4.5 Review

Greek Islands' Energy Transition: From Lighthouse Projects to the Emergence of Energy Communities

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 15, 期 16, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en15165996

关键词

energy transition islands; renewable energy sources; energy communities; hybrid power plants; public acceptance; energy democracy independency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Energy transition in Greek islands is a challenging but promising opportunity for sustainable social and economic development. The development of energy communities, driven by increased local awareness and the influence of lighthouse projects, has generated meaningful results in various aspects of energy and contributed to positive social change.
Energy transition in islands constitutes a major challenge. Apart from a necessity, it can also be a great opportunity for sustainable social and economic development. Toward this direction, a new, promising movement has emerged recently in Greek islands. Straight from the roots of the insular population, development of energy communities comes as the result of increased awareness of local people, raised also by the legacy of lighthouse projects and initiatives. Kythnos, Ikaria, Sifnos, Tilos, Agios Efstratios, Crete, and Chalki, are all islands that have embraced the implementation of successful, local-scale innovation projects and/or initiatives, generating meaningful results across different energy aspects and contributing to positive social change. Our study provides an overview of the broader energy transition aspects in Greek islands, discusses the impact of the aforementioned exemplary cases, and further elaborates on the model of energy communities. According to our analysis, leveraging on the experience of lighthouse projects and initiatives, and on the dynamics of the emerging energy community movement, could lead to increased social and economic benefits for the insular populations, to broad public acceptance, and to minimum environmental impacts for the islands' natural ecosystems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据