6 ms·

Meh about [2] - house cats and glass&steel skyscrapers kill an awful lot more birds than that. There is absolutely no outcry against either; that's how we know

Meh about [2] - house cats and glass&steel skyscrapers kill an awful lot more birds than that. There is absolutely no outcry against either; that's how we know the outrage against windmills killing birds is planted and artificially kept alive.

MrTonyD 10y ago
And I was reading that most "capped" underwater oil wells are actually leaking oil - and there are many thousands. So oil is silently killing incredible amounts of sea life. So, while I regret the loss of animal life to wind turbines it is much better than the loss of life to oil. (And new wind turbines in the ocean are being placed at heights which almost eliminate bird impacts and also being designed with structures which won't attract birds as a place to perch, unlike prior generations of wind turbines.)
- ams6110 10y ago
  Oil leaks naturally out of the sea floor also.
AReallyGoodName 10y ago
Transport too. I suspect that's the biggest bird killer. Which really just goes to show how good wind is. The worst complaints aren't actually a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  People who complain about a statistic without mentioning its severity in context are often only using it as rhetorical currency rather than actually caring about the issue itself. If they're accepting of the same outcome in other contexts you can safely ignore them.
- tertius 10y ago
  When there's no wind there's no power. Or really, when there's no wind we just turn on the gas. Also, it + solar will not meet needs.
  - hsjhgktfdy 10y ago
    Wind complements solar well in terms of peak generation. In some markets, wind + solar + hydro + existing demand pricing could already manage current consumption requirements. Hydro is perfect for base load and for peaking. As a bridge fuel natural gas is also perfectly capable for base load and peaking, and due to pricing has already been rapidly supplanting coal and oil. Longer term, pumped hydro where available, or even technologies like syngas could be used to store peak wind/solar capacity to generate when the resource does not meet need. Along with a better long-distance grid, it takes no stretch of the imagination for renewables to meet virtually all current demand, without even accounting for huge advances in new technologies. Peak population is coming, and with increasing energy efficiency/conservation, we can very well expect peak energy usage to precede peak population.
    - tertius 10y ago
      Solar and wind cannot meet demand. Neither is there enough hydro storage. The population will peak. What causes the peak? Lifting from poverty. What results? Much higher energy demand. Regardless, current demand cannot be sustained by wind and solar. Not even speaking about future demand. Gas is fossil. I prefer nuclear to meet demand for the foreseeable future.
      - randomdata 10y ago
        Apples and oranges, really. Wind/solar/gas are best suited for peak production. Nuclear is best suited for base load production. While technology can change down the road, they currently aren't directly in competition with each other.

MrTonyD 10y ago

And I was reading that most "capped" underwater oil wells are actually leaking oil - and there are many thousands. So oil is silently killing incredible amounts of sea life. So, while I regret the loss of animal life to wind turbines it is much better than the loss of life to oil. (And new wind turbines in the ocean are being placed at heights which almost eliminate bird impacts and also being designed with structures which won't attract birds as a place to perch, unlike prior generations of wind turbines.)

ams6110 10y ago
Oil leaks naturally out of the sea floor also.

AReallyGoodName 10y ago

Transport too. I suspect that's the biggest bird killer. Which really just goes to show how good wind is. The worst complaints aren't actually a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

anigbrowl 10y ago
People who complain about a statistic without mentioning its severity in context are often only using it as rhetorical currency rather than actually caring about the issue itself. If they're accepting of the same outcome in other contexts you can safely ignore them.
tertius 10y ago
When there's no wind there's no power. Or really, when there's no wind we just turn on the gas. Also, it + solar will not meet needs.
- hsjhgktfdy 10y ago
  Wind complements solar well in terms of peak generation. In some markets, wind + solar + hydro + existing demand pricing could already manage current consumption requirements. Hydro is perfect for base load and for peaking. As a bridge fuel natural gas is also perfectly capable for base load and peaking, and due to pricing has already been rapidly supplanting coal and oil. Longer term, pumped hydro where available, or even technologies like syngas could be used to store peak wind/solar capacity to generate when the resource does not meet need. Along with a better long-distance grid, it takes no stretch of the imagination for renewables to meet virtually all current demand, without even accounting for huge advances in new technologies. Peak population is coming, and with increasing energy efficiency/conservation, we can very well expect peak energy usage to precede peak population.
  - tertius 10y ago
    Solar and wind cannot meet demand. Neither is there enough hydro storage. The population will peak. What causes the peak? Lifting from poverty. What results? Much higher energy demand. Regardless, current demand cannot be sustained by wind and solar. Not even speaking about future demand. Gas is fossil. I prefer nuclear to meet demand for the foreseeable future.
    - randomdata 10y ago
      Apples and oranges, really. Wind/solar/gas are best suited for peak production. Nuclear is best suited for base load production. While technology can change down the road, they currently aren't directly in competition with each other.