Abstract
This paper argues that energy systems are becoming increasingly complex, and illustrates how new types of hazards emerge from an ongoing transition towards renewable energy sources. It shows that the energy sector relies heavily on risk assessment methods that are analytic, and that systemic methods provide important additional insights. A case study of the Dutch gas sector illustrates this by comparing the hazard and operability study (HAZOP, analytic) with the system-theoretic process analysis (STPA, systemic). The contribution is twofold. This paper illustrates how system hazards will remain underestimated by sustained use of only analytic methods, and it highlights the need to study the organization of safety in energy transitions. We conclude that appropriate risk assessment for future energy systems involves both analytic and systemic risk assessments.
Highlights
The integration of renewable energy sources increases the complexity of traditional energy systems.Renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, are intermittent, i.e., their availability strongly depends on climate and weather patterns
Rejzek and Hilbes stress their added value in the design of digital instrumentation for nuclear power plants [18]; Rosewater and Williams analyzed safety in new battery designs using a systematic risk assessment and conclude that it creates more causal scenarios for accidents compared to their analytic counterpart, in addition to providing a better answer to hazards related to uncertainties that come with new technologies [19]; and Karatzas and Chassiakos find that a systemic risk assessment is instrumental in identifying gaps in current risk assessments in the context of the increased complexity of domestic energy systems [20]
Like Rosewater et al [19], we find that the study of the safety of renewable energy systems must incorporate a systemic view to integrating all possible new interactions
Summary
The integration of renewable energy sources increases the complexity of traditional energy systems. Rejzek and Hilbes stress their added value in the design of digital instrumentation for nuclear power plants [18]; Rosewater and Williams analyzed safety in new battery designs using a systematic risk assessment and conclude that it creates more causal scenarios for accidents compared to their analytic counterpart, in addition to providing a better answer to hazards related to uncertainties that come with new technologies [19]; and Karatzas and Chassiakos find that a systemic risk assessment is instrumental in identifying gaps in current risk assessments in the context of the increased complexity of domestic energy systems [20] Their results suggest that systemic methods are more appropriate for identifying and potentially mitigating novel challenges associated with a transition to renewable energy sources.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
