Integrating applied ecology & planning policy: the case of micro-turbines & wildlife conservation. Kirsty Park, University of Stirling

Transcription

1 Integrating applied ecology & planning policy: the case of micro-turbines & wildlife conservation Kirsty Park, University of Stirling

2 Application of Ecology Requires collaboration between scientists, policy makers & (often) industry Conflicts between economic & environmental concerns Development & promotion of renewables e.g. wind energy Renewables targets

3 Wind Energy & Wildlife Direct collision mortality Disturbance / barrier effects How to assess impact? Mortality rate very variable Siting important e.g. - Altamont Pass (raptors) - Various sites in East US (bats)

4 Small Wind Turbines: the stats Over 20,000 SWT now installed in UK micro = generation <50kW In UK, usually 6-12m hub height

5 Small Wind Turbines: different effects on wildlife?

6 Small Wind Turbines: possible impacts & mechanisms 1. Collision mortality 2. Disturbance/ Displacement Activity? Avoidance? Attraction? Mitigation Policy, planning & guidance

7 Small Wind Turbines: research questions 1. Collision rates? 2. Does small wind turbine proximity or operation affect bird and bat activity? 3. Planning process for small wind turbines wildlife considerations

8 Small Wind Turbines: where are they? Turbine owner survey Via planning system Micro-turbine website 270 completed surveys - Turbine specs - Known mortality - Potential for field sites - Location / habitat Survey respondents Red = Free standing Green = Building mounted

9 Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? May Sep sites, 7 in Scotland, 13 in England Urban to rural, e.g. Perthshire, Kielder forest, North Pennines Building-mounted (5) and free-standing (15) 6-18m hub height, m diameter

10 Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? Four consecutive days/nights, 3 sites repeated once 24h 24h 24h 24h Turbine operation experimentally alternated Habitat: distance to trees, buildings, linear features Weather: wind speed, temperature and rainfall

11 Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? Bird surveys: Vantage point (VP) method adapted from wind farm surveys Two VPs (AM and PM) each day of observation period 0-10m 10-20m Number of flights, species, direction, etc. recorded Split into two distance bands: 0-10m and 10-20m from SWT

12 Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? Bat surveys: Two bat detectors, recording continuously One ( Near ) at 1-5m, one ( Far ) at 20-25m from turbine NEAR FAR Bat activity = number of passes per hour Manually ID d to species where possible

13 Probability of a bat pass per hour Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? Turbine STOPPED Turbine RUNNING 0-5m from turbine 20-25m from turbine Wind speed (m/s)

14 Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? Summary of key findings 1. Bird activity not affected by turbine proximity or operation 2. Bat activity on average 50% lower in closer proximity to operating turbines Possible implications 1. Avoidance = lower mortality? 2. Reduces habitat availability / disrupts commuting routes = effect on populations???

15 Small Wind Turbines: displacement effects? Some caveats Species limitation: bat results mainly applicable to Pipistrelles 2. Habitat differences potentially very important 3. Quantification of mortality needed Siting recommendations 1. At least 20m from suitable bat habitat 2. The above guideline should not be applied without caution, especially where vulnerable or rare species are present

16 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Guidance for siting small wind turbines? SNH: Microrenewables & the Natural Heritage Bats: Recommendation not to install on: - buildings with bat roosts - on bat flyways e.g. hedges, woodland edge Birds: Avoid nest sites, consider SPAs Joint Agencies: Bats & Onshore Wind Turbines - buffer zone 50 m from woodland Eurobats secretariat: Guidelines.. - buffer zone 200 m from woodland

17 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Planning permission required How is guidance (or lack of it) dealt with by planning officials? Background context: A barrier to expansion? Permitted Development Rights (PDR) Scotland (2010), England (2011), Wales (2012)

18 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? (1) Examine the planning process as it relates to micro-turbines and wildlife protection - Criteria in the decision making process? - Is current guidance satisfactory? - When would an ecological survey be requested? - Attitudes towards PDR? (2) Assess the likely implications of PDR in England (& Scotland?)

19 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Planning official survey 409 questionnaires sent 22% response rate (n=90) Number of applications received very variable Rejection rate variable ~ usually < 25% + applications withdrawn because of requests for e.g. surveys

20 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Criteria in decision making process reasons for rejections (n=45) 80% Visual amenity How it fits in with landscape / how intrusive

21 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Criteria in decision making process reasons for rejections (n=45) 33% Concerns over noise

22 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Criteria in decision making process reasons for rejections (n=45) 18% Concerns over wildlife or other environmental impacts

23 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Criteria in decision making process reasons for rejections (n=45)? 13% Insufficient information about impacts (general)

24 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Criteria in decision making process reasons for rejections (n=45) 9% Telecommunications / radar / transport / MOD concerns?

25 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Criteria in decision making process reasons for rejections (n=45) 5% Shadow flicker?

26 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Is current guidance satisfactory 64% yes 36% no National guidance is vague and centred around large wind turbine applications, with nothing specific for small wind turbines Guidance on balancing the impact on Greens Belts needs to be vastly improved in order to make an informed judgement Would be useful if guidance was consolidated/clear about when and who to consult on planning applications

27 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? When would an ecological survey be requested outside a designated area? Always 4% Never 4% 34% 15% 12% Natural England request bat surveys as a matter of course now If it [the proposed turbine] was not in a Special Protected Area, Ramsar site etc then we cannot ask for one

28 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Attitudes towards PDR mixed: Great extend to commercial turbines Makes the process more complicated They either ought all to be PD or not. This current two stage process is complex and confusing. Loss of Local Authority control e.g. does not permit consideration to be given to individual circumstances. Makes no difference e.g. I don t believe that any of the turbines applied for would have met the indicated criteria for PDR.

29 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Permitted Development Rights (England) Size criteria vs. specs from turbine owner survey Height: FS not > 11.1m = 28%

30 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? Permitted Development Rights (England) Size criteria vs. specs from turbine owner survey Height: FS not > 11.1m = 28% Swept area not > 3.8m 2 (rotor diameter of ~ 2.2m) BM = 92% FS = 20%

31 Small Wind Turbines: effective planning? What have we learnt? Rejection rate generally low Visual appearance Variable info/surveys requested - Use in decision making process? - demonstrate turbine would not harm local bat population PDR bit of a red herring? Implications of National Planning Policy Framework??

32 Small Wind Turbines: Recommendations on the way forward Further research - Effects of micro-turbines on wildlife in different habitat & landscape contexts - Effects of model & design - Population level effects? Guidance required - What is an adverse effect? - Habitats to avoid / safe distances? - New information Research & guidance need to occur in parallel - Working group

33 Small Wind Turbines: more info PLOS ONE open access Collision data ~ influential habitat variables? MS in preparation. Journal of Applied Ecology

34 Small Wind Turbines: what s next? Landscape-scale effects - Surveying bats & birds at a larger scale - Influence of habitat? - Wider range of bat species? Jeroen Minderman Wildlife impacts & public attitudes to small scale turbines Cerian Tatchley - BACI surveys - Economic modelling of turbine owners - Public attitudes survey

35 Acknowledgements Co-authors: Jeroen Minderman, Alex Turner, James Pearce-Higgins (BTO), Chris Pendlebury (Natural Power), Elisa Fuentes-Montemayor Participation, discussion & data collection: Local Authority planning officials & micro-turbine owners, particularly: Scottish Borders Council, Stirling Council, Northumberland Council, Christina Campbell, Adam Fitche, Colin Galbraith, Jay Dawson, Kenny Taylor Funding: