Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius called on wind energy developers to hold off on projects in the Flint Hills area in order to preserve the tallgrass prairie ecosystem there. The temporary moratorium is meant to allow counties in the area time to develop local guidelines for wind energy development and to evaluate the role of wind energy development in the Flint Hills. Governor Sebelius also encouraged wind developers to move ahead on projects outside the designated area, and is expected to draw on recommendations from the Kansas Energy Council to establish a package of wind energy incentives within the state.
Read the full story at RenewableEnergyAccess.com.
The Virginia Conservation Network, a statewide coalition of over 100 conservation organizations, has issued a "white paper" calling for a General Assembly study of environmental issues related to wind development. Visit their website at http://www.vcnva.org/white_papers/2005/wind_energy.php for details.
By Jim Balow
Staff writer
This article appeared in the Charleston Gazette on October 03, 2004.
Bats and ridgetop wind turbines are a deadly combination, recent research at a Tucker County wind power site confirms.
A second round of research this summer at the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center near Thomas shows that the 44 wind turbines there killed at least as many bats as scientists found last year, said Merlin Tuttle, director of Bat Conservation International in Austin, Texas.
The 2003 study, aimed as much at birds as bats, unexpectedly found that the Mountaineer wind turbines on Backbone Mountain killed an estimated 2,092 bats.
Tuttle, not involved in that study, called the 2003 bat kill "by far the largest bat mortality event I know of worldwide and, as far as I know, the biggest mortality event of any animal." The 2004 bat kill could be even worse.
Stunned by the 2003 findings, the wind energy industry joined hands with Tuttle's group and other scientists to conduct more comprehensive research for six weeks this summer, from Aug. 1. to Sept. 11.
Although they don't expect to finish analyzing all the data they collected until year's end, Tuttle and chief researcher Ed Arnett recently posted some preliminary findings on their Web site, www.batcon.org/wind/.
Tuttle is reluctant to discuss the research at length these days. He and others plan to present their findings to the National Wind Coordinating Committee in Washington, D.C.
But he and Jessica Kerns, a biologist at the University of Maryland's Center for Environmental Science in Frostburg, shared some thoughts a few days ago with the Sunday Gazette-Mail.
As she did last year, Kerns led a team who looked for dead bats beneath the wind towers. Researchers also looked for bat carcasses this year at a smaller wind farm in Meyersdale, Pa.
Both sites are owned by FPL Energy, sister of Florida Power & Light Co. The company would not let a reporter and photographer on the Tucker County site during the study this summer, citing safety and other concerns.
Tuttle and Kerns declined to say exactly how many dead bats were found this year. "It's safe to say the mortality was no less and was probably higher than last year," Tuttle said.
"It was at least as high and it occurred at two locations and they are both forested ridgetops. We don't know any forested ridgetops with turbines in North America where we don't have a problem."
These findings suggest that any wind farm built on a forested ridgetop, such as two Grant County projects already approved by the state Public Service Commission, would be likely to kill large numbers of bats.
Those projects — Mount Storm Wind Force's 166 towers and up to 200 towers by NedPower LLC — have been on the back burner since the end of 2003 after Congress failed to renew the lucrative tax credits that make wind power economically feasible.
The findings take on new urgency, though, because both the House and Senate approved a bill on Sept. 23 to extend the credits through Dec. 31, 2005. The bill is waiting for the signature of President Bush.
"If I were an investor and wanted to keep my green image intact, I would be deeply concerned about building turbines on forested ridgetops," Tuttle said.
"The bottom-line concern is, there's just no question if we keep putting turbines on ridgetops before the solutions are known, there will continue to be bat kills.
"We hope the data we collected will lead us to possible solutions. We appreciate the cooperation from industry. I think we'll have to do even greater research next year."
In addition to simply counting dead bats this year, scientists brought an array of high-tech equipment to try to analyze why bats are flying into the giant windmills, whose blades reach up to 300 feet off the ground.
"We brought night imaging scopes, thermal imaging with infrared light and bat detectors. They detect the ultrasound of bats," Tuttle said. "We used a powerful light to spot bats. We used radar for the first time at various altitudes. This is also the first time trained retriever dogs were used to see how effective we were in finding [dead] bats."
The research was not inexpensive. "I think we spent $80,000 just to rent three thermal imaging devices." The turbines are so large researchers needed three thermal scopes to cover one turbine, he said.
An alliance of wind companies, including many of those that helped build the Mountaineer site, chipped in to fund the research.
Kerns and her team checked for dead bats every day this year; last year they searched once a week. "We started at sunrise," she said. "From Sunday to Friday we did half the turbines. On Saturdays we did all the turbines.
"It's very interesting. By being on the mountain every day, you could see how weather patterns interacted, how fast the blades were turning. It's too early to see how the weather correlated with the bat kills.
"On some mornings when the blades weren't turning, we had higher numbers. You stand underneath and say ‘Huh. Why now?' Maybe there were more insects."
To come up with an accurate estimate of dead bats, Kerns will develop a formula that accounts for bats her team couldn't find and those carried off by scavengers like crows and ravens. "We saw crows carrying off carcasses," she said.
"There are areas up there it's just impossible — ravines impossible to climb into, grass that grows up to breast height. So some areas you just couldn't search."
Tuttle, Arnett and others are trying to compare the 750 gigabytes of data and other observations collected each night with the morning counts of dead bats.
"For the first time we'll be able to correlate accurately with weather events and insect activity," Tuttle said. "This is the first time we were able to see bats strike the blades."
They've already reached a few conclusions. "We have identified key areas to focus on and are guardedly optimistic on finding solutions," he said.
"It appears at this point the largest kills may be quite predictable. There may be options that could be taken for short periods of time that might make a difference."
Peaks in bat kills seem to occur on calm, low-wind nights after the passage of storm fronts, for example.
On the other hand, "We find no evidence that bats are killed by stationary turbines," he said. In other words, it's the spinning blades.
"We also have not given up on deterrents on adjusting the sounds put off by turbines," Tuttle said. "We have just started looking at the thermal imaging tapes. The turbines put off a wide range of sounds that are audible and ultrasonic."
The wind energy industry is highly dependent on its clean, green image because wind-generated electricity costs more than other sources. People are willing to pay extra for wind power with the knowledge that it is a renewable, non-polluting form of energy.
Some environmentalists argue that wind turbines are ugly, especially when built in sensitive areas. Others worry about hazards to birds, although the industry argues far more birds are killed in other ways.
Wildlife and industry people have learned only recently about the problems wind turbines pose to bats.
"It was definitely a surprise to us," said Tom Gray, deputy director of the American Wind Energy Association, the industry's main trade group. "It was upsetting."
The AWEA helped fund the research this summer and has gathered pledges from its members for three more years of research, Gray said. "We're going to do a lot more research next year and try to determine how to minimize the impacts."
Gray said this year's study is the most thorough research of bat-wind turbine interaction ever done. "This is the first cut. Out of this will come a lot of hypotheses. Maybe insects were being attracted because of certain weather conditions. Maybe there are certain sound factors.
"What we found this year just confirms what we know. We'll just have to do more research to determine what we have to do about it."
Officials with the two pending West Virginia wind projects — NedPower and Mount Storm Wind Force — did not return calls from the Sunday Gazette-Mail.
Gray said project developers may be too busy dusting off blueprints now that extension of the federal tax credits seems imminent. To qualify for the credits, developers must have their turbines up and "spinning" by the end of next year.
"It's very good news for the industry," he said. "There's a pent-up frustration in the industry, a lot of projects in the pipeline.
"We had to raise money for this research without a lot of revenue coming in. It's impacted us in a number of ways. There were a lot of layoffs."
Project developers are well aware of the bat research and the preliminary findings, Gray said. He said Tuttle and Arnett discussed them with developers in a conference call several days ago.
"Those are permitted projects," he said of the two in West Virginia. "Companies are probably going forward with them. Those are decisions to be made by them [the developers].
"In terms of the long-term future of ridgeline turbines, I think it's too early to say. We need more research.... In terms of the green image, certainly there are those who can make that point.
"Our demand for electricity is growing. You have to get it from somewhere." Other energy sources have more environmental drawbacks than wind, he argued. "We do take this seriously," he added.
Tuttle said he's not an opponent of wind energy. "In fact, I love those big turbines. I'm fascinated, standing under them. But I'm concerned.
"When it comes to the broad public, people who love green power also love wildlife, and I think that applies to bats." Public support of wind energy could wane unless solutions are found, he said.
"I think they [people in the wind energy industry] should be concerned for their own support base," Tuttle said.
New Highland Wind, who proposes putting 20+ gigantic wind turbines on the Allegheny Front near Monterey, VA, has failed to provide information for the Environmental Assessment required for their $500,000 grant from USDA. USDA has withdrawn the grant. The developer asserted that some of the federal environmental review requirements were "totally ridiculous." Most environmentalists see them as minimalist. Celebrate this small victory!
A joint request from Rep. Rahall and Rep. Mollohan for a GAO investigation of the impacts of wind projects was issued on June 22nd.
This document is Adobe PDF format; click/right click here to view/download the full article.
Editorial from the The Charleston Gazette, Tuesday June 29th, 2004.
Environmentalists so lamented the pollution that comes from coal-fired power plants that Congress finally responded with tax incentives for other electricity generation, including the ultimate in clean -- wind power.
But wind power turns out to have a NIMBY factor -- Not In My Back Yard -- almost as great as nuclear power plants. A lot of people don't like how wind power is shaping up as a power source either.
Reps. Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., have asked the investigative arm of Congress to take a look at where the rush to wind power is going.
Good for them.
Mollohan cut right to the heart of the matter:
"Heaven knows that West Virginia has always stepped up to the plate to contribute to our nation's energy security.
"But we now have a situation where speculators are staking claim to some of our most scenic areas and erecting these monstrosities that produce little energy and are made possible only by a tax credit."
FLP Energy, based in Florida, built Mountaineer Wind Energy Center near Thomas. It has 44 windmills that generate about 66 megawatts of power, enough to power 15,000 homes.
Regulators have also approved two larger wind farms for the Allegheny Front in West Virginia. Together, these three projects would mean more than 400 windmills in one of the most beautiful parts of the state. The towers range in height from 275 to 445 feet.
Must West Virginia play host to thousands of clean, green, scenery-despoiling machines to make urban environmentalists feel better? At the cost of how many birds and bats?
Rahall points out that the area favored by wind farm developers is a flyway for hundreds of migrating species, including bald and golden eagles. An estimated 1.7 million birds pass over the Allegheny Front.
Rahall and Mollohan want the General Accounting Office to investigate windmill proposals, their potential effects on the Potomac Highlands and their potential effects on wildlife. West Virginia's congressmen also want to know who is going to regulate wind farms before development goes any further.
These are all very good questions. They need to be answered now, before West Virginia's mountains are festooned with thousands of 400-foot towers.
That would not be a victory for anything, including the environment.
June 28th, 2004: The Wabaunsee County Commissioners voted 2-1 to prohibit industrial Wind Energy Conversion Systems as a permitted use in Wabaunsee County.
This is a portion of the motion:
"...The basis of the motion is that Commercial Wind Energy Conversion Systems would not be in the best interests of the general welfare of the County as a whole. They do not conform to the intent and purpose of the Zoning Regulations. In light of the historical, existing and anticipated land uses in the County, they would adversely affect the County as a whole. They would be incompatible with the rural, agricultural, and scenic character of the County. They would not conform to the Wabaunsee County Comprehensive Plan, including the goals and objectives that were identified by the citizens of the County and incorporated as part of the Plan. They would be detrimental to property values and opportunities for agricultural and nature based tourism...."
Wabaunsee County is a classic example of a Tallgrass Prairie landscape that should be protected from industrialization. The vast majority of the people in the area recognize this and have supported this recent action by the commissioners. We congratulate Wabaunsee County, and especially Commissioners Howard & Gleason, for setting the standard for all counties in the Kansas Flint Hills region. Hopefully other counties will be wise enough to follow the example set by our friends in Wabaunsee County.
By Ken Ward Jr., Staff Writer, Sunday Gazette-Mail, Charleston, WV, June 27, 2004
Rep. Alan Mollohan has seen the huge windmill farm that lines Backbone Mountain in Tucker County, and he doesn't like it one bit. "I think it's absolutely horrible," said the West Virginia Democrat, whose 1st Congressional District includes the area.
"There is nothing more beautiful than my West Virginia hills," Mollohan said. "And I don't need windmills to re-landscape God's glory and my West Virginia hills."
Last week, Mollohan joined with Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., to seek a new investigation of windmill proposals and their potential effects on the Potomac Highlands.
Specifically, Rahall and Mollohan asked the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, to examine the impacts on migratory birds that cross public lands in several Mid-Atlantic states, including West Virginia.
But they also asked the GAO to more broadly examine how and by what federal agencies wind turbines are regulated by the federal government.
"Heaven knows that West Virginia has always stepped up to the plate to contribute to our nation's energy security," Rahall said last week. "But we now have a situation where speculators are staking claim to some of our most scenic areas and erecting these monstrosities that produce little energy and are only made possible by a tax credit.
"Meanwhile, nobody has examined the impact these facilities will have on our people and wildlife," Rahall said. "Folks go to visit places like Pocahontas County to hunt, fish, camp, canoe, hike and bike, not to stare at giant wind scrapers straddling the ridgetops," Rahall said. "When they stand at the top of Snowshoe Mountain, I think people would prefer to see the beautiful, unending vista that is there today, not a view horribly marred by a phalanx of steel-girder pinwheels."
Today, the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center's 44 windmill turbines near Thomas generate about 66 megawatts of power. That's about enough to serve 15,000 homes. The operation is owned by Florida-based FLP Energy.
In West Virginia, regulators have also approved two other much larger wind farms for the ridges along the Allegheny Front. Combined, those projects and Mountaineer would include more than 400 windmills and produce 600 megawatts of electricity.
Also along the Allegheny Front, smaller windmill farms are up and running near Somerset and Meyersdale, Pa. Numerous other projects in West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Maryland are in various planning stages.
Mollohan said that the Mountaineer facility on Backbone Mountain is "the proverbial nose under the tent."
"The issue is not a few windmills," Mollohan said in an interview last week. "It is thousands of windmills on every ridge."
In their June 22 letter to the GAO, Rahall and Mollohan said, "Development of wind energy as a renewable energy alternative in the United States has experienced tremendous growth and is only expected to accelerate in the near term.
"In practical terms, this has meant the siting and erection of numerous fields of very large towers and turbine rotors, ranging from 275 to 445 feet in height, to capture a consistent prevailing breeze," they wrote.
"Nowhere has this development been pursued more aggressively than along the ridgetops of the Allegheny Front region of the Appalachian Plateau in the states of West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania."
Mollohan said that he fears that wind power will perpetuate West Virginia's history as a natural-resource "colony" for the nation.
"Think of it in terms of the colonial economy model that West Virginia has always been on the losing side of," he said. "We have allowed ourselves to be a natural-resource colony.
"We have lots of wonderful entrepreneurs who are mining our coal and cutting our timber, and I'm all for that," Mollohan said.
"But disproportionately the owners of the companies that are harvesting those resources are from out of state, and the profits go out of state.
"Do we want to perpetuate that?" Mollohan asked.
"Do we really want to fall into repeating that model? I don't think so, but that's exactly what we are doing with those windmills."
As ranking Democrat on the House Resources Committee, Rahall is particularly concerned that this area is "a major avian flyway for hundreds of migrant bird species, including bald eagles and golden eagles."
During migration season, an estimated 1.7 million birds - nearly one for every West Virginia resident - migrate over the Allegheny Front.
"It would appear, then, that continued growth of wind energy along the Allegheny Front represents an imminent threat to literally hundreds of different migratory bird species," Rahall and Mollohan told the GAO.
In May 2003, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued "interim guidance" for avoiding and minimizing wind power's impacts on birds. The agency called for site evaluations, proper design and location of windmills, and pre- and post-construction mortality research.
Rahall and Mollohan told the GAO, "It is extremely doubtful that these voluntary measures comply with the strict liability provisions found under both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Bald Eagle Protection Act.
Christine Real de Azua, a spokeswoman for the American Wind Energy Association, said that her group "welcomes scrutiny of the impacts of wind energy and all energy sources on birds and wildlife.
"We believe that not only wind, but all energy sources, should be similarly scrutinized for their impacts, and would welcome a report by the GAO on that topic," she said.
Judy Rodd, director of the Friends of Blackwater, said that her group hopes that the GAO study leads to "some kind of consistent regulatory policy" on windmill site decisions.
"This form of energy sort of falls in a gray area and isn't really regulated," Rodd said. "It would help the wind power industry, too, because they would know what the rules are."