Minimizing habitat conflicts in meeting net-zero energy targets in the western United States

Abstract

The scale and pace of energy infrastructure development required to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are unprecedented, yet our understanding of how to minimize its potential impacts on land and ocean use and natural resources is inadequate. Using high-resolution energy and land-use modeling, we developed spatially explicit scenarios for reaching an economy-wide net-zero GHG target in the western United States by 2050. We found that among net-zero policy cases that vary the rate of transportation and building electrification and use of fossil fuels, nuclear generation, and biomass, the “High Electrification” case, which utilizes electricity generation the most efficiently, had the lowest total land and ocean area requirements (84,000 to 105,000 km 2 vs. 88,100 to 158,000 km 2 across all other cases). Different levels of land and ocean use protections were applied to determine their effect on siting, environmental and social impacts, and energy costs. Meeting the net-zero target with stronger land and ocean use protections did not significantly alter the share of different energy generation technologies and only increased system costs by 3%, but decreased additional interstate transmission capacity by 20%. Yet, failure to avoid development in areas with high conservation value is likely to result in substantial habitat loss.

Modeling Ecological Constraints on a CO2 Pipeline Network

“…An increasing number of studies have incorporated environmental concerns into spatially explicit energy infrastructure siting models. − They have found that significant environmental protections can be realized with little additional cost. The framework developed by Wu et al integrates different environmental considerations and data sets to create a spectrum of protection levels in a national energy model, so that output and impacts can be compared under a range of protection scenarios.…”

Low impact siting for wind power facilities in the Southeast United States

“…Prior efforts by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) have explored environmentally responsible siting and development of renewable energy projects in the United States in two regions—the western United States and the wind belt area. TNC's Power of Place (PoP) study covers the western region of the United States, including Washington, Oregon, and California, 35 plus additional analyses include Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana 36 . The study identifies four categories of land that should be excluded for wind development: legally protected, administratively protected, high conservation value, and landscape intactness 36 …”

“…Both studies provide clear spatial guidelines for wind development and estimate the total installed wind capacity potential, and together cover almost the entire continental United States with only the Northeast and Southeast missing. This paper aims at filling this gap by conducting a similar study for the Southeast, using the Wu et al 36 methodology. Here, we develop a geospatial database specifying the regions where wind farms can be developed responsibly, based on the most recent data on ecological, regulatory, technical, and socioeconomic considerations in the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.…”

“…TNC's Power of Place (PoP) study covers the western region of the United States, including Washington, Oregon, and California, 35 plus additional analyses include Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana. 36 The study identifies four categories of land that should be excluded for wind development: legally protected, administratively protected, high conservation value, and landscape intactness. 36 Similarly, TNC's Site Wind Right (SWR) project covers 17 states in the US wind belt and identifies lands where wind development is unlikely to encounter significant wildlife-related conflicts.…”

“…36 The study identifies four categories of land that should be excluded for wind development: legally protected, administratively protected, high conservation value, and landscape intactness. 36 Similarly, TNC's Site Wind Right (SWR) project covers 17 states in the US wind belt and identifies lands where wind development is unlikely to encounter significant wildlife-related conflicts. 26,37 The geospatial analysis maps species-specific data layers such as migratory birds, bats, eagles, prairie/sage grouse, whooping crane stopover sites, big-game habitats, eagle and other raptor nesting areas, and other threatened and endangered species.…”