Energy next door: a meta-analysis of energy infrastructure impact on housing value

被引:24
作者
Brinkley, Catherine [1 ]
Leach, Andrew [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Human Ecol, Davis, CA 95616 USA
[2] Univ Calif Davis, Davis, CA 95616 USA
关键词
Climate change; Community choice energy; Planning; District heating; RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY-VALUES; NUCLEAR-POWER-PLANTS; ELECTRICITY-GENERATION; PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS; TRANSMISSION-LINES; RENEWABLE ENERGY; WIND ENERGY; LAND-USE; INCINERATOR; VALUATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.014
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The decision to site energy facilities occurs largely at the local level, requiring community support for permitting and construction. Biomass and waste incineration have been broadly adopted in European and Asian countries. Yet, combustion and the placement of affiliated smokestacks are often contentious. Similarly, wind turbines, large photovoltaic arrays, and transmission lines are often criticized for disturbing viewsheds. As communities consider energy production, they often weigh benefits against concerns for how facilities may impinge on the local quality of life. This review of 54 studies spanning over forty years of statistical multi-variate housing price assessments in relation to energy supply infrastructure provides a comparative meta-analysis of both the negative and positive local impacts of siting energy infrastructure. The oldest studies in the 1960s investigated powerlines and waste-to-energy facilities, both with mixed results. A surge of studies in the 1990s assessed renewable energy infrastructure, including hydropower, wind, and rooftop solar, concluding that of all energy infrastructure only rooftop solar consistently positively impacts home value. Traditional electric substations, biomass boilers, solar farms, wave-power and geothermal have not yet been studied for their impact on nearby housing markets. Most of the studies focus on single-family homes, and few include race and income-levels, though such variables have been important in energy siting decisions and hedonic models. In conclusion, we chart a research agenda and conclude with recommendations for siting local energy infrastructure.
引用
收藏
页码:51 / 65
页数:15
相关论文
共 108 条
[1]   A review of Safety, Health and Environmental (SHE) issues of solar energy system [J].
Aman, M. M. ;
Solangi, K. H. ;
Hossain, M. S. ;
Badarudin, A. ;
Jasmon, G. B. ;
Mokhlis, H. ;
Bakar, A. H. A. ;
Kazi, S. N. .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2015, 41 :1190-1204
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2009, ENV LAW
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1999, Smokestacks and Progressives: Environmentalists, Engineers, and Air Quality in America, 1881-1951
[4]   Negotiating risk in property-based arts economic development: Exploring the innovative but untimely development partnership between the Seattle Art Museum and Washington Mutual [J].
Ashley, Amanda Johnson .
CITIES, 2014, 37 :92-103
[5]   Optimal Renewable Resources Mix for Distribution System Energy Loss Minimization [J].
Atwa, Y. M. ;
El-Saadany, E. F. ;
Salama, M. M. A. ;
Seethapathy, R. .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS, 2010, 25 (01) :360-370
[6]   A critical and empirical analysis of the national-local 'gap' in public responses to large-scale energy infrastructures [J].
Batel, Susana ;
Devine-Wright, Patrick .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2015, 58 (06) :1076-1095
[7]   Social acceptance of low carbon energy and associated infrastructures: A critical discussion [J].
Batel, Susana ;
Devine-Wright, Patrick ;
Tangeland, Torvald .
ENERGY POLICY, 2013, 58 :1-5
[8]   The 'social gap' in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses [J].
Bell, D ;
Gray, T ;
Haggett, C .
ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS, 2005, 14 (04) :460-477
[9]   What Have We Learned from Over 20 Years of Farmland Amenity Valuation Research in North America? [J].
Bergstrom, John C. ;
Ready, Richard C. .
REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2009, 31 (01) :21-49
[10]  
Bezdek R. H., 2006, International Journal of Nuclear Governance, Economy and Ecology, V1, P122, DOI 10.1504/IJNGEE.2006.008708