Nothing to regret: Reconciling renewable energies with human wellbeing and nature in the German Energy Transition

Abstract

Although the transition to energy supply through renewables (RE) is, in general, politically accepted in Germany, its progress is slowed by conflicting interests, primarily nature conservation and protesting residents. This study aims to find ways to solve these conflicts in Germany. To this end, the researchers developed a geospatial model that calculates RE potentials and vulnerabilities of nature and humans. Both data input and some evaluation standards are variables in the model. The outcomes are compared to an estimated total energy demand in 2050. Two ambitious scenarios ("no regret" and "compromise") show that a maximum of 4% of the German territory is available to meet the energy demand. This demand can be met using PV in urban areas and wind in rural landscapes without significantly impairing nature's and people's wellbeing. Solar parks and other potentials not considered in the model are treated as a reserve, which can be included if the energy targets are not met under the assumed scenario conditions. Such reserves also provide flexibility for co-determination in public participation.

Uncertainties in land use data may have substantial effects on environmental planning recommendations: A plea for careful consideration

“…Results for the case study ‘National renewable energy planning’ show that the area potentials for generating renewable energy are reduced when applying higher-resolution data: According to the first model run, 8,300 km 2 (2.3% of the area of Germany) are usable for onshore wind energy in a way that is compatible with humans and nature. The second model run shows a human- and nature-friendly usable area potential of 5,320 km 2 (1.5% of the area of Germany) [ 24 ]- a reduction of 36%, 2,980 km 2 [ 22 ] ( Fig 3 ).…”

“…roads, railroad lines), which are available as line features in the DLM250 as well as in the ATKIS Basis-DLM, could also be represented in a more detailed manner in the second model run due to the fact that the ATKIS Basis-DLM offers a variety of attributes compared to the DLM250. Road axes could thus be buffered according to width classes and railroad lines were buffered according to their number of tracks (2.5 m single-track railroad line, 4.5 m double-track railroad line) [ 20 , 22 ].…”

“…Areas with slopes greater than or equal to 30° record an increase of 1,150%(6,570 km 2 ) in the second model run (DEM50) compared to the first model run (DEM200). The difference between the selections of the two digital elevation models with identical SQL expression is particularly visible when zooming in on low mountain ranges: according to the DEM200, for example, almost no areas with a slope of ≥ 30° are found in the Harz Mountains [ 22 ] ( Fig 5 ).…”

“…In order to define the inaccuracies of the results due to the data resolution, a second model run with more precise data was conducted [ 20 , 22 ], namely ATKIS Basis-DLM and the DEM50 digital elevation data. For the selection of land use types such as settlements and water bodies, the ATKIS Basis-DLM was applied, which provides a much higher surface sharpness with a resolution of 1:25,000 than the lower-resolution DLM250 used in the first run.…”

Untitled

“…classes and railroad lines were buffered according to their number of tracks (2.5 m single-track railroad line, 4.5 m double-track railroad line) [20,22]. Areas with slopes greater than or equal to 30˚record an increase of 1,150%(6,570 km 2 ) in the second model run (DEM50) compared to the first model run (DEM200).…”