American Geographical Society

Morality, Space, and the Power of Wind-Energy Landscapes

Author(s): Martin J. Pasqualetti
Source: Geographical Review, Vol. 90, No. 3 (Jul., 2000), pp. 381-394
Published by: American Geographical Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3250859
Accessed: 02/10/2009 12:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ags.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Geographical Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Geographical Review.

http://www.jstor.org
 MORALITY, SPACE, AND THE POWER OF
WIND-ENERGY LANDSCAPES
MARTIN J. PASQUALETTI

ABSTRACT. Most of us have not known-or cared-where our electricity comes from. Our
attitude is changing,however,as we turn toward wind energy,now the fastest-growingre-
newable energyresourcein the world. Becausewe cannot extractand transportthe raw en-
ergy of the wind, reaping its many environmentalbenefits requiresthat we cope with the
landscapepresenceof its developmentwhereverit occurs.Sometimesthis interfereswith the
value of open space,and sometimes it may be close to subdivisions.It is the immobility and
veryvisibilityof wind powerthat makesits presenceunavoidable.In that regardit cannot be
hidden underground,stored in tanks, or moved by trains. It is an energy resourcethat re-
minds us that our electricitycomes from somewhere.The more we wish to tap the power of
the wind, the less we will be able to avoid the responsibilitiesthat our demand for energy
brings.This necessarybargain,firstevident nearPalmSprings,California,is now being expe-
rienced whereverwind power is being developed. Keywords:California,energy,landscape,
morality,wind.

Owing to the sheer scale of today's urban places, escaping the congestion that has
become their signature feature can be difficult. Reaching the solace of open spaces
commonly requires a long journey, and sometimes the trip is punctuated by the
unexpected. Heading east from Los Angeles on Interstate 10, for example, you
drive as much as 150 kilometers before traffic thins. But just when you start to
relax your grip on the steering wheel, you sense a strong and even disconcerting
buffeting. As you struggle for control, blasts of sand etch your windshield, ob-
scuring your vision. Once you begin to exit this gauntlet, chaotic apparitions ap-
pear out of the clouds of beige dust: thousands of glinting, whirling machines
bordering the highway and crowning every visible ridge, at highway speeds a seem-
ing reversal of Don Quixote's famous confrontation. As if passing into a new di-
mension, you have entered a fascinating and challenging modern world, that of
wind power (Figure i).
This route has taken you through San Gorgonio Pass, a low, topographic "pinch
point" that is vital as a corridor for aqueducts, power lines, railroads, and highways,
whose geographical and economic importance is not new (Figure 2). Long before
San Gorgonio Pass was trenched and scraped and paved by modern society, Native
Americans used it as the most convenient travel route between the cool Southern
California coast and the searing Colorado Desert. During their treks they became
acquainted with the strong winds and their invisible irritations. Today the wind is
even more obvious because thousands of turbines march across the entire width of
the pass and on up the hillsides, becoming the dominant feature. So striking is this
scene that it is used as a backdrop for advertisements, music videos, and motion
pictures. It has become America's most famous landscape of power.

Vf DR. PASQUALETTI is a professorof geographyatArizonaStateUniversity,Tempe,Arizona85287-0104.

TheGeographical Review90 (3):381-394,July2000
Copyright ? 2001 by the AmericanGeographicalSociety of NewYork
382 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

&Ai- 4 ; w - - -
47 j }171 -

FIG. 1-Phalanxes of wind turbines obscure the view of Mount San Gorgonio, California,in the
winter of 1997.(Photographcourtesyof Paul Gipe)

The pass doubles as the stage for a moralityplay,pitting vocal public support
for renewable energy against the visible realities such advocacy can produce. It
prompts questions:Which is it going to be, fossil/nuclearfuels and their conse-
quences, or renewableresourcesand theircosts?Are the advocatesof wind energy
willing to reaffirmtheir backing,or havethe landscapesthat wind power produces
given them second thoughts?These questions havebecome relevantin the United
Statesas the public becomes spoiled by a widening physicaldistancebetween con-
sumers and their energy sources.The wider the gap, the greaterthe effect that dis-
tance has had on bufferingconsumersfrom the environmentalcosts of energy.The
recentrise of wind power is shrinkingthat distanceonce again,and this contraction
is remindingus afreshof the responsibilitieswe have for the energywe use.
The San Gorgonio Pass experienceis not unique. Globally,the generatingca-
pacity of commercialwind turbines now exceeds14,000 megawatts(MW) (Figure
3), and it is increasingmore rapidlythan any otherrenewableenergyresource.Vari-
ous forms and strataof governmentsupporthaveaidedthis expansion,but its prin-
cipal attractionis wind power's inherent environmentalattributes.Producingno
global warming,wind power floods no canyons,demands no water,contaminates
no soil, and leaves no permanent and dangerouswaste. Wind generatorscan be
installed and removed quickly;they are well suited to isolated, off-grid locations;
and the cost of the electricitythey produceis now comparablewith that from con-
ventional sources.In short, wind power is too good to ignore.
 -

WIND-POWER LANDSCAPES 383

'-
..-_-

--.
, ,,,I
4.*

*'.: .
- .

FIG. 2-View of San Gorgonio Pass from Edom Hill, California, looking west, in the winter of 1995.
The white objects in the background are wind turbines. Tamarisk trees that shield railroad tracks
from blowing sand form the horizontal dark streak in the center. (Photograph by the author)

Despite the benefitsof wind power and even its acceptancein ruralcommuni-
ties where the transcontinentalpower grid is a distant and uneconomic thought,
the more vocal public reactionis one of hesitation and resistanceto the distinctive
landscape signature of wind power (Thayer 1994; Nielsen 1996; Righter 1996; Elliott
1997).As I suggest in more detail below, such landscape imprints can be softened
and possibly even put to good use. First,however,we need to appreciatemore fully
that the degree of success that wind power achieves will depend on how well we
understandand acceptthe fundamentalspatialcosts it imposes.

THE SPATIAL COSTS OF ENERGY

Generationof electricity,unique among all industrialenterprises,places environ-

mental demands on water,air, and space while deliveringa product that is pure,
invisible,and completelyclean.It is also unique in the varietyof resources,process-
ing, and spatialcommitment it employs to produce the same commodity.
The earmarkthat most completely distinguishesconventional resourcesfrom
renewableones is whether the fuel chain is separatedor concentrated.Fossil and
nuclearfuelsthat currentlyprovide85-90 percentof our electricityareall on lengthy
and dispersedfuel chains.Coal and uranium are obtained from mines; oil and gas
resourcesarebroughtto the surfacethroughwells.Although some fuels, such as oil,
can be used right out of the ground,for best use each is processed.This refiningcan
384 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

Yearly Additions to Global

Wind-Power Generating Capacity

L)
a)
>0
L,

a)

Year

FIG. 3-Wind-power generatingcapacity in Europe,North America,and Asia, showing the quick

rise in generatingcapacityin recentyearsand the displacementof U.S. dominanceby Europe.Source:
Gipe 1999.(Adaptedby BarbaraTrapido-Lurie)

be extensiveand complicated,especiallyfor uranium,and usuallyrequiresseparate

locationsand,therefore,transportationlinks.Wateris essentialfor transferringheat,
but it is expensiveto move, so all other processingsteps accedeto the location of its
adequateavailability.This resultsin a tendencyfor powerplantsto concentratealong
rivers,lakes,seas, and oceans.
One of the most important spatial consequences of the dispersedprocessing
that characterizesmost generationof electricityis the resultingvisual and absolute
dilution of the aggregateimpactsthat result.It is the rewardof such dilution thatno
single placemust absorbor suffercumulativeenvironmental-including aesthetic-
insults. Unfortunately,this "out of sight, out of mind"pattern misleadsthe public
by suggestingthat the environmentalcosts of electricityare less than they actually
are.
Dispersedfuel chains presentlysupplymost of our electricity-indeed, most of
all types of energy-and for this reasonit has become easierto evade many an im-
pact of supplyingour needs. But if renewableenergycontinues to grow in signifi-
cance,we will become increasinglyawareof the sourceswe tap to supplythe energy
we demand because severaltypes of renewable-energyresourceshave limited spa-
tial flexibility.Forthese resources,most of the stagesbetweenproduction and con-
sumption are spatiallyconcentratedand immobile. This characteristicerasesthe
potentialfor locationalflexibilityin the event that land-use conflicts areidentified.'
Examplesof such limitations abound. The value of raw geothermalsteam,for
instance,is usuallyinsufficientto allow its transporteven a few kilometers,provid-
ing developersno choice but to locate power plants near production wells. Simi-
 WIND-POWER LANDSCAPES 385

larly,it would makeno sense to build a hydroelectricitydam awayfrom a riveror to

put wind turbines in isolatedand windless placesjust to keep them out of view.
The inescapableaccessoryof renewable-resourceimmobility is the spatial in-
tensificationof the impacts of its development.Realizingthis helps us understand
why renewable-energydevelopmentsencounterpublic resistance,especiallywhere
land is sacred,protected,scenic, or otherwise sensitive. It explains the battle that
eruptedover geothermalenergydevelopmentwhen hydrogensulfide odors wafted
over resorts in California(Pasqualettiand Dellinger 1989),when plans for a tidal
barrageacrossthe SevernEstuaryin GreatBritainwere shelvedbecauseof the eco-
logical damage it would create (Clare1992),when calls were made to breach Glen
CanyonDam becauseit had flooded picturesqueterrainupstream,2or when devel-
opmentsin SanGorgonioPassinciteddebateoverlocallandscapecostsof wind power
(Pasqualettiand Butler1987).Such spatialrealities,even if amplifiedby only a few
vocal objectors,can rob momentum and dull enthusiasmfor renewableenergy.

TURNING BACK THE CLOCK

When the primaryfuel of Europewas wood, the consequencesof its use were im-
mediateand local.Not only did pollution shroudcitieswhereverhouseholdsburned
it, but the foreststhat once defined the landscapeswere felled fasterthan they re-
grew and were soon replacedby grass. The more the expansive woodlands were
whittled away,the more the searchfor substitutefuels sharpened.It was at this his-
torical confluence of technology and need that the shift to "kingcoal"began. The
emergence of coal as a substitute for wood produced substantialchanges in the
spatial arrangementof energy impacts. As coal rose to prominence, there was a
changefrom the ratheruniform,distributedimpactsof the ubiquitoususe of wood
to the nodal, intensifiedimpactsof coal, the use of which was concentratedin rela-
tively few places.
A case study of the change in the spatial characterof impacts comes from the
transport of coal to London from the Midlands and northeasternregions of En-
gland, a practice that persistedfor centuries.Although coal mining reshapedthe
countrysideeverywhere,people in nearbycitiesbreathedfew of the sulfurousfumes
that resultedfrom its use becausevirtuallyall of the coal was sent south. In contrast,
Londonerssufferednothing of the landscapedevastationor the personalprivations
common in the mining lands of the northeast.Neitherplace experiencedthe inten-
sity of the other'sfate. This was a change in a centuries-oldpattern,a result of the
transition from low-value, widely availableresourcessuch as wood to a spatially
more concentratedresourcesuch as coal.
Other changesin impactfollowedwhereverradicallynew fuels gainedpopular-
ity.As oil was changingthe energyindustryin the firsthalf of the twentiethcentury,
supply chains and impacts spatiallystretchedout, and the aggregateimpact, sub-
stantial and differentas it was, became concentratedin more widely spaced loca-
tions. Oil was easier and less expensiveto transportlong distancesbecause it was
abundant in fewer places than was coal. In the last third of the twentieth century
386 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

uraniumbecame significantin the generationof electricity,but the visible expres-

sion of its developmentwas relativelysmall overallbecausethe energywas concen-
tratedin the physicsof its use. The separationwas as much psychologicalas literal,
becausethe invisibleand insidious risksof uranium encouragedfurtherseparation
of people from their energyresources,often a simple matterbecause uraniumsup-
plies tend to be in areasof low population concentration.
Today,as population rises and wind power becomes viable, the distancesbe-
tween supply and demand are shrinkingonce again.We are also, at the same time,
experiencinga curious transposition:Whereasmany of the impacts of coal-such
as air pollution and mercurydeposition-are invisible and regional,those of wind
are apparentand local, just as those of wood once were. In a spatial sense, we are
resolutelyturningback the clock.
COMPRESSION OF IMPACTS

As distance,technology,and our urbanizedlifestyle came to cushion us from the

direct environmentalcosts of energy,we became increasinglyless awareand even-
tually less tolerantof the intrusions of energydevelopmenton our personalspace.
With some resources,such as wind, that was not alwaysthe case.Humanitybecame
accustomedto wind machines snatchingenergyfrom the sky,and, as they labored
for the pleasureand needs of surroundingcitizens, they became permanentland-
scape fixtures.In places they came to representtechnicalaccomplishmentand in-
creasing dominion over nature (Cosgrove and Daniels 1988). Eventually,wind
machinestook on such a benign, even romantic,charmthat,in placeslikethe Neth-
erlands,centuries-oldwindmills once used to drain the poldersstill attracttourists.
Such reverenceis not manifestedsimply in the Old World:In Lubbock,Shattuck,
and other GreatPlains towns, citizens proudly erect wind museums to help recall
an earlier,simplertime when water pumpersdotted the millions of acresof coun-
tryside and gave verticalityto an otherwisehorizontal land (Figure4). With wind
turbinesagainrising from the land,3we arebeginning to reconnectwith the energy
that supports us.
The modern age of wind power was founded on the assumptionthat everyone
would want to leap aboardthe renewable-energyboat: Afterall, the history of use
and familiarityis long and rich. But developersforgot that "atthe perceptuallevel,
the less conspicuous the technologicallandscape,the more it is likelyto be valued
by the general public" (Thayer 1994, 128). As it turn outs, the public appears to like
the idea of not seeing the sources of the suppliesit uses, of not being "responsible"
for the source of its energy.Ignoring this important perceptualpredilection,and
seducedby the presumedclose ties betweenpeople and wind machines,developers
conveniently,if tacitly,counted on public fondness for low-tech solutions. But they
came up against strong feelings largelyunmoved by appealsto whatever"green"
inclinationscitizenspossessed,againsta publicthat had forgottenthat thereis more
to keepinghomes suppliedwith energythan simply payingfor it. Becauseconven-
tional networks of power are confusingly complex and-more important-scat-
 WIND-POWER LANDSCAPES 387

FIG.4-The AmericanWind PowerCenterin Lubbock,Texas,July1999.In this center,and in others

such as the one in Shattuck,Oklahoma,water pumpers have been collected to commemorate the
variety of designs and the important role they played in the settlement of the Great Plains. (Photo-
graphby the author)

tered, the environmentalcosts of energy graduallyhad receded from the public's

mind. In a flush of enthusiasmfor what wind power seemed to offer,the fact that
most renewable-energyresourcesinvolve a compressedand noticeable fuel chain
was often lost. This vital spatialdifferencefrom conventionalenergy resourceshas
been neither adequatelyrecognizednor adequatelyemployedby the wind industry
to explain why people often oppose wind-energy developments.Nor has it been
used to catalyzean appropriatelyframed or scaled programto educate those out-
side the wind-powerindustry.The public, especiallyin the AmericanWest,has be-
come used to receivingits versatileelectricityfrom a static switch on the wall and
not a turbine that spins in plain view outside the kitchen window. This condition
seems likely to pass through at least a mild reversalas part of the ongoing restruc-
turing of the utilities industry.With the increasinglyinformed consumer has also
come the rise of competitive"green"generators:Some customers are alreadypay-
ing a premium for their electricityin orderto support alternativesuppliers.In Ari-
zona, and elsewhere,such offeringsare swiftly oversubscribed.
Too MUCH LAND?
In addition to, and as a part of, the aesthetic argumentsagainstwind power, it is
said to take up too much space.But is that true?The answerdependson one's point
of view. For example,North Dakota alone has enough wind energy at class 4 and
388 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

Wind-Power Potential
FIG. 5-Wind electric potential as a percentage of total electricity consumption in the contigu-
ous United States in 1990. Specifications:wind resources greaterthan class 4 at 30 meters (that is,
320 W/m2), 30-meter hub height, loD x 5D spacing, 25 percent efficiency,25 percent losses. Source:
Elliott and Schwartz1993.(Adapted by BarbaraTrapido-Lurie)

above (6 m/sec)4to supply36 percentof the electricityused in the lowerforty-eight

states (Figure5). Only 0.6 percent of the contiguous United States-that is, almost
50,000 km2,or an areaabout the size of New Jersey-could satisfy20 percentof the
nation's demand for electricity.Although that is a substantialland requirement,
only 5 percentof it-an areaabout three-quartersthe size of Rhode Island-would
be occupied by the turbines, electrical equipment, and access roads. Many uses,
such as grazing,could remainwith little interruption(Elliottand Schwartz1993).
A similar argumentfor low-intensity use can be made for other places.In the
denselysettledUnited Kingdom,for example,100oo 30-MWwind farmscould gener-
atethe sameamountof electricityas a 1.5-GWconventionalpower-generatingpower
plant.5Each of these 30-MW wind farms would cover an area of 9 km2,with the
base of the turbinetowersperhapsoccupying1 percentof this area,or some 90 m2.
Six gigawatts,or about o1 percent of the conventional generatingcapacityof the
United Kingdom,would require400 30-MW wind farms occupying 3,600 km2-
about the size of Long Island-in total and 36 km2-about half the size of Bermuda
-for the towers (Elliott 1997). The larger figure is somewhat less than 1.5percent of
the land area of the United Kingdom, albeit the range of visual impact is much
larger.
In order to give these numbers a more concrete sense, one can comparethem
with the land requirementsof conventionalgeneration.By one estimate for coal-
 WIND-POWER LANDSCAPES 389

firedpower plants,8,072GWhareproducedper squarekilometerof impactedland

over the thirty-five-yearlife of the plant (Pasqualettiand Miller 1984).Wind tur-
bines would generate157GWhoverthe same time period and land area.The land at
a coal plant is usually unavailablefor other purposes, however,whereas only 1-5
percentof the land in a deploymentof wind turbines is physicallyoccupied by the
equipment itself (Wilshireand Prose 1987).Using the 1 percent figure,we can ex-
trapolatethat15,680GWharegeneratedper squarekilometerovera periodof thirty-
five years for wind. Thus, when it comes to land actuallywithdrawn from other
uses, wind power is twice as efficient as coal-and without coal's emissions or dis-
ruptions. Evenassumingthat the resultscould vary substantiallyaccordingto un-
derlyingassumptions,these figuressuggest that wind energy'sspace commitment
alone is a questionablebasis for opposing its development.
A furtherelement of the land question revolvesaroundthe potential for multi-
purpose use that wind allows.When privateland is leased for wind turbines,pay-
ments typically at 2-10 percent of the gross revenuesare paid on an annual basis,
dependingon use options. For example,in Altamont Pass,80 kilometerssoutheast
of San Francisco,the lease payments are relativelyhigh, owing to the competitive
pressurefrom housing developments.Leasepaymentsin the more remote Midwest
are usually lower. Landownersare the beneficiariesof these arrangements.A 20-
MW wind plant, operatingat 25 percentcapacity,with an averageenergypayment
of $0.05 per kWh, would produce gross revenue of $2,190,000. If the landowner's
lease is for 2 percent of the gross, this amounts to $43,800 (NWCC1997). In effect, this
is like ranchersand farmersfinding a resourceon their propertythat fetchesalmost
$5,o000extraper hectare.
THE "UGLY"LABEL
Another common public complaint about wind power is that arraysof turbines
degrade the quality of the landscape in which they are found. The most colorful
invectivesin this regardcome from England,where the modern development of
wind power has been called"anew way to rape the countryside"(Economist 1994).
When some people tried to contrastwind's benign reputationwith that of nuclear
power and the scars of coal mining, the debate was called the "battleof the green
giants"(WesternMail 1993).Others derisivelyrefer to wind turbines as "lavatory
brushes in the air" (Sir Bernard Ingham, quoted in Elliott 1997, 161-162). Similar
sentiments have greeted wind-power developments in Germany,Denmark, Swe-
den, Spain, and severalparts of the United States.These epithets suggest that the
public is concernedwith the appearanceof the turbines as much as with the actual
areaof land affected.
Why are feelingsabout the visual impact of wind power so intense?I offerthree
reasons. First, people expect "permanence"in their landscapes, a belief that has
developedwith an understandingof nature'sslow work from the time of the earli-
est humans.This perceptionis rudelyviolatedwhen abruptand fundamentalland-
scapechange occurs,such as when a road gashesthrough a wildernessor a housing
390 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

tract rises along an isolated beach. Such change can be fundamentallydisturbing,

perhapsbecause we are not biologicallyevolved enough to cope with the modern
speed of change. Change-especially that which is abrupt, conspicuous, or unfa-
miliar-is, at some basic level, threatening.
Second,especiallyin the westernUnited States,wind-powerdevelopmentschal-
lenge the somewhat worn yet lingering image of "Big Sky Country."Open space
remainsthe West'sgreatestattributeand attraction,the inalienablerightof all those
with the luck to havebeen born there or-as some believe-the sense to havemoved
there.
Third, in the western United Statesspatialseparationbuffersthe places of en-
ergy developmentfrom the places of resourceuse. Consequently,electricityseems
to come not from the earthbut from a switch,the elaborateand almost omnipres-
ent industrialequivalentof magic.

WIND POWER IN AN OASIS

We havebeen using wind from prehistorictimes, but its applicationfor the genera-
tion of commercialelectricityis recent,having begun in earnest only in the mid-
198os in three areas of California,including San Gorgonio Pass.Attractedby the
rising cost of fossil fuel, lulled by yearsof public support for renewableenergy,and
thinking that the windsweptland of the pass had no public value, wind-powerde-
velopersexpectedpublic encouragement,if not outright praise,for their initiative.
Instead,they encounteredstrong disapproval,especiallyfrom people living in the
nearbyresortcity of Palm Springs.
Soon afterthe wind turbineswere installed,the city claimed that they were in-
dustrializingand therebydesecratingthe principalgatewayto the resorts.Worried
PalmSpringsleadersdirectedthat a suitbe filedagainstthe managersof the land-the
U.S. Departmentof the Interior'sBureauof LandManagementand the County of
Riverside-claimingthat the two bureaucracieshad failedto follow properenviron-
mental procedureswhen they permittedthe public land in the pass to be developed
for wind power.Many local residentsthought-correctly-that the turbines rarely
worked and that the economic incentives designed to stimulatewind power also
had tax advantages.At a minimum, city leaders asserted,any electricitythat was
generatedwas not worth the landscapechangesthe wind turbines produced.And,
of course,the city was not receivingany directbenefit.

THE GREATEST POWER OF WIND LANDSCAPES

Although wind-power developments have been blamed for everything from bad
television reception to bird deaths, it is the imprimatur of wind generators on
the land that figures most prominently in the public consciousness. One group
wants to use the land for the generation of electricity; another group wants it
for something else, possibly just for its scenery. Land-use competition is the
core argument for those who consider wind power the rotten apple on the alter-
native energy tree.
 WIND-POWER LANDSCAPES 391

FIG. 6-Wind energy in Kappel, Denmark, illustrating how symmetry, placement, and attention to

existing landforms can work together to reduce the objectionable clutter that has characterized other
wind developments. These twenty-four turbines, commissioned in August 199o, have a capacity of 9.6
MW. (Photograph courtesy of Jens Bygholm)

The first two steps along the path to a fresherfruit seem clear.First,the wind-
power industry must incorporateall reasonabletechnical improvementsto miti-
gate impacts and assuage public unrest. Some progress has been made in these
respects:Equipment is now more efficient, more powerful, increasinglyaerody-
namic, quieter,safer,and more reliable.This means that fewerturbines are needed
to generatean equal amount of electricity.Wind-powerdevelopmentsalso tend to
glint and reflectless noticeably,to look less cluttered,and to be more uniform in
design and arrangement.All of these improvements have reduced the targets of
public objection, even those that focus expresslyon wind-turbinevisibility.
Second, industry must strive to intelligently and carefully integrate turbines
within individuallandscapesin which they work.Severalgenericstepscan be taken,
includingattentionto scale,symmetryof design, carefulroad constructionand site
preparation,and equipment maintenance.Such care can yield positive results, as
the Danes-long pioneersin wind-powertechnology-have demonstrated(Nielsen
1996) (Figure 6).
No matter how much we do to reduce the impact of wind turbines on land-
scapes,nothing can renderthem invisible.The most sensibleremainingstep, then,
is to embracewind'svisibilitynot as a problembut as an asset.If one concedes that
the essentialfirststepin communicationis attractinginitialaudienceattention,wind's
392 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

TABLE I-UNAVOIDABLE CHARACTERISTICS OF WIND-POWER GENERATION

AND REACTIONS TO THEM

CHARACTERISTICS MITIGATION MEASURES IN PLACE FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND NEEDS

Diffuse resource Localplanning ordinances Continued repowering

Site specificity Neutral paint and finishes Continued technicalgains
Intrusiveness Safetyand visibilitysetbacks Site evaluationand planning
Compact fuel chain Retiringbonds Economic education
Rotationalmovement Noise reduction and muffling Environmentaleducation
Existingnaturalfeatures Undergroundlines
Slim monopolies
Finding alternatesources
(repowering)

intrinsicvisibilityis the most logical foundation for a programof public education

that highlightsenvironmentaladvantagesof wind over other sourcesof electricity.
Actually harmonizing wind machines with host landscapeswill then rely on the
interplayof social and physicalgeography.
These steps are summarizedin TableI. The firstcolumn lists the characteristics
of wind power from which we cannot escape.The second identifiesthe mitigation
measuresthat have alreadybeen implemented.And the third highlightssteps,such
as planning and education, that we seem ready to address more completely and
creatively.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Civilizationgrewup with wind power.It was used to move boats alongthe Nile River
5,000 yearsago and to pump waterin Chinaseveralcenturiesbeforethe beginningof
the Christianera.Forbetteror for worse,Europeanexplorationcould not have oc-
curredwithout it. Wearefamiliarwith wind power,so it holds none of the mysteryof
fission or fusion or even standardfossil-fueledpower generation.Its total environ-
mental impacts are approximatedby its landscapeexpression.Most important,its
physicalpresenceremindsus that our supplyof electricityhas environmentalcosts,
regardlessof whetherthey arenearbyor too distantor camouflagedto see.
If wind energyis to expand, so too will wind-energylandscapesand the atten-
tion paid to them by the public. If developersare to cultivatethe promise of wind
power, they should not intrude on favored (or even conspicuous) landscapes,re-
gardlessof the technical temptations these spots may offer. Had this been an ac-
cepted admonition twentyyearsago,the potential of the San Gorgonio Passmight
havecarriedwith it the threatof publicbacklashsufficientto cause more farsighted
developersto hesitate.This argues for a more carefulmelding of land use, scenic
values,public opinion, and environmentalregulationswith the technicalconsider-
ations of each site.
The benefits of wind energy are as apparentas are the challengesof the rapid
and dramaticlandscapechangesthat wind power creates.A balancebetween costs
 WIND-POWER LANDSCAPES 393

and benefits is achievable,however,if the public does more-in classrooms,visitor

centers,tours, signs, and the like-to consider the full case before it. The best first
step in assessingthis case is to realizethat just because wind-power generation is
visible,it is not necessarilyharmful.The second is to value wind-power landscapes
as benign remindersthat the convenienceswe enjoy and the lifestyleswe lead have
attendantcosts, costs that we are unwise to hide and foolish to forget.This may be,
afterall is said and done, the most important reason to develop wind energy.

NOTES
1. In FooteCreekRim,Wyoming,for example,opponentsaskedwhy U.S.Windpower-the original
developer-did not simply move to a similartopographicalarea,apparentlynot graspingthe issue of
the cube law for wind and the need to place plants at the windiest sites. (My thanks to Tom Grayfor
this example.)
2. The mission statementof the Glen CanyonInstitutereads:"TheGlen Canyon Institute'smis-
sion is to provide leadershipin re-establishingthe free flow of the Colorado Riverthrough a restored
Glen Canyon"[http://www.glencanyon.org].
3. The use of the shallow North Sea by severalwind developers is an example of one way to
increaseseparation,to provideunobstructedaccessto the wind, and to makewind-power generation
less visible to the public.
4. That is, those areasat class4 and above areconsideredsuitablefor development.Class4 winds
can annuallyproduce 11.65million kWh/km2.Areaswith class4 winds and above total approximately
460,000 km2,or about 6 percentof the total land areain the contiguous United States.The potential
averagegenerationfrom areaswith class 4 (6 m/sec) and higher,which are suitablefor development
using advancedwind-turbinetechnology,is estimatedat 500,000 MW. If future-generationtechnol-
ogy is utilizedto takeadvantageof areaswith wind resourcesof class3 and higher,then the amount of
windy land availableis more than 1,ooo,oookm2,or almost 14percentof the land areain the contigu-
ous United States.A group of twelve states in the midsection of the nation has enough wind-energy
potential to produce nearlyfour times the amount of electricityconsumed by the entire country in
1990 (Elliott and Schwartz 1993).
5. Population density in the United Kingdom (240/km2)is nine times greaterthan that in the
United States (27/km2).

REFERENCES
Clare,R., ed. 1992. TidalPower:Trendsand Developments:Proceedingsof the 4th Conferenceon Tidal
Power.London:Thomas Telford.
Cosgrove,D., and S. Daniels, eds. 1988. TheIconographyof Landscape:Essayson the SymbolicRepre-
sentation,Design,and Useof PastEnvironments.Cambridge,England,and New York:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Economist. 1994. The Economist, 22 January.
Elliott, D. 1997. Energy,Society,and Environment:Technologyfor a SustainableFuture.London and
New York:Routledge.
Elliott,D. L., and M. N. Schwartz. 1993. WindEnergyPotentialin the UnitedStates.ReportNo. PNL-
SA-23109. Richland,Wash.:Pacific Northwest Laboratory.[http://www.nrel.gov/wind/potential
.html].
Gipe,P. 1999. WorldWindGeneratingCapacity.PaulGipe&Associates.[http://rotor.fbl2.tu-berlin.de/
overview99/worldol.gif].
Nielsen,F.B. 1996. WindTurbines& theLandscape:Architecture Aesthetics.Aarhus,Denmark:Birk
Nielsens Tegnestue.
NWCC [NationalWind CoordinatingCommittee]. 1997. TheEffectof WindEnergyDevelopmenton
Stateand LocalEconomies.Wind EnergyIssue Brief No. 5. [http://www.nationalwind.org/pubs/
wes/ibriefo5.htm].January.
394 THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW

Pasqualetti,M. J.,and E. Butler. 1987. PublicReactionto Wind Development in California.Interna-

tionalJournalof AmbientEnergy8 (3): 83-90.
Pasqualetti,M. J.,and M. Dellinger. 1989. HazardousWastefrom GeothermalEnergy:A Case Study.
Journal of Energy and Development 13 (2): 275-295.
Pasqualetti,M. J., and B. A. Miller. 1984. LandRequirementsfor the Solar and Coal Options. Geo-
graphical Journal 152 (2): 192-212.
Righter,R. W. 1996. WindEnergyin America:A History.Norman:Universityof OklahomaPress.
Thayer,R. 1994. GrayWorld,GreenHeart:Technology,Nature,and the SustainableLandscape.New
York:JohnWiley & Sons.
Western Mail. 1993. Western Mail [Cardiff, Wales], 13 September.
Wilshire,H., and D. Prose. 1987. Wind EnergyDevelopmentin California,USA.EnvironmentalMan-
agement 11 (1): 13-20.