IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v87y2024i2d10.1007_s10640-023-00777-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Costs of Setback Distances for Onshore Wind Turbines: A Model Analysis Applied to the German State of Saxony

Author

Listed:
  • Felix Reutter

    (Leipzig University
    Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ)

  • Martin Drechsler

    (Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ
    Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg)

  • Erik Gawel

    (Leipzig University
    Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ)

  • Paul Lehmann

    (Leipzig University
    Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ)

Abstract

Wind power is a key for decarbonizing economies. Yet, wind turbines can produce negative environmental externalities. These include bird collisions and disamenities for residents. Setback distances for onshore wind turbines to settlements and bird nests are a common policy instrument to address these externalities. In this paper, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of setback distances. We use a spatially-explicit model to investigate the social costs of different options for setbacks to settlements and red kite nests. In terms of social costs, we consider production costs and external costs associated with residents’ disamenities and red kite impacts given an exogenously set wind energy production target. The model is applied using data for the German State of Saxony. Three key results are: (1) More restrictive setbacks may increase social costs. (2) Uniform red kite setbacks reduce social costs rather than uniform settlement setbacks. (3) Differentiated settlement setbacks for different settlement types lead to substantially lower social costs than uniform setbacks.

Suggested Citation

  • Felix Reutter & Martin Drechsler & Erik Gawel & Paul Lehmann, 2024. "Social Costs of Setback Distances for Onshore Wind Turbines: A Model Analysis Applied to the German State of Saxony," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(2), pages 437-463, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:87:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10640-023-00777-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-023-00777-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10640-023-00777-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-023-00777-3?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. Charlotte von Möllendorff & Heinz Welsch, 2017. "Measuring Renewable Energy Externalities: Evidence from Subjective Well-being Data," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 93(1), pages 109-126.
    2. Gibbons, Stephen, 2015. "Gone with the wind: Valuing the visual impacts of wind turbines through house prices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 177-196.
    3. Eichhorn, Marcus & Tafarte, Philip & Thrän, Daniela, 2017. "Towards energy landscapes – “Pathfinder for sustainable wind power locations”," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 611-621.
    4. Williams, Eric & Hittinger, Eric & Carvalho, Rexon & Williams, Ryan, 2017. "Wind power costs expected to decrease due to technological progress," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 427-435.
    5. Martin Drechsler & Jonas Egerer & Martin Lange & Frank Masurowski & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Malte Oehlmann, 2017. "Efficient and equitable spatial allocation of renewable power plants at the country scale," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(9), pages 1-9, September.
    6. Tafarte, Philip & Lehmann, Paul, 2023. "Quantifying trade-offs for the spatial allocation of onshore wind generation capacity – A case study for Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    7. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    8. Jan Stede & Marc Blauert & Nils May, 2021. "Way Off: The Effect of Minimum Distance Regulation on the Deployment and Cost of Wind Power," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1989, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    10. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    11. Malte Oehlmann & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2017. "Stated preferences towards renewable energy alternatives in Germany – do the consequentiality of the survey and trust in institutions matter?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, January.
    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. Lehmann, Paul & Tafarte, Philip, 2023. "The opportunity costs of environmental exclusion zones for renewable energy deployment," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2023, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    2. Lehmann, Paul & Reutter, Felix & Tafarte, Philip, 2021. "Optimal siting of onshore wind turbines: Local disamenities matter," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2021, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    3. Lehmann, Paul & Reutter, Felix & Tafarte, Philip, 2023. "Optimal siting of onshore wind turbines: Local disamenities matter," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. Christian Krekel & Johannes Rode & Alexander Roth, 2023. "Do Wind Turbines Have Adverse Health Impacts?," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1197, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    5. Groh, Elke D., 2022. "Exposure to wind turbines, regional identity and the willingness to pay for regionally produced electricity," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Yushi Kunugi & Toshi H. Arimura & Miwa Nakai, 2021. "The Long-Term Impact of Wind Power Generation on a Local Community: Economics Analysis of Subjective Well-Being Data in Chōshi City," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Grimsrud, Kristine & Hagem, Cathrine & Lind, Arne & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2021. "Efficient spatial distribution of wind power plants given environmental externalities due to turbines and grids," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Meier, Jan-Niklas & Lehmann, Paul, 2020. "Optimal federal co-regulation of renewable energy deployment," UFZ Discussion Papers 8/2020, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    9. Eichhorn, Marcus & Masurowski, Frank & Becker, Raik & Thrän, Daniela, 2019. "Wind energy expansion scenarios – A spatial sustainability assessment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 367-375.
    10. Meier, Jan-Niklas & Lehmann, Paul, 2022. "Optimal federal co-regulation of renewable energy deployment," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Dugstad, Anders & Grimsrud, Kristine & Kipperberg, Gorm & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2020. "Acceptance of wind power development and exposure – Not-in-anybody's-backyard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    12. Salomon, Hannes & Drechsler, Martin & Reutter, Felix, 2020. "Minimum distances for wind turbines: A robustness analysis of policies for a sustainable wind power deployment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Dröes, Martijn I. & Koster, Hans R.A., 2021. "Wind turbines, solar farms, and house prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    15. Lehmann, Paul & Tafarte, Philip, 2024. "Exclusion zones for renewable energy deployment: One man’s blessing, another man’s curse," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    16. Kalsbach, Oliver & Rausch, Sebastian, 2024. "Pricing carbon in a multi-sector economy with social discounting," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    17. Tafarte, Philip & Lehmann, Paul, 2021. "Quantifying trade-offs for the spatial allocation of onshore wind generation capacity: A case study for Germany," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2021, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    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. Jan Stede & Nils May, 2020. "Way Off: The Effect of Minimum Distance Regulation on the Deployment of Wind Power," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1867, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    20. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.

    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:kap:enreec:v:87:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10640-023-00777-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.