• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Twitchers flocking to see rare bird saw it killed by wind turbine

Of course the environment matters. But once environmental concerns start to become more important than the progress of our own species its then I have concerns. Far too many eco mentalists today see us as a blight on the biosphere rather than a legitimate part of it frankly.

So wind and solar energy sources are inhibiting the development or our species.

We're going to die off and devolve to the stone age all because a hill has some wind turbines.

You need to do some homework on power sources and the impact it has on society and the environment - and then hook yourself to a fishing lure and reel your ass back in. Our species isn't going to decline between someone doesn't want to burn a bit of coal to charge their electronic devices.

...I'm not stupid. I see what your real issue is: you don't LIKE to SEE them. You think they're ugly. End of story.
 
So wind and solar energy sources are inhibiting the development or our species.

We're going to die off and devolve to the stone age all because a hill has some wind turbines.

You need to do some homework on power sources and the impact it has on society and the environment - and then hook yourself to a fishing lure and reel your ass back in. Our species isn't going to decline between someone doesn't want to burn a bit of coal to charge their electronic devices.

...I'm not stupid. I see what your real issue is: you don't LIKE to SEE them. You think they're ugly. End of story.

Thier land area footprint per Megawatt of production is by far the highest of any current method of power generation and that includes the mining and oil extraction processes necessary for fossil fuel power generation . The contradiction here is that environmentalists are destroying the very environment they are trying to save whilst imposing massive energy rises on us in order to do so.
 
Thier land area footprint per Megawatt of production is by far the highest of any current method of power generation and that includes the mining and oil extraction processes necessary for fossil fuel power generation . The contradiction here is that environmentalists are destroying the very environment they are trying to save whilst imposing massive energy rises on us in order to do so.

I'm still searching for a research article that denotes the turbines are having a greater negative impact on the environment that other more commonly used sources - since you care so much. . .I support making use of a wide variety - whatever is okay, readily available or otherwise ideal for the area. . . including Thorium.

So if they want to put a field of freaking fans in Oklahoma - I say go for it.
 
As we move away from more potentially harmful energy sources like petroleum we will be much less likely to have spills or accidents that will likewise destroy whole ecosystems, as we have seen in Alaska, the Gulf coast, and Arkansas.

Of course I recognize that we need a definite transition from non-renewable to renewable resources, but it's a change we need to start making nonetheless.

Forgive me while I laugh at your depiction of entire ecosystems being destroyed by oil spills. No question the ramifications of an oil spill are catastrophic but it isn’t accurate to describe it as destruction of an entire ecosystem.

Windmills kill more birds than oil spills, but they don’t do it in the dramatic fashion (all at once) oil spills do. If there are massive farms of windmills, as would be requisite for and meaningful energy production, they would be avian killing fields. There aren’t any two ways about it.
 
Oh I'll be the horrible person here and say I laughed: remembering the scene from The Crow, "Caw, caw, caw. Bang! ****, I'm dead!"

Perhaps you laugh because you seek truth and find those who think they have it all figured out already, as funny as I do. I feel bad for the bird and the bird watchers but I wish I could've been there to see a few hippies trip out and short circuit as they tried to figure out what is green and what isn't.

I'm silly that way.
 
It's kind of annoying that people don't realize that natural resources are renewable. Some take longer than others to renew, but they are all renewable. Of course, that term usage has been getting on my nerves for a while now.

Anyway, one of the entire purposes of moving forward is doing more work with less resources, not taking up hundreds of acres of land to get the same output you get from one coal plant. That is just stupid.

Petroleum is a natural resource and it is renewable. You are aware of this right?
 
Petroleum is a natural resource and it is renewable. You are aware of this right?
Oh, good, you and Henrin think you have managed to eliminate a word from English vocabulary! Gee ... :lamo
 
I remember seeing video footage of a rare bird in Illinois that birdwatchers were flocking to see from all over the country, only to have it nabbed mid-flight by and owl.

Nature happens.

Just think of all the birds killed because their habitat is moving North or to higher elevations because of climate change - where they are not adapted. Way, way more killed this way than wind turbines.

Wind turbines, nature. See the difference?:lol:
 
So are you attempting to argue that the death of a few birds is in fact worse than the destruction of a whole ecosystem? Because quite honestly I feel the implied meaning of my question, not statement, is quite clear. Perhaps it is you that misinterpreted me.

You need to be better informed on this.

The real death toll, as reported by Paul Driessen and others, is thousands of raptors a year – and up to 39 million birds and bats of all species annually in the United States alone, year after year! This is intolerable, and unsustainable. It is leading to the inevitable extinction of many species, at least in many habitats, and perhaps in the entire Lower 48 States. Meanwhile, assorted “experts” continue to insist that the greatest threats to golden eagles are other factors like hikers getting too close to their nests, even when most abandoned nests in Southern California are nowhere near any hiking trails and wind turbines continue to slaughter eagles. It is essential that people realize that no energy source comes anywhere close to killing as many raptors as wind energy does. No other energy companies are allowed to pick up bodies of rare and protected species from around their production sites on a day-to-day basis, year-in and year-out. No other energy producer has a several thousand mile mortality foot print (the highly endangered whooping cranes’ migratory corridor) like what wind energy has. Once people understand all of this, they will rightfully demand that the wind industry obey the same environmental rules that all other industries must follow. This will require that wind turbines be sited only where the risk of bird deaths is minimal to zero; that turbines be replaced with new designs that birds recognize as obstacles and thus avoid; that fines be levied for every bird death, as is done with other industries; and that industrial wind facilities not be permitted where these requirements cannot be met. - See more at: Wind turbines kill up to 39 million birds a year!

Wind turbines kill up to 39 million birds a year!
 
It's kind of annoying that people don't realize that natural resources are renewable. Some take longer than others to renew, but they are all renewable. Of course, that term usage has been getting on my nerves for a while now.

Anyway, one of the entire purposes of moving forward is doing more work with less resources, not taking up hundreds of acres of land to get the same output you get from one coal plant. That is just stupid.

Oil and coal are not renewable, no new oil or coal is forming today. And tell me how many acres of land is destroyed strip mining all that coal? How much mercury will be introduced into the environment burning it? Even if you don't care about warming, burning coal is a serious danger to all living things
 
We have a solar farm lease for 20 years within our school district. Good money, but not making up for the shortfall from the state of Illinois due to the pension fiasco. County reps from other school districts actually blocked it in committee. Our local Repub Congressman would not actually say yes but he didn't block it either.
Oil and coal are not renewable, no new oil or coal is forming today. And tell me how many acres of land is destroyed strip mining all that coal? How much mercury will be introduced into the environment burning it? Even if you don't care about warming, burning coal is a serious danger to all living things
 
How do you feel about these turbines on top of the Green Mountain ridges in northern Vermont? Very Conservative northern Vermont. Very Canadian companies, as with tar sands.
You need to be better informed on this.

The real death toll, as reported by Paul Driessen and others, is thousands of raptors a year – and up to 39 million birds and bats of all species annually in the United States alone, year after year! This is intolerable, and unsustainable. It is leading to the inevitable extinction of many species, at least in many habitats, and perhaps in the entire Lower 48 States. Meanwhile, assorted “experts” continue to insist that the greatest threats to golden eagles are other factors like hikers getting too close to their nests, even when most abandoned nests in Southern California are nowhere near any hiking trails and wind turbines continue to slaughter eagles. It is essential that people realize that no energy source comes anywhere close to killing as many raptors as wind energy does. No other energy companies are allowed to pick up bodies of rare and protected species from around their production sites on a day-to-day basis, year-in and year-out. No other energy producer has a several thousand mile mortality foot print (the highly endangered whooping cranes’ migratory corridor) like what wind energy has. Once people understand all of this, they will rightfully demand that the wind industry obey the same environmental rules that all other industries must follow. This will require that wind turbines be sited only where the risk of bird deaths is minimal to zero; that turbines be replaced with new designs that birds recognize as obstacles and thus avoid; that fines be levied for every bird death, as is done with other industries; and that industrial wind facilities not be permitted where these requirements cannot be met. - See more at: Wind turbines kill up to 39 million birds a year!

Wind turbines kill up to 39 million birds a year!
 
Excuse me, but I made no such statement, and you suggest that I misinterpreted my own words? Either you take me for an idiot or you don't understand what you are suggesting.

This is what you said:

As horrible and unfortunate as the situation is, would you rather a few avian individuals fall victim or whole ecosystems destroyed?

How else would you read that? The crystal clear implication is that without windmills the eco system is doomed...doomed I tell you!

I will now say though that consequently that statement is true, however is it a direct correlation? Of course not, but as a result from moving towards renewable resources such as wind we will stop such disasters such as oil spills from ruining our ecosystems.

So you didn't say it (even though you did) and you admit that it's true. Got it.

It is a false dichotomy. The eco system will not be destroyed if windmills do not exist.
 
How do you feel about these turbines on top of the Green Mountain ridges in northern Vermont? Very Conservative northern Vermont. Very Canadian companies, as with tar sands.

I am against all wind and solar industrial power plants. I am for roof top solar and have that myself.
 
Our solar is on land classified as below 50% farm quality here in LaSalle County. The people who own it are former students and quite conservative, if that matters. The lease runs 20 years and then goes back to farming. It is not an eyesore. Illinois has a 15%
green law. If not us, someone else would have. Our schools and governmental agencies benefit. This summer, the state of Maine floated its first windmill into the Atlantic. It is a prototype on a 1:8 scale.
I am against all wind and solar industrial power plants. I am for roof top solar and have that myself.
 
Last edited:
This is no secret, and it isn't "nature" as someone said on this thread.

Wind turbines need wind, as do soaring birds like eagles that use wind drafts to gain altitude.

These wind farms are being built in high wind zones which, no surprise, also attract soaring birds who ride these thermals right into spinning turbine blades.

A staggering 573,000 birds are killed by wind turbines each year in the US alone. This isn't "nature", it's a giant man made bird processor.
 
Time to stop making glass windows ...

FAQs - Birds and Buildings

My post was in response to someone who said wind mill farms :kill a few birds". 39 million annually is more than a few and people need to know about this before they claim or think these wind farms are green benign energy, it may change a few minds. As for your so what, windows kill birds too stance, I'm sure you are just as forgiving when an occasional oil spill kills birds.:lol:
 
JM says 570k birds, sawyer says 39 million per year.

You guys need to get your stories straight.
And you know neither are correct ... ;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom