Damage to bird and bat populations is often mentioned in arguments against new turbine installations and in recent weeks I have picked up comments (in non-wildlife articles) which imply significant losses. For example, one comment was to the effect that a wind farm in the States had killed over 100 eagles in a few years of operation. Another passing comment said that these farms can have a catastrophic effect on bats, both from direct collisions and from organ damage due to pressure-wave effects close to the blades.
It would be very helpful and interesting to have some hard evidence.
Checking this website, I found a few papers on wind farms but they were not very informative. Most dated from the early 2000s and called for thorough and extensive research into the effect of these farms but did not mention any hard data. There was one recent survey but it only addressed displacement, not collisions.
I am sure these issues have been extensively researched in recent years and I expect that reliable data are available. Hopefully there are some members on here who can provide first-hand feedback or provide links to reputable surveys? It would also be very interesting to hear the views of anyone who has had turbines installed closeby in recent years.
I'm afraid that I'm a total wind turbine sceptic (NB not a climate change sceptic - Anyone who hasn't been able to spot for themselves that the climate is changing is either still in nappies or really needs to get outside more).
Even if global warming is being driven by cultural CO2 emissions (perhaps it is - I don't know) we could cover the entire British Isles with wind turbines at, say, 50m centres and it won't make the slightest difference to rising sea levels etc. Furthermore a good blocking anticyclone over the UK (which would last a week or more) would return us to dependency on fossil fuels straight away. So landscapes and seascapes are being industrialised for no real benefit other than to subsidy farmers.
And there's the rub, aside from the incidental bird chopping and bat bursting (it's the sudden differential air pressure caused by fast moving turbine blades that does for bats) you've turned a natural landscape, possibly valued by many many people, into an industrial one. People no longer come to see a once iconic scenic view; Tourism dwindles; B&Bs feel the pinch. Thousands of visitors trek up to Yat Rock every year and it's mainly for the amazing view over a loop in the River Wye. The Peregrines are a bonus. Plonk even a single turbine on the hillside across the river and the view is massively compromised, and the odd Goshawk career (and indeed wingspan) might well get shortened. Fewer visitors will bother to come and see just another wind turbine.
The RSPB doesn't really get landscape conservation. It never did.
The climate is changing and the landscape will change with it. We must adapt as best we can and try to make it easier for wildlife to adapt too, but coating the UK with wind turbines won't save the Snow Buntings, or Dotterels or Ptarmigans.
Every day a little more irate about bird of prey persecution, and I have a cat - Got a problem with that?
Just found this quote on the American Bird Conservancy site:
"Estimates by the federal government say that currently, about 440,000 birds are killed annually by wind farms in the U.S., nearly one bird every minute."
That brought to mind the studies referenced by the RSPB position paper which made the point that tracking kills is very difficult because the evidence is both hard to find and likely to disappear fast - foxes etc.. So the real killrate may be much higher.
By chance I found out that the RSPB has just published a paper in the Journal of Applied Ecology: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.../full.
From the synopsis it looks at the impact of 18 farms and concludes that the main concern is disturbance to habitat during construction.
Only 10 species were covered by the survey which did not include any raptors, gulls, corvids or waterfowl.
Martin Harper has today published a blog on this subject.
www.rspb.org.uk/.../default.aspx
I do find it interesting in this piece that the RSPB has lost members through its support of some wind farms and also lost members by opposing others, it can't really win.
The Cotswold Water park sightings website
My Flicker page
Bob,
I agree that they are damned if they do and if they don't.
That said, I would much prefer to get the hard facts out in the open so that people can see the full picture. We live in a science-based world and this society is strongly science-based so let's be open.
They should make public what they know about kill rates etc.. It may not be very fluffy or cuddly but every form of large-scale energy production comes with a price. We should be adult enough to face that truth.
To make my own position clear, I do not support windfarms. My view is based mainly on their technical and economic inefficiency, reinforced by the collateral damage they inflict on wildlife and scenery.
Thanks for the blog link - I will take a look.
Martin has produced another blog on the financial link between the RSPB and Energy Companies.
Oh I've only just seen this and wish I hadn't - the proposals for down here are unbelievable and the Company representatives at the 'roadshow' couldn't even answer many of the questions that locals had because they said 'they didn't know' and would have to check later! I was astonished to find that these massive offshore turbines only have a lifespan of 25 years, too, after that they have to be completely dismantled and re-built (lots more money for them) and also if it's too windy they have to be turned off or they catch fire! They want to put them 8 miles from the shore. Nothing is sacred any more, Green Belt, AONB,Heritage Coast - money v the natural world - wonder who will win :-(
Pudweena,
A new protest group has just been launched: NOW - National Opposition to Windfarms (I think!). You might want to check for useful info.
Personally I will be surprised if they last anything like 25 years although catching fire is a rare event! A batch of recent big units in the N. Sea have just had their gearboxes replaced after only a few years.
It will be key that any windfarm project has ring-fenced finance for demolition at the end of their service life. There are some very ugly pics on the web of acres of derelict turbines in the US - California and Hawai, I think.
The crux of the issue is that the project economics do not work without subsidies which are a growing burden on everyone's power bills.
Many thanks for this and I will pass on to others around here. Will have a more detailed look after my hols when hopefully my batteries will be re-charged to cope with it - have been ranting enough lately about issues here and need a break! As for the catching fire, I know it's already happened even if it is rare. I am not happy at all with RSPB taking money from these big corporations to supposedly gain favours - it will always end in tears :-( NIMBY - absolutely right for so many reasons. See, I am getting het up again, will go back to the Kestrel chicks :-)
I stumbled across this blog from the US:
blog.heritage.org/.../interior-looks-to-expand-permits-for-killing-bald-eagles-to-accommodate-wind-energy
It highlights how, over there, windfarm operators are granted licences to kill protected species which would otherwise be a criminal act.
That has set me wondering about the legal position here....