Beyond emission cuts
Any meaningful fight against climate change must centre on a rapid global switch to renewable energy. Solar energy, wind energy, hydropower, geothermal power and sustainable biomass can displace fossil fuels, and contribute to more secure energy infrastructure.
But not all renewable energy is created equal.
An energy project that emits no carbon can still have detrimental environmental impacts if its siting is poor, if there is weak oversight or if it is badly designed. A wind farm constructed on a key bird migration corridor or a solar project sited in an important wildlife habitat might save carbon but cause biodiversity loss. Hydropower projects can cause river damage.
So we need to think beyond whether a project is renewable. The key question is whether it is environmentally responsible.
A renewable energy project’s first goal is to cut emissions. That is important. Climate change is itself a major stress on ecosystems, food systems, water availability and people.
So why focus beyond emission savings?
For an environmentally responsible energy project, the environmental picture is bigger than the carbon picture. Siting, biodiversity, water use, soil impacts, local communities, supply chains, construction effects, waste and ongoing operation are all relevant considerations. The objective is to check that a project contributes to national, regional and global climate change and energy policy goals without generating other environmental damage.
The scope of the renewable energy project should be broader as we scale up energy production. We need rapid deployment of clean energy, but speed should not lead us to take shortcuts when it comes to the environmental assessment of energy projects. We do not need poorly planned projects, with associated public opposition and reputational damage, that delay the energy transition.
Choose the right places
The most critical consideration in designing an energy project is siting.
The same technology has very different effects depending on location. A solar farm sited in a low-biodiversity setting, such as a degraded brownfield site or a non-productive agricultural zone, is going to have a small footprint. One sited in sensitive grasslands, wetlands or forests has potentially major effects.
In wind energy, we need to consider where wind power fits alongside birds, bats, landscapes and local communities. We also need to assess cumulative effects with other wind projects in the same area.
For hydropower we face an even more challenging situation. Rivers are a living system. Dams and diversions have implications for fish, sediment transport, floodplains and water availability downstream. Small, modernised hydropower might fit in certain places. In others, river restoration, freshwater protection and other benefits might be more important than generation capacity.
So responsible energy siting is not about saying “no” to renewable energy. It is about finding the right place for clean energy, at the right time and with minimal impact.
Apply the mitigation hierarchy
One framework to consider is the mitigation hierarchy: avoid, mitigate, restore and compensate.
The first rule should be to avoid the most damaging impacts to the environment, whenever possible. If a proposed site intersects with critical habitat, protected areas, significant migration pathways or culturally important landscapes, the most appropriate course of action might well be to select a different location entirely.
Where impacts cannot be completely avoided, the priority shifts to minimising them. Strategies here may involve reducing the development’s physical footprint, altering the schedule for construction activities, safeguarding waterways, implementing wildlife-friendly fencing, modifying turbine operation protocols during vulnerable periods, or maintaining habitat connectivity.
Following this, restoration becomes the focus. Any areas disturbed during development should be returned to their original state where feasible, incorporating native plantings, soil conservation and ongoing habitat care.
Offsetting or mitigation should only be employed as a final option. It cannot simply serve as an easy permit to degrade precious ecosystems. Certain ecosystems and species are simply not replaceable, and some damage is irreversible.
Biodiversity protection must begin at the outset
While renewable developments are typically hailed as climate mitigation strategies, they also function as projects that utilise land and impact the natural world.
Biodiversity issues must, therefore, be considered at the earliest stages of planning. Environmental assessments cannot become a box-ticking exercise conducted after the main planning decisions have been taken; they must feed back into project design.
An environmentally responsible project might ask:
- Which species and habitat types are on site?
- Is there a seasonality of risk, such as nesting, breeding or migration periods?
- Could the project lead to the fragmentation of a habitat or a barrier to wildlife movement?
- Could there be cumulative impacts from other infrastructure nearby?
- Could the site be managed to enhance biodiversity in the longer term?
Indeed, renewable energy sites can be deliberately designed to enhance, rather than harm, wildlife. Solar farms might have wildflower plantings, habitat for pollinators, low-intensity grazing or restored field margins. The access roads and power lines of a wind farm could be designed to avoid unnecessary fragmentation of the landscape, or the site could be degraded land that the project will restore.
But these are not inherent benefits. They must be carefully considered as part of planning, construction, post-construction management and monitoring.
Considering the impacts of renewable developments on local livelihoods and communities
Environmental considerations do not just cover the impacts of renewable projects on wildlife and their habitats. They also cover impacts on local livelihoods and communities.
Renewable energy projects can affect local livelihoods; access to land and other resources; cultural, historical and religious landscapes; the use of natural resources such as water; and people’s experience of the built environment through the introduction of noise and visual impacts, for example, as well as community identity.
Just because a project is environmentally positive, by reducing carbon emissions for example, does not mean that it will not cause conflict in a specific local setting where concerns are ignored.
Effective consultation needs to begin early. Communities need to be given clear information, timelines and opportunities to meaningfully engage. This is part of good environmental governance, not just part of public relations for a project.
Benefit sharing can also be important. Jobs for local people, community benefit funds, lower energy bills, opportunities for local ownership and investment in local infrastructure can all help to ensure that renewable energy development creates a tangible positive outcome for local people.
The purpose of engagement is not to sell a project that has already been determined. It is to design better projects through engagement.
Considerations around the material sourcing, construction and disposal
Renewable energy also needs materials: steel, concrete, copper, rare earth elements, glass, batteries, electronics and other components. All these materials have environmental footprints of their own.
That does not mean we should abandon renewable energy. Fossil fuel systems likewise involve extraction, transport, pollution and waste. But any sensible clean-energy approach must still ask where these materials come from, how they are made, how long things last and what happens when they do not.
The questions of recycling, repair, repowering and decommissioning are growing ever more important. Solar panels, turbine blades, batteries and electrical hardware all have end-of-life considerations. A project that delivers clean power but pushes the waste problem into future generations’ laps has not really fulfilled its responsibilities.
This means the renewable-energy policy conversation has to connect with natural resources and waste policy conversations. A transition to clean energy also needs to be a transition to greater resource efficiency.
Be especially cautious with biomass
Bioenergy gets bundled together under the renewable-energy label, yet it merits extra scrutiny.
Not every biomass source is sustainable. The impact depends on the kind of feedstock, land-use change, harvesting practices, transport, combustion efficiency and the opportunity cost of not putting the biomass to some other use. Burning leftover residue or waste can be very different from cutting down entire trees or planting new crops specifically for energy.
This is one reason why sustainable biomass cannot be judged only by carbon accounting. It requires a full appreciation of what happens in the land, forests, soils and biodiversity; what impact it has on food production; and who or what else wants the same biological resource.
Any responsible renewable energy strategy must resist lumping all biomass in as a given good.
Watch things after approval
Environmental assessment does not end at the permit table.
A lot of effects only reveal themselves when a project is built and operating. The collision of birds and bats, shifts in vegetation, soil erosion, hydrological changes, the spread of invasive species, water-quality impacts or community impacts can unfold over time.
Responsible projects have monitoring, reporting and adaptive management. When things turn out worse than anticipated, project operators should have to act. They may need to shift operations, improve habitat, repair damage or improve community engagement.
This is one place where enforcement is essential. Having good rules is no good if they are not followed and no one checks.
What responsible renewable energy projects look like
There is not one feature that will make a renewable energy project environmentally responsible. Rather, it comes from the collective weight of many sound decisions.
A responsible project will, among other things:
- Cut greenhouse-gas emissions;
- Avoid impacts to particularly sensitive areas, when it can;
- Minimise the effects it cannot avoid;
- Protect biodiversity and ecosystem services;
- Respect local communities and their livelihoods;
- Use land and materials efficiently;
- Plan for waste, recycling and decommissioning;
- Monitor impacts once construction happens;
- Adapt when things do not go to plan.
We need renewable energy, but it also matters how we get it. Clean energy development that neglects biodiversity, water, land use or community needs risks addressing one aspect of the environmental crisis while making others worse.
Good renewable energy projects will not just generate low-carbon energy. They will also demonstrate that climate policy, ecological protection and good governance can all march forward together.
