An ecosystem services perspective for classifying and valuing the environmental impacts of geothermal power projects

Abstract

An ecosystem services perspective can provide a useful means of understanding, in human well-being terms, the type, scale and value of environmental impacts deriving from the deployment of renewable energy technologies. This paper provides the first thematic review of the ecosystem service impacts commonly associated with developing geothermal areas for power projects. In this study, the typical ecosystem service impacts of geothermal power projects are classified using the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) typology. Next, in order to develop a guide for future practitioners, an analysis is conducted of the most suitable valuation methods for the respective ecosystem service impacts. A pluralist approach is advised to aide decision-making, involving the use of monetary and non-monetary information. A number of non-market valuation studies may be required to estimate the total economic value of affected geothermal ecosystems, likely including the contingent valuation and travel cost methods. The more intangible ecosystem services associated with geothermal areas, such as artistic inspiration and landscape aesthetics, are best valued using non-monetary approaches, including deliberative methods. Finally, in recognition of the importance of having a strong physical basis underpinning non-market valuation techniques, this paper critically assesses the merits of the most appropriate data sources for future environmental economists working in a geothermal context. A literature review reveals that neither Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) nor Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) studies in a geothermal context have embedded an ecosystem service perspective into their processes. EIA are closest to fulfilling the needs of environmental economists, encompassing the majority of ecosystem service impacts, yet further methodological progress is recommended to ensure that all project stakeholders are given voice and arbitrage in the data-gathering process.