Valuing trade-offs between renewable energy and ecosystems

In pursuit of a more sustainable economy and society, policies worldwide support the renewable energy transition and the protection of natural ecosystems. While these goals tend to be viewed independently, renewable energy development can disrupt ecosystem processes. Due to their interactions with natural resources such as water and biomass, hydropower and biogas exemplify this tension. Hydropower plants can alter the flow, level and temperature in water bodies, which can lead to changes in ecosystem processes. Similarly, the development of biogas has stimulated the cultivation of energy crops, which can directly compete with food production and decrease farmland biodiversity. In light of this tension, this dissertation aims to value trade-offs between renewable energy and ecosystems in four empirical studies. The first study investigates stakeholder preferences for biogas development. As German renewable energy policy has been lauded as a model for others, the expiration of the biogas feed-in-tariff scheme offers an interesting setting for understanding how stakeholders believe the sector should progress. The results indicate that support mechanisms should only compensate for specific benefits such as flexibility, special feedstock or heating to reduce tension between biogas and non-biogas farmers. The second study shifts the attention to hydropower and compares public values about run-of-the-river (RoR) hydropower in Germany, Portugal and Sweden. As a large share of future hydropower in Europe will use RoR schemes, its development represents an opportunity for sustainable decentralization. The results indicate strong preferences for regional control, citizen well-being and ecological measures, which implies that RoR hydropower should be managed as a source of distributed generation and that operators should adopt mitigation strategies that deliver both ecological and societal benefits. Given that mitigation strategies can be costly and reduce power production, the third study focuses on the economic trade-offs between the restoration of fish passage and hydropower production. We find that power losses do not account for a large share of lifetime mitigation costs, nature-like fish passes incur lower costs overall and there is limited information about monitoring costs. To quantify benefits of mitigation, the fourth study measures the public’s willingness to pay for ecological measures and monitoring at hydropower plants. The results indicate strong support for fish protection and monitoring as well as opposition to foreign ownership. Additionally, two supplementary studies investigate links between climate change and smallholder vulnerability and empowerment in South Asia. Overall, the results of this dissertation highlight the importance of valuing externalities associated with ecological mitigation for renewable energy to increase its use, acceptance and diffusion.