Debate swirls as wind power grows rapidly

Pollution-free energy source means high death toll for birds, bats

Donna Connor / AP file

Wind energy is posing a dilemma for environmentalists who support its pollution-free electricity but have grown increasingly alarmed at its death toll on birds and bats.

Most popular

updated 8:16 p.m. ET Jan. 8, 2006

STAMFORD, Conn. - Giant windmills — on scenic mountain ridges, prairie grass and even an Indian reservation — are spinning an unusual debate that is dividing leading environmentalists.

Wind power grew rapidly in 2005, becoming more competitive as natural gas prices jumped and crude oil prices reached record highs. Improved technology, a federal tax credit and pressure on utilities to use clean energy sources helped fuel the growth from coast to coast.

But wind energy is posing a dilemma for environmentalists who support its pollution-free electricity but have grown increasingly alarmed at its death toll on birds and bats.

Story continues below ↓

Officials in Atlantic City, N.J., dedicated the nation's first coastal wind farm last month, while Fairfield-based General Electric Co. announced a startup near San Diego of the largest wind power farm on Indian land.

The industry added about 2,500 megawatts of wind power last year, a record 35 percent increase, according to the American Wind Energy Association, an industry trade group. The country's wind capacity is more than 9,200 megawatts in 30 states, enough for 2.4 million average U.S homes.

Wind power still makes up less than 1 percent of the nation's electricity, but experts expect wind to generate at least 5 percent by 2020.

"The wind resource in the United States is comparable to the oil resource in Saudi Arabia," said Tom Gray, deputy executive director of the association. "It's a major strategic national resource we should be making every effort to develop."

The environmental debate has intensified as the first offshore projects are proposed in popular tourist areas, such as Cape Cod, Long Island, N.Y., and the New Jersey shore. Critics, including a member of the influential Kennedy family, worry that some projects could harm national treasures.

"All of a sudden you're transferring an asset used by 5 million people into the hands of private industrial speculators," said Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmentalist who has objected to the Cape Cod proposal. "If you're giving away public rights, you ought to make sure the public benefits from this transfer, that the costs do not exceed the benefits."

Kennedy's stance has put him at odds with the environmental organization Greenpeace, which last August sent boats to interrupt a visit by Kennedy. Supporters say the project would meet the region's energy needs in an environmentally friendly way.

Conservationists also have wrestled with the wind farms.

In Kansas, conservation groups have asked state officials to create guidelines for wind energy developments, citing concerns that more wind farms will harm the last remnants of the nation's prairie grass and prairie chicken populations.

CONTINUED: Minimal oversight over wind plants

1 | 2 | Next >