Energy Geotechnics – Wuttke, Bauer & Sánchez (Eds)

© 2016 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-03299-6

A comparative study of wind farm potential in shallow-waters in

Brazil and Scotland

G. Alves & S.B. Mickovski

School of Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow Scotland, UK

ABSTRACT: Facing the predicted climate changes and the potential measures to reduce carbon dioxide emis-
sions globally, there is an increased use of clean renewable energy sources. In Europe, the wind power has often
been used in the last decades and, more recently, a trend for offshore utilization has been noticed. However,
there is a lack of knowledge on the specific planning and engineering considerations relevant to construction of
wind farms in shallow waters. The aim of this study is investigate the potential for wind power plants in shallow
waters at sites with contrasting bio-geo-climatic characteristics. Scotland is well known for the potential offshore
wind energy and in Brazil, where this technique is not yet in use, there are only initial studies with indication
of governmental interest for future implantations in great lakes. The focus of this study is on the environmental
impact assessment as well as the impact on coastal communities and public participation in the decision-making.
To this end, this study reviews the current practice in site determination, planning, and construction while inves-
tigating the potential for construction of wind farms at two shallow waters locations in Scotland and Brazil. A
comparative study between the two countries for offshore wind turbines geotechnics with proper structure at
low depths of water, taking into accounts the environmental characteristics and needs along with suitable wind
towers construction is outlined. The results show variation of construction models used by both countries regard-
ing the environmental impact assessment and a convergent tendency for projects planning acceptance by the
communities. The study identifies a potential transfer of knowledge in specific areas of planning, development,
and construction of offshore wind farms in shallow waters. Additionally, this study recognizes the importance
of geo-environmental site investigation and classification within a sustainability framework.

Keywords: wind power, offshore geotechnics, shallow water, environmental impact assessment, planning,
public participation

1 INTRODUCTION in the de-carbonization of the EU energy system. For

In many countries, natural gas, oil, coal and nuclear
sources are the main source of energy. These are recog-
nized as highly harmful to the environment for energy
production, either by their extraction, use/waste burn-
ing and returned to the environment and also its rarity
nature, not being renewable. Policies for reduction car-
bon emissions in the atmosphere have been adopted
and have given impulse to development and energy
production from renewable energy sources and not pol-
luting (Ochieng et al. 2014). With individual targets for
reduction of emission of greenhouse gases to be met,
countries are committed to limiting the emission of
certain gases to the environment so as to combat the
greenhouse effect.
The renewable energy is a term that refers to the
source of energy that is not exhausted by the long-
term use, and regenerates in relatively short time such
as the wind energy. Commonly recognized as environ-
mentally friendly, it has been playing an important part
the UK it is expected that by 2020, 15% of the gener-
ated energy (electricity, heating and transport) will be
coming from renewable sources (DECC et al. 2015),
and a commitment from public and private sector will
be needed.
Wind energy has been very important in clean
energy production for being one of the most mature
technologies in use, especially in shallow waters (Koh,
Ng 2016), but offshore wind projects can present
environmental problems such as noise, landscape alter-
ation, mortality of wildlife especially birds, shadow
flicker, in addition to deal with the constant require-
ments of the people living around the enterprises and
feel affected in some way (Aitken 2010). Hence, to
ensure the viability of projects with perceived potential
for environmental threat, it is necessary to include pub-
lic consultations for the feasibility of projects (BWEA,
2002).
Wind farms have a tendency to be expensive when
compared to other forms of power generation (Levitt

99
et al. 2011), and considering the offshore energy gen-
erated, the expenses are even higher with increasing
distance from the coast and depth at which the struc-
tures will be installed have being the main factors
that influence the high value of the investments (Hig-
gins, Foley 2014). Typically, in remote off-shore the
wind speeds tend to be larger (Cavazzi, Dutton 2016).
Therefore, more robust structures are used with greater
demand for materials and there is a greater need for
services and logistics (Sovacool, Enevoldsen 2015).
However, the notion of depth is according to the evo-
lution of technology. In shallow waters, the technology
for construction of structures is already well known,
and the foundation is the main differential being 5
types of foundation structures usually used (Koh, Ng
2016). The need for applying each of the structures
varies with the depth that will be accessed: Monopile
(0–25 m), Gravity based (0–25 m), Jacket (20–50 m),
Tripod (20–50 m), Tripile (30–50).
In the meantime, the costs of projects of this nature,
offshore, tend to have up, often, three times the cost of
the projects to be carried out onshore and this is due
not only the distance from the coast or depth, but also
for all special treatment that the structures need to sup-
port the abrasive conditions of the sea (Wu et al. 2014).
However, this is only an assumption, since the compar-
ison of values between offshore projects is relatively
complex, especially when considering the different
physical and environmental characteristics, and eco-
nomic reality of the construction sites (Dismukes,
Upton Jr. 2015).
2 BACKGROUND
Currently, the alternatives of offshore wind energy
to be explored are not only related to the generation
capacity of the wind turbines but also to installation
sites (Le et al. 2014). Some of the sites with favorable
wind for the power plants can present challenges to the
implementation. However, the governments of Brazil
and Scotland are driving efforts to develop the wind
energy technology in theirs territory, once this source
has a huge potential to be explored in both countries.
Via the decisions of public policies, both countries,
Brazil and Scotland, are driving their energetic sys-
tems to use mainly renewable energy sources in the
composition of their energetic matrix. Among these
efforts, it is the increasing of security of supply of
energy sources from renewable alternatives sources,
notably wind farms.
Scotland decided to expand the UK targets and
aims to ensure that whole electric power generated in
the country can be provided from renewable energy
sources (O’Keeffe, Haggett 2012), with planned at
least 4.5 GW from offshore wind energy (DECC
et al. 2015). A demonstration project (7 MW turbine
founded on jacket foundation; Renewable UK 2015)
was used to prove the concept, and a number of projects
are currently at different stages albeit none at construc-
tion phase. One of the biggest wind generation parks
100
designed for the country, Firth of Forth, in the region
of Edinburgh, will have more than 700 wind turbines
in relatively shallow depth (50 m; (O’Keeffe, Haggett
2012). It is expected that the foundation structure to
be used in this project is the same used in the Energy
Park Life demonstration tower already installed.
In Brazil, through the NPCC – National Policy on
Climate Change (MMA – Ministerio do Meio Ambi-
ente, Brazil 2009), the country ensures efforts to build
a low-carbon consumption savings in electric power
generation. Thus, as it is established by the Kyoto Pro-
tocol, Brazil voluntarily assumes the commitment for
reduction of greenhouse gases emission projected until
2020. Currently, Brazil already has its energetic and,
more specifically, its electric matrix based on renew-
able energy. Hydropower is the largest electric power
supplier in the Brazilian electrical system where the
non-renewable energy source is only 26.9% in 2014. In
the same year the wind energy production had 85.6%
increases over the previous year, reaching 12.210 GWh
(EPE Brazil 2015).
At the moment, Brazil still does not use off-
shore technology for wind power generation; however,
potential sites for the development have been investi-
gated (Schubert et al. 2014). In general, the areas in
which the studies of viable and favorable winds are
located are the sites with the lower depths, in areas
near the coast. This favors the installation of wind tur-
bines with more mature and inexpensive technology.
Offshore wind farms usually have large dimensions,
and in view of the necessary capital investment for
generation, financial details are quite important.
According to the complementarity theory of
hydropower system in Brazil (Silva et al. 2016) the
wind energy can provide an alternative clean source
of electric energy during the periods of lower level of
water storage due to decreased rainfall. Wind energy
has great potential to be explored favoring the main-
tenance of the level of reservoirs of rainfall shortage
periods (ONS Brazil 2015).
It was approved in 2014 by CONAMA – National
Environmental Council (Brazil) rules that regulate the
environmental licensing and establishes criteria for
onshore electric plants and establishes that for enter-
prises with low level environmental impact, the need
for public consultation is eliminated. Knowing that
offshore wind turbine development may affect marine
life negatively (Toonen, Lindeboom 2015), and many
other positive and negative effects are still unknown, it
is necessary to have more studies to identify and assess
the level of offshore wind plants impact.
The rules that will regulate the environmental
licensing for offshore power plants in Brazil would
be developed after the elaboration of standards for
onshore projects, and has not been published up to
this date. It must be considered essential for a coun-
try owning the regularization statutory process for
large enterprise development procedure as the imple-
mentation of offshore wind farms. It ensures legal
security and presents the projects more attractive to
investors.
 Investments are extremely important in supplies
coming from alternative energy systems to the existing
hydroelectric system in Brazil. The greatest potential
for hydroelectric power in the country is in use, leav-
ing the ones with greater environmental complexity
(Eletrosul 2008) to be developed. These systems could
lower the dependence of the present hydropower sys-
tem and contribute to the sustainable development of
region accessed.
3 SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE OF OFFSHORE
WIND FARMS
According to surveys assessing the tendency of Euro-
pean citizens to fund and pay the price by advances
in clean energy (Haggett 2011), if it could reflect in
the energy bill, it is still not clear with studies report-
ing conflicting results (Walker et al. 2014). Therefore,
it should be considered that not everyone is willing
to pay for such development (Wüstenhagen, Bilharz
2006). Developers also assume the task of trying to
keep the accessible costs of the offshore wind farms,
since there is the unpopularity caused the increase in
energy bills. It is believed that developers would be
more willing to seek lower costs if this factor could
raise the number of public supporters (Hooper et al.
2015).
During the licensing process for offshore wind
projects in UK, public consultation is necessary
according to the standards set by The Crown Estate
with presentation of environmental impact assess-
ment (EIA) studies for discussion with the public.
At this stage a range of stakeholders are considered,
together with other interested parties for clarifications
and agreements that may be necessary and possible
financial compensation or mitigating environmen-
tal measures caused by the construction process are
sought.
Environmental issues, such as landscape change,
can clearly change public perception (Dai et al. 2015).
The study of public participation becomes neces-
sary since the lack of support for development from
the public (e.g. NIMBY – Not in My Back Yard;
Bidwell 2013) can seriously derail offshore projects.
Companies seek to compensate residents affected by
environmental problems what cause in many partici-
pants the feeling of bribery. (Walker et al. 2014) and
the developers must consider the socioeconomic real-
ity of the region affected during planning. Factors such
as age, income and educational level of the affected
population can interfere with understanding capacity
of the proposed projects and even consider the possi-
bility of the respondents individuals possess different
interests when suggested projects.
The connection of the communities with the land
and cultural heritage can be determining factors for
decision support or opposition (Lombard, Ferreira
2014). Indigenous communities in several areas in
Brazil have deep cultural connection with the envi-
ronment. One of the study areas for offshore wind
farm implementation in southern Brazil, the Lagoa dos
101
Patos, has a considerable number of indigenous com-
munities and areas of integral protection. On the other
hand, in Scotland, it is possible to encounter a number
of ship wrecks in the areas for potential development.
The above can contribute negatively for the perception
of the offshore enterprises by the communities.
According to the review of several studies
(Betakova et al. 2015, Ladenburg, Lutzeyer 2012,
Westerberg et al. 2015), the factor with the greatest
influence on the decision to supporting or not the wind
projects would be the loss of landscape or its alteration
thereof. The landscape alteration can bring social reac-
tions and, if we consider large developments, effects
on the local fauna (Hammar et al. 2014). The environ-
mental impacts related to construction for wind power
generation largely depend siting and the local envi-
ronmental (Leung, Yang 2012). The above shows that
there is a gap between public acceptance and local
opposition, and it can be better understood “when con-
sidering the environmental trade-off and global gains”
(Hall et al. 2013).
4 POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH WINDFARM
CONSTRUCTION IN SHALLOW WATERS
Shallow waters are those included in up to 50 meters
depth and the areas that comprise this water lamina
height are the most targeted for development projects
(Raadal et al. 2014). The tendency is that the depth
maritime increase according to the distance from the
coast. Thus, the shallow waters, ideal for enterprises
with low cost of construction are located in areas where
the visual impact is considered a factor to decrease
support the execution of the projects. Direct impacts
related to the public would be linked to the changes
presented in the landscape. The divergence of opinion
as the landscape alteration caused by wind structures
is still considered an area of research that needs further
clarification.
The foundations design and construction for these
projects can also be regarded as environmental impact
factor. The installation of the structures can provoke
disturbances in the marine environment, even being
insensitive to the human being, at the first moment; it
can become harmful to marine species. Basically, all
structures require a step of drilling the seabed, with
exception of gravity base foundation. Such founda-
tions that require drilling for installation may suspend
seabed sediments becoming harmful to life the fish and
even their reproduction. Depending on the structure of
the soil in chosen sites, it is possible that more harmful
alternatives need to be used, as the use of explosives.
The impact sound emitted by construction works of the
projects may also be mentioned as an environmental
threat factor. Some studies try to identify if there are
environmental threat related to grid connection by the
emission of possible electromagnetic waves.
Considering the continental shelf, the water depths
in the coastal areas of southern Brazil and coast bor-
dering the Lagoa dos Patos are relatively shallow. The
area has favourable winds for the siting of a wind farm.
The lagoon depth ranges from 7 m into the lagoon to
up to 50m in oceanic areas bordering the shore of
the lagoon. Due to this and because of marine habi-
tats, gravity foundation structure can be an option
more financially viable and better adaptable to the
local environment. The use of more complex structures
needing higher value for construction are disregarded
in this case, once the towers anchored that are con-
siderably a new technology for deep waters (Leung,
Yang 2012), which ensures the project is designed in
that region access a technology to foundations and
structures with more mature technology and better
economic value. For deep water, with water depth over
50 meters, the structures begin to provide high value
and floating structures present a good solution (Koh,
Ng 2016).
For Scotland, a concern reported by fishing entities
is the issue of navigation in and adjacent to wind tur-
bines (Schillings et al. 2012). It must be considered
that the North Sea, in the case of Scottish waters is
indeed quite busy, with oil production, gas, military
activities and navigation routes (Toonen, Lindeboom
2015). Co-location of offshore wind farms and fish-
eries are studied, once artificial reefs are created from
the turbine foundations. However, in many cases, it is
not possible. The safety zones for the boats are 500
meters away from the structures (Hooper et al. 2015).
Such restrictive measures it is necessary for safety
purposes. Thus, to practice co-location between com-
panies and fisheries would be necessary application
of insurance, training and open direct communication
channel between the company and fishermen.
5 PROPOSED METHODOLOGY
The measurement of social acceptance of offshore
wind farms has not been completely explained in the
past, while the low level of support to the enterprises
gives a bad popularity to the technology and, there-
fore, makes the offshore wind farms less attractive for
investments. Considering the number of offshore wind
farms planned for Scotland and the increased possibil-
ity of offshore wind farms in Brazil begin to be planned
in areas where environmental issues are relevant, the
assessment of social acceptance can provide a tool for
best guideline of development in agreement with the
public concerns. For this study, we assessed the cur-
rent research on the public participation and the effects
on the technology for offshore wind farms in shallow
waters, contrasting Scotland and Brazil.
For the next stage on this research, the data collec-
tion and analysis of the effects accessed responses, this
study will be carried out by interviews with the stake-
holders based on a standardized questionnaire survey
for merchants and institutions possible involved in the
activities undertaken at the site, which will provide
some quantitative data. The sites of research inter-
est are Lagoa dos Patos, in Brazil, and the coast of
Aberdeen, in Scotland. Both sites have been showing
suitable for implementation of wind energy, mainly
102
offshore. The application of questionnaire should be
performed during field work in order to collect and
set the sample that will be accessed. The interview
will have semi structured questions to allow accessed
have the possibility, at some point, openly express their
concerns. Research will also be done by observation
and informal conversations that allows the partici-
pants to be more confidents to express their concerns.
The questionnaire based on an embracing literature
review should be built considering the place attach-
ment and knowledge of the region, common public
concerns, assessment of level of knowledge technolo-
gies proposed and expectations for the respondents.
For this analysis should be considered the evaluation of
cultural heritage by the participants related to the envi-
ronment, and socio-demographic characteristics as age
and education, as the level of understanding of the
level of involvement and complexity of projects that
is important factor for supporting the constructions.
It is intended to separate the participants into groups
in order to achieve equality among socioeconomic
factors accessed.
6 CONCLUSIONS
The present paper understands as necessary a continu-
ous study of public acceptance of energy enterprises,
mainly the offshore wind farms. It considers the great
number of energy production planned coming from
this source for the next years in United Kingdom and
the possibility for future implementation in Brazil.
Assuming the evolution of energy production sector is
been targeting the generation of clean energy to avoid
the carbon emission on the atmosphere, this evolution
is a tool for achieve the common welfare, for society
and environment. This new focus for energy supply
combats the global warming and climate changes, and
it is necessary to include the public participation, opin-
ion and understanding of the enterprises. Researches
have been showing that the level of acceptance of the
wind turbines can increase with the better understand-
ing of the enterprises, planning and benefits for the
local communities.
There are cases of public manifestations for no sup-
porting for implantation of wind onshore parks and
the same kind of view can be replicated for the off-
shore structures, and these movements can generate
unplanned expensive for the enterprise, once the com-
panies will have to deal with unsatisfied communities.
However better explanations and involvement of the
communities located near the structures perhaps can
provide an improvement of the understanding of the
offshore wind parks and show the importance for the
whole society about the support for this source of
energy supply. The enterprise near the coast might pro-
vide a tourist attraction linking the region to sustain-
able development, reflecting the ideology of providing
clean energy and progress thought focused on human
well-being, or even, contributing for the local economy
when possible, as the example of co-location between
fishers and structures.
 Second few researches, the NIMBY’s do not explain
satisfactorily the intention of not supporting wind
farms. The main reasons for decreasing and increas-
ing of support of the enterprises are still conflicting,
requiring more studies in the field of acceptance of
offshore and onshore wind farms. The benefits com-
ing from the wind power plants should not be felt as
bribery and the outcomes prevenient from the enter-
prises in the communities makes necessary an exten-
sive study to clarification and, therefore, contribution
for the development of technology in accordance with
population interest.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors acknowledge CNPq (Conselho Nacional
de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico –
Brazil) for the financial support.
REFERENCES
Aitken, M., 2010. Wind power and community benefits:
Challenges and opportunities. Energy Policy. 38(10), pp.
6066–6075.
Barlow, E., et al., 2015. Exploring the impact of innovative
developments to the installation process for an offshore
wind farm. Ocean Engineering. 109 pp. 623–634.
Betakova, V., Vojar, J. and Sklenicka, P., 2015. Wind turbines
location: How many and how far?. Applied Energy.151
pp. 23–31.
Bidwell, D., 2013. The role of values in public beliefs and atti-
tudes towards commercial wind energy. Energy Policy.58
pp. 189–199.
Bwea – British Wind Energy Association, 2002. Best pratice
guideline: Consultation for offshore wind energy devel-
opments. [database online]. London: BWEA. [viewed
October, 2015].Available from: http://www.energy.ca.gov/
windguidelines/documents/other_guidelines/BWEA-BPG-
OFFSHORE.PDF.
Cavazzi, S. and Dutton, A.G., 2016. An Offshore Wind
Energy Geographic Information System (OWE-GIS) for
assessment of the UK’s offshore wind energy potential.
Renewable Energy. 87, Part 1 pp. 212–228.
Decc et al., 2015. Energy in Scotland 2015. [database
online]. The Scottish Government Website: The Scot-
tish Government. [viewed June, 2015]. Available from:
http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Business/
Energy/EIS2015.
Dismukes, D.E. and Upton JR., G.B., 2015. Economies
of scale, learning effects and offshore wind develop-
ment costs. Renewable Energy. 83 pp. 61–66.
Eletrosul., 2008. Relatorio Ambiental Simplificado do Com-
plexo Eolico Coxilha Negra – Modulos V, VI e VII.
AmbioTech Consultoria ed., Curitiba, BR: Eletrosul Cen-
trais Eletricas.
EPE Brazil, 2015. Brazilian Energy Balance 2015 Year
2014. [database online]. Rio de Janeiro: Empresa de
Pesquisa Energética. [viewed January, 2015]. Available
from: https://ben.epe.gov.br/downloads/Relatorio_Final_
BEN_2015.pdf
Firestone, J. and Kempton, W., 2007. Public opinion about
large offshore wind power: Underlying factors. Energy
Policy. 35(3), pp. 1584–1598.
103
Haggett, C., 2011. Understanding public responses to off-
shore wind power. Energy Policy. 39(2), pp. 503–510.
Hall, N., Ashworth, P. and Devine-Wright, P., 2013. Soci-
etal acceptance of wind farms: Analysis of four common
themes across Australian case studies. Energy Policy. 58
pp. 200–208.
Hammar, L., Wikström, A. and Molander, S., 2014. Assessing
ecological risks of offshore wind power on Kattegat cod.
Renewable Energy. 66(0), pp. 414–424.
Higgins, P. and Foley, A., 2014. The evolution of offshore
wind power in the United Kingdom. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 37(0), pp. 599–612.
Hooper, T., Ashley, M. and Austen, M., 2015. Perceptions of
fishers and developers on the co-location of offshore wind
farms and decapod fisheries in the UK. Marine Policy. 61
pp. 16–22.
Koh, J.H. and Ng, E.Y.K., 2016. Downwind offshore
wind turbines: Opportunities, trends and technical chal-
lenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 54
pp. 797–808.
Ladenburg, J. and Lutzeyer, S., 2012. The economics of visual
disamenity reductions of offshore wind farms—Review
and suggestions from an emerging field. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 16(9), pp. 6793–6802.
Le, T.M.H., Eiksund, G.R., Strøm, P.J. and Saue, M., 2014.
Geological and geotechnical characterisation for offshore
wind turbine foundations: A case study of the Sher-
ingham Shoal wind farm. Engineering Geology. 177(0),
pp. 40–53.
Leung, D.Y.C. and Yang, Y., 2012. Wind energy development
and its environmental impact: A review. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 16(1), pp. 1031–1039.
Levitt,A.C., et al., 2011. Pricing offshore wind power. Energy
Policy. 39(10), pp. 6408–6421.
Lombard, A. and Ferreira, S., 2014. Residents’ attitudes to
proposed wind farms in the West Coast region of South
Africa:A social perspective from the South. Energy Policy.
66 pp. 390–399.
MMA – Ministerio do Meio Ambiente, Brazil., 2009.
Política Nacional sobre Mudança do Clima. [database
online].Brasilia: Brazil, 29/12/2009, ISBN 12187.
O’keeffe, A. and Haggett, C., 2012. An investigation into the
potential barriers facing the development of offshore wind
energy in Scotland: Case study – Firth of Forth offshore
wind farm. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
16(6), pp. 3711–3721.
Ochieng, E.G., et al., 2014. Future for offshore wind energy
in the United Kingdom: The way forward. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 39(0), pp. 655–666.
ONS Brazil, 2015. ONS – Operador Nacional do Sistema
Elétrico – Situacao dos Reservatorios, Energia Armazeda
por Região. [database online]. ONS. [viewed April, 2015].
Available from: www.ons.org.br.
Raadal, H.L., Vold, B.I., Myhr, A. and Nygaard, T.A.,
2014. GHG emissions and energy performance of
offshore wind power. Renewable Energy. 66(0), pp.
314–324.
Renewable UK, 2015. Offshore Wind Project Timelines
2015. [database online]. London: Renewable UK.
[viewed September, 2015]. Available from: http://www.
renewableuk. com/en/publications/reports.cfm/Offshore-
Wind-Project-Timelines-2015.
Schillings, C., et al., 2012. A decision support system for
assessing offshore wind energy potential in the North Sea.
Energy Policy. 49(0), pp. 541–551.
Schubert et al., 2014. Atlas Eolico: Rio Grande do Sul. 2nd
ed. Porto Alegre: AGDI.
Silva, A.R., Pimenta, F.M., Assireu, A.T. and Spyrides,
M.H.C., 2016. Complementarity of Brazil’s hydro and
offshore wind power. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 56 pp. 413–427.
Sovacool, B.K. and Enevoldsen, P., 2015. One style to build
them all: Corporate culture and innovation in the offshore
wind industry. Energy Policy. 86 pp. 402–415.
Toonen, H.M. and Lindeboom, H.J., 2015. Dark green elec-
tricity comes from the sea: Capitalizing on ecological mer-
its of offshore wind power?. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 42(0), pp. 1023–1033.
Walker, B.J.A., Wiersma, B. and Bailey, E., 2014. Com-
munity benefits, framing and the social acceptance
ofoffshore wind farms: An experimental study in
104
England. Energy Research & Social Science. 3(0),
pp. 46–54.
Westerberg, V., Jacobsen, J.B. and Lifran, R., 2015. Offshore
wind farms in Southern Europe – Determining tourist
preference and social acceptance. Energy Research &
Social Science. 10 pp. 165–179.
Wu, J., Wang, Z. and Wang, G., 2014. The key technologies
and development of offshore wind farm in China. Renew-
able and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 34 pp. 453–462.
Wüstenhagen, R. and Bilharz, M., 2006. Green energy mar-
ket development in Germany: effective public policy
and emerging customer demand. Energy Policy. 34(13),
pp. 1681–1696.