4.7 Article

Hidden outlaws in the forest? A legal and spatial analysis of onshore wind energy in Germany

期刊

ENERGY RESEARCH & SOCIAL SCIENCE
卷 55, 期 -, 页码 14-25

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2019.04.009

关键词

Wind power; Forest; Spatial planning; Planning law

资金

  1. Helmholtz Association under the Joint Initiative Energy System 2050 - A Contribution of the Research Field Energy
  2. German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) [FKZ 3515 82]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Onshore wind power has become one of the most important technologies for renewable electricity production throughout the world, with Germany being one of the global leaders. More than 27,000 wind turbines are currently spinning across Germany. Given the government's ambitious renewable energy targets, their numbers will continue to rise rapidly. It has now become technically and economically feasible to install wind turbines in forested areas. Our interdisciplinary analysis combines legal knowledge with spatial land use and wind power data to analyse the past development of wind farms in German forests and check whether the existing planning instruments successfully steer their spatial distribution. Our results reveal that, since 2011, a growing number of wind turbines are being installed in forests, even if they only account for 5.5% of the total number (8% of the total installed wind power capacity) and are almost exclusively limited to six of the 16 federal states. As there are no nationwide, uniform regulations governing wind turbines in forested areas, the federal states developed their own specific regulations. While some, especially those with high forest shares, generally permit wind farms in forests for reaching their renewable energy targets, others aim to keep their forests clear. So far, planning law and regional planning could successfully steer the hitherto comparatively slow expansion of wind energy in forest areas and ensure that windmills in forests are by no means outlaws.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据