Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Efficient use of land to meet sustainable energy needs

Nature Climate Change volume 5, pages 353–358 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The deployment of renewable energy systems, such as solar energy, to achieve universal access to electricity, heat and transportation, and to mitigate climate change is arguably the most exigent challenge facing humans today1,2,3,4. However, the goal of rapidly developing solar energy systems is complicated by land and environmental constraints, increasing uncertainty about the future of the global energy landscape5,6,7. Here, we test the hypothesis that land, energy and environmental compatibility can be achieved with small- and utility-scale solar energy within existing developed areas in the state of California (USA), a global solar energy hotspot. We found that the quantity of accessible energy potentially produced from photovoltaic (PV) and concentrating solar power (CSP) within the built environment (‘compatible’) exceeds current statewide demand. We identify additional sites beyond the built environment (‘potentially compatible’) that further augment this potential. Areas for small- and utility-scale solar energy development within the built environment comprise 11,000–15,000 and 6,000 TWh yr−1 of PV and CSP generation-based potential, respectively, and could meet the state of California’s energy consumptive demand three to five times over. Solar energy within the built environment may be an overlooked opportunity for meeting sustainable energy needs in places with land and environmental constraints.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Selected model inputs and sensitivity analyses.
Figure 2: Compatibility matrices for PV and CSP.

References

  1. IPCC Special Report: Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011)

  2. IPCC Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014)

  3. Hoffert, M. I. et al. Advanced technology paths to global climate stability: Energy for a greenhouse planet. Science 298, 981–987 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Barthelmie, R. J. & Pryor, S. C. Potential contribution of wind energy to climate change mitigation. Nature Clim. Change 2035, 8–12 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dale, V. H., Efroymson, R. A. & Kline, K. L. The land use–climate change–energy nexus. Landsc. Ecol. 26, 755–773 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hernandez, R. R. et al. Environmental impacts of utility-scale solar energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29, 766–779 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cameron, D. R., Cohen, B. S. & Morrison, S. A. An approach to enhance the conservation-compatibility of solar energy development. PLoS ONE 7, 1–12 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ando, A., Camm, J., Polasky, S. & Solow, A. Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation. Science 279, 2126–2128 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schultz, P. W. et al. Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior. J. Cross. Cult. Psychol. 36, 457–475 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Carbajales-Dale, M., Barnhart, C. J., Brandt, A. R. & Benson, S. M. A better currency for investing in a sustainable future. Nature Clim. Change 4, 524–527 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gaffin, S. R., Rosenzweig, C. & Kong, A. Y. Y. Adapting to climate change through urban green infrastructure. Nature Clim. Change 2, 704 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hernandez, R. R., Hoffacker, M. K. & Field, C. B. Land-use efficiency of big solar. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 1315–1323 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2013 1–671 (International Energy Agency, 2013).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Van Vuuren, D. et al. An energy vision: the transformation towards sustainability—interconnected challenges and solutions. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 4, 18–34 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fluri, T. P. The potential of concentrating solar power in South Africa. Energy Policy 37, 5075–5080 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Domínguez Bravo, J., García Casals, X. & Pinedo Pascua, I. GIS approach to the definition of capacity and generation ceilings of renewable energy technologies. Energy Policy 35, 4879–4892 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stoms, D. M., Dashiell, S. L. & Davis, F. W. Siting solar energy development to minimize biological impacts. Renew. Energy 57, 289–298 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Loarie, S. R. et al. The velocity of climate change. Nature 462, 1052–1055 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Miller, N. L., Hayhoe, K., Jin, J. & Auffhammer, M. Climate, extreme heat, and electricity demand in California. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 47, 1834–1844 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Allison, T. D., Root, T. L. & Frumhoff, P. C. Thinking globally and siting locally—renewable energy and biodiversity in a rapidly warming world. Climatic Change 126, 1–6 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Armstrong, A., Waldron, S., Whitaker, J. & Ostle, N. J. Wind farm and solar park effects on plant-soil carbon cycling: Uncertain impacts of changes in ground-level microclimate. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 1699–1706 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. California Energy Commission Renewable Power in California: Status and Issues 1–282 (California Energy Commission, 2011); http://www.energy.ca.gov/2011publications/CEC-150-2011-002/CEC-150-2011-002.pdf

  23. Fry, J. et al. Completion of the 2006 national land cover database for the conterminous US. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 77, 858–864 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  24. California Energy Commission Tracking Progress: Renewable Energy – Overview 1–18 (California Energy Commission, 2014); http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/renewable.pdf

  25. California Energy Commission, New Renewable Generation Needed to Comply with Policy Goals: Update for 2022 Planning 1–25 (California Energy Commission, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Paidipati, J., Frantzis, L., Sawyer, H. & Kurrasch, A. Rooftop Photovoltaics Market Penetration Scenarios (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2008).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. San Francisco, D. of the E. CH2M Hill. San Francisco Energy Map (2013)

  28. Bazilian, M. et al. Re-considering the economics of photovoltaic power. Renew. Energy 53, 329–338 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Cook, T. R. et al. Solar energy supply and storage for the legacy and nonlegacy worlds. Chem. Rev. 110, 6474–6502 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Drury, E. & Lopez, A. Relative performance of tracking versus fixed tilt photovoltaic systems in the USA. Prog. Photovolt. 22, 1302–1315 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The McGee Research Grant of Stanford’s School of Earth Sciences, the TomKat Center for Sustainable Energy, the Jean Langenheim Research Fellowship of Graduate Women in Science Society, the Hispanic Scholarship Fund’s William Randolph Hearst Fund Scholarship, and the Vice Provost Office of Graduate Education’s Diversifying Academia, Recruiting Excellence Program provided financial support for this study. We thank M. Tavassoli who contributed to the data collection and N. Alvarez who assisted with several spatial analyses. We thank L. White who contributed to graphic design.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, California 94035, USA

    Rebecca R. Hernandez, Madison K. Hoffacker & Christopher B. Field

  2. Department of Environmental Earth System Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA

    Rebecca R. Hernandez, Madison K. Hoffacker & Christopher B. Field

Authors
  1. Rebecca R. Hernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Madison K. Hoffacker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christopher B. Field
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.R.H. conceived the project, R.R.H. developed the model, R.R.H. and M.K.H. conducted analyses and model runs, and R.R.H., M.K.H. and C.B.F. wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca R. Hernandez.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hernandez, R., Hoffacker, M. & Field, C. Efficient use of land to meet sustainable energy needs. Nature Clim Change 5, 353–358 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2556

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2556

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing