WASHINGTON — The Obama administration offered new guidance Friday on where wind farms should be located to reduce the number of bird deaths while promoting increased use of wind power.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said the guidelines, which take effect immediately, provide a scientific basis for developers and government regulators to identify sites with low risk to wildlife while allowing for more wind energy projects on private and public lands.
But a bird advocacy group that lobbied for mandatory standards said the new, voluntary guidelines will do little to protect hundreds of thousands of birds killed each year by wind turbines.
Salazar called wind power a key part of the administration’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy, and noted that the guidelines for onshore projects have been endorsed by the American Wind Energy Association and the National Audubon Society, a conservation group.
The dual endorsements “speak volumes about our goals: to do everything we can to stand up renewable energy” such as wind power while protecting wildlife and habitat, Salazar said at a news conference Friday.
The guidelines call on the wind industry to eliminate from consideration areas that would pose high risks to birds and other wildlife, and to take steps to alleviate problems by restoring nearby habitat and other actions. If developers follow the guidelines, they are unlikely to be prosecuted under federal law in the event of bird deaths, said Dan Ashe, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The American Bird Conservancy, an advocacy group that has pushed for mandatory standards, said voluntary guidelines are largely unenforceable and will do little to protect millions of birds killed or injured by wind turbines.
The group “supports wind power when it is ‘bird-smart.’ Unfortunately, voluntary guidelines will result in more lawsuits, more bird deaths and more government subsidies for bad projects,” said Kelly Fuller, the group’s wind campaign coordinator.
Exact statistics for the number of birds killed by wind turbines are not available, but a 2008 study by a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that wind farms were killing about 440,000 birds per year in the United States.
The number of wind turbines has grown significantly since then, with overall output increasing from about 25,000 megawatts of electricity in 2008 to nearly 47,000 megawatts last year, according to the wind energy association.
The wind industry’s goal of providing 20 percent of the nation’s electricity by 2030 could lead to a million bird deaths a year or more, according to the American Bird Conservancy.
The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that up to 1 million birds die annually in oil field pits and at waste facilities, but says millions more are killed by cars, cats and collisions with buildings, power lines and radio towers.
John Anderson, director of siting policy for the wind energy group, said wind turbines cause a minute fraction of overall bird deaths — less than 3 out of every 100,000 human-related deaths.
Even so, he said the industry has taken significant steps to reduce the number of birds killed, mostly by restoring habitat and locating wind farms in low-risk areas. The new guidelines established by the Fish and Wildlife Service should improve siting practices while protecting wildlife, said Denise Bode, chief executive of the wind energy association.
David Yarnold, president & CEO of Audubon, called the guidelines a good compromise that reflects years of consultation with interested groups, including environmental groups.
“Conservationists can’t have it both ways: We can’t say we need renewable energy and then say there’s nowhere safe to put the wind farms,” Yarnold said. “By collaborating with conservationists instead of slugging it out, the wind power industry gains vital support to expand and create jobs, and wildlife gets the protection crucial for survival. These federal guidelines are a game-changer and big win for both wildlife and clean energy.”
Online:
Fish and Wildlife Service wind energy site: www.fws.gov/windenergy
People need to stop donating to Audubon, NWF and other so-called environmental groups that condone the slaughter of birds and bats, and the destruction wildlife and human habitat by these useless subsidy generating boondoggles.
“Conservationists can’t have it both ways: We can’t say we need renewable energy and then say there’s nowhere safe to put the wind farms,
WIND is a low density renewable energy.
Please study other alternatives.
Lift the 100MW ban on hydro.
Maine, buy from Canada for 20 years and keep researching anything but IWFs.
Fine the wind industry just like all other industries are penalized for bird deaths. Why is okay for the government to prosecute the oil industry when a bird crashes into a derrick or refinery but the wind industry gets a blanket waiver and exclusion when it sticks towers and turbines in the midst of bird habitat or migration routes? The double standard smacks of crony capitalism and hypocrisy.
We are an ingenious society and I am surprised that the government has not created a safety shield to protect wild life, birds and bats from industrial wind turbines. Why not ” CAGE” the wind turbines so that bats can’t get close enough to explode their lungs, birds can’t fly into the blades and be killed, and there is a new industry born to put people to work in the United States. CAGE THE WIND TURBINES SO THE BIRDS, BATS AND WILD LIFE ARE PROTECTED. IF WE ARE PUTTING GOVERNMENT MONEY INTO THE PRIVATE SECTORS POCKETS, WHY NOT MAKE THEM SPEND MORE MONEY AND PAY WITH GOVERNMENT FUNDS TO DO IT? Oh, the foolish things we do to make our lives so much better. I just thought another view would be to create the cage, because the DEP and other government agencies have chosen not to enforce sound, wild life, and bird fines for the destruction caused to the worlds health and needs. Use one more worthless process to put out federal funds and drive up the deficit. DON”T FORGET THE LOSS OF QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE FORCED TO DEAL WITH THESE PROJECTS MOVING INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
$$ 10,ooo fine for being ” near” an eagle nest at the Moosehorn Refuge in Calais.
But the Govt. will pay the developers a fortune to chop up
birds and bats by the 100s of thousands.
After clear cutting the forest and destroying their habitat first.
Makes perfect sense …… to somebody.
Has Angus King been reached for a comment??
Voluntary guidelines? Gee, that’ll make a HUGE difference in mortality rates. Bird and bat kills are significant now, and the numbers are very skewed due to “voluntary reporting” at industrial wind installations. You can bet most mortalities aren’t reported by wind industry employees. In Maine these monstrous turbines are being built along our ridgelines and mountain tops, which is where the raptors ride thermals to hunt an the migratory birds fly ages old routes night and day, through fog and snow and heavy rain, in zero visibility…right into those blades. We dropped our membership in Maine Audubon and the NRCM long ago due to their apathy and support for these killing machines. Maine’s economy depends on its scenic natural environment and a robust tourism industry that brings ten billion dollars a year into the state and provides 170,000 full time jobs. Industrial wind fails the cost/benefit analysis on all counts. We don’t need the small percentage of electricity these machines produce. The birds and bats certainly don’t need their airspace being filled with churning blades. Industrial wind doesn’t belong here.
Everyone should read my next article on the 28 year wind industry mortality coverup. You will see how a bogus report and voluntary guidelines hid over 50,000 bird fatalities. Anyone that reads this will understand that this industry was built on a foundation of fraud. The reason the guidelines are voluntary is because there is no way to make these turbines safe and greedy investors want to stick with their insane propeller style design.
These turbines kill every bird species that is forced to live with these monsters. At least 3 million birds are killed annually in the US from Wind Turbines and this mortality is escalating. There has been an industry cover-up about the massive bird mortality since 1984. The use of Radar will not work. It is nothing but an industry ploy or dog and pony show for the ignorant. The fact is there is no way to make the propeller style wind turbine safe for birds and bats.
Since 2005 there has been 50 % decline in golden eagle nest sites recorded near Altamont Pass. It has been hidden from the public and I had to uncover this fact. In addition no golden eagles have nested in the 86 square mile region of Altamont pass for over 20 years even though this is prime golden eagle habitat. This is another undisclosed impact I had to uncover and this is only the beginning of what is to come.
All the current mortality estimates we hear in the media are based on industry approved, completely flawed studies. Despite wind industry claims, the bigger turbines are not safer. This notion was based on the very flawed studies from Altamont. Even though it was covered up, the studies they did prove that the taller bigger turbines did Kill more eagles per MW. I went into detail about the bogus wind industry studies in the Repowering Altamont with Smoke and Mirrors article. As for being safer for other birds, the Altamont studies are completely meaningless because of the deliberately undersized (75 Meter)search areas and the comparison to other habitats that had far more bird species. If search areas were a 200 meter radius and the comparisons were made in the same semi desert habitat, then the studies might have some credibility. The industry knows that birds hit by the turbines do not just fall within a 50-75 meter radius of wind turbines. Even the early small turbines 40-65KW threw birds 200 feet or more. Now with these huge turbines(20-45 times bigger with blades moving faster) it is a totally different story. Read the Watertown Daily Times 12/15/11 article about the flock of geese that hit the turbines. The turbines threw these geese all over the place. Yet by the wind industry mortality standards, any of the geese more than 75 yards away from a turbine would not make it into the rigged methodology of wind industry mortality studies. And then there are the uncounted mortally wounded that wander for days.
I agree. In one instance, Maine Audubon, NRCM, and one other agency split $500,000. given to them by the wind developers here in Maine. The developers call it “mitigation funds”, most of us would call it “blood money”! They are selling out the lives of 10s if not 100s of thousands of birds, bats, and raptors here in Maine every year for financial contributions from the wind power developers and their subcontractors like Reed & Reed.
Not only are these 400-500′ tall turbines very profficient at slicing and dicing birds and raptors on a daily basis, but they do immeasureable long term harm by devasting entire flocks as they migrate through in large numbers. These turbines also kill large quantities of bats because of a condition where their lungs explode just from getting close to these killing machines.
Maine Audubon and other such supposed “watch dog” agencies are supposed to be protecting our wildlife, NOT taking hush money to ignore their slaughter. If you are a member call or email them now to voice your displeasure with their actions.
Spain just came out with a new study this month where they estimate that the bird, bat, and raptor kill off by turbines in that country may be as high as 18 million per year. That’s a far cry from the piddling estimates that the wind power developers had previously stated.
Check out this recent article from California where the turbines are having a decimating affect on Golden eagles.http://www.examiner.com/wildlife-conservation-in-national/bird-slaughterhouse-repowering-altamont-pass-with-smoke-and-mirrors
Please let Maine Audubon know that you will stop your membership if they continue to “look the other way” on this issue. This insanity must stop.
Salazar: “The dual endorsements ‘speak volumes about our goals: to do everything we can to stand up for renewable energy’ such as wind power while protecting wildlife and habitat.
The fact that the protective measures are voluntary “speaks volumes” about how serious Salazar, Audubon and the AWEA really are about protecting wildlife. Salazar’s phony show of concern for wildlife is embarrassingly insulting. Audubon should be ashamed. The AWEA, well, the only thing they’re interested in protecting is their members’ financial interests.
Mr. Salazar, why bother? There can’t possibly be anyone who believes you’re sincere about protecting wildlife.
The AWEA approves these new guidelines? Wow, that makes me feel a whole lot better…NOT!!! No details were given so you can bet nothing will change. It must be OK to kill birds and bats because other things kill them to. Isn’t that like a naughty boy saying it was OK to break windows with rocks because other kids were doing it too? Thankfully, not all chapters of Audubon agree with the National group. “All of the above energy strategy” is not going to lower C02. There must be a hidden plan of more nukes and cleaner technology for coal burning. The Obamists should let us in on the secret and stop pandering to the windsprawlers, because wind turbines cannot replace baseload power. Stop the games. Maybe Steven Chu found a way to make energy from his “optical molasses”?
Our government really screwed up when they chose the Bald Eagle to represent our country. It seems the wild turkey would have been a better choice. The eagle no longer soars over our mountains and if one does a wind project comes in and eats the few that have been settled in the area, if you see one and watch it, your are in agony that you will witness it’s demise in the blades of the turbines, and how can you have pride in something that your own government is allowing to be killed off? How many years has it taken to bring this species back from the devastation of DDT, another man made destruction? I know it was 30+ before I saw an eagle soaring through the valley here in Woodstock. I even stopped my car to take time to watch it soar. I still feel that stir of awe and pride when I see it. I haven’t since the turbines went up. Is this just another way to condition us to loose pride in our national emblem?
I say we should petition to change the emblem to TURKEYS, it seems to fit the way our representatives deal with our country. Dem’s one flock, Repb’s another flock and Indp’s the castaways from the other flocks. Turkeys don’t fly high enough to be hit by turbine blades, they always leave a mess behind them and they wander from place to place in circles. Just about how our government is working these days. We mustn’t forget the pecking order, either. Yes, TURKEY’S SEEM TO FIT OUR GOVERNMENT QUITE FINE.