IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i19p8184-d423687.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The “Green on Green” Conflict in Wind Energy Development: A Case Study of Environmentally Conscious Individuals in Oklahoma, USA

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Burch

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA)

  • Rebecca Loraamm

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA)

  • Travis Gliedt

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA)

Abstract

Development in wind energy technology and deployment of infrastructure reduces reliance on fossil fuels and can further energy security goals. Wind energy, however, can conflict with other green interests. The goal of this research was to examine the perceptions of environmentally conscious individuals at the intersection of wind energy development and biodiversity conservation interests. A majority of respondents identified that they cared very much about both renewable energy development as well as biodiversity conservation. We found that while participants were aware of the shifting causes of mortality of bird populations, they were less aware of the implications of wind energy on bat populations. In addition, attitudes towards biodiversity conservation as well as wind energy development were statistically significant when looking at the identification of some impacts. Most participants were willing to support wind energy development considering trade-offs related to factors such as visual impacts or economic benefits if it had no impacts on biodiversity conservation. Our research shows that environmentally conscious individuals are well-informed on only some impacts of wind energy development. Results also suggest that biodiversity conservation impacts are prioritized by environmentally conscious individuals when gauging support for wind energy development. As sustainable development continues, it is important to consider this green on green conflict, as renewable energy development is not only confronted by general issues of public opposition, but also specific environmental complaints.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Burch & Rebecca Loraamm & Travis Gliedt, 2020. "The “Green on Green” Conflict in Wind Energy Development: A Case Study of Environmentally Conscious Individuals in Oklahoma, USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:19:p:8184-:d:423687
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/8184/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/8184/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Becca Castleberry & John Scott Greene, 2018. "Wind power and real estate prices in Oklahoma," International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 11(5), pages 808-827, September.
    2. Gasparatos, Alexandros & Doll, Christopher N.H. & Esteban, Miguel & Ahmed, Abubakari & Olang, Tabitha A., 2017. "Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 161-184.
    3. Enevoldsen, Peter & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2016. "Examining the social acceptance of wind energy: Practical guidelines for onshore wind project development in France," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 178-184.
    4. Kahn, Robert D., 2000. "Siting Struggles: The Unique Challenge of Permitting Renewable Energy Power Plants," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 21-33, March.
    5. Dai, Kaoshan & Bergot, Anthony & Liang, Chao & Xiang, Wei-Ning & Huang, Zhenhua, 2015. "Environmental issues associated with wind energy – A review," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 911-921.
    6. 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.
    7. Wimhurst, Joshua J. & Greene, J. Scott, 2019. "Oklahoma's future wind energy resources and their relationship with the Central Plains low-level jet," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    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. 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.
    10. Kumar, Yogesh & Ringenberg, Jordan & Depuru, Soma Shekara & Devabhaktuni, Vijay K. & Lee, Jin Woo & Nikolaidis, Efstratios & Andersen, Brett & Afjeh, Abdollah, 2016. "Wind energy: Trends and enabling technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 209-224.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Groth, Theresa M. & Vogt, Christine A., 2014. "Rural wind farm development: Social, environmental and economic features important to local residents," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-8.
    15. Scott R. Loss & Tom Will & Peter P. Marra, 2013. "The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 4(1), pages 1-8, June.
    16. Bidwell, David, 2013. "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 189-199.
    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. 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.
    2. Helena Schmidt & Gerdien de Vries & Reint Jan Renes & Roland Schmehl, 2022. "The Social Acceptance of Airborne Wind Energy: A Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Mariangela Vespa & Timo Kortsch & Jan Hildebrand & Petra Schweizer-Ries & Sara Alida Volkmer, 2022. "Not All Places Are Equal: Using Instagram to Understand Cognitions and Affect towards Renewable Energy Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.

    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. Langer, Katharina & Decker, Thomas & Menrad, Klaus, 2017. "Public participation in wind energy projects located in Germany: Which form of participation is the key to acceptance?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 63-73.
    3. Caporale, Diana & Sangiorgio, Valentino & Amodio, Alessandro & De Lucia, Caterina, 2020. "Multi-criteria and focus group analysis for social acceptance of wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Landeta-Manzano, Beñat & Arana-Landín, Germán & Calvo, Pilar M. & Heras-Saizarbitoria, Iñaki, 2018. "Wind energy and local communities: A manufacturer’s efforts to gain acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 314-324.
    6. Enevoldsen, Peter, 2016. "Onshore wind energy in Northern European forests: Reviewing the risks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1251-1262.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. le Maitre, Julia & Ryan, Geraldine & Power, Bernadette, 2024. "Do concerns about wind farms blow over with time? Residents’ acceptance over phases of project development and proximity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    10. Brennan, Noreen & van Rensburg, Thomas M., 2020. "Public preferences for wind farms involving electricity trade and citizen engagement in Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    11. Boyle, Kevin J. & Boatwright, Jessica & Brahma, Sreeya & Xu, Weibin, 2019. "NIMBY, not, in siting community wind farms," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 85-100.
    12. Jinjin Guan & Harald Zepp, 2020. "Factors Affecting the Community Acceptance of Onshore Wind Farms: A Case Study of the Zhongying Wind Farm in Eastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    13. Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Buessing, Marric & Kriner, Douglas L., 2016. "Geographic proximity to coal plants and U.S. public support for extending the Production Tax Credit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 299-307.
    14. Copena, Damián & Simón, Xavier, 2018. "Wind farms and payments to landowners: Opportunities for rural development for the case of Galicia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-47.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Suškevičs, M. & Eiter, S. & Martinat, S. & Stober, D. & Vollmer, E. & de Boer, C.L. & Buchecker, M., 2019. "Regional variation in public acceptance of wind energy development in Europe: What are the roles of planning procedures and participation?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 311-323.
    18. 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.
    19. Lombard, Andrea & Ferreira, Sanette, 2014. "Residents' attitudes to proposed wind farms in the West Coast region of South Africa: A social perspective from the South," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 390-399.
    20. 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.

    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:19:p:8184-:d:423687. 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.