The Science of Siting Clean Energy

The report identifies a shift in clean energy deployment challenges from technical and economic issues to social and institutional barriers, specifically community resistance to wind and solar projects. Based on workshops with 25 practitioners and researchers, it proposes four paradigm-shifting solutions: a 'fair share' policy to distribute infrastructure burdens across a state, 'off-the-shelf' visioning modules to help communities self-determine their desires before projects are proposed, the creation of local task forces supported by trusted facilitators to build capacity, and the development of co-ownership or co-management models to increase local benefits and acceptance. The document also highlights unresolved tensions, such as the conflict between the urgent need for rapid decarbonization and the time required to build meaningful community trust.

• Clean energy deployment challenges have transitioned from technical and economic hurdles to a "complex mix of social and institutional barriers," with an increasing number of communities rejecting wind and solar projects.
• Analysis of 'bright spot' case studies across various sectors (including wind energy in Denmark and nuclear waste storage) revealed that success is often driven by local champions, tangible economic development, local ownership, and the involvement of a trusted third party.
• The report proposes a 'fair share' policy framework where state-level clean energy targets are mandated such that every locality must host its proportional share of the capacity, supported by a state coordinating entity and financial incentives.
• To improve community engagement, the report suggests using 'off-the-shelf' visioning modules based on the '3 P’s' (Practitioners, Process, and Potential) to help communities define their long-term vision before specific projects are proposed.
• The document recommends augmenting local capacity by creating local task forces and utilizing trusted facilitators, such as those from Extension offices or the DOE R-STEP, to move beyond binary project-by-project decisions.
• To increase community acceptance, the report suggests moving away from purely utility or corporate ownership toward co-ownership or co-management models that include profit-sharing and decision-making input.
• Participants identified several unresolved tensions, most notably the conflict between the 'urgent need for rapid and widespread infrastructure deployment' and the slower pace of building community trust and ensuring environmental protection.

APA

Clean Air Task Force (2024). The Science of Siting Clean Energy. https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/17110605/sicence-of-siting.pdf

Chicago

Clean Air Task Force. The Science of Siting Clean Energy. 2024. https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/17110605/sicence-of-siting.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Clean Air Task Force |title=The Science of Siting Clean Energy |date=January 2024 |url=https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/17110605/sicence-of-siting.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{cleanairtaskforce2024science, author = {{Clean Air Task Force}}, title = {{The Science of Siting Clean Energy}}, institution = {Clean Air Task Force}, year = {2024}, month = jan, url = {https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/17110605/sicence-of-siting.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }