments table
In Step 1, identification of the ‘defining moments’ was useful for creating self-awareness and
establishing the status of project. As an example, the ‘defining moments table’ (or ‘critical mo-
ments table’, as it was called at that time) is presented in Table A.5.


86
Table A.5 Critical moments/defining moments table from the SMART-H2 project
CRITICAL MOMENTS TABLE

The most important moments in the projects’ unfolding all happen to be positive events:
1. When the Icelandic partners realised that local conditions, initiatives and know how should
   take actions as the opportunities exceed those of the EC members in general.
2. When car manufacturers were visited and it became evident that internal combustion engine
   vehicles would play an intermediate role in introduction hydrogen to the market.
3. The whale watching operator offered their ship as a test platform for hydrogen systems - to
   promote their environmental tourism - a clear market demand
4. When the board of Vistorka accepted the general outline for SMART-H and the department
   of Industry supported that the public companies assist in the market introduction of hydro-
   gen.
5. The responses from research funds which are expected in May - June 2007 will also have
   major moral impacts on the project. In the starting phases they were showed reluctance.

Actors table
The actors table was very useful to construct for this project, because there are many ‘internal’
stakeholders involved in the complex ownership structure of the project. The actors table was
not outlined in detail according to the template in the ESTEEM, but was presented as a list of
actors. This is because this step was done shortly before starting out on Step 2, so the list of ac-
tors was immediately elaborated into the communication map for Step 2 vision building as
shown in Figure A.4.

Step 2: Vision building
Step 2 followed closely on the footsteps of Step 1. Because it was known that the project was
not particularly controversial, it was decided to extract the ‘core group’ visions through a work-
shop rather than using individual interviews. All the work for Step 2 centered fairly closely
around this workshop and the necessary preparations for it. The workshop was organized on
May 15, 2007 in Reykjavik and many members of the Create Acceptance team were present and
helped in planning and arranging the workshop.

Project manager’s present vision
It was useful that the time-lag between Step1 and Step 2 was small, so there was much synergy
between conducting these steps (see suggestions at the end of this report). In preparation for the
workshop, a communication map was drawn up to show the complexity of the project and the
the sociograms for ‘PM present vision’ and ‘PM future vision’ were combined. Later, when a
frame had been offered by the CAcc project these were redrawn and are to be found in pp17)

The BAU Scenario
The BAU scenario was constructed as part of the project managers’ present vision (upper corner
of Figure A.2). It relates to the continuous role of imported fossil fuels, which are currently
dominant.

The Project manager’s future visions
The Project manager’s future visions were constructed as part of the project manager’s present
vision (lower corner of Figure A.2). The future vision relates to expanding the SMART-H2 pro-
ject to other fleets in addition to those involved in the demo project.

Selecting the group of core stakeholders
The core stakeholder visions were extracted by organizing a workshop (rather than through in-
terviews as suggested as the first choice in the ESTEEM manual). The SMART-H2 was already


87
engaging with a large number of stakeholders, in particular owners and customers. Special at-
tention was devoted to involving ‘ordinary people’ and stakeholders who do not yet know about
the project. Following the Step 2 instructions, attempts were also made to invite women and
men of different ages. About 16 people were contacted and invited to participate in the work-
shop. Twelve of them eventually participated, one left very early and one was less active than
expected. INE concluded from the workshop that people find the topic interesting on the whole
and want to participate by discussing and interacting. The informal atmosphere was dynamic
but there was some concern that some participants might not have taken it seriously. The par-
ticipants gave INE positive feedback after the workshop.

The workshop had a specific design, which is different from the workshop formats presented in
the ESTEEM tool manual. The format was designed in collaboration with a number of the Cre-
ate Acceptance team members. Stakeholders worked in pairs including one external and one in-
ternal stakeholder on the issues suggested in the ESTEEM tool manual. This was a well-
functioning solution.




Figure A.9 The SMART-H2 communicatioin flow outlining present and future vision. The gray
           boxes do not participate in SMART-H2 but are found important stakeholders.
           Arrows stand for communication Legend to figure below. Societal map is to be
           found in del 17


88
The Stakeholder future visions
Because different stakeholder groups were not consulted separately, it was not possible to draw
‘future vision maps’ for each stakeholder group. Nonetheless, the following conclusions about
the ‘stakeholders’ future visions’ were drawn:
1. Visions of different stakeholders seem to be fairly well aligned.
    - All agree that alternative fuels (to oil) need to be found
    - All appear to be in favour of moving toward hydrogen as a transport fuel in Iceland
2. Stakeholders have questions about the timeline (when will it happen)
    - Stakeholders have doubts about the commitment of oil companies, car companies and
         the government whereas they seem invisible in the project
    - There are in particular concerns about the lack of H2 cars, technological maturity and
         questions about when and where they will appear (and can cars be made only for Ice-
         land?)
3. Stakeholders are concerned about continuity
    - They want to know why ECTOS ‘was discontinued’ (as they understand it) and why the
         H2 buses are no longer running (but the project mangers know that they are simply
         finalised!)
    - Stakeholders wonder why hydrogen is not visible in their everyday life (but Iceland is
         presented as the world’s first hydrogen economy in the international media)
4. Stakeholders want to see rapid progress
    - Managing expectations is crucial (what will happen by 2020 and how can stakeholders
         see that it is happening)
5. There is not much discussion of why moving to hydrogen would be good for the environ-
    ment.




89
Ideal sociogram for alternative 
fuels in Iceland according to interviews
                                                                                                                                               Technology
                                 Partners / investors                     Ministry 
                                       Cars                               of                         Electrolysers,            Car providers
                                                                          Industry
                                              Bus
                                                                                                     FC providers
                                                    Boats
          Service companies, 
          lease cars
                                                                                                     H2 
                                                                                                     Cylinders
                                                                               Power 
                                                                                                                                   Eco‐
                                                                               companies
                                                                                                                                   energy         Rannís, state 
           Shell           Hydrogen 
                                                                                                                                   facilitator    research fund
                           station




                                                                                                                                                                   Science
                                                                                                                                   fro cleaner 
                                                                                                                                   technolog
 Market




           Gasoline 
           station                                                                                                                 y  
                         Stations                                                     Alternative 
                                                                                      fuels 
             Methane                    Methane 
             promoter                   station                                                             Vocational 
                                                                                                            schools 
                                 Landfill of Reykjavik

                                                                                                                          Universities 
             Ethanol  promoter                              HSE agency                         Show room 
                                                                                               on energy
                                                Municipality of          Classifier of 
                                                Reykjavik                equipment 
                                                                                               NGO
                                                                                                                                 Tourists


                                                                                                Neighbors to                     Media
                                                                                                stations
                                  Min of                           Min of                                                        Public
                                  environment                      Finance

          Policy / Politics                             Society
Figure A.10     Sociogram of future arrangements for alternative fuels drawn with the frames
           provided by ESTEEM tools




A.5.3.3 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
After the workshop, it took some time to get to Steps 3 and 4. Final versions of these were not
available immediately after the workshop, and then the SMART-H2 project required other kinds
of urgent attention. Nonetheless, conclusions were immediately drawn on the basis of the work-
shop and improvements implemented.

Steps 3 and 4 conducted in August 2006. They are very closely related, so they were conducted
as one single process. In the Manual, Step 3 is work to be done by the consultant and Step 4,
work that should be done together by the consultant and project manager. This division is not so
necessary when the consultant works in the project manager organization.

Identification of conflicting issues and features
The SMART-H2 project did not involve major conflicts, but it was fairly easy to see which are
the main issues of concern of the different stakeholders. These included concerns about continu-
ity, lack of local visibility, lack of visible infrastructure, lack of visible commitment by car and
oil companies and lack of an environmental discussion in connection with fuels in general. This
last point is most clearly one which links up with broader policy debates and the potential com-
petition between different fuel types, which in fact became an issue for INE, which was given
responsibility for assessing also other new fuels, in addition to hydrogen. That is why the sec-
ond workshop

Ranking key actors and issues according to their strategic importance
Ranking was not applied, and the SMART-H2 experience shows that it does not make sense in
every project. Small and large issues can be equally important to deal with. Urgency and impor-


90
tance were rated on a qualitative scale of high-medium-low and this was quite sufficient to gain
an overview of the issues and their importance.

Even though Table A.5 and Table A.6 describe the same things. The issues importance graph
was found useful for communicating priorities and inspiring a search for solutions (Figure A.4).
As a result, continuity and local visibility were identified as having high urgency and priority,
and these are the issues that SMART-H2 started working on right after the Step 2 workshop.

                                       Urgency (high)


                     commitment by     Continuity
                     car & oil         local visibility




importance low                         environmental            importance (high)
                                       discussion
                                       infrastructure




                                       Urgency)low)

Figure A.11        The issues rating graph from Step 3 for the SMART-H2 demo project


Issues              Description
Issue 1             Concerns about continuity: what happened to ECTOS
Issue 2             Lack of local visibility (administration, corporate, public)
Issue 3             Lack of visible infrastructure
Issue 4             Lack of visible commitment by car & oil companies
Issue 5             Lack of environmental discussion in connection with fuels
Issues              Urgency             Importance        Rank Implemented Solutions
Issue 1             High              high                  ?        easy to solve (enhanced 
continuity                                                           communications)
Issue 2             Medium            high (in        the ?          will be tackled in October by a 
local visibility                      long term)                     future scenario workshop 

Issue 3             Medium            high (in        the            A new H2 station is now planned 
infrastructure                        long term)                     on the University lot

Issue 4       Low                     medium (in the                 Shell in Iceland has now taken 
commitment by                         long term)                     over the hydrogen station till 
car & oil                                                            2010.
Issue 5             Low but rising    ??                             The head of the parliamentary 
environmental                                                        committee came to discuss links 
discussion                                                           between the H2 projects & 
                                                                     environmental issues

Figure A.12        Conflicting issues as outlined after the vision workshop




91
A.5.3.4 Step 4: Portfolio of options
Because the project did not involve major controversies, it was fairly easy to identify solutions
to the issues raised in the Step 2 workshop. Some of the options were quite practical and easy to
start implementing, such as enhanced communications. Others were more long-term and col-
laborative issues, such as intensifying co-operation with the university and with policy makers.
And when working with those the boundaries for discussion were opened up to incorporate
comparison of all alternative fuels and the

Listing and evaluating solutions to major issues
Because Steps 3 and 4 were done some time after the Step 2 workshop, INE had already started
solving the problems that were most urgent and most feasible to solve immediately. These are
indicated as ‘implemented solutions’ in the Step 4 tables shown above in Figure A.7. The sug-
gesteions were implemented shortly after the visions workshop and the project development
into a broader context was rolling. As can be seen, an exact rating of issues is sometimes diffi-
cult, but the table clearly serves its purpose.


A.5.3.5 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
The preparations of the workshop
A team of 3 students and 3 experts was formed as a consultant- and organization group for the
workshop. The experts come from research, hydrogen and innovation. The students have back-
ground in social science, engineering and environment.

The three experts suggested 45 participants of all ages and both genders according to the follow-
ing matrix:

Table A.6 The matrix for suggesting participants in a large alternative fuel- workshop
Level                Societal role         Technical role      Economy              Environment
Government           Travel and tourism    Orkusetur           Central bank         Head of environm
                     association           Vegagerðin                               committee
Municipalities and   The city research     City and other      Leader of the agenda Political Opposition
community            centre                community technical 21 (Umís)            HSE inspector
                                           department
Instituttes          Lung specialist at theEnergy Authority    Statistical office   Planning and EIA
                     National research     Centre of                                agent Marine and
                     Hospital              entrepreneurship                         Port authority
Education and        IR Vocational         Biofuel option -    UoI dep of economy, U of didactics
research             schools, out of Rvik Farmers University Techn Uof Rvk          Docent for enviro-
                                           college                                  education
Care users           Consumers             Car tecnicians      Automotiver          NGO
                     association                               Association          Framtíðarlandið

Realization of the workshop
Three large rooms / halls were reserved at the facilities of the Energy Authority to host the
meeting. The invitations went first out via telephone conversations. Even at the first contact,
during the invitation process several invitees showed interest and started talking about the topic
but would not come to the workshop. The following inputs were collected:
• People find it important to act and show collaboration with European carbon policies
• The market must play its role and yes, emissions should be charged or taxed somehow.
• Much information is lacking on fuel options
• Comparison for different drive trains and fuel efficiency must be made public
• More tests were needed
• Oil prices are going up; oil prices are going down
• Why is the city not more involved in testing alternative fuel on public transport


92
•    The government should be clearer in its emission policies


And if people were interested they got the following message via email (see following page):

Issue: invitation following a telephone converstation to assist research students to set frames
for future fuel scenarioes for Iceland and fuel development until 2030.

Place and time: The Energy Athority Thursday 31st Jan 2008.

Dear recipient, 

We trust that the following questions will wake your interest and kick off your emaginatin:
   • Will your personal life be affected because of actions taken to mitigate climate change?
   • Will your personal travels in 20 years ( 2028) differ from the way you commute today?
   • Which effect on toursim do you foresee if carbon taxes should be added to the price of
       carbon fuels?
   • Which type of infrastructure do you think municipalities have to offer to meet the
       demands of road transport by 2030? Will gasoline stations dissapear?
   • Would you care to see some actions taken in order to facilitate the participation of the
       public in decreasing CO2 emissions?

In other words; which changes do you foresee in the transportation sector and local offer of fuel
types. The changes referred to here are for example hihger gasoline price, growing concern for
air emissions and climate change and the rising interest for environmental affairs. How will
these issues effect the Icelandic context?

At the Universitu of Iceland tutors and students want to deal with real issues in their research
projects. Now a really interesting research field is opening up: Fuel for the future.. There are
many available choices on offer and no obvious winner so far in sight. Earlier the cheapest
option outcompeted other options but now other values such as environmentally effects and
social factors have to be weighed into the decision making on top of the economic effectiveness.

The University of Iceland, more precisely the Department for the environment
and natural resources, and the Institute for Sustainable Development with
support from the UOOR, CreateAccptance, the SMART-H2 hereby asks about
30 individuals to participate in a Workshop to brainstorm and discuss our
common energy future and fuel options. The outcome will be processed to form
a platform for fuel related research to compare the aspects of the suggested
pathways. The participants will be informed about the outcomes and receive in-
formation before the workshop is held.
Responsible for the workshop are: Gudrun Petursdottir, institute for sustain-
able development, Brynbhidlur Davidsdottir, associate professor for the de-
partment of natural resource management and Maria Maack project manager
for SMART-H2.

Message ends

After this the following communication took place: The invitees were sent a document explain-
ing the following:
• Goal of the Workshop



93
•    Reasons
•    List of participants
•    Reading material on all types of alternative fuel and the government policy for cutting down
     CO2
•    Suggestion to write a paragraph that is an imaginary newsflash in the year 2030 on how the
     last stages of shifting from fossil fuels has been successful.
•    Also names of those involved, facilitator (neutral) students and how the processing of out-
     comes will proceed.
•    The agenda and procedures according to Create Acceptance cookbook for a ½ day work-
     shop with preparation
•    A reminder the day before attending via email.

Returning the results of the workshop


A.5.3.6 Step 6: Recommendations for action
But the workshop could not be held within the given time frame for the analytic rproceedures
For the following reasons:

During the period Sept 2007 - Dec 2007 four major events occurred that influenced the possible
timing for a workshop incorporating new stakeholders (step 5).
a) the key monitor was allocated the task of collecting info and formulating a national strategy
in the Icelandic emission policy - which is mostly related to combat erosion, reforestation, ex-
porting geothermal know how. This held her occupied for 6 weeks in the period that the prepa-
rations of the workshop (planned in October) should have taken place. But still during this pe-
riod of Sept - October interviews were made with key persons in the energy sector as basis for
questions to be used at the workshop.
b) On the 22nd of October the majority within the municipality of Reykjavik lost their power
over to the minority due to energy policies. This called upon restructuring of all energypolicy
within the administrational level and the new majority was not ready to clarify their stand until
mid November
c) In November the municipality company who is the largest stakeholder in SMART-H (the
reykjaviks energy service, OR) was reconstructed due to new policies and the fate of SMART
was quite uncertain. Therefore the ownership of the SMART-H2 project was unclear. Finally a
new steering group for the project was re-established on the 18th of Dec.
d) Christmas, - 7 out of ten relevant persons took an extended holiday to 7th of January. The
preparations on behalf of Maria to frame the workshop were accepted but the key persons had
meetings abroad, 9th - 16th of January, 23rd - 25th January and a conference on the 29th of
January. So the only date available is 31st of January

Identifying acceptance and feasibility
Sorting of options: Capacity for action
Develop the recommendations and action plans
Evaluation of the Create Acceptance process

SMART-H2 is an interesting case to test the ESTEEM tool because of some specific features of
the project and INE. Because INE has established project management procedures and extensive
experience in its field of operation, ESTEEM needs to be integrated into those procedures. On
the other hand, because it is a small organization, the testing of ESTEEM cannot be ‘side-
tracked’ to a separate expert function (e.g., in the way environmental management or quality
management can be in a large organization). This is a good thing: ESTEEM is really being
tested and not merely executed symbolically. On the other hand, overlaps and contradictions
and synergies between ESTEEM and existing project management tools and procedures become
apparent in this demo project.


94
When joining the Create Acceptance project, INE expected to receive an almost ready tool to
test and apply in their project. The work needed to turn Socrobust into a multistakeholder tool
has turned out to be a larger effort than expected. The project has thus involved more work than
expected, and more input into developing the ESTEEM tool. INE originally thought they would
be more in a customer’s role, and be provided with a ready-made tool.

In terms of individual steps and substeps in the ESTEEM tool, the following positive experi-
ences were gained:
• Parts of the narrative were useful to gain self-understanding.
• The workshop (Step 2) opened up new issues and helped to engage new stakeholders.
• Further processing is ongoing concerning the items that came out of Steps 3 & 4. Partly,
    INE tried to deal with these issues directly as they arose, before engaging in the formal
    process of issues identification and classification or the systematic listing of all solution op-
    tions. INE is working further on these issues and solutions, which seem logical in terms of
    what could be immediately concluded from the workshop.
• The tool will definitely be used in further projects by INE

Other steps and substeps in the ESTEEM tool were found by INE to require some optimization:
• The narrative should be pre-drafted on the basis of existing documents and presented to the
   Project Manager (rather than based in the first place on an interview with the Project Man-
   ager). This would raise issues that the Project Manager does not realize. It could also serve
   the purpose of providing a ‘mirror’ for the company to self-reflect. It should be a concise
   description that could start the discussion with the Project Manager to include missing or
   remove redundant items and develop the critical moments table.
•    In this case, the actors table and social network could be developed in the first meeting. It
     would be good to streamline and condense the first parts of the tool in order to get to the in-
     teresting things sooner.
•    Similarly, the PM vision could be developed at the first meeting, after which the other ac-
     tors’ visions could be derived. This would enable a quick start for the process.
•    At the second meeting, the actors’ map and suggestions about potential conflicts could be
     discussed with the Project Manager and the interviews/workshop introduced and planned. It
     is important to motivate the Project Manager to include in addition to the Core Group also
     those who are in the periphery - competitors, NGOs, etc. Because not all those who are in
     the Core Group will come, one would have at least 2-3 persons from the Core Group and an
     equal number of outsiders. This is not a large public arena, but allows for some outsider
     views, bringing in new items on the agenda.
•    In Steps 3-4, the analysis seems too detailed and too much focused on analysis of problems,
     not solutions. Moreover, if there is movement in the project at that stage, it is difficult for
     the tools to keep up with the new developments.
•    INE started to solve some of the issues raised in the workshops immediately. (This is typical
     for small companies, which like to solve problems immediately rather than internalize them
     and reflect on them for a long time). Partly, this problem results from the Create Acceptance
     context, in which certain tools were not quite ready-to-use immediately after Step 2.
•    INE sees the Step 5 workshop as a way to align the stakeholders’ expectations with what
     INE is actually doing, and its purpose is more strategic than informative.
•    Some parts of the tool may be used within a different step. For example, INE plans to use
     the idea of a ‘newspaper article for 2015’ as a tool to derive visions (used by ECN in Step 2)
     as a way for the stakeholders to prepare for the Step 5 workshop.




95
Figure A.13     From the Vision workshop stakeholders watch how the issues unfold


A.5.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and the ESTEEM Tool in
      achieving acceptance in the region
As stated earlier, the SMART-H2 demo has not involved notable conflicts in Iceland, nor have
the future visions of a shift to the hydrogen economy been particularly controversial. In particu-
lar, the local community and the general public have been and remain supportive of the use of
hydrogen fuels. Nonetheless, the ESTEEM tool revealed a number of areas in which the project
could do better - most notably early communications with a broader group of stakeholders.
Communications have also evolved in a more interactive and networked direction, which has
provided clear benefits for the project.

Somewhat more problematic are the relations with the policy community and competitors. Hy-
drogen has gained more support from the government than other new energy initiatives. This,
and the fact that INE has been so efficient in gaining momentum and visibility, created envy in
society. Now INE is also in charge of other fuels than hydrogen, and the financial support from
government to alternative fuels is combined. INE will allocate resources to other fuels, in addi-
tion to the development of hydrogen technology, without adding to the staff.

INE has applied for research funding with a larger scope than previously, including analyses of
the environmental and socio-economic impacts of different fuels. These research efforts will in-
volve students and other outsiders, e.g., universities. But there are scarce resources and few
people so this problem is only partly solved.

These conflicts have evolved and been put in focus partly during the CA process, but are not
caused by it or solved by it. But the CA process has helped to open up the project toward the
outside stakeholders and has thus facilitated the process of engaging other fuels (competitors)
and external research and other resources. In this, the ESTEEM tool workshop organized in
Step 2 was particularly useful.

As a result of the process, INE has become more responsive to stakeholders and more aware of
the communication needs existing in society. It seems that more acceptance has developed in
the 2-3 months following the workshop. People in INE are happy to have more open and infor-
mal communication with the Icelandic society.




96
One example is a recent conference which dealt with all fuels. Because of the ESTEEM process,
INE is now communicating in a different way, making it more accessible and making stake-
holders more empowered. The interest groups involved in the project are now broader.

INE intends to communicate more strategically, but there are still many open questions in the
project, about which it is not clear how to communicate.

It is not clear yet what the process means for individual stakeholders. At least the research and
university community is now more involved.


A.5.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction in CA

A.5.5.1 Experiences with Counter partner’s support
INE feels that the Create Acceptance partners have been really supportive. In particular, support
provided in organizing the Step 2 workshop in Reykjavik was warmly appreciated. INE is also
pleased with the help received from the counterpartner. The roles of the counter-partner in the
SMART-H2 project have been to:
• Assist in applying the ESTEEM tool, in particular to identify the correct steps and substeps
    to use in the demo project.
• Discuss with the consultant specific features of the local context which require tailoring of
    the ESTEEM tool and particular steps and substeps.
• Assist in the documentation of the tool testing process.
• Conduct the counter-partner interview and draft the counter-partner report.

Co-operation between INE and the counter-partner NCRC in the demo project has been very
close and has proceeded very smoothly.
INE has been surprised on how systematic and well structured the process has been and thinks it
has been exceptionally helpful. On the other hand, what was found a bit frustrating in this demo
was the difficulty of finding the documents and establishing ‘where we are in the process’. So it
has consumed some time without immediate reward.

This is partly due to the ‘in progress’ nature of the tool. The structure and process became much
more clear once a manual of the entire tool became available. So some of the difficulties derive
from developing the tool in parallel with using it. The use of a ready-made tool is thus likely to
be easier, in particular if a good integration is achieved with existing project management tools
and procedures.


A.5.5.2 Lessons learned
For INE
The Create Acceptance project and tools have been very helpful indeed to reach the goals and
root the SMART-H2 project in society. The narration has been used to help people better under-
stand the purpose and goals of the project the actors tables were used internally to look at rela-
tionships and important communication lines, the workshops were eye-opening towards the lar-
ger context that the hydrogen project is set in. It draw attention to those who needed to be in-
volved, gave individuals the opportunity to discuss different aspects of the project and how it
links into other societal matters.

The process has given rise to improvement of our work and our project.




97
For Create Acceptance
The process of developing and testing the tool, in particular in the SMART-H2 case, reveals
some of the problems involved in developing generic (or even industry-specific) management
tools:
• It is very difficult to develop management tools that are appropriate for a range of contexts.
    Management cultures and standard operating procedures vary between and within countries
    and industries, and among large and small organisations. Moreover, when developing a
    multi-stakeholder tool, it is also necessary to take into account the requirements of the local
    culture, policy context, etc., surrounding the project management organisation.
• Projects are a specific kind of organisation in which time is a crucial element. Unlike a
    ‘normal’ organisation which has a cyclical management structure in which certain activities
    recur, a project organisation is temporary and exists in time. This is to some extent ac-
    knowledged in the Socrobust tool, but it is not such a problem as Socrobust addresses a
    short period at the early stage of a project. The problem is compounded in the ESTEEM tool
    which extends over a longer period in the project life cycle. Fitting the ESTEEM steps into
    the project management cycle - in which the length of different stages cannot be predeter-
    mined, but also depend on external factors - is a significant challenge.
• These two factors have created a large challenge for ‘testing’ and further developing the
    tool in the demo projects within a relatively short period of time. Fitting in the activities
    prescribed by the ESTEEM process with activities occurring for other reasons in the project
    has been a challenge. Nonetheless, one can assume on the basis of the experiences that us-
    ing ESTEEM is likely to encourage projects to start communicating with stakeholders ear-
    lier on in the project life cycle, which is a good thing.

On the other hand, the process reveals the amount of new information that starts to circulate and
the new insights that develop once an organisation opens itself to co-operation with external
parties with different competences and backgrounds.

The researchers have learned a lot about the practicalities and hard work involved in the early
stages of creating a hydrogen economy. This is also an important lesson for developing a multi-
stakeholder tool. It is important to leave room for interacting with those stakeholders that are
important for each particular phase of the project. They can be very different and have very dif-
ferent kinds of concerns (e.g., authorities vs. technology users). It is important to acknowledge
that project managers also interact with stakeholders on a day-to-day basis, and try to fit man-
agement tools into existing activities.


A.6     The solar water heaters project in South Africa
In the developed countries renewable energy (RE) technologies such as solar water heating are
most often introduced for environmental reasons - to reduce GHG emissions mandated under
the Kyoto Protocol. South Africa signed the Protocol in 2002, but it does not commit non-
Annex 1 (developing) countries such as South Africa to any emission targets in the first com-
mitment period (2008 to 2012), and it creates no external pressure to reduce emissions. Dis-
seminating solar water heaters (SWHs) in South Africa addresses two major concerns: reducing
peak load at a time when electricity generation cannot always meet demand, and reducing
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. And, at the household level, SWHs save electricity cost in the
long term.

RE technologies are not as widely disseminated in South Africa as in some European countries,
despite high solar radiation making them well suited. The only RE technology, which grew
steadily in the last 30 years is unglazed solar water heaters used for luxury swimming pools
(Cawood 2002). The general environmental awareness is not as high as in most European coun-
tries, and only recently has the media been regularly covering environmental issues such as
global warming and its impact on South Africa more.


98
The South African government generally supports RE, and the relevant policy has a voluntary
target of 10 000 GWh to be supplied from renewable sources by 2013. This is approximately
10% of the country’s electricity demand and at present less than 1% originates from renewable
sources (DME 2004). Different players in projects and the industry account variously for why
the market has not responded more positively, often adducing the absence of promotion, high
initial capital costs, and the comparatively low electricity tariffs as primary explanations.

The two South African case studies describe SWHs (case study 1) and electricity from solar
home systems (SHSs) (case study 2). Both studies include the impact of poverty on the dissemi-
nation and acceptance of the technology.

Subsidised SHSs using photovoltaic panels to generate electricity were expected to light the
countryside and bring light and television services to remote rural homes at a much faster rate
than they actually did.

SWHs were rapidly distributed in the late 1970s and early 1980s and then their uptake substan-
tially declined. They have been marketed to the general public and made available to poor
households in specially targeted projects. The history of the SWH by-law in Cape Town is in-
teresting, because it was inspired by the corresponding ordinance in Barcelona, another one of
the case studies in the Create Acceptance project. The technology transfer from north to south
began in 2003 when the deputy mayor of Barcelona was invited to speak about the experiences
at a workshop in Cape Town.


A.6.1 Description of the demo project
South Africa has abundant sunshine and the average daily solar radiation is between 4.5 kWh
and 6.5 kWh per square metre. This resource is relatively predictable and well distributed
throughout the country, with some regional variations. SWH are the least expensive means of
heating water for domestic use on a life cycle cost basis because solar energy is free (Austin &
Morris 2005).

SWHs have been identified as a means whereby RE could significantly contribute to alleviating
poverty, through improving the general welfare of households as well as developing productive
activities to generate employment. The country has an established manufacturing infrastructure
for SWHs and their manufacture and installation would contribute to job creation and skills de-
velopment. However, the lack of promotion and the high upfront capital cost of SWHs are two
key barriers to the development of a SWH market in South Africa.

There are three types of collectors used for SWH: glazed, unglazed, and evacuated tubes. The
glazed collectors are used for domestic solar water heating, the unglazed collectors are generally
installed for swimming pools. Evacuated tubes, which are more efficient than either, are more
recently being imported into the local market mainly from China.


A.6.2 The process of the demo project
Implementing SWH technologies in South Africa can be defined as a broad programme sup-
ported by different stakeholders. Projects within the programme address specific targets and tar-
get groups, e.g. setting up testing procedures for the poor and mid-to-high income groups. It fol-
lows that there is no single project manager for the programme. Stakeholders on their own or as
a group drive the process initially and once opportune framework conditions are achieved indi-
vidual projects are initiated and project managers drive individual projects. It is important that
the stakeholders in such informal programmes act and act together to promote SWH and the
challenge is to get them together and drive the programme.



99
The phase in which an informal group of stakeholders promotes a RE technology often preceeds
the formulation of individual projects. This stage is often necessary to sort out a number of bar-
riers, which the implementation of the new technology faces. It appears that the risk for individ-
ual projects is quite high at this stage. For example, one of the reasons why SWHs were not ac-
cepted was the absence of the mark of approval from the South African Bureau of Standards. It
took a long time to set up standards and get testing equipment in place. Individual projects may
not be able to wait years to get their technology and installation approved. A wind project took
eight years before it could start building the foundation for the windmills!

Stakeholder and environmental groups if they exist are generally not very active as compared to
the EU.

SWHs for homes are relatively small units and their installation is not a major building project
and is completed in a few days. Their operation does not cause emissions, or noise or additional
traffic, so they do not affect other people in the neighbourhood. The one aspect that neighbours
may not like is the visual impact of SWHs on the roof. But since they may wish to install their
own in the future, they generally accept them.

The PM/consultant approach of the ESTEEM tool requires that a company is introducing a new
RE or RUE technology and a project manager is appointed to manage the project. The South
African SWH is not a specific project with a project manager but a broad programme supporting
SWHs.

It is challenging to apply the tool to an early stage of renewable technology dissemination. I am
aware that it is not what was intended at this stage of tool development but it is the situation I
am faced with in both case studies. For these reasons the PM/consultant roles as given in the
present process did not apply to the South African case studies. It may be worthwhile to widen
the PM/consultant roles in a future phase of the ESTEEM tool to include cases such as this.


A.6.3 Results of testing the ESTEEM tool

A.6.3.1 Step1: Project history, context and actors
Project narrative
There is abundant sunshine in South Africa but very few homes have SWHs. The history of so-
lar water heaters explains some of the reasons. SWH dissemination in South Africa can be di-
vided into three historical phases.

Phase 1: 1978-1983 Widespread acceptance and installation of SWH:
The government supported the promotion of SWHs. The Centre for Scientific and Industrial Re-
search (CSIR) developed effective communication strategies and projects, which motivated
homeowners to install them. Homeowners would pay, either with a home improvement loan, or
cash. The SWH market grew, and six major companies manufactured, marketed and/or installed
SWHs, focusing on middle- and high-income customers. The average heater cost around R3500
for the 200-litre system which most houses installed. The industry flourished, and in 1983 about
27 000 m2 of solar collectors were produced. In that year the SWH communication project came
to an end, and following the discontinutation of the CSIR promotion the market collapsed and
has not yet recovered since - although there are encouraging signs of an industry revival more
recently.

Phase 2: 1984-2003 Collapse of the SWH market:
In this period, SWH installations dropped and annual glazed collector installations were about
half of what they had been in the previous phase. Some SWHs were installed in social housing



100
projects, such as that in Lwandle near Cape Town, where a workers’ hostel was transformed
into family units (photo on cover page).

Phase 3: New initiatives starting about 2003/2004 - the SWH by-law for middle- and high-
income households and SWH for the poor:
The White Paper on Renewable Energy gave a new perspective and created renewed interest in
the field. The City of Cape Town has taken the initiative to support RE and is committed to en-
suring that 10% of households have SWH systems by 2010, and has initiated a number of activi-
ties to promote the technology.
• The City has drafted a by-law (see Appendix 1) and is currently consulting stakeholders to
     promote the use of SWHs in middle- and high-income homes to contribute to the RE target.
• Ubushushu Bendalo - meaning ‘heat from nature’, was founded in August 2004 as a joint
     initiative by civil society organisations and the City of Cape Town. The Ubushushu Bendalo
     strategy is to harness expertise, knowledge and capacity in Cape Town to provide a channel
     for resources to enable effective and efficient implementation of RE and energy efficiency
     technologies, in particular SWHs.
• The City plans to retrofit 2 300 SWHs in low-income homes in Kuyasa in Khayelitsha
     township.
• The Central Energy Fund (CEF) is a government-supported company managing the future
     energy needs of the country. It subsidised 500 SWHs with funding from GEF and UNDP,
     which were installed in the first half of 2007. In each of the three major cities (Johannes-
     burg, Durban and Cape Town) 165 systems were installed. The project was advertised in the
     newspapers and it had a positive demonstration effect and renewed customer interest in
     SWH and encouraged the SWH industry.

The poor cannot afford SWHs and need financial assistance if they are expected to install them.
A project to explore the institutional, financial, social and technical feasibility of providing the
poor with retrofitted SWHs is being implemented in the township of Kuyasa, Khayelitsha in
Cape Town (Figure A.9). A pilot project has fitted ten houses with SWHs. Besides the water
heater, a ceiling is added and compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) are distributed, to improve the
thermal performance of the houses and the lighting and water heating efficiency. This will result
in reduced electricity consumption and avoided CO2 emissions (from coal-generated eletricity).
The project developed the methodology and procedures for receiving certified emission credits
of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the CDM credits were approved.

Very recent developments:
The SWH industry is currently experiencing a revival. The media have included more coverage;
notably an advertisement in several local and national newspapers from the CEF and two arti-
cles by Eskom encouraged the industry, and sentiment is generally positive. SESSA50 is an-
other project which installed subsidised SWH and collected data for a detailed assessment of the
technology.

At the SWH workshop held at the International Conference on the Domestic Use of Energy in
Cape Town in April 2007, Eskom presented its new approach to solar water heating and its in-
clusion into Eskom’s Demand Side Management Programme. In June 2007 the Eskom Board
approved the investment of ZAR2bn to be made over five years (€1 = R9,30 in April 2007).
This will have a major positive impact on the SWH industry.




101
Figure A.14     Solar water heater on low-cost housing

Context analysis
The context is analysed in terms of opportunities and barriers. Table A.7 analyses the opportuni-
ties and Table A.8 analyses barriers to the dissemination of SWHs.




102
Table A.7 The relationship between project and context: what opportunities emerge?
                             When will this        Level on which    How large are theTo what extent is   Describe the        Describe specific    Is the strategy     What is the
                             opportunity become opportunity          possibilities to  the project        project strategy to actions within the   focus internal      expected result of
                             important to the      emerges (local,   seize the         concerned with     seize the           strategy.            (changing the       the strategy?
                             project               national,         opportunity (low, seizing the        opportunity                              project) or
                             (immediately, within international)?    medium, high)? opportunity?          (monitoring,                             external
                             the next year, within                                     (low, medium,      indirect influence,                      (changing the
                             next five years, or                                       high, go-no-go)?   direct influence).                       context)?
                             long-term)?
            Describe the     Immediately          Local, national    Very high        High                Implementing       Eskom 150 000         SWH are better
            opportunity                                                                                   pilot projects:    subsidised SWH        known and
                                                                                                          SESSA50,                                 ultimately widely
                                                                                                          CEF500                                   accepted and
                                                                                                                                                   installed
Policy      As a consequence Within the coming Local                 High             High                Indirect and directWorking out       Both                    Enhancing the
context     of the SWH        year                                                                                           optimal strategy                          opportunities for
            byelaw 10% of the                                                                                                for dissemination                         SWH
            houses in Cape                                                                                                                                             dissemination
            Town will acquire
            SWH technologies
Socio-      Increased SWH    Immediately          Local, national    Medium           Medium/high         Indirect and directEnhance education Both
economic    demand creates                                                                                                   and information
context     employment
Cultural    Knowledge of     Immediately          Local and          High             High                Information        Newspaper articles External               More people
context     SWH is                                national                                                campaigns          and                                       become aware of
            disseminated                                                                                                     advertisements                            the benefits of
                                                                                                                                                                       SWH
GeographicalHigh solar       It is always present Local and          High             High                Putting SWH         Insisting on      external               Increasing
context     radiation                             national                                                collectors in the correct position of                        efficiency of
                                                                                                          correct position, SWH                                        SWH
                                                                                                          frost protection in
                                                                                                          some areas




103
Table A.8 The relationship between project and context: what barriers emerge?
            Describe the barrier When will this barrier   Level where       What is the       To what extent is Describe the project Describe          Is the strategy   What is the
                                 become important to      barrier emerges expected influence the project        strategy to seize the specific         focus internal    expected result of
                                 the project              (local, national, of the barrier on concerned with opportunity              actions within   (changing the     the strategy?
                                 (immediately, within     international)? the project (low, dealing with the (monitoring,             the strategy     project) or
                                 the next year, within                      medium, high, go- barrier? (low, indirect influence,                       external
                                 next five years, or                        no-go)?           medium, high)? direct influence).                        (changing the
                                 long-term)?                                                                                                           context)?

Technology SABS had no        Immediately                 National        Medium              High at the       High at the national SABS has          External and      People will have
context    approval system in                                                                 national level    level                recently          internal          greater confidence
           place                                                                                                                     acquired a                          in the technology
                                                                                                                                     testing rig


Policy      No byelaw or        Immediately               Local and       High                High              Support for byelaw Cape Town is Internal                 More SWH will be
context     subsidy policy                                national                                              and Eskom subsidy passing a                              installed due to the
                                                                                                                                   byelaw;                               byelaw and SWH
                                                                                                                                   Eskom has                             will become more
                                                                                                                                   approved a                            acceptable due to
                                                                                                                                   capital subsidy                       the subsidy

Socio-      Capital cost too    Immediately               National and    High                High              Subsidies            Approval of       External          More people can
economic    high                                          international                                                              Eskom                               afford a SWH
context                                                                                                                              subsidies

Cultural    Environmental       Immediately               Local, national High                Medium to high Communication           Media             External          More people will
context     awareness and                                                                                    strategy                campaigns                           become aware of
            concerns are low                                                                                                                                             the benefits of
                                                                                                                                                                         SWH

Geographical Back up system re- Immediately               Local           Low                 Low               SWH installers are To be taken External                  Little effect on the
context      quired in the winter                                                                               aware of the cli-     care of by in-                     project
             rainfall areas and                                                                                 matic barriers in the stallers
             frost protection in                                                                                different regions
             the highveld areas




104
Defining moments
There are three major defining moments. The first was in 1983 when the SWH communication
project came to an end and customer demand dropped sharply and the SWH market collapsed.
The unprecedented blackouts in the winter (March - July) of 2006 were the second turning point
in the programme when the electricity company Eskom could no longer meet the demand. A
number of alternatives to reduce electricity consumption were proposed such as using gas for
cooking and replacing incandescent light bulbs with CFLs. Some pilot projects were carried out
to find out the costs and benefits. Renewable energy alternatives were considered to reduce the
load of the national grid. The alternatives had to be such as to be implementable immediately
and SWHs were the least expensive options to reduce load in the short term.

The third defining moment was in response to the second. In early 2007 Eskom decided to
choose SWHs as a means to reduce electricity load and to roll out 150 000 subsidised SWHs as
part of its demand side management programme.

Actors table
The actors were identified in late 2006 when making the invitation list for speakers at the work-
shop (Table A.8) An organising committee was set up for the SWH workshop and it selected the
major actors. They were then invited to the workshop and asked to give a presentation of the as-
pect of SWH they are working on or have a major stake in. The programme of the workshop
(Appendix 2) lists the major actors, their affiliation and the topic they were presenting.




Figure A.15 Bathroom with solar water heater used as a storage space. Subsidised low-income
            houses are very small and additional rooms rather than solar water heaters are a
            greater priority
Source: Jacqueline van Meygarden, 2007
Table A.9 The actors’ table
Characterization      1. Identification      2. Interests and power                                                           3. Social organization         4. Affinity to the
                                                                                                                                                             project
Type of               name /description of   expectations or     resources that the   replaceability    Formal and         overlaps in     social networks
stakeholder           actor                  concerns:           actor controls                         informal influence roles
                                                                                                        channels on the
                                             motivation to                                              project
                                             participate
A. Private sector     SESSA as the           Increase business   Access to technical There are about 15 The major            Consultants High potential to Closeby and
companies             umbrella group for the opportunities       expertise,           SWH companies companies have                       mobilize access supportive
(business partners,   industry,                                  technology           introducing        both formal and                 to social
financiers,                                                      development, skilled competition in the informal influence,             networks
competitors, etc.)    Eskom                                      labour, financial    sector             partly through
                                                                 resources,                              SESSA,
                                                                 integrate with                         Eskom can exert
                                                                 national grid                          great influence and
                                                                                                        still is considered
                                                                                                        reliable and has a
                                                                                                        good public image


B. Experts            SESSA, consultants,    Grow business,      Expertise and        Individual experts Influence through Experts are Experts have          Closeby or
                      academics              respect             contacts             are replaceable    professional      closely      extended social      supportive
                                                                                                         networks          associated networks
                                                                                                                           with
                                                                                                                           companies,
                                                                                                                           SESSA and
                                                                                                                           other
                                                                                                                           organisatios




106
Characterization    1. Identification     2. Interests and power                                                              3. Social organization      4. Affinity to the
                                                                                                                                                          project
C. Public sector    Ministries of energy, Achieve RE targets, Policies, strategies, Not replaceable   Substantial formal                                  Closeby and
(administrators,    and science and       facilitate uptake of regulation, standards                  influence, eg,                                      supportive of
politicians)        technology, energy    SWH                                                         policies, regulation,                               government RE
                    regulator, bureau of                                                              standards, finance                                  policy
                    standards


D. Associations     Southsouthnorth,      Grow their business, Expertise,           Individual NGOs   NGOs have well                       NGOs have very Closeby and
and NGOs            Sustainable Energy    expertise,            mobilisation of     are replaceable   developed networks                   wide networks supportive
                    Africa (SEA), Agama   government            funding, government                   and know how to
(e.g., resident’s   and others            connections,          connections                           use them
associations,                             represent the
environmental                             interests of the poor
organisations,
church)


E. Non-associated Consumers               Interested in       Purchasing power     As a group not     Some consumers          Consumers                   A few are
persons and groups                        subsidised systems,                      replaceable,       hold powerful           have                        supportive the
(e.g., neighbours,                        saving on the                            individual         positions and can       extensive                   majority is
consumers)                                electricity bill                         consumers are      use the influence       networks                    indifferent or
                                                                                   replaceable                                                            their position is
                                                                                                                                                          unknown




                                                                                                                                                                         107
A.6.3.2 Step 2: Vision building
Present vision
Figure A.11 gives the social network map by sector.




                                                                      SWH
                                                                   consultants

                                                        SWH companies         Clean energy
                            Banks                       & manufacturers

                                                                            Hot water mostly
                                                                             independent
                      New companies               CEF                           from grid

                                                                  Eskom reducing
      Households use                                              peak load & C0 2
       hot water from
           the sun         Eskom as partner                                                     University of
                             & competitor                                                       Cape Town
      Commercial &
      industrial use                                         SOLAR
                            Low electricity                                       Universities of Stellenbosch,
         of SWH                tariffs
                                                             WATER
                                                                                 Witwatersrand & Johannesburg
                                                            HEATERS
       Importers of
       SWH panels
                                                               IN                               National Re-
                            High initial cost
                                                             SOUTH                             search Council
      Competition with                                       AFRICA
       grid electricity
                               Subsidies                                                          SESSA

       CDM payments
                                                                     Society still       Schools, universities,
                                           Dept of Energy           indifferent to      SETAs (Sector Education
                                                                 climate problems        & Training Authorities)
                                              Dept of
                          SANERI            Environment           NGOs, Agama,          Lack of inform-
                   Renewable                                     SouthSouthNorth,       ation on SWH
                                            City of Cape               SEA
                  energy targets
                                            Town bylaw
                   Regulator                      SABS                Media
                                                standards
                                         Dept of Science
                                          & Technology




Figure A.16 Social network map for solar water heaters in South Africa

The national RE strategy supports the use of RETs generally. In Cape Town the SWH bylaw to
be passed by the City Council in early 2008 creates a favourable environment for the SWH
market. Pilot projects such as SESSA50 and CEF150 have introduced the technology in the
three major cities (Johannesburg, Cape Town and Durban) and many homeowners have now
been exposed to the technology. Media reports have informed the public and highlighted the
benefits of SWH. The 2006 blackouts in Cape Town, which are still continuing at a national
level, are a turning point and present a good opportunity to switch from grid to decentralised so-
lar for water heating. SWH will reduce electricity demand from the grid, helping to reduce
blackouts and load shedding. It will also reduce high GHG emissions from the coal-fired power
stations.




108
The BAU scenario
People continue to heat water with grid electricity supplied from the national grid. As electricity
demand is increasing, power cuts will become more frequent in the near future. In the medium-
to-long-term future the shortfall of supply would be addressed by building new coal-fired and
nuclear power stations. The cost of investment for new power plants has driven up electricity
prices: tariffs will rise by 14% in 2008 and then annually by similar amounts. Energy efficiency
measures have offset some of the cost. Emissions from the coal power stations would continue
to contribute increasingly to the high national GHG emissions. Fewer people would be em-
ployed in the new coal and nuclear power stations than if the same amount of power were gen-
erated from solar sources. As electricity prices go up so does household expenditure for hot wa-
ter. The target of generating 10% of the country’s electricity demand from RE by 2013 is not
met.

Future vision
SWHs are widely disseminated and are the preferred option for water heating in the domestic,
commercial and industrial sector. A vibrant industry is manufacturing and installing SWH.
Technological innovations have increased efficiency and the economy of scale has reduced
prices so that most people can afford the SWHs. The industry has absorbed many unemployed
particularly young people. Technical colleges offer courses on different aspects of solar water
heating and enrolment has steadily increased over the years. Homeowners are conscious and
proud of saving GHG emissions and doing their part for the environment and reducing climate
change.

Selecting the group of core stakeholders
The core stakeholders were selected when preparing the workshop. The organising committee
listed the people and organisations which could make a major contribution to or negatively in-
fluence the project. Areas of expertise which are useful and important to the programme were
also considered. The members of the organising committee invited the core stakeholders by
phone and this was followed up by an email explaining what presentation was expected from
them. Some stakeholders wanted to expand their topic, have more time, etc and such requests
were negotiated and agreement was reached. Personal contacts of the committee members
greatly helped to motivate the attendance of speakers, but if the selected person was not avail-
able a replacement was chosen. The core stakeholders were requested to give presentations on
the areas of expertise relevant to the programme. The list is given in the workshop programme
(Appendix 2).

Free hot water from the sun
15 November 2015
Hot water panels have become a common sight on homes in all parts of the city and households
enjoy water heated by the sun. The new technology is easy and quick to install and the sun heats
water for free.
In the last years we also see more and more solar water heaters on commercial and industrial
buildings and the trend is spreading fast.
Almost any body can afford a solar water heater these days. Over the years prices have come
down substantially and banks give loans, which can be repaid over a long term. People have re-
alised that they save of up to 40% of their electricity bill when they are using solar water heat-
ers.
The solar water heater industry has grown over the years and created a considerable number of
jobs. Technical colleges offer training courses in SWH. SWH are generally tested and are of
high quality. Manufacturers export solar water heaters to the neighbouring countries and further
a field in Africa.
As electricity tariffs from the national grid go up SWH have helped to keep the electricity bill
down. At the same time homeowners are consciously saving GHG emissions and use energy re-
sponsibly.



                                                                                              109
The stakeholders’ future vision
There being no project manager, there were no differing visions of the two parties. The future
vision of the stakeholders is similar to what is described above ‘Present vision’ and ‘Future vi-
sion’. The vision itself was not conflicting, but understandings of the most effective way to get
there differed in some instances, and this is discussed below under A.6.3.3.


A.6.3.3 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
Identification of conflicting issues and features
Five major issues have been identified which if resolved might lead to greater acceptance of
SWHs.
• Necessary subsidy and who should pay for it?
    It had become obvious that homeowners would not install SWHs until there was an incen-
    tive of a subsidy. Electricity prices are among the lowest in the world and it did not seem
    worthwhile to spend the initial capital to buy a SWH.
• Subsidy level
    The subsidy level raised some controversy. The organisations which pay the subsidy want
    to keep it as low as possible so as to benefit a larger number of people. The SWH industry
    wants higher subsidies because they know people will not order SWH unless there is a sub-
    stantial subsidy. Homeowners also want a high subsidy so as to reduce the upfront capital
    cost.
• Adherence to standards and quality control
    The SWH industry suffered a serious loss of reputation and credibility in the past when fly-
    by-night companies installed unreliable SWHs. The established companies are keen to pre-
    vent this happening again.
• Communication
    The public knows very little about solar water heaters and this contributes to the lack of ac-
    ceptance.
• Free SWH for the poor: Are SWHs their priority?
    The poor cannot afford SWH and they have other priorities.

Ranking key actors and issues according to their strategic importance
The key actors were ranked and the strategically most important ones were invited to give a
presentation at the workshop. They are listed in Appendix 2. Other actors were invited or made
aware of the workshop.


A.6.3.4 Step 4: Portfolio of options
Step 4 identifies the variety of options the PM/programme can take to enhance social accep-
tance, and their implications. The four key issues and possible solutions are given in Ta-
ble A.10.




110
Table A.10 Issues/solutions table for the solar water heater programme in South Africa
SWH case                                                   Possible solutions
Key issues                      Equipment/environment       Knowledge gap             Financial
                                Improved adaptation         reduction                 incentive
1. High initial capital cost    Subsidy                     Communication of          Subsidy
                                Bank loans, CDM             benefits of SWH,          Economy of scale
                                mechanism                   long-term savings on
                                                            electricity cost
2. Lack of communication        Pilot projects              Design
                                                            communication and
                                                            education campaign
3. Standards                    Introduce testing           SABS to issue mark
                                                            of approval
4. Poor cannot afford           Explore financial                                     Need 100%
SWH and may have other          contribution from CDM                                 capital subsidy
priorities                      mechanism

The upper part of Table A.11 is derived from Table A.10 and the lower part ranks the solutions.

Table A.11 Solutions ranking table
Solution                Description
1. Cost                 Introduce subsidies
Solution 1
Solution 2              Negotiate bank loans for SWH and use CDM mechanism to contribute to cost

Solution 3              Explain benefits of SWH such as long-term savings on electricity bill
2. Communication        Make pilot projects more visible, eg, media spots, newspapers
Solution 1
Solution 2              Design a communication campaign to educate the public about SWH
3. Standards            Improve the image of SWH by testing procedures carried out by the South African
Solution 1              Bureau of Standards
Solution 2              Attach a mark of approval to the equipment
4. Poor cannot          Explore financial contribution from CDM mechanism and government housing
afford, have other      subsidy
priorities Solution 1
Solution 2              The poor need 100% capital subsidy because they have other more urgent priorities
                        such as additional space
                        Strategic impact                 Costs/benefits         Preferred process Rank
                        urgent necessary feasible fit Costs          Benefits
1. Cost/solution 1      1       1           1      1     High        High       Compromising 1
Solution 2              4       4           4      4     50 000                                   4
Solution 3              1       1           1      1     2Billion    High       Compromising 1
2. Communication        2       2           2      2                                              2
Solution 1
Solution 2           2         2           2        2     200 000                                   2
3. Standards/quality                                      40 000 for    High                        1
control/Solution 1                                        company
Solution 2                                                Included in   High                        1
                                                          above
4. Poor cannot                                            CDM           High
afford, have other                                        covers
priorities Solution 1                                     about 15%
                                                          of cost
Solution 2                                                100% of       High       Compromising
                                                          cost




                                                                                                        111
There is not a single and unique preferred solution. Several solutions have the rank 1 because
one solution alone will not achieve the desired result. Several things have to happen almost at
the same time.


A.6.3.5 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
The preparation of the workshop
It is difficult to get the major actors together for a workshop as they are busy, and some hold
senior positions in their organisations. The cost of air tickets - it is a two-hour flight from Jo-
hannesburg/Pretoria and Durban where most of the major stakeholders work - and accommoda-
tion is another consideration. The yearly International Conference on Domestic Use of Energy is
held in March/April and usually workshops on topics of general interest are added on or held
simultaneously. A colleague and I had organised a SWH workshop in 2006 and there was de-
mand for holding another one in 2007. I thought that was a good opportunity to get all the major
actors together and try out step 5 of the ESTEEM tool. The attraction would be twofold: to at-
tend the Conference and to attend the SWH or other workshops and professional meetings. Be-
ing in the organising committee of the Conference provided me with additional resources to put
the workshop together and to access the major stakeholders. As in the year before, a small or-
ganising committee was formed with colleagues from Johannesburg/Pretoria and Durban. A
colleague from industry, Will Cawood, who has worked on SWH in South Africa for the last 35
years, knew most of the actors and played a vital role in approaching and inviting them. The
framework of the Conference advertised the workshop, and we could not have had if we had or-
ganised the workshop as a stand-alone event of the CA project. The workshop was a public
event, which everybody could attend.

The workshop was planned such that the major actors present their point of view and position
and in the subsequent discussion other major actors and the audience, including stakeholders
and interested persons, debate the issues. The format of the workshop - patterned on meetings in
which researchers present their findings - is well known to all participants and is designed to
bring critical issues into the open. The poor are not present at such workshops and their interest
is generally represented by NGOs.

The preparation of the workshop started in the third quarter of 2006. The major actors were se-
lected on the criteria of involvement in the SWH programme. They were asked to give a presen-
tation of their SWH-related work. If the people approached could not come replacements were
selected until qualified speakers covered most relevant areas of SWH. Having a small organis-
ing committee consisting of four well connected professionals in Johannesburg/Pretoria, Durban
and Cape Town helped greatly to contact people or remind them when confirmations were out-
standing. The major communication tools were email and telephone.

A detailed programme was drawn up, agreed upon by all presenters and it was part of the Con-
ference programme. This gave the SWH workshop wide exposure.

Realization of the workshop
The workshop took place on 12 April 2007. It was open to everybody who was interested. The
major stakeholders attended because they were presenting their work and other stakeholders and
generally interested public were also present. Interest and activist groups wanting to capture a
workshop for their own interest and publicity operate only sporadically in South Africa; as it
proved correctly, we did not expect this to happen.

The speakers presented their work and point of view and I as chairperson invited the audience to
ask questions or comment. The audience contributed additional information, asked many ques-
tions to clarify issues and there were at times lively discussions. Many issues were explained
and people were generally satisfied with the outcome.



112
I had intended to draw up a research agenda of the outstanding problems as one of the outcomes
of the workshop and had asked the key stakeholders to send me, or present at the workshop,
outstanding problems that needed further investigation or research. Labelling them research
problems, which anybody who wished to could solve, reduced personalised controversy. To-
wards the end of the workshop I presented the submitted issues and most were discussed and
resolved then and there, and I gave up my idea of presenting a list of research topics to the re-
search funding agency of the government.

Returning the results of the workshop
At the end of the workshop I asked all presenters if they agreed to put their presentations on the
conference website. All did, bar one who first had to submit his findings to the funding organi-
sation. Shortly after the workshop the presentations were on the website, which added greatly to
the information exchange and gave the presenters a greater feeling of being part of the work-
shop. For some the public exposure added value to their work or business.


A.6.3.6 Step 6: recommendations for action
Identifying acceptance and feasibility
Table A.12 gives the acceptance and feasibility of the proposed solutions.

Table A.12 Acceptance and feasibility: Project redesign and stakeholder negotiation options
1              2                3              4                 5                 6
Key issue         Alternative solu- Acceptance Type of action(s)      Does it require col- Feasibility
                  tions             (stakeholder required             laboration by oth-
                                    response)                         ers?
High capital cost Subsidies         High         Eskom to roll out    Industry             High
                                                 subsidised systems
                  Loans, CDM        Medium       Negotiate with       Banks, CDM body Medium
                                                 banks, CDM body
                  Explain long-term Medium       Communication        Funding source and Medium
                  savings                        campaign             communication pro-
                                                                      ject
Standards       SABS testing       High         SABS to buy and       SABS               High
                                                install testing
                                                equipment
                Attach mark of      High        SABS to attach af- SABS and industry High
                approval                        ter testing        to pay for it
New issue (from SESSA as um-        High        To influence in-   SESSA and industry High
step 5)         brella organisation             dusty
Quality control to oversee industry

Sorting the options: Capacity for action
Eskom stated at the workshop that it will subsidise 150 000 systems over the next three years.
The level of subsidy was not resolved and was further debated in the subsequent Eskom work-
shops and email discussions. The SABS will certify the SWH and the installation. SESSA (So-
lar Energy Society of South Africa) stated that, as a representative body of the industry, it will
look after quality control, and people appeared to be happy with this solution.

Homeowners accept SWHs when they are subsidised, as the quick uptake of SWH under the
SESSA50 and CEF500 projects has proved. SWH companies are urged to roll out the Eskom-
subsidised SWHs as soon as possible so that the momentum of acceptance is seized as an oppor-
tunity and is not lost in lengthy delays.




                                                                                                   113
Communication strategy
The stakeholders thought that a communication strategy would be good, but there was no deci-
sion made and no stakeholder took ownership of the issue.

Evaluation of the Create Acceptance process
Participating in the process of developing the ESTEEM tool has been a valuable experience,
which added insight and value to my work. Comparing the acceptance or lack of RET in Europe
and South Africa it emerged that RETs may not be accepted for different reasons but the tool is
still applicable and valuable in many different circumstances, as the demos have shown. The lo-
cal circumstances in South Africa - particularly environmental awareness and the development
of renewable energy technologies - lag far behind the European developments.

Overall I found the process extremely interesting and useful. The tool is definitely applicable to
the South African situation although some adjustments will have to be made and this may be
done when the tool is developed further to apply to a less specific PM/consultant situation.


A.6.4 Success and limitations of the CA-process and the ESTEEM tool in
      achieving acceptance in the region
The tool is of great help guiding the consultant. In the South African case I had to interpret the
tool freely and follow the spirit more than the actual instructions. This was made necessary by
the lack of a project manager, the consultant taking almost a double role, imagining what a pro-
ject manager would have done in a particular situation. The tool appears to address primarily
activist and concerned stakeholder objections and lack of acceptance. In South Africa the activ-
ist movements are not as strong as in Europe, and people are often quite indifferent to environ-
mental issues, which translates into a lack of urgency to introduce, disseminate and use renew-
able energy technologies. RETs are in an early stage of development, dissemination and use. I
have tried to apply the tool to this situation and found that some adjustments have to be made.
This could be done in a second phase of the ESTEEM tool development if there is one.


A.6.5 Exchange of demos/partners interaction in CA
This was very encouraging and useful. Just to present the results of the case studies and receive
expert comments at the presentation or later on the submitted report was valorising my experi-
ence.


A.6.5.1 Experiences with counter partner’s support
So far the exchange has been limited. Presumably the counter partner is waiting for this report.


A.6.5.2 Lessons learnt
The tool is an excellent guide to be followed where applicable. Each project is specific and also
in a different stage of development and adjustments for the specific situations have to be made.
The tool encourages the consultant to address the issues very systematically and find solutions
to increase the chances of acceptance. If the tool is applied early in the project development
when opposition has not yet firmly developed it is easier to engage opposing stakeholders.
The tool might also be of interest to workers in developing countries where technologies and
practices new to a particular environment are continually introduced as part of the development
process.


A.6.6 References


114
Austin, G. & Morris, G. 2005. The status of solar water heating for domestic hot water supply in
  the low-income sector in South Africa. Agama Energy. Stellenbosch.
Cawood, W. 2002. Baseline study - solar energy in South Africa 2000-2001. Report prepared
  for DANCED.
DME 2004. Capacity building in Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Report no. 2. 3. 4. -
  19. Economic and Financial Calculations and Modelling for the Renewable Energy Strategy
  Formulation. Department of Minerals and Energy, Pretoria.


A.6.7 Appendices
Appendix 1: City of Cape Town: Draft By-law
                                CITY OF CAPE TOWN
                      SOLAR WATER HEATER BY-LAW
                                          Draft 10
                                      12 March 2007
To regulate the incorporation of solar water heaters for the production of sanitary hot water in
buildings in the City of Cape Town; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Municipal Council of the City of Cape Town, as follows:-
OBJECTIVES
            a. To improve energy security and improve energy risk management;
            b. To reduce the use of electricity;
            c. To reduce the national contribution to environmental impacts associated with
                the burning of fossil fuels, such as carbon dioxide (C02), sulphur dioxide (S02)
                and nitrous oxide emissions (N03);
            d. To improve the quality of life through the provision of hot water;
            e. To create jobs in the solar water heater industry.
SCOPE
            a. This By-law applies to all new buildings in the City other than those exempted
                in subsection (c.).
            b. This By-law applies to all additions to existing buildings, which will require the
                use of hot water (eg bathroom, bedroom with en-suite bathroom and kitchen ex-
                tensions) other than those exempted in subsection (c.).
            c. This By-law does not apply to the following cases:
i)      Water used only for industrial purposes in buildings where hot water requirements ex-
ceed that which can be reasonably obtained through solar water heating;
ii)     Any privately funded residential building of which the extent is less than 75 m2 (includ-
ing garage space)




                                                                                            115
               a. The City shall be authorised to exempt buildings or parts of buildings from the
                   obligations of this bylaw if there are valid reasons for such an exemption, such
                   as :-
i)         Historical Buildings;
ii)        Buildings in areas, which, due to permanent shading, are not able to have solar water
heating.
               a. Multi-storey buildings are required to have as much solar water heating as can
                   be technically and economically accommodated by the structure and may apply
                   for a Notice of Exemption for the hot water requirements not able to be served.
               b. No Notice of Exemption will be valid unless given in writing over the signature
                   of an authorised official.
REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL
               a. An application for building plan permission must disclose a description of the
                   solar water heating system, showing compliance with this bylaw.
               b. The description shall, as a minimum, contain the following information:
                      i.   aperture area; where an aperture area of 0.7m2 per 50l of usage is
                           deemed the minimum acceptable;
                     ii.   size of the water storage tank to be installed
iii.       whether the SWH is freeze resistant or not freeze resistant;
iv.        for domestic solar water heating, a signed declaration on compliance of the SWH with
SANS 1307 in terms of section 4(2)(e) from manufacturer or distributor;
v.         a declaration including the rated daily output according to SANS 6211-1 or SANS
6211-2 which should equal 80% unless exemption has been given as per Clause 3 (d.) or (e.). In
the absence of SABS standards, international standards should be adhered to;
vi.        the name of the installer and the installing company.


Appendix 2: Programme for stakeholder workshop
International Conference on Domestic Use of Energy 2007: Solar Wa-
                  ter Heater Workshop Programme
                8.30 to 15.00 Thursday 12 April 2007
              Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Each presentation will last ten minutes followed by questions clarifying issues. A discussion will
                                 follow at the end of the session
SWH Workshop Chairpersons: Gisela Prasad and Will Cawood

Time               Topic                             Presenter                Organisation

Plenary

8.30 - 8.55        Keynote address: Solar water      Andrew Etzinger          Eskom
                   heating



116
Solar Water Heater Workshop

9.00 - 9.15     SESSA solar water heater activi-        John Ledger               SESSA
                ties

9.15 - 9.30     SESSA Solar 50 project                  Jon Adams                 SESSA

9.30 - 9.45

9.45 - 10.00    UNDP/CEFSWH 500 pro-                    Nadia Hamid               Central Energy Fund
                gramme                                                            (CEF)

10.00 - 10.15   SWH activities in other countries       Dieter Holm and Will      Consultants
                                                        Cawood

10.15 - 10.30   Report on REEP SWH pro-                 Glynn Morris              REEP
                gramme and the REEP SWH
                workshop

10.30 11.00     Refreshments

11.00 - 11.15   Report on Eskom SWH activities          Cedric Worthmann          Eskom
                and the Eskom SWH workshop

11.15 - 11.30   Current status of SABS SWH              Solly Peter               SABS
                specifications

11.30 - 11.45   Current status of testing facilities,   Cornelis van Hoeve, Ka-   SABS
                cost, time and other relevant is-       rel Deist
                sues

11.45 - 12.00   Presentation on SWH installa-           Cedric Worthmann          Eskom
                tions testing programme

12.00 - 13.00   Lunch

13.00 - 13.15   CDM and other financing                 Jason Schaffler
                mechanisms

13.15 - 13.30   Towards a framework of clean            Steve Thorne              Southsouthnorth
                energy receptivity: SWH case
                study

13.30 - 13.45   Employment opportunities in the         Glynn Morris              Agama
                SWH industry

13.45 - 13.55   Cape Town's proposed by-laws            Andrew Janish             Sustainable Energy
                and their impact on the solar wa-                                 Africa
                ter heating programme

13.55 - 14.15    Kuyasa - Learning by doing -           Shirene Rosenberg         City of Cape Town
                solar water heating for poverty
                alleviation

14.15 - 14.25   Other solar water heating initia-       Wouter Roggen             City of Cape Town
                tives in Cape Town apart from
                the Kuyasa project

14.25 - 15.00   Presentation of outstanding prob-       Gisela Prasad             University of Cape
                lems and discussions                                              Town




                                                                                                    117
Appendix B Matrix overview




118
Step1 - Project history, context and actors
             Biomass Germany                          ZEPP Netherlands                           Archimede Italy                           VEP Hungary                                  SMART H Iceland
General                                               four tools of the first step add to each
evaluation                                            other; PM is encouraged to tell the
                                                      same story in different ways (with
                                                      different starting points: defining mo-
                                                      ments, actors, chronological story, etc)
                                                      which gives a complete picture in the
                                                      end; Recommendation: first step is
                                                      quiet time-consuming but necessary
                                                      to get to know the project; time can
                                                      be saved by consultant by filling in
                                                      tables and let PM check (difficult to
                                                      be objective) or by letting PM fill in
                                                      tables at home; the experiences of
                                                      the PM with similar projects influ-
                                                      ence the process; at forehand an
                                                      catagorisation of PMs is necessary
                                                      (experienced or not, technical, politi-
                                                      cal or economic background, well
                                                      known figure, historical conflicts
                                                      with sthlds, etc)
Narrative    using the questionnaire in a very active narrative longer than recommended 2-       to meet many times PM was needed in       the questionnaire was helpful but there      The narrative frame was not very
             phase of project caused kind of ‘resis- 3 pages (5 pages); interview (2h) &         order to gain all the information; Rec-   were redundancies in the guiding ques-       helpful in getting the PM to talk
             tance’; the tool wasn’t regarded very    writing narrative (8h) are time consum-    ommendation: some redundancy in           tions; the tool wasn’t regarded very         freely. There emerged a resistance as
             helpful with respect to the value added; ing, but give relevant input also for      the narrative questionnaire; inter-       helpful with respect to the value added;     if the questionnaire tried to find faults
             it is time consuming for PM and con-     actors table, critical moments table and   viewing PM many times and in an           it is time consuming for PM and con-         rather than smooth work. At the be-
             sultant; for the consultant it helps to  context; Recommendation: during            organized way (through tables) al-        sultant; for the consultant it is a useful   ginning of a project this rather de-
             identify critical moments; Recom-        interview PM for narrative directly        lowed PM to develop a higher reflex-      starting point, and also for writing the     creased fluent communication - also
             mendation: check, if project descrip- critical moments and actors can be            ive and enlarged vision of the project    present vision in step 2; Recommen-          when other important stakeholders
             tions is already available; adjust-      pointed out -> relevant for filling in                                               dation: check if questions are consis-       within the project consortium made
             ment of questions with already           other tools; works best to have 2                                                    tent and remove redundancies);               the conversation somehow stiff. Rec-
             available project information (e.g.      interviewers (1 asking questions, 1                                                  check, if project descriptions are           ommendation: Instead of using
             flyers, brochures, tenders); before      writing down); use narrative as in-                                                  already available; reduce and/or             such a narrative where the project
             starting step 1, the project state       put for the other tools of step 1                                                    adjust questions utilising already           manager is set in sort of interroga-
             should be reflected: what is the pm’s                                                                                         available project information (e.g.          tion the project description or even
             information background, awareness                                                                                             flyers, brochures, tenders); prepara-        description from applications
             and experience; handling closely                                                                                              tion by consultant should save time          should be used. The consultant can
             linked to context analysis, actors                                                                                            for the PM                                   then scan the description and con-
             table and critical moments; prepara-                                                                                                                                       struct his own narrative. This can
             tion by consultant should save time                                                                                                                                        then be presented to the PM for
             for the PM                                                                                                                                                                 discussion. By this the consultant
                                                                                                                                                                                        can interpret his understanding and
                                                                                                                                                                                        check that against the main stake-




                                                                                                                                                                                                                           119
           Biomass Germany                             ZEPP Netherlands                            Archimede Italy                           VEP Hungary                             SMART H Iceland
                                                                                                                                                                                     holder; the PM. As an insider, a
                                                                                                                                                                                     PM, the framework does not give
                                                                                                                                                                                     much added value, a PM can there-
                                                                                                                                                                                     fore go directly to the next phase.
Context    PM has a deep and well grounded             2h interview to name opportunities and      PM and consultant worked in a com-        context tables a bit clumsy, but man-   The PM context analysis is pretty well
Analysis   know-how on the political, economical       barriers; important to mention it deals     plementary way to draw the context        ageable; requires well prepared and     grounded in societal context. But the
           and societal environment through the        with present context; consultant cannot     analysis; PM gave us only some in-        experienced consultant, and also one    question is whether a consultant
           reflection and input of a central plan-     fill in table (too subjective); some dif-   formation; consultant must integrate      with a good memory and/or well or-      would set the project in a different
           ning group; experiences of a precursor      ficulties in defining opportunities and     the whole tool; Recommendation: the       ganised, prepared notes; PM regarded context. Recommendation: very
           project offer valuable information;         barriers (often two sides of same coin);    strategy related to the context analy-    it as highly useful to identify and or- useful to reflect relevant aspects; it
           quantity and specification of questions     Recommendation: start with oppor-           sis (see table) can be referred to dif-   ganise issues systematically; Recom-    could be helpful to follow a few
           depend on projects’ context (e.g. pre-      tunities: frames mind of PM; take 3         ferent moments of the project: i.e. in    mendation: context tables are a         keywords here; context to human
           cursor process); categories of context      hours for interview; fill in barriers       our case Archimede has a change of        jump in the deep water suddenly,        capital, financial capital, natural
           are very helpful to reflect all relevant    and opportunities with PM; consult-         leadership; we have chosen to refer       better to put critical moments before capital
           areas; Recommendation: very useful          ant fills in level and timing column;       to the strategy of the first PM, since    it; requires much patience from pro-
           to reflect relevant aspects; difficult      PM completes table; skip catogories         the change is still on going; PM          ject manager, lengthy (Context ta-
           to deal with the key question “pres-        (only for consultant use); to save          knowledge of the context can be fo-       bles took 2.5 hours, tiring for PM);
           sure on the existing energy system /        time PM: define opportunities and           cused on its interest and be partial;     PM interpreted some headings dif-
           fit into existing system”; the dy-          barriers together with PM and than          necessary the consultant role looking     ferently, but easily understood with
           namic development has to be re-             let PM fill in rest of the table            for information sources such as con-      a few sentence additional explana-
           flected; change order of tool use                                                       tent of national or local debates;        tion; PM Interpretation of expected
                                                                                                   policy initiatives and laws               result was sometimes just the evident
                                                                                                                                             „success", some hint would be expe-
                                                                                                                                             dient for PM?; complemented with
                                                                                                                                             innovation characterisation table;
                                                                                                                                             make social networks; let us charac-
                                                                                                                                             terise their significance with the
                                                                                                                                             phrase: potential for „social lever-
                                                                                                                                             age”; continuous consultant feed
                                                                                                                                             back/intervention (cell by cell) rec-
                                                                                                                                             ommended; if the PM has no ideas –
                                                                                                                                             toss up the ball for PM to consider
                                                                                                                                             (he can accept or reject; think of fit
                                                                                                                                             or not)
Defining   actors of PM and stakeholders are re-       critical moments taken from narrative;      the tool works well; and is of high im-   it was easy to use; systematic collec-  critical moments are important to
Moments    flecting continuously; so there is a high   extended document, should be made           portance and interest; Recommenda-        tion was a good reflecting exercise;    understand as carriers and barriers;
Table      level of awareness; critical moments        easier to use (excell file); remove col-    tion: this tool is very useful for PM     PM realises: could have chosen better this is in a way a SWOT exercise,
           table is of high importance and inter-      umn on irreversibility; consultant fills    because it represents a synthetic         strategy for building wind park if gov- which PM are familiar with; or a risk
           est; Recommendation: questions              in table after interview for narrative      vision of the past and present project    ernment position had been known;        assessment; Recommendation: This
           work well with the PM if they were          and let PM check (saves time for PM);       history; process works well; irre-        Recommendation: using the CM            part could be linked more to regu-
           condensed; some sound very similar          Recommendation: difficult to indi-          versibility aspects are important         table in the original order, and only lar PM tools. if the project manager
           and aim at similar facts; critical          cate what critical moments are (and         changes wich produce a shift in the       afterwards the context seems more       is using a management tool, de-
           moments table is better linked with         what not); this becomes easier when         project journey, but they are still       appropriate. CM/DM gives a good         scriptions from common (engineer-
           context analysis, table format              changing the name in defining mo-           open to changes or lock in; useful for    warm up with a feeling of first         ing) literature there needs to be an



120
         Biomass Germany                          ZEPP Netherlands                            Archimede Italy                             VEP Hungary                                SMART H Iceland
         shouldn’t focus on single dates be-      ments; change name in defining              the context analysis                        achievement; none other than the           understandable; clear link between
         cause problems are mostly process        moments table; consultant fills in                                                      order change; it is ok and easily us-      these two tools
         dependant, an adequate format is         table and let PM check (saves time                                                      able
         yet needed                               PM); use table to check narrative on
                                                  completeness
Actors   the adjustment of categories and the     key actors table compliled by actors        while filling in the actor table we asked   it was tool 4, so came after the context   The actors table gave a good over-
Table    preparation of the table with already    mentioned in narrative and actors           PM on potential conflicts between           and CM tables, and that is ok; it was      view of the important actors and the
         available information was necessary;     added by consultant; extended excell        project vision and actors' expectations     useful for PM to take a systematic ac-     relationship between them. But a
         downsizing from 14 to 11 categories;     file (not user friendly); consultant fill   + potentially influential actors. this      count of players and their roles,          missing element is the dimension that
         the discussion of the actors table is    in table and let PM check (risk for         facilitated the filling in the context      strengths and attitudes; importance of     may be important to notice; actors can
         seen as a good backing for more trans-   subjectivity but saves time PM); Rec-       table; Recommendation: not all the          emerging potential actors acknowl-         have many roles within a project, how
         parency and potential role conflicts;    ommendation: by adding actors that          questions are relevant for all the          edged; some points emerged to be con-      can that be made clear? Recommen-
         Recommendation: PM has a good            were not mentioned in narrative, the        projects; in our case the less relevant     sidered for the PM; e.g to join or not a   dation: Perhaps the PM should give
         overview of relevant actors and          PM was encouraged to tell more              ones are: three questions on social         RES association; Recommendation:           a good description of what he ex-
         stakeholder groups through precur-       detailes about project for the narra-       organization; in the table the key          interpretation of "affinity" (re-          pects from the stakeholders and
         sor project; PM is very sensitive re-    tive; saving time of PM by filling in       issues are: role and interest, power,       sponse „supportive”) was ambigu-           back check the actors.
         lating to different roles of actors;     table by consultant and let PM check        communication channels, trust from          ous, should be clarified; a PM con-
         modification of questions and cate-      (at any time - not during interview)        the PM; repositioning                       cern was to smear or be explicit re-
         gories - depends on projects’ context                                                                                            garding conflicts with important
         (e.g. precursor process) and PM’s                                                                                                actors; not only as a task to think
         understanding; condense the amount                                                                                               over the strategy handling them, but
         of categories (…max 10) –                                                                                                        also to present these in these tables;
         Reformulation of categories like the                                                                                             interpretation of "affinity" (re-
         •“(re-)positioning” => “conflicts”                                                                                               sponse „supportive”) was ambigu-
         •“resources that actors control” =>                                                                                              ous, should be clarified
         “project activities”; split categories
         like “expectations and motivation”




                                                                                                                                                                                                                     121
Step 2 - Vision building
              Biomass Germany                        ZEPP Netherlands                         Archimede Italy                           VEP Hungary                           SMART H Iceland
General                                              less time consuming than step 1; Rec-
evaluation                                           ommendation: subjectivity is less of
                                                     an option in this step
PM Present based on the narrative, context analy- in stead of present vision an intermedi-    difficult to distinguish between future more descriptive of the past and        description between current and future
Vision      sis and actors table; difficult distinc- ate vision was compiled (based on        and present vision; no prior experience present than a vision; separate in-     vision comes as a mix the PM is inside
            tion between future and present vi-      context analysis) by consultant and      about this project                      termediate vision was constructed       the project constantly preparing for short
            sion; set of time frame for present and checked by PM; Recommendation:                                                    for the midterm future; PM reacted      and long term actions; Recommenda-
            future vision; Recommendation:           no added value seen for present vi-                                              with minor modifications; Recom-        tions: Can a consultant separate be-
            time frame should be based on the        sion (it's all said in narrative all-                                            mendation: include some sum of          tween these for a PM this is not possi-
            expectations of the PM; separation ready); therefore intermediate vision                                                  the narrative to make other             ble?
            of present and future vision might       made by consultant to get PM and                                                 stakeholders know the project;
            be not feasible                          stakeholders in 'future thinking                                                 elaborate intermediate vision to
                                                     mode'; change present vision PM in                                               make vision more tangible and the
                                                     intermediate vision                                                              path explicit
Social net- input by the consultant, modification simplified version of network map           input by consultant comment and ad-     tansparently clarified actors and       This tool is in a way a repetition of the
work map    by PM; Recommendation: if the            compiled by consultant; checked by       justment by PM; Recommendation:         relationships done by consultant;       actors' table; Recommendation: use
            main players are wellknown; map- PM; Recommendation: dimensions                   very useful for PM to visualise         Recommendation: drawn by con-           rather the actors table to more extent
            ping is easy; reduce complexity;         may be changed a bit to better fit the   clearly the present network of the      sultant, easily approved by PM; it
            mapping should be rated as suppor- project; clear description of map is           stakeholders involved in the project; required not always easy ponder-
            tive                                     needed (or keep it simple); what to      it was useful to set a reference on     ing which (non-PM) relations to
                                                     do when relations change over            which to build future network map represent or ignore; relationships
                                                     time?; use different colours to indi-                                            could be shown more sophisticat-
                                                     cate differences between visions;                                                edly and illustratively
                                                     change dimensions when needed
                                                     according to the project
Synthesis   description of map; correction by PM;                                             modification: done by consultant and      description of map, minor correction For the project manager this is not very
            Recommendation: description is                                                    discussed with PM; Recommenda-            by PM; Recommendation: should helpful and the goal is not evident.
            crucial                                                                           tion: it is difficult to be too much      be in short sentences, sort of a
                                                                                              demanding with the PM; more work          short descriptive summary be-
                                                                                              must to be done by the consultant         cause much information on rela-
                                                                                                                                        tionships included already in vi-
                                                                                                                                        sions description
PM Future     based on input of the PM (meetings,                                             difficult to distinguish between future   elaborated by consultant; based on   ditto
Vision        telefon interviews); Recommenda-                                                and present vision; based on input        the narrative, context analysis and
              tion: the frame and the main fac-                                               from PM and SH; Recommendation:           actors table and previous discus-
              tors should be discussed; don't fol-                                            time for the future visions: no more      sions with PM; PM reacted with
              low the concept of split visions                                                than 5 years                              minor modifications; Recommen-
                                                                                                                                        dation: a mix of qualitative and
                                                                                                                                        quantitative statements, but more
                                                                                                                                        qualitative statements than quan-
                                                                                                                                        titative to see the essence; not to
                                                                                                                                        be lost in numbers; it may be a




122
               Biomass Germany                           ZEPP Netherlands                           Archimede Italy                           VEP Hungary                           SMART H Iceland
                                                                                                                                              challenge to make the PM contra-
                                                                                                                                              dict with the consultant/expert
                                                                                                                                              prefabricated view; how to pro-
                                                                                                                                              voke/encourage the PM?
Vision title   was not of high relevance, but elabo-     composed together with PM & stake-                                                   no high importance; done by PM       This is not very helpful whereas this pro-
               rated by consultant and PM; Recom-        holders; sometimes difficult to indicate                                             and consultant together; Recom-      ject is a second step in a larger context
               mendation: clarify the concernment        in title the small differences between                                               mendation: no high importance,       called hydrogen economy by media.
               with PM; vision title not always of       visions; Recommendation: just title                                                  but good to keep it for short label-
               high importance                           is often not enough to show the (mi-                                                 ling visions in discussions
                                                         nor) differences between visions; not
                                                         really usefull when minor differ-
                                                         ences between visions can not be
                                                         shown in titles
Future         input by the consultant on the basis of                                              input by PM and stakeholders; Rec-
network        workshop discussion; modification by                                                 ommendation: both for PM and
map            PM (interview); Recommendation:                                                      stakeholders; this tool is a reflection
               the importance of single players in                                                  about the present network map; this
               the future is difficult to assume;                                                   tool deepens the most important
               reduce complexity; mapping should                                                    relationships and the future suitable
               be rated as supportive                                                               development; it allow stressing the
                                                                                                    real expectations of each actors; this
                                                                                                    tool is necessary in order to create
                                                                                                    future visions and the conflicting
                                                                                                    issues table
Stakeholder based on the scenario-workshop; dif-         ?                                          modification: not done; Recommen-         PM's vision reacted upon; interview   They used the description given in the
present     ficult to distinct between future and                                                   dation: it was difficult to distinguish   questionnaire was also used; Rec-     project description and that the PM's
vision      present vision; Recommendation:                                                         between present vision and the fu-        ommendation: various "tricks" to      future vision; Recommendation: Not
            use storylines to involve stake-                                                        ture one and we chose to have only        make stakeholders interested;         found important
            holder in vision building process;                                                      one intermediate stakeholder vision       sometimes return service was of-
            don't follow the concept of split                                                                                                 fered by consultant; address the
            visions any longer; vision implicates                                                                                             stakeholders' sensitive points to
            the future                                                                                                                        make them interested
Stakeholder based on the scenario-workshop; dif-         easily written after interview (6 times    modification: all the information ob-     PM's vision reacted upon; interview   can describe visions that are much
future vi-  ficult to distinct between future and        1,5h); often on 2 pages; subtitles added   tained from the interviews was ex-        questionnaire was also used; Rec-     broader; not so much in practical scale
sion        present vision; Recommendation:              to structure text; Recommendation: 2       trapolated to a short time (5 years)      ommendation: various "tricks" to      but larger future vision for the whole
            use storylines to involve stake-             pages are needed to desribe all di-        (intermediate vision); Recommenda-        make stakeholders interested;         society; Recommendation: use this to
            holder in vision building process;           mensions; dimensions used to struc-        tion: time for the future visions: no     sometimes return service was of-      catch the stakeholders wishful thinking
            don't follow the concept of split            ture text; confidential information        more than 5 years since the project       fered by consultant; address the      and expectations; use this to put com-
            visions any longer; vision implicates        can easily be used in future vision        is new                                    stakeholders' sensitive points to     munication with internal and external
            the future                                   format; use dimensions and subtitles                                                 make them interested                  stakeholders in the right scale and con-
                                                         to structure text                                                                                                          text.




                                                                                                                                                                                                                       123
             Biomass Germany                        ZEPP Netherlands                        Archimede Italy                            VEP Hungary                             SMART H Iceland
PM inter-    modification: combining the feedback   structured interview of 2 hours based   modifications: many PM interviews,         intercactive consultation rather than
views        on mapping and visions with inter-     on social network map and intermedi-    focused on the inputs gained during        just having PM to modify/approve
             views; Recommendation: synchro-        ate vision; Recommendation: hand-       single interviews with stakeholders;       visions premade by consultant;
             nisation with the PM's needs and       full to work 'live' in social network   the interviews were recorded; Rec-         (Slightly) modified and approved
             timeframe is crucial; substeps         map on laptop with beamer during        ommendation: the presence of two           visions and maps resulted
             should be linked; substeps might be    interview; 2 interviewers for inter-    consultants enriched the outcome:
             linked to avoid time consuming         view (one on laptop and one asking      added questions; before interview-
             activities                             questions); use dimensions social       ing PMs, we searched for more in-
                                                    network map to structure interviews     formation, especially about energy
                                                                                            policy and international Solar ther-
                                                                                            modynamic R/D projects, so that we
                                                                                            obtained more completed and satis-
                                                                                            factory answers from PM
PM stake-    appliance modification due to the   Social network map is base for struc-      single interviews: the core group inter-   done by consultant (not PM); single     A workshop was used instead of inter-
holder in-   stakeholders schedule: no single in-ture of interview; can be worked on        views not feasible due to the difficult    stakeholder interviews; interview       views. This was useful and cost-
terviews     terviews but group discussion with  during interview; synthesis writing;       to organise a joint meeting; following     questionnaire was also used; stake-     effective. Recommendation: The work-
             core stakeholders; Recommendation:  PM future vision and PM social net-        the questionnaire is time consuming        holder views elicited; Recommen-        shop is very useful as a reality check.
             PM important as contact person;     work map were read by stakeholders                                                    dation: various "tricks" to make        Unfortunately NGO representatives
             consultant need pm support; PM      before interview; Recommendation:                                                     stakeholders interested; some-          did not participate in the workshop.
             must trust in the consultant and    start interview with general ques-                                                    times return service was offered        workshop is a good alternative to in-
             should submit some competences      tions to get to know the position of                                                  by consultant; use also a ques-         terviews if there are no large conflicts
                                                 the stakeholder; use social network                                                   tionnaire to elicit broader context
                                                 map for structure and to show dif-                                                    views rather than just react on
                                                 ferences between PM vision and                                                        PM's vision?; address the stake-
                                                 stakeholder vision 'live' by drawing                                                  holders' sensitive points to make
                                                 on map; stakeholders can easily re-                                                   them interested
                                                 act on vision PM during interview
                                                 when read the synthesis writing;
                                                 future vision and social network
                                                 map of the PM at front
BAU          consistent scenario; discussed and  not written as an future vision and        done by consultant, based on informa-      a short scenario description, dis-      Instead of asking the PM for a descrip-
             reflected with PM and core stake-   network map; but as summary (nega-         tion gathered through interviews and       cussed and reflected with PM and        tion of a BAU scenario there is the ten-
             holder; Recommendation: necessary tion of PM vision) integrated in con-        context analysis; it was prepared, but     core stakeholders; stakeholders do      dency in critical media to refer to differ-
             data have to be available; stake-   flicting issues table step 3; Recom-       not used neither dicussed; Recom-          not agree on BAU; consultant de-        ent future vision which then again is
             holder have to be included and      mendation: difficulties in defining        mendation: this document is done by        cided final status; Recommenda-         nearer to a BAU. Recommendation: use
             should get feedback; analysing data the BAU-vision (whose vision is it?)       consultant; it is a document not dis-      tion: Whose BAU? How to settle          the media / societal discourse to find
             by observing changes over time      and social network map (what to put        cussed but acquired by the consult-        different BAU visions? Hard to          out how the project implications are
                                                 in the centre of the map); no ex-          ant; as regards the information            separate stakeholders "standard"        reflected against BAU given by the
                                                 tended future vision and social net-       gathered through interviews as well        vision from BAU?                        society ?; This recommendation is
                                                 work map of the BAU is needed as           as the context analysis                                                            again a suggestion on how to go about
                                                 long as summary of BAU can be                                                                                                 the work without a consultant.
                                                 given in step 3




124
Step 3 - Identifying conflicting issues
               Biomass Germany                           ZEPP Netherlands                        Archimede Italy                           VEP Hungary                           SMART H Iceland
 General                                                 4h of consultant and 2h meeting with
 Evaluation                                              PM needed; 20 issues identified
 Conflicting   based on the input of PM pre-             change rows and columns (visions in     this tool represented a critical review   it was few conflicts and straight-    The heading 'conflicting issues' is per-
 Issues ta-    sent&future vision; stakeholder pre-      columns) to make comparison of          of the whole process applied to Ar-       forward to identify for existing      haps not so appropriate. Issues were
 ble           sent&future vision; BAU; devided          visions more visible; issues are di-    chimede project; Recommendation:          stakeholders; but difficult to an-    entered as 'doubtful', 'unresolved' and
               into 5 evaluation points (infrastruc-     vided in opportunities and controver-   it is a very useful moment of syn-        ticipate not yet identified actors    'strong support'. Because stakeholder
               ture, environment, economy, social        sies; no blue is used in table; Rec-    thesis for the consultant: it             and conflicting issues; Recom-        views were identified in a workshop,
               and policy issues); Recommenda-           ommendation: no added value for         emerged the real room for action          mendation: beyond indicating          there is only one stakeholder vision.
               tion: the preparation work for the        BAU vision -> no differences in         towards this pilot project                consensus, synergetic points          Recommendation: Would have been
               visions was very helpful; a suc-          outcome table with or without BAU                                                 should be stressed/made more          more useful at an earlier stage of the
               cessful stakeholder-ws is suppor-                                                                                           highlighted/explicit; colours for     project? harmonise with project
               tive (necessary); the evaluation                                                                                            conflicts and agreements and          management tools (e.g. risk analysis)
               points changed during the "step-                                                                                            uncertainty is not well visible in    but helpful in setting a communca-
               process"; the classification is dif-                                                                                        print; beyond indicating consen-      tion agenda
               ficult                                                                                                                      sus, synergetic points should be
                                                                                                                                           stressed/made more high-
                                                                                                                                           lighted/explicit
 Issues        easy to fill on the basis of key issues   ranking difficult when many issues      not done; Recommendation: it has          issues ranked; Recommendation:        ok; some issues are more important in
 ranking       from conflicting issue table; ranking     exist; therefore multiplying impor-     to be considered that core stake-         also include issues anticipated       the long than in the short term (added
 table         without weigthing factors not possi-      tance and urgency automatically to      holders will probably change in the       from future; instead of or be-        to table); Recommendation: ditto
               ble; modification: implementation of      get ranking; Recommendation:            future, grasping new national and         sides ranking I would use mark-
               score descriptions and weigthing          automatic ranking by multiplying        global opportunities                      ing between 1-5, as some issues
               factors; Recommendation: check if         importance and urgency                                                            can almost equally be of high
               pm gets additional information;                                                                                             importance, ranking them in this
               neccessity depends on the pro-                                                                                              case may be misleading
               jects' status (step 0 / typology);
               more interesting for new projects
 Strategic     visualisation of key issues indicating    automatically filled in when ranking    not done; Recommendation: be-             vsualisation of key issues indicat-   This graph seems a bit redundant. It
 issues        importance and urgency; following         issues; Recommendation: discus-         cause there will be soon a new PM,        ing importance and urgency; use-      needs more clarification of the ex-
 graph         the manual and the additional             sion whether this graph should be       with different interest (Enel)            ful for external communication;       pected value. The table is easier to read
               weighting procedure; Recommen-            used in further process or not                                                    Recommendation: also include          than the graph.
               dation: check if PM gets addi-                                                                                              issues anticipated from future,
               tional information (depends on                                                                                              these by nature of the "urgency"
               type of issues and existing knowl-                                                                                          dimension will be "discounted"
               edge); neccessity depends on the
               projects' status, more interesting
               for new projects




                                                                                                                                                                                                                     125
Step 4 - Portfolio of options
               Biomass Germany                         ZEPP Netherlands                          Archimede Italy                            VEP Hungary                               SMART H Iceland
 General                                            30 solutions identified; started during
 Evaluation                                         interview PM and finished by PM at
                                                    home; Recommendation: saving time
                                                    by letting PM fill in tables at home;
                                                    tools can be filled in by PM at home;
                                                    with little help of consultant (by giv-
                                                    ing examples or help with filling in
                                                    first rows)
 Issues       solutions worked by consultant and    4th column is added with 'other' solu-     clear visualisation of real problems: 3      numerous solution options                 OK. Solutions mean that either parts of
 /solution    pm; still ranked; Recommendation:     tions for those that didn't fit one of the main issues which rose from conflict-        groupped in three categories were         the project will be redesigned or the old
 table        new ideas for common process op-      3 types of solutions                       ing issues table; all these issues involve   invented to solve conflicting issues;     parts will be used but explained and
              tions; detailed information on solu-                                             new and peripheral actors that will          Recommendation: none                      communicated. Recommendation: for
              tions; positive for difficult project                                            have an impact on fu-ture strategy;                                                    example car companies' & oil compa-
              phases                                                                           Recommendation: used as input for                                                      nies' commitment; It is part of the
                                                                                               WS: this is a valuable tool of discus-                                                 project but cannot be realised at this
                                                                                               sion; allowing to participate on a                                                     stage. good for keeping overview
                                                                                               common basis; effective sinthesis of
                                                                                               the main problems which constraint
                                                                                               the project development; clear pic-
                                                                                               ture of "who is responsible for"
 Solutions    ranking with a score between 1-4 and not used because we never recieved          this table has not been done since the       not used; there was not sufficient        not applied; further guidance needed;
 ranking      a weighting correction factor; Rec-   back the solution ranking table from       present PM cannot wholly controll the        and detailde information to fill it; it   Recommendation: further guidance
 table        ommendation: definition of the        the PM; the tables asks too much de-       range of solutions for the development       was decided to priotise options in        needed; step 4 includes many tables;
              range (score) is needed; check if     tailed information that the PM does not and commercialisation of the technol-           Step 5 Workshop and in Step 6             difficult to keep track of the issues and
              weighting factor is assistant and     have and added value no very clear to ogy tested through Archimede and can-             action planning; Recommenda-              communicate to PM what we are talk-
              needed                                the PM and to ECN (how will it be          not enter into details                       tion: none; keep it as an optional        ing about
                                                    used later on in the process?) Recom-                                                   tool; it can be useful for projects
                                                    mendation: remove table from                                                            with sufficient information
                                                    ESTEEM tool
 Portfolio of input for stakeholder-ws; Recom-      not used because there is overlap be-      this step seems to be redundant since        not used; all identified solution         not applied; further guidance needed;
 options      mendation: new impulses for PM        tween this instrument and step 5, where similar to the capacity for action table;       options; were decided to carry on to      Recommendation: further guidance
              and new possibilites to solve con-    there is also testing of the solutions and both are focused on the feasibilty of        the workshop to discuss; Recom-           needed; Would be good to have exam-
              flicts support the discussion and the issues with a large number of stake-       options; also in this case, like in the      mendation: none; drop this in-            ples on how this can be applied!
              motivation to participate; positive   holder; instrument is too time-            table before, the PM Enea was not able       strument from CA
              for difficult project phases          consuming with little added value;         of giving us a suggestion in terms of
                                                    Recommendation: remove instru-             resources availability and other details
                                                    ment from ESTEEM tool




126
Step 5 - Getting to shake hands
              Biomass Germany                       ZEPP Netherlands                          Archimede Italy                          VEP Hungary                              SMART H Iceland
General       important role within communication  preparation costs a lot of time but is
Evaluation    strategy, manual was very detailed   worth it, Recommendation: a two day
              and seen as substantially helpful    workshop was not feasible; some
                                                   participants / stakeholders com-
                                                   plained allready about a duration of
                                                   1 day; try to limit the duration of the
                                                   workshop as much as possible with-
                                                   out decreasing the results
Selection of depends on aim of the workshop,       in coorperation with the PM and some       this phase is extremely important for    approx. 30 people were invited to
WS / par-    implementation of partners and stake- active stakeholders we have invited 45     selecting right people who are not di-   represent all relevant segments of
ticipants    holder workshop regarding conflicts, stakeholders by Email (majority) and        rectly involved yet, Recommendation:     society; PM had helped the consult-
             Recommendation: one day work-         some by mail; when no reaction, we         starting from context analysis, allows   ant with putting together the list of
             shop, selection regarding specific    called the invited persons by phone        to widen the social dimension in-        stakeholders who were to be in-
             problems in the view of mainly        Recommendation: PM has prefer-             volved in the demo project               vited, Recommendation: invite
             long-term economic, be attentive to ences in participants; ask every                                                      several people representing a par-
             all relevant stakeholders             stakeholder that you communicate                                                    ticular segement/dimension to
                                                   with to come up with other persons                                                  secure representative and diverse
                                                   (organisations) that might be inter-                                                participation unless the first place
                                                   ested in the workshop and invite                                                    chosen candidate(s) will surely
                                                   these as well; no balance in gender /                                               attend
                                                   age feasible; selecting and inviting
                                                   the stakeholders is an active process
                                                   that changes all the time when peo-
                                                   ple confirm their presence or non-
                                                   presence and come up with other
                                                   names
Prepar-      instead of a dossier an elaborated    dossier included the intermediate vi-      Step 1+ Step2 --> Core stakeholder       on a preparatory meeting the con-
ing&Infor invitation letter was prepared and a     sion of the PM, the future vision of the   group Step 1+ Social Map + Is-           sultant and PM selected and dis-
mation       handout was offered to the partici-   PM, the issues list compiled by con-       sues/Solutions --> new participants;     cussed the key issues and solution
(Dossier,    pants, Recommendation: because of sultant, route description, information        Recommendation: different type of        options to be discussed on the
issues list) the existing feasibility studies as a booklet ZEPP & agenda. 1 meeting           document for different participant       workshop; the PM asked to refor-
             common information basis; no dos- with PM + 1 meeting with modera-               group had been necessary due to a        mulate into a more general issue
             sier was needed; the preparation      tors/minute taker, Recommendation:         confidential matters                     one of the selected conflicts; a dos-
             depends on the specific information not feasible to let stakeholders vote                                                 sier was sent by Email to all partici-
             level of the involved stakeholders    on issues upfront, consultant com-                                                  pants before the workshop. It con-
                                                   piled list of five issues: local pro's,                                             tained: a brief description of the
                                                   local cont's, technical & legal issues,                                             situation of wind projects and the
                                                   economic issues & relation with re-                                                 Vép wind project, the CA project
                                                   newable energy; when voting not                                                     and the aim of the workshop; pre-
                                                   feasible (f.e. stakeholders don't know                                              sent, intermediate and future vision
                                                   enough about project to vote), let                                                  of PM, maps; a chart showing the
                                                   consultant decide upon issues to dis-                                               CA process; agenda of the work-




                                                                                                                                                                                                  127
              Biomass Germany                          ZEPP Netherlands                        Archimede Italy                            VEP Hungary                               SMART H Iceland
                                                       cuss                                                                               shop; printed brochures about the
                                                                                                                                          wind project at Vép were distrib-
                                                                                                                                          uted to all participants right before
                                                                                                                                          the workshop; Recommendation:
                                                                                                                                          phone call follow up and provid-
                                                                                                                                          ing information is recommended
                                                                                                                                          for some important invitees; it is
                                                                                                                                          recommended in the sent material
                                                                                                                                          to describe shortly the role of the
                                                                                                                                          workshop in the ESTEEM proc-
                                                                                                                                          ess and also send the process
                                                                                                                                          chart
Facilitator   preparatory meetings and agreements    one of the stakeholders offered their     not done                                   it was unnecessary to hold such a
meeting       mainly with the project manager are    facilities to host the workshop (a                                                   meeting; the CA consultant was the
              needed (in the Jühnde demo consult-    neigbhour of the future plant): rooms &                                              facilitator; two collegues of his
              ant and PM cover the facilitator func- lunch, Recommendation: being                                                         were aids, Recommendation:
              tion); Recommendation: in Jühnde       physically close to future plant, made                                               none; keep it as an optional sub-
              a preliminary workshop with part-      discussion more direct & helped im-                                                  step
              ners took place to prepare the         agening what project would look
              stakeholder workshop (presenta-        like, informal atmosphere made
              tions, handout, solutions/options)     networking during lunch and breaks
                                                     possible, try to create connection
                                                     between project and location of the
                                                     workshop
Execution     25 participants, workshop took place morning session: plenary session with       we chose half day WS, with a semi          17 invitees showed up, intro presen-
              Friday afternoon to include all stake- presentations on CA, the ZEPP & the       structured programme, including a          tation by the consultant (facilitator),
              holder groups, solutions and options   aim of the workshop. afternoon: 3         round table on the main points, discus-    group work for participants to come
              were prioritized, the workshop helps groups of 6-7 persons (1 moderator + 1      sion with all core stakeholders and then   up with solution proposals, propos-
              to build a new communication plat-     (representative of) PM in each group):    open discussion with all the other par-    als were presented, discussed, then
              form, Recommendation: a partners 2 proposals per person per issue, in-           ticipants, Recommendation: the state       evaluated with voting, new useful
              workshop beforehand supported          stead of voting, a summary by the         of the project is the main criterion to    contacts established between the
              the execution of the main work-        moderators was given in final plenary     choose this kind of WS, as agreed          project manager and stakeholders,
              shop; the workshop helps to build a session, Recommendation: 2 partici-          with our CP; to overcome the lack of       WS process as recommended in the
              new communication platform             pants that confirmed did not show         right knowledge and the awareness          manual can not strictly be kept, it
                                                     up; 1 participant that was not invited    of the real conflicts; the better path     must be taken flexible according to
                                                     did show up; when possible, add a         was to manage a meeting during             the particular situation and the peo-
                                                     fun-part to the workshop (excursion,      which the discussion among the main        ple attending; Recommendation:
                                                     drink, etc) to facilitate the network-    stakeholders was, at the same time,        flexibility for group work, e.g.
                                                     activities among participants, work-      observed by peripheral stakeholders,       working in groups of four people;
                                                     ing in pairs not feasible, voting is      without filters                            the WS process as recommended
                                                     time consuming, 3 proposals per                                                      in the Manual can not strictly be
                                                     person too time consuming, add al-                                                   kept, it must be taken flexible
                                                     ternative for voting, discussion in                                                  according to the particular situa-
                                                     small groups increases the interac-                                                  tion and the people attending (e.g.



128
            Biomass Germany                            ZEPP Netherlands                             Archimede Italy                          VEP Hungary                            SMART H Iceland
                                                       tion and reaction upon each other,                                                    how to involve them, how to make
                                                       (representative of) PM in each group                                                  them present their results, etc.);
                                                       to provide direct answers to ques-                                                    the aim of the Evaluation/Voting
                                                       tions concerning plans, provide some                                                  should be further qualified: what
                                                       networking time                                                                       we want to learn from it, for what
                                                                                                                                             we want to use the outcome;
                                                                                                                                             evaluation/Voting procedure
                                                                                                                                             should be improved, to be made
                                                                                                                                             simpler, faster; include Borda
                                                                                                                                             count voting method as an option;
                                                                                                                                             use voting or evaluation also iden-
                                                                                                                                             tify what type of participants are
                                                                                                                                             against a particular proposal;
                                                                                                                                             allow more flexibility for group
                                                                                                                                             work, e.g. working in groups of
                                                                                                                                             three, four or five, rahter than in
                                                                                                                                             pairs or having multi level group-
                                                                                                                                             ing; further clarification of PM's
                                                                                                                                             role and activity during the work-
                                                                                                                                             shop is recommended; allow the
                                                                                                                                             process more markedly discussing
                                                                                                                                             the step 4 solution ideas not just
                                                                                                                                             as last resort if participants do
                                                                                                                                             not mention such solution options
Reporting   to send out a workshop report was          report content: introduction (step 5 of      the WS report has been based on a        WS report was sent to participants
            supportive for the reflection of patici-   CA, aim of workshop, date & loca-            synthesis of the discussion on the three and interested other people; WS
            pants and PM, Recommendation:              tion), workshop description (minutes +       critical issues presented and on the     report and the presentation were put
            the charts of the presentation as          results) and appendix (list participants,    proposals that emerged; all introduced on the Hungarian Wind Association
            well as the other background mate-         viewpoint local NGO, slides presenta-        by a short summary about the history     website; consultant called PM to
            rial was already available before-         tions, pictures, issues list, future + in-   of the project; Recommendation: we       inquiry his perception of the WS
            hand; the quantity and quality of          termediate vision PM), Recommenda-           have chosen to omit specific refer-      and discuss in general the overall
            the workshop report depends on             tion: record the whole workshop on           ences to the position of the single      results; Recommendation: besides
            the preparation work: if the dossier       audio / video tape to help the re-           stakeholders, we had collected before participants, also send WS report
            or a handout or a presentation is          porter to recall all details of the dis-     the WS; following the suggestion of      to everyone invited and others
            already at hand of the participants        cussions                                     the PM who has been contacted by         who are interested
            not all the material has to be in-                                                      some institutional stakeholders
            cluded again                                                                            (Enel; Ministry of Economic Devel-
                                                                                                    opment) showing to be worried
                                                                                                    about circulation of information on
                                                                                                    their official position




                                                                                                                                                                                                      129
Step 6 - Recommendations for action
             Biomass Germany                          ZEPP Netherlands                           Archimede Italy                            VEP Hungary                             SMART H Iceland
General      medium time consuming, but well          good, clear instructions, most impor-                                                 step 6 tools were first pre-filled by
Evaluation   instructed by manual                     tant step, but time consuming, Rec-                                                   the consultant and then a 2 hour
                                                      ommendation: try to avoid repetition                                                  meeting with the PM ensued to
                                                      in strategies and tables                                                              discuss and finalise the proposed
                                                                                                                                            actions, Recommendation: a
                                                                                                                                            summary time table for the ac-
                                                                                                                                            tions template would be useful for
                                                                                                                                            the users, alternatively a timing
                                                                                                                                            column could be inserted in each
                                                                                                                                            table, in later ESTEEM applica-
                                                                                                                                            tions the consultant may also have
                                                                                                                                            a follow up and helping hand role
                                                                                                                                            also in the execution phase of the
                                                                                                                                            action and communication plan -
                                                                                                                                            formally probably as a separate
                                                                                                                                            activity from ESTEEM
Acceptance input from stakeholder workshop,          as no voting took place during work-        the table works very well and gives        for three key issues ten solution
and Feasi- Recommendation: colour code               shop, column 3 cannot be filled in,         value added; since at the end we got a     options were listed and qualified,
bility Table might not always be helpful, the        column 3 changed in strategies column       clearer vision of what the project is      Recommendation: acceptance
             third category is different from the    with 3 possible combinations: strategy      going to become                            indicated as highly or positively
             other two and might cause confu-        of both PM + stakeholders, strategy of                                                 should be further clarified: who
             sion                                    stakeholder, strategy of PM, problem:                                                  still opposes?, allow some flexibil-
                                                     list becomes long, stategies divided                                                   ity in marking feasibility
                                                     into 5 key issues used in workshop,                                                    of/capacity for an action to a pro-
                                                     Recommendation: in the ZEPP case                                                       posal with two types at the same
                                                     the results of the voting are missing;                                                 time (type 1&2, 2&3)
                                                     than it's relevant to indicate whether
                                                     a strategy is from the PM, the stake-
                                                     holders or both
Capacity     helpful in general, but the table might 45 strategies left over for further proc-   this table resulted very useful; design-   easy to use summary reorganisation
for Action   be combined with the following ac-      essing. filled in by consultant, Rec-       ing the paths at short and long term       of the Acceptance and Feasibility
Table        tion and communication plan - due to ommendation: sometimes difficult                                                          table, Recommendation: list moni-
             the number of actions, Recommenda- for consultant to decide what exact                                                         toring action and monitored issue
             tion: differentiation between action subactions must be undertaken                                                             together: monitor what issue with
             and subaction difficult; coloured                                                                                              what action (what and how)
             activity allocation was not neces-
             sary; if the number of actions is
             manageable the following substeps
             might be integrated




130
              Biomass Germany                          ZEPP Netherlands                          Archimede Italy                            VEP Hungary                            SMART H Iceland
Short-term    worked well, Recommendation:             17 strategies pointed out; consultant     this table gives a clear picture of the    straightforward to select type 1 ac-
action plan   identification of project specific       filled in columns; often repetition in    room for action at this stage; a large     tions from previous table, Recom-
              strategies; the short-term action        the columnsRecommendation: some-          range of actions are on the agenda:        mendation: do not take “actions
              plan and the collaboration plan can      times difficult for consultant to de-     collecting experience through partici-     that PM can do alone” always
              be prepared together                     cide what exact subactions must be        pating to other bids on solar thermody-    equivalent with short term ac-
                                                       undertaken, critical review on rele-      namic plants, with different degree of     tions - type 2 collaboration ac-
                                                       vance of 2nd column                       innovation; going on with research near    tions in particular cases can be
                                                                                                 to the new PM of Archimede (Enel);         more crucial and urgent for the
                                                                                                 sustaining the promotion of the tech-      success of the project, clarify
                                                                                                 nology together with the national in-      question of priority with the PM
                                                                                                 dustrial suppliers and their learning
                                                                                                 curve through two dedicated Industrial
                                                                                                 Innovation Projects; a new instrument
                                                                                                 involving different institutional actors
                                                                                                 and funds, through which Government
                                                                                                 has launched a new industrial policy,
                                                                                                 managed by the Ministry of Economic
                                                                                                 Development, Recommendation:
                                                                                                 Positive reaction by PM (Enea) who
                                                                                                 is giving up the management respon-
                                                                                                 sibility but will continue to operate
                                                                                                 for Archimede in agrement with the
                                                                                                 new PM.
Collabora-    worked well and is supportive in sort-   17 strategies pointed out; some diffi-    clear identification of the relevant       it was not difficult to use, but not
tion plan     ing out cooperation, Recommenda-         culties encountered when filling in the   stakeholders who can support the real      that straightforward either as the
              tion: was helpful to reflect on coop-    2nd and 3rd column; often repetion of     dissemination of this technology (in-      tables above because of some ambi-
              eration, see short-term action plan      answers Recommendation: some-             dustrial suppliers) but also of the con-   guity in the meaning of headings;
                                                       times difficult for consultant to de-     ditions which can support it (large in-    consultant decided upon an inter-
                                                       cide what exact subactions must be        volvement of political authorities such    pretation Recommendation: inser-
                                                       undertaken; delete 2nd column             as Regions); Recommendation: the           tion of a “with whom?” column
                                                                                                 latest events created a positive push      would be explicit, make it more
                                                                                                 to the project, but comparing the          transparent and useful; type 2
                                                                                                 whole experience and the result of         collaboration actions can be more
                                                                                                 the CA process help PM to have             crucial for the success of the pro-
                                                                                                 higher awareness                           ject, in this case these should be
                                                                                                                                            addressed first as short term ac-
                                                                                                                                            tivities; clarify question of prior-
                                                                                                                                            ity with the PM; explore, keep in
                                                                                                                                            mind and utilise synergies!; table
                                                                                                                                            headings should be further clari-
                                                                                                                                            fied in the Guidance, possibly
                                                                                                                                            with example filling of the table




                                                                                                                                                                                                     131
               Biomass Germany                         ZEPP Netherlands                   Archimede Italy                           VEP Hungary                        SMART H Iceland
Long-term      classification of monitoring specific   11 strategies pointed out          no modifications of the original plan it was not that straightforward to
monitoring     issues difficult, understanding and                                        are envisaged; awareness of the futureuse, some ambiguity in the meaning
and capac-     definition of long-term not clear,                                         growing importance of the social ac-  of some items in the checklist, con-
ity building   Recommendation: difficult to com-                                          ceptance and of the key role played bysultant decided upon an interpreta-
plan           bine with specific future project                                          the communication, together with the  tion, Recommendation: it should
               activities; review on relevance                                            necessity of a national plan for energy
                                                                                                                                be planned in an economic way to
                                                                                          and a European programme for renew-   restrict it to such actions that may
                                                                                          able energy and solar thermodynamic   really bring in some benefits (to
                                                                                          technology; Recommendation: Ar-       avoid swelling to worthlessly
                                                                                          chimede project has been revisited    comprehensive, some terminology
                                                                                          many times and it is now arrived to   clarification for the checklist is
                                                                                          its realisation, without relevant op- recommended (see Vép D10 re-
                                                                                          positions                             port) as well as examples for fill-
                                                                                                                                ing in the table
Communi-       it worked well, but the aim needed communicationplan written for PM by     some suggestion have been done for    straightforward to do, format well
cation plan    explanation, Recommendation: open filling in table, no accompanying text   communication in short and long term; designed for a detailed communica-
               conflicts between farmers and PM                                           Recommendation: the comunication tion plan, Recommendation: the
               were seen and a communication                                              plan can be suggested to the new PM tool is well designed if a detailed
               strategy will be elaborated; needs                                         Enel and performed in collaboration communication plan is necessary;
               further development and explana-                                                                                 if not, the integration of this sub-
               tion                                                                                                             step into the previous tables near
                                                                                                                                the actions is recommended; the
                                                                                                                                detailed format could be left as
                                                                                                                                optional.;
                                                                                                                                it can easily swell big and run out
                                                                                                                                of PM's resources, so the impor-
                                                                                                                                tant issues; the right channel for
                                                                                                                                the right target group should be
                                                                                                                                carefully chosen; the table calls
                                                                                                                                for the essential info needed and
                                                                                                                                helps rational management of the
                                                                                                                                task




132
             Biomass Germany                           ZEPP Netherlands   Archimede Italy                            VEP Hungary                           SMART H Iceland
Evaluation   the questions worked well and were                           it was fundamental to look at the dif-     it took about 45 minutes, traight-
of CA        seen helpful to reflect the process and                      ferences among projects and define the     forward to do based on the manual's
process      the value added, Recommendation:                             project typology; Recommendation:          guiding questions, Recommenda-
             feedback of the project manager                              some project with less developed           tion: do it on a separate occasion,
             regarding contacts and advices of                            aspects (previous experience, social       not right when having finalised
             the consultant, support of reflec-                           acceptance) can benefit more of CA;        step 6, it helps avoid tiredness,
             tion, keep the questionnaire in a                            this process is a starting point to cre-   gives time to PM's reflection on
             qualitative manner and short                                 ate “right knowledge” or disseminate       the whole process
                                                                          information, since we learnt that
                                                                          there is a real problem of building a
                                                                          common awareness of what the pro-
                                                                          ject is and of how many opportuni-
                                                                          ties it brings (different possible ap-
                                                                          plications, design and localizations)




                                                                                                                                                                             133
Appendix C Counter-partner reports

C.1     Counter partner - Evaluation report dissemination Jühnde

C.1.1 Short Description of Demo project and Counter partners’ activities
The CA Biomass Demonstration Project was commenced in January 2007. However, the CA
Demonstration Project is a continuation of an earlier project started under the EU funded re-
gional projects (Save I and later on the Leader). The original biomass village project was carried
out in the years 2001-06 and consisted of various biomass investments e.g. in agricultural bio-
gas and district heating. The initial idea was to transfer the ‘model’ of an entirely bioenergy-
supplied village (Jühnde) to five other villages in the County. The project was considered suc-
cessful and the regional authority of the County of Goettingen decided to disseminate its results
and make it replicable also in other villages of the region. For this purpose the methodology and
human resources of the CA project were used from January 2007 onwards.

The project manager’s focus was on the dissemination of bioenergy villages and investments in
the region. A local consulting company developed the feasibility studies for the eight selected
villages. In parallel, the planning group consulted with the village inhabitants within the frame-
work of local working groups, addressing different topics.

The main actors in the process can be listed as follows:
• Project manager- the regional authority County of Goettingen represented by its employee
   Mr. Berndt and his staff. It is important to note that they are highly motivated to disseminate
   the use of biomass in the region but they are not supposed to take any investment decisions
   but rather encourage them on the local level,
• Consultancy groups: there are two types of consultants in the project due to the fact that the
   bioenergy village project already has it history in the past. The first group of consultants,
   which were engaged in the project before the Create Acceptance process started, are the sci-
   entific staff of IZNE - still accompanying the County in the dissemination phase of the pro-
   ject. The second group of consultants consists of the CA methodology group i.e. Oeko-
   Institute. These two separate consultancies learn from each other’s experiences and accom-
   pany the Council in the process of encouraging bioenergy investments in the region,
• potential investors: farmers, local enterprises,
• others: NGOs etc.
   The Create Acceptance methodology was implemented by the German partner in the project
   i.e. Oeko-Institute. It was decided by the project consortium that each of the demonstration
   projects will be reported by an external observer. For the biomass project in Germany EC
   BREC IEO Ltd. of Poland was chosen as an observer and thus is an author of this report.


C.1.2 Check of project steps
C.1.2.1 Assessment of material and given information
All work undertaken since January 2007 by the CA consultant Oeko-Institute was well docu-
mented; all steps from 1-4 clearly described. Additionally, one telephone interview was carried
out with the evaluator of the process EC BREC IEO Ltd., which clarified some points. At this
point of time the whole process was not finalised and the observation will continue.




134
C.1.2.2 The type and process of the Demo project
The implementation of the CA methodology started in January 2007. It took approximately 10
months to carry out the steps 1-4, however in terms of man-hours requirements of all the com-
munication processes took only 2 weeks altogether.

The project was evaluated as very dynamic, which was additionally supported by the fact that:
• The project already had its history in the past, previous activities concerning the bioenergy
   village were carried out in the years 2001-2006, the project is a continuation and dissemina-
   tion of the already very advanced process.
• The project manger, who is the regional authority i.e. the County of Goettingen is very
   dedicated to the realisation of the project and actively supports the implementation of the
   CA methodology.
• The financial resources for the initial phase of the projects (2001-2006) were secured by the
   external EU funds, also now the dissemination phase as well as the implementation of the
   CA methodology is supported by a mixture of EU funds and County‘s own financial re-
   sources.

To sum up the prospects for the smooth completion of the CA methodology have always been
very promising.

C.1.2.3 Conflicting issues from Counter partner’s point-of-view
From the point of view by the evaluator of this demo there are some doubtful issues concerning
the role of PM in the project. Is the final goal of the project to disseminate the idea of bioenergy
villages or is it to carry out the investments? Probably both?

The project manager which is the County of Goettingen, can provide information, technical
support, financial advice and encourage but not force any investments. The real investor is the
association of farmers or any other local enterprise, which can decide for or against a biomass
investment. At the end of the day the final investment decisions depend not on the PM but on
the stakeholders who will invest their financial resources.

The final outcome of the CA exercise shows that all key issues lead to a potential investor any-
way. It also shows that it is not to PM who will have to overcome barriers but the investors. In
this demo case the potential investors were not in the main focus but were merely described as
stakeholders. The time will probably show for whom the tool was more useful: for the PM or
the real investors?


C.1.3 Results of the Counter partner Interview
C.1.3.1 Role of the Consultant in the Demo
The role of the consultant from the different points-of-view
As mentioned before the bioenergy village project had two groups of consultant due to its past
record, before the commencement of the CA project. The first consultancy group were the sci-
entific staff of IZNE. They still accompany the County in the dissemination phase of the project.
The second group of consultants consisted of the CA methodology staff i.e. the Oeko-Institute.
These two separate consultancies learn from each other through their experiences and simulta-
neously support the County in their bioenergy activities.

The relation of IZNE to the CA was evaluated as ambiguous. The general feeling of the CA
consultant was that IZNE felt a kind of competition from them. When two different consultants
are involved there is a risk of feelings of competition between them.

The role of IZNE and its relation to CA project is interesting for two reasons:




                                                                                               135
•     They can be potential users of CA methodology in the future. It is for such entities that the
      methodology is being deviced.
•     Their activity in the CA is voluntary, as a consultant they can learn but they do not get paid
      for it.

Now that a much simpler version of the methodology is being elaborated it would be interesting
to know their opinion on the applicability of the tool.

Expectations beforehand
C.1.3.2 Relationship between Project Manager and Consultant
Character and role of the Project Manager
The co-operation between the project manager (the County) and the consultant (Oeko-Institute)
went very smoothly. The PM was always very dedicated to assigned tasks during the whole
process - hosting the consultation meetings, sharing its own ideas and ensuring that the process
went smoothly.

During the whole process about 10 meetings rsp. phone conferences between the PM and Oeko-
Institute were organised. They were carried out in the atmosphere of mutual understanding and
ownership of the project. The PM was eager to know the solutions, he followed them but he also
expressed a lot of his own ideas. He was also very keen on the effectiveness of the whole proc-
ess.

Description of Conflicts in the Demo and Role of Consultant
In the process there was a potential uneasy feeling of the competition between two consultants
IZNE and Oeko-Institute. As both are basically advising the PM County of Goettingen in the
same biomass project, Oeko-Institute makes the utmost effort to avoid bad feelings, communi-
cates all findings with the other consultant and invites IZNE to learn new skills during all activi-
ties.

C.1.3.3 Relationship between Stakeholder and Consultant
There were 3 workshops organised for all stakeholders. All of them were hosted by the project
manager and facilitated by the consultant i.e. Oeko-Institute. Another 4 meetings took place
with a selected group of stakeholders. Participants showed great interest and it was possible to
formulate present and future visions for customers and farmers.

The final results of the project i.e. 8 feasibility studies for villages will enable the stakeholders
to make investment decisions.

C.1.3.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and Tools in achieving ac-
        ceptance in the region
The analysis of the key issues led to a conclusion that many legal and economic issues depend
on the decisions made on the national and not the regional level. However, as many of the actors
involved on the regional discussion are also part of the discussion carried out on the national
level - for instance the green NGO Friends of the Earth Germany - the problems and concerns
raised on the regional level will become a part of the national debate.

In the 8 feasibility studies, which are being prepared at the moment for bioenergy villages the
key legal and financial issues (for instance level of support) will be included.

C.1.3.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction
The project partner Oeko-Institute listened very carefully to presentations of other demos in the
CA project. Especially interesting seemed the experiences of hydrogen stations in Island. All
projects were different and also there were different problems encountered on the way but all of
them seemed very interesting to compare experiences.


136
The question of the applicability of the methodology for other technologies and other regions in
the world was raised. There will be made attempts to replicate the results for other technologies
(other than green energy). As far as the regional replicability is concerned it was concluded that
the public acceptance project could be realised only in political systems where the public opin-
ion is valued and guarded by the legal system, in regimes like China it would be hardly possible
to apply.


C.1.4 Experience of Counter partner’s support
Oeko-Institute thinks that the external evaluation of the project can be very useful; it can give
their biomass project a different perspective. From the point of view of the external evaluator it
was also an extremely useful exercise. While reading the documents, some points required clari-
fication. It turned out that it is always good to have an outsider’s point of view.

As an external evaluator who did not carry out any demo project herself I was also paying atten-
tion to the possibility to replicate the methodology in Poland. Which things would be different,
which things would be similar? I think from the Polish perspective the most urgent issue would
be to secure the financing for the realization of the CA methodology. The regional authorities,
no matter how excited they can be on green energy, would have little financial and human re-
sources to carry out such a project without external financial support. Thus, the question re-
mains whether the dedication to the project by the PM i.e. the County of Goettingen, is replic-
able in other regions of Europe.

I am also personally very interested in the outcome of the project i.e. the real investments. How
many of them will be realized, who will withdraw from the project, who will decide to invest
their financial resources. It would be extremely interesting to find out how the project and the
methodology were useful for the investor and how it contributed to making his investment deci-
sions.


C.2     Counter partner - Evaluation Report ZEPP demo

C.2.1 Short Description of Demo project and Counter partners’ activities
The Zero Emission Power Plant (ZEPP) is a project that is being developed in Drachten in the
North of the Netherlands and has a go/no-go decision due in 2007 and a plan to be operational
by 2009. The project developer is SEQ Nederland BV and involves a number of partners
(Eneco, Wintershall, Siemens, Volker Vessels, Clean Energy Systems US). This development is
taking place within the context of the so-called Wadden Sea discussion that was ongoing from
the late 1990s onwards. This discussion centred on the question of whether oil extraction in the
Wadden Sea would result in the subsidence of the ground and involved both those who sug-
gested there was no indication that this would be the case (Shell) but also interests counter to
this position. It is with this context in mind that Wouter van de Waal - formerly employed on a
freelance basis by Shell - developed, in August/September 1999, the idea to store CO2 under the
Wadden Sea to prevent subsidences.

Van de Waal developed the concept of a Zero Emission Power Plant (ZEPP), which uses pure
oxygen to combust the natural gas. This concept, which is called the oxyfuel principle, has the
advantage that the CO2 does not have to be removed from the natural gas before combustion,
while CO2 can be captured after combustion and stored subterranean. Van de Waal asked his
former university teachers to check his concept and acquires a patent on the concept.

Following a long series of negotiations and reports, by the end of 2004 the project had a loca-
tion, storage capacity in the form of an almost empty natural gas field, a partner from the elec-


                                                                                             137
tricity field (ONS), a concession and a partner from the oil and natural gas business (Winter-
shall). The only thing missing is subsidies to finance the ‘unprofitable part’ of electricity pro-
duction in the ZEPP (the part of the price that was higher than conventional electricity).

Van de Waal expects that in the third quarter of 2007 the ministry of Economic Affairs will an-
nounce if and how much money will be available for the ZEPP plant. SEQ will also start with
applying for the necessary permits (environmental and construction permits). Van der Waal ex-
pects that construction can start by the end of 2007. To that end several technology suppliers are
now forming a consortium (including Siemens). Construction might also include a connection
with a local district heating system for supply to local industry as well as new residential areas.
Other stakeholders in the area include Energy Valley (a public-private partnership that focuses
on concentrating energy research and projects in the North of the Netherlands) and the munici-
pality and province (who are both proponents of the project).

The role of SURF has been as a counter-partner to ECN who have been ‘applying’ the in-draft
steps and tools of the developing Create Acceptance approach. As part of this process SURF has
undertaken the following work:
• We have read all the numerous documents produced by ECN through their engagement with
    the ZEPP project. This has included the processes through which the different steps of the
    process have been ‘applied’ and ‘populated’.
• We have also undertaken a one hour interview with Rob Raven from ECN which addressed
    the key strengths and weaknesses of the application of the steps in relation to the ZEPP
    project.
• We drafted a note of this interview from reflection made both at the time of the interview
    and from listening back to the tape of the interview.
• We have utilised these different approaches to analyse the process of application of the
    steps in relation to ZEPP and through reflecting on the issues in the sections below.


C.2.2 Check of project steps
Assessment of material and given information
ECN has at the time of writing undertaken 4 of the proposed steps in the process. In this section
an overview of this process is provided. Step 1 consists of four tools. In relation to ZEPP the
following assessment is made:
1. It appeared that at least 4 hours of formal interviewing went into Step 1. There was also
    time dedicated to liaising with PM and other actors. Added together this requires a signifi-
    cant investment of time from the PM.
2. Project narrative - the narrative was considerably longer than the 2-3 pages recommended,
    but it is clear and comprehensive and provides the context for relating to the other tools in
    the Step.
3. Context analysis- there appeared to be some difficulties in terms of the practicalities of fill-
    ing in the Context analysis table and some effort was needed to elicit what were seen by the
    PM as barriers or opportunities for the project in relation to context.
4. Defining moments table- there was some difficulty in eliciting defining moments.
5. Actors table - in this case the consultant filled in the table, which was a helpful way of
    building on the actors pinpointed by the narrative but which also provided the basis for the
    PM to reflect on actors that may not have been thought about in relation to the narrative.

In relation to Step 2 the following reflections are made:
1. With the heavy time investment in Step 1 the second step is somewhat quicker to negotiate.
2. The Present vision of the PM was built by the Consultant - although this was in fact not a
    Present vision but something that tried to add value and build on the ’Present Vision’ en-
    compassed by the Project narrative.




138
3. The social network map was simplified, constructed by the Consultant and responded to by
   the PM.
4. The BAU - There was some difficulty in ascertaining whose vision the BAU was. As such
   this was integrated with the Conflicting issues table in Step 3 rather than being produced as
   a standalone Future vision.
5. Stakeholders Future visions - these were written in the style of short newspaper articles (of-
   ten a couple of pages) - which seemed to be a very useful way of doing this. In terms of
   time, this took around one and a half hourse each for each of the seven interviews.

Step 3 allowed a series of conflicting steps to be highlighted, which required a two hour meeting
with the PM and a further four hours of Consultant time. A series of Conflicting/controversial
issues were elicited and ranked according to their significance (1 low and 5 high) and their
solveability (low, medium and high). These were then plotted on a 2x2 matrix of Strategic is-
sues.

Step 4 provides a largely useful way of listing and presenting the controversies and opportuni-
ties surrounding ZEPP and the possible contextual, knowledge, financial and other responses to
these controversies and opportunities.

The type and process of the Demo project
The type of Demo is outlined both in the Introduction to this paper and also in respect of the
Project narrative.

Conflicting issues from Counter partner’s point-of-view
We have done this in Section 2.1. But just to add that the process as currently constituted takes a
considerable amount of time and commitment from both the PM and Consultant and that it
would be useful for both to lay down their expectations of the process at the start to make sure
that there is not too big a gap between expectations and to provide a basis on which the process
can proceed productively.

Role of Counter-partner
The role of the counter-partner has been one of engagement, reflection and response. We have
achieved this through a number of methods. We have monitored ECN’s involvement with the
ZEPP project over a period of time. This has involved listening to presentations, reading reports
and write-ups of the process, assessment of the application of different tools, undertaking of a
detailed interview with the Consultant, and the making of notes and reflections on that
interview.

In terms of what may be done differently if this exercise was to be repeated. It would be useful
as Counter Partner to get ‘closer’ to the ZEPP project. Although the value of the Counter
Partner is in providing critical reflections on the process from a distance. There has to be some
care that this critical distance does not lead to the Counter Partner being too distant from the
process.


C.2.3 Results of the Counter partner Interview
C.2.3.1 Role of the Consultant in the Demo
The role of the consultant from the different points-of-view
In this case there was no real need to explain the research process to the Project Manager which
was largely due to the specific characteristics of the project being about carbon capture and se-
questration. There were a lot of discussions going on generally in the Netherlands about CCS
and whether the public would accept this. With this context in mind the PM was open to finding
people who could help him in this respect. The consultant, from the PM’s perspective, was
somebody who could perform this kind of role. The personal expectations of the Consultant re-


                                                                                              139
lated to their interest in strategic niche management as a conceptual framework on the role of
experiments and projects in technological change. In particular, the hope was to move the con-
ceptual insights gained from strategic niche management on ‘a step further’ to inform the devel-
opment of instrumental tools: that is ‘something that a project manager could do something
with’.

Expectations beforehand
So in negotiations to enrol the PM the consultants did not have to explain too much in advance
about the process. Having said this, at the first meeting ECN did take along a couple of slides
about aims of the Create Acceptance project and what it was about. At this time ECN had no
idea about what the Create Acceptance project would look like. With this in mind, most of the
‘pitch’ to the PM was based on the expectations of those researchers from ECN working on
Create Acceptance, and information and experience from the application of the Socrobust tool.
The expectations of the PM centred around finding people who could help with addressing is-
sues of ’public acceptance’ of CCS.

C.2.3.2 Relationship between Project Manager and Consultant
In thinking about the relationship between PM and consultant the key point that was raised is
that: ‘Intervention is much more than just giving somebody instruments’. It is also a learning
process of how to intervene in a project in reality. In terms of learning it highlights the key issue
of (1) how to communicate things and (2) the fact that you cannot just push instruments on peo-
ple. You need to convince people but also listen to them and in doing so get a sense of what
their own expectations and aims are and how to align them with the assumptions of the tool.
The key point here is that it requires a very active relational process of getting a tool to make
sense in a context with particular people, which requires a huge amount of effort from the con-
sultant.

Character and role of the Project Manager
The PM was a very busy person and at the start of the project worked alone with one other col-
league - although more people are involved now. Within that context the consultant suggests
that the PM may have made a judgment about whether he was willing to give certain informa-
tion and also to engage with certain parts of the process. In the case of the Solutions Ranking
Table the Consultant suggests that the PM probably made the judgement that this was not im-
portant enough to do now. This does not necessarily mean he is not willing to do it in other sets
of circumstances. Yet the PM does seemingly take public acceptance seriously.

The issue essentially is one of getting the tool to ‘work’ in context. In one example, for part of
Step 4 (the Solutions Ranking Table) there was difficulty in getting the PM to do certain things
where, for example, the PM was asked for information that they could not give or were unwill-
ing to give or that just took too much time. On the other hand there is a requirement for infor-
mation as a consultant so you have to balance what the PM is willing and capable to give and
what you require as a consultant.

Description of Conflicts in the Demo and Role of Consultant
In terms of the futures laid out in the visions there were examples of both consensus and conflict
but the Consultant pointed out that they had expected more conflicts but instead got a lot of con-
sensus. Many people, although they had minor issues, were largely in favour of the demonstra-
tion plant. The local NGOs and entrepreneurs were very positive as was the municipality. There
were not so many controversies but rather these were seen as opportunities for the PM. The area
of the proposed demonstration plant is one of relatively high unemployment. Although the plant
would not provide large employment opportunities there was the suggestion from some stake-
holders that the PM should do more to encourage the development of local level contracts and
getting other industries on board in the area. Using the plant as a ‘badge’ for activities in the re-
gion (as a ‘Silicon Valley’ for energy). In addition, the tool helps to widen the learning process



140
and widen the collection of information that a PM would often do in a tacit way - but this makes
it more manifest. A final issue is that many of the Steps are time consuming, in a context of a
busy PM - in this respect the Consultant filled in many of the tables. This raises issues about the
aspirations for the process to eventually be standalone.

Experiences with the consultant’s support (in using the ESTEEM tool)
In terms of then tool and its ‘implementation’ there are a number of things that have worked
well. These include: 1) the comparison of the visions and the way this was done through writing
newspaper articles from the future; 2) this in turn helped to organise subsequent material, in-
cluding the tables in Steps 3 and 4; and 3) as a basis for analysing the information. In the begin-
ning the Consultant was hesitant to do this in this way as it requires an awful lot of asking of
questions. But then once Steps 2, 3 and 4 had been started it became clear that this provided
very helpful foundations. It provided a way of seeing the future from the present and a link be-
tween the two - a way of connecting the prospective and retrospective. The formulation of the
PM vision in a newspaper article was a very helpful way of capturing their vision. visions of
PM was formulated in an newspapers article.

C.2.3.3 Relationship between Stakeholder and Consultant
If the tool requires active work in context and the Consultant is an ’ambassador’ for the tool
there was a sense that some stakeholders had to be persuaded more than others. In particular the
PM was the person who had to be persuaded most particularly as he was busy but was also a
key source of information. The PM takes the process seriously but the Consultant was not sure
that he will take the outcomes and the recommendations of the process seriously. That will be
the ‘ultimate proof’ of whether he has taken the project seriously, according to the Consultant.

C.2.3.4 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction
The relationship between the PM and Consultant was, as one would expect, something that had
to be continually worked at given their differing expectations of the process outlined above but
also given the mutual need in achieving what they each wanted from the process. The
importance of reflexive learning to the process raises the issue of whether the interaction
between the PM and some sort of consultant can be avoided if this process is to be effective.
That is to say can the process ever be constituted effectively as a stanalone tool or does it need
somebody to ‘manage’ the process of how it is applied in what are often different ‘local’
contexts?


C.2.4 Experience of Counter partner’s support
In this section we wish to add a few further suggestions and issues that have arisen from the
process of being a Counter Partner in trying to support the Consultant. In particular we wish to
highlight five issues:
1. There are processes of exclusion as well as inclusion in the process of trying to create ac-
    ceptance. This raises the issue of whether there is there a limit to the types of stakeholders
    that should be involved? For example, in ZEPP, Greenpeace isn’t involved, there’s some-
    body against the project who the Consultant wanted to involve in the workshop but now
    can’t, etc, etc. How do you decide who to include and exclude? And what have we as re-
    searchers and consultants learned from this process?
2. It is the PM who is the limit and he who decides whether to involve stakeholders or not. The
    process starts from the PM. In terms of evaluating our own collective approach to creating
    acceptance - is this the most effective/best place to start from?
3. The researcher as Consultant is not a passive participant but is active in raising issues in the
    process and for the PM that otherwise wouldn’t have been raised.
4. This asks questions about what the role of the researcher is in this process and suggests
    more reflexivity is required about what we as researchers are doing.




                                                                                              141
5. In short, there is a politics and a selectivity to processes of creating acceptance that we as
   researchers need to be aware of and feedback into our practices.


C.3        Counter partner - Evaluation report Archimede demo
The origins of the Archimede Project are in December 2000 when the Italian National Agency
for New Technologies, Energy and the Environment (ENEA) obtains extra funding for starting
an experimental project in solar thermo energy. (200.000.000 lira to get from 2001 to 2003).

This initiative is fixed in a Pilot Project called ‘Archimede Project’ in 2001. This one is sup-
ported by the technical and scientific guarantees of Carlo Rubbia and Mr. Vignolini from ENEA
is designed as the responsible for executing the Demo Project.

In May 2001, there is a politic change and the new Italian government (a right wing - Berlus-
coni- government) is more interested in the nuclear energy than the solar one. Therefore, the
budget for the project that should received ENEA has a reduction of 35% of the initial extra
funding.

After that, from 2001 to 2004 ENEA develops the technical requirements (in tubes and others...)
for the development of the Archimede Project.

In 2004 ENEA and ENEL (the main energy company in Italy) reach an agreement. There is a
collaboration Protocol between them for building and setting of the plant for checking the tech-
nology. The protocol establishes the conditions of the commercialization of the new technology
as well.
                                                       4
The same year, ENEL asks for the Decree of the green certificate that recognises the solar
thermo as a renewable energy source to the Ministry of Economic Development but this decree
is blocked in the Environmental Ministry. ENEL was very interested in the passing of this de-
cree for gaining a normative and financial support.

Afterwards ENEL, tacking into account the lack of normative and financial support and Rub-
bia’s resignation because of the tight relationship with the government, blocks the Archimede
Project in 2005.

In the meantime, during 2006, there were the general elections and the new government of Italy
will be a left wing party that will support the project. Therefore, the Archimede Project restarts
at the end of 2006 with a new agreement between ENEA and ENEL supported by the Environ-
mental Ministry, the Economic Development Ministry, the environmental department of the
Region of Sicily and Carlo Rubbia. This new agreement includes some modifications:
• the power plant will be downsized from 20 to 5 Mw (from 8000 parabolic mirrors to 2000)
• the demo plant will be a combined loop plant and solar thermal plant introducing modifica-
     tions in a current plant in Sicily
• and ENEL is the main contractor of the project. In other words, ENEL will be the new PM
     when the construction of the demo plant starts in January 2008.

The current situation is that ENEL is waiting for the authorization of the Sicilian Regional Gov-
ernment for building the demo plant. It is foreseen that the building works starts in January 2008
and the plant will start functioning at the end of 2009 or the beginning of 2010.

This demo project has a very important macro political and economical dimension with political
and economical partners that have non-explicit interests. As an example, the project has been

4
    Decree foreseen in 2000 that has not been enacted in 2004 yet.


142
blocked approximately one year because ENEL had not the financial and normative support.
Nevertheless, afterwards and regardless the public support, ENEL decides to start again the pro-
ject at the same time that ENEL came into the Spanish energy market where they can develop
the technology.

During all this process, the social dimension of the project has been underdeveloped because the
consultants did not detect any need to introduce the social dimension in the process of gestation
of the ‘final’ design of the Archimede Pilot Project.

Role of the Counter-partner
The role of the Ecoinstitut as a Counter Partner until now has been to offer support and help to
the demo leader, but the demo leader decided to develop the steps one and two of the Esteem
toolbox without our support.

Now, once the project has a new design, the consultants consider that is the moment to look for
the social stakeholders and to include a social dimension in the project (particularly in the step 5
and the execution of the workshop). The Ecoinstitut will support and help in the preparations of
the workshop and will attend the workshop as observer.


C.3.1 Check of project steps
C.3.1.1 Assessment of material and given information
The information and material that the demo leaders sent to the counter partner is:

Step 1:
•   Project narrative
•   The context table (in English)
•   The actors table
•   The critical moments table (defining moments table)

Step 2:
•   PM Vision (title, synthesis writing and social network map)
    - Mr. Vignolini -ENEA (Project Manager from 2000 to 2007)
    - Mr. Fanno - ENEL (Project Manager from 2008, when the construction of the demo
       plant starts)
•   Core Group Visions (title, synthesis writing and social network map)
    - Environmental Ministry
    - Economical Development Ministry
    - Angelatony Industry
•   BAU vision

These are all the tools that have been sent to the counter partner. The documentation of step 1
and 2 has been sent to the counter partner on 20th of September 2007. Excepting the context ta-
ble, all documents are in Italian. The documents are simple, clear and clarify a lot the project
although sometimes because of the inherent complexity of the project it is difficult to follow all
the facts related to the demo (agreements and disagreements, changes on the main contractors of
the demo...).

C.3.1.2 Conflicting issues from Counter partner’s point-of-view
The Archimede Project is a demo project that is very marked by the political and economical
interests at the macro level, so much that the execution of the demo plant has been stopped be-
cause of, on one hand the political tensions among the government and the project leaders, and
on the other hand because of the lack of public financial and normative support.



                                                                                               143
Afterwards the project is taken up again but the demo plant has substantial modifications: ini-
tially it was a very ambitious project with an avant-garde technology and now it has become a
smaller project and related to loop plant.

Until now, the Archimede project has been developed without the social dimension because this
dimension has been not considered applicable in a project of these characteristics5. Moreover,
ENEA had not have a clear and explicit support for the PM and Archimede Project, and as a re-
sult for applying the CA process.

The lack of the social dimension in the project is the main conflicting issue6 for several reasons:
Instead of including the social dimension7 in the redesign phase of the demo plant when the pro-
ject was in ‘hibernation’, the demo leaders have considered that it was not pertinent. Therefore,
the opportunity of counting on the social support of environmental and social NGO’s, or local
authorities in the initially design of the project is lost.

Now, the demo plant will be constructed at 2008 with a design that cannot like or can cause dis-
agreements among the main social actors, above all the environmental NGO’s who (in all prob-
ability) can be against the new design. For that reason, probably the conflicting interests with
the social stakeholders will emerge at the end of CA process, in the workshop of step 5, because
they have not been asked before.

The same could happen with the point of view of the local authorities affected by the project:
until now, the consultants consider that no conflicting issues will appear in this field, and there-
fore they do not consider necessary any involvement or consultation with possible local or re-
gional stakeholders in application of the Esteem Tool.

This point is very important for the final design of the Tool: it should be very clear that in
Step2, the visions of the core group have to include at least 1 vision from a stakeholder of each
social dimension (in this case, including the NGO vision and including the local / regional gov-
ernments vision). It cannot be the role of the consultant to exclude conflicting issues because in
his/her personal opinion they do not exist. This is exactly the objective of step 2: identify possi-
ble future conflicts that are not in mind of the PM or the consultant.

Therefore, in the final design of the Esteem Tool it should be avoided that the tool permits to
jump to conclusions.

In the other hand, it is very important that the organization (ENEA) support the project, the pro-
ject manager and the application of Esteem tool, otherwise the application of the tool can be
hampered by the lack of informative transparency that can inhibit the stakeholders communica-
tion and involvement.

C.3.1.3 Role of Counter-partner
As a counter-partner, the Ecoinstitut insisted on helping the demo leaders offering its support in
all the steps but the demo leaders have not used it yet. Maybe it happened because the demo
leaders have not considered pertinent the social dimension in the project.



5
    The argument of the demo leaders is that the Archimede Project develops in a macro level that has not place for
    the social dimension. This dimension is only needed in local projects or in the case of conflicts with social actors
    (local authorities, NGO’s...).
6
    The other conflicts related to the design of the demo plant, its execution, the fundraising, the agreements and dis-
    agreements of the partners and stakeholders belong to the ordinary development of a project that was in gestation
    as Archimede was.
7
    For example: letting know the project and the state to environmental national NGO’s, or getting in touch with con-
    sumers associations or local public authorities...


144
Currently the demo leader is getting in touch with the stakeholders of the social dimension for
the workshop that will be at the middle of November and Ecoinstitut is supporting the demo
leader in the organization of the workshop and will attend it as an observer.


C.3.2 Results of the Counter partner Interview
C.3.2.1 Role of the Consultant in the Demo
The role of the consultant from the different points-of-view
In the interview, the consultants said that at the beginning, they listened a lot and systematically
they became more active, made more clear questions and they looked at policy and other infor-
mation. As they explained, as consultant they play the role of researchers who listen, learn, for-
mulate questions and research other information.

Maybe the consultant could play two more roles, as a helper of the PM and as a tester of
ESTEEM tool. These two roles are much linked, are the two sides of the same coin.

There is the role of facilitator that helps the PM accompanying the PM in the execution of the
project taking into account the involvement of the partners and stakeholders and whenever there
are conflicts helping in solving conflicts that hamper the execution of the project.

Obviously, the PM is who has to solve the conflicts, but the consultant accompanies, gives
ideas, and facilitates the resolution of the conflicting issues taking into account the involvement
of the stakeholders.

In addition, these tasks of accompaniment are executed using the ESTEEM toolbox for testing
the usefulness of tools and steps (with or without conflicts).

In the Archimede Demo Project, and maybe because of ENEA PM and the consultants have
been overcome by the Archimede development, these other roles (helper and tester) have been
executed only partially.

It is necessary to have in mind that the conflicts that hinder the project have been solved by their
own. In other words, it seems that neither ENEA PM nor the consultants have had an active in-
tervention to solve or to improve the situation that blocked the project. Because when ENEL has
had the business chance in the Spanish market and has changed its market strategy restarts the
project, but as a result, ENEA has lost the project management and ENEL will be the new PM
when the construction of the demo plant will start (foreseen in January 2008).

Expectations beforehand
The consultant’s expectations beforehand were:
1. Press the political level for obtaining the green certificate for the solar thermo energy. This
   is the main obstacle for the development of the project.
2. Put in contact the main stakeholders, without intermediaries, and increase substantially the
   communication among them.
3. Increase the public debate on the Archimede Project in Italy. Therefore, the information on
   the project comes out of the institutional framework.

C.3.2.2 Relationship between Project Manager and Consultant
All the comments on the PM are about the ENEA PM, because he has been the PM since the
beginning and will still be the PM of the project until the construction of the demo plant start.
The protocol that establishes that the main contractor, or in other words, the new project man-
ager will be ENEL is agreed in 26th March 2007.




                                                                                               145
Character and role of the Project Manager
The relationship between the ENEA Project Manager and the Consultant has been always re-
laxed; there is a good relation of trust and the consultants have seen him eight times. They ex-
plained that it is a confidence relationship.

The PM has been very interested, active and participative. On one hand, he has been very trans-
parent and collaborative with the consultants and, on the other, he used some of the documents
elaborated in the CA process for his presentations of the project. Although the reaction of the
PM was not that he learned something new, he thinks that there are very useful tools (as the so-
cial network map).

Description of Conflicts in the Demo and Role of Consultant
Some conflicts appeared immediately when the project started in 2000 before the CA process,
the conflicts on the financial issues and affected by the political change in the government. Af-
terwards, when the consultants started the interviews, there still were some conflicts on the fi-
nancial issues and the solutions came through the agreement between ENEL and ENEA. The
situation of the market changed and Vignolini got many offers (for selling the patent), there was
new knowledge that came from the market, from peripheral actors, independent from the con-
sultant and appeared new economical opportunities in the international market (Spain). The
consultants think that the solution of the conflicts came from outside. The PM said, ‘There are
many conflicts, but the market started and we want to promote the technology’. The problems
with the region were not taken into account, ENEA and ENEL want to realise the demonstration
plant and they can do it without any kind of local support.

Experiences with the consultant’s support (in using the ESTEEM tool)
The consultants consider that the Archimede Project is a macro level project and the CA process
maybe is not very suitable for this kind of project. Having in mind this, in the interview the con-
sultants said that maybe the workshop could help to create attention and can be an occasion for
the exchange of knowledge and to make evident the decisions.

About the acceptance of the pilot project in the region, the consultants have two opinions. On
one hand, they said that this question is for another type of projects (non-macro) and on the
other hand, the consultants think that it is not pertinent because the loop plant that will be modi-
fied is build yet and therefore there are no problems.

On the success of the CA for the individual stakeholders, the resistance came mainly from Min-
istry of Economy, but maybe currently this has changed. Whereas the industrial manager of the
consortium is very open for new ideas, he is very open to the market.

C.3.2.3 Relationship between Stakeholder and Consultant
The PM selected the persons in the Ministries, and they contacted them via phone. The third
stakeholder was met in a conference (from the region); the consultants think that he is not a
really critical actor.

On the missing social dimension (as NGO’s, Municipalities...) the consultants consider that
there is no problem, so they do not need to talk with them. However, in the interview they
agreed to open the debate with NGO’s and social actors at national level for the workshop.

C.3.2.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and Tools in achieving ac-
        ceptance in the region
The consultants thinks that there are different kinds of projects (local and macro), in the Ar-
chimede case, it is a very innovative project it is a macro level project and it comes to the mar-
ket, so, the social local dimension is not pertinent. So there evaluation is that maybe the CA-




146
Process is not suitable for the project, or that maybe the tools could be used partially selecting
interesting steps and actors.

Moreover, they consider that the loop plant that will be modified is constructed yet, so there is
no problem.

The only one local social actor that the consultants take into account is the Regional Govern-
ment of Sicily, the public local institution that has to give the authorization for the construction
of the modification of the loop plant.

About the use of the tools: the concrete tool that have been more useful for PM and stakeholders
is the social network map, it helped to comment and to decide importance of different aspects.
On the other tools, the consultants think that they should not be improved.

C.3.2.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction
The consultants said that they found a lot of collaboration in the CA process, but they also con-
sider that some partners do not understand so well what kind of project do they have. There
were some conflicts in discussion; it seemed that only projects with regional / local context are
accepted. The consultant found that some partners were totally close to the difference between
micro and macro projects.


C.3.3 Experience of Counter-partner’s support
In our opinion, the demo leaders, as consultants of the PM, have not played an active part in us-
ing and testing the ESTEEM tool in the Archimede Project. Their attitude towards the use of
ESTEEM tool was not checking and testing the tool, ‘forcing’ the tool for improving it so much
that the tool works. The demo leaders’ attitude is other, the demo leaders are working with the
PM in the execution of the Archimede Project and they use the steps and tools that consider per-
tinent for their project but they are not testing the ESTEEM tool.

Therefore, the Archimede Project has been developed without a demo leader’s active attitude
because they have not considered pertinent to take part as a consultants of the PM in the redes-
ign of the Archimede Demo Plant. They did not know that they could get involved as consult-
ants in Create Acceptance process.

In other hand, it is important to remark that the Archimede Project and the project manager have
been not clear and explicit supported by ENEA, and this context can hinder the application of
the Create Acceptance process. Therefore, it is important to take into account for the further ap-
plication of Esteem Tool that it is needed an explicit and unequivocal agreement on the applica-
tion of the tool that allows the informative transparency that requires the communication and the
involvement of the stakeholders.

As said before, in our opinion it is absolutely necessary to include in the selection of stake-
holders in Step 2 at least 1 stakeholder from every social dimension. For us the basic aim of the
Esteem Tool is to identify future conflicts (and opportunities) and to integrate possible new so-
lutions in the design and execution phase of a project. The ‘jump to conclusions’ is exactly what
happens normally without using a tool as Esteem in the development of the project. On the other
hand, there is a risk that the Esteem Tool could be used in an incorrect way: it seems that the
social dimension and participation has been included in a project, when in reality the consultant
only added some interesting aspects or sub-steps to the conventional way of planning and decid-
ing.


C.4     Counter partner - Evaluation report demoproject Vep, Hungary


                                                                                               147
C.4.1 Short description of demo project and counter-partner’s activities
The Vép demonstration project aims at developing an important wind park of 37,4MW capacity
in Western Hungary, nearby the Austrian border. Set in 2002 with the creation of a dedicated
company, the plan is to install a 20 turbines farm in three phases. Hungary is not particularly
windy, but Vép is situated in the Nothwestern part of the country, relatively gifted compared
with most part of the country. Vép is home to 5000 inhabitants, and the plan was to site the park
in the nearby countryside. Reason for this choice included favorable wind conditions and good
connections of one of the founder with local actors.

Two founders were in fact two neighbours, Rudolf Pillér, an entrepreneur, and Szilàrd Horvàth,
quiet knowledgeable about wind areas particularly the Vép site and its local actors. Another ac-
tor was a local teacher. Together, they established Scélêro Ltd in January 2002 as a vehicle to
implement their plan. Investment partners included an Austrian partner, that could transfer part
of its experience with wind parks. The project was presented as an opportunity to develop the
village and not for profit. After having successfully presented their plan to local authorities and
local land owners, the company’s activity started with the successful participation of the com-
pany in a tender called by the West Pannon Regional Development Agency. This allowed Scé-
lêro to start up with wind farm conception, with the help Elinor ltd. A ’communal implementa-
tion’ model of ownership was favoured: local authority, landowners and citizen were offered a
large share of the company and the benefits of the farm (up to 65%). The E.ON EDASZ utility
was also consulted, as local supplier of energy and the operator of the energy grid, but they were
not fully supportive, and started to stop communication as the investment plan unfolded. Next
step was concerned with starting to build the turbines. In order to finance this investment, the
two founders turned to an EU tender called PHARE. To be able to bid, they had to transform the
company into a non profit organisation Szélëro Vép Kht. Project received a PHARE Contract in
2004, and was granted the founds to build their first pilot turbine (0,86 million euros). The
building permit was granted by local government based and the Regional Technical Safety Li-
censing and Inspection and the first turbine was built in june 2005 by the company Enercon
(later the Hungarian Trade Licensing Office validated this although it was consulted late).

This project is however not isolated in Hungary. Until the 2000th, no large wind turbines were
used in this country, as more traditional power plants were doing the job though. At the begin-
ning of the 2000th however, numerous wind farm projects flourished over the country. Some 13
large size projects of more than 20 MW investments were presented to the Hungarian Energy
Office by 2006, and a total 1100 MW investment plan for the country. Facing a turmoiling de-
mand, and sharing some of the concerns of the established utilities and grid operators coordina-
tor (Mavir), the Hungarian Energy Office strictly limited the national level of wind investment
by setting an overall 330MW limit in the spring 2006. Arguments included wind energy irregu-
larity and then the difficulty to plan and manage it in a global manner to match customer’s de-
mand as well as possible risks of damage for the grid and utilities installations. Although 4 addi-
tional turbines were actually ready to be build, they did not obtain the HEO permit to be ex-
ploited, and are then left virtual since 2006. Only the pilot turbine of 600kW capacity, that was
granted a permit beforehand, while no HEO permission was yet required, could actually be op-
erated so far.

So the situation is locked since the spring 2006 and no proper solutions could be devised so far,
endangering the project greatly. At first sight, it sounds like a regulation question. With a closer
look, in reality, the project is facing a real societal acceptance problem, including notably utili-
ties, established energy firms and organisations, at a national (MAVIR, HEO), and at a local
level (EON-EDASZ). The point is not about the technology itself, as the feasibility of a Hungar-
ian wind farm was made in Kulcs. Opposition to the project are concerned about wind energy
mass production and the effect of relying massively on wind energy to satisfy customers de-
mand of electricity. Difficulties associated with the reliance of wind turbines on natural and dif-
ficult to plan resources conflicts with the public service mission to deliver electricity on demand
to each citizen.


148
When the Create Acceptance team arrived in the project in 2006, it was already blocked by
HEO. As one turbine has been put in operation ’for real’, local citizen started to consider that a
limited number of turbines would probably be more appropriate rather than the planned 20. Pro-
ject manager had some expectations that HEO quotas might be eased but it did not occur so far.
A case study was performed under the auspices of WP2 - ’historical and recent attitude of
stakeholders: Wind power plant in Western Hungary, near Vép’ during winter 2006. A number
of public and Szélëro Vép Kht internal documents were collected, and two interviews performed
(with the project manager and a manager from E.ON EDASZ). This preliminary study then
helped the implementation of the Create Acceptance method in 2007. At the date of this report,
3 steps have been cleared and the fourth has been prepared and is about to be organised with the
project manager.

Our role at IAE as a counter-partner has been to support MAAK in the implementation of the
step by step methodology of the Create Acceptance tool. In this context, IAE has:
• Send Maak documentation on wind energy and social acceptance of wind energy on their
    demand.
• Engaging discussion with Maak, especially sizing face to face meetings opportunities, about
    the methodology and its application to the Vép case.
• Critically reading the different documents delivered in the process of Create Acceptance
    application by Maak
• Provide an external look and reflection on the major sources of conflicts and possible solu-
    tions as a preparation for step 4.
• Perform a feedback interview during the ’counter-partners interview sessions’ in the Buda-
    pest meeting and draft a note about this interview.
• Reflect upon the process of Create Acceptance application in the Vép case, as stated in the
    following sections of this document.


C.4.2 Check of project steps
So far, MAAK implemented steps 1 to 3. Step 4 is in preparation for its near implementation. A
description of this process, the material it generated, the type of demo project, conflicting issues
seen from the counter-partner and the role of the counter-partner as we experienced them is pro-
vided in the following lines.

C.4.2.1 Assessment of material and given information
All in all, the process of implementing the Create Acceptance methodology took a long time in
the Vép case. In 6 months, 3 steps were carried out and an additional 1,5 months will certainly
be necessary to finalise it.

Step 1

This step is organised for the delivery of 4 main tools, and it was considered useful and rela-
tively straightforward by both the consultant and the PM. It helped built a common understand-
ing between consultant and PM, and the documents were consulted several times during ulterior
steps. The time spent by the PM (about 5 hours of interview) and by consultants (about 15
hours) was however considered important. This is time consuming and it took one formal inter-
view plus additional phone calls to clear the step. This is all the most important that, as we have
noticed already, the consultant and the PM already knew each other and that some documenta-
tion and project background was already collected during the WP2 case study on Vép.

Project narrative
It was pre-filled by consultant and then amended by PM during the interview as a basis for start-
ing the discussion. The narrative is relatively short and fits the allocated 2-3 pages. As a


                                                                                               149
counter-partner, we sometimes could not clearly understand some implicit statements, but it was
an interesting bases to ask a number of questions to consultant.

Context analysis table
It was pre-filled by consultant and then completed and filled out by PM during the interview.
Together, PM and consultant went through the different cells. Both felt it was a useful tool to
systematize the PM vision about its project, but the filling out experience was felt somehow
clumsy and long, and filling out often required some guidance and explanations on the consult-
ant part.

Defining moment’s table
Again, it was prefilled by consultant and complemented by PM. This process was rather
straightforward.

Actor’s table
Was drafted jointly, from the narrative on the consultant part and then on the basis of questions
asked to the PM like who are the important players. This tool was considered useful as it helped
PM systematically consider the social environment of its project.

Step 2

This step confronts two sets of visions, PM vision seized through a number of descriptive writ-
ings and maps, and stakeholders visions as written reactions it. Step 2 was very much facilitated
by step 1 preparation. However, it proved equally fairly time consuming for the consultant (es-
timated 20 hours), as the choice was made to go for individual interviews with stakeholders in
the Vép project rather than organise a stakeholder’s workshop.

PM vision & social network maps
The present, intermediate and future visions, as well as the present and future social network
maps were drafted by the consultant from the step 1 material and then sent and submitted to PM
validation and amendment through an interview over the phone. A meeting was then organised
with the PM to finalise both vision and maps. These tools were considered relatively straight-
forward by both the consultant and the PM.

BAU
BAU was equally drafted by the consultant and then discussed with project managers and
shown to stakeholders.

Stakeholders future visions
According to most problematic issues and more critical actors as defined in step 1, 5 main
stakeholders were actually selected for interviewing. The expert in charge of Renewable Energy
Policy at the Ministry of Economics, The head of the economic Department at HEO, the expert
in charge of climate change strategy at the Ministry of Environment, the head of connecting
management at MAVIR, one representative of the Energy Club NGO, the Mayor of Vép. Indi-
vidual interviews were preferred to a workshop. The PM vision, BAU and social network maps
were sent to stakeholders beforehand, but eventhough, it was observed that this high number of
documents was sometimes discouraging to them, and not all documents were red and used. The
maps appeared to be the most straightforward tool for interacting with stakeholders and getting
their reactions during the 2 hours interviews. From these reactions, a synthetic note was drafted
for each stakeholders as an input into step 3.




150
Step 3

This step is the time when the consultant alone tries to take some distance from the material and
the demo in order to identify a list of issues and rank them according to their impor-
tance/significance to the project and to their solvability. Filling the tables was found relatively
easy and straighforward, although clarifications about the next steps of the process were asked
as they were not obvious in reading the Create Acceptance manual.

This was done in two stages. First, the consultant spent about a day working on the list of issues.
Second, we considered it might be interesting at this value adding stage that the counter-partner
take a more active part in the process. We then organised a one hour skype phone session to
confront readings and interpretations of the case between the consultant and the counter-partner.
This confrontation was very fruitful as it helped consultant taking more distance from the PM
viewpoint. Part of the discussion also went on preparing step 4 in terms of starting to think of
possible options and ways out the blocked situation that could be kept in mind during the next
meeting with PM (step 4) and during the shake hand session with stakeholders (step 5).

C.4.2.2 The type and process of the demo project
In this project of wind farm, the basic wind farm technology is not a problem and could easily
be transferred from international firms to the Hungarian local context.

Equally, the local actors are generally favorable and supportive to the project, as it is a non for
profit mission performed by a non for profit organisation. Being presented as a local develop-
ment project, with a governance and a ownership largely opened to local actors, the project was
equally widely publicised by the company.

The key issue here from a demo project point of view is that the project is socially blocked by
national level planning and coordinating organisations (MAVIC, HEO, E.ON EDASZ) and by
competing networks (hydropower, fossil fuel). The Vép project and its societal acceptance prob-
lems are indeed to be understood in the wider context of a technological transition at a moment
where Hungarian society is wondering which energy system to choose for its future. As such, it
is an interesting demo project for the Create Acceptance method, and its confrontation with
practicalities, one of the difficulties in such project being to get a hold on for local actors on re-
mote and global issues and actors.

C.4.2.3 Conflicting issues from counter-partners point of view
Conflicting issues are a very central way through which counter-partner can play a value added
role. From the Vép experience, we consider that the clear identification of such issues, that sug-
gest taking some distance from the project commitment is a really crucial input of Create Ac-
ceptance methodology and is not so easy for project managers. This is also on discussing differ-
ent interpretations of what are the most important conflicting issues that the dialogue between
consultant and counter-partner might prove useful.

As regards the Vép project, project managers and the consultant pointed to the regulatory au-
thorities as a major source of blocking the project. With a more distant view point, we consid-
ered that this focus left the importance of competing actors and their arguments aside and that it
should be considered more directly as a conflicting issues ’what energy system for the Hungar-
ian future?’ that needed to be addressed. This has important implications too as regards possible
solutions and options. We think that as long as this question will not be settled, and the interest
of wind energy as a reliable and economical source of electricity demonstrated, regulatory au-
thorities might prove reluctant to move on. Practical implications such as balanced provision of
electricity through mixed of combined plants, technical safety of irregular electricity feed into
the grid, might be considered as well.




                                                                                                 151
C.4.2.4 Role of counter-partner
The role of the counter-partner has been described in section 1. Important lessons learned from
our experience are the following:
1. Working at a distance was not always simple and easy. Not knowing the Vép site, project
    manager and not being able to face to face interact with consultant with more regularity was
    perceived as a limiting constraint and we would recommend that counter-partners should
    live close, possibly in the same city as the consultant in order to ease interactions.
2. Another side to it is the translation issue. Conversely to demo projects in which english was
    used all the way, the Vép demo project was implemented in Hungarian and then all the
    documents had to be translated to the counter-partner, which was very time consuming and
    provoked some delays in issuing the documents.
3. besides its role in following up of documents delivery, favouring the clarification of some
    points, and easing the application of the methodology, we found that it could be very useful
    to have a more active interpretative involvment of the counter-partner in the last steps of the
    process (from step 3), as much value added and interpretation on the consultant part takes
    place there.


C.4.3 Results of the counter-partner’s interview
C.4.3.1 Role of the consultant in the demo

Role of the consultant from the different points-of-view
PM was relatively opened to questions and approaches about social acceptance. Nevertheless,
he could not devote much time to the Create Acceptance methodology and consultant tried to
facilitate the process of implementing it by preparing most of the documents.

On the stakeholder side, one of the issue was really to not be considered as part of the project
management team. It was crucial to be perceived as a third party helping in getting the project
more participative and ease stakeholders views consideration. Many of the stakeholders called
upon in the Vép demo were important regulatory authorities member and policy makers in-
volved in important national issues. So the role of the consultant had to be clarified to them as a
facilitator, not a lobbyist of a participant, otherwise they would have refused to participate.

Expectations beforehand
To the consultant, methodologies to favour social acceptance of projects were not very familiar.
So more than expectations as such, there was a real curiosity to experiment with the Create Ac-
ceptance method, and see whether it could be of practical use in solving acceptance problems.
The Vép project had been blocked for some time, and the PM certainly was ready to get support
in solving this situation.

C.4.3.2 Relationship between project manager and consultant
One of the important dimensions in the relationship, beyond the implementation of the method
as such, which demands a lot of efforts and understanding of the PM constraints and problem-
atic, is, for the consultant to establish a trust relationship with them. In the Vép case, Maak good
reputation in the field of renewable energy policy, as well as the access of Maak to key high
level national figures played a positive role in this respect. Consultant managed to establish
friendly and trustful relations with PM.

Character and role of PM
PM is a commercial in power electronics goods. Szélëro management is then not his main job.
As a result, he is kept very busy and can not devote so much time on the method. Consultant
took this into consideration and tried to lower the burden associated with the implementation of
Create Acceptance down. Consultant considers that in terms of project management, and con-




152
sidering that it is not his full time job, the Szélëro team achieved quite good results in develop-
ing their projects.

The PM is very opened to social acceptance issues and support from the consultant as he con-
siders himself not to be very knowledgeable on this matter. So he demonstrated a very impor-
tant ability to listen to the consultant and to give credit to him. He was really ready to go
through the Create Acceptance tool with an open mind, and considered most of it with credit, as
long as the consultant presented the tools to him.

On the other hand, due the project history and its implication, PM has developed some judge-
ments about some stakeholders that he would not easily change. At the latest stage of the Create
Acceptance, it might hamper dialogue and negotiation processes and put the all result at risk.
Consultant will have to devise a way to overcome such possible difficulties.

Description of conflicts in the demo and role of consultant
According to the consultant, most conflicts in the Vép project are conflicts of interest. When
listing the number of important issues, a short list of 3 to 4 came up, no more. But on the other
hand, conflicts between different interest groups that ended up in blocking the whole Vép pro-
ject through the establishment of quotas seem difficult to resolve. One reason is that competing
networks like fossil fuel and hydropower would not easily participate in negotiation processes
as they seem more inclined to lobby through their well established networks of relations. On the
other hand, some stakeholders like the EU or the ministry of environment might prove impor-
tant allies as they are supporting renewable energies.

In this process, the consultant might play an important role by bringing different actors into the
discussion and negotiation process. Independence from project management is therefore critical.
For instance, relations with the Ministry of Economics was fully managed by the consultant and
no direct contact was yet organised with PM.

Experiences with the consultant support (in using the ESTEEM tool)
There was a number of clear results obtained thanks to the ESTEEM tool implementation.
1. CA contributed to enrich project manager’s vision about stakeholders. In some cases, in-
   visible stakeholders were made visible to him.
2. Step 1, 2, 3 required a lot of efforts and preparation, and while in the process, it was some-
   times not easy to understand the how this would finally turn into useful action. This might
   also be partly due to the Create Acceptance method being in progress as its implementation
   in demo projects had already started to keep up with the schedule. It all started to make
   more sense with the implementation of step 4 and the evocation of possible solutions to im-
   portant issues.
3. CA helped a number of stakeholders be more aware of the social acceptance issue as a key
   aspect. In the case of Vép, as it is a non for profit development project, questions of accep-
   tance by the neighbours and citizen is well handled. In this case, the acceptance problem is
   more at a national level and of a technology transition and energy policy nature.
4. Helped PM get a more systematic representation of its projects and rooms for manoeuvre.

C.4.3.3 Relationship between stakeholder and consultant
The consultant already managed to get a number of key high level stakeholders involved in the
Create Acceptance process which the project manager could never have done, ever because of a
lack of connections, or because of his position in the conflicting/ political scene.

Step 4 and 5 will be crucial in determining if the consultant will be as well in a position to start
negotiation process and a number of actions capable of closing the gap that resulted in the
blocking of the Vép project, and more widely in the 330 MW quota policy to limit wind energy
development in Hungary. If successful, Vép can very well become a catalyser for a major
change in the energy policy and technology landscape in Hungary. Will the Create Acceptance


                                                                                               153
method be helping that process, and will the consultant establish constructive and trust enough
relations with key stakeholders to unlock blocked forces?

C.4.3.4 Exchange of Demos/ partners interaction
As mentioned earlier, implementation of the demo projects started while the Create Acceptance
method was still under development. Moreover, the feedback from demo project was an impor-
tant input into finalising the Create Acceptance method.

In this collective learning situation, the exchange organised about different practices was abso-
lutely fruitful and useful to the consultant. Tools might sound a little abstract sometimes, and
seeing real examples of how to use and fill them like the Jühnde and Zepp maps was very
enlightening. Consultant in Vép has gone several times through other demos examples to do the
job.


C.4.4 Experience of Counter-partner’s support
Overall, the experience of being a counter-partner to a demo project was a positive and interest-
ing experience. In the specific context of the Create Acceptance demo project, it was important
to have counter-partners to discuss and follow up the application of the method with ’consult-
ants’. Is such a role of counter-partner going to be as useful once the method is more established
or for use by ‘real consultants’? We are not sure it should really be maintained as such.
1. One of the difficulties has clearly been to work at a distance, with very little direct interac-
    tion with ’consultant’ and no interaction with actors and Vép project reality. Another side to
    it has been the hassle for the consultant to constantly need to translate the produced docu-
    ments into English for communication to counter-partners, in addition to the already time
    consuming process of implementing the experimental methodology. One important point we
    think is that the existence of a counter-partner does not add too much of a burden on the
    consultant.
2. Beyond the support in applying the methodology through clarification of points and discus-
    sion of deliveries, one very positive contribution of the counter-partner role has been to con-
    tribute in the interpretative work that started from step 3. Step 1 and 2 are mainly aimed at
    building a common understanding of the PM view of the project, so it is PM-centric.
3. But from step 3, consultant is starting to become more actively contributing to interpretation
    and actions by identifying key issues that the PM did not fully consider and their implica-
    tions, contributing to identify and choose key stakeholders who should be on board for dis-
    cussion, starting to establish relationships and a discussion and negotiation process between
    actors that otherwise would not have talked to each other. This is when getting reflective
    support from counter-partner, confronting interpretations and understanding proved useful.
    And we suggest that even if counter-partner as such might not be extended to more routine
    used of Create Acceptance, such qualitative team support to consultant should probably be
    maintained in preparing step 3 and 4. In terms of consultancy, it might mean that the main
    consultant would find a temporary counter-consultant for step 3 and 4, or that a internal
    brainstorming about the case might be organised by the consultancy organisation. One way
    or another, this part of the methodology is involving important strategic and theoretical in-
    sights on the part of the consultant, that we think are important for success.
4. We consider the Vép project is a very important and interesting demonstration project for
    Create Acceptance. It is rather exemplary in the sense that Szélëro incorporated important
    social acceptance arrangements from the start with the model of ’communal implementa-
    tion’. It allowed citizen and neighbours to get a significant ownership and share in the gov-
    ernance structure of the wind farm very much on the model of the successful Danish wind
    farms (the EU PHARE framework importantly contributed to this).
    So the acceptance nexus in this case is very much of a technology transition kind: compet-
    ing forces at play to define a strategy for Hungary Energy policy for the future. This raises a
    very specific challenge to Create Acceptance as an important focus was placed on local ac-



154
    tors acceptance. The question then is: can the method be adapted successfully to deal with
    more institutional questions and how? This is what the Vép consultant is now trying to do,
    and clearly identifying this challenge was already an outcome of consultant - counter-
    partner relation.


C.5     Counter partner - Evaluation report demoproject SMARTH, Iceland

C.5.1 Short Description of Demo project and Counter partners’ activities
SMART H2 is a demonstration project for hydrogen fuelled vehicles and vessels. The project
will test various types of hydrogen-fuelled company cars and other equipment that runs on hy-
drogen, including a hydrogen auxiliary power unit for a tour ship run by Elding. The project
also aims to demonstrate the operation infrastructure for compressed hydrogen and develop the
distribution system for hydrogen, for example by organizing and running a small-scale hydro-
gen transport service.

The project is based on the vision that Iceland can in the future use hydrogen made with local
renewable energy and water as a transport fuel. This will enable the country to cut its carbon di-
oxide emissions and replace imported fossil fuels with a locally made fuel. The tests are an im-
portant learning phase in realizing the large-scale introduction of hydrogen. A shift to hydrogen
fuel will require the development of new equipment and the introduction of a partially new fuel
delivery and production infrastructure.

Icelandic New Energy (INE) is the initiator of the project. One of INE’s major shareholders is
Vistorka, a company which serves to unite business venture funds, key energy companies, aca-
demic institutes and the Icelandic government. In the Create Acceptance project, INE represents
both

SMART H2 is the second major test project in Iceland. It is rooted in the experience gained in
the use of hydrogen fuelled public buses in the ECTOS and HYFLEET: CUTE projects, also
initiated and run by Icelandic New Energy (INE) and run partly on EU funding. SMART H2
aims to extend the experiences gained in public transportation to other types of cars and to the
shipping fleet. It is also different from the previous projects in the sense that SMART H2 is
funded domestically by Vistorka and the Icelandic government.

The project consists of three paths:
• SMART H2 ICE path focuses on company and rental cars. These cars run on conventional
   internal combustion engines (ICEs), which represent an intermediate step toward the shift to
   fuel cell cars. The cars will be retrofitted Toyota Prius vehicles that use hydrogen instead of
   gasoline. The cars will fill up at Shell Hydrogen’s hydrogen station. The aim of the SMART
   H2 ICE path is to test the hydrogen distribution options, collect data on vehicle and station
   performance, collect drivers’ experiences, and validate the market potential in Iceland.
• SMART H2 FC path focuses on fuel cells. The first demonstration project within this path
   will test an auxiliary power unit based on a hydrogen hybrid engine. This will be done on
   the whale-watching tour boat Elding. The engine will produce the electricity needed on
   board. This demonstration aims to develop the auxiliary power unit into a marketable prod-
   uct for other vessels or other types of users. The path will also create awareness of hydrogen
   based technology among the hospitality industry and tourists. Also fuel cell powered cars
   will be tested within this path at a later stage.
• SMART H2 Research will focus on assessing the economic, environmental and social ef-
   fects of using hydrogen as the main fuel in Iceland compared to other alternative fuels. It
   will also compile data on user experiences, performance, reliability, operational design, and
   operators’ experiences.



                                                                                             155
Currently there are more than 20 organizations participating in the project. Three closely co-
operating project managers from Iceland New Energy (INE) are in charge of the different paths.
The main parties involved are providers of materials and technology (Orkuveitan: power, Daim-
ler Chrysler, fuel cell cars, Quantum: ICE cars, other vehicle providers, fuel cell provider, the
users of the equipment (e.g., Hertz, Aloca, Landvirkjun, Orkuveitan, Elding boat and tour op-
erator), administrators and regulators, and different research institutes and universities involved
in the research. Meetings with users, suppliers and other stakeholders have been ongoing since
September 2006. The companies participating in the tests will need to agree to provide data for
the research conducted by INE.

In terms of the Create Assessment process of testing the ESTEEM tool in a demo project, this
demo project has some particular features. Iceland New Energy is both a partner in Create Ac-
ceptance (and thus represents the ‘consultant’ using the ESTEEM tool) and the operator of the
SMARTH2 project. The demo project leader in the Create Assessment project, Maria Maack, is
also a ‘real life’ project leader of one of the SMART H2 Research path. She has also been cen-
tral in the previous project, ECTOS, and is a central figure in the development of hydrogen sys-
tems in Iceland. Thus, from the perspective of the ESTEEM tool, the demo project leader has
something of a dual role.

In the ESTEEM tool testing process, the director of Iceland New Energy is designated as the
‘Project Manager’. There is thus a separate ‘Project Manager’ with whom the tool is tested, but
the relations between the project manager and the ‘Consultant’ are closer than is the case in the
other demo projects. The ‘Project Manager’ and the ‘Consultant’ work in the same organization,
which has some benefits but can also make some things more complicated.

This demo project thus provides some insights on the use of the ESTEEM tool in a situation
when the ‘Consultant’ is in-house. It can also give some insights into situations where there is
no particular consultant at all, but the ‘Project Manager’ or some of the project staff use the
ESTEEM tool themselves.

The roles of the counter-partner in the SMARTH2 project have been to:
• Assist in applying the ESTEEM tool, in particular to identify the correct steps and substeps
   to use in the demo project.
• Help to identify when to apply the tools in a project that already was into the developmental
   phase before CreateAcceptance started.
• Discuss with the consultant specific features of the local context which require tailoring of
   the ESTEEM tool and particular steps and substeps and known project management tools
• Assist in the documentation of the tool testing process.
• Conduct the counter-partner interview and draft the counter-partner report,. Thereby high-
   lighting the interactions between the demo project and the ESTEEM.

This report is based on discussions between the demo path leader (INE) and the counterpartner
(NCRC). Original tables, figures and other material from the WP3 tool development process are
provided as examples.


C.5.2 Check of project steps
C.5.2.1 Assessment of material and given information
At present, Steps 1-4 have been tested in the SMARTH2 project. Step 5 is planned and a stake-
holder workshop is organized in November 2007. Step 6 will be implemented shortly thereafter.

Step 1 was conducted in April-May 2007. In this specific demo, the narrative was more for the
use of the Create Acceptance team because the Consultant is very well acquainted with the his-
tory of the project. Nonetheless, identification of the ‘critical moments’ was useful for creating



156
self-awareness and status of project. Moreover, the actors’ table and context analysis proved
useful and are closely linked to the work done for Step 2. The actors table also helped the Pro-
ject Manager to devote more attention to ‘external’ and ‘peripheral’ stakeholders in addition to
the Steering Group members, i.e., owners and customers of the project.

It was useful that the time-lag between Step1 and Step 2 was small, so there was much synergy
between conducting these steps (see suggestions at the end of this report). All Step 1 materials
are compiled in a separate document delivered to the Create Acceptance team on May 4th.

Step 2 followed closely on the footsteps of Step 1. The stakeholder visions were extracted by
organizing a workshop (rather than through interviews as suggested as the first choice in the
ESTEEM manual). The workshop was organized on May 15, 2007 in Reykjavik and many
members of the Create Acceptance team were present and helped in planning and arranging the
workshop.

In preparation for the workshop, the sociograms for ‘PM present vision’ and ‘PM future vision’
were combined. They show that the SMARTH2 project is an extremely complex project with
many different activities and thus also many different kinds of stakeholders (Figure C.1).

                               fo ssil fuel (or other n ew                 altern ativ e fu el p ro v id ers
                               Fuel p rovid ers)


             T ax is                               M o u n tain                           C ap tiv e fleet
                                                   jeep s/to u rism
             L o rries                                                                    2 p u b lic b u ses

             to u rb u ses                                                                3 w aste
                                                                                          co llecto rs
             P u b lic tran sp o rt



                                            IC E cars
                                            providers
      C a r dem o                           SM A R TH 2
                                                                                                                                  C u sto m ers
                                            IC E dem o
      d im en sion s
                                           F uel cell cars                                                                        H erz
                                           SM ARTH2                             H yd ro g en
                                           F C dem o                                                                              L an d sv irk ju n
                                                                                m a in ten a n ce
                                                                                sh o p                                            O rk u v eita
                                                                                                                                  R v ík u r




                                                                                                                                                                               Government
       V isto r                                                                H yd ro g en                      H 2 crew
                                                                               sta tio n                         (train ed )
          ka
                                                                                                                                                            R ep o rtin g
        M unicip ality                                                                                                                                        D ata
                                  Ice  N ew  E n                                                                                                           an d p o licy
                                                                     M o b ile H 2                                                                        co llectio n
                                                                     statio n                                                                             su g g estio n s
                                                                                                                                                           R esearch
         A uthority                         IsA G A H 2                       B o at an d to u r                                                           A n aly sis
                                            transp ort?
                                                                              O p erato r
                         HSE                 fu el cell p rovider             E ld in g                  G ro u p  o f art stu d e n ts 
                         au th o rity
                                            V arm araf                                                         p ro m o tio n  –  
                                                                                                          m arke tin g o n b o ard
                                            A P U en g in eer?
                         Icel.
                         M aritim e                                                                                                        to u rists               M ed ia
                                                      G . L o yd s
                                                      V erifyin g

                                                                                                                                                        P u b lic


                                 B o at dem o
                                                                                          th e rest o f th e sh ip p in g in d u stry
                                 dim en sio n s
                                                                              T ou rist       F erries         F ish in g fleet       C argo sh ip
                                                                              b oa ts                          o p erators            op e ra to rs


                                                                                               fossil fu el (or other new
                                                                                               F uel p rov iders)


Figure C.1 The PM present/future vision sociogram for the SMARTH2 demo project




                                                                                                                                                                              157
About 16 people were contacted and invited to participate in the workshop. Twelve of them
eventually participated, one left very early and one was less active than expected. INE con-
cluded from the workshop that people find the topic interesting on the whole and want to par-
ticipate by discussing and interacting. The informal atmosphere was dynamic but there was
some concern that some participants might not have taken it seriously. The participants gave
INE positive feedback after the workshop.

The workshop had a specific design, which is different from the workshop formats presented in
the ESTEEM tool manual. The format was designed in collaboration with a number of the Cre-
ate Acceptance team members. Stakeholders worked in pairs including one external and one in-
ternal stakeholder on the issues suggested in the ESTEEM tool manual. This was a well-
functioning solution.

Because different stakeholder groups were not consulted separately, it was not possible to draw
‘future vision maps’ for each stakeholder group. Nonetheless, the following conclusions about
the ‘stakeholders’ future visions’ were drawn:
1. Visions of different stakeholders seem to be fairly well aligned.
    - All agree that alternative fuels (to oil) need to be found
    - All appear to be in favour of moving toward hydrogen as a transport fuel in Iceland
2. Stakeholders have questions about the timeline (when will it happen)
    - Stakeholders have doubts about the commitment of oil companies, car companies and
         the government whereas they seem invisible in the project
    - There are in particular concerns about the lack of H2 cars, technological maturity and
         questions about when and where they will appear (and can cars be made only for Ice-
         land?)
3. Stakeholders are concerned about continuity
    - They want to know why ECTOS ‘was discontinued’ (as they understand it) and why the
         H2 buses are no longer running (but the project mangers know that they are simply
         finalised!)
    - Stakeholders wonder why hydrogen is not visible in their everyday life (but Iceland is
         presented as the world’s first hydrogen economy in the international media)
4. Stakeholders want to see rapid progress
    - Managing expectations is crucial (what will happen by 2020 and how can stakeholders
         see that it is happening)
5. There is not much discussion of why moving to hydrogen would be good for the environ-
    ment

After the workshop, it took some time to get to Steps 3 and 4. Final versions of these were not
available immediately after the workshop, and then the SMARTH2 project required other kinds
of urgent attention. Nonetheless, conclusions were immediately drawn on the basis of the work-
shop and improvements implemented. These are indicated as ‘implemented solutions’ in the
Step 4 tables. Steps 3 and 4 were conducted in August 2003.




158
                                     Urgency (high)


                   commitment by     Continuity
                   car & oil         local visibility




importance low                       environmental            importance (high)
                                     discussion
                                     infrastructure




                                     Urgency)low)

Figure C.2 Example of the issues rating graph from Step 3 for the SMARTH2 demo project

Step 3 was useful for organizing the results of the workshop and establishing priorities. Even
though Figure C.2 and Figure C.3 (numbered according to the ESTEEM - logic), describe the
same things. The format is useful for communicating priorities and inspiring a search for solu-
tions. As a result, continuity and local visibility were identified as having high urgency and pri-
ority, and these are the issues that SMARTH2 started working on right after the Step 2 work-
shop.

Step 4 tables were used in this context to monitor which issues had already been solved and to
follow the development of the issues and solutions in the time following the workshop (Figure
C.3). As can be seen, an exact rating of issues is sometimes difficult, but the table clearly serves
its purpose.

Issues             Description
Issue 1            Concerns about continuity: what happened to ECTOS
Issue 2            Lack of local visibility (administration, corporate, public)
Issue 3            Lack of visible infrastructure
Issue 4            Lack of visible commitment by car & oil companies
Issue 5            Lack of environmental discussion in connection with fuels
Issues             Urgency             Importance        Rank Implemented Solutions
Issue 1            High             high                  ?       easy to solve (enhanced 
continuity                                                        communications)
Issue 2            Medium           high (in        the ?         will be tackled in October by a 
local visibility                    long term)                    future scenario workshop 

Issue 3            Medium           high (in        the           A new H2 station is now planned 
infrastructure                      long term)                    on the University lot

Issue 4       Low                   medium (in the                Shell in Iceland has now taken 
commitment by                       long term)                    over the hydrogen station till 
car & oil                                                         2010.
Issue 5            Low but rising   ??                            The head of the parliamentary 
environmental                                                     committee came to discuss links 
discussion                                                        between the H2 projects & 
                                                                  environmental issues

Figure C.3 Excerpt from the Step 4 table for the SMARTH2 demo project



                                                                                                     159
The type and process of the Demo project
The SMARTH2 demo project differs from the other demo projects in a number of ways. These
are discussed in the following in terms of (1) technological maturity, (2) management capabili-
ties of the project manager, (3) governance of the demo project, and (4) stakeholder relations to
the demo project. All these characteristics have implications for how the ESTEEM process
works in the demo project.

(1) Hydrogen is an ‘emerging’ technology, which is probably closest to actual application in
Iceland. Iceland has a number of natural advantages in the use of hydrogen as a transport fuel,
most notably the abundant hydroelectric and geothermal energy resources that can be used to
produce hydrogen, long experience in running community based systems with renewable energy
only. There are also some natural ‘disadvantages’ that make hydrogen very attractive as an al-
ternative fuel, most notably the lack of domestic biomass reserves and the distance of the coun-
try from the rest of Europe.

Nonetheless, in Iceland as elsewhere, actual market applications of hydrogen technology have
taken longer to materialize than might be expected on the basis of some of the public discussion.
Many aspects of market application require the co-operation of foreign partners, including oil
companies and car manufacturers. On the other hand, there is a strong economic rationale in
Iceland to develop hydrogen-based transport fuels because this would provide a new product for
the domestic energy industry.

(2) The SMARTH2 project represents a fairly mature project in terms of managerial capabili-
ties. INE is a small organization with a very small but very capable staff. The owners of INE are
large companies for which INE is strategically important. Promotion of hydrogen has been the
main mission of INE since the inception of the company. INE has fairly established project
management procedures.

INE has been working on developing the hydrogen economy in Iceland for almost a decade, and
SMARTH2 represents a natural continuation of previous projects and promotion activities for
hydrogen in Iceland. The project managers are very familiar with the domestic and international
debate surrounding hydrogen and have years of experience in promoting hydrogen. They are
fairly well aware of the views of different stakeholders and have longstanding contacts with
many of the stakeholders.

SMARTH2 is an interesting case to test the ESTEEM tool because of some specific features of
the project and INE. Because INE has established project management procedures and extensive
experience in its field of operation, ESTEEM needs to be integrated into those procedures. On
the other hand, because it is a small organization, the testing of ESTEEM cannot be ‘side-
tracked’ to a separate expert function (e.g., in the way environmental management or quality
management can be in a large organization). This is a good thing: ESTEEM is really being
tested and not merely executed symbolically. On the other hand, overlaps and contradictions
and synergies between ESTEEM and existing project management tools and procedures become
apparent in this demo project.

(3) Governance of the demo project is complicated, because it is owned by a number of differ-
ent companies with somewhat different interests. Because SMARTH2 is strategically very im-
portant for the owners of INE, there have been some uncertainties about when to make public
specific aspects of the project. The owners of INE have various roles in the project - they are not
merely financial investors, but also users, producers and stakeholders of the project. This aspect
requires significant sensitivity to context when applying the ESTEEM tool. A partial solution to
the situation was to involve an outsider, the department of natural resources at the University of
Iceland to implement the stakeholder workshop in step 4.



160
(4) The stakeholder relations of the demo project reflect some specificity of the project and its
national context. Because hydrogen has raised so much international interest, it has been widely
aired in the international media. Icelanders follow such media (e.g., BBC World) closely, and
thus receive communications concerning ‘their’ hydrogen projects ‘from outside’. This has
raised large expectations about the materialization of the hydrogen economy, which are chal-
lenging to meet.

Iceland is a small country (about 300 000 inhabitants) where people tend to know each other
and inhabit a number of different roles at the same time. Because of the tight-knit and non-
hierarchical nature of the community, communication routes are quite informal. Also the or-
ganization of social life and the relations between different interest groups follow a similar,
fairly informal pattern. In such a community, highly organized forms of, e.g., stakeholder con-
sultation may be viewed as ‘over-organized’ and may not fit the local traditions.

C.5.2.2 Conflicting issues from Counter partner’s point-of-view
As the previous sections illustrated, there are some aspects of the project which require signifi-
cant tailoring of the ESTEEM tool to the demands of the local context. A summary of these is
presented below:
(1) The dual role of ‘consultant’/’project manager’ in the same organization has created some
scheduling challenges. The SMARTH2 project is in a very intensive phase, and testing the dif-
ferent steps of the tool is difficult to integrate into this fast-moving project. This may be more of
a problem in the demo project - testing an unfinished tool - than it would be if the tool were
ready to use and could be used at a time appropriate for the project. Moreover, the tool should
be very user-friendly and easy to adapt to existing project management procedures.

(2) The project does not involve notable conflicts between the project manager and the local
population concerning the design of the project. There are clearly differences of interest among
different stakeholders. The most obvious ones are between the different parties that finance (or
fail to finance) the project and governing the institutional environment of the project. Often,
such questions are perhaps perceived of as being different from questions of ‘societal accep-
tance’ (even though this might not necessarily be the case). In this case, society has accepted
and expects more commitment from the government and municipalities. But it is worth raising
the question about the extent to which ESTEEM is suitable for organizing ‘high-level’ negotia-
tion processes among financial stakeholders and the national government, for example. There
are established procedures for conducting such negotiations and we need to think about whether
and how ESTEEM can contribute to such procedures.

In contrast, the ESTEEM process has contributed to improved communications between the pro-
ject and its stakeholders. A number of communication needs were identified through the
ESTEEM process and the project has developed closer relations with a number of ‘non-core’
stakeholders such as local citizens, academia and other similar organizations.

(3) Because of the very active participation of the owners of INE in its governance and man-
agement (and because the owners also have other roles vis-à-vis the project), using the
ESTEEM tool requires their co-operation. This raises the question of integrating the ESTEEM
tool into the governance and management procedures of the ‘project manager’ organization. The
project manager is rarely in a position to decide alone on many issues, and time is needed to
consult with other stakeholders with a decision-making role in the project.

(4) Projects like SMARTH2, with established project management procedures, highlight the
importance of integrating ESTEEM into existing project management procedures and into the
project management process.

(5) Local conventions on how stakeholders usually communicate and participate in projects
vary. Some local cultures are hierarchical and highly organized while others are more spontane-


                                                                                                161
ous and informal. Thus, it is important that the ESTEEM tool offers a variety of ways in which
stakeholder interaction and participation can be organized.

C.5.2.3 Role of Counter partner
The roles of the counter-partner in the SMARTH2 project have been to:
• Assist in applying the ESTEEM tool, in particular to identify the correct steps and substeps
   to use in the demo project.
• Discuss with the consultant specific features of the local context which require tailoring of
   the ESTEEM tool and particular steps and substeps.
• Assist in the documentation of the tool testing process.
• Conduct the counter-partner interview and draft the counter-partner report.

Co-operation between INE and the counter-partner NCRC in the demo project has been very
close and has proceeded very smoothly.


C.5.3 Results of the Counter partner Interview
C.5.3.1 Role of the Consultant in the Demo
The consultant had a particular role in this demo as she also works in the Project Manager or-
ganization, INE, and is project manager for one of the SMARTH2 paths, the Research path. The
‘Project Manager’ in the demo project is the consultant’s supervisor and the director of INE.
This means that the consultant has a number of different roles: partly consultant, partly project
manager. Moreover, she has an existing work role vis-à-vis the Project Manager in the demo
project, i.e., the director of INE.

As a manager working in INE, the consultant has a number of management support tasks: dis-
cussion, analysis and suggesting changes and new strategy. She has always taken an active role
in this process, and it is difficult to separate her role as consultant and her ‘ordinary’ work role
in INE.

The role of the consultant from the different points-of-view
The role of the consultant from the project manager’s perspective is unavoidably coloured by
their work roles outside the ESTEEM tool testing process. In these work roles, the director of
INE has direct access to the project Steering Committee and the Board of INE, and thus controls
the flow of information. Maria Maack (as a manager in INE) has no direct access to the Steering
Committee, who is very active in the governance and even the management of the project,
partly because they are not only the owners of INE but also the users of its results.

As a manager in INE, Maria Maack is very active vis-a-vis stakeholders. She is the manager of
the 3rd project path, research, which is networked and connected to stakeholders. She is used to
communicating a lot horizontally and vertically, and can go above the Board to e.g., discuss
with the Ministers. This active role also relates to the cultural context where there are few peo-
ple, everyone takes an active role, and people expect direct communications.

Expectations beforehand
INE was linked to the Create Acceptance project via ECN, which was viewed by INE as a high-
quality research organization. ECN as an interesting partner because they have a lot of experi-
ence in stakeholder management in energy projects.

INE expected to receive an almost ready tool to test and apply in their project. The work needed
to turn Socrobust into a multistakeholder tool has turned out to require more work than ex-
pected. .




162
The project has thus involved more work than expected, and more input into developing the
ESTEEM tool. INE originally thought they would be more in a customer’s role, and be provided
with a ready-made tool.

C.5.3.2 Relationship between Project Manager and Consultant
The relations between the Project Manager and the Consultant are defined more by their exist-
ing work roles than by the Create Acceptance process. They are both open and relaxed but also
sometimes strained and conflicting. It is an issue of the two parties’ characters and their need to
find a way to work together. They have six years’ experience in working together. Conflicts are
due to the lack of clarity and overlaps in roles: Maria Maack is sometimes consultant, some-
times Project Manager, and sometimes assistant. This has been repeated by involvement in the
Create Acceptance process, where the Project Manager can play evasive to formal interviews
stating that the consultant already knows everything about SMARTH2.

Character and role of the Project Manager
The Project Manager is a confident, self-sufficient and efficient manager. He appreciates Maria
Maack’s criticism (as a co-worker and co-manager in INE) and takes it into account. Maria can
influence the Project Manager’s decisions, even though this influence is not always formally
acknowledged. Maria has an important role in the company and the Project Manager is very
aware of the crucial assets that she represents. The Create Acceptance process has not changed
these relations in any way. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that in this specific demo, the results
of the Create Acceptance process are filtered to a great extent into the decision making in the
project via Maria Maack as Consultant-Project Manager.

Description of Conflicts in the Demo and Role of Consultant
Previous, but already solved conflicts in the project relate to the relations between the owners of
INE and their different interests. An important owner of INE, Daimler Chrysler did not want
any technology involved in the project that they could not produce themselves. This was a ma-
jor conflict but it was solved when other Board members overruled Daimler Chrysler on this
matter and the path managers were allocated different technology management.

Another conflict, which is as yet partly unsolved, derives from the fact that hydrogen has gained
more support from the government than other new energy initiatives. This, and the fact that INE
has been so efficient in gaining momentum and visibility, created envy in society. Now INE is
also in charge of other fuels than hydrogen, and the financial support from government to alter-
native fuels is combined. INE will allocate resources to other fuels, in addition to the develop-
ment of hydrogen technology, without adding to the staff.

INE has applied for research funding with a larger scope than previously, including analyses of
the environmental and socio-economic impacts of different fuels. These research efforts will in-
volve students and other outsiders, e.g., universities. But there are scarce resources and few
people so this problem is only partly solved.

These conflicts have evolved and been put in focus partly during the CA process, but are not
caused by it or solved by it. But the CA process has helped to open up the project toward the
outside stakeholders and has thus facilitated the process of engaging other fuels (competitors)
and external research and other resources. In this, the ESTEEM tool workshop organized in
Step 2 was particularly useful.

Experiences with the consultant’s support (in using the ESTEEM tool)
Both the consultant and the ESTEEM tool were viewed as being very supportive. As a result of
the process, INE has become more responsive to stakeholders and more aware of the communi-
cation needs existing in society. People in INE are happy to have more open and informal com-
munication with the Icelandic society.



                                                                                              163
C.5.3.3 Relationship between Stakeholder and Consultant
INE has active and direct relationships with stakeholders, and these are already largely managed
by Maria Maack (as a manager in several projects at INE). She has had the responsibility and
initiative in horizontal communications, whereas the Director (the Project Manager) has com-
municated more vertically (with the Steering Group and Board). This division of roles pre-
existed in INE, but the horizontal communications have been supported and reinforced by the
Create Acceptance process. Thus, it seems quite natural that if the Consultant is someone from
within the project managing organization, a person with good contacts to outside stakeholders is
a good choice for Consultant.

C.5.3.4 Success and limitation of the CA-Process and Tools in achieving ac-
        ceptance in the region
As a result of the process, INE has become more responsive to stakeholders and more aware of
the communication needs existing in society. It seems that more acceptance has developed in
the 2-3 months following the workshop. INE intends to communicate more strategically, but
there are still many open questions in the project, about which it is not clear how to communi-
cate.

One example is a recent conference which dealt with all fuels. Because of the workshop, INE is
now communicating in a different way, making it more accessible and making stakeholders
more empowered. The interest groups involved in the project are now broader.

It is not clear yet what the process means for individual stakeholders. At least the research and
university community is now more involved.

In terms of individual steps and substeps in the ESTEEM tool, the following positive experi-
ences were gained:
• Parts of the narrative were useful to gain self-understanding.
• The workshop (Step 2) opened up new issues and helped to engage new stakeholders.
• Further processing is ongoing concerning the items that came out of Steps 3 & 4. Partly,
    INE tried to deal with these issues directly as they arose, before engaging in the formal
    process of issues identification and classification or the systematic listing of all solution op-
    tions. INE is working further on these issues and solutions, which seem logical in terms of
    what could be immediately concluded from the workshop.
• The tool will definitely be used in further projects by INE

Other steps and substeps in the ESTEEM tool were found by INE to require some optimization:
• The narrative should be pre-drafted on the basis of existing documents and presented to the
   Project Manager (rather than based in the first place on an interview with the Project Man-
   ager). This would raise issues that the Project Manager does not realize. It could also serve
   the purpose of providing a ‘mirror’ for the company to self-reflect. It should be a concise
   description that could start the discussion with the Project Manager to include missing or
   remove redundant items and develop the critical moments table.
• In this case, the actors table and social network could be developed in the first meeting. It
   would be good to streamline and condense the first parts of the tool in order to get to the in-
   teresting things sooner.
• Similarly, the PM vision could be developed at the first meeting, after which the other ac-
   tors’ visions could be derived. This would enable a quick start for the process.
• At the second meeting, the actors’ map and suggestions about potential conflicts could be
   discussed with the Project Manager and the interviews/workshop introduced and planned. It
   is important to motivate the Project Manager to include in addition to the Core Group also
   those who are in the periphery - competitors, NGOs, etc. Because not all those who are in
   the Core Group will come, one would have at least 2-3 persons from the Core Group and an


164
    equal number of outsiders. This is not a large public arena, but allows for some outsider
    views, bringing in new items on the agenda.
•   In Steps 3-4, the analysis seems too detailed and too much focused on analysis of problems,
    not solutions. Moreover, if there is movement in the project at that stage, it is difficult for
    the tools to keep up with the new developments.
•   INE started to solve some of the issues raised in the workshops immediately. (This is typical
    for small companies, which like to solve problems immediately rather than internalize them
    and reflect on them for a long time). Partly, this problem results from the Create Acceptance
    context, in which certain tools were not quite ready-to-use immediately after Step 2.
•   INE sees the Step 5 workshop as a way to align the stakeholders’ expectations with what
    INE is actually doing, and its purpose is more strategic than informative.
•   Some parts of the tool may be used within a different step. For example, INE plans to use
    the idea of a ‘newspaper article for 2015’ as a tool to derive visions (used by ECN in Step 2)
    as a way for the stakeholders to prepare for the Step 5 workshop.

C.5.3.5 Exchange of Demos / Partners Interaction and Experience of Counter
        partner’s support
The Consultant-Project Manager Maria Maack feels that the Create Acceptance partners have
been really supportive. In particular, support provided in organizing the Step 2 workshop in
Reykjavik is warmly appreciated. She is very pleased with the help she has got from her coun-
terpartner.

INE has been surprised on how systematic and well structured the process has been and think it
has been exceptionally helpful. On the other hand, what was found a bit frustrating in this demo
was the difficulty of finding the documents and establishing ‘where we are in the process’. So it
has consumed some time without immediate reward.

This is partly due to the ‘in progress’ nature of the tool. The structure and process became much
more clear once a manual of the entire tool became available. So some of the difficulties derive
from developing the tool in parallel with using it. The use of a ready-made tool is thus likely to
be easier, in particular if a good integration is achieved with existing project management tools
and procedures.


C.6     Counter partner - Evaluation report demoproject solar, South Africa

C.6.1 Introduction
Implementing SWH technologies in South Africa can be defined as a broad informal pro-
gramme supported by different stakeholders. Projects within the programme address specific
targets and target groups, e.g., setting up testing procedures or the poor and mid-to high-income
groups. It follows that there is no single project manager for the programme. Stakeholders on
their own or as a group drive the process initially and once opportune framework conditions are
achieved individual projects are initiated and project managers drive individual projects. It is
important that the stakeholders in such informal programme act and act together to promote
SWH and the challenge is to get them together and drive the programme.

The phase in which an informal group of stakeholders promotes a RE technology often proceeds
the formulation of individual projects. This stage is often necessary to sort out a number of bar-
riers which the implementation of the new technology faces. It appears that the risk for individ-
ual projects is quite high at this stage. For example one of the reasons why solar water heaters
were not accepted was the absence of the mark of approval from the South African Bureau of
Standards. It took a long time to set up standards and get testing equipment in place. Individual
projects may not be able to wait years to get their technology and installation approved. A wind
project took eight years before it could start building the foundation for the windmills!


                                                                                              165
It is challenging to apply the tool to an early stage of a renewable technology dissemination. I
am aware that it is not what was intended at this stage of tool development but it is the situation
I am faced with in both case studies. For these reasons the PM/consultant roles as given in the
present process did not apply to the South African case studies. It may be worthwhile to widen
the PM/consultant roles in a future phase of the ESTEEM tool to include cases such as this.

The blackouts in the winter (March - July) of 2006 were the turning point in the programme
when the electricity company Eskom could no longer meet the demand. Renewable energy al-
ternatives had to be considered to reduce the load of the national grid. The alternatives had to
such as to be implementable immediately.

Eskom presented its SWH project at the stakeholder workshop on 12 April 2007. These work-
shops were held in Johannesburg and like many other participants I took part via email.

Eskom invited me to all its SWH workshops from January to June 2007.11.22


C.6.2 What kind of role did you play
Sometimes an active role, e.g., organizing and chairing the stakeholder workshop and at other
times a ‘behind the curtain’ role, e.g., in the very technical Eskom workshops when the active
role was played by Eskom.

I did not expect that the stakeholders’ workshop could achieve as much as it did. People came
together from all parts of South Africa. The workshop was organised as part of the International
Conference on Domestic Use of Energy which is a well known yearly event. Some stakeholders
came specifically for the workshop and others came for both events. In the stakeholder work-
shop they discussed openly and freely and outlined their roles and ‘territories’ vis-à-vis each
other. I had encouraged participants to write down or communicate to me the outstanding prob-
lems. I projected these on the screen and they were discussed and in many cases resolved. Con-
flict appeared to be resolved before it actually happened because stakeholders now better under-
stood and appreciated each others’ roles and contributions.


C.6.3 The relationship between stakeholders and ‘consultant’
I had prepared a printed programme with speakers and the time of presentation and discussion
and this was distributed as part of the conference programme weeks before the workshop
started. Consequently the workshop was well structured and the knowledge and opinions of the
major stakeholders could be communicated. Other stakeholders contributed in the discussions.
The workshop was closed in mid-afternoon when all the relevant topics were discussed and no
new issues were brought forward.

The atmosphere was open and relaxed and everybody felt free to speak. Some of the stake-
holders got so interested in one of the presentations (SESSA solar 50 project) that the speaker
was asked to elaborate further during lunch break.


C.6.4 The character and role of stakeholders
Stakeholders were open, cooperative and supportive. They defended their ‘territories’ and made
clear who should do what, eg., who should check the adherence to standards. They had a com-
mon interest in the dissemination of solar water heaters to succeed.




166
C.6.5 Main conflicts in the demo are the following
•   Necessary subsidy and who should pay it?
•   Subsidy level
•   Adherence to standards

The first two are issues rather than conflicts and are well known. They are one of the major
causes why solar water heaters are not accepted. Eskom stated at the workshop that it will sub-
sidise 150 000 systems over the next three years. The level of subsidy was not resolved and was
further debated in the subsequent Eskom workshops and email discussions. SESSA (Solar En-
ergy Society of South Africa) stated that as a representative body of the industry it will check
the adherence to standards and people appeared to be happy with this solution.


C.6.6 Relationship between stakeholders and ‘consultant’
I communicated directly, actively and openly with the stakeholders.


C.6.7 Socrobust process and consultant
Both were seen as supportive in general. The stakeholders would not have come to the work-
shop from all over South Africa if they did not think the process to be useful.
More acceptance and understanding was achieved.


C.6.8 Socrobust tools
•   Social network mapping
    This was important and helped to identify the relevant people to be invited to the stake-
    holder workshop
•   Stakeholder workshop

These two were the most useful.


C.6.9 CA: exchange of demos/partners interaction
My participation in the CA process was limited by the facts that; I joined almost a year after the
project had started; I attended only two meetings; and the local circumstances in South Africa -
particularly environmental awareness and the development of renewable energy technologies -
lag far behind the European developments. I sometimes struggled to ‘connect’.

Overall I found the process extremely interesting and useful. The tool is definitely applicable to
the South African situation although some adjustments will have to be made and this may be
done when the tool is developed further to apply to a less specific PM/consultant situation.




                                                                                             167
Appendix D Tool lists

D.1      List of ESTEEM Tools for Demo Project Biomass, Germany

D.1.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM steps
D.1.1.1 Suitability check
Nr. Question                                       Rank Explanation
                                                  (0-10)
1     Is this project completely new or a            9   0=completely new
      replication of another project?                    10=replication of many other projects
2     Is the local community familiar with          7     0=not familiar at all
      these type of projects?                             10=very familiar
3     Has the project manager experience with       8     0=no experience
      similar projects?                                   10=fully experienced
4     In what phase of development is the           6     0=project is only an early idea
      project?                                            10=project is in full operation
5     To what extent can the project be             5     0=everything can still be adapted to
      adapted to stakeholder wishes?                      stakeholder wishes
                                                          10=nothing can be adapted to
                                                          stakeholder wishes anymore
6     Would you characterise the current            5     0=very local
      political and social debates as local or            10=very global
      global?
7     Is the project manager willing and able      10     0=not at all
      to engage in discussions with                       10=yes, fully
      stakeholders in the planning phase of the
      project?
8     Is the project manager willing and able      10     0=not at all
      to discusse the project with stakeholders           10=yes, fully
      with quite opposite views?
7     How do you estimate the local socio-         10     0=very negative
      economic consequences of the project?               10=very positive
8     How do you estimate the national socio-       5     0=very negative10=very positive
      economic consequences of the project?
9     How do you estimate the local                 8     0=very negative
      environmental consequences of the                   10=very positive
      project?
8     How do you estimate the national              5     0=very negative
      environmental consequences of the                   10=very positive
      project?
9     How do you estimate the average policy        7     0=very negative (many adaptations in
      and regulatory consequences of the                  policy or regulations are required)
      project?                                            10=very positive (no adaptations in
                                                          policy or regulations are required)




168
Nr. Question                                      Rank Explanation
                                                 (0-10)
10   How would you characterise the point of       10   0=very negative or unknown
     view of the local policy community?                10=very positive
11   How would you characterise the point of       10   0=very negative or unknown
     view of the national policy community?             10=very positive
12   How would you characterise the point of        5   0=very negative or unknown
     view of NGO's?                                     10=very positive
13   How would you characterise the point of        8   0=very negative or unknown
     view of local citizens?                            10=very positive
14   How would you characterise the point of        7   0=very negative or unknown
     the general public?                                10=very positive


                                    Germany - Jühnde




                                        Experience with similar
                                               projects




         Social acceptance                                                  Adaptability




                                        Positive project impact




D.1.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors
D.1.2.1 Project narrative

A group of scientists from the Interdisciplinary Centre for Sustainable Development (IZNE) at
the University of Göttingen implemented the basic project idea: a complete shift from fossil en-
ergy to bioenergy for an entire village.

The IZNE research group consists of different academic qualifications: energy and society, bio-
diversity, life-style changes, health, process research and gender research. The vision of IZNE is


                                                                                             169
the implementation of a biomass strategy linked to social and economical welfare in rural areas.
To find the appropriate project village, IZNE carried out a feasibility study. Within this precur-
sor approach, 54 potential villages were interested in the model. At last, Jühnde was selected to
become the first bioenergy village in Germany. The success of the project raised the interest of
other villages to pursue the project idea, i.e. the success and the publicity are motivating more
villages and other actors to replicate the Jühnde model. IZNE hoped for a kind of snowball since
the initial project idea. The chosen scientific approach and the practical project structure aimed
at a further dissemination. Among others, Bündnis90/Die Grünen (the Green Party) initiated a
process on the regional level to implement other bioenergy villages as a measure for climate
protection in the region.

The advantages of bioenergy like climate protection and energy supply security are reasons for
the project dissemination. Therefore, the county and the EU LEADER+ Program finance the
dissemination project. The financing supports the village selection and feasibility studies which
are to be the base for decision making. The studies will answer the question how and where the
implementation of further bioenergy villages is realistic.

The official decision of the country council was made on Nov. 29, 2006. The county committee
confirmed the preliminary selection of 12 village candidates and provides financing for the fur-
ther process. A working group prepared the decision for the county council. Members of the
working group were IZNE, the managing board of the operating company Jühnde (Mr. Fang-
meier and Mr. Tannhäuser), members of the county council and the manager of the new dis-
semination activities, Dr. Berndt. The consulting firm „Tannhäuser’ will carry out the feasibility
studies. Mr. Tannhäuser was also responsible for the technical project support of Jühnde. The
feasibility studies will include basics like the energy demand of households, supply of biomass,
willingness of farmers to deliver biomass. Furthermore the feasibility studies include the calcu-
lation of costs for implementing the projects.

The participation structure of the new villages is similar to the participation structure of Jühnde.
The planning workshops consist of representatives of IZNE, the mayors, speaker of the working
groups, representatives of the villages and the village councils. The inhabitants are playing an
important role for the successful implementation of the project idea. They decide on the project
and participation structure as well as on the foundation of operating companies. Here they de-
velop their own ideas, this includes the decision on the management board. The participation
structure sustains self-esteem, creates acceptance and credibility.

An engaged communication process supports the dissemination of the project idea. In the vil-
lages, four working groups are set up (public relations, bioenergy, operating company, technical
issues). The persons which play a key role within the dissemination project are described in the
following. Mr. Berndt is a county staff and responsible for the regional implementation of the
European LEADER+ program. He holds the function of project manager, and is an engaged
supporter of the project idea. Over the years he collected much experience which is important
for the advancement of bioenergy villages. Mr. Berndt reports that the key actors were surprised
about the enormous interest of other villages to become a bioenergy village. This is an example
for his persuaded work in the last years. Mr. Ruwisch is a scientist with IZNE and accompanies
the dissemination process in the name of the county. He identifies the need of action and oppor-
tunities for inhabitants to participate. He is active since the beginning of the bioenergy village
context. Mr. Ruwisch studied business economy at the University of Göttingen, and works as a
scientist in the divisions’ production management, ecology and economy and is teaching envi-
ronmental economy and environmental policy at the University of Applied Sciences at Wer-
nigerode. His main focus of work is sustainable management, which founds his motivation to
disseminate the bioenergy village concept. Mr. Fangmeier is an inhabitant of the first bioenergy
village, and now CEO of the operating company in Jühnde. Together with his partner Mr.
Tannhäuser, he is working in an engineering firm which supports the technical aspects of the
dissemination project. At the beginning of the project in Jühnde he was not concerned with the


170
bioenergy issue. After the first village meeting in Jühnde and the visit of demonstration plants
(best practices) he was convinced of the technological concept. This shows the successful in-
volvement of former unconcerned inhabitants. Nature conservation organisations (German
Society for Nature Conservation, Friends of the Earth Germany) raise concerns regarding cer-
tain aspects of the project, especially the sustainable supply of biomass They fear negative im-
pacts on tourism, habitats for animals, and a reduction of biodiversity from the cultivation of
energy crops

The involvement of farmers is a crucial issue, as the prices of the feedstock for the biogas plant
depend on the contracts with this group. There is competition with fodder sales which offers po-
tentially higher returns. A second reason is the potential danger of innovation without covering
economical risks.

D.1.2.2 Context Analysis (Part I - Opportunities; Part II - Barriers)
The aim of the tool is to have project managers reflect upon the context within which their pro-
ject is to be deployed and thus identify the level of sensitivity the project manager has in regards
to the influence of context. Instead of using the table format, we decided to describe the context
within chapters of text. This detailed description was easier to handle for the project manager.

Policy context (National and general economical framework)
The Federal Government’s campaign to promote renewable energy sources has proven success-
ful. Since the introduction of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) in 2000, electricity grid
operators are obliged to purchase electricity generated from solar power, hydro power, wind
power, geothermal energy and biomass, and to pay minimum rates (fixed feed-in tariffs) for it.
The contribution of biomass has more than trebled, wind power has increased by almost fivefold
and solar electricity has multiplied ten times. In the field of heat and transportation too, renew-
able energies have made substantial gains.

With economic growth remaining comparatively low in Germany, the renewables sector is an
important driver for new income, and employment. With the surge of oil and gas prices in 2004-
2006, renewables and especially biomass became interesting options for private investors as
well as corporate finance, and investment fonds. With the adjustment of the EEG feed-in tariffs
in 2004 especially for bio-based electricity, further sustained growth is expected in the next
years.

Technology context
Since the EEG 2004 amendment, a rapid growth in biomass electricity is seen, especially from
waste wood, and biogas - the latter mainly from bioenergy crops (maize), and manure. Since
2003, biomass electricity nearly doubled, and is expected to rise further.

Besides the EEG-driven expansion of bioelectricity, the German Government’s support schemes
also fastened the development of biomass for heat production which rather stagnated until 2003.
To increase the market shares, to reduce the system costs, and to improve the overall cost-
effectiveness of systems which utilize renewable energy sources, the Market Stimulation Pro-
gram was introduced by the German government in 1999.

The current promotion scheme within this program provides different support for the various
biomass options in the heat market (direct subsidies for investments depending on size, and
technology).

The use of biomass for heating is indirectly promoted by the energy tax exemption for biomass
fuels which creates an economic advantage over oil and natural gas, as those are taxed on the
basis of the Energy Tax Act.

Further measures for the promotion of biomass heating are discussed in Germany, especially a


                                                                                               171
quota model for renewable heat which could, for example, be implemented within the scope of a
‘Heat Act’. New stimuli also are seen from the prospective national implementation of the
European Biomass Action Plan.

Geographical and cultural context
Besides the above mentioned impulses from the Federal government and the prospective eco-
nomical advantages, the County of Göttingen was inspired by several local energy initiatives
and the initiative of the University of Göttingen to implement a model of energy-independent
villages in the rural area south-west of Göttingen. Moreover, the positively expected effects for
a prospering regional development played an important role in the decision-making process of
the County’s key actors. A new market for farmers focusing on biomass should be formed in
addition to the demand for traditional agricultural crops. Selling bioenergy crops and forestry
residues as bioenergy creates a new income base for local farmers which is independent from
the fluctuations of the traditional agricultural markets, and underpins the regional welfare. The
main thesis was that the overall effect on the region’s and County's balance of trade will turn out
positive, as payments for oil and natural gas imports are reduced, and people’s money will be
reinvested in local and regional facilities.

While in other landscapes biomass plants are already widespread, the south-western part of the
county has yet a relevant potential to be realised. The Jühnde area especially offers a local agri-
cultural supply structure with the necessary quantity of biomass production.

Moreover, several technical conditions like a minimum density of heat demand have to be met
in order to establish a new district heating grid at reasonable cost. Also, a good and functioning
social network is expected in the newly involved villages. The aspect of participation and identi-
fication is necessary to promote the ideas of the project, and to build on the trust between the
local actors. Besides the question of implementing a new supply technology, the dissemination
of the Jühnde model focuses on the active involvement of the village inhabitants and their spe-
cific know-how as well as on their willingness to engage themselves in an operating company.

Within a questionnaire based survey, the expectations of the villagers were evaluated. Besides
the aspects of economical and technical feasibility the issues of environmental concerns and ag-
ricultural framework conditions were the focus of several public events and workshops.

The model’s ecological aims and technological requirements of changing the energy system as a
whole is one of the central objectives.

D.1.2.3 Defining Moments Table
Instead of using the table format we reported the interview as follows:

Did problematic or critical situations occur in the project which was decisive fort its further de-
velopment, or which hampered the project, respectively? (e.g., inclusion of specific groups,
technology selection, the project itself)

The involvement of farmers became a critical issue because of the prices of the feedstock
for the biogas plant - there is competition with sales for fodder which offers potentially
higher returns. A second reason is the potential danger of innovation without covering
economical risks (how will these new energy strategies be developed? Farmers aren’t yet
familiar with opportunities and risks of the new ‘energy’ business).
Moreover, it seems to be a question of mentality (fear of loosing influence if ‘just’ supplier
of feedstock to a non-agro business).
As the basic idea of the project was meant to support the rural area and small agro-
businesses, these are rather unexpected problems, but they were identified in a very early
in the project stage.
Key actors on the farmers side:


172
Large landowners (partly aristocratic)
Kreislandwirt (farmer of the county); association of farmers (Landvolk)
The second problem area is land use conflicts (nature protection interests vs. the expan-
sion of maize/corn)
Key actors: nature protection NGO on the regional level (NABU; BUND) - discussions
might hamper the engagement of farmers and the public support (media, regional discus-
sion)

Describe these situations in more detail! What happened? (Brief description of the situation/the
conflict)
see above

What was the cause/trigger of the conflict situation? (Why did this happen?)
see above

Did these causes originate from within the project context, or did negative influences come from
the outside? (e.g., rising raw material prices, decisions within the project group)

Most of the problems mentioned above are externally driven

How did the conflicts impact the further project course? (e.g., positive or negative, hampering
or supportive- brief description of the effect)

They hampered the involvement of farmers with the consequence that more and detailed
expertise is needed

Were project elements changed? (e.g. changes of technology, other actors, adjustment in the
project management)

More flexibility in the contracts, adaptation of the calculation (guaranteed prices for bio-
mass, longer-term price adjustment mechanisms etc.)

How did the project management deal with these situations?

• Intense discussions with all interest groups and key actors
• More information and transparency on all issues
Offering individual solutions

How did the Project Manager react? Should he/she have reacted differently?

See above, adequate management / no other choices

Did the event lead to complications outside of the project?

Political discussion about nature protection areas, what and how far-reaching should cul-
tural land be included in nature protection zones (restrictions of land use and cultivation;
bird protection)

Have existing and already discussed conflicts still an influence on the project development?
Yes, more intense discussion and independent information are needed




                                                                                               173
D.1.2.4 Actors Table
Actor        Identification                      Interest in Participation                               Social Integration                                  Communication       Conflicts
             Position within     description     expectations      motivation   Project ac-    formal     Which different      key ac-    Contribution       Do actor-group      In which con-
             the project         of actor’s                        (high, me-   tivities       (f) and    roles the actor      tor        to outreach        related commu-      flicts is the
                                 role                              dium, low)                  informal takes?                 (yes/no)                      nication path-      actor in-
                                                                                               (i) influ-                                                    ways exist?         volved?
                                                                                               ence on
                                                                                               the pro-
                                                                                               ject
Mayor        Representative,     Informs the     Aims for eco-     high         Moderator,     f+i       Inhabitant, politi-   yes        Acceptance         With all actors     Convincement
             contact broker      citizenship,    nomic prosper-                 stakeholder              cian, stakeholder                within all vil-                        within local
                                 heads meet-     ity of his vil-                within work-                                              lage inhabitants                       parliament,
                                 ings, pro-      lage,energy                    ing group                                                                                        financing prob-
                                 vides public    independence,                  public rela-                                                                                     lems
                                 information     environmental                  tions
                                                 protection
Village      active actors,      Participation   Independent       high         Development    f+i       Investor,             yes        Formation of a     Village meetings,   Energy price
inhabitant   future investors,   in planning     energy supply                  of project               stakeholder,                     cooperative        local working       development,
             stakeholder, co-    and financ-                                    planning and             planer, energy                                      groups              energy security
             operative stake-    ing phase                                      visions                  client
             holder



IZNE         Support of the      village meet-   Smooth course     high         Promoter,      i         Consultant, mod-      yes        Implementation With all actors         Initiator of the
             project manager     ings, mod-      of events,                     moderator,               erator, contractor               of the next steps                      project and
                                 eration, sci-   sound imple-                   organiser                                                                                        contractor, ac-
                                 entific sup-    mentation                                                                                                                       ceptance, posi-
                                 port of work-                                                                                                                                   tion within the
                                 ing groups                                                                                                                                      project

Regional     observer            Lobbyist        Improvement       medium                      i         critic                no         Information        Events, position-   Land use
NGO                                              of project struc-                                                                        events             ing papers
                                                 tures




174
Actor           Identification                   Interest in Participation                                Social Integration                                 Communication Conflicts
                Position         description     expectations      motiva-     Project     formal (f)     Which different        key actor   Contribution Do actor-group       In which
                within the       of actor’s                        tion (high, activities  and in-        roles the actor        (yes/no)    to outreach  related commu-       conflicts is
                project          role                              medium,                 formal (i)     takes?                                          nication path-       the actor
                                                                   low)                    influence                                                      ways exist?          involved?
                                                                                           on the
                                                                                           project
Engineering     contractor       Backup of       Income, image     high        Consultant, i              Consultant, con-       yes         Feasibility     Village meet-     Position
firm                             planning                                      moderator,                 tractor                            study           ings, local work- within the
                                 basics, sup-                                  organisa-                                                                     ing groups        project, ac-
                                 port of local                                 tion                                                                                            ceptance
                                 working
                                 groups
manufacturers contractor       Working in        New operating     medium                                                        no                                            Nothing visi-
                               the villages      area                                                                                                                          ble
External con-   Information on Functional        Implementation    low         Public        Only indi-   No involvement         no          Scenario de-    Workshops
sultant         request        consulting        of the project                events,       rectly                                          velopment
                               for PM and        idea                          speeches
                               stakeholder
County staff    Project man-     promoter        Regional devel-   high         Control-     f+i          Initiator, observer,   yes         Sustainable     Management        nature con-
                ager, fund                       opment, project                ling, man-                consultant                         projects        group, central    servation,
                                                 implementation                 agement                                                                      planning group    economy
Farmers rep-    stakeholder      Energy sup-     Economical re-    medium                    i            Stakeholder, critic    yes         Contracts be-   Village meetings Economical
resentative                      plier           silience, new                                                                               tween coop-                      competition
                                                 operating area                                                                              erative and
                                                                                                                                             farmers
peasantry       Consultant,      Consultant      Image, benefit in medium       Interest     i            Consultant, critic     yes         Information,    Meetings, mail    Loss of influ-
                observer         of farmers      competence                     group                                                        consulting                        ence




                                                                                                                                                                                        175
D.1.3 Step 2: Vision building
D.1.3.1 The project manager’s present vision

Starting point for the PM is the county’s general - and politically based - vision of supporting
the economic and societal welfare of the rural area in the Southwest of Göttingen, and the idea
of IZNE8 of local energy-independence by using biomass.

Economically, a new market for farmers delivering biomass should be created in addition to the
demand for traditional agricultural crops. Selling crops and forestry residues as bioenergy cre-
ates a new income base for local farmers which is independent from the fluctuations of the tradi-
tional agricultural markets, and supports regional welfare. The main thesis was that the overall
effect on the region’s and county's balance of trade will turn out positive, as payments for oil
and natural gas ‘imports’ are reduced, and people’s money will be re-invested in local and re-
gional facilities. While in other regions, biomass plants are already widespread, the Southwest
part of the county has yet a relevant untapped potential. The county of Göttingen especially of-
fers a local agricultural supply structure with the necessary quantity of biomass production.

The initial idea was to transfer the ‘model’ of an entirely bioenergy-supplied village (Jühnde) to
five other villages in the county. During the phase of acquisition of these projects, the PM’s first
outline had to be changed, as the interest of potential participants was overwhelming. The dy-
namics of discussions in the villages lead the responsible planning group (and the PM) to in-
crease the number of funded villages9 up to ten, with two joint projects in two of the participat-
ing villages.

In October 2006, every household received a questionnaire on energy consumption and willing-
ness to participate in a local operating company. On the base of this information, the planning
group - together with the PM and the county’s representatives - selected the participants. In
mid-November, the villages were informed about the selection results.

A local consulting firm is currently developing the feasibility studies for the 8 selected villages,
with one combined study involving two villages. In parallel, the planning group consults with
the village inhabitants within the framework of local working groups, addressing different top-
ics of visions. The working groups develop village-specific aspects which are necessary for the
implementation of the project idea. Meanwhile, all villages founded operating companies. Pre-
contracts with farmers and potential clients are in preparation to secure the further implementa-
tion of the bioenergy system. One critical aspect concerns the situation of the agricultural mar-
ket: The long-term drought in central-western Europe (only little rain during springtime) to-
gether with a high demand for food and feed on the world markets lead to increasing prices for
agricultural products, and bioenergy respectively.

In general, price adjustment clauses in contracts could hedge the risks imposed by an increasing
demand for energy and food crops, but the exact structure of price indexing is not yet agreed, so
that the overall market uncertainties influence and slow down the decisions of the local farmers.
Nevertheless, their region-wide resources are necessary for the implementation of the bioenergy
village vision which aims at the regional provision.

In fall 2007, the planning group, the county and the PM will decide on the investment details.
After that, the detailed planning and official licensing procedures will start. In spring 2008, the
construction and investment phase will begin. The bioenergy heat supply is planned to start in
late 2008.


8
    Scientist group at the University of Göttingen
9
    The County and the LEADER+ programme offer aid money to prepare a feasibility study for every local project.


176
D.1.3.2 The social network map




D.1.3.3 Synthesis writing
The demonstration project builds upon an existing actor network, the structure of which is al-
ready very complex. Its focus is on the district of Göttingen which brings together the different
actors as project manager. Particularly close contact and cooperation takes place with the may-
ors, the residents, and the local supporting organisations of the respective villages that have re-
cently been founded by the residents. There is also a regular exchange of information between
the ministries as the funding authorities (in particular the BMELV, the Federal Ministry of
Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection) as well as with the local engineering firm which
provides technical support for the preceding project as well as the one at hand. In addition, the
Interdisciplinary Centre for Sustainable Development (IZNE), the village mayors and residents
are working in close cooperation. For the implementation of the project, the village mayors are
the important contacts and intermediaries for science, the district administration and policy. In
turn the mayor activates the citizens in their communities for the project implementation. A
multitude of further actors make up the existing actor network, which is currently more or less
in contact with one another (see Paragraph D.1.3.2.)

The future social network map shows the vision of the project manager as to how the actor net-
work could look in the future (see Paragraph D.13.7). In this vision, the IZNE no longer plays a
role as scientific actor because the project can now operate by itself. On the fringes there are
also actors from science who serve as consultants, but who are only incorporated when required.
As previously, the district is located at the centre of the network. Contact remains strong be-
tween the district, the ministries, the local companies as well as the mayors. Additionally, there
is now also a strong link to the group of external consultants. They belong to various fields and
can encompass practitioners as well as scientific experts. The network links to the farmers as
resource producers themselves as well as to the nature conservation organisations are stronger.
In this regard, the network concentrates on sustainability standards which are discussed and de-
termined jointly. As is the case in the current actor constellation, the residents themselves play a
fundamental role. They not only act closely with their mayor, but also work with the local com-
panies which handle their energy supply, i.e. the residents partly take the supply and economic


                                                                                               177
activities into their own hands. It is the general wish of the project manager that the aspects of
policy, environment, regional culture and technology are addressed together in order to guaran-
tee successful project implementation.


D.1.3.4 The project manager’s future vision

With economic growth remaining comparatively low in Germany, the renewable sector is an
important driver for new income, and employment. With the surge of oil and gas prices in 2004-
2006, renewables and especially biomass became interesting options for private investors as
well as corporate finance, and investment fonds. With the adjustment of the EEG feed-in tariffs
e.g. for biomass-based electricity, further sustained growth is expected in the next years.

Since the EEG 2004 amendment, a rapid growth - among other RES - of biomass electricity oc-
curred, especially for waste wood, and biogas - the latter mainly from bioenergy crops (maize),
and manure. With the upcoming amendment of the EEG in 2008, biomass electricity and bio-
mass cogeneration is expected to rise further.

Besides the EEG-driven expansion of bioelectricity, the German Government’s support schemes
also fastened the development of biomass for heat production. To increase the market shares, to
reduce the system costs, and to improve the overall cost-effectiveness of systems which utilize
renewable energy sources, the Market Stimulation Program was introduced by the German gov-
ernment in 1999.

The current promotion scheme within this program provides different support for the various
biomass options in the heat market (direct subsidies for investments depending on size, and
technology) and will be continued in the next years.

Further measures for the promotion of biomass heating are discussed in Germany, especially a
quota model for renewable heat which will most probably be implemented in a ‘Renewable
Heat Act’ in late 2007/early 2008.

The interest of the EU on RES is increasing in the view of climate protection targets, with the
Council Decision of March 2007 to introduce a binding renewable energy quote of 20% by
2020 being a significant landmark.

The national as well as local dependence on oil and gas imports will be decreased accordingly,
so that positive effects on the security of supply are to be expected. Due to the fact that the oil
prices are expected to remain on a relatively constant high level, the supply of RES in local re-
gions will become more and more competitive.

Relevant stakeholder within the future vision is the EU and the national government as promo-
tional sponsors and legislators. Power authorities have to realise their sustainable responsibility.
Farmers and investors assure the usage of resources and the implementation of new technology.
In the meantime, 80% of the county’s villages are actively involved in different energy coopera-
tives. The income of local farmers is stabilized through the provision of biomass for heat and
electricity. The cultivation is guided by a newly revised feed-in regulation which offers stan-
dards for nature protection. Further value added is gained by several tourist activities offered by
local actors. Local inhabitants and local authorities play an important role - partially as new en-
trepreneurs - to support the projects with ideas




178
D.1.3.5 Synthesis writing

Storyline to start the stakeholder vision building (version group 1)
Energy farmer and operations manager Norbert Werum looks at his surroundings with a sense
of satisfaction. ‘The machine has been operating well for 2 months without malfunction or
complaint, all of the teething problems that we had with the new unit have finally been solved.
The district heating customers can rely on us.’ Norbert W. is one of the pioneers from the early
2000s who as made the transition from farmer to energy farmer. In addition to his farm, he has
built a certified biogas plant together with four other farmers in the near vicinity and inhabitants
of the neighbouring village. ‘Financially, so it must have been around the end of 2009,’ Werum
recalls. ‘Then it suddenly seemed like a good idea to cultivate energy crops and produce elec-
tricity from them. In the meantime we’ve had to upgrade our first unit. ‘He and his colleagues
have been successful energy entrepreneurs for 10 years now; as a result of fair contracts with
their neighbours, they are not dependent on world market prices. ‘This new branch of business
has also safeguarded livelihoods in agriculture,’ says Werum’s colleague Freidbert Kaiser of the
farmer’s union.


D.1.3.6 Creating a vision title

‘Leben und Landwirtschaft in der Region 2020’

D.1.3.7 Future social network map




D.1.3.8 The stakeholder future visions
Developing visions and ideas for the future was the intention of a stakeholder workshop in Göt-
tingen. The workshop was divided into three phases:
(1) Introduction and impulse statement by consultant
(2) Preparation of two working groups
(3) Working groups



                                                                                               179
Within the working groups the moderator collected questions. Afterwards the group started a
vision building process introduced by a storyline (PM vision) to develop new dimensions of the
future. To confront the stakeholders with the PM Vision, Oeko-Institut elaborated two different
storylines representing the context of the two stakeholder groups ‘farmers’ and ‘customers’. At
the end of the workshop, the participants of the working groups evaluated analytical dimensions
(poles) by assigning indicators of relevance through scoring. The results focused on the ‘cus-
tomers’ and the ‘farmers’ present and future visions which are outlined in the following two ta-
bles.




Table D.1 Customers Group Vision
Analytical Dimension              Present Vision                Future Vision
Livelihood and Work               Added value for the region;   Increasing living standard,
(Socio-cultural pole, economic    SME                           commercial parks, new firms
pole)
Energy Supply                     World market prices           Bioenergy prices independent
(techno-scientific pole, economic development for wheat etc.    from oil price
pole)                             secure access to biomass      financial and technical support
                                  supply
Social/Culture                    Local companies,              Positive development through
(socio-cultural pole)             cooperatives                  social cohesion + cooperation,
                                                                new infrastructure (grid)
Economy/Agriculture (economic Common support for                Farmers as regional suppliers,
pole, political regulation pole, farmers, cooperation of        more involvement of the
environmental pole)              operators                      farmers


Table D.2 Farmers Group Vision
Analytical Dimension              Present Vision             Future Vision
Livelihood and Work               Perspective for            cooperation of farmers,
(Socio-cultural pole, economic    small/medium scale         financial relief for RES
pole)                             farming; subsidies for     mobility is of high importance;
                                  energy crops
Energy Supply                     bioenergy has a small/     energy storage and efficiency of
(techno-scientific pole, economic medium share on the energy high importance
pole)                             supply
Social/Culture                    Ongoing „rural exodus’     Regional development of public
(socio-cultural pole)                                        transport, innovative
                                                             infrastructure
Economy/Agriculture (economic no monoculture, aiming at employment through supply of
pole, political regulation pole,  Biodiversity               RES; Biodiversity secured
environmental pole)




180
Table D.3 Key Changes Table
Analytical Dimen- ‘Leben und Landwirtschaft in ‘Leben und Landwirtschaft in der Region
sions               der Region 2020 - Step 1’      2020 - Step 2’
Techno-Scientific Energy independent villages Energy independent county on the basis of a
Pole                on the basis of bioenergy      mix of renewables with the main focus on
                    heating; intermediary          bioenergy for heating and electricity;
Political-          Renewable Energy Law, mar- Renewable Energy Law, Renewable Heating
Regulation Pole ket stimulation program by Law, Feed-in regulations with nature protec-
                    economical incentives          tion standards
Economic Pole       New market for farmers and Security of supply through RES, guarantee of
                    rural development), regional competitive prices for all RES suppliers, en-
                    business cycle; operating      trepreneurs
                    companies
Socio-cultural Pole Societal dialogue and partici- involvement of inhabitants and other stake-
                    pation; working groups         holders, increasing quality of life through new
                                                   income sources and social cohesion; inhabi-
                                                   tants in the tourist +energy business
Environmental-      Plant diversity, climate pro- enhanced greenhouse-gas reduction (40% re-
Sustainability Pole tection, reduction of CO2      duction in 2020 for Germany), biodiversity
                    emissions; NGO

D.1.3.9 The stakeholder synthesis writing
The socio-cultural and economic poles were combined into the analytical dimension ‘livelihood
and work’. The working group considered „added value for the region’, especially for small and
medium sized enterprises, as relevant parts of their vision.

In the long term, they aim for a higher standard of living and an increasing number of commer-
cial parks and firms. The techno-scientific pole and parts of the economic pole define the ‘en-
ergy supply’ dimension. In the short term, rising world-market prices for wheat etc. have high
importance for the stakeholders, and the group wishes to de-couple bioenergy prices from oil
prices. The socio-cultural dimension of the vision is expressed in the thoughts on local compa-
nies’ positive developments through social cohesion and cooperation, which would requite to
built up respective infrastructures in the region. The dimension ‘Economy/Agriculture’ refers to
the economic, political, regulation, and environmental poles. The present vision includes sup-
port for farmers and cooperation of operators. More involvement of the farmers in regional bio-
energy processes is a future vision of the working group.

For the farmers group, the present vision within the ‘livelihood and work’ dimension concerns
small and medium-scale farming and subsidies for energy crops. In the long term, the group
wish cooperation of farmers and financial relief for supplying RES10. The dimension ‘energy
supply’ includes the future vision of energy storage and energy efficiency measures together
with the mix of RES.

The social/cultural dimension is reflected in the ongoing ‘rural exodus’, at least in the short and
medium-term. In the longer term, regional development of public transport and an innovative
infrastructure are important future aspects. Considering the economy/agriculture pole, the work-
ing group considered agrobiodiversity (multiple crops and cropping schemes) as important in
the medium- and longer term, and called for an economic acknowledgement of addressing na-
ture protection concern. Another future aspect is based on employment effects through the sup-
ply of RES.

10
     Another important aspect within this context is the biofuels/transport/mobility nexus which could be considered in
     future planning processes.


                                                                                                                  181
D.1.3.10        The stakeholder vision titles
‘Leben und Landwirtschaft in der Region 2020 Step 2’

D.1.3.11        The stakeholder social networks
See Paragraph D.1.3.7.

D.1.3.12        BAU
Analytical Dimension             BAU implications
Livelihood and Work              Very slow change (heating mix nearly constant; low effi-
(socio-cultural + economic pole) ciency gains); traditional division of labor (customers vs.
                                 suppliers)
Energy Supply                    Traditional technology mix; simple market orientation of
(techno-scientific + economicsuppliers (price competition); interaction with customers
pole)                            mainly via tariffs
Social/Culture                   Conservative orientation of rural inhabitants; no call for in-
(socio-cultural pole)            novation; individual „coping’ strategies
Economy/Agriculture              Cultivation of feed & food crops; forest residues mostly un-
(economic, political regulation +used; moderate rise of fossil energy & agricultural commod-
environmental pole)              ity prices




182
D.1.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
D.1.4.1 The conflicting issues table


Visions             Evaluation Points
                    Infrastructure         Economy                  Environment             Social Issues               Policy Issues           Representativeness
                                           Cultivation of                                   Very slow change
                                           feed&food crops;                                 (heating mix nearly
                                           forest residues                                  constant; low effi-
                                           mostly unused;                                   ciency gains); tradi-
                    Traditional technol- moderate rise of fos-                              tional division of la-
                    ogy mix; simple        sil energy & agricul-                            bour (customers vs.
                    market orientation     tural commodity                                  suppliers); Conserva-
                    of suppliers (price    prices; traditional      Cultivation of          tive orientation of rural
                    competition); inter- division of labour         feed&food crops;        inhabitants; no call for     traditional division
                    action with custom- (customers vs. sup-         forest residues         innovation; individual      of labour (customers
BAU (no project)    ers mainly via tariffs pliers);                 mostly unused;          „coping’ strategies         vs. suppliers);
                    Energy independent
                    villages on the basis New market for            Plant diversity, cli-
                    of bioenergy heat-     farmers and there-       mate protection, re-    Civil society dialogue,
                    ing, changing the      fore the support for     duction of CO2          participation of all in-
                    energy system for      local agriculture (ru-   emissions; NGO in-      terested inhabitants        Renewable Energy
                    more entire villages, ral development),         volved through the      and other stakeholders,     Law, market stimu-
                    scientific Intermedi- regional business         question of protec-     quality of life, com-       lation program by
                    ary (content-wise,     cycle; farmers, in-      tive aspects (use of    munity identity, social     economical incen-
                    organizational,        habitants, operating     land and prerequi-      cohesion; working           tives, County ad-
PM Present Vision   moderator)             companies                sites of cultivation)   groups                      ministration




                                                                                                                                                              183
Visions              Evaluation Points
                     Infrastructure         Economy               Environment           Social Issues              Policy Issues         Representativeness
                                                                                        Participation and in-
                                                                                        volvement of inhabi-
                                                                                        tants and other stake-
                                                                                        holders, increasing of
                     Energy independent                                                 life quality in the
                     county on the basis    Security of supply                          county through a high      Renewable Energy
                     of a mix of renew-     through RES, guar- Reaching of en-          level of new income        Law, Renewable
                     able energies with     antee of competitive hanced greenhouse- sources and social co-         Heating Law, Feed-
                     the main focus on      prices for all renew- gas reduction targets hesion ; inhabitants       in regulations with
                     bioenergy for heat-    able energy suppli- (40% reduction in       working in the tourist     nature protection
PM Future Vision     ing and electricity    ers                   2020 for Germany) business                       standards
                                            common support for
                                            farmers, cooperation environmental and
                    world price devel-      of operators; SME, climate protection       added value for the re-                          very high as result
‘Customers’ present opment wheat etc.       added value for the through the use of      gion; local companies,                           of a groups' discus-
Vision              ;Ensure potential       region;               biomass               cooperation                                      sion
                                                                                        Increasing living stan-
                                            farmers as regional                         dard, positive devel-
                     bioenergy prices in-   suppliers, more in-                         opment through social
                     dependent of oil       volvement of the                            cohesion + coopera-                              very high as result
‘Customers’ future   price; financial and   farmers; commercial                         tion, new infrastructure                         of a groups' discus-
Vision               technical support      parks, new firms;                           (grid)                                           sion

                                          Perspective for                               Perspective for
                     bioenergy has a      small/medium scale      no monoculture,       small/medium scale                               very high as result
‘Farmers’ present    small/ medium share farming; subsidies       aiming at Biodiver-   farming; Ongoing „ru-                            of a groups' discus-
Vision               on the energy supply for energy crops;       sity                  ral migration’                                   sion



184
Visions              Evaluation Points
                     Infrastructure          Economy                 Environment              Social Issues            Policy Issues          Representativeness

                     energy storage and
                     efficiency of high                                              cooperation of farmers,
                     importance; Re-                                                 financial relief for    mobility is of high
‘Farmers’ future Vi- gional development      employment through                      RES; stop of rural mi- importance; innova-
sion                 of public transport     supply of RES;     Biodiversity secured gration                 tive infrastructure
                                                                     Plant diversity,
                                             world market prices:    NGO involved
                                             farmers shut down       through the question
                     concept and size of     the supply of bio-      of protective aspects    social exclusion of
                     the heating system,     mass; new feed-in       (use of land and pre-    farmers and local con-
                     economy of heating      tariff for heat and     requisites of cultiva-   flicts might derive if   project impulse with
                     systems depends in-     electricity from bio-   tion), oppose the        the conflict regarding   aid money; national
                     ter alia on the price   energy; negociation     cultivation of energy    biomass supply con-      regulation on stan-
Key issues           for reference case      of contracts            plants                   tinues                   dards




                                                                                                                                                            185
D.1.4.2 The issues ranking table
Issue                                                                                   Description
farmers supply (change of prios)             increasing prices for cereals, while changing the economic priorities the sufficient supply of
                                             regional biomass is endangered
NGO/conditions of cultivation/standards of   NGO oppose the cultivation of energy plants, they assume the danger of mono-cropping and
cultivation                                  nature destortion / a national regulation and standard will be implemented and has to be ad-
                                             justed to the regional level and requirement
feed-in-tariff                               new feed-in tariffs as well as new regulations for heat are expected on the national level
Public fund                                  project impulses; necessary aid money from EU and national programs, etc.
economy of heating system                    concept and size of the heating system depend from the successful acquisition of users as well
                                             as from the supply of biomass
farmers and local conflicts                  social exclusion of farmers and local conflicts might derive if farmers don't provide biomass
                                             for regional use
Contracts                                    Willingness to long-term contracts is missing
national standards of cultivation            national standards are expected and have to be adjusted
                                                                                                                                              Rank with
Issue/Features                                   Urgency               Importance                Sum                Sum Weighted              Weighting
farmers supply                                      4                      4                      8                     16                        1
NGO/conditions of cultivation /adjustment           2                      3                      5                     10                        4
of national standards
feed-in-tariff                                       2                      3                     5                         5                    6
(national) standards of cultivation                  2                      4                     6                         6                    5
Public fund                                          3                      3                     6                        12                    3
heating system                                       2                      4                     6                        12                    3
farmers and local conflicts                          1                      4                     5                        10                    4
Contracts                                            3                      4                     7                        14                    2




186
Score                                         Description
1                                                 low
2                                               medium
3                                                high
4                                              very high
                           Weighting factor
issues on national level                          1
issues on local level                             2

D.1.4.3 Strategic issues graph




                                                            187
                                 Urgency (high)                                   Farmers supply
                                                      4

                      IV                                                         I
                                                                         Aid money              Contracts
                                                      3


           1                            2                                  3                          4

 Importance (low)                                                                             Importance (high)
                                                                      NGO
                                                      2                                           Heating system (e/s)
                                                                    Feed-in tariff
                                                                                         national Standards of
                      III                                                        II      Cultivation
                                                                                               Farmer/local conflicts
                                                      1

                                                          Urgency (low)
Quadrant I: the project manager should immediately act upon these issues
Quadrant II: the project manager should develop an action strategy and planning to deal with these issues in the coming month/years
Quadrant III: the project manager should not deal with these issues
Quadrant IV: these issues need a defensive strategy, as they are urgent, but not important for the project manager (they might be important to other stake-
holders!)




188
D.1.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options
D.1.5.1 Issues/solution table
Key Issue                                                                               Possible Solution


                                    Equipment design / environment        knowledge gap reduction       Financial incentives            Further Issues
                                              adaption                    / expert assessment of im-
                                                                                     pact

farmers supply                      strengthen the role of farmers as a     more information about          feed-in tariffs       farmers with best practise as
                                        part of the local community        land use options (area of                             role model; farmer should not
                                                                            land use, time horizon)                              only be seen as an economical
                                                                                                                                            ‘subject’
NGO / implementation of na-         development of common goals by          information workshop
tional cultivation standards        NGO, farmers and association rep-
                                    resentatives, regional development
                                            concepts as a basis
feed-in tariff                                                            has to be dealt with in the   see the results of the
                                                                          feasibility studies and the     feasibility study
                                                                             different scenarios
national standards of cultivation   optional: regional agreements (e.g.   Implementation of expert                                 Labelling at regional level
                                      amendment to the agreement)               workshops                                        (implementation of specified
                                                                                                                                      quality standards)
project impulse with public funds   regional development concepts as a       who will allocate aid      active acquisition in
                                                   basis                      money (and when)          cooperation with vil-
                                                                                                                lages
Key Issue                                                                               Possible Solution


                                    Equipment design / environment        knowledge gap reduction       Financial incentives            Further Issues


                                                                                                                                                           189
                                                  adaption                 / expert assessment of im-
                                                                                        pact
economy of heating system             technical adjustment if necessary    presentation and discussion
                                              (scale of system)              of alternative supply sys-
                                                                                        tems
farmers and local conflicts                   mediation needed             social cohesion conflict has                            biomass production in com-
                                                                              to be faced by planning                              parison with animal process-
                                                                             group and ‘Stammtisch’                                             ing
willingness to long-term contracts        adjustment of conditions         imparting the pros and cons                              promote farmers with best
                                                                              of long-term contracts,                                 practise as role model
                                                                            show risks under different
                                                                                     scenarios

D.1.5.2 Solution ranking table
Solution                      Description
strengthen role of farmers    strengthen the role of the farmers as a part of the local society
more information              more information about land use options (area of land, time horizon)
feed-in tariffs               financial incentives for biomass producer
best practise model           farmers with best practise as role model, they should not only be seen as an economical subject, but as innovative and trendsetting
common goals                  development of common goals by NGO, farmers and association representatives, regional development concepts as a basis
information workshop          special prepared workshop for NGO etc. to solve conflicts and thinking barriers, know how building
economical calculation        feed-in-tariffs has to be dealt with in the feasibility studies and the different scenarios
feasibility study             results support the investment process
regional agreements           regional agreements for standards of cultivation, regional labelling for a better identification
public funds                  project impulses by public funds, active acquisition
economy of heating system     technical adjustment (scale of system, alternative supply systems in the view of economy and ecology
farmers conflicts             together with local conflicts, mediation needed, social cohesion conflict has to be faced by planning group and ‘Stammtisch’
biomass production            in comparison with animal processing
contracts                     willingness to long-term contracts, adjustment of conditions, imparting pros and cons, show ris under different scenarios


190
Issue/features                             Strategic Impact             Costs/benefits Preferred Process   Rank
                             urgent      necessary     feasible   fit   costs benefits
strengthen role of farmers     4             4            4        2      1       4            4             3
more information               3             4            4        4      2       4            4             2
feed-in tariffs                1             1            1        1      1       3            2            11
best practise model            2             2            2        2      1       2            2             9
common goals                   4             2            3        2      1       2            3            7
information workshop           4             4            4        4      2       4            4             1
economical calculation         2             4            2        3      2       2            2             6
feasibility study              3             3            4        4      3       2            2             3
regional agreements            2             3            4        2      1       3            4             6
public funds                   2             3            2        2      1       3            2            8
economy of heating system      2             3            4        3      1       3            2             5
farmers conflicts              4             4            3        2      1       1            4             6
biomass production             2             2            1        1      2       2            1            10
contracts                      4             4            2        2      1       4            2             4

Score                                 Description
1                                     low (+ impact)
2                                     medium (+ impact)
3                                     high (+impact)
4                                     very high (+impact)
regional level
national level

D.1.5.3 Portfolio of options




                                                                                                                  191
D.1.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
D.1.6.1 The informative dossier for participants
Instead of a dossier the consultant prepared an elaborated invitation letter. Additionally a hand-
out was provided to the participants. This is due to the fact that the existing feasibility studies
guaranteed a common information level of all involved participants. Therefore a dossier was not
needed.

                               Workshop 30 November 2007:
                     ‘The bioenergy villages take the next steps!’

Introduction
The feasibility studies for all selected villages have been completed. Within the villages, impor-
tant steps have been taken. At present they support the forthcoming implementation of the pro-
ject.
The political and the economic basic conditions are also changing. The revision of the Renew-
able Energy Sources Act is due soon. Furthermore, the requirements on nature conservation will
be discussed.
What do the parameters look like? What is happening within the district? How can the vil-
lages/communities react? How can the villages protect themselves? How can the villages coop-
eratively reduce their risk and at the same time create a renewable future for them?
What is the purpose of the new Renewable Energy Sources Act? What risks are contained
therein regarding an economical operation of the biomass plants? Do we have enough biomass
resources at affordable prices? What are the requirements of nature conservation? Who is pay-
ing for nature conservation? Do we incorporate all relevant actors? What is the right strategy for
a successful project implementation?
These are important questions that we want to discuss with all interested participants from all
villages today in order to find possible solutions. Together we want to find cooperative means
for a sustainable bioenergy usage.

Hopes and Visions
Investments into the future represent not only new challenges for visionaries. They also include
aims and hopes for the short or longer term future. Within the scope of a visions-workshop in
April 2007, the workshop participants discussed their ideas of a bioenergy future.
Two groups of actors have emerged: on one side there was the group of village inhabitants who
will be future heating costumers and at the same time investors, too. On the other side there was
the group of biomass producers, the farmers.
On one point all participants were in agreement: the sustainable use of bioenergy and the inde-
pendence from oil and gas will increase the regional added value. This is a question of use,
which can be an advantage for all project actors involved. With the possible added value the
group of village inhabitants associated an increasing living standard within the region, the im-
plementation of a new infrastructure and the settling of new firms and enterprises in the area.
The impact of the bioenergy should expand into many other economic sectors. Therefore, the
majority of the population can profit as a result.

Regarding the energy supply the group wished for the price of bioenergy to be independent
from the price of oil. Also financial support for credit incentives in the case of new heating
techniques or technical support during the operation of the heating system was requested.All vi-
sions merged on one point: in addition to the economic aspects, the group of inhabitants is hop-
ing for a positive development in the case of social cohesion within the village community and
the region. This matter is combined with the hope that farmers and therefore energy producers
are going to become better integrated within the community. The new structures on both the
technical and the economic side should increase the quality of life for all village inhabitants.


192
Furthermore, it should increase social cooperation, the sense of community as well as respect
for one’s neighbours in the region.
The visions of the farmers showed a similar tendency, widened by some issues, which are par-
ticular to the farmers’ situation: cooperative work within the agricultural sector, cooperative
work with the costumers and village inhabitants; and public incentives for the cultivation of en-
ergy crops. Closely linked to this was the expansion of the regional infrastructure. Another mat-
ter which cannot be ignored was biodiversity. The economical utilisation of land by the cultiva-
tion of energy crops should not bring about disadvantages for humans or the environment.
The individual perspectives of the workshop participants showed a number of common aims
and visions. The majority of all actors will be able maximise their own benefits.
International development processes currently create conflicts. A significant example in this re-
gard is the increase of the world market prices for crops. In the following, the legal modifica-
tions, requirements of nature conservation and effects on the heating prices that can be expected
will be described.

The new Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) 2008
The following modifications will accompany with the new EEG:
• higher promotion of small plants
• promotion of biogas from liquid manure, reduction of the ‘NaWaRo’ bonus in the case of
   ‘corn-only’
• increasing and tightening of Combined Heat and Power bonus
• open issues: nature conservation bonus, cross compliance.

The following chart is showing: the new EEG get a wider range for the bioenergy villages.

Chart 1: Influence of the new EEG

                                      350
                                            bei 50 €cent/l                                          = Kapitalkosten
                                                                                                    = Marge (3%)
   jährliche Kosten (€ je Haushalt)




                                      300

                                      250

                                      200

                                      150

                                      100

                                       50

                                        0
                                              Öl-Hzg         Bio-Basis, EEG   Bio-Basis, EEG-neu   Bio-Basis, EEG-
                                                                                                      neu+Gülle

Source: Öko-Institut 2007

Scenarios for the county: possible resources and energy price developments
The price developments of recent years tof agricultural products have different influences.
The following figure shows the price dynamic of selected agricultural products.

Chart 2: Price development of agricultural products since 1991




                                                                                                                      193
                                                                                                        Weizen

                                          250                                                           Roggen

                                                                                                        Mais

                                                                                                        Zuckerrübe                   Obergrenze Preis für Mais langfristig
                                          200
 Euro2000 pro t Produktion in der EU-15




                                                                                                                                       entspricht 45 €/t FM für Mais-Silage

                                          150




                                          100




                                                          50




                                                                    0
                                                                             1991   1992    1993     1994   1995     1996   1997    1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003


Source: Öko-Institut 2007,

What happens to the operating efficiency of the plants, if the prices for substrate are increased?
The following figure shows a possible outcome:
Result: If substrate costs increase by 50%, the proceeds of the bioenergy villages will be suffi-
cient when higher oil prices (70 instead of 50 c/l) are also assumed.

Chart 3: Costs of Bioenergy solutions

                                                                    350
                                                                                    bei 70 €cent/l                                                         = Kapitalkosten
                                 jährliche Kosten (€ je Haushalt)




                                                                    300                                                                                    = Marge (3%)


                                                                    250

                                                                    200

                                                                    150

                                                                    100

                                                                        50

                                                                         0
                                                                                      Öl-Hzg                Bio-teuer, EEG         Bio-teuer, EEG-neu     Bio-teuer, EEG-
                                                                                                                                                             neu+Gülle

Source: Öko-Institut 2007.

Requirements of nature conservation
If the challenges of nature conservation are to be met, some changes for the biogas substrate
must be considered:



194
- more crop rotation
- more plant species
- use the material from landscape preservation.
All these conditions involve higher costs. The willingness to pay for nature conservation must
be discussed among suppliers and users.

Chart 4: Costs of Bioenergy solutions inclusive nature conservation supplement
                                      350
                                            bei 50 €cent/l                                             = Kapitalkosten
   jährliche Kosten (€ je Haushalt)




                                      300                                                              = Marge (3%)


                                      250

                                      200

                                      150

                                      100

                                       50

                                        0
                                               Öl-Hzg            Bio-Natur, EEG   Bio-Natur, EEG-neu   Bio-Natur, EEG-
                                                                                                          neu+Gülle

Source: Öko-Institut 2007.

Conclusion and Recommendations
The economical feasibility can be achieved under different basic conditions and in the case of
additional requirements. One of the discussed requirements - to solve a possible conflict be-
tween the cultivation of energy crops and nature conservation - can be resolved by regional
agreements.

Example: a regional agreement can lead to higher achievements with regard to nature conserva-
tion. The bonus can be passed on to the customers.
The new regulation of the amended EEG 2008 provides new planning capacity for investments
within the bioenergy villages as well as for agreeing upon moderate, long-term prices for biogas
substrates and wood with the farmers.
The advantages of a higher added value and better climate protection can be realised by means
of engaging citizens as investors in, as well as customers of, a sustainable energy supply.


D.1.6.2 The workshop report

                                                               Stakeholder Workshop Report
                                                   ‘The bioenergy villages take the next steps!’
                                                             Göttingen, Germany, Nov 30th 2007

Introduction
The workshop in Göttingen was the second CA meeting with stakeholders of the processes for
developing new bioenergy villages, to which the host district invited others within the scope of
its ‘Bioenergy Village Forum’. In all candidate villages, feasibility studies are now available.
Important steps have already been taken in these villages; further implementation is now being



                                                                                                                         195
pursued collectively.
A CA meeting with the project manager and the project partners also took place beforehand
which was tailored towards strategy discussion and workshop preparation. Several of the basic
conditions and the important need for clarification were discussed. The CA six-step project was
also presented.
The goal of the workshop was to:
• specify current and possible future conflicts;
• obtain new information on selected problem areas;
• find common solutions; and
• prepare for the next action steps.

The expectations of the participants:
The 25 participants (from agriculture, administration, environmental associations, science, plan-
ning and residents/operating companies) made the point that a lot has been done in the district in
recent months, but that the basic economic conditions have changed, too. On the federal level,
the amendment of the Federal German Electricity Feed-In Act is due as is an act on the produc-
tion of ‘renewable heat’. In connection with the production of biomass, nature conservation re-
quirements and sustainable cultivation methods are being discussed.

Information
What are the basic conditions precisely? What do they mean for the realisation of bioenergy vil-
lages in the district? How can the villages and future operating companies react to them - how
can they safeguard and collectively minimise their risk, on the one hand, and continue to ac-
tively shape their future on the other hand?
These were the issues and possible conflicts as specified by the stakeholders.
A brief, important initiative with regard to three selected topic areas was given:

1. New Federal German Renewable Energy Act 2008:
With the new Federal REA 2008, the following foreseeable changes for biogas will come about:
• greater support of small installations;
• support of biogas from liquid manure, reduction of the ‘NaWaRo’ bonus in the case of
    „corn-only’;
• increase and tightening of the Combined Heat and Power bonus;
• open issues: nature conservation bonus and minimum crop rotations (cross compliance!)

2. Scenarios for the district: possible basic commodity - and energy price developments
If the price developments of recent years are perused with regard to agricultural products and
basic commodities, very different influences can be seen as taking effect. However: even in the
case of 50% additional costs for the substrate, the revenues for the bioenergy villages are still
good when higher oil prices (70 instead 50 c/l) are also assumed.

3. Nature conservation requirements
If the requirements of nature conservation are to be satisfied, several conditions - alongside lo-
cation issues - need to be taken into account for biogas substrates:
• wider crop rotations;
• more plant types; and the
• use of material from landscape conservation.

This partly involves higher costs. How much is nature conservation ‘worth’ to us? - a consensus
between providers and suppliers is necessary in this regard.

Further questions and discussion
Does the new Federal Renewable Energy Act benefit us or does it contain dangers for the eco-



196
nomic operation of our installations?
It can be shown that, in the case of a 3% margin and a customer density of 70% (heat custom-
ers), an installation can - according to calculations based on average levels - be operated eco-
nomically and the new REA entails positive effects (see attachment).
Will a federal act on renewable heat bring about new additional advantages for us?
These regulations will not bring about an additional economic advantage for the district of Göt-
tingen.
What further support measures could be used?
The federal state of Lower Saxony has passed support guidelines for community local heat
plans (setting up of networks), which could be drawn upon.
Will there be sufficient biomass at affordable prices in the future?
At first glance, the prices on the global market make the decisions of potential biomass suppli-
ers with regard to medium/long-term contracts more difficult. However, the model calculations
show that high substrate prices are economically realisable even in the case of high oil prices.
What nature conservation demands need to be made and who will pay for them?
A wider crop rotation and the use of more plant types, for example, need to be taken into con-
sideration. These represent minimum demands; the whole spectrum of requirements from the
perspective of nature conservation cannot yet be covered.
Is good technical practice in agriculture sufficient in order to meet the new requirements?
There is too little know-how about the sustainable cultivation of energy crops - greater commu-
nication of knowledge is needed in this regard.
Are all the important players on board?
It may be helpful for local nature conservation authorities and associations as well as local rep-
resentatives and representatives from agriculture to come together to share their experiences
with regard to water protection control and the perspectives for FFH protection areas.
Which strategy will lead us to the right solution?
Use of synergies. Approaching the federal level (Environment Minister) with a model sugges-
tion.
Can new customers be acquired on the grounds of climate protection?
Previous experience shows that this is rather not the case.

Group session results
The number one priority is the concern regarding increasing customer density in the villages.
This is the key economic point of departure. All further discussions also foregrounded one spe-
cific aspect: village inhabitants and project management are hoping for a positive development
in terms of social cohesion within the region, alongside economic initiatives. This also requires
that farmers of the region along with the energy suppliers become more integrated in the com-
munity and contribute accordingly.
A further point of importance seemed to be the issue of nature conservation and biodiversity.
The economics of land utilisation by the cultivation of energy crops should not lead to disadvan-
tages for people or the environment (soil).
The following arrangements (recommendations and action plan) were made:
• The first priority is the realisation of and increasing of the number of connections in the vil-
     lages (customer density);
•   it is an initiative of the district, together with nature conservation associations, farmers and
    interested villagers, to examine selected areas from the perspective of nature conservation
    concerns and to determine criteria;
•   dissemination of knowledge with regard to the cultivation of energy crops - starting imme-
    diately in the new villages - will be undertaken; and
•   submission of a model initiative to the Federal German Environment Ministry will be con-
    sidered.




                                                                                               197
Conclusions and external recommendations
The economic feasibility is apparent under various basic conditions and can be accomplished -
also in the case of additional requirements.
A possible conflict - as can arise between the conditions of biomass cultivation and nature con-
servation concerns - can be resolved through regional deals and agreements.
On the basis of a regional agreement it could also be arranged that the farmers receive a bonus
for added performance with regard to nature conservation (use of material from landscape con-
servation, wider crop rotations, other plant types), which is then passed onto the customers
(‘green’ heat).
The new regulations of the draft for the Federal REA amendment 2008 promote continuation of
the preliminary plans for investments in the bioenergy villages as well as agreement with the
farmers on moderate, long-term prices for biogas substrates and wood.
The advantages of higher value added and of climate protection could be realised together by
means of involving citizens as investors in, and customers of, sustainable energy.

Participants
The participants list was made available to the project manager and interested participants.

Contact persons for further enquiries: Uwe R. Fritsche, u.fritsche@oeko.de
Bettina Brohmann / Katja Hünecke, k.hünecke@oeko.de
Our work is supported by the EU Commission: www.createacceptance.net




198
D.1.7 Step 6: Recommendations for Action
D.1.7.1 The Acceptance & Feasibility Table
                                                                      Acceptance
                                                                      (stakeholder re-                             Does it require col-
Key Issue                             Alternative Solution            sponse)                 Type of action       laboration by others?      Feasibility
                             more information about land use op-                         cross compliances,
                             tions (area of land, time horizon);                         meetings to talk about
                             development of common goals by                              water protection and      lower nature conserva-
                             NGO, farmers and association repre-                         protectorates and sus-    tion authority, nature
                             sentatives, regional development                            tainable standards for    conservation associa-
                             concepts as a basis; special prepared                       the region, more in-      tion, representatives of
NGO/conditions of culti-     workshop for NGO etc. to solve con-                         formation about energy    farmers and village in-
vation/standards of cultiva- flicts and thinking barriers, know                          cropping, definition of   habitants, ministry of
tion                         how building                                   mixed        regional conditions       environment                   high
                             financial incentives for biomass pro-
                             ducer, feed-in-tariffs has to be dealt
feed-in-tariff (Renewable with in the feasibility studies and the                        keep in line with the
Energy Sources Act)          different scenarios                           positive      calculation               engineering firm              low
                             project impulses by public funding,
                             active acquisition; submission of a
                             model initiative to the Federal Ger-
                             man Environment Ministry will be                            public funds at the state
public funds                 con-sidered                                   positive      level                     cooperatives, villages      medium
                             technical adjustment (scale of sys-
                             tem, alternative supply systems in
                             the view of economy and ecology,
                             results support the investment proc-                        adaptation of technical
economy of heating system ess                                              positive      implementation            engineering firm            medium
                             willingness to long-term contracts,                         more information about farmer associations,
                             adjustment of conditions, imparting                         regional long-term con- administration (LW-
contracts                    pros and cons,                                 mixed        tracts                  Kammer)                       medium


                                                                                                                                                            199
                                                                        Acceptance
                                                                        (stakeholder re-                            Does it require col-
Key Issue                             Alternative Solution              sponse)                Type of action       laboration by others?      Feasibility
                             The new regulations of the draft for
                             the Federal REA amendment 2008
                             promote continuation of the prelimi-
                             nary plans for investments in the
                             bioenergy villages as well as agree-
price developments on the    ment with the farmers on moderate,                            information about ad-    farmer associations,
world market; Farmers        long-term prices for biogas sub-                              vantages of regional     administration (LW-
supply of biomass            strates and wood.                               positive      long-term contracts      Kammer)                     medium
                             The first priority is the realisation of                      climate protection ar-
                             and increasing of the number of con-                          guments, adaptation of
                             nections in the villages (customer                            technical implementa-
acquisition of customers     density);                                       positive      tion                     cooperatives                  low
There is only little know-
ledge about the sustainable further communication and spread of
cultivation of energy crops knowledge is needed in this regard.               mixed        workshops                research                    medium
                            it is an initiative of the district, to-
                            gether with nature conservation as-
                            sociations, farmers and interested vil-
exchange of information     lagers, to examine selected areas
and experience (nature      from the perspective of nature con-                                                     district administration,
protection standards, land servation concerns and to determine                                                      NGO, villagers, farm-
use)                        criteria                                         positive      stakeholder meetings     ers                           high




200
D.1.7.2 The capacity for action table
                                                      Activities that can only be undertaken in co-   External dynamics that are relevant, but cannot
Activities that can be done today                     operation with others                           be controlled. Monitoring is crucial
acquisition of customers                              definition of regional conditions               development of world market prices
discussion, convincing suppliers and end users, de-   more information about energy cropping, cross
creasing economical risks by contracts                compliances                                     development of resources
                                                      meetings to talk about water protection and pro-
                                                      tectorates and sustainable standards for the re-
keep in line with the calculation                     gion,                                            feed-in-tariffs
adaptation of technical implementation                acquire public funds at the state level          development of public funding
more information about regional long-term contracts   climate protection arguments
                                                      image campaign (national level)

Legend:
                                                      activities are necessary for the survival of the
activities related to option                          project                                          no solution within the power of the project
activities related to option
activities seem reasonable to accomplish with only
limited participation by other parties




                                                                                                                                                     201
D.1.7.3 Short-term action plan

                                                                             Necessary revisions to pro- Necessary interfacing with external
Action                                         Sub-actions                   ject plan                   stakeholders
                                                                             adaptation of feasibility stud-
acquisition of customers                       information and discussion    ies                             Cooperatives
                                                                                                             NGO and district administration,
discussion, convincing suppliers and end users,                                                              farmers association and scientific
decreasing economical risks by contracts        information and discussion   Delay of implementation         knowledge
                                                                             adaptation of feasibility stud-
keep in line with the calculation              feasibility studies           ies                             Engineering firm
                                                                             adaptation of feasibility stud-
adaptation of technical implementation         feasibility studies           ies                             Engineering firm
Provide more information on regional long-
term contracts                                 Elaborate information         Additional activities needed




202
D.1.7.4 Collaboration plan


Actions to be taken together with other stake-
holder                                                 Type of action recommended                           Sub-actions and revisions to existing practises
include more farmers, willingness to long-term         discussion and information, convincing key players intensify information exchange between different ac-
contracts                                              and association representatives                    tors, show risk under different scenarios
project impulses by public funds, active acquisi-
tion                                                   additional activities to gain funding                acquire public funds at the state level

                                                       more information about land use options (area of
regional agreements for standards of cultivation,      land, time horizon); development of common goals
regional labelling for a better identification, more   by NGO, farmers and association representatives, financial incentives for biomass producer, feed-in-
information about energy cropping, cross compli-       workshop for NGO to solve conflicts, know-how    tariffs has to be dealt with in the feasibility studies
ances                                                  building                                         and the different scenarios


meetings to talk about water protection and pro-
tectorates and sustainable standards for the region, definition of regional conditions
Provide climate protection arguments                 image campaign (national and regional level)




                                                                                                                                                              203
D.1.7.5 The long-term monitoring and capacity-building plan
                                                                                                     Subactions and revisions to existing
      Monitoring actions                          Type of action recommended                         practises
      development of world market prices          no influence by regional stakeholder
                                                                                                     work with scientists in the agricultural sec-
      development of resources                    implementation of new cultivation methods,         tor
                                                                                                     working with politicians, organisations,
      feed-in-tariffs                             no influence by regional stakeholder               scientists
                                                  meetings with local banks and savings banks,
                                                  public relations, proposals to national or Euro-   building of own regional funds in coopera-
      development of public funding               pean institutions                                  tion with enterprises etc.

D.1.7.6 The Communication Plan
  Target group                                Type of Stakeholder                              Format of communication
                                                                                               continually meetings and discussion (central planning
  close-by partners                           project partners, inhabitants, cooperatives      group)
  stakeholders with affinity to the project   ministry, associations, NGO                      specific meetings and consultation
  indifferent stakeholders                    farmers, association                             has to be developed
  opposing stakeholders                       farmers                                          has to be developed
                                                                                               continually public meetings, working groups, written in-
  everybody                                                                                    formation




204
D.1.7.7 Evaluation of the CreateAcceptance process
Question                                           Answer Project Manager
What was most memorable about CA process?          Discussion and highlighting of specific conflicting aspects; the scenario building process
What was most difficult or uncomfortable about
the process?                                   parts of the instrument were time consuming and doesn't fit to the projects' advanced status
What have you learned about your project?      the Jühnde dissemination is a very well prepared and accepted project
What have you learned about the context and        All important stakeholder have been on board and world market (price) development can be faced by re-
stakeholders of the project?                       gional solutions
Have you gained any new contacts (allies, in-
formation channels, opponents)?                    partly (few new information channels and contacts)
Are there questions that have been left unan-
swered?                                            The question of how to involve and newly motivate the farmers is still unsolved
Are there things that should have been done dif-
ferently?                                        not in principle, but the frame for the feasibility studies should have been more explicit and transparent
How has the project changed as a consequence
of the Create Acceptance process?                  The vision building process and discussion gave new impulses
Have any new management capabilities been
developed?                                         No, but new information on external influences and scenario paths has been gained




                                                                                                                                                              205
D.2   ZEPP

D.2.1 Step 0: Project typologies and the suitability of the ESTEEM steps
D.2.1.1 Suitability check
 Nr. Question                                                           Rank     Explanation
                                                                        (0-10)
 1    Is this project completely new or a replication of another pro-     3      0=completely new
      ject?                                                                      10=replication of many other projects
 2    Is the local community familiar with this type of technology?       3      0=not familiar at all
                                                                                 10=very familiar
 3    Has the project manager experience with similar projects?           0      0=no experience
                                                                                 10=fully experienced
 4    In what phase of development is the project?                        4      0=project is only an early idea
                                                                                 10=project is in full operation
 5    To what extent can the project be adapted to stakeholder            4      0=everything can still be adapted to stakeholder wishes
      wishes?                                                                    10=nothing can be adapted to stakeholder wishes anymore
 6    Would you characterise the current political and social de-         5      0=very local
      bates as local or global?                                                  10=very global
 7    Is the project manager willing and able to engage in discus-        8      0=not at all
      sions with stakeholders in the planning phase of the project?              10=yes, fully
 8    Is the project manager willing and able to discusse the project     8      0=not at all
      with stakeholders with quite opposite views?                               10=yes, fully
 7    How do you estimate the local socio-economic consequences           6      0=very negative
      of the project?                                                            10=very positive
 8    How do you estimate the national socio-economic conse-              8      0=very negative
      quences of the project?                                                    10=very positive
 9    How do you estimate the local environmental consequences            4      0=very negative
      of the project?                                                            10=very positive
 8    How do you estimate the national environmental conse-               9      0=very negative
      quences of the project?                                                    10=very positive



206
Nr. Question                                                        Rank     Explanation
                                                                    (0-10)
9    How do you estimate the average policy and regulatory con-       0      0=very negative (many adaptations in policy or regulations are required)
     sequences of the project?                                               10=very positive (no adaptations in policy or regulations are required)
10   How would you characterise the point of view of the local        8      0=very negative or unknown
     policy community?                                                       10=very positive
11   How would you characterise the point of view of the national     5      0=very negative or unknown
     policy community?                                                       10=very positive
12   How would you characterise the point of view of NGO's?           3      0=very negative or unknown
                                                                             10=very positive
13   How would you characterise the point of view of local citi-      0      0=very negative or unknown
     zens?                                                                   10=very positive
14   How would you characterise the point of the general public?      0      0=very negative or unknown
                                                                             10=very positive




                                                                                                                                                    207
                      Netherlands - ZEPP




                         Experience with similar
                                projects                          Experience with similar projects:
                                                                  A high score means that the project manager and stakeholders are not
                                                                  yet very familiar with this kind of technology and it is therefore recom-
                                                                  manded to use ESTEEM

                                                                  Adaptability:
                                                                  A high score means that the project can still be adapted to stakeholder
                                                                  wishes and that it is therefore recommended to use ESTEEM
  Social acceptance                                Adaptability

                                                                  Positive project impact:
                                                                  A high score means that there are negative impacts expected and is is
                                                                  therefore recommanded to use ESTEEM

                                                                  Social acceptance:
                                                                  A high score means there is currently limited social acceptance for this
                         Positive project impact                  technology and it is therefore recommanded to use ESTEEM




208
D.2.2 Step 1: Project history, context and actors
D.2.2.1 Project narrative
Narrative example ZEPP project, the Netherlands
After finishing an education in mining at the technical university of Delft, the project manager Wouter
van de Waal starts working as a freelancer at Shell. He leaves Shell to work in Africa for a year and
comes back to the Netherlands in 1999. At that time the so-called Wadden Sea discussion is going on.
This discussion is centred around the question whether oil extraction in the Wadden Sea will result in
the subsidence of the ground. The Dutch oil company argues that there is no indication that this will be
problematic and that there is also no clear cure for it, but others disagree. Against the backdrop of this
discussion Wouter van de Waal develops in August/September 1999 the idea to store CO2 under the
Wadden Sea to prevent subsidence.

Van de Waal presents his innovative proposition to the NAM (Dutch oil/gas company). The NAM re-
plies that Van de Waal should first think of a solution to separate the CO2 from the natural gas that
will be extracted when storing CO2 in a natural gas field under the Wadden Sea. Subsequently van de
Waal develops the concept of a Zero Emission Power Plant (ZEPP), which uses pure oxygen to com-
bust the natural gas. This concept, which is called the oxyfuel principle, has the advantage that the
CO2 does not have to be removed from the natural gas before combustion, while CO2 can be captured
after combustion and stored subterranean.

Van de Waal asks his former teachers at the university to check his concept and acquires a patent on
the concept. On December 10th, 1999 he presents his renewed plan to the NAM again, including Jan
Gusink and colleagues. The NAM is still not very enthusiastic, because the plan is not in line with
their official statement that subsidence does not have any negative consequences for the Wadden Sea.
The NAM advises Van de Waal to present his plans to the Ministry of Economic Affairs (Fokke
Rispes). The ministry reacts positively (partially because they seize any opportunity to go into discus-
sion with the NAM on subsidence in the Wadden Sea) and advises van de Waal to find a partner for
carrying out a feasibility study.

Van de Waal, who in the mean while was working again at Shell, first presents his ideas to his em-
ployer. Shell finds the idea interesting, but does not want to invest in a feasibility study. Eventually
van de Waal manages to receive € 272.000 subsidy. Half is paid by SenterNovem (a Ministry of Eco-
nomic Affairs’ agency who is responsible for a programme on innovative gas technologies) and the
other half by the NAM. The Research and Technology Service (RTS) department from Shell carries
out the feasibility study. The participation of RTS almost leads to a change in the design of the project,
because one employee of RTS has a strong interest in fuel cells, and wants to include fuel cells in the
feasibility study. But employees of SenterNovem (Schreurs and Stolweg, who are strong proponents
of ZEPP technology) prevent this. The main conclusion of the report is that the ZEPP was technically
feasible, although the price of electricity produced by the ZEPP will be higher than the price of con-
ventional electricity.

The report is finished in December 2000, but not published. The reason for this is that the NAM is not
happy with the results, because the results show that subsidence of the ground can be prevented with
ZEPP technology (which they oppose in public debates). Wouter van de Waal, however, participates
in the publication of an article in a Dutch journal called ‘De Ingenieur’, but does not receive any reac-
tions on the publication.

Project development now slows down for about a year. In 2002 van de Waal decides to search for a
new partner and meets with the director of ONS Energy, a small organisation that buys electricity
from small decentralised producers and sells it to consumers. ONS also aims to distinguish their selves
from large energy companies by participating in innovative energy projects - something in which the
larger incumbents are not interested. At the end of 2002 Van de Waal and ONS agree on a contract
that Van de Waal starts with project development (conceptual design of the plant) and finding a loca-
tion. Van de Waal receives € 200.000 and establishes the project development company SEQ. The


209
only design requirement set by ONS is that the plant should have a size of 50 MWe and that it should
be located in the Netherlands.

To find a location, van de Waal contacts the director of the Dutch department of the oil and gas com-
pany Chevron, Jan Laurens, in June 2003. They have several concessions for oil and gas extraction in
the Netherlands, but due to disappointing financial results, they are forced to sell the concessions. SEQ
makes an offer for one of the concessions, the Akkrumer concession. However, the organisation
SodM, who have supervision on changes in concessions, does not allow the deal and gives a negative
advice to the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The reason is that SEQ is an unknown player in the field.
Subsequently the concessions are sold back to the Dutch state on 31st December 2003.

Jan Laurens, who likes the idea of the ZEPP, decides to donate Chevron’s archives to Van de Waal,
including all historical data on the Akkrumer gas field. Because there is no alternative SEQ decides to
continue to focus on this field. ONS energy is also still interested, because the data show that there is
still some gas present in the gas field. Subsequently another partner enters the scene. Wintershall, a
well known company in the oil and natural gas business and part of the German BASF company, is
also interested in the natural gas fields and they want to carry out seismic research. The archival data
is valuable information to Wintershall and they are a valuable partner for SEQ, because they are a well
known (and in the eyes of SodM a trustworthy) company.

By the end of 2004 the project has a location, storage capacity in the form of an almost empty natural
gas field, an partner from the electricity field (ONS), a concession and a partner from the oil and natu-
ral gas business (Wintershall). The only thing missing is subsidies to finance the ‘unprofitable part’ of
electricity production in the ZEPP (the part of the price that was higher than conventional electricity).
In principle there is room for subsidising clean fossil fuel plants in the regulation for green electricity
of that time (MEP), but no tariff is mentioned. In December 2004 ECN publishes a study on the tariff.
SEQ expects that the project can now continue, but the Ministry of Economic Affairs does not want to
open the MEP for subsidising clean fossil fuels, because only one plant is claiming subsidies. They
advise SEQ to acquire finance from a different fund, the so called ‘FESfonds’.

In 2005 SEQ applies for a subsidy of € 120 million in this fund. However, the Central Bureau of Sta-
tistics (CBS), is responsible for calculating costs and benefits of each application, concludes that the
costs of the ZEPP plant are higher than the benefits, and therefore advises not to grant the subsidy.

Meanwhile money becomes available from the so-called Borssele deal, in which money is to be in-
vested in renewable and clean energy sources in return of a later closing date of the nuclear power
plant in Borssele. A large amount of this money will be available for clean fossil fuels in the course of
2007.

In December 2005 ONS decides to raise the budget for the project to € 1.3 million. SEQ uses the
money for a detailed design of a 170 MWth plant. The designer is the American company Clean En-
ergy Systems (CES).

Other developments also improve the economic feasibility of the ZEPP plant. Firstly, within new regu-
lations for emission trading, it is possible that the ZEPP plant receives CO2 emission rights which they
can sell, because the ZEPP plant does not emit any CO2. Secondly, the costs for producing pure oxy-
gen can probably be lowered, because SEQ can sell the nitrogen that is also produced in this process to
‘GasUnie’, the Dutch natural gas company. GasUnie uses the nitrogen to add it to imported natural gas
to make it suitable for use in Dutch natural gas equipment.

In the beginning of 2007 ONS is sold to another energy company, and currently SEQ is negotiating
with a new partner from the electricity field. In the coming month another partner will probably be
added to the project, a large energy producing company from Germany. In general companies from the
energy sector are currently interested in ZEPP technology. The reason is that it is currently very diffi-
cult to get a concession for a new coal plant if there is no investment in carbon capture and sequestra-
tion.


210
Van de Waal expects that in the third quarter of 2007 the ministry of Economic Affairs will announce
if and how much money will be available from the ’Borssele deal’ for the ZEPP plant. SEQ will also
start with applying for the necessary permits (environmental and construction permits). Van der Wall
expects that construction can start by the end of 2007. To that end several technology suppliers are
now forming a consortium (including Siemens). Construction might also include a connection with a
local district heating system for supply to local industry as well as new residential areas. Other stake-
holders in the area include Energy Valley (a public-private partnership that focuses on concentrating
energy research and projects in the North of the Netherlands) and the municipality and province (who
are both proponents of the project).
D.2.2.2 Example of a defining moments table from the ZEPP project, the Netherlands

Date         Description of the         Description of the cause    Internal or external   Internal consequences       External consequences
             critical moment                                        cause
Aug./Sept.   Idea to store CO2          Discussion on subsidence    External               Emergence of basic idea     Principle of CO2 storage introduced to
1999         underground. First         Waddenzee                                          of CO2 storage =            outside world
             concept ZEPP developed                                                        foundation for later
             by v/d Waal                                                                   ZEPP
8 Dec.       Patent application for     Idea and possibilities to   Internal               Great level of protection   Radical constraint for competition to
1999         concept of EGR-oxyfuel     protect idea through                               and enforcement of own      make away with the idea
                                        patent                                             position with regard to
                                                                                           outside world and
                                                                                           competition
10 Dec.      Presentation at NAM and    Request of NAM to find      External               Inception base ZEPP         Project known at NAM and mainly
1999         Economic Affairs           solution to problem of                                                         Economic Affairs
                                        subsidence
Dec. 2001    Feasibility study by RTS   Necessary study to          External/internal      Idea proved feasible        Idea proved viable for
                                        review if the idea was                             which led to further        Sheel/EZ/NAM/Senter-Novem
                                        viable                                             project development
End 2002     ONS becomes project        Partner needed to further   Internal               Opportunity emerged to      Further enforcement feasibility project
             partner                    elaborate the project                              further work out the        to the outside world
                                                                                           project
Dec. 2003    Donation business          Cause: Chevron was          External               Possibility to work out     None
             archive Chevron to v/d     forced to destroy or hand                          plan at a concrete
             Waal                       over the archive                                   location
Q2 2004      Start cooperation          Partner required who was    External               Project became feasible     Location available
             Wintershall                acceptable for licensing                           due to involvement
                                        party and supervisor                               crucial partner
Sept. 04     Application recovery       License required to         External               Concluding piece in         Formal procedure results in
             license                    implement project                                  underground project         involvement new actors (EPB, Mining
                                                                                           implementation              council, TNO, Province)
Oct. 2004    Application MEP tariff
2004         Refusal of Economic        MEP budget depleted and     Internal               Delay of project            Urgency for project within Economic
             Affairs to make tariff     MEP regulation disputed                            implementation              Affairs decreases
             public within MEP for      within Economic Affairs

212
           climate neutral
           electricity
2005       Negative advice CPB to     Unclear                      Internal   Delay project              Ditto
           FES Funds for ZEPP
           subsidy
End 2006   Agreement with NV          See above                    Internal   Hole in exploitation       Further visibility in outside world
           Gasunie for selling                                                budget reduced
           nitrogen
End 2006   Search for new project     ONS has decided to leave     Internal   Necessity to attract new   Outside world gets opportunity to
           partner (to replace ONS)   the project (instigated by              partner                    participate
                                      municipality Schiedam)
March      Contract with new          Lack of financing            Internal   Financial means            Project implementation can start
2007       project partner                                                    available to implement
                                                                              the project




                                                                                 213
D.2.2.3 Context Analysis (Part I - Opportunities; Part II - Barriers)
Part I - opportunities
Not performed by PM because opportunities are often opposites from barriers.

Part II - barriers
Integration in existing energy system (limitation barriers).
Integration in exist- Describe the barrier When will this barrier Level at which this       What is the expected Significance of the Describe the project Describe in keywords Is the strategy focus What is the expected
ing energy system:                         go into effect (now, barrier manifests           impact on the project barrier to the project strategy to overcome the type of actions the internally or exter- result of this strategy?
barriers                                   within a year, within itself (local, national,   (low, average, high, (low, average, high)? this barrier (monitor- strategy exists of      nally aimed?
                                           five years, long       international)?           go-no-go)?                                   ing, indirect influenc-
                                           term)?                                                                                        ing, direct influenc-
                                                                                                                                         ing).
Technology            New construction        Now, 5 years less, 10   Local, national       Go-no go              High                   Label above-ground     Discussions with     Internal               No blocker and costs
                      drawings are re-        years no more                                                                              part as chemistry      American sector, not                        can be recharged to
                      quired. This is a mat-                                                                                             plant to apply engi-   yet with steam-                             new projects
                      ter of new engineer-                                                                                               neering based on       engineering, does
                      ing because it has not                                                                                             experience and regu-   automatically enter
                      been done for this                                                                                                 lation from that       engineering phase
                      concept before. For                                                                                                viewpoint, not from    through
                      that reason know-                                                                                                  energy point of view   Siemens
                      how transfer from the                                                                                              because of lack of     Choice for Siemens
                      petrochemical indus-                                                                                               experience             because of efficient
                      try is required. Fur-                                                                                                                     turbine developed by
                      thermore steam-                                                                                                                           them
                      engineering has to
                      prove the new drafts
                      and all this leads to
                      extra costs
                      The scale size of the Now, 5 years              Local, National       High                  High                   Invalidate objections Good detailed design External                No stopper for project
                      injection is new and                                                                                               by attracting reliable and information sup-
                      this raises questions                                                                                              partners and thus      ply to organisations
                      among designers and                                                                                                creating confidence
                      approvers with regard                                                                                              in the project
                      to safety, leakage
                      The need to supply Now, 5 years, long           Local,                Average               Average                Maximise heat turn- Survey heat demand External                    No blocker for pro-
                      heat is also a possible term                                                                                       over and discharge and discharge possi-                            ject
                      barrier because it is                                                                                              the rest in approved bilities
                      always difficult to fit                                                                                            manner (surface wa-
                      in (there will be                                                                                                  ter or cooling tower)
                      100MW residual
                      heat) and turnover is
                      only 20MW maxi-
                      mally
                      The necessity to dis- Now, 5 years              Local,                Average               Average                See above              See above             See above             See above
                      charge residual heat



214
Integration in exist- Describe the barrier When will this barrier Level at which this       What is the expected Significance of the Describe the project Describe in keywords Is the strategy focus What is the expected
ing energy system:                         go into effect (now, barrier manifests           impact on the project barrier to the project strategy to overcome the type of actions the internally or exter- result of this strategy?
barriers                                   within a year, within itself (local, national,   (low, average, high, (low, average, high)? this barrier (monitor- strategy exists of      nally aimed?
                                           five years, long       international)?           go-no-go)?                                   ing, indirect influenc-
                                           term)?                                                                                        ing, direct influenc-
                                                                                                                                         ing).
                      that cannot be sold
                      could possibly be a
                      barrier because it is
                      problematic to build a
                      cooling tower as well
                      as to discharge it on
                      the surface water
Strategic             Unclear legislation: Now, 5 years            Local, National          High                  Average                Label underground Fill out licensing       External                No blocker for first
                      VROM can be of the                                                                                                 part as gas recovery application precisely                         project and problem
                      opinion that it can be                                                                                             project to ensure that and correctly                               will be solved if legal
                      categorised under the                                                                                              it is categorised in the                                           framework has been
                      mining legislation as                                                                                              mining legislation                                                 created
                      well as environment
                      legislation, which
                      would imply a differ-
                      ent licensing system.
                      Consequences for
                      authority, storage of
                      waste materials in
                      mine illegitimate. No
                      strategic arrange-
                      ments for CO2 as of
                      yet
                      Clean up duty after Long term                Local                    Low                   Low                    Set up good plan      Work according to External                   No blocker
                      end of recovery li-                                                                                                                      approved procedures
                      cense
                      The water ordnance Now, 5 years              Local                    Average               Average                Cooling tower (below Developing other      External                No blocker
                      of the water man-                                                                                                  35 meter) possibly at engineering solution
                      agement body states                                                                                                roof
                      that cooling water has
                      a maximum delta of 5
                      degrees and is maxi-
                      mally 28 degrees
                      Cooling tower takes Now, 5 years             Local                    Average               Low                    Possible necessity to See above                                    No blocker
                      up space at the cost of                                                                                            buy neighbouring
                      possible visitor cen-                                                                                              terrain, will cost more
                      tre/park                                                                                                           than buying ground
                                                                                                                                         from the city
                      Sound ordnance        Now, 5 years           Local                    Low                   Low                    Noise producing as- Limit noise level by External                  No blocker for pro-
                                                                                                                                         pects within construc- means of insulation                         ject
                                                                                                                                         tion and possibly
                                                                                                                                         sound box


                                                                                                                                           215
Integration in exist- Describe the barrier When will this barrier Level at which this       What is the expected Significance of the Describe the project Describe in keywords Is the strategy focus What is the expected
ing energy system:                         go into effect (now, barrier manifests           impact on the project barrier to the project strategy to overcome the type of actions the internally or exter- result of this strategy?
barriers                                   within a year, within itself (local, national,   (low, average, high, (low, average, high)? this barrier (monitor- strategy exists of      nally aimed?
                                           five years, long       international)?           go-no-go)?                                   ing, indirect influenc-
                                           term)?                                                                                        ing, direct influenc-
                                                                                                                                         ing).
                      No policy on CO2      Now, 5 years           National EU-Kyoto        High                  Average                Keep project within   Make sure that cor- External                 That project can be
                      storage                                                                                                            mining legislation    rect procedures and                          executed without
                                                                                                                                                               licenses are used                            fitting policy
                                                                                                                                                               (also by government)
Social economic       Nontransparent mar- Now, 5 years, long       Local, National          Average               High                   Regard possibilities Research on turnover External                 Some locations can
                      ket for nitrogen: De- term                                                                                         per location and make markets nitrogen,                            drop out by lack of
                      livery of more than                                                                                                optimal use of possi- CO2, heat, etc                               turnover opportuni-
                      electricity (nitrogen)                                                                                             bilities                                                           ties
                      makes project vulner-
                      able for export if
                      there is no market for
                      nitrogen
                      Less financing by      Now, 5 years          Local, National          Average               High                   Reduce financial risk Apply for subsidies    Internal with external Follow-up projects
                      bank and higher in-                                                                                                for financiers and                           solution               will be cheaper
                      terest because of new                                                                                              thus decreasing fi-
                      and unproven com-                                                                                                  nancing costs
                      ponents (burner),
                      which causes higher
                      energy price

                      Also policy aspect      Now, 5 years         National                 High                  Average                Fortify consortium Invite companies to External                    After 1 or 2 projects
                      Dutch government                                                                                                   with appealing parties participate in contract                     the name of SEQ
                      reluctant in granting                                                                                                                                                                 should be sufficiently
                      large subsidies to                                                                                                                                                                    known to solve this
                      small unknown par-                                                                                                                                                                    problem
                      ties (all among large
                      players)
                      Large (European)        Now, 5 years         National                 Average               Average                Forced to participate, Invite companies to External                See above
                      subsidies only to con-                                                                                             and protect technol- participate in contract
                      sortia with large par-                                                                                             ogy through patent
                      ties, but those large                                                                                              and contract
                      utilise these kinds of
                      proejcts to buy the
                      new radical technoloy
                      at low price and put it
                      aside (temporarily)
                      Unawareness civil       Now, 5 years         National                 High                  High                   Create familiarity to Participate in work- External                Eventually solved
                      service of smaller                                                                                                 the project           ing groups, symposia,
                      players                                                                                                                                  etc. and focused lob-
                                                                                                                                                               bying within minis-
                                                                                                                                                               tries
                      Patent: Protects      Now, 5 years           National, interna-       Average               Average


216
Integration in exist- Describe the barrier When will this barrier Level at which this       What is the expected Significance of the Describe the project Describe in keywords Is the strategy focus What is the expected
ing energy system:                         go into effect (now, barrier manifests           impact on the project barrier to the project strategy to overcome the type of actions the internally or exter- result of this strategy?
barriers                                   within a year, within itself (local, national,   (low, average, high, (low, average, high)? this barrier (monitor- strategy exists of      nally aimed?
                                           five years, long       international)?           go-no-go)?                                   ing, indirect influenc-
                                           term)?                                                                                        ing, direct influenc-
                                                                                                                                         ing).
                      against sale but at the                      tional
                      same time limitation
                      because there is less
                      interest in participa-
                      tion
                      Insufficient / unclear Now, 5 years          National                 Go / no go            High                   Sales of extra prod- Search for most suit- intern                  After technology
                      subsidy structure:                                                                                                 ucts                  able locations                               development this will
                      Uneconomic top of                                                                                                  Onshore gas field                                                  be solved automati-
                      current not solved                                                                                                 Find 800 million cu-                                               cally
                      with just subsidy                                                                                                  bic meter with more
                                                                                                                                         CO2 than required for
                                                                                                                                         commercial purposes
                                                                                                                                         UK already present
                                                                                                                                         Actively searching in
                                                                                                                                         NL as alternative for
                                                                                                                                         lack of subsidy
                                                                                                                                         Possible move to UK
Cultural              Open Dutch culture Now, 5 years, long        National                 Average               Low                    Prevent time loss by Find necessary part- External                 No blocker for the
                      and corresponding      term                                                                                        positioning the pro- ners outside the tradi-                       time being and even-
                      consensus culture                                                                                                  ject in the market on tional associations                          tually this problem
                      maintain status quo                                                                                                its own power instead that are aware of the                        will disappear
                      and is a threat to in-                                                                                             of attempting to find advantages of partici-
                      novation in general                                                                                                support from the tra- pation that are not
                                                                                                                                         ditional parties      necessarily part of the
                                                                                                                                                               core activities of the
                                                                                                                                                               project (Wintershall)
                      Public perception.    Now, 5 years, long     National, interna-       Average               High                   When question comes Work up list of ar-       External             Reduce citizens' fear
                      There have been sev- term?                   tional                                                                up explain that these gument arguments                             for accidents
                      eral widespread acci-                                                                                              accidents cannot oc-
                      dents with CO2 that                                                                                                cur at the chosen CO2
                      damaged the gas'                                                                                                   storage location
                      reputation
                      Local residents not Now, 5 years             Local                    High                  Average                Increase local knowl- Folders, website,      External              Increased acceptation
                      informed yet                                                                                                       edge of the project information session                            of the project
                                                                                                                                         through information
                                                                                                                                         sessions




                                                                                                                                           217
Integration in exist- Describe the barrier When will this barrier Level at which this       What is the expected Significance of the Describe the project Describe in keywords Is the strategy focus What is the expected
ing energy system:                         go into effect (now, barrier manifests           impact on the project barrier to the project strategy to overcome the type of actions the internally or exter- result of this strategy?
barriers                                   within a year, within itself (local, national,   (low, average, high, (low, average, high)? this barrier (monitor- strategy exists of      nally aimed?
                                           five years, long       international)?           go-no-go)?                                   ing, indirect influenc-
                                           term)?                                                                                        ing, direct influenc-
                                                                                                                                         ing).
                      The anti windmill    Now, 5 years            Local                    Average               Average                Positioned as transi- No competition          External             Acceptance of CCS
                      movement and the                                                                                                   tion technology       through sustainable                          as 3rd pillar in cli-
                      environment move-                                                                                                                        or energy saving                             mate policy
                      ment show little en-
                      thusiasm, however
                      they may carefully
                      change their no to
                      maybe
                      North Netherlands is Now, 5 years            Local                    Average               High                   Keeping costs and       E.g. hire local archi- External            Growth of public
                      area knowing mental-                                                                                               gains local and thus    tect                                       embedding of project
                      ity that needs to be                                                                                               keeping construction,
                      taken into account                                                                                                 employability, etc.
                                                                                                                                         local.
                                                                                                                                         Actively contracting
                                                                                                                                         certain parts of pro-
                                                                                                                                         ject within Friesland
Geographical          Open landscape puts Now, 5 years, long       Local                    Low                   Low                    Design within the       Limit height of con- External              No blockage for pro-
                      demands on construc- term                                                                                          agreed framework        struction                                  ject progress
                      tion
                      Proven technology Now, 5 years               National, interna-       Average               Low
                      but values known of                          tional
                      30-40 € per ton CO2.
                      Lack of oil fields   Now, 5 years, long      Local, National          Low                   Low                    Put focus on gas                              External             No blocker
                                           term                                                                                          fields and prove that
                                                                                                                                         that also can create a
                                                                                                                                         profit by enhanced
                                                                                                                                         gas recovery
                      Limited space avail- Now, 5 years            Local                    High                  Average                Acquisition            Adjust design to       External             Construction within
                      able at location for                                                                                               neighbour              available space                             set limits possible
                      possible installation
                      of cooling tower


D.2.2.4 Defining Moments Table




218
Critical moments are the moments in the process of the project that are irreversible and sent the project into a certain (definite) direction. Based on the narrative
we have extracted the following critical moments in chronological order. If there are any other moments that can be considered critical and irreversible, the list
can be complemented.

Date        Description of the critical     Description of the cause      Internal or external cause Internal consequences              External consequences
            moment
Aug./Sept. Idea to store CO2 under-         Discussion on subsidence      External                      Emergence of basic idea of Principle of CO2 storage in-
1999        ground. First concept ZEPP      Waddenzee                                                   CO2 storage = foundation for troduced to outside world
            developed by v/d Waal                                                                       later ZEPP
8 Dec. 1999 Patent application for con-     Idea and possibilities to pro- Internal                     Great level of protection and Radical constraint for com-
            cept of EGR-oxyfuel             tect idea through patent                                    enforcement of own position petition to make away with
                                                                                                        with regard to outside world the idea
                                                                                                        and competition
10 Dec. 1999 Presentation at NAM and        Request of NAM to find so- External                         Inception base ZEPP           Project known at NAM and
             Economic Affairs               lution to problem of subsi-                                                               mainly Economic Affairs
                                            dence
Dec. 2001     Feasibility study by RTS      Necessary study to review if External/internal              Idea proved feasible which   Idea proved viable for
                                            the idea was viable                                         led to further project devel-Sheel/EZ/NAM/Senter-
                                                                                                        opment                       Novem
End 2002      ONS becomes project part- Partner needed to further         Internal                      Opportunity emerged to fur-  Further enforcement feasibil-
              ner                       elaborate the project                                           ther work out the project    ity project to the outside
                                                                                                                                     world
Dec. 2003     Donation business archive    Cause: Chevron was forced External                           Possibility to work out plan None
              Chevron to v/d Waal          to destroy or hand over the                                  at a concrete location
                                           archive
Q2 2004       Start cooperation Winter-    Partner required who was       External                      Project became feasible due     Location available
              shall                        acceptable for licensing party                               to involvement crucial part-
                                           and supervisor                                               ner
Sept. 04      Application recovery license License required to imple- External                          Concluding piece in under-      Formal procedure results in
                                           ment project                                                 ground project implementa-      involvement new actors
                                                                                                        tion                            (EPB, Mining council, TNO,
                                                                                                                                        Province)
Oct. 2004     Application MEP tariff
2004          Refusal of Economic Affairs MEP budget depleted and         Internal                      Delay of project implementa-Urgency for project within


                                                                                                    219
             Date               Description of the critical                     Description of the cause                      Internal or external cause Internal consequences                                   External consequences
                                moment
                                to make tariff public within                    MEP regulation disputed                                                                   tion                                   Economic Affairs decreases
                                MEP for climate neutral                         within Economic Affairs
                                electricity
             2005               Negative advice CPB to FES                      Unclear                                       Internal                                    Delay project                          Ditto
                                Funds for ZEPP subsidy
             End 2006           Agreement with NV Gasunie                       See above                                     Internal                                    Hole in exploitation budget            Further visibility in outside
                                for selling nitrogen                                                                                                                      reduced                                world
             End 2006           Search for new project part-                    ONS has decided to leave the Internal                                                     Necessity to attract new               Outside world gets opportu-
                                ner (to replace ONS)                            project (instigated by mu-                                                                partner                                nity to participate
                                                                                nicipality Schiedam)
             March 2007 Contract with new project                               Lack of financing            Internal                                                     Financial means available to Project implementation can
                        partner                                                                                                                                           implement the project        start

             D.2.2.5 Actors Table
             Actors stated below have been mentioned in narrative. The table can be filled out using key words and completed with possible additional actors.
Charac- Identification                        Interests and                                                                                         Organisation                                      Communication                    (re-)positioning
terisation11                                  power
          Name of actor   What is the po-     What does the          Which expecta-      Which sources      To which extent Which channels to       Does the actor Which networks If the actor is a   Is the actor ac- In which way How confident How feasible is
                          sition of the       actor expect of        tions are criti-    that are needed    can the actor be influence project      have more than are accessible to group, who is    quainted with does the actor is the project       it to adjust the
                          actor in the pro-   participation in the   cal, that is they   for the project    replaced by      are available to the   one role in the the actor?       the potential    the project (low, obtain his in- manager about project to the
                          ject?               project?               are crucial to      are available to   another (low, actor?                    project?                         representative   medium, high) formation on the the actor (little, requirements of
                                                                     decide whether      the actor?         medium, high)                                                            of this group?                     project?       average, much)? the actor (low,
                                                                     or not the actor                                                                                                (position and                                                      medium, high)?
                                                                     participates in                                                                                                 name of the
                                                                     the project?                                                                                                    person)




          Wouter van de Initiator / pro-      Work                   All                 Knowledge and low                   Own network and Yes                    All                               High            Direct           high               high
          Waal          ject leader                                                      experience                          finances to further
                                                                                                                             implement the
                                                                                                                             project
          SEQ Nederland Project coordi- Expansion to a               Has to (eventu- Finances for           low              Decision and con- No                   All                               High            direct           high               high
                        nator           mid-size energy              ally) lead to   project imple-                          trol possibilities


             11
                  Characterization classified in: (1) partners, (2) potential partners, (3) competition, (4) potential competition, (5) stakeholders, (6) potential stakeholders, (7) general actors. Combinations are pos-
                  sible as well.


             220
Charac- Identification                     Interests and                                                                    Organisation                                      Communication                 (re-)positioning
terisation11                               power
                                           company             profit         mentation and             through ownership
                                                                              employees                 of shares
          NAM            Take no part in                                                                                                   l
          Jan Gusink     the project
          Johan van Luik anymore



          Shell           As largest oil Regards the project No participation                           Very extensive      Yes            All              Margriet Kui- Medium              Discussions   little             Little
                          company plays as competition for in project                                   lobby network                                       jper, manager                     with seq
                          an important       own activities but                                         used for ao promo-                                  sustainable de-
                          role in all Dutch possibly also as                                            tion of own project                                 velopment Shell
                          underground        opportunity if eve-                                        and CCS in general                                  Europe
                          activities at this rything turns out to
                          moment Shell work in the long
                          mainly regards run
                          how the project
                          develops
          EZ              Licensing          Possibilities to     No participation Can decide as Low    Judicial power      Yes            Mainly law and Hand Cahen,         Medium          Discussions   Medium             High
          Rispes          agents for parts meet the Dutch         in project       licensing agent                                         regulators, poli- policy adviser                   with SEQ
          Van Gennip      of the project climate objectives                        within which                                            tics
                                                                                   framework the
                                                                                   activities should
                                                                                   take place
          VROM            Licensing          Possibilities to     See Economic See Economic Low         Judicial power      Yes            Law regulation Hans Spiegler, Medium               Discussions   high               High
                          agents             meet climate ob- Affairs              Affairs                                                 and politics   policy adviser                      with seq
                                             jectives


          SenterNovem H. Implementation Contribution to      Both are critical Subsidy funds   low      Power of decision Nee              Politics, law and Harry Schreurs, high             Conversations high               high
          Schreuders     representative climate and inno-                                               wrt subsidy grant-                 regulators fi-                                     with seq and
          P. Stolberg    for the subsidies vation objectives                                            ing                                nances                                             research partici-
                                                                                                                                                                                              pation
          RTS (Research No longer di- Firstly innovation
          & Techn ser- rectly involved in gas production
          vices Shell)                 and positive PR

          ONS Group       financier        Profitable new      Has to be prof- Finances avail- Medium   Directing through No               all              Henk Eijken-      medium          direct        high               High
                                           business activity   itable          able                     ownership of                                        broek director
                                                                                                        shares




                                                                                                                                           221
Charac- Identification                        Interests and                                                                  Organisation                                 Communication                  (re-)positioning
terisation11                                  power
          Chevron            No longer in-    Effective use of
          (Jan Laurens)      volved           old Chevron data



          SopM               Supervisor un- Positive contribu- Has to be exe- Can halt project low         Directing through no             Law and regula- Jan de Jong,    low           Discussions    Medium             high
          State control on   derground ac- tion to Dutch gas cuted safely by if not complied               supervisory func-                tors, provinces inspector gene-               with Winter-
          mines              tivities in NL supplies            an approved       to their regula-         tion                             and municipali- ral of mines                  shall
          J. de Jonge                                           party.            tions                                                     ties
          Wintershall        Implementation Profitable business Project has to be Is executor and Medium   Is responsible for Yes           all             Wouter          Medium        direct         high               high
          Noordzee BV        of underground activities and pos- profitable        has the knowl-           all operational                                  d’Engelbronner,
                             activities     sible opportunity                     edge and ex-             affairs with regard                              business devel-
                                            to reduce CO2                         perience to im-          to subsoil                                       opment man-
                                            emission                              plement project                                                           ager
          Duco Drenth        Second man     Work                Has to be prof- Knowledge and low          Influence through Yes            all                             high          direct         high               high
                             within SEQ                         itable            experience               advising role



          ECN                Involved as
                             energy adviser
                             for Dutch gov-
                             ernment
          CPB                Adviser to
                             Dutch govern-
                             ment

          CES (Clean      Supplier of one    Demonstration on      Has to lead to   Knowledge and low      If CES loses faith Yes           Supply industry Keith Pronsky, High           direct         high               high
          Energy Systems, of the most im-    functioning burner    systems sales    experience on          in project she can                               CEO
          US)             portant parts of   within the applica-                    own product            decide not to de-
                          the plant          tion in an energy                                             liver necessary
                                             plant                                                         equipment
          NV Gasunie         supplier of gas Cost reduction for    Has to lead to   Pricing deter- low     Can decide not to Yes            all               Rob de Wolf, Medium         Discussions    Medium             Medium
                             and consumer of nitrogen demand,      cost reduction   mination for gas       accept nitrogen, or                                senior manager              with seq
                             nitrogen        and a possible role   and gas sales    and nitrogen           only under unfa-                                   strategy
                                             for CO2 transport                                             vourable condi-
                                                                                                           tions.
          New project        financier        Profitable business Has to lead to    Finances +    Medium   Controls flow of no              Financial net-                High            direct         high               high
          partner A                           activity with large profit            knowledge and          funding to the pro-              works and poli-
                                              growth opportuni-                     experience             ject                             tics
                                              ties
          New project
          partner B




             222
Charac- Identification                        Interests and                                                                    Organisation                                   Communication                 (re-)positioning
terisation11                                  power
          Siemens         supplier            Demonstration of Project has to be Equipment +   Medium      Partly determines Yes              Suppliers and Koos Lichten- high                direct        high               high
                                              new Siemens tur- implemented       knowledge and             the technical im-                  financial net- donk, business
                                              bine                               experience                plementation of                    works + politics development
                                                                                                           project because she                                 manager
                                                                                                           carries responsibil-
                                                                                                           ity for the per-
                                                                                                           formance of the
                                                                                                           plant
          Volker Wessels supplier             Construction vol- Has to lead to   Knowledge and high        Little possibilities Yes           Supply industry Sape de Haan , high             direct        high               Medium
                                              ume               construction     experience on                                                , financial and business devel-
                                                                                 construction                                                 politics        opment

          TNO-Nitg        Consultant for      Advise activities Has to lead to   Knowledge and Medium      Little possibilities Yes           Law and regula-                 Medium          Discussions and Medium           Medium
                          CO2 injection       and drafting and assignment        experience                but could have an                  tion + politics                                 participation to
                          and possible        implementation of                                            impact through                     and public or-                                  research
                          monitoring          plan CO2 storage                                             advising govern-                   ganisations
                                                                                                           ments
          Jacobs Engi-    No longer in-       supplier for feasi-
          neering         volved              bility study




          CE              Advising agent ?
                          to government
                          (CPB)


          UKR             (is subsidy regu-
                          lation?)




          SNM (stichting Public organisa- The fact that CCS All critical is-     Can impact       Medium   Can influence pub- no              Public organisa- Arjette Stevens low            Discussions   Medium             high
          Natuur and     tion reviewing is safe and leads to sues                policy by taking          lic acceptance by                  tions, law and                                  with seq
          Milieu)        the develop-     low cost and per-                      a stand in fa-            taking a stand                     regulation poli-
                         ments of CCS in manent storage of                       vour of or                (positive and nega-                tics
                         climate policy CO2, can not have                        against the pro-          tive)
                                          a negative impact                      ject
                                          on energy saving
                                          and sustainable
                                          energy




                                                                                                                                              223
Charac- Identification                        Interests and                                                                    Organisation                                  Communication                 (re-)positioning
terisation11                                  power
          Other environ-
          ment movements




          Energy Valley    Lobby group to     Charisma towards               Can influence high            Little direct impact Yes           Law and regula- Jorg Gigler,     Medium        Discussions   Medium             little
                           governments to     the rest of Energy             governments                   but can pass stric-                tors, politics  clean fossil ad-               with seq
                           the cause of the   Valley area with               and project                   ture through lobby-                public interest viser
                           ZEPP project       regard to energy               partners, has                 ing at e.g. govern-                groups
                                              innovation and                 limited financial             ments
                                              employability                  means available
                                                                             for the project
          Municipality   Licensing            Image of munici- Should mainly Can direct        low         Has judicial power No              Law and regula- Sjouke van der high            direct        high               High
          Smallingerland agents               pality and employ- be safe     through license               on project imple-                  tion, politics  Meulen, busi-
                                              ability                        regulation                    mentation                                          ness intermedia-
                                                                                                                                                              tor


          Province Frys- Licensing            Image of province Should mainly Can direct      low          Has judicial power No              Law and regula- Harm Jan Bou- high             direct        high               high
          lan            agents               and employability be safe       through license              on project imple-                  tion. politics  wens, economic
                                                                              regulation                   mentation                                          development
                                                                                                                                                              adviser



          Companies near Consumers of         Cost reduction for                  Little direct   high     Little influence    No             Municipality                   low             Discussions   high               high
          plant          residual heat        own company pol-                    impact                                                                                                     with seq
                                              icy




          Energie Kom-     Advising agent Contribution to          Contribution   Little direct   Medium   Can influence gov- No              Law and regula-                low             Discussions   Medium             Medium
          pas              for province   climate objective        should be      impact                   ernments at e.g.                   tion                                           with seq
                                          of province              reached                                 licensing decisions




          De Lier          Intended storage                                                                                                                                                  Discussions   little             low
                           location of                                                                                                                                                       with seq
                           NAM was de-
                           nied but new
                           location was
                           found by NAM


             224
Charac- Identification                      Interests and                                                             Organisation         Communication   (re-)positioning
terisation11                                power
                         and is competi-
                         tion for subsidy
                         funds


          NAM Pernis     Pernis delivers    Expects contribu- Not involved in   Can influence Medium   Can have impact Yes           all                   Little             low
                         pure CO2 for       tion from ZEPP to project           governments            on project through
                         NAM project        general public                      (e.g.) through         lobbying (positive
                         and is competi-    acceptance of CO2                   dominant posi-         as well as nega-
                         tion to ZEPP       storage and expan-                  tion on the gas        tive)
                                            sion of knowledge                   market
                                            in the field of ap-
                                            plication, is com-
                                            petition for subsi-
                                            dies
          Henk Veenstra Local protester




          CE Delft       Negative atti-
                         tude towards
                         CCS




                                                                                                                                     225
D.2.3 Step 2: Vision building
D.2.3.1 The project manager’s present vision
See narrative.

D.2.3.2 The social network map
                            Partners / investors                                                      Technology

                                                                            Clean Energy
                                                                            Systems US
                                                      Wintershall
                                                     Noordzee BV
                                                                                Siemens

                                                   ONS                                    Volker
           Shell                                                                          Wessels




                                                                                                                 ECN
                         Companies
                         next to plant                                                                CE
                                                                       SEQ
 Market




                                                                                    X




                                                                                                                       Science
                                                                    Nederland
                                             X                       (Van der
            NAM Pernis                                                 Waal,                                     TNO
                                                                      Drenth)
                                                                                               Energie
                               NV Gasunie                                                      Kompas




                                                              VROM
                                     EZ (Gusink,
                                      Van Luik                                            Stichting
                                                                                          Natuur en
                         CPB                        SenterNovem                            Milieu
           Energy                                   (Schreuders,
           Valley                                     Stolberg)
                                 SopM

                                              Province
                                                               Municipality                                Society
                                                              Smallingerland
          Politics / policy                   Fryslan



D.2.3.3 Synthesis writing intermediate vision
Pathway narrative. Reviewing from 2010.
A lot has happened the last 3 years. All technical problems are solved, also by attracting new experts
and good partners. New building drawings are made with support from the petrochemical industry.
This was possible by labeling the part of the plant above ground level as petrochemical plant. Even
though the concept was completely new, Lloyd’s Register BV has approved the new drawing of the
plant. The designers further have solved all security and leak aspects which occurred with the injection
on this big scale. Because we were working with reliable partners and had a good and detailed design,
many relevant institutions showed confidence in the project and did not have many objections.

Also financial businesses are fixed within the last years. Firstly we had some difficulties in getting
good interest because the bank did not know the concept. This increased the costs of electricity pro-
duced. But luckily this was solved within a few years. The financial risks for investors were decreased
which resulted in lower financing costs. Firstly uncertainty existed about subsidy structures in the
Netherlands because the financial gap of electricity produced with our technology was not subsidised.
Due to this we were obliged to sell our nitrogen and residual heat and were able to maximise the use of
possibilities of our location.

We have thought about moving the whole project to the UK where we had found an onshore gas field
of 800 million square meters that contained too much CO2 then desired for commercial gas recovery.
But then the Dutch government changed their subsidy structure. Firstly the Dutch government was
afraid in appointing big subsidies to our project because we were a new and unknown partner. We
have solved this by attracting some big and well-known partners to the consortium. Because the dan-


226
ger existed that these new big partners would use the project to buy a innovative technology for a low
price, we have secured our technology by many contracts and patents. Apart from that we have started
a strong lobbying-process by joining working groups, conferences, etc. to let policy-makers get to
know our technology-concept and project.

At the time that our plant was running for a few years, several policies and legislation existed about
CO2 storage. The years before we have worked around the existing lacks in policy by labeling the un-
derground part of the plant as gas recovering project. This connected us to the mining legislation and
not to the environmental legislation.

The public perception of our project has been managed correctly. The local inhabitants didn’t know
anything about our plans before we started. But with the supply of information we have increased the
local knowledge of the project. Both inhabitants as governments had questions about safety because
they were familiar with the accidents that happened with CO2. But we have performed a research to-
wards the communication strategies and had a worked out a set of arguments which convinced people
that accidents could not occur with this location for CO2 storage. The communication-study mainly
showed that the North of the Netherlands has a specific mentality which should be taken into account.
An important aspect of the area were the local costs and benefits of the project. That is why we have
hired many local constructors, architects and employees.

Because we had adapted our communication campaign to the regional mentality, we gained a supply
market for our residual heat. The local inhabitants and companies felt strongly connected to the project
and wanted to receive our residual heat. Without any problems we thus give away our 100 MW of re-
sidual heat. We therefore didn’t need to build a cooling tower or dump heat in the surface water any
more. We did build a cooling tower though of less then 35m on the ground we could buy from our
neighbour.

D.2.3.4 The project manager’s future vision 2020
Clean energy started in Drachten
March, 20th 2020. Wouter van de Waal, director of SEQ International, owner of the ZEPP, describes
the development of the first climate neutral power plant in Drachten which celebrates its tenth birthday
coming month.

Wouter van de Waal is proud at the ZEPP in Drachten which is profitable for already five years with-
out any governmental support. With the (financial) support from the project partners SEQ Interna-
tional has brought the ZEPP towards its current size and position.

Innovative technology is profitable
For the technology companies that have build the plant (VolkerWessel, Siemens and Clean Energy
System (CES)), the ZEPP is still one of their most important demonstration projects in which they ap-
ply and maintain their technical innovations. Among other things this has lead to the improvement of
the generator which has doubled the capacity of the plant to 140 MWh three years ago. At the same
time the residual heat was reduced through the placement of more efficient turbines. Apart from that
the continuous cooperation with TNO and the Technical University (TU) of Delft leads to regular im-
provements in for example the burning processes and monitoring of the plant.

The biggest amount of residual heat is currently distributed through a heat network to the neighbour-
ing companies and the new residential area built on the south side of the plant. After consultation with
the inhabitants of this area, who prefer electric cooking in stead of cooking with gas, the municipality
decided to not connecting the neighbourhood to the gas grid. The remaining residual heat of the plant
is cooled down in the cooling tower next to the plant.

In the last years the ZEPP has been using Enhanced Gas Recovery methods in a growing amount of
gas fields in the (Frisian) region. Following the new legislation from the ministry of Energy the NAM
(Dutch new oil exploration and production Company), former owner of the gas fields, gave up the
fields in 2014. SEQ bought the gas fields from the Ministry for the storage of CO2. At that time the

                                                                                                   227
demand for CO2-storage capacity was rather high after the governments decision to oblige all electric-
ity grids to capture their CO2-emissions. The electricity plants and heavy industry in the North of the
Netherlands have anticipated on this legislation and have built a direct CO2-connection from their
plants to the gas fields in the Frysian province. The province has supported this CO2-network by
adapting the zoning plans. Gasunie, the owner of the gas grids in the Netherlands, manages these first
CO2-grids which are expanded nowadays to the rest of the country. To be profitable the ZEPP is also
active on the emissions trading market in which the price for CO2 is stable already for a few years
around 20 euro/ton. Also the ZEPP still sells its nitrogen emissions.

Educative role within green energy municipality
The information centre of the ZEPP welcomes about 5.000 visitors yearly. Technicians, politicians,
students, neighbours, and other national and international visitors come to the plant. They get a guided
tour through the plant (with its unique transparent design with a lot of windows and glass, this is a
very special experience) in which is shown that climate neutral energy can also be cheap and get in-
formed about the storage of CO2, the role of the ZEPP in the development of several technologies and
the approach of environmental and climate problems in general. Apart from that, Wouter van de Waal
and his employees give lectures worldwide on a regular base on universities, conferences and other.
Also many PhD-students finalise their research at the plant yearly.

After a small decrease of visitors around 2015, the amount of visitors of the ZEPP increases again
since the municipality has been called out as most innovative green energy municipality of the coun-
try. This nomination has come after the opening of the test plant from Nuon (energy company) at the
other side of town in which the newest technologies of CO2 capture are demonstrated. Together with
the biomass plant close to the ZEPP, an initiative from local farmers who provide the plant with bio-
mass recourses, the municipality now has the highest degree of innovative renewable energy technolo-
gies. Apart from the three plants also many research institutes and consultancies have started business
in the town of Drachten. This is again a new impulse for the local employability and the result of the
local policy to create an attractive establishment location for innovative business within the energy
sector.

Conquering the world from Drachten
Within Europe about 30% of the energy is renewable. Due to the high costs of renewable energy,
European policy has been changed in favour of CO2 storage. The low costs for CO2-storage has made
it a societal accepted alternative for renewables (this is even acknowledged by NGOs). SEQ Interna-
tional has adapted to this by building two bigger ZEPPs in the Netherlands, three in the UK and two in
the USA. All these plants are based on the technologies demonstrated in Drachten. The ministry of
Foreign Affairs considers the cooperation between SEQ and the American technology developer CES
as a best practice for the trading relation between the Netherlands and the USA. To improve also the
technology-exchange with other countries, Van de Waal often joins the trading missions of the minis-
try of foreign affairs to a variety of countries. The contacts he makes during these missions, still help
directly and indirectly in improving the ZEPP concept and transporting it to other parts of the world.
In general is expected the ZEPP concept to grow further internationally the coming years.

D.2.3.5 Creating a vision title
Clean energy started in Drachten.

D.2.3.6 Future social network map




228
                                                                                             Heat infrastructure residential
                                                                                                                                          Technology
                                        Partners / investors                                area, without connection to gas
                                                                                                          grid                                 Plant 2x as big


                                                                                               Cooling tower           New, more efficient
                                                                      Wintershall                                           turbines
                                                      Bank           Noordzee BV
   Households enjoy                                                                         Clean Energy
    electric cooking                                                                        Systems US           Gas recovered
                                                                                      Siemens                          from
                                                      New                                                         neighbouring
                                                      party                                                           fields
          Nuon: supllier CO2
                                                                                                Volker
             from el. grid
                                                                                                Wessels

      other CO2 suplliers                                                                                                       ECN
          from region

                                    Companies                                                                                         University of
                                    next to plant                                  SEQ                                                   Delft
 Market




                NAM: supllier




                                                                                                                                                                 Science
                                                                                Nederland
                empty fields
                                                                                 (Van de
                                        competitors CO2
                                                                 X                Waal)                                                  TNO
                                           storage

 Emissietrading:
                                        NV Gasunie
 high CO2 price
  (20 euro/ton),
 decreasing role                   Biomass                                                                     Universities /
      CDM                            plant                                                                       schools
                                                                                        Visiters
                                                                                        centre
   Renewable                                  Min Econ.
   energy max.           Shell
                                               affairs                                              NGO                  Media
    30% in EU                                               EU
                                        Min foreign
                                                                         UN                                              Public in favour of
   No high                                affairs                                       Climate problems high
                                                                                         on societal agenda                 cheap clean
  gas price                                                                 Min.                                         energy compared
                         Legislations                                   environment                                         to expensive
                                              SodM
                         CO2-storage                                                                                     renewable energy
                                                                            Municipality
                                                          Province
                                                                           Smallingerland
                                                          Fryslan
                    Policy / Politics                                                                                       Society
D.2.3.7 The stakeholder future visions

Ministery of Economic Affairs
Based on interview with Mr Hans Cahen (Amsterdam - 15 June 2007)

Breakthrough in Drachten
‘Technological life test enormous success!’

20 March 2020. Hans Cahen of the Ministry of Economic Affairs look back on the struggling devel-
opments of ZEPP technology and the recent technological breakthrough in Drachten.

Technical breakthrough at last
A Dutch Zero Emission Power Plant (ZEPP) recently caused the ZEPP technology to make a giant
leap forward after the successful wrap-up of a six month life test. The life test took place in Drachten
(Province of Friesland), where SEQ and her partners have worked hard for the past ten years to create
a distinct profile for CO2 capture and storage. This life test was executed to obtain a thorough view of
the effects of extremely high temperatures caused by pure oxygen combustion on the construction ma-
terial of the plant. The new materials that were tested turn out to be very well equipped for the extreme
conditions in the combustion chamber. After opening the installation the Frisian engineers could not
find a trace of corrosion, cracks or other forms of thermic/chemical damage. This ‘proof of principle’
clears the way for a rapid dissemination of the ZEPP technology. Moreover, this high-temperature re-
sistant material seems extremely suitable for other applications, e.g. in turbine construction.

Material technology, the drawback
The breakthrough arrives at a just moment. When the construction of the plant proceeded in 2007 it
was still surrounded by high technological promises. CO2 capture and storage was (and is) a costly
matter which can cause the profits of electricity plants to rapidly decrease and brings down the
rentability. SEQ and project manager Wouter van der Waal considered that the rentability decrease
could be halted by using the oxyfuel principle, combusting natural gas with pure oxygen. From a tech-
nological viewpoint this would be an innovative tour de force for which no practical examples existed

                                                                                                                                                                           229
before 2007, but the expectations were that a technological breakthrough at suppliers Clean Energy
Systems (CES), Volker Wessels and Siemens would not be long. The practice however has turned out
to be much more unruly. As in many other energy technologies, like fuel cells or solar cells, it be-
comes clear that developing technology cannot be easily manipulated. Particularly the development of
materials equipped to withstand the extreme conditions of oxyfuel have proven to be crucial. Not until
2015, a unique discovery involving the combination of several materials pointed out that the oxyfuel
principle could possibly be applied in electricity plants. The life test in Drachten demonstrated that this
is actually feasible in practice.

The crucial role of the European system for emission trade
Consequently, material development was the drawback of the ZEPP plant in Drachten. However,
without a thorough embedment of emission trade in the European system the plant would have been
out of business already. In the beginning the plant used existing technology without oxyfuel principle.
The low efficiency has to be compensated for economically in one way or the other. The investment
costs were partly covered by FES and UKR fees, but for the operational cost the plant depended on
MEP and the European emission trading system and steep CO2 emission prices. In the case of MEP a
solution was found when it turned out that renewable gas was also housed in the regulations. As for
the CO2 emission trading system it was crucial to know whether the plant would be eligible to obtain
emission rights at all. After all, she did not emit CO2 from the beginning and the European system did
not automatically grant emission rights. Partly due to lobbying efforts of Economic Affairs and revi-
sion proposals of the system the ZEPP plant was eventually rewarded for her emission free electricity
production. When finally CO2 emission prices started to rise, the ZEPP plant could still run despite the
limited efficiency and the substantial delay in development of the oxyfuel technology. Furthermore,
the recently established European CO2 emission bank has played an important role by buying a large
amount of emission rights from the market, which caused a considerable price increase.

Leave it to the market
The joint efforts in designing an effective set-up of a European system for emission trade are a good
match to the ‘leave it to the market’ strategy of the Ministry of Economic Affairs. Despite the fact that
they were charmed by the idea of extra gas extraction by means of CO2 storage, the oxyfuel technol-
ogy was just one of many options. Thus at least three other options were examined to realise CO2 cap-
ture and storage (pre and post combustion, but also the relatively unknown method of cryogenic cap-
ture of CO2 from flue gases using the cold present in LNG). And then there were nuclear energy and
the many renewable energy options. Economic Affairs insisted that the choice of technology should
not be up to the government. A level playing field should be created through general regulation in
which the market would eventually determine the technology. The fact that this did not only lead to
competition can be concluded from the clever combinations SEQ created with other options. Thus cur-
rently CO2 is stored from a pre-combustion plant in the Eemshaven. More importantly, following the
advice of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, SEQ looked across the borders of the energy domain,
which eventually considerably accelerated the development of new material for the ZEPP. After all,
the high requirements connected with materials exposed to extreme conditions are no specific problem
for the energy generation industry. Apart from that, Economic Affairs recently decided to divert from
this market-aimed strategy at one point by playing a pioneering role in the development of a CO2 in-
frastructure in the North of the Netherlands.

CO2 storage not a public issue
Contrary to the many technological and economic obstacles the public acceptation eventually turned
out to be better than anticipated. NGOs like Greenpeace and the Society for Nature and Environment,
who regularly expressed pessimistic views on CO2 capture and storage, eventually turned out to be in
favour of the option when they understood that without nuclear energy (‘never!’) and CO2 storage a
more environment-friendly energy supply would not easily be feasible. They also indicated to be will-
ing to participate under the condition that CO2 storage would be a -temporary- transition technology,
on the way to the end goal: energy supply based on sustainable, clean energy. Locally there were no
objections against the plant either. The expectation that CO2 storage could take place safely and with-
out a problem as well as natural gas, which also had been stored for millions of years without any
problems, was sufficient to convince the local inhabitants and governments. The visitor centre pro-


230
vided by SEQ at the plant’s premises eventually turned out to be a resounding success: especially the
hyper modern playground attracted many youth.

Ministery of Environmental Affairs
Based on interview with Mr Hans Spiegeler (Den Haag - 22 June 2007)

10 YEARS ZEPP IN DRACHTEN
Continuous critical reports lead to success
20 March 2020. Ex-employee of the ministry of VROM, Hans Spiegeler, describes the relationship
between VROM and the ZEPP in Drachten which will celebrate its 10th anniversary next month.

Despite a critical view, the ministry of VROM has always been in support of the ZEPP. And partly
due to this support the ZEPP has achieved its current position.

Follower of ZEPP from the very beginning
The ministry of VROM has followed the developments of ZEPP from the very beginning. At the be-
ginning of the years 2000 VROM was critical about the low returns caused by the energy demanding
production of oxygen for the oxyfuel method and the problems the first versions of the turbine experi-
enced with the high temperatures. The ministry also had her doubts about the 'jet motor' that had not
been tested extensively and the concept of Enhanced Gas Recovery, a technique that had not been
proven yet. But because of the Enhanced Gas Recovery ambitions, the degree of innovation and the
scale of the ZEPP at the same time VROM supported the project. For this reason, after the plant's re-
turns were improved, the technologies went through thorough testing and SEQ found a substantial
partner who was willing to bear some of the risk, Vrom decided to provide the project with financial
support (by means of the Borssele deal) to make a good start. The increase in scale of the ZEPP and
broader application of the technology in de past years was also regarded as positive by VROM be-
cause it fit within the framework of the Netherlands as an innovation country.

CO2 capture and storage: third pillar VROM policy
From the beginning of the century the energy policy of the ministry of VROM has been based on three
pillars connected with the goals of the governments. The first and most important pillar was energy
saving, the second pillar was sustainable energy. And the third pillar was aimed at energy generation
based on fossil fuels: CO2 capture and storage (CCS). The ZEPP could be categorised in the third pil-
lar but also had a connection to the first pillar by releasing residual heat to companies and households.
VROM considered this an advantage in the evaluation of the subsidy application of the ZEPP. How-
ever, the third pillar has always been the core of public discussion. After all, public money was used to
a fossil fuel, an aspect which was reason for a public debate.

ZEPP was a good start of national debate CCS
The start of construction of the ZEPP was also the start of the first concrete debate among directly in-
volved parties (local residents, companies, environment organisations and the contractors of the plant
with CCS) and expansion from a local to a national debate. The ministry of VROM has acted as direc-
tor in this debate because it was of great importance that the society would maintain a positive image
on CCS implementation. This public debate would not only determine the fate of other CCS projects,
but it would also have an effect on the market and especially the national and regional policy in this
field. VROM advised SEQ to set up and execute a communication plan aimed at transparent commu-
nication to all parties. To keep all parties sufficiently involved in the discussion and reduce the risk at
resistance, VROM also encouraged the minister of environment to stay in close contact on the subject
with environment organisations.

Through the transparent communication and active approach of the initiators of the ZEPP, the debate
on CCS and the ZEPP went into the right direction. This was a positive development for the ZEPP it-
self, but also for VROM. The ZEPP could be constructed without delays or major adjustments and the
implementation of CCS in the Netherlands had a positive start. The large-scale CCS projects that were
later implemented in our country also profited of this positive outcome of the ZEPP debate.



                                                                                                      231
North Netherlands and Rotterdam: the CCS regions
The location of the ZEPP in the North of the Netherlands was a good choice of SEQ according to the
Ministry. After all, from an early stage VROM has considered the CCS activities in the Netherlands as
more or less bundled in North Netherlands and the region of Rotterdam (Rijnmond).

From the start, the North of the Netherlands was well represented by Energy Valley in the negotiations
with the government. And the ZEPP has gratefully made use of this and allowed Energy Valley to rep-
resent her interests at a national level.

Municipality of Smallingerland
Based on interview with Mr Sjouke van der Meulen, Wim Wierda and Eric Meurs (Drachten - 8 May
2007)

Opportunistic thinking
20 March 2020. Alderman Jeeninga of the municipality Smallingerland looks back at the relationship
between the municipality and the ZEPP in Drachten which has been active for 10 years.

ZEPP created many opportunities for Drachten
From the beginning, the municipality Smallingerland has been positive about the plans of the ZEPP in
Drachten and at an early stage had proactive discussions with Mr van de Waal, the Ministry of Eco-
nomic Affairs and the province. From the very start the municipality attempted to think in opportuni-
ties for the city and region created by a similar plant. Of course it quickly became clear that the plant
offered the opportunity to realise highly ambitious goals in the field of climate policy. However, that
was not all. The ZEPP eventually turned out to be an engine for several developments in the region.

Soon became clear that the innovative generator applied in the ZEPP is also suitable for other plants in
the region, especially after a new and larger type had been developed. The biomass plant which was
located nearby, for example - which has been active for eight years already - uses the same technol-
ogy. The performance of the plant - along with emission reduction within the city borders - have made
a giant leap forward. Cooperation between ZEPP and the biomass plant also took place in de form of
joint lobby work and information supply. In the vicinity of both installations an information center was
built to inform citizens, but also to communicate with the national government to achieve better sub-
sidy arrangements. Through these activities the municipality Smallingerland gained a reputation in the
field of energy. Finally the offer of low-priced heat turned out to be a source of new activities and
agreements were set up with the employers organisation ‘Ta Wolfaert’ regarding long term heat sup-
ply to the industrial area located nearby.

Time gain for actual sustainable technologies
In general, application of the ZEPP technology has proved to generate more time for further imple-
mentation of real sustainable technologies in the region like wind (which was still coping with serious
problems around public acceptance in 2007) and biomass. Although at that time some parties from the
environment movement often indicated that investments in CO2 storage could take their toll on in-
vestments in sustainable energy, the municipality substantiated that the ZEPP technology was a seri-
ous candidate for the short and mid term, because it could build on over 100 years experience with the
recovery and combustion of fossil fuels. The example of the generator and joint lobbying above shows
that even a positive spin-off to real sustainable technologies was possible.

Positive contribution to employability
However, the main contribution eventually entails a substantial decrease of unemployment in the re-
gion of Drachten. The municipality considered this aspect crucial for the public acceptance and suc-
cess rate of the plant. History shows that unemployment rates have been very high in the region (10-
15%). The exploitation of the plant itself has played an important however small part in this. More
important was that in the further refining of the process and the exploration of the acquired knowledge
local knowledge institutes were involved, like the development centre of Philips which is located in
Drachten. After facilitating work of the municipality, the academics within these organisations were
closely involved in the ZEPP and at a later date also in other new energy projects within the munici-


232
pality like and ethanol plant and a biogas production installation. It had a positive effect on the image
of the region as employer for academics. No longer do academics leave the region and an increasing
number of academics return to the region. Also other sectors like the hotel branch, housing corpora-
tions and cultural institutions still profit from this renewed attraction.

Public acceptance and safety
Despite the opportunities ZEPP created for the region the developments did not come easy. The view
of SEQ at that time properly dealt with public acceptance and information supply, however after little
time the municipality noticed that current policy was not sufficient. Above all, the city feared the
NIMBY effect and lack of knowledge. Even within the city council for example little was known
about the installation. The city council then decided to take the initiative to organise an information
session in the beginning of the planning phase, which also created an opportunity to discuss the bio-
mass plant. SEQ considered this a signal to develop more activities in this field itself, and cooperated
with the municipality to make sure that the communication around the ZEPP occurred as optimal and
transparent as possible. An important aspect in this was the communication around the safety of CO2
storage in the ground. Several studies showed that this would not cause any problems, however SEQ,
together with the local knowledge institutes and the association ‘Dorpsbelang de Wilgen’, set up a
special communication and information programme on the safety aspect. A number of gatherings took
place which allowed local residents and other interested parties to ask questions and have discussions
with Wouter van de Waal and other SEQ members and the municipality, but also with independent in-
stitutions and persons like scientists from the University of Groningen. They also opened an informa-
tive website with an open forum to encourage citizen participation and flyers on the ZEPP were dis-
tributed in the entire region. Besides SEQ members held presentations at schools and environment,
neighbourhood, sports and other institutions. In this period SEQ also reported in the media on the
plans and progress of the ZEPP on a regular basis. These activities eventually had a positive effect and
were enforced by a rapidly increasing public awareness of climate issues.

Local policy for a local installation
Ten years ago, when the plant became operable, there was no legal framework for CO2 storage. At
first instance SEQ tried to work around this by categorising the plant in the existing mining legislation.
Because the Ministry of Economic Affairs is in charge of this regulation, the municipality feared not
to have much influence on this. Several years later joint lobbying of SEQ and the municipality Smal-
lingerland eventually a new legal framework was created that allowed much more competences to lo-
cal governments. The advantages of this was that local governments had more insight in de wishes and
demands of citizens and were better equipped to take that into account in the licensing process. The
further expansion of the CO2 network in the region and the supply of CO2 from the Eemshaven to the
ZEPP already showed that this brought along a considerable improvement in licensing procedures,
taking the preferences of the local community into account.

Province of Friesland
Based on interview with Mr Harm Jan Bouwers (Leeuwarden, May 2nd 2007)

ZEPP started local economic growth
20 March 2020. Deputy Jeeninga of the province of Frisian describes the relation between the prov-
ince and the ZEPP in the town of Drachten which will celebrates it’s 10th birthday next month.

The province has been positive about the ZEPP from the first plans on. They considered the economic
spin-off of such a innovative plant as a opportunity for the province. In 2005 the province already
wrote a letter of recommendation for the ZEPP to the minister of Economic Affairs. Since that mo-
ment a lot has happened.

Information supply and an open debate with citizens.
Because PM Wouter van de Waal considered a broad societal support for his plans essential for the
success of the ZEPP, he started an active information and debating campaign with the public in 2007
to inform them about and discuss the plans. Many meetings were organised in which neighbours and
other interested people could ask questions and discuss with the PM and other employees of SEQ, the


                                                                                                     233
province and the municipality. Also an informative website was opened with an open forum on which
everybody could react on the plans and bring in their own ideas. Together with these, information leaf-
lets were spread out in the whole province. The employees of SEQ also gave many presentations at
local schools, environmental-, neighbour-, sport- and other associations. The local media also reported
often about the plans and development of the ZEPP and therewith played an important role in the pub-
lic opinion. In the first series of license procedures in 2007, the media were still critical about the
plans, but as the information supply of SEQ reached a broader group, the articles in local newspaper
and items on radio and television became more and more positive.

It turned out that the public had a big need for information and the meetings were very busy. The Fri-
sians specifically wanted to know details about the possible consequences of the ZEPP for the sinking
of the ground. At the time several debates were running on the consequences for the soil (sinking of
the soil) of gas recovery and salt mining in the province. Many citizens were scared that the landscape
and soil of the traditionally agricultural province would change due to the underground activities. SEQ
anticipated on this fear by stressing the closed circle the ZEPP was working with in which the CO2
from the gas was stored back into the gas field which even reduced the chance for sinking of the soil.
The honesty of SEQ, that also pointed out in detail the uncertainties and possible negative conse-
quences of the ZEPP in their information campaign, for example the risk of using three innovative
technologies at the same time (generator & turbines, enhanced gas recovery and CO2 storage), ap-
pealed to the Frisians, known for their common-sense.

Apart from the information and debating campaign, the public was also asked to actively bring up own
ideas for example for the design of the plant. This eventually lead to some adaptations of the initial de-
sign like the placement of the more efficient turbines which made it possible to build a smaller cooling
tower which would be less dominant in the landscape. Also many trees and bushes are planted around
the plant to give it a more green appearance from both the land as the river side.

From public opinion towards policy and subsidies
The good information providence of SEQ has lead to a positive local public opinion towards the
ZEPP. The Frisians, and especially the inhabitants of Drachten, but also the Frisian environmental
federation, wanted the innovative plant to settle in their region and with that give a great impulse to
the economy in the region. They were proud of the ZEPP and saw the plant as a common project with
which they put Drachten on the map. The province has translated this positive public opinion and the
results of neutral research on the environmental consequences of the ZEPP into policy in favour of the
ZEPP. The province does not only work out the necessary licenses but also coordinated all the license
procedures at the national and municipality level.

Also the province has promoted the ZEPP within the joint venture of the three Northern provinces in
the Netherlands that meets up with the national government. At the time several plans for CO2 storage
projects existed in the north of the Netherlands that claimed for subsidies at the national level. But due
to an active promotion of the ZEPP within the joint venture, the ZEPP has received the necessary sub-
sidies.

That the ZEPP indeed was an economic impulse for the region, turned out at the moment SEQ moved
his headquarters to Drachten (they were still situated in Utrecht, in the middle of the country) and in-
volved many local companies and the local university within the development of the ZEPP. The plant
in Drachten has been expanded and two more ZEPPs have been built in the province close to other gas
fields. This spread out of small scale projects did fit better in the local policies than the earlier sug-
gested big expansion of the ZEPP in Drachten with the help of CO2 from other big electricity plants in
the north of the Netherlands. There was little public support, measured in the province at an early
stage of the plan by SEQ, for this expansion plan. The Frisians definitely preferred more small scale
projects to empty their own gas fields and store the CO2 from these fields. They didn’t want to become
the ‘drain of the region’ and store CO2 from other provinces in their gas fields.

Also another initial plan to supply the neighbouring companies and residential area with the residual
heat of the ZEPP via a heat grid, was adapted. The existing companies did not want to adapt their ex-


234
isting heat installations and also the inhabitants of the neighbouring residential area preferred gas
cooking and heating.

Siemens
Based on interview with Mr Koos Lichtendonk and Bernard Bos (Den Haag - 21 May 2007)

Columbus among the ZEPP plants started in Drachten
20 March 2020. Koos Lichtendonk of Siemens looks back at the successful development of ZEPP
technology. These developments started ten years ago when the first installation was built in Drachten.

A technical tour de force
The ZEPP plant in Drachten has been active for ten years now and has become a technical tour de
force, carefully combining efficiency, low production cost and environment-neutral energy generation.
Ten years ago the developments in ZEPP technology were still in full swing. The first applications
with CO2 capture and storage had already been implemented in a.l. America, the North Sea and in
Norway, but the scheduled plant in Drachten posed new challenges for technology supplier Siemens.
For the first version of the plant Siemens could still use existing turbine technology, but the high effi-
ciency required for compensating for the energy loss of oxygen production called for the development
of new, highly advanced turbine technology. The technical problems encountered were severe. It was
unclear if the mixture of CO2 and wat vapour would behave as a gas or as a vapour. Moreover, there
were insecurities which were brought along by possible contaminations in the oxygen and natural gas.
However, the real efficiency step was taken when Siemens, together with her partners Clean Energy
Systems (CES) and Florida Turbine Technologies (FTT), succeeded in realising a direct (as opposed
to indirect) combustion cycle which could skip the intermediary steam cycle. The possibility of a di-
rect cycle had already been realised in a test set-up by CES in 2007, but despite all positive expecta-
tions it wasn't until 2014 before the turbine was actually produced at a commercial scale.

Fair competition
The fact that technology development takes effort once again became clear from the fair competition
the unit Business Development of Siemens Nederland had to face to be able to introduce ZEPP tech-
nology at the R&D concern. Koos Lichtendonk of the unit made a smart move by first betting on ex-
isting technology which did not require R&D. An advantage was that Siemens had just bought gasifi-
cation technology, which was extensively used in the development of the new turbine. And then there
were the CES experts. Their background in rocket technology was way beyond this innovative turbine.
The consortium of Siemens, CES and FTT could count on the financial support of the Department of
Energy (DOE), that worked on the promotion of innovative energy technology within several pro-
grammes. In the beginning this did bring along some insecurities. The consortium depended on the du-
ration of such programmes. Fortunately it all turned out well and a major efficiency leap took place
which made the ZEPP plant in Drachten so innovative.

Public financing
Besides technology suppliers and the DOE the Ministry of Economic Affairs (EZ) of Spatial Planning
and … (VROM) have played a crucial role in the realisation of the ZEPP in Drachten. In 2007 they
were, directly and indirectly (through the transition platforms), for a large part responsible for the pub-
lic financing of the installation. For a long time the financing from the FEW and UKR fees were un-
clear, but halfway through 2007 things were looking better in The Hague and eventually in September
it was announced that the construction could take place with sufficient financing. Without this financ-
ing things could have turned out quite differently and the project could not have taken place.

Licensing and public acceptation
When the main hurdles were taken (technical and financial) construction could start. To Siemens ex-
pectation it turned out that Wouter van de Waal had arranged for a very favourable local licensing
procedure. SEQ had also taken sufficient action with regard to public acceptation, even though the po-
sition of environment federations remained ambivalent for a long time. Several federations had differ-
ent viewpoints, which on top of that could vary greatly. Another insecure factor was the attitude of the
local residents. Eventually, partly with the help of Siemens (who meanwhile also has an interest in the


                                                                                                      235
plant), the communication stressed the fact that CO2 storage offered local advantages, because surface
subsidence could be halted. This complemented the first ideas of Wouter van de Waal around CO2
storage in the nineties. A second argument that Siemens and SEQ stressed in their communication ap-
proach was the positive relation with renewable energy sources. After all, all options including CO2
storage were necessary to realise the ambitious goals of the Dutch government.

A crucial role for the Dutch government
The Dutch government did not only play a crucial role in the setting of objectives. After the first in-
stallation was in full operation, after 2015 many inquiries were received for similar plants. The impor-
tance of a number of well functioning regional infrastructures for not only CO2 but also oxygen and
hydrogen quickly became evident. Because of the public interest and despite the privatisation trends in
the 90’s the government has decided to play a pulling role. Soon in Drachten construction will be
started of a combined infrastructure for CO2, oxygen and hydrogen. Siemens, SEQ and their partners
thereby honourably defend their ‘Columbus’ status with another discovery mission to the future of the
Dutch energy supply.

Frisian Environmental organisation
Based on interview with Mr Rob from de Bosch (Amsterdam - 11 June 2007)

ZEPP: important step in environment improvement
20 March 2020. Director of the Frisian Environment Federation (FMF) Hemminga describes the rela-
tionship between the FMF and the ZEPP in Drachten which, next month, has been active for ten years.

The Frisian Environment Federation (FMF) has been positive about the ZEPP from the beginning.
They regarded ZEPP as an important opportunity for the environment because it tackles the CO2 emis-
sions. The reduction of CO2 emission, besides the reduction of energy consumption, has for long been
a spearhead of the FMF.

North Netherlands, the Silicon Valley of sustainable energy
The FMF has, in direct cooperation with Energy Valley, the Environment Federations of Groningen
and Drenthe and the various governments in the North, in the past decades put a lot of effort into the
development of Friesland as the Silicon Valley of sustainable energy. Partly thanks to the efforts of the
FMF the Northern part of the Netherlands has become an area where several sustainable energy tech-
nologies are tested and developed to subsequently be applied at a larger scale throughout the world.
Because the ZEPP fitted very well within these regional ambitions of the FMF, FMF has supported the
project in several ways right from the planning phase.

Project group ‘public acceptance ZEPP’
From the planning phase the FMF has focused on the public acceptance of the ZEPP among the resi-
dents of Drachten and Friesland in general. According to the FMF, public acceptance was essential to
achieve a successful realisation of the ZEPP. In 2007, at the recommendation of FMF, a project group
was established to achieve this. Besides the FMF and SEQ Nederland the city of Smallingerland and
the province Fryslân participated in this group as well as representatives of the surrounding
neighbourhoods and the industrial area Ta Wolfeart. One of the first achievements of the project group
‘Public acceptance ZEPP’ is the implementation of an independent research by four experts to the im-
pact of CO2 storage on the surface in the longer term. The results of this research (‘we can state with
high probability that CO2 storage in the soil has no major negative impact on the soil condition’) are
used as a basis for an active promotion campaign the project group set up for the ZEPP.

This campaign started in 2007 with a special edition of the information bulletin Environment News
(Milieunieuws) of the FMF on the capture and storage of CO2 in general and the planned ZEPP as
main item. This free information paper was distributed in large quantities among the residents of
Drachten and surroundings. This edition of Milieunieuws was also a means of announcing gatherings
organised by the project group where residents of Drachten and other interested parties received in-
formation on the ZEPP and could inquire about the plant, the used technologies, the profits, etc. Dur-
ing these meetings images were used to enable the participants to visualise the plant as well as the


236
technology. There was a scale model of the plant and video images with an artist impression of the in-
side of the plant providing a simple explanation of the technology. Besides these gatherings the EMF
and the project group organised several excursions for interested parties to Siemens, where the ZEPP
turbines were produced, to ECN in Petten where a test set-up of CO2 capture was displayed and to the
German Spremberg where the first CO2 capture installation in Europe was built at a coal-fired power
plant.

During the entire planning phase the FMF and the project group ‘public acceptation ZEPP’ have
worked closely together with the Frisian media. Since the local newspapers as well as the Frisian radio
station are a powerful party in the region, there was a risk that negative reporting would put the ZEPP
in a different light which would increase the aversion against the plant. For this reason, on the advice
of FMF, the project group has chosen for a pro-active media approach and encouraged the involve-
ment of the media in her activities as much as possible. In this way, the media received reliable infor-
mation on the opportunities and positive aspects of the ZEPP but also on the insecurities and technical,
societal, economic and legal barriers. Partly because of this steady information exchange, reporters
were generally relatively positive about the ZEPP and negative reports in the media remain few.

Adjustments project plan in consult with local parties
Based on the contacts FMF and the project group ‘Public acceptation ZEPP’ had with local residents
and other local parties, a number of adjustments have been made to the first project plan to improve
public acceptance of the ZEPP. At first, the design of the plant and the surrounding terrain were al-
tered to match the surroundings. The changes mainly implied that more natural materials were used for
the plant and the open space planning in the immediate surroundings of the plant. Because of the ma-
jor resistance to the planned cooling tower (‘waste of heat' and ‘the ZEPP should be a cogeneration
plant') further research was done to explore the possibilities of heat emission to adjoining companies
and residential areas. This led to a modern heat grid which was installed at the same time of the expan-
sion of the plant, which entailed that water was transported underground under high pressure to the
heat consumers. At the same time, this residential use of heat led to a better acceptance of the plant by
the residents who now were part of the chain. A third adjustment to the project plan applied to the in-
volvement of local businesses (contractors, installers, construction companies, architects, painters,
technical maintenance personnel, etc.) in the construction and maintenance of the plant. It was clear
that the Frisians wanted to keep the profit within the region for as much as possible and would not just
have to deal with the inconveniences and no advantages, which often used to be the case with the gas
winning in the past. A last adjustment to the original project plan is the financial participation of resi-
dents in the ZEPP. Residents could participate and become part owner of the ZEPP for an amount of
minimally € 5.000 and receive a percentage of the profit. Over 100 private persons have participated in
this manner since 2009 in the ZEPP. This participation will be profitable from 2012 (on the average
residents gain approximately 10% of their investment a year) and the profit of the ZEPP increases an-
nually due to efficiency improvements to the plant in several areas.

Visitors centre ZEPP is profit for FMF
The organisation of the visitors centre at the ZEPP grounds has been in the hands of the FMF from the
beginning. They have turned the ZEPP location into a regional visitors centre where all Frisians can
obtain information about the ZEPP, but also on improving energy efficiency of their households. The
centre provides clear information on energy saving, on green electricity and green gas, on sustainable
energy generation in households (e.g. small wind mills like the Energy Ball) and on sustainable energy
solutions that can be implemented at district level. Besides, there are temporary expositions on themes
like sustainable water use, environment friendly transportation, etc. The visitor’s centre of the ZEPP
draws thousands of visitors annually and stimulates the acceptance of the plant in the region. At the
same time it brings along a liveliness at the industrial area which prevents it from the desertion that is
typical for many industrial areas.

Ta Wolfeart
Based on interview with Mr Hans Olislagers, Johan Raatjes and Douwe Offringa (Drachten, 3 July
2007)



                                                                                                      237
ZEPP catalyst in public developments
20 March 2020. The former management of Ta Wolfeart looks back at the successful development of
ZEPP technology. These developments started ten years ago with the construction of the first installa-
tion in Drachten.

The development and application of sustainable technology has strongly emerged in the Netherlands
in the past years. Positive effects for the environment like the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
have always been an important argument in this, but the development of the innovative ZEPP plant in
Drachten has shown that new technologies can have a much broader effect and even serve as a catalyst
for public developments. This is substantiated by the three former members of Ta Wolfeart - the asso-
ciation of undertakings of Drachten. At first SEQ considered the construction of the plant in Drachten
also part of the debate on climate change. However, with cooperation of Ta Wolfeart - a strong sup-
porter of the plant from the beginning -, the plant became an instrument to raise some other issues in
the local surroundings of Drachten.

The water returned in Drachten
The ZEPP was built on the industrial area ‘De Haven - Tussendiepen’. On one side it borders on the
inland harbour which connects to the Prinses Margrietkanaal and on the other side to the Drachtster
Vaart. The arrival of the ZEPP implied a renovation of both waterways. At the beginning of this cen-
tury the Drachtster Vaart - filled in the past - still ended at the border of the residential area of Drach-
ten, but suggestions were made to dig out the canal once again and bring back the water to the centre
of Drachten, for recreational purposes. The Prinses Margrietkanaal and the inland harbour were
mainly used for transport to and from the industrial area, however it faced a capacity problem and the
option to upgrade to a so-called class 5D canal became inevitable. Both developments rapidly took
place after the arrival of the ZEPP.

Tourism at the Drachtster Vaart
The extension of the Drachtster Vaart brought along the possibility to use residual heat of the ZEPP,
the main catalyst. The two largest heat consumers at the industrial area - Kijlstra beton and Philips -
were highly interested in low-cost heat from the start, but it quickly turned out that ZEPP produced
much more heat than the companies could consume. Subsequently SEQ, together with the city,
searched for different solutions and soon came upon the construction plans of a new swimming pool.
They decided to build this swimming pool in the centre of Drachten, at the location of the former Tha-
lenpark. Also, Fenner Dunlop, who had been suffering from ongoing protests against stench nuisance,
was relocated from the centre to the industrial area, where it could profit from low-cost energy and
room for expansion. The freed space in the centre was occupied by the new swimming pool, while the
necessary parking space for pool visitors was established at the industrial area. The expansion of the
Drachtster Vaart was a logical continuation. The visitors of the pool were transferred to and from the
pool by means of a free 'gondola service', which created a unique attraction for the pool. Moreover,
tourism at the Drachtster Vaart will soon be further enforced with the construction of a recreative har-
bour for small sailboats in the centre of Drachten, including a number of senior residences with a view
of the harbour and a growing market for the Drachtse business people.

CO2 transportation by ship
On the other side of the industrial area the arrival of the ZEPP entailed a large impulse for an upgrade
of the Prinses Margrietkanaal. The natural gas field on which the ZEPP was built can contain a large
quantity of CO2. Therefore it was evident to store CO2 from other electricity plants. Although many
regional and national parties were convinced that it was necessary to install a pipeline grid for the
transportation of CO2, this was a toilsome process due to the great investments and risks. SEQ, in co-
operation with Ta Wolfeart, lobbied at the province and national government for a broadening and
deepening of the Prinses Margrietkanaal, to create a facility to transport CO2 in compressed form
(‘Compressed CarbonDioxide Gas’, CCG) by ship. This innovation which was patented by SEQ is
now implemented at several locations worldwide.




238
Intelligent heat supply
Looking back, the supply of residual heat of SEQ to the swimming pool and the industrial area has
been a crucial step in the success of the ZEPP, but that is not all. In recent, steadily progressing plans
for a new residential area in Drachten Oost residual heat supply of the ZEPP is considered in the de-
sign plan. The construction of a new biomass plant next to the ZEPP plays an important role in this.
An expansion of the production of heat by different companies creates the possibility for intelligent
heat supply, where demand and supply can be attuned much better. Thus the residents of the new area
can be sure of a stable, continuous and low-cost heating supply.

The upgrade of an old industrial area
The arrival of the new companies has eventually led to a major upgrade of the old industrial area. Be-
sides Dunlop, the biomass plant and the parking company, also more knowledge intensive organisa-
tions were approached who aim towards high level energy research. The Philips research centre is the
key figure in these new developments and has freed part of her research capacity for a new ‘Energie-
campus’ - comparable to the R&D campus in Eindhoven - and works closely together with SEQ and
the biomass plant in a broad visitors centre for sustainable energy and other socially interesting devel-
opments like a recent exposition on transportation on water ways. Such a broad set-up of the visitors
centre is a good match to the city's ideas of further developing Drachten as a culture city. SEQ, which
with this series of technical and social innovations could play an important public surplus value for the
local community in Drachten, is therefore highly regarded among the business people and citizens of
Drachten.

D.2.3.8 The stakeholder vision titles
Ministry of Economic Affairs
Breakthrough in Drachten
‘Technological life test enormous success!’

Ministry of Environmental Affairs
10 years ZEPP in Drachten
Continuous critical reports lead to success

Municipality of Smallingerland
Opportunistic thinking

Province of Friesland
ZEPP started local economic growth

Siemens
Columbus among the ZEPP plants started in Drachten

Frisian Environmental organisation
ZEPP: important step in environment improvement

Ta Wolfeart
ZEPP catalyst in public developments

D.2.3.9 The stakeholder social networks




                                                                                                     239
Ministry of Economic Affairs
   Economic
    Affairs                                                                              Possible heating infrastructure                       Technology
                                       Partners / investors                                households, new housing                    Plant 2x as big
                                                                                           development, no gas grid
                                                                                                                                          New, efficient, low-
                                                                                                Heat release         Gas recovery           cost turbine
                                                                                              through cooling       from adjoining           technology
                                                                        Wintershall
                                                                                                   tower                fields
                                                     Bank              Noordzee BV
 Households in favor of                                                                      Clean Energy
   electric cooking                                                                          Systems US               Material
                                                                                            Siemens                 development
                                                         New                                                         by external
                                                         party                                  Volker               industries
       Nuon: CO2 supply
      from Magnum plant                                                                         Wessels


            Other CO2                                                                                                             ECN
          suppliers from
           Eemshaven
                                    Companies                                                                                                 Delft
                                    near plant                                       SEQ                                                    University
 Market




              NAM: supplier




                                                                                                                                                                   Science
                                                                                                                                                                   Science
                                                                                  Nederland
               empty fields
                                                                                   (Van de
                                         Competition:
                                                                    X               Waal,                                                     TNO
                                         CO2 storage                               Drenth)

 Emission trading:
                                       NV Gasunie
  high CO2 price
    (20 €/ton),
  decreasing role                   Biomass                                                                      Universities /
                                      plant                                                                        schools
       CDM                                                                                    Visitors
                                                                  EU: Emission                center
                                                                 trading system
   Sustainable
                       Shell                  Economic            + CO2 bank +
   energy max.                                                                                      Society Nature         Media
                                               Affairs           high CO2 price
    30% in EU                                                                                      and Environment
                                         Foreign
                                         Affairs                                              Climate problems high         Public in favor of cheap
 Reasonable                                              SodM
                                                                       UN                      on societal agenda          clean energy compared to
  gas price                                                                  Min.Envir                                        expensive renewable
                      Specific        Sustainable                            onment                                                  energy
                  legislation CO2     gas in MEP
                                                                                City of
                      storage                             Province
                                                                             Smallingerland
                                                          of Fryslan
                  Politics / Policy                                                                                    Social / cultural

Ministry of Environmental Affairs
Ministry of Housing,                                                                                                                           Technology
                                                                                               Possible heating infrastructure
Spatial Planning and                      Partners / investors                                   households, new housing
the Environment (VROM)                                                                           development, no gas grid                        Plant 2x as big

                                                                                                    Heat release            New, efficient,
                                                                                                      through              low-cost turbine
                                                                        Wintershall
                                                                                                    cooling tower            technology
                                                     Bank              Noordzee BV
 Households in favor of                                                                       Clean Energy
   electric cooking                                                                           Systems US              Gas recovery
                                                                                                                     from adjoining
                                                         New                                Siemens                      fields
                                                         party
      Nuon: delivery CO2
                                                                                                    Volker
      from Magnum plant
                                                                                                    Wessels

            Other CO2                                                                                                             ECN
          suppliers from
           Eemshaven
                                    Companies                                                                                               University
                                    near plant                                       SEQ                                                      Delft
 Market




              NAM: supplier
                                                                                                                                                                   Science
                                                                                                                                                                   Science




                                                                                  Nederland
               empty fields
                                                                                   (Van de
                                         Competition:
                                                                    X               Waal,                                                     TNO
                                         CO2 storage                               Drenth)

 Emission trading:
                                       NV Gasunie                                                                    Universities /
  high CO2 price


       CDM
          X
    (20 €/ton),
  decreasing role                   Biomass
                                      plant                                                  Visitors
                                                                                                                       schools

                                                                                                                      Society Nature
                                                                                             center                  and Environment
                                              Economic
   Sustainable
                       Shell                   Affairs                                           Public debate                              Neighborhood - local
   energy max.                                                                                                             Media
                                                             EU                                   CO2 storage                                     citizens
     30 in EU
                                         Foreign
                                                                            UN
 Reasonable                              Affairs            Energy                           High public awareness          Citizens: aware of surplus value
  gas price                                                 Valley                               climate issues             of CO2 storage due to low energy
                                                                             VROM                                            price compared to sustainable
                         Specific
                                              SodM
                        legislation
                       CO2 storage                        Province
                                                          of Fryslan
                                                                                City of
                                                                             Smallingerland
                                                                                                                                  X      energy


                  Politics / Policy                                                                                    Social / cultural
Municipality of Smallingerland


240
          City
                                                                                                     Possible heating infrastructure
                                                                                                                                                      Technology
                                          Partners / investors                                         households, new housing
                                                                                                       development, no gas grid                           Plant 2x as big


                                                                                                  Heat release through             New, efficient, low-
                                                                             Wintershall             cooling tower                   cost turbine
                                                            Bank            Noordzee BV                                               technology
 Households in favor of                                                                              Clean Energy
   electric cooking                                                                                  Systems US             Gas recovery
                                                                                                 Siemens                   from adjoining
                                                             New                                                               fields
                                                             party
       Nuon: CO2 supply
                                                                                                           Volker
      from Magnum plant
                                                                                                           Wessels

             Other CO2                                                                                                                   ECN
           suppliers from
            Eemshaven
                                      Companies                                                                                                      Delft
                                      near plant                                           SEQ                                                     University
 Market




                 NAM: supplier




                                                                                                                                                                             Science
                                                                                                                                                                             Science
                                                                                        Nederland
                  empty fields
                                                                                         (Van de
                                              Competition:
                                                                          X               Waal,                                                      TNO
                                              CO2 storage                                Drenth)

                                                                                                                                                      RUG
 Emission trading:
                                          NV Gasunie
  high CO2 price
                                                                                                Visitors
    (20 €/ton),
                                      Biomass                                                   center                 Universities /
  decreasing role                                                                                                                                    Philips development
       CDM                              plant                                                                            schools
                                                                                                                                                             center
                                                                                                Dorpsbelang de
                                                                                                    Wilgen             Frisian Environment
   Sustainable                                                                                                              Federation
                          Shell                  Economic
   energy max.                                                                                         Society Nature and      Media
                                                  Affairs          EU
    30% in EU                                                                                            Environment
                                              Foreign
                                                                                UN                                                      Residents: aware of the
  Reasonable                                  Affairs                                                      High public
                                                                                                                                        synergy advantages of
   gas price                                                                                                awareness                    ZEPP technology and
                                                                          Min.Environment
                                Specific                                                                  climate issues                   other renewable
                                                  SodM
                            legislation CO2                                                                                                   technology
                                storage                                              Licensing: City of
                                                              Province
                                                                                      Smallingerland
                                                              of Fryslan
                     Politics / Policy                                                                                        Social / cultural

Province of Friesland
   Province
                                                                                                   Possible heating infrastructure
                                                                                                                                                     Technology
                                          Partners / investors
                                                                                                                     X
                                                                                                     households, new housing
                                                                                                     development, no gas grid                         Plant twice as big

                                                                                                        Heat release           New, efficient, low-
                                                                            Wintershall               through cooling            cost turbine
                                                            Bank           Noordzee BV                     tower                  technology
 Households in favor of                                                                              Clean Energy

             X
   electric cooking

                                    Several
                                                                                                     Systems US
                                                                                                Siemens
                                                                                                                            Gas winning
                                                                                                                           from adjoining
                                                             New                                                               fields
   Nuon: CO2 supply                ‘ZEPP’ in
                                                             party
    from Magnum
         plant
                 X                 Friesland                                                              Volker
                                                                                                          Wessels
                                                                                                                           Local
                                                                                                                           MKB

      Other CO2                                                                                                                         ECN
            X
    suppliers from
     Eemshaven
                                      Companies                                                                                                     Delft
                                           X
                                      near plant                                           SEQ                                                    University
 Market




                 NAM: supplier
                                                                                                                                                                            Science
                                                                                                                                                                            Science




                                      (heat grid)                                       Nederland
                  empty fields
                                                                                        Located in
                                          Competition: CO2
                                                                        X                Drachten                                                   TNO
                                          storage in North
                                            Netherlands
 Emission trading:                                                                                                                                RUG
                                          NV Gasunie
  high CO2 price
    (20 €/ton),
  decreasing role                     Biomass
                                        plant                                                     Visitors             Universities /
     of CDM                                                                                                                                        Frisian
                                                                                                  center                 schools
                                                                                                                                                environment
   Sustainable                                 Economic                                                                                          federation
                         Shell                                                                            Society Nature
   energy max.                                Affairs (DG                        UN                                            Media
                                                                EU                                             and                                              Citizens: aware of
    30% in EU                                 energy and                                                                                                          surplus value of
                                                                                                           Environment
                                              DG region)                            Min.                                                                        CO2 storage due to
 Reasonable
  gas price                                     Foreign
                                                                                Environment      High public awareness
                                                                                                    of climate issues
                                                                                                                                      Residents critical
                                                                                                                                                                        X
                                                                                                                                                                 low energy price
                                                                                                                                                                   compared to
                            Specific            Affairs        SNN              Municipality                                                                    renewable energy
                                                                                                                                        on foundation:
                        legislation CO2                                        Smallingerland                                         early involvement
                                                 SodM
                            storage                                                                                                   in planning ZEPP
                                                             Province
                     Politics / Policy                       of Fryslan                                                      Social / cultural




                                                                                                                                                                                       241
Siemens
   Siemens
                                                                                                          Possible heat infrastructure                   Technology
                                             Partners / investors                                          households, new housing
                                                                                                           development, no gas grid                        Plant 2x as big
                                                                                     Wintershall
                                                                                    Noordzee BV       Heat release            Combined CO2, oxygen                   Dutch
                                                                                                        through                   and hydrogen                     government
                                                                                                      cooling tower              infrastructures
                                                                Bank
                                                                                                      Florida Turbine
 Households in favor of                                                                                                         Gas recovery                        Department
                                                                                                       Technologies
   electric cooking                                                                                                            from adjoining                        of Energy
                                                                                                          Clean Energy             fields
                                                                  New                                     Systems US
                                                                  party                                                     Siemens                        New, efficient,
       Nuon: CO2 supply                                                                               Volker
      from Magnum plant                                                                                                                                   low-cost turbine
                                                                                                      Wessels
                                                                                                                                                            technology
             Other CO2                                                                                                                     ECN
           suppliers from                                                                                                                                   Siemens
            Eemshaven                                                                                                                                      management
                                           Companies
                                           near plant                                           SEQ
 Market




                   NAM: supplier                                                                                                             Delft




                                                                                                                                                                              Science
                                                                                                                                                                              Science
                                                                                             Nederland
                    empty fields                                                                                                           University
                                                                                              (Van de
                                                   Competition:
                                                                               X               Waal,                                                    TNO
                                                   CO2 storage                                Drenth)

 Emission trading:
                                              NV Gasunie
  high CO2 price
    (20 €/ton),
  decreasing role                          Biomass                                                                        Universities /
                                             plant                                                                          schools
     of CDM                                                                                            Visitors
                                                                                                       center
   Sustainable                                                            EU
                           Shell                   Economic
   energy max.                                                                                               Society Nature           Media
                                                    Affairs
    30% in EU                                                                                               and Environment
                                                                   Transition          UN
                                           Foreign                                                                                       Citizens: aware of
 Reasonable                                                        platforms                          High public awareness
                                           Affairs                                                                                     surplus value of CO2
  gas price                                                                                              of climate issues
                                                                                           Min.                                       storage as a means to
                                Specific                                                                                                prevent subsidence
                                                      SodM                             Environment
                            legislation CO2
                                storage                                                      City of
                                                                   Province
                                                                                         Smallingerland
                                                                   of Fryslan
                       Politics / Policy                                                                                        Social / cultural

Frisian Environmental organisation
          Future vision FMF
                                                                                                            IMPORTANT: role of CHP: heat
                                                                                                                                                              Technology
                                                    Partners / investors                                     infrastructure households, new
                                                                                                            housing development, no gas grid                    Plant 2x as big
                                                                                        Wintershall
                                                                                       Noordzee BV       Heat release without            New, efficient, low-
                                      Financial participation
                                            residents                                                     cooling tower with               cost turbine
                                                                                Bank                   innovative heating grid              technology
          Households in favor of                                                                               Clean Energy
            electric cooking                                                                                   Systems US           Gas recovery from
                                            Keep profits as                                                                          adjoining fields
                                                local as                                                  Siemens
                                               possible:               New
            Nuon: CO2 supply
                                             involve local             party                                        Volker
           from Magnum plant
                                              companies                                                             Wessels
                Other CO2                                                                                                                      ECN
              suppliers from
               Eemshaven
                                               Companies                                                                                                     Delft
                                               near plant                                             SEQ                                                  University
          Market




                       NAM: supplier
                                                                                                                                                                                        Science




                                                                                                   Nederland
                        empty fields
                                                                                                    (Van de
                                                       Competition:
                                                                                    X                Waal,                                                   TNO
                                                       CO2 storage                                  Drenth)                        Research to long
                                                                                                                                 term consequences
          Emission trading:                                                                                                        of CO2 in subsoil
                                                     NV Gasunie
           high CO2 price
             (20 €/ton),
           decreasing role                     Biomass
                                                 plant                                                                               Media
                CDM                                                                                    Visitors center:                                 Universities /
                                                                                                         renewable                                        schools
            Sustainable                                                                                    energy
                                   Shell                  Economic                                     management             FMF             residents
            energy max.
                                                           Affairs             EU
             30% in EU                                                                                                                                             Residents acceptation
                                                      Foreign                                                                              Residents: aware              essential
                                                                                            UN
                                                      Affairs                                              High public awareness            of surplus value
            HIGH
           gas price                                                                                          of climate issues             of CO2 storage
                                      Specific                                             Min.
                                                                                                                                               because of           Renewable energy
                                     legislation                                       Environment
                                                           SodM                                                                             environmental               becomes
                                         CO2
                                                                                              Municipality            SNM                     advantages           competition to fossil
                                       storage                            Province
                                                                                             Smallingerland                                                            (mainly PV)
                                                                          of Fryslan
                            Politics / Policy                                                                                         Social / cultural




242
Ta Wolfeart
 Ta Wolfeart
                                                                                            Possible heating infrastructure
                                                                                                                                           Technology
                                     Partners / investors                                     households, new housing                   Excavation Vaartse Dracht
                                                                                              development, no gas grid                   and widening PM canal

                                                                                               Heat release            Plant 2x as big
                                                                     Wintershall                 through
                                                     Bank           Noordzee BV                cooling tower     New, efficient, low-
 Households in favor of                                                                Clean Energy                cost turbine
   electric cooking                                                                    Systems US                   technology

                               Ta Wolfeart           New                              Siemens             Gas recovery
 Nuon: CO2 supply from                               party                                               from adjoining
     Magnum plant:                                                                                           fields
 transportation by ship         Swimmingpool,
                               gondola service +
                                                                                             Volker
                               parking company                                               Wessels                            ECN
 Other CO2 suppliers from
       Eemshaven:
 transportation by ship            Dunlop
                                                                                                                                           Delft
                                                                                  SEQ                                                    University
  Market




                                 Companies near plant:




                                                                                                                                                                Science
                                                                                                                                                                Science
                                                                               Nederland
                                Philips en Kijlstra beton
                                                                                (Van de
           NAM: supplier
            empty fields
                                                                  X              Waal,                                                     TNO
                                    Competition:                                Drenth)
                                    CO2 storage
 Emission trading:                   NV Gasunie                                                                                          Philips Energy
  high CO2 price                                                                                                                            campus
    (20 €/ton),            Biomass plant: combined
  decreasing role                                                                                              Universities /
                            heat supply with ZEPP                                                                schools
       CDM                                                                                Broad
                                                                                       public visitors
   Sustainable                                                                            center
                      Shell              Min.Economic
   energy max.                                                                                  Society Nature            Media
                                            Affairs          EU
    30% in EU                                                                                  and Environment
                                         Foreign
                                                                        UN                                                                  Residents: aware
 Reasonable                              Affairs                                       High public awareness         Local businesses
                                                                                           climate issues                                    of surplus value
  gas price                                                                                                                 and
                                                                        Ministry                                                             of CO2 storage
                           Specific                                                                                   neighborhood
                                             SodM                     Environment                                                           compared to low
                       legislation CO2                                                                                   aware of
                                                                             Gemeente                                                       energy price vs.
                           storage                      Provincie                                                    advantages ZEPP
                                                                           Smallingerland                                                      sustainable
                                                         Fryslan
                 Politics / Policy                                                                                  Social / cultural




                                                                                                                                                                          243
D.2.4 Step 3: Identifying conflicting issues
D.2.4.1 The conflicting issues table
Dimensions          Vision SEQ              Vision Municipal- Vision Frisian    Vision Ministry of Vision Province of Vision Siemens              Vision VROM       Vision Ta          Controverses           Opportunities
                                            ity Smallingerland Environment Fed- Economic Affairs Friesland                                                          Wolfeart
                                                               eration
Technology     and Drachten is demon- Technical spillover      Friesland as test   Technical spillover Adjustment plant     Technology devel- Technology devel- Heating grid to         Technology devel-     Involvement of
infrastructure     stration location for (generator) to bio-   location for sus-   to other technolo- design to public      opment slower than opment slower than Kijlstra beton, Phil- opment: timely        national govern-
                   ZEPP technology mass plant                  tainable technology gies and disciplines desires and local   expected and de- expected due to       ips Dunlop, new      delivery or too       ment in develop-
                   elsewhere in the                            elsewhere                                surroundings:       pendent of Ameri- energy-demanding residential area and many technical            ment CO2 infra-
                   world                                                                                smaller cooling     can partners and   production of oxy- swimming pool         problems and inse-    structure
                                                                                                        tower, more green   competition for    gen, problems with                       curities?
                                                                                                                            R&D resources      first versions tur-
                                                                                                                            within Siemens     bine, enhanced gas
                                                                                                                                               recovery and scale

                    Oxyfuel technology Made a big leap in Heat supply to       Development of     No heating supply         Several regional      ZEPP supplies     Compressed CO2 Infrastructure: cen- Technical combina-
                    development at     returns            business and resi- Oxyfuel technology to residential area         infrastructures for   businesses and    transport per ship tral infrastructure tion with biomass
                    sufficient pace                       dential area through occurs much slower due to lack of pub-       CO2, hydrogen and     households with   through PM canal for CO2 distribution plant (e.g. through
                                                          innovative CHP       than expected, es- lic acceptation of        oxygen, with pio-     heat                                 in combination with joint heat delivery)
                                                                               pecially develop- heating supply             neering role for                                           large scale e-
                                                                               ment of materials                            government                                                 production, or
                                                                                                                                                                                       much more decen-
                                                                                                                                                                                       tralised system, or
                                                                                                                                                                                       combination of
                                                                                                                                                                                       several infrastruc-
                                                                                                                                                                                       tures for oxygen,
                                                                                                                                                                                       CO2 and hydrogen,
                                                                                                                                                                                       or transport over
                                                                                                                                                                                       water?

                    Residual heat to        Low-cost residual Adjustment plant     Regional CO2 in-                                                                 Combined heating Heat infrastructure
                    business area and       heat to business  design to public     frastructure, with                                                               supply with bomass and delivery: deliv-
                    residential area        area              desires and local    pioneering role of                                                               plant              ery to households
                                                              surroundings: no     government                                                                                          and/or business
                                                              cooling tower,                                                                                                           district or not?
                                                              more green

                    CO2 infrastructure                                                                                                                                                 Cooling tower:
                    in combination with                                                                                                                                                cooling tower or
                    large scale electric-                                                                                                                                              not?
                    ity production

                    Installation cooling
                    tower
Economy             High CO2 price (20 Substantial de-         Involvement local FES, UKR fees and ZEPP important           FES and UKR fees ZEPP receives fi-      ZEPP important     If FES, UKR, MEP Involvement of


244
Dimensions    Vision SEQ            Vision Municipal- Vision Frisian    Vision Ministry of Vision Province of Vision Siemens                   Vision VROM          Vision Ta              Controverses        Opportunities
                                    ity Smallingerland Environment Fed- Economic Affairs Friesland                                                                  Wolfeart
                                                       eration
              euro/ton)             crease of employ- merchants and           MEP subsidy (sus-      impulse for local crucial for succes      nancial support of   impulse for upgrade and/or high CO2        local merchants and
                                    ment due to use of businesses in reali-   tainable gas in        economy by estab- of project              important partner    industrial area     price do not apply,    knowledge insti-
                                    local employment sation                   MEP) crucial for       lishment of main                          and through          through attracting the project will        tutes and settlement
                                    opportunities and                         success rate           office SEQ in                             Borssele deal        new industries and experience great        of main office SEQ
                                    knowledge institute                                              Drachten and in-                                               knowledge insti- difficulty because        in Drachten
                                    like RUG and Phil-                                               volving local busi-                                            tutes               important parties
                                    ips development                                                  nesses and knowl-                                                                  pull out
                                    center                                                           edge institutes like
                                                                                                     RUG and local
                                                                                                     merchants

              New employment                             Financial participa- Increase emission                                                Close cooperation ZEPP generates     Close cooperation Financial participa-
              possibilities by                           tion of citizens in prices CO2 not evi-                                               between Energy    opportunities for with Energy Valley tion of citizens
              establishment new                          ZEPP                 dent but crucial for                                             Valley and SEQ    local merchants in
              business and                                                    success rate                                                                       center of Drachten
              knowledge insti-                                                                                                                                   by increased tour-
              tutes                                                                                                                                              ism

                                                         Sustainable energy Strong competition                                                                                             Competition with    ZEPP generates
                                                         (mainly PV) be-    with other CCS and                                                                                             other sustainable   opportunities for
                                                         comes competition DE options                                                                                                      energy options      local merchants in
                                                         to fossil                                                                                                                                             center of Drachten
                                                                                                                                                                                                               by increased tour-
                                                                                                                                                                                                               ism

Environment   Climate neutral       Major decrease of    ZEPP important
              electricity produc-   municipal emis-      option in CO2 emis-
              tion                  sions                sion reduction
Society       Building informa-     Important role in-   Important role in- Public acceptance        Much more interest     Sufficient interest ZEPP exemplary      Important role in-     Role of information Emphasising posi-
              tioncentre, give      formation center,    formation center, not an issue for          in public accepta-     in public accepta- technology for in-   formation center       centre: only ZEPP tive image of North
              presentations and     however broader      but broader than    CCS, national as        tion and relation      tion, although posi- novative Nether-   but not just limited   or much broader     Netherlands and/or
              supervise PhD stu-    than just ZEPP       just ZEPP (interest well as local. In-      with media, Fri-       tion of environment lands and mainly    to ZEPP: on all        and including all region Drachten
              dents                                      in sustainable en- formation center         esche Milieufed-       federations re-      for Dutch CCS      publicly relevant      forms of sustain- and/or industrial
                                                         ergy household in especially success-       eratie and citizens.   mained ambivalent activities            developments           able energy house- area as sustainable
                                                         general)            ful because of          Mainly on local        for a long time                                                hold and including energy region
                                                                             playground              impact on subsoil                                                                     playground facili-
                                                                                                     and landscape due                                                                     ties
                                                                                                     to gas storage
                                                                                                     (never touch the
                                                                                                     Frisian ground and
                                                                                                     traditional land-
                                                                                                     scape)

              CCS accepted by       Much more interest Much more interest                            Resistance against                        ZEPP starting sig- ZEPP improves            Much more atten-



                                                                                                                                                                                                                             245
Dimensions   Vision SEQ          Vision Municipal- Vision Frisian    Vision Ministry of Vision Province of Vision Siemens                    Vision VROM             Vision Ta       Controverses           Opportunities
                                 ity Smallingerland Environment Fed- Economic Affairs Friesland                                                                      Wolfeart
                                                    eration
             public due to low   in information sup- in public accep-                              CO2 storage by                            nal for broad public image industrial   tion for public ac-
             cost                ply and especially tance through in-                              other emitters out-                       discussion on CCS area                  ceptance by well
                                 on safety of storage troduction of pro-                           side Friesland.                           under the supervi-                      organised informa-
                                 in cooperation with ject group, research                          Friesland is not                          sion of VROM                            tion supply to citi-
                                 Dorpsbelang de       on long term secu-                           interested in be-                                                                 zens and other in-
                                 Wilgen and Fri-      rity and close coop-                         coming the drain of                                                               volved parties (pos-
                                 esche milieufed-     eration Friesche                             North Netherlands                                                                 sibly in cooperation
                                 eratie               media                                                                                                                          with stakeholders)

             Smallingerland     Smallingerland        Friesland as Silicon                         North Netherlands                         Proper information
             most innovative    known for energy      Valley for sustain-                          as sustainable en-                        supply and active
             green municipality image                 able energy                                  ergy region                               approach of SEQ of
                                                                                                                                             directly involved
                                                                                                                                             like local residents,
                                                                                                                                             companies, envi-
                                                                                                                                             ronment orgnaisa-
                                                                                                                                             tions and the con-
                                                                                                                                             tractors
                                                                                                                                                                                     Research and em-
                                                                                                                                                                                     phasis on safety
                                                                                                                                                                                     CO2 storage?
                                 Citizens aware of Citizens aware of
                                 advantages of syn- surplus value of
                                 ergy between ZEPP CO2 storage be-
                                 and other sustain- cause of environ-
                                 able technology    mental advantage

Policy       Obliged capture of ZEPP is important                            ‘Leave it to the      Competition with      Positive relation   CCS third pillar in                     Role of regional       Emphasise time
             CO2                method to realise                            market’ strategie     other CCS projects    with sustainable    Dutch climate pol-                      government versus      gain in national and
                                very ambitious                               voor CCS beleid       in North Nether-      energy technologies icy                                     national govern-       regional policy for
                                goals on climate                             (met uitzondering     lands for subsidy     because all options                                         ment: to what ex-      development sus-
                                change of munici-                            van infrastructuur)   funds and political   are necessary                                               tent does regional     tainable energy
                                pality                                                             support (Coopera-                                                                 government play a      supply through
                                                                                                   tion alliance North                                                               role in licensing      CCS implementa-
                                                                                                   Netherlands)                                                                      coordination (new      tion
                                                                                                                                                                                     legal framework)

             Around 30% of the   ZEPP give time to                           Sustainable gas will Increasingly impor- Crucial role of EZ Share of 30% sus-                           Insecure: develop-
             energy supply in    develop real sus-                           be subsidies by new tant role of the re- VROM through       tainable feasible in                        ment emission trad-
             Europe is renew-    tainable technolo-                          MEP-format           gional government transition platforms Europe                                      ing system, but
             able energy         gies in region                                                   in licensing and                                                                   crucial for success
                                                                                                  coordination                                                                       rate of project

             ZEPP as example     New legal frame-                            Positive adjustment                                             Location ZEPP fits                      Competition with



246
Dimensions        Vision SEQ          Vision Municipal- Vision Frisian    Vision Ministry of Vision Province of Vision Siemens   Vision VROM          Vision Ta     Controverses          Opportunities
                                      ity Smallingerland Environment Fed- Economic Affairs Friesland                                                  Wolfeart
                                                         eration
                  for international   work with much                      of emission trading                                    within policy to                   other CCS projects
                  trade relations     more competences                    system                                                 turn North Nether-                 in North Nether-
                                      for local govern-                                                                          lands into Energy                  lands for subsidy
                                      ment                                                                                       Valley                             funding and politi-
                                                                                                                                                                    cal support (Coop-
                                                                                                                                                                    eration alliance
                                                                                                                                                                    North Netherlands)

                  New national pol-
                  icy framework for
                  CCS


D.2.4.2 The issues ranking table
Controversies and    Description
Opportunities
Controversy 1        Technology development: timely delivery or too many technical problems and insecurities?
Controversy 2        Infrastructure: central infrastructure for CO2 distribution in combination with large scale e-production, or much more decentralised system, or combination of several infrastruc-
                     tures for oxygen, CO2 and hydrogen, or transport over water?
Controversy 3        Heat infrastructure and delivery: delivery to households and/or business district or not?
Controversy 4        Cooling tower: cooling tower or not?
Controversy 5        If FES, UKR, MEP and/or high CO2 price do not apply, the project will experience great difficulty because important parties pull out
Controversy 6        Close cooperation with Energy Valley
Controversy 7        Competition with other sustainable energy options
Controversy 8        Role of information centre: only ZEPP or much broader and including all forms of sustainable energy household and including playground facilities
Controversy 9        Much more attention for public acceptance by well organised information supply to citizens and other involved parties (possibly in cooperation with stakeholders)
Controversy 10       Research and emphasis on safety CO2 storage?
Controversy 11       Role of regional government versus national government: to what extent does regional government play a role in licensing coordination (new legal framework)
Controversy 12       Insecure: development emission trading system, but crucial for success rate of project
Controversy 13       Competition with other CCS projects in North Netherlands for subsidy funding and political support (Cooperation alliance North Netherlands)
Opportunities 1      Involvement of national government in development CO2 infrastructure
Opportunities 2      Technical combination with biomass plant (e.g. through joint heat delivery)
Opportunities 3      Involvement of local merchants and knowledge institutes and settlement of main office SEQ in Drachten
Opportunities 4      Financial participation of citizens
Opportunities 5      ZEPP generates opportunities for local merchants in centre of Drachten by increased tourism
Opportunities 6      Emphasising positive image of North Netherlands and/or region Drachten and/or industrial area as sustainable energy region
Opportunities 7      Emphasise time gain in national and regional policy for development sustainable energy supply through CCS implementation




                                                                                                                                                                                                      247
D.2.4.3 Strategic issues graph
                                               Urgency (high)
                                                   5                                   C5; 5; 5



                                                                       K7; 4; 4




                                                                                                   Importance (high)
                             C4; 1; 4                                  C11; 4; 4       C9; 5; 4
                                                                       K3; 4; 4        K6; 5; 4
      Importance (low)




                                                           C6; 3; 3    C3; 4; 3        C1; 5; 3
                                                   3                   C8; 4; 3
                                                           C13; 3; 3   C12; 4; 3       C10; 5; 3
                         1                             3                           5


                                        C7; 2; 2                       K2; 4; 2
                                        K5; 2; 2
                             C2; 1; 1
                             K1; 1; 1
                             K4; 1; 1              1
                                              Urgency (low)




248
Ranking table   Urgency   Significance (1=low, 5=high)   Weight (U x S)   Solvability (low / average / high)

C1                 3                   5                      15                        high
C2                 1                   1                       1                         low
C3                 3                   4                      12                        high
C4                 4                   1                       4                        high
C5                 5                   5                      25                         low
C6                 3                   3                       9                        high
C7                 2                   2                       4                       average
C8                 3                   4                      12                        high
C9                 4                   5                      20                        high
C10                3                   5                      15                        high
C11                4                   4                      16                       average
C12                3                   4                      12                         low
C13                3                   3                       9                        high
K1                 1                   1                       1                         low
K2                 2                   4                       8                        high
K3                 4                   4                      16                        high
K4                 1                   1                       1                         low
K5                 2                   2                       4                         low
K6                 4                   5                      20                        high
K7                 4                   4                      16                        high




                                                                                                         249
D.2.5 Step 4: Portfolio of options
D.2.5.1 Issues/solution table
Possible solutions
Controversy or opportunity                    Adjustment installation design to (or        Gain extra knowledge                          Financial measures                          Other
                                              change of) surroundings
Technology development: timely delivery Make plant upgrade-ready for technical             Continuous contact with all technology        Possible extra financial impulse to acceler- In case of delayed supply use other technol-
or yet many technical problems and insecu- improvements                                    suppliers                                     ate development technology                   ogy producer for turbine for example
rities?
                                                                                           Informing stakeholders (technology devel-
                                                                                           opers and others) on state of affairs tech-
                                                                                           nology development
Infrastructure: central infrastructure for CO2 Make infrastructure available to third par-
distribution in combination with large scale ties, but little/no own initiative for large
e-production, or much more decentralised scale infrastructure
system, or combination of several infra-
structures for oxygen CO2 and hydrogen or
water transport?
Heating infrastructure and supply: supply to Delivery to businesses and possibly future
households and/or industrial area?             new housing
Cooling tower: yes or no?                      Integrate cooling tower in design, not visi- Research to possible extra heat release
                                               ble                                          possibilities
If FES, UKR, MEP and/or high CO2 price Low cost option: move project to different
do not apply the project will experience       location (possible other countries) or wait
severe problems because important parties for turbine development and postpone plan-
pull out                                       ning ZEPP Drachten
Close cooperation with Energy Valley                                                                                                                                                 Cooperation for gathering political support
Competition with alternative sustainable                                                                                                                                             Information supply on position ZEPP with
energy options                                                                                                                                                                       regard to sustainable energy (is no competi-
                                                                                                                                                                                     tion)
Role of information centre: only ZEPP or Possible adjustment initial design informa-       Brainstorm with other stakeholders on de-
much broader and including all forms of      tion centre (expansion)                       sign information centre
sustainable energy household and including
playground facilities
Much more interest in public acceptance                                                    Investigate how to set up communication                                                   Implementation of communication plan
through well organised information supply                                                  plan in cooperation with other parties (EU,
to citizens and other involved parties (pos-                                               government, environment movements, etc.)
sibly in cooperation with stakeholders)
Research to and emphasis on safety CO2                                                     In the framework of the licensing procedure
storage?                                                                                   a MER will be made for the storage. Results
                                                                                           of this can be used in informa-
                                                                                           tion/communication plan
Role of the regional versus national gov-                                                                                                                                            Will have to be solved by governments, be-
ernment. To which extent does the regional                                                                                                                                           comes urgent after licence applications
government play a role in licensing coordi-                                                                                                                                          have been filed due to government response
nation (new legal framework)                                                                                                                                                         times


250
Possible solutions
Controversy or opportunity                    Adjustment installation design to (or            Gain extra knowledge   Financial measures                          Other
                                              change of) surroundings
Insecure: development emission trading       Development high efficiency turbine                                      Arranging additional income for the ZEPP,
system, but crucial for success rate of the                                                                           e.g. heat and nitrogen supply
project
Competition with other CCS projects in       Deliver the best project in all fields, safety,
North Netherlands for subsidy funds and      execution future perspective, etc.
political support (Cooperation alliance
North Netherlands)
Involve national government in develop-      Project development independent of infra-
ment CO2 infrastructure                      structure
Technical combination with biomass plant Fit in as additional fuel source                                                                                         Find partner for biogas
(e.g. through joint heating supply)
Involvement of local businesses and knowl- Fit products (heat) to local needs                                         Contracting implementation through local
edge institutes and establishment of main                                                                             businesses
office SEQ in Drachten
Financial participation of citizens                                                                                                                               ?
ZEPP generates opportunities for local       Adjust design with exposition hall or meet-
businesses in centre of Drachten by increase ing room if required
tourism
Emphasise positive image North Nether-                                                                                                                            Fit in communication plan
lands and/or region Drachten and/or indus-
trial area as sustainable energy region
Emphasise time gain in national and re-                                                                                                                           Fit in communication plan
gional policy for development sustainable
energy supply by application of CCS




                                                                                                                                                                                              251
D.2.6 Step 5: Getting to shake hands
D.2.6.1 The informative dossier for participants
These are part of the workshop report. See below.
D.2.6.2 The workshop report

Introduction
In the framework of the research project CreateAcceptance (www.createacceptance.net), which was
financed by the European Commission, a stakeholder workshop took place on 6 November 2007 at
Philips DAP in Drachten. The workshop - organized by ECN Policy Studies - was part of a six-step
method for achieving public acceptance of the intended Zero Emission Power Plant (ZEPP) in Drach-
ten of SEQ Nederland E.G.

The goal of this workshop was twofold:
1. The identification and designation of strategies, that are desirable from a societal point of view, in
   interaction with SEQ and relevant stakeholders, to tackle five ‘discussion points’.
2. Het toetsen van stap vijf van the methode om te leren van the ervaringen and the methode verder
   te verfijnen.

This report is a reflection of this enervating workshop. We welcome any questions, remarks or other
additional comments following the workshop or this report. Please communicate your input, on the
contents as well as the (workshop) process, by mail to coördinator@createacceptance.net.

The authors thank all participants for their Sharp and creative contributions to the workshop. The par-
ticipants list is included in Annex A. Unfortunately the Friese Milieu Federatie was not able to partici-
pate due to unexpected last minute circumstances. Annex E contains the viewpoint of the Friese Mi-
lieu Federatie. Furthermore we express our thanks to Philips DAP for the kind facilitation of the work-
shop location near the construction site of the ZEPP plant. We also thank Margreet Veenstra, Manuela
Loos and Menno Ros of ECN Policy Studies for their contributions to the logistic organisation of and
assistance during the workshop and group sessions.

Rob Raven and Ynke Feenstra


General introduction
Aim of the workshop
• Opportunity to learn from ideas, opinions and contributions ZEPP
• Sharing thoughts, open discussion and sharing of opinions.

The workshop agenda is included in Annex B.

During the introduction the participants were requested to communicate their expectations of the
workshop.

Expectations of the participants at the start of the workshop:
• Open mentality.
• Get a grip on the sense of acceptance in the Northern part of the country.
• Informative day.
• Receive feedback on project (questions/solutions).
• Receive abundant information to obtain a vision.
• Early recognition and solving of every possible remaining hurdle.
• Good initiative.
• Embrace every possible way to obtain information to be included in the design.

252
•   As a coalition partner, this is an important concept for this area. Investigate tricky areas and be
    surprised by the mysterious procedure of the ZEPP project.
•   Open discussion with indirect partners.
•   Invited, informative, eventually be able to respond to inquiries of members of the local interest
    group.
•   Obtain insight in the (im)possibilities of CO2 storage.
•   Receive response from citizens. Obtain information on unclarity and concern about risks, hope-
    fully at the end of the workshop this will be clear.
•   Informative.
•   Interest in the societal side of innovative ideas.


Introduction Create Acceptance
Create Acceptance is a research project financed by the European Commission and executed by 11 re-
search institutes in several countries. ECN is the coordinator. The duration of the project is two years
(conclusion is in February 2008). After the conclusion the method to be developed will be available at
no cost. This method is used for the ZEPP as well.

Principles Create Acceptance:
• Resistance leads to delay or even cancellation of projects;
• Public acceptance is not self-evident;
• Lack of methods to form public acceptance;
• Public acceptance = balancing between local aspects, public interests and the requirements of the
    project manager.

The aim of Create Acceptance is the development of a user-friendly instrument aimed at project man-
agers for creating public acceptance of new energy projects, taking local aspects and public acceptance
into account.

Remarks:
• The assumption that a project will have to be accepted.
   Reaction: Although the title suggests otherwise, the explicit goal is to open up the decision making
   process. This could also lead to the investigation of a different location. Point of interest is not
   only acceptation by the stakeholders, but also of the project manager, with regard to the output of
   the process. Acceptation in a broad context.




                                                                                                   253
                                                                              Consultant +
                                                                                                 Consultant:
                                    Consultant:                                  PM:                                                                                  Consultant:
                                                                                               Interview PM +
                                   Interview PM                               Core groep                                                                               Analyse
                                                                                                 Core groep
                                                                                selectie




                                                          Narratieve


   Nieuw energie                  Stap 1:          Bepalende momenten tabel           Stap 2:                         PM visie                      Stap 3:
       project                                                                                                                                      Visies
                               Project heden                                          Visies
                                en verleden             Context tabel                 bouwen                                                      confronteren
                                                                                                                  Core Groep visies


                                                       Stakeholder tabel




                                                                                                                                                                                                  conflicterende issues tabel
                                                                                                                                           strategie issues grafiek



                                                                                                                                                                           Issues ranking tabel
                                     RONDE 2
                                     RONDE 2




                                                   CREATE ACCEPTANCE PROCESS


        Acties korte termijn
                                                         Issues uit stap 3

      Plan voor samenwerking
                                                                                                                                                          Stap 4:
                                   Stap 6:                                           Stap 5:                                                             Project
                                    Acties                Opties uit stap 4        Stakeholder                     Issues & opties tabel                 variaties
       Plan voor monitoring
                                   plannen                                          workshop                                                           identificeren
        communicatieplan                                 Verslag workshop




                                                                                               Consultant + PM:                                                       Consultant:
                                 Consultant:                                    Consultant:
                                                                                                 Identificeren                                                         And PM:
                                Schrijft rapport                              Organiseert en
                                                                                                  relevante                                                            dialoog
                                                                              leidt workshop
                                                                                                 stakeholders




Step 5 basically represents the core of the project - the workshop. The collected information will be
discussed today and expectations, opportunities and remaining options will be reviewed. Based on this
information an advice will be drafted for Wouter van de Waal.

The four other demo projects in Europe are:
• Hydrogen project in Iceland
• Biomass installation in Germany
• Wind park in Hungary
• Solar plant in Italy.

Questions:
• Are the above projects at the same stage?
   Yes, all four projects are in the planning phase, therefore thusfar there are no polarised conflicts
   hampering the interest to share thoughts.
   The projects are very diverse. The method will be adjusted to append to the project. Flexibility is
   required (also culturally determined). An example is that one on one interviews were held in the
   Netherlands, while in South Africa it is more common to hold workshops.
• Is the ZEPP final yet?
   No, not yet. Wouter van de Waal will get back to this later.
   The name Create Acceptance gives a wrong image: as if all that remains to be done is to create ac-
   ceptance. This is absolutely not the case. The aim is to eventually rename the instrument.


Introduction SEQ and ZEPP in Drachten
SEQ has been on the subject for eight years, of which three in Drachten. The introduction takes place
by means of three questions: What will we do, for what reason and why in Drachten.




254
Without paying too much attention to the technical aspects. The basic idea of the ZEPP (Zero Emis-
sion Power Plant) is to inject CO2 in a gas field, in order to extract extra gas on the other side of the
gas field. During the combustion process a special technique is used based on oxygen supply (Oxi-
fuel), which allows for easier CO2 capture. The resulting products are CO2 (which is pressurized and
subsequently injected underground) and water (steam, which can be used to generate electricity and
heat water).

Questions:
• How much remains in the gas field?
   That depends, in this field approximately 50%, at most fields this is less.
• How long does it take for the gas field to be filled with CO2?
   That depends on the plant and the gas field, approximately 10 to 15 years for these fields.
• Is the nitrogen market large enough for marketing the residual product
   Among others, it is used by Philips. Besides that other marketing opportunities should be investi-
   gated.
• What do you do with the nitrogen if there is no market for it?
   There is a substantial market, the rest can be released into the air.

The Demo plant in California (10x smaller than the ZEPP) is located in an old biomass plant.

CO2 storage is not new, there are fields in the Netherlands with too much CO2 due to gas extraction.
To limit the risks involved in CO2 injection it is necessary to find the same type of field (setting).
Thus, leakage of CO2 is no issue.

Questions:
• What is the percentage of CO2 in this field?
   1.3%. In the first test SEQ will remain with the natural situation with a proper cover layer. This
   entails that the field will be covered by salt instead of clay. A clay layer could cause side effects,
   this will not happen with a saline layer.
• What is the risk?
   The risks are the same as in gas extraction, at the location near the injection point.
• How deep do you go?
   2300 meter

Drachten lies in a cluster of gas fields. After demonstration of the operating plant it is fairly easy to
gain interest of other parties in the neighborhood. 50 Gas fields are closed (empty), CO2 injection can
facilitate extraction of 10% extra gas (from 360 bln m2). The Dutch gas market approximately entails
ongeveer 80 bln m2 per year.


                                                                                                    255
Question
• Is there a need for new wells?
   Yes, two, a separate production- and injection well; no major construction, we expect no calami-
   ties.

Pipeline installment is likely to cause inconvenience. The pipelines would run straight through ‘de
Wilgen’. At the moment other possible routes are investigated. It might be possible to use some of the
existing pipelines.

It is essential to achieve synergy of residual heat within the built area. Heat users, such as Philips,
Agrifirm can use the residual heat, thereby facilitating CO2 reduction.

Questions
• Why is the plant planned for this location and not close to the gas field?
• At this point the ZEPP is located nearby a ground station of the electricity grid. This choice was
   made to avoid placing above-ground high-voltage cables.
• Is there space left at the industrial area?
   Yes, abundant (see map).
• At what distance is transportation of warm water possible?
   It is possible to transport water of 120ºC over 6-7 kilometers, however that would not be profitable
   because of the required length of piping.


Overview identified discussion points and group session results
The aim of the group sessions is to debate on possible strategies for SEQ (the project manager) to
tackle the identified discussion points. The discussion points have been discussed in the three groups
and subsequently in a plenary session.

The discussion points emerged from interviews with seven stakeholders prior to the workshop (Step 2
of the six-step method): local benefits, local impact, economic and legal aspects, economic aspects and
relation to sustainable energy (see Annex D).

The programme stated that every outcome would be voted on separately. The programme was adjusted
accordingly, to prevent frequent repetition of moves. The moderator has discussed the most important
and/or outstanding points per discussion point, additions were welcomed. Issues mentioned at previous
sessions were omitted.

Discussion point ‘Local benefits’
Physical adjustment Gain extra knowledge Financial measure                Other
installation to (or
change of)
surroundings
Group1:
- ‘Deal’ on            - Production of       - Cheap electricity use      - Create platform by
  application of         (innovative)          citizens Drachten            transparant
  residual heat for      components of the                                  communication
  industry, built        plant in/around                                  - Make optimal use of
  environment,           Drachten/North                                     locally present
  recreation, etc. and   Netherlands, also                                  knowledge in the
  thereby attracting     regarding expansion                                development
  extra activity (heat   of the number of                                 - Employment
  demanding industry, plants (=composing                                    opportunities/ internships
  vacation park with     economic cluster)                                  + graduation projects for


256
  subtropical                                                                students. Establishment
  swimming pool                                                              of a college/university.
  etc.)                                                                  -   Tourism/expositions
                                                                         -   More businesses
                                                                         -   Broader ‘marking’ of the
                                                                             region, activities,
                                                                             products etc. besides
                                                                             ZEPP (=spin-off of this
                                                                             innovative application
                                                                         -   Positive image CO2
                                                                             reduction e.g. Energy
                                                                             pillar
                                                                         -   Give citizens the feeling
                                                                             that they are involved in
                                                                             the project
                                                                         -   Find as many users of
                                                                             residual heat as possible.
                                                                         -   Invest in environment-
                                                                             education.
Group2:
- According to                                                           - Position Drachten as
  Zollverein-Essen                                                         clean energy city
- From info center                                                         (billboard)
  (like Ecodrome
  Zwolle)
- Climbing wall
  cooling tower? Use
  height.
- Recreation, tourism,
  entertainment
  (Kernwasser
  wunderland)
Group3 (not discussed in Group 3)


Plenary discussion:
Group 1:
• Focus on (creation of) local employment (construction, design, after use).
• Tourism in a broad perspective (visitors, schools, etc.) also combined with other public attractions
    (e.g. other innovative institutions).
• Combine with heat grid, so other heat clients.

Group 2:
• Added value for Drachten (attract tourism)
• Climbing wall on cooling tower (technical feasibility unknown)
• Try to profile Drachten as energy city.

Discussion point ‘Local impact’
Fysical adjustment    Gain extra knowledge       Financial measure       Other
installation to (or
change of)
environment
Group1:
- Minimal impact                                                         - Local main attraction!
  construction                                                             Communication to

                                                                                                    257
  infrastructure                                                           citizens in the Frisian
- Local burden: limit                                                      language.
  piping length, tower
  height, overall size
- Pay attention to the
  design of the
  building (safe,
  attractive)
- Avoid construction
  of cooling tower
- Avoid negative
  impact on water
  sports and nature in
  pipeline
  construction.
- Involve citizens in
  the design of the
  plant (e.g. codesign,
  help choose design)
- Use the cooling
  tower in a creative
  way (1st climbing
  wall in Drachten)
Group2:
- Releasing more                                                         - Very good
  heat, requiring less                                                     communication and
  cooling (absorption                                                      allowing discovery that
  cooling)                                                                 the impact is almost non-
- Nice design,                                                             existent.
  representative                                                         - Housing pricing? (also
- Sight location                                                           CCS in densely
- Monitoring physical                                                      populated areas). Insure
  aspects (pressure,                                                       risks housing pricing for
  amount CO2 (no                                                           private people/meeting
  leakage) land                                                            city?
  measurement with
  regard to
  prolapsing). Timely
  adjustment or
  cancellation.
Group3:
- Involve citizens in                                                    - Carry out positive
  design and/or colour                                                     contribution of this
  of the plant                                                             project to worldwide
- Build small and                                                          measures to reducing
  modest, incl.                                                            climate change.
  possibilities for                                                      - Positive PR which (also)
  tours.                                                                   reaches surroundings
- Invest extra in a
  good alignment of
  the pipeline because
  of visibility.

Group 1:
• Make the plant as attractive as possible, by for example having the buildings painted.


258
•   Appoint local contact person who can provide a well-founded (Frisian) explanation of pro’s and
    cons of ZEPP and what entails.
•   Physical design: least possible impact on surroundings while installing pipelines.

Group 2:
• On-site demonstration of how the project works.
• Heat release to the air does not look attractive (steam cloud), facilitate emission at lower tempera-
   ture.
• Allow people to discover that impact is nil, by making the impact zo as visible as possible. Just
   statements make people suspicious.
• Monitoring the CO2 storage and clear communication to citizens.

Group 3:
• For physical design of the plant look at buildings like, e.g., HVC Alkmaar.
• Involve local citizens in design etc.
• Try to limit local impact through local PR (contribution SEQ to the region).
• Most resistance can be expected to be focused on the pipeline (rest of the construction is at the in-
   dustrial area), pay sufficient attention to the local impact of this.

Discussion point ‘Technological and legal aspects’
Physical adjustment Gain extra knowledge Financial measure               Other
installation to (or
change of)
surroundings




                                                                                                   259
Group1:
-                     - Invest in research      - Make technology        - what if in 10 to 15 years
                        after safety of long-     part of the investing    the ex-gas fields in the
                        term underground          consortium, so their     surrounding are are full.
                        CO2 storage also.         financial interests are Isn’t it better to invest in a
                                                  considerable as well.    more sustainable energy
                                                - Form risk funding        plant
                                                  (by stock holders and - who pays for required
                                                  poss. government)        infrastructure
                                                                         - invest in platform to
                                                                           prevent possible ‘local
                                                                           resistance’ which can lead
                                                                           to long legal procedures
                                                                         - assess risks, are the risks
                                                                           as big as expected?
                                                                         - Take away sense of
                                                                           unsafety