| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| We fell for the snail darter hype, so now the idiots are suggesting we have gone to the birds; I thought it had a ring | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 16 2013, 07:12 AM (196 Views) | |
| Pat | Dec 16 2013, 07:12 AM Post #1 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm nearly at a loss for words on this one. How many here remember the fiasco involving the spotted owl? How about shutting down the Tennessee Valley Authority project over something called a snail darter? How about the fact that every year species go extinct just because that's how it works? A stronger species or smarter one does you in. Think Neanderthal when reading this article. Does the author think we are this stupid? Death by Renewables Marita Noon | Dec 15, 2013 “Even green projects have an impact on their surrounding environment.” Green energy, specifically so-called renewables, has been sold to the American public as the answer to a host of crimes against the planet. But, as Lex Berko points out in her post on Motherboard, “even green” has its downside. Biomass may be “renewable,” but burning it releases CO2. Then, it’s expensive: “A 100% renewable-energy mix from in-state sources could cost up to five times more,” reports the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). And, energy from wind and solar sources kills birds. Wind turbines chop up bald and golden eagles, and other endangered species, like a Cuisinart—the taller turbines with longer blades (which produce more energy, and, therefore, is where the trend is heading) have a predicted annual ten-fold mortality increase. The authors ofa new study on bird collision mortality at wind facilities concludes: “Given that we found evidence for increased bird mortality with increasing height of monopole turbines along with a move toward increasing turbine size, we argue that wildlife collision risk should be incorporated with energy efficiency considerations when evaluating the ‘greenness’ of alternative wind energy development options.” If the Department of Energy were to meet its 2030 goal of having 20 percent of the nation’s electricity generated from wind, they project: “a mean annual mortality estimate of roughly 1.4 million birds.” Hundreds of acres of photovoltaic solar panels confuse migratory water birds, such as the “once-critically endangered brown pelican whose lifestyle involves fishing by diving into open water,” to veer miles out of their way to dive toward what they perceive are lakes or wetlands—only to die from “blunt force trauma.” At the largest solar thermal plant in the world, Ivanpah, owned by Brightsource Energy, the 170,000 reflecting mirrors—designed to “superheat liquid in boilers”—literally fries feathers. The USA Today reports that the intense radiation—called solar flux—has singed some birds, melted feathers, and denatured the protein in their wings as they fly through the intense heat. Unable to fly, the injured birds drop out of the sky and die. The federally Endangered Yuma clapper rail, the dramatic-looking black-crowned night heron, double-crested cormorant, red-breasted merganser, American coots, warblers, goldfinches, a common raven, and a barn owl—just to name a few, may get a reprieve from being lured to their death by solar power plants. USA Today references a “solar-industrial corridor” along I-10 in Riverside County, California, which was to have 80 percent of its 148,000 acres covered with solar panels or mirrors. However, it reports: “Today, that seems unlikely. Industry trends are toward smaller solar projects and the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) loan-guarantee program has ended.” (Remember, last week, I reported on the crony corruption behind the loan approval process for BrightSource’s Ivanpah project.) Additionally, Friday, December 13, was unlucky for the solar industry—but lucky for the birds. Giving official recognition of the threat solar power tower projects pose to wildlife, The California Energy Commission announced that it is “likely to deny approval to a major Riverside County solar power project that has been criticized for posing an unacceptable risk to birds and other wildlife.” The bald and golden eagles aren’t so lucky. The Friday before, December 6, the Obama Administration announced an extension of the existing five-year eagle take permit. Effective immediately, the new rule issued by the Department of Interior (DOI) will grant 30-year permits allowing wind farms to “accidently kill federally protected eagles.” The “rule” is in direct violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act passed by Congress in 1940. Once again, executive action trumps the law. The DOI decision prompted this response from Mike Daulton, vice president of government relations for the National Audubon Society: “This is going to lead to more dead eagles—plain and simple.” To encourage Interior Secretary Jewell to reverse the decision, the National Audubon Society has set up a direct email option with a customizable letter to Secretary Jewell that states: “The 30-year permit rule is a blank check for the wind industry and provides no comfort or confidence at all that you will be protecting America’s majestic Bald and Golden Eagles and safeguarding their populations.” Like the expiration of the DOE loan guarantee program has increased the likelihood populations of migratory birds will survive death by renewables, the pending expiration of the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy could help the eagles and other raptors that are attracted to the towering turbines. A December 12 WSJ editorial, Powering Down the Wind Subsidy, points out, as the subtitle states: “How Congress can achieve something by doing nothing.” The WSJ is encouraging Congress to “do nothing” and allow the PTC to expire as scheduled on December 31—which would save taxpayers $18 billion over the next five years. Expire it may, as the current budget deal takes away last minute negotiations that got it extended last year—but that doesn’t mean it is really gone. The PTC has expired several times in its twenty-year history and has always been extended retroactively—which is what we may be facing this year. The WSJ states: “The wind lobby is now trying to get the subsidy included in a January ‘tax extender’ package and made retroactive.” Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on December 13, for the first time hinted, according to Politico.com, that he may push the Senate to consider a tax extenders package. Wyden said: “If you didn't have tax reform and you didn't have extenders, you’d do crushing damage to solar, wind and renewables.” No mention was made of the “crushing damage” to America’s migratory bird population or to the bald and golden eagles. Wyden will likely have his way. While, as I’ve written previously, Republicans generally oppose government subsidies and support the energy that actually works, and Democrats, like Wyden, tend to favor government giveaways and support the energy that they “hope” will “change” and actually work—there are plenty of Republicans who will help him push the “extenders” package and give the PTC back (despite the probable expiration on December 31). Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, where the PTC extension originates, and he recently predicted a PTC extension. With just a handful of Republicans, such as Orin Hatch (UT), Pat Roberts (KS), John Thune (SD), and Mike Crapo (ID)—all of whom voted for the extension in 2012, the PTC could be hailed a “bipartisan victory.” Think of all the millions of birds being killed by renewables. Think of the billions of taxpayer dollars that have gone down the drain in “the quest for the holy grail of cheap renewable power.” Whether you oppose death by renewables for avian or economic reasons isn’t important. But what does matter is making your opposition heard. Send your customizable National Audubon Society letter to Secretary Jewell and contact the Republican Senators listed above and tell them to stop supporting wind welfare. |
![]() |
|
| Brewster | Dec 16 2013, 07:55 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Silly Article. Once again, a Right Wing source that claims that if there's a problem with some project that they don't like, then that problem cannot ever be cured, and we must stop the project immediately. The "Windmills kill Birds" meme is a excellent example. The actual numbers never were very great - much less than say, windows in houses, and nowhere near what are lost to skyscrapers with 60 stories of glass. Maybe we should stop building skyscrapers? But whatever number of birds it was before, engineers have worked out that if they change the shape of the tips of the windmills, they will produce a low volume whistle far outside the range of human hearing (and most other animals as well). On windmills with that change, bird deaths have declined by 80%. The engineers can probably do better in the future. But of course, the WSJ would never tell you that. Edited by Brewster, Dec 16 2013, 10:51 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Brewster | Dec 16 2013, 08:03 AM Post #3 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A chart showing the Dangers of Wind Power...![]() More Details
Edited by Brewster, Dec 16 2013, 08:18 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Neutral | Dec 16 2013, 08:30 AM Post #4 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The article shows why the wackos are called wackos. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)





10:11 PM Jul 11
