Gamesa Corp., an international company with over a decade of experience in wind turbine innovation, manufacturing, and installation, recently announced that it will scrap plans for the 60 megawatt Shaffer Mountain Wind Farm project in Pennsylvania. Interestingly, it’s not oil and gas companies that are celebrating — it’s conservationists.
Company officials state that a “combination of factors, including uncertainty surrounding federal policies” contributed to their decision to abandon plans for the wind power project in Somerset County, but it’s no secret that the project has been the target of serious opposition from locals for the past six years. A roughly constructed website called ShafferMountain.com is dedicated to informing the public that “Shaffer Mountain is not the right place for a wind farm” and that “wind power is a scam.”
The Shaffer Mountain Wind Farm would have placed 30 Gamesa turbines in an undeveloped area that many consider to be exceptionally valuable. The area is full of mountain streams, upland wetlands, vernal ponds and bogs that are home to threatened plants and animals. Opponents of the wind farm said that any development, even in the name of renewable energy, would put that habitat at risk. Others opposed the farm for purely aesthetic reasons, saying they didn’t want turbines on the pristine mountain ridge.
A local paper reports that an endangered Indiana bat found dead last September under a wind turbine near Lilly interrupted Shaffer Mountain’s permitting process while U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service investigators reviewed the situation. Shaffer Mountain has an Indiana bat maternity colony and local wildlife experts feared that the turbines would block their migratory path.
As America becomes desperate for alternatives to rapidly dwindling oil and coal, it’s likely that disputes like this will become more common. They raise an interesting question about where our priorities should lie when working to develop the clean energy technology sector. Is the ability to power 18,000 Pennsylvania homes with wind energy a valid reason to risk the potential disruption of an endangered species’ habitat? Animals have adapted to environmental changes for millions of years, and bats have incredible natural sonar that allows them to detect tiny bugs in total darkness. Would something as massive as a wind turbine really give them that much trouble?
Not to mention that Pennsylvania is a massive producer of coal, one of the dirtiest and most dangerous forms of energy on the planet. A recent U.S. study, Comparison of Reported Effects and Risks to Vertebrate Wildlife — which appears to be the only comparative study of electricity generation to factor in wildlife mortality — concludes that coal-fired generation is a far greater killer, thanks to emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon dioxide and mercury. Where is the massive outcry from Pennsylvania outdoorsmen over the continued operation of these plants throughout the state?
The Gamesa incident is a warning about potential issues that will arise repeatedly in the energy game between those with different vested interests. Agencies like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as well as private wind and solar companies would do well to spur research into the impact versus benefits of these projects. Rejecting renewable energy development in the name of endangered species will only serve to hasten their extinction that much faster.
Photo credit: Gamesa Corp.