Peak residential electricity demand and social practices: deriving flexibility and greenhouse gas intensities from time use and locational data

Peak residential electricity demand takes place when people conduct simultaneous activities at specific times of the day. Social practices generate patterns of demand and can help understand why, where, with whom and when energy services are used at peak time. The aim of this work is to make use of recent UK time use and locational data to better understand: (i) how a set of component indices on synchronisation, variation, sharing and mobility indicate flexibility to shift demand; and (ii) the links between people’s activities and peaks in greenhouse gases’ intensities. The analysis is based on a recent UK time use dataset, providing 1 minute interval data from GPS devices and 10 minute data from diaries and questionnaires for 175 data days comprising 153 respondents. Findings show how greenhouse gases’ intensities and flexibility to shift activities vary throughout the day. Morning peaks are characterised by high levels of synchronisation, shared activities and occupancy, with low variation of activities. Evening peaks feature low synchronisation, and high spatial mobility variation of activities. From a network operator perspective, the results indicate that periods with lower flexibility may be prone to more significant local network loads due to the synchronization of electricity-demanding activities

Timing, Fragmentation of Work and Income Inequality - An Earnings Treatment Effects Approach

Traditional welfare analyses based on money income needs to be broadened by its time dimension. In the course of time the traditional full-time work is diminishing and new labour arrangements are discussed (keyword: flexible labour markets). Our study is contributing to economic well-being by adding insights into particular work effort characteristics - the daily timing of work and its fragmentation - and its resulting income distribution. With our focus on ‘who is working when within a day with which earnings consequences’ we go beyond traditional labour market analyses with its working time division into aggregated full and part time work, working hours spread across a week and weekend, life time working etc. Whereas the first part of our study is describing the distribution of timing and fragmentation of daily work time and its resulting income based on more than 35.000 diaries of the recent German Time Budget Survey 2001/2002, the second part of our study quantifies determinants of arrangement specific earnings functions detecting significant explanatory pattern of what is behind. The economic theory behind is a human capital approach in a market and non-market context, extended by non-market time use, the partner’s working condition, social networking as well as household and regional characteristics. The econometrics use a treatment effects type interdependent estimation of endogenous participation (selection) in a daily working hour pattern (self-selection)and pattern specific earnings function explanation. The overall result: Individual earnings in Germany are dependent on and significant different with regard to the daily working hour arrangement capturing timing and fragmentation of work time. Market and non-market factors are important and significant in explaining earnings

Increasing LGBTQ+ inclusion & competency in wildlife sciences: intersections of sociocultural, structural, and historic barriers to inclusion

Abstract Science has a history of excluding marginalized groups, including people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, and other marginalized gender and sexual identities (LGBTQ+), and recent calls urge the wildlife sciences to address disparities. Literature on inclusion in the life sciences generally has focused on personal affirmation and has neglected comprehensive discussion of barriers rooted in historical, structural, and sociocultural context. In our literature review, we construct a narrative highlighting the intersections between historic LGBTQ+ exclusion in society and wildlife science due to current policy trends, pressures of cis‐heteronormativity, and survival barriers on LGBTQ+ people in wildlife sciences in the United States. Wildlife scientists must have competency on LGBTQ+ marginalization topics to advance inclusion in our discipline, and this should include comprehension of historic and current legislation and social perceptions. To bolster inclusion efforts, we recommend thoughtful data collection on experiences of LGBTQ+ people within the wildlife sciences. To address root causes of exclusion, institutions and organizations should address disparities in financial support, housing, and physical and mental health resources as part of LGBTQ+ advocacy, in addition to interpersonal efforts