Enabling Renewable Energy While Protecting Wildlife: An Ecological Risk-Based Approach to Wind Energy Development Using Ecosystem-Based Management Values

Abstract

Acceptance of wind energy development is challenged by stakeholders’ concerns about potential effects on the environment, specifically on wildlife, such as birds, bats, and (for offshore wind) marine animals, and the habitats that support them. Communities near wind energy developments are also concerned with social and economic impacts, as well as impacts on aesthetics, historical sites, and recreation and tourism. Lack of a systematic, widely accepted, and balanced approach for measuring the potential damage to wildlife, habitats, and communities continues to leave wind developers, regulators, and other stakeholders in an uncertain position. This paper explores ecological risk-based management (RBM) in wind energy development for land-based and offshore wind installations. This paper provides a framework for the adaptation of ecosystem-based management to wind energy development and examines that framework through a series of case studies and best management practices for applying risk-based principles to wind energy. Ten case studies indicate that wind farm monitoring is often driven by regulatory requirements that may not be underpinned by scientific questions. While each case applies principles of adaptive management, there is room for improvement in applying scientific principles to the data collection and analysis. Challenges and constraints for wind farm development to meet RBM framework criteria include collecting sufficient baseline and monitoring data year-round, engaging stakeholder facilitators, and bringing together large and diverse scientific teams. The RBM framework approach may provide insights for improved siting and consenting/permitting processes for regulators and their advisors, particularly in those nations where wind energy is still in the early development stages on land or at sea.

Joint responsibility in the development of effective wind-turbine collision-reducing solutions

“…Regulatory consenting practice are usually based on impact assessments, however, often lack requirements for mitigating allowed impacts (Tallis et al, 2015;Copping et al, 2020). Failing to fully address environmental impacts is an important cause of conflict in wind energy proposals (Tinker et al, 2005;Inderberg et al, 2020;Vuichard et al, 2022).…”

“…Also, such impacts are also often considered to be "local costs" (Inderberg et al, 2020). To avert this, potential impacts should be considered by developers by evoking the polluter-pays and precautionary principles to prevent harm to the environment (Stabell and Steel, 2018), and encompassed into consenting practice (Tinker et al, 2005;Copping et al, 2020). Still, mitigating wildlife impacts is a shared responsibility, since society desires more renewable energy ("beneficiary of development") as well as a resilient natural environment ("beneficiary of mitigation") (May 2019).…”

The Role of State in Managing the Wind Energy Projects: Risk Assessment and Justification of the Economic Efficiency

“…Their selection is due to the experience accumulated to date in risk management in renewable energy projects. For example, the influence of political risks on the implementation of renewable energy projects is studied in [40][41][42][43][44][45], environmental risks in [44,[46][47][48][49][50], and economic risks in [51][52][53][54][55][56]. The general methodology of our study is presented in the form of the block diagram depicted in Figure 1, which follows.…”

Socio‐economic, legal, and political context of offshore renewable energies

“…97 97 In this sense, Wright et al (2016) understand that most national EIA legal regimes are not adapted to properly manage scientific uncertainty and, for this connection, these authors defend the idea that regulators must strike the right balance between precaution and risk management. In the same vein, regarding offshore (and onshore) wind farms Copping, Gorton, et al (2020) note how the uncertainty and the lack of available data on the impacts during the construction and operation of these facilities often leads regulators to approach consenting and environmental assessment processes conservatively, rigidly applying the precautionary principle. …”