IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v353y2024ipas0306261923014873.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Monetized (socio-)environmental handprint and footprint of an offshore windfarm in the Belgian Continental Shelf: An assessment of local, regional and global impacts

Author

Listed:
  • De Luca Peña, Laura Vittoria
  • Taelman, Sue Ellen
  • Bas, Bilge
  • Staes, Jan
  • Mertens, Jan
  • Clavreul, Julie
  • Préat, Nils
  • Dewulf, Jo

Abstract

Renewable offshore wind electricity is as one of the major renewable energy sources on our path towards carbon neutrality. As for all energy technologies, offshore wind farms (OWFs) will have both local and global negative and positive impacts. Understanding and quantifying these burdens and benefits requires a holistic sustainability assessment. This study tests and applies a novel (socio-) environmental impact assessment framework to quantify the monetized (socio-) environmental footprint and handprint of an offshore wind farm located in the Belgian Continental Shelf. This framework consists of a combination of two ways of integrating Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Ecosystem Services Assessment (ESA) to quantify both the site-specific and site-generic impacts on ecosystem services (ESs) over the lifetime of a human intervention. For the operation and maintenance stage of the OWF, impacts on three local ESs were quantified, i.e. offshore wind energy provisioning, nursery and habitat maintenance and aesthetic value, while for the other life cycle stages site-generic impacts on multiple ESs were calculated. A comprehensive list of data was inventoried to conduct both the LCA and ESA studies. The monetized impact results were then aggregated and monetized at the level of three areas of protection, i.e. human health and well-being, natural resources and ecosystem quality. The results show that the OWF has a net handprint of +€85,196, mainly due to electricity production, while the absolute footprint (−€4039) consists largely of impacts associated to the supply chain of materials to manufacture the offshore windfarm. Furthermore, this study compares the (socio-) environmental performance of an OWF with nuclear energy, which is used as benchmark because of its high importance for electricity supply in Belgium. This study is a first step towards a valuable contribution to understanding the multi-scale burdens and benefits of offshore wind energy, which can support decision- and policy-making.

Suggested Citation

  • De Luca Peña, Laura Vittoria & Taelman, Sue Ellen & Bas, Bilge & Staes, Jan & Mertens, Jan & Clavreul, Julie & Préat, Nils & Dewulf, Jo, 2024. "Monetized (socio-)environmental handprint and footprint of an offshore windfarm in the Belgian Continental Shelf: An assessment of local, regional and global impacts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(PA).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:353:y:2024:i:pa:s0306261923014873
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261923014873
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122123?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lechtenböhmer, Stefan & Nilsson, Lars J. & Åhman, Max & Schneider, Clemens, 2016. "Decarbonising the energy intensive basic materials industry through electrification – Implications for future EU electricity demand," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P3), pages 1623-1631.
    2. Jesuina Chipindula & Venkata Sai Vamsi Botlaguduru & Hongbo Du & Raghava Rao Kommalapati & Ziaul Huque, 2018. "Life Cycle Environmental Impact of Onshore and Offshore Wind Farms in Texas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Carr-Harris, Andrew & Lang, Corey, 2019. "Sustainability and tourism: the effect of the United States’ first offshore wind farm on the vacation rental market," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 51-67.
    4. Liang Tsai & Jarod C. Kelly & Brett S. Simon & Rachel M. Chalat & Gregory A. Keoleian, 2016. "Life Cycle Assessment of Offshore Wind Farm Siting: Effects of Locational Factors, Lake Depth, and Distance from Shore," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(6), pages 1370-1383, December.
    5. Papathanasopoulou, Eleni & Beaumont, Nicola & Hooper, Tara & Nunes, Joana & Queirós, Ana M., 2015. "Energy systems and their impacts on marine ecosystem services," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 917-926.
    6. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    7. Baptiste Poujol & Anne Prieur‐Vernat & Jean Dubranna & Romain Besseau & Isabelle Blanc & Paula Pérez‐López, 2020. "Site‐specific life cycle assessment of a pilot floating offshore wind farm based on suppliers’ data and geo‐located wind data," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(1), pages 248-262, February.
    8. Huang, Yu-Fong & Gan, Xing-Jia & Chiueh, Pei-Te, 2017. "Life cycle assessment and net energy analysis of offshore wind power systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PA), pages 98-106.
    9. Bonou, Alexandra & Laurent, Alexis & Olsen, Stig I., 2016. "Life cycle assessment of onshore and offshore wind energy-from theory to application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 327-337.
    10. Topham, Eva & McMillan, David, 2017. "Sustainable decommissioning of an offshore wind farm," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PB), pages 470-480.
    11. Raadal, Hanne Lerche & Vold, Bjørn Ivar & Myhr, Anders & Nygaard, Tor Anders, 2014. "GHG emissions and energy performance of offshore wind power," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 314-324.
    12. Poinssot, Ch. & Bourg, S. & Ouvrier, N. & Combernoux, N. & Rostaing, C. & Vargas-Gonzalez, M. & Bruno, J., 2014. "Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. Comparison between closed and open fuel cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 199-211.
    13. Baulaz, Yoann & Mouchet, Maud & Niquil, Nathalie & Ben Rais Lasram, Frida, 2023. "An integrated conceptual model to characterize the effects of offshore wind farms on ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Buchmayr, A. & Verhofstadt, E. & Van Ootegem, L. & Thomassen, G. & Taelman, S.E. & Dewulf, J., 2022. "Exploring the global and local social sustainability of wind energy technologies: An application of a social impact assessment framework," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 312(C).
    15. Mirasgedis, S. & Tourkolias, C. & Tzovla, E. & Diakoulaki, D., 2014. "Valuing the visual impact of wind farms: An application in South Evia, Greece," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 296-311.
    16. Ladenburg, Jacob & Dubgaard, Alex, 2007. "Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4059-4071, August.
    17. Gkeka-Serpetsidaki, Pandora & Papadopoulos, Stylianos & Tsoutsos, Theocharis, 2022. "Assessment of the visual impact of offshore wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 358-370.
    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. Rueda-Bayona, Juan Gabriel & Cabello Eras, Juan Jose & Chaparro, Tatiana R., 2022. "Impacts generated by the materials used in offshore wind technology on Human Health, Natural Environment and Resources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PA).
    2. Yashuang Feng & Lixiao Zhang, 2023. "The GHG Intensities of Wind Power Plants in China from a Life-Cycle Perspective: The Impacts of Geographical Location, Turbine Technology and Management Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Ferreira, Victor J. & Benveniste, Gabriela & Rapha, José I. & Corchero, Cristina & Domínguez-García, Jose Luis, 2023. "A holistic tool to assess the cost and environmental performance of floating offshore wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    4. Nurullah Yildiz & Hassan Hemida & Charalampos Baniotopoulos, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of a Barge-Type Floating Wind Turbine and Comparison with Other Types of Wind Turbines," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Mohamed R. Gomaa & Hegazy Rezk & Ramadan J. Mustafa & Mujahed Al-Dhaifallah, 2019. "Evaluating the Environmental Impacts and Energy Performance of a Wind Farm System Utilizing the Life-Cycle Assessment Method: A Practical Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    6. Anne P. M. Velenturf, 2021. "A Framework and Baseline for the Integration of a Sustainable Circular Economy in Offshore Wind," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-41, September.
    7. Mendecka, Barbara & Lombardi, Lidia, 2019. "Life cycle environmental impacts of wind energy technologies: A review of simplified models and harmonization of the results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 462-480.
    8. Moussavi, S. & Barutha, P. & Dvorak, B., 2023. "Environmental life cycle assessment of a novel offshore wind energy design project: A United States based case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    9. Li, Jinying & Li, Sisi & Wu, Fan, 2020. "Research on carbon emission reduction benefit of wind power project based on life cycle assessment theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 456-468.
    10. Zhang, Xiaoyue & Huang, Guohe & Liu, Lirong & Li, Kailong, 2022. "Development of a stochastic multistage lifecycle programming model for electric power system planning – A case study for the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. Roger Samsó & Júlia Crespin & Antonio García-Olivares & Jordi Solé, 2023. "Examining the Potential of Marine Renewable Energy: A Net Energy Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-35, May.
    12. Louise Christine Dammeier & Joyce H. C. Bosmans & Mark A. J. Huijbregts, 2023. "Variability in greenhouse gas footprints of the global wind farm fleet," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(1), pages 272-282, February.
    13. Garcia-Teruel, Anna & Rinaldi, Giovanni & Thies, Philipp R. & Johanning, Lars & Jeffrey, Henry, 2022. "Life cycle assessment of floating offshore wind farms: An evaluation of operation and maintenance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    14. Li, Qiangfeng & Duan, Huabo & Xie, Minghui & Kang, Peng & Ma, Yi & Zhong, Ruoyu & Gao, Tianming & Zhong, Weiqiong & Wen, Bojie & Bai, Feng & Vuppaladadiyam, Arun K., 2021. "Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of a 40 MW wind farm with consideration of the infrastructure," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    15. Summerfield-Ryan, Oliver & Park, Susan, 2023. "The power of wind: The global wind energy industry's successes and failures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    16. Judge, Frances & McAuliffe, Fiona Devoy & Sperstad, Iver Bakken & Chester, Rachel & Flannery, Brian & Lynch, Katie & Murphy, Jimmy, 2019. "A lifecycle financial analysis model for offshore wind farms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 370-383.
    17. Iain A. Struthers & Nadezda Avanessova & Anthony Gray & Miriam Noonan & R. Camilla Thomson & Gareth P. Harrison, 2023. "Life Cycle Assessment of Four Floating Wind Farms around Scotland Using a Site-Specific Operation and Maintenance Model with SOVs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-24, November.
    18. Peri, Erez & Becker, Nir & Tal, Alon, 2020. "What really undermines public acceptance of wind turbines? A choice experiment analysis in Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    19. Li, Chen & Mogollón, José M. & Tukker, Arnold & Dong, Jianning & von Terzi, Dominic & Zhang, Chunbo & Steubing, Bernhard, 2022. "Future material requirements for global sustainable offshore wind energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    20. Lee, Min-Kyu & Nam, Jungho & Kim, Miju, 2023. "Valuing the public preference for offshore wind energy: The case study in South Korea," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PB).

    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:eee:appene:v:353:y:2024:i:pa:s0306261923014873. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    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.