When it Comes to Wind Farm Bat and Bird Strikes How Many is ‘Not Many’?

by
Steve MacDonald

The Vermont Public Utilities Commission has instructed Avangrid Renewables to no longer track and report bat and bird strikes (deaths) at its 15-turbine Deerfield Wind project in Searsburg and Readsboro. Why?

“The number of carcasses found near the turbines was on the low end of similar projects in the Northeast.”

The Public Utility Commission agreed to let the company stop measuring bird and bat mortality after the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources signed off on the 5-year report.

Permitting limitations require Wind Farm Project Developers and operators to reduce the turning speed of turbines during certain hours when wildlife might be active to reduce strikes or deaths of bats or birds. But if you do that, you deliberately decrease the electricity you might produce. Given how inefficient an unpredictable so-called green energy can be, anyone tooting its horn might have some incentive to report better numbers.

Removing those restrictions would help, and while I’m not saying that’s what happened at the Deerfield Wind project, the absence of actionable data makes me think that may be precisely what happened.

What exactly is the low end for similar projects in the Northeast? We don’t know, and I went looking. Any related links to reporting at Vermont’s PUC ended with “Page not Found.” A site search of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) sites produced little related to the Deerfield Project.

I did find a draft with some details that included a section on “incidental takings.”

 

 

 

 

That’s all I found, so we do not know how many bird or bat strikes occurred or if that is low for the Northeast. If someone can figure that out, we’d be well on our way to something that looks like transparency, but not without direct inquiries or phone calls.

Shouldn’t that sort of thing be easier to access online to avoid this sort of speculation?

The PUC and ANR have signed off on allowing the wind farm to operate normally regardless of bird or bat strikes because the number of reported carcasses is low. How do we know they are not underreporting the kills or hiding evidence?

Is the PUC or ANR doing the looking and counting, and if so, can you guarantee the operators don’t have people scooping up and hiding evidence before they can find it?

And where are the rabid environmentalists, some of whom support wind energy but are equally concerned about the impacts on wildlife? They continue to object before, during, and after development, including in the local press.

 

The Burlington Free Press Oct 7, 2016 Deerfield wind destroys.

 

 

Rutland Herald Sep 20, 2016 protest Deerfield wind project.

 

Rutland Herald Jul 28 2022.

 

 

They are out there but not likely readers of these pages, concerned about the foreign involvement and initial and ongoing environmental impact.

If anyone, pro or con, can find out more, please let me know. I’m very curious about the impact and the likelihood that the facts are being hidden to favor so-called renewable energy interests. It’s not like they don’t ignore the effects of mining, manufacturing, transportation, installation, and use.

There is ample reason to think skulduggery is afoot.

 

 

Author

  • Steve MacDonald

    Steve is a long-time New Hampshire resident, blogger, and a member of the Board of directors of The 603 Alliance. He is the owner of Grok Media LLC and the Managing Editor of GraniteGrok.com, a former board member of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, and a past contributor to the Franklin Center for Public Policy.

Share to...