There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Demand for renewable energy is rising exponentially. While this has benefits in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, there may be costs to biodiversity [1]. Environmental Impact
Assessments (EIAs) are the main tool used across the world to predict the overall
positive and negative effects of renewable energy developments before planning consent
is given, and the Ecological Impact Assessments (EcIAs) within them assess their species-specific
effects. Given that EIAs are undertaken globally, are extremely expensive, and are
enshrined in legislation, their place in evidence-based decision making deserves evaluation.
Here we assess how well EIAs of wind-farm developments protect bats. We found they
do not predict the risks to bats accurately, and even in those cases where high risk
was correctly identified, the mitigation deployed did not avert the risk. Given that
the primary purpose of an EIA is to make planning decisions evidence-based, our results
indicate that EIA mitigation strategies used to date have been ineffective in protecting
bats. In the future, greater emphasis should be placed on assessing the actual impacts
post-construction and on developing effective mitigation strategies.