An immersive path-based study of wind turbines' landscape: A French case in Plouguin

Renewable Energy

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 597-607

  Jallouli, J ^a   Moreau, G ^a,b  

^a CERMA UMR CNRS 1563   (France)

^b ECOLE CENTRALE DE NANTES   (France)

Author keywords

Immersion; Impact; Landscape; Path based method; Perception; Wind turbines

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ELECTRIC GENERATORS; ENGINES; HYDRAULIC MACHINERY; HYDRAULIC MOTORS; TURBINES; VIRTUAL REALITY; WIND POWER; WIND TURBINES;

IMMERSION; IMPACT; LANDSCAPE; PATH-BASED METHOD; PERCEPTION;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; LANDSCAPE; PERCEPTION; URBAN AREA; WIND TURBINE;

BRETAGNE; EURASIA; EUROPE; FINISTERE; FRANCE; PLOUGUIN; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 54249142576     PISSN: 09601481     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2008.05.036     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Clay G.R., and Daniel T.C. Scenic landscape assessment: the effects of land management jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty. Landscape and Urban Planning 49 (2000) 1-13
2. Briggs D.J., and France J. Landscape evaluation: a comparative study. Journal of Environmental Management 10 (1980) 263-275
3. Zube E.H., Sell L.J., and Taylor G.J. Landscape perception: research, application and theory. Landscape Planning 9 (1982) 1-33
4. Moles A. Information theory and aesthetic perception (1966), University of Illinois Press, Illinois
5. Stanton C. Landscape strategy and assessment guidance for wind energy development within Caithness and Sutherland. Commissioned report No. 087. Scotland: Scottish Natural Heritage; 2005.
6. Zube H.E. Perceived land use patterns and landscape values. Landscape Ecology 1 (1987) 37-45
7. Daniel T.C., and Vining J. Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In: Altman I., and Wohwill J.F. (Eds). Behaviour and the natural environment (1983), Plenum Press, London 39-83
8. Buhoyoff G.J., Miller P.A., Hull R.B., and Schlagel D.H. Another look at expert visual assessment: validity and reliability. AI Applications 9 (1995) 112-120
9. Coeterier J.F. Dominant attributes in the perception and evaluation of the Dutch landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning 34 (1996) 27-44
10. Lange E. The limits of realism: perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 54 (2001) 163-182
11. Bishop I.D., and Miller D.R. Visual assessment of off-shore wind turbines: the influence of distance, contrast, movement and social variables. Renewable Energy 32 (2007) 814-831
12. Gipe P. Design as if people matter: aesthetic guidelines for a wind power future. In: Pasqualetti M.J., Gipe P., and Righter R.W. (Eds). Wind power in view (energy landscapes in a crowded world) (2002), Academic Press, London 173-212
13. Kaldellis J.K. Social attitude towards wind energy applications in Greece. Energy Policy 33 (2005) 595-602
14. Ek K. Public and private attitudes towards "green" electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy 33 (2005) 1677-1689
15. Gibson J.J. The ecological approach to visual perception (1986), Lawrence Elbaum Associates, New Jersey
16. Lynch K. The image of the city (1960), MIT Press, Cambridge
17. Bosselmann P. Representation of places: reality and realism in city design (1998), University of California Press, Berkeley and London
18. Passini R. Wayfinding: a conceptual framework. Urban Ecology 5 (1980) 17-31
19. Thibaud J.-P. La méthode des parcours commentés. In: Grosjean M., and Thibaud J.-P. (Eds). L'espace urbain en méthodes (2001), Editions parenthèses, Marseille 79-99
20. Tahrani S., and Moreau G. Integration of immersive walking to analyze urban daylight ambiences. Journal of Urban Design 13 1 (2008) 99-123
21. Bishop I.D., Wherrett J.R., and Miller D.R. Assessment of path choices on a country walk using a virtual environment. Landscape and Urban Planning 52 (2001) 225-237
22. Loiteron D., and Bishop I. Simulating visitor movement: autonomous agents in urban public gardens. In: University College London (Ed). CUPUM 05 (computers in urban planning and urban management) (2005), University College London, London
23. Shuttleworth S. The use of photographs as an environmental presentation medium in landscape studies. Journal of Environmental Management 11 (1980) 61-76
24. Amir S., and Gidalizon E. Expert based method for the evaluation of visual absorption capacity of the landscape. Journal of Environmental Management 30 (1990) 251-263
25. University of Newcastle. Visual assessment of windfarms: best practice. Commissioned report F01AA303A. Scotland: Scottish Natural Heritage; 2002.
26. Bishop I.D. Determination of thresholds of visual impact: the case of wind turbines. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 29 (2002) 707-718
27. Planchais L. La mise en situation des éoliennes dans le paysage. In: ADEME (Germain P. Coordinator) (Ed). Eoliennes, quels impacts environnementaux? (2003), Editions L'Harmattan, Angers 97-109
28. Bolin K. Investigating the audibility of wind turbines in the presence of vegetation noises. In: INCE/Europe (Ed). Second international conference on wind turbines noise 2007 (2007), INCE/Europe, Lyon
29. Pedersen E., and Persson Waye K. Exploring perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise in dissimilar living environments. In: EAA, Acoustic Society of Finland, and VTT (Eds). Euronoise 2006: advanced solutions for noise control (2006), EAA, Tampere
30. Wolsink M. Attitudes and expectancies about wind turbines and wind farms. Wind Engineering 13 (1989) 196-206
31. Moles A. Les Sciences de l'imprécis (1990), Editions du Seuil, Paris
32. Burckhardt L., Hans H., and Abriani A. Lucius Burckhardt: design = unsichtbar (1995), Cantz, Ostfildern