Correction for Hernandez et al., Solar energy development impacts on land cover change and protected areas

Abstract

The authors note that on page 13579, right column, first full paragraph, lines 12-16, the following statement published incorrectly: "If up to 500 GW of USSE may be required to meet United States-wide reduction of 80% of 1990 greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, 71,428 km 2 of land may be required (roughly the land area of the state of South Carolina) assuming a capacity factor of 0.20 (an average capacity factor for PV; Table S1)." The statement should instead appear as: "For example, up to 500 GW of USSE may be required to meet United States-wide reduction of 80% of 1990 greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 (33). This requires about 14,285 km 2 of land [roughly the area of the state of Connecticut, (9)], underscoring the possible vast area requirements for energy needs in the United States." Additionally, the authors note ref. 33 was omitted from the published article. The full reference appears below.

GIS-AHP Multi-Decision-Criteria-Analysis for the Optimal Location of Solar Energy Plants at Indonesia

“…Firstly, it is worth reminding that solar collectors and PV farms are both able to utilize diffused and direct solar radiation for electricity generation, where the total amount of incoming shortwave radiation received by a horizontal surface per unit time, i.e., the Global Horizontal Irradiation, GHI in kWh/m 2 , is the chief governing factor to locate and identify the best site to install solar farms. In simple terms, the intensity of radiation and installation area determine the magnitude of the electrical output from a solar-power plant [48,55,56], where it is known that the exploitation of solar energy resources is economically viable or profitable, specially on locations with a GHI average of 4 kWh/m 2 /day [57,58]. In this sense, at least from the GHI perspective, WKP is an ideal location as it attains an average of 4.58 kWh/m 2 /day measured across a 11 years by the WBG [49], with really scarce days reporting minimums as low as 2.6 kWh/m 2 /day in small areas affected by short seasons of great cloudiness, but with maximums very often reaching up to 5.04 kWh/m 2 /day in the vast majority of the province.…”

Μετριασμός Επιπτώσεων Στη Βιοποικιλότητα Κατά Την Ανάπτυξη Ηλιακών Και Αιολικών Πηγών Ενέργειας : Οδηγίες Για Κατασκευαστές Έργων

“…Riggs & Deacon (2002 Farmer (1993), McClure et al (2013), Rahul & Jain (2014). Hernandez et al (2015). Hoffacker et al (2017).…”

The potential land requirements and related land use change emissions of solar energy

“…the protected status of the land, often related to ecosystem and wildlife preservation 21 – 27 . Therefore, where available, deserts and dry scrubland with high solar irradiance and which are generally not suitable for human activities, are used or planned to be used for solar energy 26 – 28 . However, beyond hard restrictions, other features such as the lack of road, electricity and water infrastructures, and the distance from human settlements complicate the large scale construction, operation and maintenance of solar power in these areas 22 .…”

“…On top of that, spatial frictions might occur if land which is made available for solar energy by national or local governments is in reality a biodiversity hotspot 29 , 30 or the home of human communities 31 , 32 . Recent developments show that USSE in densely populated countries is often installed on arable land that is used or potentially suitable for other productive uses such as agriculture or forestry 17 , 26 , 33 , 34 , intensifying land competition for the same reasons as the sprawl of bioenergy does. Furthermore, clearing currently vegetated land for USSE also has local impacts on biodiversity, carbon cycling and aestetics 25 , 30 , 35 .…”