in Ecology

Bird migration and wind-energy production across Western Europe

101 Views


Abstract

With global ambitions to decarbonize the energy system, wind power capacity will continue to increase dramatically worldwide. This raises concerns about environmental impacts of wind energy infrastructure and operations, particularly for collision of aerial wildlife. Using a network of weather surveillance radars, we quantified numbers, timing and spatial extent of nightly and annual large-scale bird movements over Western Europe. We also mapped onshore wind turbines and calculated potential energy production using wind speed and distribution data. Integrating bird movement patterns, turbine characteristics and energy production, we estimated the number of birds that are potentially at risk of collision because they fly in proximity to wind turbines and at heights of rotating blades. To demonstrate potential for designing measures to mitigate risk to aerial biodiversity, we derive curtailment scenarios and compare costs and benefits for energy production and conserving biodiversity and show that surprisingly efficient trade-offs may be possible. Our findings contribute to broader efforts for minimizing impacts from wind energy production on migratory bird populations while endeavouring to ensure adequate energy supply.

Access through your institution

Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Migrating birds flying through areas with wind turbines.
The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.
Fig. 2: Energy potential and birds at risk when migrating at night.
The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.
Fig. 3: Nightly curtailment scenarios based on different metrics.
The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

Similar content being viewed by others

Bird mortality at wind farms in a tropical desert

Article
Open access
01 June 2025

Effects of wind turbine wakes on bird gliding aerodynamic performance

Article
Open access
19 December 2025

Impacts of onshore wind energy production on biodiversity

Article

08 September 2025

Data availability

All data (bird movement, wind turbine and wind data) used in this study are available via Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17960034 (ref. 59).

Code availability

Data processing and analysis were conducted in MATLAB (release 2025b)60. The MATLAB code used in this study is available via Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17960034 (ref. 59).

References

  1. Pryor, S. C., Barthelmie, R. J., Bukovsky, M. S., Leung, L. R. & Sakaguchi, K. Climate change impacts on wind power generation. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 627–643 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rehbein, J. A. et al. Renewable energy development threatens many globally important biodiversity areas. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 3040–3051 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  3. Katzner, T. E. et al. Wind energy: an ecological challenge. Science 366, 1206–1207 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  4. Loss, S. R., Will, T. & Marra, P. P. Estimates of bird collision mortality at wind facilities in the contiguous United States. Biol. Conserv. 168, 201–209 (2013).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  5. Browning, E., Barlow, K. E., Burns, F., Hawkins, C. & Boughey, K. Drivers of European bat population change: a review reveals evidence gaps. Mamm. Rev. 51, 353–368 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bairlein, F. Migratory birds under threat. Science 354, 547–548 (2016).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rosenberg, K. V. et al. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science 366, 120–124 (2019).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  8. Burns, F. et al. Abundance decline in the avifauna of the European Union reveals cross-continental similarities in biodiversity change. Ecol. Evol. 11, 16647–16660 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rushing, C. S., Ryder, T. B., Marra, P. P. & Rushing, C. S. Quantifying drivers of population dynamics for a migratory bird throughout the annual cycle. Proc. R. Soc. B 283, 20152846 (2016).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  10. Studds, C. E. et al. Rapid population decline in migratory shorebirds relying on Yellow Sea tidal mudflats as stopover sites. Nat. Commun. 8, 14895 (2017).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  11. Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (UNEP/AEWA, 2025); https://www.unep-aewa.org

  12. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (UNEP, 1979).

  13. Convention on Biological Diversity (UNEP/CBD, 1992); https://www.cbd.int

  14. Reynolds, M. D. et al. Dynamic conservation for migratory species. Sci. Adv. 3, e1700707 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  15. Horns, J. J. & Şekercioğlu, Ç. H. Conservation of migratory species. Curr. Biol. 28, R980–R983 (2018).

  16. Cohen, E. B. et al. A place to land: spatiotemporal drivers of stopover habitat use by migrating birds. Ecol. Lett. 24, 38–49 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dokter, A. M. et al. Seasonal abundance and survival of North America’s migratory avifauna determined by weather radar. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1603–1609 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nussbaumer, R. et al. Nocturnal avian migration drives high daily turnover but limited change in abundance on the ground. Ecography 2024, e07107 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nussbaumer, R. et al. Quantifying year-round nocturnal bird migration with a fluid dynamics model. J. R. Soc. Interface 18, 20210194 (2021).

  20. Devault, T. L., Seamans, T. W., Linnell, K. E., Sparks, D. W. & Beasley, J. C. Scavenger removal of bird carcasses at simulated wind turbines: does carcass type matter?. Ecosphere 8, e01994 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ravache, A. et al. Monitoring carcass persistence in windfarms: recommendations for estimating mortality. Biol. Conserv. 292, 110509 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  22. May, R. F. A unifying framework for the underlying mechanisms of avian avoidance of wind turbines. Biol. Conserv. 190, 179–187 (2015).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cohen, E. B. et al. Using weather radar to help minimize wind energy impacts on nocturnally migrating birds. Conserv. Lett. 15, e12887 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  24. Aschwanden, J. et al. Bird collisions at wind turbines in a mountainous area related to bird movement intensities measured by radar. Biol. Conserv. 220, 228–236 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kunz, T. H. et al. Assessing impacts of wind-energy development on nocturnally active birds and bats: a guidance document. J. Wildl. Manag. 71, 2449–2486 (2007).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nilsson, C. et al. Revealing patterns of nocturnal migration using the European weather radar network. Ecography 42, 876–886 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kemp, M. U., Shamoun-Baranes, J., Van Gasteren, H., Bouten, W. & Van Loon, E. E. Can wind help explain seasonal differences in avian migration speed?. J. Avian Biol. 41, 672–677 (2010).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  28. Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN, 2015).

  29. Hoekstra, B. et al. Large-scale mapping of nocturnal bird migration to accelerate a nature-inclusive energy transition. J. Environ. Manag. 395, 127753 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  30. Brodie, J. F., Watson, J. E. M. & Hasan Ali, S. Human responses to climate change will likely determine the fate of biodiversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2205512120 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  31. Brondizio, E. S., Settele, J., Díaz, S. & Ngo, H. T. (eds) Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019).

  32. Bauer, S., Lancaster, L. T. & Zimmermann, N. E. Towards a sustainable energy transition. J. Appl. Ecol. 62, 1570–1578 (2025).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  33. Marques, A. T. et al. Understanding bird collisions at wind farms: an updated review on the causes and possible mitigation strategies. Biol. Conserv. 179, 40–52 (2014).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  34. Diehl, R. H. The airspace is habitat. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 377–379 (2013).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lambertucci, S. A., Shepard, E. L. C. & Wilson, R. P. Human–wildlife conflicts in a crowded airspace. Science 348, 502–504 (2015).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  36. van Doren, B. M. et al. Drivers of fatal bird collisions in an urban center. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2101666118 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  37. van Gasteren, H. et al. Aeroecology meets aviation safety: early warning systems in Europe and the Middle East prevent collisions between birds and aircraft. Ecography 42, 899–911 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  38. Enevoldsen, P. & Xydis, G. Examining the trends of 35 years growth of key wind turbine components. Energy Sustain. Dev. 50, 18–26 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  39. Davy, C. M., Ford, A. T. & Fraser, K. C. Aeroconservation for the fragmented skies. Conserv. Lett. 10, 773–780 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  40. Dunnett, S., Holland, R. A., Taylor, G. & Eigenbrod, F. Predicted wind and solar energy expansion has minimal overlap with multiple conservation priorities across global regions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2104764119 (2022).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gasparatos, A., Ahmed, A. & Voigt, C. Facilitating policy responses for renewable energy and biodiversity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 36, 377–380 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kranstauber, B. et al. High-resolution spatial distribution of bird movements estimated from a weather radar network. Remote Sens. 12, 635 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  43. Dokter, A. M. et al. Bird migration flight altitudes studied by a network of operational weather radars. J. R. Soc. Interface 8, 30–43 (2011).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  44. Sanchez-Fernandez, A. J., González-Sánchez, J. L., Luna Rodríguez, Í, Rodríguez, F. R. & Sanchez-Rivero, J. Reliability of onshore wind turbines based on linking power curves to failure and maintenance records: a case study in central Spain. Wind Energy 26, 349–364 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kranstauber, B., Bouten, W., van Gasteren, H. & Shamoun-Baranes, J. Ensemble predictions are essential for accurate bird migration forecasts for conservation and flight safety. Ecol. Solutions Evidence 3, e12158 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  46. Bradarić, M., Kranstauber, B., Bouten, W. & Shamoun-Baranes, J. Forecasting nocturnal bird migration for dynamic aeroconservation: the value of short-term datasets. J. Appl. Ecol. 61, 1147–1158 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ferrer, M., Alloing, A., Baumbush, R. & Morandini, V. Significant decline of Griffon Vulture collision mortality in wind farms during 13-year of a selective turbine stopping protocol. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 38, e02203 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Horton, K. G., Van Doren, B. M., Albers, H. J., Farnsworth, A. & Sheldon, D. Near-term ecological forecasting for dynamic aeroconservation of migratory birds. Conserv. Biol. 35, 1777–1786 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  49. Van Doren, B. M. & Horton, K. G. A continental system for forecasting bird migration. Science 361, 1115–1118 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  50. Lippert, F., Kranstauber, B., Forré, P. D. & van Loon, E. E. Learning to predict spatiotemporal movement dynamics from weather radar networks. Methods Ecol. Evol. 13, 2811–2826 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  51. Veers, P. et al. Grand challenges in the science of wind energy. Science 366, eaau2027 (2019).

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  52. Hersbach, H. et al. Complete ERA5 From 1940: Fifth Generation of ECMWF Atmospheric Reanalyses of the Global Climate (Copernicus Climate Change Service, 2017).

  53. Olauson, J. ERA5: the new champion of wind power modelling?. Renew. Energy 126, 322–331 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  54. Nussbaumer, R. Vertical profiles time series of bird density and flight speed vector (01.01.2018–01.01.2019). Zenodo https://zenodo.org/record/4587338 (2020).

  55. Desmet, P. et al. Biological data derived from European weather radars. Sci. Data 12, 361 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  56. Dokter, A. M. et al. bioRad: biological analysis and visualization of weather radar data. Ecography 42, 852–860 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  57. Nussbaumer, R. et al. A geostatistical approach to estimate high resolution nocturnal bird migration densities from a weather radar network. Remote Sens. 11, 2233 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  58. Huso, M. et al. Relative energy production determines effect of repowering on wildlife mortality at wind energy facilities. J. Appl. Ecol. 58, 1284–1290 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  59. Nussbaumer, R., Tito, A. D. R., Farnsworth, A., Shamoun-Baranes, J. & Bauer, S. Safeguarding aerial migrants need not jeopardize wind energy production. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17960034 (2025).

  60. MATLAB release 2025b (MathWorks, 2025); https://ch.mathworks.com/products/new_products/release2025a-2025b.html

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project is part of GloBAM (https://globam.science), funded through the BiodivERsA BiodivScen-call, with Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF 31BD30_184120), Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BelSPO BR/185/A1/GloBAM-BE), Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO E10008), Academy of Finland (aka 326315) and National Science Foundation (NSF 1927743), as well as HiRAD (https://hirad.science), funded through the BiodivERsA+ BiodivMon-call, with Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF 31BD30_216840), Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (BelSPO RT/24/HiRAD), Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO EP.1512.22.003) and Academy of Finland (aka 359864). Funding was also provided by the European Union under grant agreement no. 101084171—(Kappa-Flu). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or REA. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. S.B. acknowledges funding from the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI 23.00323). R.N. received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF 191138 and 217873). J.S.-B received funding from the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Food Security and Nature and the Province of Groningen. K. Both beautified the figures.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Judy Shamoun-Baranes, Andrew Farnsworth.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dynamic Macroecology, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), Birmensdorf, Switzerland

    Silke Bauer

  2. Department of Environmental Systems Science, Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, Switzerland

    Silke Bauer

  3. Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Silke Bauer & Judy Shamoun-Baranes

  4. Swiss Ornithological Institute, Sempach, Switzerland

    Raphaël Nussbaumer

  5. Center for Avian Population Studies, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Raphaël Nussbaumer & Andrew Farnsworth

  6. Faculty of Science and Technology, Uppsala University Sweden, Uppsala, Sweden

    Damire Ariel Rojas Tito

  7. Actions@EBMF, New York, NY, USA

    Andrew Farnsworth

Authors

  1. Silke Bauer
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raphaël Nussbaumer
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Damire Ariel Rojas Tito
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Judy Shamoun-Baranes
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew Farnsworth
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.B. conceived of the study, developed its experimental design and prepared the paper. S.B., R.N., J.S.-B. and A.F. established the conceptual framework. D.A.R.T. compiled the data for wind industry extent and energy production. R.N. led the data analyses. All authors edited and approved the paper and responded to reviewers’ comments.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Silke Bauer.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Sustainability thanks Roel May, Andrea Santangeli and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information (download PDF )

Supplementary Text 1–3, Figs. 1–7, Tables 1 and 2 and References.

Reporting Summary (download PDF )

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bauer, S., Nussbaumer, R., Rojas Tito, D.A. et al. Bird migration and wind-energy production across Western Europe.
Nat Sustain (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-026-01853-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-026-01853-4

Source: Ecology - nature.com

Agricultural crop trade alleviates China’s water shortage but redistributes water value unevenly

Swine wastewater-cultivated Chlorella sorokiniana reduces cadmium accumulation in rice grown on contaminated paddy soil