This review examines the dual roles of renewable energy in mitigating climate change and preserving biodiversity. It looks at the direct and indirect impacts of renewable energy on biodiversity and highlights strategies for striking a balance between energy development and ecological conservation. The global climate crisis demands immediate action, and renewable energy is a key component of efforts to mitigate climate change. However, while renewable energy technologies like solar, wind, and bioenergy hold significant potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, their deployment also presents risks to biodiversity. The relationship between renewable energy and biodiversity conservation is complex, as energy infrastructure can cause habitat destruction, ecosystem disruptions, and habitat fragmentation, potentially aggravating the very environmental challenges that renewable energy seeks to address. Whereas renewable energy technologies can lessen the environmental impact of human activity, their widespread use may have unforeseen effects on species and ecosystems. If not properly managed, renewable energy projects have the potential to cause major changes in land use, including desertification, deforestation, and the disruption of delicate ecosystems. Ecosystems may also be harmed by the exploitation of raw resources for renewable energy, such as lithium for batteries and rare earth elements for wind turbines. This review examines the main obstacles to coordinating the growth of renewable energy with the preservation of biodiversity, including the effects of wind farms on bat and bird populations, the way hydropower dams change river ecosystems, and the possibility that bioenergy crops would supplant native flora. It then suggests ways to lessen these effects, such as improved site design, more effective energy systems, and incorporating biodiversity concerns into legislative frameworks. In order to guarantee that renewable energy contributes to a sustainable future for both climate and biodiversity, the study concludes by highlighting the necessity of a multidisciplinary strategy that combines energy and conservation policy.

1. IPCC. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/ (accessed on 10 December 2024).

2. Cardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, et al. Biodiversity Loss and Its Impact on Humanity. Nature. 2012; 486(7401):59–67. doi: 10.1038/nature11148

3. Alongi DM. Carbon sequestration in mangrove forests. Carbon Management. 2014; 313–322. doi: 10.4155/cmt.12.20

4. Munroe R, Dilys R, Doswald N, et al. Review of the evidence base for ecosystem-based approaches for adaptation to climate change. Systematic Review Protocol. 2012; 1(13):1–11. doi: 10.1186/2047-2382-1-13

5. Kumara HN, Babu, S, Rao GB. et al.. Responses of birds and mammals to long-established wind farms in India. Scientific Reports. 2022; 1339: 1–15. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-05159-1

6. Fu B, Wang YK, Xu P, et al. Value of ecosystem hydropower service and its impact on the payment for ecosystem service. Science of the Total Environment. 2014; 472: 338–346. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.015

7. Berndes G, Ahlgren S, Börjesson P, et al. Bioenergy and Land Use Change—state of the art. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2012; 2(3): 282–303. doi: 10.1002/wene.41

8. UNFCCC. The Paris Agreement. What is the Paris Agreement? United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available online: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement (accessed on 10 December 2024).

9. van de Ven DJ, González-Zapata F, & Drummond P. Solar plants, environmental degradation and local socioeconomic contexts: A case study in a Mediterranean country. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 2016; 61: 88–93. doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2016.07.003

10. Regassa Y, Dabasa T, Amare G, et al. Bio-inspired design trends for sustainable energy structures. Materials Science and Engineering. 2021; 1294: 1–14. doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/1294/1/012044

11. Exley G, Hernandez RR, Page T, et al. Scientific and stakeholder evidence-based assessment: Ecosystem response to floating solar photovoltaics and implications for sustainability. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2021; 152: 1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.111639

12. Gasparatos A, Doll CNH, Esteban M, et al. Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017; 70: 61–184. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.030

13. Balmford A, Green RE, Scharlemann JPW. Renewable energy expansion: Legal strategies for overcoming regulatory barriers and promoting innovation. International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences. 2024; 6(5): 927–944. doi: 10.51594/ijarss.v6i5.1145

14. Cui Y, Zhao H. Marine renewable energy project: The environmental implication and sustainable technology. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2023; 232: 106415.

15. Yoon YG, Han D-G, Choi JW. Measurements of underwater operational noise caused by offshore wind turbine off the southwest coast of Korea Frontiers in Marine Science. 2023. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2023.1153843

16. Werner KM, Haslob H, Reichel AF, et al. Offshore wind farm foundations as artificial reefs: The devil is in the detail. Fisheries Research. 2024; 272: 1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2024.106937

17. Newell R, Dale A, Listerr NM. An integrated climate-biodiversity framework to improve planning and policy: an application to wildlife crossings and landscape connectivity. Ecology and Society. 2021; 27(1): 1–22. doi: 10.5751/ES-12999-270123

18. Gonçalves B, Marques A, Da Maia Soares AMV, et al. Biodiversity offsets: from current challenges to harmonized metrics. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 2025; 14: 61–67. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.008

19. Sala OE, Chapin FS, Armesto JJ, et al. Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100. Science. 2000; 287(5459): 1770–1774. doi: 10.1126/science.287.5459.1770

20. Walston LJ, Barley T, Bhandari I, et al. Opportunities for agrivoltaic systems to achieve synergistic food-energy-environmental needs and address sustainability goals. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2022; 6: 1–13. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2022.932018

21. Smallwood KS. Comparing Bird and Bat Fatalities from Wind Turbines and Other Sources. Journal of Wildlife Management. 2013; 37(1): 19–33. doi: 10.1002/wsb.260

22. Kati V, Kassara C, Vrontisi Z, et al. The biodiversity-wind energy-land use nexus in a global biodiversity hotspot. Science of The Total Environment. 2021; 768. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144471

23. Hernandez RR, Hoffacker MK, Murphy-Mariscal ML, et al. Solar energy development impacts on land cover change and protected areas. PNAS. 2015; 112(44): 13579–13584. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1517656112

24. Karban CC, Lovich JE, Grodsky SM, et al. Predicting the effects of solar energy development on plants and wildlife in the Desert Southwest, United States. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2024; 205. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114823

25. Peggy KH, Whitney M, Jesse R. Land use conflicts between wind and solar renewable energy and agriculture uses. Available online: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/law_faculty/104 (Accessed on 19 December 2024).

26. Gleick PH. Environmental consequences of hydroelectric development: The role of facility size and type. Energy. 1992; 17(8): 735–747. doi: 10.1016/0360-5442(92)90116-H

27. Cabernard L, Pfister S. Hotspots of mining-related biodiversity loss in global supply chains and the potential for reduction through renewable electricity. Environmental Science & Technology, 2022; 56(22): 1–24. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.2c04003

28. Parker SS, Clifford MJ, Cohen BS. Potential impacts of proposed lithium extraction on biodiversity and conservation in the contiguous United States. Science of The Total Environment. 2024; 911:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168639

29. IRENA. Renewable energy benefits: Leveraging local capacity for concentrated solar power. Available online: https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2025/Jan/IRENA_Renewable_energy_benefits_leveraging_capacity_CSP_2025.pdf (accessed on 19 December 2024).

30. WindEurope. Horns Rev 3 offshore wind farm to boost Danish wind production by 12%. Available online: https://windeurope.org/newsroom/press-releases/horns-rev-3-offshore-wind-farm-to-boost-danish-wind-production-by-12/ (Accessed 19 December 2024).

31. Jager HI, Efroymson RA, McManamay RA. Renewable energy and biological conservation in a changing world. Biological Conservation. 2021; 263. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109354

32. European Commission. Renewable energy – directive, targets and rules. Available online: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-directive-targets-and-rules_en (accessed on 19 December 2024).

33. Mosoh DA, Prakash O, Khandel AK, et al. Preserving earth’s flora in the 21st century: climate, biodiversity, and global change factors since the mid-1940s. Frontiers in Conservation Science. 2024; 5: 1–40. doi: 10.3389/fcosc.2024.1383370

34. Raghutla C, Kolati Y. Public-private partnerships investment in energy as new determinant of renewable energy: The role of political cooperation in China and India. Energy Reports. 2023; 10: 3092–3101.

35. Tatti A, Ferroni S, Ferrando M, et al. The Emerging Trends of Renewable Energy Communities’ Development in Italy. Sustainability 2023; 15(8): 1–18. doi: 10.3390/su15086792

36. Li Y, Feng H. GIS for the Potential Application of Renewable Energy in Buildings towards Net Zero: A Perspective. Buildings. 2023; 13(5): 1–12. doi: 10.3390/buildings13051205

37. Nickols KJ, White JW, Malone D, et al. Setting ecological expectations for adaptive management of marine protected areas. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2019; 56(10): 2376–2385. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13463

38. Lorente DB, Joof F, Samour A, et al. Renewable energy, economic complexity and biodiversity risk: New insights from China. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators. 2023; 18: 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.indic.2023.100244

39. Vakili SV, Ölcer AI, Ballini F. The development of a policy framework to mitigate underwater noise pollution from commercial vessels. Marine Policy. 2020; 118. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104004

40. Fischer D, Lochner P, Annegarn H. Evaluating the effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment to facilitate renewable energy planning and improved decision-making: a South African case study. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 2020; 38 (1):28–38. doi: 10.1080/14615517.2019.1619389

41. Ojija F. Perennial grasses: natural allies for soil health and biodiversity, climate change mitigation, and invasive plant management. Grass Research. 2024; 4(1):1–7. doi: 10.48130/grares-0024-0019

42. Trainor AM, McDonald RI, Fargione J. Energy Sprawl Is the Largest Driver of Land Use Change in United States. PLoS One. 2016; 11(9): e0162269.

43. Langhamer O. Artificial Reef Effect in relation to Offshore Renewable Energy Conversion: State of the Art. The Scientific World Journal. 2012; 1–8. doi:10.1100/2012/386713

44. De Battisti, D. The resilience of coastal ecosystems: A functional trait-based perspective. Journal of Ecology. 2021; 109(9): 3133–3146. doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.13641

45. Martín-Betancor M, Osorio J, Ruiz-García A, et al. Evaluation of maritime spatial planning for offshore wind energy in the Canary Islands: A comparative analysis. Marine Policy. 2024; 161: 1–17.

46. Ashraf U, Morelli TL, Smith ab, et al. Climate-Smart Siting for renewable energy expansion. IScience. 2024; 27(10).

47. Ojija F, Swai EE, Mwakalapa EB, et al. Impacts of emerging infrastructure development on wildlife species and habitats in Tanzania. Journal of Wildlife and Biodiversity. 2024; 8(2): 365–384. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11106542