5 ms·
If wind farms are going to contribute significantly, then there will be a lot of them. In terms of replacing fossil fuels they will likely still be a net benefi
by pbh101 9y ago
If wind farms are going to contribute significantly, then there will be a lot of them. In terms of replacing fossil fuels they will likely still be a net benefit, but unless the Audubon Society has been captured by Big Oil etc (which I doubt, but possible) then bird safety still sounds like an open question.
[1] http://www.audubon.org/news/will-wind-turbines-ever-be-safe-birds http://www.audubon.org/news/will-wind-turbines-ever-be-safe-...
- anotherbrownguy 9y agoI would be very happy with all birds being extinct if that is what would take to come up with a solid replacement for fossil fuels. The problem with wind power is it will not replace anything. Wind cannot provide reliable power so it has to be backed by something else that is reliable. Also, wind provides variable power so infrastructure has to be setup such that it can handle such variation. After accounting for initial setup costs and maintenance of wind turbines (it is worse than Solar in this regard because of the wear and tear in mechanical parts) and power infrastructure (which has to be designed to handle such variation without any impact on consumers), it will take a very long time to break even, if at all. And don't forget that we will still need something reliable like nuclear or fossil fuels to back it up... which we already have enough of to last for thousands of years. So, basically, all we get with wind is more work for no gain at all (not to mention the unnecessary environmental harm). I am sure Statoil is not ignorant of this. They are just using a small portion of their 100 billion dollar yearly revenue in this to please the eco-terrorists.