Exercise A Build an envisioning workshop for how

Exercise A Build an envisioning workshop for how energy transition technologies will develop in the next 15 years

Background • Energy system forcasting in Finland has proceeded in linear ‘technology by technology’ manner and then summed up. • This worked well for the decades of high path dependency and incremental change in the system • The results regarding key energy transition technologies, however, have been systematically underplayed in both national and global IEA estimates • The systemic change dynamics and interlinkages appear downplayed • The existing system intertia and flow of investment appear downplayed: first slower than expected change then faster than expected ; continuous corrections introduced to linear estimates • Smart Energy Transition (SET) research project proceeded first through a Delfoi study sent to 200 experts, but the results again looked overly cautious

Ratioale for the workshop • The technology, regulation, consumer behavior change interlinkages may not be addressed because technology experts specialized and not in contact with each other • In addition to just looking at each technology and its cost curves, the technology diffusion will be affected by changes in at least • Regulation and (carbon)taxation, subsidies, investment intensity and sources • Discussion at national scale only somewhat misleading: local and city etc solutions feature important details for new potentials as well as hindrances so shifting the scale of dicussion an opportunity • The delfoi study experts a good contact pool; knowledgeable and influential, and representing different institutions and interest groups

The codesign challenges known to us • The key technologies are several and expertize distributed, calling for parallel groups for • On-shore wind power, off-shore wind power, Solar-PV, Solar heat, Heat-pumps, Electricity storage, Heat storage, Demand response systems, biogas, wood based bioenergy (Woodchips, pellets, pulp plant waste heat) • Potentially the CO 2 emitting technologies to be replaced: Oil, Gas, black coal, peat would merit focus as well • The experts are busy people, who get all kind of invitations. Unrealistic to get as many of them needed for more than a day • Several potential participants outside helsinki so start before 10 and continuance after 16 may begin to curb participation • Face to face interaction probably needed to talk about changes in the overall system that may be required or may happen because of rising energy transition technologies share: may also lead to direct changes in perceptions and attitudes of these people • ie somekind of a workshop design • Our capacity to run the workshop limited by facilitator and note taker availability to about 15 -20 people total (benefits to having a 32 person project : -D), spaces in Aalto business school Töölö kampus semi-flexible

Goals from the codesign workshop • Facilitate participants learning about particular energy transition technologies and changes in the energy system change related to them • Help participants to re-consider their estimates of each technology for 15 year timespan • Introduce to Finnish energy system planning more fine-scale considerations in addition to just the national scale

Co. Design action planning check-list 1. 2. Assess what are the primary and secondary aims of the codesign action Assess the change domain characteristics: What is the social issue? What and who is involved? Systemic issue? Nature of Infrastructure and need to change it? Nature and path dependencies in science, tech, markets and pricing, regulation, resource use, logistics, consumer behavior? Cognitive lock-in(s)? … 3. Assess further the targeted and implied people: ’users’ and ’stakeholders’ • Who are they – unified group or diverse set of different groups? What kind of people are they? • Motivation – why are they interested? • Contact – how to reach them? • Competence – what are they capable of doing? • Relevance – what are they getting from the project? What is the design project getting from them? 4. Select the approach(es) and methods (mix) to work with these people(s) (see CDJP and methods sites) 5. Tailor the methods and practical arrangements to ensure meaningful inputs: how? What all needs to get done? 6. If relevant, consider ways the participants can share with each other 7. Plan how the results and outcomes will be documented (and see if this affects the methods and arrangements) 8. Plan how you will attract the participants and what are the rewards for them 9. Plan how you integrate results and outcomes into design project (and larger sociotechnical development) 10. If you aim for sustained participation, what are the participation forms and pathways people can take • Do not try too much at once, work in phases, make it easy for participants (internal/external to your organization) • Enable multiple ways, intensity and channels of participation 11. Create ways to deepen, extend and pool collaboration with (strategically important) participants