A European Strategy for the Introduction of Renewable Energy Systems in Mountain Regions

Transcription

1 Workshop SHERPA September 2004 A European Strategy for the Introduction of Renewable Energy Systems in Mountain Regions Results of the Survey Dipl.Psych. Claudia Villalobos Montoya J.Prof. Dr. Petra Schweizer-Ries Dipl.Psych. Daniel Pichert Otto-von-Guericke-University of Magdeburg

2 Analysis of the Questionnaire about the Energy Supply of Mountain Huts -Social and ecological data- Sample: 236 of 288 returned questionnaires Bulgaria 5,9% Germany 80 28,0% Absolute values Germany France Italy 14 Bulgaria Italy 49,6% France 16,5% Sample

3 The kind of guests Missing data Skier,8% Mountain climbers 55,1% 2,5% Tourists 21,6% Hikers 19,9%

4 The kind of Energy Supply 100% RES 71 huts (30,1%) Hybrid-Systems 75 huts (31,8%) Non-RES 70 huts (29,7%) Germany 24 (36,4%) 21 (31,8%) 20 (30,3%) Italy 38 (32,5%) 29 (24,8%) 36 (30,8%) France 8 (20,5%) 25 (64,1%) 2 (5,1%) Bulgaria 1 (7,1%) 0 (0%) 12 (85,7%)

5 The kind of Energy Supply Bulgaria Absolute values Missing data 2 Mains connection 1 Genset Hydro power Electricity production

6 Others /unknown 29% Former and Actual Energy Supply 100%RES 6% Hybrid 3% NonRES 30% others/ unknown 8% 100%RES 30% NonRES 62% Hybrid 32%

7 Former and Actual Energy Supply Former E-Supply Actual E-supply 100% RES Hybrid Systems Non RES 13 5,5% 8 3,4% ,3% 71 30,1% 75 31,8% 70 29,7%

8 Satisfaction with the Energy Supply Very unsatisfied 6,8% Unsatisfied 10,2% Partly satisfied Missing data 10,2% Very satisfied 18,6% 19,9% Satisfied 34,3%

9 Satisfaction with the Energy Supply Bulgaria very satisfied very unsatisfied 2,00 / 14,3% 1,00 / 7,1% satisfied 1,00 / 7,1% partly satisfied 1,00 / 7,1% unsatisfied 9,00 / 64,3%

10 Satisfaction and Energy Supply Kind of E- supply Unsatisfied and very unsatisfied Partly satisfied Satisfied and very satisfied 100% RES ,2% 81,8% Hybrid systems ,1% 26% 58,9% Non RES ,7% 24,6% 37,7% Total ,0% 19,9% 42,9%

11 Wish to use more Renewable Energy Sources missing data 20% No, sufficient RES 6% No 9% Yes 58% undecisive 7%

12 Arguments why no (more) RES are demanded RES are too expensive and require too much maintenance We depend on a supply without disruption The hut is too big, better a mains connection Impossible because of the location The mains connection is comfortable RES are not feasible RES don t work RES systems are not economic

13 Higher attractiveness of the hut because of RES No 10,6% Rather not 10,6% I am undecisive 11,0% Missing data 18,6% Yes, very much 21,6% Yes, partly 27,5%

14 Wishes regarding the energy supply: more reliable and more ecological % % Absolute values More reliable Not marked Germany France Italy Bulgaria Absolute values Not marked More ecological Germany France Italy Bulgaria

15 Wishes regarding the energy supply: more economic and more user-friendly % 11% Absolute values Not marked More economic Germany France Italy Bulgaria Absolute values Not marked More user-friendly Germany France Italy Bulgaria

16 No special demand for Energy Supply % Absolute values Not marked No wishes Germany France Italy Bulgaria

17 Final Comments Renewable energies are only used if the landlord is very engaged. [] Because of economic reasons many projects will not be carried out or stopped in the beginning It would be absolutely necessary to involve the landlord seriously in the planning phase. The energy supply should not be calculated too scarce. Less experiments, less technocrats, more practice (The landlord has to live with the installation!)

18 Final Comments [...] RES makes the hut partly attractive, because before there was no light Landlord appreciates the reduction of noise through PV [ ] Since the extension of the PV-plant the clients appreciate the additional comfort [ ] RES are more useful and more comfortable for the landlord and the guests (e.g. warm water from PV) [ ] RES are necessary to run the hut. The total autonomy of the energy supply is guaranteed through solar panels