Would you buy a house near a wind farm?

The question of whether wind farms affect the value of properties around them hasn’t exactly been a breeze to figure out.

As wind energy makes an increasing contribution to the grid the issue has become a global one, but a new study from the University of Guelph published in the Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics came to the conclusion that wind turbines don’t affect property values negatively.

Guelph researchers pored over 7000 home and farm sales in Ontario’s Melancthon Township, where 133 wind turbines were erected between 2005 and 2008.

Despite widespread outcry from residents, the study says their fear are unfounded.

“These results do not corroborate the concerns raised by residents regarding potential negative impacts of turbines on property values,” said Richard Vyn, a professor in the Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Guelph, who co-authored the study.

One local realtor, however, disagrees with the professor. Dave Launchberry says there seems to be a “growing stigma” around properties near wind farms, and estimates that they sell for more than 10% less than houses not near wind turbines.

If Launchberry’s assessment seems homespun compared to a Canadian university-led study, consider that his take puts him in company with research from the prestigious London School of Economics, (PDF) which found that having a wind farm visible from a property devalues a property by an average of 5-6%, more if the operation is of greater density. “A wind farm with 20+ turbines within 2km reduces prices by some 11 percent on average,” said the study.

Opposition to wind farms has always been about property values. And today’s opponents think that is enough, especially considering the payoff developers are routinely nabbing.

The tact used by those opposing wind farms has changed. If the real motivation of Not-in-my-Backyarders was monetary, it used to come couched in claims that wind farms presented health issues. But those arguments have factored less and less into the game, as science has soundly debunked them.

Opposition to wind farms has always been about property values. And today’s opponents think that is enough, especially considering the payoff developers are routinely nabbing.

In Denmark, where wind power supplied a record 41.2% of the country’s electricity consumption in the first half of 2014, turbine manufacturer Vestas was successfully sued for 500,000 Danish kroner (about 96,000 Canadian dollars) due to noise, visual interference, and light reflection.

Wind power is clean, plentiful, consistent and efficient. Around the world, more than 80 countries derive at least some of their energy from it, and that’s not likely to change anytime soon.

But it is clear where the legal fight is headed. The minimum distance from which wind turbines can be from residential areas will gradually stretch as developers factor in the cost of potential legal action. In Scotland, where the debate has been fierce, new legislation has been proposed that would require a minimum two-kilometre distance between a wind farm and a residential area.

In Canada, where land is far more abundant, legislating a minimum distance of two-kilometres or more just makes economic and legal sense in the long term. Would you buy a house near a wind turbine? In the not-so-distant future you may simply not be allowed to.