TY - JOUR
T1 - Noise pollution from wind turbines and its effects on wildlife
T2 - A cross-national analysis of current policies and planning regulations
AU - Teff-Seker, Y.
AU - Berger-Tal, O.
AU - Lehnardt, Y.
AU - Teschner, N.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank several scholars for their help in clarifying and obtaining relevant planning guideline documents for this study: Prof. Johann Koeppel and Dr. Gesa Geissler for their assistance with the German data, Dr. Kenneth Shawn Smallwood and Prof. Jesse Barber for their help with the California data, and Dr. Benny Furst for his advice regarding the Israeli case study. A special thank you to Prof. Sven-Erik Rose for his assistance in translating the German documents. We thank the reviewers and the editors for their comments, which contributed to manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors
PY - 2022/10/1
Y1 - 2022/10/1
N2 - The quest for cleaner energy has caused governments to expand renewable energy infrastructure, including wind turbine farms. However, wind turbines (WTs) can also pose a risk to certain wildlife species, with wildlife-related research predominantly focusing on the potential harm caused to birds and bats from impact injuries. New evidence suggests that WT noise (WTN) impacts on wildlife can also be detrimental to wildlife, but rarely receive attention from planners. Potential types of WTN impact, including damage to wildlife physical wellbeing, vital survival mechanisms, social and reproductive processes, and habitat continuity. This article reviews the current literature on WTN effects on wildlife, and analyzes the planning guidelines relating to WTN and wildlife in three selected locales where WT infrastructure is being expanded: California, Germany, and Israel. Findings indicate that none of them have clear zoning limitations or obligatory environmental impact assessment (EIA) guidelines that require addressing the WTN effects on wildlife. However, some steps taken by planning authorities suggest potential for improvement. These include language in California planning recommendations addressing the potential effects of WTN on wildlife; a German survey of local bird species’ sensitivity to noise (including a WTN section); and increasing non-obligatory recommendations that encourage distancing WTs from protected areas. The study concludes that WTN effects on wildlife could be mitigated by gathering additional scientific data on WTN impacts, mapping species presence and auditory sensitivity to provide information for planners and advisors, and mandating the use of better science-informed practices and technologies for WTN reduction, such as long-term monitoring, zoning, and micro-siting.
AB - The quest for cleaner energy has caused governments to expand renewable energy infrastructure, including wind turbine farms. However, wind turbines (WTs) can also pose a risk to certain wildlife species, with wildlife-related research predominantly focusing on the potential harm caused to birds and bats from impact injuries. New evidence suggests that WT noise (WTN) impacts on wildlife can also be detrimental to wildlife, but rarely receive attention from planners. Potential types of WTN impact, including damage to wildlife physical wellbeing, vital survival mechanisms, social and reproductive processes, and habitat continuity. This article reviews the current literature on WTN effects on wildlife, and analyzes the planning guidelines relating to WTN and wildlife in three selected locales where WT infrastructure is being expanded: California, Germany, and Israel. Findings indicate that none of them have clear zoning limitations or obligatory environmental impact assessment (EIA) guidelines that require addressing the WTN effects on wildlife. However, some steps taken by planning authorities suggest potential for improvement. These include language in California planning recommendations addressing the potential effects of WTN on wildlife; a German survey of local bird species’ sensitivity to noise (including a WTN section); and increasing non-obligatory recommendations that encourage distancing WTs from protected areas. The study concludes that WTN effects on wildlife could be mitigated by gathering additional scientific data on WTN impacts, mapping species presence and auditory sensitivity to provide information for planners and advisors, and mandating the use of better science-informed practices and technologies for WTN reduction, such as long-term monitoring, zoning, and micro-siting.
KW - Anthropogenic noise
KW - Noise pollution
KW - Planning regulation
KW - Protected areas
KW - Renewable energy
KW - Wind turbines
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85136531784&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112801
DO - 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112801
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85136531784
SN - 1364-0321
VL - 168
JO - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
JF - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
M1 - 112801
ER -