There is no question that we need to build more electricity generating capacity now and into the future. Although we can become much more efficient in our use of electricity by taking steps to improve the efficiency of our buildings, by using energy efficient appliances and vehicles, and by taking conservation measures, our demand for electricity continues to grow. We will need more generating capacity to meet the demand of growing populations, of developing countries, and to support newly developed technologies that we adopt in our lives. We will also need to develop generating capacity to replace older facilities that are reaching the end of their useful or productive life. - Within the U.S. there are approximately 74 nuclear power plants, all of whose licenses will expire within the next 21 years¹. It is critical that we make informed choices for how we meet this demand.

One of the important factors to consider is how we use our land. There is an impact on land use related to the construction and operation of all power generating facilities and wind turbines are no exception. As we plan for our energy future it is important that we understand the impact of the choices we make.

Individual wind turbines have a relatively small footprint on the land; a typical 100kW turbine erected on a tubular tower will sit on a platform surrounded by a small clearing which will be approximately 1000 square feet or less.  This makes them an ideal choice for individual buildings and businesses since their impact on land use is minimal.  A wind turbine of this size can be sited next to a municipal building such as a school as was done in the City of Medford, Massachusetts or on the property of a small business as was done at Country Garden in Hyannis, Massachusetts.  According to the feasibility study for the turbine in Medford “Potential land use conflicts posed by the school setting are of minor concern for a wind turbine.  With the exception of the construction phase of the project, the wind turbine will effortlessly coexist with the sporting fields and the walking paths in the area.^2”  Both of these turbines were installed with no significant impact on the land use.  

Large industrial sized turbines which are installed together to form a wind farm will have a much larger footprint on the land. Depending on the local terrain, wind projects “occupy anywhere from 28 – 83 acres per megawatt, but only 2 – 5% of the project area is needed for turbine foundations, roads or other infrastructure”³. It is in relation to these larger industrial sized wind turbines and wind farms that land use issues become a significant factor in considering the development of wind projects to generate electricity.

Successful wind projects require open space and clear access to the wind. This makes them an ideal choice for agricultural areas, grazing lands and the coastline. As seen in several sites in California and the Midwest, a wind farm can be established on farm land without requiring any change to the land use.

Wind farm installations in hilly, forested areas however, present some additional considerations. Several ridges of the mountains in places like Appalachia or the Berkshires have wind conditions that are attractive to wind developers. However, development in these areas requires clearing trees during the construction phase and cutting roads for access to the turbines. The potential land use impact in these areas is more complex and tends to be cause for controversy.

As wind projects are developed in forested areas it is critical to include landowners and the public in the planning discussions. Excluding the public from these lines of communication can foster poor relationships, lack of trust and provide uninformed fodder for organizations who are opposed to this type of development. When mountain ridges with unbroken patches of forest that provide ecologically significant habitat appear to have favorable wind resources, the impact of clearing several acres and creating an ‘edge-effect’ at the turbine clearing and access roads needs to be understood and evaluated.

Responsible proponents of wind development recognize that there are land impact issues. However they also understand that these impacts need to be recognized, considered and addressed in the planning process. As stated on the AWEA (American Wind Energy Association) website, “Habitat fragmentation can occur at projects in relatively pristine areas due to trees being removed around turbines; also, new “edges” created in a forest (when parts of it are cleared for turbines or service roads) are detrimental to some species, and the presence of turbines causes some species or individual animals to avoid previously viable habitats.” It is important for the wind industry to work with concerned organizations and citizens to minimize these impacts.

Not all of the land use issues can be completely mitigated, however with open discussion and creativity we can continue to minimize the impact and make informed choices.

Of course, developing wind projects is only one option for how to increase our electricity generating capacity. In deciding what to develop for our future, we need to consider the other options that are available and look at the impact that they have on land use.

One option would be to continue to expand our use of coal-fired power plants. The impact that coal has on land use is significant. Unlike wind, where the acquisition of fuel is completely free of any environmental impact (the wind simply blows across the rotor), the acquisition of coal is frequently done through strip mining. Instead of clearing trees, this process removes the entire mountain top. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, about 60% of US coal is acquired through strip mining and, in West Virginia alone, “more than 300,000 acres of hardwood forests (half the size of Rhode Island) and 1,000 miles of streams have been destroyed by this practice”.⁵

Another option would be to continue to build oil-fired power plants. To pursue this option we will need to expand our drilling capacity and this will likely lead to oil drilling rigs off the coast of New England which is opposed by many coastal communities who depend on the beaches and ocean for their economic livelihood. Oil-fired power plants and coal-fired power plants, once developed, occupy acres of land that can no longer be used for anything else. As an example, on the edge of Cape Cod the unsightly Canal Plant takes up valuable canal front property for the plant plus fuel storage which is surrounded by fencing labeled ‘danger’ and ‘no trespassing’. Unlike wind turbines, these facilities do not easily co-exist with other land uses.

A third option to consider is to build more nuclear power plants. Again there are land use impacts from the mining. Also nuclear power plants are very large facilities.  According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, nuclear power plant requires 50 – 100 acres and the land for access, transmission lines and cooling lakes can expand this to thousands of acres. Once land is used for a nuclear power plant, it cannot be used for anything else.

Hydropower is another option that can be considered, however the land use impacts of developing new hydropower plants can be severe. When a dam is built to create a reservoir, forests, farmland, wildlife habitats, and even small towns can be destroyed. The ecosystems both up and down stream are dramatically changed.

In addition to ‘traditional’ power sources, it is valuable to consider other ‘green’ sources that are being developed such as biofuels. Unfortunately, there is significant concern over the indirect land use changes caused by turning land over to the farming of feedstock for biofuels. These indirect impacts are equally important to consider as we plan for our future. Transforming the use of an ecologically sensitive forest into crop land, can be economically tempting for a local population, but the long term impact can be global and much more difficult to address.

As stated previously we need to develop more electricity generating capacity.  We have an opportunity to make choices which limit the negative impact we have on our land use and on the environment.  It seems clear after considering coal, petroleum, nuclear, hydro, and biofuels that wind turbine projects have the least negative impact on our land use.  For many sites such as agricultural land and coastlines, and for individual turbine development in more populated areas, the land use impact is virtually negligible.  It is without a doubt that we should be leveraging our wind resources in these areas.

For hilly, forested areas we need to work closely with the local communities and the public to be sure everyone understands the land use impact and steps are taken to mitigate any concerns.  Our siting selections in these regions need to be carefully chosen.  However, even in these areas, the land use impact is small when compared to the alternatives.

Of course there are many other factors that need to be considered in addition to land use which may cause some sites with valuable wind resources to be inappropriate for development, but it is clear that from a land use perspective, wind turbines are the most responsible choice.

1. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (online) , www.nrc.gov

2. “City of Medford Wind Power Feasibility Study” (online), http://www.medfordcleanenergy.org/medfordfeasibilityreport.pdf

3. American Wind Energy Association (online) , www.awea.org

4. United States Government Accountability Office, “Renewable Energy, Wind Power’s Contribution to Electric Power Generation and Impact on Farms and Rural Communities” (online) http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04756.pdf

5. Union of Concerned Scientists, “Coal vs Wind” (online, http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02a.html