Coexistence of Eagles and Wind Power on Gotland -...
Transcript of Coexistence of Eagles and Wind Power on Gotland -...
Coexistence of Eagles and Wind
Power on Gotland
Outline
• Bird protection methods
• Automatic bird protection systems – detection
and deterrence / curtailment • DTBird
• Identiflight
• Merlin
• Others
Curtailment response times
• Testing
2
Bird protection methods
Deterrents / prevention techniques
• Deterrents / prevention techniques
• Passive acoustic (specific sound frequencies)
• Auditory stimuli (noise)
• Visual stimuli (laser, lights)
• Taste deterrents (grape-seed extract)
• Hiding prey mask
• Bright blades (paint)
• Compressed air
• Scarecrows
• Mapping protected birds’ areas with possible conflict with wind
power development interest
3
Automatic bird protection systems
DTBird®
• DTBird
Detection and deterrence (sound) or/and curtailment
Detection range based on birds’ wingspan
4
Figure 1 – DTBird detection system
Source: DTBird, 2016
Figure 2 – DTBird deterrent system
Source: DTBird, 2016
Figure 3 – DTBird video image with White-
Tailed Eagle
Source: DTBird, 2016
Automatic bird protection systems
Identiflight
• Identiflight
Detection and curtailment
Detection range up to 1 km
Species specific
5
Figure 4 – Identiflight detection system
Source: Boulder Imaging, 2017
Figure 5 – Identiflight installation tower
Source: Boulder Imaging, 2017
Figure 6 – Identiflight user interface
Source: Boulder Imaging, 2017
Automatic bird protection systems
Merlin radar system
• Merlin radar system
Detection with possibility for manual / automatic curtailment
Long detection range (≈ 4,5 km)
Conditioned specie identification
6
Figure 7 – Merlin Standard, I Model
Source: DeTect, 2015 Figure 8 – Merlin Extended tower
Source: DeTect, 2015
Figure 9 – Merlin Off road
Source: DeTect, 2015 Figure 10 – Merlin offshore
Source: DeTect, 2015
Technical specifications of the three first systems can be seen in
the pre-distributed booklet
Automatic bird protection systems
Other possibilities?
• Doppler radar systems improvement – detection
• Geo-fences
• Detection based on species’ characteristics
(ex: keratin’s amount)
• Improvements on turbine design
• Drones use
• Development of new research studies, for ex:
biological behavior patterns
birds’ habituation to deterrents
protection systems effectiveness
7
Curtailment response times
8
• Curtailment response times are dependent on each WTG
manufacturer.
Several manufacturers were contacted and all gave the same
answer:
• How to calculate an approximated curtailment
response time?
Two considerations were made:
a) According to the SvenskaKraftnät Requirements (SvKFS,2005)
b) Natural capabilities of the target species
Curtailment response times are
”Protected Intellectual Property”.
WTG = Wind Turbine Generator
Curtailment response times
Considerations
9
• (A) SvKFS,2005, says: ” It shall be possible to control the
production of a wind power group…regulate production
so fast that it is reduced to a value below 20% of
maximum power within 5 seconds.
• (B) Kochert, et al. 2002 says: the maximum golden eagle
flight speed is 80 mph (36 m/s) and the averaged flight
speed 28-32 mph (12,5 -13,4 m/s).
Curtailment response times
Results (considerations)
10
Bird
Protection
System
Maximum
Detection Range
Considering Eagles
[m]
(1) Maximum
Eagle Flight
Speed [m/s]
Time to the
WTG at (1) [s]
(2) Averaged
Eagle Flight
Speed [m/s]
Time to the
WTG at (2) [s]
DTBird 600 36 17 13,4 45
Identiflight 1000 36 28 13,4 75
Bird
Protection
System
Response
time [s]
Time to
the WTG
at (1) [s]
Including
response
time at (1)
[s]
Time to
the
WTG at
(2) [s]
Including
response
time at (2)
[s]
DTBird 2 – 10 17 7 - 15 45 35 - 43
Identiflight 0,2 28 27,8 75 74,8
Table 2: Golden Eagle Flight speed and maximum “expected time” to curtailment
Note: This assumption does not possess a scientific background,
nonetheless it shows that BPS based on curtailment can be effective.
Table 3: Interval between bird detection and curtailment based on table 2
BPS = Bird protection systems
Automatic bird protection systems
Tests – I (Identiflight & Merlin)
• Identiflight system Tested in the Top of the World wind farm in Wyoming, USA
Focus on golden eagles and bald eagles
(promising results but no published report, yet)
• Merlin radar system
”Marketable” product
Results:
Good detectability rate at long distances
Good detectability at night and under inclement weather
Difficulty evaluating birds’ specie
Difficulty identifying small objects within 80-120 m radius from
the turbines due to shadowing effect:
High number of false-positives at short distances
Non-detection below the RSA
11 RSA = Rotor Swept Area
Automatic bird protection systems
Tests – II (DTBird)
• DTBird system:
Verified and published results reports:
• Norway, (Smøla, 2012)
• Switzerland, (Haldenstein, 2015)
• Sweden, (Lundsbrunn, 2016)
Main Results / Conclusions:
(Smøla, 2012)
• Testing period (270 days)
• Detectability rate > 80%
• False positives per day = 1,2 per day (2d analyses)
Limited coverage (only 50% on the distance of 150-300 m)
System can be fine-tuned to reduce the FP rate
• Failure to detect in conditions < 200 lux
12 FP = False Positives
Automatic bird protection systems
Tests – III (DTBird)
(Smøla, 2012)
• Main focus on white-tailed eagles
• Collision Avoidance module (deterrent) activated 426 times
(45% birds, 55% false positives)
Warning system 63%
Dissuasion system 20%
• No collisions recorded
(Haldenstein, 2014)
• Testing period (19 days)
• 886 targets detected
• False positives = 69,3 %
Helicopters / Aircrafts (far)
Mosquitos (close)
13
From videos containing birds
Highly sensitivity to these objects
due to similarity in pixel size
Automatic bird protection systems
Tests – IV (DTBird)
(Haldenstein, 2014)
• Main focus in birds with large wingspan
Red kites (detection range 150 m)
• Most birds flew above the turbine, outside the CRA
• ”Stop Control” module was never activated
• Deterrent sound was weekly enabled/disabled
Inconclusive analysis on birds’ behavior
• No collisions recorded
(Lundsbrunn, 2015)
• Testing period (7 weeks = 78 days)
• 285 flights detected
31% below the RSA
69% above the RSA
• Detection rate = 5.8 birds per day
• False positives = 0,7 FP/day
14 RSA = Rotor Swept Area
FP = False Positives
CRA = Collision Risk Area
Automatic bird protection systems
Tests V - DTBird
(Lundsbrunn, 2015)
• Main focus on birds with wingspan lower than 1 m
Detection range of 250 m
Largest birds’ species identified:
Seabirds (27%)
Corvids (19%)
Raptors (10%)
• ”Stop Control” module was never activated
• Deterrent sound was enabled/disabled every second week
Assessment on flight pattern change
Enabling deterrent shows higher rate of flight pattern
change
• No collisions recorded
• A study on the sound (deterrent) perception/annoyance by the
neighbors of the wind farm was also performed
15
Bird protection systems
Questions
16
References - I
17
• Aschwanden, J., Wanner, S. & Liechti, F. (2015): Investigation on the effectivity of bat and bird detection at a wind
turbine: Final Report Bird Detection. Schweizerische Vogelwarte, Sempach.
• Bevanger, K et al, 2010, Pre-construction studies of conflicts between birds and wind turbines in coastal Norway
(Bird-Wind), Report on findings 2007-2010. - NINA Report 620. 156 pp.
• Detect, 2009, MERLIN Avian Radar System for Bird Activity Monitoring and Mortality Risk Mitigation [Online],
Available from: http://www.radarmeteo.com/documentazione/MERLIN_Avian_Radar_System.pdf, [Accessed 2nd
February 2017]
• Boulder Imaging, 2017, Identiflight [Online], Available from: http://www.boulderimaging.com/identiflight,
[Accessed 18th May 2017]
• Detect, 2015, Technical Data Sheet MERLIN SCADA Avian Radar Mortality Risk Mitigation System
[Online],Available from; http://www.detect-inc.com/avian.html, [Accessed 2nd February 2017]
• DTBird, 2016, Bird Monitoring & Reduction of Collision Risk with Wind Turbines [Online], Available from:
http://www.dtbird.com/images/Downloads/DTBird_System_Brochure__November_2016.pdf, Accessed 2nd of
February 2017
• DTBird, 2017, DTBird [Online], Available from: http://www.dtbird.com/index.php/, Accessed 2nd of February 2017
• Kochert, M., Steenhof, C.. McIntyre,E. Craig. 2002, Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Pp. 1-44 in A Poole, F Gill,
eds. The Birds of North America, Vol. 648. Philadelphia. [Online], Available from:
http://animaldiversity.org/site/accounts/information/Aquila%20chrysaetos.html#fc24c3d88c6924e829a36cc51ca358
14, Accessed [4th of April 2017]
• May, R., Hamre, Ø., Vang, R. & Nygård, T. 2012. “Evaluation of the DTBird video-system at the Smøla wind-power
plant - detection capabilities for capturing near-turbine avian behavior”, Report 910. 27 pp. Norwegian Institute for
Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim, Norway
• Nilsson, Marcos de la Puente (2015), DTBird System Pilot Installation – Test Results Summer 2015, Lundsbrunn
(Sweden)
References - II
18
• Renewable Energy Systems, 2017, Identiflight [Online], Available from: http://www.res-group.com/en/services-,
products/identiflight/. Accessed 30th of January 2017
• Sheppard, J.K., McGann, Andrew, Lanzone, Michael and Swaisgood Ronald (2015). An autonomous GPS
geofence alert system to curtail avian fatalities at wind farms, Anim Biotelemetry 3:43
• Saidur, R., Rahim, N.A., Islam, M.R., Solangi, K.H., 2011. “Environmental impact of wind energy”. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Reviews 15, 2423–2430.
• Sinclair, K. and DeGeorge, E., 2016a, “Wind Energy Industry Eagle Detection and Deterrents - Research Gaps and
Solutions Workshop Summary Report”, NREL/TP-5000-65735, 40pp. National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(NREL), Denver– Colorado
• SvFKS, 2005, SvKFS 2005:2, Affärsverket svenska kraftnäts författningssamling, Reglerbarhet för vindkraft, p. 11
• Watson, Jeff, 2010. The Golden Eagle. 1st ed. Poyser, London
Bird protection systems
Appendix
19
Bird protection systems
DTBird – Detection Module
• Installation
WTGs, meteorological
towers, other facilities
• Detection sensors
4 to 8 HD cameras per turbine
• Spatial coverage
360 degrees around
the installation site
• Detection Distance
Birds’ wingspan Detection range
> 150 cm 200 to 600 m
75 – 150 cm 100 to 350 m
< 75 cm 25 – 175 m
• Light conditions
> 50 lux
• Bird detectability
Higher than 80%
• False positives per day
0,5 – 5 (average in a year)
• Other features
Automatic recording (video and
sound)
Flight time data
Weather and operational data
Automatic database for
recordings
20
Bird protection systems
DTBird – Collision Avoidance Module
• Installation
Wind turbine
• Warning/Dissuasion Units
4 to 10 Speakers
• Features
Warning sound for birds in
PCRA
Dissuasion sound for birds in
HCRA
Trigger: 2s after detection
Adjustable for legal
requirements compliance
Sound projected to RSA
• False positives per day
0,2 – 4,5 per day
Duration
0.1 to 2.5 min/day
• Recorded data
Sound length and initial trigger
time
Video and sound
21
Bird protection systems
DTBird – Stop Control Module
• Interface with wind turbine
Hardware and software
compatible with WT
manufacturers
• Stop trigger
Automatic stop
Connected with real time
detection
• Collision Risk Area
Defined according to WT
complete rotor stop and bird’s
wingspan
• Rotor Stop (init time)
2 – 10 s after stop trigger
(dependent on WT model)
• Complete stop
10 – 25 s after stop init time
(dependent on WT model)
• Restart
Automatic after risk
disappearance
False positives Stops/yr
0,5 – 10 hours /year
• Automatic e-mail
notifications
22
Bird protection systems
Identiflight (Detection / Curtailment)
• Installation
10 m tower
• Detection sensors
8 HD cameras
Stereoscopic sensors for
measurement of 3d positions
• Spatial coverage
2 m3 from installation tower
360 degrees field of view
• Detection Distance
Up to 1 km distance
• Detection response time
Less than 200 ms
• Light conditions
Daylight conditions
• Bird detectability
More than 99 %
• Curtailment time
WTG manufacturer dependent
• Other features
Species Identification
Flexibility to add new species
characteristics
High resolution data collection
and traceability
Real-time identification
23
Bird protection systems
Merlin Radar System - Detection
• Installation
Flexible (mobile of fixed)
• Detection sensors
Dopplar Horizontal
Surveillence Radar
Vertical Surveillence Radar
(Scanning Radar)
• Spatial coverage
360 degrees field of view
• Detection Distance
Approx. 4,5 km
Detection response time
Less than 200 ms
• Light conditions
Day and night
• Bird detectability
Effective (?)
• Curtailment time
WTG manufacturer dependent
• Other features
Robust (suitable for onshore
and offshore)
Collection and tracking of all
detection data
24
Bird protection systems
Comparison
25 Table 1a) - Bird protection systems comparison, Sources: Renewable Energy Systems (2017); DTBird (2016); DeTect, (2015)
System Characteristics Identifl ightDTBird (collision avoidance
module)DTBird (Collision Control Module) Merlin Avian Radar System
Instalation Site 10 m height independent tower
Wind turbine tower (heigh defined
according to site characteristics
and client request)
Wind turbine tower (height
defined according to site
characteristics and client
request)
Separated Structure (Portable for
onshore and fixed to offshore
applications)
Detection System8 fixed cameras plus a
stereoscopic "planet tilt" camera4 to 8 High Definition (HD) cameras
4 to 8 High Definition (HD)
cameras
200 watt solid state doppler
horizontal surveillence radar and
25 KW vertical scanning radar
Spatial Coverage 360° / 2 km3
360° / Pre-designed according to
site specifications and client
request
360° / Pre-designed according to
site specifications and client
request
360° around site with 24° above
ground level and 0,75-2 miles, 22°
beam width
Detection Range Up to 1km
According to taget specie's
wingspan (maximum 200-600m for
winspan > 150 cm)
According to taget specie's
wingspan (maximum 200-600m
for winspan > 150 cm)
15,000 ft above ground level
(≈4,5 km)
Detectability under "bad weather
conditions"
Not good under foggy and heavy
rain conditions Good over 50 lux Good over 50 lux Good
Night Detection No Under Development Under Development Non-specified
Species IdentificationYes, with ability to detect different
species with similar wingspanNo No
Yes (size based), but conditioned
to the existence of similar sized
birds foraging the area
Bird Detectability rate > 99 % > 80 % > 80 % Non-specified
False-Positives < 1%
Triggers: 0.2-4.5 per day with the
duration of 0.1 to 2.5 minutes/day
(yearly average)
Stopping time: 0.5 - 10 hours/year Non-specified
Bird Protection System
Bird protection systems
Comparison
26
Table 1b) - Bird protection systems comparison, Sources: Renewable Energy Systems (2017); DTBird (2016); DeTect, (2009);
Detect (2015)
System Characteristics Identifl ightDTBird (collision avoidance
module)DTBird (Collision Control Module) Merlin Avian Radar System
Time from detection to curtailment < 200 ms Non-appliacable2 - 10 s after trigger (depends on
turbine manufacturer)
Via MERLIN SCADATM motality Risk
Mitigation System (time not
specified)
Curtailment ResponseWind Turbine Manufacturer and
Model Dependent Non-appliacable
Wind Turbine Manufacturer and
Model Dependent
Wind Turbine Manufacturer and
Model Dependent
Automatic Restart after curtailment Non-specified Non-appliacable Yes Yes
Deterrent type Non-appliacable
2 different types of sound emission:
warning and discourange (110 -
120 dB measure 1 m from noise
source)
Non-appliacable
LRAD (Long range acoustic device)
and LDU (laser deterrent unit)
under testing
Number of Deterrents Non-appliacable 4 to 10 speakers per wind turbine Non-appliacable Non-appliacable
Time from detection to deterrent
activationNon-appliacable Less than 2 s Non-appliacable Non-appliacable
Operation under "bad weather"
conditionsGood Good Good Good
Bird Protection System
Coexistence of Eagles and Wind
Power on Gotland (cover 2)