Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · ofr20161087

Mortality monitoring design for utility-scale solar power facilities

Abstract

Introduction Solar power represents an important and rapidly expanding component of the renewable energy portfolio of the United States (Lovich and Ennen, 2011; Hernandez and others, 2014). Understanding the impacts of renewable energy development on wildlife is a priority for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in compliance with Department of Interior Order No. 3285 (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2009) to “develop best management practices for renewable energy and transmission projects on the public lands to ensure the most environmentally responsible development and delivery of renewable energy.” Recent studies examining effects of renewable energy development on mortality of migratory birds have primarily focused on wind energy (California Energy Commission and California Department of Fish and Game, 2007), and in 2012 the FWS published guidance for addressing wildlife conservation concerns at all stages of land-based wind energy development (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012). As yet, no similar guidelines exist for solar development, and no published studies have directly addressed the methodology needed to accurately estimate mortality of birds and bats at solar facilities. In the absence of such guidelines, ad hoc methodologies applied to solar energy projects may lead to estimates of wildlife mortality rates that are insufficiently accurate and precise to meaningfully inform conversations regarding unintended consequences of this energy source and management decisions to mitigate impacts. Although significant advances in monitoring protocols for wind facilities have been made in recent years, there remains a need to provide consistent guidance and study design to quantify mortality of bats, and resident and migrating birds at solar power facilities (Walston and others, 2015). In this document, we suggest methods for mortality monitoring at solar facilities that are based on current methods used at wind power facilities but adapted for the unique conditions encountered at solar facilities. In particular, unlike at wind-power facilities, the unimpeded access to almost all areas within the facilities, the typically flat terrain, and general absence of thick vegetation allow distance-sampling techniques (Buckland and others, 2001, 2004) to be exploited to advantage at industrial solar sites. These protocols build on the work of Nicolai and others (2011), and as our understanding and techniques for monitoring improve, the methods may be further modified to incorporate improvements in the future. We present case studies based on monitoring methods currently implemented at different utility-scale solar facilities to illustrate how distance-sampling techniques may improve overall detectability without substantially increasing costs. Every facility is unique, and the protocols presented may be adapted based on specific monitoring objectives and conditions at each site. We provide guidance for designing monitoring programs whose objective it is to estimate the total number of bird and bat fatalities occurring at a facility over an extended period of time. We address spatial variation in causes of mortality, as well as potential sources of imperfect detection, for example, animals falling in or moving to unsearched areas, carcasses removed by predators, and carcasses missed by searchers. We suggest methods to estimate and account for each source of imperfect detection. This document focuses on monitoring design only and does not discuss approaches for estimating mortality from collected data. The development of statistically sound estimators relevant to the solar context is a current topic of research, although there are already strong foundations for estimation with distance-sampling methods in similar open, arid environments (Anderson and others, 2001; Freilich and others, 2005). Nonetheless, if protocols described in this document are followed, the resulting data will be adequate and sufficient for estimating mortality using newly formulated estimators.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Manuela M. Huso, Thomas Dietsch, Chris Nicolai. 2016-05-27. Mortality monitoring design for utility-scale solar power facilities. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20161087

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 2, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 2 (April–June), 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov.

Open-File Report↗

ECCOE Landsat quarterly calibration and validation report—Quarter 1, 2026

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation and Science Calibration and Validation (Cal/Val) Center of Excellence (ECCOE) focuses on improving the accuracy, precision, calibration, and product quality of remote-sensing data, leveraging years of multiscale optical system geometric and radiometric calibration and characterization experience. The ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team continually monitors the geometric and radiometric performance of active Landsat missions and makes calibration adjustments, as needed, to maintain data quality at the highest level. This report provides observed geometric and radiometric analysis results for Landsats 8 and 9 for quarter 1 (January–March) of 2026. All data used to compile the Cal/Val analysis results presented in this report are freely available from the U.S. Geological Survey EarthExplorer website: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov . One specific activity that the ECCOE Landsat Cal/Val Team closely monitored was a Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Sensor encoder alerts anomaly. On March 18, 2026, the Thermal Infrared Sensor instrument’s mechanism control electronics board reset, driving several parameters to default power-on values. Subsequent telemetry and analysis determined that no persistent hardware misconfiguration was present and no radiometric or geometric degradation was observed.

Open-File Report↗

Floods of June 20–July 6, 2024, in the Big Sioux River, Rock River, Little Sioux River, Ocheyedan River, and Floyd River Basins, northwestern Iowa

Major flooding occurred on June 20–July 6, 2024, in northwestern Iowa affecting the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd River Basins. Heavy rain fell in northwestern Iowa, southwestern Minnesota, and southeastern South Dakota on June 20–22, 2024. Parts of northwestern Iowa recorded 2–6 inches of rainfall and localized amounts exceeding 12 inches. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 175,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Big Sioux River at Akron, Iowa (06485500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at four locations along the Big Sioux River between U.S. Interstate 29 at Sioux City, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 north of Hawarden, Iowa, a distance of 75.7 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 157,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Rock River near Rock Valley, Iowa (06483500), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability of less than 0.2 percent. High-water marks were measured at eight locations along the Rock River between County Road B30 east of Hudson, South Dakota, upstream to Iowa Highway 9 at Rock Rapids, Iowa, a distance of 39.3 river miles. A maximum peak-of-record streamflow of 63,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Little Sioux River at Correctionville, Iowa (06606600), was recorded on June 24, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at 11 locations along the Little Sioux River between Iowa Highway 31 west of Correctionville, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 north of Spencer, Iowa, a distance of 134.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 24,500 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Ocheyedan River near Spencer, Iowa (06605000), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 0.2–0.49 percent. High-water marks were measured at three locations along the Ocheyedan River between County Road M38 west of Spencer, Iowa, upstream to U.S. Highway 18 west of Everly, Iowa, a distance of 12.8 river miles. A maximum streamflow of 41,000 cubic feet per second at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Floyd River at Alton, Iowa (06600100), was recorded on June 22, 2024, and had an annual exceedance probability range of 1–1.99 percent. High-water marks were measured at six locations along the Floyd River between Iowa Highway 3 at Le Mars, Iowa, upstream to Iowa Highway 10 at Alton, Iowa, a distance of 27.5 river miles. The high-water marks were used to develop flood profiles for the Big Sioux, Rock, Little Sioux, Ocheyedan, and Floyd Rivers.

Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota↗