Europe requires significant transmission grid expansions to foster the integration of electricity markets, enhance security of supply and integrate renewable energies. However, next to lengthy authorization processes, transmission system operators (TSOs) in Europe are currently facing extreme public opposition in their transmission line projects leading to significant project delays. These delays imply significant additional costs for TSOs as well as society as a whole and put the transformation of the European energy system at risk. Existing scientific literature currently lacks comprehensive studies that have tried to identify generalizable success factors to overcome public opposition in transmission line projects. The goal of work at hand was to close this research gap. Potential success factors were collected through extensive literature review and interviews throughout Europe with respective stakeholders such as citizen action groups, NGOs or energy experts. Experiences from analogue large infrastructure projects like wind parks, carbon capture and storage facilities, hydro dams, nuclear waste repositories, etc. were also used to form hypotheses. The findings were transformed into a structural equation model and tested through a questionnaire answered by almost all European TSOs.
Results revealed that people’s trust in the TSO is of utmost importance for less public opposition. It can be regarded as the critical success factor per se. TSOs can create trust through stakeholder participation, sufficient communication, proper organizational readiness and liaison with stakeholders. Furthermore, appropriate technical planning can help to reduce public opposition in transmission line projects. In total 18 concrete and actionable success factors were identified for TSO management to facilitate the establishment of these aforementioned aspects. They will help European TSOs to reduce public opposition and thus accelerate the implementation of new transmission lines. Interestingly, economic benefits for people did not turn out to be a Significant success factor in reducing their opposition against new transmission lines.:Contents I
List of tables VIII
List of figures IX
List of abbreviations XI
List of symbols XV
List of country codes XVI
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Problem statement 1
1.2 Thematic classification and research gap 2
1.3 Objective, research questions and scop e of work 3
1.4 Methodology and structure of work 5
2 Fundamentals of electricity transmission line planning 7
2.1 History of the European electricity transmission network 7
2.2 Transmission technologies 9
2.2.1 High-voltage alternating current (HVAC) 9
2.2.1.1 High - voltage alternating current overhead lines (HVAC OHL) 9
2.2.1.2 High - voltage alternating underground cables (HVAC UGC) 10
2.2.2 High - voltage direct current (HVDC) 12
2.2.2.1 High - voltage direct current overhead lines (HVDC OHL) 12
2.2.2.2 High - voltage direct current underground cables (HVDC UGC) 13
2.2.3 Gas - insulated lines (GIL) 14
2.3 Major players 15
2.3.1 European Transmission System Operators (TSOs) and related associations 15
2.3.1.1 National Transmission System Operators (TSOs) 15
2.3.1.2 ENTSO - E 16
2.3.2 Energy regulators and related associations 18
2.3.2.1 National regulatory authorities (NRA) 18
2.3.2.2 European associations of energy regulators 19
2.4 Development of new transmission lines 20
2.4.1 Planning objectives 20
2.4.2 Planning process 21
2.4.2.1 Identification of needs 22
2.4.2.2 Feasibility study 23
2.4.2.3 Spatial planning 24
2.4.2.4 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 25
2.4.2.5 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 26
2.4.2.6 Permitting procedure 28
2.4.2.7 Securing land rights and way - leaves 28
2.4.2.8 Construction, commissioning and operation 29
2.5 Project delays and obstacles 31
2.5.1 Project delays 31
2.5.2 Rationales for delay 33
2.5.2.1 Minor obstacles 34
2.5.2.2 Public opposition 35
2.5.2.3 Insufficient authorization procedures 36
2.5.3 Excursus: Recent governmental measures to overcome delays 38
2.5.3.1 Austria 38
2.5.3.2 Denmark 38
2.5.3.3 Germany 39
2.5.3.4 Great Britain 41
2.5.3.5 Netherlands 42
2.5.3.6 European Union 43
2.5.3.7 Further recommendations 48
2.6 Interim conclusion on the fundamentals of transmission line planning 49
3 Fundamentals of social acceptance 51
3.1 Definition and classification 51
3.2 Contextual factors that influence stakeholders’ attitudes 54
3.2.1 Proximity of stakeholders to a facility 54
3.2.2 Risk perception of individuals 55
3.2.3 Individual knowledge base 56
3.2.4 Existing and marginal exposure 56
3.2.5 Land valuation and heritage 57
3.2.6 Trust in project developer 58
3.2.7 Energy system development level 59
3.3 The history of social movement against infrastructure facilities 60
3.4 Forms of public opposition 61
3.5 Interim conclusion on the fundamentals of social acceptance 63
4 Fundamentals and methodology of success factor research 64
4.1 The goal of success factor research 64
4.2 Defining success factor terminology 64
4.2.1 Success 64
4.2.2 Success factors 65
4.3 Success factor research history and current state 67
4.4 Classification of success factor studies 67
4.4.1 Specificity 68
4.4.2 Causality 69
4.5 Success factor identification approaches 70
4.5.1 Systematization of success factor identification approaches 70
4.5.2 Approach assessment 72
4.6 Criti cism to success factor research 73
4.7 Interim conclusion on the fundamentals of success factor research 75
5 Success factor res earch on social acceptance in transmission line planning – a combination of research streams 77
5.1 State of research 77
5.1.1 Social acceptance in electricity transmission line planning (A) 77
5.1.2 Success factor research on social acceptance (B) 83
5.1.3 Success factor research in transmission line planning (C) 89
5.2 Value add and classification of this work 89
5.3 Research design 90
5.3.1 Identification of potential success factors through a direct, qualitative - explorative approach 92
5.3.1.1 Overview of methodologies 92
5.3.1.2 Survey 93
5.3.2 Quantitative - confirmatory approach to validate potential success factors 95
5.3.2.1 Overview of statistical methodologies 95
5.3.2.2 Structural equation modeling (SEM) 96
5.3.2.2.1 Path analysis 97
5.3.2.2.2 Structure of SEM 99
5.3.2.2.3 Methods for SEM estimation 102
5.3.2.2.4 PLS algorithm 106
6 Identification of reasons for public opposition and derivation of potential success factors 112
6.1 Conducted interviews 112
6.1.1 Selection of interviewees 112
6.1.2 Preparation, conduction and documentation of interviews 115
6.2 Reasons for public opposition 117
6.2.1 Health and safety issues 118
6.2.1.1 Electric and magnetic fields (EMF) 118
6.2.1.2 Falling ice 124
6.2.1.3 Toppled pylons and ruptured conductors 125
6.2.1.4 Flashover 125
6.2.2 Reduced quality of living 126
6.2.2.1 Visual impact 126
6.2.2.2 Noise 128
6.2.3 Economic unfairness 130
6.2.3.1 Devaluation of property and insufficient compensation 130
6.2.3.2 Expropriation 131
6.2.3.3 Negative impact on tourism 132
6.2.3.4 Lack of direct benefits and distributional unfairness 132
6.2.3.5 Agricultural disadvantages 133
6.2.4 Lack of transparency and communication 135
6.2.4.1 Insufficient justification of line need 135
6.2.4.2 Insufficient, inaccurate and late information 137
6.2.4.3 Intransparent decision making 138
6.2.4.4 Inappropriate appearance 138
6.2.4.5 Expert dilemma 139
6.2.5 Lack of public participation 140
6.2.5.1 Lack of involvement 140
6.2.5.2 One - way communication 141
6.2.5.3 Lack of bindingness 141
6.2.5.4 Inflexibility 142
6.2.6 Environmental impact 142
6.2.6.1 Flora 143
6.2.6.2 Fauna 145
6.2.7 Distrust 146
6.3 Potential success factors to reduce public opposition 147
6.3.1 Communication 149
6.3.1.1 Communication strategy 149
6.3.1.2 Early communication 150
6.3.1.3 Line justification 150
6.3.1.4 Direct personal conversation 151
6.3.1.5 Appropriate communication mix 153
6.3.1.6 Comprehensibility 156
6.3.1.7 Sufficient and honest information 157
6.3.1.8 Stakeholder education 158
6.3.1.9 Post - communication 159
6.3.2 Participation 160
6.3.2.1 Pre - polls 160
6.3.2.2 Participation possibilities 161
6.3.2.3 Participation information 164
6.3.2.4 Macro - planning involvement 165
6.3.2.5 Pre - application involvement 166
6.3.2.6 Neutral moderation/mediation 166
6.3.2.7 Joint fact finding 169
6.3.2.8 Flexibility, openness and respect 170
6.3.2.9 Commitment and bindingness 171
6.3.2.10 Transparent decision making 172
6.3.3 Economic benefits 173
6.3.3.1 Local benefits 173
6.3.3.2 Individual compensations 174
6.3.3.3 Muni cipality compensations 176
6.3.3.4 Socio - economic benefits 177
6.3.3.5 Excursus: Social cost - benefit analysis of a new HVDC line between France and Spain 177
6.3.4 Organizational readiness 182
6.3.4.1 Stakeholder analysis and management 182
6.3.4.2 Qualification and development 184
6.3.4.3 Sufficient resources 186
6.3.4.4 Internal coordination 187
6.3.4.5 Cultural change 187
6.3.4.6 Top - management support 188
6.3.4.7 Best practice exchange 188
6.3.5 Stakeholder liaison 189
6.3.5.1 Stakeholder cooperation 189
6.3.5.2 Supporters / Multiplicators 190
6.3.5.3 Local empowerment 191
6.3.6 Technical planning 191
6.3.6.1 Line avoidance options 191
6.3.6.2 Route alternatives 194
6.3.6.3 Transmission technology options 194
6.3.6.4 Piloting of innovations 198
6.3.6.5 Excursus: Exemplary transmission line innovations 198
6.3.6.6 Avoidance of sensitive areas 206
6.3.6.7 Bundling of infrastructure 206
6.3.6.8 Line deconstruction 207
6.3.6.9 Regulatory overachievement 208
7. Development of research model 209
7.1 Procedure 209
7.2 Development of hypotheses on causal relationships 209
7.2.1 Stakeholder liaison 209
7.2.2 Participation 210
7.2.3 Communication 210
7.2.4 Organizational readiness 211
7.2.5 Economic benefits 212
7.2.6 Technical planning 212
7.2.7 Trust 213
7.2.8 Summary of hypotheses 213
7.3 Development of path diagram and model specification 214
7.3.1 Structural model 214
7.3.2 Measurement model 215
7.3.2.1 Formative measurements 215
7.3.2.2 Reflective measurements 2
7.4 Identifiability of model structure 217
8 Empirical validation of potential success factors 219
8.1 Data acqu isition 219
8.1.1 Concept of using questionnaires for data acquisition 219
8.1.2 Target group and sample size 220
8.1.3 Questionnaire design 222
8.1.3.1 Form and structure 222
8.1.3.2 Operatio nalization 224
8.1.3.2.1 Operationalization of potential success factors 224
8.1.3.2.2 Operationalization of construct TRUST 225
8.1.3.2.3 Operationalization of construct REDUCED PUBLIC OPPOSITION 226
8.1.3.2.4 Operationalization of control variables 226
8.1.3.3 Bias 227
8.1.3.3.1 Common method bias 227
8.1.3.3.2 Key i nformation bias 229
8.1.3.3.3 Hypothetical bias 229
8.1.4 Pretest 230
8.1.5 Questionnaire return and data preparation 231
8.2 Model estimation 236
8.2.1 Software selection for modeling 236
8.2.2 Estimation results 237
8.3 Model evaluation 239
8.3.1 Evaluat ion of reflective measurement models 240
8.3.1.1 Content validity 240
8.3.1.2 Indicator reliability 243
8.3.1.3 Construct validity 245
8.3.1.3.1 Convergent validity 245
8.3.1.3.1.1 Average var iance extracted (AVE) 245
8.3.1.3.1.2 Construct reliability 245
8.3.1.3.2 Discriminant validity 247
8.3.1.3.2.1 Fornell/Larcker criterion 247
8.3.1.3.2.2 Cross loadings 248
8.3.2 Evaluation of formative measurement models 250
8.3.2.1 Content validity 250
8.3.2.2 Indicator reliability / relevance 250
8.3.2.2.1 Indicator weights and significance 250
8.3.2.2.2 Multicollinearity 254
8.3.2.3 Construct validity 256
8.3.3 Evaluation of structural model 256
8.3.3.1 Multicollinearity 256
8.3.3.2 Explanatory power 257
8.3.3.3 Predictive relevance 259
8.3.4 Evaluation of total model 260
8.4 Verification of hypotheses and discussion of results 260
8.5 Success factors for reducing public opposition in transmission line planning: Recommendations for TSO management
264
8.5.1 Measures to create stakeholder trust 266
8.5.1.1 Sufficient stakeholder participation 266
8.5.1.2 Proper stakeholder communication 267
8.5.1.3 TSO’s organizational readiness for stakeholder management 267
8.5.1.4 Creating liaison with stakeholders 268
8.5.2 Important aspects in technical planning 268
8.5.3 Consolidated overview 269
9 Concluding remarks 270
9.1 Summary of results 270
9.2 Contribution, limitations, and directions for further research 272
10 Appendix 276
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:DRESDEN/oai:qucosa:de:qucosa:28563 |
| Date | 26 February 2015 |
| Creators | Perras, Stefan |
| Contributors | Möst, Dominik, Günther, Edeltraud, Technische Universität Dresden |
| Source Sets | Hochschulschriftenserver (HSSS) der SLUB Dresden |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | doc-type:doctoralThesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis, doc-type:Text |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-141575, qucosa:27970 |
Page generated in 0.0035 seconds