This document provides a useful compilation of recent research pertaining to the impact of wind turbines on human health.

Concern over climate change has led the U.S. to consider a cap-and-trade system to regulate emissions. Here we illustrate the land-use impact to U.S. habitat types of new energy development resulting from different U.S. energy policies. We estimated the total new land area needed by 2030 to produce energy, under current law and under various cap-and-trade policies, and then partitioned the area impacted among habitat types with geospatial data on the feasibility of production. The land-use intensity of different energy production techniques varies over three orders of magnitude, from 1.9–2.8 km2/TW hr/yr for nuclear power to 788–1000 km2/TW hr/yr for biodiesel from soy. In all scenarios, temperate deciduous forests and temperate grasslands will be most impacted by future energy development, although the magnitude of impact by wind, biomass, and coal to different habitat types is policy-specific. Regardless of the existence or structure of a cap-and-trade bill, at least 206,000 km2 will be impacted without substantial increases in energy efficiency. ...The possibility of widespread energy sprawl increases the need for energy conservation, appropriate siting, sustainable production practices, and compensatory mitigation offsets.

Ben Hoen, Dr. Ryan Wiser, and others conducted a national study to determine the impact of industrial-scale wind turbines on nearby property values. The preliminary conclusions of the report were announced in 2007, however, no report has been released. Windaction.org had an opportunity to review the study's methodology and provide comments to Hoen and Wiser. Our comments can be accessed by downloading the file at the bottom of this page.

This important report, which appeared in the Wildlife Society's Journal of Wildlife Management, details the effect on raptor and bird mortality following repowering a portion of the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area (APWRA) in California (USA). Repowering involves removing older generation towers and replacing them with higher capacity -- and potentially better sited -- units. The abstract to this report appears below. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the link at the bottom of this page.

The U.S. wind industry experienced a banner year in 2008, surpassing even optimistic growth projections from years past. At the same time, the past year has been one of upheaval, with the global financial crisis impacting near-term growth prospects for the wind industry, and with significant federal policy changes enacted to push the industry towards continued aggressive expansion. Dr. Ryan Wiser, and others, prepared this detail analysis of wind development in the United States.

The Animal Welfare Institute, Mountain Communities for Responsible Energy and David G. Cowan have filed a law suit against Beech Ridge Energy LLC and Invenergy Wind LLC under the federal Endangered Species Act ("ESA"). This filing seeks preliminary injunction to halt further construction, turbine erection, and operation of the Beech Ridge industrial wind power project. The plaintiffs argue that the project, if constructed, will result in the "likely killing, injury, and other forms of "take" of endangered Indiana bats in violation of the ESA." The wind project is proposed to be located on ridgelines in Greenbrier County, West Virginia.

It's commonly believed that new wind power generation will displace coal and natural gas-fueled power plants and thereby avoid all their associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2). The benefits of these avoided emissions have become a major factor in wind developers gaining public support for their plans to site wind farms. These purported benefits also are the reason for the large subsidies governments have provided to offset wind's higher power production costs. Unfortunately, some of these environmental claims are built upon incorrect assumptions about how U.S. environmental regulations actually work and the type of generation a new wind project will displace. On any given power project, the benefits of avoided air emissions can be calculated as the simple difference between whether a designated project is built versus if the project is not built. This simple calculation has been incorrectly done by several renewable project developers and their consultants. Their mistakes have led them to incorrectly claim large air emission benefits from building new wind facilities.

Windaction.org is grateful to Dr. Smallwood for taking the time to develop these constructive comments in response to the US Fish and Wildlife Service's 3rd draft of its wind turbine siting guidelines.

In late February 2009 the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) received a request from the Office of Energy Security (OES) in the Minnesota Department of Commerce, for a “white paper” evaluating possible health effects associated with low frequency vibrations and sound arising from large wind energy conversion systems (LWECS). MDH agreed to evaluate health impacts from wind turbine noise and low frequency vibrations. In discussion with OES, MDH also proposed to examine experiences and policies of other states and countries. Below are the Introduction and Conclusions of the white paper released in May 2009. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the link at the bottom of this page.

Eric R. Glitzenstein of the public interest law firm Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal in Washington DC filed this letter with the U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar on behalf of a number of conservation and citizen groups concerned with the impact of poorly sited and constructed wind power projects on bat and bird populations and other wildlife resources.