Wildlife%20Considerations%20in%20Financing%20Wind%20Power

1
Wildlife Considerations in Financing Wind Power
Penny Jennings Eckert, Ph.D.
Albuquerque, New Mexico July 2007
2
Tetra Tech Experience

• Actively permitting projects in any state the
  wind is blowing!
• Many permitting and engineering projects in the
  West (including California), the Midwest, and the
  East (including New York).
• Also active in project construction (EPC)

3
Why Wildlife Issues at all?

• Collisions with turbines kill birds and bats
• Collisions with transmission lines kill birds
• Collision numbers vary geographically
• Wildlife may avoid windfarms, further reducing
  habitat available
• Installation of wind turbines and access roads
  can reduce or divide habitat
• Regulating agencies worry

4
Putting Avian Mortality in Perspective With Other
Causes
5
But the agencies still worry!
6
Birds, Bats, and BankersImportant questions

• Is permitting this project feasible?
• How long will permitting take?
• How much will permitting cost?
• What role do wildlife issues play in permitting
  feasibility?
• Will there be wildlife problems during operations?

7
It Depends!
8
Depends on.

• Is there a Federal nexus?
• What are the State permitting rules?
• Who else is watching (stakeholder groups)?
• Whos in the neighborhood (resident wildlife)?
• Who passes through and when (migratory birds and
  bats)?

9
Common Sources of Federal Nexus

• Federally managed land? (BLM, National Forest,
  Military, Indian Reservation)
• Substantial wetland or waterbody impact, either
  with project or with access and transmission? If
  yes then Army Corps of Engineers permit required.
• Cross an Interstate with a transmission line? If
  yes then FHWA involvement

10
Federal Nexus Brings.

• NEPA compliance
• Consultation with USFWS on threatened and
  endangered species
• USFWS active in protection of eagles and
  migratory birds, involved in NEPA
• USFWS recommends THREE years of avian surveys
  prior to permitting
• Section 7 consultation on TE has a timeline of
  around 6 months

11
State Permitting

• Varies drastically from state to state
• Federal-like rules in many states (e.g. CA, NY)
• NO state permitting in some states (e.g. TX)
• Intermediate permitting structures in most other
  states

12
State Permitting Brings.

• Quasi-NEPA compliance
• Involvement of state wildlife agencies
• Often USFWS-like pre-permitting survey
  requirements
• If serious concerns for TE species, may require
  a Section 10 consultation with USFWS, which has
  no set timeline and can take 1-2 years to issue a
  take permit

13
Stakeholder involvement brings

• More attention to
• preconstruction surveys
• analysis
• Mitigation
• Longer public involvement, possibly decision drag
  in agencies

14
Whos in the neighborhood, and whos passing
through?
15
Wildlife Studies

• Site-specific baseline studies geographically
  similar case histories predicted impacts
• Impacts vary by location, location, and location

16
Wildlife Studies

• Pre-construction/siting
• Initial fatal flaw analysis
• Preconstruction surveys
• During Construction
• Compliance, micrositing, habitat avoidance
• Post-construction
• Fatality monitoring
• Displacement studies

17
Wildlife Baseline Studies

• Preconstruction Surveys
• Avian use surveysresident, migrantat least 1
  year
• Raptor nesting surveys
• Habitat inventory and mapping
• Bat habitat inventory and/or risk analysis
• State Natural Heritage database/USFWS TE species
  inquiries
• Studies vary by state and geographic setting

18
Additional Baseline Studies

• Radar study of night migrants
• Focused TE species surveys where necessary
• USFWS requests a MINIMUM of two full years of
  avian studies prior to permitting (USFWS 2003)

19
Ideally.
Preconstruction Surveys
Permit Conditions, including mitigation
Permit
Construction!
20
Impact Mitigation

• Avoidance
• Minimization
• Compensation

21
Avoidance

• Site turbines, roads, or transmission lines
  somewhere else
• Setbacks
• Have biologist on site to assist with micrositing
• Do not construct while animals are present
• Operational limitations (last resort)

22
Minimization

• Reduce footprint
• Reduce need for very wide roads by assembling
  cranes near installation site
• Reduce working hours during critical periods

23
Compensation

• Expenditures on studies sometimes count
• Post-construction mortality studies
• Pre- and Post-construction habitat use and
  species presence/success studies
• Contribution to other programs involved in
  habitat restoration
• Conduct onsite restoration
• Purchase of mitigation bank credits, where
  available
• Purchase of offsite habitat for preservation
• Management of offsite habitat in perpetuity

24
Conclusions

• Cost and schedule impact of wildlife studies
  varies by federal nexus presence, state rules,
  geography
• Studies are conducted to determine risk
• Risk can be mitigated (at a price)
• USFWS and state wildlife agencies generally
  continue to work with wind proponents in
  non-enforcement roles

25
Questions?