3 ms·

Noise doesn't only affect humans.

elric 5y ago
Funny how people are suddenly concerned with other species when a wind turbine is placed near their home. But when an out-of-sight coal plant belches out tons of pollutants which affect thousands of species, that concern seems to vanish. Quaint.
- Smithalicious 5y ago
  The discussion is comparing solar to wind, nobody is suggesting coal as an alternative, so this complaint seems out of place.
  - elric 5y ago
    Not really. It's an observation on human nature. It's about how certain problems are only problems when they fit a narrative, and can be conveniently ignored otherwise. It seems like the toxicity of solar panel production is also conveniently being ignored, or how much water it requires. Certainly less than coal, but more than wind turbines.
    - mensetmanusman 5y ago
      It’s less water over the life of the product though.
guerrilla 5y ago
Well, let me know when you have a study showing how the mice and vipers in those fields are affected.
- DocTomoe 5y ago
  Well, there is a DLR (essentially Germany's NASA) study about the effect of wind turbines on insects [1]. It's not pretty. Neither is the study on the effect on birds [2] by NABU, one of our "Sierra Club"-style organisations. [1] https://www.dlr.de/content/en/articles/news/2019/01/20190326_dlr-studies-interactions-flying-insects-wind-farms.html https://www.dlr.de/content/en/articles/news/2019/01/20190326... links to an English-language interview. [2] https://bergenhusen.nabu.de/imperia/md/nabu/images/nabu/einrichtungen/bergenhusen/projekte/windenergie/impact_of_repowering.pdf https://bergenhusen.nabu.de/imperia/md/nabu/images/nabu/einr...
  - cinntaile 5y ago
    It's not pretty is not what the research concluded. "From the currently available figures and the DLR model calculation, we cannot conclude either that wind energy plays a significant role in the reduction of insect numbers, or that it has no impact. " Needs more research.
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    There's no mention of sound or noise in either one of those.
    - DocTomoe 5y ago
      The insect study focusses on getting hit by the turbine wing, that's right. The bird study only talks about effects, without specifying effects, and takes note about bird-specific things like "avoidance distance", which is linked to - among other factors - noise. Tbh: it does feel like you are moving goalposts because the studies do not show what you'd like them to show, that wind energy is green and ecologically friendly. We see that a lot.
      - guerrilla 5y ago
        >>> Wind produces noise >> Noise doesn't only affect humans. > Well, let me know when you have a study showing how the mice and vipers in those fields are affected. This part of the thread is about noise. I'm not moving the goalpost, you're just off topic.
- otherme123 5y ago
  This is anecdata, but I was hiking through an eolic field and saw a group of semi-wild horses directly below a turbine. Some of them were grazing, others were resting/sleeping. None of them could care less about the noise.

Funny how people are suddenly concerned with other species when a wind turbine is placed near their home. But when an out-of-sight coal plant belches out tons of pollutants which affect thousands of species, that concern seems to vanish. Quaint.

Smithalicious 5y ago
The discussion is comparing solar to wind, nobody is suggesting coal as an alternative, so this complaint seems out of place.
- elric 5y ago
  Not really. It's an observation on human nature. It's about how certain problems are only problems when they fit a narrative, and can be conveniently ignored otherwise. It seems like the toxicity of solar panel production is also conveniently being ignored, or how much water it requires. Certainly less than coal, but more than wind turbines.
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago
    It’s less water over the life of the product though.

guerrilla 5y ago

Well, let me know when you have a study showing how the mice and vipers in those fields are affected.

DocTomoe 5y ago
Well, there is a DLR (essentially Germany's NASA) study about the effect of wind turbines on insects [1]. It's not pretty. Neither is the study on the effect on birds [2] by NABU, one of our "Sierra Club"-style organisations. [1] https://www.dlr.de/content/en/articles/news/2019/01/20190326_dlr-studies-interactions-flying-insects-wind-farms.html https://www.dlr.de/content/en/articles/news/2019/01/20190326... links to an English-language interview. [2] https://bergenhusen.nabu.de/imperia/md/nabu/images/nabu/einrichtungen/bergenhusen/projekte/windenergie/impact_of_repowering.pdf https://bergenhusen.nabu.de/imperia/md/nabu/images/nabu/einr...
- cinntaile 5y ago
  It's not pretty is not what the research concluded. "From the currently available figures and the DLR model calculation, we cannot conclude either that wind energy plays a significant role in the reduction of insect numbers, or that it has no impact. " Needs more research.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  There's no mention of sound or noise in either one of those.
  - DocTomoe 5y ago
    The insect study focusses on getting hit by the turbine wing, that's right. The bird study only talks about effects, without specifying effects, and takes note about bird-specific things like "avoidance distance", which is linked to - among other factors - noise. Tbh: it does feel like you are moving goalposts because the studies do not show what you'd like them to show, that wind energy is green and ecologically friendly. We see that a lot.
    - guerrilla 5y ago
      >>> Wind produces noise >> Noise doesn't only affect humans. > Well, let me know when you have a study showing how the mice and vipers in those fields are affected. This part of the thread is about noise. I'm not moving the goalpost, you're just off topic.
otherme123 5y ago
This is anecdata, but I was hiking through an eolic field and saw a group of semi-wild horses directly below a turbine. Some of them were grazing, others were resting/sleeping. None of them could care less about the noise.