IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i22p9352-d443092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enabling Renewable Energy While Protecting Wildlife: An Ecological Risk-Based Approach to Wind Energy Development Using Ecosystem-Based Management Values

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea E. Copping

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 1100 Dexter Ave N #500, Seattle, WA 98109, USA)

  • Alicia M. Gorton

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 902 Battelle Blvd, Richland, WA 99352, USA)

  • Roel May

    (Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Høgskoleringen 9, 7034 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Finlay Bennet

    (Marine Scotland, St. Andrew’s House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG, UK)

  • Elise DeGeorge

    (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 18200 CO-128, Boulder, CO 80303, USA)

  • Miguel Repas Goncalves

    (STRIX, Rua Roberto Ivens, 1314 1º sala 15, 4450–251 Matosinhos, Portugal)

  • Bob Rumes

    (Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Vautier Street 29, 1000 Brussels, Belgium)

Abstract

Acceptance of wind energy development is challenged by stakeholders’ concerns about potential effects on the environment, specifically on wildlife, such as birds, bats, and (for offshore wind) marine animals, and the habitats that support them. Communities near wind energy developments are also concerned with social and economic impacts, as well as impacts on aesthetics, historical sites, and recreation and tourism. Lack of a systematic, widely accepted, and balanced approach for measuring the potential damage to wildlife, habitats, and communities continues to leave wind developers, regulators, and other stakeholders in an uncertain position. This paper explores ecological risk-based management (RBM) in wind energy development for land-based and offshore wind installations. This paper provides a framework for the adaptation of ecosystem-based management to wind energy development and examines that framework through a series of case studies and best management practices for applying risk-based principles to wind energy. Ten case studies indicate that wind farm monitoring is often driven by regulatory requirements that may not be underpinned by scientific questions. While each case applies principles of adaptive management, there is room for improvement in applying scientific principles to the data collection and analysis. Challenges and constraints for wind farm development to meet RBM framework criteria include collecting sufficient baseline and monitoring data year-round, engaging stakeholder facilitators, and bringing together large and diverse scientific teams. The RBM framework approach may provide insights for improved siting and consenting/permitting processes for regulators and their advisors, particularly in those nations where wind energy is still in the early development stages on land or at sea.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea E. Copping & Alicia M. Gorton & Roel May & Finlay Bennet & Elise DeGeorge & Miguel Repas Goncalves & Bob Rumes, 2020. "Enabling Renewable Energy While Protecting Wildlife: An Ecological Risk-Based Approach to Wind Energy Development Using Ecosystem-Based Management Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:22:p:9352-:d:443092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/22/9352/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/22/9352/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank Hanssen & Roel May & Jiska van Dijk & Jan Ketil Rød, 2018. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Tool Suite for Consensus-Based Siting of Renewable Energy Structures," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-28, September.
    2. Karin Sinclair & Andrea E. Copping & Roel May & Finlay Bennet & Marijke Warnas & Muriel Perron & Åsa Elmqvist & Elise DeGeorge, 2018. "Resolving environmental effects of wind energy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(4), July.
    3. Andrea Staid & Seth D. Guikema, 2015. "Risk Analysis for U.S. Offshore Wind Farms: The Need for an Integrated Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 587-593, April.
    4. Helene Ahlborg & Ilse Ruiz-Mercado & Sverker Molander & Omar Masera, 2019. "Bringing Technology into Social-Ecological Systems Research—Motivations for a Socio-Technical-Ecological Systems Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, April.
    5. Barnes, Cassandra & McFadden, Katherine W., 2008. "Marine ecosystem approaches to management: challenges and lessons in the United States," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 387-392, May.
    6. Pelc, Robin & Fujita, Rod M., 2002. "Renewable energy from the ocean," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 471-479, November.
    7. James Griffiths & William Dushenko, 2011. "Effectiveness of GIS suitability mapping in predicting ecological impacts of proposed wind farm development on Aristazabal Island, BC," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 957-991, December.
    8. Ashrafi, Maryam & Davoudpour, Hamid & Khodakarami, Vahid, 2015. "Risk assessment of wind turbines: Transition from pure mechanistic paradigm to modern complexity paradigm," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 347-355.
    9. Lovich, Jeffrey E. & Ennen, Joshua R., 2013. "Assessing the state of knowledge of utility-scale wind energy development and operation on non-volant terrestrial and marine wildlife," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 52-60.
    10. Jones, Christopher R. & Richard Eiser, J., 2010. "Understanding 'local' opposition to wind development in the UK: How big is a backyard?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3106-3117, June.
    11. Joos, Michael & Staffell, Iain, 2018. "Short-term integration costs of variable renewable energy: Wind curtailment and balancing in Britain and Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 45-65.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    2. Lehmann, Paul & Reutter, Felix & Tafarte, Philip, 2021. "Optimal siting of onshore wind turbines: Local disamenities matter," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2021, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    3. Yao, Ganzhou & Luo, Zirong & Lu, Zhongyue & Wang, Mangkuan & Shang, Jianzhong & Guerrerob, Josep M., 2023. "Unlocking the potential of wave energy conversion: A comprehensive evaluation of advanced maximum power point tracking techniques and hybrid strategies for sustainable energy harvesting," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    4. Nadège Bouchonneau & Arnaud Coutrey & Vivianne Marie Bruère & Moacyr Araújo & Alex Costa da Silva, 2023. "Finite Element Modeling and Simulation of a Submerged Wave Energy Converter System for Application to Oceanic Islands in Tropical Atlantic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Eicke, Anselm & Ruhnau, Oliver & Hirth, Lion, 2021. "Electricity balancing as a market equilibrium," EconStor Preprints 233852, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Licheri, Fabio & Ghisu, Tiziano & Cambuli, Francesco & Puddu, Pierpaolo, 2022. "Detailed investigation of the local flow-field in a Wells turbine coupled to an OWC simulator," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 583-593.
    7. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    8. Borch, Kristian & Munk, Anders K. & Dahlgaard, Vibeke, 2020. "Mapping wind-power controversies on social media: Facebook as a powerful mobilizer of local resistance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    9. Qazi, Abroon & Dickson, Alex & Quigley, John & Gaudenzi, Barbara, 2018. "Supply chain risk network management: A Bayesian belief network and expected utility based approach for managing supply chain risks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 24-42.
    10. Hammar, Linus & Ehnberg, Jimmy & Mavume, Alberto & Cuamba, Boaventura C. & Molander, Sverker, 2012. "Renewable ocean energy in the Western Indian Ocean," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 4938-4950.
    11. Abadie, Luis Mª & Chamorro, José M., 2023. "Investment in wind-based hydrogen production under economic and physical uncertainties," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 337(C).
    12. Zarzuelo, Carmen & López-Ruiz, Alejandro & Ortega-Sánchez, Miguel, 2018. "Impact of human interventions on tidal stream power: The case of Cádiz Bay," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 88-104.
    13. Rao, A. Gangoli & van den Oudenalder, F.S.C. & Klein, S.A., 2019. "Natural gas displacement by wind curtailment utilization in combined-cycle power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 477-491.
    14. Lewis, Matt & McNaughton, James & Márquez-Dominguez, Concha & Todeschini, Grazia & Togneri, Michael & Masters, Ian & Allmark, Matthew & Stallard, Tim & Neill, Simon & Goward-Brown, Alice & Robins, Pet, 2019. "Power variability of tidal-stream energy and implications for electricity supply," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1061-1074.
    15. Liu, Hong-wei & Ma, Shun & Li, Wei & Gu, Hai-gang & Lin, Yong-gang & Sun, Xiao-jing, 2011. "A review on the development of tidal current energy in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 1141-1146, February.
    16. Paul Simshauser & Farhad Billimoria & Craig Rogers, 2021. "Optimising VRE plant capacity in Renewable Energy Zones," Working Papers EPRG2121, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    17. Jin, Xin & Ju, Wenbin & Zhang, Zhaolong & Guo, Lianxin & Yang, Xiangang, 2016. "System safety analysis of large wind turbines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1293-1307.
    18. Groh, Elke D. & Möllendorff, Charlotte v., 2020. "What shapes the support of renewable energy expansion? Public attitudes between policy goals and risk, time, and social preferences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    19. Peter Bossew & Giorgia Cinelli & Giancarlo Ciotoli & Quentin G. Crowley & Marc De Cort & Javier Elío Medina & Valeria Gruber & Eric Petermann & Tore Tollefsen, 2020. "Development of a Geogenic Radon Hazard Index—Concept, History, Experiences," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, June.
    20. Krekel, Christian & Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Does the presence of wind turbines have negative externalities for people in their surroundings? Evidence from well-being data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 221-238.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:22:p:9352-:d:443092. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.