Photo Credit: NREL
Article Tools
Email This Story Share This Story Add to Bookmarks Printer Friendly Version 10 Comments
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

Previous Article
Next Article
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
May 7, 2007

Wind Turbines Not a Threat to U.S. Bird Population, Says Study

NRC report finds governmental guidance to help communities and developers evaluate and plan proposed wind-energy projects is lacking.
Washington, DC [RenewableEnergyAccess.com]

Proponents of wind energy in the U.S. have long argued that the overall impact of properly sited wind turbines on birds is extremely low compared with other human-related activities and structures. Now a congressionally mandated study released by the National Research Council (NRC) on Thursday offers new findings to support this argument -- and is recommending that implementing national-level policies to enhance the benefits of wind energy and minimize its harms would help guide state and local regulatory efforts.

"The report rightly concludes that our challenge is to design and locate wind-power projects to minimize the negative impacts on birds. It is essential that industry-wide environmental safeguards be developed so that each wind project can be considered on its own merits with appropriate studies before and after construction."

-- Betsy Loyless, National Audubon Society, senior vice president

Focusing its study on a mountainous region that included parts of West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania, the report cited that bird deaths caused by collisions with wind turbines are a minute fraction of total anthropogenic bird deaths -- less than 0.003% [three of every 100,000] in 2003.

"The report verifies the fact that wind energy development's overall impact on birds is extremely low compared with many other human-related activities. More than a thousand times as many birds are killed flying into buildings, for example, than wind turbines," said Randall Swisher, executive director of the American Wind Energy Association.

While the study found that wind facilities can have certain adverse environmental effects on a local or regional level, the report committee saw no evidence that fatalities from existing wind facilities are causing measurable changes in bird populations in the U.S. A possible exception to this is deaths among birds of prey, such as eagles and hawks, near Altamont Pass, California -- a facility with older, smaller turbines that appear more apt to kill such birds than newer models of wind turbines.

"The report rightly concludes that our challenge is to design and locate wind-power projects to minimize the negative impacts on birds. It is essential that industry-wide environmental safeguards be developed so that each wind project can be considered on its own merits with appropriate studies before and after construction," said Betsy Loyless, senior vice president of the National Audubon Society.

The report recommends studies be conducted to evaluate possible ecological impacts prior to choosing sites for wind facilities, and follow-up studies should be conducted to measure actual effects. Additional basic research also is needed to help assess the short- and long-term impacts of these facilities on other species at risk such as bats.

But while some states have developed guidelines, wind energy is such a recent addition to the energy mix in most areas -- the nation's wind-energy capacity more than quadrupled between 2000 and 2006 -- that most states are relatively inexperienced at planning and regulation.

To help inform the development of guidelines, the report offers an analysis of the environmental benefits and drawbacks of wind energy, along with an evaluation guide to aid decision-making about projects. The report does not examine the impact of offshore wind-energy projects.

The Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects report was sponsored by the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The National Research Council is the principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering.
For Further Information
Please Note: RenewableEnergyWorld.com does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.
Add Your Comment 10 Reader Comments
No image available
May 7, 2007
"A possible exception to this is deaths among birds of prey, such as eagles and hawks, near Altamont Pass, California -- a facility with older, smaller turbines that appear more apt to kill such birds than newer models of wind turbines."

Eventually, the older, smaller turbines near Altamont Pass have got to go. They are not as Kwh cost effective and should be replaced as soon as possible by the larger turbines.

We had Mitsubishi wind turbines installed at South Point wind farm on the island of Hawaii twenty years ago but bit by bit the turbines broke down because they were not maintained. This year, they were replaced by a farm of 2.5Mw GE generators which are supposed to be about 6x more efficient than the older Mitsubishi's.

adrianakau@aol.com
No image available
May 7, 2007
I am often surprised that so many opponents of wind power are also cat-owners. Since cats kill more birds in this country than just about anything else, I suggest a change in strategy. Rather than inhibit wind-energy development because a misperceived threat, let's tackle a very real one, by declawing Snuggums and keeping the little monster indoors -- by law.

BG
No image available
May 8, 2007
This type of study regarding birds has been run several times with the same conclusion. The anti-wind forces just use the issue for propoganda and legal attacks on the industry.

Even the older turbines are indefinite as to their impact as source of bird kills.

This report is actually a great disappointment. If the future off-shore wind farms would chop-up lots of sea gulls, more people would support the projects.
No image available
May 9, 2007
Eugene:

I would love to see a bird riding a 150' long turbine blade traveling at 19 RPM. At this speed, the tip of the blade is traveling at over 200 MPH! If a bird can ride a blade, you can be sure it is not generating much electricity.

Jim
No image available
May 9, 2007
As mentioned elsewhere, the biggest threat to birds and bats are the high-speed turbines, now being replaced by larger, slower, ones. Birds have even been seen riding the large rotors. Any valid study needs to concern itself with future impact, so as to reflect any dangers to this population.
No image available
May 9, 2007
James,
It's a pretty simple calculation, if one bothers to perform it, to estimate what the impact would be for your 5%. Currently, about 17 million Mwh are produced from wind each year, out of about 4 billion Mwh, or about 0.4%. So, to obtain 100% wind energy (obviously unrealistic), we would need 250x as much wind energy. 250 x 0.003% is 0.75%. Still less than 1% of anthropogenic bird deaths, or about 0.03% at 5% total generation. Not significant. While I agree that direct comparisons are somewhat disingenuous, these factors can be taken into account.

While the issues with mountain top removal are valid, most current turbines are sited in already developed agricultural land, which is far from natural. And if offshore wind can be better developed, the northeast can turn in this direction rather than looking to the mountains.
No image available
May 9, 2007
Please see National Wind Watch's response to the NRC study at their web site (wind-watch.org): press-070509.php.
No image available
May 9, 2007
In assessing bird death statistics as a whole, comparisons made to deaths caused by buildings, automobiles and cats are completely disingenuous and ridiculous considering that there are exponentially more buildings, automobiles and cats than industrial wind turbines operating today. Just like everything in life, the devil is in the details. Wind installations must be properly placed. Mountaintop removal wind farming can have disastrous implications, not only on birds, but on many aspects of nature, as well as for humans. Please learn all of the details about what these wind farms mean, both so far as benefits and pitfalls are concerned. Approximately 150,000 huge wind turbines (1.5mw) would be required to supply ONLY 5% of today's U.S. electricity consumption!
No image available
May 10, 2007
Appropriate siting of windfarms is still the obvious conclusion to avoid impacts on sensitive bird species. Windfarms can have adverse impacts on rare and sensitive species if they are sited in the wrong place - eg: Altamont, Tarifa, Navarra and Smola. What this report shows that when sited in the right places, wind energy does not cause significant bird death - which is what we knew already - so let's stop trying to put them in wrong places, and get on with expanding the industry in the right places!
No image available
May 28, 2007
What is missing here is any elaboration or discussion of the full process of creation and operation of a wind farm. The report refers to one aspect--siting. Apparently ignored are two other important features: turbine layout and turbine design. Completely ignored and almost universally dismissed is the fourth feature: operational controls. It really is simple: if you are in heavy traffic you slow down; if you are operating a wind farm and a flock of birds or bats approaches you slow or stop turbines. They are so proud of their low mortality calculation; the mortality with an unmoving blade is virtually zero.

It is time to improve the technology and environmental responsiveness.

David
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Alpha Technologies UL University - Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition Midwest Renewable Energy Association The Switch San Luis Valley Energy Fair SolarCraft
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters