Wind turbines as new smokestacks: Preserving ruralness and restrictive land-use ordinances across U.S. counties.

Renewable energy (RE) facilities provide a global public good of climate mitigation but impose local costs such as landscape disruption and harming the rural character. Because of their land-intensive nature, utility-scale RE facilities tend to be located in rural areas with plentiful and cheap land. In the U.S., about every fourth county (729 of 3,143) has enacted ordinances restricting the siting of RE facilities. Drawing on a novel dataset of county-level restrictions on wind and solar RE facilities for the period 201o-2022, we explore whether, all else equal, levels of ruralness motivate the onset of such restrictions. As the policy literature on problem visibility suggests, we find support for this hypothesis for wind energy facilities only, probably because wind turbines due to their height tend to disrupt the rural landscape and are visible from long distances. We also find that counties are more likely to adopt restrictions for both wind and solar when adjacent counties have enacted them, thereby suggesting a contagion effect in the onset of restrictions. Contrary to the prevalent view on partisanship in climate policy, liberal counties are likely to restrict wind facilities. Our paper points to important sociological and quality-of-life factors that might be impeding the clean energy transition.

Comparing public support for nuclear and wind energy in Washington State.

The proliferation of country and state-level net zero-emission commitments, rising energy costs, and the quest for energy security in the wake of the Ukraine crisis have renewed the debate about the future of energy sources. As opposed to elite discourse, the energy policy preferences of the public remain less explored. While many public opinion surveys report preferences for a specific type of clean energy, there is less work on understanding choices among different types. We explore whether support for nuclear over wind energy at the state level depends on how people assess the impact of these energy sources on health, local jobs, landscape disruption, and the stability of the electricity supply. Importantly, we seek to understand where people physically reside (and their experience of existing energy possibilities) might influence their energy policy preferences. We estimate multiple regression models with OLS with our original survey data of a representative sample of Washington residents (n = 844). We find that the physical proximity to existing energy facilities does not influence support for nuclear over wind energy. However, this support is shaped by the importance respondents attach to health (-), jobs (-), landscapes (+), and supply stability (+) dimensions of energy source. Moreover, the physical proximity to existing energy facilities moderates the importance respondents attach to these dimensions.

Global governance for pandemic prevention and the wildlife trade.

Although ideas about preventive actions for pandemics have been advanced during the COVID-19 crisis, there has been little consideration for how they can be operationalised through governance structures within the context of the wildlife trade for human consumption. To date, pandemic governance has mostly focused on outbreak surveillance, containment, and response rather than on avoiding zoonotic spillovers in the first place. However, given the acceleration of globalisation, a paradigm shift towards prevention of zoonotic spillovers is warranted as containment of outbreaks becomes unfeasible. Here, we consider the current institutional landscape for pandemic prevention in light of ongoing negotiations of a so-called pandemic treaty and how prevention of zoonotic spillovers from the wildlife trade for human consumption could be incorporated. We argue that such an institutional arrangement should be explicit about zoonotic spillover prevention and focus on improving coordination across four policy domains, namely public health, biodiversity conservation, food security, and trade. We posit that this pandemic treaty should include four interacting goals in relation to prevention of zoonotic spillovers from the wildlife trade for human consumption: risk understanding, risk assessment, risk reduction, and enabling funding. Despite the need to keep political attention on addressing the current pandemic, society cannot afford to miss the opportunity of the current crisis to encourage institution building for preventing future pandemics.

Pursuing decarbonization along with national security: Assessing public support for the Thacker Pass lithium mine.

Decarbonization policies are being stymied by political conflict. Local communities might oppose decarbonization infrastructure such as solar farms, mines, or transmission lines if they view these projects as imposing high costs on them in relation to their benefits. To decarbonize, the automobile industry seeks to shift from the internal combustion engine to electric vehicles, which require lithium-based rechargeable batteries. In the United States, to meet the increasing lithium demand through domestic sources, there is a proposal for a lithium mine in Thacker Pass, Nevada, which faces strong opposition from native nations and environmental groups. Using a representative sample of Nevada residents (n = 1,368), we explore if proximity to the Thacker Pass mine and to any Nevada mine influence public support for the proposed lithium mine. In addition, we test three frames that emphasize different benefits of the proposed mine: climate policy, national security, and local economic development. We find that respondents living closer to the Thacker Pass mine tend to be more supportive of the proposed lithium mine but exposure to existing Nevada mines does not affect public support. Among the treatment frames, only the national security frame increases public support. This suggests that to navigate local public opposition, the national security-domestic sourcing of key inputs required for decarbonization, aspect of decarbonization projects should be highlighted.

Do windy areas have more wind turbines: An empirical analysis of wind installed capacity in Native tribal nations.

The decarbonization of the electricity sector is leading to a substantial increase in the demand for wind energy. Will tribal nations, which account for 7.8% of utility-scale wind capacity, benefit from this policy shift? To examine why tribal nations vary in translating wind energy potential into wind installed capacity, we have constructed an original dataset of the potential as well as the location of wind turbines across tribal nations. Our statistical analysis of 286 tribal nations suggests that wind energy potential is not associated with wind installed capacity. Instead, casino square footage, a proxy for tribal nation's administrative capacity and business acumen, is associated with wind installed capacity. Political orientation plays a role as well: tribal nations are more likely to have wind installed capacity when they value tribal sovereignty. While tribes suffering from natural disasters do not install more wind turbines, those receiving federal grants for wind energy projects, and located in states that already have a substantial number of wind turbines, are more apt to have wind turbines. Surprisingly, tribes located in states with renewable portfolio standards do not show an association with installed wind turbines capacity.

Willingness to help climate migrants: A survey experiment in the Korail slum of Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Bangladesh faces a severe rural to urban migration challenge, which is accentuated by climate change and the Rohingya crisis. These migrants often reside in urban slums and struggle to access public services, which are already short in supply for existing slum dwellers. Given the inadequacy of governmental efforts, nonprofits have assumed responsibility for providing essential services such as housing, healthcare, and education. Would local slum-dwellers in Dhaka be willing to support such nonprofits financially? We deploy an in-person survey experiment with three frames (generic migrants, climate migrants, and religiously persecuted Rohingya migrants) to assess Dhaka slum-dwellers' willingness to support a humanitarian charity that provides healthcare services to migrants. Bangladesh is noted as a climate change hotspot and its government is vocal about the climate issue in international forums. While we expected this to translate into public support for climate migrants, we find respondents are 16% less likely to support climate migrants in relation to the generic migrants. However, consistent with the government's hostility towards Rohingya, we find that respondents are 9% less likely to support a charity focused on helping Rohingya migrants. Our results are robust even when we examine subpopulations such as recent arrivals in Dhaka and those who have experienced floods (both of which could be expected to be more sympathetic to climate migrants), as well as those who regularly follow the news (and hence are well informed about the climate and the Rohingya crisis).