| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Klintman, Mikael, et al.
(author)
-
Erfarenheter av vindkraftsetablering: Förankring, acceptans och motstånd.
- 2008
-
Reports (pop. science, debate, etc.)abstract
- Many politicians and researchers perceive wind power as an important part of future energy supply, nationally and globally. However, it has turned out to be problematic to expand wind power in the pace necessary to meet the national and international goals about wind power expansion. A significant challenge concerns the social and policy-related processes surrounding the establishment of wind power in local regions. Depending on how these processes are designed and carried through, the result may become anything from a well-supported development in the local area to a heavily criticized and socially disintegrating process, where the wind power projects sometimes have to be cancelled. Previous research on wind power establishments has typically been local in scope. Moreover, cross-nationally comparative overviews of local wind power projects are rare. In the few studies that have been done, only two countries, or a few establishments have been examined. In this report, the experiences are collected and analysed from a broad range of local processes of wind power planning and establishments throughout Europe. The aim of the report is to identify what characterizes more – as well as less – efficient and “well-anchored” planning and establishing processes. The goal is to provide increased knowledge about how the actors involved may design and carry through the planning and establishment in ways that resonate with the (often changing) concerns and interests of the local population throughout the process. As a background to the local comparisons, the report examines more general, national tendencies. In certain countries, the development and expansion of wind power has been far more difficult and slow than in others. Unsurprisingly, the report indicates strong connections between the degree of successful wind power development and the degree of support among the public. Yet, the bases for public support vary. In wind power projects, the likelihood of public opposition is high. The attitudes to specific wind power prospects are dependent on local values, such as appreciation of nature, and local views on the relation between “untouched” nature, recreation and tourism. Still, we would like to emphasize that the level of acceptance differs substantially across countries and across local regions, differences that cannot be directly tied to the proportion of the landscape that has been used for wind power establishments. The level of acceptance is rather connected to a range of factors that concern the organizing, public participation, decision-making, and the economy. The report suggests strategies that can be used in order to acknowledge wind power opposition, particularly strategies based on open dialogue, genuine public participation, but also financial benefits, such as co-ownership of wind power plants, among the local community. It stands clear that wind power projects should not be forced upon a local community by an external actor. This is not only a moral or democratic issue. If the wind power establishment is to work on a long-term basis, and if it is to stimulate further establishments in other local areas, it is necessary that the process be based on open and straight dialogue with local actors, particularly with negative groups. The report distinguishes four possible situations related to wind power planning. In the first situation, the wind power plant is built, and the population is positive to wind power and to the project. This process is characterized by local support, and the possibilities for developing wind power further in the area are good. The second situation is in the report called resignation. This situation means that the wind power plant is built, although the local public remains negative. To be sure, wind power actors may perceive this as positive in the sense the project is completed, as is the share of renewable energy. Yet, the negative or resigned attitude among the local public constitutes a significant risk that the opposition may grow more powerful and more categorical against wind power in the local region. In the third situation, there is a high acceptance of wind power among the local population, although other obstacles contribute to the cancelling of the wind power project. Here, there is a social potential for wind power establishments, but it may require a different strategy and planning process, or modifications at the policy level. The fourth and last situation, which we call conflict and cancellation, is when the protests of the local population are so powerful that the opportunities for developing wind power in the local area are highly limited during the near future. In the report, these four situations are analyzed, through concrete European examples, and through elucidations of how wind power actors may have an impact on the outcome. Very roughly, and pulled out of context, here follow certain recommendations to wind power actors. In order to make use of these recommendations, and to adapt them to various types of wind power projects, the reader will need to consult the report as a whole. • Inform yourself about the entire range of various local groups’ attitudes to the plans for establishing local wind power; also inform yourself about what views are represented by the respective groups and what knowledge they have about wind power. • Regard the local attitudes and engagement as a changeable process. Positive viewpoints should be taken care of, and an initially negative viewpoint may become a positive engagement. • Acquire thorough knowledge about the history, culture and current challenges of the local society, in order to identify local opportunities that can be tied to the wind power project. • Do not invite the affected local public to “participatory meetings” if there is no real room for their influencing the outcome. • Consider alternative types of financial participation that only require the local population to make small investments.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Observation of e(+)e(-) -> eta ' J/psi center-of-mass energies between 4.189 and 4.600 GeV
- 2016
-
In: PHYSICAL REVIEW D. - 2470-0010. ; 94:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The process e(+)e(-) -> eta' J/psi is observed for the first time with a statistical significance of 8.6 sigma at center-of-mass energy root s = 4.226 GeV and 7.3 sigma at root s = 4.258 GeV using data samples collected with the BESIII detector. The Born cross sections are measured to be (3.7 +/- 0.7 +/- 0.3) and (3.9 +/- 0.8 +/- 0.3) pb at root s = 4.226 and 4.258 GeV, respectively, where the first errors are statistical and the second systematic. Upper limits at the 90% confidence level of the Born cross sections are also reported at other 12 energy points.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Observation of eta(c)(2S) -> 3(pi(+)pi(-)) and measurements of chi(cJ) -> 3(pi(+)pi(-)) in psi (3686) radiative transitions
- 2022
-
In: Physical Review D. - : American Physical Society. - 2470-0010 .- 2470-0029. ; 106:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The hadronic decay eta(c) (2S) -> 3 (pi(+)pi(-)) is observed with a statistical significance of 9.3 standard deviations using (448.1 +/- 2.9) x 10(6) psi(3686) events collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The measured mass and width of eta(c) (2S) are (3643.4 +/- 2.3 (stat) +/- 4.4 (syst)) MeV/c(2) and 19.8 +/- 3.9 (stat) +/- 3.1 (syst)) MeV, respectively, which are consistent with the world average values within two standard deviations. The product branching fraction B[psi(3686) -> gamma eta(c) (2S)] X B[eta(c)(2S) -> 3(pi(+)pi(-))] is measured to be (9.2 +/- 1.0(stat)+/- 1.2(syst)10(-6). Using B[psi(3686) -> gamma eta(c) (2S)] = (7.0(-2.5)(+3.4)) x 10(-4), we obtain B[eta(c)(2S) -> 3 (pi(+)pi(-))] = (1.31 +/- 0.15 (stat) +/- 0.17 (syst) ((+0.64)(-0.47)) (extr))x 10(-2), where the third uncertainty is from B [psi(3686)->gamma eta(c)(2S)]. We also measure the chi(cJ)-> 3(pi(+)pi(-)) (J = 0, 1, 2) decays via psi' -> gamma chi(cJ) transitions. The branching fractions are B[chi(c0) 3(pi(+)pi(-))] = (2.080 +/- 0.006(stat)+/- 0.068(syst))x10(-2), B [chi c(2) -> (pi(+)pi(-))]=1.092 x 0.004(stat)+/- 0.035(syst))x10(-2), and B[chi(C2) -> 3 (pi(+)pi(-))] = 1.565 +/- 0.005 (stat) +/- 0.048 (syst)) x 10(-2).
|
|
| 6. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Observation of the decay D-s(+) -> omega pi(+)eta
- 2023
-
In: Physical Review D. - : American Physical Society. - 2470-0010 .- 2470-0029. ; 107:5
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Using 7.33 fb(-1) of e(+)e(-) collision data collected by the BESIII detector at c.m. energies between 4.128 GeV and 4.226 GeV, we observe for the first time the decay D-s(+/-) -> omega pi(+/-)eta with a statistical significance of 7.6 sigma. The measured branching fraction of this decay is (0.54 +/- 0.12 +/- 0.04)%, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Search for baryon and lepton number violation in J/ψ → Λc+e- + c.c.
- 2019
-
In: Physical Review D. - 2470-0010 .- 2470-0029. ; 99:7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Using 1.31 x 109 J/ψ events collected by the BESIII detector at the Beijing Electron Positron Collider, we search for the process J/ψ → Λc+e- + c.c. for the first time. In this process, both baryon and lepton number conservation is violated. No signal is found and the upper limit on the branching fraction Β(J/ψ → Λc+e- + c.c.) is set to be 6.9 x 10-8 at the 90% confidence level.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Amplitude analysis of D-s(+) -> pi(+) pi(-) pi(+)
- 2022
-
In: Physical Review D. - : American Physical Society. - 2470-0010 .- 2470-0029. ; 106:11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Utilizing the data set corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.19 fb(-1) collected by the BESIII detector at a center-of-mass energy of 4.178 GeV, we perform an amplitude analysis of the D-s(+) -> pi(+) pi(-) pi(+) decay. The sample contains 13,797 candidates with a signal purity of similar to 80%. The amplitude and phase of the contributing pi pi S wave are measured based on a quasi-model-independent approach, along with the amplitudes and phases of the P and D waves parametrized by Breit-Wigner models. The fit fractions of different intermediate decay channels are also reported.
|
|
| 9. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Measurement of branching fractions of psi(3686) -> phi eta ', phi f(1) (1285) and phi eta(1405)
- 2019
-
In: Physical Review D. - 2470-0010 .- 2470-0029. ; 100:9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Using a sample of 448.1 x 10(6) psi(3686) events collected with the BESIII detector, we perform a study of the decay psi(3686) -> phi pi(+)pi(-)eta. The branching fraction of psi(3686) -> phi eta' is determined to be (1.51 +/- 0.16 +/- 0.12) x 10(-5), which is consistent with the previous measurement but with significantly improved precision. The resonances f(1)(1285) and eta(1405) are clearly observed in the pi(+)pi(-)eta mass spectrum with statistical significances of 18s and 9.7 sigma, respectively. The corresponding product branching fractions are measured to be B(psi(3686) -> phi f(1)(1285), f(1)(1285) -> pi(+)pi(-)eta) = )1.03 +/- 0.10 +/- 0.09) x 10(-5) and B(psi(3686) -> phi eta(1405), eta(1405) -> pi(+)pi(-)eta) = (8.46 +/- 1.37 +/- 0.92) x 10(-6). These results are used to test the perturbative QCD "12% rule."
|
|
| 10. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Measurement of the absolute branching fractions of Lambda(+)(c) -> Lambda eta pi(+) and Sigma(1385) (+) eta
- 2019
-
In: Physical Review D. - 2470-0010 .- 2470-0029. ; 99:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We study the decays Lambda(+)(c) -> Lambda eta pi(+) and Sigma(1385)(+)eta based on Lambda(+)(c)(Lambda) over bar (c) pairs produced in e(+)e(-) collisions at a center-of-mass energy of root s = 4.6 GeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 567 pb(-1). The data sample was accumulated with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The branching fractions are measured to be beta(Lambda(+)(c) -> Lambda eta pi(+)) = (1.84 +/- 0.21 (stat) +/- 0.15(syst))% and B(Lambda(+)(c) -> Sigma(1385)(+) eta) = (0.91 +/- 0.18 (stat) +/- 0.09 (syst))%, constituting the most precise measurements to date.
|
|
