Environment
It's a paradox that windfarms are promoted on the basis that they are environmentally friendly, but in fact they damage the environment in so many different ways - landscape damage, noise, shadow and flicker, effect on animals and many others. A large part of Country Guardian's The Case Against Windfarms is devoted to specific environmental issues.
This page gives you the relevant references to the Case document, plus independent reference material, and links to other organisations and websites. Inevitably it also covers the UK planning systems, which are in turn influenced by government policies. These systems are the main democratic resource available to local communities and so we provide advice on 'How to Fight a Windfarm'.
This website is an on-line development from our long-established document The Case Against Windfarms, last updated in 2000 but still even more relevant. A link is provided at the head of each topic, and we strongly recommend you access this to gain a comprehensive overview of the subject.
Contents
1 Windfarm Environmental Impacts
1.1 Landscape and visual impact
1.2 Noise and visual effect: scientific and medical research
1.3 Impact on animals
1.4 Safety: Radar interference and accidents
1.5 Social impacts: tourism, TV interference, property prices
2. Policy and Planning
2.1 Government strategy
2.2 Planning
2.3 How to fight a windfarm
2.4 Windfarm Action Groups
1. Windfarm environmental impacts
1.1 Landscape and visual impact
Read: The Case Against Windfarms sections D and E
Most people who have not seen a wind turbine at close quarters have no idea of their size. The latest 2 Megawatt turbines are about 400ft (122 metres)high . The giant wheel, the London Eye, which towers above Central London and is twice the height of Big Ben across the river, gives a view of up to 25 miles around the capital, is 135 metres high, just 10 metres less than the latest turbine model. Lookat an architect's scale drawing of some earlier models against some newer ones, alongside the Angel of the North and a six-foot human. See also a scale drawing of a 2 MW turbine against local buildings, trees and a human being.
For the value of landscape
Read: The Case Against Windfarms section U
Also read about the battle to save a Cumbria landscape at Wharrals Hill
1.2. Noise
Noise from windfarms exists, lives have been made miserable by it, not enough research has been done on it, and the developers/politicians/"environmentalists" are in denial.
This section brings together the accounts of those who have suffered, the research that is available and news about the fight back
Read: The Case Against Windfarms, section G
Since The Case Against Windfarms was last published in 2000 evidence has mounted of the serious and damaging effects of windfarm noise. The new research that has been done has only gone to show that these damaging effects are poorly understood. However a significant court judgement has recognised "noise pollution" from windfarmsIn a landmark decision in January 2004, a District Judge in Cumbria awarded a couple £12,500 plus interest, as compensation of 20 per cent of the market value of their house in 1997, because of damage to visual amenity, noise pollution and the "irritating flickering" caused by the sun going down behind the moving blades of the turbines 550 metres from the house. In so doing, he made what is believed to be the first ruling of its kind. This is on the site at Marton described above.
Following on from the judgement the Department of the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs announced that it would be commissioning some research on windfarm noise - 12 years since its members started building windfarms in the UK! Click for the report in The TimesFollow the story of this windfarm at www.windfarm.fsnet.co.uk
What other experiences have people had of noise pollution from windfarms? Here are a few:
Lotta's Story
From: LOTTA NILSSON "
In 1997 I bought a house in the countryside on the west coast of Sweden. I was so happy and relieved.
I have been a single mother for twenty years and my daughter and I have three horses. At last our dream was coming true - we were going to have our own stable and pastures. The house was not modern. We did not even have water in the house when I first started the renovation.In 1998, in November, our dreams were dashed. A farmer, not living in the neighbourhood but owning land there, built a wind turbine 650 meters from our house. The wind turbine is an Enercon E-40 65 meters high. Both my neighbour and I realised after a few weeks that this was going to change our lives. I think it took about one month and then we became very annoyed and disturbed by the horrible noise from the wind turbine. The first weeks, I think we were unsure of the reason for the awful noise. Then we were thinking that it would stop, or that someone would discover that there was something wrong with this wind turbine. We were cruelly mistaken. The first "service" was made by Enercon in May 1999. They said they had found a very rare fault with the rotor blade that had made the sound level "much higher than expected". This was not an acceptable excuse for taking so long to investigate the matter.And the worst part, we did not experience any change at all after the service. If anything, things had got worse.The strange thing was that they claimed to have been at the wind turbine on the very same day that the "health and environmental staff" was measuring the level of 48 dBA 400 meters from the turbine. I was there. Before I go on I just want to tell you that I am an ordinary person. I have a daughter and a little grand daughter. I am a chemist now working as a teacher in chemistry and biology (and environmental studies) at a school for 16 - 19 year-olds, preparing them for university.I like my work and was fully content with my life, before the"robbery". I feel robbed of everything today - the happiness, the peace, my home, my family, economy and pride. No one told me when I bought the house that the community had already set up a plan for a wind turbine in this area.In this small community, ruled by farmers and the "environmental" party together with the "Right" the plan was to install 90 wind turbines. In four years 50 of them have been erected. The distance between houses and wind turbines are as little as 290 meters." Read Lotta's Story for the full story
Complaints from their patients lead doctors in Cornwall to investigate.
"Onshore wind farms are a health hazard to people living near them because of the low- frequency noise that they emit, according to new medical studies. Doctors say that the turbines - some of which are taller than Big Ben - can cause headaches and depression among residents living up to a mile away. "
"When wind farm developers do surveys to assess the suitability of a site they measure the audible range of noise but never the infrasound measurement - the low-frequency noise that causes vibrations that you can feel through your feet and chest. This frequency resonates with the human body - their effect being dependent on body shape. There are those on whom there is virtually no effect, but others for whom it is incredibly disturbing."
A report by Dr Geoff Leventhall, a fellow of the Institute of Physics and Institute of Acoustics, has endorsed the findings. "Low-frequency noise causes extreme distress to a number of people who are sensitive to its effects," it says.
Read the full report from the Daily Telegraph
Read the report from the local Western Morning News
"WIND TURBINES HAVE EATEN INTO MY VERY SOUL"
Mark Taplin has lived in the shadow of wind turbines for more than a decade. As part of our on-going debate on the issue, he describes how the experience has affected his life:
"I cannot avoid the noise. I hear them nearly all the time. It is not easy to equate it to other noise sources, and I find the attempts at comparisons trite. The dilemma for one such as me is that the industry has always argued that as the wind picks up speed and the power output and noise level produced increases, the natural background noise created by the wind will mask any turbine noise.
Where this argument falls down, however, is when you find yourself in a comparatively sheltered position on lower ground than the turbines and not buffeted by the wind. Then you hear a great deal more than if you stand up close with the wind rushing past your ears. When small but violent changes in wind direction shear past the turbines, the chomp and swoosh of the blades passing the towers creates a noise, albeit mercifully brief, that beggars belief. It is as if a ghostly steam engine were pumping an abandoned mine working"
Read the full article from the Western Morning News 9 January 2004
What research has been done on the effects of turbine noise?
The answer is "not enough". It is unacceptable that several thousand turbines have been built, including about 1,000 in the UK, without a full research programme to justify it.
1. Research at the University of Groningen (Netherlands) shows that existing research on windfarm noise is invalid because measurements have been made at 10 metres. Measurements at 80 metres show up to a 3.5 times increase over 10 metres, with correspondingly higher noise levels. Read the report and references
****
2. A review of noise effects is available at :
www.naturvardsverket.se/bokhandeln/pdf/620-5308-6.pdf. (Pedersen, Eja, ?Noise annoyance from wind turbines - a review?, Naturvårdsverket Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, 2003.)
Not particularly enlightening, due to paucity of research in the field, but for what its worth the conclusions are:
- "Noise from wind turbines is not at all as well studied as for instance noise from road traffic. As the number of studies is low no general conclusions could be drawn. However, some indications will be listed here.
- The reviewed studies above indicate that annoyance from wind turbine noise
Is to a degree correlated to noise exposure.
Occurs to a higher degree at low noise levels than noise annoyance from other sources of community noise such as traffic.
Is influenced by the turbines? visual impact on the landscape.
- Wind turbine noise
Does not directly cause any physical health problems. There is not enough data to conclude if wind turbine noise could induce sleep disturbance or stress-related symptoms.
Is, due to its characteristics, not easily masked by background noise.
Is particularly poorly masked by background noise at certain topographical conditions.
- Regulations on noise from wind turbines are based on different principles leading to a heterogeneous legislation in Europe.
No conclusions on wind turbine noise in recreational areas could be drawn as no studies on the subject have been found. Other sources of noise studied as aircraft over flights indicate that noise levels tolerated in wilderness areas compared to residential areas are lower, but there is no evidence that this could be transferred to wind turbine noise."
****
A white paper prepared by the Renewable Energy Research Laboratory
Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
University of Massachusetts at Amherst
Amherst, MA 01003
Anthony L. Rogers, Ph.D.
(413) 545-4866
arogers@ecs.umass.edu
James F. Manwell, Ph.D.
(413) 545-4359
manwell@ecs.umass.edu
June 2002
www.ceere.org/rerl/publications/whitepapers/ WindTurbineNoiseIssues.pdf
For space reasons, only the List of Contents, Summary and Conclusions, and References are shown here. As in the other references quoted above the article concludes that there are not enough research-based standards in existence in the USA to provide guidance for building windfarms. On the Precautionary Principle, much quoted by windfarm protagonists, we should stop building them until such standards exist. There is no reason to believe that the situation is any better in Europe.
3. Wind Turbine Noise Issues
Table of Contents
Introduction.......................................................................................................................3
Noise and Sound Fundamentals .......................................................................................4
Sound and Noise ...........................................................................................................4
Sound Power and Pressure Measurement Scales ........................................................5
Measurement of Sound or Noise ...................................................................................5
dB Math .........................................................................................................................7
Sources of Wind Turbine Noise.........................................................................................8
Sources of Wind Turbine Noise .....................................................................................8
Mechanical Noise.......................................................................................................8
Aerodynamic Noise ....................................................................................................9
Noise Reduction Methods for Wind Turbines ..............................................................11
Noise and Wind Turbine Operation .................................................................................11
Noise Propagation...........................................................................................................11
Ambient Noise .................................................................................................................13
Noise Standards and Regulations...................................................................................14
Turbine Sound Power Measurement Standards..........................................................14
Community Standards for Determining Acceptable Sound Pressure Levels...............15
Sample Noise Assessment for a Wind Turbine Project...................................................16
Noise from Small Wind Turbines.....................................................................................17
Conclusions and Recommendations...............................................................................18
References ......................................................................................................................19
Conclusions and Recommendations
A number of improvements in standards and regulations are needed to ensure that communities can reliably anticipate noise from wind turbines and to ensure that the data are available to make those sound estimations:
1. Guidelines for defining acceptable noise from wind turbines in Massachusetts should be
expanded. These should include not only the present DEP criteria for broadband noise
and pure tones, but also criteria for impulsive and other sounds and guidelines for the
appropriate consideration of background noise levels at different wind speeds.
2. Any incentives to promote wind energy should be provided only to turbines for which the
manufacturer can provide noise data based on IEC standards or for turbines which are to
be located at sites where there will clearly be no problem.
3. Setbacks should be defined for turbines for which no data is available.
4. Clearer state standards are needed for the measurement of background noise and the
estimation of wind turbine noise in assessments of wind turbine projects. These should
include standards for measuring background noise as a function of both time of day and
wind speed and standards for appropriate propagation models that include the effects of
reflection and absorption of sounds in grasslands, woodlands, and pavement or urban
areas and appropriate values for air absorption.
5. Standards are also needed for the measurement of noise from small wind turbines. These
standards should include measurements to higher wind speeds and measurements that
include all the variety of operating modes that might be encountered and that include
unusual noise conditions, including time dependent and frequency dependent components
such as thumping and whistles. These standards need to provide sound measures that
provide an accurate representation of issues of interest to potential listeners.
6. Further study of small wind turbine noise is needed to adequately define the types of
noise generated by small wind turbines. An understanding of the character of the noise
generated by small wind turbines needs to be included in any new measurement and
reporting standard and in community noise regulations.
7. Finally, manufacturers of small wind turbines need to make comprehensive sound power
level measurements, based on new standards, available to the public.
References
AWEA (American Wind Energy Association), Procedure for Measurement of Acoustic
Emissions From Wind Turbine Generator Systems, Tier I – Standard 2.1 (1989),
American Wind Energy Association, Washington, DC, 1989.
Beranek, L. L. and Ver, I. L., Noise and Vibration Control Engineering: Principles and
Applications, Wiley, New York, 1992.
Danish Wind turbine Manufacturers Association, www.windpower.dk, 2002.
Fégeant, O., “On the Masking of Wind Turbine Noise by Ambient Noise,” Proc. European Wind
Energy Conference, Nice, France, March 1-5, 1999.
Germanisher Lloyd, Regulation for the Certification of Wind Energy Conversion Systems
Supplement to the 1993 Edition, Hamburg, March, 1994.
Gipe, P., Wind Energy Comes of Age, Wiley, New York, 1995.
Goodman, N., "The Environmental Impact of Windpower Development in Vermont: A Policy
Analysis," Proc. Windpower '97, AWEA, pp 299- 308, 1997.
Hubbard, H. H. and Shepherd, K. P., "Wind Turbine Acoustics," NASA Technical Paper 3057
DOE/NASA/20320-77, 1990.
Huskey, A. Meadors,M., Wind Turbine Generator System Acoustic Noise Report for the Whisper
H40 Wind Turbine, National Wind Technology Center, Boulder, CO, June 1, 2001.
IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission), IEC 61400-11: Wind turbine generator systems
– Part 11: Acoustic noise measurement techniques. Document No. 88/141/CDV.
Publication of the IEC Central Office, Geneva Switzerland, 2001.
International Energy Agency: Expert Group Study on Recommended Practices for Wind Turbine
Testing and Evaluation, 4. Acoustics Measurements of Noise Emission from Wind
Turbines, 3. Edition 1994.
National Wind Coordinating Committee, NWCC, Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities: A
Handbook," RESOLVE, Washington, D. C, 1998.
Tech environmental, Inc., Acoustical Analysis of Bergey Wind Turbine, Halibut Point State Park,
A report prepared for the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management,June 1998.
Wagner, S., Bareib, R. and Guidati, G., Wind Turbine Noise, Springer, Berlin, 1996.
***
4. DEFRA awards contract to investigate low frequency noise
Directly as a result of the court case referred to at the beginning of this webpage on Windfarm Noise, the following appeared on Salford University's website:
The Acoustics Research Centre at the University of Salford has recently been awarded a contract by DEFRA (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) for investigation into methods of assessment of low frequency noise. We are looking for case studies where there is a cluster of complaints about low frequency noise in a relatively small area If you are an Environmental Health Officer or Technician and you have some such cases in your area we would be most grateful if you could leave your contact details with Anne-Marie Lavin with the heading 'Lfn case studies'. 0161 295 4406 a.m.lavin@salford.ac.uk
***
5. Apparently not on April 1st !
Scottish Power recruits musician to add music to the existing noise from wind turbines.
MUSICAL symphonies played on the giant rotating blades of wind turbines
are being considered by one of Scotland's leading power companies in an
attempt to engage the public with the growing energy-generating source.
The Scotsman 22 January 2004
1.3 Impact on animals
Birds and Bat strikes
For an introduction to this subject, refer to The Case Against Windfarms, section L.
Since this was written more evidence has come to light of the damage caused by wind turbine blades to birds, and also bats, which are very highly protected. This page contains links to a selection of the relevant articles
In each case a paragraph or two from the relevant article is quoted, or perhaps a summary and a hyperlink given to access the full article.
Contents:
- Evidence of bird and bat strikes by wind turbines
- Legal aspects
- Research
1 Evidence of bird and bat damage
Transcription from the BBC programme Nature 13 Jan 2003, discussing the research which shows how the rare Skota duck has particular problems with nearshore windfarms.
Extract / summary
There are currently wind turbine proposals right the way out throughout the Baltic from Lithuania and Latvia ,Estonia all the way through Poland ,through German waters and then in the north sea ,in , in the Netherlands ,Belgium off France and of course round British waters, everywhere where common skotas occur they are now being threatened by wind farm developments.
The first phase in the development of electricity generation from offshore wind farms In Britain dubbed round 1,.began with proposals for 20 farms at various locations around the coast. Responsibility for leasing portions of the seabed for their development lies with the crown estate which owns the seabed out to the 12 nautical mile territorial limit
Caroline Heaps is the marine environmental policy manager for the crown estate and I asked her to explain the criteria for assessing lease applications
Read more
***
RENEWABLE ENERGY INDUSTRY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
An excellent survey and review of the research done on the impact of wind turbines on wildlife and particularly birds, in this case in Australia
Extract
RENEWABLE ENERGY INDUSTRY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
By Andrew Chapman - 15/11/03
Karl Mallon of the Australian Wind Energy Association, on 11 November 2003, suggests that wind farm bird kills are minimal and because birds are killed in other ways we shouldn’t be overly concerned about wind turbine kills. Bird kills at wind farms are in fact significant and this is particularly relevant because wind power companies market themselves as providing “green energy”. This image, of their own creation and naively fostered by others, should not exempt them from the normal level of environmental scrutiny and compliance applied to industry. Company boards, investors and consumers alike want to be sure that their expectations of social and environmental responsibility are met and not just by ticking boxes on paper. It is therefore important that the impact of wind farms on the environment, particularly wildlife, be conveyed so people have the opportunity to make informed social and environmentally conscious investment decisions.
Andrew is a Consulting Engineer with a private practice who has held senior positions in leading Australian engineering and environmental consultancies. He has provided engineering and environmental services to major corporations in Japan, South East Asia and throughout Australia. He served on the Victorian Government’s Conservation Advisory Committee and over 11 years Chaired or was member of panels appointed to conduct hearings under the Victorian Government’s Planning and Environment and Environment Effects Acts
Read the full report
***
For an example of a detailed survey, carried out in the United States look at http://www.west-inc.com/reports/nine_canyon_monitoring_final.pdf
***
Windpower Monthly, the internal journal of the wind industry is concerned about bat strikes. This is from its
Bat kills a sudden and unexpected problem
Bat kills are emerging as a major and unexpected problem at wind turbine sites. The issue was brought to a head last month after the death of what scientists describe as an "alarming" and "surprising" number of bats in a single large wind farm over a period of weeks.
Deaths of bats at wind power stations is not new, but the recent incident, reported in full in the October issue of Windpower Monthly, is among the worst recorded. The wind industry is being called upon to accept responsibility for the emerging problem and to co-operate fully in dealing with it. "Right now, the picture that’s emerging is that bats populations are more at risk from wind turbines than birds," says one of the many scientists studying the kills.
Tension between wildlife authorities and the wind industry over the issue has been exacerbated by a further clash over a wind power project under construction in the same region. State wildlife officials are warning that the threatened bald eagle, golden eagles and endangered bat species are at risk from the project. The initial response from the project developer to continue with construction has unnerved the authorities. Concern is mounting among officials that the wind industry may not willing to co-operate on the siting of wind turbines where they will have least impact on animal and bird habitat.
The same wind project development company has been involved in both the large projects now under environmental suspicion. The wind turbine supplier is also the same. Of deep concern to wildlife officials is the lack of comprehensive information from the wind industry on the bat kills and lack of co-operation on the details of environmental assessment work. This contrasts with their experience of close co-operation with the wind industry in the region to date.
So far, no endangered species have been identified among the hundreds of dead bats collected. Until an endangered or threatened species is involved, wildlife authorities have no authority to intervene. They warn, however, that the killing, or "take," of endangered species is a criminal offence and it is the responsibility of project developers or owners to obtain "an incidental take permit or avoid take of any federally listed species." The concerned wildlife authority has wide-ranging legal powers to act against persons responsible for kills of endangered species.
Very little is known about most of the 1000 or so bat species that exist -- and almost nothing about their migratory habits and requirements. Scientists are baffled about what is causing the bats to be attracted into wind farms, though migration habits may have an important bearing on the problem. They say the wind industry has much to learn. "They talk about lighting the towers to prevent bird impacts, but the lights they're using may be more likely to attract bats," says one researcher.
The wind industry could help solve the puzzle by the timely release of relevant data, including numbers involved, genus and species involved, circumstances under which the animals are killed, time of night when the deaths occurred, age of the dead animals, and other relevant information. Money is also needed for research and analyses.
Despite the newly emerged tension between a section of the wind industry and wildlife officials and scientists, serious efforts are being made by the authorities for a constructive dialogue on the formation of guidelines to help developers site wind turbines to lessen the numbers of bird and bat kills.
For the full details of exactly what is happening where and who is involved -- including interviews with wind industry members, scientists and wildlife officials -- read our series of stories on this contentious issue in the current issue of Windpower Monthly.
***
Environmentalists get tough
Legal action against Altamont bird kills
A US environmental group has filed a lawsuit in federal court against
the owners of some of the nation’s oldest wind farms, just as the projects were set to receive new operating permits.
The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed suit against FPL Group Inc, parent company of FPL Energy, the largest wind developer in the US, and NEG Micon, a wind turbine supplier in Denmark and FPLs partner in its Altamont Pass Wind Resource Center (WRC), in January.
The suit charges that the roughly 5400 wind turbines in Altamont Pass have killed up to 10,000 birds in the 20 years since they were first permitted by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, earning it the reputation
as the most lethal project in North America. About 2100 of the Kenetech 100 kW turbines have been owned by FPL and NEG Micon since 1998. SeaWest owns a significant number of additional turbines, but CBD says it is going after the biggest two companies first and will see how this lawsuit is resolved before moving ahead on further court action.
A SPECIAL CASE
CBD claims the entire array of WRC turbines kills more than 60 golden eagles, 300 red- tailed hawks and 270 western burrowing owls, among other raptors, each year. These and other species are protected by several state and federal wildlife agencies and by federal laws. Although CBD supports wind development, the centre’s Jeff Miller says the turbines in Altamont Pass are a special case.
The group filed the lawsuit, says Miller, because Alameda County’s East County Board of Zoning Adjustments approved in November new long term conditional use permits for 14 Altamont Pass wind farms. It was scheduled to approve 15 more at its mid-January meeting and four more later without requiring the project owners to come up with an environmental plan to stop the bird kills. CBD has also appealed pealed the zoning board’s decision to the County Board of Supervisors, which would have been the final step for permit approval.
Reacting to both CBD’s lawsuit and its appeal, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors put together an advisory committee made up of environmentalists, wind developers and county staff to draft a list of environmental conditions that would be put in place as the projects receive new conditional use permits.
The advisory committee was to report to the board of supervisors at its January 29 meeting, but getting to an agreement about environmental conditions for the current projects and for repowering could take several months longer.
Miller wants the wind turbine operators to implement measures to reduce bird mortality, such as shutting down the 12°/o of turbines that cause 80°/o of the bird deaths. In addition, he wants project owners to provide some compensation, such as conservation easements to help bird populations that are being depleted, even if the offsets protect habitat someplace else.
FPL says it is already doing what it can to prevent bird mortality and has been working with the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees federal wildlife protection laws. “We’re concerned about bird collisions at Altamont,” says FPL’s Steve Stengel, who refuses to comment on pending litigation. “And, we’ve been doing things to mitigate the interaction.”
The mitigation includes removing some turbines in areas of potential risk, installation of nacelle screens to reduce the opportunity for birds to perch on turbines and a rodent control pi-program. “If we eliminate or reduce the number of prey on the ground, then the raptors won’t swoop in to feed on them,” Stengel says. But Miller says the rodent control program is not working and, depending on which expert weighs in on the issue, the program could be making the mortality problem even worse by killing other terrestrial non-target species, such as the kit fox.
MIKE O’BRYANT Windpower Monthly USA
***
Bird kills in the thousands stir opposition to wind turbines
Environmentalists seek to block permit renewals for California energy
farm
By Rone Tempest
Los Angeles Times
December 17, 2003
ALTAMONT PASS, Calif. - When the giant Altamont wind farm sprouted here
two decades ago, the only major objections were aesthetic. Local
residents didn't appreciate the forest of 7,000 ungainly wind towers
cluttering their view.
No one, apparently, thought about the birds.
Since the giant windmills began churning the air above the Altamont Pass
east of San Francisco Bay, an estimated 22,000 birds have died -
including hundreds of golden eagles, red-tailed hawks, kestrels and
other raptors - after flying into the spinning blades.
Now, some environmental groups that routinely supported wind power as a
clean, alternative source of electric power are opposing the renewal of
permits for the wind farm, the largest in the world in number of
turbines, until steps are taken to reduce the bird deaths.
"Renewing these permits without addressing the cumulative impacts of
wind energy on migratory birds, especially raptor species, will give a
black eye to wind power," said Michael Boyd, president of Californians
for Renewable Energy, a Santa Cruz-based organization that generally
supports energy sources such as wind power.
Joining in the effort is the Center for Biological Diversity, a national
nonprofit group known for its litigious approach to wildlife protection.
The organizations have asked the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to
reverse a recent decision by a local zoning board granting permit
renewals to some of the wind power operators. Quoting from recent
research for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the California
Energy Commission, they estimate that over the past 20 years 22,000
birds have died in the Altamont windmills, including 400 to 800 golden
eagles.
"The county did everyone a disservice by choosing to ignore the true
impacts of these turbines, which are the equivalent of a terrestrial
Exxon Valdez every year," said Jeff Miller, spokesman for the Center for
Biological Diversity.
The open country surrounding Altamont Pass is believed to contain one of
the largest populations of breeding pairs of golden eagles in the world.
In the fall, the eagles, as well as thousands of the more common
red-tailed hawks, use the pass as a route to their winter homes in
California's Central Valley.
There are 16 other major wind farms in the United States, but none comes
close to Altamont in the number of bird kills. In part, this is because
of the abundance of birds. On a recent morning in the Altamont area,
visitors counted more than 30 red-tailed hawks and several kestrels
perched in trees and on fence posts or soaring in the currents high
above the turbines.
The wind power industry, eager to expand, describes the Altamont
situation as an "anomaly" that has provided valuable lessons for other
wind farms, including those in Southern California's Tehachapi area and
the San Gorgonio Pass, which the industry claims are much safer for
birds.
For example, the new Foote Creek Rim wind farm near Arlington, Wyo., is
also in an area with heavy concentrations of golden eagles. Using data
about eagle flight patterns collected from Altamont, planners there were
able to space rows of turbines in a way that has avoided high numbers of
bird deaths.
A 2001 report commissioned by the National Wind Coordinating Committee,
an industry-funded advocacy group, contends that the controversy over
bird kills, particularly at Altamont, has "delayed and even
significantly contributed to blocking the development of some wind
plants in the U.S."
Researched by Wyoming-based Western EcoSystems Technology Inc., the
report contends that many more birds are killed annually in collisions
with vehicles (60 million), window panes (98 million) and communication
towers (4 million) than die nationwide in wind turbines (10,000 to
40,000).
Even the common household cat, wind power industry advocates argue, is
responsible for more bird deaths than turbines.
Paul Kerlinger, a New Jersey avian biologist who works regularly as an
industry consultant, contends that of all the main energy sources
excluding solar power, wind is the least threatening to bird life.
"When you turn on your lights you kill something, no matter what the
source of electricity," said Kerlinger.
Industry officials said they felt blindsided by the recent opposition at
Altamont.
"We felt that we were already way down the track in reducing avian
fatalities," said Steven P. Steinhour, vice president of Seawest, a San
Diego wind power company with holdings in Altamont. Steinhour, an avid
bird watcher who specializes in project development for Seawest, was
incensed by the comparison of Altamont to the Exxon Valdez oil spill
disaster off the coast of Alaska.
"It's estimated that half a million birds died because of Exxon Valdez,"
said Steinhour. "It would take 400 years to reach that number here."
The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council estimates that 250,000
seabirds and 250 bald eagles died in the spill.
The current flap over bird deaths came when the 20 permits held by the
companies began to expire this year and the companies were required to
go before a local zoning board for renewal. The board approved renewals
for 1,400 turbines.
Opponents have asked the board of supervisors to reverse those renewals
when the board meets early next year.
The Los Angeles Times is a Tribune Publishing newspaper.
***
Wind farms threaten the red kite
Conservationists attack the Government's latest environment plans after rare bird's death
Mark Townsend
Sunday January 25, 2004
The Observer
At first, it was dismissed as another routine, if tragic, death. The dismembered body of one of Britain's rarest birds, the red kite, had been found on a remote hillside, its right wing efficiently severed.
Local enthusiasts, saddened by the loss of the bird they had christened Filled Heart, launched an investigation. Now their findings have triggered a rebellion among ornithologists which threatens to derail Tony Blair's attempts to tackle climate change. It could thwart a £1 billion investment in building wind farms across Britain.
The death of Filled Heart is also blamed for a series of impending lawsuits against planned wind turbines, which some believe could reduce bird populations to the extent that internationally recognised nesting sites lose their global importance.
Filled Heart's body was found close to a major Welsh wind farm. A detailed inspection by vets concluded its injuries were consistent with being slashed by a giant turbine blade.
The synopsis offered the first proof that Britain's army of birdwatchers had been dreading: endangered species were being shredded in the 'killer blades' of huge turbines that can travel at up to 300kph.
Now, a year after its death, Filled Heart has also precipitated an unprecedented spat among the green lobby. For conservationists, the red kite has become an unlikely martyr in the fight against wind farms. For the environmentalists who argue the loss of a few birds is a worthy sacrifice if it means reducing the impact of global warming, Filled Heart remains a powerful nemesis.
'It might have been only one bird, but because the red kite is such a rarity it has tended to polarise views and has raised real questions about the siting of turbines,' said Rowena Langston, research biologist for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.
Wind farms proven potentially to affect birdlife may have to be sited elsewhere or abandoned altogether according to legal experts.
Evidence continues to emerge that thousands of the UK's most well-known birds could be killed in the 40-metre-long blades. Wind farms are currently planned for sites near the habitats of some of Britain's rarest birds, including golden eagles, as well as the red kite, of which there are 500 breeding pairs left. Pressure will mount this week when conservationists warn Ministers they are failing to take the threat seriously.
The story of how the death of a single red kite near Aberystwyth could dent the Government's high-profile pledge to provide 10 per cent of Britain's electricity by 2010 by the wind has stunned the industry.
Last week, its concern deepened when US wildlife experts launched a lawsuit against a San Francisco wind farm known to kill 5,500 birds a year. Now Welsh campaign ers, in a move to save the once-persecuted red kite, are preparing to follow with their own legal action.
In particular, they are targeting 39 massive turbines the size of a 40-storey office block to be constructed deep in the Cambrian mountains, until recently one of the last refuges of the red kite in Britain and a major tourist draw. Plans for a giant wind farm to be built on the estate of the Duke of Beaufort on the outskirts of Swansea, and another key red kite habitat, may follow.
Earlier this year, the RSPB, which has two million members, condemned the proposed £600m siting of hundreds of wind turbines on the Isle of Lewis as illegal because of its standing as an internationally important bird sanctuary.
Yet it is the Government-backed proposals for a huge flagship offshore wind farm at Shell Flats off Lancashire that could prove the test case that threatens Blair's wind energy revolution.
A previously unknown flock of 15,000 common scoter ducks was recently discovered at the site. Now, RSPB lawyers and government officials are locked in discussions over the site's viability.
'There is the very real possibility of legal action,' confirmed an RSPB source.
Elsewhere, opposition continues to mount in the name of Filled Heart. In Dorset, campaigners argue that the country's world heritage coastline will be tarnished if a wind farm at Portland Harbour affects birdlife.
Days ago, Teesside's standing as a globally important sanctuary was thrown into question by a proposed wind farm to be sited off Redcar. Experts claim the fast-moving blades would 'pulverise' thousands of seabirds as they flew offshore off Teesmouth. Famed environmentalist Professor David Bellamy recently demanded wind farms be banned on the grounds they 'chopped up birds'.
So far, 27 major wind farms have been objected to by the RSPB. It has just written to another 30 expressing concerns over the effect on birdlife. Despite this, planning approval has been granted for a 27 turbine farm in the shadow of the dramatic Cuillin Hills on the Isle of Skye.
The move has shocked independent experts who recently observed 55 golden eagles in three days last spring. The endangered birds all flew between 20 and 200 metres above the sea - the precise height at which the blades rotate.
Until the death of Filled Heart, the opposition against wind farms centred primarily on aesthetic grounds. Suspicion began to rise after an allegedly suppressed report claimed thousands of birds were being torn apart each year in the turbines' blades. The first major study into a potential problem, carried out in northern Spain, found 6,000 birds were killed by turbines in a year.
However, the industry and the Government argue that UK studies reveal 'birdstrikes' of less than one per turbine a year. In addition, they maintain, developers consult the RSPB to help them site away from migratory routes with plans modified until there is no threat
'We wouldn't build turbines on a motorway and we don't propose them on the avian equivalent,' said a British Wind Energy Association spokesman.
Experts, however, argue the dearth of detailed research into bird movements raises the potential for costly mistakes. They also argue that bird corpses could easily be removed by foxes or other predators before being discovered. Many in the Government may wish that had happened to the body of Filled Heart.
2. Legal aspects
From Cambria Magazine - Comment
Extract / Summary
Currently the Argyll & Bute Regional Council are considering an application by Scottish Power for the construction of a wind farm on land owned by the Forestry Authority. The site is in the Inverliever Forest, with the intended construction to be high on a ridge overlooking Loch Awe and Loch Avich. Obviously, the turbines, 22 in number and 93 metres high, will dominate the landscape of the area. The Environmental Impact Assessment drawn up by the applicants indicates that Schedule 1, or Annex 1 (the highest protection level afforded by current legislation) species of birds will be under threat from the development, indeed, some will certainly be killed. Those mentioned include Golden Eagle, Osprey, Red Throated Diver and Hen Harrier. Read more
3. Research
The report Avian Hearing and the Avoidance of Wind Turbines is a detailed study of the possible reasons why birds tend to fly into the blades of wind turbines. Basically they can't hear them. It is a damning indictment of the wind industry and its self-appointed "green" supporters.
1.4 Safety: Radar interference and accidents
Safety
The Case Against Windfarms section J
Danger to low flying aircraft - the six-year battle of Kielder Forest. Judge throws out developer's plea.
UK wind farms threatened by defence concern - Local news report on the dangers to low-flying aircraft of proposed offshore windfarms in the Irish Sea
1.5 Social impacts: tourism, TV interference, property prices
Television interference - Case Against Windfarms section H .
Tourism, jobs, house prices - Case Against Windfarms section K.
Windfarms have an adverse effect on property values- the evidence is clear from these letters from estate agents.
Also relevant is the evidence in Cumbria quoted above (Report from The Times)
2. Policy and Planning
2.1 Government strategy
Government Policy and the Windfarm Industry
Unfortunately there is no point in trying to separate the Government and the wind industry. The Government seems hell-bent on promoting windpower at all costs, through direct subsidies, the Renewables Obligation (see below), the new Planning Green Paper, the Energy Review, and by giving the DTI the power of deciding planning issues for large windfarms.
The process for this is through a level of government organisation called "The Regions" which most people have never heard of. Organisations exist in Scotland and Wales and in some of the English regions, with representatives from 'green' non-govermental organisations (NGOs), civil servants and representatives of industry. The offices of these organisations usually have a name like GONE (Government Office for the North East) or GOSE. Search for your local office on the Internet and you will find out what they have in store for you.
In February 2003 the Government published the Energy White Paper. A copy of the full report can be downloaded from www.dti.gov.uk and is also available from
the Views of Scotland website www.viewsofscotland.org. There is a review of the White Paper on this site at Energy White Paper
For general background about Government Policy go to The Case Against Windfarms:
The implications of the The Renewables Obligation
The Renewables Obligation was inaugurated on April 1st 2002. It requires all electricity suppliers to take 3% of their electricity from renewable sources. This percentage will rise to 10% in 2010, thus meeting the UK's target for 2010, or it would if there was any likelyhood of that amount of renewable energy being available.
As part of this scheme, the English regions (plus Scotland and Wales) have been asked to work out how much renewable energy they could contribute. The British Wind Energy Association, ever helpful, made the following suggestions
Wind resources by Region
Following the Government's announcement in the Utilities Bill that each Region will be given ' assessments ' and targets for renewable energy, the BWEA has got in early to ensure that as much of this as possible is wind energy. Their starting point is the 'high wind' scenario described in the DTI's recent document. This scenario gives onshore wind 26% of the national 10% target (the other scenarios were 'current trends continued' 21% and 'wind constrained' 13%)Their research is based on an assessment of windspeed for each region and are as follows (the numbers refer to Installed Capacity in terms of numbers of 1.5MW turbines.The full report - Planning for Wind Energy - is obtainable from the BWEA website at: www.britishwindenergy.co.uk
High Wind Scenario
| England |
No of 1.5MW turbines |
| North East |
137 |
| North West |
178 |
| Yorkshire and The Humber |
131 |
| East Midlands |
81 |
| West Midlands |
95 |
| East of England |
99 |
| South West |
251 |
| South East |
151 |
| Total England |
1123 |
| |
|
| Wales |
193 |
| Scotland |
973 |
| Northern Ireland |
227 |
Thus the UK total is 2516 x "1.5 MW turbine equivalents", which is 3774 MW Installed Capacity or (3774 x 30%) = 1,132.2MW Operational (or Practical) capacity, and is assumed to meet 2.6% of UK's electricity resources. The total UKrequired capacity is 52,000 MW, so 2.6% of that is 1,300MW.
In March 2002 Brian Wilson, Energy Minister, launched the Renewables Obligation and produced a list of the English regions, Scotland and Wales, with the percentage of the RO allocated to each
| Region/Administration |
Low-end % |
High-end % |
| East of England |
13.3 |
13.3 |
| East Midlands |
5.6 |
6.1 |
| London |
0.7 |
1.9 |
| North East |
2.7 |
6.3 |
| North West |
8.6 |
9.7 |
| South East |
4.4 |
10.1 |
| South West |
3.7 |
7.8 |
| West Midlands |
7.7 |
8.9 |
| Yorkshire and Humberside |
3.8 |
11.0 |
| Scotland |
11.1 |
11.1 |
| Wales |
4.2 |
13.4 |
| TOTAL % of RO |
66.0 |
100 |
The Minister for Energy, said:
"Important research like this is crucial. Educating the Government, local developers and all stakeholders involved is the key to taking the real steps to make the UK greener. "The report shows that the Government's targets of gaining ten per cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2010 is challenging but achievable. "The recent Scottish Renewables Study, published after this report was compiled, suggested that Scotland alone had the potential to supply even up to 30% of the UK's electricity supply from renewables. Also this report did not take account of larger wind farms which are further offshore than the initial 18 sites allocated by Crown Estates. We cannot, however, expect offshore wind and Scotland to
deliver our targets. I hope that every region will get involved in developing our renewable energy resources. "Targets are no use on their own if there is no sensible understanding of our renewable potential. Everyone working together, one step at a time, with the right investment, is the right way forward to progress the UK's green agenda."Just last week, I launched the community renewables initiative which gives advice and training to local organisation wishing to set up small scale renewables energy schemes. These small steps are the difference between succeeding or failing to reach our overall target."
The Government expects to create a £1 billion market for renewable energy by 2010. The main driver for this will be the shortly to be introduced renewables obligation which will put an obligation on electricity suppliers to supply ten per cent of their electricity from renewable sources. In addition a £260 million support programme has been provided over the next three years.
2.2 Planning
Windfarms and the Planning System
Refer to The Case Against Windfarms, Section R (Windfarms and the planning system) for Country Guardian's views on this key issue.
The planning system has generally been successful in forestalling the majority of planning applications for windfarms, particularly in recent years. However, the Government's recent Green Paper - available from Government's Green Paper on Planning - and comments on planning issues in its Energy Review have given rise to serious fears about its intentions
 |
It appears that there is to be a constitutional change to devolve responsibility for planning to the English Regions, in much the same way as already happens in Wales and Scotland. This is likely to undermine the rights of local communities to raise objections to schemes which affect them. However the decisive rejection of regionalisation by the North East "region" has put a brake on this for the time being |
|
"Large infrastructure projects" are to be determined at national level, and it seems likely that windfarms of more than 150MW Installed Capacity will be determined by ministers. However for the moment the existing limit of 50MW under the Electricity Act remains the standard |
|
The current system whereby developers may appeal against a planning decision which goes against them, but local communities cannot also appeal is likely to be retained, despite strong protests from a wide range of conservation and environmental groups. |
Environmental Impact Assessments
The Royal Town Planning Institute has published a set of Planning Practice Standards for Environmental Impact Assessments This document, which gives detailed guidelines for EIAs, which are normally required for windfarm applications. It can be viewed at and downloaded from:
http://www.rtpi.org.uk/resources/publications/environment/eia/#top
2.3 How to fight a windfarm
1. Information and guidelines
The Case against Windfarms Section R provides an introduction to the topic. Written in 2000 it is still valid, but you should be aware that the current Government is hell-bent on bending the planning system to make it more supportive of onshore wind, in a panic measure in response the great success of the conservation groups.
Fighting a Windfarm Proposal brings together the practicalities faced by a local community which has just discovered that a windfarm developer has a proposal to build a windfarm nearby. This is usually when an application has been submitted for planning permission to erect an anemometer (to determine whether the site is windy enough), but it is much better if the proposal can be discovered long before this stage, at the point where when developers get into discussions with the Planning Authority.
It is also useful to know that the Government has laid down targets for Renewables, including wind energy, for each of the devolved administrations and the English regions.
2. Background Papers
Environmental Impact Assessments
The Royal Town Planning Institute has published a set of Planning Practice Standards for Environmental Impact Assessments This document, which gives detailed guidelines for EIAs, which are normally required for windfarm applications. It can be viewed at and downloaded from: http://www.rtpi.org.uk/resources/publications/environment/eia/#top
Policy Planning Statement PPS22
Issued for consultation by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in November in November 2003 instantly drew fire from conservation groups. This was instructing planning authorities to plan to build windfarms and has rejected the arguments that Areas of Local Landscape Value, and areas on the fringes of National Parks/SSSI’s/AONBs should be protected. Noise intrusion and bird strikes are dismissed as trivial. Aspects such as problems with grid connections, and the general lack of viability of wind energy will not be an argument. Some designated areas get limited protection, but “small windfarms may be permitted in them”.
2.4. Windfarm Action Groups and Linked sites
UK Windfarm Action Groups
In almost all cases where a windfarm development is proposed an opposition group is formed. This list has been compiled as a guide and reference to assist windfarm action groups to contact each other, particularly new groups, which will thus avoid 'reinventing the wheel' and gain gain a lot of moral support in the early stages. Many of these them are group members of Country Guardian and many have individual members who are also CG members, however, it is important to emphasise that Country Guardian does not have 'branches' and that all these groups are totally autonomous. Increasingly the groups are building up a national and indeed international network, visiting each other and exploiting email and Internet sites to communicate. Currently 73 action groups are recorded in Country Guardian's UK list, but they are growing as the Government pushes for more and more onshore windfarms.
Links
This is a list of over 30 links. They include some of the UK Windfarm Action Groups sites , where they are groups which operate beyond their own locality or at regional level, or have particularly interesting sites and links.
The list also includes sites in France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, United States, New Zealand
Saddleworth Conference
