Good-by-Devicing seeks to maps out different ideas of 'good' for fossil-free economy constructed by networks of expertise that over time has changed and used different technological devices. This entails tracing the historical trajectory of arguments regarding the merits of the energy islands, of hydrogen as an energy carrier and the role of wind power in this context.
Calling for a new ontology of the value of energy transition (also see Daggett 2019), I argue that Valuation Studies offer a vital perspective by focusing on how value is made, constructed and deviced: devices do not just represent, but also create, and thus have concrete effects. Valuation Studies have however tended to focus on quantitative valuation. To get closer to the challenge of studying the interface where actors routinely bridge the divide between quantitative “value” and qualitative “values” in the practice of valuation (Helgesson & Muniesa 2011; also see Lamont 2012; Stark 2000, 2009), the critical notion of the ‘good economy’ can help to shed light on those markets that are naturalised as ‘good’ (e.g. moral, ethical, responsible, renewable) through both quantitative and qualitative valuation devices. Such perspective helps to capture how ‘the good’ does not exist of itself, it must be construed. This also implies that ‘the good’ could be valued and devised otherwise. Good-by-Devicing offers a relational understanding of valuation processes.
These are constituted by practices and their material networks of concerns and networks of expertise, including actors, techniques, and devices entangled in a particular politico-historical context (paraphrasing Eyal 2013:864). This is why the elements of concerns, expertise, and devices reoccur throughout this project’s framework and design. I suggest more reflexivity of not only what concerns valuation devices include, but particularly also what they, sometimes inadvertently, overlook and exclude, and with what consequences.
The way in which technologies manage to make it to the market, or not, has been an object of inquiry in STS for decades (e.g. Callon 1984, 1986; Callon et al. 2002), e.g. in foundational laboratory studies (Callon 1980, 1986; Latour 1983, 1987; Latour & Woolgar 1979). Valuable accounts have been made of how, and through what devices, markets for renewable energy technologies have emerged, but no research has so far shed light on how energy islands have become valued as ‘good’. Good-by-Devicing seek to map shifting networks of expertise construing the energy islands and associated technologies as e.g. environmentally or economically ‘good’. Through text-based historical research, supported with background expert interviews, this lays the foundation for a better understanding of how energy islands moved to the centre of Denmark’s energy vision, coproducing a “good fossil-free economy”.
To this end, I dive into the role of devices deployed in the design phase, equipping different (economic/environmental/social) concerns to come to matter in the design of the energy transition. I use as my case the Danish energy vision of GigaWatt-scale “energy islands”. The first of their kind, the Danish Energy Islands constitute an ‘electron metropolis’ (DTU&AAU 2021) providing a platform in the sea for collecting wind power from massive offshore wind farms. This power is either sent into the Danish electricity network, onto another European country, or used for the production of green hydrogen through Power-to-X technology, eventually converting it into synthetic fuels for the transport sector. The first energy island is the natural island of Bornholm, with 3GW of wind power by 2030. The second is an artificial island in the North Sea and with no local communities (DTU&AAU 2021) with 3GW wind power by 2030 and 10GW in 2050 (Energinet.dk) (see Figure 1, EA Energy Analyses 2022:11). Good-by-Devicing particularly uses its unique access to
Bornholm and the two main technologies of large-scale offshore wind power and Power-to-X. Energy Island Bornholm constitutes a critical case of ‘the good fossilfree economy’ where local communities will live with the techno-scientific test-bed for in vivo experimentation with the roll out of a “model of the future 100% renewable-based energy system” (DTU 2022). The Bornholm case can give widely applicable learnings in Denmark, EU, and beyond, being considered “Representative and scalable (1% of DK)” (DTU&AAU2021) and thus boasting the potential for upscaling (Pfotenhauer et al. 2022).
Good-by-Devicing looks not only at temporal changes to what is deemed as 'good' but also how varying kinds of expertise value concerns differently. Different concerns over the Energy Island Bornholm can be seen as entrenched and belonging to alternative networks of expertise which is the Work package 02.