DEFINING AN INTEGRATED PLAN
FOR AVIAN-WIND POWER RESEARCH
This topic was taken up on the second and last afternoon of the meeting. First, Jan Beyea of the National Audubon Society gave a short introductory presentation suggesting some "Principles for a National Avian-Wind Power Research Plan". This was followed by a group discussion of the components of a National Research Plan. Various components that were suggested and discussed included
 |
policy and conceptual context, |
|
general research approach, |
|
site-selection and pre-construction studies, |
|
need for clear and appropriate definitions, |
|
important research categories, |
|
specific studies needed under each research category, |
|
key elements of any good scientific research project, |
|
guidelines for field surveys, and |
|
priorities associated with (a) categories of research and (b) suggested individual projects. |
Principles for a National Avian-Wind Power Research Plan
by
Jan Beyea, National Audubon Society
This presentation suggested some principles that could be useful in formulating a national plan. It is based on experience in dealing with
|
economists, |
|
critical reviews of applied research on other topics, |
|
examples of successful research plans developed for other topics, |
|
general principles of the scientific method, and |
|
principles of negotiated conflict resolution. |
Principles Related to Management
Level 4 subheadings in Jan Beyea's presentation are not coded for ToC, given how short each of the level 4 subsections is. Cost Sharing: This is appropriate for the avian-wind power issue, given the diversity of stakeholders. Also, prior to the days of cost sharing, results from many research programs in energy were not adequately used. Research that can gain partial funding from many stakeholders is more likely to be relevant to the users of the research and to encourage active interest in its conduct and application.
Portfolio of Projects: Not all stakeholders can be expected to support each individual research project. It is not reasonable to expect full advance agreement on priorities, research timing, and other research details. There should be a mechanism to allow different combinations of stakeholders to support different projects.
Adequate Management Support: A workable program will require a management structure sophisticated and large enough to assure that the research fits into a coordinated framework and is focused, adequately funded, delivered on time, and disseminated.
Clearly Stated Program Objectives: These are necessary to focus the research and provide a basis for evaluation of progress and success.
Measures of Success: Some measure of actual program performance is helpful for management in identifying the need for "mid-course corrections". Decision trees can be helpful; an example was circulated to meeting attendees before the meeting (Appendix 4).
Establishing a Research Climate
Competitive, Peer-Reviewed Research: In general, proposals tend to be better when proposals are competitive and peer-reviewed. The research also tends to be better-done when different groups try to measure the same or similar variables (possibly in different ways), and when the results are peer reviewed. Having competition in the field may at first sight seem duplicative, but the benefits of competition and replication outweigh the apparent redundancy.
Hypothesis-Based Research: Exploratory research is often valuable at an early stage of enquiry in any given field. However, once the issues are defined, hypothesis-based research improves efficiency and focus, and reduces the amount of money spent on unproductive data-gathering activities.
Who Should Sponsor or Conduct Various Kinds of Research?
Different types of research are best done by different types of groups, including environmental groups, industry, trade associations, and government. It is most appropriate for government or trade associations to sponsor and/or conduct research when single private firms do not have an incentive to do so. This generally occurs when private firms cannot capture the benefits of the research for themselves, e.g. when other companies can use the results without having paid for them.
Collaborative Research
Collaborative research is especially appropriate when research credibility is difficult to obtain. When research results have economic implications, stakeholders may question the results of research that was sponsored by stakeholders with different interests. This could occur in the case of studies Ø reviewing overlap between migration routes and wind resource areas, or Ø assessing mitigation and enhancement options.A collaborative approach toward sponsorship and management of controversial research is more likely to produce results that will be accepted by all concerned. When results are accepted, progress toward informed site selection, mitigation and enhancement can be made.
Toward a National Research Agenda
Following the above presentation, there was a wide ranging discussion of the components of a national research agenda. Many of these points had been discussed earlier in the meeting. Rather than repeat previously-discussed points, the following section refers to the relevant pages of these Proceedings.
Policy, Conceptual and Research Management Context
Some attendees believed that the first step in developing a national research framework must be to consider the policy, economic and legal situation that surrounds wind power development and the avian-wind power mortality question. They suggested that, without a broad policy-oriented conceptual plan, it is difficult to focus on specific research requirements.
Although there was considerable agreement with this, it was noted that decisions about research priorities and methods are being made on an ongoing basis because of the many wind power proposals now under active consideration in various parts of the U.S.A. Many attendees felt that it was appropriate for a technically-oriented group to do its best to address research needs at this stage, and to submit recommendations to interested stakeholders and potential funding agencies for further discussion and refinement. It was noted that questions and guidance formulated by the present technically-oriented group could be helpful in defining questions about wind power economics, policy, legalities, and risk analysis that might then be dealt with by a group with a broader representation and mandate.
There was general acceptance of the suggestion that a collaborative approach would be appropriate for management of a national research plan on avian-wind power issues. There was also general acceptance of the idea that the National Wind Coordinating Committee's Avian Workgroup may, when formed, be appropriate for at least part of this role (see "Next Steps", p. *). Some attendees suggested that the overall goal should be to devise a process, incorporating scientific research as a major element, that would allow the wind industry to develop without being stopped by the occurrence of an unacceptable number of bird deaths. In order to meet this goal, the program would need to assure that bird mortality at wind plants does not reach unacceptable levels.
General Research Approach
Many attendees felt that the general approach or framework for a national research agenda needed to be established before devoting much discussion to the merits of individual categories of research and specific proposed projects. It was agreed that, in general, scientific research was urgently needed to help resolve existing questions related to bird-wind power developments.
Many attendees were supportive of the Adaptive Research Management (ARM) concept, as outlined earlier in the meeting (p. *ff). It was noted that there is increasing industry and utility interest in constructing new wind plants in various parts of the U.S.A. (p. *). Some felt that the ARM approach provides a "golden opportunity" to conduct well-designed scientific experiments on high-priority research topics at the scale necessary to obtain meaningful results. However, it was noted that ARM would only be relevant if new or expanded wind plants are to be constructed. Several questions were raised relating to the phasing of wind plant development, and to the economics and politics of terminating a development if bird problems prove to be severe and unmitigable (p. *). Notwithstanding the need to resolve these issues, meeting attendees agreed that well-designed avian-wind power research should be done in conjunction with new wind plant developments.
Some attendees recommended that conceptual modeling of bird population processes and potential wind plant effects be used as planning tool. This might help identify the key data gaps (p. *). Other attendees expressed some doubt as to whether enough is known about bird population dynamics for this to be a useful approach in advance of specific population studies. The question warrants further consideration.
Some attendees felt that detailed studies of population dynamics could be important in specific circumstances, but that the first priority at most existing and proposed wind plants would be for systematic monitoring of bird numbers, movements, and mortality. These attendees tended to place high priority on the need for standardized survey methodologies (p. *, *).
The above approaches are not mutually exclusive. Any research program, whether site specific, regional or national, might well incorporate all of the above elements: conceptual models to help identify key data gaps, an ARM approach to the experimental testing of hypotheses, and use of standardized field methods.
There was some discussion as to whether comprehensive bird studies would need to be a part of every wind power development project:
|
One view was that there are certain areas where impacts on birds can be predicted to be low, and that it is not cost-effective or necessary to conduct detailed studies there. |
|
Another view was that, in some situations, it may be sufficient to conduct brief "snapshot" surveys during each season. |
|
Others suggested that what is now needed is rigorous testing of defined hypotheses. Studies that are opportunistic, exploratory or short-term are unlikely to provide data of a quantity or quality sufficient for hypothesis tests with adequate statistical power. From a cost-effectiveness viewpoint, if studies are to be done at all, they should be done in a rigorous fashion with sample sizes adequate to provide meaningful results. Otherwise, the money that is spent is unlikely to provide useful or convincing results. |
A related perspective is that wind power impacts on birds in other parts of the U.S.A. can be expected to be very different from those in California, where almost all U.S. studies to date have been done. Given this, there is a need to investigate the extent of "the bird problem", and the types of birds involved, in different parts of the country. Both pre- and post-construction studies would be important components of this work. Where problems are anticipated (based on pre-construction studies) or identified during post-construction monitoring, mitigation measures appropriate to those circumstances should then be developed. Attendees expressing this view suggested that it would be ineffective to expend scarce resources on development of mitigation measures for areas and species where they are not needed. However, it was noted that this approach might be assumed to imply that mortality of individual birds is not a serious concern in the absence of population effects. This assumption involves legal, ethical and other non-biological considerations, and attendees had varying views on this (p. *).
Site-Selection and Pre-Construction Studies
It was agreed unanimously that, for the foreseeable future, there should be some form of pre-development bird survey at each proposed wind plant. Some attendees suggested that, for the foreseeable future, bird studies will inevitably be done in association with any newly proposed wind plant in the U.S.A., notwithstanding any technical arguments about the need (or lack of need) for bird studies in that area.
Attendees agreed that pre-development studies should be divided into two stages, as discussed earlier by S. Gauthreaux (p. *):
|
preliminary site-selection or "resource assessment" surveys of general areas under consideration for wind plant development, and |
|
more detailed pre-construction surveys of specific sites where wind plants are proposed. |
Site-selection surveys can be based largely on previously-available literature and data, but would probably include some fieldwork. Preliminary estimates of potential bird mortality if a wind plant were constructed are desirable even at this early stage.
The more detailed pre-construction surveys should include several components. (1) They should determine the species present, their local population sizes, and their movement rates (migratory and local, day and night) through the potential envelope of risk. Measurements or estimates of all of these parameters are needed through the year (a) to predict potential impacts on birds if a wind plant is built, and (b) as a baseline against which to measure actual impact if wind plant construction goes ahead. (2) Ideally, these parameters should be measured not only on the proposed wind plant site(s), but also on at least one nearby, similar site that can serve as an undeveloped control if the wind plant is built. This type of control area is necessary for a BACI (Before-After-Control-Impact) design, which is highly desirable (p. *). (3) It would also be desirable to determine mortality rates under pre-construction conditions, but this is a difficult task. Meeting attendees were not unanimous as to whether dead-bird searches were useful or necessary during pre-construction surveys (p. *). However, data on pre-existing mortality rates, if obtainable, would be valuable for baseline purposes.
Need for Clear and Appropriate Definitions
Terms such as survival and mortality have many different definitions, and are often used in a loose and ill-defined manner. Wildlife biologists and human epidemiologists may use these terms to mean quite different things. It is important to calculate these population parameters in a manner appropriate to the question at hand. Mortality is a rate, derived by dividing the number of birds that died by a denominator representing the spatial and temporal bounds of the birds under consideration and at risk. The choice of denominator is a critical factor in determining mortality rates, and the most appropriate measure will depend on the question being asked.
In the case of wind plant-related mortality, it is important to separate deaths attributable to the wind plant from other deaths that would have occurred with or without a wind plant. This requires necropsies to determine causes of death, and/or appropriate control data against which death rates in wind plants can be compared. Many wildlife population studies assume that all animals that disappear are dead, when in fact some may have dispersed (emigrated) from the area. In a bird-wind power study, deaths must be distinguished from dispersal, and deaths must be further partitioned into those attributable to the wind plant and those that are not.
The meeting did not reach a full understanding of the most appropriate measures of mortality for the purposes at hand. This issue deserves further consideration during development of guidelines for appropriate measurement protocols (p. *).
Important Research Categories
During the second afternoon of the meeting, there was further discussion about the types of research needed, and how they should be categorized and prioritized. The important categories of research had also been discussed previously, during the first day, when a long list of possible questions was first narrowed to 14 points and then (depending on the attendees' individual preferences) to 7 or 5 points. These lists of research categories, and associated discussion, were summarized earlier (see p. *ff).
Some attendees suggested that three main research questions need to be addressed:
Does the avian mortality caused by wind plants constitute a problem, from a population, ecological, or other perspective?
If mortality is a problem, how can the impact be reduced?
If mortality is a problem, how can future wind plants be sited or designed to reduce mortality?
Item (1) is carefully worded to avoid pre-judging whether deaths of individual birds would be deemed to constitute a problem if there were no population or ecological consequences. As discussed on p. * and elsewhere, there was a spectrum of opinion among meeting attendees about the degree of concern that should be attached to individual bird deaths without population consequences.
Item (2) is also carefully worded. Most obviously, it allows for the possibility that bird mortality might be alleviated through direct mitigation measures reducing mortality, e.g. turbine design features or bird deterrent measures. However, it also allows for the possibility that impact might be reduced through some indirect mitigation or habitat enhancement effort on the wind plant or elsewhere, if this is deemed appropriate and effective.
Some attendees felt that these three general categories did not explicitly cover all necessary research. For example, prior to initiating detailed studies of avian mortality (topic 1), it might be appropriate to conduct a preliminary assessment to determine which bird populations might be at risk, and then to focus attention on those.
Some attendees felt that the research categories identified in this 3-point list are undesirably broad. They preferred to work with the previously-developed 7 or 5 point categorization schemes, as listed on p. *ff. It was agreed that, taken together, the various closely-related lists of 7, 5 or 3 research topics provide a good sense of the types of research needed.
Research Priorities
The attendees narrowed an initial list of many potential research questions first to a list of 14 questions and then to alternative lists of 7, 5 and 3 questions. Although there was no consensus as to which of the "short" lists of 3-7 questions was optimum, these lists were closely related. To that extent, priorities were identified. However, meeting attendees did not assign priorities to the various categories of research identified on those "short-lists" of 3-7 general research topics. All categories on the short-lists were identified as important.
Suggested Specific Research Projects.—Many meeting attendees submitted specific research suggestions during the meeting. Appendix 3 (p. *ff) is a summary of these research questions, compiled by Michael Morrison. Many participants wanted to discuss these specific suggestions during the meeting. However, the majority felt that it would be impossible to reach consensus on the merits of specific research proposals in the absence of a more general framework, and that it was more urgent to work toward consensus on that general framework. Therefore, the meeting did not undertake a group discussion of the specific research projects listed in Appendix 3.
Near-Term Contract Awards by DoE/NREL.—Some attendees felt that the attendees should attempt to formulate recommendations to DoE and NREL regarding the priority that should be given to various proposals that have been received by those agencies. Others did not consider this appropriate. In any event, these specific proposals were not described in any detail and were not discussed at the meeting. As noted earlier, the attendees did agree unanimously that, for the foreseeable future, there should be some form of pre-development bird survey at each proposed wind plant.
Key Elements of any Good Scientific Research
Attendees compiled the following list of key elements that should be part of any scientific research on avian-wind power issues:
|
competitive proposals, |
|
peer review of proposals and results, |
|
clearly stated objective(s), |
|
statement of hypothesis(es), |
|
experimental design appropriate to test the hypothesis(es), |
|
measurement protocols that will produce consistent data, and |
|
specified measures of success. |
Guidelines for Field Surveys
Some attendees pointed out that, as evident from the above list of key research elements, one should first define the key research questions and objectives, then determine the appropriate experimental design, and only then decide what should be measured and how the measurements should be obtained.
Others noted that systematic surveys of bird numbers, movements, and mortality will inevitably be essential components of most pre- and post-construction surveys, and will also be required for specific tests of mitigation measures. Given that studies of these types are already going on and that others are planned for the near future, there is much merit in addressing the issue of measurement protocols and standardization now.
There were differences of opinion as to the importance of standardized methods (p. *). At the least, it is essential that consistent and systematic methods be used within a given study area, and that the results be comparable among regions whether or not the specific methods used to obtain those results are identical. For example, in conducting mortality searches, it is not essential that the same search radius be employed in all studies. However, all studies should report the search radius used and the specific distances from turbines at which the birds were found. With these data, among-study comparisons would be possible even if search radii were unequal. Many attendees felt strongly that standardized methods are very desirable and would be welcomed by many researchers.
S.A. Gauthreaux, Jr., is presently preparing draft guidelines for standardized research protocols for bird-wind plant studies, under contract to the Electric Power Research Institute. These draft guidelines will take into account the experience gained by the Avian Powerline Interaction Committee (APLIC) group.
