IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i21p5628-d435868.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ratepayer Perspectives on Mid- to Large-Scale Solar Development on Long Island, NY: Lessons for Reducing Siting Conflict through Supported Development Types

Author

Listed:
  • Chelsea Schelly

    (Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49930, USA)

  • Emily Prehoda

    (Chart House Energy LLC, Muskegon, MI 49441, USA)

  • Jessica Price

    (Landscape Conservation Ecologist, The Nature Conservancy New York Division, Long Island, NY 11937, USA)

  • Aimee Delach

    (Senior Policy Analyst, Climate Adaptation, Defenders of Wildlife, Washington, DC 20036, USA)

  • Rupak Thapaliya

    (Renewable Energy & Wildlife Policy Analyst, Defenders of Wildlife, Washington, DC 20036, USA)

Abstract

The state of New York has ambitious mandates for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing renewable energy generation. Solar energy will play an important role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the electric energy sector. Concerns over solar installations’ impacts to host communities and the environment have led to growing conflicts over solar energy siting on Long Island, in other parts of New York, and throughout the US. Understanding community members’ perspectives is critical for reducing conflict. Solar energy can be deployed more quickly and at lower cost if projects are structured to address the concerns and meet the needs of the community. This paper presents the results of a survey of residential utility ratepayers that examined their perceptions, preferences, and priorities concerning mid- to large-scale solar development on Long Island (250 kW and larger). The survey asked respondents to consider specific installation types, financial models, and other aspects of solar development. Results indicate that respondents were overwhelmingly supportive of mid- to large-scale solar development in their communities. The most highly supported development types were solar systems on rooftops and solar systems that are co-located with other land uses (mixed use) at a particular site, such as parking canopies, landfills, or integration with agriculture. The most highly supported financial models included privately funded projects by local developers and community solar projects. The largest concern about solar development expressed by respondents did not involve tree removal or visibility (as initially hypothesized to be the most significant considerations) but rather the fairness of the distribution of economic benefits associated with solar development. This paper provides concrete insight into particular models of solar development that may invoke less conflict and more community support.

Suggested Citation

  • Chelsea Schelly & Emily Prehoda & Jessica Price & Aimee Delach & Rupak Thapaliya, 2020. "Ratepayer Perspectives on Mid- to Large-Scale Solar Development on Long Island, NY: Lessons for Reducing Siting Conflict through Supported Development Types," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5628-:d:435868
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5628/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5628/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van der Horst, Dan, 2007. "NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2705-2714, May.
    2. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of 'backyard motives'," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 1188-1207, August.
    3. Stoms, David M. & Dashiell, Stephanie L. & Davis, Frank W., 2013. "Siting solar energy development to minimize biological impacts," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 289-298.
    4. Crago, Christine L. & Koegler, Eric, 2018. "Drivers of growth in commercial-scale solar PV capacity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 481-491.
    5. Carlisle, Juliet E. & Kane, Stephanie L. & Solan, David & Bowman, Madelaine & Joe, Jeffrey C., 2015. "Public attitudes regarding large-scale solar energy development in the U.S," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 835-847.
    6. Brewer, Justin & Ames, Daniel P. & Solan, David & Lee, Randy & Carlisle, Juliet, 2015. "Using GIS analytics and social preference data to evaluate utility-scale solar power site suitability," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 825-836.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kristina Lebedeva & Andris Krumins & Antra Tamane & Egils Dzelzitis, 2021. "Analysis of Latvian Households’ Potential Participation in the Energy Market as Prosumers," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-13, May.
    2. Pascaris1, Alexis S. & Schelly, Chelsea & Rouleau, Mark & Pearce, Joshua M., 2021. "Do Agrivoltaics Improve Public Support for Solar Photovoltaic Development? Survey Says: Yes!," SocArXiv efasx, Center for Open Science.
    3. Chelsea Schelly & Don Lee & Elise Matz & Joshua M. Pearce, 2021. "Applying a Relationally and Socially Embedded Decision Framework to Solar Photovoltaic Adoption: A Conceptual Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Marie Schaefer & Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Kristin Arola & Christie M. Poitra & Elise Matz & Marika Seigel & Chelsea Schelly & Adewale Adesanya & Doug Bessette, 2021. "Understanding Socio-Technological Systems Change through an Indigenous Community-Based Participatory Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.

    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. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    2. Vuichard, Pascal & Stauch, Alexander & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2021. "Keep it local and low-key: Social acceptance of alpine solar power projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    3. Brewer, Justin & Ames, Daniel P. & Solan, David & Lee, Randy & Carlisle, Juliet, 2015. "Using GIS analytics and social preference data to evaluate utility-scale solar power site suitability," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 825-836.
    4. Carlisle, Juliet E. & Kane, Stephanie L. & Solan, David & Bowman, Madelaine & Joe, Jeffrey C., 2015. "Public attitudes regarding large-scale solar energy development in the U.S," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 835-847.
    5. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    6. Baxter, Jamie & Morzaria, Rakhee & Hirsch, Rachel, 2013. "A case-control study of support/opposition to wind turbines: Perceptions of health risk, economic benefits, and community conflict," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 931-943.
    7. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Zerrahn, Alexander & Krekel, Christian, 2015. "Sowing the Wind and Reaping the Whirlwind? The Effect of Wind Turbines on Residential Well-Being," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 112956, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Pepermans, Yves & Loots, Ilse, 2013. "Wind farm struggles in Flanders fields: A sociological perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 321-328.
    11. Linnell, Peter, 2010. "Are Smaller Turbines the Way Forward for Wind Energy in Herefordshire?," MPRA Paper 58879, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Sirr, Gordon & Power, Bernadette & Ryan, Geraldine & Eakins, John & O’Connor, Ellen & le Maitre, Julia, 2023. "An analysis of the factors affecting Irish citizens’ willingness to invest in wind energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    13. Brannstrom, Christian & Gorayeb, Adryane & de Sousa Mendes, Jocicléa & Loureiro, Caroline & Meireles, Antonio Jeovah de Andrade & Silva, Edson Vicente da & Freitas, Ana Larissa Ribeiro de & Oliveira, , 2017. "Is Brazilian wind power development sustainable? Insights from a review of conflicts in Ceará state," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 62-71.
    14. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Panduro, Toke Emil & Termansen, Mette, 2019. "Impact of biogas plants on rural residential property values and implications for local acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1121-1131.
    15. Sliz-Szkliniarz, B. & Eberbach, J. & Hoffmann, B. & Fortin, M., 2019. "Assessing the cost of onshore wind development scenarios: Modelling of spatial and temporal distribution of wind power for the case of Poland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 514-531.
    16. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    17. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    18. Bertsch, Valentin & Hyland, Marie & Mahony, Michael, 2017. "What drives people's opinions of electricity infrastructure? Empirical evidence from Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 472-497.
    19. John Colton & Kenneth Corscadden & Stewart Fast & Monica Gattinger & Joel Gehman & Martha Hall Findlay & Dylan Morgan & Judith Sayers & Jennifer Winter & Adonis Yatchew, 2016. "Energy Projects, Social Licence, Public Acceptance and Regulatory Systems in Canada: A White Paper," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(20), May.
    20. Agnieszka Rochmińska, 2023. "Wind Energy Infrastructure and Socio-Spatial Conflicts," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, January.

    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:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5628-:d:435868. 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.