Image via Wikipedia
Recent Study Suggests That Wind Farms Could Be Harmful to Wildlife by Jamie Green
A leading conservation agency has recently completed a study that has found significant threat to a Montana wildlife habitat from the proposed construction of wind farms. The Montana Nature Conservancy has spent a great deal of effort in compiling the study, taking care to find an alternative location for the wind farms that would offer equivalent energy production with less impact of wildlife.
The state of Montana is in the process of greatly increasing their amount of generated wind power, and the legislature is currently dealing with a number of proposals encouraging the develop of more wind farms on both state and private land. The Conservancy proposes that the farms be moved to agricultural land, which has high winds and less wildlife. Because the land is already cleared, there would be no significant cost differences incurred by the state.
The threats to wildlife from the wind farm are two fold. Many species such as sage grouse and grizzly bears avoid roads, and wind farms contain a large number of roads and trails. In addition, the spinning blades pose a threat to flying animals, such as birds and bats. The Conservancy and the Montana Audubon have performed their own research to come up with areas of the state where the wind turbines would pose the lowest threat to local wildlife.
Much to the chagrin of the Montana Conservancy and Montana Audubon, the state recently OK'd a bill that eliminates the need for an environmental review before constructing a wind farm as long as less than one third of the land used is owned by the state. Supporters encourage the bill by noting that the revenue from wind generation would be used for schools, but the Audubon states worry that the state will use less than thirty-three percent of state land in all future wind farms to avoid environmental review. This would allow the state to erect wind farms in many areas with heavy wildlife, posing a significant threat.
The basis of the complaint made by the Montana Audubon is viable, as no wind farm in Montana has been built utilizing more than the 33% threshold of state land, which means that under the new regulations, there would be no environmental reviews of wind farms in the state. Because the farms utilize such vast road networks, the danger to the wildlife population could be significant, depending on the location chosen. Because both the Audubon and the Conservancy have offered wildlife friendly high-wind alternative locations, the groups feel they have significant reason to fight the new bill and the lack of regulation.
It is important to note that neither agency is in opposition to wind turbines or wind farms, but that both are simply proposing a new location and sharper regulations. Wind farms are a sustainable and environmentally friendly source of renewable energy, and a necessity in reducing U.S. dependence on fossil fuels. By allowing regulations and the proposed move to agricultural land, the state can reap the benefits of harnessing the power of the wind while avoiding the environmental impact that comes with endangering the local wildlife.
Renewable Energy Today is devoted to providing individuals with up-to-date information and resources on renewable energy and sustainability. Through articles, videos and other content, you can learn how to implement renewable energy in your home as well as what the government is doing to help the environment.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Jamie_Green
http://EzineArticles.com/?Recent-Study-Suggests-That-Wind-Farms-Could-Be-Harmful-to-Wildlife&id=2070972
http://thezeitgeistischanging.blogspot.com/
http://psychedelichippiemusic.blogspot.com/
http://psychedelichippiefashion.blogspot.com/
http://www.soul-flower.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=SFNT&Store_Code=SOS&AFFIL=Robert_Muller
There are drawbacks to every energy source. Period.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s funny that people are starting to hammer on wind, now that it’s becoming more viable. Wait for it to gain a better toehold on the industry, and its competitors will find creative ways to discredit it without us ever knowing it.
Fossil fuel has deep pockets and decades of experience at manipulating public opinion so that we never even see their influence. For some reason no one seems to remember how bad fossil fuels are as they criticize alternative energy options.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t look at potential downsides to new fuels. That is, of course, important. But I fear public opinion about wind, solar, etc. will take a dive once these options become a real threat to the status quo, just like what has happened to ethanol. There’s a wealth of current research out there showing that ethanol (yes, even ethanol from corn) is a valuable fuel, but those reports never get the bright media spotlight. There are forces at work that will keep us reliant on fossil fuels for decades.