Environment and energy in Iceland: A comparative analysis of values and impacts

Within an Icelandic framework plan for energy, environmental values and impacts were estimated in multicriteria analyses for 19 hydroelectric and 22 geothermal developments. Four natural environment classes were defined (geology + hydrology, species, ecosystems + soils, landscape + wilderness) with cultural heritage as the fifth class. Values and impacts were assessed through 6 agglomerated attributes: richness/diversity, rarity, size/continuity/pristineness, information/symbolic value, international responsibility and visual value. The project offers a unique opportunity for comparing environmental values and impacts within a large sample of sites and energy alternatives treated within a common methodological framework.Total values were higher in hydroelectric than in geothermal areas. Hydroelectric areas scored high for cultural heritage (particularly in rarity and information value), landscape and wilderness. Geothermal areas had high bedrock and hydrological diversity and information values, and a high landscape visual value but little cultural heritage. High values were correlated among some classes of the natural environment, all of which are likely to reflect functional relationships. In contrast, cultural heritage values were not related to natural environment values. Overall, landscape and wilderness had the highest mean value and were also most affected by energy development. Over 40% of the hydroelectric development had a predicted mean impact value of > 4 (out of a maximum of 10), compared with 10% of the geothermal projects. Excluding two outsized hydropower options, there was a significant correlation between plant capacity and impact on geology and hydrology but not with other environmental variables.