DOCSLIB.ORG

The Impact of Wind Turbines on Agricultural Land Values in West Texas by Courtney Baker, B.S. a Thesis in Agriculture & Appl

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Impact of Wind Turbines on Agricultural Land Values in West Texas by Courtney Baker, B.S. a Thesis in Agriculture & Appl The Impact of Wind Turbines on Agricultural Land Values in West Texas by Courtney Baker, B.S. A Thesis In Agriculture & Applied Economics Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Approved Kelly Lange, Ph.D. Chair of the Committee Darren Hudson, Ph.D. Jaime Bologna-Pavlik, Ph.D. Mark Sheridan Dean of the Graduate School May, 2021 Copyright 2021, Courtney Baker Texas Tech University, Courtney Baker, May 2021 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge everything that Dr. Lange did to help me while conducting this research. I would not have been able to make as far as I have, if it were not for her advice and encouragement during this course of this research. She was always willing to listen and help if I had an issue even though the topic I was researching was not her usual area of expertise. Additionally, I would also like to thank Dr. Hudson and Dr. Bologna-Pavlik, who gave me great advice on how I could improve my study using the propensity score matching method. Finally, I would like to thank the Texas Tech University Office of Family and Parent Relations, The Graduate Assembly, and the Texas Tech Graduate School for providing additionally funding for my research via the Graduate Student Research Support Award. Even though I did not end up using the extra data source as much as I anticipated during the course of my research, it still allowed me to consider different alternatives for the course of my research. ii Texas Tech University, Courtney Baker, May 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... ii Table oF Contents ............................................................................................................ iii Abstract .............................................................................................................................. v List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vi List of Figures .................................................................................................................. vii CHAPTER I Introduction ............................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION .............................................................................. 1 1.2 SPECIFIC PROBLEMS ............................................................................................. 3 1.3 STUDY OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................. 4 CHAPTER II Literature Review ..................................................................................... 5 2.1 LAND VALUE STUDIES ......................................................................................... 5 2.2 THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION EFFECT ON THE IMPACT OF WIND TURBINE PRESENCE 7 2.3 PROFITABILITY AND WAKE EFFECTS ................................................................... 9 CHAPTER III Conceptual Framework ........................................................................ 13 3.1 WIND TURBINE PROFITABILITY MODEL ............................................................ 13 3.1.1 SAM’s General Modelling Approach ............................................................ 14 3.1.2 SAM’s Estimation of Wake Effect ................................................................. 14 3.2 ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK FOR WIND TURBINE AND AGRICULTURAL PROFITABILITY .............................................................................................................. 16 3.3 IN-DEPTH CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................... 18 CHAPTER IV Methods & Procedures ........................................................................ 21 4.1 STUDY AREA ..................................................................................................... 21 4.1.1 Propensity Score Matching ........................................................................... 24 4.2 WIND TURBINE PROFITABILITY ......................................................................... 25 4.3 AGRICULTURAL PROFITABILITY ........................................................................ 28 iii Texas Tech University, Courtney Baker, May 2021 CHAPTER V Results ..................................................................................................... 32 5.1 SAM MODEL RESULTS ...................................................................................... 32 5.1.1 Cotton Plains Wind Farm ............................................................................. 33 5.1.2 Hale Wind Farm ........................................................................................... 34 5.1.3 Longhorn Wind Farm ................................................................................... 35 5.1.4 Lorenzo Winds Farm .................................................................................... 36 5.1.5 Old Settler Wind Farm .................................................................................. 37 5.1.6 Pleasant Hill Wind Farm .............................................................................. 38 5.1.7 Ralls Wind Farm ........................................................................................... 39 5.1.8 South Plains Wind Farm ............................................................................... 40 5.1.9 South Plains II Wind Farm ........................................................................... 41 5.1.10 Wake Wind Farm ........................................................................................ 42 5.1.11 Whirlwind Energy Center ........................................................................... 42 5.2 SUMMARY STATISTICS ....................................................................................... 44 5.3 SCENARIO ONE .................................................................................................. 46 5.3.1 Normalized Market Value Excluding Improvements .................................... 46 5.4 SCENARIO TWO .................................................................................................. 48 5.4.1 Normalized Agricultural Profit ..................................................................... 48 5.4.2 Normalized Profit ......................................................................................... 49 CHAPTER VI Conclusions ............................................................................................ 51 6.1 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... 51 6.1.1 SAM Results .................................................................................................. 51 6.1.2 Statistical Analysis ........................................................................................ 52 6.2 LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................... 52 6.2.1 Secondary Data ............................................................................................. 52 6.2.2 Kurtosis & Presence of Outliers ................................................................... 53 6.2.3 Appraised Market Value vs. Market Value ................................................... 53 6.2.4 Underestimation of Wind Turbine Profitability ............................................ 54 6.3 FUTURE RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................... 54 References ........................................................................................................................ 55 Appendix I Projected Profitability Results ................................................................... 58 Appendix II Study Area with CropScape Data ........................................................... 71 iv Texas Tech University, Courtney Baker, May 2021 ABSTRACT Increased wind turbine development has rapidly raised concerns about decreases in surrounding land values due to wind turbine presence. Estimations on the effect of wind turbines on surrounding land values have been mixed. Few studies have empirically examined whether agricultural land values are affected by wind turbine presence, or whether wind turbine profitability affect property values. This study examined the extent to which agricultural land values in Southern High Plains of Texas are impacted by wind turbine presence, and if wind turbine profitability results in notable differences in land value. The study's objectives were threefold; first, the System Advisor Model (SAM) was used to calculate wind turbine profitability in order to determine whether wind turbine profitability positively affected agricultural land values; second, propensity score matching and statistical t-tests were applied to investigate whether agricultural land values change due to the presence of wind turbines; and third, the potential effects of wind energy policies on wind turbine profitability and agricultural land values were discussed and reviewed. The results indicate that agricultural land values are negatively affected by wind turbine presence, while the total profit made by agricultural producers increases as a result of wind turbine presence. These results open a new direction of inquiry when considering wind turbine placement. v Texas Tech University,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kansas Wind Energy Update House Energy & Utilities Committee Kimberly Svaty on Behalf of the Wind Coalition 23 January 2012
    KANSAS WIND ENERGY UPDATE HOUSE ENERGY & UTILITIES COMMITTEE KIMBERLY SVATY ON BEHALF OF THE WIND COALITION 23 JANUARY 2012 Operating Kansas Wind Projects •1272.4 MW total installed wind generation •10 operating wind projects •Equates to billions in capital investment and thousands of construction jobs and more than 100 permanent jobs •Kansas has the second best wind resource in the nation th •Ranked 14 in the nation in overall wind power production • Percent of Kansas Power by wind in 2010 – 7.1% th •Kansas ranked 5 in the US in 2010 for percentage of electricity delivered from wind • Operating Kansas Wind Projects Project County Developer Size Power Turbine Installed In-Service Name (MW) Offtaker Type Turbines Year (MW) Gray County Gray NextEra 112 MKEC Vestas 170 2001 KCP&L 660kW Elk River Butler Iberdola 150 Empire GE 1.5 100 2005 Spearville Ford enXco 100.4 KCP&L GE 1.5 67 2006 Spearville II 48 48 2010 Smoky Hills Lincoln/ TradeWind 100.8 Sunflower – 50 Vestas 56 2008 Phase I Ellsworth Energy KCBPU- 25 1.8 Midwest Energy – 24 Smoky Hills Lincoln/ TradeWind 150 Sunflower – 24 GE 99 2008 Phase II Ellsworth Energy Midwest – 24 1.5 IP&L – 15 Springfield -50 Meridian Cloud Horizon 204 Empire – 105 Vestas 67 2008 Way EDP Westar - 96 3.0 Flat Ridge Barber BP Wind 100 Westar Clipper 40 2009 Energy 2.5 Central Wichita RES 99 Westar Vestas 33 2009 Plains Americas 3.0 Greensburg Kiowa John Deere/ 12.5 Kansas Power Pool Suzlon 10 2010 Exelon 1.2 Caney River Elk TradeWind 200 Tennessee Valley Vestas 111 2011 Energy Authority (TVA) 1.8 Operating Kansas Wind Projects Gray County Wind Farm- Gray County, Kansas - Kansas' first commercial wind farm was erected near the town of Montezuma by FPL Energy (now NextEra Energy Resources) in 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Empire Offshore Wind LLC Empire Wind 1 Project Article VII
    Empire Offshore Wind LLC Empire Wind 1 Project Article VII Application Pre-Filed Direct Testimony June 2021 PRE-FILED DIRECT TESTIMONY Pre-filed direct testimony in support of the Article VII Application for the Empire Wind 1 Project is presented by witnesses by subject area, as follows: Witness Exhibit(s) Sponsored Laura Morales Exhibit 1: General Information Regarding Application Laura Morales, Nathalie Schils Exhibit 2: Location of Facilities Laura Morales, Joel Stadell, Exhibit 3: Alternatives Sabrina Hepburn Laura Morales, Joel Stadell, Exhibit 4: Environmental Impact Sabrina Hepburn, Robert Jacoby, Katherine Miller, June Mire, Ryan Earley Joel Stadell Exhibit 5: Design Drawings Julia Bovey, Geir Miskov, Joel Exhibit 6: Economic Effects of Proposed Facility Stadell Laura Morales, Joel Stadell, Exhibit 7: Local Ordinances Sabrina Hepburn Laura Morales, Nathalie Schils Exhibit 8: Other Pending Filings Geir Miskov, Joel Stadell Exhibit 9: Cost of Proposed Facility Joel Stadell Exhibit E-1: Description of Proposed Transmission Facility Joel Stadell Exhibit E-2: Other Facilities Joel Stadell Exhibit E-3: Underground Construction Georges Charles, Joel Stadell Exhibit E-4: Engineering Justification Laura Morales, Sabrina Hepburn Exhibit E-5: Effect on Communications Laura Morales, Sabrina Hepburn, Exhibit E-6: Effect on Transportation Joel Stadell, Ryan Earley Laura Morales, Erin Lincoln Appendix B: Sediment Transport Analysis Empire Wind 1 Project Pre-Filed Direct Testimony Article VII Application Witness Exhibit(s) Sponsored Laura Morales, Katherine Miller Appendix C: Coastal Zone Management Consistency Statement Julia Bovey Appendix D: Public Involvement Plan Laura Morales, June Mire Appendix E: Benthic Resource Characterization Reports Benjamin R.T. Cotts and William Appendix F: Electric- and Magnetic-Field Assessment H.
    [Show full text]
  • DOE/EA-1521; Environmental Assessment for Spring Canyon
    EA, Spring Canyon Wind Project ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED............................................................................................. 3 1.2.1 Federal Agency Action ............................................................................... 3 1.2.2 Applicant's Purpose and Need .................................................................... 3 1.3 SCOPING .................................................................................................................. 3 2.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................ 5 2.1 WESTERN'S PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................................ 5 2.2 DESCRIPTION OF INVENERGY'S PROPOSED PROJECT................................. 5 2.2.1 Overview..................................................................................................... 5 2.2.2 Construction................................................................................................ 9 2.2.2.1 Road and Pad Construction.......................................................... 10 2.2.2.2 Foundations and Tower Erection................................................. 12 2.2.2.3 Trenching and Placement of Underground Electrical and Communications Cables ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Statewide Air Emissions Calculations from Wind and Other Renewables
    ESL-TR-20-07-01 STATEWIDE AIR EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS FROM WIND AND OTHER RENEWABLES VOLUME I A Report to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality For the Period January 2019 – December 2019 Juan-Carlos Baltazar, Ph.D., P.E.; Jeff Haberl, Ph.D.; Bahman Yazdani, P.E.; David Claridge, Ph.D., P.E.; Sungkyun Jung; Farshad Kheiri; Chul Kim July 2020 Page 1 ENERGY SYSTEMS LABORATORY July 15, 2020 Mr. Robert Gifford Air Quality Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Austin, TX 78711-3087 Dear Mr. Gifford, The Energy Systems Laboratory (ESL) at the Texas Engineering Experiment Station of The Texas A&M University System is pleased to provide its annual report, “Statewide Emissions Calculations From Wind and Other Renewables,” as required by the 79th Legislature. This work has been performed through a contract with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). In this work, the ESL is required to obtain input from public/private stakeholders, and develop and use a methodology to annually report the energy savings from wind and other renewables. This report summarizes the work performed by the ESL on this project from January 2019 to December 2019. Please contact me at (979) 845-9213 should you have questions concerning this report or the work presently being done to quantify emissions reductions from renewable energy measures as a result of the TERP implementation. Sincerely, David E. Claridge, Ph.D., P.E. Director Enclosure . Page 2 Disclaimer This report is provided by the Texas Engineering Experiment Station (TEES) as required under Section 388.003 (e) of the Texas Health and Safety Code and is distributed for purposes of public information.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2021 Offshore Wind – East Coast Projects 1
    2021 Offshore Wind – East Coast Projects By John Benson January 2021 1. Introduction This is the first post of a 2-part paper and only covers the subtitle subject. The second post will cover everything else, including west coast activity, a new inter-government organization and new turbine developments. Although these are basically both completed, there will be two weeks between this post and part 2, as these originally started out as a single post (but was way too long), and I have committed to post another paper on 1/26. The last posts with the same subject as this was and last May. This is described and linked below. A Wet & Windy Post: This post focuses on updates for U.S. East Coast off-shore wind projects, and any advancements in products from turbine vendors that supply these to the aforementioned projects. https://energycentral.com/c/cp/wet-windy-post Although there has been some progress on the East Coast, most projects have slowed to a crawl – partially due to the Pandemic, but mostly due to delays by the outgoing administration. The former is being mitigated by the vaccines, and the latter will be toast after tomorrow (on Jan 20 and this paper is scheduled for posting on Jan 19). Also the new administration is likely to quickly accelerate the deployment of these projects due five reasons: the COVID-19 Vaccines, climate change mitigation, jobs, jobs, and jobs. 2. East Coast Each of the subsections below will deal with a single project or a series of stages for a large single project.
    [Show full text]
  • Clean Energy Momentum
    SERIES TITLE OPTIONAL Clean Energy Don Anair Momentum Amine Mahmassani Ranking State Progress July 2013 Executive Summary FIGURE ES-2. States Across the Nation Lead on Clean Clean energy is moving forward in the United States, with Energy Momentum significant, tangible, rapid progress. Wind farms in 41 states provide enough electricity to meet the needs of more than 20 million American households. In 2016 alone, the nation added enough solar electric panels to meet the needs of two million households. Investments in energy efficiency over the last quarter century have precluded the need for the equivalent of more than 300 additional large power plants. Electrifica- tion of the transportation sector, while nascent, is rapidly picking up steam, with more than half a million plug-in electric vehicles now on US roads. Those advancements yield direct benefits. Clean energy substantially improves public health by reducing the power sector’s harmful emissions, particularly emissions from coal-fired power plants. And more than half a million people now work in the fields of solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal States from across the country drive clean energy momentum. Eight of the energy; four times as many have jobs in energy efficiency. top 10 states in the UCS Clean Energy Momentum State Ranking are on the West Coast or in the Northeast, highlighting region-wide commitments to To assess state leadership in this historic transformation, clean energy. Iowa leads in the Midwest, followed by Minnesota. Maryland, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) created the Clean Colorado, Arizona, and Nevada also make the top 15. Energy Momentum State Ranking.
    [Show full text]
  • Using More of the Grid We've
    north american Volume 14, Number 8 I September 2017 Using More Of The Grid We’ve Got Technology advances – and a few policy tweaks – can increase wind delivery over existing transmission lines. page 20 Spotlight: Canada How one agency is advancing wind energy north of the border. page 14 Spotlight: South Dakota At long last, the state may finally achieve its wind potential. page 18 a_01_NAW1709.indd 1 8/17/17 3:31 PM _Suzlon_1708.indd 1 7/11/17 11:07 AM Contents Features 14 Spotlight 14 How One Agency Is Advancing Canadian Wind Energy Natural Resources Canada’s CanmetENERGY advances the knowledge, understanding and capabilities of the wind industry. Spotlight 18 A Wind Energy Boom Is Coming To South Dakota Once a laggard, the state now suddenly packs a powerful punch, which could be meaningful to developers. 20 Using More Of The Grid We’ve Got There is ample opportunity to increase wind delivery over existing transmission lines. 24 Extending Life To Your Turbines Changes to the design of wind turbines create additional demands on lubricants that are used in the wind power industry. 18 20 24 Departments 4 Wind Bearings 6 New & Noteworthy 12 Products & Technology 27 Policy Watch 31 Projects & Contracts North American Windpower • September 2017 • 3 b_NAW_2_13.28_36_1709.indd 3 8/18/17 12:44 PM Wind Bearings www.nawindpower.com [email protected] 100 Willenbrock Road, Oxford, CT 06478 Toll Free: (800) 325-6745 A Mission For Phone: (203) 262-4670 Fax: (203) 262-4680 Transmission MICHAEL BATES Publisher & Vice President [email protected] Mark Del Franco MARK DEL FRANCO Associate Publisher (203) 262-4670, ext.
    [Show full text]
  • Ercot Market Cold Weather Failure 10-19 February 2021: Wind Energy Financial Losses and Corrective Actions
    ERCOT MARKET COLD WEATHER FAILURE 10-19 FEBRUARY 2021: WIND ENERGY FINANCIAL LOSSES AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS Prepared by Gregory S. Poulos, Principal Atmospheric Scientist, PhD William Johnson, Renewable Energy Analyst, MS Jerry Crescenti, Director, Energy Analysis Team, MS Mark Stoelinga, Lead, Atmospheric Science Innovation and Applications, PhD John Bosche, Principal Engineer ArcVera Renewables 1301 Arapahoe Street, Suite 105 Golden, Colorado 80401 USA DOCUMENT HISTORY Preparer(s): Gregory. S. Poulos, Principal Atmospheric Scientist; William Johnson, Renewable Energy Analyst; Jerry Crescenti, Director, Energy Analysis Team; Mark Stoelinga, Lead, Atmospheric Science Innovation and Applications Reviewer(s): Jerry Crescenti, Director, Energy Analysis Team; John Bosche, Principal Engineer, Sydney Strauss, Technical Editor, External Advisors Final Review and Approval by Greg Poulos, Principal Atmospheric Scientist Version Date Comments 1.0 04/19/2021 Initial issue Disclaimer The information, opinions, and analysis contained herein are based on sources believed to be reliable. No representation, expressed or implied, is made as to the content’s accuracy, completeness, or correctness. Neither ArcVera Renewables, nor any of its employees, contractors, or subcontractors makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for either accuracy, completeness, or any third party's use or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Offshore Wind Technologies Market Report This Report Is Being Disseminated by the U.S
    2016 Offshore Wind Technologies Market Report This report is being disseminated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As such, this document was prepared in compliance with Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2001 (public law 106-554) and information quality guidelines issued by DOE. Though this report does not constitute “influential” information, as that term is defined in DOE’s information quality guidelines or the Office of Management and Budget’s Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, the study was reviewed both internally and externally prior to publication. For purposes of external review, the study benefited from the advice and comments of nine energy industry stakeholders, U.S. Government employees, and national laboratory staff. NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at SciTech Connect http:/www.osti.gov/scitech Available for a processing fee to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ride Like the Wind:† Selected Issues in Multi-Party Wind Lease Negotiations
    \\jciprod01\productn\T\TWR\1-3\TWR305.txt unknown Seq: 1 31-MAR-14 13:57 RIDE LIKE THE WIND:† SELECTED ISSUES IN MULTI-PARTY WIND LEASE NEGOTIATIONS By Rod E. Wetsel and Steven K. DeWolf ‡ I. INTRODUCTION .......................................... 502 R II. HISTORY OF WIND DEVELOPMENT IN TEXAS: THE WIND BOOM ............................................ 502 R III. THE TEXAS WIND LEASE ............................... 506 R A. Origins and Evolution .............................. 506 R B. Major Elements ..................................... 507 R IV. MULTI-PARTY WIND LEASE NEGOTIATIONS ............ 507 R A. The Town Hall Meeting Concept .................... 508 R B. Wind Groups and their Creators; Signing Parties .... 509 R 1. Roscoe Wind Project ........................... 509 R 2. Wind Tex Energy: Project Snyder, Camp Springs I and II, Stanton and Turkey Track ............. 510 R 3. Payne Mountain ................................ 511 R 4. Horse Hollow................................... 512 R 5. Signing Party ................................... 512 R C. Ethics, Professional Responsibility and Conflicts of Interest: Whose Side Are You On? .................. 513 R D. The Pros and Cons of Multi-Party Negotiation of Wind Leases: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly ..... 515 R 1. The Good....................................... 515 R 2. The Bad ........................................ 516 R 3. The Ugly ....................................... 516 R a. Dissenters ................................... 516 R b. “Hold Outs” ................................ 517 R c. “Moles” ..................................... 518 R V. CURRENT STATE OF MULTI-PARTY WIND NEGOTIATIONS IN TEXAS ............................... 518 R † Christopher Cross, Ride Like The Wind (Warner Music Group 1980). ‡ Professor Wetsel bio: J.D., Univ. of Tex. 1977; B.A., Univ. of Tex. 1975; Phi Beta Kappa. Professor DeWolf bio: J.D., Univ. of Tex. 1978; B.A., Univ. of Tex. 1975; LLM, Cam- bridge Univ. 1983; Phi Beta Kappa.
    [Show full text]
  • US Offshore Wind
    U.S. Offshore Wind: Status, Project Development, and Transmission Considerations PRESENTED TO HARVARD ELECTRICITY POLICY GROUP NINETY-SEVENTH PLENARY SESSION PREPARED BY Johannes Pfeifenberger Sam Newell Kasparas Spokas Marana, Arizona December 13, 2019 Copyright © 2018 The Brattle Group, Inc. Content ▀ Status of U.S. Offshore Wind Generation − Global Context − U.S. Offshore Wind Generation Potential − Policy Commitments and Development Efforts − Cost and Value of U.S. Offshore Wind Generation ▀ Project Development and Transmission Considerations − Project Development Risks and Challenges − Advantages of Gen-tie vs. Offshore-Grid Models − Grid Constraints and Transmission Needs ▀ Takeaways 1| brattle.com Global Context of Wind Generation The U.S. now has 100 GW wind generation … but little offshore wind because focus has been developing abundant low-cost onshore wind resources (though often far from major load centers) Total Onshore (2018): Total Installed Wind Capacity Dec 2018 (GW) Country Onshore Offshore Total PR China 206.8 4.8 211.6 USA 96.6 0.03 96.7 Germany 53.2 6.4 59.6 India 35.1 0.0 35.1 Spain* 23.5 0.0 23.5 New UK 13.0 8.0 21.0 2018 Onshore Installations: France 15.3 0.0 15.3 Brazil 14.7 0.0 14.7 Canada 12.8 0.0 12.8 Italy* 10.0 0.0 10.0 Rest of world 87.4 3.9 91.3 TotalTO P10 481.0 19.2 500.2 World Total 568.4 23.1 591.5 Source: GWEC Global Wind Report 2018, *Wind Europe Source: GWEC (2019) 2018 Global Wind Energy Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Impacts to Other Communities That Experienced Offshore Wind
    California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies Social Impacts to Other Communities that Experienced Offshore Wind This report was authored by Ciara Emery, Tanya Garcia, and Christina Ortega of the Schatz Energy Research Center and Laurie Richmond of the Humboldt State University’s Environmental Science & Management Department. It is part of the California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies collection, edited by Mark Severy, Zachary Alva, Gregory Chapman, Maia Cheli, Tanya Garcia, Christina Ortega, Nicole Salas, Amin Younes, James Zoellick, & Arne Jacobson, and published by the Schatz Energy Research Center in September 2020. The series is available online at schatzcenter.org/wind/ Schatz Energy Research Center Humboldt State University Arcata, CA 95521 | (707) 826-4345 California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies Disclaimer This project was funded by the California Natural Resources Agency, Ocean Protection Council. The content does not represent the official views of policies of the State of California. This report was created under agreement #C0304300 About the Schatz Energy Research Center The Schatz Energy Research Center at Humboldt State University advances clean and renewable energy. Our projects aim to reduce climate change and pollution while increasing energy access and resilience. Our work is collaborative and multidisciplinary, and we are grateful to the many partners who together make our efforts possible. Learn more about our work at schatzcenter.org Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Please cite as follows: Ciara, E., Garcia, T., Ortega, C. and Richmond, L. (2020). Social Impacts to Other Communities that Experienced Offshore Wind. In M. Severy, Z. Alva, G. Chapman, M.
    [Show full text]