Renewable Energy Zone Mapping (REZOMA) is a structured process for designating suitable geographical areas for renewable energy development. It involves analysing a variety of factors, such as wind and solar resources, geographic and environmental conditions, electric infrastructure availability, and land use, to identify zones where renewable energy projects can be effectively developed. This study focuses on the identification of sites for onshore wind power and ground mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) plants.
REZOMA ultimately creates a spatially defined blueprint that aligns renewable energy potential with technical, environmental, and societal considerations, serving as a tool for planning and implementation.
The purpose of Renewable Energy Zone Mapping (REZOMA) is to expedite the implementation of economically viable renewable energy projects that harmonize with neighboring areas and other land use interests. By identifying suitable zones for development in advance, RE mapping can streamline planning processes at the local level, providing a structured framework to potentially allow for fast-tracking of projects at the governmental or oblast levels. This approach not only saves time but also reduces uncertainty for developers and stakeholders, fostering a more conducive environment for investment in renewable energy.
The primary challenge for renewable energy development in Ukraine lies in the protracted timelines for implementation of greenfield projects, such as onshore wind power, typically requiring around 3.5 years to reach completion. Of this, approximately two years are consumed by obtaining necessary approvals—a bottleneck caused by regulatory compliance, environmental surveys, and planning requirements that are unavoidable for large-scale renewable energy projects.
In many current planning processes, it is the renewable energy developers who drive the development, meaning that local authorities must assess the sites proposed by these developers. REZOMA supports the government and governmental bodies to participate in the selection process, in a way that site selection and prioritization are based on common criteria. Citizens and businesses may agree or disagree with the weighting of individual criteria (and there may be a need to add additional criteria), but the selected sites are chosen using a consistent method. This can foster greater public acceptance, as the process is transparent, aiming to minimize subjective preferences for specific sites.
In this study, Renewable Energy Zone Mapping (REZOMA) is conducted by calculating a suitability score for each 25x25 meter grid cell across Ukraine to identify optimal locations for renewable energy (RE) technologies. This methodology is designed to comprehensively evaluate environmental factors, land cover, topography, conservation areas, hydrological features, renewable energy resources, and infrastructure limitations, while also considering technical constraints, such as the distance to potential connection points.
The suitability score is developed using a model in Geographic Information Systems (GIS), which integrates multiple geospatial parameters that influence the feasibility of RE installations and their potential for development.
Through REZOMA, governmental agencies at all levels can proactively assess the feasibility of renewable energy projects at specific sites. This process allows for the early identification and resolution of critical concerns related to environmental impact, land use, and regulatory compliance. Importantly, REZOMA can help facilitate inclusion of local communities since both developers and local citizens have access to the website. Early community engagement can help ensure that potential social, cultural, or environmental objections are addressed, and could potentially creating a smoother path for project development and reducing opposition during later stages in the project development.
The current Ukrainian government has introduced an emergency act, with the intend to expedite the development process of energy production. This has been done by specifying that cadasters outside of settlements can more easily be approved for the development of industrial plants, warehouses, agricultural buildings, pipelines and complex structures, categories wherein wind turbines and photovoltaic development fall. It has been stated that approval of permits should take no more than 1.5 months.
For RE-developers, REZOMA provides greater certainty and reduces risks associated with development. Guidelines on where projects are likely to gain approval can save developers significant time and resources, allowing them to focus on areas with a higher probability of success. This can encourage private sector participation, stimulate competition, and lower the overall costs of renewable energy deployment.
Furthermore, developers can use the map to pick out areas of interest, to which they want to conduct their own feasibility study. This can be done as the map provides areas with a range in suitability scores for the location of RE facilities and a range of expected production capacity. Based on the developers’ preferences, they can then pick out areas suitable for their needs. Since the RE-map covers the whole geography of Ukraine and includes a large variety of potential project areas, it can be used by both small and large developers.
From a political standpoint, RE-mapping offers a way to address competing priorities. By transparently designating zones where renewable energy development is encouraged, the government can balance the need for rapid energy transitions with concerns about preserving biodiversity, maintaining agricultural land, and respecting the interests of local citizens. It also demonstrates a commitment to forward-thinking energy policies, which can bolster public support and attract international investment.
If the Ukrainian government uses the RE-Map to green light highly ranked project sites, it could expedite efforts to meet power demand during wartime. This approach would reduce administrative burdens on local authorities, but it may also limit local input on land use and biodiversity considerations.
With the RE-Map, which displays project sites selected based on uniform parameter criteria, governmental bodies can streamline the approval process. This tool enables them to take proactive steps, rather than relying solely on developers to propose sites before action can be initiated. Consequently, governmental bodies can preapprove sites, using the publicly available RE-Map as a transparent and equitable basis for their decisions.
If specific high-scoring sites are identified as highly viable for project development, the Ukrainian government can designate these areas as priority zones. Subsequently, they can conduct Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and preapprove these areas for wind turbine or photovoltaic (PV) production. This plan can then be communicated to the local level, initiating a dialogue with local communities on the placement and number of turbines. Once the consultation process is complete, the approved areas can be offered for tenure.
If the local governmental bodies have preapproved some of the areas, the DSO can update their development plan for their grid connections and make plans for what should happen in case a developer arrives, prompting the need for more grid capacity. Meaning that DSOs can make conditional development plans.
The screening of suitable locations for renewable energy (RE) facilities in Ukraine covers the entire country and is performed using a weighted analysis in a GIS model developed by Ea Energy Analyses. A weighted GIS analysis aims to calculate a score for all areas, based on several parameters, that influence the areas’ suitability of RE facilities.
The suitability of an area is determined by planning, environmental, and technical energy factors relevant to the establishment of RE facilities.
Each factor is assigned a value that is used in the GIS model. For instance, a factor could be assigned a positive value if it positively impacts the feasibility of installing RE facilities or a negative value if it acts as a barrier. Some factors are so significant as barriers that the areas in question are excluded entirely.
The factors and their assigned scores included in the analysis were selected based on a dialogue between IEF and Ea Energy Analyses. This ensures the analysis is, as far as possible, adapted to local priorities.
The potential conflicts can be foreseen in the following fields:
Renewable energy installations can disrupt sensitive ecosystems, biodiversity, and protected natural areas. Ensuring appropriate buffers around habitats and protected landscapes is essential to minimize these impacts.
Large installations can affect the visual landscape and cultural heritage sites, leading to community opposition. Protecting landmarks, churches, and historical monuments pre-serves local heritage and maintains public support.
Wind turbines can generate noise and shadow flicker, which can affect nearby residential areas. Ensuring adequate distances from buildings reduces these nuisances.
Areas used for valuable agriculture, natural resource extraction, or other essential purposes may be unsuitable for renewable energy projects due to competing priorities.
Steep slopes, insufficient wind speeds, or areas with high-risk factors such as natural disasters can render sites technically or economically unfeasible.
Proximity to roads, railways, airports, and existing energy infrastructure can pose safety risks or operational challenges.
Table 1: Exclusion criteria for onshore wind power.
| Excluded land uses | Buffer distance | Unit | Data source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Churches | 600 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Lake and waterway | 400 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Natural reserves | 1000 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Protected areas (Forest, heath, meadow, scrub) | 0 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Slope* | 15° | degrees | NASA |
| Small cultural heritage | 20 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Natural resource excavation areas | 500 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Ancient monuments | 100 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Roads | 50 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Railways | 300 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| City zone | 1500 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Airports | 4 | km | OpenStreetMap |
| High risk areas | 100 | km | LiveUAMap |
| Energy infrastructure | 20 | km | OpenStreetMap |
| Areas with special restrictions | 0 | m | OpenStreetMap |
The exclusion criteria listed for renewable energy siting ensure that development does not conflict with sensitive or unsuitable areas. Below is an explanation of why each type of area and buffer distance is excluded:
Religious sites are excluded to preserve cultural and community significance and to avoid potential aesthetic or noise-related conflicts.
Ensuring a buffer from water bodies protects aquatic ecosystems, minimizes risks of pollution, and avoids visual distortion of the natural landscape.
These areas are excluded to safeguard biodiversity, rare species, and ecosystems critical to environmental sustainability.
Direct exclusion prevents any disturbance or degradation of forests, heathlands, meadows, and scrublands, which are essential habitats for flora and fauna.
Steep slopes are excluded due to technical challenges in construction, increased erosion risk, and higher maintenance costs.
Proximity to cultural heritage sites is restricted to protect historical and archaeological values and to maintain the cultural integrity of the area.
These areas are avoided to prevent interference with ongoing or potential future mining or excavation activities, ensuring safe and efficient land use.
Buffering ensures the preservation of archaeological significance and reduces risks of structural or visual disturbance.
A safe buffer prevents traffic disruptions, ensures public safety, and provides space for road maintenance.
Rail infrastructure is buffered to avoid operational risks, ensure safety during construction, and maintain safety during the operation of renewable energy facilities.
Areas adjacent to land classified as city zones are excluded to minimize noise, shadow flicker, and aesthetic concerns for nearby residents.
Airports are excluded to avoid interference with aviation operations, particularly radar and flight safety regulations.
These areas include Russia and Belarus, including the areas currently (Dec 2024) occupied by Russia, are excluded due to the risk of shelling or other security threats, which compromise safety and operational reliability.
Areas far from existing energy infrastructure are excludes, as this would lead to excessive costs for reinforcing or extending the grid to support new facilities.
Locations with insufficient wind speed are excluded as they are not economically viable for wind energy generation.
The table below lists the factors included in the analysis along with their weighting points.
Table 2: Evaluation parameters for onshore wind power.
| Parameter scoring: Land use, grid and WTG FLH | Distance and WTG FLH | Unit | Score | Data source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings - Zone 1 | 750 | m | -0,1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Buildings - Zone 2 | 1000 | m | -0,1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Buildings - Zone 3 | 2000 | m | -0,05 | OpenStreetMap |
| Valuable cultural environments | 0 | m | -3 | OpenStreetMap |
| Cultural heritage restriction zones | 300 | m | -5 | OpenStreetMap |
| Coastal proximity zone | 0 | m | -3 | OpenStreetMap |
| Organic corridors (Grass) | 0 | m | -1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Valuable agriculture areas | 0 | m | -1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Agriculture areas | 0 | m | 1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 1 | 0-1 | km | 5 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 2 | 1-5 | km | 4 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 3 | 5-10 | km | 3 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 4 | 10-15 | km | 2 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 5 | 15-20 | km | 1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Wind resource prior. 1 | >4300 | FLH | 10 | DTU |
| Wind resource prior. 2 | 4025-4300 | FLH | 8 | DTU |
| Wind resource prior. 3 | 3750-4025 | FLH | 6 | DTU |
| Wind resource prior. 4 | 3475-3750 | FLH | 4 | DTU |
| Wind resource prior. 5 | 3200-3475 | FLH | 2 | DTU |
| Wind resource prior. 6 | <3200 | FLH | 0 | DTU |
The parameters in the table define the scoring system used in the GIS model to evaluate the suitability of areas for renewable energy installations. Each parameter is scored based on its distance, type, or intensity, with positive scores indicating favourable conditions and negative scores indicating constraints or barriers. Below is a description of each parameter:
Religious sites are excluded to preserve cultural and community significance and to avoid potential aesthetic or noise-related conflicts.
These areas receive a high negative score (–3) to protect cultural and historical significance from visual or physical disruption.
Like cultural environments, a high penalty (–3) protects sensitive coastal areas from environmental or visual impacts.
These areas are penalized (–1) to preserve ecological connectivity and biodiversity in grassland habitats.
A small penalty (–1) reflects the importance of preserving valuable agricultural land for food production rather than converting it to energy use. In the analysis, valuable agricultural land is defined as orchards and vineyards, as the plants typically take a long time before they reach maturity and bear fruit, which means that the areas can’t quickly be reverted after teardown.
Scoring is highly favorable for areas closer to substations, as proximity reduces grid connection costs and energy losses. For a small to medium sized wind project a transmission distance of around 20 km is deemed to increase the LCOE by approx. 3 €/MWh. Moreover, distance to transmission infrastructure means less need for infrastructure and thus a quicker implementation and an easier approval process. These benefits are factored into the scoring:
Higher wind speeds (measured in full-load hours) are scored more positively, reflecting the economic viability of wind turbine installations:
The table below lists areas that have been excluded for development of photovoltaic plants, because the areas are not deemed suitable for development.
Table 3: Exclusion criteria for solar PV farms in open terrain.
| Excluded land uses | Buffer distance | Unit | Data source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Churches | 600 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Lake and waterway | 400 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Natural reserves | 1000 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Protected areas (Forest, heath, meadow, scrub) | 0 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Slope* | 15° | degrees | NASA |
| Small cultural heritage | 20 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Natural resource excavation areas | 500 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Ancient monuments | 100 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Roads | 50 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Railways | 100 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| City zone | 750 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| Airports | 1000 | m | OpenStreetMap |
| High risk areas | 100 | km | LiveUAMap |
| Energy infrastructure | >20 | km | OpenStreetMap |
| Areas with special restrictions | 0 | m | OpenStreetMap |
The exclusion criteria listed for renewable energy siting ensure that development does not conflict with sensitive or unsuitable areas. Below is an explanation of why each type of area and buffer distance is excluded:
Religious sites are excluded to preserve cultural and community significance and to avoid potential aesthetic conflicts.
Ensuring a buffer from water bodies protects aquatic ecosystems, minimizes risks of pollution, and avoids visual distortion of the natural landscape.
These areas are excluded to safeguard biodiversity, rare species, and ecosystems critical to environmental sustainability.
Direct exclusion prevents any disturbance or degradation of forests, heathlands, meadows, and scrublands, which are essential habitats for flora and fauna.
Steep slopes are excluded due to technical challenges in construction, increased erosion risk, and higher maintenance costs.
Proximity to cultural heritage sites is restricted to protect historical and archaeological values and to maintain the cultural integrity of the area.
These areas are avoided to prevent interference with ongoing or potential future mining or excavation activities, ensuring safe and efficient land use.
Buffering ensures the preservation of archaeological significance and reduces risks of structural or visual disturbance.
A safe buffer prevents traffic disruptions due to reflections, ensures public safety, and provides space for road maintenance.
Rail infrastructure is buffered to avoid operational risks, ensure safety during construction, and maintain safety during the operation of renewable energy facilities.
Areas adjacent to land classified as city zones are excluded to minimize aesthetic concerns for nearby residents.
Areas near airports are excluded to avoid reflections.
These areas include Russia and Belarus, including the areas currently (Dec 2024) occupied by Russia, are excluded due to the risk of shelling or other security threats, which compromise safety and operational reliability.
Areas far from existing energy infrastructure are excluded, as this would lead to excessive costs for reinforcing or extending the grid to support new facilities.
The table below lists the factors included in the analysis along with their weighting points for the suitability for construction of photovoltaic plants.
Table 4: Suitability scoring parameters for solar PV for land use, distance to electricity grid and full load hours (FLH).
| Parameter scoring: Land use, grid and PV FLH | Distance and PV FLH | Unit | Score | Data source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buildings - Zone 1 | 200 | m | -1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Valuable cultural environments | 0 | m | -3 | OpenStreetMap |
| Cultural heritage restriction zones | 300 | m | -5 | OpenStreetMap |
| Coastal proximity zone | 0 | m | -3 | OpenStreetMap |
| Organic corridors (Grass) | 0 | m | -1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Valuable agriculture areas | 0 | m | -1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Agriculture areas | 0 | m | 1 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 1 | 0–1 | km | 12 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 2 | 1–5 | km | 9 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 3 | 5–10 | km | 6.5 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 4 | 10–15 | km | 3.5 | OpenStreetMap |
| Substation prior 5 | 15–20 | km | 0 | OpenStreetMap |
| Solar resource prior. 1 | >1350 | FLH | 11 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 2 | 1300–1350 | FLH | 9.5 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 3 | 1250–1300 | FLH | 8 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 4 | 1200–1250 | FLH | 6.5 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 5 | 1150–1200 | FLH | 5 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 6 | 1100–1150 | FLH | 3 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 7 | 1050–1100 | FLH | 1.5 | DTU |
| Solar resource prior. 8 | <1050 | FLH | 0 | DTU |
The parameters in the table define the scoring system used in a GIS model to evaluate the suitability of areas for renewable energy installations. Each parameter is scored based on its distance, type, or intensity, with positive scores indicating favourable conditions and negative scores indicating constraints or barriers. Below is an explanation of each parameter:
Religious sites are excluded to preserve cultural and community significance and to avoid potential aesthetic or noise-related conflicts.
These areas receive a high negative score (-3) to protect cultural and historical significance from visual or physical disruption.
Like cultural environments, a high penalty (-3) protects sensitive coastal areas from environmental or visual impacts.
These areas are penalized (-1) to preserve ecological connectivity and biodiversity in grassland habitats.
A small penalty (-1) reflects the importance of preserving valuable agricultural land for food production rather than converting it to energy use. In the analysis, valuable agricultural land is defined as orchards and vineyards, as the plants typically take a long time before they reach maturity and bears fruit, which means that the areas can’t quickly be reverted after teardown.
Scoring is highly favorable for areas closer to substations, as proximity reduces grid connection costs and energy losses. For a small to medium sized solar PV project a transmission distance of around 20 km is deemed to increase the LCOE by approx. 10 €/MWh. The effect on the LCOE is pronounced because of the relatively low full load hours of solar power facilities. Moreover, distance to transmission infrastructure means less need for infrastructure and thus a quicker implementation and an easier approval process. These benefits are factored into the scoring:
The solar resource scoring evaluates the suitability of areas for ground-mounted solar PV installations based on solar irradiance, measured in annual full-load hours (Flh). Higher full-load hours indicate greater solar energy potential, improving the economic and technical feasibility of the site. The scoring is tiered, with lower priority (higher scores) assigned to regions with less irradiance:
REZOMA and the underlying analysis make use of a number of external datasets and open-source software tools. All such resources are used in accordance with their respective licences, which permit free use for analytical, planning, and policy purposes, subject only to standard attribution requirements. The use of these resources does not entail any present or future licensing fees.