Journal of Geography in Higher Education
ISSN: 0309-8265 (Print) 1466-1845 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjgh20
Introduction: teaching energy geographies
Autumn Thoyre & Conor Harrison
To cite this article: Autumn Thoyre & Conor Harrison (2016) Introduction: teaching
energy geographies, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 40:1, 31-38, DOI:
10.1080/03098265.2016.1132539
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1132539
Published online: 02 Mar 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjgh20
Download by: [Autumn Thoyre]
Date: 03 March 2016, At: 16:28
Journal of GeoGraphy in hiGher education, 2016
Vol. 40, no. 1, 31–38
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1132539
JGHE SYMPOSIUM
Introduction: teaching energy geographies
Autumn Thoyrea and Conor Harrisonb
department of Geography, colgate university hamilton, uSa; bdepartment of Geography and environment
and Sustainability program, university of South carolina columbia, uSa
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
a
In his introduction to the 2011 special issue on energy of the Annals of the Association of
American Geographers, Karl Zimmerer argues that “Geography is central to understanding and addressing the current energy dilemmas” (2011, p. 705). He further states that the
ability of geographers to efectively unpack systems of resource production, distribution,
and consumption, as well as the ways in which these are intertwined with socioecological
systems and relations, makes geographers uniquely qualiied to understand the shiting
global energy landscape. he special issue of the Annals is but one piece of evidence of the
recent increase in energy scholarship by geographers. he number of sponsored sessions
by the Energy and Environment Specialty Group at the annual AAG conference has more
than doubled since 2011 (Elvin Delgado,1 personal communication). he formation of the
Energy Geography Working Group by the RGS-IBG in 2011 crystallized growing energy
research by UK geographers, evidenced by recent increases in the number of sponsored
sessions at the RGS-IBG annual meetings (Stefan Bouzarovski,2 personal communication).
How has this increase in energy research activity translated into university classrooms?
he collection of papers that make up this symposium issue represent four ways that energy
geographies are being taught, as well as some of the challenges that emerge in their teaching. In what follows, we irst briely touch on the history of teaching energy in geography
classes, and place shits in its pedagogy within larger disciplinary and societal changes.
Next, we focus on the importance of bringing geographical perspectives to the teaching of
energy, particularly, perspectives from critical geography. Because these perspectives link
theory and practice in critical, relexive ways, energy geographers oten ind active learning
approaches useful in their teaching. Finally, we introduce the collection of papers, a group
that aims to share best practices and key challenges for conducting engaged, critical energy
pedagogy – a growing area of interest for both researchers and students alike.
A history of teaching energy in geography classes
While recent years have seen a rise in interest among geographers researching energy,
there has been relatively little written recently that explicitly discusses teaching energy
geographies. In fact, other than a surge in interest in the late 1970s/early 1980s, little about
teaching energy in geography courses has been published. his void partially stems from
a historic dearth of geographers focusing on energy. Writing in 1978, Fitzsimmons and
CONTACT autumn thoyre
© 2016 taylor & francis
authoyre@gmail.com
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
32
A. THOYRE AND C. HARRISON
Walton (1978) noted the lack of faculty in geography graduate programs that identiied
energy as a specialty: only 8 out of 1300 surveyed faculty. Further, they found that only
17 articles about energy were published in 19 diferent geography journals between 1965
and 1973. Over the next decade, a signiicant change occurred. Similar to contemporary
times, a series of crises related to energy in the 1970s brought its study and teaching to the
forefront among geographers. he emergence of OPEC and related oil shocks, questions
about long-term supply and demand, an increase in concerns about the environmental and
economic sustainability of fossil fuel and nuclear power use, and new thinking about the
regulation and pricing of energy resources all produced considerable interest in teaching
energy courses. By 1985, a survey of the Energy Specialty Group of the AAG indicated that
at least 28 US geography departments ofered at least one energy course at both the undergraduate and graduate level (Pryde, 1985). Yet, despite this increased interest in teaching
energy in geography classrooms, publications on the subject rapidly came to a halt. With
global oil prices rapidly dropping and administrations in the USA and Britain hostile to
analyzing conventional energy systems, interest in energy issues was already on the decline
by 1985 (Pryde, 1985).
he decline in teaching energy in geography departments during the 1980s meant that
energy concerns were largely let outside of the Marxist, feminist, postmodern, and other
critical turns of the 1980s and 1990s (Livingstone, 1993), and as a result, these perspectives
on energy were largely let of the teaching curricula at many universities. For example, a
search for energy-related articles in the Journal of Geography in Higher Education and the
Journal of Geography between 1975 and 19903 returned eight articles, most of which focused
on helping students understand the basic distributions of energy resources using maps and
charts (e.g. Beer, 1982; Fitzsimmons & Walton, 1978). However, one article attempted to link
spatial distributions of energy to developing spatial and critical thinking (Allen & Lahart,
1981), while another sought to introduce instructors to new concepts that could yield a
better understanding of household energy use and conservation (McColl, 1978). Somewhat
relective of the rise of feminist geography during the 1980s, one lesson introduced students
to the “other” global energy crises, most notably the scarcity of fuelwood in the global
South and its disproportionate impact on women (Branson, 1983). However, despite wider
acknowledgment by geographers that energy played a crucial role in global political and
economic geographies (Cook, 1976; Harper, 1966) of the literature reviewed, only Pryde
(1978) indicates how political economic processes shape the sorts of energy geographies
being taught. In his review of an energy teaching resource developed by the state of Texas,
Pryde links Texas’ important role in fossil fuel production to the scant attention paid in the
teaching resource to energy conservation and alternative energy production.
The need for teaching energy in geography classes
Although interest in teaching energy geographies declined ater the 1970s energy crises,
matters of energy have continued to be taught on university campuses, and their importance
has risen with concerns about global climate change. Kandpal and Broman (2014), reviewing worldwide renewable energy pedagogies, found that energy courses tend to be taught
primarily in engineering, architecture, and physics curricula (see also Karabulut, Gedik,
Keçebaş, & Alkan, 2011). he inding that energy tends to be taught mainly as a matter of
techniques and technologies was backed up by a search we conducted on the literature on
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHY IN HIGHER EDUCATION
33
teaching energy resources beyond-(but-including)-geography.4 When they do engage with
non-technical aspects, such pedagogies primarily have focused on neoclassical economic
concepts. For example, several scholars have suggested ways to better teach electricity markets to engineering students (Guevara-Cedeno, Palma-Behnke, & Uribe, 2012; Ibrahim,
2008; Madrigal & Flores, 2004).
Scholarship on teaching conventional energy sources (fossil fuels and nuclear) is sparse,
while sharing strategies for teaching renewable energy technologies are more common. No
relevant literature on teaching coal or natural gas concepts was found, and only one article
on teaching oil was found, focusing on teaching Canadian oil sands to a geology class by
partnering with regional industries (Dudley & Doram, 1999). Courses in renewable energy
in particular rose in popularity following the oil crises of the 1970s and were resurgent in
the 2000s with concerns about climate change (Kandpal & Broman, 2014). Such courses
have tended to focus on alternative energy technologies, aiming to train new generations
of students to use and consume them as members of the public, sustainability practitioners, policymakers, engineers, architects, and others (Jennings, 2009; Kandpal & Broman,
2014). Our search showed that scholars have focused mainly on teaching technologies like
wind and solar to engineers (e.g. Martinez, Herrero, & de Pablo, 2011; Reis et al., 2014) or
to natural scientists (e.g. van Sark, 2007); no pedagogical scholarship on hydropower or
biomass was found, nor cases of teaching non-technical aspects of these renewable energy
technologies. Overwhelmingly, however, this energy teaching was being couched in the
realm of sustainability.
Energy is an excellent vehicle for thinking about sustainability issues, since it is imbricated in so many current environmental problems at multiple scales: climate change, air
and water pollution, overconsumption, geopolitics, among others. Because energy is tied
to people’s everyday lives, it is also a key way to bring those larger sustainability issues
“home” to students. Understanding the techniques and technologies of energy – whether
they are conventional energy sources, unconventional fossil fuels, renewables, energy eiciency, or conservation – are important parts of energy literacy for students who go on to
become active members of the public, business owners, researchers, activists, policymakers,
sustainability practitioners, and others (c.f. van der Horst et al., 2016). Yet, geographers
ofer additional perspectives that are also important to students’ energy thinking which are
sometimes not found in other disciplinary approaches to energy pedagogies.
Building on the critical turns of the 1980s and 1990s, the resurgence of energy concerns
in geography particularly brings to the fore new perspectives on energy. Energy geographers oten follow the tradition of resource geographers in assuming that resources have
both physical and social aspects (Bridge, 2009) and that, like any technologies, energy
technologies are adopted in the context of political, economic, and social forces (Huber,
2013; Nye, 1998). his means that to understand how fossil fuels have become dominant in
contemporary societies, as well as what barriers alternative energy resources face, requires
an understanding of both where minerals and energy lows are physically located and consumed but also how these resources it into larger political, economic, and social contexts.
his perspective also emphasizes that what is considered a “resource” changes over time and
space, because resources are things that people value (Bridge, 2009). From this perspective,
greater knowledge of the facts and techniques of renewable energy are important but not
necessarily suicient to facilitating a larger societal transition away from fossil fuels.
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
34
A. THOYRE AND C. HARRISON
Energy geographers also emphasize issues of inequality and social justice in their research,
from both environmental justice and critical political economy standpoints. Drawing out
the implications of diferent energy regimes for communities who have difering amounts
of power in larger political economic and social systems are in many ways fundamentally
geographical concerns. Energy geographies are ripe for students to practice asking of the
world around them, “who beneits (and where?), who loses (and where?), and how?” questions that will better equip them for thinking of sustainability as including but beyond the
“natural” world. Energy geographers are, for example, currently asking important questions
about the relationships between energy and geopolitics (Le Billon, 2012; Watts, 2012) and
energy and citizenship (Valdivia, 2008), as well as about energy eiciency in state policies
(hoyre, 2015), energy landscapes (Pasqualetti, 2001; van der Horst & Vermeylen, 2012),
energy vulnerability and resilience (Bouzarovski, 2007; Graybill, 2013), the social dynamics
of energy demand (Walker, 2014), energy and neoliberalism (Huber, 2013), and the energetic
political economies of power and control (Bridge & Le Billon, 2013; Harrison, 2013). his
body of research points to the fact that student understandings of energy should be based
on more than just understanding technologies and neoclassical economics. Rather, students
of energy geographies should understand that energy seeps into our political, economic,
cultural, and social lives at a variety of scales and in ways that are geographically uneven.
hus, as energy courses, minors, and concentrations within larger geography, environmental
studies, physics, engineering, and other programs are developed, there is a need to include
perspectives like that of geography alongside these other disciplinary approaches.
Teaching energy geographies through active learning techniques
In large part because they center constructivist and social justice perspectives, many energy
geographers, including those in this collection, use active learning approaches in their
teaching, emphasizing critical thinking, relection, and transformation as pedagogical goals.
Active learning is oten contrasted with traditional lecturing approaches to teaching, and is
focused on students developing critical thinking skills as well as mastery of content (Bonwell
& Eison, 1991; Hanson & Moser, 2003). Such “learning by doing” (e.g. Scheyvens, Griin,
Jocoy, Liu, & Bradford, 2008) can be used for a class period or for a course-length project and
can act as a complement to or replacement for traditional lectures (Scheyvens et al., 2008).
Active learning techniques ofer a range of beneits for geography students. Students in
active learning environments are oten more motivated and interested in course material
than in traditional lectures (Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Hanson & Moser, 2003). A recent
meta-analysis of active learning techniques in STEM courses showed that students master
content better in such environments, as seen in higher test scores and lower failure rates
(Freeman et al., 2014). “Learning by doing” especially activates “higher-order” critical thinking skills, honing students’ skills in analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and creativity (Anderson
& Krathwohl, 2001; Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Hanson & Moser, 2003). Such techniques
enhance learning for students from multiple learning styles (Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Healey
& Jenkins, 2000), making them useful for interdisciplinary geography courses.
he techniques and perspectives of active learning are particularly useful for teaching
energy geographies from critical perspectives by linking student’s lives with theory in politically engaged ways. Geographers have long used such techniques to help students connect
their everyday lives with local, regional, and global issues and patterns (e.g. Hanson &
JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHY IN HIGHER EDUCATION
35
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
Moser, 2003). Energy is all around students both inside and outside the classroom – including through their interactions with lightbulbs, microwaves, cell phones, cars, trees, and
food – making student lives bursting with possibilities for linking theory with everyday in
energy geography courses. hrough active learning, students oten link their experiences
with theory through relection (as in Kolb’s theory of experiential thinking, cited in Healey
& Jenkins, 2000). By emphasizing relection and positionality, critical energy geographers
can use such techniques to help students practice the methods and political engagements
relected in the wider sub-discipline, helping students to also make the Marxist, feminist,
relational, and post-modern turns that the study of energy in geography itself has taken. In
addition, many critical geographers have called for geography to become a more inclusive
discipline (e.g. Gilmore, 2002; Pulido, 2002; Woods, 2002), and active learning techniques
have been shown to help students from historically underrepresented groups (Freeman
et al., 2014) as well as to make classrooms themselves more inclusive (Davis, 2009).
Teaching energy geographies: successful approaches
he papers in this collection were irst developed in response to a panel held at the 2014
AAG conference called “Teaching energy geographies: Successful approaches.” In the panel,
we asked participants to present teaching interventions they have used to teach energy
geography concepts and theories in their courses. Emerging from this panel was a diverse
set of activities and interventions that examine energy at a variety of scales and locations
using engaged pedagogical techniques. hree of the papers emerged directly from the panel
(Huber’s, Delgado’s, and Graybill’s), while a fourth (van der Horst et al.’s) was later added
to the collection. While varying in their topics and approaches, the papers are united by
their commitment to encouraging critical approaches to the study of energy through the
use of active learning techniques.
Delgado’s (2016) intervention relects the shit towards using political economic concepts in the study of energy geographies. He uses concepts of the spatial ix, scarcity, and
the second contradiction of capitalism to encourage students to think critically about how
contemporary energy issues are related to political economies. He also uses his own research
as an empirical example of the theories, engaging students with the speciics of Venezuelan
petrochemical processing. An in-class activity and critical response paper encourage students to practice deepening their knowledge of these concepts and in the process rethink
energy technologies.
While Delgado’s active learning intervention spans the length of a single class meeting,
Graybill (2016) engages students with Arctic and urban spaces of energy through a semester-long video project. he project encourages students to make the shit from consumers
of knowledge to producers. By producing 3–5 min video clips, students learn the technical
skills of ilmmaking while also critically thinking about the relations between texts and
images. Such an approach, which is oriented toward a more public scholarship model of
class projects, encourages students to think critically about the content they are producing,
and by sharing these videos on social media, students are more motivated to produce high
quality outputs.
Delgado’s and Graybill’s interventions encourage students to think globally about energy,
while connecting to students’ everyday experiences, as van der Horst et al. (2016) does, is
another way to engage students in critical energy analyses. Recent energy research has also
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
36
A. THOYRE AND C. HARRISON
pointed to the roles of positionality and self-relection, as well as the importance of energy
literacy, in addressing the harms that come from current patterns of energy production
and consumption. he intervention from van der Horst et al. does this by shiting the scale
of energy analysis, focusing on energy consumption in the home. Making use of relatively
inexpensive energy monitoring devices, students assess their household energy use over
a period of several weeks. his activity encourages students to relect on the link between
their social practices and energy consumption, and is aimed at ultimately enabling students
to compare energy consumption across the globe.
All of these active learning pedagogies can foster students’ critical thinking. However,
empowering students inside and outside of the classroom is also unpredictable. Like
Delgado, Huber (2016) uses energy – particularly oil – as an empirical focus for students
to understand broader critical geography concepts. Yet Huber also confronts this issue of
student political engagement and empowerment head on, describing how the complexity of
energy geographies presents pedagogical challenges. In his teaching about oil, for example,
Huber notes the diiculty students ind in moving beyond the what and where of oil to the
why and how. Further, Huber has also found that highlighting the centrality of fossil fuels
to American life oten leaves students delated, overwhelmed, and sapped of environmentalist vigor – results that are at cross purposes with critical scholarship and active learning.
As climate change once again brings concerns over energy to the fore, research and
teaching on energy by geographers is on the rise. his collection of papers is one attempt to
begin sharing the best practices and innovative methods being developed to teach energy
geographies, but also the challenges that such an undertaking presents. Other resources
are also becoming available. An upper level textbook for teaching energy geography is currently being written (Gavin Bridge, personal communication), and an online repository for
energy-related syllabi are also available (Energy teaching in GEES 20145). his collection of
papers highlights the need to continue developing energy pedagogies that not only inform,
but also encourage students to take action. Our hope is that this work serves as inspiration
for sustained and future teaching of the geographies of energy.
Notes
1. Past chair, AAG Energy and Environment Specialty Group.
2. Past secretary, RGS Energy Geography Speciality Group.
3. Conducted by searching the homepages of the Journal of Geography (http://www.tandfonline.
com/toc/rjog20/current#.VFuBU8kxpzQ) and the Journal of Geography in Higher Education
(http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/cjgh20/current#.VFuBp8kxpzQ) using the search terms:
“energy,” “electricity,” “renewable energy,” “solar,” “wind,” “hydroelectric,” “hydroelectricity,”
“dam,”, “oil,” “coal,” “natural gas,” and “nuclear,” in November 2014.
4. Conducted by searching the Web of Science database for journal articles using title words
“teach” + the following search terms: “energy,” “electricity,” “renewable energy,” “solar,” “wind,”
“hydroelectric,” “hydroelectricity,” “dam,” “biomass,” “oil,” “coal,” “natural gas,” “fracking,”
“hydraulic fracturing,” “hydrofracking,” and “nuclear,” in October 2014.
5. http://energygees.wikispot.org/, accessed 11 June 2014.
Disclosure statement
No potential conlict of interest was reported by the authors.
JOURNAL OF GEOGRAPHY IN HIGHER EDUCATION
37
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
References
Allen, R. F., & Lahart, D. E. (1981). Critical thinking skills and energy: Using energy error cards in
geography class. Journal of Geography, 80, 64–70.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing
(abridged ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Allyn and Bacon.
Beer, D. D. (1982). Energy education. Journal of Geography, 81, 66–67.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Washington,
DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.
Bouzarovski, S. (2007). Energy poverty in Eastern Europe: Hidden geographies of deprivation. London:
Ashgate.
Branson, M. S. (1983). Building map skills: he other energy crisis. Journal of Geography, 82, 30–33.
Bridge, G. (2009). Material worlds: Natural resources, resource geography and the material economy.
Geography Compass, 3, 1217–1244.
Bridge, G., & Le Billon, P. (2013). Oil. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cook, E. (1976). Man, energy society. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Davis, B. G. (2009). Tools for teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Delgado, E. (2016). Energy geographies: hinking critically about energy issues in the classroom.Journal
of Geography in Higher Education, 40, 38–53.
Dudley, J. S., & Doram, T. (1999). Oil sands geologists in an industry–school partnership: A resource
and teaching opportunity. Geoscience Canada, 26, 39–43.
Fitzsimmons, A. K., & Walton, K. J. (1978). Toward a geography of energy: A review of basic sources
and literature. Journal of Geography, 77, 61–66.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P.
(2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 8410–8415.
Gilmore, R. (2002). Fatal couplings of power and diference: Notes on racism and geography. The
Professional Geographer, 54, 15–24.
Graybill, J. (2013). Imagining resilience: Situating perceptions and emotions about climate change
on Kamchatka, Russia. GeoJournal, 78, 817–832.
Graybill, J. (2016). Teaching energy geographies via videography,Journal of Geography in Higher
Education, 40, 54–65.
Guevara-Cedeno, J. Y., Palma-Behnke, R., & Uribe, R. (2012). Experimental economics for teaching
the functioning of electricity markets. IEEE Transactions on Education, 55, 466–473.
Hanson, S., & Moser, S. (2003). Relections on a discipline-wide project: Developing active learning
modules on the human dimensions of global change. Journal of Geography in Higher Education,
27, 17–38.
Harper, R. A. (1966). he geography of world energy consumption. Journal of Geography, 65, 302–315.
Harrison, C. (2013). “Accomplished by methods which are indefensible”: Electric utilities, inance,
and the natural barriers to accumulation. Geoforum, 49, 173–183.
Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2000). Kolb’s experiential learning theory and its application in geography
in higher education. Journal of Geography, 99, 185–195.
Huber, M. (2013). Lifeblood. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Huber, M. (2016). Teaching energy geography? It’s complicated. Journal of Geography in Higher
Education, 40, 76–82.
Ibrahim, D. (2008). Teaching the principles of modern electricity metering. International Journal of
Engineering Education, 24, 1163–1169.
Jennings, P. (2009). New directions in renewable energy education. Renewable Energy, 34, 435–439.
Kandpal, T. C., & Broman, L. (2014). Renewable energy education: A global status review. Renewable
& Sustainable Energy Reviews, 34, 300–324.
Karabulut, A., Gedik, E., Keçebaş, A., & Alkan, M. A. (2011). An investigation on renewable energy
education at the university level in Turkey. Renewable Energy, 36, 1293–1297.
Le Billon, P. (2012). Wars of plunder: Conflicts, profits and the politics of resources. New York, NY:
Hurst and Columbia University Press.
Downloaded by [Autumn Thoyre] at 16:28 03 March 2016
38
A. THOYRE AND C. HARRISON
Livingstone, D. (1993). The geographical tradition: Episodes in the history of a contested enterprise.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Madrigal, M., & Flores, M. (2004). Integrated sotware platform to teach diferent electricity spot
market architectures. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 19, 88–95.
Martinez, F., Herrero, L. C., & de Pablo, S. (2011). Project-based learning and rubrics in the teaching
of power supplies and photovoltaic electricity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 54, 87–96.
McColl, R. W. (1978). Some basics for teaching and evaluating energy conservation in the home.
Journal of Geography, 77, 94–99.
Nye, D. E. (1998). Consuming power: A social history of American energies. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Pasqualetti, M. (2001). Wind energy landscapes: Society and technology in the California Desert.
Society and Natural Resources, 14, 689–699.
Pryde, P. R. (1978). A review of a teacher’s handbook on energy. Journal of Geography, 77, 39.
Pryde, P. R. (1985). Energy courses in American geography departments. Journal of Geography, 84,
154–157.
Pulido, L. (2002). Relections on a white discipline. The Professional Geographer, 54, 42–49.
Reis, A., da Costa, F. H., Xavier, G. L., Alvarenga, E. B., de Oliveira, J. C., & Guimarães, G. C.
(2014). A comparative performance analysis of a controlled d.c. and a.c. motor which emulates
wind turbines for teaching and research purposes. International Journal of Electrical Engineering
Education, 51, 146–161.
Scheyvens, R., Griin, A. L., Jocoy, C. L., Liu, Y., & Bradford, M. (2008). Experimenting with active
learning in geography: Dispelling the myths that perpetuate resistance. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, 32, 51–69.
hoyre, A. (2015). Energy eiciency as a resource in state portfolio standards: Lessons for more
expansive policies. Energy Policy, 86, 625–634.
Valdivia, G. (2008). Governing relations between people and things: Citizenship, territory, and the
political economy of petroleum in Ecuador. Political Geography, 27, 456–477.
van der Horst, D., & Vermeylen, S. (2012). Ownership claims, valuation practices, and the unpacking
of energy-landscape conlicts. International Review of Sociology, 22, 429–445.
van der Horst, D. (2016). Improving energy literacy through student-led ieldwork - at home. Journal
of Geography in Higher Education, 40, 66–75.
van Sark, W. G. H. H. M. (2007). Teaching the relation between solar cell eiciency and annual energy
yield. European Journal of Physics, 28, 415–427.
Walker, G. (2014). he dynamics of energy demand: Change, rhythm and synchronicity. Energy
Research and Social Science, 1, 49–55.
Watts, M. (2012). A tale of two gulfs: Life, death, and dispossession along two oil frontiers. American
Quarterly, 64, 437–467.
Woods, C. (2002). Life ater death. The Professional Geographer, 54, 62–66.
Zimmerer, K. S. (2011). New geographies of energy: Introduction to the special issue. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers, 101, 705–711.