Thirty years of North American research on public acceptance of wind energy has produced important insights, yet knowledge gaps remain. This review synthesizes the literature, revealing the following lessons learned. (1) North American support for wind has been consistently high. (2) The NIMBY explanation for resistance to wind development is invalid. (3) Socioeconomic impacts of wind development are strongly tied to acceptance. (4) Sound and visual impacts of wind facilities are strongly tied to annoyance and opposition, and ignoring these concerns can exacerbate conflict. (5) Environmental concerns matter, though less than other factors, and these concerns can both help and hinder wind development. (6) Issues of fairness, participation, and trust during the development process influence acceptance. (7) Distance from turbines affects other explanatory variables, but alone its influence is unclear. (8) Viewing opposition as something to be overcome prevents meaningful understandings and implementation of best practices. (9) Implementation of research findings into practice has been limited. The paper also identifies areas for future research on wind acceptance. With continued research efforts and a commitment toward implementing research findings into developer and policymaker practice, conflict and perceived injustices around proposed and existing wind energy facilities might be significantly lessened.

Expanding wind energy deployment to meet climate and policy goals requires willing communities to host wind projects. Wind power acceptance is inextricably linked to perceptions of projects' planning process, but it is less understood what makes wind planning processes more or less fair. Using a mixed-methods case study research design, this paper evaluates the planning process for two state-approved wind farms in Ohio and Minnesota using four analytical themes relating to procedural justice: participation, information, decision-making, and local context. In doing so, we provide one of the few detailed mappings of a United States wind farm planning process. Our findings confirm other results in the wind planning literature, particularly with respect to the limited opportunities for participation and decision-making input afforded to the public. However, our study also argues that to realize procedural justice in utility-scale wind project planning, planning processes need to evolve to: (1) afford non-compensated neighbors of wind projects similar information and participation opportunities as compensated landowners, (2) provide additional resources for and knowledge-sharing opportunities among local (county and township) governments, (3) create structures for participation, information provision, and decision-making surrounding wind farm construction, operation, and decommissioning (not just siting), and (4) consider local contexts of historical power generation and resident connections to the land.

In 2023, Berkeley Lab conducted the first of its kind survey of industry professionals with direct experience working in community engagement and permitting of land-based, utility-scale wind and solar energy facilities in the U.S. The survey solicited information about project timelines over the last five years, leading causes of project delays and cancelations, community opposition, experience with permitting authorities, community engagement, comparisons between wind and solar, and other related topics. A total of 123 individuals responded to the survey for a response rate of 19.2%. Respondents were employed at 62 unique companies, which together are responsible for approximately half of the wind and solar developed from 2016 to 2023.

The commercial rooftop solar energy market remains an under-developed sector. The market is estimated to contain 150 gigawatts of potential in the U.S. but it faces significant barriers to deployment to meet that potential, with an estimated 1.4 GW developed through 2017. This analysis focuses on of over 30,000 solar systems installed through 2017 and the properties on which they are located. The sample represents greater than 60% of the installed market at that time. The properties covered 20 states and almost 30 different types including industrial, warehouse, school/university, office, retail, and municipal/government and were compared to more than 2.4 million non-solar properties in the same geographies. The analysis finds overall commercial rooftop PV penetrations have only surpassed 1% recently across all property types with education properties (schools and universities) leading at over 6% penetration and with NJ and CA seeing the highest overall penetrations close to 2.5%. Also revealed were characteristics of those buildings, owners, and tenants and how solar penetrations change as those characteristics change. The research found clearly higher penetrations on owner-occupied larger (>9000 ft2) buildings with fewer tenants indicating, potentially, areas for future customer acquisition for PV developers. Also investigated were differences of solar system characteristics on commercial buildings such as system installed prices, size, and percentages of third-party owned (TPO) systems. The research found a steady and substantial drop in installed prices over time, a drop in the percentage of TPO systems being installed, and a relatively steady trend of system size. This latter finding indicates that smaller systems remain difficult to develop.

Improving battery technology and the growth of variable renewable generation are driving a surge of interest in “hybrid” power plants that combine, for example, wind or solar generating capacity with co-located batteries. While most of the current interest involves pairing photovoltaic (PV) plants with batteries, other types of hybrid or co-located plants with wide-ranging configurations have been part of the U.S. electricity mix for decades. This annually updated briefing tracks and maps existing hybrid or co-located plants across the United States while also synthesizing data from power purchase agreements (PPAs) and generation interconnection queues to shed light on near- and long-term development pipelines. The scope includes “co-located hybrids” that pair two or more resources (e.g., multiple types of generation and/or generation with storage) that are operated largely independently behind a single point of interconnection, and “full hybrids” that also feature coordinated operations of the co-located resources. The focus is on plants with one megawatt (MW) or more of capacity; smaller (often behind-the-meter) projects are also increasingly common, but are not included in this data synthesis. Key findings from the latest briefing include: -At the end of 2022, there were 374 hybrid plants (>1 MW) operating across the United States (+25% compared to the end of 2021), totaling nearly 41 GW of generating capacity (+15%) and 5.4 GW/15.2 GWh of energy storage (+69%/+88%). PV+storage plants are by far the most common, dominating in terms of plant number (213), storage capacity (4.0 GW/12.5 GWh), storage:generator capacity ratio (49%), and storage duration (3.1 hours). But there are nearly twenty other hybrid plant configurations as well, including several different fossil hybrid categories (each dominated by the fossil component) as well as wind+storage, wind+PV, wind+PV+storage, geothermal+PV, and others. -Last year was another strong year for PV+storage hybrids in particular: 59 of the 62 hybrids added in 2022 were PV+storage. As of the end of 2022, there was roughly as much storage capacity operating within PV+storage hybrid plants as in standalone storage plants (~4 GW each). In storage energy terms, however, PV+storage edged out standalone storage by ~2 GWh (12.5 GWh vs. 10.4 GWh, respectively). -Interconnection queue data show continued strong developer interest in hybridization. At the close of 2022, there were 51% more hybrid plants—representing 59% more generating capacity—in interconnection queues across the United States than there were at the end of 2021. Solar dominates these proposed plants as well: at the close of 2022, there were 457 GW of solar capacity proposed as a hybrid (representing ~48% of all solar capacity in the queues), most typically pairing PV with battery storage. At the same time, there were 24 GW of wind capacity proposed as a hybrid (representing ~8% of all wind capacity in the queues), again most-often pairing wind with storage. Meanwhile, more than half of all storage in the queues is estimated to be part of a hybrid plant. While many of the plants proposed in the queues will not ultimately reach commercial operations, the depth of interest in hybrid plants—especially PV+storage—is notable, particularly in certain regions. For example, in CAISO, 97% of all solar capacity and 45% of all wind capacity in the queues is proposed as a hybrid. -The report also surveys power purchase agreement (PPA) price data from a sample of operating and proposed PV+storage plants. Though PV+storage PPA prices have fallen over time, “levelized storage adders” have recently increased somewhat to ~$7000/MW-month, ~$60/MWh-stored (assuming one full cycle per day), or ~$15/MWh-PV. Some of the recent price increase could simply reflect a trend towards higher battery:PV capacity ratios over time, which increases costs, all else being equal. The well-publicized impact of inflationary and supply chain pressures on battery prices is no doubt a contributor as well.

The rapid expansion of solar and wind energy projects is raising questions of energy justice. Some scholars argue that solar and wind project development could burden under-resourced communities with negative impacts such as environmental harm and reduced access to resources. Conversely, other scholars argue that project development could be a boon to under-resourced communities, providing local economic and cultural benefits. Here, we analyze the drivers of solar and wind project siting patterns in the United States and explore their potential energy justice implications. We find that siting patterns are driven primarily by technoeconomic factors, especially resource quality and access to open undeveloped spaces. These technoeconomic factors channel projects into sparsely populated rural areas and, to a lesser extent, areas with lower income levels. We avoid simplifying assumptions about the broad justice implications of these siting patterns and explore our results from multiple perspectives.

Multiple technological, social, and market factors of wind power are evolving rapidly. Most notably, significant wind turbine scaling is occurring and is forecasted to continue. While the larger turbines expected to be deployed in the future are more powerful and efficient, they are also expected to operate at higher sound levels and require larger setbacks than those installed in the last decade. These sometimes-competing deployment trends and impacts cannot be understood via simple extrapolations of past trends. This study analyzes the effect of these future larger turbines on wind turbine micro-siting, project-level power and energy density, and community noise impacts. Due to their taller heights, larger rotors, and higher sound power levels, future wind turbines will require larger setbacks from homes and greater inter-turbine spacing, resulting in fewer turbines deployed for a given land area. This research finds these changes more than offset the effect of the higher turbine sound emissions, significantly decreasing the average sound levels that wind plant hosting communities experience. Yet, simultaneously, plant layouts using future turbine designs also result in projects with higher installed capacities and annual energy output for a given land area. These increases will likely lead to increased tax benefits and local income in the community. The deployment of fewer turbines on a smaller number of parcels could have implications on siting flexibility and landowner payments.

The moving shadows caused by wind turbines, referred to as “shadow flicker” (“SF”), are known to generate annoyance in a subset of the exposed population. However, the relationship between the level of modeled SF exposure and the population's perceived SF and SF annoyance is poorly understood. Improved understanding of SF exposure impacts could provide a basis for exposure thresholds and, in turn, potentially improve community acceptance of and experience with wind power projects. This study modeled SF exposure at nearly 35,000 residences across 61 wind projects in the United States, 747 of which were also survey respondents. Using these results, we analyzed the factors that led to perceived SF and self-reported SF annoyance. We found that perceived SF is primarily an objective response to SF exposure, distance to the closest turbine, and whether the respondent moved in after the wind project was built. Conversely, SF annoyance was not significantly correlated with SF exposure. Rather, SF annoyance is primarily a subjective response to wind turbine aesthetics, annoyance to other anthropogenic sounds, level of education, and age of the respondent. We also examined regulations governing SF in the sample project areas and compared them to SF exposure in the surrounding population. Additionally, we found that noise limits could serve as a proxy for SF exposure, as 90% of those exposed to wind turbine sound of no more than 45 dBA L1h had SF exposure of less than 8 h per year (a prototypical EU regulatory threshold).

Community engagement is a key pathway for incorporating social considerations into the development of utility-scale renewable energy facilities. Prior literature recommends meaningful, early community engagement to both improve siting outcomes and empower the public to participate in decision-making, but there is no recent nor comprehensive understanding of industry experiences with engagement. This study provides a critical contribution by revealing the practices and perspectives of project developers. We draw upon a survey of 123 professionals employed at 62 unique companies across the United States. We demonstrate that developers are highly concerned about the impact of community opposition on project deployment, and that they already use a variety of engagement strategies and adjust project designs in response to community feedback. However, the public is generally not made aware of project proposals until after land for the project is secured, and industry expenditures on engagement activities pale in comparison to other project development costs. We draw upon Arnstein's ladder of citizen participation to operationalize the engagement preferences of developers, and find that the majority of developers prefer that members of the public provide input but not recommend or make decisions. We characterize this preference as ‘halfway up the ladder’, compared to the idealized vision of full citizen empowerment envisioned in narratives of just transition. These findings contribute to discussion of the role and potential for community engagement to attend to justice in the energy transition.