A wind turbine in the landscape

No-one is indifferent to the installation of a wind farm next to where they live.  However, research shows that some landscapes gain from the presence of wind turbines. And if the developers took care to share the advantages as much as the disadvantages, plans for wind farms would be better accepted by the population concerned.

While the energy produced by wind turbines in Belgium is still fairly insignificant, they are nevertheless beginning to impose their presence in the landscape. At the beginning of 2012, Wallonia had 246 working wind turbines in the region, representing an installed capacity of 541 megawtt (MW). Flanders had 130 and the federal region 61 on the coast. In all, the installed capacity of the wind turbines is 1078 MW (compared with 5700 MW for the seven nuclear reactors in use in Belgium). The choice of where to put the wind farms is, of course, determined by technical criteria such as the strength, frequency and direction of the dominant winds or the level of urbanisation (there are no big wind turbines in urban areas). In Wallonia, they must be grouped into farms rather than installing single units, not just for economic reasons but also to restrict visual pollution. Because putting one up in the landscape (often measuring more than 100 m high) is never neutral.  This is why KUL and ULg joined forces, under the leadership of the Federal Science Policy, to examine the placement of wind turbines in the landscape as well as the social attitudes adopted by the population during the construction of a wind farm.

The research (1) began in 2007 within the framework of a call for project issued by the Federal Science Policy (Belspo) called SSD (Science for a Sustainable Development). The initiative fell to KUL (professors Van Rompaey and Kesteloot), which wanted to bring together the departments of physical geography and human geography. For Wallonia, the study was carried out by Serge Schmitz and Vincent Vanderheyden, professor and assistant lecturer respectively in the University of Liège’s rural geography department.

The first part of the study was aimed at defining the capacity of some landscapes to accept wind turbines. In other words, the study endeavoured to answer the question whether some landscapes are more suited than others to the placement of wind turbines. “There’s a European Landscape Convention (The Florence Convention was adopted on 20 October 2000 and came into force on 1 March 2004) whose purpose is to promote the protection, management and planning of European landscapes", Vincent Vanderheyden points out. "In its recommendations, the convention specifies that the landscape isn’t simply a geographic object disconnected from all social reality, but that it is perceived by populations, that they have shaped it over time and that the social object of the landscape can’t be ignored; therefore, the opinion of the populations must be taken into account.”

To determine the landscape preferences of the Belgians, the researchers showed a series of photos to a representative sample of more than 1500 people during a face-to-face door-to-door survey. Simulations of wind farms had been added to some of the photos. There were two versions of each photo: one with and one without wind turbines. Of course, the two photos weren’t shown to the same person to avoid influencing their opinion. Furthermore, the interviewers didn’t say that they were carrying out a survey on wind turbines.

The rural landscapes chosen were representative of the country’s diverse landscapes and not of their capacity to possibly host wind turbines in the future. However, with the superimposed photos, a maximum number of rules were respected to ensure they were as plausible as possible; for instance, the legal distance from homes if there happened to be any on the photo, the proportions of the masts, etc. The people interviewed had to comment on the landscape’s attractiveness on a scale of 1 to 7, i.e. not attractive at all to very attractive. “We therefore had assessments of landscapes with and without wind turbines that we were able to compare", Vincent Vanderheyden sums up. “We were thus able to determine if in such or such a landscape, the presence of a wind turbine significantly spoilt people’s enjoyment of this landscape. Of course, as we expected, the presence of a wind turbine reduced the attractiveness of the landscapes in the majority of cases. But in some cases, the wind turbines increased the landscapes’ attractiveness value. For instance, this was the case for landscapes featuring wasteland, industrial zones, etc. Hence, not very attractive for the majority of us. Adding a wind turbine somehow made them useful.”

The second part of the study was aimed at understanding the attitudes of people living next to wind farms. The researchers began by targeting five farms, three in Flanders and two in Wallonia; four where the wind turbines were functioning already and one where it was still in the planning stage (it has since been completed). On the Walloon side, the Houyet wind farm near Beauraing and the Mettet one were chosen. The first one was selected because it was an initiative of the inhabitants, some of whom were environmental activists. The developers wanted the local population to participate in the action by making them the shareholders, among other things, and rewarding them in the form energy. One of the wind turbines was even reserved for the children with the parents buying the shares in their names. The second Walloon site was chosen because it was the opposite of the previous one. This time, it was an industrial initiative which initially planned the construction of some 40 wind turbines spread across several farms. When it was launched, this project met with strong opposition initiated by several people because some homes were going to be surrounded by the wind turbines. The developer therefore had to reduce the number and only develop a handful of wind turbines in the part where the landscape had the least value in the inhabitants' eyes.  On the Flemish side, a site located close to Beveren was selected because it lay between two communes, one of which was in favour and the other not. The Middelkerke farm, close to the coast, was chosen because it is an old one and was developed in several phases hence with different technologies, and because there are a lot of holiday homes in the area, which was likely to affect the points of view. Finally, the site in Courtrai, situated in an industrial zone, was selected... because it wasn’t yet in existence when the research started. Therefore, this was an opportunity to follow the implementation process.

The aim of this second part of the survey was therefore to understand how attitudes were formed faced with the placement of wind turbines. The researchers met those involved with the development of the wind turbines and the opponents, representatives from the authorities, and managers from the “Association pour la Promotion des Energies Renouvables” (APERe) on the French-speaking side, who serve as wind turbine facilitators for the region, as well as their Flemish counterparts. And, of course, the project sponsors, the local authorities and local inhabitants.

During the interviews, the researchers tried to reconstruct the evolution of people’s feeling over time. “We examined the different viewpoints on renewable energy at different levels”, Vincent Vanderheyden explains. “First of all, the need to develop renewable energies is unanimously acknowledged on an international level. The same is true on a national level: we know that there are European commitments we have to meet. When we get to the regional level, responsible for the development of wind turbines in Belgium, you can see the first stirrings of a difference between the need to develop renewable energy on the one hand, and personal interests on the other:  “these types of energy must be developed but not on my doorstep!" These rifts are accentuated at a local level: for the local inhabitants,  they share only the disadvantages but not the benefits.”

The first argument put forward to convey this frustration is visual: “my landscape will be modified”. Then there are the arguments relating to noise, the sound of the machines if they are old ones, the sound of the air being displaced, the background noise if the technology used is more recent. The noise isn’t loud in terms of decibels but it can be annoying if you become aware of it. For some people, there is also a stroboscopic effect when the sun reflects off the rotating blades. Finally, some people put forward rather more fallacious arguments such as the fear of the blades breaking or interference with bird migration corridors! The economic aspect is also very present. For farmers, and especially market gardeners with small plots, the shade cast by a 150-m high mast can be significant... but that can be compensated by renting the land: one wind turbine brings in approximately EUR 5000 a year! Another economic argument: the potential capital loss of a house or a piece of land. The argument in favour of employment doesn’t seem to be relevant either according to the opponents: the wind turbines aren’t built here and the only sustainable jobs are those relating to maintenance and, to a lesser extent, the excavation works. “What dominates in all these viewpoints”, Vincent Vanderheyden continues, “and what is the determining factor, is this impression that there are nothing but disadvantages for ‘me’ while the ‘others’ (the developer, the person who owns the land next to mine where the wind turbine will be installed, the electricity producer, etc.) will be the winners and will pocket all the benefits.”

Of course, these arguments aren’t set in stone. They vary according to the size of the farm (the more the initiative seems small-scale rather than industrial, the better it is accepted) and the type of decision-makers (a local initiative will be more easily accepted by citizens). Finally, the researcher also noted an evolution in perceptions over time. The key moment is when a plan to install wind turbines in a certain place is announced. This announcement is compulsory; it takes the form of a public meeting during which the project is presented. “This is when the first opinions are forged, which will often be lasting”, Vincent Vanderheyden emphasises. This is when groups are formed, in general, opponents. Attitudes evolve more or less according to a U curve. Before the announcement of a placement project, everyone finds it positive. When the announcement is made, there is often a strong, argued rejection. When the wind turbines have been in operation for some time, a proportion of the local inhabitants abandon their opposition. But for this to happen, certain rules must be respected. It is essential to reduce local costs (noise, spoiling the landscape, etc.) and increase local benefits (local shareholding system, local job creation for the turbines’ maintenance, cheaper electricity supply). Rules of good practice, you could say, from which the developers should draw inspiration.

(1) Landscape capacity and social attitudes towards wind energy projects in Belgium, A. Van Rompaey et al., Belspo, 2011.