Search

Birds colliding with turbine rotor blades is a well‐known negative consequence of wind‐power plants. However, there has been far less attention to the risk of birds colliding with the turbine towers, and how to mitigate this risk.Based on data from the Smøla wind‐power plant in Central Norway, it seems highly likely that willow ptarmigan (the only gallinaceous species found on the island) is prone to collide with turbine towers. By employing a BACI‐approach, we tested if painting the lower parts of turbine towers black would reduce the collision risk.Overall, there was a 48% reduction in the number of recorded ptarmigan carcasses per search at painted turbines relative to neighboring control (unpainted) ones, with significant variation both within and between years.Using contrast painting to the turbine towers resulted in significantly reduced number of ptarmigan carcasses found, emphasizing the effectiveness of such a relatively simple mitigation measure., Willow ptarmigan is prone to collide with turbine towers. Using contrast painting to the turbine towers at the Smøla wind‐power plant in Central Norway resulted in significantly reduced number of ptarmigan carcasses found, emphasizing the effectiveness of such a relatively simple mitigation measure.

Adaptive management (AM) is a systematic process intended to improve policies and practices and reduce scientific uncertainty by learning from the outcome of management decisions. Although many nations are considering the use of AM for wind energy, its application in practice and in policy has been limited. Recent applications of AM have revealed fundamental differences in the definition of AM, its applications, and the projects or planning processes to which it might be applied. This chapter suggests the need for a common understanding and definition of and framework for AM and its application to wind energy. We discuss a definition of AM and technical guidance created by the United States (US) Department of the Interior’s (DOI’s) Adaptive Management Working Group. The chapter also examines how AM has been applied to wind energy development in several European nations and in the USA. The challenges and opportunities associated with implementation of AM for wind development are addressed, management actions in nations that exhibit attributes of AM are compared, and pathways to appropriate application and potential broader use of AM are explored.

Societal concerns regarding the negative impacts of wind turbines on species and ecosystems have placed more emphasis on mitigation efforts pre- and post-construction. While the mitigation hierarchy is usually fronted to deal with negative ecological impacts, it is hardly employed accordingly. This calls for the core of the problem to be addressed, namely, the lack of an appropriate framework for mitigation as a concept to properly address ecological impacts caused by wind-power development. In this chapter, mitigation is defined as the intervention(s) implemented to affect the risk of wind turbines impacting species or ecosystems. This concept is placed within a social-ecological context where the consecutive steps of the mitigation hierarchy may be affected by socio-economic, technological or environmental spheres of interest. Decisions relating to mitigation are in principle normative, which necessitates addressing three central ethical questions: (1) In which circumstances should mitigation be implemented? (2) How much mitigation is required? (3) Who is responsible for mitigation? Implementing mitigation requires decision-makers to acknowledge that trouble never comes alone, which requires balancing trade-offs and embracing uncertainty into the decision-making process. Adaptive and participatory management may be the best decision-making framework to do this, as it allows for improved ecological understanding through monitoring and a flexible approach to mitigate locally but manage regionally.

Wind energy development continues to expand rapidly to meet international climate targets. However, these developments impact biodiversity and associated sustainability targets negatively. Environmental impact assessments (EIA) predominately focus on site-specific impacts; failing to account for cumulative impacts at larger spatial scales. Life cycle assessments (LCA) can take such a holistic view, however models quantifying the main impact pathways on biodiversity are still lacking. To address this gap, we present a methodology to quantify habitat loss, disturbance and collision impacts of onshore wind power plants on bird biodiversity globally. By overlaying species ranges with wind-power plant locations, species-area relationships were used to calculate the potentially disappeared fraction of species (PDF) for the three impact pathways. Results revealed habitat-specific bird richness values, at order level, which were greatest in tropical and subtropical regions. Temporal changes in PDF were related to operationalizing wind-power plants. Despite similar PDF curves throughout the time period, disturbance and habitat loss had a greater effect compared to collisions. Annual energy production values strongly affected overall impacts for all impact pathways, which in turn differed between continents. When controlling for continent, bird order rather than country more strongly influenced variation in the pathway-specific PDF per GWh. Our approach represents the first step towards incorporating the impacts of wind power production in strategic environmental planning and the LCA framework. Failing to account for these negates an assessment of the trade-offs between biodiversity and energy production, and therefore the balancing of global sustainability goals. © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Concerns for potential wildlife impacts resulting from land†based and offshore wind energy have created challenges for wind project development. Research is not always adequately supported, results are neither always readily accessible nor are they satisfactorily disseminated, and so decisions are often made based on the best available information, which may be missing key findings. The potential for high impacts to avian and bat species and marine mammals have been used by wind project opponents to stop, downsize, or severely delay project development. The global nature of the wind industry—combined with the understanding that many affected species cross†national boundaries, and in many cases migrate between continents—also points to the need to collaborate on an international level. The International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Technology Collaborative Programs facilitates coordination on key research issues. IEA Wind Task 34—WREN: Working Together to Resolve Environmental Effects of Wind Energy–is a collaborative forum to share lessons gained from field research and modeling, including management methods, wildlife monitoring methods, best practices, study results, and successful approaches to mitigating impacts and addressing the cumulative effects of wind energy on wildlife. WREN develops products such as white papers, fact sheets, and short science summaries, and is involved in a number of activities including hosting a webinar series and outreach and information dissemination through participation in meetings, workshops, and conferences to increase and expand the knowledge base pertaining to wildlife challenges at wind energy facilities. This information is available on WREN Hub, hosted on the Tethys website. This article is categorized under: Wind Power > Climate and Environment

© The Ecological Society of America The removal of thousands of structures associated with oil and gas development from the world's oceans is well underway, yet the environmental impacts of this decommissioning practice remain unknown. Similar impacts will be associated with the eventual removal of offshore wind turbines. We conducted a global survey of environmental experts to guide best decommissioning practices in the North Sea, a region with a substantial removal burden. In contrast to current regulations, 94.7% of experts (36 out of 38) agreed that a more flexible case-by-case approach to decommissioning could benefit the North Sea environment. Partial removal options were considered to deliver better environmental outcomes than complete removal for platforms, but both approaches were equally supported for wind turbines. Key considerations identified for decommissioning were biodiversity enhancement, provision of reef habitat, and protection from bottom trawling, all of which are negatively affected by complete removal. We provide recommendations to guide the revision of offshore decommissioning policy, including a temporary suspension of obligatory removal.

Concurrent with the development of wind energy, research activity on wind energy generation and wildlife has evolved significantly during the last decade. This chapter presents an overview of remaining key knowledge gaps, consequent future research directions and their significance for management and planning for wind energy generation. The impacts of wind farms on wildlife are generally site-, species- and season-specific and related management strategies and practices may differ considerably between countries. These differences acknowledge the need to consider potential wildlife impacts for each wind farm project. Still, the ecological mechanisms guiding species’ responses and potential vulnerability to wind farms can be expected to be fundamental in nature. A more cohesive understanding of the causes, patterns, mechanisms, and consequences of animal movement decisions will thereby facilitate successful mitigation of impacts. This requires planning approaches that implement the mitigation hierarchy effectively to reduce risks to species of concern. At larger geographical scales, population-level and cumulative impacts of multiple wind farms (and other anthropogenic activity) need to be addressed. This requires longitudinal and multiple-site studies to identify species-specific traits that influence risk of mortality, notably from collision with wind turbines, disturbance or barrier effects. In addition, appropriate pre- and post-construction monitoring techniques must be utilized. Predictive modelling to forecast risk, while tackling spatio-temporal variability, can guide the mitigation of wildlife impacts at wind farms.

On average, 7.8 white-tailed eagles (Haliaeetus albicilla) collide with wind turbines annually at the operating wind-power plant on the island of Smøla off the coast of central Norway. To better understand the impact of this wind-power plant on white-tailed eagles, we investigated how habitat utilization affected displacement effects. We collected data on habitat utilization in non-territorial subadult white-tailed eagles using global positioning system satellite telemetry (2004–2009). From these data, we estimated utilization distributions using the Brownian bridge movement model and analyzed them using Resource Utilization Functions. Home ranges were circa 10–30% smaller for subadults hatched on skerries and islets farther from the wind-power plant, and tended to be circa 40% larger during spring. Shallow sea, skerries, and islets were utilized extensively, as was marsh, heathland, and forest on the main island of Smøla. We noted lower selectivity for arable land and higher levels of differentiation in utilization among individuals for forest and islets. Females also had a nearly 4 times higher between-individual variation, which was likely due to longranging excursions. The within- and between-individual variation among seasons showed an annual pattern, with increasing between-individual variation toward summer. Displacement (indicated by an overall 40% proportional reduction in utilization) was more pronounced in the birds’ second and third calendar year compared with their first calendar year, and during autumn–winter. Reduced displacement during spring coincides with the white-tailed eagle pre-breeding period with increased flight activity. This may, in part, explain increased collision risk during spring. Possible displacement effects in white-tailed eagles may be avoided by siting wind-power plants farther inland or offshore, avoidance, collision risk, displacement, habitat use, habitat utilization, Haliaeetus albicilla, Norway,wind turbines

Evidence is increasing of bird mortality due to large-scale wind-energy development. Soaring raptors, such as the white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), have proven particularly vulnerable to collisions. In this study, we compared white-tailed eagle flight behavior both inside and outside of the Smola wind-power plant on coastal Central Norway. During the eagle breeding period (mid-Mar–end May 2008), we collected data on flight activity (directional flight, social behavior, and soaring) and flight altitude (below, within, and above the rotor-swept zone [RSZ]) at 12 vantage points; 6 within the wind-power plant and 6 outside (control area). We found that white-tailed eagles did not show any clear avoidance flight responses to the wind turbines. Hence, we found no significant differences in the total amount of flight activity within and outside the power-plant area. However, we found less flight activity among adults than among subadults within the power plant compared with the control area. We also found a slightly increased probability of flight activity in the RSZ within the power plant, which obviously may increase the risk of collision with wind turbines. Our findings may help explain the relatively high mortality rate of white-tailed eagles in the wind-power-plant area and the recorded peak in eagle fatalities during the breeding season. © 2013 The Wildlife Society.