Renewable energy vs. wildlife conservation - Solar, Wind and Land: Conflicts in Renewable Energy Development - page 85

In some countries, the price tag for even unintentional bird deaths can
be incredibly high. In March of 2013, a wind farm in eastern Nevada
in the United States drew media attention because it discovered a dead
golden eagle on its project site. Even though the bird's death appeared to
have been purely accidental and the wind farm quickly turned the dead
eagle over to the FWS and reported the case, the wind farm developer
reportedly faced fines of up to $200,000 for that single bird's death. 77
And in November of the same year, a different company in the United
States agreed to pay $1 million in fines in connection with the deaths
of 14 golden eagles and other birds at two wind farms in the state of
Wyoming. 78
In spite of these examples, governments can sometimes be reluctant to
enforce bird protection laws against wind farms because they are fearful
that such enforcement could deter wind energy development. In fact,
wind energy developers can sometimes get permits that expressly protect
them from liability for unintentional bird deaths. Developers of wind
energy projects in the United States in areas where protected birds may be
threatened can apply to obtain “incidental take” permits from the federal
government. 79 These permits effectively give wind farm developers and
operators a limited license to kill protected birds. 80 The FWS only issues
incidental take permits if a laundry list of requirements are met, including
the applicant's submittal of a habitat “conservation plan.” 81 These plans
typically describe mitigation measures the developer will take to limit its
threat to protected birds. Obtaining such permits can be crucial for wind
energy developers of privately owned lands where deaths to protected birds
are likely to occur.
Not surprisingly, the very existence of such permits and of policies
aimed at promoting renewable energy at the expense of wildlife preser-
vation has inflamed some wildlife advocates. Animal rights activists
and some media organizations in the United States have criticized the
Obama administration for neglecting to prosecute dozens of eagle
deaths at wind farms over the course of Obama's presidency. 82 In
addition, the administration has drawn attention to the revision of
federal regulations to allow wind farm developers to obtain permits
to incidentally kill eagles for up to 30 years in connection with their
projects—a much longer permit period than the previous five-year
rule. 83 Because the administration has continued to prosecute eagle
deaths at oil -related facilities, it has been accused of applying a double
standard. 84 It remains an open question whether the broader benefits of
renewable energy justify this purported double standard as it relates to
wildlife protection. What does seem clear is that these sorts of debates
will only become more common as wind energy plays an ever larger role
in the global energy economy.