The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds plans Wind turbine

[Trakar]

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds announces wind turbine plan to reduce its carbon footprint

The RSPB is today unveiling plans to build a wind turbine at its UK headquarters in Sandy, Bedfordshire.

The RSPB believes that renewable energy is an essential tool in the fight against climate change, which poses the single biggest threat to the long term survival of birds and wildlife.

In addition to campaigning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the RSPB is committed to reducing its own carbon footprint by generating its energy needs from renewable sources wherever possible.

The proposal will be a significant step for the wildlife charity, which is joining forces with green energy company, Ecotricity...

“We know that with the right design and location wind turbines have little or no impact on wildlife. The RSPB has commented on over 1,500 wind farm applications. In the small number of cases – around six per cent – where we feel there is likely to be a significant impact on wildlife we have lodged an objection. In many of these cases the developers have listened and redesigned their plans to make sure they do not threaten wildlife...

“Ecotricity is a British company which started 16 years ago as the world’s first green energy company and we don’t pay dividends to shareholders, instead we use our profits to build new sources of green energy.”...

Good Job!!

 

[Oddball]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

 

[Trakar]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

According to the Landsward Institute (formerly the Ecological Monitoring & Assessment Program):
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...6NnuBw&usg=AFQjCNH2rz6B8tSfG0hk1wgep8iUXmcTVQ

• Wind energy offsets any damage done to wildlife: displaces emissions of air toxins, greenhouse gases & other pollutants from fossil fuels that threaten wildlife
• Scientists and the conservation community views fossil fuel plants as much more harmful to the environment
• Wind turbines are less harmful to birds than cars, tall buildings, airplanes etc.
• Fewer than 3 in 100,000 bird deaths are attributed to wind turbines every year
• Low-impact facilities will not disturb wildlife like fossil fuel plants do

Accoding to the Audubon society:

• Coal plants produce air and water pollution, which has a negative impact on bird habitats
• Wind Turbines kill very few birds compared to other human activities
• Glass windows are the leading human-caused death of birds every year
• Estimates are ~1-2 bird deaths per turbine per year
• Global warming is the single biggest threat to wildlife today
• A recent study in Nature found that more than 1/3 of species worldwide will be extinct by 2050 if global warming trends continue
• The site proposed for the wind farm has been studied, and will have minimal impact on local bird populations
• The goal of the Audubon Society is to protect wildlife, and using renewable energy will eventually protect more birds than it will harm in the long run.

 

[skookerasbil]

The Royal Scam

 

[Old Rocks]

The Royal Society is the oldest scientific society in the world.

 

[Trakar]

The Royal Society is the oldest scientific society in the world.

True, but this is a different Royal Society. Nonetheless, it is a respected and renowned conservatory group; it was granted its Royal Charter in 1904, just 15 years after being founded.

The RSPB: About us

 

[onecut39]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

Far less than the billion or so killed every year by cars.

 

[RollingThunder]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

Probably a lot less than your bad breath, shit4brains.

 

[Oddball]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

Far less than the billion or so killed every year by cars.

The cars are already there and will continue to be for quite some time.


FAIL!

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[onecut39]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

Far less than the billion or so killed every year by cars.

The cars are already there and will continue to be for quite some time.


FAIL!

As will the wind turbines.

 

[Trakar]

Far less than the billion or so killed every year by cars.

The cars are already there and will continue to be for quite some time.
...

As will the wind turbines.

Indeed! many currently operating windmills will likely outlive most existent automobiles!

 

[bobgnote]

Until my miserable Congress-geek's website quits doing the swirly, I don't get to write a plug, for CO2-neutral biomass. Wind and solar are the existing, practical, alternative energy options.

Sequestered CO2 options are going to be less popular, going into 2020. One popular estimate has us identifiably going into Mass Extinction Event 6, by 2022. Something must be done.

 

[westwall]

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds announces wind turbine plan to reduce its carbon footprint

The RSPB is today unveiling plans to build a wind turbine at its UK headquarters in Sandy, Bedfordshire.

The RSPB believes that renewable energy is an essential tool in the fight against climate change, which poses the single biggest threat to the long term survival of birds and wildlife.

In addition to campaigning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the RSPB is committed to reducing its own carbon footprint by generating its energy needs from renewable sources wherever possible.

The proposal will be a significant step for the wildlife charity, which is joining forces with green energy company, Ecotricity...

“We know that with the right design and location wind turbines have little or no impact on wildlife. The RSPB has commented on over 1,500 wind farm applications. In the small number of cases – around six per cent – where we feel there is likely to be a significant impact on wildlife we have lodged an objection. In many of these cases the developers have listened and redesigned their plans to make sure they do not threaten wildlife...

“Ecotricity is a British company which started 16 years ago as the world’s first green energy company and we don’t pay dividends to shareholders, instead we use our profits to build new sources of green energy.”...

Good Job!!

Only if your goal is to destroy birds......wind power is a failure. Even Lovelock agree's they are a pox on the world.




"(Washington, D.C., February 2, 2011) American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the nation’s leading bird conservation organization, said today that the build-out of wind energy proposed by the federal government to meet a Department of Energy target of generating 20% of the nation’s electricity through wind power is expected to kill at least one million birds per year by 2030, and probably significantly more.



ABC considers the one million estimate, which is based on a 2005 paper1 and widely cited by the wind industry, as likely a significant underestimate of bird mortality. For example, a more recent 2009 estimate by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) indicated that approximately 440,000 birds were already being killed per year2. At the time, 22,000 turbines were in operation representing 25GW of installed capacity, a fraction of the 300GW of production capacity needed to meet the 20% by 2030 target. Wind farms are also expected to impact almost 20,000 square miles of terrestrial habitat, and over 4,000 square miles of marine habitat by 2030, some of this critical to threatened species."




Wind Power Could Kill Millions of Birds Per Year by 2030

 

[westwall]

Wonder how many birds that whirling chunk of shit will end up killing.

Far less than the billion or so killed every year by cars.

Billion huh? The highest estimate is 50-100 million killed by tens of millions of cars and trucks compared to the 20,000 wind turbines. And, more importantly, the wind turbines kill raptors and other rare breeds far in excess of what cars do. Furthermore the figures for any cause is highly variable. The etimate for the number of birds killed by windows is between 76 and 797 million. In other words they havn't a clue.

Wind turbine kills on the other hand are very easy to calculate because the corpses are there on the ground for you to count.

 

[bobgnote]

Turbines will kill raptors because raptors soar and glide, which will let them get sucked into a turbine.

Birds are smart, so if killer emissions are reduced, they will do fine, with the turbines.

Still, if a raptor follows a smart, little bird, toward a turbine, that raptor needs to watch out, now. Prey species have already learned, to use those turbines, against raptors.

 

[westwall]

Turbines will kill raptors because raptors soar and glide, which will let them get sucked into a turbine.

Birds are smart, so if killer emissions are reduced, they will do fine, with the turbines.

Still, if a raptor follows a smart, little bird, toward a turbine, that raptor needs to watch out, now. Prey species have already learned, to use those turbines, against raptors.

Wind turbines are to raptors what a flame is to a moth. The flicker rate of the blades mesmerise the birds and draws them in to the kill. No bird is smart enough to avoid the blade, some are lucky, most aren't. If your goal is to drive raptors, buzzards and vulturs to extinction your precious little wind farms will do just that.

They won't produce enough usable power however, ever.

 

[bobgnote]

Hmmm. If somebody keeps Jewing up a big old carbon footprint, with other pollution, the heat and pollution will fuck up the birdies' eggs.

The warming-induced droughts and deluges will leave forests susceptible, to beetle infestations and then to wildfire events. Just saying . . . GHGs ain't kosher, yo.

 

[Intense]

Here is a concept worth playing with.

In October 2009, James Dyson's consumer electronics company, famous for its line of vacuum cleaners, introduced a new device to the market called the Dyson Air Multiplier. The Air Multiplier is a fan with an unusual characteristic: It doesn't have any visible blades. It appears to be a circular tube mounted on a pedestal. The shallow tube is only a few inches deep.

Looking at the device, you wouldn't expect to feel a breeze coming from the mounted circle. There are no moving parts in sight. But if the fan is switched on, you'll feel air blowing through the tube. How does it work? How can an open circle push air into a breeze without fan blades?

As you might imagine, there are a few scientific principles at play here. There's also an electronic element. While the tube doesn't have any blades inside it, the pedestal of the fan contains a brushless electric motor that takes in air and feeds it into the circular tube. Air flows along the inside of the device until it reaches a slit inside the tube. This provides the basic airflow that creates the breeze you'd feel if you stood in front of the fan. Dyson claims that the Air Multiplier generates a breeze with 15 times more air than what the device actually takes in.

According to Dyson, the breeze generated by the Air Multiplier is more consistent and steady than one from a standard fan with blades. Since there are no rotating blades, the breeze from the fan doesn't buffet you with short gusts of air.

HowStuffWorks "Stuff You Should Know's First-ever Crowd-sourced Quiz"

 

[RollingThunder]

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds announces wind turbine plan to reduce its carbon footprint

The RSPB is today unveiling plans to build a wind turbine at its UK headquarters in Sandy, Bedfordshire.

The RSPB believes that renewable energy is an essential tool in the fight against climate change, which poses the single biggest threat to the long term survival of birds and wildlife.

In addition to campaigning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the RSPB is committed to reducing its own carbon footprint by generating its energy needs from renewable sources wherever possible.

The proposal will be a significant step for the wildlife charity, which is joining forces with green energy company, Ecotricity...

“We know that with the right design and location wind turbines have little or no impact on wildlife. The RSPB has commented on over 1,500 wind farm applications. In the small number of cases – around six per cent – where we feel there is likely to be a significant impact on wildlife we have lodged an objection. In many of these cases the developers have listened and redesigned their plans to make sure they do not threaten wildlife...

“Ecotricity is a British company which started 16 years ago as the world’s first green energy company and we don’t pay dividends to shareholders, instead we use our profits to build new sources of green energy.”...

Good Job!!

Only if your goal is to destroy birds......

Silly nonsense promoted by the fossil fuel industry as part of their campaign to dismiss renewable energy sources that are in competition with fossil fuels.

wind power is a failure.

Actually wind power is a big success and getting bigger all the time. It is only in your crazy little cult of AGW denial, that stooges for the fossil fuel industry, that you can find anyone who considers wind power a "failure". But of course, you always have been a massively ignorant and very crazy little liar, walleyedretard.

As far as the bird kills go, you and FauxNews are very good at spinning up a story and ignoring the context. And, of course, you both usually get your facts wrong.

A 2007 report by the National Research Council concluded that wind turbine losses account for “a minute fraction” of bird deaths caused by human activities:

Collisions with buildings kill 97 to 976 million birds annually; collisions with high-tension lines kill at least 130 million birds, perhaps more than one billion; collisions with communications towers kill between 4 and 5 million based on “conservative estimates,” but could be as high as 50 million; cars may kill 80 million birds per year; and collisions with wind turbines killed an estimated at 20,000 to 37,000 birds per year in 2003, with all but 9,200 of those deaths occurring in California. Toxic chemicals, including pesticides, kill more than 72 million birds each year, while domestic cats are estimated to kill hundreds of millions of songbirds and other species each year. Erickson et al. (2005) estimate that total cumulative bird mortality in the United States “may easily approach 1 billion birds per year.”

Clearly, bird deaths caused by wind turbines are a minute fraction of the total anthropogenic bird deaths–less than 0.003% in 2003 based on the estimates of Erickson et al. (2005). [National Research Council, May 2007​

And then, of course, there is the fact that these man-made climate changes we're experiencing will wipe out whole species of birds and kill far, far more birds than wind turbines ever will.

A 2008 Department of Energy report noted that wind-related bird deaths cannot compare to the threat of climate change:

Publicity related to wind power developments often focuses on wind power’s impact on birds, especially their collisions with turbines. Although this is a valid environmental concern that needs to be addressed, the larger effects of global climate change also pose significant and growing threats to birds and other wildlife species.

The future for birds in a world of global climate change is particularly bleak. A recent article found that 950 to 1,800 terrestrial bird species are imperiled by climate changes and habitat loss. [Department of Energy, July 2008]​

And then there is the fact that fossil fuel production kills far more birds than wind turbines. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:

Every year an estimated 500,000 to 1 million birds are killed in oilfield production skim pits, reserve pits, and in oilfield wastewater disposal facilities according to a study published by Pepper Trail, forensic ornithologist with the Service’s Forensics Laboratory in Ashland, Oregon. [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 8/19/11]​

Although some members of the American Bird Conservancy seem to have their feathers in a twist over this, here's the organizational position statement on wind energy.

American Bird Conservancy’s Policy Statement on Wind Energy and Bird-Smart Wind Guidelines

Wind power is the fastest developing source of energy in the United States and can be an important part of the solution to climate change. However, wind farms can kill birds through collisions with turbines and associated structures, and also harm them through the loss of habitat that birds need for survival. American Bird Conservancy supports wind power when it is bird-smart, and believes that birds and wind power can co-exist if the wind industry is held to mandatory standards that protect birds.

Other bird conservation groups, like the Audubon Society, don't entirely agree with the ABC on this problem.The Audubon Society just recently endorsed the Obama Administration's new guidelines on wind farms that are aimed at reducing bird fatalities from wind turbines.

New wind tower guidelines aim to lower bird deaths
By Associated Press business staff
March 23, 2012
(excerpts)

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration offered new guidance Friday on where wind farms should be located to reduce the number of bird deaths while promoting increased use of wind power. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said the guidelines, which take effect immediately, provide a scientific basis for developers and government regulators to identify sites with low risk to wildlife while allowing for more wind energy projects on private and public lands. Salazar called wind power a key part of the administration's "all-of-the-above" energy strategy and noted that the guidelines for onshore projects have been endorsed by the American Wind Energy Association and the National Audubon Society, a conservation group. The dual endorsements "speak volumes about our goals: to do everything we can to stand up renewable energy" such as wind power while protecting wildlife and habitat, Salazar said at a news conference Friday. The guidelines call on the wind industry to eliminate from consideration areas that would pose high risks to birds and other wildlife, and to take steps to alleviate problems by restoring nearby habitat and other actions.

John Anderson, director of siting policy for the wind energy group, said wind turbines cause a minute fraction of overall bird deaths -- less than 3 out of every 100,000 human-related deaths. Even so, he said the industry has taken significant steps to reduce the number of birds killed, mostly by restoring habitat and locating wind farms in low-risk areas. The new guidelines established by the Fish and Wildlife Service should improve siting practices while protecting wildlife, said Denise Bode, chief executive of the wind energy association. David Yarnold, president & CEO of Audubon, called the guidelines a good compromise that reflects years of consultation with interested groups, including environmental groups. "Conservationists can't have it both ways: We can't say we need renewable energy and then say there's nowhere safe to put the wind farms," Yarnold said. "By collaborating with conservationists instead of slugging it out, the wind power industry gains vital support to expand and create jobs, and wildlife gets the protection crucial for survival. These federal guidelines are a game-changer and big win for both wildlife and clean energy."