Meeting Europe's renewable energy targets in harmony with - RSPB

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY 31 cumulative mortality takes place as a result of multiple installations (Drewitt and Langston, 2006). For example, there could be cumulative impacts on migratory species where a migratory route passes through the footprint of multiple wind farm sites. 2.3.2 AVOIDING AND MITIGATING RISKS, AND ACHIEVING BENEFITS FOR WILDLIFE Site selection All projects need robust, objective baseline studies to inform sensitive siting to minimise negative effects on birds, other wildlife and their habitats, and post construction monitoring at consented installations where there are environmental sensitivities (Langston and Pullan, 2003). There is clearly a distinction to be made between temporary effects (for example disturbance due to construction activities) and those of a more permanent nature. There is also a need to put potential impacts into context, to determine the spatial scales at which they may apply (site, local, regional, national and/or international). The weight of evidence to date indicates that locations with high bird use, especially by species of conservation concern, are not suitable for wind farm development (Langston and Pullan, 2003). Site selection is crucial to minimising collision mortality. The precautionary principle is advocated where there are concentrations of species of conservation importance that are vulnerable to aspects of wind power plants. Where at all possible, developers should avoid areas supporting the following: ● ● ● ● High densities of wintering or migratory waterfowl and waders, where important habitats might be affected by disturbance, or where there is potential for significant collision mortality. Areas with a high level of raptor activity, especially core areas of individual breeding ranges and in cases where local topography focuses flight activity, which would cause a large number of flights to pass through the wind farm. Breeding, wintering or migrating populations of less abundant species, particularly those of conservation concern, which may be sensitive to increased mortality as a result of collision or more subtle effects on survival and productivity due to displacement. Areas which have been identified as important for birds such as SPAs, SACs, IBAs, Ramsar sites, and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) should all be avoided. Environmental assessments Strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) are used by authorities in the development of spatial plans for a range of infrastructure needs, including energy installations. They provide a structured process of analysis and public consultation to integrate environmental protection considerations into plans and investment programmes, to promote sustainability. SEA is discussed in Section 4.5. Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are undertaken by developers to avoid, reduce and mitigate the impacts of projects, and their findings are taken into account in planning decisions. Potentially significant harmful effects on wild birds identified by an EIA must be addressed. If an impact can be avoided or mitigated then the assessment should identify suitable measures (Drewitt and Langston, 2006). In addition, in the event that the wind farm is consented, the assessment should include measures to compensate for any residual damage not covered by mitigation measures. If a proposed project or plan could significantly affect a Natura 2000 area, stricter “appropriate” assessment procedures and other tests apply (see Section 4.6) If there are any other projects (including non-wind energy developments) that have been developed or are being proposed in an area where significant effects on an SPA or SAC are likely, then it is required that the assessment should take into account any cumulative effects that may arise from the wind farm development in combination with these other projects (Drewitt and Langston, 2006). SEAs and EIAs require detailed ecological survey data, and often make use of models and other predictive techniques, discussed below. Modelling collision risks and estimating displacement impacts Collision risk models enable a standardised approach to be taken to the measurement of the likelihood of collisions where birds take no avoiding action. Models such as the Band model (Band et al., 2007) provide a potentially useful means of predicting the scale of collision risk attributable to wind turbines in a given location. To verify the models, they must incorporate actual (measured) avoidance rates and post-construction assessment of
32 MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGETS IN HARMONY WITH NATURE collision mortality at existing wind farms (Langston and Pullan, 2003). To be useful, the models require sufficient data on bird movements (numbers, activity, flight height and angle of approach) throughout the annual cycle and across a range of weather and light conditions (Scottish Natural Heritage, 2005; Drewitt and Langston, 2006). Assessment of bird collision risk and mortality, arising from collision and electrocution, needs to include wind turbines and associated structures, including overhead power lines transporting energy from the wind farm (Langston and Pullan, 2003). It is recognised that the actual rate of collision is likely to be under-recorded, owing to the limitations of study techniques, particularly corpse searches, so it is essential that calibration is undertaken at each site to enable correction factors to be applied to produce more realistic estimates of collision mortality. Population modelling, or “population viability analysis” (PVA), provides a means of predicting whether or not there are likely to be population level impacts arising from collision mortality (Langston and Pullan, 2003). Population models also require post-construction verification at consented wind farms in light of the observed collision rates. Spatial models may be useful for estimating displacement impacts, by testing different scenarios. The scale of displacement/effective habitat loss, together with the extent of availability and quality of other suitable habitats that can accommodate displaced birds, and the conservation status of those birds, will determine whether or not there is an adverse impact (Langston and Pullan, 2003). Few studies are conclusive in their findings, often because of a lack of well-designed studies both before and after construction of the wind farm. Furthermore, very few studies take account of differences in diurnal and nocturnal behaviour, basing assessments on daytime only, which is inadequate for those species which are active during darkness and which may behave differently at night, and could be using different areas compared with daytime (Langston and Pullan, 2003). Sensitivity mapping and location guidance Wildlife “sensitivity maps” record the locations and movements of species that are vulnerable to the impacts of specific types of infrastructure development, such as power lines or wind farms (Bright et al., 2008). They can be developed at local, regional or national scales, and can be used in a variety of ways by developers, policy makers, regulators and conservationists. They may simply provide information to developers, indicating broad areas in which ecological impacts are likely to be more or less significant. This information can be valuable to financiers and developers when weighing up the planning risks associated with specific proposals or investment plans. In several countries, and many European regions and localities, sensitivity maps have been used in official location guidance for developers, and to inform strategic spatial plans and associated SEAs. Strategic plans and guidance can then be taken into account in regulations and planning procedures. In some countries policy makers encourage developers to locate wind farms in low risk areas, by varying the level or availability of subsidies. Sensitivity mapping is one of the most valuable tools for “positive planning” for renewable energy, and is discussed in detail in Section 4.5.1. Mitigation Mitigation measures fall into two broad categories: best-practice measures, which should be adopted as an industry standard, and additional measures, which are aimed at reducing an impact specific to a particular site/development. Examples of best practice include the following measures: Ensuring that key areas of conservation importance and sensitivity, including the Natura 2000 network and IBAs, are avoided. Siting turbines close together to minimize the development footprint (subject to technical constraints). Grouping turbines to avoid alignment perpendicular to main flight paths and to provide corridors between clusters, aligned with main flight trajectories, within large wind farms. Where possible, installing transmission cables underground (subject to habitat sensitivities and in accordance with existing best practice guidelines for underground cable installation). Marking overhead cables using deflectors and avoiding use over areas of high bird concentrations, especially for species vulnerable to collision. Implementing appropriate working practices to protect sensitive habitats, for example, providing adequate briefing for site personnel and, in particularly sensitive locations, employing an on-site ecologist during construction. ● ● ● ● ● ●
Page 1 and 2: MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENERGY
Page 3 and 4: Meeting Europe’s Renewable Energy
Page 5 and 6: CHAPTER THREE THE ECOLOGICAL SUSTAI
Page 7 and 8: 6 RUNNING HEAD LOREM ISPSUM DOLOR C
Page 9 and 10: 8 MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENER
Page 11 and 12: 10 MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENE
Page 17 and 18: 16 RUNNING HEAD LOREM ISPSUM DOLOR
Page 31: 30 MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENE
Page 39: 38 MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENE
Page 42 and 43: RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND E
Page 58 and 59: Under the Renewable Energy Directiv
Page 60 and 61: THE ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY OF EU
Page 78 and 79: Harnessing the clean, renewable ene
Page 80 and 81: HOW TO ACHIEVE A EUROPEAN RENEWABLE
Page 82 and 83:
HOW TO ACHIEVE A EUROPEAN RENEWABLE
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
BOX 27 Bird sensitivity mapping in
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
This Chapter provides an evaluation
Page 106 and 107:
TABLE 4 BirdLife Partners’ evalua
Page 108 and 109:
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NATIONAL AND EU
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
REFERENCES 129 Daunt, F. (2006) Mar
Page 132 and 133:
REFERENCES 131 Lonsdale, D., Pautas
Page 134 and 135:
ENDNOTES 133 ENDNOTES i Chris Huhne
Page 136:
Birdlife European and Central Asian
show all

Meeting Europe's renewable energy targets in harmony with - RSPB

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?