Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Will Offshore Energy Face “Fair Winds and Following Seas”?: Understanding the Factors Influencing Offshore Wind Acceptance

  • Published:
Estuaries and Coasts Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most offshore energy studies have focused on measuring or explaining people’s perceptions of, and reactions to, specific installations. However, there are two different types of acceptance: one surrounds the siting of projects while the other surrounds a more general acceptance of offshore energy. Understanding what drives this second type of acceptance is important as governments have implemented new financial incentives and policies to support renewable energy development; however, citizens and government officials may be increasingly opposed to some of these support mechanisms. Our paper fills a void in the literature by using regression approaches to better understand how people’s evaluations of the benefits and costs of offshore wind impact their level of general acceptance for offshore wind, while controlling for other factors (e.g., demographics). This analysis should help policy makers, and individuals attempting to educate the general public about renewable energy, to better understand the important factors influencing people’s support or opposition to offshore wind energy initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. General acceptance has also been found to impact people’s opposition to specific projects (Johansson and Laike 2007).

  2. Incentives include tax reductions, grants and loans, and bonds; policies can include net metering allowance, solar and wind access laws, green power purchase requirements, and simplified or expedited permitting standards.

  3. National Wind Watch® disseminates information about the negative impacts of industrial-scale wind developments.

  4. Half of Maine’s net electricity generation is from renewable energy resources (EIA 2012).

  5. We focus on newspapers since more than 80 % of Maine residents (Anderson et al. 2012) and policymakers (Smith and Lindenfeld in press) get their energy information from newspapers.

  6. In a follow-up study, Firestone et al. (2012) illustrate the stability between acceptance and benefit/cost perceptions can vary; for example, over a 4-year period, the relationship between acceptance and the perception that wind farms will decrease electricity prices is relatively stable, while the relationship with perceived improvements in air quality changed.

  7. The sample frame was purchased from InfoUSA, which maintains a database containing information about 210 million US residents; see http//www.infoUSA.com for more information about the frame.

  8. These items were presented as benefits or concerns in the survey; however, some respondent may not agree with our characterization (e.g., some may view increased tourism as a negative).

  9. INDEX is the same acceptance variable used in Thøgersen and Noblet (2012).

  10. Because studies find that increased distance positively influences attitudes toward wind power (Krueger et al. 2011; Bishop and Miller 2007), we included a variable measuring the distance the respondent lived from the coast; however, this variable was never significant and did not improve the model fit, so it was dropped from the final model.

  11. We dropped the marine recreation variables and two of the experience variables (VOTE, KNOW) as they were not significant; dropping them did not alter other results, the AIC values were lower and the model fit was unchanged.

  12. Recently, Maine’s Governor has used the increased prices argument to lobby against wind power development in the state (Miller 2012).

  13. Contact first author for full results.

  14. Results show that42% stated they supported “all wind power equally,” 29 % preferred deep-water offshore wind, 20 % preferred land-based wind, 6 % preferred shallow-water offshore wind, and 3 % stated they wanted “no wind power in Maine.”

References

  • Acheson, J. 2012. Attitudes toward offshore wind power in the Midcoast Region of Maine. Maine Policy Review 21(2): 42–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, E., and C.A. Seaman. 2007. Likert scales and data analyses. Quality Progress 40: 64–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Council on Renewable Energy. 2010. Renewable Energy in Maine http://www.hpba.org/government-affairs/renewableenergy/pdfs/Maine.pdf. Accessed 1 February 2014.

  • Anderson, M.W., C. Noblet, and M. Teisl. 2012. Our environment. A glimpse at what Mainers value. Maine Policy Review 21(1): 104–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, I.D., and D.R. Miller. 2007. Visual assessment of off-shore wind turbines: The influence of distance, contrast, movement and social variables. Renewable Energy 32: 814–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrington, D. 2012. Local opposition to onshore windfarms has tripled, poll shows. The Guardian (February 29).

  • Chervinsky, G. 2006. The State House news poll, May. Boston, MA: State House News Service. http://www.statehousenews.com/.

  • Devine-Wright, P. 2005. Beyond NIMBYism: Towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy 7: 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2009. Internet, mail and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design methods, 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • DMR (Maine Department of Marine Resources). 2012. Preliminary 2012 commercial Maine landings by live pounds. http://www.maine.gov/dmr/commercialfishing/documents/2012PoundsPie.pdf. Accessed 12 April 2013.

  • DSIRE (Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency). 2012a. Financial incentives for renewable energy. N.C. Solar Center, N.C. State University and the Interstate Renewable Energy Council. http://www.dsireusa.org/summarytables/finre.cfm. Accessed on 7 May 2012.

  • DSIRE (Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency). 2012b. Rules, regulations & policies for renewable energy. N.C. Solar Center, N.C. State University and the Interstate Renewable Energy Council. http://www.dsireusa.org/summarytables/rrpre.cfm; Accessed on 7 May 2012.

  • EIA (US Energy Information Administration). 2012. Maine state profile and energy estimates. http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=ME. Accessed 12 April 2013.

  • Firestone, J., and W. Kempton. 2007. Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors. Energy Policy 35: 1584–1598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, J., W. Kempton, and A. Krueger. 2009. Public acceptance of offshore wind power projects in the USA. Wind Energy 12: 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, J., W. Kempton, M.B. Lilley, and K. Samoteskul. 2012. Public acceptance of offshore wind power across regions and through time. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 55(10): 1369–1386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggett, C. 2011. Understanding public responses to offshore wind power. Energy Policy 39: 503–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Island Institute. 2012. Economics of Offshore Wind Energy in Maine http://www.islandinstitute.org/documents/Economics_11x17_march21.pdf. Accessed 1 February 2014.

  • Johansson, M., and T. Laike. 2007. Intention to respond to local wind turbines: The role of attitudes and visual perception. Wind Energy 10: 435–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempton, W., J. Firestone, J. Lilley, T. Rouleau, and P. Whitaker. 2005. The offshore wind power debate: Views from Cape Cod. Coastal Management 33: 119–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, P. 1999. The handbook of psychological testing, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, A.D., G.R. Parsons, and J. Firestone. 2011. Valuing the visual disamenity of offshore wind power projects at varying distances from the shore: An application on the Delaware shoreline. Land Economics 87(2): 268–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladenburg, J. 2008. Attitudes towards on-land and off-shore wind power development in Denmark: Choice of development strategy. Renewable Energy 33: 111–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladenburg, J. 2009. Visual impact assessment of offshore wind farms and prior experience. Applied Energy 86(3): 380–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladenburg, J. 2010. Attitudes towards offshore wind farms—The role of beach visits on attitude and demographic and attitude relations. Energy Policy 38: 1297–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladenburg, J., and B. Moller. 2011. Attitude and acceptance of offshore wind farms—The influence of travel time and wind farm attributes. United States Association for Energy Economics and the International Association for Energy Economics Working Paper, USAEE-IAEE WP 11-079.

  • Ladenburg, J., and A. Dubgaard. 2009. Preferences of coastal zone user groups regarding the siting of offshore wind farms. Ocean and Coastal Management 52: 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilley, B.L., J. Firestone, and W. Kempton. 2010. The effect of wind power installations on coastal tourism. Energies 3: 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marrinan, S.J. 2012. Evaluating the influence of Maine residency on support for energy investments and private behavior: Two economic choice studies. M.S. thesis, The Graduate School, The University of Maine, August.

  • McCartney, A. 2006. The social value of seascapes in the Jurien Bay Marine Park: An assessment of positive and negative preferences for change. Journal of Agricultural Economics 57(3): 577–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. 2012. LePage’s wind power stance stirs discomfort. Bangor Daily News 5/28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morison, S.L. 2012. US Department of the Navy, Naval Historical Center, Washington DC http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/nhc/fairwinds.htm . Accessed 3 July 2012.

  • MRSA 35-A (Maine Revised Statute Title 35-A). Public utilities heading: PL 1987, C. 141, Pt. A, §6 (new). http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-A.pdf. Accessed on 7 May 2012.

  • NWW (National Wind Watch). 2011. Groups opposed to Kibby wind project to protest LURC meeting January 4, 2011. http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2011/01/04/groups-opposed-to-kibby-wind-project-to-protest-lurc-meeting/. Accessed 9 May 2012.

  • Nyborg, K. 2000. Homo economicus and Homo politicus: Interpretation and aggregation of environmental values. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 42(3): 305–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalit N. 2010. Some who created wind-power fast track now questioning the goals they set. Bangor Daily News (Aug. 09). http://bangordailynews.com/2010/08/09/news/some-who-created-windpower-fast-track-now-questioning-the-goals-they-set/. Accessed 9 May 2012.

  • Seelye, K.Q. 2013. A proposal for a propane tank looms large over a Maine coastal town. The New York Times (Feb. 22, 2013). http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/us/proposed-propane-tank-cleaves-searsport-me.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0. Accessed 18 April 2012.

  • Smith, H., and L. Lindenfeld. In press. Making media studies engaged: A look at methods, approaches and opportunities for change. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature & Culture.

  • Thøgersen, J., and C.L. Noblet. 2012. Does green consumerism increase the acceptance of windpower? Energy Policy 51: 854–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldo, A. 2012. Offshore wind power in Sweden—A qualitative analysis of attitudes with particular focus on opponents. Energy Policy 41: 692–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D.R., and J.J. Vaske. 2003. The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science 49(6): 830–840.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolsink, M. 2007. Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of ‘backyard motives. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 11: 1188–1207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolsink, M. 2010. Near-shore wind power-protected seascapes, environmentalists’ attitudes, and the technocratic planning perspective. Land Use Policy 27(2): 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding was provided by the Maine Sustainability Solutions Initiative, the National Science Foundation Grant EPS-0904155 to Maine EPSCoR at the University of Maine, and the Maine Agriculture and Forest Experiment Station.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario F. Teisl.

Additional information

Communicated by Wayne S. Gardner

Marrinan and Wibberly worked on this manuscript as former graduate students of the School of Economics, University of Maine. Manuscript contents do not reflect work at their current positions and have not been vetted by their current employers

Fair winds and following seas is a nautical good luck wish at the start of a new voyage (Morison 2012).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Teisl, M.F., McCoy, S., Marrinan, S. et al. Will Offshore Energy Face “Fair Winds and Following Seas”?: Understanding the Factors Influencing Offshore Wind Acceptance. Estuaries and Coasts 38 (Suppl 1), 279–286 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-014-9777-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-014-9777-6

Keywords

Navigation