Stated public preferences for on-land and offshore wind power generation - A review

Wind Energy

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 171-181

  Ladenburg, Jacob ^a  

^a DANISH INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENTAL RESEARCH   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Literature review; On land or offshore; Preferences for location; Wind power

Indexed keywords

ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION; LOCATION; OFFSHORE OIL WELL PRODUCTION; WIND POWER;

ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS; LITERATURE REVIEWS; OFF-SHORE WIND POWER; OFF-SHORE WIND POWER GENERATIONS; OFFSHORE LOCATIONS; ON-LAND OR OFFSHORE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY; WIND POWER DEVELOPMENT;

OFFSHORE WIND FARMS;

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK; LITERATURE REVIEW; OFFSHORE STRUCTURE; PERCEPTION; POWER GENERATION; SITE SELECTION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY; WIND POWER; WIND TURBINE;

EID: 63049135316     PISSN: 10954244     EISSN: 10991824     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/we.308     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Christensen P, Lund H. Conflicting views of sustainability: the case of wind power and nature conservation in Denmark. European Environment 1998; 8: 1-6. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0976(199801/02)8:1.
2. Krohn S, Damborg S. On public attitudes towards wind power. Renewable Energy 1999; 16: 954-960. DOI:10.1016/S0960-1481(98)00339-5.
3. Freeman MA. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values - Theory and Methods. Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, 1993.
4. Johansson P-O. The Economic Theory of Measurement of Environmental Benefits. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1987.
5. Martinez E, Sanz F, Pellegrini S, Jimenez E, Blanco J. Life cycle assessment of a multi-megawatt wind turbine. Renewable Energy 2009; 34(3): 667-673. DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2008.05.020.
6. Ardente F, Beccali M, Cellura M, Brano VL. Energy performances and life cycle assessment of an Italian wind farm. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2008; 12: 200-217. DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2006.05.013.
7. 2 life-cycle analyses of wind turbines. Review and applications. Renewable Energy 2002; 26: 339-362. DOI: 10.1016/S0960-1481(01)00145-8.
8. Navrud S. Miljøkostnader av Vindkraft i Norge [Environmental Costs from Wind Power in Norway]. Sammendragsrapport til SAMRAM-programmet. Norges Forskningsra&ringd. Notat. Institutt for Økonomi og Ressursforvaltning, Universitetet for Miljø- og Biovitenskap (UMB) 2004.
9. Alvarez-Farizo B, Hanley N. Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms - an example from Spain. Energy Policy 2002; 30: 107-116. DOI:10.1016/S0301-4215(01) 00063-5.
10. Kikuchi R. Adverse impacts of wind power generation on collision behaviour of birds and anti-predator behaviour of squirrels. Journal for Nature Conservation 2008; 16: 44-55. DOI:10.1016/jjnc.2007.11.001.
11. Schleisner L, Nielsen PS. External Costs Related to Power Production Technologies - ExternE National Implementation for Denmark, Roskilde. Risø, National Laboratory: Roskilde, Denmark, 1997.
12. Ciaccia G, Doni N, Fontini F. Auctioning wind power sites when environmental qualities matters. 'Marco Fanno' Working Paper, Universita di Padova, 2008.
13. Bishop ID, Miller DR. Visual assessment of off-shore wind turbines: the influence of distance, contrast, movement and social variables, Renewable Energy 2007; 32: 814-831. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2006.03.009.
14. Firestone J, Kempton W. Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors. Energy Policy 2007; 35: 1584-1598. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.04.010.
15. Ladenburg J. Attitudes towards on-land and off-shore wind power development in Denmark; choice of development strategy. Renewable Energy 2008; 33: 111-118. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2007.01.011.
16. Ladenburg J. Visual impact assessment of offshore wind farms and prior experience. Applied Energy 2008. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.05.005.
17. Krueger AD. Valuing Public Preferences for Offshore Wind Power: A Choice Experiments Approach. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware, College of Marine and Earth Studies, 2007.
18. Ladenburg J. Attitudes and perceptions of offshore wind farms and monetary trade-offs - do they differ? Proceedings from the European Offshore Wind Conference & Exhibition 2007, Berlin: Germany, 4-6 December 2007.
19. Jordal-Jørgensen J. Samfundsmœssig vœrdi of vindkraft, visuelle effekter og støj of vindmøller - kvantificering og vœrdisœtning [Welfare economic value of wind power, visual and noise effects of wind turbines - quantification and valuation]. Institute of Local Goverments Studies, Denmark, 1995.
20. Poletti P. A real estate study of the proposed forward wind energy center Dodge and Fond du Lac counties. Report prepared for Invenergy Wind LLC, Wisconsin, 2005.
21. Sterzinger G, Beck F, Kostiuk D. The Effect of Wind Power Development on Local Property Values. Renewable Energy Policy Project: Washington DC, USA, 2003.
22. Bergmann A, Hanley N, Wright R. Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments. Energy Policy 2006; 34: 1004-1014. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.035.
23. Groothuis PA, Groohuis JD, Whitehead JC. Green vs. green: measuring the compensation required to site electrical generation windmills in a viewshed. Energy Policy 2008; 36: 1545-1550. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.01. 018.
24. Aravena C, Martinsson P, Scarpa R. The effect of a monetary attribute on the marginal rate of substitution in a choice experiment. Proceedings from Environmental and Resource Economists 3rd World Congress. Kyoto, Japan, 2006.
25. Mitchell RC, Carson RT. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, 1989.
26. Hoehn JP, Randall. The effect of resource quality information on resource injury perceptions and contingent values. Resource and Energy Economics 2002; 24: 13-31. DOI:10.1016/S0928-7655(01)00051-3.
27. Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
28. Ek K. Quantifying the environmental impacts of renewable energy: the case of Swedish wind power. In Environmental Valuation in Developed Countries. Pearce D (ed.). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK, 2006; 181-210.
29. McCartney A. The social value of seascapes in the Jurien Bay Marine Park: an assessment of positive and negative preferences for change. Journal of Agricultural Economics; 57: 577-594. DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2006. 00074.x.
30. Dubgaard A, Ladenburg J. Preferences for reducing the visual impacts from offshore wind farms - heterogeneity and coastal zone recreational patterns. Paper presented at the PoCoast Seminar on Coastal Research. Faculty of Engineering of the University of Porto, Portugal. 2008.
31. Danish Energy Authority. Future offshore wind power sites - 2025. The Committee for Future Offshore Wind Power Sites, Danish Energy Authority: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2007
32. Ladenburg J. Attitudes and preferences for future wind power development in Denmark and testing the validity of choice experiments. PhD Thesis, University of Copenhagen, 2007.
33. Ladenburg J, Dubgaard A. Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in Denmark. Energy Policy 2007; 35: 4059-71. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2007.01.023.
34. Ladenburg J. Visual disamenity costs of offshore wind farms in the coastal zone - the influence of prior information. Paper presented at the ENCORA 1st Thematic Network Conference on 'Integrated Coastal Zone Management and Valuation of Socio-Economic Impacts, Venice, Italy, 2006.
35. Ladenburg J, Tranberg J, Dubgaard A, Kuehn S. Socioeconomic effects-positive attitudes in local communities. In: Danish Offshore Wind-Key Environmental Issues. Dong Energy, Vattenfall, The Danish Energy Authority and The Danish National Forest and Nature Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006; 112-123.
36. Kuehn S. Sociological investigation of the reception of Horns Rev and Nysted offshore wind farms in the local communities, Environmental Report 2005. Econ Analyse: Denmark
37. Lemming JK, Morthost PE, Clausen N-E. 2007. Offshore Wind Power Experiences, Potential and Key Issues for Deployment. Risø National Laboratory, Technical University of Denmark.