Visibility analysis and visibility software for the optimisation of wind farm design

Renewable Energy

Volumn 60, Issue , 2013, Pages 388-401

  Manchado, Cristina ^a   Otero, César ^a   Gómez Jáuregui, Valentín ^a   Arias, Rubén ^a   Bruschi, Viola ^a   Cendrero, Antonio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANTABRIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Computer aided VIA; VIA software; Visibility analysis; Visual Impact Assessment (VIA); Visual mitigation

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS; COMPUTER AIDED; ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCESS; METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH; OPTIMISATIONS; VISIBILITY ANALYSIS; VISUAL IMPACTS; VISUAL MITIGATION;

COMPUTER AIDED ANALYSIS; DESIGN; ELECTRIC UTILITIES; WIND POWER;

VISIBILITY;

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; SOFTWARE; VISIBILITY; VISUAL ANALYSIS; WIND FARM; WIND POWER;

EID: 84879287110     PISSN: 09601481     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2013.05.026     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bureau of Land Management(BLM).U.S.Department of Interior Visual resource management(VRM): VRM system 2012, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/Recreation/recreation_national/RMS.html.
2. United States Forest Service (USFS).U.S.Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Washington D.C. landscape aesthetics: a handbook for scenery management. Agriculture handbook N 701 1995.
3. Landscape Institute & Environmental Management Assessment Guidelines for landscape and visual impact assessment 2002, Spon Press. 2nd ed.
4. The James Hutton Institute/The Macaulay Land Use Research Institute Impact of wind turbines 2010, http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/ccw/index.html.
5. Scottish National Heritage.University of NewCastle Visual assessment of windfarms best practise 2002, Report No FO1AA303A, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A305437.pdf.
6. NAS (National Academy of Sciences) Environmental impacts of wind-energy projects 2007, The National Academies Press, p. 159-98 and 368-95, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11935.html.
7. Vissering J., Sinclair M., Margolis A. Avisual impact assessment process for wind energy projects. State clean energy program guide (CESA) 2011, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.cleanenergystates.org/assets/2011-Files/States-Advancing-Wind-2/CESA-Visual-Impacts-Methodology-May2011.pdf.
8. Scottish Natural Heritage, Kedrem Williams Cumulative effects of windfarms (guidance), version 2 2005, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/cumulativeeffectsonwindfarms.pdf.
9. Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Renewables Forum and The Scottish Society of Directors of Planning Visual representation of windfarms. Good practice guidance 2006, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A305436.pdf.
10. Scottish Natural Heritage Siting and designing windfarms in the landscape, version 1 2009, [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A317537.pdf.
11. Molina-Ruiz J., Martínez M.J., Pérez-Sirvent C., Tudela-Serrano M.L., García M.L. Developing and applying a GIS-assisted approach to evaluate visual impact in wind farms. Renewable Energy 2011, 36(3):1125-1132. Elsevier.
12. Rodrigues M., Montanés C., Fueyo N. Amethod for the assessment of the visual impact caused by the large-scale deployment of renewable-energy facilities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2009, 30(4):240-246. Elsevier.
13. Hurtado J., Fernández J., Parrondo J., Blanco D. Spanish method of visual impact evaluation in wind farms. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2004, 8(5):483-491.
14. Bishop I., Miller D. Visual assessment of off-shore wind turbines: the influence of distance, contrast, movement and social variables. Renewable Energy 2007, 32(5):814-831. Elsevier.
15. Torres-Sibille A., Cloquell-Ballester V., Cloquell-Ballester V., Darton R. Development and validation of a multicriteria indicator for the assessment of objective aesthetic impact of wind farms. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009, 13(1):40-66.
16. Bishop I. What do we really know? A meta-analysis of studies into public responses to wind energy. World Renewable Energy Congress Linkping, Sweden 2011.
17. Möller B. Changing wind-power landscapes: regional assessment of visual impact on land use and population in Northern Jutland, Denmark. Applied Energy 2006, 83(5):477-494. Elsevier.
18. Möller B. Spatial analyses of emerging and fading wind energy landscapes in Denmark. Land Use Policy 2010, 27(2):233-241. Elsevier.
19. Nadaï A., Labussière O. Wind power planning in France (Aveyron), from state regulation to local planning. Land Use Policy 2009, 26(3):744-754.
20. 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 2009, 27(2):243-354. Elsevier.
21. Generalitat Valenciana.Conselleria de Territorio y Vivienda de la Comunidad Valenciana.Decreto 120/2006 Reglamento del Paisaje de la Comunidad Valenciana 2006, [in spanish, accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.docv.gva.es/datos/2006/08/16/pdf/2006_9858.pdf.
22. ISO/IEC 7942-1:1994 Information technology, computer graphics and image processing, graphical kernel system (GKS), part i: functional description 1994.
23. Turnbull W.M., Alyward G. Visual impact analysis: a computer-aided approach to determine visibility. Computer-Aided Design 1977, 9(2):103-108. Elsevier.
24. Turnbull W.M., Maver T.W., Gourlay I. Visual impact analysis: a case study of computer-based system. Computer-Aided Design 1987, 19(4):197-202. Elsevier.
25. Travis M.R., Elsner G.H., Iverson W.D., Johnson C.G. VIEWIT: computation of seen areas, slope, and aspect for land-use planning 1975, Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-11, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Berkeley, CA.
26. WindPro. [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.emd.dk/WindPRO/.
27. WindFarm. [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.resoft.co.uk/.
28. WindFarmer. [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.gl-garradhassan.com/en/index.php.
29. OpenWind. [accessed 15.11.12]. http://awsopenwind.org/.
30. LSS (DTM Software). [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.dtmsoftware.com/.
31. Envision. [accessed 15.11.12]. http://www.envision3d.co.uk/.
32. Otero C., Bruschi V., Cendrero A., Gálvez A., Lázaro M., Togores R. An application of computer graphics for landscape impact assessment. Lecture notes in computer science (ICCSA - 2004) 2004, vol. 3044:779-788.
33. Bonachea J., Bruschi V., Remondo J., González-Díez A., Salas L., Bertens J., et al. An approach for quantifying geomorphological impacts for EIA of transportation infrastructures: a case study in Northern Spain. Geomorphology 2005, 66:95-117.
34. Otero C., Cendrero A., Bruschi V., Togores R., Manchado C., Arias R. Moyses v3.0 (modeller and simulator for visual impact assessment). ASCE, International Workshop in Civil Engineering 2007, 486-493. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. USA.
35. Otero C., Manchado C., Arias R., Bruschi V., Gomez-Jauregui V., Cendrero A. Wind energy development in Cantabria, Spain. Methodological approach, environmental, technological and social Issues. Renewable Energy 2012, 40(1):137-149. Elsevier.
36. Hearn D., Baker P. Computer graphics, C version 1996, Prentice Hall. 2nd ed.
37. Tsoutos T., Tsouchlaraki A., Tsiropoulos M., Serpetsidakis M. Visual impact evaluation of a wind park in a Greek island. Applied Energy 2009, 86(4):546-553. Elsevier.
38. Otero C, Manchado C, Arias R, Iglesias A, Galves A. Method for mitigating visual impact. PCT Patent, PCT/ES2011/000295, WO2012049340, 2012.
39. Shove E. Gaps, barriers and conceptual chasms: theories of technology transfers and energy in buildings. Energy Policy 1998, 26:1105-1112. Elsevier.