Energised communities?:
meanings, motivations and
lessons learnt
Gordon Walker
Lancaster University

ESRC funded Project
“Community Energy Initiatives: embedding
sustainable technologies at a local level”
De Montfort, Northumbria and Lancaster
Universities: reviews of activity UK-wide, 6 case
studies

PhD Studentships



Community renewable energy in South Korea and Japan
(Yonjoo Jeong)
Ownership, landscape and community renewables (Neil
Simcock)
Plus multiple student undergrad and masters
dissertations …
Case Study 1: Llandwddyn




Location:
Montgomeryshire, Wales
Technology: Wood fuelled
local heating network;
school & community
centre, 19 local houses
Cost: £375,000
Programme: Community
Energy (EST)
Llanwddyn
Case Study 2: Moel Moelogan




Location: North Wales
Technology: 2 x 1.3MW
turbines; followed by a
further 9, grid connected
Cost: £2.6 Million (phase
1)
Programme: Ashden
Awards
Moel Moelogan
Case Study 3: Bro Dyfi




Location: Dyfi Valley, Mid
Wales
Technology: 75kw wind
turbine (grid connection in
place)
Budget: £83,555
Programme: Baywind,
REIC
Bro Dyfi
Case Study 4: Kielder




Location: Northumberland
Technology: Biomass local heat
network; school, youth hostel, 6
houses, workshops, Castle
Budget: £630,000
Programme: Clear Skies, EST, CRI
Kielder
Case Study 5: Falstone




Location: Northumberland
Technology: Solar photovoltaic
(grid connected) and biomass
boiler; tea rooms, shop,
interpretation centre
Budget: £175,000
Programme: CRI, Clear Skies,
EST
Falstone
Case Study 6: Gamblesby




Location: Cumbria
Technology: Ground Source Heat
Pump for renovated village hall.
Followed by 6kW wind charger.
Budget: £42,100 (GSHP and
renovation)
Programme: CRI
Gamblesby
Case Study Selection and Methods

Selection



all involve ‘successful’ technology installation
including involvement of local people (in some
form)
Methods



Regional interviews (15)
Local interviews with those most directly
involved (41)
Questionnaire survey of all local households
within settlement area (205 total)
Similarities






Importance of individuals – initial idea, commitment, skills
Profile of multiple outcomes - environmental, economic,
social
Stress on local benefits
Complex financial packages – and finance problems of
various forms (timings, amounts, restrictions)
Need for advice, expertise (although from different sources)
Need for support from key local institutions, particularly
local authorities/regeneration agencies

Energy efficiency also included (directly or indirectly)
Differences

Primary purpose (although all but one problem focused)

Scale (physical, time, energy, cost)

Technologies and form/function of energy generation

Leadership/management arrangements

Partnerships and alliances (formal, informal)

Extent of reliance on, involvement with central government
community RE programmes

Ownership arrangements

Levels of direct involvement and contribution of local people

Distribution of benefits and outcomes (local, collective)

Degrees of local support/opposition

Extent of technology and installation problems
Ownership Models

community company


Gamblesby
Village Hall Committee (registered
charity)
local farmers
energy services company (ESCO)


Falstone
private ownership by local
entrepreneurs


old school buildings purchased by
National Park Authority
existing community organisation
owning building


Kielder
public body owning existing property


Tyndale Council then transferred to
Kielder Community Enterprises Limited
the trading arm of charity Kielder
Limited
DULAS install and operate, contracted
by Powys County Council
cooperative

unincorporated association with 59
shareholders
Moel Moelogan
Llanwddyn
Bro Dyfi
Involvement and contribution of local people
Proportion of 'Yes' Responses
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Llanwddyn
1
M oel
M oelogan
2
Bro Dyfi
Kielder
Falstone
Gamblesby
Q1 Have you been involved in any way?
Q2 Have you made any direct contribution to the project?
‘attended meetings- painted hall as a
member of a group- donated money in
lieu of silver wedding’
Gamblesby resident, response on questionnaire to ‘how
have you been involved’
I am in favour of the project
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Llanwddyn
Mean Value
Moel
Moelogan
Bro Dyfi
Kielder
Falstone
Gamblesby
1. How and why are projects initiated and
developed?

No one simple answer …..

Individuals in localities and roles are important..


BUT institutions and policies are important too..


for ideas, skills, providing impetus – both within
communities and partner institutions
individuals need and respond to the strategic
opportunities & openings that institutional agendas
and initiatives provide (govn and non-govn)
.. as is, the particular context of time and place

problems to be solved, and opportunities to do so
‘8 years ago our farming was taking a dive, I thought I needed to
diversify and looked to what we can do and there’s not much you
can do up here. I thought of everything-dry ski slopes and
anything, but the obvious one was wind and it made perfect sense
for the tops of hills. And there was lots of talk in the paper at the
time that this global warming thing might be a reality and
renewable energy was about to explode and it sounded like a
good time.’
‘I knew there was a European grant for farmers even thought it
hadn’t been used for wind before, it was there as potential. The
whole feeling of it sounded just what the government wanted to
happen. They wanted more renewable energy, they wanted
farmers to diversify and get together and work together. It had
never been done and we didn’t know how we would do it
ourselves but we just found out step by step’.
Moel Moelogan, Project Developer

connections to regeneration and rural
development, and associated funding, are
often crucial …
Llanwddyn
Llanwddyn Biomass DH
Idea from Vrnwy Forum a local residents group.
- to boost local economy through using local wood
plus
- replace aged heating system for school
- improve heating of local housing (mainly owned
by Severn Trent)
- reduce fuel poverty
Capital Funding
ERDF (30.5%) Welsh Assembly Government
via Powys County Council (43.5%)
Community Energy Programme (12.5%)
Welsh Development Agency (13%)
Falstone Biomass and solar
Local people approached the community
development officer when village shop in
old school buildings closed. National Park
Authority developed RE aspects with
architects.
Sustaining community facilities
Attracting visitors
Jobs for local people
Demonstration sustainability project
Falstone
2. How is ‘community’ interpreted?
Well …. its not very straightforward!!
What does community mean to you?
‘people who are willing to support and
work for the common welfare and good’
‘where people live together in harmony
with different cultures and interests, but
with a strong feeling of trust and respect
for one another’
‘a place where you live and raise your
family amongst friends and people you
know’
What does community mean to you?
‘people of the village and surrounding
area who live and work in the area and
are involved in things that go on in the
area. Not people who buy houses and
use them 1 or 2 weekends a month and
keep themselves to themselves’
‘nothing now, as most people are too self
centred’
‘bunch of nosey people slagging each
other off behind their backs’
Debating community at Moel Moelogan
‘And when is a community project a community project? You
know, this is 3 men who have set up a limited company and yet
they give it these buzz words, they use words like community
and sustainability and they press particular buttons don’t they?’
Moel Moelogan, member of opposition group
‘One of the main factors which kept cropping
up was that the project was run by local
people. Even though its not a community
project as such, the benefit was going to stay
in the area, rather than being developed by a
large multinational company where the
profits all go out of the area?
County Councillor
‘Clearly there’s a substantial difference between a community
project that does support the community and one that is owned
by the community. I don’t think it’s a worry that they sit side by
side, I think it’s a good thing …. The problem is that it does raise
these issues of local jealousies, rivalries, whereas the community
projects perhaps as the text book lays it out is meant to take
care of that through consultation and people being involved in it
in the true sense of ownership.’
Conwy Energy Agency

two key dimensions are seen as
making projects in some way
‘community’


process: how the project is developed and
run, who is involved and has influence
outcome: how the project outcomes are
distributed, who benefits
The PROCESS dimension of RE projects
who is involved and has influence
The process of
developing and
running a
project is
closed, distant
and
institutional
(public or
private)
The process of
developing
and running a
project is
open, local
and
participatory
The OUTCOME dimension of RE projects
who benefits?
The beneficial
outcomes of a
project are
distant and
private
The beneficial
outcomes of a
project are
local, shared/
collective
PROCESS
Open, local,
participatory
Distant,
private
Local,
collective
OUTCOMES
Closed, distant,
institutional
PROCESS
Open, local,
participatory
Gamblesby
Bro Dyfi
Moel Moelogan
Distant,
private
Local,
collective
Falstone
Llanwdynn
Kielder
Utility wind farm
Closed, distant,
institutional
OUTCOMES
PROCESS
Open, local,
participatory
Gamblesby
Bro Dyfi
Moel Moelogan
Distant,
private
Local,
collective
Falstone
Llanwdynn
Kielder
Utility wind farm
Closed, distant,
institutional
OUTCOMES
PROCESS
Open, local,
participatory
Gamblesby
Bro Dyfi
Moel Moelogan
Distant,
private
Local,
collective
Falstone
Llanwdynn
Kielder
Utility wind farm
Closed, distant,
institutional
OUTCOMES

what counts as ‘community’ is flexibly defined; on the
ground as well as by funding/support programmes. This
reflects:




what is locally appropriate and possible
diverse motivations and drivers
how using a community approach fits with agenda of
important institutions and funders
the extent to which there are already cohesive,
connected and trusting relationships between local
people and reflected in community groups

within small rural settlements (where most community RE
is happening) there is some scope for a cohesive, inclusive
and cooperative community to be mobilised, but:






they are in reality, rarely found, and may be illusory
innovation with RET may not be embraced, or be appropriate
(to time and place)
there are social fractures, exclusivities and conflicts within all
places
processes have dynamics and relationships/positions can
change over time
processes of public consultation and participation can be
evaluated and represented in different ways
adopting a community approach, or using a community
label, cannot guarantee wholesale local acceptance and
support ………
The project has brought the community together
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Llanwddyn
Moel
Moelogan
Strongly Agree
Agree
Bro Dyfi
Neutral
Kielder
Disagree
Falstone
Gamblesby
Strongly Disagree

In addition to local social and economic
outcomes, learning processes of various forms
are widely claimed:



but evidence not clear


from project to project -visits, presentations, resources,
contractors etc…
from project to local people - understanding, support for
RET, micro-adoption, green lifestyles
problems of ‘measurement’ - anecdotal rather than
systematic
Key policy issue given small energy generation
and carbon reduction usually involved
32.5%
35%
30.4%
30%
I understand more about
renewable energy as a result of
this project
25%
18.8%
20%
15%
9.9%
8.4%
10%
5%
0%
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree Strongly
Disagree
34.7%
35%
27.9%
30%
18.4%
25%
I feel more positive about
renewable energy as a result of
this project
20%
10.0%
8.9%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
40.7%
45%
40%
29.6%
35%
I am more aware of
climate change as a
result of this project
30%
25%
20%
15%
11.6%
13.2%
4.8%
10%
5%
0%
Strongly
Agree
I think projects like this
should be set up in other
places as well
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
34.9%
35%
30%
Agree
25.0%
25.0%
25%
20%
15%
6.8%
8.3%
10%
5%
0%
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
31.6%
35%
30%
25%
18.9%
23.0%
15.3%
20%
11.2%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
I feel a sense of pride in the project
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Llanwddyn
Moel
Moelogan
Strongly Agree
Agree
Bro Dyfi
Neutral
Kielder
Disagree
Falstone
Gamblesby
Strongly Disagree
I feel more positive about renewable energy as a result of this project
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Llanwddyn
Moel
Moelogan
Strongly Agree
Agree
Bro Dyfi
Neutral
Kielder
Disagree
Falstone
Gamblesby
Strongly Disagree
I feel a sense of pride in the project
Concluding Comments

These six cases particularly show:







diversity and multi-functionality
community RE is not one category; recognising the
many differences and some commonalities is important
projects are all time and place dependent and to some
degree opportunistic
there are many financial, technical, social challenges
wider learning outcomes can be achieved
technological innovation is far more than developing ‘kit
that works’ – innovation in social and economic
arrangements
Since undertaking the research, policy and
support structures have changed, profile of who
is involved has evolved, stronger focus on low
carbon communities
Concluding Comments

But … for every success there are many that fall by the way
side or never get going
“years can tick by with other community projects. Nobody is willing to
take the bull by the horn and drive it”
“the problem is that they are such hard work, they are difficult to get off
the ground. There’s always the argument that I can probably put in ten
times as many cavity walls and lofts in an urban area as I can in a rural
area”
“I am very cautious about getting involved in community initiatives
because you know that you are going to invest a huge amount of time in it
for very little return”
“. if its an affluent area where you’ve got people who are well used to
filling in that sort of application form and they have the intelligence to deal
with it and follow it through and chase it, then they are the ones who
benefit. And you get the poorer communities where maybe they would use
it more haven’t got the people within that community who can drive it
forward and deliver it and so its not equitable at all”