• 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!

Wind Turbines Kills Hundreds of Thousands of Birds Each Year

PoS

Minister of Love
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
38,591
Reaction score
31,316
Location
Oceania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
How Many Birds Do Wind Turbines Really Kill?
|
Smart News
| Smithsonian


In the end, using 58 mortality estimates that met their criteria, they came up with an estimate. According to the current literature somewhere between 140,000 and 328,000 birds die each year from collisions with wind turbines.

How Do Wind Turbines Kill Birds | Wind Farms Eagles | Live Science

Wind turbines kill more than 573,000 birds each year in the United States, according to The Associated Press, including federally protected species like bald eagles and golden eagles.

And the econuts want to put up more of these things to blanket the earth? Hypocrites.
 
How many birds do buildings kill?
 
A redesign is definitely in order. Perhaps to a turbosail type cylindrical turbine.


Because Texas is a leader in wind energy production, trunks carrying those wings are constantly clogging our roadways. Please find a different design.
 
At this point I am starting to doubt there is much we can do about climate change / energy needs that will not impact something.

What a damn mess.
 
At this point I am starting to doubt there is much we can do about climate change / energy needs that will not impact something.

What a damn mess.

The answer is nuclear power. :cool:
 
At this point I am starting to doubt there is much we can do about climate change / energy needs that will not impact something.

What a damn mess.


It would be a massive undertaking even if everyone were on board. There are plenty of variables as well which don't guarantee a favorable outcome, but at least it gets things moving in the right direction. My hope has been that what all of the climate change talk serves to shift the focus of technology to one of finding more efficient ways of replacing the current forms of fuel. I've always seen this more about progress; progress which then helps improve our inefficiencies. The resistance to change is what I find rather odd, given that we have the technology we have because people in the past challenged the paradigms of their time.
 
At this point I am starting to doubt there is much we can do about climate change / energy needs that will not impact something.

What a damn mess.

Giving up is not the answer. The adaptations we make must be to our lifestyles and our technologies.
 
It would be a massive undertaking even if everyone were on board. There are plenty of variables as well which don't guarantee a favorable outcome, but at least it gets things moving in the right direction. My hope has been that what all of the climate change talk serves to shift the focus of technology to one of finding more efficient ways of replacing the current forms of fuel. I've always seen this more about progress; progress which then helps improve our inefficiencies. The resistance to change is what I find rather odd, given that we have the technology we have because people in the past challenged the paradigms of their time.

What ecoloonies believe is that humans can alter a natural cycle that has going on for billions of years. Then we must do something to alter the cycle that we didn't create.
 
Let's see, if we use the lower estimate of 10 billion birds in the US...that's .006%!!!
 
I guess the deniers and the flat earth types will just keep on ranting like this.

The marketplace has already made its decision.

Coal and nuclear are out.

No one wants to invest in technologies that require larger fixed investments with long paybacks,

Cheap batteries are going to make peaker power plants a thing of the past in a decade, and a lot of that capacity (which is now largely natural gas) will shift to base load power, further crowding out coal and nuclear.

Solar and wind powered battery farms are the future. The operating costs of all three technologies has fallen considerably in the last decade, and continues to fall.

It doesn’t take a thirty year investment to build a windmill farm, unlike a coal or nuclear plant.

And now that energy can be stored when generated and sold when needed, some thing that has never happened before on a large scale, the entire economics of the electric power industry is changing.

And that trend will only accelerate because of two changes on the way.

One is the shift to electric cars. We aren’t anywhere near the tipping point there.....yet. But just about every auto maker in the world has an electric program, is introducing electric cars, or has invested in it. Gas mileage and emissions worries go away with the tailpipe!

The other is the shift to a distributed grid.

When utilities can actually count on their own customers to store, use and feed them power, they don’t have to build capacity at all. All they have to do is maintain a grid to equalize the flow.

Wall Street is betting in renewables.

100% of the new investment in electric power generation in the US in the last three years has been in renewables.

And 100% of the capacity that has been retired has been coal and nuclear.
 
I hate to see birds killed in such a way but it's silly to just focus on wind turbines.

Soft kitty, warm kitty, little ball of fur, happy kitty, sleepy kitty Purr, purr, purr. So cute when they're not out terrorizing and killing birds.

Ban kitty!

Ban air travel!

Almost seven million birds are killed each year when they fly into communication towers that broadcast TV and radio and make cell phone conversations possible. Do away with them all!

Consider the bigger picture, it's not a very good argument is it......
 
Don't forget about windmill cancer.
 
I hate to see birds killed in such a way but it's silly to just focus on wind turbines.

Soft kitty, warm kitty, little ball of fur, happy kitty, sleepy kitty Purr, purr, purr. So cute when they're not out terrorizing and killing birds.

Ban kitty!

Ban air travel!

Almost seven million birds are killed each year when they fly into communication towers that broadcast TV and radio and make cell phone conversations possible. Do away with them all!

Consider the bigger picture, it's not a very good argument is it......

Really enjoy reading real,rational debate responses.

Nice job.
 
I guess the deniers and the flat earth types will just keep on ranting like this.

The marketplace has already made its decision.

Coal and nuclear are out.

No one wants to invest in technologies that require larger fixed investments with long paybacks,

Cheap batteries are going to make peaker power plants a thing of the past in a decade, and a lot of that capacity (which is now largely natural gas) will shift to base load power, further crowding out coal and nuclear.

Solar and wind powered battery farms are the future. The operating costs of all three technologies has fallen considerably in the last decade, and continues to fall.

It doesn’t take a thirty year investment to build a windmill farm, unlike a coal or nuclear plant.

And now that energy can be stored when generated and sold when needed, some thing that has never happened before on a large scale, the entire economics of the electric power industry is changing.

And that trend will only accelerate because of two changes on the way.

One is the shift to electric cars. We aren’t anywhere near the tipping point there.....yet. But just about every auto maker in the world has an electric program, is introducing electric cars, or has invested in it. Gas mileage and emissions worries go away with the tailpipe!

The other is the shift to a distributed grid.

When utilities can actually count on their own customers to store, use and feed them power, they don’t have to build capacity at all. All they have to do is maintain a grid to equalize the flow.

Wall Street is betting in renewables.

100% of the new investment in electric power generation in the US in the last three years has been in renewables.

And 100% of the capacity that has been retired has been coal and nuclear.

This so-called green market is heavily subsidized, and the bottom is primed to fall out from under it. The Germans learned the hard way that it is not the future, not by a long shot. Battery technology has already reached its plateau, and barring a scientific breakthrough it will not be sustainable.
 
The answer is nuclear power. :cool:

A combination of things is still the answer, and it may need to include wind turbines in that mix. The point of my post is we already have this approach (at least according to the US EIA,) and there are consequences even with nuclear power as well.

The questions are always the same.

What do we adjust, over what time frame, and to what expectation of impact to both power needs and the environment?

Nuclear accounts for roughly 19% of our power needs, wind turbines is somewhere around 6.6%.

The elephant in the room is natural gas still accounts for some 35% with coal accounting for another 27%.

While we are arguing about a percentage of the bird population killed off by wind turbines (which seems to be way behind the numbers of those killed by hunters, house cats, and birds flying into things... literally categorized as "collisions," I kid you not,) we are avoiding the real discussion... again.
 


Meh... :shrug:

Wind turbines kill fewer birds than do cats, cell towers

Wind energy takes a toll on birds, but now there'''s help

Will Wind Turbines Ever Be Safe For Birds? | Audubon

Question of scope, but regardless, your concerns are being worked on.

As for nuclear...give this a read, to balance out your position:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2198024

Here's hoping we find a way to power our societies without killing anything. :)
 
Windmills don't cause cancer. Anus P. McPuckerface is an idiot, however.

It takes a ****-load of energy and resources to build 'em. Life expectancy of the earlier ones in use are being reached and I don't think the blades can be recycled (solar panels are loaded with toxic chemicals).
Converting to wind and or solar would require a huge resource and land commitment ... not to mention all the other unfortunate consequences.
 
Back
Top Bottom