These bat species are far more important than First Wind's profits. There's presently a glut of generation in New England and First Wind's intermittent power does nothing more than add to the surplus on the grid. ...First Wind agreed to curtailment during low wind speeds at certain temperatures and now seems to be complaining that such curtailment won't be profitable. Too bad for them.

If wind power is to achieve its potential in the western Lake Erie region, the wind industry must concede the risks such generation poses and address them sensitively. Denial and rationalization will work to the industry's detriment.

Things are going badly for our wildlife populations in and around the operating industrial scale wind projects in Wisconsin. Anecdotal reports from people living in Wisconsin wind projects report an absence of normal wildlife, i.e. no turkey, no deer, fewer or no songbirds, and no bats. Relatives and friends outside the wind facility report greater numbers of deer and turkey.

There are plans moving forward rapidly by PPL Renewable Energy LLC, Allentown, and the Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority to construct and operate two gigantic utility-scale wind turbines on top of Turkey Hill in Manor Township. ...Regretfully, there are significant wildlife and environmental problems associated with the proposed Frey Farm Landfill Wind Energy Project. To begin, common sense should dictate that plans are inappropriate to construct two gigantic wind turbines in the middle of such an exceptionally bird-rich location.

I am extremely concerned at the detrimental impact the construction of wind turbines on the land adjacent to High Elms Lane, Benington could have on wildlife. It is well known locally that this site supports a large and varied wildlife and many of the species are of national and international importance. It has taken a long time and sympathetic farming to encourage so many species to thrive in this area. A total of 26 mammal species (not counting bats) and 75 bird species have been recorded around the proposed wind farm, along with various amphibians and reptiles.

A series of events on bats look set to be overshadowed by problems affecting the mammals' chances of survival, according to an expert. Anne Youngman, the Bat Conservation Trust's Scottish officer, said wet weather may have hit the breeding season for a second year running. ...On the agenda is a presentation on wind farms in mountain areas of Portugal. Ms Youngman said: "Wind farms were a hot topic at the last symposium. "In Germany, there are turbines above forests and the mortality rate of bats has been found to be high.

Highland New Wind Development (HNWD), developer of the proposed 20-turbine ridgeline wind project in Highland County, Virginia, has taken its search for investors to extremes, posting a website entitled: "The Greenest Windfarm in the World." ...This greenest-of-all posturing puts a new spin on the permit conditions imposed by the State Corporation Commission (SCC). Although potential investors will want to know why the SCC imposed precedent-setting wildlife monitoring conditions on the project, this critical information is missing from the HNWD website. Most of the extensive record, however, including expert reports and testimony submitted to the SCC, is provided here on the Virginia Wind website.

Before everyone becomes too hyped up about the wind turbines, we need to take a serious look on how they will affect local wildlife. It is no secret that the spinning turbine blades have been responsible for killing birds and bats worldwide. Bats have been especially prone to colliding with the blades - thousands are believed to be killed annually in the U.S., with the majority being threatened species. It is believed by some experts that the wind turbines emit an ultrasonic frequency that confuses bats and predatory birds, possibly even attracting them to the turbines. More recently, bat biologists have reported that the turbines have been placed in migratory paths, further increasing bat kills. Studies have revealed that the deaths in question occurred only when the turbines were in operation.

The Texas Hill Country, home to the world's largest remaining bat colonies, has been the focus of proposals for wind energy projects. We are deeply concerned about the potentially serious consequences to Hill Country wildlife - ironically, from an energy source commonly promoted as "green." ...While we feel it is the private landowner's decision whether to participate in wind energy development, overarching concerns for wildlife create a need for caution. Development of wind energy in areas of high wildlife usage, such as certain Hill Country and Gulf Coast sites, should be avoided until credible scientific documentation of threat levels and solutions has been gathered. ...The environmental consciousness demonstrated by AES SeaWest in the Hill Country must be emulated throughout the wind-energy industry. Companies that put wildlife at risk cannot claim to produce "green energy."

Alexander Skirpan, the hearing examiner, made several recommendations most will appreciate, including requiring mitigation and monitoring throughout the life of the project as needed. ...But most still retain hope the project will never come to fruition. Hurdles remain. Investors will be wary of HNWD's decision to ignore strong advice about getting a habitat conservation plan and incidental take permit for endangered species. There are still lawyers waiting in the wings for the first time one of those raptors is found dead at the foot of a wind tower. Without taking the best steps to mitigate its own financial outlook, HNWD may not be able to get backing it needs.

Bats serve important ecological functions that keep natural systems in balance, especially insect control. Their diminishment could impact humans in ways ranging from decreased crop yields and increased use of pesticides to greater incidence of insect-borne diseases. There is a risk that the public will accept wind energy as an easy solution to global warming without understanding the necessity of monitoring and mitigation requirements. It is important for the public to recognize that while the proposed development could produce up to 39 megawatts of power under ideal conditions, eastern turbines average less than a third of that amount over the course a year, and much less than a third during the summer when electricity demand is highest.

More consideration and belief need to be given to the vast research that has been done regarding the impact of wind turbines on our environment before decisions are made again that will profit a few and harm many.

Earlier this month, the National Academy of Science put forward some compelling evidence that industrial wind power has some serious flaws. Also, recent U.S. Congress hearings brought forth several expert testimonies that warn of a potential environmental disaster (birds, bats, etc.) due to poor siting of turbines and lack of accountability. There are gaping holes in the protection of wildlife, birds and bats in particular, from poorly sited, constructed and monitored wind turbines in both the U.S. and Canada.

Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Katie McGinty’s claim that the huge bat kill resulting from the Mountaineer industrial windfarm in West Virginia was an “aberration” is false. The kill rate for bats due to collision with the blades of industrial wind turbines on forested ridgetops east of the Mississippi River is 50-100 bats per turbine per year.

While the Audubon Society supports wind power, the group understandingly is lobbying state and local governments to require regional environmental impact studies before permitting proposed wind energy projects. In addition, Audubon wants each state to do a statewide survey to identify potential wind farm sites and overlay those sites with migratory bird pathways and bird and bat habitats.

Nothing in nature is ever quite that simple.

My viewpoint was, and still is, that the huge towers (260 feet high), gigantic blades (add another 150 feet), blinking strobe lights, permanent removal of wind-hindering vegetation, and highly visible road and transmission infrastructures are totally inappropriate for wild, undeveloped, scenic and highly visible settings. And I said I thought that opponents should focus on those issues, as well as the small return in electricity for the massive public price paid, aesthetically and otherwise, and should perhaps stay away from the issue of bird mortality caused by the rapidly spinning blades. The jury is still out on that, I said, and conventional wisdom is that vastly more birds are killed by high-rise windows and free-running cats......Well, so much for conventional wisdom.

Editor's Note This opinion piece was written in response to a letter received from Lisa Linowes that is available via the link below.

In your column, you state bird mortality is a subject that wind energy opponents should stand down from. However, there is good reason for us to continue to shed light on this problem. To our knowledge, no commercial scale wind facility in the United States has been subject to pre-construction avian risk assessments that included remote sensing (radar or acoustical).

Editor's Note: Mr. Harrigan's reponse to this letter is available via the link below.