Combining spatial modeling and choice experiments for the optimal spatial allocation of wind turbines

Energy Policy

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 3845-3854

  Drechsler, Martin ^a   Ohl, Cornelia ^b   Meyerhoff, Jürgen ^c   Eichhorn, Marcus ^a   Monsees, Jan ^a  

^a HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^b German Emissions Trading Authority   (Germany)

^c TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Choice experiment; Optimal spatial allocation; Wind power

Indexed keywords

CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; ECOLOGICAL-ECONOMIC MODELING; ENERGY PRODUCTIONS; ENERGY TARGETS; EXTERNAL COSTS; MODELING APPROACH; PRODUCTION COST; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; SAXONY , GERMANY; SOCIAL COST; SPATIAL ALLOCATION; SPATIAL MODELING; SPATIALLY EXPLICIT; TOTAL COSTS; WELFARE LOSS; WIND POWER PRODUCTION;

BIODIVERSITY; CARBON DIOXIDE; COST ACCOUNTING; COSTS; EXPERIMENTS; WIND POWER; WIND TURBINES;

OPTIMIZATION;

CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON EMISSION; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; MODELING; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; WIND POWER; WIND TURBINE;

EID: 79955894038     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.04.015     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Álvarez-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.
2. BirdLife International, 2009. Red Kite-BirdLife Species Factsheet. (online) URL: 〈. http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/index.html?action=SpcHTMDetails.asp&sid=3353&m=0.
3. BMU-Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, 2006. Themenpapier: Windenergie. Artikel-Nr. 2123; Redaktion: KI III 3, Berlin.
4. BMU-Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, 2007. National Strategy on Biological Diversity. Berlin.
5. Bright J., Langston R., Bullman R., Evans R., Gardener S., Pearce-Higgins J. Map of bird sensitivities to wind farms in Scotland: a tool to aid planning and conservation. Biological Conservation 2008, 141(9):2342-2356.
6. Dimitropoulos, A., Kontoleon, A., 2008. Assessing the Determinants of Local Acceptability of Wind Farm Investment: A Choice Experiment in the Greek Islands. University of Cambridge, UK, Department of Land Economics, Environmental Economy and Policy Research Working Paper No. 35.
7. EEG, 2008. Gesetz für den Vorrang Erneuerbarer Energien (Renewable Energy Sources Act) (EEG), Bundesgesetzblatt (Federal Law Gazette) Jahrgang (Volume) 2008 Teil I Nr. 49, Bonn, Germany. 〈. http://www.bgblportal.de/BGBL/bgbl1f/bgbl108s2074.pdf.
8. Eichhorn M., Drechsler M. Spatial trade-offs between wind power production and bird collision avoidance in agricultural landscapes. Ecology and Society 2010, 15(2):10. [online] URL. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art10/.
9. Ek K. Quantifying the environmental impacts of renewable energy: the case of Swedish wind power. Environmental Valuation in Developed Countries: Case Studies 2006, 181-210. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. D. Pearce (Ed.).
10. Hau E. Wind Turbines. Fundamentals, Technology, Application, Economics 2006, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany.
11. Hess S., Rose J. Should reference alternatives in pivot design SC surveys be treated differently?. Environmental and Resource Economics 2009, 42(3):297-317.
12. Hondo H. Life cycle GHG emission analysis of power generating systems: Japanese case. Energy 2005, 30(11-12):2042-2056.
13. Hötker H., Thomsen K.M., Jeromin H. Impacts on Biodiversity of Exploitation of Renewable Energy Sources: The Example of Birds and Bats-Facts, Gaps in Knowledge, Demands for Further Research, and Ornithological Guidelines for the Development of Renewable Energy Exploitation 2006, Michael-Otto-Institut im NABU, Bergenhusen, Germany, 〈http://www.batsandwind.org/pdf/impacts%20on%20biodiversity%20of%20renewable%20energy.pdf.
14. Valuing Environmental Amenities Using Stated Choice Studies 2006, Springer, Dordrecht. B. Kanninen (Ed.).
15. Kuhfeld W.F. Marketing research methods in SAS. Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques 2005, SAS Institute, Cary NY.
16. Krause C.L. Our visual landscape: managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 54:239-254.
17. Ladenburg J Onshore and offshore locations for wind power development-what does the public prefer and should it matter?. Modern Energy Review 2009, 1:32-34.
18. Louviere J.J., Hensher D.A., Swait J.D. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application 2000, Cambgridge University Press, Cambridge.
19. Lärm TA, 1998. Technische Anleitung zum Schutz gegen Lärm [neue Fassung] Sechste Allgemeine Verwaltungsvorschrift zum Bundes-Immissionsschutzgesetz (TA Lärm) vom 26. August 1998 (GMBl. Nr. 26 vom 28.08.1998S. 503).
20. Meyerhoff J., Ohl C., Hartje V. Landscape externalities from onshore wind power. Energy Policy 2010, 38:82-92.
21. Möller B. Changing wind-power landscapes: regional assessment of visual impact on land use and population in Northern Jutland, Denmark. Applied Energy 2006, 83:477-494.
22. Möller B. Continuous spatial modelling to analyse planning and economic consequences of offshore wind energy. Energy Policy 2011, 39:511-517.
23. Moran D., Sherrington C. An economic assessment of windfarm power generation in Scotland including externalities. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2811-2825.
24. Ohl C., Eichhorn M. The mismatch between regional spatial planning for wind power development in Germany and national eligibility criteria for feed-in tariffs-a case study in West Saxony. Land Use Policy 2010, 27:243-254.
25. Punt M.J., Groeneveld R.A., van Ierland E.C., Stel J.H. Spatial planning of offshore wind farms: a windfall to marine environmental protection?. Ecological Economics 2009, 69:93-103.
26. REN 21, 2010. Renewables 2010: Global Status Report. Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century. 〈. http://www.ren21.net/Portals/97/documents/GSR/REN21_GSR_2010_full_revised%20Sept2010.pdf.
27. Rogers, A.L., Manwell. J.F., Wright, S., 2006. Wind Turbine Acoustic Noise-A White Paper Prepared by the Renewable Energy Research Laboratory Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, MA. 〈. http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/wp-content/uploads/rogers-windturbinenoise_rev2006.pdf.
28. RPW, 2008. Regionalplan Westsachsen 2008. Regionaler Planungsverband Westsachsen, Leipzig, Germany.
29. Scarpa R., Ferrini S., Willis K. Performance of error component models for status-quo effects in choice experiments. Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics 2005, 247-273. Springer, Dordrecht. R. Scarpa, A. Alberini (Eds.).
30. Schrijver A. Theory of Linear and Integer Programming 1998, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England.
31. Schmitt M., Dosch F., Bergmann E. Flächeninanspruchnahme durch Windkraftanlagen. Berichte aus Forschung und Praxis. Raumforschung und Raumordnung 2006, 64/5:405-412.