The reception of the resilience concept in the energy discourse, and genesis of the theory of resilient energy system design

Abstract

The concept of resilience in energy systems and the derived principle of resilient energy system design are prominent results of metaphorical thinking in technology. They combine two metaphorical processes: the transfer of biological/ecological system models to energy systems and the transfer of less vulnerable decentralized information/communication network architectures to power infrastructure networks. This chapter reconstructs the roots and the development steps of the concept of resilience in energy systems, starting in the alternative energy discourse in the early 1970s and ending in the first elaborated theory of resilient energy system design by Amory Lovins in 1982. The historical discourse analysis goes into detail about: • transfers of metaphors and guiding concepts in energy and communication infrastructure systems; • countercultural debates about small distributed, self-organized soft energy systems condensed in Schumacher’s principle of ‘appropriate technology’; • Lovins’s introduction of entropy law, thermal carrying capacity of the Earth, ecodisaster research and the ‘biological metaphor’ into the discourse stimulating the first resilient energy system design debate in late 1970s; • the first integration of the ‘energy internet’ metaphor into the resilience discourse: The ‘Power Systems 2000’ scenario of the Homeostatic Control Group; and, finally • the multidisciplinary synthesis of the resilient energy system design-debate: the distributed computing-inspired study Brittle Power by Lovins and Lovins. As a summary of the early history of the resilience debate in the energy sector, it can be concluded how stimulating the ecological resilience concept has been for this discourse, and analogies with bio-ecological systems do not suffice for the resilience assessment and design of energy systems. The theory of resilient socio-technological systems design therefore requires resilience concepts that are emancipated from natural analogies and that are based on metaphors corresponding with the specific principles, structures and social architecture of the technology in question.