IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v92y2012icp269-278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Visual preferences for wind turbines: Location, numbers and respondent characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Molnarova, Kristina
  • Sklenicka, Petr
  • Stiborek, Jiri
  • Svobodova, Kamila
  • Salek, Miroslav
  • Brabec, Elizabeth

Abstract

There is a dichotomy in the view of wind farms among members of the public: on one hand, there is a desire for renewable energy sources, and on the other hand, there is a major concern about the visual impact of wind turbines used for power production. This concern for visual impact is a major factor in the reaction of the public to the development of new wind farms. Our study aims to objectify this influence and to establish the factors that determine how people evaluate these structures. We tested the visual quality of landscapes in which these structures are to be placed, the number of structures and their distance from the viewer, and various characteristics of our respondents. We found that the physical attributes of the landscape and wind turbines influenced the respondents’ reactions far more than socio-demographic and attitudinal factors. One of the most important results of our study is the sensitivity of respondents to the placement of wind turbines in landscapes of high aesthetic quality, and, on the other hand, a relatively high level of acceptance of these structures in unattractive landscapes. Wind turbines also receive better acceptance if the number of turbines in a landscape is limited, and if the structures are kept away from observation points, such as settlements, transportation infrastructure and viewpoints. The most important characteristic of the respondents that influenced their evaluation was their attitude to wind power. On the basis of these results, recommendations are presented for placing wind turbines and for protecting the character of the landscape within the planning and policy making processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Molnarova, Kristina & Sklenicka, Petr & Stiborek, Jiri & Svobodova, Kamila & Salek, Miroslav & Brabec, Elizabeth, 2012. "Visual preferences for wind turbines: Location, numbers and respondent characteristics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 269-278.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:92:y:2012:i:c:p:269-278
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261911006969
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.001?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. Charles Warren & Carolyn Lumsden & Simone O'Dowd & Richard Birnie, 2005. "'Green On Green': Public perceptions of wind power in Scotland and Ireland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(6), pages 853-875.
    2. Connolly, D. & Lund, H. & Mathiesen, B.V. & Leahy, M., 2010. "A review of computer tools for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 1059-1082, April.
    3. Kaldellis, J. K., 2005. "Social attitude towards wind energy applications in Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 595-602, March.
    4. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    5. Alvarez-Farizo, Begona & Hanley, Nick, 2002. "Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 107-116, January.
    6. Zoellner, Jan & Schweizer-Ries, Petra & Wemheuer, Christin, 2008. "Public acceptance of renewable energies: Results from case studies in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4136-4141, November.
    7. Price, Trevor & Probert, Doug, 1997. "Integrated approach for the achievement of environmental sustainability," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 58(2-3), pages 73-129, October.
    8. Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Ohl, Cornelia & Hartje, Volkmar, 2010. "Landscape externalities from onshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 82-92, January.
    9. Ladenburg, Jacob, 2009. "Visual impact assessment of offshore wind farms and prior experience," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 380-387, March.
    10. Tsoutsos, Theocharis & Tsouchlaraki, Androniki & Tsiropoulos, Manolis & Serpetsidakis, Michalis, 2009. "Visual impact evaluation of a wind park in a Greek island," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(4), pages 546-553, April.
    11. Eltham, Douglas C. & Harrison, Gareth P. & Allen, Simon J., 2008. "Change in public attitudes towards a Cornish wind farm: Implications for planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 23-33, January.
    12. Wolsink, Maarten, 2000. "Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 49-64.
    13. Torres Sibille, Ana del Carmen & Cloquell-Ballester, Víctor-Andrés & Cloquell-Ballester, Vicente-Agustín & Darton, Richard, 2009. "Development and validation of a multicriteria indicator for the assessment of objective aesthetic impact of wind farms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 40-66, January.
    14. Krohn, Søren & Damborg, Steffen, 1999. "On public attitudes towards wind power," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 954-960.
    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. Dimitropoulos, Alexandros & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2009. "Assessing the determinants of local acceptability of wind-farm investment: A choice experiment in the Greek Aegean Islands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1842-1854, May.
    2. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    3. Langer, Katharina & Decker, Thomas & Roosen, Jutta & Menrad, Klaus, 2016. "A qualitative analysis to understand the acceptance of wind energy in Bavaria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 248-259.
    4. Kontogianni, A. & Tourkolias, Ch. & Skourtos, M. & Damigos, D., 2014. "Planning globally, protesting locally: Patterns in community perceptions towards the installation of wind farms," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 170-177.
    5. Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mura, Marina & Contu, Davide, 2012. "Combining choice experiments with psychometric scales to assess the social acceptability of wind energy projects: A latent class approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 334-347.
    6. Betakova, Vendula & Vojar, Jiri & Sklenicka, Petr, 2015. "Wind turbines location: How many and how far?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 23-31.
    7. van Rensburg, Thomas M. & Kelley, Hugh & Jeserich, Nadine, 2015. "What influences the probability of wind farm planning approval: Evidence from Ireland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 12-22.
    8. Groth, Theresa M. & Vogt, Christine, 2014. "Residents' perceptions of wind turbines: An analysis of two townships in Michigan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 251-260.
    9. Ladenburg, Jacob & Dahlgaard, Jens-Olav, 2012. "Attitudes, threshold levels and cumulative effects of the daily wind-turbine encounters," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 40-46.
    10. Graham, Jessica B. & Stephenson, Janet R. & Smith, Inga J., 2009. "Public perceptions of wind energy developments: Case studies from New Zealand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3348-3357, September.
    11. Ladenburg, Jacob & Termansen, Mette & Hasler, Berit, 2013. "Assessing acceptability of two onshore wind power development schemes: A test of viewshed effects and the cumulative effects of wind turbines," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 45-54.
    12. 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.
    13. Harper, Michael & Anderson, Ben & James, Patrick A.B. & Bahaj, AbuBakr S., 2019. "Onshore wind and the likelihood of planning acceptance: Learning from a Great Britain context," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 954-966.
    14. Bauwens, Thomas & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2018. "Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 612-625.
    15. Caporale, Diana & De Lucia, Caterina, 2015. "Social acceptance of on-shore wind energy in Apulia Region (Southern Italy)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1378-1390.
    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. Slattery, Michael C. & Johnson, Becky L. & Swofford, Jeffrey A. & Pasqualetti, Martin J., 2012. "The predominance of economic development in the support for large-scale wind farms in the U.S. Great Plains," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3690-3701.
    18. Shen, Shiran Victoria & Cain, Bruce E. & Hui, Iris, 2019. "Public receptivity in China towards wind energy generators: A survey experimental approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 619-627.
    19. Swofford, Jeffrey & Slattery, Michael, 2010. "Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2508-2519, May.
    20. Zaunbrecher, Barbara S. & Linzenich, Anika & Ziefle, Martina, 2017. "A mast is a mast is a mast…? Comparison of preferences for location-scenarios of electricity pylons and wind power plants using conjoint analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 429-439.

    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:92:y:2012:i:c:p:269-278. 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.