4 ms·
The fact that birds are killed in other places is not an argument for making more bird-killing structures when it can be avoided. Especially when the kinds of b
by kebman 4y ago
The fact that birds are killed in other places is not an argument for making more bird-killing structures when it can be avoided. Especially when the kinds of birds they tend to kill are endangered birds of prey. That is unless the number of bird deaths it causes are negligible.
- JoeAltmaier 4y agoYes, it is. We have lots of needs in an industrial society. Torpedoing one effort for marginal benefit when work elsewhere would benefit much more, is astonishingly damaging and wasteful.
- kebman 4y agoNo, it definitively isn't! If it was your intention to mention societal needs for wind power this entire time, then why didn't you? If you don't mention the societal needs, and merely make unsupported claims that "windows kill birds," then you are being woefully disingenuous. Because windows do not kill eagles, but wind farms do! This is an important distinction which your blanket statement does not cover. As for what's marginal, damaging or wasteful, then why is Germany supporting the construction of a woefully and inadequate technology when they have a much better alterative: Nuclear power?
- JoeAltmaier 4y agoHm. My first comment here but ok. All electricity generation is for societal needs. And those eagles? One unfortunate incident, fixed by decommissioning one tower?
- ls15 4y ago> why is Germany supporting the construction of a woefully and inadequate technology when they have a much better alterative: Nuclear power? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germa... The Green Party is a result of the Anti-nuclear movement in Germany. They need to do a 180 first, before nuclear in Germany can happen again. That probably happens in the next three months...