ISSUES/LOCATIONS

View titles only
(by date)
List all documents, ordered…

By Title

By Author

View PDF, DOC, PPT, and XLS files on line
RSS

Add NWW documents to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

News Watch

Selected Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Resource Documents — latest additions

Documents presented here are not the product of nor are they necessarily endorsed by National Wind Watch. These resource documents are 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.


Date added:  October 1, 2016
Environment, Law, Oregon, WildlifePrint storyE-mail story

Reply Brief of Petitioners Friends of the Columbia Gorge and Save Our Scenic Area v. Bonneville Power Administration

Author:  Friends of the Columbia Gorge

To try to justify its violations of NEPA (including a failure to consider any alternatives besides the Applicant’s proposal and a failure to take a hard look at the Project’s environmental impacts), BPA leans upon the slender reed of lacking direct siting authority over the Project’s wind turbines. But the inescapable reality is that BPA evaluated the proposed wind turbines and the requested interconnection to its power grid together as components of the single action alternative in the FEIS. Moreover, BPA has conceded that if it were to deny the interconnection the turbines would not be built. Accordingly, BPA was required to comply fully with NEPA to inform its decision whether to approve or deny the interconnection.

Ultimately, BPA has authority to say “no”—to the interconnection, and thereby to the entire Project—and NEPA requires it to make an informed decision and thus potentially avoid or minimize harm to the environment. BPA’s litigation position posits an alternative reality in which the agency did not evaluate the wind turbines and interconnection together as a single action, and did not admit that the interconnection is a necessary element of the Project without which the wind turbines cannot be built. The analyses adopted in the FEIS—not the agency’s current litigation position—must be the focus of this Court’s review.

BPA’s arguments rely almost entirely on cases in which federal actions were completely distinct from non-federal actions—rather than intertwined, as the proposed wind turbines and interconnection are here—and on knocking down straw-man arguments that Friends does not make. The fact that BPA can cite no case where a court upheld an EIS that considered only a single action alternative involving several undefined variables underscores the unprecedented way BPA evaded NEPA’s express requirements.

Although BPA may “believe[] that the Project will be implemented in an environmentally responsible manner,” it failed to follow the procedures NEPA requires to draw an informed conclusion about likely harm from the proposed Project as compared to reasonable alternatives. BPA asks this Court to condone a NEPA analysis that in essence evaluated only a single, worst-case alternative and that lacked any evaluation whether the proposed mitigation measures could effectively reduce or eliminate harm.

Where an agency could prevent environmental harm, as BPA could do here by denying the requested interconnection, NEPA and this Court’s precedents require the agency’s decision to be fully informed and to include a complete understanding of the effects of reasonable alternatives—even alternatives not within BPA’s jurisdiction. An evaluation showing that changes to the number, locations, capacities, heights, or other details of the proposed wind turbines would cause significantly less harm to birds, bats, or scenic values might have led BPA to deny the requested interconnection. BPA’s uninformed decision violates NEPA and its procedures for ensuring informed, democratic decisionmaking.

Sept. 26, 2016, Docket No. 15-72788, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Download original document: “Reply Brief of Petitioners Friends of the Columbia Gorge and Save Our Scenic Area v. Bonneville Power Administration”

Bookmark and Share


Date added:  September 30, 2016
WildlifePrint storyE-mail story

Selection of recent studies on birds and bats and wind turbines

Author:  Various

Watson, J. W., Duff, A. A. and Davies, R. W. (2014), Home range and resource selection by GPS-monitored adult golden eagles in the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion: Implications for wind power development. Journal of Wildlife Management, 78(6): 1012–1021. doi:10.1002/jwmg.745

Katzner, T. E., Brandes, D., Miller, T., Lanzone, M., Maisonneuve, C., Tremblay, J. A., Mulvihill, R. and Merovich, G. T. (2012), Topography drives migratory flight altitude of golden eagles: implications for on-shore wind energy development. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49(5): 1178–1186. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02185.x [download PDF]

Kolar, P. S. and Bechard, M. J. (2016), Wind energy, nest success, and post-fledging survival of Buteo hawks. Journal of Wildlife Management, 80(7): 1242–1255. doi:10.1002/jwmg.21125

Shaffer, J. A. and Buhl, D. A. (2016), Effects of wind-energy facilities on breeding grassland bird distributions. Conservation Biology, 30(1): 59–71. doi:10.1111/cobi.12569 [download PDF]

Graff, B. J., Jenks, J. A., Stafford, J. D., Jensen, K. C. and Grovenburg, T. W. (2016), Assessing spring direct mortality to avifauna from wind energy facilities in the Dakotas. Journal of Wildlife Management, 80(4): 736–745. doi:10.1002/jwmg.1051

Pylant, C. L., Nelson, D. M., Fitzpatrick, M. C., Gates, J. E. and Keller, S. R. (2016), Geographic origins and population genetics of bats killed at wind-energy facilities. Ecological Applications, 26(5): 1381–1395. doi:10.1890/15-0541

Voigt, C. C., Lindecke, O., Schönborn, S., Kramer-Schadt, S. and Lehmann, D. (2016), Habitat use of migratory bats killed during autumn at wind turbines. Ecological Applications, 26(3): 771–783. doi:10.1890/15-0671

Zimmerling, J. R. and Francis, C. M. (2016), Bat mortality due to wind turbines in Canada. Journal of Wildlife Management. doi:10.1002/jwmg.21128

Baerwald, E. F., W. P. Patterson, and R. M. R. Barclay (2014), Origins and migratory patterns of bats killed by wind turbines in southern Alberta: evidence from stable isotopes. Ecosphere 5(9): 1–17. doi:10.1890/ES13-00380.1 [download PDF]

Kunz, T. H., Arnett, E. B., Erickson, W. P., Hoar, A. R., Johnson, G. D., Larkin, R. P., Strickland, M. D., Thresher, R. W. and Tuttle, M. D. (2007), Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats: questions, research needs, and hypotheses. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5(6): 315–324. doi:10.1890/1540-9295(2007)5[315:EIOWED]2.0.CO;2 [download PDF]

Bookmark and Share


Date added:  September 29, 2016
California, WildlifePrint storyE-mail story

Golden Eagle fatalities and the continental-scale consequences of local wind-energy generation

Author:  Katzner, Todd; et al.

Abstract. Renewable energy production is expanding rapidly despite mostly unknown environmental effects on wildlife and habitats. We used genetic and stable isotope data collected from Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) killed at the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area (APWRA) in California in demographic models to test hypotheses about the geographic extent and demographic consequences of fatalities caused by renewable energy facilities. Geospatial analyses of δ2H values obtained from feathers showed that ≥25% of these APWRA-killed eagles were recent immigrants to the population, most from long distances away (>100 km). Data from nuclear genes indicated this subset of immigrant eagles was genetically similar to birds identified as locals from the δ2H data. Demographic models implied that in the face of this mortality, the apparent stability of the local Golden Eagle population was maintained by continental-scale immigration. These analyses demonstrate that ecosystem management decisions concerning the effects of local-scale renewable energy can have continental-scale consequences.

Todd E. Katzner, U.S. Geological Survey, Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Boise, Idaho

David M. Nelson and Matthew C. Fitzpatrick, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Appalachian Laboratory, Frostburg, Maryland

Melissa A. Braham, Adam E. Duerr, and Tricia A. Miller, Division of Forestry and Natural Resources, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia

Jacqueline M. Doyle, Nadia B. Fernandez, and J. Andrew DeWoody, Department of Forestry & Natural Resources, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

Peter H. Bloom, Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology, Camarillo, California

Renee C. E. Culver and Loan Braswell, NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida

Conservation Biology
First published: 27 September 2016
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12836

Fatalidades del Águila Dorada y Consecuencias a Escala Continental de la Generación Local de Energía Eólica

Resumen

La producción de energía renovable se está expandiendo rápidamente a pesar de los muchos efectos desconocidos sobre la vida silvestre y sus hábitats. Utilizamos los datos genéticos y de isotopos estables recolectados de águilas doradas (Aquila chrysaetos) muertas en el Área de Recursos de Aire del Paso de Altamont (ARAPA) en California en modelos demográficos para probar las hipótesis sobre la extensión geográfica y las consecuencias demográficas de las fatalidades causadas por las instalaciones de energía renovable. Los análisis geoespaciales de los valores de δ2H obtenidos de las plumas mostraron que ≥25 % de estas águilas muertas en ARAPA eran migrantes recientes hacia la población, la mayoría desde distancias lejanas (>100 km). Los datos de los genes nucleares indicaron que este subconjunto de águilas inmigrantes era genéticamente similar a las aves identificadas como locales a partir de los datos de δ2H. Los modelos demográficos insinuaron que, de frente a esta mortalidad, la estabilidad aparente de la población local de águilas doradas fue mantenida por una inmigración a escala continental. Estos análisis demuestran que las decisiones de manejo del ecosistema con respecto a los efectos de la energía renovable a escala local pueden tener consecuencias a escala continental.

Bookmark and Share


Date added:  September 26, 2016
Health, Noise, WisconsinPrint storyE-mail story

Shirley Wind case crossover testimonies

Author:  Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy

The following one page statement, and the twelve case crossover testimonies attached, were submitted to the Brown County (Wisconsin) Board of Health on September 13, 2016, by Barbara Vanden Boogart, Vice President of BCCRWE (Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy).

In late July 2016, all of the Shirley Wind turbines were shut down for several consecutive days and nights – Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and part of Thursday, July 25-28. Not only were the wind turbines not operating during this timeframe, it also appears that all electric power to the wind turbines was also shut down for some or all of this timeframe, as evidenced by the fact that the red warning lights on top of the wind turbines were not illuminated during one or more of these nights. Also it was observed that work was being performed on the Shirley Wind substation during this timeframe.

After the wind turbines resumed operation during the day of Thursday, July 28, 2016, a number of Shirley Wind residents described what they experienced during this shutdown period when they were not exposed to any wind turbine emissions as compared to what they experience when the Shirley Wind turbines are operating and they are exposed to the wind turbine emissions. They then had their statements notarized.

These case crossover testimonies of several Shirley Wind turbine residents are attached and are being submitted with permission of the authors.

BCCRWE requests that members of the Brown County Board of Health, Human Services Committee, and Board of Supervisors consider the gravity of this evidence and testimony that appears supportive of not only a relationship between wind turbine emissions and adverse health effects to Shirley Wind residents but also confirms that the Brown County Board of Health’s “human health hazard” declaration is appropriate and that remedial action is needed to protect these adversely affected Brown County residents. Prior Shirley Wind resident testimony and acoustical experts’ ILFN test measurements at Shirley Wind, together with the vast body of professional documents that have been submitted, further support the relationship between Shirley Wind turbines and the adverse health effects reported by Shirley Wind residents.

Download original document: “Shirley Wind case crossover testimonies”

Bookmark and Share


Earlier Documents »

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Formerly at windwatch.org.

HOME
Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share