PDA

View Full Version : Bird VS Idiots



AgentOrange
09-21-2013, 06:10 PM
Although millions of birds are killed by wind turbines each year, the UK’s Royal Society for the Protection of Birds wants to install a wind turbine on its headquarters to reduce the group’s carbon footprint

1901

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-21-2013, 07:37 PM
Millions of birds?

Prove it.

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 04:36 PM
Millions of birds?

Prove it.

No.

I can site surveys from what I believe to be reputable sources, but if you believe in Al Gore, those probably will not change your mind.

A thing that stands out to me about it all is the use of the endangered species act. Liberals have used that like a bunch of Nazis (successfully) to stop all types of human endeavor.
The wind turbine is given complete exemption even though it is maybe the worst example of green energy and the most destructive to wild life.

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-23-2013, 04:55 PM
Then I guess we should just take your word for it.

Does that apply to everything from here on?

I just want t know what the rules are.

Chuck Farley
09-23-2013, 05:17 PM
I'm taking AO's word for it. Green is the new red, if you know what I mean.

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-23-2013, 05:25 PM
You SAY you want folks to post more & you like a good discussion (argument). PROVE IT.

Check out this article to the contrary of what you're stating--they cite their sources & give a decent, thorough report. Throwing out inflated statistics to support your stance doesn't really help in the long run. Especially when you refuse to even address the stat when questioned & instead throw stones at the questioner....

Do wind turbines kill birds?
by Julia Layton

http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/wind-turbine-kill-birds-1.jpg (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/environmental/green-science/green-science-pictures.htm)
A bird of prey soars over wind turbines in New Zealand.


With U.S. dependency on foreign oil getting uncomfortably close to crisis levels, any viable alternative energy source is looking pretty good. With environmental damage from coal and gas-derived power already at crisis levels, even alternatives that are decades off are looking pretty great. Wind power, a viable energy source that costs far less than nuclear and coal power and contributes almost no pollutants to the environment, seems to many of us to be almost ideal.


But there are some people who disagree and are fighting the installation of new wind turbines in the United States. They cite bird mortality as an unacceptable side effect of wind-generated power. Through lawsuits and protests against pending legislation, they hope to save huge numbers of birds from death at the blades of massive wind turbines.

To most experts, though, there's a problem with the bird-mortality argument: The vast majority of research shows that wind turbines kill relatively few birds, at least compared with other man-made structures. The statistics are shocking if you consider just how many people are crying out against wind power for the birds' sake:



Man-made structure/technology
Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)


Feral and domestic cats
Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]


Power lines

130 million -- 174 million [source: AWEA]


Windows (residential and commercial)
100 million -- 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]


Pesticides
70 million [source: AWEA]


Automobiles
60 million -- 80 million [source: AWEA]


Lighted communication towers
40 million -- 50 million [source: AWEA]


Wind turbines
10,000 -- 40,000 [source: ABC]








Collisions with wind turbines account for about one-tenth of a percent of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year. And of all bird deaths, 30 percent are due to natural causes, like baby birds falling from nests [source: AWEA]. So why the widespread misconception that labels wind turbines "bird-o-matics"? I*t all starts with California, raptors and the thousands of old turbines that make up the Altamont Pass wind farm.


*In this article, we'll find out where the statistics went wrong, how thousands of birds do end up flying into wind turbines each year and what's being done to reduce the number of bird-turbine collisions.

The Problem with Wind Turbines


http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/wind-turbine-kill-birds-2.jpg
The Altamont Pass in California is known for its outdated turbines and high avian mortality rate.


It's easy to see why wind turbines are at least potentially hazardous for birds: Massive blades with tips spinning at up to 179 mph (80 meters per second), hundreds of feet (at least 30 meters) in the air, are an obvious problem for anything flying near them [source: MIT]. The fact is, birds do fly into the path of the blades and die a grisly death. Most of the affected birds are songbirds, and about 10 percent are birds of prey like raptors [source: ABC]. It's the raptors that started all the protests, when hundreds of carcasses were found strewn across Northern California's Altamont Pass wind farm.

Bird conservationists took great interest, and the misconception that wind turbines pose a major threat to bird populations grew from there. By applying the mortality rates at Altamont Pass to every wind farm in the United States, the bird-mortality figures became extremely inflated. In fact, Altamont Pass is a unique case of a wind farm that is truly a significant hazard to birds.


Altamont Pass is different for two main reasons: turbine location and turbine design.


There are more than 4,000 wind turbines at the Altamont Pass energy farm in California. It's one of the first wind farms in the United States, and its 20-year-old turbines are accordingly out-of-date. Their design has long since been abandoned: Latticework blades with small surface area are far from efficient for energy generation, and far from safe for birds. The lattice structure actually attracts large birds, because the frame makes for an excellent perch. Large birds like raptors are drawn to the blades, and collision rates are high as a result.


The other design issue is the blades' low surface area, because less surface area means the blades have to spin faster to turn the electricity-generating turbines. The faster the blades spin, the more dangerous they are to birds flying near them. It's unlikely that a bird that finds itself in the vicinity of the blades could ever make it through when they're spinning so fast.


As if this weren't enough to make old wind farms a bird nightmare, the Altamont Pass power plant was built smack dab in the middle of a major migratory route for large birds. The area also houses the world's largest single population of golden eagles [source: USA Today]. With thousands of dated wind turbines sprawling across a super-high-population bird area, it's inevitable that birds and turbines will meet. A current estimate puts the number of birds killed by turbines at Altamont Pass to be about 4,700 each year, several hundred of which are raptors [source: USA Today].


The Altamont Pass wind farm kills far more birds than any other farm in the United States. The total at that single wind farm with 4,000 turbines is 4,700 fatalities; the total for all wind farms in the United States, with more than 25,000 turbines in operation at any given time, is 10,000 to 40,000 per year [source: Reuters].


*Even though up to 1 billion birds die each year by flying into windows, no one is brushing off the tens of thousands of turbine-related deaths every year. So what are we doing to lower that number? On the next page, we'll see what changes are being implemented to save the birds.

Location, Location and Surface Area



http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/wind-turbine-kill-birds-3.jpg
Newer turbines, like those on Tug Hill in New York, have a larger surface area and cause fewer bird deaths.


In the past couple of decades, turbine designs have changed dramatically. Turbine blades are now solid, meaning no lattice structure to attract birds looking to perch. Also, the blades' surface area is much larger, so they don't have to spin as fast to generate power. Slower-moving blades mean fewer bird collisions.


Perhaps the biggest change in wind-farm safety, though, has to do with location. Now, all new turbine proposals are reviewed for ideal, bird-friendly placement. Wind farms cannot be built in migratory pathways, in areas with high bird populations, or in areas with special features that could possibly attract high bird populations in the future. Also, the growing trend toward offshore turbine construction bodes well for birds, since offshore wind farms have fewer bird collisions than land-based farms.




Turbines and Bats


Bats have many of the same habits and habitats as birds. They just come out at night instead of day. It logically follows that bats would have run-ins with wind turbines, too; and they do, more often than birds at some locations. Still, most experts see the numbers as negligible compared to bat deaths by other forms of human intervention. According to the American Wind Energy Association, it's not just pollution and habitat destruction. People accidentally waking bats from their daytime sleep kills far more bats than wind turbines ever could. Apparently, sleep disruption messes up bats' metabolism, causing many of the little guys to starve in winter [source: AWEA].





Possibly the greatest indicator that wind turbines are not, in fact, bird-o-matics, is the growing number of endorsements by bird conservation groups. The American Bird Conservancy supports wind power with the caveat that bird-friendly placement and design be primary factors in construction [source: ABC]. The Wisconsin Bird Initiative states that wind turbines have a "low impact" on avian mortality compared to window glass and communication towers [source: WBCI]. And in 2006, the Audubon Society gave its figurative seal of approval to the American Wind Energy Association. The president of the national organization is quoted by Renewable Energy World as stating, "When you look at a wind turbine, you can find the bird carcasses and count them. With a coal-fired power plant, you can't count the carcasses, but it's going to kill a lot more birds" [source: REW].


Of course, zero turbine-related bird deaths would be the best-case scenario, but as far as energy production goes, that seems to be an unrealistic goal. The best we can hope for is smarter placement of wind turbines and more bird-friendly design in order to further reduce the number of bird deaths resulting from one of the best alternative energy sources available right now. Altamont Pass, for its part, is in the process of slowly replacing its turbines with newer models.
Lots More Information


Related Articles


How Wind Power Works (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-power.htm)
How the Audubon Society Works (http://people.howstuffworks.com/audubon-society.htm)
How Bats Work (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/bat.htm)
How Global Warming Works (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/global-warming.htm)
How the Sierra Club Works (http://science.howstuffworks.com/sierra-club.htm)

More Great Links


American Wind Energy Association: Bats and Wind Turbines (http://www.awea.org/faq/sagrillo/ms_bats_0302.html)
MIT Technology Review: Massive Offshore Wind Turbines Safe for Birds. February 12, 2007. (http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18167/)
TreeHugger: Common Eco-Myth: Wind Turbines Kill Birds. April 6, 2006. (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/04/common_misconce.php)

Sources


Bats and Wind Turbines. American Wind Energy Association.
http:*//www.awea.org/faq/sagrillo/ms_bats_0302.html
Common Eco-Myth: Wind Turbines Kill Birds. TreeHugger. April 6, 2006.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/04/common_misconce.php
For the Birds: Audubon Society Stands Up in Support of Wind Energy. Renewable Energy World. December 14, 2006.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/story?id=46840
Massive Offshore Wind Turbines Safe for Birds. Technology Review. MIT. February 12, 2007. * *
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18167/
Mortality Threats to Birds: Wind Turbines. American Bird Conservancy.
http://www.abcbirds.org/conservationissues/threats/energyproduction/wind.html
Putting Wind Power's Effect on Birds in Perspective. American Wind Energy Association.
http://www.awea.org/faq/sagrillo/swbirds.html
Quietly, wind farms spread footprint in U.S. Reuters. May 19, 2008.
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN18351503
Wind Power and Birds. Wisconsin Bird Conservation Initiative.
http://www.wisconsinbirds.org/WindPowerandBirds.htm
Wind turbines taking toll on birds of prey. USAToday. January 4, 2005.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-23-2013, 05:29 PM
On a side note, here's a very sad article about a rare bird sighted in the northern UK then killed by a wind turbine as onlookers watched:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2350267/Rare-bird-white-throated-needletail-killed-wind-turbine-crowd-twitchers.html

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-23-2013, 05:37 PM
No.

I can site surveys from what I believe to be reputable sources, but if you believe in Al Gore, those probably will not change your mind.

A thing that stands out to me about it all is the use of the endangered species act. Liberals have used that like a bunch of Nazis (successfully) to stop all types of human endeavor.
The wind turbine is given complete exemption even though it is maybe the worst example of green energy and the most destructive to wild life.

Everyone who knows me knows I do NOT believe in or support Al Gore.

I've checked, but can't find anything to support your notion that wind turbines are the "worst example of green energy"....other than the fact that it is sporadic & dependent upon the wind.....?

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:01 PM
I consider Forbes a good source:

President Obama's Climate Plan Would Kill Hundreds Of Millions Of Birds And Bats

A newly published peer-reviewed study reports U.S. wind turbines kill 1.4 million birds and bats every year, even while producing just 3 percent of U.S. electricity. The numbers reveal that President Obama’s global warming plan will kill hundreds of millions of birds and bats while doing little if anything to reduce global temperatures.

Even if no new wind turbines are ever built, turbine blades will slice 14 million birds and bats to death in mid-flight during the next decade. However, global warming alarmists say we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 50 or even 80 percent. President Obama’s recently announced assault on climate change appears likely to seek such numbers. Given that most global warming alarmists also vigorously oppose hydropower, natural gas power and nuclear power, reducing emissions by 50 to 80 percent would require increasing the number of wind turbines roughly 25 fold. That means killing 350 million birds and bats in the United States every decade.

Actually, the number of bird and bat deaths would likely be much higher than that. Wind turbines produce power on an intermittent and unpredictable basis, meaning conventional power plants must remain cycling on a constant basis to fill minute-by-minute fluctuations in wind power. That means electricity produced by wind turbines is far from carbon neutral. Also, wind power companies have already cherry picked the best locations to place wind turbines. As wind power companies are forced to build their industrial wind farms on less productive sites, each new wind turbine and wind farm will produce less electricity than its predecessors. Accordingly, producing 25 times as much wind power means building a heck of a lot more than 25 times more wind turbines.

Looking at the direct consequences of all these new wind turbines, it is hard to visualize so many bird and bat deaths. After all, 350 million is a HUGE number. And that is not a one-time number. That is the number of birds and bats that wind turbines would kill every decade. How would bird and bat populations be able to sustain themselves under such an onslaught? The answer is, most bird and bat populations likely couldn’t sustain themselves, and President Obama’s climate plan would initiate an open-ended aviary holocaust the likes of which we have never before seen.

Bald eagles, California condors and whooping cranes would be among the first to go. But it wouldn’t be just endangered and threatened species that would fail to sustain their numbers. Pretty much every kind of bird you can think of would race precipitously toward unsustainability, with many facing a very real threat of extinction.

Bat populations would also be decimated. Bats are already in rapid decline due to white-nose syndrome, a cold-loving fungus that is decimating bat populations in the U.S. Northeast and is spreading westward across the country. Bat populations in the Northeast have declined by approximately 80 percent, and the 888,000 bat kills resulting from wind turbines each year aren’t helping the cause. Ramp up the number of wind turbines and ramp up the pressure on declining bat populations.

Killing off so many birds and bats every year would have profound negative consequences beyond the mere deaths of birds and bats. Birds and bats are vital in keeping insect populations in check. Kill off as many birds and bats as President Obama desires and mosquito-borne diseases will assault Americans with striking ferocity. Crops will suffer under a growing onslaught of insect attack. Farmers will have to employ more and stronger pesticides to secure our food production.

With wind turbines killing off so many birds of prey, infestations of rats and other vermin will also become more frequent and severe.

Moreover, wind turbines require vast amounts of land to produce even a small amount of electricity. Even under optimum conditions, It takes approximately 400 square miles of land to produce as much electricity as a conventional power plant. Ramp up wind power production to replace conventional power plants and watch America’s remaining open spaces turn into whirring killing fields for birds and bats.

If global warming actually threatened to destroy the planet, perhaps we would have to sacrifice so many birds and bats for the cause. But the reality is just the opposite. United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) lead author Hans von Storch conceded earlier this month that computer models predicting significant future global warming cannot replicate recent temperatures and likely need to be adjusted downward to predict less warming. A panel of experts convened last week by Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer agreed President Obama’s recent assertion that global warming is accelerating is not supportable by real-world facts and data. Hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, wildfires, etc., are all in long-term downward trends as our planet modestly warms in its recovery from the recent Little Ice Age.

Finally, sacrificing hundreds of millions of American birds and bats would do nothing to impact global temperatures. China alone emits more carbon dioxide than the entire Western Hemisphere. Even if the United States immediately cut emissions by 80 percent, new growth in Chinese emissions would render our reductions moot in less than a decade. Americans would suffer the negative economic and environmental consequences of eliminating conventional power generation, there would be no measurable impact on global temperatures, and Americans would be put at a competitive disadvantage producing goods and services while burdened with immensely high energy costs.

President Obama, you keep your global warming plan, we’ll keep our aviary wildlife and our undeveloped lands.

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:05 PM
Wind Energy Gets Away With Murder

I’m not sure what all the fuss is about. So Wind Farms kill eagles. It’s not like we don’t kill beautiful endangered animals all the time. True, these are federally-protected and they’re an iconic symbol of our democracy. But hey, who minds using taxpayer dollars to kill a few icons?

I guess it’s the hypocrisy that galls. Under both the Bald and Gold Eagle Protection Acts and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the death of a single eagle is a felony, and the Administration has prosecuted oil companies when birds drown in their oily facilities, and fined utilities when birds are electrocuted by their power lines.

But, come on, everyone hates oil companies. And who even knows what a utility is.

So the Interior Department can be forgiven for never fining or prosecuting a wind-energy company that repeatedly kills eagles. And we taxpayers can be forgiven for subsidizing them to the tune of a billion dollars a year.

According to an estimate published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin in March almost 600,000 birds are killed by wind farms in America each year, including over 80,000 raptors such as hawks and falcons and eagles (Wildlife Society). Even more bats die as their lungs are inverted by the negative pressures generated behind the 170 mile-per-hour spinning blades.

A wind industry spokesman countered by saying “We don’t kill as many as cars do.”

Well said!

A paper published in the Journal of Raptor Research by Fish and Wildlife researchers really hit a nerve when it reported that wind energy facilities have killed at least 67 golden and bald eagles in the last five years. Because companies report eagle deaths voluntarily, the scientists said their figure is greatly underestimated.

Even worse, the study did not include the large wind farm at Altamont Pass in California that alone kills more than 60 eagles per year (NBC). In addition, the recently-approved construction of the nation’s largest wind farm in Wyoming would kill about 50 eagles each year, just by itself.

“It is not an isolated event that is restricted to one place…it is pretty widespread,” said Brian Millsap, the national raptor coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and one of the study’s authors.

Rarely discussed is the impact of wind farms on habitat loss and habitat fragmentation, and the large area of roads serving the farms (Wildlife Society). The physical footprint of human systems is one of the fundamental measures of environmental harm. We use it to assess the impact of roads, pipelines, airports and shopping centers. While we focus on the low carbon footprint of wind energy, we need to appreciate its enormous physical footprint.

The typical footprint assigned for a 1 MW wind turbine is 0.25 acres. However, this does not include the 5-10 turbine diameters of spacing required between wind turbines. This extra area is often cited as being useable for farming. But with respect to aerial ecosystems inhabited by birds, this area is not merely unuseable, it is deadly.

About 60 square miles of land covered with wind turbines is necessary to produce 1 billion kWhrs per year (NREL) but the affected area for birds is over 400 square miles. In contrast, it takes only 3 square miles of land for gas fired power plants, and less than 1 square mile for a nuclear plant, to produce the same amount of power. These include the land required for mining and drilling.

This is not a trivial difference. The large physical footprint represents probably the weakest point of wind energy. Every energy source has a drawback.

Maybe a few fines and prosecutions would spur the wind industry to take this issue more seriously, and address their Achilles’ heel. Wind really shouldn’t get a free pass just because they make a contribution to reducing carbon emissions. Hydro and nuclear make infinitely more contributions to reducing emissions and they don’t get a pass for anything.

The golden eagle, seen here, is even more at risk from turbines, with ten times the number of deaths at wind farms than the bald eagle. Photo credit: George Gentry, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Fortunately, the Audubon Society has come up with guidelines on how to site wind farms correctly to reduce the bird kills (Audubon), and State governments are beginning to take action (Huffington Post).

On the other hand, the White House is considering giving wind generators permission to kill a set number of eagles for the next 30 years, at the urging of wind-energy lobbyists. Unfortunately for eagles, such permission is not subject to an environmental review because it is only an administrative change.

What?

BP was fined $100 million for harming migratory birds during the 2010 Gulf spill, and PacifiCorp paid $10 million in 2009 for electrocuting eagles along power lines and at its substations. Exxon Mobil pleaded guilty to killing birds and paid $600,000 to the State of Colorado.

Common, we just extended a $12 billion tax break for the wind industry (Tax Breaks), we don’t need this kind of shenanigans. Making an exception for one industry substantially weakens the government’s ability to enforce the law and has become an issue inside the Interior Department itself.

“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does not do this for the electric utility industry or other industries,” Kevin Kritz, a government wildlife biologist in the Rocky Mountain region wrote in September of 2011. “Other industries will want to be judged on a similar standard.”

The Interior Department repeatedly overrules its experts at the Fish and Wildlife Service on the wind issue. The wind industry actually became part of the committee that drafted and edited the guidelines and pretty much got everything it wanted, including stripping law-enforcement agents in the field from having the authority to file charges with federal attorneys.

Wow! Just like Big Oil. I guess Wind has really arrived.

You know, it’s not the money. These fines are a pittance. It’s the idea that we don’t need to compromise one set of environmental principles for another.

Widespread implementation of wind farms is relatively new, and research and evaluation is only just beginning. Frantically taking advantage of wind construction/production tax credits before they disappear is not a good reason to harm this special ecosystem.

The Administration needs to care about this. Just like any technology, there are good places to build and bad places to build.

We need to build in the good places.
---James Conca

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:08 PM
There hasn’t been a sighting of a White-throated Needletail in the United Kingdom for 22 years, so nearly 80 birdwatchers flocked to Scotland this week to get a look, the Telegraph reported. But instead of enjoying the world’s fastest flying bird soaring, they watched it fly into the small blade of a wind turbine and die.

"It was seen by birders fly straight into the turbine. It is ironic that after waiting so long for this bird to turn up in the UK, it was killed by a wind turbine and not a natural predator, “ Josh Jones of Bird Guides said.

The Needletail was apparently thousands of miles off course when two bird spotters identified it on the isle of Harris Monday. By Wednesday, scores of watchers had gathered in the Tarbet area of Harris, Outer Hebrides, Scotland to catch a glimpse of the rare bird.

“It’s tragic. More than 80 people had already arrived on the island and others were coming from all over the country. But it just flew into the turbine. It was killed instantly," Jones told the Telegraph.

Avid bird watcher David Campbell witnessed the accident Wednesday. "We all ran over there and were heartbroken to find the poor bird lying beneath the machine, in perfect condition apart from blood and slight trauma on the head - but it was stone dead. Cries of sorrow and anger from the assembled birders began to turn into discussion as to what would happen to the bird's corpse, as we took pictures of it lying there. Seeing it up close, as much as I'd rather it were still alive, was, if nothing else, a rare opportunity to examine the utterly amazing plumage and structure of the Needletail," Campbell wrote in his blog, Devil Birder.

Experts believed the bird had likely come from Siberia, Australia, or Japan. It may have gotten lost and affected by the weather. A spokesman for Bird Guides said it was only the ninth time it was spotted in the UK since 1846.

"A very sad end to a delightful bird that may well have attracted many more birders to Harris over the following days had it not met it's untimely demise, "said Western Isles wildlife expert Steve Duffield.

The bird’s body will be sent to a museum.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/06/28/birdwatchers-flock-to-see-rare-bird-then-watch-it-killed-by-wind-turbine/

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:09 PM
Wind power kills birds. Birds that Greenies are supposedly FOND of.

By: Moe Lane (Diary) | June 29th, 2013 at 10:30 AM | 46

RESIZE: AAA

Look, the news that the extinct-for-the-area white-throated needletail bird had been spotted in Scotland – only to be promptly sucked into a wind turbine, accompanied by the screams of horrified amateur ornithologists – should not be surprising. Wind farms are Giant Scythes Of Swinging Doom, when it comes to birds.

The American Bird Conservancy rather desperately wants to support wind power, which is why they’re begging wind farms to somehow stop the darn things from being on track to kill a million birds a year in the USA by 2030.
Most of the articles that I’ve seen estimate that we’re killing about 40% to 60% of that now, with the real problem being that endangered species and raptors are disproportionately represented:
Wind farms kill golden eagles.
Wind farms endanger bald eagles.
Wind farms endanger whooping cranes.
At least one wind farm has been given preemptive forgiveness to kill a California Condor, which news came perilously close to causing actual mass aneurysms among bird conservationists.
The Obama administration has absolutely no plans to solve the problem. No interest, either. Birds don’t make campaign contributions.
Wind farms are killing birds in other countries, too.

Look, the bottom line is this: birds are, by and large, not the most intelligent animals on the planet*. Wind turbines are large spinning blades of metal designed to move as fast as possible without detaching, and then go spinning off into the countryside**. When the two groups struggle for the same airspace, the birds lose. Repeatedly. This might be chalked up to the old saying of Think of it as evolution in action, except for the absolute boondoggle that is wind power. Essentially, we’re paying people to make and operate inefficient power generators that kill birds.

The problem here is that expecting a Greenie to deny wind energy is like expecting a Roman Catholic to deny the Virgin Mary. And I apologize in advance to my fellow Catholics for making that particular analogy; but it really is a matter of purely religious faith among the environmentalists that wind power is somehow the miracle cure for all our power needs…

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:11 PM
A new study found that the federal government underestimated the number of birds that die colliding with wind turbines across the country.

In fact, bird deaths were found to be 30 percent higher than previous estimates given by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2009.

“I estimated 888,000 bat and 573,000 bird fatalities/year (including 83,000 raptor fatalities) at 51,630 megawatt (MW) of installed wind-energy capacity in the United States in 2012,” writes K. Shawn Smallwood, author of the study that was published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin.

“As wind energy continues to expand, there is urgent need to improve fatality monitoring methods, especially in the implementation of detection trials, which should be more realistically incorporated into routine monitoring,” Smallwood added.

Wind turbines have been a dividing issue among environmental groups, as different priorities are placed on promoting renewable energy to curb global warming versus saving wildlife.

“It is the rationale that we have to get off of carbon, we have to get off of fossil fuels, that allows them to justify this,” said Tom Dougherty, a former National Wildlife Federation employee. “But at what cost? In this case, the cost is too high.”

Last month, environmentalists and bird enthusiasts watched in horror as the rare White-throated Needletail flew into a wind turbine and died on the Outer Hebrides.

“This wasn’t even a turbine on a huge wind farm, it was a solitary turbine to provide power to a small community,” said a 38-year old who witnessed the bird hit the turbine. “There is huge concern in Scotland about plans for big wind farms and the danger they would pose to big birds of prey like golden eagles and sea eagles.”

In the U.S., nearly all the birds killed are protected by federal law, but the Obama administration has so far refused to prosecute renewable energy companies whose turbines kill birds.

“Despite numerous violations, the Obama administration — like the Bush administration before it — has unofficially exempted the wind industry from prosecution under the Eagle Protection and Migratory Bird Treaty Acts,” wrote the Manhattan Institute’s Robert Bryce. “By exempting the wind industry from prosecution under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Eagle Protection Act, the federal government is providing another indirect subsidy to the sector.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/23/study-feds-underestimated-how-many-birds-get-killed-by-wind-turbines/#ixzz2fkxh6apV

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:13 PM
James M. Taylor, J.D.
James M. Taylor is managing editor of Environment & Climate News, a national monthly... (read full bio)

Wind turbines in the United States kill 1.4 million birds and bats each year, according to a new peer-reviewed study. Even though wind power generates only 3 percent of U.S. electricity, wind turbines kill 573,000 birds each year and 888,000 bats each year, the study reported. Many of the birds and bats killed by wind turbines are endangered and protected species.

“As wind energy continues to expand, there is urgent need to improve fatality monitoring methods, especially in the implementation of detection trials, which should be more realistically incorporated into routine monitoring,” study author Shawn Smallwood reported.

Smallwood emphasized that restricting carbon dioxide emissions, and thus conventional power generation, in the name of addressing global warming creates even worse environmental problems.

“It is the rationale that we have to get off of carbon, we have to get off of fossil fuels, that allows them to justify [building and employing more wind turbines]. But at what cost? In this case, the cost is too high,” said Smallwood.


“Despite numerous violations, the Obama administration — like the Bush administration before it — has unofficially exempted the wind industry from prosecution under the Eagle Protection and Migratory Bird Treaty Acts,” wrote the Manhattan Institute’s Robert Bryce, as reported in the Daily Caller. “By exempting the wind industry from prosecution under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Eagle Protection Act, the federal government is providing another indirect subsidy to the sector.”

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:14 PM
By: Marc Morano - Climate DepotJuly 19, 2013 8:58 AM

Barack Obama=BIRD KILLER!

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/NWlS/~3/c6FN7h6J9js/barack-obamabird-killer.html

During the 2012 campaign we learned the President of the US ate dog when he was growing up. Now we learn years later that he is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of birds each year and if he has his way that killing will accelerate.

Its not from hunting all of America saw that lame picture of Obama’s fake firing of a shot gun. This President is killing birds (and the economy) via his green energy subsidies.

“The plan I’m announcing today will help us double again our energy from wind and sun,”
As Brian Seasholes reminds us in a recent Forbes magazine piece, those giant wind turbines kill around 600,000 birds annually according to a recently
published scholarly article in the Wildlife Society Bulletin. But the number is likely higher:

The latest wind power plan is likely to cost taxpayers a lot money and cost a lot of birds their lives. Wind turbines have a significant impact on this nation’s birds, especially birds of prey and other large species. The American Bird Conservancy even thinks it’s possible the golden eagle will end up on the endangered species list because so many are being killed by wind turbines. In fact, the Obama administration is so fixated on wind power that it recently gave a California-based wind company an exemption from prosecution if a turbine kills a California condor, one of the rarest birds in the world, with only around 400 alive today. And the administration is hoping to grant a similar exemption to all wind farms along the 1,500-mile Texas to North Dakota migratory corridor for the whooping crane, another of the world’s rarest birds.

According to the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, if you shoot a Bald Eagle you can be subject to a maximum of two years in Jail and a $250,000 fine. However:

“What it boils down to is this: If you electrocute an eagle, that is bad, but if you chop it to pieces [with a wind turbine], that is OK,” Tim Eicher, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement agent, told the AP.
Obama’s plan is to double the number of turbines which means over 1.2 million dead birds, plus a bigger hole in your pocket. Plus he said:

“Your federal government will consume 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources within the next seven years,”
That means instead of hunting for the best price, we will be wasting money on purchasing the more expensive “green” energy (it’s called that because it costs more green).

Wind companies avoid paying fines that other energy companies would face if they killed birds; they avoid hefty legal fees that companies incur when prosecuted by the feds; and they are allowed to build wind farms in areas others would not be allowed into.
All this because of the progressive support for the global warming hoax/international redistribution of income.

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:18 PM
Associated Press
DINA CAPPIELLO September 11, 2013 5:34 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) — Wind energy facilities have killed at least 67 golden and bald eagles in the last five years, but the figure could be much higher, according to a new scientific study by government biologists.

The research represents one of the first tallies of eagle deaths attributed to the nation's growing wind energy industry, which has been a pillar of President Barack Obama's plans to reduce the pollution blamed for global warming. Wind power releases no air pollution.

But at a minimum, the scientists wrote, wind farms in 10 states have killed at least 85 eagles since 1997, with most deaths occurring between 2008 and 2012, as the industry was greatly expanding. Most deaths — 79 — were golden eagles that struck wind turbines. One of the eagles counted in the study was electrocuted by a power line.

The vice president of the American Bird Conservancy, Mike Parr, said the tally was "an alarming and concerning finding."

A trade group, the American Wind Energy Association, said in a statement that the figure was much lower than other causes of eagle deaths. The group said it was working with the government and conservation groups to find ways to reduce eagle casualties.

Still, the scientists said their figure is likely to be "substantially" underestimated, since companies report eagle deaths voluntarily and only a fraction of those included in their total were discovered during searches for dead birds by wind-energy companies. The study also excluded the deadliest place in the country for eagles, a cluster of wind farms in a northern California area known as Altamont Pass. Wind farms built there decades ago kill more than 60 per year.

"It is not an isolated event that is restricted to one place in California, it is pretty widespread," said Brian Millsap, the national raptor coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and one of the study's authors.

The study excluded 17 eagle deaths for which there was not enough evidence. And, in a footnote, it says more golden and bald eagles have since been killed at wind energy facilities in three additional states — Idaho, Montana, and Nevada.

It's unclear what toll the deaths could be having on local eagle populations. And while the golden eagle population is stable in the West, any additional mortality to a long-lived species such as an eagle can be a "tipping point," Millsap said.

The research affirms an AP investigation in May, which revealed dozens of eagle deaths from wind energy facilities and described how the Obama administration was failing to fine or prosecute wind energy companies, even though each death is a violation of federal law.
View gallery."
Graphic shows how birds are harmed by wind turbines; …
Graphic shows how birds are harmed by wind turbines; 3c x 7 inches; 146 mm x 177 mm;

Documents obtained by the AP under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act show that in two cases in Iowa federal investigators determined that a bald eagle had been killed by blunt force trauma with a wind turbine blade. But neither case led to prosecution.

In one of the cases, a bald eagle was found with a missing wing and a leg in a corn field near a turbine at EDP Renewables North America LLC's Pioneer Prairie facility in Iowa. But the report says, "due to the sensitive nature of wind farm investigations and the fact that this investigation documented first violation for EDPR in Midwest, no charges will be pursued at this time." The report lists four other golden eagle deaths at a wind farm operated by the company in Oregon. The company did not return emailed questions about the incidents from the AP.

The Fish and Wildlife Service, which employs the six researchers, has said it is investigating 18 bird-death cases involving wind-power facilities, and seven have been referred to the Justice Department. The authors noted the study's findings do not necessarily reflect the views of the agency, although some of their data was obtained from staff.

Meanwhile, the wind energy industry has pushed for, and the White House is currently evaluating, giving companies permission to kill a set number of eagles for 30 years. The change extends by 25 years the permit length in place now, but it was not subjected to a full environmental review because the administration classified it as an administrative change.

Wind farms are clusters of turbines as tall as 30-story buildings, with spinning rotors as wide as a passenger jet's wingspan. Though the blades appear to move slowly, they can reach speeds up to 170 mph at the tips, creating tornado-like vortexes.

Wind farms in two states, California and Wyoming, were responsible for 58 deaths, followed by facilities in Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, Washington, Utah, Texas, Maryland and Iowa.

In all, 32 facilities were implicated. One in Wyoming was responsible for a dozen golden eagle deaths, the most at a single facility.

The research was published in the Journal of Raptor Research.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NAAzBArYdw

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-23-2013, 06:22 PM
The problem in the article you posted is the same problem with everything that the government sticks it's nose into. Tax subsities, MONEY, lobbyists, etc.

AgentOrange
09-23-2013, 06:43 PM
The problem in the article you posted is the same problem with everything that the government sticks it's nose into. Tax subsities, MONEY, lobbyists, etc.

--- and yours was "complete fact".:love_heart:

I like critters more than most, it is beyond politics for me.
Politics are great fun but WTF.

Beyond party, I support the 2nd amendment, the Southern Battle Flag, and critters.

TNRabbit R.I.P.
09-23-2013, 06:50 PM
--- and yours was "complete fact".:love_heart:

I like critters more than most, it is beyond politics for me.
Politics are great fun but WTF.

Beyond party, I support the 2nd amendment, the Southern Battle Flag, and critters.

I wasn't complaining about your article, I was complaining about the bureaucrats fucking everything up

AgentOrange
11-10-2013, 10:19 PM
BOULDER, Colo., Nov. 8 (UPI) -- Wind turbines killed at least 600,000 -- and possibly as many as 900,000 -- bats in the United States in 2012, researchers say.

Writing in the journal BioScience, the researchers said they used sophisticated statistical techniques to infer the probable number of bat deaths at wind energy facilities from the number of dead bats found at 21 locations.

Bats, which play an important role in the ecosystem as insect-eaters, are killed at wind turbines not only by collisions with moving turbine blades but also by the trauma resulting from sudden changes in air pressure that occur near a fast-moving blade, the study said.

Study author Mark Hayes of the University of Colorado notes that 600,000 is a conservative estimate -- the true number could be 50 percent higher than that -- and some areas of the country might experience much higher bat fatality rates at wind energy facilities than others.

Hayes said the Appalachian Mountains have the highest estimated fatality rates in his analysis.

With bats already under stress because of climate change and disease, in particular white-nose syndrome, the estimate of wind turbine deaths is worrisome, he said -- especially as bat populations grow only very slowly, with most species producing only one young per year.

TNRabbit R.I.P.
11-10-2013, 11:03 PM
The USGS is studying this: http://www.fort.usgs.gov/BatsWindmills/

Should be interesting to see what they determine.

I see reports strewn all over the internet predicting doom & gloom & the imminent demise of the planet. Many take a fact, then stretch & mold it to fit the particular dogma that they happen to be selling. I take most with a pound (!) of salt until I learn otherwise. I SUSPECT the current flurry over the decimation of bats & birds is more overreaction/fabrication, but I try to keep an open mind. I generally don't trust reports from "freerepublic.com" or other extreme sites, unless I can back it up from a confirmed reliable source.

So far, what I've read indicates the single biggest thing we can do to reduce the number of strikes is to ensure these wind farms aren't built on major migratory routes. They are also studying ways to modify wind farms & specifics of the windmills to reduce impact on bird/bat & other fauna, to include different colors & types of paint, blade shape, etc.

TNRabbit R.I.P.
11-10-2013, 11:21 PM
I was trying to upload a Dept of Energy fact sheet, but it keeps failing...not sure why. It appears to be well-presented & makes sense. Here's a link to it: https://www.nationalwind.org/assets/publications/Birds_and_Bats_Fact_Sheet_.pdf

Here's another report by Duke University: https://web.duke.edu/nicholas/bio217/ptb4/batswind.html

AgentOrange
11-22-2013, 07:02 PM
In a settlement announced Friday, Duke Energy will pay $1 million for killing 14 golden eagles over the past three years at two Wyoming wind farms. The company says it pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Marty Gass
03-25-2019, 04:28 PM
Go nuke.
We are now a net exporter of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are currently the lowest cost, most reliable and easiest to produce form of energy. Fossil fuels have helped to almost half the number of people globally living in poverty. We will someday have to get off of fossil fuels. The world will some day run out. Current renewable energy sources are expensive and unreliable. Claiming that we must stop using fossil fuels so we can reduce CO2 is, at best, silly.
I do not believe there is any accurate way to count the number of birds killed by wind turbines. You can only estimate and that leaves much room for argument. It is interesting to note that, at least from what I was able to find info on, the carbon foot print to make and then dispose of a wind turbine is bigger than the amount of foot print is may eliminate. I am also waiting to see what happens to all the solar panels when they finally need to be replaced. Energy is the live blood of civilization.

AgentOrange
12-24-2019, 11:02 AM
From great American and President this week:


“You want to see a bird graveyard?” he asked. “You just go take a look. A bird graveyard. Go under a windmill someday,” he said. “You’ll see more birds than you’ve ever seen ever in your life.” --Donald Trump

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/23/donald-trump-issues-one-of-his-greatest-takedowns-of-windmills/

Marty Gass
12-26-2019, 09:59 AM
Bill,
It is interesting to note that power companies seem to be installing wind farms and solar farms to satisfy a public relations situation. Neither technology has or will do anything to supply large amounts of cost effective reliable broad based energy requirements. There is no need to worry about CO2 as we need more and not less. Someday we will run out of fossil fuels and we need a great source of energy and I believe it is next generation nuclear.
On the subject of bird killings, I read recently that the number one killer of the California condor. I do not think it was an estimate but an actual count.