Which Way Does the Wind Blow? Analysing the State Context for Renewable Energy Deployment in the United States

Wind power is an important low-carbon technology and the most rapidly growing renewable energy technology in the US, but there is significant state-by-state variation in wind power distribution. This variation cannot be explained solely by wind resource patterns or US state policy and points to the importance of both local and central governance. We outline the national context for wind deployment in the US and then explore the sub-national, state-level factors shaping wind deployment patterns. We probe the socio-political context across four US states by integrating multiple research methods. Through comparative state-level analysis of the energy system, energy policy, public discourse as represented in the media and statelevel, energy policy stakeholders’ perceptions we examine variation in the context for wind deployment in Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana and Texas. Our results demonstrate that differentpatternsofwinddeploymentanddifferentdebatesaboutwindpowerhaveemergedin each locale. Participants across the different states appear to frame the risks and benefits of wind power in significantly different ways. We discuss the impact of risks and benefit frames on energy policy outcomes. The comparative assessment highlights the complex interplay between central and local governance and explores the significant socio-political variation between states. The study contributes to the understanding of energy technology deployment processes,decision-makingandenergypolicyoutcomes.Copyright©2014JohnWiley&Sons,

[1]  Miriam Fischlein,et al.  Carbon emissions and management scenarios for consumer-owned utilities , 2009 .

[2]  J. Creswell Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. , 1998 .

[3]  A. Valle,et al.  Diffusion of nuclear energy in some developing countries , 2014 .

[4]  Fredric C. Menz,et al.  The effectiveness of different policy regimes for promoting wind power: Experiences from the states , 2006 .

[5]  N. Meyer Learning from wind energy policy in the EU: lessons from Denmark, Sweden and Spain , 2007 .

[6]  Sanya Carley State Renewable Energy Electricity Policies: An Empirical Evaluation of Effectiveness , 2009 .

[7]  Susan Owens,et al.  Siting, sustainable development and social priorities , 2004 .

[8]  T. Peterson,et al.  Environmental Risk Communication: Responding to Challenges of Complexity and Uncertainty , 2008 .

[9]  S Pacala,et al.  Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies , 2004, Science.

[10]  Anders Hansen,et al.  The media and the social construction of the environment , 1991 .

[11]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences? , 2008 .

[12]  Barry G. Rabe,et al.  States on Steroids: The Intergovernmental Odyssey of American Climate Policy , 2008 .

[13]  R. Phadke,et al.  Steel forests or smoke stacks: the politics of visualisation in the Cape Wind controversy , 2010 .

[14]  Gary Goertz,et al.  The Possibility Principle: Choosing Negative Cases in Comparative Research , 2004, American Political Science Review.

[15]  Tarla Rai Peterson,et al.  Socio-Political Evaluation of Energy Deployment (SPEED): An integrated research framework analyzing energy technology deployment , 2008 .

[16]  Kirsten H. Engel,et al.  Subglobal Regulation of the Global Commons: The Case of Climate Change , 2005 .

[17]  R. Wiser,et al.  Annual Report on U.S. Wind Power Installation, Cost, and Performance Trends: 2007 (Revised) , 2008 .

[18]  Rolf Wüstenhagen,et al.  Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept , 2007 .

[19]  J. Corbett,et al.  Testing Public (Un)Certainty of Science , 2004 .

[20]  John A. Sautter,et al.  A Fractured Climate? The Political Economy of Public Utility Commissions in an Age of Climate Change , 2009 .

[21]  Lena Neij,et al.  An assessment of governmental wind power programmes in Sweden-using a systems approach , 2006 .

[22]  John P. Holdren,et al.  The Energy Innovation Imperative: Addressing Oil Dependence, Climate Change, and Other 21st Century Energy Challenges , 2006, Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization.

[23]  R. Wiser,et al.  The Treatment of Renewable Energy Certificates, EmissionsAllowances, and Green Power Programs in State Renewables PortfolioStandards , 2007 .

[24]  Tarla Rai Peterson,et al.  Policy stakeholders and deployment of wind power in the sub-national context: A comparison of four U.S. states , 2010 .

[25]  D. Kammen,et al.  U.S. energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion , 2007 .

[26]  Antonio Soria,et al.  Technical change dynamics: evidence from the emerging renewable energy technologies , 2001 .

[27]  Hugh M. Culbertson,et al.  “Media Malaise”: Explaining Personal Optimism and Societal Pessimism About Health Care , 1985 .

[28]  J. Stephens,et al.  Wind Energy in US Media: A Comparative State-Level Analysis of a Critical Climate Change Mitigation Technology , 2009 .

[29]  C. Lant,et al.  Welcoming the Wind? Determinants of Wind Power Development Among U.S. States , 2009 .

[30]  Elizabeth J Wilson,et al.  Wind deployment in the United States: states, resources, policy, and discourse. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[31]  Hubert Sacher,et al.  When do deep drilling geothermal projects make good economic sense , 2010 .

[32]  Jason Seawright,et al.  Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research , 2008 .

[33]  W. Gamson,et al.  Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach , 1989, American Journal of Sociology.

[34]  Jeremy Firestone,et al.  The Offshore Wind Power Debate: Views from Cape Cod , 2005 .

[35]  Peter A. Strachan,et al.  Wind Energy Policy, Planning and Management Practice in the UK: Hot Air or a Gathering Storm? , 2004 .

[36]  Donna Heimiller,et al.  2018 Wind Technologies Market Report , 2010 .

[37]  Nebojsa Nakicenovic,et al.  Technological change and diffusion as a learning process , 2002 .

[38]  Steven E. Stemler,et al.  An Overview of Content Analysis. , 2001 .

[39]  O. Holsti Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities , 1969 .

[40]  John P. Holdren,et al.  Energy-Technology Innovation , 2006 .

[41]  Andrea M. Feldpausch-Parker Communicating Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies: Opportunities and Constraints across Media , 2010 .

[42]  Melisa F. Pollak,et al.  Reducing greenhouse gas emissions: Lessons from state climate action plans , 2011 .

[43]  Barry G. Rabe,et al.  Race to the Top: The Expanding Role of U.S State Renewable Portfolio Standards , 2010 .

[44]  Bruce Bimber,et al.  Searching for a Frame , 2009 .

[45]  R. Garud,et al.  Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship , 2003 .

[46]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[47]  R. Weber Basic Content Analysis , 1986 .

[48]  Ragnar E. Löfstedt,et al.  Facility Siting : Risk, Power and Identity in Land Use Planning , 2004 .

[49]  William E. Grant,et al.  Chapter Two: Social Practice and Biophysical Process , 2004 .

[50]  Bob van der Zwaan,et al.  The Case for Carbon Capture and Storage , 2005 .

[51]  Anabela Carvalho,et al.  Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: re-reading news on climate change , 2007 .

[52]  Anthony A Leiserowitz,et al.  American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[53]  Martin J. Pasqualetti,et al.  Morality, Space, and the Power of Wind‐Energy Landscapes , 2000 .