Wind-bat habitat conservation plans (up through 2022) and cost analysis
Data files
Mar 26, 2025 version files 251.71 MB
-
Beechridge.pdf
5.41 MB
-
Bitter_Ridge_Wind_HCP.pdf
7.56 MB
-
Blue_Creek_Wind_Farm_Van_Wert_and_Paulding_Counties__Ohio.pdf
6.70 MB
-
BLUFF_POINT_WIND_ENERGY_CENTER_JAY_AND_RANDOLPH_COUNTIES__INDIANA_.pdf
9.77 MB
-
California_Ridge_Wind_HCP.pdf
3.36 MB
-
Copenhagen_Wind_HCP.pdf
3.95 MB
-
Criterion_Wind_HCP.pdf
1.40 MB
-
Draft_Crescent_Wind_HCP.pdf
10.18 MB
-
Ford_Ridge_Wind_HCP_Draft.pdf
5.03 MB
-
Fowler_Ridge_Wind_Farm__Benton_County__Indiana.pdf
2.32 MB
-
Green_River_Wind_HCP.pdf
39.25 MB
-
HCP_Analysis_Script.r
33.61 KB
-
HCP_Analysis_Spreadsheet_02092024.csv
4.38 KB
-
Headwaters_II_Wind_HCP.pdf
9.23 MB
-
Headwaters_Wind_Farm.pdf
4.72 MB
-
High_Prairie_Wind_Energy_Facility.pdf
6.42 MB
-
Hog_Creek_Wind_Project__Hardin_County__Ohio.pdf
6.82 MB
-
Hoopeston_Wind__LLC.pdf
13.37 MB
-
Indiana_Crossroads_Wind_HCP.pdf
15.05 MB
-
Jordan_Creek_Wind_HCP_Draft.pdf
11.68 MB
-
Meadow_Lake_Wind_Resource_Area_White_and_Benton_Counties__Indiana.pdf
4.41 MB
-
MidAmerican.pdf
2.90 MB
-
North_Allegheny_Wind_Facility.pdf
5.99 MB
-
PIONEER_TRAIL_WIND_FARM_IROQUOIS_AND_FORD_COUNTIES__ILLINO.pdf
5.37 MB
-
README.md
4.68 KB
-
Rosewater_Wind_Farm_HCP.pdf
7.24 MB
-
Sugar_Creek_Wind_HCP_Draft.pdf
25.19 MB
-
Timber_Road_II__III__and_IV_Wind_Farms__Paulding_County__Ohio.pdf
4.74 MB
-
Wildcat_Wind_Farm.pdf
16.52 MB
-
Wildhorse_Mountain_Wind_Facility_HCP.pdf
17.10 MB
Abstract
The wind industry’s expansion in North America due to the need to provide clean energy is leading to increased regulatory concern for bats, particularly those that are endangered due to white-nose syndrome. The projected growth of installed wind capacity overlaps extensively with the ranges of several endangered and potentially regulated bat species. Wind energy operators in the US can comply with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by submitting a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Incidental Take Permit (ITP) to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. HCP documents include wind project overviews, estimates for incidental take (e.g., unavoidable fatalities), outline minimization and compensatory mitigation measures to avoid take, and often include estimated cost information for actions to implement the HCP/ITP. However, the lack of insight into specific cost data, combined with the lengthy ITP application process, has potentially led to the perception that ESA compliance imposes a costly regulatory burden on the private sector, deterring motivation for voluntary compliance. Resulting from the absence of routine reporting practices, it is not known how much it costs for companies to comply with ESA listings, nor is there a standardized database of compliance costs or a method for estimating them. This analysis of 25 publicly available project-specific HCPs published through 2022 establishes one approach to conceptualizing these costs and determined the median total cost for an HCP to be approximately $4.68 million, with notable discrepancy between the median costs for compensatory mitigation cost ($1.64 million) and fatality monitoring ($3.15 million). This analysis also created a general linear model that can be used to estimate potential project-specific costs, and overall provides better insight into the costs of complying with the ESA by identifying variables that might affect compliance costs, and estimating future costs for the wind industry.
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.59zw3r2kf
Description of the data and file structure
This analysis of 25 publicly available project-specific HCPs published through 2022 establishes one approach to conceptualizing costs. This analysis created a general linear model that can be used to estimate potential project-specific costs and provides insight into the costs of complying with the ESA by identifying variables that might affect compliance costs and estimating future costs for the wind industry.
Files and variables
PDF files with HCPs used in this study.
File: Beechridge.pdf
File: Bitter_Ridge_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: California_Ridge_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: Blue_Creek_Wind_Farm_Van_Wert_and_Paulding_Counties__Ohio.pdf
File: Criterion_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: BLUFF_POINT_WIND_ENERGY_CENTER_JAY_AND_RANDOLPH_COUNTIES__INDIANA_.pdf
File: Copenhagen_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: Fowler_Ridge_Wind_Farm__Benton_County__Indiana.pdf
File: Draft_Crescent_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: Ford_Ridge_Wind_HCP_Draft.pdf
File: Headwaters_Wind_Farm.pdf
File: Headwaters_II_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: Green_River_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: Hog_Creek_Wind_Project__Hardin_County__Ohio.pdf
File: High_Prairie_Wind_Energy_Facility.pdf
File: Hoopeston_Wind__LLC.pdf
File: Indiana_Crossroads_Wind_HCP.pdf
File: Meadow_Lake_Wind_Resource_Area_White_and_Benton_Counties__Indiana.pdf
File: Jordan_Creek_Wind_HCP_Draft.pdf
File: PIONEER_TRAIL_WIND_FARM_IROQUOIS_AND_FORD_COUNTIES__ILLINO.pdf
File: MidAmerican.pdf
File: Rosewater_Wind_Farm_HCP.pdf
File: Sugar_Creek_Wind_HCP_Draft.pdf
File: North_Allegheny_Wind_Facility.pdf
File: Timber_Road_II__III__and_IV_Wind_Farms__Paulding_County__Ohio.pdf
File: Wildhorse_Mountain_Wind_Facility_HCP.pdf
File: Wildcat_Wind_Farm.pdf
Summarized data in .csv format:
File: HCP_Analysis_Spreadsheet_02092024.csv
Description: Summary of relevant metrics of all examined HCPs
Variables
- HCP_Num: HCP Identifier
- Name: Full name of project
- HCP_Year: Year HCP was made
- Project_or_Large: Differentiates between single project (P) or multi-project (L) HCPs
- FWS_Region: Fish and Wildlife Service Region HCP belongs
- State: US State HCP falls into
- Bat_Only: Does the HCP deal only with bats, or other species as well? ‘1’ indicates only bats were examined.
- IBAT: Does the HCP deal with the Indiana bat, Myotis sodalis? ‘1’ indicates yes.
- NLEB: Does the HCP deal with the Northern Long-eared bat, Myotis septentrionalis? ‘1’ indicates yes.
- VBEB: Does the HCP deal with the Virginia Big-eared bat, Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus? ‘1’ indicates yes.
- LBB: Does the HCP deal with the Little Brown bat, Myotis lucifugus? ‘1’ indicates yes.
- TCB: Does the HCP deal with the Tricolored bat, Perimyotis subflavus? ‘1’ indicates yes.
- Num_Covered_Bats: Number of bat species in the HCP.
- Num_Covered_Species: Number of species, including non-bat species, in the HCP
- Total_Bat_Take: Total number of bat fatalities allowed by the HCP.
- MW: Megawatt value of the wind project.
- Number_of_Turbines: Number of turbines in the wind project.
- Permit_Duration_Years: Length of the HCP in years.
- Admin_Costs: Costs allocated by the HCP for administration.
- Mitigation_Costs: Costs allocated by the HCP for mitigation measures.
- Monitoring_Costs: Costs allocated by the HCP for species monitoring.
- Total_HCP_Costs: Total costs of the HCP.
- Admin_Costs_%: Percent of total costs for administration costs.
- Mitigation_Costs_%: Percent of total costs for mitigation costs.
- Monitoring_Costs_%: Percent of total costs for monitoring costs.
- Mit-Mon_Costs: Difference between the costs allocated for mitigation and monitoring.
- MW__Num_Turb: Megawatt of project divided by the number of turbines for the project.
- After_2019: Is the HCP for years after 2019? ‘1’ indicates yes.
“NA” indicates that sample size is not large enough to generate value estimates.
Code/software
Analysis was done primarily with R. The R script ‘HCP_Analysis_Script.r’ takes ‘HCP Analysis Spreadsheet 02092024.csv’ as input and must be run in the same directory. Packages included: psych, car, caret, reshape2, glmnet, lme4, dplyr, knitr, kableExtra, jtools, RcppAlgos, flexplot, dplyr, rstatix, corrplot, GGally, pals, and DescTools
Access information
https://osf.io/2a4vb/files/c87444fb-72d7-4248-b7e9-900e47aa635e?view_only= (Click to access databased of all downloadable HCP-relevant files hosted by Defenders of Wildlife, public access)