4 ms·

The subtitle is revealing: [We don't know how much birds kill the windmills so] "This makes it a weak argument against windmills" "We don't know how much, so

The subtitle is revealing: [We don't know how much birds kill the windmills so] "This makes it a weak argument against windmills" "We don't know how much, so it may not happen, or is not so relevant as we think, but is repeated by ideology", is a nasty trick. Nice smoke curtain. Specially when is joined later with: "it is true that all humanmade structures are technically bird killers, but..." Either it happens, or it does not happen. We aren't talking here about a sparrow crashing against a window. What we do know is that carcasses of big raptors, vultures, storks, other birds, and even bats can be found near the windmills basis often, in a distribution that is not aleatory. Even if we never achieve to calculate an exact value (before the corpses are quietly removed by foxes or companies) we can identify that there is a problem here. As predators are scarce (by definition) and some are endangered, the impact on populations is not negligible. Killing endangered species is illegal. It does not matter If is "just one" or "just a few" eagles.

throwaway290 2y ago
> Killing endangered species is illegal. It does not matter If is "just one" or "just a few" eagles. Great logic! Let's ban skyscrapers and any windows that do not pass through UV. Use one in your house? Illegal.
- pvaldes 2y ago
  But the biggest fallacy in this PR stunt is that outrageous "we don't know, nothing to see here": Windmill company ESI Energy LLC, guilty of killing 150 bald and golden eagles in 8 USA states [1][2] [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wind-energy-company-pleads-guilty-least-150-eagles-killed-us-rcna23360 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wind-energy-company-ple... [2] https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/pr/esi-energy-llc-wholly-owned-subsidiary-nextera-energy-resources-llc-sentenced-after https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/pr/esi-energy-llc-wholly-o... > Use one in your house? Illegal I'm curious, how much bald eagles crashed against your house windows lately?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - croes 2y ago
    Have you looked at the Highways? And we are talking about skyscrapers not simply houses.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
    We have them around here. In fact, there’s even a Facebook page for a local nesting pair. They mostly eat eels, so water pollution is their worst enemy. The thing that often gets raptors, is rat poison. It also kills cats. Rats seem to thrive, no matter what we throw at them. It’s generally a good idea to keep cats indoors. I read a statistic that outdoor cats live dramatically shorter lives than indoor ones.
  - throwawayqqq11 2y ago
    > we don't know, nothing to see here > ESI Energy LLC, guilty of killing 150 eagles > how much bald eagles crashed against your house? We dont know the statistical extend but we can measure very accurately in smaller areas especially large and endangered birds. This is why (in my country) you have to study the local bird population before you get your permission to build your windmills. Something ESI should have done, even if we perfectly knew the statistics of all birds killed by windmills globally.
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      But what about migrating birds?
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    > Windmill company ESI Energy LLC, guilty of killing 150 bald and golden eagles in 8 USA states [1][2] Read the case. They were guilty of basically not getting a permit. If they got a permit their incidental kills can be thousand+ per project. They are a "least concern" category. > But the biggest fallacy in this PR stunt is that outrageous "we don't know, nothing to see here" The fallacy is saying this is a concern while not having measurements showing it is a bigger concern than other things like illegal shooting or lead poison or rat poison or power lines or skyscraper windows. If the windmill fighters actually care about birds maybe they could fund these studies. Do they fund these bird studies or just don't want wind energy for whatever reason (like investing into fossil fuels)? If they fund those bird studies why don't we have the measurements. Meanwhile there are no permits for killing eagles with rat poison (every death is illegal but who's counting?). Meanwhile every power line operator is given unlimited permit for incidental bald eagle kills. But yes wind turbines, the big enemy of bird lovers.
bowsamic 2y ago
> Killing endangered species is illegal. It does not matter If is "just one" or "just a few" eagles. Well, yes it actually does, legally at least.
- lazide 2y ago
  Also, if a bird kills itself, that isn’t illegal. Even if members of it’s species consistently does it on your particular window.
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    It could be illegal actually. Even if you install some obstacle near eagle's nest I heard you can be criminally charged. But if you install power lines and eagles kill themselves or you poison some animals and eagles die from eating them you are in the clear
    - lazide 2y ago
      Only if you do it with the intent (or prior knowledge) that will happen. If they just like suiciding against a specific window of yours for no apparent reason, then you’re fine.
      - throwaway290 2y ago
        Not really. If you build this window or whatever close enough to eagle base and eagle dies on it incidentally or it is found to be simply disturbed by it you are still criminally liable https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management/eagle-incidental-disturbance-and-nest-take-permits https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management/eagle-incidenta... I hope you didn't disturb any eagles lately;) (Unless you have a permit. If you are powerline company you are allowed unlimited incidental kills for example. Or if you are wind power company you can apply for a permit for thousand incidental kills or something)
        lazide 2y ago
croes 2y ago
So we ban cars? So top 3 killers are cats, windows and cars and it doesn’t help if cats only kill small birds and mammals because they basically kill the food of the larger birds. Don’t forget tire wear and all the other sources of pollution that endangers any living being. And add climate change. So why are wind turbines singled out?
- briandear 2y ago
  Because we are building wind turbines when there are far better alternatives such as nuclear. We’re also being sold that “wind is better for the environment” when it’s not.
  - mrweasel 2y ago
    You will notice that the same people who are against wind turbines are frequently also oppose to nuclear power (and cell tower, highways, factories, farms, forests, high rise building, schools, railroads, new neighbourhoods, pretty much any change that is not to their immediate benefit. In many cases nuclear is a better option, but if you want to stand up a few gigawatts of power in two - five years, turbines will let you do that. There's no chance of getting a nuclear power plant operating in a country with no history of nuclear power in less than ten year, and that's perhaps being fairly optimistic. Wind is better than running coal 24/7, which is what you competing against in most cases.
  - croes 2y ago
    We‘re also being sold nuclear is better. Nuclear power plants take a long to build and are expensive in power production and maintenance. Just look at France in the hot summers. And that doesn’t include the danger of sabotage and terrorism. Didn’t read anything about the fear of russian rockets hitting Ukrainian wind turbines. Nuclear power plants are also a SPF. In insecure times decentralization is better.
- aziaziazi 2y ago
  What makes you think turbines are singled out?! There’s no point to ban them altogether neither the cats or cars. Consider a range if options between total ban and total unregulation. Thing about traffic code. The biologists that took of look at it probably already have propositions like putting them outside of the narrowest migratory corridors or ways to be visible to birds as stickers does on German windows.
Sloowms 2y ago
Counting the carcasses is a very flawed analysis. In cities you rarely find far less carcasses of raptors, vultures and storks. In your analysis this would lead you to making a larger built environment is a good measure to save endangered species. It would even be illegal not to do so.
- pvaldes 2y ago
  Is true that we should keep in mind that there is an implicit "at least" 150 eagles killed by just one company. Plus all the other bird species. This value is a minimum estimation. Several scientific studies calculate than between 234,000 and 573,093 birds on average are killed by year in USA by windmills. Big and small species. Data points that bats suffer even more than birds. (See Smallwood. 2010. The Journal of the wildlife management 71, issue 8 for example).
  - Sloowms 2y ago
    I do not understand why you would reply this to my comment. It seems that you are single minded about windmills like a fictional character. Without context these numbers mean nothing. Species are displaced by human existence, acting like windmills are the biggest danger and supporting the fossil fuel industry, like you are doing, is not going to help birds or other animals.
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    > Is true that we should keep in mind that there is an implicit "at least" 150 eagles killed by just one company Wind company permit allows killing 1000+ eagles. This company just did not get it. 150 is basically nothing.

throwaway290 2y ago

> Killing endangered species is illegal. It does not matter If is "just one" or "just a few" eagles. Great logic! Let's ban skyscrapers and any windows that do not pass through UV. Use one in your house? Illegal.

pvaldes 2y ago
But the biggest fallacy in this PR stunt is that outrageous "we don't know, nothing to see here": Windmill company ESI Energy LLC, guilty of killing 150 bald and golden eagles in 8 USA states [1][2] [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wind-energy-company-pleads-guilty-least-150-eagles-killed-us-rcna23360 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wind-energy-company-ple... [2] https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/pr/esi-energy-llc-wholly-owned-subsidiary-nextera-energy-resources-llc-sentenced-after https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/pr/esi-energy-llc-wholly-o... > Use one in your house? Illegal I'm curious, how much bald eagles crashed against your house windows lately?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- croes 2y ago
  Have you looked at the Highways? And we are talking about skyscrapers not simply houses.
- ChrisMarshallNY 2y ago
  We have them around here. In fact, there’s even a Facebook page for a local nesting pair. They mostly eat eels, so water pollution is their worst enemy. The thing that often gets raptors, is rat poison. It also kills cats. Rats seem to thrive, no matter what we throw at them. It’s generally a good idea to keep cats indoors. I read a statistic that outdoor cats live dramatically shorter lives than indoor ones.
- throwawayqqq11 2y ago
  > we don't know, nothing to see here > ESI Energy LLC, guilty of killing 150 eagles > how much bald eagles crashed against your house? We dont know the statistical extend but we can measure very accurately in smaller areas especially large and endangered birds. This is why (in my country) you have to study the local bird population before you get your permission to build your windmills. Something ESI should have done, even if we perfectly knew the statistics of all birds killed by windmills globally.
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    But what about migrating birds?
- throwaway290 2y ago
  > Windmill company ESI Energy LLC, guilty of killing 150 bald and golden eagles in 8 USA states [1][2] Read the case. They were guilty of basically not getting a permit. If they got a permit their incidental kills can be thousand+ per project. They are a "least concern" category. > But the biggest fallacy in this PR stunt is that outrageous "we don't know, nothing to see here" The fallacy is saying this is a concern while not having measurements showing it is a bigger concern than other things like illegal shooting or lead poison or rat poison or power lines or skyscraper windows. If the windmill fighters actually care about birds maybe they could fund these studies. Do they fund these bird studies or just don't want wind energy for whatever reason (like investing into fossil fuels)? If they fund those bird studies why don't we have the measurements. Meanwhile there are no permits for killing eagles with rat poison (every death is illegal but who's counting?). Meanwhile every power line operator is given unlimited permit for incidental bald eagle kills. But yes wind turbines, the big enemy of bird lovers.

bowsamic 2y ago

> Killing endangered species is illegal. It does not matter If is "just one" or "just a few" eagles. Well, yes it actually does, legally at least.

lazide 2y ago
Also, if a bird kills itself, that isn’t illegal. Even if members of it’s species consistently does it on your particular window.
- throwaway290 2y ago
  It could be illegal actually. Even if you install some obstacle near eagle's nest I heard you can be criminally charged. But if you install power lines and eagles kill themselves or you poison some animals and eagles die from eating them you are in the clear
  - lazide 2y ago
    Only if you do it with the intent (or prior knowledge) that will happen. If they just like suiciding against a specific window of yours for no apparent reason, then you’re fine.
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      Not really. If you build this window or whatever close enough to eagle base and eagle dies on it incidentally or it is found to be simply disturbed by it you are still criminally liable https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management/eagle-incidental-disturbance-and-nest-take-permits https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management/eagle-incidenta... I hope you didn't disturb any eagles lately;) (Unless you have a permit. If you are powerline company you are allowed unlimited incidental kills for example. Or if you are wind power company you can apply for a permit for thousand incidental kills or something)
      - lazide 2y ago

croes 2y ago

So we ban cars? So top 3 killers are cats, windows and cars and it doesn’t help if cats only kill small birds and mammals because they basically kill the food of the larger birds. Don’t forget tire wear and all the other sources of pollution that endangers any living being. And add climate change. So why are wind turbines singled out?

briandear 2y ago
Because we are building wind turbines when there are far better alternatives such as nuclear. We’re also being sold that “wind is better for the environment” when it’s not.
- mrweasel 2y ago
  You will notice that the same people who are against wind turbines are frequently also oppose to nuclear power (and cell tower, highways, factories, farms, forests, high rise building, schools, railroads, new neighbourhoods, pretty much any change that is not to their immediate benefit. In many cases nuclear is a better option, but if you want to stand up a few gigawatts of power in two - five years, turbines will let you do that. There's no chance of getting a nuclear power plant operating in a country with no history of nuclear power in less than ten year, and that's perhaps being fairly optimistic. Wind is better than running coal 24/7, which is what you competing against in most cases.
- croes 2y ago
  We‘re also being sold nuclear is better. Nuclear power plants take a long to build and are expensive in power production and maintenance. Just look at France in the hot summers. And that doesn’t include the danger of sabotage and terrorism. Didn’t read anything about the fear of russian rockets hitting Ukrainian wind turbines. Nuclear power plants are also a SPF. In insecure times decentralization is better.
aziaziazi 2y ago
What makes you think turbines are singled out?! There’s no point to ban them altogether neither the cats or cars. Consider a range if options between total ban and total unregulation. Thing about traffic code. The biologists that took of look at it probably already have propositions like putting them outside of the narrowest migratory corridors or ways to be visible to birds as stickers does on German windows.

Sloowms 2y ago

Counting the carcasses is a very flawed analysis. In cities you rarely find far less carcasses of raptors, vultures and storks. In your analysis this would lead you to making a larger built environment is a good measure to save endangered species. It would even be illegal not to do so.

pvaldes 2y ago
Is true that we should keep in mind that there is an implicit "at least" 150 eagles killed by just one company. Plus all the other bird species. This value is a minimum estimation. Several scientific studies calculate than between 234,000 and 573,093 birds on average are killed by year in USA by windmills. Big and small species. Data points that bats suffer even more than birds. (See Smallwood. 2010. The Journal of the wildlife management 71, issue 8 for example).
- Sloowms 2y ago
  I do not understand why you would reply this to my comment. It seems that you are single minded about windmills like a fictional character. Without context these numbers mean nothing. Species are displaced by human existence, acting like windmills are the biggest danger and supporting the fossil fuel industry, like you are doing, is not going to help birds or other animals.
- throwaway290 2y ago
  > Is true that we should keep in mind that there is an implicit "at least" 150 eagles killed by just one company Wind company permit allows killing 1000+ eagles. This company just did not get it. 150 is basically nothing.