Environmental impact of wind power

The environmental impact of electricity generation from wind power is minor when compared to that of fossil fuel power.[2] Wind turbines have some of the lowest global warming potential per unit of electricity generated: far less greenhouse gas is emitted than for the average unit of electricity, so wind power helps limit climate change.[3] Wind power consumes no fuel, and emits no air pollution, unlike fossil fuel power sources. The energy consumed to manufacture and transport the materials used to build a wind power plant is equal to the new energy produced by the plant within a few months.[4]

Greenhouse gas emissions per energy source. Wind energy is one of the sources with the least greenhouse gas emissions.
Livestock grazing near a wind turbine.[1]

Onshore (on-land) wind farms can have a significant visual impact and impact on the landscape.[5] Due to a very low surface power density and spacing requirements, wind farms typically need to be spread over more land than other power stations.[6][7] Their network of turbines, access roads, transmission lines, and substations can result in "energy sprawl";[8] although land between the turbines and roads can still be used for agriculture.[9][10]

Conflicts arise especially in scenic and culturally-important landscapes. Siting restrictions (such as setbacks) may be implemented to limit the impact.[11] The land between the turbines and access roads can still be used for farming and grazing.[9][12] They can lead to "industrialization of the countryside".[13] Some wind farms are opposed for potentially spoiling protected scenic areas, archaeological landscapes and heritage sites.[14][15][16] A report by the Mountaineering Council of Scotland concluded that wind farms harmed tourism in areas known for natural landscapes and panoramic views.[17]

Habitat loss and fragmentation are the greatest potential impacts on wildlife of onshore wind farms,[8] but they are small[18] and can be mitigated if proper monitoring and mitigation strategies are implemented.[19] The worldwide ecological impact is minimal.[2] Thousands of birds and bats, including rare species, have been killed by wind turbine blades,[20] as there are around other manmade structures, though wind turbines are responsible for far fewer bird deaths than fossil-fueled power stations.[21] This can be mitigated with proper wildlife monitoring.[22]

Many wind turbine blades are made of fiberglass and some only had a lifetime of 10 to 20 years.[23] Previously, there was no market for recycling these old blades,[24] and they were commonly disposed of in landfills.[25] Because blades are hollow, they take up a large volume compared to their mass. Since 2019, some landfill operators have begun requiring blades to be crushed before being landfilled.[23] Blades manufactured in the 2020s are more likely to be designed to be completely recyclable.[25]

Wind turbines also generate noise. At a distance of 300 metres (980 ft) this may be around 45 dB, which is slightly louder than a refrigerator. At 1.5 km (1 mi) distance they become inaudible.[26][27] There are anecdotal reports of negative health effects on people who live very close to wind turbines.[28] Peer-reviewed research has generally not supported these claims.[29][30][31] Pile-driving to construct non-floating wind farms is noisy underwater,[32] but in operation offshore wind is much quieter than ships.[33]

Basic operational considerations

Pollution costs

Compared with other low-carbon power sources, wind turbines have one of the lowest global warming potentials per unit of electrical energy generated by any power source.[34] According to the IPCC, in assessments of the life-cycle global warming potential of energy sources, wind turbines have a median value of between 15 and 11 (gCO2eq/kWh) depending on whether offshore or onshore turbines are being assessed.[35][36]

Wind power doesn't consume water[37] for continuous operation and has near negligible emissions directly related to its electricity production. Wind turbines when isolated from the electric grid, produce negligible amounts of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, mercury and radioactive waste when in operation, unlike fossil fuel sources and nuclear energy station fuel production, respectively.

With the construction phase largely to blame, wind turbines emit slightly more particulate matter (PM), a form of air pollution, at an "exception" rate higher per unit of energy generated(kWh) than a fossil gas electricity station("NGCC"),[38][39] and also emit more heavy metals and PM than nuclear stations, per unit of energy generated.[40][41] Wind power externality costs are negligible compared to the cost of electricity generation.[42]

Findings when connected to the grid
See also: Wind power § Variability
The Vattenfall utility company study found Hydroelectric, nuclear stations and wind turbines to have far less greenhouse emissions than other sources represented.

A typical study of a wind farm's Life cycle assessment, when not connected to the electric grid, usually results in similar findings as the following 2006 analysis of 3 installations in the US Midwest, where the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of wind power ranged from 14 to 33 tonnes (15 to 36 short tons) per GWh (14–33 gCO2/kWh) of energy produced, with most of the CO2 emission intensity coming from producing steel, concrete, and plastic/fiberglass composites for the turbine structure and foundation.[43][44] By combining similar data from numerous individual studies in a meta-analysis, the median global warming potential for wind power was found to be 11–12 g CO2/kWh and unlikely to change significantly.[35][45][46]

This higher dependence on back-up/Load following power plants to ensure a steady power grid output has the knock-on-effect of more frequent inefficient (in CO2e g/kWh) throttling up and down of these other power sources in the grid to facilitate the intermittent power source's variable output. When one includes the total effect of intermittent sources on other power sources in the grid system, that is, including these inefficient start up emissions of backup power sources to cater for wind energy, into wind energy's total system-wide life cycle, this results in a higher real-world wind energy emission intensity. Higher than the direct g/kWh value that is determined from looking at the power source in isolation and thus ignores all down-stream detrimental/inefficiency effects it has on the grid. This higher dependence on back-up/Load following power plants to ensure a steady power grid output forces fossil power plants to operate in less efficient states.[45]

In comparison to other low carbon power sources wind turbines, when assessed in isolation, have a median life cycle emission value of between 11 and 12 (gCO2eq/kWh).[35][47] While an increase in emissions due to the practical issues of load balancing is an issue, Pehnt et al. still conclude that these 20 and 80 g CO2-eq/kWh added penalties still result in wind being roughly ten times less polluting than fossil gas and coal which emit ~400 and 900 g CO2-eq/kWh respectively.[48] As these losses occur due to the cycling of fossil power plants, they may at some point become smaller when more than 20–30% of wind energy is added to the power grid, as fossil power plants are replaced, however this has yet to occur in practice.[49]

Rare-earth use

The production of permanent magnets used in some wind turbines makes use of neodymium.[50] Pollution concerns associated with the extraction of this rare-earth element, which is primarily exported by China, have prompted government action in recent years,[51][52] and international research attempts to refine the extraction process.[53] Research is underway on turbine and generator designs which reduce the need for neodymium, or eliminate the use of rare-earth metals altogether.[54] Additionally, the large wind turbine manufacturer Enercon GmbH chose very early not to use permanent magnets for its direct drive turbines, to avoid responsibility for the adverse environmental impact of rare-earth mining.[55]

Material inputs

International Energy Agency study projects the demand for mined resources such as lithium, graphite, cobalt, copper, nickel and rare earths will rise 4x by 2040 and notes insufficient supply of these materials to match demand imposed by expected large-scale deployments of decentralized technologies solar and wind power, and required grid upgrades. For example, an on-shore wind farm requires 9x more materials than a similar fossil gas plant.[56][57] According to a 2018 study significant increase of wind power would require 1000% increase in supply of these metals by 2060, requiring significant increase in mining operations.[58]

Waste, recycling, repurposing

Modern wind turbine blades are made from plastic/fiberglass composite designs that provide a service lifetime of less than about 20 years.[23] As of February 2018, there was no economical technology and market for recycling these old blades, and the most common disposal procedure is to truck them to landfills.[59] Other options for disposing of the blades includes incinerating the material or grinding it up into powder, but both of these methods are not only expensive, but also inefficient and involves additional energy usage.[60] Blade incineration emits a significant amount of green house gases, though it can be used as a source of heat and power, which somewhat offsets these emissions.[61][62] Because of their hollow design for less weight, blades can take up an enormous volume compared to their mass, making road transport difficult, expensive, and dangerous due to wide turning berths, extra safety vehicles, and longer flatbed trucks.

Since many blades are still trashed, landfill operators have started requiring blades to be cut to pieces and sometimes crushed before they can be landfilled, which consumes further energy.[23][63] However, as they can take a lot of weight they can be made into long lasting small bridges for walkers or cyclists.[64] Along with ongoing development work to extend the generating efficiency and service life of newer turbines, blade recycling solutions continue to be pursued that are economical, energy efficient, and market scalable.[65]

There may be as much as 45% additional waste resulting from processes that occur during the lifecycle of the turbine blades, and it is estimated that total annual blade waste of all countries may reach 2.9 million tons by 2050.[66] In comparison, global solar photovoltaic cell waste is expected to reach about 78 million tons by 2050,[67] and 750 million tons of fly ash waste was produced by coal power in 2022.[68]

Recycling and repurposing
Footbridge in Poland made from a turbine blade

As much as 80% of the wind turbine structure can be recycled, though this does not include the foundation of the structure, which is typically made from reinforced concrete, or the blades.[69] Alternatively, these components of the turbine structure that are not easily recycled into new turbines can still be repurposed and used in other ways.[70]

The large volume of the turbine blades, while difficult to handle, is advantageous in repurposing the blades as playground structures, bike shelters and footbridges. Other recycling methods include creating pellets for waterproof boards and injectable plastics, as well as pyrolysis for producing paints, glues, and both cement and concrete.[71][72][73] Carbon fiber blades can now be recycled, the fiber first being separated from the epoxy resin binder, then chopped into small particles. After the separation, the resin is used as a fuel source for the next materials to be processed.[74] After pyrolysis, the resulting material can be further separated and the glass fibers extracted to be used in insulation or fiber reinforcement.[75]

The blades may also be repurposed into building materials and structural components.[76] Research indicates that turbine blades could successfully be repurposed as electrical transmission poles as their strength and structural stability was found to be comparable to the materials that are typically used.[77] Sections of the blades have been adapted to create roofs for small houses and these structures meet the requirements of building codes and may prove to be a viable way to reuse blade materials without extensive processes needed to make the material usable.[78] Components of the turbine could be reused by implementing segmentation, where the object is divided into different elements.[79] Research on segmentation suggests that the resulting materials are better than conventional construction materials when measuring specific flexural stiffness and flexural strength.[79]

Overall, there are several different avenues through which wind turbine components can be recycled, reused, or repurposed, all with their advantages and disadvantages, and there continues to be research conducted to determine even more ways that the materials can economically utilized. While various methods for recycling or repurposing the turbine blades have been proven effective, they have not been implemented on a large enough scale to adequately address the rapidly rising amounts of turbine blade waste being produced.[80]

Alternative building materials

In addition to carbon fiber blades sometimes being installed due to lower weight and higher strength and durability compared to fiberglass-epoxy composites, as of 2020 there is now a wind turbine with a modular wooden structural support trunk in Gothenburg, Sweden, which is stronger, lighter, easier to recycle and transport, and more carbon-neutral than steel.[81][82] These wooden towers would not need to be recycled as often as steel due to their fire-resistance and higher tolerance of metal-oxidizing chemicals.[83] Other alternative building materials include recyclable polymers (thermoplastic, recyclable thermosets, polyurethane), bamboo, natural fiber composites, biodegradable resins, and bio-based carbon fibers.[75]

Research on wind turbine materials also focuses on how to make the turbine blades more resistant to damage as this would extend their lifespan and reduce the replacement turnover (frequency of replacements).[84] In addition to adapting the materials used in the blades to increase their resistance to damage, there are also potential methods of altering the turbine's activity during certain weather events in order to decrease any damage caused by wind or rain.[85]

Ecology

Land use

Wind power has low life-cycle surface power density of 1.84 W/m2 which is three orders of magnitude (103 times, which is equivalent to 1,000x) less than nuclear or fossil fuel power and 3x less than PV.[86]

Wind farms are often built on land that has already been impacted by land clearing. The vegetation clearing and ground disturbance required for wind farms are minimal compared with coal mines and coal-fired power stations. If wind farms are decommissioned, the landscape can be returned to its previous condition.[87]

A study by the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory of US wind farms built between 2000 and 2009 found that, on average, only 1.1 percent of the total wind farm area suffered surface disturbance, and only 0.43 percent was permanently disturbed by wind power installations. On average, there were 63 hectares (160 acres) of total wind farm area per MW of capacity, but only 0.27 hectares (0.67 acres) of permanently disturbed area per MW of wind power capacity.[88]

In the UK many prime wind farm sites – locations with the best average wind speeds – are in upland areas that are frequently covered by blanket bog. This type of habitat exists in areas of relatively high rainfall where large areas of land remain permanently sodden. Construction work may create a risk of disruption to peatland hydrology which could cause localised areas of peat within the area of a wind farm to dry out, disintegrate, and so release their stored carbon. At the same time, the warming climate which renewable energy schemes seek to mitigate could itself pose an existential threat to peatlands throughout the UK.[89][90] A Scottish MEP campaigned for a moratorium on wind developments on peatlands saying that "Damaging the peat causes the release of more carbon dioxide than wind farms save".[91] A 2014 report for the Northern Ireland Environment Agency noted that siting wind turbines on peatland could release considerable carbon dioxide from the peat, and also damage the peatland contributions to flood control and water quality: "The potential knock-on effects of using the peatland resource for wind turbines are considerable and it is arguable that the impacts on this facet of biodiversity will have the most noticeable and greatest financial implications for Northern Ireland."[92] Wind farm construction near wetlands has been linked to several bog landslides in Ireland that have polluted rivers, such as at Derrybrien (2003) and Meenbog (2020).[93][94] Such incidents could be prevented with stricter planning procedures and siting guidelines.

[95]

Wind-energy advocates contend that less than 1% of the land is used for foundations and access roads, the other 99% can still be used for farming.[12] A wind turbine needs about 200–400 m2 for the foundation. With the increasing size of the wind turbine the relative size of the foundation decreases.[96] Critics point out that on some locations in forests the clearing of trees around tower bases may be necessary for installation sites on mountain ridges, such as in the northeastern U.S.[97] This usually takes the clearing of 5,000 m2 per wind turbine.[98]

During construction of wind farms in Scotland in 2007–2008 over 3.4 million trees were removed on 6202 acres of forest, out of which 31.5% has been replanted.[99]

Turbines are not generally installed in urban areas. Buildings interfere with the wind, turbines must be sited a safe distance ("setback") from residences in case of failure, and the value of land is high. There are a few notable exceptions to this. The WindShare ExPlace wind turbine was erected in December 2002, on the grounds of Exhibition Place, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. It was the first wind turbine installed in a major North American urban city centre.[100] Steel Winds also has a 20 MW urban project south of Buffalo, New York. Both of these projects are in urban locations, but benefit from being on uninhabited lakeshore property.

In Greece, wind turbine sites have been installed "on mountain peaks, in forests, near archaeological sites, on islands, in protected habitats" and in highly populated tourist areas, causing disruption to hospitality business and protests of residents.[101][102]

Livestock

The land can still be used for farming and cattle grazing. Livestock is unaffected by the presence of wind farms. International experience shows that livestock will "graze right up to the base of wind turbines and often use them as rubbing posts or for shade".[87]

In 2014, a first of its kind veterinary study attempted to determine the effects of rearing livestock near a wind turbine, the study compared the health effects of a wind turbine on the development of two groups of growing geese, preliminary results found that geese raised within 50 meters of a wind turbine gained less weight and had a higher concentration of the stress hormone cortisol in their blood than geese at a distance of 500 meters.[103]

Semi-domestic reindeer avoid the construction activity,[104] but seem unaffected when the turbines are operating.[105][106]

Impact on wildlife

Environmental assessments are routinely carried out for wind farm proposals, and potential impacts on the local environment (e.g. plants, animals, soils) are evaluated.[87] Turbine locations and operations are often modified as part of the approval process to avoid or minimise impacts on threatened species and their habitats. Any unavoidable impacts can be offset with conservation improvements of similar ecosystems which are unaffected by the proposal.[87]

A research agenda from a coalition of researchers from universities, industry, and government, supported by the Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future, suggests modeling the spatiotemporal patterns of migratory and residential wildlife with respect to geographic features and weather, to provide a basis for science-based decisions about where to site new wind projects. More specifically, it suggests:

  • Use existing data on migratory and other movements of wildlife to develop predictive models of risk.
  • Use new and emerging technologies, including radar, acoustics, and thermal imaging, to fill gaps in knowledge of wildlife movements.
  • Identify specific species or sets of species most at risk in areas of high potential wind resources.[107]

Wind turbines, like many other human activities and buildings, also increase the death rate of avian creatures such as birds and bats. A summary of the existing field studies compiled in 2010 from the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative identified fewer than 14 and typically less than four bird deaths per installed megawatt per year, but a wider variation in the number of bat deaths.[108] Like other investigations, it concluded that some species (e.g. migrating bats and songbirds) are known to be harmed more than others and that factors such as turbine siting can be important. However, many details, as well as the overall impact from the growing number of turbines, remain unclear.[109][110] The National Renewable Energy Laboratory maintains a database of the scientific literature on the subject.[111]

Birds
Arctic terns and a wind turbine at the Eider Barrage in Germany.

The impact of wind energy on birds, which can fly into turbines, or have their habitats degraded by wind development, is complex. Displacement is thought to be more of a threat to species than collisions.[112] Habitat loss is highly variable between species.[113][114]

Hundreds of thousands of birds,[115][116][117] including raptors and migrants,[118][119][120] are killed each year because of wind turbines and their power lines,[20] but this is less than the number killed (or not born) because of fossil fuel (coal and gas) power stations.[121] Wind farms are estimated to be responsible for losing less than 0.4 birds per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity generated, compared to over 5 birds per GWh for fossil fueled power stations.[122] As well as threatening extinction,[123] one of the effects of climate change is to already cause a decline in bird population,[124] and this is the main cause of bird loss from fossil power.[125][18][110][126]

On some important migration routes turbines are banned, or birds may alter their flight paths to avoid them.[127] Biological surveys beforehand and correctly siting turbines is very important, especially for raptors as they are slow to breed.[121] Methods to help birds avoid turbines include painting of one of the turbine blades black,[128] and making ultrasonic noise.[129] Some approaching birds can be spotted, for example by avian radar,[130][131] in time for turbines to be slowed to a speed which is safe for them.[132] Wind farms may need more power lines, and lines may be made less damaging to compensate.[133][134] Making permits for the number of birds (such as eagles) killed tradeable has been suggested, in order to save the most birds at the least cost.[135]

Bats

Bats may be injured by direct impact with turbine blades, towers, or transmission lines. Recent research shows that bats may also be killed when suddenly passing through a low air pressure region surrounding the turbine blade tips.[136] The numbers of bats killed by existing onshore and near-shore facilities have troubled bat enthusiasts.[137] In April 2009 the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative released initial study results showing a 73% drop in bat fatalities when wind farm operations are stopped during low wind conditions, when bats are most active.[138] Bats avoid radar transmitters, and placing microwave transmitters on wind turbine towers may reduce the number of bat collisions.[139][140]

It is hypothesized that a portion of bat fatalities are attributed to the wind displacement caused by the wind turbine blades as they move through the air causing insects in the area to become disoriented making it a dense area of prey – an attractive hunting ground for bats.[141] To combat this phenomenon ultrasonic deterrents have been tested on select wind turbines and has been shown to reduce bat fatalities from collision and barotrauma.[141] Testing of the ultrasonic deterrents has shown significantly reduced bat activity around wind turbines; according to study done in Zzyzyx, California, bat activity was reduced by 89.6–97.5% when ultrasonic acoustic deterrents were used.[141]

A 2013 study produced an estimate that wind turbines killed more than 600,000 bats in the U.S. the previous year, with the greatest mortality occurring in the Appalachian Mountains. Some earlier studies had produced estimates of between 33,000 and 888,000 bat deaths per year.[142]Mortality, specifically in migratory birds and bats, seems to be increased in locations where wind patterns seem to facilitate both migration paths and energy production.[143]

Marine life

Wind farms designed to be more efficient from lack of airflow-impeding obstacles, offshore wind farms, have altered marine ecosystems by providing refuge from humans in the form of fishing-restricted areas due to safety concerns of moving blades. Interestingly, the regions of refuge are not directly at the location of the wind turbines but rather slightly closer to shore. As an example, new colonies of Blue Mussels in the North Sea fed by phytoplankton are a food source for other predators, namely fish and crabs, and further up the food chain, pinnipeds, colloquially known as seals. Blue Mussels also reduce turbidity in the ocean water, making for greater underwater visibility, and leave behind their shells as shelter, further altering possible inhabitants of their coastal domain.[144][145]

Weather and climate change

Wind farms may affect weather in their immediate vicinity. Turbulence from spinning wind turbine rotors increases vertical mixing of heat and water vapor that affects the meteorological conditions downwind, including rainfall.[146] Overall, wind farms lead to a slight warming at night and a slight cooling during the day time. This effect can be reduced by using more efficient rotors or placing wind farms in regions with high natural turbulence. Warming at night could "benefit agriculture by decreasing frost damage and extending the growing season. Many farmers already do this with air circulators".[147][148][149]

A number of studies have used climate models to study the effect of extremely large wind farms. One study reports simulations that show detectable changes in global climate for very high wind farm usage, on the order of 10% of the world's land area. Wind power has a negligible effect on global mean surface temperature, and it would deliver "enormous global benefits by reducing emissions of CO2 and air pollutants".[150] Another peer-reviewed study suggested that using wind turbines to meet 10 percent of global energy demand in 2100 could actually have a warming effect, causing temperatures to rise by 1 °C (1.8 °F) in the regions on land where the wind farms are installed, including a smaller increase in areas beyond those regions. This is due to the effect of wind turbines on both horizontal and vertical atmospheric circulation. Whilst turbines installed in water would have a cooling effect, the net impact on global surface temperatures would be an increase of 0.15 °C (0.27 °F). Author Ron Prinn cautioned against interpreting the study "as an argument against wind power, urging that it be used to guide future research". "We're not pessimistic about wind," he said. "We haven't absolutely proven this effect, and we'd rather see that people undertake further research".[151]

Another study by David Keith and Lee Miller on climactic impacts of wind power which predicted warming when considering the area of the United States[152] has been criticized by Mark Z. Jacobson on the grounds of its limited geographical scope, with the argument that a large-scale wind energy extraction would significantly lower global temperatures.[153][154][155][156][157]

Impacts on people
See also: Renewable energy debate – Community debate about wind farms
Acceptance of wind and solar facilities in one's community is stronger among U.S. Democrats (blue), while acceptance of nuclear power plants is stronger among U.S. Republicans (red).[158]

Aesthetics
See also: Wind turbines on public display and Windfall (2010 film)
The surroundings of Mont Saint-Michel at low tide. While windy coasts are good locations for wind farms, aesthetic considerations may preclude such developments in order to preserve historic views of cultural sites.

Aesthetic considerations of wind power stations have often a significant role in their evaluation process.[159] To some, the perceived aesthetic aspects of wind power stations may conflict with the protection of historical sites.[160] Wind power stations are less likely to be perceived negatively in urbanized and industrial regions.[161] Aesthetic issues are subjective and some people find wind farms pleasant or see them as symbols of energy independence and local prosperity.[162] While studies in Scotland predict wind farms will damage tourism,[163] in other countries some wind farms have themselves become tourist attractions,[164][165][166] with several having visitor centers at ground level or even observation decks atop turbine towers.

In the 1980s, wind energy was being discussed as part of a soft energy path.[167] Renewable energy commercialization led to an increasing industrial image of wind power, which is being criticized by various stakeholders in the planning process, including nature protection associations.[168] Newer wind farms have larger, more widely spaced turbines, and have a less cluttered appearance than older installations. Wind farms are often built on land that has already been impacted by land clearing and they coexist easily with other land uses.

Coastal areas and areas of higher altitude such as ridgelines are considered prime for wind farms, due to constant wind speeds. However, both locations tend to be areas of high visual impact and can be a contributing factor in local communities' resistance to some projects. Both the proximity to densely populated areas and the necessary wind speeds make coastal locations ideal for wind farms.[169]

Loreley rock in Rhineland-Palatinate, part of UNESCO World heritage site Rhine Gorge

Wind power stations can impact on important sight relations which are a key part of culturally important landscapes, such as in the Rhine Gorge or Moselle valley.[170] Conflicts between the heritage status of certain areas and wind power projects have arisen in various countries. In 2011 UNESCO raised concerns regarding a proposed wind farm 17 kilometres away from the French island abbey of Mont-Saint-Michel.[171] In Germany, the impact of wind farms on valuable cultural landscapes has implications on zoning and land-use planning.[170][172] For example, sensitive parts of the Moselle valley and the background of the Hambach Castle, according to the plans of the state government, will be kept free of wind turbines.[173]

Wind turbines require aircraft warning lights, which may create light pollution. Complaints about these lights have caused the US FAA to consider allowing fewer lights per turbine in certain areas.[174] Residents near turbines may complain of "shadow flicker" caused by rotating turbine blades, when the sun passes behind the turbine. This can be avoided by locating the wind farm to avoid unacceptable shadow flicker, or by turning the turbine off for the time of the day when the sun is at the angle that causes flicker. If a turbine is poorly sited and adjacent to many homes, the duration of shadow flicker on a neighbourhood can last hours.[175]

Noise
See also: Health effects from noise

Wind turbines also generate noise, and at a residential distance of 300 metres (980 ft) this may be around 45 dB; however, at a distance of 1.5 km (1 mi), most wind turbines become inaudible.[176][177] Loud or persistent noise increases stress which could then lead to diseases.[178] Wind turbines do not affect human health with their noise when properly placed.[179][180][181][11] However, when improperly sited, data from the monitoring of two groups of growing geese revealed substantially lower body weights and higher concentrations of a stress hormone in the blood of the first group of geese who were situated 50 meters away compared to a second group which was at a distance of 500 meters from the turbine.[103]

A 2014 study by Health Canada [182] involving 1238 households (representing 79 percent of the households in the geographic area studied) and 4000 hours of testing in Ontario and on Prince Edward Island includes the following supportive statements of wind turbine low frequency noise annoyance in its summary:

"Wind turbines emit low frequency noise, which can enter the home with little or no reduction in energy, potentially resulting in.. annoyance."

Regarding the comparison of low frequency wind turbine noise annoyance to transportation noise annoyance, the Health Canada study summary states: "Studies have consistently shown.. that, in comparison to the scientific literature on noise annoyance to transportation noise sources such as rail or road traffic, community annoyance with (low frequency) wind turbine noise begins at a lower sound level and increases more rapidly with increasing wind turbine noise."

The summary also includes the following three findings of its own study:

"Statistically significant exposure-response relationships were found between increasing wind turbine noise levels and the prevalence of reporting high annoyance. These associations were found with annoyance due to noise, vibrations, blinking lights, shadow and visual impacts from wind turbines. In all cases, annoyance increased with increasing exposure to wind turbine noise levels."

"Community annoyance was observed to drop at distances between 1–2 kilometers (0.6 to 1.2 miles) in Ontario." (It dropped off at 550 meters (1/3 mile) on Prince Edward Island.)

"Annoyance was significantly lower among the 110 participants who received personal benefit, which could include rent, payments or other indirect benefits of having wind turbines in the area e.g., community improvements."

The above Health Canada summary states that "no statistically significant association was observed between measured blood pressure, resting heart rate, (hair cortisol concentrations) and wind turbine noise exposure."

Wind turbine syndrome, a psychosomatic disorder, pertains to the belief that low frequency wind turbine noise, either directly or through annoyance, causes or contributes to various measurable health effects related to anxiety, for which there is little general evidence.[183]

Offshore

Many offshore wind farms have contributed to electricity needs in Europe and Asia for years, and as of 2014 the first offshore wind farms are under development in U.S. waters. While the offshore wind industry has grown dramatically over the last several decades, especially in Europe, there is still some uncertainty associated with how the construction and operation of these wind farms affect marine animals and the marine environment.[184]

Traditional offshore wind turbines are attached to the seabed in shallower waters within the near-shore marine environment. As offshore wind technologies become more advanced, floating structures have begun to be used in deeper waters where more wind resources exist.

Common environmental concerns associated with offshore wind developments include:[185]

  • The risk to seabirds being struck by wind turbine blades or being displaced from critical habitats;
  • Underwater noise associated with the installation process of monopile turbines;
  • The physical presence of offshore wind farms altering the behavior of marine mammals, fish, and seabirds by reasons of either attraction or avoidance;
  • Potential disruption of the near-field and far-field marine environments from large offshore wind projects.

Germany restricts underwater noise during pile driving to less than 160 dB.[186]

Due to the landscape protection status of large areas of the Wadden Sea, a major World Heritage Site with various national parks (e.g. Lower Saxon Wadden Sea National Park) German offshore installations are mostly restricted on areas outside the territorial waters.[187] Offshore capacity in Germany is therefore way behind the British or Danish near coast installments, which face much lower restrictions.

In 2009, a comprehensive government environmental study of coastal waters in the United Kingdom concluded that there is scope for between 5,000 and 7,000 offshore wind turbines to be installed without an adverse impact on the marine environment. The study – which forms part of the Department of Energy and Climate Change's Offshore Energy Strategic Environmental Assessment – is based on more than a year's research. It included analysis of seabed geology, as well as surveys of sea birds and marine mammals.[188][189] There does not seem to have been much consideration however of the likely impact of displacement of fishing activities from traditional fishing grounds.[190]

A study published in 2014 suggests that some seals prefer to hunt near turbines, likely due to the laid stones functioning as artificial reefs which attract invertebrates and fish.[191]

Offshore wind is similar to terrestrial wind technologies, as a large windmill-like turbine located in a fresh or saltwater environment. Wind causes the blades to rotate, which is then turned into electricity and connected to the grid with cables. The advantages of offshore wind are that winds are stronger and more consistent, allowing turbines of much larger size to be erected by vessels. The disadvantages are the difficulties of placing a structure in a dynamic ocean environment.[185]

The turbines are often scaled-up versions of existing land technologies. However, the foundations are unique to offshore wind and are listed below:

Monopile foundation

Monopile foundations are used in shallow depth applications (0–30 m) and consist of a pile being driven to varying depths into the seabed (10–40 m) depending on the soil conditions. The pile-driving construction process is an environmental concern as the noise produced is incredibly loud and propagates far in the water, even after mitigation strategies such as bubble shields, slow start, and acoustic cladding. The footprint is relatively small, but may still cause scouring or artificial reefs. Transmission lines also produce an electromagnetic field that may be harmful to some marine organisms.[185]

Tripod fixed bottom

Tripod fixed bottom foundations are used in transitional depth applications (20–80 m) and consist of three legs connecting to a central shaft that supports the turbine base. Each leg has a pile driven into the seabed, though less depth is necessary because of the wide foundation. The environmental effects are a combination of those for monopile and gravity foundations.[185]

Gravity foundation

Gravity foundations are used in shallow depth applications (0–30 m) and consist of a large and heavy base constructed of steel or concrete to rest on the seabed. The footprint is relatively large and may cause scouring, artificial reefs, or physical destruction of habitat upon introduction. Transmission lines also produce an electromagnetic field that may be harmful to some marine organisms.[185]

Gravity tripod

Gravity tripod foundations are used in transitional depth applications (10–40 m) and consist of two heavy concrete structures connected by three legs, one structure sitting on the seabed while the other is above the water. As of 2013, no offshore windfarms are currently using this foundation. The environmental concerns are identical to those of gravity foundations, though the scouring effect may be less significant depending on the design.[185]

Floating structure

Floating structure foundations are used in deep depth applications (40–900 m) and consist of a balanced floating structure moored to the seabed with fixed cables. The floating structure may be stabilized using buoyancy, the mooring lines, or a ballast. The mooring lines may cause minor scouring or a potential for collision. Transmission lines also produce an electromagnetic field that may be harmful to some marine organisms.[185]

See also

References
  1. Buller, Erin (11 July 2008). "Capturing the wind". Uinta County Herald. Archived from the original on 31 July 2008. Retrieved 4 December 2008."The animals don't care at all. We find cows and antelope napping in the shade of the turbines." – Mike Cadieux, site manager, Wyoming Wind Farm
  2. Dunnett, Sebastian; Holland, Robert A.; Taylor, Gail; Eigenbrod, Felix (2022-02-08). "Predicted wind and solar energy expansion has minimal overlap with multiple conservation priorities across global regions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 119 (6). Bibcode:2022PNAS..11904764D. doi:10.1073/pnas.2104764119. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 8832964. PMID 35101973.
  3. "How Wind Energy Can Help Us Breathe Easier". Energy.gov. Retrieved 2022-09-27.
  4. Begoña Guezuraga; Rudolf Zauner; Werner Pölz (January 2012). "Life cycle assessment of two different 2 MW class wind turbines". Renewable Energy. 37 (1): 37. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2011.05.008.
  5. Thomas Kirchhoff (2014): Energiewende und Landschaftsästhetik. Versachlichung ästhetischer Bewertungen von Energieanlagen durch Bezugnahme auf drei intersubjektive Landschaftsideale Archived 18 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine, in: Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 46 (1), 10–16.
  6. What are the pros and cons of onshore wind energy?. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. January 2018.
  7. "What are the pros and cons of onshore wind energy?". Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment. Archived from the original on 22 June 2019. Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  8. Nathan F. Jones, Liba Pejchar, Joseph M. Kiesecker. "The Energy Footprint: How Oil, Natural Gas, and Wind Energy Affect Land for Biodiversity and the Flow of Ecosystem Services". BioScience, Volume 65, Issue 3, March 2015. pp. 290–301
  9. "Why Australia needs wind power" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 7 January 2012.
  10. "Wind energy Frequently Asked Questions". British Wind Energy Association. Archived from the original on 19 April 2006. Retrieved 21 April 2006.
  11. Loren D. Knopper, Christopher A. Ollson, Lindsay C. McCallum, Melissa L. Whitfield Aslund, Robert G. Berger, Kathleen Souweine, and Mary McDaniel, Wind Turbines and Human Health, [Frontiers of Public Health]. June 19, 2014; 2: 63.
  12. "Wind energy Frequently Asked Questions". British Wind Energy Association. Archived from the original on 2006-04-19. Retrieved 2006-04-21.
  13. Szarka, Joseph. Wind Power in Europe: Politics, Business and Society. Springer, 2007. p.176
  14. Dodd, Eimear (27 March 2021). "Permission to build five turbine wind farm at Kilranelagh refused". Irish Independent. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  15. Kula, Adam (9 April 2021). "Department defends 500ft windfarm in protected Area of Outstanding Beauty". The News Letter. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  16. "Building wind farms 'could destroy Welsh landscape'". BBC News. 4 November 2019. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  17. Gordon, David. Wind farms and tourism in Scotland Archived 21 September 2020 at the Wayback Machine. Mountaineering Council of Scotland. November 2017. p.3
  18. Dunnett, Sebastian; Holland, Robert A.; Taylor, Gail; Eigenbrod, Felix (2022-02-08). "Predicted wind and solar energy expansion has minimal overlap with multiple conservation priorities across global regions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 119 (6). Bibcode:2022PNAS..11904764D. doi:10.1073/pnas.2104764119. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 8832964. PMID 35101973.
  19. Parisé, J.; Walker, T. R. (2017). "Industrial wind turbine post-construction bird and bat monitoring: A policy framework for Canada". Journal of Environmental Management. 201: 252–259. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.06.052. PMID 28672197.
  20. Hosansky, David (April 1, 2011). "Wind Power: Is wind energy good for the environment?". CQ Researcher.
  21. Sovacool, B. K. (2013). "The avian benefits of wind energy: A 2009 update". Renewable Energy. 49: 19–24. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.074.
  22. Parisé, J.; Walker, T. R. (2017). "Industrial wind turbine post-construction bird and bat monitoring: A policy framework for Canada". Journal of Environmental Management. 201: 252–259. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.06.052. PMID 28672197.
  23. Joe Sneve (4 September 2019). "Sioux Falls landfill tightens rules after Iowa dumps dozens of wind turbine blades". Argus Leader. Archived from the original on 24 November 2021. Retrieved 5 September 2019.
  24. Rick Kelley (18 February 2018). "Retiring worn-out wind turbines could cost billions that nobody has". Valley Morning Star. Archived from the original on 5 September 2019. Retrieved 5 September 2019. The blades are composite, those are not recyclable, those can't be sold," Linowes said. "The landfills are going to be filled with blades in a matter of no time.
  25. "These bike shelters are made from wind turbines". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 2022-04-02.
  26. How Loud Is A Wind Turbine? Archived 15 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine. GE Reports (2 August 2014). Retrieved on 20 July 2016.
  27. Gipe, Paul (1995). Wind Energy Comes of Age. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 376–. ISBN 978-0-471-10924-2.
  28. Gohlke JM et al. Environmental Health Perspectives (2008). "Health, Economy, and Environment: Sustainable Energy Choices for a Nation". Environmental Health Perspectives. 116 (6): A236–A237. doi:10.1289/ehp.11602. PMC 2430245. PMID 18560493.
  29. Professor Simon Chapman. "Summary of main conclusions reached in 25 reviews of the research literature on wind farms and health Archived 22 May 2019 at the Wayback Machine" Sydney University School of Public Health, April 2015
  30. Hamilton, Tyler (15 December 2009). "Wind Gets Clean Bill of Health". Toronto Star. Toronto. pp. B1–B2. Archived from the original on 18 October 2012. Retrieved 16 December 2009.
  31. Colby, W. David et al. (December 2009) "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Panel Review" Archived 18 June 2020 at the Wayback Machine, Canadian Wind Energy Association.
  32. "The Underwater Sound from Offshore Wind Farms" (PDF).
  33. Tougaard, Jakob; Hermannsen, Line; Madsen, Peter T. (2020-11-01). "How loud is the underwater noise from operating offshore wind turbines?". The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 148 (5): 2885–2893. Bibcode:2020ASAJ..148.2885T. doi:10.1121/10.0002453. ISSN 0001-4966. PMID 33261376. S2CID 227251351.
  34. Guezuraga, Begoña; Zauner, Rudolf; Pölz, Werner (2012). "Life cycle assessment of two different 2 MW class wind turbines". Renewable Energy. 37: 37–44. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2011.05.008.
  35. "IPCC Working Group III – Mitigation of Climate Change, Annex II I: Technology – specific cost and performance parameters" (PDF). IPCC. 2014. p. 10. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 June 2014. Retrieved 1 August 2014.
  36. "IPCC Working Group III – Mitigation of Climate Change, Annex II Metrics and Methodology. pp. 37–40, 41" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-09-29.
  37. Mielke, Erik. Water Consumption of Energy Resource Extraction, Processing, and Conversion Harvard Kennedy School, October 2010. Accessed: 1 February 2011.
  38. LCA in Wind Energy: Environmental Impacts through the Whole Chain
  39. Wind Energy Environmental issues. table V.1.2 & V.1.15
  40. ExternE. The EU's Externality study.Page 35 figure 9
  41. Hydropower-Internalised Costs and Externalised Benefits"; Frans H. Koch; International Energy Agency (IEA)-Implementing Agreement for Hydropower Technologies and Programmes; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. pp. 131–34, Figure 1.
  42. ExternE. The EU's Externality study.Page 37
  43. White, S. W. (2007). "Net Energy Payback and CO2 Emissions from Three Midwestern Wind Farms: An Update". Natural Resources Research. 15 (4): 271–81. doi:10.1007/s11053-007-9024-y. S2CID 110647290.
  44. Smil, Vaclov (2016-02-29). "To Get Wind Power You Need Oil – Each wind turbine embodies a whole lot of petrochemicals and fossil-fuel energy". IEEE Spectrum.
  45. Dolan, Stacey L.; Heath, Garvin A. (2012). "Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Utility-Scale Wind Power". Journal of Industrial Ecology. 16: S136–S154. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00464.x. S2CID 153821669. SSRN 2051326.
  46. "IPCC Working Group III – Mitigation of Climate Change, Annex II Metrics and Methodology. pp. 37–40, 41" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-09-29.
  47. "IPCC Working Group III – Mitigation of Climate Change, Annex II Metrics and Methodology. pp. 37–40, 41" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-09-08.
  48. Pehnt, Martin; Oeser, Michael; Swider, Derk J. (2008). "Consequential environmental system analysis of expected offshore wind electricity production in Germany". Energy. 33 (5): 747–59. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.577.9201. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2008.01.007.
  49. Breyer, Christian; Koskinen, Otto; Blechinger, Philipp (2015). "Profitable climate change mitigation: The case of greenhouse gas emission reduction benefits enabled by solar photovoltaic systems". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 49: 610–28. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.061.
  50. Hilsum, Lindsey (6 December 2009). "Chinese pay toxic price for a green world". London: The Sunday Times. Retrieved 2011-03-02.
  51. Bradsher, Keith (26 December 2009). "Earth-Friendly Elements Are Mined Destructively". The New York Times. Retrieved 2011-03-02.
  52. Biggs, Stuart (6 January 2011). "Rare Earths Leave Toxic Trail to Toyota Prius, Vestas Turbines". Bloomberg L.P. Retrieved 2011-03-02.
  53. Ingebretsen, Mark. Developing greener, cheaper magnets Ames Laboratory. Accessed: 10 March 2011.
  54. Biello, David (13 October 2010). "Rare Earths: Elemental Needs of the Clean-Energy Economy". Scientific American. Retrieved 2011-03-02.
  55. Enercon explanation on p.4 on avoidance of Neodymium use
  56. "Renewable revolution will drive demand for critical minerals". RenewEconomy. 2021-05-05. Retrieved 2021-05-05.
  57. "Clean energy demand for critical minerals set to soar as the world pursues net zero goals - News". IEA. Retrieved 2021-05-05.
  58. Månberger, André; Stenqvist, Björn (2018-08-01). "Global metal flows in the renewable energy transition: Exploring the effects of substitutes, technological mix and development". Energy Policy. 119: 226–241. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.056. ISSN 0301-4215.
  59. Rick Kelley (18 February 2018). "Retiring worn-out wind turbines could cost billions that nobody has". Valley Morning Star. Retrieved 5 September 2019. The blades are composite, those are not recyclable, those can't be sold," Linowes said. "The landfills are going to be filled with blades in a matter of no time.
  60. Yakovlev, Grigory; Khozin, Vadim; Abdrakhmanova, Lyaila; Maisuradze, Natalia; Medvedev, Vladislav; Grechkin, Pavel; Polyanskikh, Irina; Gordina, Anastasiya; Elrefai, Ali Elsaed Mohamed Mohamed; Zakirov, M. F. (2021-11-01). "Sustainable Ways and Methods of Recycling Epoxy Fiberglass Waste". IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. 1203 (3): 032024. Bibcode:2021MS&E.1203c2024Y. doi:10.1088/1757-899x/1203/3/032024. ISSN 1757-899X. S2CID 244838636.
  61. Heng, Herman; Meng, Fanran; McKechnie, Jon (2021-09-01). "Wind turbine blade wastes and the environmental impacts in Canada". Waste Management. 133: 59–70. Bibcode:2021WaMan.133...59H. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2021.07.032. ISSN 0956-053X. PMID 34385121.
  62. Deeney, Peter; Nagle, Angela J.; Gough, Fergal; Lemmertz, Heloisa; Delaney, Emma L.; McKinley, Jennifer M.; Graham, Conor; Leahy, Paul G.; Dunphy, Niall P.; Mullally, Gerard (2021-08-01). "End-of-Life alternatives for wind turbine blades: Sustainability Indices based on the UN sustainable development goals". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 171: 105642. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105642. ISSN 0921-3449. S2CID 236597525.
  63. Eller, Donnelle (2019-11-08). "With few recycling options, wind turbine blades head to Iowa landfills". Desmoines Register. Disposing of turbine blades is an issue that will likely linger for years in Iowa. Large, investor-owned Iowa utilities are erecting new turbines and replacing blades to extend the life of older ones.
  64. "Renewable energy: The upcycled wind turbines getting a second life". BBC News. 2023-09-07. Retrieved 2023-09-07.
  65. "Accelerating Wind Turbine Blade Circularity" (PDF). WindEurope – Cefic – EuCIA. 2020-05-31.
  66. Liu, Pu; Barlow, Claire Y. (2017-04-01). "Wind turbine blade waste in 2050". Waste Management. 62: 229–240. Bibcode:2017WaMan..62..229L. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2017.02.007. ISSN 0956-053X. PMID 28215972.
  67. Chowdhury, Md. Shahariar; Rahman, Kazi Sajedur; Chowdhury, Tanjia; Nuthammachot, Narissara; Techato, Kuaanan; Akhtaruzzaman, Md.; Tiong, Sieh Kiong; Sopian, Kamaruzzaman; Amin, Nowshad (2020-01-01). "An overview of solar photovoltaic panels' end-of-life material recycling". Energy Strategy Reviews. 27: 100431. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.100431. ISSN 2211-467X. S2CID 214476584.
  68. "Eco-efficient cement could pave the way to a greener future: Rice U. scientists 'flash' toxic heavy metals out of fly ash, make stronger concrete". ScienceDaily. Retrieved 2023-05-17.
  69. Guezuraga, Begoña; Zauner, Rudolf; Pölz, Werner (2012-01-01). "Life cycle assessment of two different 2 mw class wind turbines". Renewable Energy. 37 (1): 37–44. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2011.05.008. ISSN 0960-1481.
  70. Delaney, Emma L.; McKinley, Jennifer M.; Megarry, William; Graham, Conor; Leahy, Paul G.; Bank, Lawrence C.; Gentry, Russell (2021-07-01). "An integrated geospatial approach for repurposing wind turbine blades". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 170: 105601. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105601. ISSN 0921-3449. S2CID 234820398.
  71. "12 Feb Green energy: wind power's recycling dilemma". ESSUtility. 12 February 2020. Retrieved 15 December 2021.
  72. "Strategies for the recycling of wind turbine blades". REVE. 26 May 2020. Retrieved 15 December 2021. Today around 85 to 90% of wind turbines' total mass can be recycled.
  73. "Global Fiberglass Solutions Becomes the First US-Based Company to Commercially Recycle Wind Turbine Blades into Viable Products". Business Insider. 29 January 2019. Retrieved 15 December 2021.
  74. "Tennessee Carbon Fiber Recycling Outfit Can Recycle 100% of Wind Turbine Blades". Windpower Engineering. Retrieved 15 December 2021.
  75. Mishnaevsky, Leon (2021-02-27). "Sustainable End-of-Life Management of Wind Turbine Blades: Overview of Current and Coming Solutions". Materials. 14 (5): 1124. Bibcode:2021Mate...14.1124M. doi:10.3390/ma14051124. ISSN 1996-1944. PMC 7957806. PMID 33673684.
  76. Lozanova, Sarah (2022-02-28). "Repurposing Used Wind Turbine Blades". Earth911. Retrieved 2022-09-20.
  77. Alshannaq, Ammar A.; Bank, Lawrence C.; Scott, David W.; Gentry, T. Russell (2021-08-01). "Structural Analysis of a Wind Turbine Blade Repurposed as an Electrical Transmission Pole". Journal of Composites for Construction. 25 (4): (ASCE)CC.1943–5614.0001136, 04021023. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0001136. ISSN 1090-0268. S2CID 235514589.
  78. Gentry, T. Russell; Al-Haddad, Tristan; Bank, Lawrence C.; Arias, Franco R.; Nagle, Angela; Leahy, Paul (2020-12-01). "Structural Analysis of a Roof Extracted from a Wind Turbine Blade". Journal of Architectural Engineering. 26 (4): 04020040. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000440. ISSN 1943-5568. S2CID 224909654.
  79. Joustra, Jelle; Flipsen, Bas; Balkenende, Ruud (2021-07-01). "Structural reuse of wind turbine blades through segmentation". Composites Part C: Open Access. 5: 100137. doi:10.1016/j.jcomc.2021.100137. ISSN 2666-6820. S2CID 233807269.
  80. Cooperman, Aubryn; Eberle, Annika; Lantz, Eric (2021-05-01). "Wind turbine blade material in the United States: Quantities, costs, and end-of-life options". Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 168: 105439. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105439. ISSN 0921-3449. OSTI 1765605. S2CID 233536403.
  81. Lewis, Michelle (7 May 2020). "Sweden erects the first wooden wind turbine tower". electrek. Retrieved 15 December 2021.
  82. "Modvion".
  83. Mishnaevsky, Leon (27 February 2021). "Sustainable End-of-Life Management of Wind Turbine Blades: Overview of Current and Coming Solutions". Materials. 14 (5): 1124. Bibcode:2021Mate...14.1124M. doi:10.3390/ma14051124. ISSN 1996-1944. PMC 7957806. PMID 33673684.
  84. Lusty, Ariel F.; Cairns, Douglas A. (2021-10-01). "Alternative Damage Tolerant Materials for Wind Turbine Blades: An Overview". doi:10.2172/1825355. OSTI 1825355. S2CID 245807291.
  85. Bech, Jakob Ilsted; Hasager, Charlotte Bay; Bak, Christian (2018-10-19). "Extending the life of wind turbine blade leading edges by reducing the tip speed during extreme precipitation events". Wind Energy Science. 3 (2): 729–748. Bibcode:2018WiEnS...3..729I. doi:10.5194/wes-3-729-2018. ISSN 2366-7443. S2CID 55672515.
  86. Van Zalk, John; Behrens, Paul (2018-12-01). "The spatial extent of renewable and non-renewable power generation: A review and meta-analysis of power densities and their application in the U.S." Energy Policy. 123: 83–91. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.023. ISSN 0301-4215.
  87. New South Wales Government (1 November 2010). The wind energy fact sheet Archived 2011-03-20 at the Wayback Machine Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, p. 13
  88. Paul Denholm, Maureen Hand, Maddalena Jackson, and Sean Ong, Land-Use Requirements of Modern Wind Power Plants in the United States, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/TP-6A2-45834, Aug. 2009.
  89. Prentice, Colin (19 December 2013). "Climate change poses serious threat to Britain's peat bogs". London: Imperial College London. Retrieved 2013-12-19.
  90. Smith, Jo; et al. (5 September 2012). "Renewable energy: Avoid constructing wind farms on peat". Nature. 489 (7414): 33. Bibcode:2012Natur.489Q..33S. doi:10.1038/489033d. PMID 22955603.
  91. Stevenson, Tony Struan (20 May 2009). "Bid to ban peatland wind farms comes under attack". Sunday Herald. newsquest (sunday herald) limited. Archived from the original on 27 June 2009. Retrieved 20 May 2009.
  92. David Tosh, W. Ian Montgomery & Neil Reid A review of the impacts of onshore wind energy development on biodiversity Archived 2015-05-31 at the Wayback Machine, Northern Ireland Environment Agency, Research and Development Series 14/02, 2014, p.54
  93. "Fears Donegal landslide has devastated EU protected salmon site". RTÉ News. 18 November 2020. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  94. "Donegal: Peat landslide linked to wind farm raised in Dáil". BBC News. 18 November 2020. Retrieved 18 January 2022.
  95. Lindsay, Richard (2004). "Wind farms and blanket peat: A report on the Derrybrien bog slide" (PDF). Derrybrien Development Cooperatve; University of East London.
  96. Erich Hau. Windkraftanlagen: Grundlagen, Technik, Einsatz, Wirtschaftlichkeit, Berlin: Heidelberg 2008, pp. 621–23. (German). (For the english Edition see Erich Hau, Wind Turbines: Fundamentals, Technologies, Application, Economics, Springer 2005)
  97. Forest clearance for Meyersdale, Pa., wind power facility
  98. Windkraftanlagen in Brandenburgs Wäldern, Statement of the Government of Brandenburg, Germany.
  99. "Millions of trees chopped down to make way for Scottish wind farms". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 2021-03-30.
  100. "Canada's First Urban Wind Turbine – Not Your Average Windmill". Toronto Hydro. 2006-02-06. Archived from the original on 2008-03-30. Retrieved 2008-04-11.
  101. "Turbine 'torture' for Greek islanders as wind farms proliferate". CNA. Retrieved 2022-02-14.
  102. Koutantou, Angeliki (2021-05-26). "Greek environmentalists fear windfarm scars on mountain forests". Reuters. Retrieved 2022-02-14.
  103. Mikołajczak, J.; Borowski, S.; Marć-Pieńkowska, J.; Odrowąż-Sypniewska, G.; Bernacki, Z.; Siódmiak, J.; Szterk, P. (2013). "Preliminary studies on the reaction of growing geese (Anser anser f. Domestica) to the proximity of wind turbines". Polish Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 16 (4): 679–86. doi:10.2478/pjvs-2013-0096. PMID 24597302. S2CID 3528393.
  104. Skarin, Anna; Nellemann, Christian; Rönnegård, Lars; Sandström, Per; Lundqvist, Henrik (2015). "Wind farm construction impacts reindeer migration and movement corridors". Landscape Ecology. 30 (8): 1527–40. doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0210-8.
  105. Flydal, Kjetil; Eftestøl, Sindre; Reimers, Eigil; Colman, Jonathan E. (2004). "Effects of wind turbines on area use and behaviour of semi-domestic reindeer in enclosures". Rangifer. 24 (2): 55. doi:10.7557/2.24.2.301. mirror
  106. "Article list". Archived from the original on 2018-09-20. Retrieved 2016-02-26.
  107. Zehnder and Warhaft, Alan and Zellman. "University Collaboration on Wind Energy" (PDF). Cornell University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 September 2011. Retrieved 17 August 2011.
  108. "Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds, Bats, and their Habitats:A Summary of Research Results and Priority Questions" (PDF). National Wind Coordinating Collaborative. 31 March 2010.
  109. Eilperin, Juliet; Steven Mufson (16 April 2009). "Renewable Energy's Environmental Paradox". The Washington Post. Retrieved 17 April 2009.
  110. "Wind farms". Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. 14 September 2005. Retrieved 6 December 2012.
  111. "Wind-Wildlife Technology Research and Development". NREL National Wind Technology Center. Retrieved 7 May 2019.
  112. "Off the East Coast, a Massive Network of Wind Turbines Is Coming—Along With New Risks for Migrating Birds". Audubon. 2022-04-14. Retrieved 2022-09-23.
  113. J. Ryan Zimmerling, Andrea C. Pomeroy, Marc V. d'Entremont and Charles M. Francis, "Canadian estimate of bird mortality due to collisions and direct habitat loss associated with wind turbine developments", Avian Conservation & Ecology, 2013, v.8 n.2.
  114. Fitch, Davey. Upland birds face displacement threat from poorly sited wind turbines (press release), Royal Society for the Protection of Birds website, September 26, 2009. Retrieved August 2, 2013. This press release in turn cites:
  115. Smallwood, K. Shawn (2013). "Comparing bird and bat fatality-rate estimates among North American wind-energy projects". Wildlife Society Bulletin. 37: 19–33. doi:10.1002/wsb.260.
  116. Loss, Scott R.; Will, Tom; Marra, Peter P. (2013). "Estimates of bird collision mortality at wind facilities in the contiguous United States". Biological Conservation. 168: 201–09. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2013.10.007.
  117. "Study: California Wind Power is the Worst For Wildlife, Chris Clarke, November 2013". Archived from the original on 2014-02-20.
  118. abcadmin (2017-04-08). "Wind Energy and Birds FAQ — Part 1: Understanding the Threats". American Bird Conservancy. Retrieved 2022-09-24.
  119. Thaxter, Chris B.; Buchanan, Graeme B.; Carr, Jamie; Butchart, Stuart H. M.; Newbold, Tim; Green, Rhys E.; Tobias, Joseph A.; Foden, Wendy B.; O'Brien, Sue; Pearce-Higgins, James W. (13 September 2017). "Bird and bat species' global vulnerability to collision mortality at wind farms revealed through a trait-based assessment". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 284 (1862): 10. doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.0829. PMC 5597824. PMID 28904135.
  120. Welcker, J.; Liesenjohann, M.; Blew, J.; Nehls, G.; Grünkorn, T. (2017). "Nocturnal migrants do not incur higher collision risk at wind turbines than diurnally active species". Ibis. 159 (2): 366–73. doi:10.1111/ibi.12456.
  121. "The impact of wind turbines on biodiversity and how to minimise it". Retrieved 2022-09-24.
  122. Sovacool, B. K. (2013). "The avian benefits of wind energy: A 2009 update". Renewable Energy. 49: 19–24. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.074.
  123. Shepherd, Abby (2022-08-01). "Wind turbines and solar panels can hurt birds and bats. A Missouri group hopes to help". The Beacon. Retrieved 2022-09-24.
  124. Li, Xiaohan; Liu, Yang; Zhu, Yuhui (2022). "The Effects of Climate Change on Birds and Approaches to Response". IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 1011 (1): 012054. Bibcode:2022E&ES.1011a2054L. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1011/1/012054. S2CID 248122037.
  125. Sovacool, Benjamin K. (2013). "The avian benefits of wind energy: A 2009 update". Renewable Energy. 49: 19–24. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.074.
  126. Narwhal, The. "Extreme heat a strain for birds already burdened by habitat loss". The Narwhal. Retrieved 2022-09-24.
  127. Bob Yirka (15 August 2012). "British researchers find geese alter course to avoid wind farm". Phys.org. Retrieved 6 December 2012.
  128. Why are wind turbines being painted black?
  129. "Do Wind Turbines Kill Birds? (How, Statistics + Prevention)". Birdfact. Retrieved 2022-09-24.
  130. "Wind Turbines A Breeze For Migrating Birds". New Scientist (2504): 21. 18 June 2005. Retrieved 6 December 2012.
  131. Desholm, Mark; Johnny Kahlert (9 June 2005). "Avian Collision Risk At An Offshore Wind Farm". Biology Letters. 1 (3): 296–98. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0336. PMC 1617151. PMID 17148191.
  132. "Can AI stop rare eagles flying into wind turbines in Germany?". The Guardian. 2022-09-20. Retrieved 2022-09-20.
  133. "Critical federal approvals for massive Wyoming wind project". AP. 18 January 2017. Retrieved 29 October 2017.
  134. "BLM Announces Major Milestone and FWS Issues Record of Decision for Potential Eagle Take Permit for Chokecherry and Sierra Madre Phase I Wind Energy Project". Bureau of Land Management. 9 March 2016. Retrieved 29 October 2017. "take" (disturb, injure or kill)
  135. "Using Markets to Limit Eagle Mortality from Wind Power". PERC. 2022-07-26. Retrieved 2022-09-24.
  136. Baerwald, Erin F; D'Amours, Genevieve H; Klug, Brandon J; Barclay, Robert MR (2008-08-26). "Barotrauma is a significant cause of bat fatalities at wind turbines". Current Biology. 18 (16): R695–R696. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2008.06.029. OCLC 252616082. PMID 18727900. S2CID 17019562.
  137. "Caution Regarding Placement of Wind Turbines on Wooded Ridge Tops" (PDF). Bat Conservation International. 4 January 2005. Retrieved 2006-04-21.
  138. "Effectiveness of Changing Wind Turbine Cut-in Speed to Reduce Bat Fatalities at Wind Facilities" (PDF). American Wind Energy Association. 2009-04-28. Retrieved 2009-04-28.
  139. Aron, Jacob (2009-07-17). "Radar beams could protect bats from wind turbines". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2009-07-17.
  140. Nicholls, Barry; Racey, Paul A. (2007). Cresswell, Will (ed.). "Bats Avoid Radar Installations: Could Electromagnetic Fields Deter Bats from Colliding with Wind Turbines?". PLOS ONE. 2 (3): e297. Bibcode:2007PLoSO...2..297N. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000297. PMC 1808427. PMID 17372629.
  141. Arnett, Edward B.; Hein, Cris D.; Schirmacher, Michael R.; Huso, Manuela M. P.; Szewczak, Joseph M. (2013-09-10). "Correction: Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Ultrasonic Acoustic Deterrent for Reducing Bat Fatalities at Wind Turbines". PLOS ONE. 8 (9). doi:10.1371/annotation/a81f59cb-0f82-4c84-a743-895acb4b2794. ISSN 1932-6203.
  142. Morin, Monte. 600,000 bats killed at wind energy facilities in 2012, study says, Los Angeles Times, November 8, 2013.
  143. "Naturalist Traces The 'Astounding' Flyways Of Migratory Birds". NPR. Retrieved 2021-03-30.
  144. "First Evidence That Offshore Wind Farms Are Changing the Oceans". MIT Technology Review. 22 September 2017. Retrieved 15 December 2021.
  145. Slavik, Kaela; Lemmen, Carsten; Zhang, Wenyan; Kerimoglu, Onur; Klingbeil, Knut; Wirtz, Kai W. (9 May 2018). "The large scale impact of offshore wind farm structures on pelagic primary productivity in the southern North Sea". arXiv:1709.02386 [q-bio.PE].
  146. "Wind Power Found to Affect Local Climate". Scientific American.
  147. "Turbines and turbulence". Nature. 468 (7327): 1001. 2010. Bibcode:2010Natur.468Q1001.. doi:10.1038/4681001a. PMID 21179120.
  148. Baidya Roy, Somnath; Traiteur, Justin J. (2010). "Impacts of wind farms on surface air temperatures". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107 (42): 17899–904. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10717899B. doi:10.1073/pnas.1000493107. PMC 2964241. PMID 20921371.
  149. Wind farms impacting weather Archived 2010-09-06 at the Wayback Machine, Science Daily.
  150. Keith, David W.; Decarolis, Joseph F.; Denkenberger, David C.; Lenschow, Donald H.; Malyshev, Sergey L.; Pacala, Stephen; Rasch, Philip J. (2004). "The influence of large-scale wind power on global climate". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 101 (46): 16115–20. Bibcode:2004PNAS..10116115K. doi:10.1073/pnas.0406930101. PMC 526278. PMID 15536131.
  151. MIT analysis suggests generating electricity from large-scale wind farms could influence climate – and not necessarily in the desired way MIT, 2010.
  152. Miller, Lee M.; Keith, David W. (19 December 2018). "Climatic impacts of wind power" (PDF). Joule. 2 (12): 2618–2632. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2018.09.009. S2CID 53123459.
  153. Jacobson, Mark Z. (2 October 2018). "Response to Miller and Keith "Climatic Impacts of Windpower"(Joule, 2018)" (PDF). Renewable Energy (123).
  154. Jacobson, Mark Z. (6 October 2018). "Response to Reply of Miller and Keith" (PDF). Renewable Energy (123).
  155. Jacobson, M.Z.; Delucchi, M.A.; Cameron, M.A.; Mathiesen, B.V. (2018). "Matching demand with supply at low cost among 139 countries within 20 world regions with 100% intermittent wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) for all purposes" (PDF). Renewable Energy (123): 236–248. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018.02.009. S2CID 46784278.
  156. Jacobson, M.Z.; Delucchi, M.A.; et al. (2017). "100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for 139 countries of the world" (PDF). Joule. I: 108–121. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2017.07.005.
  157. Jacobson, M.Z.; Archer, C.L. (2012). "Saturation wind power potential and its implications for wind energy" (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109 (39): 15, 679–15, 684. Bibcode:2012PNAS..10915679J. doi:10.1073/pnas.1208993109. PMC 3465402. PMID 23019353.
  158. Chiu, Allyson; Guskin, Emily; Clement, Scott (3 October 2023). "Americans don't hate living near solar and wind farms as much as you might think". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 3 October 2023.
  159. Thomas Kirchhoff (2014): Energiewende und Landschaftsästhetik. Versachlichung ästhetischer Bewertungen von Energieanlagen durch Bezugnahme auf drei intersubjektive Landschaftsideale, in: Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 46 (1), 10–16.
  160. Tourismus und Regionalentwicklung in Bayern, Diana Schödl, Windkraft und Tourismus – planerische Erfassung der Konfliktbereiche, in Marius Mayer, Hubert Job, 5 December 2013, Arbeitsgruppe "Tourismus und Regionalentwicklung" der Landesarbeitsgemeinschaft Bayern der ARL, p 125. ff
  161. Günter Ratzbor (2011): Windenergieanlagen und Landschaftsbild. Zur Auswirkung von Windrädern auf das Landschaftsbild. Thesenpapier des Deutschen Naturschutzrings DNR Archived 2014-01-16 at the Wayback Machine, pp. 17–19
  162. Gourlay, Simon. Wind farms are not only beautiful, they're absolutely necessary, The Guardian, 12 August 2008.
  163. "Tourism blown off course by turbines". Berwickshire: The Berwickshire News. 2013-03-28. Retrieved 2013-10-08.
  164. Young, Kathryn (2007-08-03). "Canada wind farms blow away turbine tourists". Edmonton Journal. Archived from the original on 2009-04-25. Retrieved 2008-09-06.
  165. Zhou, Renjie; Yadan Wang (2007-08-14). "Residents of Inner Mongolia Find New Hope in the Desert". Worldwatch Institute. Archived from the original on 2010-11-09. Retrieved 2008-11-04.
  166. "Centre d'interprétation du cuivre de Murdochville". Archived from the original on 2008-07-05. Retrieved 2008-11-19. – The Copper Interpretation Centre of Murdochville, Canada features tours of a wind turbine on Miller Mountain.
  167. Windenergie in Deutschland: Konstellationen, Dynamiken und Regulierungspotenziale Im Innovationsprozess, Bö Ohlhorst, Springer-Verlag, 2009, p.90 ff
  168. Windenergie in Deutschland: Konstellationen, Dynamiken und Regulierungspotenziale Im Innovationsprozess, Bö Ohlhorst, Springer-Verlag, 2009, p.163, "Kritik an zunehmend industrieller Charakter der Windenergienutzung"
  169. Dipert, Brian. Cutting the carbon-energy cord: Is the answer blowin' in the wind?, EDN Network website, December 15, 2006.
  170. Sören Schöbel (2012): Windenergie und Landschaftsästhetik: Zur landschaftsgerechten Anordnung von Windfarmen, Jovis-Verlag, Berlin
  171. UNESCO's Wind Turbine Problem: Mont-Saint-Michel's World Heritage Status Under Threat, Stefan Simons, Der Spiegel
  172. Nohl, Werner (2009): Landschaftsästhetische Auswirkungen von Windkraftanlagen, p.2, 8
  173. Fittkau, Ludger: Ästhetik und Windräder, Neues Gutachten zu "Windenergienutzung und bedeutenden Kulturlandschaften" in Rheinland-Pfalz, Kultur heute, 30 July 2013
  174. Rod Thompson (20 May 2006). "Wind turbine lights have opponents seeing sparks". Honolulu Star-Bulletin. Retrieved 2008-01-15.
  175. New South Wales Government (1 November 2010). The wind energy fact sheet Archived 2011-03-20 at the Wayback Machine, Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water of New South Wales, p. 12.
  176. "How Much Noise Does a Wind Turbine Make?". 2014-08-03.
  177. Wind Energy Comes of Age By Paul Gipe
  178. Gohlke, Julia M.; Hrynkow, Sharon H.; Portier, Christopher J. (2008). "Health, Economy, and Environment: Sustainable Energy Choices for a Nation". Environmental Health Perspectives. 116 (6): A236–37. doi:10.1289/ehp.11602. PMC 2430245. PMID 18560493.
  179. Professor Simon Chapman. "Summary of main conclusions reached in 25 reviews of the research literature on wind farms and health" Sydney University School of Public Health, April 2015
  180. Hamilton, Tyler (15 December 2009). "Wind Gets Clean Bill of Health". Toronto Star. Toronto. pp. B1–B2. Retrieved 16 December 2009.
  181. W. David Colby, Robert Dobie, Geoff Leventhall, David M. Lipscomb, Robert J. McCunney, Michael T. Seilo, Bo Søndergaard. "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Panel Review", Canadian Wind Energy Association, December 2009.
  182. "Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study: Summary of Results". 17 December 2012.
  183. Committee on Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects, National Research Council (2007). Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects, pp. 158–59.
  184. Rodmell, D. & Johnson, M., 2002. The development of marine based wind energy generation and inshore fisheries in UK waters: Are they compatible? In M. Johnson & P. Hart, eds. Who owns the sea? University of Hull, pp. 76–103.
  185. "Environmental Effects of Wind and Marine Renewable Energy". tethys.pnnl.gov. Retrieved 2022-09-20.
  186. Pace, Federica (21 July 2015). "Did You Hear That? Reducing Construction Noise at Offshore Wind Farms". www.renewableenergyworld.com. Retrieved 29 October 2017. an SEL limit of 160 dB re 1 μPa2 s outside a 750-meter radius for pile-driving operations appears in the licence conditions for offshore wind farms
  187. Internationales Wirtschaftsforum Regenerative Energien (IWR), German wind power industry Offshore windpark website Archived 2014-07-29 at the Wayback Machine
  188. Study finds offshore wind farms can co-exist with marine environment, BusinessGreen.com website.
  189. UK Offshore Energy: Strategic Environmental Assessment, UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, January 2009.
  190. Johnson, M.L.; Rodmell, D.P. (2009). "Fisheries, the environment and offshore wind farms: Location, location, location". Food Ethics. 4 (1): 23–24.
  191. Warwicker, Michelle. "Seals 'feed' at offshore wind farms, study shows" BBC, 21 July 2014. Accessed: 22 July 2014. Video of seal path
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.