Wildlife and Wind Farms - Conflicts and Solutions: Onshore: Potential Effects

Preface

Wind farms are seen to be an essential component of global renewable energy policy and the action to limit the effects of climate change. There is, however, considerable concern over the effects of wind farms on wildlife especially on birds and increasingly on bats. Environmental impact assessment, which has been adopted in many countries, should, in theory, reduce any impacts to an acceptable level. Although a wide range of monitoring and research studies have been undertaken, only a small body of that work appears to make it to the peer-reviewed literature. The later is, however, burgeoning, concomitant with the interest in the interactions between wind energy and wildlife as expressed by the continuing CWW (Conference on Wind Energy and Wildlife Impacts) series of international conferences on the topic. In 2015, 391 participants from 33 countries attended CWW 2015 in Berlin. This will hopefully be exceeded at Estoril in Portugal in September 2017. It is hoped that relationships with researchers in key global producers of wind energy such as China and India, and the emerging markets in Brazil and Africa can become established. Lessons learned in mostly temperate Europe and North America need to be applied to subtropical and tropical climes. Here, in areas with higher biodiversity, it will be even more critical first to understand and then reduce and hopefully eliminate impacts upon wildlife. Even with specific knowledge of the literature and participation at CWW meetings, I came to the conclusion that it remained difficult for an interested party to judge possible effects on flora and flora and especially the prospects of ecosystem effects focusing on ecological interactions between affected habitats and their dependent species, or between species, one or more of which could be affected by wind farms. In other words, there was a clear need for a coherent overarching review of potential and actual effects of wind farms, and perhaps even more importantly, once that had been attained, how impacts could be successfully avoided or mitigated. Understanding the tools available to conduct meaningful research is also clearly fundamental to any research undertaken.

A meeting with Nigel Massen of Pelagic Publishing in Cardiff in late 2012 at the Chartered Institute of Ecology & Environmental Management Renewable Energy and Biodiversity Impacts conference (where else?) crystallised the notion of a current treatise and the opportunity to bring it to reality. Even then, the project could not have been undertaken without the financial support of ECON Ecological Consultancy Ltd expressed as my time and the administrative help of Dr Sarah Eglington in selecting and inviting many of the authors.

The industry is effectively divided into onshore and offshore disciplines that share many similarities such as potential displacement and collision of birds, but also differences such as the relative importance of noise, in the type and strength of effects upon wildlife. This provided a natural division into two compendia sharing common themes and threads within a similar framework. Each was to document current knowledge of the effects – the conflicts with wildlife – and to provide a state-of-the-science guide to the monitoring and assessment tools and the means of avoiding, minimising and mitigating potential impacts – the solutions.

The scope of coverage was to be global, although as a result of the concentration of different forms of the technology in different parts of the world, there was an inevitable bias in experience of the invited authors of the chapters within the different sections. Potential authors were carefully selected from the large number of academics and consultants now engaged in wind farm studies, for their influential contribution to the science. Fortunately, the rate of take-up was high. Many authors also proved keen to significantly extend their chapters, which resulted in the division of the two parts of the onshore compendium into two volumes; this one, Volume 1, describing the potential conflicts and Volume 2 outlining the solutions, as described above.

In this Volume 1, the concept was to cover as wide a taxonomic spread as possible starting with Vegetation and including Terrestrial invertebrates, Aquatic invertebrates and fish, Reptiles and amphibians, (non-volant) Terrestrial mammals as well as Bats and Birds; the latter two groups being the sole focus of most previous reviews. The wealth of information on birds required two chapters according to the effects: Birds – displacement and Birds – collision. As such, chapters on poorly studied groups were to outline potential as well as realised effects and possible impacts.

As well as chapters on the taxonomic groups, the scene was to be set by an introductory chapter on the Nature of wind farms, with a further chapter on Climate outlining the emerging science of climatic changes experienced as a result of the installation of onshore wind farms, which has ecological consequences. The effects of construction on the original habitats, including soils, are encompassed in the Vegetation chapter, with the Aquatic invertebrates and fish chapter outlining the hydrological consequences of the construction of some wind farms in particular localities. Otherwise, the construction of wind farms has similarities with other large-scale construction projects, the effects of which are dealt with in detail in other publications. A Synthesis of the effects and impacts upon all the taxonomic groups is also provided in a stand-alone chapter at the end of the volume. This also aimed to fill any gaps in the preceding chapters and as it was completed after all other chapters also had the benefit of incorporating more recent information published in the intervening period.

To promote coherence within and across volumes, a consistent style was adopted for all chapters, with seven sub-headings: Summary, Introduction, Scope, Themes, Concluding remarks, Acknowledgements and References. For ease of reference, the latter are reproduced after each chapter. The carefully selected sub-headings break from standard academic structure (i.e. some derivative of Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Conclusions) in order to provide flexibility for the range of chapters over the two volumes, many of which are reviews of information, whilst others provide more prescriptive recommendations or even original research. Some sub-headings require a little explanation. For example, the Summary provides a ~300-word overview of the entire chapter, whilst the Concluding remarks provide both conclusions and any recommendations in a section of generally ~500 words. The Scope sets the objectives of the chapter, and for the benefit of the reader describes what is, and what is not, included. Any methods are also incorporated therein. The Themes provide the main body of the text, generally divided into as few subheading levels as possible. Division between effects during construction and operation was generally avoided as this increased the number of sub-headings and led to unwieldy structure. Any clear differences in effects between different stages of wind farm construction and operation are incorporated into specific sub-headings.

As well as being liberally decorated with tables, figures and especially photographs, which are reproduced in colour courtesy of sponsorship by Vattenfall, most chapters also contain Boxes of information. These were designed to be provide particularly important examples of a particular point or case or suffice as an all-round exemplar and ‘stand-alone’ from the text. In some cases, these have been written by an invited author(s) with the principal that it is better to see the words from the hands of those involved than to paraphrase published studies. Boxes also provided an opportunity to widen the geographic spread of information in the chapter.

I take any deficiencies in the scope and content in this and its sister volume to be my responsibility, particularly as both closely align to my original vision, and many authors have patiently tolerated and incorporated my sometimes extensive editorial changes to initial outlines and draft manuscripts. My sincere thanks to all 23 chapter authors and 16 additional Box (case study) authors for their contributions. From my perspective, at least, there can be no satisfaction without at least a little pain. I hope the authors feel the same. I also hope that these volumes are a further step towards the sustainable development of wind farms and the ultimate goal of win–win¹ scenario for renewable energy and wildlife

Martin R. Perrow

ECON Ecological Consultancy Ltd

7 November 2016

1 Kiesecker, J.M., Evans, J.S., Fargione, J., Doherty, K., Foresman, K.R., Kunz, T.H., Naugle, D., Nibbelink, N.P. & Niemuth, N.D. (2011) Win–win for wind and wildlife: a vision to facilitate sustainable development. PLoS ONE 6: e17566.

CHAPTER 1

The nature of wind farms

GERO VELLA

Summary

This chapter discusses the technological aspects of wind power; the policy, planning and statutory requirements underpinning its deployment; and the development process from site selection through to permit award, mitigation and monitoring. While this chapter presents a global perspective, many of the examples provided have a European focus drawn from the author’s own experiences in developing wind farms in the UK. Research for the chapter was undertaken through a literature review of academic papers, government and industry reports and grey literature. The review found that policy support worldwide has led to the construction of wind farms in more than 90 countries and a contribution of around 3% to the renewable energy mix globally, but with much higher contributions in areas where there is a good wind resource. Large three-bladed horizontal-axis wind turbines continue to dominate commercial wind farms, but deployment of small to medium-sized turbines for domestic and rural applications is increasing, in addition to the use of vertical-axis wind turbines in urban locations. The focus of Environmental Impact Assessment as a key stage in the development process is discussed and the importance of robust site selection is highlighted as mitigation against potential environmental impacts.

Introduction

Since early history, humans have harnessed the power of the wind to propel boats, grind grain and pump water. When the generation of electricity became sufficient for industrial purposes at the end of the nineteenth century, the first prototypes of modern wind turbines were built using technology based on the classical windmill. Generally, these were to provide power to farms and remote locations. It was not until the oil crisis of the 1970s, with the consequential increase in the price of oil, that interest was raised in identifying ecologically and commercially viable alternative energies and wind power came into focus. For example, in the USA, the Federal Government worked with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to research and develop utility-scale wind turbines (Wind Energy Foundation 2015). Thereafter, concerns were raised over the environmental and economic threat of global warming due to a number of ‘greenhouse’ gases (GHGs). Thus, increasing atmospheric concentrations of GHGs, such as carbon dioxide and methane resulting from industrial processes, the refining and burning of fossil fuels, and intensive livestock farming, provided additional stimulus for research and development into the potential of wind power (Box 1.1).

Box 1.1 Renewable energy policy as the basis for wind farm development

A global perspective

Global warming has become the most prominent environmental issue of our time. Growing public awareness of the effects of elevated global temperatures has been driven by clear signs around the world that climate change is already happening. From the UK Stern Review in 2007 (Stern 2007) to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports (IPCC 2014), stark warnings are coming from both scientific and economic experts who think that climate change is a reality and that the consequences to the environment and our society will be significant.

However, it was the climate change research undertaken in the 1970s and 1980s that led to the development of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the Rio Convention on Climate Change and Biodiversity in 1992. Following the Rio Convention, targets were set for ratifying countries to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as defined by the Kyoto Protocol, which was adopted in 1997 and came into legal force in 2005. This protocol requires that a number of industrialised countries reduce their GHG emissions by an average of 5% below 1990 levels during the first commitment period of 2008 to 2012, with additional reduction in the second period from 2013 to 2020 (UNFCCC 2015a). The protocol has been described as a historic ‘first step’ to controlling GHG and provided a basic framework around action to combat climate change. Importantly, it has led many industrialised countries to put in place the policies and action plans needed to achieve emissions cuts. For example, the European Union (EU) has made commitments to a reduction of 20% by 2020, discussed further below, and China, the world’s biggest emitter of carbon dioxide (Oliver et al. 2012), created a National Action Plan on Climate Change in 2007.

The ‘Paris Agreement’ of the UNFCCC in December 2015 is set to have the same impact as the Kyoto Protocol, with almost 200 world leaders pledging commitments to reducing GHG emissions and holding the increase in global average temperatures to below 2ºC over pre-industrial levels (UNFCCC 2015b). These targets will be reviewed on a five-yearly basis from 2020 with an aim of achieving ‘GHG emissions neutrality’ (net zero anthropogenic GHG emissions) in the second half of the century. A move towards the use of renewable energy is therefore essential to achieving this aim. Encouragingly, the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21) reports that more than 160 countries have established renewable energy targets and support policies in place, including feed-in tariffs, tax credits, ‘green’ certificates, mandatory targets, capital cost subsidies, and support for research, development and demonstration (REN21 2015).

Wind power is an important component of the renewable energy mix. Although it only contributes about 3% to global renewables when considered alongside hydroelectric and biomass [Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) 2015b], it is a significant contributor in markets where there is a good resource. Wind power accounted for more than 50% of renewable energy generation during 2014 in the UK and provided 10% of national electricity requirements (RenewableUK 2015b). In the same year, wind power accounted for nearly 40% of Denmark’s national demand (GWEC 2015b), while cumulatively across Europe it meets just over 10% of EU electricity requirements (European Wind Energy Association 2015).

The European perspective

The EU Renewable Energy Directive (EU 2009a) is the key policy driving renewables and a move to a low-carbon economy in Europe. The directive sets a binding target of 20% final energy consumption from renewable sources by 2020. To achieve this, EU countries have committed to reaching national renewables targets set by the Directive, which are based on a number of factors, including the existing renewable energy generation in a country and its gross domestic product. These targets range from 10% in Malta to 49% in Sweden (EU 2009a). The Directive requires that EU countries prepare and adopt National Renewable Energy Action Plans outlining the actions they intend to take to meet their targets.

As a result of the Directive and the National Action Plans, REN21 reports that renewable energy projects represented 72% of new electricity generating capacity in 2013, which was the majority for the sixth consecutive year. This is in stark contrast to the situation a decade earlier, when conventional fossil fuel generation accounted for the majority of new capacity (REN21 2015).

The UK perspective

The Climate Change Act 2008 [and Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009] set the UK commitments to reducing GHG emissions and includes key policies driving wind power. The Act puts a duty on the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change to ensure that the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 80% lower than the 1990 baseline. The Act aims to enable the UK to become a low-carbon economy and gives ministers powers to introduce the measures necessary to achieve a range of GHG reduction targets. An independent Committee on Climate Change has been created under the Act to provide advice to the UK Government on these targets and related policies.

The past decade has seen unprecedented deployment of wind power worldwide driven by renewable energy targets established in more than 160 countries [Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21) 2015]. The World Wind Energy Association (WWEA 2015) reports a global installed capacity of nearly 370,000 megawatts (MW) of wind power, the majority of which is distributed across Asia, North America and Europe (Figure 1.1). At the time of writing, China is the world leader, generating over 30% of global wind power, followed by the USA, Germany, Spain and India, with emerging markets in Brazil and Africa. Furthermore, the majority of the generation is from onshore wind, with only 2.5% being generated offshore by the end of 2014 [Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) 2015a], although the huge potential for offshore wind should be noted (see Wildlife and Wind Farms: Conflicts and Solutions, Volume 2: Offshore).

Figure 1.1 (a) Global distribution of installed wind power capacity (MW) by region; (b) installed wind power capacity (MW) for the top ten countries. (GWEC 2015a)

In addition to renewables targets and incentives such as green tariffs, the GWEC and Greenpeace International (2014), together with Zindler (2015), report that in an increasing number of world markets, wind power is the lowest cost option when adding new generation capacity to the electricity grid. As a result, wind power has now firmly established itself as a mainstream option for new electrical generation. Yet despite the rapid deployment of onshore wind, there are still a number of permitting barriers. These relate to potential impacts on birds, bats and other wildlife, and social concerns such as the visual and cultural setting of wind farms and their performance and value. This has led to an application refusal rate of approximately 50% per year in the UK between 2013 and 2014 (RenewableUK 2014b; 2015b). While many of the refusals relate to concerns over impacts to local communities, wind farms do present a number of potential impacts to different wildlife taxa which may contribute to delays in permitting or refusal. In brief, key impacts during construction and decommissioning include direct and indirect impacts associated with displacement of wildlife or their prey from construction noise and activity, habitat modification from installation of the wind turbines, access roads and other infrastructure, and habitat loss resulting from, for example, the removal of hedgerows and trees. During operation, key concerns relate to the collision risk to birds and bats, or their displacement if they avoid the wind farm and its surrounding area owing to turbine operation and maintenance or visitor disturbance. Displacement can include barrier effects in which birds are deterred from using their normal routes to feeding or roosting grounds. For reviews, see Hötker et al. (2006), Arnett et al. (2007), May and Bevanger (2011), Rydell et al. (2012), Arnett and Baerwald (2013) and Gove et al. (2013).

It is predicted that wind power could reach nearly 2 million MW by 2030, equating to approximately 19% of global electricity requirements and a saving of over 3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions annually (GWEC 2014). To achieve this, there needs to be continued research and development into wind power technology, supported by global and national policies. In addition, both governments and wind farm developers need to work together to reduce continued concerns over the potential environmental and social barriers.

Scope

Three themes are discussed in this chapter:

Technological aspects of wind power

Policy, planning and statutory requirements

The development process.

The first theme will review the technology: the types of wind turbines in use and how they work. The theme focuses on three-bladed wind turbines, which are most commonly deployed in wind farms, but also considers small to medium-sized wind turbines and vertical-axis wind turbines. The second theme will consider the planning and statutory permitting requirements, focusing on those relative to considering wildlife and the environment, using the UK as a specific example. The third theme will describe the development process that wind farm companies typically undertake in identifying wind farm sites, from initial site selection through to mitigation and monitoring.

Although this chapter presents a global perspective, many of the examples provided have a European focus drawn from the author’s own experiences in developing wind farms in the UK.

Themes

The technology of wind power

Generation of electricity

Wind turbines use the kinetic energy of the wind to generate electrical energy. Traditional turbines consist of three main elements: the tower, the nacelle and, most commonly, three rotor blades. The steel tower is fixed to the ground by a concrete foundation. The nacelle, composed of glass-fibre reinforced plastic, sits at the top of the tower and is connected to the blades via the rotor hub. Both hub and blades are also typically composed of glass-fibre reinforced plastic. A rotor shaft inside the nacelle connects the hub to the generator, usually via a gearbox.

The wind blows on the angled blades of the rotor, causing the rotor shaft to rotate and convert some of the wind’s kinetic energy into mechanical energy. The generator converts this mechanical energy into electrical energy. Traditional wind turbines employ a gearbox to increase the rotational speed of the rotor shaft and, therefore, the efficiency of the generator (Figure 1.2). An anemometer on top of the nacelle monitors wind speed and direction, starting the turbine when wind speeds are sufficient, the ‘cut-in speed’, and shutting it down when wind speeds exceed its maximum operating speed. In general, turbines cut in at around 4 or 5 metres per second (m/s) and shut down at speeds exceeding 30 m/s (Boyle 2004). Additional sensors can also direct (yaw) the nacelle and rotor into the wind, and pitch (feather) the blades to control energy capture.

Figure 1.2 How a wind turbine generates electricity.

A transformer at the base of the turbine converts the electricity generated by the wind turbine at around 700 volts (V) to a more typical voltage for distribution to electrical distribution networks such as 33,000 V, which is equal to 33 kilovolts (kV). Where a turbine connects to a high-voltage distribution network, usually when the turbine is part of a wind farm, buried cables transfer the medium voltage electricity to a substation where it is converted to high voltage (132/275/400 kV). The high-voltage electrical distribution network transmits the electricity around the country. The process of electricity generation and distribution is illustrated in Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3 Electricity generation and distribution.

Turbine design

There are two main classes of wind turbine: those whose rotors spin about a horizontal axis, termed horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWTs), and vertical-axis wind turbines (VAWTs), whose rotors spin about a vertical axis (Figure 1.4). HAWTs typically have either two or three blades. Three-bladed HAWTs are operated ‘upwind’, with the blades facing into the wind. Sensors mounted above the turbine nacelle orientate the rotor with respect to the wind. The rotor speed as well as the power output can be controlled by pitching the rotor blades along their longitudinal axis. This blade pitching allows the aerodynamically engineered blades to control lift and thus power generation from the wind, but also acts as a form of protection against extreme wind conditions and overspeed through pitching to reduce lift.

Most early HAWT designs operated at fixed speeds and utilised brakes to hold the blades until a sufficient wind speed was detected. Modern HAWTs (Figure 1.5) operate at variable speeds with sensors allowing the rotor blades to match the wind speed until peak or ‘rated’ speeds are attained. This allows cost-effective energy generation at low speeds in light winds.

Figure 1.4 Classes of modern wind turbine. (Renewable Energy Systems Ltd)

Figure 1.5 An example of a horizontal-axis wind turbine at Hornberget wind farm, Sweden. (Nor-disk Vindkraft)

Figure 1.6 An example of a Darrieus-type vertical-axis wind turbine. (Gero Vella)

Although one- and two-bladed wind turbines are available, the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) notes that three-bladed designs are most commonly deployed in commercial wind farms as they are structurally efficient (or balanced), in addition to providing other benefits including lower acoustic noise emissions and visual impacts associated with the less frequent passage of only a single blade or two blades in comparison to three blades (EWEA 2004). To further improve the energy capture of commercial three-bladed HAWTs, blade aerodynamics has been a key focus of research and development.

VAWTs can be divided into two major groups: Savonius type, which use aerodynamic drag to extract power from the wind; and Darrieus type, which use lift (Figure 1.6). The advantages of VAWTs are that they can utilise winds from all directions, unlike traditional HAWTs which need to track the oncoming wind. This is an important advantage in locations where winds are turbulent, gusty and constantly changing direction, such as in towns and cities. The omnidirectional nature of electricity generation in VAWTs also provides mitigation against ‘down-time’ lost to the requirement to yaw or swivel to face the wind (Boyle 2004). In addition, the location of the gearbox and generator at the base of the turbine allows easy access and therefore generally reduces maintenance costs.

Turbine size

Modern wind turbines have shown a significant increase in size and rotor diameter since the 1970s and 1980s, leading to greater power generation. EWEA (2004) reports that in spite of repeated predictions that turbine size would level off at an optimum mid-range, the size of turbines deployed in commercial wind farms has increased year on year. From rotor blade diameters of 15–20 m in the 1980s, the commercial market is now ready to deploy turbines with rotor blade diameters greater than 125 m atop hub heights exceeding 100 m, such as the Enercon E-126 rated at 7,580 kW (Enercon 2015). Permitting applications for onshore wind farms in the UK regularly assume a turbine tip height of around 150 m for the purpose of impact assessment. Offshore, wind turbine sizes are even larger, as shown by planning permission for Creyke Beck offshore wind farm (Forewind 2013), which incorporates 10,000 kW (or larger) wind turbines with a maximum blade tip height of 313 m above sea level. For further information on the nature of offshore wind turbines, see Jameson et al, Chapter 1, Volume 3 of this series.

Table 1.1 Definitions of micro, small and medium-sized wind turbines according to RenewableUK (2010).

In parallel with the trend of increasing rotor blade length and the size of turbines, there has also been significant increase in the development and deployment of small and medium-sized wind turbines. These classes of turbine range in size from micro-turbines less than 20 m in height to medium-sized wind turbines of up to 55 m (Table 1.1). RenewableUK (2014a) commonly categorises small wind turbines as single-turbine installations, usually owned by individual homeowners or farmers for on-site electricity consumption, such as the example shown in Figure 1.7. In comparison, medium-sized wind projects are larger developments that may also supply electricity to the grid, and are often investor financed. Importantly, RenewableUK notes that despite the size differences, small and medium-sized projects are typically installed to provide on-site electricity to homes, farms and small communities. They only use the electricity grid to sell back any excess generation above their immediate energy needs. This is in contrast to large-scale wind farms that feed all their generated electricity direct to national electricity grids.

Figure 1.7 A domestic wind turbine providing power to a residential property. (Nick Bristow)

The WWEA reports that globally, 806,000 small wind turbines were in operation by 2012 (WWEA 2014), with over 25,000 small and medium-sized wind systems reported in the UK alone (RenewableUK 2015a). With inevitable advances in the manufacturing processes, the cost of these turbines is likely to decrease and one would imagine that their deployment would increase accordingly. Crucially, the small to medium-sized wind market provides the diversity of scale to allow a wider range of society to implement renewable energy options to suit their needs, thus reducing our reliance on energy from fossil fuels.

Wind farms

The term ‘wind farm’ generally refers to more than two wind turbines connected to the national electricity grid. Modern wind farms tend to comprise turbines that generate more than 1 MW, and typically 2 MW of power. As wind farms are only as productive as the wind resource that powers them, they tend to be sited at elevated and exposed locations where there are good average wind speeds and a minimum of obstacles and obstructions such as trees, hills and other buildings to affect the wind resource. Other important aspects of their siting include sufficient separation from noise-sensitive neighbours, good access to the electricity grid, good site access to transport the turbine components to the site, and an absence of special environmental or landscape designations (see The development process, below).

With policy support for renewable energy and wind power globally, the size of wind farms keeps increasing. At the time of writing, Alta Wind Energy Center (AWEC) in California, USA, is the largest single wind farm in the world. Once complete, it will have a capacity of 1,548 MW generated from up to 600 turbines (California Energy Commission 2015). Several of the world’s largest wind farms are in the USA, with others scattered across the globe in Asia, Australasia and Europe (Table 1.2). In contrast, the UK’s largest site at Whitelee near Glasgow, at 215 turbines producing 539 MW, is around a third of the size and capacity of the current world leader. It is, however, the second largest wind farm in Europe.

Table 1.2 A selection of some of the largest wind farms in the world.

Planning and statutory requirements

In the UK, a number of government policies and parliamentary acts govern the planning process for onshore wind. Key policies include the UK Government’s National Planning Policy Framework, the National Policy Statement for Renewable Energy Infrastructure, the Planning Act and the Localism Act, all of which apply to England and Wales; the Scottish Planning Policy for Renewable Energy, which applies to Scotland; and the Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland. Further requirements are set out in the individual Town and Country Planning Acts for England, Wales and Scotland.

Table 1.3 Wind farm consenting regimes in the UK.

a Permit applications for wind farm projects over 50 MW in England and Wales will be consented by the Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning Act from 2016.

The size of a proposed wind farm has a direct bearing on its planning process, with different consenting regimes for proposed wind farms of greater or less than 50 MW (Table 1.3). An important first step in the examination process for all applications is to determine whether they are in line with national, regional and local planning policies. It is therefore the duty of the applicant, invariably the wind farm developer, to ensure that the application meets all relevant policy requirements.

Since the introduction of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the USA through the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act, many industrialised counties have adopted some requirement for the consideration of potential impacts on the environment during the development phase of infrastructure projects (Table 1.4). Within the European Union (EU), this requirement is implemented through the EIA Directive (EU 2014), which requires an assessment to be carried out by the competent national authority in each member state for certain projects, such as wind farms (Box 1.1). Several other EU directives also influence the development process, such as the Habitats Directive (EU 1992) and Birds Directive (EU 2009b). These EU directives are discussed in more detail in Box 1.2.

From a developer’s perspective, the EIA process provides an opportunity to mitigate potential significant effects through the project design process. Depending on the results of the assessment, developers may be obligated to implement mitigation strategies and monitoring programmes where significant impacts are identified that cannot be mitigated through the design process and/or to validate the results of the assessment in the absence of an existing evidence base for the potential impact. The practice of actually undertaking EIA is considered further in the next subsection, The development process.

Table 1.4 Legislation implementing Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in selected industrialised countries around the world.

Box 1.2 European Union directives relevant to wind farm assessment

Membership of the European Union (EU) requires implementation of its directives into national legislation. Several of these directives, as described below, apply to the permitting of wind farms.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive

The EIA Directive (EU 2014) requires an assessment to be carried out by the competent national authority in each member state for certain projects, which may have a physical effect on the environment. The purpose of the EIA is to aid the decision-making process by providing the competent authority with a full account of the likely significant environmental effects. The directive specifies the need to consider direct and indirect impacts of a positive or negative nature on the following receptors: human beings, fauna and flora, soil, water, air, climate and the landscape, material assets and cultural heritage, and the interaction between these receptors. Furthermore, it requires consideration of potential cumulative and trans-boundary impacts between member states. This is a key directive for European developers as wind farms require mandatory EIA.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive

The SEA Directive (EU 2001c) seeks to provide a high level of protection of the environment by integrating environmental considerations into the process of preparing certain plans and programmes. The aim of the Directive is to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans and programmes by requiring that an environmental assessment is carried out of certain plans and programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment. The key difference between EIA and SEA is geographic scale: whereas EIA is undertaken at the project level, SEA requires consideration of the potential environmental impacts associated with a plan or programme of projects. As a result, the SEA must be prepared or adopted by an authority (at national, regional or local level) rather than a developer.

Habitats and Birds Directives

European nature conservation policy is based on two main pieces of legislation: the Birds Directive (EU 2009b) and the Habitats Directive (EU 1992). The later focuses on the protection of wild species and their habitats. Each member state is required to identify sites of European importance termed Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), and to put in place management plans where necessary. Under the former, member states are required to classify Special Protection Areas (SPAs), which are similar to SACs and may overlap at times.

The Habitats and Birds Directives are particularly pertinent to European wind farm developers as they are required to carry out a Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) (EU 2001a) where a plan or project (in this case a wind farm proposal) is likely to have a significant effect upon a European site, either individually or in combination with other projects. This is in addition to the EIA.

The HRA is undertaken in stages, with progression to each stage based on the findings of the previous stage. A description of each stage, based on EU (2001a), is given below:

Stage 1 – Screening: The process of identifying the likely impacts of a project upon a European site, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, and considering whether the impacts are likely to be significant. If likely significant effects cannot be discounted, Stage 2 must be undertaken.

Stage 2 – Appropriate assessment: The consideration of the impacts on the integrity of the European site, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, with regard to the site’s structure and function and its conservation objectives. Where likely significant effects are identified, an assessment of mitigation options must be carried out to determine adverse effects on the integrity of the site. If these mitigation options cannot avoid adverse effects then development consent can only be given if Stages 3 and 4 are followed.

Stage 3 – Assessment of alternatives: Examination of alternative ways of achieving the objectives of the project to establish whether there are solutions that would avoid or have a lesser effect on European sites.

Stage 4 – Imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI): Consideration of whether a development is necessary; IROPI is undertaken where no alternative solution exists and where adverse impacts remain. If it is decided that the development should be permitted for IROPI, potential compensatory measures needed to maintain the overall coherence of the site or integrity of the European site network will need to be identified. Generally, there is a requirement to ensure that the compensation works satisfactorily before construction of the development can begin.

The development process

The development process undertaken by wind farm developers encompasses initial selection studies for a potential wind farm site through to its construction, while incorporating the implementation of mitigation measures and/or monitoring programmes. The process has five key stages: site selection, pre-application, application determination, pre-construction and construction/operation (Figure 1.8).

Figure 1.8 Key stages in the development process.

Site selection

Site selection is an important stage in the development process as location plays a vital role in the performance and efficiency of a wind farm, but also allows developers to identify sites where potential effects on local communities, wildlife and landscape will be minimised. Geographic information systems (GIS) are a key tool in this process. These systems are designed to capture, store, manipulate, analyse, manage and present all types of spatial or geographical data. Generally, they comprise a base map of the area of interest into which data for relevant attributes can be incorporated.

The first stage in site selection is the identification of areas that provide a suitable wind resource. Exposed sites, coastal locations and sites at higher altitudes often provide this requirement and there are a number of resources that can assist in this processes. In the USA, the Department for Energy hosts wind resource maps that show the predicted mean wind speed across the country at 80 m with links to state-level wind maps of finer resolution (US Department of Energy 2015). The European Environment Agency (EEA) provides a similar service for Europe (EEA 2009), and wind resource maps catering for ‘small’, ‘medium’ and utility-scale wind turbines are provided by the Met Office in the UK (Met Office 2015).

The second stage applies the location of potential sites with a good wind resource against known sensitivities of the receiving environment. However, data on the required resolution to make decisions about the suitability of a site are often lacking and generally not available until the developer has undertaken expensive site-specific surveys. To mitigate this, many countries have started to produce strategic location guidance to assist developers with this process by highlighting areas of higher and lower sensitivity to provide developers with some insight into locations where development may be more acceptable. Good examples of such guidance are provided by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) for Scotland (SNH 2002) and the California guidelines for reducing impacts to birds and bats from wind energy development (California Energy Commission 2007). Sensitive areas may include those protected for their natural beauty, such as national parks, cultural importance or the habitats and species that they support. In the UK, this includes protected areas such as national nature reserves and European designations such as Special Protection Areas for birds (Box 1.2).

Development in or close to protected areas is not always precluded. However, demonstration that a proposed wind farm will not adversely impact the features and/or management objectives of a protected area will be required. As a result, developers