An integrated visual impact assessment model for offshore windfarm development

Ocean and Coastal Management

Volumn 98, Issue , 2014, Pages 95-110

  Depellegrin, Daniel ^a   Blažauskas, Nerijus ^b   Egarter Vigl, Lukas ^c  

^a KLAIPEDA UNIVERSITY   (Lithuania)

^b Coastal Research and Planning Institute ^*  (Lithuania)

^c INSTITUTE FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COASTAL ZONES; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; GEOMORPHOLOGY; VISIBILITY; WIND POWER; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; HOUSING; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS (EIA); IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS; INTEGRATED VISUAL; LANDSCAPE CHANGES; OBSERVATION POINT; OFF-SHORE WIND ENERGY; VISUAL SENSITIVITY; WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT; RESIDENTIAL BUILDING;

RISK ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

COASTAL PROTECTION; COASTAL ZONE; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; GIS; INTEGRATED APPROACH; LANDSCAPE CHANGE; NUMERICAL MODEL; WIND FARM; DECISION MAKING; OFFSHORE STRUCTURE; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION; VISUAL ANALYSIS; WIND POWER;

LITHUANIA;

EID: 84904352053     PISSN: 09645691     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.05.019     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Albrecht C., Wagner A., Wesselmann K. The Impact of Offshore Wind Energy on Tourism 2013, Source, (accessed 03.01.14.). http://www.southbaltic-offshore.eu.
2. ArcGIS Resource Center, 2014. URL:, (accessed 05.01.14.). http://resources.arcgis.com/en/home/.
3. BaltSEAplan, 2013. Source: (accessed 13.10.13.). http://www.baltseaplan.eu.
4. Bishop I.D., Hull R.B. Integrating technologies for visual resource management. J.Environ. Manag. 1991, 32:295-312.
5. Blažauskas N., Suždalev S., Gulbinskas S. Towards MSP in Lithuania: BaltSeaPlan reports 4 and 15 2011, Source, (accessed 13.10.13.). http://www.baltseaplan.eu.
6. Buynevich I.V., Bitinas A., Souza-Filho P.W.M., Pupienis D., Asp N.E., Goble R.J., Kerber L.E. Rapid coastal dune migration into temperate and equatorial forests: optical chronology of imaged upper slipface strata. J.Coast. Res. 2011, 726-730. SI 64 (Proceedings of the 11th International Coastal Symposium), Szczecin, Poland, ISSN 0749-0208.
7. Buynevich I., Bitinas A., Pupienis D. Reactivation of coastal dunes documented by subsurface imaging of the Great Dune Ridge, Lithuania. J.Coast. Res. 2007, SI 50 (Proceedings of the 9th International Coastal Symposium), 226 - 230. Gold Coast, Australia, ISSN 0749.0208.
8. Chamberlain B.C., Meitner M.J. Aroute-based visibility analysis for landscape management. Landsc. Urban Plan. March 2013, 111:13-24.
9. De Montis A., Caschilli S. Nuraghes and landscape planning: coupling viewshed with complex network analysis. Landsc. Urban Plan. 15 April 2012, 105(3):315-324.
10. Depellegrin D., Blažauskas N. Integrating ecosystem service values into oil spill impact assessment. J.Coast. Res. 2013, 29(4):836-846. http://dx.doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-11-00191.1.
11. Depellegrin D., Blažauskas N., Egarter-Vigl L. Aesthetic Value Characterization of Landscapes in Coastal Zones 2012, 1-6. Baltic International Symposium (BALTIC), 2012 IEEE/OES.
12. Damsbo - Andersen L. Offshore Windfarms and Tourism 2013, Source, (accessed 03.01.14.). http://www.southbaltic-offshore.eu/reports-studies/img/OFFSHORE_WIND_FARMS_AND_TOURISM.pdf.
13. EEA Corine Landscape Coverage 2006 2013, (accessed 23.04.13.).
14. Ergin A., Karakaya T., Radic M., Williams A.T. Coastal scenic evaluation: a study of some Dalmatian (Croatia) areas. J.Coast. Res. 2006, SI 39 (Proceedings of the 8th International Coastal Symposium), 898-902. Itajaí, SC, Brazil, ISSN 0749-0208.
15. Falconer L., Hunter D.C., Telfer T.C., Ross L.G. Visual, seascape and landscape analysis to support coastal aquaculture site selection. Land Use Policy 2013, 34:1-10.
16. Fleming C.M., Cook A. The recreational value of Lake McKenzie, Fraser Island: an application of the travel cost method. Tour. Manag. 2008, 29:1197-1205.
17. Fry G., Tveit M.S., Ode A., Velarde M.D. The ecology of visual landscapes: exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators. Ecol. Indic. 2009, 933-947.
18. Fairhurst K.B. Geoptics Landscape Apparency: a Dynamic Visual Resource Indicator and Tool for Multi-Functional Landscape Planning 2010, 324. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, p.
19. Gaël C., Da Rugna J. Arobust detection of tourism area from geolocated image databases. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2011, vol. I.
20. Global ASTER, 2013. Source: (accessed 04.01.13.). http://www.jspacesystems.or.jp/ersdac/GDEM/E/.
21. Gönenç I.E., Vadineanu A., Wolflin J.P., Russo R.C. Sustainable use and development of watersheds. Proceedings of the NATO SPS (NFA) 5th Workshop on Sustainable Use and Development of Watersheds for Human Security and Peace Kumburgaz, Istanbul, Turkey 2008, 22-26. October 2007. ISBN 978-1-4020-8556-7.
22. Haggett C. Understanding public responses to offshore wind power. Energy Policy 2011, 39:503-510.
23. Hamilton S.E., Morgan A. Integrating lidar, GIS and hedonic price modeling to measure amenity values in urban beach residential property markets. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2010, 34:133-141.
24. Harff J., Björck S., Hoth P. The Baltic Sea Basin. Central and Eastern European Development Studies 2011, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, xiii-449 pages.
25. HELCOMGIS Helcom Data and Map Service 2013, Source, (accessed 09.07.13.). http://www.helcom.fi/GIS/en_GB/HelcomGIS/.
26. Hochmair H.H. Spatial Association of Geotagged Photos with Scenic Locations July 2010, 1-10. GIFORUM.
27. Hurtado J.P., Fernandez J., Parrondo J.L., Blanco E. Spanish method of visual impact evaluation in wind farms. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004, 8:483-491.
28. Jarmalavičius D., Satkunas J., Zilinskas G., Pupienis D. The influence of coastal morphology on wind dynamics. Est. J. Earth Sci. 2012, 61(2):120-130.
29. Jim C.Y., Chen W.Y. Value of scenic views: hedonic assessment of private housing in Hong Kong. Landsc. Urban Plan. 30 July 2009, 91(4):226-234.
30. Kisilevich S., Mansmann F., Bak P., Keim D., Tchaikin A. Where would you go on your next vacation? A framework for visual exploration of attractive places. GeoProcessing 2010, 21-26.
31. Lithuanian Department of Statistics Lithuania Statistics 2011, (accessed 14.01.11.). http://www.stat.gov.lt/en/.
32. LSDT (Lithuanian State Department of Tourism) Statistics 2006 2007, Source, (accessed 10.10.11.). http://www.travel.lt/index/php/lithuanian_tourism_statistic_2006/21421.
33. Manchado C., Otero C., Gómez-Jáuregui V., Arias R., Bruschi V., Cendrero A. Visibility analysis and visibility software for the optimisation of wind farm design. Renew. Energy December 2013, 60:388-401.
34. Marine InVest, 2013. (accessed 08.10.13.). http://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/toolbox.html.
35. Mouflis G.D., Gitas I.Z., Iliadou S., Mitri G.H. Assessment of visual impact of marble quarry expansion (1984-2000) on the landscape of the Thasos Island, NE Greece. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2008, 86:92-102.
36. Möller B. Spatial analysis of emerging and fading wind energy landscapes in Denmark. Land Use Policy 2010, 27:233-241.
37. NRC (National Research Council of the National Academies) Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects 2007, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
38. NRC (National Research Council) Marine Protected Areas: Tools for Sustaining Ocean Ecosystem 2001, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
39. NLS National Land Service Under the Ministry of Agriculture 2013, (accessed 07.10.13.). http://www.nzt.lt/go.php/lit/English.
40. Panoramiocom, 2012. (accessed 23.04.12.). http://www.panoramio.com.
41. Plexida S.G., Sfougaris A.I., Ispikoudis I.P., Papanastasis V.P. Selecting landscape metrics as indicators of spatial heterogeneity-A comparison among Greek landscapes. Int. J. Appl. Earth Observ Geoinform February 2014, 26:26-35.
42. Pranzini E., Williams A.T. Coastal Erosion and Protection in Europe 2013, Routledge, Science - 457 pages.
43. Rangel-Buitrago N., Correa I.D., Anfuso G., Ergin A., Williams A.T. Assessing and managing scenery of the Caribbean Coast of Colombia. Tour. Manag. 2013, 35:41-58.
44. Rocchini D., Delucchi L., Bacaro G., Cavallini P., Feilhauer H., Foody G.M., He K.S., Nagendra H., Porta C., Ricotta C., Schmidtlein S., Spano L.D., Wegmann M., Neteler M. Calculating landscape diversity with information-theory based indices: a GRASS GIS solution. Ecol. Informatics September 2013, 17:82-93.
45. Sander H.A., Polasky S. The value of views and open space: estimates from a hedonic pricing model for Ramsey County, Minnesota, USA. Orig. Res. Article Land Use Policy July 2009, 26(3):837-845.
46. Sander H.A., Manson S.M. Heights and locations of artificial structures in viewshed calculation: how close is close enough?. Orig. Res. Article Landsc. Urban Plan. 17 October 2007, 82(4):257-270.
47. Scott K.E., Anderson C., Dunsford H., Benson J.F., MacFarlane R. An Assessment of the Sensitivity and Capacity of the Scottish Seascape in Relation to Offshore Windfarms 2005, Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.103 (ROAME No. F03AA06).
48. Shropshire D., Purvins A., Papaioannou I., Maschi I. Benefits and cost implications from integrating small flexible nuclear reactors with off-shore wind farms in a virtual power plant. Energy Policy July 2012, 46:558-573.
49. State Enterprise Centre of Registers, 2013. Source: (accessed 07.08.13.). http://www.registrucentras.lt/masvert/paieska_apsk_new.jsp.
50. Sullivan R.G., Kirchler L.B., Cothren J., Winters S.L., 2012. Preliminary assessment of offshore wind turbine visibility and visual Impact Threshold Distances. Source: (accessed 12.11.13.). http://www.visualimpact.anl.gov/offshorevitd/docs/OffshoreVITD.pdf.
51. Sullivan R.G., Cothren J., Williamson M., Smith P., McCarty J., Kirchler L.B. Visual Impact Risk Assessment and Mitigation Mapping System for Utility-Scale Wind Energy Facilities 2011, Source, (accessed: 23.08.13.). http://www.visualimpact.anl.gov/index.cfm.
52. Tsoutsos T., Tsouchlaraki A., Tsiropoulos M., Serpetsidakis M. Visual impact evaluation of a wind park in a Greek island. Appl. Energy April 2009, 86(4):546-553.
53. Tonderski A., Jedrzejewska A., Abrahamsen A.B., Albrecht C., Bay Hasager C., Blažauskas N., Carstensen D., Clausen N.E., Danborg F., Genachte A.B., Hentsch S., Korb M., Lawson C., Maegaard P., Miszewska A., Ohleth K., Paulauskas S., Platts J., Proba G., Rathinavelu R., Samotyj M., Schröder S.T., Skrzypiński W., Sturesson S., Wagner A., Wall B., Wesselmann K., Zemsta H. Offshore Wind Energy in the South Baltic Region - Challenges & Opportunities 2013, Source, ISBN 978-83-933461-8-9, (accessed 23.12.13.). http://www.southbaltic-offshore.eu/reports-studies/img/OFFER_FINAL_PUBLICATION_FINAL_VERSION.pdf.
54. University of Newcastle Visual Assessment of Windfarms Best Practice. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report F01AA303A 2002, 1-79.
55. U.S.Forest Service Landscape aesthetics. A handbook for scenery management. Agric. Handb. 1995, 701:104.