We studied people's preferences to support a renewable energy programme to grow seaweed for biogas production, using a choice experiment. Participants had to choose one among three alternatives, two of which were variations of a seaweed programme and the third was the status quo. The two alternatives were defined in terms of four attributes: the number of households powered, the percentage of coastline used to farm seaweed, the additional cost they would incur and perks, which were added to encourage people to participate in the programme. The choice experiment was conducted online in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland among 2016 respondents. The compensating variation from a renewable energy programme from seaweed that powers 85,000 households and covers 20% of the UK coastline is £16 per year in England, £16 per year in Scotland and £14 per year in Northern Ireland, respectively. We find that people are willing to use more coastline to farm seaweed in order to power more households. That is, they are willing to make a trade-off between the visual disamenity caused by the seaweed farms and producing more green energy. Lastly, both perks have negative effects on people's preferences for using seaweed as biogas.

中文翻译：

---

权衡可再生能源的视觉障碍：愿意为海藻养殖支付能源生产费用

我们使用选择实验研究了人们支持可再生能源计划以种植海藻以生产沼气的偏好。参与者必须从三个选项中选择一个，其中两个是海藻计划的变体，第三个是现状。这两个替代方案是根据四个属性定义的：供电家庭数量、用于养殖海藻的海岸线的百分比、它们将产生的额外成本和津贴，添加这些属性是为了鼓励人们参与该计划。选择实验是在 2016 年受访者中在英格兰、苏格兰和北爱尔兰在线进行的。来自海藻的可再生能源计划的补偿变化为 85,000 户家庭提供电力，覆盖英国海岸线的 20%，在英格兰每年为 16 英镑，苏格兰每年 16 英镑，北爱尔兰每年 14 英镑。我们发现人们愿意使用更多的海岸线来养殖海藻，以便为更多的家庭供电。也就是说，他们愿意在海藻养殖场带来的视觉不适和生产更多绿色能源之间做出权衡。最后，这两项福利对人们使用海藻作为沼气的偏好都有负面影响。