Wind energy vs. wind energy - Solar, Wind and Land: Conflicts in Renewable Energy Development - page 67

Parcel D

Parcel U

Property
line

Predominant
wind direction

Site D 1
($400,000 or $250,000)

Site U 2
($200,000)

Site D 2
($150,000)

Site U 1
($300,000)

Figure 3.7 Potential turbine sites on parcels U and D: scenario #2

though this agreement would be in the best of interest of both parties and
of society, it is uncertain at best that it would actually occur. As described
earlier in the chapter, competing wind energy developers often view each
other as rivals. Voluntarily negotiating to resolve turbine wake interference
issues thus may be quite difficult for them, even if the laws governing such
interference are made clear under a non-nuisance rule. If bargaining does
fail, inefficient turbine siting decisions (in this case, installations at Sites U 1
and D 2 ) can result.
In summary, neither the existing approaches for addressing wind turbine
wake interference conflicts nor any of the most obvious potential legal
rules to govern them are very satisfactory, because all are likely to lead
to sub-optimal wind farm siting decisions in some cases. Given the strong
public policy interest in not wasting scarce wind resources, a more sophis-
ticated wind rights law may be required that is better equipped to promote
productive efficiency in these unique situations.

A more suitable alternative: the “option approach”
Technological innovation sometimes necessitates policy innovation, and
such may be the case as policymakers seek for better ways to address
the sorts of wind rights disputes already highlighted in this chapter. The
following is a description of a unique set of rules for addressing conflicts
over wind rights that is arguably better tailored to wind's unique character-
istics. This two-part policy approach is designed to respect existing property
interests in the scarce resources involved in wind energy development while