August 13th, 2020
The field notes were also content-analyzed to discern discrete mentions of perceived disadvantages of renewable energy generally and of CSP development specifically. The responses on disadvantages lent themselves to categorization in the same categories as the responses on perceived advantages: (1) economic, (2) environmental, (3) technological, (4) social – psychological and (5) policy and regulatory. Again, under each of these broad categories, subcategories were defined. Each response was coded by category and subcategory.
Table 2 shows that 158 responses mentioned disadvantages of renewable energy generally and CSP specifically. The table is organized in terms of decreasing frequency of mention (or responses) of the different types of disadvantages, with environmental disadvantages receiving the most emphasis in the data set overall (42% of the responses), followed by economic disadvantages (23%), technological disadvantages (19%), social – psychological disadvantages (11%), and policy and regulatory disadvantages (4%). One outside stakeholder said there were no disadvantages of CSP siting at all.
Comments on environmental disadvantages occurred more frequently in the interviews than other types of disadvantages and represented the most important area of concern for both types of interviewees (within Valley n=37; outside Valley n=30). Responses from the Valley cited economic disadvantages for renewable energy generally and CSP development specifically (n=26) more frequently than responses from outside the Valley (n=10).
TABLE 2: Types and Percentage Distribution of Responses about Perceived Disadvantages from Stakeholders within and outside of the San Luis Valley (n=158 comments)