IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nim/nimawp/64-2016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Accounting for local impacts of photovoltaic farms: two stated preferences approaches

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Renewable energy sources for electricity generation are unequivocally more environmentally friendly than the traditional sources, but are not impact-free. Given the potential for solar photovoltaic energy to contribute to the energy mix in some countries, it is timely to carefully consider the potential environmental costs of operation of photovoltaic farms, which are experienced by the local population, while the general benefits accrue to all. These adverse impacts should be identified and acknowledged. This paper proposes and applies economic valuation methods to estimate the value of those environmental impacts. We apply the contingent valuation method to a sample of local residents close to three selected photovoltaic farms in Portugal. We design a discrete choice experiment to elicit the valuation of specific adverse impacts of electricity generation through photovoltaic energy by national residents. Our results show that the value elicited in the vicinity of the photovoltaic farms is non-negligible and national residents value positively and differently the different adverse local impacts. Both of these estimates, in conjunction or independently, can be used to fully account for this often neglected cost of solar energy. The asymmetric equity implications of photovoltaic projects should not be neglected when deciding their construction and location.

Suggested Citation

  • Anabela Botelho & Lina Sofia Lourenço-Gomes & Lígia Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2016. "Accounting for local impacts of photovoltaic farms: two stated preferences approaches," NIMA Working Papers 64, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
  • Handle: RePEc:nim:nimawp:64/2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www3.eeg.uminho.pt/publications/NIMAwp64.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: none

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    2. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. " Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    3. Erin Baker & Meredith Fowlie & Derek Lemoine & Stanley S. Reynolds, 2013. "The Economics of Solar Electricity," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 387-426, June.
    4. Klaus S. Lackner & Jeffrey D. Sachs, 2005. "A Robust Strategy for Sustainable Energy," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 36(2), pages 215-284.
    5. Fthenakis, Vasilis M., 2000. "End-of-life management and recycling of PV modules," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(14), pages 1051-1058, November.
    6. Chiabrando, Roberto & Fabrizio, Enrico & Garnero, Gabriele, 2009. "The territorial and landscape impacts of photovoltaic systems: Definition of impacts and assessment of the glare risk," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2441-2451, December.
    7. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Photovoltaic Farms; Stated Preference Methods; Contingent Valuation; Discrete Choice Experiments; Environmental Impacts;

    JEL classification:

    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nim:nimawp:64/2016. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (NIMA). General contact details of provider: http://nima.eeg.uminho.pt/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.