Resource Library Archive: October 2010
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.
Recent bird and bat wind turbine research (abstracts)
Source: Various
Barriers to movement: Modelling energetic costs of avoiding marine wind farms amongst breeding seabirds.
Masden EA, Haydon DT, Fox AD, Furness RW.
Boyd Orr Centre for Population and Ecosystem Health, University of Glasgow, Scotland.
Abstract
Proposals for wind farms in areas of known importance for breeding seabirds highlight the need to understand the impacts of these structures. Using an energetic modelling approach, we examine the effects of wind farms as barriers to movement on seabirds of differing morphology. Additional costs, expressed in relation to typical daily energetic expenditures, were highest per unit flight for seabirds with high wing loadings, such as cormorants. Taking species-specific differences into account, costs were relatively higher in terns, due to the high daily frequency of foraging flights. For all species, costs of extra flight to avoid a wind farm appear much less than those imposed by low food abundance or adverse weather, although such costs will be additive to these. We conclude that adopting a species-specific approach is essential when assessing the impacts of wind farms on breeding seabird populations, to fully anticipate the effects of avoidance flights.
Marine Pollution Bulletin. 2010 Jul;60(7):1085-91. Epub 2010 Feb 25.
Wind turbines and bat mortality: Doppler shift profiles and ultrasonic bat-like pulse reflection from moving turbine blades.
Long CV, Flint JA, Lepper PA.
Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, Loughborough University, Leicestershire.
Abstract
Bat mortality resulting from actual or near-collision with operational wind turbine rotors is a phenomenon that is widespread but not well understood. Because bats rely on information contained in high-frequency echoes to determine the nature and movement of a target, it is important to consider how ultrasonic pulses similar to those used by bats for echolocation may be interacting with operational turbine rotor blades. By assessing the characteristics of reflected ultrasonic echoes, moving turbine blades operating under low wind speed conditions (<6?m?s(-1)) were found to produce distinct Doppler shift profiles at different angles to the rotor. Frequency shifts of up to ±700-800 Hz were produced, which may not be perceptible by some bat species. Monte Carlo simulation of bat-like sampling by echolocation revealed that over 50 rotor echoes could be required by species such as Pipistrellus pipistrellus for accurate interpretation of blade movement, which may not be achieved in the bat's approach time-window. In summary, it was found that echoes returned from moving blades had features which could render them attractive to bats or which might make it difficult for the bat to accurately detect and locate blades in sufficient time to avoid a collision.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2010 Oct;128(4):2238.
Bird and bat fatalities at wind turbines in Germany
Source: Dürr, Tobias
Data from the central registry of the National Bird Protection Fund, Environmental Agency of Brandenburg, Spring 2002 to September 8, 2010
Click here for bird fatalities
Ripley Wind Power Project Post-construction Monitoring Report
Source: Jacques Whitford
In 2008, Jacques Whitford Limited was retained by Suncor Energy Products Inc. and Acciona Wind Energy Canada to undertake a bird and bat post-construction monitoring program for the Ripley Wind Power Project (the Project) near the Town of Ripley in Bruce County, Ontario. The Project began commercial operation on January 21, 2008. …
In 2008, mortality surveys were conducted in April and May (spring monitoring), and July through mid- October (fall monitoring). Avian monitoring was undertaken in June (for breeding bird surveys) and September through mid-November (for fall diurnal migration surveys). Surveys were carried out by qualified Jacques Whitford personnel, trained in the methods and protocols of the Program.
The mortality survey component of the Program incorporated three survey types; carcass surveys, searcher efficiency trials, and scavenger impact trials. Searcher efficiency trials were carried out each day of the carcass searches, and scavenger impact trials were carried out once monthly over two-week periods: in April, and in July through October. …
Mortality surveys were conducted from April 14 through May 30 (spring), and again from July 2 through October 17 (fall) of the same year. Mortality surveys were conducted when weather permitted. During inclement weather (i.e., heavy rainfall), surveys were delayed until later on the same day, or resumed on the next or the earliest feasible day. All mortality surveys were conducted by two biologists during each visit. …
Birds
Spring monitoring was undertaken April 14 to May 31, 2008, for a total of seven weeks. A total of six avian carcasses were located by searchers, with a corrected total estimate of 9.42 for the spring season; 0.25 per turbine for spring; and 0.12 per MW for spring. …
Fall monitoring encompassed the months of July through mid-October, for a total of 16 weeks. A total of 25 avian carcasses were located by searchers, with a corrected estimated total of 105.04 for the fall season; 2.76 birds per turbine for fall; and 1.38 per MW for fall. …
Bats
Spring monitoring encompassed the latter half of the month of April and the month of May, for a total of seven weeks. Four bat carcasses were located by searchers during spring monitoring, with a corrected estimate of 6.28 in total for the season; 0.17 bats per turbine for spring; and 0.08 bats per MW for spring. …
Fall monitoring encompassed the months of July through mid-October, for a total of 16 weeks. A total of 116 bat carcasses were located by searchers, with a corrected estimated total for the season of 487.37 bat mortalities, with 12.83 bats per turbine for fall; and 6.41 bats per MW for fall. …
Download original document: “Ripley Wind Power Project Post-construction Monitoring Report”
Bat in the Wind Turbine Facility … Today’s Canary in the Coal Mine
Source: Kawula, Kevin
The notion that the wind industry is predominantly made up of small, environmentally conscious operations is one that must be quickly dispelled.
These are large, corporate-scale utility companies, not unlike coal and oil conglomerates … with a checkered environmental track record to date.
Voluntary guidelines will not change that paradigm, and will work about as well as voluntary taxes.
—George Fenwick, President, American Bird Conservancy, “Fed wind farm rules may not save birds” (UPI, May 10, 2010)
Things are going badly for our wildlife populations in and around the operating industrial scale wind projects in Wisconsin.
Anecdotal reports from people living in Wisconsin wind projects report an absence of normal wildlife, i.e. no turkey, no deer, fewer or no songbirds, and no bats. Relatives and friends outside the wind facility report greater numbers of deer and turkey.
The birds and deer are leaving the area, but the bats are as likely to be dying as leaving.
A recent post-construction bird and bat mortality report, conducted by We Energies (WEPCO) as part of receiving approval for its Blue Sky Green Field project, shows that the bird deaths were 11 to 12 bird deaths per turbine per year. This is four times higher than the national average of 3 bird kills per turbine per year.
Even more alarming are the bat kill rates of 40.54 to 41 per turbine per year. This is more than ten times the reported national average of less than 4 per turbine per year.
Wisconsin’s turbine-related bat deaths are among the highest in North America, and equal to the bat mortality numbers from the Pennsylvania/Appalachia area which stunned conservationists across the nation.
The total number of bats killed by the 88-turbine Blue Sky Green Field project is estimated to be between 3,500 and 3,600 per year.
Two additional post-construction reports show the same bat kill rates at the Cedar Ridge project and slightly higher kill rates at the Invenergy Forward Energy project near the Horicon Marsh.
These three projects alone have resulted in an estimated 8,000 bat deaths per year.
That’s 16,000 dead bats for the two years these projects have been in operation.
Predictions for number of bat kills for the pending Glacier Hills wind project are expected to be equally as high, adding at least another 3,500 turbine-related bat deaths per year.
Can Wisconsin bat populations sustain this kind of impact?
Bats are not being struck by the blades (135 feet long with tip speeds of 180 mph), but are suffering catastrophic damage to their lungs as they fly into the low-pressure zone that is created behind the rotating blades.
This drop in pressure causes their lungs to expand rapidly, burst and fill with fluid and blood, and they drown. It is called barotrauma – deep-sea divers get a version of it called the bends when raised too quickly from the depths.
Birds have different lung structures, so they are not as readily affected, but bats are mammals and have lungs much more similar to ours, so take a deep breath, and imagine you can’t stop inhaling until your lungs burst.
Bats live up to thirty years, reproduce slowly, maybe one pup a year, and because they maintain tight family groups, the loss of a single bat can have a significant impact.
Bats are a vital link in the natural balance of Wisconsin’s wild and not so wild areas.
I cannot think of a time in human history that bats have not been flying over Wisconsin, but the loss of our bat population could happen in our lifetimes.
White nose syndrome, a nasal/respiratory fungus, is threatening cave-roosting/hibernating species of bats, in the eastern United States into extinction, but it has not yet reached Wisconsin.
Industrial wind turbines kill all species of bats, even the tree-roosting/migrating species we hope might be spared from the white nose blight.
If the state continues to follow its plan to add 200 to 300 new industrial turbines each year until 2025, turbine-related bat deaths could be as high as 131,200 to 192,700 bats per year.
This total annual mortality number is unlikely, because the remaining bat populations would likely crash from mounting annual losses before then.
I am asking that we, as conservationists, help stop this needless slaughter.
Contact the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Public Service Commission (PSC) of Wisconsin with your concerns.
Shari Koslowsky, Conservation Biologist with the DNR, has been very helpful in explaining the post-construction mortality numbers. She can be reached at shari.koslowsky@wisconsin.gov and (608) 261-4382.
My main concern is that there is no representative of any organization with expertise in wildlife and natural habitat protection on the Wind Siting Council. The Wind Siting Council is a 15-member organization currently working on creating guidelines for siting wind turbines in our state.
I am asking that the DNR require the PSC to stop the operation of industrial-scale wind turbine facilities at night (curtailment) when electrical demand is low and easily met by existing base load generation which cannot be shut off.
The period from dusk until dawn must be reserved for migrating and feeding wildlife as an equitable distribution of a state natural resource (“free wind”) for the greater good of the whole rural community, human and animal. Night-time curtailment would ensure safe passage for bats and night-migrating birds, and provide a reliable period of quiet for the undisturbed sleep that is vital to any being’s health.
CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the PSC’s Wind Siting Council’s docket.
Thank you all for your time and consideration on this issue. Energy independence will eventually mean grid independence, but until then the decision makers need to face the facts, take responsibility for the harm caused by their decisions, and remedy the problem.
Thanks again,
Kevin Kawula
Board member of the Rock County Conservationists, The Prairie Enthusiasts Member, Spring Valley Planning and Zoning board member, Lone Rock Prairie Nursery owner and operator, and Rock County Parks Volunteer
lonerockprairienursery@gmail.com
