jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
A Solano County, Calif., wind farm would be the first renewable energy project in the nation allowed to kill eagles under a federal plan
well isnt that nice
Wind Farm Seeks Permit to KILL GOLDEN EAGLES
- Thread starter westwall
- Start date
A Solano County, Calif., wind farm would be the first renewable energy project in the nation allowed to kill eagles under a federal plan
well isnt that nice
Mr. H.
Diamond Member
How about some shut the **** up and butt the hell out?
Look I am completely ok with sucking the blood from slaughtered animals. I do it in my basement all the time. After a little Then I use some acid and strip the bones to make little skeleton statues. Sometimes I even have puppet shows.
- Banned
- #25
There is an enormous difference between building a machine that provides people a necessary commodity but which is dangerous to eagles and other birds - and taking many measures to protect the birds from being harmed - and picking up your gun and going out into the fields and shooting one; whether or not it was your first or your second choice, whether or not you thought it was a buzzard or a bunny rabbit.
The purpose of the wind turbines is not killing one eagle a year. If Joe Blow takes a gun outside and looks up in the air for his next victim, he bears a great deal more of the responsibility for unintended death of an animal.
The Golden Eagle is neither an endangered nor a threatened species.
From Wikipedia:
Once widespread across the Holarctic, it has disappeared from many areas which are now more heavily populated by humans. Despite being extirpated from or uncommon in some its former range, the species is still fairly ubiquitous, being present in sizeable stretches of Eurasia, North America, and parts of North Africa.
And those areas from which it has been driven were not covered with windmills. They were covered with roads, houses, factories and power plants. The open meadows where it once hunted its food have been turned into monocultural fields of grain for human consumption, the rodents poisoned or caught in traps. The golden eagle is neither threatened nor endangered but what harm it has received at the hands of humans has not, for the vast part, come from windmills.
Last edited:
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
killing birds by fossil fuels =bad
killing birds by green energy = good
got the love the limited outrage of the left
killing birds by green energy = good
got the love the limited outrage of the left
Saigon
Gold Member
One of the oil sands industry’s most pressing concerns is its impact on woodland caribou herds. As an iconic Canadian species, and something of a bellwether for boreal forest health, we all want to see caribou thrive.
The first big declines of the woodland caribou in Alberta were observed in the late 1940s and the early 1970s, linked to extensive logging in old-growth forests. Caribou are dependent on old-growth forests because only there can they find abundant amounts of the slow-growing lichen on which they depend for 70 per cent of their diet.
Today, the principal threat to specific caribou sub-populations comes from oil sands development and associated road building and seismic lines within their roaming areas. The woodland caribou is a migratory species, so roads and lines can easily disrupt and fragment their habitat. Moreover, even if the actual area of habitat disturbed by roads and seismic lines is physically small, the amount of habitat that becomes unavailable to the caribou may be much greater, because they cannot or will not cross the disturbed areas. - See more at: How can oil sands operators become better neighbours to caribou? - Oil Sands Question and Response (OSQAR) Blog
Saigon
Gold Member
got the love the limited understanding of the right.
Firstly, oil kills something around several hundred times more birds than wind does.
Secondly, the number of birds killed per wind mills is decreasing steadily, because the industry is working to make the mills safer for birds.
It's a non issue - the usual lies and disinformation spread by people with nothing better to do.
- Banned
- #29
killing birds producing green energy = bad
killing millions of times more animals by fossil fuels = millions of times as bad.
Got to love the selective blindness of the neocon.
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
almost 1 1/2 million birds a year are killed by wind farms
and that is on mere 3 percent of the countries energy needs
U.S. Wind Turbines Kill 1.4 Million Birds and Bats Every Year | Heartlander Magazine
Saigon
Gold Member
Jon -
As I have already explained - the number of birds killed by wind (per mill) is dropping steadily, as the industry gets its head around the issue.
btw, how many bids are killed by nuclear, oil or the electrical grid itself?
As I have already explained - the number of birds killed by wind (per mill) is dropping steadily, as the industry gets its head around the issue.
btw, how many bids are killed by nuclear, oil or the electrical grid itself?
percysunshine
Diamond Member
But we can't eat those birds. We can eat the birds chopped up by wind turbines. Probably de-feathers them quite well too.
Does Eagle taste like chicken?
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
not all lefty enviroactivists are sheeple
many are wondering why the wind farms
although turned into the justice department
are not prosecuted of fined for killing eagles
ScienceRocks
Democrat all the way!
- Banned
- #34
Let's eat them all! 
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
no it is not
it is increasing
and studies say the number is underestimated as well
are you back to it is bad or okay in which way a bird dies
because of energy production
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
Impacts on birds
Because the areas around nuclear power plants and their cooling ponds are so clean, some plants have developed them as wetlands that provide nesting areas for waterfowl and other birds. In fact, such endangered birds as Osprey, Peregrine Falcons, Bald Eagles, and Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers, have found a home at nuclear power plants. Some nuclear plants also have programs to protect species that are not endangered, such as Eastern Bluebirds, Wood Ducks, American Kestrels, Wild Turkeys, and Ring-necked Pheasant.
Clearly, there are many huge potential negative impacts to birds and other wildlife from radiation poisoning in the case of nuclear catastrophe, but these are outside the scope of this document.
Nuclear Power Impacts on Birds
Because the areas around nuclear power plants and their cooling ponds are so clean, some plants have developed them as wetlands that provide nesting areas for waterfowl and other birds. In fact, such endangered birds as Osprey, Peregrine Falcons, Bald Eagles, and Red-Cockaded Woodpeckers, have found a home at nuclear power plants. Some nuclear plants also have programs to protect species that are not endangered, such as Eastern Bluebirds, Wood Ducks, American Kestrels, Wild Turkeys, and Ring-necked Pheasant.
Clearly, there are many huge potential negative impacts to birds and other wildlife from radiation poisoning in the case of nuclear catastrophe, but these are outside the scope of this document.
Nuclear Power Impacts on Birds
Saigon
Gold Member
Jon -
Please go away and do a little reseach - otherwise you just come across as dumb and dishonest as the OP who started this train wreck.
Here is a list of what the indsutry is doing in the US, but obviously countries like Austria are much further down the road to long-term solutuons:
Siting: Bird-smart wind power (including wind farms and associated infrastructure) is sited to prevent harm to birds, ideally in already altered habitats such as farmland, and avoids sensitive areas. Examples of such areas may include migratory bottlenecks, wetlands, raptor concentration and key nesting areas, the edges of ridges used by migrants, key habitat or flight paths for endangered or declining species, breeding concentrations of species that avoid tall structures (such as some grouse species), and in or adjacent to Important Bird Areas. Maps with detailed data on wildlife are currently being developed by conservation groups for use by the wind industry. Pre-construction assessments should always be conducted to confirm whether a particular site presents an especially high risk to birds. Some areas are not going to be suitable for wind development.
Operation and Construction Mitigation: Bird-smart wind power uses the best technology and management practices to avoid and minimize harm to birds, such as by burying transmission lines in high risk areas, following Avian Power Line Interaction Committee standards for above-ground transmission lines, using lighting that minimizes nighttime migratory bird collision mortality (such as strobe lights), using unguyed rather than guyed meteorological towers, and restoring habitat disturbed by construction, e.g., re-compacting soils disturbed by construction and replanting native vegetation (or restoring the site if the wind farm is decommissioned).
Monitoring: Bird-smart wind power conducts effective, federally reviewed and approved, site-specific, pre- and post-construction studies/assessments to assist with improved siting and operation, and to properly quantify impacts. Pre-construction assessments must provide sufficient data to assist with micro-siting (e.g., by use of radar to detect local bird movements), create an annual baseline against which post-construction studies can be evaluated, use all existing available bird study data, and be conducted during months when bird use can be expected to be at its peak at the selected site. Post-construction studies must employ mathematical models that best account for variations in local conditions and the relative difficulty of locating bird carcasses in different habitats, as well as any scavenging by predators that may reduce the number of carcasses found, and run for at least two years (and long enough to determine the efficacy of, and make needed revisions to, operational mitigation measures).
Compensation: Bird-smart wind power redresses the loss of any birds or habitat unavoidably harmed by construction and operation to a net benefit standard. This includes bird deaths caused by collisions with turbines and their associated power lines, and lost or degraded habitat (e.g., areas of abandoned habitat) Such compensation could include acquiring additional land for the National Wildlife Refuge system or other off-site habitat conservation projects.
Wind Energy Frequently Asked Questions
btw The National Academy of Sciences (2007) reported that less than 0.003% of anthropogenic bird deaths every year were attributed to wind turbines in four eastern states in the United States, and confirmed that collisions with buildings and communication towers pose a much greater risk.
Please go away and do a little reseach - otherwise you just come across as dumb and dishonest as the OP who started this train wreck.
Here is a list of what the indsutry is doing in the US, but obviously countries like Austria are much further down the road to long-term solutuons:
Siting: Bird-smart wind power (including wind farms and associated infrastructure) is sited to prevent harm to birds, ideally in already altered habitats such as farmland, and avoids sensitive areas. Examples of such areas may include migratory bottlenecks, wetlands, raptor concentration and key nesting areas, the edges of ridges used by migrants, key habitat or flight paths for endangered or declining species, breeding concentrations of species that avoid tall structures (such as some grouse species), and in or adjacent to Important Bird Areas. Maps with detailed data on wildlife are currently being developed by conservation groups for use by the wind industry. Pre-construction assessments should always be conducted to confirm whether a particular site presents an especially high risk to birds. Some areas are not going to be suitable for wind development.
Operation and Construction Mitigation: Bird-smart wind power uses the best technology and management practices to avoid and minimize harm to birds, such as by burying transmission lines in high risk areas, following Avian Power Line Interaction Committee standards for above-ground transmission lines, using lighting that minimizes nighttime migratory bird collision mortality (such as strobe lights), using unguyed rather than guyed meteorological towers, and restoring habitat disturbed by construction, e.g., re-compacting soils disturbed by construction and replanting native vegetation (or restoring the site if the wind farm is decommissioned).
Monitoring: Bird-smart wind power conducts effective, federally reviewed and approved, site-specific, pre- and post-construction studies/assessments to assist with improved siting and operation, and to properly quantify impacts. Pre-construction assessments must provide sufficient data to assist with micro-siting (e.g., by use of radar to detect local bird movements), create an annual baseline against which post-construction studies can be evaluated, use all existing available bird study data, and be conducted during months when bird use can be expected to be at its peak at the selected site. Post-construction studies must employ mathematical models that best account for variations in local conditions and the relative difficulty of locating bird carcasses in different habitats, as well as any scavenging by predators that may reduce the number of carcasses found, and run for at least two years (and long enough to determine the efficacy of, and make needed revisions to, operational mitigation measures).
Compensation: Bird-smart wind power redresses the loss of any birds or habitat unavoidably harmed by construction and operation to a net benefit standard. This includes bird deaths caused by collisions with turbines and their associated power lines, and lost or degraded habitat (e.g., areas of abandoned habitat) Such compensation could include acquiring additional land for the National Wildlife Refuge system or other off-site habitat conservation projects.
Wind Energy Frequently Asked Questions
btw The National Academy of Sciences (2007) reported that less than 0.003% of anthropogenic bird deaths every year were attributed to wind turbines in four eastern states in the United States, and confirmed that collisions with buildings and communication towers pose a much greater risk.
Last edited:
Saigon
Gold Member
And nuclear...
The threat to avian wildlife from nuclear power plants can also be divided into upstream and downstream fatalities. Uranium milling and mining can poison and kill hundreds of birds per facility per year. Indeed, in early 2008 the Cotter Corporationwas fined $40,000 for the death of 40 geese and ducks at the Can˜on City Uranium Mill in Colorado. The birds apparently ingested contaminated water at one of the settling ponds at the uranium mine (Uranium Watch, 2008). These deaths can be very roughly quantified into 0.006 deaths per GWh. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (2008) have also noted that abandoned open pit uranium mines in Wyoming can form lakes hazardous to wildlife. Uranium-bearing formations are usually associated with strata containing high concentrations of selenium. It is not uncommon for these pits to kill 300 birds per year. Because those mines operated at about one-tenth the efficiency of Canon City, they would correlate to about 0.45 deaths per GWh. Taking the mean from both uranium mines gets us 0.228 fatalities per GWh.
Like fossil-fueled power stations and wind farms, avian fauna can also collide with nuclear power plants. Three thousand birds died in two successive nights in 1982 from collisions with smokestacks and cooling towers at Florida Power Corporation's Crystal River Generating Facility (Maehr et al., 1983). Given that the power plant now hosts an 838 MW nuclear reactor, and presuming it operated with a capacity factor of 90% and that the 3000 deaths were the only ones throughout the year, the facility was responsible for 0.454 avian deaths per GWh. Ornithologists observed 274 fatal bird collisions with an elevated cooling tower at the Limerick nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania from 1979 to 1980 (Veltri and Daniel, 2005). Since the Limerick plant has a 1200 MW reactor, and also assuming it operated at a 90% capacity factor, it was responsible for 0.261 deaths per GWh. At the Susquehanna plant in eastern Pennsylvania, 1500 dead birds were collected between 1978 and 1986 for an average of 187 fatalities per year (Biewald, 2005). Assuming that the 2200 MW plant operated at 90% capacity factor, it was responsible for 0.01 deaths per GWh. Extensive surveys for dead birds were also conducted at the Davis-Bess nuclear plant near Lake Erie in Northern Ohio. Ornithologists recorded a total of 1554 bird fatalities or an average of 196 per year from 1972 to 1979 (Biewald, 2005). Given that the power plant hosts an 873 MW reactor, and assuming it operated with a 90% capacity factor, and the plant was responsible for 0.0285 fatalities per GWh. Taking the mean for each of the four power plants results in 0.188 deaths per GWh. Table 4 (in PDF) calculates that the total avian deaths per GWh for nuclear power plants at about 0.416.
Avian mortality from wind power, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity | NukeFree.org
The threat to avian wildlife from nuclear power plants can also be divided into upstream and downstream fatalities. Uranium milling and mining can poison and kill hundreds of birds per facility per year. Indeed, in early 2008 the Cotter Corporationwas fined $40,000 for the death of 40 geese and ducks at the Can˜on City Uranium Mill in Colorado. The birds apparently ingested contaminated water at one of the settling ponds at the uranium mine (Uranium Watch, 2008). These deaths can be very roughly quantified into 0.006 deaths per GWh. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (2008) have also noted that abandoned open pit uranium mines in Wyoming can form lakes hazardous to wildlife. Uranium-bearing formations are usually associated with strata containing high concentrations of selenium. It is not uncommon for these pits to kill 300 birds per year. Because those mines operated at about one-tenth the efficiency of Canon City, they would correlate to about 0.45 deaths per GWh. Taking the mean from both uranium mines gets us 0.228 fatalities per GWh.
Like fossil-fueled power stations and wind farms, avian fauna can also collide with nuclear power plants. Three thousand birds died in two successive nights in 1982 from collisions with smokestacks and cooling towers at Florida Power Corporation's Crystal River Generating Facility (Maehr et al., 1983). Given that the power plant now hosts an 838 MW nuclear reactor, and presuming it operated with a capacity factor of 90% and that the 3000 deaths were the only ones throughout the year, the facility was responsible for 0.454 avian deaths per GWh. Ornithologists observed 274 fatal bird collisions with an elevated cooling tower at the Limerick nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania from 1979 to 1980 (Veltri and Daniel, 2005). Since the Limerick plant has a 1200 MW reactor, and also assuming it operated at a 90% capacity factor, it was responsible for 0.261 deaths per GWh. At the Susquehanna plant in eastern Pennsylvania, 1500 dead birds were collected between 1978 and 1986 for an average of 187 fatalities per year (Biewald, 2005). Assuming that the 2200 MW plant operated at 90% capacity factor, it was responsible for 0.01 deaths per GWh. Extensive surveys for dead birds were also conducted at the Davis-Bess nuclear plant near Lake Erie in Northern Ohio. Ornithologists recorded a total of 1554 bird fatalities or an average of 196 per year from 1972 to 1979 (Biewald, 2005). Given that the power plant hosts an 873 MW reactor, and assuming it operated with a 90% capacity factor, and the plant was responsible for 0.0285 fatalities per GWh. Taking the mean for each of the four power plants results in 0.188 deaths per GWh. Table 4 (in PDF) calculates that the total avian deaths per GWh for nuclear power plants at about 0.416.
Avian mortality from wind power, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity | NukeFree.org
jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,370
- 1,130
fined $40,000 for the death of 40 geese
but not one wind farm fined for killing eagles
but not one wind farm fined for killing eagles
Saigon
Gold Member
Jon -
Please read and respond to posts #37 and #38.
Please read and respond to posts #37 and #38.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Judge rules Kari Lake unlawfully ran US media agency, voiding layoffs- Started by EvilEyeFleegle
- Replies: 0
-
Impossible Places: The Most Extreme Corners of Planet Earth | 4K Travel Documentary- Started by Robert W
- Replies: 0
-
-
'Head Unbowed'; Trump Buried For Showing Total Disrespect For Fallen Soldiers- Started by skews13
- Replies: 10
-
