With the glaring exception of its wind energy provisions in Subtitle D, HR 2337 contains many beneficial provisions. To reduce our continued reliance on fossil fuels, for instance, HR 2337 would repeal provisions in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that protect oil and gas companies from having to pay fair-market costs for leases and permits.

HR 2337 encourages energy efficiency, generating non-wind forms of renewable energy, and reducing the threat of climate change to wildlife. It would require that new Department of Interior buildings meet high energy-efficiency standards (LEED certification). It would require federal agencies to develop a plan to create a “strategic solar reserve,” with up to 10 megawatts of concentrating solar plants on federal land;develop a biomass pilot project to determine the highest and best use of ecologically-sensitive biomass resources from public land; and establish a regulatory and certification framework for carbon sequestration—the isolation and/or removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to be stored underground—on public lands. It would also charge federal agencies to develop strategies to reduce the impact of global warming on wildlife and oceans.

UCS supports the main provisions of the bill, but has strong objections to subtitle D, which imposes restrictions on wind energy that are unwarranted both in their severity and selectivity. Until the wildlife standards are written, and wind projects are certified to comply, generating any amount of wind energy from utility- or residential-scale turbines would be punishable by a $50,000 fine, up to a year in jail, or both.

The standards, though supposed to be finished 180 days after enactment of the law, may take years to finish. Similar wildlife impact and siting guidelines for offshore wind were to be developed by the Minerals Management Service in 270 days, but are now expected to take over two-and-a-half years to finish. And because wind generation would be illegal pending the release of the standards and the certification of each wind development, the bill would shut down the wind energy industry at a time when America needs concerted effort to lower its global warming.

The selectivity of subtitle D is evident in that no other energy sources but wind are subject to the same wildlife impact standards. However, fossil fuel and nuclear power generation have a significant impact on wildlife. For more info, click here.

Government agencies and multi-stakeholder groups are addressing the issue of wind impact on birds and wildlife. The Fish and Wildlife Service is developing guidelines for siting wind turbines. Its Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee, formed in 2007 and chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, is developing guidance for the state and local regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction to approve siting applications for onshore wind energy projects.

UCS has a long-standing commitment to considering and mitigating the impact of all energy sources on wildlife and birds. UCS staff has been working with other stakeholders on the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative to develop scientifically-sound methods for assessing wildlife impacts and ways to minimize impacts with proper siting and mitigation techniques.