1994 National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting Proceedings

---

INTRODUCTION

Introduction
Meeting Organizers, Facilitators, and Proceedings
Meeting participants
        Table 1. List of Attendees
Introductory Comments by Organizers
Objectives of the Meeting
Process Guidelines
        Table 2. Meeting Agenda

Wind power technology has advanced to the point that it is expected to grow rapidly and expand geographically in this decade. In recent years, bird deaths in wind power plants within the United States have become an important issue that must be addressed. This issue has a variety of dimensions, including economics, legalities, policy, and research.

The National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting was convened to concentrate on the research dimension. The organizers and sponsors consisted of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and Department of Energy (DoE), American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), National Audubon Society (NAS), Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), and Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). Collectively, these groups represent a wide range of interests and perspectives. However, they share a common belief that it would be useful and timely to convene a meeting to initiate planning for a national, coordinated program of research on the avian-wind power issue.

 

Meeting Organizers, Facilitator and Proceedings

The meeting was organized by a Management Committee consisting of representatives from DoE, EPRI, NAS and UCS, supported by a Technical Committee with representatives of NREL, NAS and EPRI. Management Committee members were Jan Beyea (NAS), Earl Davis (EPRI), Ron Loose (DoE), and Mike Tennis (UCS), assisted by meeting facilitator Abby Arnold of Resolve Inc. Technical Committee members were Robert W. Thresher and Al Miller (NREL), Michael L. Morrison (University of Arizona, for NAS), and W. John Richardson (LGL Ltd., for EPRI).

The meeting was chaired by Bob Thresher of NREL, and facilitated by Abby Arnold of Resolve Inc. Resolve specializes in environmental conflict resolution. Ms. Arnold was assisted by Tim Wohlgenant and Morrissa Young, also of Resolve. That firm also had a major role in planning the meeting logistics.

The Proceedings were compiled and edited by W. John Richardson of LGL Ltd., based on Abstracts and other materials supplied by some Technical Presenters and on notes taken at the meeting. The draft Proceedings were reviewed by the organizers, Technical Presenters and Technical Participants, and were finalized taking their comments into account.

 

Meeting Participants

In planning the meeting, the organizers identified several principles that seemed desirable:

	discussion should focus on technical rather than policy issues;
	participants should include scientists with research experience on bird-wind turbine issues and other closely related issues;
	participants should include additional scientists without previous involvement in these issues, but with good abilities to design research needed in order to address biological and environmental impact problems;
	the number of attendees should be small enough to allow effective discussion;
	because the technical and policy issues are interrelated, persons representing a wide spectrum of policy interests should be present.

It was obvious that, to accommodate a reasonable number of people from each interested group, 40 or more people would need to be invited. With that number of participants, discussion and consensus-building would be difficult. Therefore, the organizers decided to divide the meeting attendees into four categories: Technical Presenters, Technical Participants, Invited Participants, and Observers (Table 1). Appendix 1 provides full addresses and telephone and facsimile numbers for the meeting attendees.

Technical Presenters and Technical Participants included individuals, in most cases with a scientific or technical background, from the following organizations:

Ø American Wind Energy Association
Ø Edison Electric Institute
Ø Electric Power Research Institute
Ø Kenetech Windpower
Ø National Audubon Society
Ø National Biological Survey
Ø National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Ø Pacific Gas & Electric
Ø Union of Concerned Scientists
Ø U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Ø Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Representatives from these organizations were invited because of the nature and breadth of those organizations' involvement in avian interaction issues. In most cases, the invited representatives of these organizations were scientists or technical specialists with relevant technical expertise. The Technical Presenter/Technical Participant category also included several additional biologists from academic institutions and research firms, both within the United States and internationally. During the meeting, Technical Presenters and Technical Participants sat at a table. Technical Presenters gave prepared presentations, and Technical Presenters and Technical Participants led the discussion of these and other topics.

Additional individuals and group representatives were invited to attend as Invited Participants. These individuals represented utilities, firms, agencies and environmental groups. The objective was to obtain reasonable representation across the range of interested parties and geographic regions of the United States. The Invited Participants participated in the discussion of each major topic after a range of views had been presented by the Technical Presenters/Participants.

 

Table 1. List of Attendees, National Avian-Wind Power Planning Meeting

Attendee	Affiliation	Role
Amidaneau, Debbie Anderson, Dick Arapkiles, Tina Arnold, Abby Bain, Don Beyea, Jan Bouchard, David C Brower, Mike Byrne, Sheila Cade, Tom Campbell, Lennox H. Carey, Christopher Colson, Ed Curry, Dick Davies, Al Davis, Earl Davis, Holly Davis, Laura DeMeo, Ed Dunlop, John Feinstein, Art Flynn, John Fuller, Mark Gauthreaux, Sid Harmata, Alan R. Haugh, John Hock, Susan Hunt, Grainger Jamison, Van Kendall, Bill Kingsbury, Marcia D. Letto, Jay Loose, Ron Martí, Ramón Marvin, Mike Mayer, Larry Mazelis, Joel McEwen, Gail Miller, Al Mitchell, Diane Monahan, Mike Morrison, Mike Nudds, Tom Olmstead, Paul Osieck, Eduard Poulos, Pete Richardson, John Sharp, Lynn Stanley, Tom Strickland, Dale Thompson, Michael Thresher, Bob Turner, Bob Ugoretz, Steve Winkelman, Johanna Wohlgenant, Tim Young, Morrissa	NREL California Energy Commission Sierra Club RESOLVE, Inc Oregon Dept. of Energy National Audubon Society Central & South West Services Union of Concerned Scientists PG&E Boise State Raptor Center/Kenetech RSPB, Gr. Britain Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife AWEA Kenetech Windpower Zond Systems, Inc EPRI NREL NREL EPRI AWEA—Great Plains Reg. Off. Golden Gate Audubon Society, Bay Area DoE/HQ National Biol. Survey Clemson University Montana State University Bureau of Land Management NREL Univ. of Calif. Santa Cruz—PBRC Montana Natural Resources Dept USFWS—Migratory Bird Management Naval Facil. Eng. Serv. Center Audubon Regional Representative, WA DoE/HQ Sociedad Española de Ornitologia AWEA Statistical Consultant Edison Electric Institute Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife NREL Consulting Biologist Univ. of Denver U. of Arizona and National Audubon Society U. of Guelph, Canada Sacramento Mun. Utility Dist Netherlands Soc. Prot. Birds USFWS—Migratory Bird Management LGL Ltd., Canada (for EPRI) Woodward-Clyde Consultants National Biol. Survey WEST Spectrum Sciences & Software NREL National Audubon Society Wisconsin Dept. Natural Resources Dutch DLO-Inst. Forestry & Nature Manage RESOLVE, Inc RESOLVE, Inc	Observer Invited Participant Observer Facilitator Observer Technical Presenter Observer Technical Participant Technical Presenter Technical Presenter Observer Observer Technical Participant Technical Participant Invited Participant Technical Participant Observer Observer Technical Presenter Observer Invited Participant Invited Participant Technical Participant Technical Presenter Observer Invited Participant Observer Technical Participant Invited Participant Technical Participant Observer Invited Participant Invited Participant Observer Invited Participant Technical Participant Technical Participant Observer Observer Technical Participant Observer Technical Presenter Technical Presenter Observer Observer Observer Technical Participant Observer Technical Participant Observer Technical Participant Program Chair Technical Participant Technical Participant Technical Presenter Recorder Assistant to Facilitator

All other persons who expressed an interest in attending the meeting were accommodated as Observers. They, like other categories of attendees, included people from a variety of backgrounds including federal and state agencies, utilities, industry, consulting firms, universities, and environmental groups—mostly from the United States but some from Europe. Observers were encouraged to interact with other meeting participants during breaks.

 

Introductory Comments by Organizers

National Audubon Society

On behalf of the National Audubon Society (NAS), Jan Beyea noted that NAS and many local Aububon chapters are very concerned about the effects of wind turbines on birds. The primary NAS concern is the potential impacts of wind plant-related bird mortality on bird populations. However, there is also concern about any unnecessary deaths of individual birds, whether or not these bird deaths have population consequences.

National Audubon is very pleased to be involved in this collaborative effort to understand and resolve the avian-wind power issues. NAS hopes that, during this meeting, representatives of the different interests can set aside their respective policy positions and focus on technical issues. This should facilitate a process in which scientists and engineers can work together to gain the knowledge necessary to resolve the issues.

American Wind Energy Association

On behalf of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), Mike Marvin noted that participation in this meeting is an important initiative for the wind power industry, including individual companies and their trade association. This industry has for many years seen itself as providing an environmentally responsible approach to the generation of electrical energy in a renewable manner. Given these environmental benefits, the existence of even one environmental issue is a real concern to AWEA.

AWEA believes that an expanded research effort is necessary in order to address this issue. AWEA has been taking steps to encourage increased funding for avian-wind power research, and expects that there will be increases in the funding devoted to this issue by both government agencies and industry. On-going industry research permits implementation of research-based recommendations for modifications, where appropriate, in subsequent phases of wind power projects. The modular nature of wind developments provides an opportunity to assess the effects of wind plant construction and operation on the surrounding environment. It will be important to focus the expanded research effort on the most important questions. This meeting can help achieve that focus. On its own initiative, AWEA is compiling an international database listing the studies done on this topic. Mr. Marvin concluded by noting that the wind power industry began largely because of environmental concerns about other forms of energy generation. The wind power industry wants to continue operating in partnership with environmental groups.

Electric Power Research Institute

Earl Davis of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) noted that EPRI is a Research and Development organization serving most of the electric utility industry in the United States. EPRI focuses on developing, evaluating, and deploying technologies appropriate for the electrical utilities. EPRI believes that, near the end of this decade, some generating plants will need to be retired, and anticipates that there will be an increasing demand for electricity. For these reasons, EPRI believes that there will be a need for new generating facilities, and that wind power plants could be an important part of new generation. Therefore, it is important that concerns about bird fatalities at wind plants be resolved. Scientific research will be necessary to resolve the concerns. This research should be done in a well-planned and coordinated manner in order to resolve the existing issues in a comprehensive and convincing way. EPRI hopes that this collaborative meeting will make significant advances toward that objective.

Union of Concerned Scientists

On behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Mike Brower noted that UCS supports the development of wind power but also focuses on environmental concerns. UCS is involved in collaborative programs to promote wind power in the Midwest and in New England. However, UCS recognizes that there are environmental concerns associated with wind power development. These include not only the avian issues, but also concerns about the effects of road construction, tree felling, and visual impacts. UCS believes that, in addressing these issues, it is important to involve all interested parties. This has not always been done in the past. Research is needed to improve understanding and agreement concerning the most appropriate areas and methods for wind power development, and about areas that should not be developed. Without a cooperative approach, there will be a legacy of confrontation that will benefit neither industry nor the cause of environmental protection.

 

Objectives of the Meeting

The initial invitations stated that the overall goal of the meeting

"...is to define a research program that addresses wind power-related avian mortality issues. This research program should investigate both individual site impacts and national cumulative impacts.

"To reach this goal, the meeting intends to (1) identify and prioritize key issues with respect to bird-wind turbine interactions, (2) define a research agenda to resolve scientific and technical issues, while (3) insuring transferability of results, (4) avoid duplication and inadequate science, and (5) build consensus on approaches to the research needed to address the issues."

At the start of the meeting, a more specific list of meeting objectives was proposed by the meeting Chairman, Bob Thresher, and accepted by the participants:

	to help all parties understand the principal interests and concerns of one another;
	to identify and where possible prioritize the key scientific and technical questions regarding avian-wind interactions at wind power plants;
	to define and where possible prioritize research projects to address the questions identified;
	to identify research study requirements (e.g. time frame, resources and challenges associated with particular research proposals);
	if there is time, to develop consensus on a national research plan and establish priorities were possible; and
	define possible next steps.

For the purposes of this meeting, consensus was taken to mean that "all participants at the table can live with a decision being considered".

 

Process Guidelines

The Facilitator reviewed the draft Agenda circulated before the meeting (Table 2). There were no suggestions for changes. The first day of the meeting consisted largely of prepared presentations. (More detailed versions of some presentations and background materials appear in Appendix 2) The second day included additional presentations but was largely devoted to discussion.

Meeting attendees were asked to hand in, during the first day of the meeting, their suggestions concerning specific research projects. A form was provided to each attendee, requesting information about the suggested research question, research needed, research design, time frame, and estimated cost. These forms were collated by the meeting organizers and discussed on the second day. Appendix 3 summarizes these suggestions.

The Facilitator then proposed the following procedural guidelines, and they were accepted by the meeting participants:

	Honor agenda, or modify it by consensus;
	Attempt to make comments as constructive as possible;
	Attempt to be as responsive to direct questions as possible;
	Respect time for Invited Participants' comments at times identified by Facilitator;
	General good faith commitment to make this meeting as productive as possible.

 

Table 2. Meeting Agenda. The following is the draft agenda circulated before the meeting and accepted by the attendees at the start of the meeting.

---

Wednesday July 20, 1994

8:15-9:00 am I. Introduction

1. Welcome and Introductions                 Abby Arnold, RESOLVE
   - Meeting organizers introductory comments
   - Participant introductions

2. Goals, objectives, and products             Robert Thresher, NREL

3. Meeting format