Resource Library Category: Wildlife (156 items)
Documents presented here are not the product of nor are they necessarily endorsed by National Wind Watch. This resource library is provided to assist anyone wishing to research the issue of industrial wind power and the impacts of its development. The information should be evaluated by each reader to come to their own conclusions about the many areas of debate.
Corncrakes and Great Northern Divers: Hypocrisy and the Destruction of an Endangered Species
Source: No Tiree Array
The inshore waters of Tiree hold over 42% of the wintering population of the Great Northern Diver (aka, the Common Loon) … the proposed location is home to these beautiful birds.
In 1992, Governments throughout the European Union adopted legislation designed to protect Europe’s natural resources. The legislation is called the Habitats Directive and it protects the most seriously threatened habitats and species across Europe. It complements the Birds Directive adopted in 1979.
At the heart of both of these Directives is the creation of a network of sites called Natura 2000. The Birds Directive requires the establishment of Special Protected Areas (SPAs). SPAs are vitally important for rare and vulnerable birds because they rely on them for breeding, feeding, wintering and migration.
The Habitats Directive requires Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) to be designated for other species, and for habitats. SACs are classified under the Habitats Directive and provide rare and vulnerable animals, plants and habitats with increased protection and management.
Together, SPAs and SACs make up the Natura 2000 network. All EU member States are required to manage and implement Natura 2000 Networking Programme’s partnership approach. A strategic approach that ensures for example ; that a species breeding in one location can arrive at its wintering grounds in another … and complete its natural cycle.
Isle of Tiree (SPA)
In March 2000 the land mass of Tiree was classified as a SPA, this decision was based on our breeding Corncrake population. The population forms 9.2% of the UK’s breeding population.
To attain this protection for our Corncrakes the Isle of Tiree had to fulfill a certain number of criteria, this was exceeded and now the Corncrakes have a stable breeding ground. What implications the proposed Argyll Array (Tiree Array) will have is yet to be established.
Will ringing our island with turbines cut these birds down mid flight? Will the other two huge wind farms to the north and south destroy migration routes for the Corncrake and our other avian visitors?
The destruction of the Great Northern Diver wintering grounds (fiasco, illegal or hypocrisy?)
It is a simple task to show that the Great Northern Diver or Muir-bhuachaille is a vulnerable species; it is on the IUCN RED List. It is a species classed as ‘ highly sensitive to human disturbance’ and currently falls within the realms of a local extinction criteria, if not protected it will gradually climb up the list to ‘ High risk of Global extinction’ (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/106003868/0).
As with the Corncrakes, all species have to meet and hopefully exceed a certain threshold of numbers and concentration to be viably placed within the protection of an SPA or SAC. It makes sense to protect vulnerable and at risk species from decline. As per the Scottish Executives Environmental report (Scottish Marine SEA Faber Maunsell & Metoc 2007) preempting the allotment of exclusive rights to Scottish Power Renewables and others … and pertaining directly to Great Northern Diver population:
Northern and Western Scotland holds very important numbers of Great Northern Divers overwinter. The study area is a strong hold for this species in winter in the UK. Great Northern Divers prefer rocky to sandy shores, and their distribution extends more offshore (10s of km) than the other diver species (Black Throated/Red Throated) Large concentrations are found in particular along the sandy shores and bays of the Northern Isles and Western Isles, in Shetland at least that numbers are in sharp decline (Heubeck 2005)
The inshore waters of Tiree: a solid case for SPA status, the winter home of the largest population of Great Northern Divers in the UK
The following report was issued in August 2009 — JNCC Report No. 416 (2009):
On the basis of the UK SPA Selection Guidelines (Stroud et al. 2001) the waters around Coll and Tiree qualify as an SPA in the area for the great northern diver at stage 1.1. Therefore, when the complete suite of marine SPAs in inshore areas is being determined the inshore areas of Coll and Tiree (or parts thereof), should be considered for inclusion. If the inshore areas of Coll and Tiree are further considered for SPA classification then additional analysis will be required of the data presented here in order to determine a boundary for that SPA. Once dedicated surveys have clarified the relative importance of other potential areas for the various species around the shores of both mainland Scotland and its islands, consideration may also be given to inclusion of other species using stage 1.4 of the SPA UK Site Selection Guidelines’
It is a case of fact that already it is proven that the waters around Tiree, for many of 10s of km offshore and with concentrations at Skerryvore and throughout the proposed location of the Tiree Array are the wintering grounds of a minimum of 42% of the British Population of the Great Northern Diver. The shallow waters of the Skerryvore reef and the entire North to south transect of the Array location is a global hot spot … of global importance. The water depth from 0m to 50m is a favorite habitat for this internationally protected species.
Further support … given that we have at least 42% of the British population of Great Northern Divers what else does the waters around Tiree have to do to be the protected wintering grounds?
A comparison of other species and other percentages of population all of which visit our Island:
Sleibhtean agus Cladach Thiriodh (Tiree Wetlands and Coast) SPA description (information as published 2001):
This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive:
During the breeding season;
Corncrake Crex crex, 47 individuals representing at least 9.8% of the breeding population in Great Britain (1993-1997)
This site qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following species listed on Annex I of the Directive:
Over winter;
Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis, 959 individuals representing at least 3.6% of the wintering population in Great Britain (winter peak mean)
Greenland White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons flavirostris, 783 individuals representing at least 5.6% of the wintering population in Great Britain (winter peak mean)
This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species:
During the breeding season;
Dunlin Calidris alpina schinzii, 125 pairs representing at least 1.1% of the breeding Baltic/UK/Ireland population (1994/5)
Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus, 160 pairs representing <0.1% of the breeding Europe & Northern/Western Africa population (1994/5)
Redshank Tringa totanus, 140 pairs representing at least 0.2% of the breeding Eastern Atlantic – wintering population (1994/95)
Ringed Plover Charadrius hiaticula, 160 pairs representing at least 1.0% of the breeding Europe/Northern Africa – wintering population (1998)
Over winter;
Turnstone Arenaria interpres, 700 individuals representing at least 1.0% of the wintering Western Palearctic – wintering population (mean 1995, 1998, & 1999 special surveys)
Note also: EU protection status: Natura 2000 Code: UK9003033 and UK9003034
Other protection status: A small (2.4%) section of the Coll (corncrake) SPA (UK9003033) is designated as a site of Special Scientific Interest under UK legislation (Crossapol and Gunna SSSI).
The Final Solution?
So where does the Scottish Government and Scottish Power Renewables (Iberdrola) go from here?
We have already shown that the area of inshore waters for many 10s km out far exceeds the criteria for SPA status … that the area is of British, European and International importance. That it is a crucial hereditary wintering ground for the Great Northern Diver. The birds cannot simply move elsewhere, hereditary instinct, trial and error; evolution has selected their wintering grounds, a symbiosis of environment and creature, food and shelter.
The JNCC, SNH, RSPB, BTO and now the NTA are all aware of the situation and, the grave consequences this proposed development will have on this endangered species.
All are aware that the area should have been adopted as an SPA prior to exclusive rights been released by the Crown Estates.
Maybe a burecratic error or an exceptional work load or a hidden agenda has delayed the process of certification and protection.
One thing is for certain, the Great Northern Diver is here to stay, unless the Scottish Government and Scottish Power Renewables feel the sacrifice of a species supports the generation of ‘Green’ electricity in our home waters …
Do the cash returns for a Spanish Multinational such as Iberdrola outweigh the bio diversity of our beautiful home isle?
Does the Pelican Brief now become the Great Northern Diver Brief?
Basking sharks next …
Aesthetics, Environment, General, Health, Human rights, Impacts, Noise, Wildlife •
Wind Wise Radio
Source: Wind Wise Radio
RSS feed — previous shows
RSS feed — upcoming shows
Infrasound and Adverse Health Effects
Ambrose and Rand
Sunday, February 12, 2012, 7:00-8:00PM
Join us for the first edition of Wind Wise Radio when we will be delighted to welcome Stephen Ambrose and Robert Rand, professional acousticians, members of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering, and the authors of “The McPherson Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise Study” which investigated the possible relationship between infrasound and adverse health effects experienced by people living near and industrial wind turbine (IWT) in Falmouth, Massachusetts.
We will be discussing Stephen and Robert’s findings, their personal experience in the vicinity of IWT, their work on other projects, and their thoughts on the the recently released “Wind Turbine Health Impact Study”. We will also be asking them about their ideas for further studies to advance our knowledge.
Stephen and Robert will be happy to take questions and listen to your comments so please join us for this important event.
Read the McPherson Report.
Read the Mass. DEP Wind Turbine Health Impact Study.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
The Word from Waubra
A conversation with Dr. Sarah Laurie
Sunday, February 19, 2012, 7:00PM
Dr. Laurie is the medical director of the Waubra Foundation in Australia and is facilitating some of the seminal research surrounding the set of symptoms known here in the U.S. as Wind Turbine Syndrome. ”Down Under” it is often termed Waubra Disease.
In mid 2010, Dr. Laurie was in the process of returning to work clinically as a rural General Practitioner when she became aware that a wind energy project was proposed for the hills near her home in regional South Australia. Being concerned with climate change and the environment, and the need for renewable energy she was initially supportive of the local project and unaware of any health concerns. It wasn’t until a neighbour alerted her to Dr Amanda Harry’s study of health issues with wind factories, that Dr. Laurie realised there were some potentially serious health problems associated with wind turbines. She decided to look into the matter fully, and became aware that despite the health problems being described around the world, there was a lack of research, and hence an urgent need for more research into this problem.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (16-MB MP3).
An Alternative Vision for Vermont
Luke Snelling, Geoff Goll, and Steve Wright
Sunday, February 26, 2012, 7:00PM
Please join us as we talk with leaders in the struggle for smart alternative energy solutions in Vermont.
- Lukas B. Snelling, Executive Director, Energize Vermont
- Geoff Goll, Hydrologist, Princeton Hydro
- Steve Wright, Former Commissioner of Fish & Wildlife Department
We will discuss the current situation in Lowell Mountain, Sheffield, Searsburg, the current regulatory environment, and other projects and issues involving industrial scale wind turbines in Vermont.
Energize Vermont advocates for renewable energy solutions that are in harmony with the irreplaceable character of Vermont and contribute to the people’s well-being.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (18-MB MP3).
National Wind Watch’s Eric Rosenbloom and David Roberson on WWR
Sunday, March 4, 2012, 7:00PM
Wind Wise Radio is honored to be joined by the president and vice-president of National Wind Watch, Eric Rosenbloom and David Roberson, for an hour of conversation about their experiences at the center of the struggle against Industrial Wind in the U.S.
Since 2005, National Wind Watch (NWW) has been a indispensable resource providing a central clearinghouse for information and assistance to individuals and local groups seeking the facts about industrial wind power.
Eric Rosenbloom is a science writer and editor. In 2001 Eric and family moved from New York to northeastern Vermont, where he founded his own company, Kirby Mountain Composition & Graphics. Eric has been involved since 2003 when he learned that there were plans to erect wind turbines on the ridge behind his house. At first, he was a cautious supporter of the development but as he learned more his opinion shifted. In 2005, he started up the excellent site aweo.org, which he continues to maintain and where you can find much of his writing on the subject of IWT. He also blogs at kirbymtn.blogspot.com.
David Roberson is a gallery owner in Shelburne Falls (jewelry, fine handcrafts, décor, books, gifts) and a small-scale farmer. David lived off the grid for 12 years in Hawley, Massachusetts, before moving to Rowe, where he lives with his “wife, dogs, cats, goats, geese, and chickens.”
In December of 2003, his seminal article, Questioning the Faith of Wind Power, was published in Shelburne Falls Independent. The article broke new ground on a host of issues, argued cogently against the rush to wind without rigorous, thorough analysis, and should be required reading for all those interested in these issues. In 2005, David organized the first gathering of interstate wind opponents, a weekend-long conference with participants from 10 states. He was the founding president of National Wind Watch and has served as its Vice-President since 2006.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
The Struggle in Canada
Dr. Robert McMurtry
Sunday, March 11, 2012, 7:00PM
Dr. Robert McMurtry is currently an advisor for the Society Wind Vigilance, an international federation of physicians, engineers and other professionals promoting the development of authoritative international wind turbine guidelines to protect the health and safety of communities. The mission of The Society for Wind Vigilance is to mitigate the risk of both physiological and psychological adverse heath effects through the advancement of independent third party research and its application to the siting of industrial wind turbines.
He was a member of the Health Council of Canada for 3½ years and a member and special advisor to the Royal Commission under Roy Romanow on the future of health care in Canada. Dr. McMurtry was a visiting Cameron Chair to Health Canada for providing policy advice to the Minister and Deputy Minister of Health. He was the Founding and Associate Deputy Minister of Population & Public Health, Canada.
Dr. McMurtry sat on the National Steering Committee on Climate Change and Health Assessment. Presently Dr. McMurtry is Professor (Emeritus) of Surgery, University of Western Ontario.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
Vermont’s Precious Ridges
Susan Morse and Annette Smith
Sunday, March 18, 2012, 7:00PM
Please join us as we talk with Susan Morse, a world-renowned naturalist and wildlife tracker, and Annette Smith, the executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment (VCE), about the threats posed to some of Vermont’s most ecologically sensitive areas by industrial wind power.
Susan Morse has more than thirty-five years of experience monitoring wildlife and interpreting wildlife habitat use. Her research has focused on cougar, bobcat, black bear, and Canada lynx. She is the founder and director of Keeping Track an organization devoted inspiring community participation in the stewardship of wildlife habitat.
Ms. Morse has authored numerous articles and authors a regular column on wildlife in Northern Woodlands Magazine. Her work has also been featured in many other publications, including Smithsonian, Audubon, Amicus Journal, Forest Magazine, Wild Earth, Vermont Life, Adirondack Life, The Nature Conservancy, and Ranger Rick, as well as on National Public Radio’s “Morning Edition”.
Annette Smith is a native of Lewisburg and leads Vermonters for a Clean Environment in its mission to raise the voices of Vermonters and hold corporations accountable for their impacts on our people, our land, our air and our water.
VCE’s members are united in the belief that Vermont’s future lies in conserving its clean, rural, small-town environment. They have joined together to pursue the common goals of encouraging economic development with minimal environmental impacts and preserving Vermont’s natural beauty. VCE is committed to providing facts and information so that people can make informed decisions.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
Industrial Wind in the Wilds of Maine
Monique Aniel, David Corrigan, and Steve Thurston
Sunday, March 25, 2012, 7:00PM
Join us as we talk with those struggling against the ongoing destruction of Maine’s precious natural areas by industrial wind developers.
We will be joined by Dr. Monique Aniel and Steve Thurston from the Citizens’ Task Force on Wind Power – a coalition of citizens from around Maine drawn together in the common purpose of advocating for responsible, science-based, economically and environmentally sound approaches to Maine’s energy policy.
Also we are happy David Corrigan, a Registered Maine Master Guide who blogs at Real Wind Info for Me, will be joining in our discussion.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (16-MB MP3).
Talking Action
Lisa Linowes and Julie Johnson
Sunday, April 1, 2012, 7:00PM
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
Direct Impact: Talking with Victims of IWT
Neil Anderson, Barbara Ashbee, and Richard Braithwaite
Sunday, April 8, 2012, 7:00PM
Neil Anderson hails from Falmouth, Massachusetts, and has been a leader in the effort to tell the story of the many families in Falmouth who have been severely affected by the turbine know as Wind One. Wind One is located at the town’s wastewater treatment plant a little more than 1300 feet from Neil’s home. As many as 50 families have been affected and they have managed, for now, to get the turbine turned off. Neil was an advocate of the turbine before it turned on and started to affect his health.
Barbara Ashbee was forced out of her Amaranth, Ontario, home by the siting of industrial turbines too close. Barbara could easily count 15 turbines from her yard. Her experiences with the local and provincial government is scary and disturbing:
“The Ontario government did not help, in fact they misled us on the number of complaints they had received and were claiming all was running in compliance when it wasn’t.
“The Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH) released a literature review in May 2010 concluding there are no direct health issues linked to turbines. The developers and government actually use this review to approve new wind projects and they hand out copies at wind meetings but the CMOH, Dr. Arlene King, was well aware of the serious problems in many wind projects in Ontario before she signed off on the literature review. She was made well aware that families were being made sick with some being forced from their homes and chose not to speak with even one of them. She was warned.
“There is a wall of silence but as the evidence mounts they will have to answer to it at some point. These people are in a position of public trust and their lack of action or even acknowledgment of what they are doing to people is very serious.”
[Click here for a CBC radio report about Barbara Ashbee's whistleblowing about the province's knowledge of noise problems. (Click the play button above to listen, or download the 7-MB MP3 file.)]
Richard Braithwaite lives in Keyser, West Virginia and was one of 75 neighbors who signed a petition seeking a solution to the noise coming from the Pinnacle Wind project. He purchased an inexpensive sound meter and routinely registers 60–70 dB outside his home. As he says, “Let them bring their thousand dollar machine and take their own readings.” The wind developer has paid lip service to the complaints and is installing, of all things, a muffler!
Gerry Meyer lives in the 86-turbine Forward Energy project in Brownsville, Wisconsin that was erected by Invenergy of Chicago. There are five 400′ turbines within 3/4 of a mile and eleven within a mile of his house.
Gerry attended the first few public meetings about the Forward Energy project. (that was long after many local farmers were signed up to host turbines). The Invenergy representatives and the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin told the public the turbines were quiet and would be a great benefit to his community. Gerry left those meeting feeling good about wind energy.
Gerry knew know about the Horicon Marsh Advocates, a group fighting for a 5-mile set back from the Horicon National Wildlife Refuge, however he did nothing to help them in their cause. As a rural mail carrier he drove within the project often stopping to take photos and on his way home from work stopped to talk to workers and take more photos. As a former construction worker the turbine construction was intriguing.
On March 3rd, 2008, he walked out of his house and heard a jet flying over. He looked to the sky for that jet. There was no jet. It was the large industrial wind turbine 1560 feet straight north of his house. This was the first day of operation of this turbine. He immediately knew he was lied to by Invenergy about the quiet sound of the turbine. This did not sound like the wind blowing through the trees. It sounded like sitting on the runway at O’Hare Airport. He began writing a daily noise diary which can be read at lifeinawisconsinwindproject.tumblr.com.
“In the house there are thumping sounds everywhere, especially upstairs in the sewing room. Very tense and sickening.”
Just a few of the heath affects caused to Gerry’s quality of life are sleep deprivation, high cortisol levels, chest pain, pulsating the neck, nausea, exhaustion, no longer has dreams, cognitive thinking issues, and the concern of what other heath affects are down the road due to constant sleep deprivation.
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
Strife in Ontario: The IWT Resistance
Sunday, April 15, 2012, 7:00PM
Rural Ontario is being plundered by the McGuinty government and his wind developer allies. The citizens are actively resisting the onslaught. We will talk to some of the leaders of the resistance.
Mark Davis, Deputy Mayor of the Municipality of Arran Elderslie, farm country consisting of 1 town, 2 villages, several hamlets and about 7000 people, located in central Bruce County, which is about 10 miles off the shore of Lake Huron about 3 hours northwest of Toronto. Cash crop and beef farmer, real estate sales rep for Coldwell Banker and auctioneer doing charity auctions for worthwhile causes, Mark has been a strong opponent of industrial wind turbines for quite some time and is chair of the Inter Municipal Wind Turbine Working Group consisting of 12 to 15 municipalities from about 6 counties of like-minded elected and appointed citizens doing their very best to work with the Ontario Green Energy Act and come up with bylaws and ideas to get some control back to local government and the people directly involved.
Greg Schmalz, the founder of S.T.O.P. Saugeen Shores Turbine Operation Policy resisted group opposing placement of CAW (UAW in Canada) whose 35-story turbine on the grounds of their $70M resort is surrounded by 100 families living within 550 m and more than 4,000 people within 2,000 m. This turbine has become the lightning rod representing all that is wrong with placing turbines too close to people’s homes and businesses.
Lisa Thompson, the MPP for Bruce-Huron, recently introduced a private member’s bill at Queen’s Park to establish a moratorium on futher IWT development in Ontario.
Jane Wilson, a registered nurse and health care writer and editor, is the current president of Wind Concerns Ontario, a coalition of individuals and community groups in Canada’s most populous province, Ontario. She is also the editor of a book on how the Ontario government has pushed the industrial wind power generation agenda at the expense of Ontario’s people and communities, called Dirty Business: the reality behind Ontario’s rush to wind power. Jane lives in a rural community which is part of Canada’s capital city, Ottawa; her community is threatened by a 20-megawatt industrial power project that will be too close to hundreds of homes.
Along with our special guests:
Gail and Ed Kenney of Wolfe Island, Ontario, whose appeal of their property value assessment was rejected this past week by Ontario’s assessment review board because they could find “no evidence”. Didn’t the fact that zero homes had sold since the 86 Turbines went up actually constitute stark, compelling evidence?
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (16-MB MP3).
Saving Massachusetts from IWT — Louise Barteau, Virginia Irvine, Andrew Wells
Sunday, April 22, 2012, 7:00PM
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (15-MB MP3).
Truth from Texas — Robert Bryce
Sunday, April 29, 2012, 7:00PM
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (18-MB MP3).
Turbine Trouble in Paradise
Sunday, May 6, 2012, 7:00PM
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (17-MB MP3).
Windfall hits the small screen – Director Laura Israel
Sunday, May 13, 2012, 7:00PM
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (16-MB MP3).
Fighting for Feathered Friends (and Other Creatures) – Ileene Anderson, Biologist and Public Lands Deserts Director, Center for Biological Diversity; and Miriam Raftery, Editor and Founder, East County Magazine
Sunday, May 20, 2012, 7:00PM
Click the play button above to listen, or download the archived show (18-MB MP3).
Fish and Wildlife Service Comments: Pantego Wind Energy
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has a vested interest in northeast North Carolina as evidenced by the presence of nine National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) encompassing over 360,000 acres. In addition, the Service has a National Fish Hatchery and a Migratory Bird Field Office (MBFO) in the area. Staff members from the Service’s Ecological Services Field Office (ESFO) in Raleigh also routinely work on issues within the region.
The Department of the Interior and the Service support the development of wind and other renewable energy sources in the right places. That being said, the location of the Pantego Wind Energy, LCC project causes us great concern and we want to make the Commission aware of these concerns. Service staff (primarily ESFO and MBFO) have been communicating with representatives of the company for months now and have relayed these concerns to them as well. We are currently providing technical assistance to the company on migratory bird survey protocols, but my understanding is that the study they are conducting this winter is to help determine the best locations for turbines within the selected project area/site and will not be used to assess the suitability/impacts on migratory birds of the project site itself.
During the winter, Pocosin Lakes and Mattamuskeet NWRs become home to hundreds of thousands of migratory waterfowl. Although the birds concentrate on the refuges, they routinely fly out to surrounding agricultural and other lands to forage. One species of special concern is the tundra swan (Cygnus columbianus). Tundra swans are large birds weighing up to 23 pounds with a wingspan of 5-1/2 feet. The breeding grounds for tundra swans are in Alaska and western Canada. Part of the population migrates south along the Pacific Coast during the winter, but the other part, the Eastern Population of tundra swans, migrates across the continent to North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. Eastern North Carolina winters approximately 70-80% of this Eastern Population of tundra swans. Thus, this area supports a substantial part of this international migratory bird resource for four to six months annually.
Tundra swan use of the Pantego Wind Energy, LCC project site in the winter is well documented. Most of these birds are probably associated with the Pungo Unit of Pocosin Lakes NWR (approximately 2 miles apart at the closest points) but some are probably associated with Mattamuskeet NWR (approximately 15 miles apart at the closest points). In addition, studies have shown that there is a lot of mixing among tundra swans on the wintering grounds, so it is likely that many different individual birds within the population use the site, rather than the same birds using the site over and over again.
While there are few data on the potential impacts of wind farms on tundra swans, it seems reasonable to be concerned about 1) site avoidance (which means a loss of foraging habitat) and 2) direct mortality from turbine blade strikes (especially at night – tundra swans and other migratory waterfowl wintering at Pocosin Lakes NWR are known to fly between roosting and foraging areas at night). Additional study is needed to better understand these and other possible impacts of the proposed wind farm on tundra swans and other migratory bird resources wintering at Pocosin Lakes and Mattamuskeet NWRs. Due to crop rotations in the project area and other variables, it would likely take years, rather than a single field season as is planned for the company’s current study, to gather the appropriate data. As stated above, the Service continues to provide technical assistance to Pantego Wind Energy, LCC on their proposed study, but thus far we have not received any written survey reports or migratory bird risk assessments from them. As there appears to be no other review process for this proposed project, delaying the decision on the application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity until risk assessment studies are completed would seem prudent.
Based on the information we currently have and our experience with the migratory birds wintering at Pocosin Lakes NWR, we believe that detrimental impacts to tundra swans from the proposed wind farm are likely. Other migratory bird resources, such as bald eagles, might also be affected. Direct mortality from blade strikes, if they occur, might be considered a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We offer all of this information for you to consider as you evaluate Pantego Wind Energy, LLC’s application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.
Sincerely,
~~~
Howard Phillips
Refuge Manager
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge
205 South Ludington Drive
P.O. Box 329
Columbia, NC 27925-0329
Phone: 252/796-3004
December 6, 2011
TO: Ms. Renne Vance, Chief Clerk, N.C. Utilities Commission
4325 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4325
RE: Docket No. EMP-61, Sub 0
Pantego Wind Energy, LLC – Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
Download original document: “Fish and Wildlife Service Comments: Pantego Wind Energy”
Repowering Altamont Pass with Smoke and Mirrors
Source: Wiegand, Jim
A few months back it was disclosed through the media that the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area was repowering with new safer turbines. With their new turbines Altamont was going to drastically reduce the bird mortality rate by 80 percent and raptors by 67 percent. We were led to believe that this major upgrade was going to drastically reduce the number of bird kills in the Altamont region while increasing energy production. This highly publicized move was received as good news across the world because thousands of eagles and tens of thousands of other raptors have been slaughtered at the wind turbines of Altamont Pass.
I began to think about it. The turbine designs haven’t really changed, they’re just bigger. I did not understand how this could be possible. So I set out on a journey to find out if the new turbines really are safer for birds and raptors.
Why is my opinion important? I am a wildlife biologist, an expert on birds of prey, and I tell it the way it is. I have even done my own research in the Altamont pass area before wind turbines were installed. The wind turbine issue has been of great concern to me because protected and rare species have been getting chopped up in great numbers at Altamont for over 30 years. Some will say this is not my business and they will be wrong. Dead eagles are my business.
Over the years I have seen the wind industry answer to this problem. Environmental laws have been changed in their favor, the industry has virtually no regulations, they have their own army of biologists, and as far as they are concerned, wind turbines belong just about everywhere the wind blows. Their money has always won and the golden eagles, as well as all other raptors, have always lost.
I now have a different story to tell. It is important because the scientific studies that were used to bring us this good news are loaded with seriously flawed information. In addition, This false information is now being used to sell even more turbines to the ignorant across the world. Ignored is the fact that if something is not done, we are going see major population declines of nearly every raptor species across the world. This includes the extinction of several species. All caused by the uncontrolled installations of the propeller style wind turbine.
For this critique I have looked through decades of reports and studies on Altamont Pass. To sum it up, Altamont Pass is one big mess and mortality is really much worse than what is being reported. I will explain why and hope to bring some clarity to a very complex set of circumstances. Some of what I have to say is quite tedious but in the end I believe everyone that reads this, will never think of Altamont pass or any other wind farm, in the same light again.
The Golden Numbers
The industry numbers used to proclaim that the larger turbines used for the repowering of Altamont will be much safer, are presented in ratios comparing Fatalities per 1 Megawatt per Year. Many charts and hundreds of ratios were used to compare the different species of birds killed at Altamont. I could tear apart any of these numbers but I will only illustrate and discuss a few of the key numbers. Those being the numbers used for the media reports, target species of raptors and those used for all native birds. The target raptors are those species killed in the greatest numbers every year at Altamont. They are the Golden Eagle, the Red-tailed hawk, the American kestrel, and the Burrowing Owl. The all native birds category, are all the many species of native birds killed at Altamont over the years.
The numbers from numerous studies show that raptor mortality since 2005 at Altamont has ranged from 4.035 fatalities per megawatt to 0.803 fatalities per megawatt per year according to the size class of turbine. The death rate for all native birds range from 11.00 fatalities per megawatt a year down to 2.389 for the newly repowered Buena Vista wind farm.
The higher mortality numbers were derived from the smallest 40-65 kW class turbines in use at Altamont for over 20 years. The lower mortality figures were derived from studies conducted on much larger 1 MW turbines in the newer section of Altamont called Buena Vista. There were also comparisons to other progressively smaller turbine size categories as well. The categories shown below illustrate a progressive increase in mortality per megawatt. These numbers can be seen below.
| 40-65 kW | 95-200 kW | 250-400 kw | 660 KW | 1 MW | ||||
| 4.035/MW/year | 3.243/MW/year | 1.579/MW/year | 2.117/MW/year | 0.748/MW/year | ||||
| 11.000/MW/year | 8.140/MW/year | 4.111/MW/year | 3.512/MW/year | 2.389/MW/year |
These are impressive numbers and it appears that Altamont is on its way to reducing yearly mortality and living up to the settlement agreement made with the Audubon society, Californians for Renewable Energy (“CARE”); and Attorney General ( People of the State of California), to reduce mortality. But there is a lot more to these numbers as I will illustrate and the agreement made to reduce mortality is not being met.
Rated Capacity and Actual Energy Production
Altamont pass has a rated capacity of 580 MW. This number represents the theoretical total energy output of their 5000 or so turbines under high wind conditions. Every turbine depending on its size also has an industry given “rated capacity”. These turbines are represented in the different categories seen above. For the sake of simplicity I will compare just two different wind turbines. One from the from the lowest 40-65 kW category and one from the 1 MW category,. those being an older Windmatic 65 kW will be compared with one of the new Mitsubishi 1 MW turbines that have been installed in the Buena vista section of Altamont. These can be seen in the images provided.
The average wind speed in the Altamont region is in the 12-16 mph range. At 12.5 mph the Windmatic wind turbine produces about 135,000 kWh per year. According to the manufacturer the 1 MW turbine at the same wind speed produces about 1,000,000 kWh. This comes out to a 7.4 to one ratio in energy production when compared to the smaller turbine. The “rated capacity” for the smaller turbine is 65 KW This industry rating when compared to the 1 MW Mitsubishi rating creates a ratio that is 15.4 to 1 (65 kW divided by 1000 kW). With this disparity between “rated capacity” and actual energy production it more than doubles the number of wind turbines used to compare fatalities for the much higher 40-65 kW mortality category. This type of comparison can be used with any of the turbines installed at Altamont.
All the mortality numbers from Altamont were derived by using comparisons to “rated capacity”. By using bird mortality and equating it to rated capacity, it creates a deception or trick of numbers because rated capacity is a subjective wind industry figure that refers to maximum energy potential of a turbine at a particular wind speed. The term rated capacity is so vague that it should NEVER be discussed in any mortality impact studies to protected species.
I know the State of California is well aware of this as well because twenty years ago the California Energy Commission made the following statement about rated capacity: “Because the wind industry does not yet employ a standardized turbine rating system, much of the data reported is not directly comparable. Turbines are tested under different conditions and rated at widely varying miles per hour specifications. Evidence of the problem is indicated by the lack of correlation between blade swept area and turbine KW specifications.” Yet the wind industry has created false correlations for their mortality studies.
Instead what should always be discussed in every scientific mortality study are total rotor sweep area, tip speed, and placement because these are the primary wind turbine factors that slaughter our birds.
Currently there are no data available from Altamont Pass or any other wind facility across America equating actual energy production to raptor and bird mortality. If one understands the magnitude of what I have just presented, then it becomes obvious that that none of the wind industry mortality studies using rated capacity comparisons have credibility. Rated capacity, that vague term of potential, is also used in another deceptive manner, it is used to embellish the energy projections of wind farms.
In the end, with these new turbines going into Altamont, more energy will be produced and that is the real reason why they are repowering. It is not for the birds and never has been. More energy will be produced because at 300 feet up in the sky these turbines reach into stronger winds and far more rotor sweep will be put into Altamont. Likewise if the same old turbines now on 60- 80 foot towers were placed at the same level, they too would produce far more energy.
Rotor Sweep
All things being equal, if we look at rotor sweep comparisons to produce the equal amounts of energy (135,000 kWh) it shows that at a 7.4 to 1 ratio the Windmatic has a combined total rotor sweep of 1140 sq meters (7.4 × 154 sq meters = 1140). The new 1 MW Buena Vista turbines reaching almost 300 feet into the air have a rotor sweep of 2959 square meters. Each of these turbines has a rotor sweep equal to the total sweep area of 19.2 of the smaller Windmatic turbines. They also a total rotor sweep of 2.6 times for the same energy production. But more importantly the mortality equivalent of 19.2 turbines in the numbers above, is being compared to just one 1 MW turbine when it should be compared to just 7.4 turbines. This creates a figure showing 2.6 times more fatalities for the smaller turbines. If this inflated 2.6 ratio is plugged into the industry numbers it drastically lowers the mortality numbers again for the smaller 40kw-65kw class of turbines.
Even so, there are far bigger problems with the wind industry mortality studies and their conclusions.
Proportional Rotor Sweep and Search Areas
In order to get the mortality data, an area around each turbine must be searched. If we compare the areas searched between the different turbine types the results are shocking. Especially when comparing the search areas of the 1 MW turbine to the smallest and supposedly most dangerous 40-65 kW turbines.
| 40-65 kW | 95-200 kW | 250-400 kW | 660 kW | 1 MW | ||||
| rotor sweep area: 154 sq m, 1658 sq ft | rotor sweep area: ~350 sq m, ~1734 sq feet | rotor sweep area: ~800 sq m, ~1734 sq feet | rotor sweep area: 1734 sq m, 18,664 sq ft | rotor sweep area: 2960 sq m, 31,860 sq ft | ||||
| 50 meter search | 50 meter search | 50 meter search | 60 meter search | 75 meter search |
Published scientific reports claim declining fatalities in the new larger turbines installed at Altamont but the data also shows something else if you look close. The data shows that there a direct association between the number of fatalities found in relation to turbine size. It is an illusion because from the highest number of fatalities found in the studies down to the lowest shows progressively smaller search areas for each of the five larger wind turbines categories.
The area searched for each of the smaller Windmatic turbines is 50 meters out from the base of each turbine. The area searched looking for bodies around the 1 MW turbines at Buena Vista was 75 meters. Since the 1 MW turbines are actually 19.1 times bigger we can multiply the 7850 square meter Windmatic search areas by that amount for comparison. This will give us an area of 149,935 square meters that was searched for the fatalities listed for the smallest turbines. Now if we look at the total area searched for the much larger 1 MW turbines it is just 17662 square meters
A total single search of the so called safer 38 turbines installed in the Buena Vista wind project, covered 671175 square meters. The total search area of the same rotor sweep equivalent (726 40-65 kW turbines) of the smaller turbines was 5,699,100 square meters. A difference of 5,028,735 square meters, or almost 2 square miles.
This is very important because wounded birds with severed limbs can travel for days before dying and smaller birds hit by blade tips can fly like a baseball upon impact.
The mortality figures given by the industry for the 1 MW turbines were derived from search area equivalents 8.5 times smaller. The new larger turbines with lower claimed fatalities had bird and bat mortality searches covering an area of over 26 million less square feet every time searchers looked through the turbines. What does this all really mean? That if you do not look, you will not see.
Now that the wind industry undersized search radius ploy has been exposed, an argument can also be made that comparison search areas should be derived from the equal angles created from the outside edge or the maximum height of the rotor sweep to the outside edge of the search radius. I have looked into this and depending on tower height, it still creates a search area radius in the 130-142 meter range that should have been done for each of the Buena Vista 1 MW turbines. This is still 3-3.6 times too small. But even if this had been done, the increased search areas would not account for the higher winds at the increased elevation of impact, nor the greater impact to birds generated from birds hitting blades with much faster tip speeds of the newly installed 1 MW turbines.
All Native Bird Comparisons
The new turbines were said to drastically reduce the bird mortality rate by 80 percent. This statement is not true. Not only are the all native bird figures wrong from the result of using distorted comparisons of rated capacity, rotor sweep, and search area sizes, but birds species that do not use the habitat, were used to create the low Buena Vista number of 2.389 bird fatalities/MW/year.
Bird species that do not live in or use the habitat should not have ever been used. I’ve walked the Buena Vista habitat. The habitat where the Buena Vista wind turbines are placed, is a treeless semi desert grassland (see images). You will not see wild turkeys, flickers, scrub jays, pelicans and many of the other bird species that were used to build the 80 percent reduction number. This is another trick of numbers used to create the safer turbine myth.
Other Problems with the Turbine Comparisons
Hidden in the numbers are several other facts that completely change the widely published repowering conclusions. With the largest 1 MW turbines, is the terrible news that the golden eagle death rate went up over all other wind turbine categories from .043 fatalities to 0.084/MW/year. Even with the many flawed comparisons and conclusions the death rate still nearly doubled when compared to the 40-65 kw turbines. When accounting for these flaws, the death rate for the golden eagle becomes even more alarming because it easily escalates mortality to over 4 times as many golden eagles killed with the so called safer turbines.
Another fact buried in the 67% lower raptor mortality numbers is the fact that with the burrowing owl mortality category, no mortalities were reported because they also do not live around the turbines in Buena Vista 1 MW turbine habitat. This lowered the overall raptor mortality of the raptor species. The closest and rare observations of this species were all about 1/2 mile away from the closest turbines.
Lastly it must be pointed out that the these same 1 MW Turbines put in other locations of Altamont pass with better habitat would kill far more raptors, birds, and bats. In other words the bird and raptor mortalities reported would have been higher in nearly every category except for those species like the Horned lark and Prairie falcon that prefer this semi desert habitat. The death list from the Buena Vista turbines shows that their mortality numbers went up.
The only reasonable conclusions that can be made from the Buena Vista Mortality studies is that the new larger turbines are far more dangerous to the golden eagle and wind turbines kill the indigenous species from the habitat where they are placed.
The Stark Reality
One of the reasons the new turbines are so dangerous to eagles is because the placement of the Buena Vista turbines now has the highest concentration of wind turbines in all of the Altamont region. In addition, for any bird species that pays a visit to the Buena Vista Wind farm, the chances of coming out alive are the worst in all of Altamont. Now within this .85 mile square mile area, anything that flies must face 1,205,132 square feet of air space with spinning turbine blades. Their blade tip speed is 210 mph when spinning at 19.8 rpm. The Buena Vista section of Altamont Pass now has more than three times the density of spinning blades (rotor sweep) found anywhere else in the entire Altamont wind resource area. In other words, the equivalent of 726 of the older Windmatic wind turbines have been crammed into one small area.
For the Buena Vista project 179 older turbines were taken out and this repowering project added 441,320 more square feet of rotor sweep to the previous total. When the original 179 turbines that were pulled out, they also did not sit on 0.85 square miles, they were spread out over an area of 3.9 square miles. The untold truth is that the Buena Vista wind farm is now the most dangerous installment of turbines in the entire region of Altamont Pass and it is going get worse.
Why Altamont Death Rate Is Really Much Higher
When looking through the many studies conducted at Altamont over the years, I also saw mistakes researchers we were making with their the studies under the turbines. I can report that mortality is much worse than anything reported and much higher than any of previous of estimates. Especially for the smaller birds and bats. This is because all the previous studies were set up to see only the leftovers from scavenging. Unreported in the studies is the fact that Ravens, sea gulls, vultures are picking the search areas clean long before the searchers arrive. Over the years I have spent time studying each of these species and from what I have seen of their behavior I know that most of the smaller species killed by the turbines are carried off or eaten from the turbines in a day or two after they hit the ground.
In all the studies researchers have been coming back to the turbines checking for bodies two weeks, a month , or even 3 months later so they can tally up the fatalities. But its really old news and even if they checked everyday the ravens and gulls would make fools out of them.
A look at the many Altamont studies consistently shows that these species as a group are the most commonly seen birds in the Altamont Pass region. These species are tenacious scavengers equipped with very keen eyesight. Their eyesight may not equal that of an eagle’s, but it is not far off. In addition there is another very important characteristic about raven behavior that plays a part in all of this. That is, they stash food. Hiding it away even if they do not need it or can ever possibly eat it all, they will fly off and hide it. I have witnessed ravens carry off and hide a months worth of food in a few hours. But due to spoilage much of the food taken could never be consumed.
Scavenger studies by researchers have been set up to account for the disappearance of fatalities, but as I have seen, they too are flawed. For example with the Buena Vista scavenger studies, the dead quail used in the scavenger studies were too big for gulls to swallow whole or for the ravens to carry away.
There are other very serious problems with all the mortality studies. These problems arise from deliberate interference from those protecting the money. Lack of researcher access given by the wind companies, wind farm personnel picking up and hiding bodies, land owners with leases wanting to keep a lid on the bad publicity so their money will keep coming in. Then there are those endless studies generated from the wind industry experts. As anyone can see from the results of the Altamont repowering studies, none have these have much merit.
I have a lot more I could say about Altamont but I will save it for another day. Right now I want the people in the Bay Area, to understand the next ugly chapter of what is about to take place at Altamont Pass, more eagles will die.
The Future
The result of the repowering of Altamont will bring many more fatalities to the golden eagle and all raptors. Currently Altamont has a rated capacity of 580 Mw of which it has never come close to achieving. With the new turbines and by using the obscure meaning of “Rated Capacity”, I believe the industry is going to make it happen. In the process the total rotor swept area for Altamont will be increased by several million more square feet. For Altamont the blood bath will not only continue, it will get much worse. If this happens a mortality decline for raptors will never be reported until there is a decline in the overall raptor populations or the media grabs a hold of a cooked-up wind industry report.
The repowering of Altamont is in it early stages. I know that 100 much larger 2.3 MW turbines are scheduled to be put in at Altamont by Nextera. The total rotor sweep of these turbines will equal 4400 of the early turbines 65 KW turbines (see image). Combine these turbines with the 38 1 MW turbines installed at Buena vista, the 31 Diablo Winds 660 KW turbines and together they will total 5434 of the early 65KW turbines. I have been told that as many as 700 of these huge new generation wind turbines are planned for the repowering of Altamont.
So I ask, at what point, if ever, does any of this ever sink into the consciousness of the Bay Area?
Jim Wiegand
Vice President USA, Save the Eagles International
www.savetheeaglesinternational.org
