LOLOLOL....riiiiight....everybody who is informing you about facts that contradict your denier cult myths and misinformation should just shut up. Typical Flat Earther response, fecalhead.
That's why the Audubon Society agrees with ME.. Because THEY are in the claws of fossil fuel producers. You're embarrassing yourself here..
Your crackpot delusions should be embarrassing you but you're unfortunately way too retarded and misinformed to even realize how crazy you are, you poor victim of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
BTW, fecalhead, in what way exactly does your feeble little brain imagine that the Audubon Society agrees with your demented nonsense?
Audubon's Position on Wind Power
Summary
Audubon strongly supports properly sited wind power as a renewable energy source that helps reduce the threat posed to birds and people by climate change. However, we also advocate that wind power facilities should be planned, sited, and operated in ways that minimize harm to birds and other wildlife, and we advocate that wildlife agencies should ensure strong enforcement of the laws that protect birds and other wildlife.
Why Does Audubon Support Properly Sited Wind Power?
Top scientific experts from around the world, including Audubon's own scientists, agree that the effects of climate change are here now and will get worse.[1] Scientists have found that climate change has already affected half of the world's species' breeding, distribution, abundance, and survival rates.[2] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that by mid-century, climate change may contribute to the extinction of 20-30 percent of all species on earth.
Scientists also agree that in order to help prevent species extinctions and other catastrophic effects of climate change, we must significantly reduce pollution from fossil fuels as quickly as possible. This will require rapidly expanding energy efficiency, renewable energy, and alternative fuels and making changes in land use, agriculture, and transportation.
Properly sited wind power is an important part of the strategy to combat climate change. Wind power is currently the most economically competitive form of renewable energy. As of October 2013, it provides more than 60,000 megawatts of power in the United States. With the current transmission infrastructure, the Department of Energy estimates that wind has the potential to generate 20 percent of the nation's energy.[3] Every megawatt-hour produced by wind energy avoids an average of 1,220 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. If the United States obtains 20 percent of its electricity from wind power by 2020, it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to taking 71 million cars off the road or planting 104 million acres of trees. Expanding wind power instead of fossil fuels also avoids the wildlife and human health impacts of oil and gas drilling, coal mining, and burning fossil fuels.
You're a hugely dishonest SOB.. And all your buds are Eco-Frauds.
You're a hugely disgusting anti-science POS. If you ever had any 'buds', they'd also be working for the Koch brothers or Exxon.
Your selective cut and pastes are EXTREMELY dishonest. In terms of your latest hatchet job -- you know FULL WELL that the "Audubon Society agrees with me" because you CENSORED this part of their statement.
That's crap, fecalhead. Your position, as dictated to you by your puppet masters in the fossil fuel industry, and as you have made clear many times, is that wind farms are a boondoggle that will never provide any useful energy. The Audubon Society does not agree with you on that. Your position is that anthropogenic global warming/climate change is not a problem and poses no threat to the Earth's ecosystems, including bird populations. The Audubon Society does not agree with you on that either. As I just quoted from their position paper on wind farms....
"
Audubon strongly supports properly sited wind power as a renewable energy source that helps reduce the threat posed to birds and people by climate change. "
.....as well as the rest of their position paper quoted above.
Audubon has testified in Congress about the effects of wind turbines on birds and bats. Audubon also supported and helped develop guidelines for the wind industry to help minimize harm to birds and other wildlife. Of course, in order for those guidelines to be effective, the government must enforce existing laws that protect birds and other wildlife. Audubon is a forceful advocate for enforcement of those protective laws, which is why as of December 2013, we are standing in strong opposition to a new U.S. Interior Department rule that will offer 30-year permits for wind farms to kill and injure Bald and Golden eagles.
In essence you are lying to US and the Audubon Society is LYING to themselves with all that MEANINGLESS homage to wind power.. They WILL eventually learn their lesson.. The Audubon Society has taken it up the ass supporting a cause that has made them hypocrits and liars --- and they are pissed.
The Audubon Society disagrees with your denier cult opposition to clean, renewable energy sources, like wind turbines, as they have clearly stated. Your retarded notion that they are "
lying to themselves" is simply insane. They also currently and narrowly disagree with the Interior Department's recent decision on the 30 year permits but whether or not their concerns will prove to be justified is yet to be seen. The wind industry is working hard to minimize the dangers their turbines pose to birds through improved site selection standards, improved turbine design, and radar triggered turbine shutdown systems, and more to come, so the Society's concerns may turn out to be groundless. Under the new rules, the wind farms have to document all of the different ways they are utilizing to preserve the eagles, they get re-examined every five years to see if those methods are working and to check their compliance with the laws, and if the number of accidental eagle deaths rises, they have to do even more stuff to mitigate any harm to eagle populations, both on their sites and elsewhere, or else their permits are revoked. The fact is, the wind power industry, which is very concerned about avian mortality, conducts more studies of their wind farms, both pre- and post-construction, to help them guard against adverse impacts to eagles and other types of birds than any other type of conventional power generation, including nuclear as well as fossil fuel plants. Studies have shown that eagle populations over the last three or four decades have stabilized.
The Avian and Wildlife Costs of Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power
Benjamin K. Sovacool - Vermont Law School
Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences vol. 9, no. 4, December 2012, 255-278
Vermont Law School Research Paper No. 04-13
June 30, 2012
Abstract:
Environmentalists and environmental scientists have criticized wind energy in various forums for its negative impacts on wildlife, especially birds. This article highlights that nuclear power and fossil-fuelled power systems have a host of environmental and wildlife costs as well, particularly for birds. Therefore, as a low-emission, low-pollution energy source, the wider use of wind energy can save wildlife and birds as it displaces these more harmful sources of electricity. The paper provides two examples: one relates to a calculation of avian fatalities across wind electricity, fossil-fueled, and nuclear power systems in the entire United States. It estimates that wind farms are responsible for roughly 0.27 avian fatalities per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity while nuclear power plants involve 0.6 fatalities per GWh and fossil-fueled power stations are responsible for about 9.4 fatalities per GWh. Within the uncertainties of the data used, the estimate means that wind farm-related avian fatalities equated to approximately 46,000 birds in the United States in 2009, but nuclear power plants killed about 460,000 and fossil-fueled power plants 24 million. A second example summarizes the wildlife benefits from a 580-MW wind farm at Altamont Pass in California, a facility that some have criticized for its impact on wildlife. The paper lastly highlights other social and environmental benefits to wind farms compared to other sources of electricity and energy.
You have hypocritically jumped on this issue because it suits the agenda of your fossil fuel industry puppet masters, who fear the competition the fast developing wind industry poses to their profits and market dominance. You obviously don't actually give a shit about the birds or you would also be upset about the much, much larger number of birds that are killed by the activities of the fossil fuel industry. Per megawatt of electricity generated, wind farms kill fewer birds than any of the fossil fuel burning power plants. Lead poisoning from eating bullet riddled animal carcasses kill far more eagles than wind turbines but I don't see getting your panties in a twist over that and demanding that hunters stop using lead bullets. You are a lying hypocrite, fecalhead, and your phony 'outrage' over the wind turbines is a crock of shit.
Stay crooked my friend....................
I'd tell you to 'stay stupid', fecalhead, but that advice would be totally unnecessary and superfluous. You'll never change. That's just how congenital retardation works.
