All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Jan. 7, 2020 - Skeptoid
18:18
Skeptoid #709: Wind Turbines and Birds

Wind turbines actually save many more bird lives than they destroy. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Wind Turbines and Bird Risks 00:10:12
You may have heard that wind turbines pose a singular threat to birds, chopping them up as their giant blades slice through the skies.
And it makes a certain amount of sense.
It does seem perfectly logical that such a thing would indeed be dangerous or even deadly to small flying creatures.
But it turns out the science might tell us that the true facts might seem counterintuitive.
And as a spoiler alert, even the Audubon Society, the world's largest group dedicated to the conservation of birds, advocates for wind turbines.
Wind turbines and birds is today on Skeptoid.
Hi, I'm Alex Goldman.
You may know me as the host of Reply All, but I'm done with that.
I'm doing something else now.
I've started a new podcast called Hyperfixed.
On every episode of Hyperfixed, listeners write in with their problems and I try to solve them.
Some massive and life-altering, and some so minuscule it'll boggle your mind.
No matter the problem, no matter the size, I'm here for you.
That's HyperFixed, the new podcast from Radiotopia.
Find it wherever you listen to podcasts or at hyperfixedpod.com.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Wind turbines and birds.
It's well known that birds often crash into buildings, power lines, cars, even rocks and trees, and are often injured or killed.
But many people call out wind turbines as an especial threat, with their enormous blades slicing through the sky.
At a time when half the country is calling out for renewable energy to reduce carbon emissions, and the other half searches for arguments against it, the belief that wind turbines pose an unacceptable risk to birds is gaining traction among the general public.
Today, we're going to look at the facts and see what role wind power should best play in the future of birds.
Typically, when we hear the debate over wind farms and their impact on bird populations, we assume that the two sides are represented by greedy energy companies in favor of the wind farms and environmentalists representing the side of the birds.
This is the first and biggest piece of misinformation.
It seems counterintuitive at first, but the most significant advocate for wind farms is the group you might least expect, the National Audubon Society, the world's largest and oldest non-profit environmental organization dedicated to the conservation of birds.
Just to be clear on this point that may come as a surprise to many people, their official position paper on wind power opens with this no-nonsense sentence.
Audubon strongly supports properly cited wind power as a renewable energy source that helps reduce the threats posed to birds and people by climate change.
Audubon strongly supports wind power because it reduces threats to birds.
It does not increase them.
Now, there are important qualifiers in there, namely that wind farms have to be properly sighted.
And we'll talk about all that in a moment.
Audubon's position is founded upon thorough science.
The paper continues.
Top scientific experts from around the world, including Audubon's own scientists, agree that the effects of climate change are happening now and will get worse.
Scientists have found that climate change has already affected half the world's species breeding, distribution, abundance, and survival rates.
Audubon's research shows a particularly stark threat for North American birds.
Our Birds and Climate Change report confirmed that 314 species stand to lose more than 50% of their current ranges by 2080.
Properly cited wind power is an important part of the strategy to combat climate change.
So if you're hearing that wind farms are bad for birds, you're not hearing it from the best informed bird conservationists.
You're more likely hearing it from poorly informed but well-intentioned amateur wildlife lovers, or even more likely from fossil fuel interests intent on hampering the renewable energy sector.
Wrapping opposition to renewable energy inside a superficially persuasive Trojan horse of wind turbines kill birds is a devious and effective greenwashing ploy.
Another such ploy is the promotion of conspiracy theories that the number of birds killed by wind turbines is massive but covered up by the wind industry.
You'll find all these conspiracy theories and more on websites that also promote the long-debunked wind turbine syndrome said to sicken people.
Truckers transporting turbine blades are routinely killed because they're so dangerous on the road.
The manufacture of wind turbines produces more greenhouse gases than coal and oil power plants produce.
The turbines habitually burst into flames.
Building wind farms requires the wholesale destruction of forest habitats and any other nonsense the fossil fuel interests can dream up.
The claim that they kill huge number of birds is one that resonates best with many proponents of renewable energy, so it's the one you'll hear repeated most often.
So the big question, obviously, is how many birds are getting killed.
Well this raises other questions like what types of turbines are most dangerous and at what locations do they pose the most risk.
If you've heard this discussed before you've undoubtedly heard the comparisons with other types of human activity that kill birds.
It is clear that wind turbines are responsible for about the smallest number of bird deaths among all anthropogenic causes.
This is true, even though the estimates range widely, about a full order of magnitude, for nearly all the causes studied.
The numbers I'll give are for the United States alone, as studies are almost always confined to a single nation, and the U.S. is the one for which the most data is available.
Two things are changing about wind turbines year after year.
More of them are being built, and they're getting taller.
Data shows that taller turbines clearly kill more birds than shorter ones.
And obviously, the more turbines there are, the more birds will be killed.
A third thing is also changing.
Reporting.
Wind farms are generally on private property and reporting used to be rare.
Now it's becoming commonplace, so we have better data.
Data I studied back in 2001 showed an average of two birds killed annually per wind turbine.
Today, with much better data and taller towers, that number is up to just over five.
This analysis using 2013 data counting 44,577 turbines with a range of 3.15 to 7.35 birds killed per year per turbine, with a mean of 5.25.
So with about 50,000 wind turbines averaging five birds a year apiece, that's a quarter of a million birds every year.
The U.S. Department of Energy has targeted the number of turbines to increase by a factor of six by 2050.
So we're potentially looking at about 1.4 million birds killed per year.
The biggest man-made killer of birds is the humble cat, both domestic and feral.
about 100 million of whom live in the United States, kill an estimated 2.4 billion birds each year.
That's 24 per cat, or nearly 2,000 times as many as even the DOE's ultimate 6X buildout of wind turbines.
Even collisions with building windows, which are the second biggest anthropogenic source of bird deaths, kill about 1 billion per year, many hundreds of times that of even the 6X buildout.
The simple fact is that under no outlook will wind turbines ever be a significant contributor to birds killed by anthropogenic impacts.
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding.
Together, get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
Misused Statistics on Raptors 00:06:12
However, for all of these numbers, the vast majority of birds being killed are passerines, basically songbirds, which exist in numbers large enough that no single source threatens their population.
Of greater concern are raptors, due to their smaller numbers, their longer lifespan, and their much lower reproductive rates.
Any impact to raptor populations is a significant one, from which it's much harder to recover.
And due to the difference in flight behavior between passerines and raptors, raptors are the ones most at risk from wind turbines.
Raptors, particularly California condors, bald eagles, and golden eagles, are where the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other conservation organizations focus their efforts.
In the United States, it's illegal for these birds to be killed, and wind farm operators can face steep fines when it happens.
In 2013, Duke Energy Renewables was fined $1 million, and in 2014, Pacific Corp Energy was fined $2.5 million for various violations of federal acts resulting from protected bird species killed on their wind farms.
Recognizing that it's not possible to avoid all bird deaths, permits can be issued to wind farms allowing them to legally kill a strictly limited number of protected birds, thus motivating all parties to do everything technology allows to avoid any accidents.
For example, the Alta wind farm in Tehachapi, California, located in one of the places where rare California condors are most common, is allowed to kill one single condor over its entire 30-year lifespan.
So they employ various technologies intended to protect the birds.
Most California condors are tagged, and when one approaches ALTA, its radio transmission is detected, and a shutdown signal is automatically sent to any turbines in its path, minimizing the risk of harm.
A commercially available system called IdentaFlight uses camera arrays to scan the skies looking for the flight patterns of bald and golden eagles, and when one of those is detected, a similar shutdown signal can be sent.
Other experimental systems are in various stages of development or testing.
These include radar to detect flocks of migrating birds, lights to illuminate turbine blades at night to make them more visible, thermal cameras that look for birds then attempt to identify them using artificial intelligence, optical cameras that spot raptors then produce a blaring audio signal to frighten them away, and even painting the turbine blades purple to attract fewer insects and thus attract fewer songbirds.
Many of these systems are of limited utility, but substantial investment continues flowing to improve them.
But mitigation of an existing problem can only do so much.
The best solution is prevention, and the best form of prevention is proper sighting of the wind farms.
Proper sighting means, in general terms, staying away from bird migration routes and places where threatened raptor populations live.
But there's also a lot more to it.
In 2010, the U.S. Secretary of the Interior commissioned the Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee to make these recommendations.
This committee consisted of 22 members representing major conservation groups, including the Audubon Society, government wildlife departments, government energy departments, energy industry groups, and academics.
Its 162-page recommended guidelines cover just about anything and everything you can imagine.
In short, proper sighting of wind farms minimizes the need for mitigation technologies.
The importance of proper sighting is such that in the Audubon Society's position paper, giving their strong endorsement of wind power, it's always qualified as properly sighted wind power.
We already see the impact of proper sighting by comparing the bird strike numbers of well-sighted existing wind farms to that of poorly sighted ones.
Passerine deaths can be reasonably expected to be cut in half, and some well-sighted farms have never recorded a single condor or eagle casualty.
Global warming represents by far the greatest threat to bird populations, and especially to those that are already at risk.
But it's hardly the only anthropogenic threat to birds that can be reduced by increased deployment of wind power.
Air pollution from oil and coal-fired power plants kills hundreds of thousands of people each year worldwide from lung cancer.
There are probably about 50 times as many birds as people, and birds, due to differences in their respiratory systems, are far more susceptible to pollutants, including particulates, carbon monoxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, and heavy metals.
Figures on bird deaths from this are not known, but it's probably within an order of magnitude of 10 million annually.
This is another reason the Audubon Society supports wind power.
If we replaced all the coal and oil power plants in the world with wind farms, bird deaths from human power generation would be cut by more than 90%.
Probably a lot more than 90%.
Wind turbines and birds are a perfect example of how statistics can be misused.
When we trumpet only the number of bird lives lost and say nothing about the much greater number of bird lives saved, we are being deceptive and abusing the data.
But there's no deception from our premium members like Tim Barnett, Jeff Quickfall, the paleoclimatologist pilot, Dennis Lasseter, and Heather from Vermont.
Support Skeptoid Teachers Toolkit 00:01:50
Thanks for making this show possible, especially for students worldwide.
If you're a teacher and you want an easy, private way to share Skeptoid episodes with your classroom, check out our Teachers Toolkit.
Just come to skeptoid.com slash teachers to watch a three-minute video walkthrough of the Teachers Toolkit, provided free to teachers, paid for by Skeptoid's generous premium members.
Skeptoid.com slash teachers.
You're listening to Skeptoid, a listener-supported program.
I'm Brian Dunning from skeptoid.com.
Hello, everyone.
This is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and moose.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile nonprofit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX
Export Selection