Skip to main content

The Challenges of Addressing Wildlife Impacts When Repowering Wind Energy Projects

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Wind Energy and Wildlife Interactions

Abstract

Industrial wind power expanded rapidly since the earliest projects, and with this rapid expansion came understanding of wind power’s impacts on wildlife and how to measure and predict those impacts. Many of the earliest wind turbines began exceeding their operational lifespans >10 years ago, spawning plans for repowering with modern turbines. All wind turbines eventually wear out. Repowering can replace old turbines that have deteriorated to capacity factors as low as 4–12% with new wind turbines with capacity factors of 30–38%, and possibly sometimes better. At the same rated capacity, a repowered project can double and triple the energy generated from the project while reducing avian fatality rates by 60–90% when the new turbines are carefully sited. On the other hand, the grading needed for wider roads and larger pads can harm terrestrial biota, and can alter the ways that birds fly over the landscape. Larger turbines are usually mounted on taller towers, so the rotor-swept plane reaches higher into the sky and can kill species of birds and bats that were previously at lower risk. Slower cut-in speeds might increase bat fatalities, and faster cut-out speeds might increase bird fatalities. Repowering poses special problems to fatality monitoring and to estimating changes in collision rates. Differences in collision rate estimates before and after repowering can be due to climate or population cycles, changes in monitoring methods, and changes in wind turbine efficiency. Fatality monitoring could be more effective when it is (1) long-term, including when the older project was operating at peak efficiency, (2) executed experimentally, such as in a before-after, control-impact design, (3) largely consistent in methodology and otherwise adjusted for inconsistencies, and (4) sufficiently sampling the projects’ installed capacity. Another challenge is overcoming public and regulator impatience over documented wildlife fatalities. Fatality monitoring before repowering necessarily reveals project impacts. Repowering can reduce those impacts, but this message needs to be delivered effectively to a public that might be skeptical after seeing the earlier impacts and will want to see trustworthy fatality predictions going forward. Accurately predicting impacts at repowered projects can be challenging because the often-used utilization survey has fared poorly at predicting impacts, and because flight patterns can shift in the face of larger wind turbines and an altered landscape.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Brown K, Smallwood KS, Szewczak, J, Karas, B (2014) Final 2012–2013 annual report Avian and Bat monitoring project Vasco winds, LLC. Report to NextEra Energy Resources, Livermore, California

    Google Scholar 

  • De Lucas M, Janss GFE, Whitfield DB, Ferrer M (2008) Collision fatality of raptors in wind farms does not depend on raptor abundance. J Appl Ecol 45:1695–1703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drewitt AL, Langston RHW (2006) Assessing the impacts of wind farms on birds. Ibis 148:29–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrer M, de Lucas M, Janss GFE, Casado E, Munoz AR, Bechard MJ, Calabuig CP (2012) Weak relationship between risk assessment studies and recorded mortality in wind farms. J Appl Ecol 49:38–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hein C, Erickson W, Gruver J, Bay K, Arnett EB (2012) Relating pre-construction bat activity and post-construction fatality to predict risk at wind energy facilities. In: Schwartz SS (ed) Proceedings of the wind-wildlife research meeting IX. Broomfield, CO. November 28–30, 2012. Wildlife Workgroup of the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative by the American Wind Wildlife Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hötker H (2006) The impact of repowering of wind farms on birds and bats. Michael-Otto-Institute within NABU—Research and Education Centre for Wetlands and Bird Protection. Available via http://www.sofnet.org/1.0.1.0/1267/download_916.php. Accessed on 11 Dec 2015

  • Orloff S, Flannery A (1992) Wind turbine effects on avian activity, habitat use, and mortality in Altamont Pass and Solano County Wind Resource Areas: 1989–1991. Report to California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS (2007) Estimating wind turbine-caused bird mortality. J Wildl Manage 71:2781–2791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS (2013) Comparing bird and bat fatality-rate estimates among North American wind-energy projects. Wildl Soc Bull 37:19–33. +Online Supplemental Material

    Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS (2016) Monitoring birds. In Perrow M (ed) Wildlife and wind farms: conflicts and solutions. Pelagic Publishing (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS, Thelander C (2004) Developing methods to reduce bird mortality in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area. Final Report to the California Energy Commission, Public Interest Energy Research—Environmental Area, Contract No. 500-01-019. Sacramento, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS, Karas B (2009) Avian and bat fatality rates at old-generation and repowered wind turbines in California. J Wildl Manage 73:1062–1071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS, Neher L, Bell DA (2009a) Map-based repowering and reorganization of a wind resource area to minimize burrowing owl and other bird fatalities. Energies 2:915–943. Available via http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/2/4/915

  • Smallwood KS, Rugge L, Morrison ML (2009b) Influence of behavior on bird mortality in wind energy developments: the Altamont Pass wind resource area, California. J Wildl Manage 73:1082–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS, Bell DA, Karas B, Snyder SA (2013) Response to Huso and Erickson comments on novel Scavenger removal trials. J Wildl Manage 77:216–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood KS, Neher L, Bell DA (2016) Siting to minimize raptor collisions: an example from the repowering Altamont pass wind resource area. In Perrow M (ed) Wildlife and wind farms: conflicts and solutions. Pelagic Publishing (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker VA (1996a) A mathematical model of bird collisions with wind turbine rotors. J Sol Energy Eng 118:253–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker VA (1996b) Using a collision model to design safer turbine rotors for birds. J Sol Energy Eng 118:263–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Shawn Smallwood .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shawn Smallwood, K. (2017). The Challenges of Addressing Wildlife Impacts When Repowering Wind Energy Projects. In: Köppel, J. (eds) Wind Energy and Wildlife Interactions. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51272-3_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics