18.4 Land Use And Biodiversity Impacts

Introduction

Land use and biodiversity are central to judging how sustainable any energy technology is. When we install power plants, build transmission lines, create access roads, or mine materials, we change how land is used and how species live in that space. This chapter focuses on how renewable and conventional energy systems affect land and biodiversity, how these impacts occur, and what can be done to avoid, reduce, and manage them throughout an energy project life cycle.

Key Concepts: Land Use and Biodiversity

Land use refers to the way humans manage and occupy land for activities such as agriculture, forestry, housing, industry, or energy production. An energy project changes land use both directly, where infrastructure is built, and indirectly, through associated activities such as mining, transport, or grid expansion.

Biodiversity means the variety of life on Earth. It includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems. High biodiversity contributes to ecosystem resilience, pollination, water regulation, soil health, and many services that human societies depend on. Energy projects can fragment habitats, disturb species, and alter ecological processes that support biodiversity.

In the context of environmental assessment, land use and biodiversity impacts are evaluated from a life cycle perspective. This means looking at where land is occupied, transformed, or disturbed at all stages of the energy system, not only at the location of a power plant.

Types of Land Use Impacts in Energy Systems

Energy systems affect land in several distinct ways. First, there is land occupation, which is the area kept in use by energy infrastructure during its lifetime. Examples include the footprint of solar farms, wind turbine bases, hydro reservoirs, or biomass plantations.

Second, there is land transformation, where natural or semi natural land is converted into another type of land cover. Transforming forests, wetlands, or grasslands into reservoirs or industrial sites can permanently change ecosystems and associated species.

Third, energy development fragments landscapes. Even if the direct footprint is small, access roads, power lines, and scattered installations can break continuous habitats into smaller patches. Fragmentation can isolate wildlife populations, alter migration routes, and increase edge effects such as exposure to predators or human disturbance.

Finally, there are indirect land use changes. For example, if land is used to grow bioenergy crops, agriculture may shift elsewhere, sometimes causing deforestation or conversion of other ecosystems. These indirect effects are often harder to measure but can be significant for both biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions.

Comparing Land Footprints of Different Energy Technologies

Different technologies use land in very different ways, and simple comparisons are often misleading. For instance, energy output is commonly expressed in kilowatt hours or megawatt hours. If we relate land use to energy, we can discuss land use intensity, usually measured as square meters per kilowatt hour or square kilometers per terawatt hour over the system lifetime.

At one extreme, large hydropower reservoirs can flood wide areas. At the other extreme, rooftop solar uses surfaces already dedicated to buildings and adds almost no new land occupation. Wind turbines require space between towers to capture wind effectively, but much of that land can often remain in use for agriculture or grazing. Bioenergy systems can demand substantial areas of productive land, especially when based on dedicated crops rather than residues or wastes.

It is also important to consider the quality of land, not only the quantity. Converting already degraded land has different implications from converting primary forests, wetlands, or unique habitats.

Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, and Degradation

Habitat loss occurs when natural habitats are removed or submerged, for example when a reservoir floods valleys or when forests are cleared for infrastructure or crops. Once habitat is lost, many specialist species either disappear from the area or decline significantly.

Habitat fragmentation occurs when continuous habitats are broken into smaller patches. Even if the total area of habitat is not drastically reduced, fragmentation can impair movement of species, reduce genetic exchange, and create isolated populations that are more vulnerable to local extinction. Wind farms, access roads, and transmission lines can contribute to fragmentation in forests, grasslands, and coastal areas.

Habitat degradation refers to the reduction in habitat quality due to noise, light pollution, altered hydrology, invasive species, or chemical pollution. For example, fluctuating water levels around a hydro reservoir can erode shorelines and affect riparian vegetation. Construction activities can introduce invasive plants along cleared corridors.

From a life cycle perspective, these processes may occur at different stages construction, operation, and even decommissioning. A robust assessment identifies which habitats are present, their ecological value, and how each project phase could affect them.

Species Impacts and Species Sensitivity

Changes in land use directly affect species that live in the impacted areas. Some species are generalists that can adapt to modified landscapes and even benefit from human infrastructure. Others are specialists that depend on particular habitats or migration routes and are much more sensitive.

For example, large dams can block fish migration, which affects species that move upstream to breed. Reservoirs can also alter water temperature and sediment flow, changing conditions for downstream species. In coastal and marine environments, tidal and wave energy structures interact with marine life, including fish, seabirds, and marine mammals.

Wind farms on land and at sea can affect birds and bats, both through collision risk and through displacement if species avoid areas with turbines. However, the magnitude of this impact varies strongly by site, turbine layout, and species behavior. Careful site selection and design are therefore central to minimizing biodiversity impacts.

Solar farms can reduce habitat availability if placed on high value natural land. Conversely, if located on disturbed or low biodiversity sites, and managed with appropriate ground vegetation, they can offer some habitat function for pollinators and small animals.

Species sensitivity is also linked to conservation status. Projects that impact threatened, endemic, or legally protected species are of higher concern and require stronger safeguards.

Land Use and Biodiversity in Renewable Energy Technologies

Renewable energy technologies are often described as low carbon, but not all are low impact for land and ecosystems. The location, scale, and design of installations matter greatly.

Large hydropower can offer substantial renewable electricity but may flood extensive areas, displace communities, and disrupt river ecosystems. Small hydropower can reduce some impacts but can still fragment rivers, especially when many small projects are built in one watershed.

Wind energy usually has a modest direct land footprint per unit of energy, especially where agricultural or grazing activity continues between turbines. However, placement near key bird migration routes, breeding colonies, or bat roosting areas can cause significant local impacts.

Solar photovoltaic systems on rooftops generally add almost no new land pressure. Ground mounted solar farms, particularly when built on previously natural or agricultural land, can alter land use. Their biodiversity impact depends on prior land condition, design choices such as panel spacing and mounting, and management of vegetation.

Bioenergy from dedicated crops can have extensive land demands. If it competes with food production or drives conversion of forests or grasslands, the resulting biodiversity and climate impacts can be severe. Bioenergy based on residues, wastes, or carefully managed perennial crops on marginal lands tends to have lower land use and biodiversity risks.

Geothermal installations tend to occupy relatively small areas and are often localized, but infrastructure such as pipelines, access roads, and drill pads still changes land use and can affect fragile high value ecosystems, for example in volcanic zones with unique biodiversity.

Land Use Change, Carbon, and Ecosystem Services

Land use change influences both biodiversity and climate. When forests, peatlands, or grasslands are cleared or flooded, stored carbon is released. Reservoirs can emit methane from decomposing organic matter, especially in tropical regions. The loss of vegetation and soil carbon stocks can offset part of the climate benefit of low carbon energy and can persist for decades.

Ecosystem services such as pollination, water regulation, erosion control, and cultural values are also affected. For instance, deforestation or large scale land conversion for energy crops can degrade watersheds and reduce resilience to droughts and floods.

When assessing energy technologies, it is important to link land use change to both greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity outcomes. This is where life cycle assessment and environmental impact assessment intersect, since they consider how land conversion changes both carbon balances and ecosystem health.

Planning, Siting, and the Mitigation Hierarchy

Avoiding or minimizing harm begins with strategic planning and careful site selection. Placing projects on already degraded land, brownfields, rooftops, or low biodiversity areas can reduce pressure on natural habitats. Early screening of potential locations against biodiversity maps, protected areas, and critical habitats is essential.

Environmental assessment typically applies a mitigation hierarchy. This hierarchy is a structured approach to managing impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Avoidance means choosing locations, scales, or technologies that prevent serious impacts in the first place, for example not building in critical habitats or migration bottlenecks. Minimization involves design and operational changes to reduce impacts, such as micro siting of turbines, turbine curtailment during peak migration, or fish passages at dams.

Restoration refers to rehabilitation of ecosystems that are disturbed, including replanting native vegetation, reconnecting habitats, or restoring river flows where possible. Offsetting or compensation is only considered when significant residual impacts remain, and involves creating or improving habitats elsewhere to achieve at least no net loss, and ideally a net gain, in biodiversity.

Design and Management Strategies to Reduce Impacts

Beyond where projects are built, how they are designed and managed also shapes land and biodiversity outcomes. In solar farms, using higher mounting structures, varied panel spacing, and diverse native ground cover can allow light penetration, reduce soil erosion, and provide habitat for pollinators and small mammals. Avoiding unnecessary fencing or incorporating wildlife friendly designs can maintain connectivity for terrestrial species.

In wind projects, layout design can follow detailed bird and bat studies. Turbine placement can avoid ridge tops heavily used by soaring birds, and curtailment strategies can temporarily stop turbines during high risk periods. Lighting can be designed to reduce attraction and disorientation of nocturnal species.

In hydropower projects, environmental flow regimes can be implemented to mimic more natural river flow patterns, reducing downstream impacts on fish and riparian ecosystems. Fish ladders or bypass systems can partly restore migration routes, though their effectiveness varies with species and river characteristics.

Bioenergy systems can adopt landscape level planning that maintains habitat patches, corridors, and buffer zones, and can use mixed cropping or agroforestry approaches. Maintaining riparian buffers along rivers and hedgerows can support biodiversity even in production landscapes.

Monitoring and adaptive management are key elements. Regular monitoring of bird and bat collisions, fish populations, vegetation, and key indicator species allows adjustments over time. If impacts are found to be larger than predicted, operational measures and restoration efforts can be modified.

Cumulative and Landscape Scale Effects

Single projects are only one part of the picture. In many regions, numerous small installations can add up to large cumulative effects. Many small hydropower plants on a single river can fragment it more severely than one larger dam. Multiple wind farms across a migratory flyway can collectively affect bird populations, even if each individual project appears acceptable on its own.

Cumulative effects also involve interactions with other land uses such as agriculture, forestry, urban expansion, and transport infrastructure. For effective biodiversity conservation, planning needs to consider the broader landscape. Identifying key biodiversity areas, ecological corridors, and refuges helps guide where energy development is compatible and where it should be restricted or excluded.

Strategic environmental assessments and regional planning tools can look beyond project boundaries. By placing energy development in a wider spatial and temporal context, decision makers can better balance energy goals with biodiversity protection and land stewardship.

Land Use, Indigenous Peoples, and Local Communities

Land use changes for energy projects often have social as well as ecological dimensions. Indigenous peoples and local communities may have customary rights, cultural ties, and traditional knowledge linked to land and biodiversity. Changes in land use can affect access to resources, sacred sites, and livelihoods based on farming, fishing, or herding.

Recognizing land rights, obtaining free, prior, and informed consent where applicable, and involving communities in planning and monitoring are essential elements of responsible energy development. Community knowledge can improve understanding of local ecosystems, seasonal patterns, and species behavior, which contributes to better site selection and design.

Protecting biodiversity is therefore closely connected with respecting social and cultural values embedded in landscapes. When communities are partners in decision making, local stewardship of land and resources is often stronger.

Integrating Land and Biodiversity Considerations into Life Cycle Thinking

From a life cycle thinking perspective, land and biodiversity impacts appear at multiple stages. Raw material extraction and processing can affect ecosystems far from the final project site, as with mining for metals used in renewable technologies. Manufacturing facilities, transport, installation, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning all involve land uses and ecological interactions.

Including land occupation and transformation in life cycle assessment allows comparison of how different technologies and supply chains affect ecosystems. Coupling this with spatially explicit biodiversity data can show which impacts occur in sensitive areas. Such analysis helps guide design choices such as material selection, sourcing regions, and end of life strategies.

Over time, improvement options might include shifting to secondary materials through recycling, reducing material intensity, or redesigning systems to have smaller footprints. Life cycle thinking encourages continuous improvement rather than a one time assessment.

Conclusion

Land use and biodiversity impacts are critical dimensions of sustainable energy systems. Even low carbon technologies can create significant ecological pressures if they are poorly located, designed, or managed. By understanding how energy projects alter habitats, species, and ecosystem services, and by applying robust planning, mitigation, and life cycle assessment, it is possible to expand renewable energy while protecting the diversity of life that underpins resilient societies.