Wind Energy and Species Protection: a Comparative Study in Germany and the U.S.

Explore the policies, concerns, and measures taken for wind energy and species protection in Germany and the U.S. through a comprehensive study analyzing regulations, case studies, and future research implications.

• Wind Energy
• Species Protection
• Germany
• United States
• Comparative Study

tola_ra Follow

Uploaded on Sep 17, 2024 | 0 Views

Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Presentation Transcript

1. Wind energy and species protection in Germany and the U.S. M.Sc. Victoria Gartman IAIA 2015 http://www.evwind.es/

2. Outline Introduction Why is this good to know? Policies & wind and the concerns Materials & Methods Steps taken! Study Area Case studies Results Comparative analysis Case studies Laws, regulations Future research How does this impact YOU? 2

3. Intro Why is this good to know? 3 main questions Mitigation hierarchy differences? Policy comparison (state, national, international)? Trans-Atlantic measures? State of research Elements of Focus Regulatory measures Wind facility logistics Species of concern Avoidance and minimization measures U.S. Wind facilities & Germany windparks 3

4. Intro Policy & Wind in U.S. & Germany Germany (EU) The U.S. BLM, USFWS, USFS, NGOs German state guidelines Species Protection EU s Annex II, IV Germany s BNatSchG United States ESA ITP Guidelines for WE Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918) Bald & Gold Eagle Protection Act (1940) National Environmental Policy Act (1969/70) EA, EIS, FONSI Endangered Species Act (1973) Section 7, 9, 10 Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Biological Opinion (BO) Incidental Take Permits (ITP) Federal & NGO guidelines EU s EIA Directive (amend. 2009) EU Habitats Directive (1992) Annexes II, IV Article 12: FCS, CEF measures EU Birds Directive (1979 amend. 2009) Natura 2000 Germany EIA Act (UVPG) (1990) BNatSchG (1976 revised 2009) 15, 31-36, 44-45 Artenschutzpr fung (ASP) German State guidelines ASP Avoidance and Minimization Within HCP and ASP Instruments & Measures Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) Biological Opinion = ITP Artenschutzpr fung (ASP) (endangered species impact assessment) Review of area/region Continued Ecological Functionality (CEF) Measures to offset impacts within 4

5. Materials & Methods Steps taken! Explanatory and Comparative Case Study Analysis (Yin 2009) Explanation Building Multiple-cases study Comparative Analysis Criteria and Conditions Literature Research Onshore wind facilities Federally and internationally endangered species of birds, mammals, insects 5 Eurasian Kestrel. Photo by: Austin Teague

6. Materials & Methods Study Area/Cases Wind Facility Alta East Wind Energy Project (CA) Windpark Locations Beech Ridge Wind Energy Project (WV) Himmelsleiter (Aachen, NRW) Buckeye Wind Power Project (OH) Bergkamp (Rosendahl, NRW) Chokecherry & Sierra Madre Wind Energy Project (WY) Holtwicker Mark (Rosendahl, NRW) Kaheawa Pastures Wind Energy Generation Facility (HI) Midlich (Rosendahl, NRW) Monarch Warren County Wind Turbine Project (IL) Pilsach W2, W3 (Bayern) Kapfenburg (Aalen, Bayern) Ocotillo Express Wind Project (CA) Riepsdorf (SH) Searchlight Wind Energy Project (NV) Unkel (Neuwied, NRW) Tule Wind Project (CA) We ling (Starnberg, Bayern) 6

7. Results Measures The U.S. Germany Micro-Siting Approximate capacity & area Maximum 3,025.2 MW, 284,677 acres (115,204 ha) Breeding/ foraging areas, U.S. Wind facilities (land optimization ) Legal Take at WF nesting, FFH, agricultural fields, singular Roosting areas, hibernacula, linear, small grouping of WT 1,153 wind turbines at nine facilities Wind Turbine Logistics 6 bird species, 3 bat species, 1 mammal species 1 reptile species, 1 insect species painting, gaps Replacement of old WT, few turbines, monopoles, Number of WT, monopoles, lighting measures Constructio n Seasonal, tree checking, existing roads, cables Seasonal, speed limits, WEAP, cables Approximate capacity & area Unknown in capacities, unknown in land area Carcass removal, limiting on-site vegetation, native vegetation, dust abatement Identified at WP locations 79 bird species, 16 bat species, 2 mammal species, 5 amphibian & reptile species, 1 insect species Vegetation: Seasonal mowing, hedges, food- poor area, re-vegetation, re-cultivation, fallow lands Pre-construction, monitoring, turn-off periods Germany windparks Surveying Pre- & Post- Monitoring, Biological Monitors (Biologists), Response Team Up to 42 wind turbines (no definite number) at nine locations ss Attractivene Food management for raptors, Luderpl tzen Plans, Programs: Condor Monitoring & Avoidance Plan, Eagle Conservation Plan, Bighorn Sheep Monitoring Program, Avian & Bat Protection Plan Additional Measures 7

8. Results, Discussion Strong federal (and international) laws pertaining to species protection Little regulation for wind facilities Guidelines, land development plans Cases Detail, documentation Illegal/legal take U.S. Incidental Take Permit Germany / EU CEF measures Availability Land energy distribution Public information U.S. Compensation Germany CEF Beech Ridge: Complete an offsite conservation project within 1st two years of receiving ITP Himmelsleiter: Bat boxes Holtwicker Mark: Veg. strips, fallow lands Midlich: Veg. strips, fallow lands Kapfenburg: Bird boxes (Baumfalken) Pilsach W2, W3: Bat boxes, fallow lands outside windpark Riepsdorf: Expand reed vegetation Unkel: Reforest. of damaged envir. Aid for Gelbbauchunke We ling: Bat boxes Recreational areas Kaheawa: Construct a release facility, $200,000 hoary bat research Ocotillo: $200,000 Bighorn sheep research, $500,000 Carrizo Marsh restoration 8

9. 9 Future research- How does this impact YOU? Are current measures working? Large collaboration, data collection over time What measures can be trans- Atlantic? Small-scale approach v. regulatory national approach Continued tax-breaks, subsidies, incentives Can private lands be comparable? Would they even be comparable at all? Would conclusions be different if Germany made similar information more available? Public information, development process Recommendations Development by Design Strategies to optimize low-impact development Current Research Transdisciplinarity Optimize ways to implement science into practice

10. Thank you for your attention! 10