3 ms·

You've got to be incredibly concerned about feral domesticated cats and window collisions, which kill 1,000-10,000 times more birds annually (on the upper end b

You've got to be incredibly concerned about feral domesticated cats and window collisions, which kill 1,000-10,000 times more birds annually (on the upper end between the two orders of magnitude) between them.

mikepurvis 7y ago
A common argument; Michael Schellenberger addresses it here: https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shellenberger_why_renewables_can_t_save_the_planet https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shellenberger_why_renewabl... Basically, cats kills sparrows and other small and extremely prolific urban birds. Those birds aren't what wind turbines threaten. Wind turbines threaten larger prey birds like owls, eagles, falcons, etc.
- idoh 7y ago
  How many owls and eagles are anywhere near offshore wind turbines?
  - VyperCard 7y ago
    Zero
- throwaway5752 7y ago
  Rather than trying to poke holes in my response you could look at all cause mortality tables for birds. You can compare wind turbines with the many other sources - heavy metal poising, car and plane collisions, habitat loss - and you can compare it to estimated turbine collisions. Cornell Ornithology Lab is a great resource. This isn't an ideal situation, but you can't talk about this sensibly without the background that we are in a planetary climate emergency and this is one route to try to fix a bigger problem. All current life on Earth is headed somewhere bad unless human beings can alter the course of atmospheric CO2. That would be a worse outcome for large birds than more wind farms. If someone wants to concurrently pursue nuclear or solar, by all means they should do so. Shellenberger is a controversial figure, and there is a reason for it.
  - mikepurvis 7y ago
    Oh I hear you on the planetary emergency, and I'm all about having multiple irons in the fire. But each pillar of the strategy should stand on its own merits. You don't get to lead with "meh the birds are not a big deal, they're mostly common ones" and then when challenged, pivot to "so what if it's endangered predatory birds? We're in an emergency here!"
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]

mikepurvis 7y ago

A common argument; Michael Schellenberger addresses it here: https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shellenberger_why_renewables_can_t_save_the_planet https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_shellenberger_why_renewabl... Basically, cats kills sparrows and other small and extremely prolific urban birds. Those birds aren't what wind turbines threaten. Wind turbines threaten larger prey birds like owls, eagles, falcons, etc.

idoh 7y ago
How many owls and eagles are anywhere near offshore wind turbines?
- VyperCard 7y ago
  Zero
throwaway5752 7y ago
Rather than trying to poke holes in my response you could look at all cause mortality tables for birds. You can compare wind turbines with the many other sources - heavy metal poising, car and plane collisions, habitat loss - and you can compare it to estimated turbine collisions. Cornell Ornithology Lab is a great resource. This isn't an ideal situation, but you can't talk about this sensibly without the background that we are in a planetary climate emergency and this is one route to try to fix a bigger problem. All current life on Earth is headed somewhere bad unless human beings can alter the course of atmospheric CO2. That would be a worse outcome for large birds than more wind farms. If someone wants to concurrently pursue nuclear or solar, by all means they should do so. Shellenberger is a controversial figure, and there is a reason for it.
- mikepurvis 7y ago
  Oh I hear you on the planetary emergency, and I'm all about having multiple irons in the fire. But each pillar of the strategy should stand on its own merits. You don't get to lead with "meh the birds are not a big deal, they're mostly common ones" and then when challenged, pivot to "so what if it's endangered predatory birds? We're in an emergency here!"
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]