Public perception of residential solar energy in Minnesota’s urban areas

Titolo Rivista ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Autori/Curatori Nicholas Valentini, Raed Jarrah, Chang-Ray Chen
Anno di pubblicazione 2023 Fascicolo 2023/1
Lingua Inglese Numero pagine 83 P. 61-23 Dimensione file 326 KB
DOI 10.3280/EFE2023-001004
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

With virtually no solid, liquid, or gas by products, and a stable and ever-present source, pho- tovoltaic (PV or solar) has the attractive benefits of reducing a home’s carbon footprint, harm- ful emission levels, and energy costs. With increasing concerns over energy cost and environ- mental harm, many homeowners are choosing to install solar panels. While the costs of solar panel installation and ownership have steadily declined over the last decade, there has been a concern that there has not been a comparable increase in solar panel implementation on resi- dential buildings. This study gathered and analyzed data from urban residents of Minnesota on their overall perception towards different aspects of solar energy and specific factors that are driving them away from solar. The main findings show that while solar is by far the most popular renewable energy generating method for homeowners, the perceived costs are an ob- stacle to adoption, as well as the perception that it would negatively impact the dwelling’s aesthetics.

Keywords:solar energy, public perception, sustainable investment, cost of investment, urban sustainability.

Jel codes:Q420, Q480

  1. Bamgbade, J. A., Kamaruddeen, A. M., Nawi, M. N. M., Adeleke, A. Q., Salimon, M. G., Ajibike, W. A. (2019). Analysis of some factors driving ecological sustainability in con- struction firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 1537-1545.
  2. Bilo, S., Hamlen, S., Vogel, M., Geiger, M. (2015). Solar Electricity for the Home, Farm, and Business. University of Minnesota.
  3. Cifuentes, L., Borja-Aburto, V. H., Gouveia, N., Thurston, G., Davis, D. L. (2001). Hidden Health Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation. Science, 293(5533), 1257-1259.
  4. Gagnon, P., Margolis, R., Melius, J., Phillips, C., Elmore, R. (2016). Rooftop Solar Photovol- taic Technical Potential in the United States. A Detailed Assessment (NREL/TP--6A20- 65298, 1236153; p. NREL/TP--6A20-65298, 1236153). DOI: 10.2172/1236153
  5. Green Building Council. (2021). An Introduction to LEED and Green Building. Hosenuzzaman, M., Rahim, N. A., Selvaraj, J., Hasanuzzaman, M., Malek, A. B. M. A., Na-
  6. har, A. (2015). Global prospects, progress, policies, and environmental impact of solar photovoltaic power generation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 284-297.
  7. Interstate Renewable Energy Council (n.d.). Solar Jobs Census. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from -- https://irecusa.org/programs/solar-jobs-census/.
  8. Kabir, E., Kumar, P., Kumar, S., Adelodun, A. A., Kim, K.-H. (2018). Solar energy: Potential and future prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 894-900.
  9. Kannan, N., Vakeesan, D. (2016). Solar energy for future world: – A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1092-1105.
  10. Kato, K., Murata, A., Sakuta, K. (1998). Energy pay-back time and life-cycle CO2 emission of residential PV power system with silicon PV module. Progress in Photovoltaics: Re- search and Applications, 6(2), 105-115.
  11. Lewis, N. S. (2007). Toward Cost-Effective Solar Energy Use. Science, 315(5813), 798-801.
  12. Marsh, J. (2021). The cost of solar panels in 2021: What price for solar can you expect? Solar News. -- https://news.energysage.com/how-much-does-the-average-solar-panel-installation -cost-in-the-u-s/.
  13. McArleton, A., Deva Racusin, J., Magwood, C. (2018). Beyond Energy Efficiency: Why Em- bodied Carbon In Materials Matters. -- https://www.buildingenergymagazine-digital. com/eneb/0218_fall_2018/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1422002.
  14. Messer, B. L., Dillman, D. A. (2011). Surveying the General Public over the Internet Using Address-Based Sampling and Mail Contact Procedures. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(3), 429-457.
  15. Minnesota Department of Commerce. (2022a). Energy Data Dashboard. -- https://mn.gov/commerce/energy/policy-data-reports/energy-data/.
  16. Minnesota Department of Commerce. (2022b). Minnesota Solar Fact Sheet. -- https://mn.gov/commerce-stat/pdfs/solar-fact-sheet-2022.pdf.
  17. Minnesota House File No.7, Chapter 7 (2023). -- https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/ bill.php?b=house&f=hf7&ssn=0&y=2023
  18. Minnesota Statutes, § 216B.164 (2022). https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/216b.164.
  19. National Centers for Environmental Information (n.d.). Retrieved February 15, 2023, from -- https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). Retrieved February 15, 2023, from -- https://www.noaa.gov/.
  20. Neumeister, K. (2023). Solar Panel Cost in Minnesota (2023 Local Savings Guide). Eco- Watch. -- https://www.ecowatch.com/solar/panel-cost/mn.
  21. Next Generation Energy Act, MN SF 145, chapter 136 (2007). https://www.revisor.mn. gov/bills/bill.php?b=senate&f=sf145&ssn=0&y=2007.
  22. Oteng, D., Zuo, J., Sharifi, E. (2023). An evaluation of the impact framework for product stewardship on end-of-life solar photovoltaic modules: An environmental lifecycle as- sessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 411, 137357. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro. 2023.137357.
  23. Pitt, D., Michaud, G. (2015). Assessing the Value of Distributed Solar Energy Generation. Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports, 2(3), 105-113.
  24. Polack, R., Wood, S., Smith, K. N. (2019). An Analysis of Fossil-Fuel Dependence in the United States with Implications for Community Social Work. Critical Social Work, 11(3).
  25. Putnam, M., Perez, M. (2018). Solar Potential Analysis Report.
  26. Sengupta, M., Xie, Y., Lopez, A., Habte, A., Maclaurin, G., Shelby, J. (2018). The National Solar Radiation Data Base (NSRDB). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 89, 51-60.
  27. Shaner, M. R., Davis, S. J., Lewis, N. S., Caldeira, K. (2018). Correction: Geophysical con- straints on the reliability of solar and wind power in the United States. Energy & Environ- mental Science, 11(4), 997-997. DOI: 10.1039/C8EE90019A
  28. Solar Energy Industries Association. (2022). Minnesota Solar. Solar Energy Industries Asso- ciation. -- https://www.seia.org/state-solar-policy/minnesota-solar.
  29. Sullivan, L. (2023). Power and Sample Size Determination. -- https://sphweb.bumc.bu. edu/otlt/mph-modules/bs/bs704_power/bs704_power_print.html
  30. Tutuncu, A. (2020). Fossil Fuels, a Technical Overview. In The Oxford Handbook of Energy Politics (p. 23).
  31. Tyson, A., Funk, C., Kennedy, B. (2022). Americans Largely Favor U.S. Taking Steps To Become Carbon Neutral by 2050.
  32. Union of Concerned Scientists. (n.d.). Clean Energy, Green Jobs. Retrieved February 8, 2023, from -- https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/clean-energy-green-jobs.
  33. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2020). Residential Energy Consumption Sur- vey.pdf. -- https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2020.
  34. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2021). Minnesota State Profile and Energy Esti- mates. -- https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=MN#tabs-1-
  35. Wilkinson, P., Smith, K. R., Beevers, S., Tonne, C., Oreszczyn, T. (2007). Energy, energy efficiency, and the built environment. The Lancet, 370(9593), 1175-1187. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61255-0
  36. Wiser, R., Millstein, D., Mai, T., Macknick, J., Carpenter, A., Cohen, S., Cole, W., Frew, B., Heath, G. (2016). The environmental and public health benefits of achieving high pene- trations of solar energy in the United States. Energy, 113, 472-486.
  37. Zemp, M., Haeberli, W. (2007). Glaciers and ice caps. Part I: Global overview and outlook. Part II: Glacier changes around the world (pp. 116-152).

Nicholas Valentini, Raed Jarrah, Chang-Ray Chen, Public perception of residential solar energy in Minnesota’s urban areas in "ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT" 1/2023, pp 61-23, DOI: 10.3280/EFE2023-001004