Wind Turbine Design and Operation: How to Mitigate Impacts

New England Wind Energy Education Project Conference & Workshop

Marlborough, Massachusetts, June 7, 2011
Presented by: Benjamin Bell
Technical by nature
GL GH offices in 38 locations - 23 countries
Countries with GL Garrad Hassan presence
Countries with newly established GL Garrad Hassan presence
Staff Americas: ~150 Staff Europe: ~460 Staff Asia/AU/NZ: ~70
Beijing, CN
Tokyo, JP
Shanghai, CN
Mumbai, IN
Bangalore, IN
Newcastle, AU
Melbourne, AU
Wellington, NZ
Vancouver, BC
Ottawa, ON
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
Montreal, QC
Peterborough, NH
Austin, TX
Monterrey, MX
Santiago, CL
Porto Alegre, BR
Heerenveen, NL
Sint Maarten
Kaiser-Wilhelm-Koog, DE
Glasgow
Bristol, UK
Slough
London
Dublin, IR
Paris, FR
Izmir, TK
Copenhagen, DK
Hinnerup
Oldenburg, DE
Hamburg
Poland
Lisbon, PT
Barcelona, ES
Zaragoza
Madrid
Imola, IT
Cairo, EG
A US Historical perspective and design evolution
B
Design to minimize impacts
C
Key factors to consider during development and operation
Contents
First decade of wind
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Year
C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

I
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d

C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

(
M
W
)
Rest of World
Europe
United States
Foreign Companies
Vestas
Nordtank
Bonus
Micon
Windmatic
Howden
WEG
Aeroman
Nedwind
Mitsubishi
US Companies
US Windpower (KENETECH)
Flowind
ESI
Fayette
Enertech
Carter
Jacobs
Dynergy
UTRC
U.S Discontinues
Renewable Energy
Incentives in 1985
Period of Irrational
Exuberance
(Source: Walt Musial NREL)
Turbines deployed in the 1980s
US installed wind power capacity in 1999
(Source: www.windpoweringamerica.gov)
A US Historical perspective and design evolution
B
Design to minimize impacts
C
Key factors to consider during the build and operation
Contents
Tube or lattice towers?
Upwind or downwind rotors?
Horizontal- or vertical-axis rotors?
How many blades?
Small or large rotors?
Wind turbine design evolution size and rating
1982, 18 m dia., 100 kW 2008, 126 m dia. , 7.5 MW
Big blades
but not the biggest.
GL GH Offices
US installed wind power capacity 2010
(Source: www.windpoweringamerica.gov)
Boeing 747
Already the worlds biggest rotating machines
3.6 MW
Source Siemens Wind Power
10
8
cycles
2.3 MW
A US Historical perspective and design evolution
B
Design to minimize impacts
C
Key factors to consider during development and operation
Contents
Environmental review and permitting
Review of endangered species
Avian and bat studies
Visual aesthetic studies
Flicker studies
Historical and archeological review
Wetlands review
Noise studies
(Source: Siemens Wind Power)
Mitigating impacts
Design:
Proper siting
Upwind versus downwind
Number of blades
Tip speed and design
Tubular versus lattice towers
Non reflective coatings
Audio visual warning systems
Operation:
Lighting systems
Dusk/dawn idling a case study
Mitigating impact on wildlife
According to current studies:
3 bat species account for a majority of mortalities at wind farms:
Hoary Bat Eastern Red Bat Silver-haired Bat
All three bats are migratory
None of the species are currently classified as threatened or endangered
Bat fatalities peak during the late summer and early fall migration
Similar, but smaller peak during spring migration period
Exact reason behind why and when bats collide with turbines is unknown
Project development and permitting
Threatened and Endangered bats can pose a permitting risk to project development
Endangered Species Act
State Wildlife Laws
Comprehensive Permit Application - State
Take of any bat species can create a large PR problem
Prior to permitting significant studies must take place
Can last several nights to several months
Cost ranges from $50k to $100k+
Current technology can not always decipher
beyond genus
Poses large problem in understanding what
impacts will be to protected species
Likely that if bats do occur on project site,
state wildlife agency will recommend 2-years
post-construction monitoring
Cost ~$50k+ per year
Reasons for bat mortalities
Unknown why bats are killed by turbines or why certain species appear to be
more affected than others. There is growing information about the mortality
events and reasons for the mortality.
Bats can be killed by direct collision mortality or from barotraumas by flying
into the low-pressure zone behind a blade
Mortalities appear to be concentrated during low wind speed nights, during
the migratory periods, and possibly shortly before and after the passage of
storms
Suggestions include: proximity, attraction, migratory behavior
Greatest impacts are being seen at forested ridge tops in the East. Lowest
mortalities in the West
Infrared image of bat collision
Bat curtailment study summary
The purpose of this project was to analyze, estimate, and quantify the impacts of bat
curtailment strategies on the energy output of wind farms
Comparison to actual mortality reduction estimates were limited by the lack of field
studies available
Measurement data from 60 sites, over 170 years of time series power data
Data was matched with local daily sunset/sunrise times
Reproduced field studies:
April-November, night hours, full curtailment
April-November, night hours, 5.0 m/s cut-In
April-November, night hours, 6.5 m/s cut-In
Casselman wind farm in Pennsylvania
Increased cut-in wind speeds
Bat fatality study for higher cut-in wind speeds
Casselman Wind Project, Pennsylvania
Regional differences in energy impact
Bat curtailment and energy impact
Northeast
Time Period: Apr-Nov
Night Curtailment
Annual
Energy Loss
Bat Mortality
Reduction
2, 3
Curtailment
Effectiveness*
Full Curtailment 31% Assumed > 90% 3
6.5 m/s Curtailment 3% 44-93% 15-30
5.0 m/s Curtailment 1% 44-93% 60-130
* Curtailment effectiveness = % Bat Mortality Reduction / % Energy Loss
GL GH perspective on bat curtailment
Curtailment is one method to reduce bird and bat mortality risks,
but it shouldnt necessarily be the first approach.
GL GH supports proper siting of projects, adequate surveys, and
the use of other mitigation techniques as ways to prevent site
mortality.
Post-construction baseline studies and fatality monitoring may be
a first step to understanding if curtailment is a viable approach.
Regional differences and local siting benefits
Casselman Project
New York Projects
~Northeast / Mid-Atlantic ~ Other
Summary
Over the past 30 years wind turbine technologies have evolved and many
environmental impacts have been mitigated through smart design, proper siting and
responsible operation.
Review of endangered species, avian and bat studies, visual aesthetic studies,
historical and archeological review, wetlands review, and noise studies are common in
wind project environmental review and permitting.
A case study showed that at wind farms with bat curtailment studies, low wind speed
curtailment is an effective operating strategy for reducing bat mortality from wind
turbines by offering reductions in bat mortality in exchange for modest losses in energy.
Additional research is needed to determine the causes of bat mortality at wind farms
and other environmental impacts which could lead to more effective curtailment
methods and prevention devices. Additional research will also improve siting and other
mitigation methods that reduce the need for curtailment.
Disclaimer: Bat mortality reductions are based on a limited number of studies at sites
with observed high bat mortality. Caution should be taken in extrapolating mortality
reductions to other sites as the magnitude and the type of bat mortality is site specific.
Projects that are sited to avoid bat interference or that employ other mitigation
techniques may not see comparable mortality reductions.
References
1. GL GH Environmental Permitting Services
2. Bat Conservation International: http://www.batcon.org/
3. NREL Wind-Wildlife Impacts Literature Database (WILD): http://www.nrel.gov/wind/wild.html
4. Arnett et al., Patterns of Bat Fatalities at Wind Energy Facilities in North America, The Journal of
Wildlife Management, 2008
5. Baerwald et al., A Large-Scale Mitigation Experiment to Reduce Bat Fatalities at Wind Energy
Facilities, The Journal of Wildlife Management, 2009
6. Arnett et al., Altering Turbine Speed Reduces Bat Mortality at Wind-Energy Facilities, Frontiers in
Ecology and the Environment, 2010
7. Arnett et al., Effectiveness of Changing Wind Turbine Cut-in Speed to Reduce Bat Fatalities at
Wind Facilities, Annual Report for the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative and the Pennsylvania
Game Commission, May 2010
8. Hunz et al., Ecological Impacts of Wind Energy Development on Bats: Questions, Research
Needs, and Hypotheses, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2007
9. National Wind Coordinating Collaborative, Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds, Bats, and their
Habitats: A Summary of Research Results and Priority Questions, Spring 2010
10. Barclay, R. Bat Detectors: Their Uses and Abuses; Capabilities, Limitations, and Utility in
Assessing Use and Impacts of Wind Farms, University of Calgary
For more information please contact:
Benjamin Bell
President and CEO
GL Garrad Hassan America, Inc.
45 Main Street, Suite 302
Peterborough, NH 03458
(603)924-8800
benjamin.bell@gl-garradhassan.com
www.gl-garradhassan.com
Thank You!