The social and ecological footprint of renewable power generation plants. Balancing social requirements and ecological impacts in an integrated approach

Abstract It is necessary to combine ecological and social assessment of energy supply options in an integrated approach to come to a holistic understanding of acceptable scenarios. The study thus argues the importance of a thorough ecological basis for social acceptance analyses in this context and exemplifies an integrated approach in which scenarios are evaluated from both ecological and social perspectives. To illustrate the methodology, first, spatially explicit scenarios of electricity supply were assessed according to their ecological footprint by deducing ecological values of the respective landscapes from biotope valences. Following, the scenarios and their ecological assessment served as input for an empirical survey to assess attitudes and preference for an electricity mix (shares of wind power, photovoltaics (PV), and biogas), land use for the infrastructure (in the forest/on pastures), as well as specific combinations of electricity mix and land use. It is shown how, by this two-step procedure, socially preferred and ecologically sustainable scenarios (in this case, electricity mix with a high share of PV (on roofs) with the remaining infrastructure on pastures) can be identified and evaluated within one frame of reference. Methodological challenges and policy implications of the approach are discussed.

[1]  Charles R. Warren,et al.  Does community ownership affect public attitudes to wind energy? A case study from south-west Scotland , 2010 .

[2]  Nobukazu Soma,et al.  Integration of natural and social environment in the implementation of geothermal projects , 2017 .

[3]  Gerd Ascheid,et al.  Extending the engineering trade-off analysis by integrating user preferences in conjoint analysis , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[4]  K. Gaston,et al.  Common European birds are declining rapidly while less abundant species' numbers are rising. , 2015, Ecology letters.

[5]  Reinhard Madlener,et al.  Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[6]  G. Daily,et al.  Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity , 2012, Nature.

[7]  Farrokh Albuyeh,et al.  Grid of the future , 2009, IEEE Power and Energy Magazine.

[8]  K. Nuortimo,et al.  Exploring the social acceptance of biomass power , 2017 .

[9]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Assessment of urban green space structures and their quality from a multidimensional perspective. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.

[10]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Does transmission technology influence acceptance of overhead power lines? An empirical study , 2016, 2016 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems (SMARTGREENS).

[11]  Ben Hoen,et al.  Wind Energy Facilities and Residential Properties: The Effect of Proximity and View on Sales Prices , 2010 .

[12]  Peter J. G. Pearson,et al.  Measuring preferences for low-carbon energy technologies in South-East England: the case of electricity generation , 2008 .

[13]  Charles R. Warren,et al.  ‘Green On Green’: Public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland , 2005 .

[14]  Andreas Kontoleon,et al.  Assessing the determinants of local acceptability of wind-farm investment: A choice experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands , 2009 .

[15]  L. Steg,et al.  Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: A review-based comprehensive framework , 2012 .

[16]  A. Bergmann,et al.  Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments , 2006 .

[17]  A. Zabaniotou,et al.  Social acceptance of bioenergy in the context of climate change and sustainability – A review , 2017 .

[18]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support , 2000 .

[19]  P. Reich,et al.  High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services , 2011, Nature.

[20]  Valentin Bertsch,et al.  The Role of Community Involvement Mechanisms in Reducing Resistance to Energy Infrastructure Development , 2018 .

[21]  P. Devine‐Wright,et al.  Social acceptance of low carbon energy and associated infrastructures: A critical discussion , 2013 .

[22]  Carsten Schröder,et al.  Eliciting Public Support for Greening the Electricity Mix Using Random Parameter Techniques , 2011 .

[23]  Marjorie Musy,et al.  Seven questions around interdisciplinarity in energy research , 2017 .

[24]  J. Thepaut,et al.  The ERA‐Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system , 2011 .

[25]  R. Luce,et al.  Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement , 1964 .

[26]  C. Geitner,et al.  Renewable energies and ecosystem service impacts , 2015 .

[27]  A. McMichael,et al.  Ecosystems and Human well-being , 2003 .

[28]  The CBC / HB System for Hierarchical Bayes Estimation Version 5 . 0 Technical Paper , 2009 .

[29]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Using Scenarios for Interdisciplinary Energy Research - A Process Model , 2017, SMARTGREENS.

[30]  M. Schloter,et al.  Biodiversity at multiple trophic levels is needed for ecosystem multifunctionality , 2016, Nature.

[31]  J. Ollerton,et al.  Extinctions of aculeate pollinators in Britain and the role of large-scale agricultural changes , 2014, Science.

[32]  Lone Kørnøv,et al.  Spoiled darkness? Sense of place and annoyance over obstruction lights from the world’s largest wind turbine test centre in Denmark , 2017 .

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

[34]  Elisabeth Dütschke,et al.  Knowledge, Use and Effectiveness of Social Acceptance Measures for Wind Projects , 2017 .

[35]  Moritz von der Lippe,et al.  Human-biodiversity interactions in urban parks: The species level matters , 2017 .

[36]  Armin Schnettler,et al.  Analysis of future power generation structures with a multi-period, multi-objective expansion model , 2014, 2014 49th International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC).

[37]  P. Devine‐Wright.  Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place‐protective action , 2009 .

[38]  T. Plieninger,et al.  An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators , 2013 .

[39]  Eija Pouta,et al.  Local residents’ perceptions of energy landscape: the case of transmission lines , 2011 .

[40]  W. Krewitt,et al.  The potential for electricity generation from on-shore wind energy under the constraints of nature conservation: a case study for two regions in Germany , 2003 .

[41]  A. Bergmann,et al.  Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments , 2008 .

[42]  Carsten F. Dormann,et al.  Indicators for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes: a pan‐European study , 2007 .

[43]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  Multi-method Approach to Identify Acceptance-Relevant Characteristics of Renewable Energy Infrastructure , 2017, HCI.

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

[45]  Martin J. Pasqualetti,et al.  Social Barriers to Renewable Energy Landscapes* , 2011 .

[46]  Ignazio Cabras,et al.  The transition of Germany's energy production, green economy, low-carbon economy, socio-environmental conflicts, and equitable society , 2017 .

[47]  Wilhelm Windhorst,et al.  Landscapes' Capacities to Provide Ecosystem Services - a Concept for Land-Cover Based Assessments , 2009 .

[48]  J. Meyerhoff,et al.  Landscape externalities from onshore wind power , 2010 .

[49]  U. Walz,et al.  Linking landscape structure and biodiversity , 2013 .

[50]  J. Spangenberg.  Sustainability and the challenge of complex systems , 2014 .

[51]  Joyce McLaren Loring,et al.  Wind energy planning in England, Wales and Denmark: Factors influencing project success , 2007 .

[52]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  Transforming the UK energy system: public values, attitudes and acceptability: synthesis report , 2013 .

[53]  S. Nilsson,et al.  Long‐term land‐use changes and extinction of specialised butterflies , 2008 .

[54]  Andres Baeza,et al.  A framework for mapping and comparing behavioural theories in models of social-ecological systems , 2017 .

[55]  E. Trutnevyte,et al.  Managing geoenergy-induced seismicity with society , 2018 .

[56]  Martina Ziefle,et al.  A mast is a mast is a mast…? Comparison of preferences for location-scenarios of electricity pylons and wind power plants using conjoint analysis , 2017 .

[57]  Nick Hanley,et al.  Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain , 2002 .

[58]  W. Konrad,et al.  The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: A qualitative study of public perceptions towards energy technologies and portfolios in Germany , 2017 .

[59]  G. Mace,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. , 2012, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[60]  Eja Pedersen,et al.  Response to noise from modern wind farms in The Netherlands. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[61]  B. Sovacool,et al.  Integrating techno-economic, socio-technical and political perspectives on national energy transitions: A meta-theoretical framework , 2018 .

[62]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  My neighbourhood, my country or my planet? The influence of multiple place attachments and climate change concern on social acceptance of energy infrastructure , 2017 .

[63]  W. Dürrschmidt,et al.  Renewable energy sources in figures: national and international development. , 2010 .

[64]  W. Fichtner,et al.  Public acceptance and preferences related to renewable energy and grid expansion policy: Empirical insights for Germany , 2016 .

[65]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  Effects of exemplar scenarios on public preferences for energy futures using the my2050 scenario-building tool , 2017, Nature Energy.

[66]  Linda Steg,et al.  The influence of values on evaluations of energy alternatives , 2015 .

[67]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy , 2005 .

[68]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Putting pylons into place: a UK case study of public perspectives on the impacts of high voltage overhead transmission lines , 2013 .

[69]  George Dodd,et al.  Can expectations produce symptoms from infrasound associated with wind turbines? , 2014, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[70]  C. Gross,et al.  Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance , 2007 .

[71]  B. Sovacool.  What Are We Doing Here? Analyzing Fifteen Years of Energy Scholarship and Proposing a Social Science Research Agenda , 2014 .

[72]  Renée A. Irvin,et al.  Citizen Participation in Decision Making: Is It Worth the effort? , 2004 .

[73]  A. Jobert,et al.  Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies , 2007 .

[74]  E. Pedersen,et al.  Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise--a dose-response relationship. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.