IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/58879.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Smaller Turbines the Way Forward for Wind Energy in Herefordshire?

Author

Listed:
  • Linnell, Peter

Abstract

This study set out to determine the social and economic viability of a proposal that smaller turbines are 'better' for wind energy in the county of Herefordshire. The study is in two parts, an opinion poll and a technical desk study. The opinion poll was to discover variations in attitude to three sizes of turbines. Data gathered to allow sample verification also allowed investigation of how attitude varied with demographic factors. Additional questions gave estimates of public perception of WECS effectiveness related to size; and some basic findings on issues of ownership and investment. A random stratified sample of 500 county residents yielded results showing strong correlation between size and attitudes. Questions were designed to also test the 'conditional' supporter model proposed by Bell and others, which was confirmed. Older and better off groups are significantly more likely to be opposed to any size of WECS; but strongest support also includes younger better off people. Respondents over estimated output of smallest and under estimated output of largest turbines. A considerable sub population supports the technology and local ownership, appearing willing to invest. Some methodological issues remain unresolved, but the results given are considered sufficiently robust for this scale of study. The economic analysis was heavily dependant on a few meta-studies, backed up with calculations from primary data for calibration. The proposal to develop arrays of small turbines in place of large machines is revealed as unviable in energy and financial terms. A model of sub urban or industrial locations for medium and large scale WECS is proposed. In addition a community ownership model for projects at this scale is advanced as a pathway to local energy resilience, supportive participation, and energy equity.

Suggested Citation

  • Linnell, Peter, 2010. "Are Smaller Turbines the Way Forward for Wind Energy in Herefordshire?," MPRA Paper 58879, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:58879
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/58879/1/MPRA_paper_58879.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    2. Agterbosch, Susanne & Vermeulen, Walter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2004. "Implementation of wind energy in the Netherlands: the importance of the social-institutional setting," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(18), pages 2049-2066, December.
    3. Mitchell, Catherine & Connor, Peter, 2004. "Renewable energy policy in the UK 1990-2003," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1935-1947, November.
    4. White, L. & Taket, A., 1997. "Beyond appraisal: Participatory Appraisal of Needs and the Development of Action (PANDA)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 523-534, October.
    5. Jefferson, Michael, 2008. "Accelerating the transition to sustainable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4116-4125, November.
    6. Sims, Ralph E. H. & Rogner, Hans-Holger & Gregory, Ken, 2003. "Carbon emission and mitigation cost comparisons between fossil fuel, nuclear and renewable energy resources for electricity generation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(13), pages 1315-1326, October.
    7. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of 'backyard motives'," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 1188-1207, August.
    8. Kubiszewski, Ida & Cleveland, Cutler J. & Endres, Peter K., 2010. "Meta-analysis of net energy return for wind power systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 218-225.
    9. Bénédicte Vidaillet & V. d'Estaintot & P. Abécassis, 2005. "Introduction," Post-Print hal-00287137, HAL.
    10. van der Horst, Dan, 2007. "NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2705-2714, May.
    11. Boccard, Nicolas, 2009. "Capacity factor of wind power realized values vs. estimates," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2679-2688, July.
    12. Gordon Walker & Sue Hunter & Patrick Devine-Wright & Bob Evans & Helen Fay, 2007. "Harnessing Community Energies: Explaining and Evaluating Community-Based Localism in Renewable Energy Policy in the UK," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 7(2), pages 64-82, May.
    13. Blanco, María Isabel, 2009. "The economics of wind energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1372-1382, August.
    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. Linnell, Peter, 2010. "Are Smaller Turbines the Way Forward for Wind Energy in Herefordshire?," MPRA Paper 58227, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Linnell, Peter, 2010. "Are Smaller Turbines the Way Forward for Wind Energy in Herefordshire?," MPRA Paper 58386, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. 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.
    4. Baxter, Jamie & Morzaria, Rakhee & Hirsch, Rachel, 2013. "A case-control study of support/opposition to wind turbines: Perceptions of health risk, economic benefits, and community conflict," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 931-943.
    5. Eitan, Avri & Herman, Lior & Fischhendler, Itay & Rosen, Gillad, 2019. "Community–private sector partnerships in renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 95-104.
    6. 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.
    7. Burton, Jonathan & Hubacek, Klaus, 2007. "Is small beautiful? A multicriteria assessment of small-scale energy technology applications in local governments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6402-6412, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & Sutherland, Lee-Ann, 2016. "Patterns of attention to renewable energy in the British farming press from 1980 to 2013," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 959-973.
    10. Arvesen, Anders & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2012. "Assessing the life cycle environmental impacts of wind power: A review of present knowledge and research needs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 5994-6006.
    11. Scherhaufer, Patrick & Höltinger, Stefan & Salak, Boris & Schauppenlehner, Thomas & Schmidt, Johannes, 2017. "Patterns of acceptance and non-acceptance within energy landscapes: A case study on wind energy expansion in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 863-870.
    12. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    13. Lai, N.Y.G. & Yap, E.H. & Lee, C.W., 2011. "Viability of CCS: A broad-based assessment for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3608-3616.
    14. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas & Altmann, Jörn, 2014. "A Review of Renewable Energy Supply and Energy Efficiency Technologies," IZA Discussion Papers 8145, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Szarka, Joseph, 2006. "Wind power, policy learning and paradigm change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3041-3048, November.
    16. Agnolucci, Paolo, 2008. "Factors influencing the likelihood of regulatory changes in renewable electricity policies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 141-161, January.
    17. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    18. Shahriyar Nasirov & Carlos Silva & Claudio A. Agostini, 2015. "Investors’ Perspectives on Barriers to the Deployment of Renewable Energy Sources in Chile," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Renewable Energy; Energy Economics; Electric Cars; Wind Power;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • R0 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:58879. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.