It is my understanding that legal actions against the wind industry from several different parties may take place in the near future. To help with these actions I am going to give my expert opinion in a series of posts pertaining to the wind industry’s non-scientific and fraudulent mortality data. These posts may include my personal notes.
The highest annual estimated bird mortality from wind turbines in the US is claimed to be no more than 573,000. After reading through these notes, it will become obvious this estimate is an absurdity. This post analyzes some of the manipulation of a study conducted at a University around one large 2 MW wind turbine. Read how this unscientific study relates to the highest of all the fake US wind mortality estimates. My notes on the Lewes Delaware wind turbine mortality study
“In May 2010 a Gamesa G90 2.0 megawatt wind turbine was erected in Lewes, DE
through a collaborative effort between The University of Delaware, Gamesa
Technology Corporation, Inc. and Sustainable Energy Developments, Inc.
The turbine was commissioned and began generating electricity in June 2010.
The turbine has a tower height of 78.03 m (256 feet) above ground with a
three blade rotor diameter of 90m (295 feet), thus a rotor swept area
of 6,362 m2. The blades can turn up to 19 RPM, giving it a top rotational speed of 89.54 m/s
(200.28 mph) at the blade tips”
This study was pitiful and in no way scientific. This study was set up to hide most of the mortality from this turbine. Was this from stupidity or deliberate? When reading over this study it appeared more like a rigged card game or preset slot machine. Everything about this study reeks with conflicts of interest and collusion. At the university level with their funding, the business level with their profit motives and at the government level by looking the other way. What if nuclear reactors, weapons technology, NASA or advanced medicine had these same non scientific standards? Pay close attention to the direction of the rotor sweep in the images because spinning turbine blades smash carcasses and send them flying great distances with a directional force. Also pay close attention to these images showing how much of this turbines blades extended past the search area boundary.
This turbine has an active Yaw and the sweep can rotate depending on wind direction. How much of the time was this turbine throwing bodies completely away from the designated search area? This study does not say. I have studied prevailing winds information at this location and primary carcass throw aided by winds are away from the search area.
Search area was 1.41 acres or 5705 square meters. This is a search area even smaller than the search areas used on the tiny 100 kW turbines at Altamont. The first and only credible mortality study I've ever found had search areas of 50 meters out from towers around turbines less than 100 . This turbine is rated at 2MW, 20 time more. I know of studies around 1.5 MW that produced blade victims 155 meters and further from turbine towers. The proper adjustment for the search area around this turbine should have been 200 -250 meters out from the turbine base in all directions. In other words an area of at least 125600 square meters or an area 22 times larger should have been the expected area to find carcasses. In addition, every carcass found incidentally, outside the formal search area and all wounded/grounded birds within 1/2 square mile should have been called a turbine mortality for a proper assessment of this turbines mortality impact to species living in this habitat..
"We instructed maintenance staff not move or disturb any carcass during any of their time at the turbine site and to only disclose the location of any specimen they found to the senior researcher". ....... Did the senior researcher filter through the bodies culling out every threatened and endangered species? Otherwise why would staff need to say anything? Telling them not to disturb the site should have been enough.
"We recorded any carcasses found outside of formal searches as incidentals".
Why? To hide turbine mortality? Carcasses were found outside this tiny search area and this turbine was killing all these birds. Their locations should have been a huge red flag for any numb skull or dimwit to increase the search area size and/or to account for all carcasses that were to be found over a much bigger area. Why would any study dismiss carcasses found outside of formal searches be treated as incidentals and why would anybody except researchers ever be looking? Were others with access to the site moving and discarding carcasses away from search areas? With no controls there is no way of knowing.
“We found all carcasses within 50m of the turbine".......................How convenient, especially when the blades are 45 meters long and they are only looking in a small open area. But in my opinion and Newton's laws of motion, this feat or description of carcass locations, in actuality is totally impossible. Nice try scholars.
The adjustment factor of 1.56, taken from a tiny search area and ignoring all carcasses in the outlying areas around this turbine, was used to estimate that this turbine had 82 fatal collisions. "We estimate that 82 fatal collisions by birds and bats occurred between March 2011 and February 2012 after adjusting observed fatality rates for search effort, search efficiency," Here is the saddest and most disgraceful part of this entire study. The adjustment factor based upon a tiny 5705 square meters search area and the remaining area 120,000 square meters (200 meters out) not searched or accounted for, should have been 22.0 or greater. Especially when search areas avoided the obvious carcasses throw areas. If a 22.0 adjustment factor were used, mortality would have jumped to 1166 birds and bats killed by a single turbine in one year. At this mortality rate (approx. 600 per MW) carried over the entire 75,000 MW of of America's installed capacity, produces an annual mortality rate of 45,000,000 birds and bats. The first year of operation this turbine killed at least 2 Ospreys. An established Ospery nest located near this turbine, failed. Nesting mortality caused by turbines killing an adult is common and this has never been accounted for in any wind turbine mortality study. "We are uncertain as to whether the two Osprey collisions we detected were of migrating or breeding individuals because they occurred during April and July; times when both breeding and migrating individuals co-occur in the area."