3 ms·

6000 sounds like a lot, right? But in context, crashing into glass buildings kills about 600 million birds a year. Cats? About 2.4 BILLION bird kills a year.

6000 sounds like a lot, right? But in context, crashing into glass buildings kills about 600 million birds a year. Cats? About 2.4 BILLION bird kills a year. https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds

spicyusername 2y ago
To be fair that is all glass buildings everywhere compared to a single place. Not quite a fair comparison.
- Retric 2y ago
  Divide by the 111 million buildings in the US of which 90% are single family homes. So it’s what ~1,000x as bad as the average structure but we’re talking about something several times the size of the average single family home. Plop down a housing development on those same 3,500 acres and it’s likely to kill far more birds.
  - smogcutter 2y ago
    > Plop down a housing development on those same 3,500 acres and it’s likely to kill far more birds. Do you actually believe that? It seems obvious that single family homes don’t kill birds en masse. Plop down 3500 acres of glass office towers and we’ll talk.
    - Retric 2y ago
      I’ve personally witnessed many birds die flying into windows in a detached single family homes. Multiply that by ~3000 homes and 6k per year would be a massive underestimate IMO. It’s uncommon with small windows, but a glass sliding door or big picture window regularly gets a thump. Some get back up, but many don’t. I do live in an area with a lot of birds so that may be a major factor.
zdragnar 2y ago
Context is always important. Part of why this gets attention is that the plant is killing protected species, including many that don't fall victim to cats. More than that, the solar plant itself is an entirely unnecessary addition. Photovoltaic cells were already viable in 2014. Other net-zero CO2 power options are also available, though wind turbines frequently suffer the same problem. This plant exists to feel good about the energy it produces, and being able to sit around and watch it immolate protected species every day cuts against that goal.
- mlyle 2y ago
  > More than that, the solar plant itself is an entirely unnecessary addition. The interesting thing about Ivanpah is that it's both generation and storage. It's probably a technological dead end, but that is not an absolutely sure thing now and it certainly wasn't obvious a decade ago. Batteries have come a long way in that time.
throwaway290 2y ago
What about something else that's even worse?
- solardev 2y ago
  Thanksgiving?
perihelions 2y ago
It's a bit of a tangent, but this is basically the question behind one of the classic cognitive bias studies on "scope neglect", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_neglect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_neglect - "In one study, respondents were asked how much they were willing to pay to prevent migrating birds from drowning in uncovered oil ponds by covering the oil ponds with protective nets. Subjects were told that either 2,000, or 20,000, or 200,000 migrating birds were affected annually, for which subjects reported they were willing to pay $80, $78 and $88 respectively.[2] Other studies of willingness-to-pay to prevent harm have found a logarithmic relationship or no relationship to scope size.[3]"
kcplate 2y ago
I do my part to heat up probably 75 birds a year on my grill if you are keeping count.
ldbooth 2y ago
Yet this doesn't account for the type of birds they are killing. I view milling a swallow different from killing some kind of large raptor or large bird. Those arent your window hitters. In fairness windmills also kill a lot of large birds. No tech is perfect.
chneu 2y ago
A ton of birds also die from power lines and getting hit by cars. ~30mil/year from power lines. ~300mil/year from cars/trucks hitting them. 6000 is nothing. Whenever someone talks about how alternative energy kills a bunch of birds, you know they're a pretty dumb person who can't be bothered with context.

spicyusername 2y ago

To be fair that is all glass buildings everywhere compared to a single place. Not quite a fair comparison.

Retric 2y ago
Divide by the 111 million buildings in the US of which 90% are single family homes. So it’s what ~1,000x as bad as the average structure but we’re talking about something several times the size of the average single family home. Plop down a housing development on those same 3,500 acres and it’s likely to kill far more birds.
- smogcutter 2y ago
  > Plop down a housing development on those same 3,500 acres and it’s likely to kill far more birds. Do you actually believe that? It seems obvious that single family homes don’t kill birds en masse. Plop down 3500 acres of glass office towers and we’ll talk.
  - Retric 2y ago
    I’ve personally witnessed many birds die flying into windows in a detached single family homes. Multiply that by ~3000 homes and 6k per year would be a massive underestimate IMO. It’s uncommon with small windows, but a glass sliding door or big picture window regularly gets a thump. Some get back up, but many don’t. I do live in an area with a lot of birds so that may be a major factor.

zdragnar 2y ago

Context is always important. Part of why this gets attention is that the plant is killing protected species, including many that don't fall victim to cats. More than that, the solar plant itself is an entirely unnecessary addition. Photovoltaic cells were already viable in 2014. Other net-zero CO2 power options are also available, though wind turbines frequently suffer the same problem. This plant exists to feel good about the energy it produces, and being able to sit around and watch it immolate protected species every day cuts against that goal.

mlyle 2y ago
> More than that, the solar plant itself is an entirely unnecessary addition. The interesting thing about Ivanpah is that it's both generation and storage. It's probably a technological dead end, but that is not an absolutely sure thing now and it certainly wasn't obvious a decade ago. Batteries have come a long way in that time.

throwaway290 2y ago

What about something else that's even worse?

solardev 2y ago
Thanksgiving?

perihelions 2y ago

It's a bit of a tangent, but this is basically the question behind one of the classic cognitive bias studies on "scope neglect", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_neglect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_neglect - "In one study, respondents were asked how much they were willing to pay to prevent migrating birds from drowning in uncovered oil ponds by covering the oil ponds with protective nets. Subjects were told that either 2,000, or 20,000, or 200,000 migrating birds were affected annually, for which subjects reported they were willing to pay $80, $78 and $88 respectively.[2] Other studies of willingness-to-pay to prevent harm have found a logarithmic relationship or no relationship to scope size.[3]"

kcplate 2y ago

I do my part to heat up probably 75 birds a year on my grill if you are keeping count.

ldbooth 2y ago

Yet this doesn't account for the type of birds they are killing. I view milling a swallow different from killing some kind of large raptor or large bird. Those arent your window hitters. In fairness windmills also kill a lot of large birds. No tech is perfect.

chneu 2y ago

A ton of birds also die from power lines and getting hit by cars. ~30mil/year from power lines. ~300mil/year from cars/trucks hitting them. 6000 is nothing. Whenever someone talks about how alternative energy kills a bunch of birds, you know they're a pretty dumb person who can't be bothered with context.