The management utility of large-scale environmental drivers of bat mortality at wind energy facilities: The effects of facility size, elevation and geographic location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wind power development can cause direct mortality of both birds and bats through collisions with turbines, but the estimates of mortality necessary to evaluate the impact of this mortality are unavailable for many facilities and regions. We used monitoring surveys from the majority of facilities in a contiguous region spanning 800 km of southwest-northeast distance and almost 900 m of elevation (Quebec, Canada) to produce estimates of mortality per facility. The distribution of these estimated mortalities is skewed low with more than two thirds of facilities having annual mortalities of less than 50 individuals. We then used this set of estimated annual mortalities to explore how changes in installed capacity (megawatts), elevation and geographic position affected estimated annual mortality, with the goal of providing guidance to conservation mangers attempting to find strategies for minimizing mortality. More installed capacity (MW) correlated with higher mortality, but installed capacity alone was a poor predictor of estimated mortality. Medium-sized facilities were the best management strategy to minimize per MW mortality. Mortality decreased with increasing elevation and decreased from southwest to northeast within this region. The cumulative effects of this mortality have the potential to be devastating for bats, particularly migratory species, which account for the majority of carcasses observed. Our results also highlight the necessity of monitoring at all facilities in order to identify the small number of high mortality facilities for effective application of mitigation measures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".