Electricity Industry: Renewable Energy

Schedule, contacts, requirements, and grading

Schedule

Starting October 25, we will meet on a weekly basis, every Monday, 10:00 Brno time in the room P21a.

Contacts and office hours

Contact: osicka@mail.muni.cz

Office hours: Monday 9:00-9:45 (office 4.35), Monday 16:00-17:00 (chat MS Teams).

Course Requirements

(1)   Active participation is the key. Check the literature and other required sources before each session and join us on time with your webcam on. Be ready for in-class polls and discussions. 

(2)  Submit three questions or discussion topics related to renewable energy. They can, but do not have to, follow-up on issues covered in sessions or course sources. The questions shall be submitted in a doc(x) or odt format into a dedicated IS vault linked below by November 29. Late submission will be penalized by a loss of 2 points per each day of delay.

(3)  Team up with a classmate and submit a country analysis together (see details below). Register your topic (country) by November 1 via Late registration will be penalized by a loss of 1 point.

The final analysis should be submitted by November 16 via an IS vault linked below. Late submission will be penalized by a loss of 2 points per each day of delay.

(4) Submit a short feedback to one country analysis. Each analysis shall therefore receive feedback by two students. After the submission deadline, check the available (submitted) analyses and register to one of them in the same . The feedback should be submitted to the same folder as the analyses by November 22, 2020. In the feedback, discuss the clarity and validity of argumentation, analytical depth and the selection and use of sources and data. Late submission will be penalized by a loss of 1 points per each day of delay.


Country analysis


Details and recommendations

(1) Form a group of two. Together select a country whose approach to renewable energy stands out in some way (fast build up of renewable energy over short period of time, little development of renewable energy despite favorable conditions, rapid decline in (previously) high pace of deployment of renewable energy, etc.)

(2) Use the explaining-outcome process-tracing methodology (see for example Beach 2017 - attached below) to identify and discuss e.g. the socio-political or techno-economic factors behind the examined situation.

(3) Prepare a bullet-point outline of your argument before you start writing.

(4) Be concise, avoid text fillers. The goal is not to fill up the required word count but to learn and to facilitate learning. Streamline the text as much as possible during the final reading and editing (yes, this should take place).


Required structure

(1) Title (think of something interesting not just "Czech Republic"), full names of the authors and the estimated contribution of each author to the whole endeavor - this will be reflected in the grading (see below). Example: Filip Černoch (60%), Jan Osička (40%).

(2) Justification: What makes the selected country a relevant case for the analysis (max 5 sentences).

(3) Results at a glance (4-5 most important takeaways from your analysis; max 3 sentences per result; see Agora Energiewende studies for inspiration).

(4) Analysis (900-1,500 words).

(5) Conclusions (4-5 most important takeaways from your analysis; one paragraph per result)

(6) References (the use of citation manager such as Mendeley is highly recommended).

- items 1-3 can be placed on the front page, do not bother with faculty logos.


Evaluation criteria

Validity, consistency and analytical depth: up to 10 points
Data and literature (richness and validity): up to 5 points
 


Grading

Grading details

The final grade will be determined by the country analysis (up to 15 points), the submitted questions (3 points if submitted in time) and the feedback (2 points if submitted in time).

To avoid freeriding in the groups, the authors' scores will be determined by weighting the analysis' final score by the authors' stated contribution. Example: the analysis by Filip (60%) and Jan (40%) receives 8 points out of 15, which makes it 2 x 8 = 16 points in total for both authors. Consequently, Filip will receive 16 x 60% = 9.6 = 10 points. Jan will receive 16 x 40% = 6.4 = 6 points (and will have to retake the course). 


Points and grades

A                     20-19
B                     18-17
C                     16-15
D                     14-13
E                      12
F                      11 and less