Perceptions of wind energy projects in two coastal Massachusetts communities

Abstract Using 15 semi-structured interviews of residents in two neighboring coastal Massachusetts communities, one of which recently installed an onshore wind project, a study sought to identify the specific characteristics that drive perceptions about the existing project as well as hypothetical new onshore or offshore projects. It found that economic benefits and visual aspects of the project were most important to participants, followed by noise, environmental benefits, hazard to wildlife, and safety concerns.

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

[2]  D. Horst.  NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies , 2007 .

[3]  Jeremy Firestone,et al.  Valuing the Visual Disamenity of Offshore Wind Power Projects at Varying Distances from the Shore: An Application on the Delaware Shoreline , 2011, Land Economics.

[4]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in denmark , 2007 .

[5]  Kristina Ek,et al.  Wind farms — Where and how to place them? A choice experiment approach to measure consumer preferences for characteristics of wind farm establishments in Sweden , 2014 .

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

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

[8]  Trieu Mai,et al.  Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United States , 2015 .

[9]  B. Johnson.  Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach , 2002 .

[10]  G. Parsons,et al.  Valuing the Visual Disamenity of Offshore Wind Projects at Varying Distances from the Shore , 2011 .

[11]  Jacob Ladenburg,et al.  Attitudes towards on-land and offshore wind power development in Denmark; choice of development strategy , 2008 .

[12]  Oar,et al.  Clean Power Plan , 2013 .

[13]  A. Bostrom,et al.  Assessing what to address in science communication , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.