Posters

Abstract

Historically, manual methods for data collection have been used to gather insight on the impact of wind farms on birdlife. With offshore wind, manual data collection is still held as the standard by many regulators, but this method faces a number of challenges when applied offshore. We present results from a field study carried out at an offshore wind farm in Norway, comparing manual and automated methods of bird data collection. Birds were simultaneously counted and classified by ornithologists in a boat, and through a surveillance camera mounted on a turbine tower of a floating turbine. Data from the automated system shows that the day of the field study had 50% lower bird activity compared to the average of the 2 month period. During the field test, the human observers counted 20 birds during 1,5 hours, and of those 2 were in the field of view of the camera. The field study shows that the human observer method is constrained by HSE concerns requiring good weather and sufficient training, by logistical and supply-chain aspects of hiring local experts, hiring a boat, getting the right vantage point, and by limitations in attention span. The benefit is a high freedom of movement. The automated method is not affected by offshore HSE concerns, logistical challenges or attention constraints, but has a lower degree of freedom of movement and introduces other biases than a human observer has. The field study demonstrates that insufficient adaptation of environmental regulations from onshore to offshore conditions leads to a number of challenges, in addition to the general dilemma of using humans and manual methods as a measurement standard for automated systems.