Implementing a just renewable energy transition: Policy advice for transposing the new European rules for renewable energy communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recast of the Renewable Energy Directive (RED II) provides an enabling framework for “Renewable Energy Communities” (RECs) that is being transposed into law by the 27 European Union Member States by June 2021. RECs are majority owned by local members or shareholders who are authorized to share energy within the community, offering the potential to unlock private investment and financing for renewable energy sources and provide social benefits. However, successful implementation and a just energy transition requires the coupling of technological solutions with more open decision making, based on sound analysis, knowledge of engineering, spatial planning, and social science. We argue that financing and ownership models that address renewable energy complementarity, spatial organization of resource potential, demographics, pushback from incumbents, and inclusion of traditionally marginalized groups, are common issues across all Member States that are crucial for the transposition of RED II and a just energy transition. This paper highlights the benefits and challenges of widespread development of RECs, and using examples from the pending transposition process provides policy advice for effective implementation of the RED II with respect to RECs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.041 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.041 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".