Birds and Wind Farms M.Ferrer EBD-CSIC The state of the art in Spain 2017 M.Ferrer EBD-CSIC

CLIMATE CHANGE SPEED: 4-5 Km/year ACCORDING JULY ISOTHERMS BETWEN 10 AND 25 TIMES FASTER THAN IN THE LAST GLACIATION Apollo 17

We NEED renewable energies

Wind power in different countries in 2007

The effects of a wind farm on birds in a migration point: the Strait of Gibraltar Cádiz 1993

STUDY AREA SPAIN NP WF AM Atlantic Ocean Mediterranean Sea

Birds changed flight direction when crossing wind farm, increasing altitude and avoiding turbines Passerines diversity, density and breeding success was equal in and out of the wind farm Bird mortality was low in this wind farm

BEFORE-AFTER CONSTRUCTION STUDIES

No differences before-after in both bird and small mammals densities

WIND FARM IMPACT ON BIRDS

Power 0.8-2.2 MW, Height (without blades) 50-80 m 20 Wind farms, 252 Turbines Power 0.8-2.2 MW, Height (without blades) 50-80 m

High mortality rates with 337 collided birds per year, 124 of them raptors. With mean collision rate of 1.33 birds per turbine and year being one of the higher mortality records published in the world

Does mortality differ among wind farms ?

Test of SS Whole Model vs. SS Residual Multip Multipl Adjuste SS df MS F p Vulture / year 0,6355 0,4039 0,3555 44,1596 19 2,3242 65,15 232 0,2808 8,27 0,000

Mortality per turbine and year was significant different among wind farms The one with the highest mortality of griffon vultures was causing 23% of total mortality for the species, followed by another one causing 13%

Do collisions depend on raptor abundance ?

mortality of birds at the wind farm scale No relationship between density (number of birds crossing the area) and mortality of birds at the wind farm scale

Is mortality stable among years?

Univariate Tests of Significance Over-parameterized model Type III decomposition Effect SS Degr. of MS Den.Syn. F p Intercept Fixed 12,83083 1 1,0000 0,707976 18,12327 0,146879 Year Random 0,70798 22,0268 0,848024 0,83485 0,370766 month (year) 18,66778 22 0,84854 168,0000 0,426339 1,99028 0,007895 Error 71,62500 168 0,42634

Does mortality change during the year?

Does mortality differ among turbines ?

Coefficient of variation of vulture mortality: Observed vs. Expected Frequencies in griffon vultures Chi-Square = 316,3429 df = 251 p < ,003227 Friedman ANOVA and Kendall Coeff. of Concordance ANOVA Chi Sqr. (N = 251, df = 1) = 68,37052 p = 0.00000 Coeff. of Concordance = ,27239 Aver. rank r = ,26948 Average Sum of Mean Std.Dev. Vulture / year turbine 1,239044 311,0000 0,128574 0,266456 Expected 1,760956 442,0000 Coefficient of variation of vulture mortality: Among wind farms: 50% Among turbines: 150%

But: How were these high impact wind farms authorized? Didn't they conduct risk assessment studies? Did they carry them out in a wrong way?

Risk assessment studies in Spain, as in Europe and several states in USA, rely mainly on bird counts in the potential area for the new wind farm. Some other aspects are considered such distance to breeding areas of sensitive species, bat breeding or roosting sites and others. The most relevant factor for raptors is considered to be the local density in the potential area, usually measured as the number of birds crossing the whole area of the future wind farm.

Observation at risk per hour Deaths per turbine and year Wind Risk ________________________ ___________________________ Farm level Birds Vultures Raptors Birds Vultures Raptors 1 1 14.10 6.00 1.94 1.05 0.78 0.10 2 1 20.03 5.52 2.72 2.38 1.88 0.19 3 0 9.01 4.76 1.33 0.83 0.08 0.04 4 0 12.20 2.09 1.50 0.61 0.12 0.14 5 0 8.75 2.20 1.67 2.11 0.66 0.44 6 1 16.23 2.23 1.92 1.25 0.15 0.22 7 0 17.24 5.91 1.65 1.63 0.00 0.00 8 1 3.18 1.01 0.49 0.53 0.23 0.04 9 0 7.79 1.28 1.74 1.57 0.11 0.25 10 0 8.62 2.19 1.65 1.83 0.50 0.33 11 0 14.69 5.91 1.98 2.00 0.83 0.00 12 1 4.09 0.33 0.73 0.76 0.05 0.11 13 0 6.45 3.02 2.30 1.46 0.20 0.20 14 0 6.45 3.02 2.30 2.20 0.33 0.06 15 0 5.55 1.90 0.84 1.20 0.20 0.06 16 0 7.56 1.04 1.75 1.61 0.22 0.46 17 1 20.03 10.52 2.72 1.45 1.09 0.00 18 0 16.27 8.18 1.18 3.81 0.43 0.00 19 0 16.35 7.93 2.50 1.00 0.00 0.00 20 0 18.67 9.87 1.44 0.60 0.24 0.12

Observation at risk per hour Deaths per turbine and year Wind Risk ________________________ ___________________________ Farm level Birds Vultures Raptors Birds Vultures Raptors 1 1 14.10 6.00 1.94 1.05 0.78 0.10 2 1 20.03 5.52 2.72 2.38 1.88 0.19 3 0 9.01 4.76 1.33 0.83 0.08 0.04 4 0 12.20 2.09 1.50 0.61 0.12 0.14 5 0 8.75 2.20 1.67 2.11 0.66 0.44 6 1 16.23 2.23 1.92 1.25 0.15 0.22 7 0 17.24 5.91 1.65 1.63 0.00 0.00 8 1 3.18 1.01 0.49 0.53 0.23 0.04 9 0 7.79 1.28 1.74 1.57 0.11 0.25 10 0 8.62 2.19 1.65 1.83 0.50 0.33 11 0 14.69 5.91 1.98 2.00 0.83 0.00 12 1 4.09 0.33 0.73 0.76 0.05 0.11 13 0 6.45 3.02 2.30 1.46 0.20 0.20 14 0 6.45 3.02 2.30 2.20 0.33 0.06 15 0 5.55 1.90 0.84 1.20 0.20 0.06 16 0 7.56 1.04 1.75 1.61 0.22 0.46 17 1 20.03 10.52 2.72 1.45 1.09 0.00 18 0 16.27 8.18 1.18 3.81 0.43 0.00 19 0 16.35 7.93 2.50 1.00 0.00 0.00 20 0 18.67 9.87 1.44 0.60 0.24 0.12

GLM using Poisson distribution and log link function Dependent variable Birds per turbine and year df Wald P Intercept 1 0.007 0.931 Bird / hour 1 0.012 0.909 Birds at risk / hour 1 0.587 0.443 Risk level 1 0.541 0.461 Griffon vultures per turbine and year df Wald P Intercept 1 2.784 0.095 G. vulture / hour 1 0.813 0.366 G. vulture at risk / hour 1 0.204 0.650 Risk level 1 1.819 0.177 Other raptors per turbine and year df Wald P Intercept 1 1.477 0.224 Raptor / hour 1 0.140 0.707 Raptor at risk / hour 1 1.504 0.220 Risk level 1 0.536 0.464

And Now? We need to mitigate mortality caused by badly placed turbines. 2) We need to change our methods to evaluate the potential risk in new installations

And Now? We need to mitigate mortality caused by badly placed turbines. 2) We need to change our methods to evaluate the potential risk in new installations

Since 2008, we are using a selective stopping program to stop turbines when vultures were observed near. Griffon vulture mortality rate was reduced by 65% with only a reduction in total energy production of the wind farms by 0.07% per year. The use of selective stopping techniques at turbines with the highest mortality rates mitigate the impacts of wind farms on birds with a minimal affect on energy production.

And Now? We need to mitigate mortality caused by badly placed turbines. 2) We need to change our methods to evaluate the potential risk in new installations

Using Wind Tunnels to Predict Bird Mortality in Wind Farms: The Case of Griffon Vultures

N Viento Sur Viento Sureste Viento Este No statistical differences were detected between the observed flight trajectories of griffon vultures and the wind passages observed in our wind tunnel model

A significant correlation was found between dead vultures and predicted proportion of vultures crossing each turbine according to the aerodynamic model (rs = 0.840, n= 6. P= 0.036).

Simulación con ETESIO

Ensayo V-45 (400 m)

Ensayo V-45 (100 m)

Now in Spain, new regulations said that Risk Assessment Studies must be conducted at individual turbine scale and the Wind Tunnel Test would be a good tool.

Thank you for your attention