Wind power development in Sweden: Global policies and local obstacles

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 365-400

  Söderholm, Patrik ^a   Ek, Kristina ^a   Pettersson, Maria ^a  

^a LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ENERGY POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; POWER GENERATION; PUBLIC POLICY; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT; POWER INVESTMENTS; WIND MILLS; WIND POWER GENERATION;

WIND POWER;

EID: 33748112756     PISSN: 13640321     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2005.03.001     Document Type: Review

References (69)

1. Sundqvist T. Power generation choice in the presence of environmental externalities. Doctoral Thesis, Division of Economics, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden, 2002.
2. Bergek A. Shaping and exploiting technological opportunities the case of renewable energy technology in Sweden. PhD Thesis, Department of Industrial Dynamics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2002.
3. Bergek A., and Jacobsson S. The emergence of a growth industry: a comparative analysis of the German, Dutch and Swedish wind turbine industries. In: Metcalfe S., and Cantner U. (Eds). Change, transformation and development (2003), Physica/Springer, Heidelberg, Germany 197-228
4. Åstrand K. Methods for evaluation of technology and market development of wind power. Paper Presented at the 2003 energy program evaluation conference, Seattle, USA; August, 2003, pp. 20-2.
5. Åstrand K, Neij L. Styrmedel för vindkraftens utveckling i Sverige (Policy Instruments for Wind Power Development in Sweden). IMES/EESS Report No. 46, Department of Technology and Society, Environmental and Energy Systems Studies, Lund University, Sweden; 2003.
6. Åstrand K, Neij L. An assessment of governmental wind power programmes in Sweden using a systems approach [in press].
7. Unger T. Common energy and climate strategies for the nordic countries-a model analysis. PhD Thesis, Department of Energy Technology, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden; 2003.
8. 2 emission markets in the Nordic countries. Energy Policy 33 16 (2005) 2152-2163
9. Rydén B. (2003). Nordleden. Slutrapport för etapp 2. Internet: www.nordleden.nu, Profu i Göteborg AB, Mölndal, Sweden.
10. Swedish Government. Regeringens Proposition 1990/91:88 om energipolitik, Stockholm; 1991.
11. Swedish Government. Regeringens Proposition 1990/91:90 om en god livsmiljö, Stockholm; 1991.
12. Swedish Government. Regeringens Proposition 1996/97:84 om en uthållig energiförsörjning, Stockholm; 1997.
13. Swedish Government. Regeringens Proposition 2001/02:143 om samverkan för en trygg, effektiv och miljövänlig energiförsörjning, Stockholm; 2002.
14. Bärring M, Nyström O, Nilsson P-A, Olsson F, Egard M, Jonsson P. El från nya anlåggningar-2003 (Electric Power from New Plants-2003). Report 03:14, Elforsk, Stockholm; 2003.
15. Cerveny M., and Resch G. Feed-in tariffs and regulations concerning renewable energy electricity generation in European countries (1998), Energieverwertungsagentur (EVA), Vienna, Austria
16. Söderholm P., Klaassen G. Wind power in Europe: a simultaneous innovation-diffusion model. Paper presented at the 12th annual conference of the European association of environmental and resource economists, Bilbao, Spain, June 28-30; 2003.
17. Reiche D., and Bechberger M. Policy differences in the promotion of renewable energies in the EU member states. Energy Policy 32 (2004) 843-849
18. Swedish Government. Regeringens Proposition 2002/03:40 om elcertifikat för att främja förnybara energikällor, Stockholm; 2003.
19. Voogt M., Boots M.G., Schaeffer G.J., and Martens J.W. Renewable electricity in a liberalised market-the concept of green certificates. Energy Environ 11 1 (2000) 65-79
20. Swedish Energy Agency. Översyn av elcertifikatsystemet. Delrapport etapp 2, Swedish Energy Agency, Eskilstuna, Sweden; 2004.
21. SOU. Handla för bättre klimat-handel med utsläppsrätter 2005-2007, Fritzes, Stockholm, vol. 62; 2004.
22. Bemis GR, DeAngelis M. Levelized cost of electricity generation technologies. Contemporary policy issues, vol. VIII 1990 pp. 200-14.
23. Söderholm P. Power generation in deregulated market: implications for fuel choice behaviour in Europe. In: Jameson R. (Ed). The new power markets: corporate strategies for risk and reward (1999), Risk Books, London 185-201
24. Stiglitz J.E. Information and the change in paradigm in economics. Am Econ Rev 92 3 (2002) 460-501
25. North D. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance (1990), Cambridge University Press, New York
26. Neij L. Cost dynamics of wind power. Energy 24 (1999) 375-389
27. Söderholm P. Fuel for thought: European energy market restructuring and the future of power generation gas use. Int J Global Energy Issues 16 4 (2001) 313-327
28. Bull-Gjertsen S.Y. Göteborg Energi bygger gasskraftverk med norsk gass. Kraftjournalen 9 1 (2004) 20-21
29. Bergman L., and Radetzki M. The continue project. Global climate policy and implications for the energy sector in a small open economy: the case of Sweden (2003), Multi-Science Publishing Company Ltd., United Kingdom
30. Swedish Energy Agency. Konsumenten och den förnybara elen. Report ER 12:2004, Swedish Energy Agency, Eskilstuna, Sweden; 2004.
31. Ahnland R. Högtryck för renovering av vattenkraft. Energimagasinet 25 5 (2004) 10-12
32. Dagens Nyheter. Nej till vindkraftverk i fjällen, March 28; 2003.
33. Sundsvalls Tidning. Stoppa snurrigheten, November 17; 2003.
34. Norrbottens Kuriren. Vindkraft hör hemma i Sydsverige, September 30; 2003.
35. Krohn S., and Damborg S. On public attitudes towards wind power. Renew Energy 9 (1999) 945-960
36. Ek K. Valuing the environmental impacts of wind power: a choice experiment approach. Licentiate Thesis 2002:40, Division of Economics, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden; 2002.
37. Kåberger T. Environmental labelling of electricity delivery contracts in sweden. Energy Policy 31 7 (2003) 633-640
38. Freudenberg W.R., and Pastor S.K. NIMBYs and LULUs: stalking the syndromes. J Soc Issues 48 4 (1992) 36-61
39. Wolsink M. Wind power and the NIMBY-Myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renew Energy 21 (2000) 49-64
40. Hammarlund, K. Attityder till vindkraft, Occasional Paper 1997:2, Department of Human and Economic Geography, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden; 1997.
41. Swedish Energy Agency. Vindkraft i harmoni. Report ET 19:1998, Swedish Energy Agency, Eskilstuna, Sweden; 1998.
42. Dudleston A. Public attitudes towards wind farms in Scotland: results of a residents survey (2000), The Scottish Executive Central Research Unit, Edinburgh
43. Liljestam A. Ekonomisk värdering av miljöförändringar-En undersökning om vindkraftutbyggnad med scenariovärderingsmetoden (CVM) (2004), D-essay, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
44. Ek K. Public and private attitudes towards green electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 33 13 (2005) 1677-1689
45. Collins N, Reed J, Oh A. The Fort Collins wind power pilot program: who subscribed and why? Final report prepared for Fort Collins Utilities, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA; 1998.
46. Roe B., Teisl M.F., Levy A., and Russel M. US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity. Energy Policy 29 (2001) 917-925
47. Zarnikau J. Consumer demand for 'green' power and energy efficiency. Energy Policy 31 (2003) 1661-1672
48. Nordahl E. Miljokostnader av vindkraftutbyggnad på Smola (2000), Hovedoppgave, Norges Landbrukshogskole, Norway
49. Pedersen E., and Persson Wayne K. Störningar från vindkraft: Undersökning bland människor boende i närheten av vindkraftverk (2002), Department of Environmental Medicine, Gothenburg University, Sweden
50. SOU. Rätt plats för vindkraften, Fritzes, Stockholm, vol. 75; 1999.
51. Michanek G. Energirätt. En undersökning från mark-och miljörättslig utgångspunkt med sär-skild inriktning på frågor om energihushållning (Energy Law. An investigation from the point of view of land and environmental legislation especially concentrating on energy conservation). PhD Thesis, Department of Law, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; 1990.
52. Michanek G. Svensk miljörätt (Swedish Environmental Law) (1993), Justus Förlag AB, Uppsala, Sweden
53. Swedish Energy Agency. Vindkraft: Fördelning av nationellt planeringsmål och kriterier för områden av riksintresse, Report ER 16:2003, Swedish Energy Agency, Eskilstuna, Sweden; 2003.
54. Khan J. Wind power planning in three Swedish municipalities. J Environ Plan Manag 46 4 (2003) 563-581
55. Brunt A., and Spooner D. The development of wind power in Denmark and the UK. Energy Environ 9 3 (1998) 279-296
56. Toke D. Wind power in UK and Denmark: can rational choice help explain different outcomes. Environ Polit 11 4 (2002) 83-100
57. Khan J., and Åstrand K. På väg mot ett hållbart energisystem. In: Wickenberg P., Nilsson A., and Steneroth Sillén M. (Eds). Miljöoch hållbar utveckling (2004), Studentlitteratur, Lund, Sweden 383-407
58. Pasqualetti M.J. Wind power: obstacles and opportunities. Environment 46 7 (2004) 22-38
59. Rawls J. A theory of justice (1971), Harvard University Press, Cambridge
60. International Energy Agency (IEA) (annual). Electricity Information, OECD, Paris.
61. Bird L., Bolinger M., Gagliano T., Wiser R., Brown M., and Parsons B. Policies and market factors driving wind power development in the United States. Energy Policy 33 11 (2005) 1397-1407
62. Garcia-Cebrián L.I. The influence of subsidies on the production process: the case of wind energy in Spain. Electr J 15 4 (2002) 79-86
63. Wolsink M. Dutch wind power policy: stagnating implementation of renewables. Energy Policy 24 12 (1996) 1079-1088
64. Rogner H-H, Langlois L. The economic future of nuclear power in competitive markets. In: Conference proceedings of the 23rd annual IAEE conference, energy markets and the new millennium, Sydney,Australia, 7-10 June; 2000.
65. Edinger R., and Kaul S. Humankind's detour toward sustainability: past, present, and future of renewable energies and electric power generation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 4 (2000) 295-313
66. Hanley N., Wright R.E., and Adamowicz V. Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environ Resour Econ 11 (1998) 313-341
67. Hanley N., Mourato S., and Wright R. Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental evaluation?. J Econ Surv 15 3 (2001) 453-557
68. Alvarez-Farizo B., and Hanley N. Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain. Energy Policy 30 (2002) 107-116
69. Khan J. Local politics of renewable energy: project planning, siting conflicts and citizen participation. PhD Dissertation, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; 2004.