Low-Energy Fridays: We have the data: NIMBYism is renewable energy’s archnemesis

Poll after poll finds a universal truth among Americans: Everyone loves clean energy. In fact, with 90 percent of Americans saying renewable energy sources should be given priority over fossil fuels, it seems to be right up there with golden retriever puppies. Yet, when we look at the data of who wants to live near clean energy—especially wind power—we see a big disconnect. At R Street, we’ve taken a deep dive on state and local ordinances governing the deployment of various energy types and have found that these ordinances are growing more numerous—and more restrictive.

First, let’s talk about wind power, which is poised to be the biggest loser under state and local ordinances. From 2003 to 2021, the annual number of new county-level ordinances on wind power increased by 16-fold. The average setback requirement (i.e., the stringency) of those ordinances increased by 304 percent. And there is a clear trend in the data: Places that are more likely to have wind power are also more likely to have ordinances restricting wind power. Even worse, the more potential for wind energy, the more stringent the ordinances.

For solar power, there are similar, but less impactful trends. The number of new ordinances for solar power is also going up, but their stringency is not changing much. The nature of ordinances on solar are also less impactful. The big caveat is that solar is starting to encounter some unique forms of ordinances that govern the minimum and maximum size of installations, which effectively prohibits solar from being deployed at certain scales (i.e., no community solar or utility-scale solar in certain areas), so the trend could change in the future.

We also examined geothermal, but its state and local permitting restrictions are more esoteric and have limited data compared to wind and solar.

The useful conclusion is ultimately that people don’t often want to live near renewable energy. Or more accurately, people change their minds about renewable energy when presented with tradeoffs. It is no accident that the areas with the most wind face the toughest regulations on wind turbines; they’re unsightly and noisy, and even though people like low-carbon electricity, they just don’t like living near industry. Technology that is less disruptive to daily life, such as solar farms, has an easier time getting permitted.

A National Renewable Energy Laboratory analysis focusing on this issue found that if the entire country adopted the most stringent ordinances typically seen, it would cut potential wind capacity by 87 percent. That would still entail a big growth in wind power from current levels, but it wouldn’t be enough for clean energy scenarios like Princeton University’s “Net-Zero America.”

The revealed policy insight from the data is that no amount of subsidy will overcome state and local restrictions on wind power and, to a lesser extent, other energy forms that face local opposition. Even federal permitting reform is unlikely to make a difference unless an ill-advised, heavy-handed use of eminent domain is adopted. (Seriously. Do not do that.)

The upshot is that to sustain the current rates of growth for renewable energy, industry will have to build generation plants on sites that are acceptable to local communities. This isn’t insurmountable, and other energy types have had to win over local populations (e.g., oil fields smell terrible, and nuclear power plants scare people, but they are defended by locals). Under the status quo, however, renewable energy may run into serious problems with state and local permitting in the not-too-distant future.