Renewable energy vs. wildlife conservation - Solar, Wind and Land: Conflicts in Renewable Energy Development - page 84

when micro-siting turbines and supporting infrastructure. For example,
adjusting turbine rotor heights based on pre-construction bird density
data can allow developers to avoid placing rotors in migration routes or at
altitudes where most local birds tend to fly. The FWS or similar agencies
may also require buffer areas around geological features known to attract
raptors such as cliffs or prairie dog colonies. Or, they may impose similar
buffers of up to a mile around raptor nests or critical grouse nesting areas. 70
Incorporating certain design features into a wind energy project can
also mitigate its hazards to birds. Among other things, developers can
bury intra-project transmission lines or omit external ladders from turbine
towers so as not to create unnecessary perching areas for birds. 71 In some
cases, developers have tried painting turbine blades with colors intended
to scare off birds, or emitting sound or radar waves that dissuade birds
from approaching turbine blades . 72 Such strategies can be highly effective,
so long as they themselves do not inadvertently lead to increased habitat
fragmentation. 73
Another possible design approach is to install radar systems that notify
project operators of approaching bird flocks and allow for the slowing or
shutting down of turbines while the birds pass through the area. 74 These
sorts of technology-based solutions are particularly promising as ways to
reduce conflicts between wind farms and wildlife. As they are perfected over
time and become more commonplace, they have the potential to signifi-
cantly reduce wind farm-related animal deaths in the coming decades.
Even post-construction, wind farm operators can use several different
strategies to continue mitigating wildlife hazards associated with their
projects. For example, operators can periodically remove carcasses near
the bottoms of wind turbines to avoid attracting vultures to such areas.
Likewise, they can change the types of agricultural crops grown beneath
turbines to reduce the presence of birds that favor a specific crop. 75
Collecting dead birds from beneath turbines and tracking counts of bird
kills over time can also help wind farm operators to detect trends in bird
deaths and identify periods of the year when slowing or shutting down
turbines may be warranted.
Bird deaths and “incidental take” permits
Even when developers apply the sorts of mitigation measures described
above, some birds inevitably die from wind farms. According to a 2013
peer-reviewed study by the Wildlife Society Bulletin , wind farms kill more
than 573,000 birds every year in the United States alone, including approxi-
mately 83,000 raptors. 76 This harsh reality can raise perplexing policy
questions. If a developer of a wind farm has taken all government-mandated
precautions to mitigate hazards to birds, should the developer still be subject
to penalties when inadvertent bird deaths occur? If so, are there any circum-
stances in which developers should be excused from such liability?