National Wind Watch: Documents » Pennsylvania http://www.wind-watch.org/documents http://www.wind-watch.org/nwwlogo-white-50.jpg National Wind Watch: Documents » Pennsylvania http://www.wind-watch.org/documents 100 40 Industrial Wind Resource Library, from National Wind Watch Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:40:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 en Documents Wind power Wind energy Preliminary Evaluation on the Use of Dogs to Recover Bat Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:13:41 +0000 12 Aug 2008 Arnett, Edward Abstract. I assessed the ability of dog–handler teams to recover dead bats (Chiroptera) during fatality searches typically performed at wind energy facilities to determine fatality rates for birds and bats. I conducted this study at the Mountaineer and Meyersdale Wind Energy Centers in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, USA, respectively. Dogs found 71% of bats used during searcher-efficiency trials at Mountaineer and 81% of those at Meyersdale, compared to 42% and 14% for human searchers, respectively. Dogs and humans both found a high proportion of trial bats within 10 m of the turbine, usually on open ground (88% and 75%, respectively). During a 6-day fatality search trial at 5 turbines at Meyersdale, the dog–handler teams found 45 bat carcasses, of which only 42% (n 1?4 19) were found during the same period by humans. In both trials humans found fewer carcasses as vegetation height and density increased, while dog–handler teams search efficiency remained high. Recommendations for evaluating the biases and efficiency when using dogs for bat fatality searches are provided. (WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 34(5):1440–1445; 2006)

Download “Preliminary Evaluation on the Use of Dogs to Recover Bat Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/preliminary-evaluation-on-the-use-of-dogs-to-recover-bat-fatalities-at-wind-energy-facilities/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/?p=1031 Documents Wind power Wind energy Tioga Preservation Group Land Use Appeal Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:55:24 +0000 28 Jan 2008 Tioga Preservation Group Tioga Preservation Group, Dr. Stephen Ollock, and Patricia Ollock v. Tioga County Planning Commission

Land Use Appeal

On or about September 24, 2007, AES Armenia Mountain Wind, LLC (”AES”) filed a Land Development Application (”Application”) with the Tioga county Planning Commission proposing to construct a wind farm on properties located in eastern Tioga County as more fully described in the Application. The Application indicated the intent to construct 72 turbines; upon reasonable belief, AES has increased the proposed number o turbines to 128 turbines. …

In granting the Preliminary Approval, the Planning Commission acted capriciously, abused its discretion, and committed errors of law in the following manner …

WHEREFORE, [Tioga Preservation Group, Dr. Stephen Ollock, and Patricia Ollock] respectfully requests the Court:

(1) Reverse the grant of preliminary approval and deny the Preliminary Land Development Plan; and

(2) Grant such other alternative relief as may be permitted by law.

Download “Tioga County Appeal”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/tioga-preservation-group-land-use-appeal/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/tioga-preservation-group-land-use-appeal/ Documents Wind power Wind energy Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:11:26 +0000 02 Aug 2007 Kunz, Thomas; Arnett, Edward; Erickson, Wallace; Hoar, Alexander; Johnson, Gregory; Larkin, Ronald; Strickland, M. Dale; Thresher, Robert; and Tuttle, Merlin Thomas Kunz, of the Center for Ecology and Conservation Biology, Boston University, with colleagues from Bat Conservation International, Western EcoSystems Technology, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Illinois Natural History Survey, and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, reviews the state of knowledge about impacts of wind energy facilities on bats. Published in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, August 2007.

Of particular concern is the cumulative effect of continuing wind energy development. Based on existing studies and the proposal queue for the mid-Atlantic grid, they project annual bat fatilities of up to 111,000 by 2020.

Abstract:  At a time of growing concern over the rising costs and long-term environmental impacts of the use of fossil fuels and nuclear energy, wind energy has become an increasingly important sector of the electrical power industry, largely because it has been promoted as being emission-free and is supported by government subsidies and tax credits. However, large numbers of bats are killed at utility-scale wind energy facilities, especially along forested ridgetops in the eastern United States. These fatalities raise important concerns about cumulative impacts of proposed wind energy development on bat populations. This paper summarizes evidence of bat fatalities at wind energy facilities in the US, makes projections of cumulative fatalities of bats in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands, identifies research needs, and proposes hypotheses to better inform researchers, developers, decision makers, and other stakeholders, and to help minimize adverse effects of wind energy development.

Download “Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/ecological-impacts-of-wind-energy-development-on-bats/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/ecological-impacts-of-wind-energy-development-on-bats/ Documents Wind power Wind energy Review of Pennsylvania Game Commission Protocols to Monitor Bat and Bird Mortality at Industrial Wind Sites Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:38:59 +0000 12 Jun 2007 Wind Energy and Bats subcommittee, Mammal Technical Committee, Pennsylvania Biological Survey Preamble: The Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) has a responsibility to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its citizens to manage and protect the wildlife of Pennsylvania using the best science and information available at the time management decisions are made. To that end, the PGC entered into a memo of understanding with the Mammal Technical Committee (MTC) of the Pennsylvania Biological Survey (PBS, a non-profit scientific, educational, and advisory organization of professional biologists, incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) to act in an advisory capacity to the PGC on all matters related to management and protection of mammals within the Commonwealth that fall under PGC jurisdiction. That memo of understanding had been in effect for well over a decade. … In order to provide the most current scientific advice possible, the MTC formed the “Wind Energy and Bats” (WEB) sub-committee in October of 2006. This sub-committee is composed of MTC bat experts throughout the Commonwealth who are familiar with the biology and ecology of bats and issues concerning how they are being affected by wind power development. The WEB subcommittee advised the PGC representatives on the MTC that it was ready to assist the PGC in reviewing material related to this topic and offering the most current scientific advice possible in designing guidelines for siting wind turbines in Pennsylvania with respect to protecting wildlife, and specifically bats. In February of 2007, the PGC released a final draft of Voluntary Wind Energy Cooperative Agreement, which included guidelines for the siting of wind turbines in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The MTC was not provided with draft formats of the guideline for review. … Subsequent to the publication of the final draft of the siting guidelines, the PGC informed the chairs of the MTC that in this case the normal close consultation with the MTC did “break down” somewhat but was necessary due to the time pressure that the PGC was under to complete these guidelines. Given the aforementioned events, the WEB sub-committee feels it is still imperative that we offer feedback to the PGC now, from experts in the Commonwealth, based on the most current science available, and in the spirit of the memo of understanding between the PGC and MTC.

The Wind Energy and Bats sub-committee wishes to acknowledge that the PGC deserves credit for its attempt to institute a means for systematically monitoring the wildlife collision impact of industrial wind energy development in the Commonwealth, particularly since limited information currently exists on this. In addition, we have no doubt that the PGC protocol reflects the input of many competent and well-meaning biologists who work for the PGC. Nonetheless, it appears that the PGC’s voluntary protocol is flawed, will not help avoid or effectively mitigate the harmful impacts to our natural heritage from the pending development of industrial wind energy in Pennsylvania, or even serve to adequately monitor the effects such development has on wildlife.

The greatest and most damaging flaw in the PGC protocol is a “loophole” which allows wind industry “cooperators” to block public access to research information collected under the auspices of this protocol if it is not “deemed to be in the[ir] best interest” (see section 13 of PGC protocol). …

There is widespread dissatisfaction among our sub-committee over the lack of meaningful pre-construction research, which the PGC protocol largely fails to require. Incredibly, there is no requirement that any pre-construction monitoring efforts be evaluated or otherwise used to determine whether a proposed wind energy project should go forward or be halted. No thresholds or standards for evaluating the acceptability of pre-construction study results are included in the PGC protocol. …

The PGC protocol provides very little real protection for wildlife and may help shelter the wind industry from growing criticism of environmental and wildlife impacts that can result from the development of wind energy facilities. …

The effects of energy development on wildlife and the environment must be a major point of deliberation in the development of any viable energy sources of alternative energy. Whereas wind turbines were once thought to have no adverse environmental impacts, they are now recognized to have negative impacts on wildlife and most significantly on bats and birds (USFWS 2003, US Government Accountability Office 2005, National Research Council 2007). The Government Accountability Report (2005) specifically cites Pennsylvania as one of the states in the Appalachia region of the United States where bats are being killed in the largest numbers, and populations are at greatest risk. Moreover, as bats are the primary predators of nocturnal insects in the Commonwealth, and many of these insects are considered human and crop pests, bats are considered ecological keystone species. …

The current PGC protocol is not based on the “best science available” and is not in keeping with recommendations and/or does not address concerns of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (2003), The US Government Accountability Office (2005), the National Research Council Report (2007), the position held by the Mammal Technical Committee in a previous communication to the PGC (appendix I), the position of Bat Conservation International (appendix II), recent expert testimony before the US Congress (Committee on Natural Resources, 2007) and numerous government and independent bat experts and scientists in the US and Canada. To continue to promote and use such a protocol would be to put the interest of the wind industry before the interest of the Commonwealth.

Download “Review of Pennsylvania Game Commission Protocols to Monitor Bat and Bird Mortality at Industrial Wind Sites”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/review-of-pennsylvania-game-commission-protocols-to-monitor-bat-and-bird-mortality-at-industrial-wind-sites/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/review-of-pennsylvania-game-commission-protocols-to-monitor-bat-and-bird-mortality-at-industrial-wind-sites/ Documents Wind power Wind energy Wind Industry: Making a Mockery of Environmentalism Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:36:29 +0000 18 Apr 2007 Folmont Property Owners Association Wind salesmen mimic the memes of environmentalism to sell their industry, often in ways so deceptive or contrary as to mock the very movement they claim to promote. You will often hear wind salesmen, and politicians who want to look ‘green,’ make the following claims …

Go to: “Wind Industry: Making a Mockery of Environmentalism”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/wind-industry-making-a-mockery-of-environmentalism/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/wind-industry-making-a-mockery-of-environmentalism/ Documents Wind power Wind energy Turbine Talk Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:56:33 +0000 14 Apr 2007 Save Our Allegheny Ridges A series of ads by Save Our Allegheny Ridges that ran in the Bedford (Penn.) Gazette in March 2007.

Turbine Talk 1: No benefit
Turbine Talk 2: Noise
Turbine Talk 3: Low production
Turbine Talk 4: Watershed
Turbine Talk 5: Wildlife
Turbine Talk 6: Aesthetics
Turbine Talk 7: Property values

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/turbine-talk/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/turbine-talk/ Documents Wind power Wind energy Throwing Caution to the Wind Fri, 08 Dec 2006 18:03:23 +0000 08 Dec 2006 Boone, Dan Presentation by Dan Boone: Throwing Caution to the Wind: the Growing Threat of
Industrial Wind Development in Pennsylvania to Wildlife, Habitat and
Public Lands

Download “Throwing Caution to the Wind”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/throwing-caution-to-the-wind/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/throwing-caution-to-the-wind/ Documents Wind power Wind energy Relationships Between Bats and Wind Turbines Tue, 28 Nov 2006 04:43:12 +0000 28 Nov 2006 Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (BWEC) An Assessment of Fatality Search Protocols, Patterns of Fatality, and Behavioral Interactions with Wind Turbines — A Summary of Findings from the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative’s 2004 Field Season

Download “Relationships between Bats and Wind Turbines”

]]> http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/relationships-between-bats-and-wind-turbines/ http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/relationships-between-bats-and-wind-turbines/