Environmentalist vs. Environmentalist
The confrontation may be coming soon in the environmental community over wind power -- it certainly would have occurred already had the President promoting wind been Republican rather than Democrat. I might have categorized this as "all energy production has environmental tradeoffs", but wind power is so stupid a source to be promoting that this is less of a tradeoff and more of another nail in the coffin. As a minimum, the equal protection issues vis a vis how the law is enforced for wind companies vs. oil companies are pretty staggering.
“It happens about once a month here, on the barren foothills of one of America’s green-energy boomtowns: A soaring golden eagle slams into a wind farm’s spinning turbine and falls, mangled and lifeless, to the ground.
Killing these iconic birds is not just an irreplaceable loss for a vulnerable species. It’s also a federal crime, a charge that the Obama administration has used to prosecute oil companies when birds drown in their waste pits, and power companies when birds are electrocuted by their power lines.”
“[The Obama] administration has never fined or prosecuted a wind-energy company, even those that flout the law repeatedly. Instead, the government is shielding the industry from liability and helping keep the scope of the deaths secret.”
“Wind power, a pollution-free energy intended to ease global warming, is a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s energy plan. His administration has championed a $1 billion-a-year tax break to the industry that has nearly doubled the amount of wind power in his first term. But like the oil industry under President George W. Bush, lobbyists and executives have used their favored status to help steer U.S. energy policy.”
“The result [of Obama energy policy] is a green industry that’s allowed to do not-so-green things. It kills protected species with impunity and conceals the environmental consequences of sprawling wind farms.”
“More than 573,000 birds are killed by the country’s wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles, according to an estimate published in March in the peer-reviewed Wildlife Society Bulletin.
Would you care to present the source for your islands story? Is their cost of electricity really .50/kwh? I didn't think that transporting coal was that costly, but I could be informed.
I wonder why they don't build wind turbines and avoid costly coal. That would be an interesting analysis.
@ Marque2 says; I have never heard of a cat catching a Bald or Golden eagle.
You never will either. I have two turkeys and a peacock and they run roughshod over every neighborhood cat. Especially the peacock. He'll literally fly over and land on the cat's perch just to mess with them.
One time the big yellow cat (baddest cat in the hood with many a sparrow and bluejay pelt taken) wadded up his courage to confront the peacock. He crept up to take the bird unaware but before he took the second step the peacock was on to him and gave out a squawk. Not just any sort of squawk. The peacock's call can drown out an ambulance. It's startlingly loud. It certainly startled the cat.
Before the cat had time to recover the bird puffed out it's feathers instantly doubling the apparent size of his neck and body.
The cat is thinking to bug out at this point, but the bird jumps ten feet straight up then lands three feet closer to the cat, simultaneously popping it's umbrella like tail feathers.
The cat lost it. Ran blindly off the side of the roof, crash landed, got up and kept going over the fence and away.
Peacocks and turkeys don't eat cats. An eagle would.
Imagine that confrontation for a minute. A cat taking an eagle? No way, no how, not on this planet.
Here's a double standard for you.
Companies won't face charges in condor deaths
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service grants exceptions to a wind farm and a building project in harassing or killing the endangered birds.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-killing-condors-20130511,0,1790222.story
Fish and Wildlife also made an exception for the 270,000-acre Tejon Ranch
Co., saying that the government will not prosecute if construction of
the company's controversial 5,553-acre development of luxury homes,
hotels and golf courses violates the harassment ban in the endangered
species law. The exception will last for 50 years. The project is
expected to consume 8% of the critical condor habitat in the Tehachapis,
about 60 miles north of Los Angeles.
Fish and Wildlife Director Daniel Ashe said the decision reflects a
difficult reality. The threat of prosecution jeopardized the
construction of large-scale alternative energy facilities and real
estate developments in the wild and windy places preferred by condors.
"This is the first time we've authorized incidental takes of
California condors — and we're approaching them very cautiously," Ashe
said in an interview.
The rest I assume they just covered up. Now they don't even have to do that.
How many cars you think take out a condor? How many buildings? (excluding wind turbines in high desert passes of course).
If that ever happened it would be a news event, since the media is most interested in covering up for team obama.
nope. my response was to ask you for the link to the story so I could go read it myself instead of reading your cherry-pick and you then failed to follow- through - so we know your game.
I from reading F&W regs that they explicitly say that. wanna trade links?
it's easy verifiable... guy... they are starting to build turbines and solar and yes transportation coal is that expensive and the interesting thing is that these islands don't use nukes either.
but if you really wanted to be informed - you could - there is a lot of easily obtained info.
...rest of story: " Fish and Wildlife Director Daniel Ashe said the decision reflects a difficult reality. The threat of prosecution jeopardized the construction of large-scale alternative energy facilities and real estate developments in the wild and windy places preferred by condors.
"This is the first time we've authorized incidental takes of California condors — and we're approaching them very cautiously," Ashe said in an interview."
not all groups. as I said many issues that are difficult actually split the groups - as society gets split on similar dilemmas. What wrong is treating them all the same and refusing to try to understand their actual positions - which do vary.
where to put or not put wind turbines as well as their actual impacts - especially compared to other kinds of power that also have impacts is still playing out and it's
clear to me that in terms of energy output that it's weaker and likely never will be able
to take over coal.
what drives some on eco side is that coal has adverse impacts also. They're not opposed to coal just to be opposed to coal. they opposed to it because it has impacts but many who support wind instead do so without really understanding some realities.
even then - the enviros are split on wind because of the avian mortality so the folks who are anti-enviro - across the board on all new potential new technologies and support fossil fuels are not really concerned about birds - just unprincipled political wedges.
wind has applications - where there is no grid and/or where coal transport costs get pushed to what wind costs.
you're not going to see wind go away, nor solar. They have applications and they will continue to be improved and as most other technologies, they will likely get better and more efficient and laws to require more mercury removal for coal may get stricter.
the point is - adopting a LUDDITE-like attitude on power is dumber than the dumbest enviros , IMHO of course.
http://www.heco.com/portal/site/heco/menuitem.508576f78baa14340b4c0610c510b1ca/?vgnextoid=692e5e658e0fc010VgnVCM1000008119fea9RCRD&
Larry - I bet all your credible sourced studies were peer reviewed.
Though I am inclined to believe the credibility of the studies based on my personal experience and common sense. One of the important intellectual skills that one develops is the ability to recognize biases and agendas in the various arguments.
In this case, I am with Marque.
>>> “Wind power, a pollution-free energy intended to ease global warming
Yeah, that neodymium that is used to make the magnets in their windings is just lying around like forest litter waiting to be picked up by anyone who trots along....
:-/
"That which is unseen", indeed.
Anyone else notice how Greens are like little children playing "peekaboo"? If they can't see it, it must not exist.
The title should be "Environmentalists vs. Conservationists".
There is a big difference. Environmentalists have become humanity hating left-wing statists. Conservationists are far less political and care about preserving open-space, wilderness, and wildlife.
I'm a Conservationists and definitely not an Environmentalist.
I appreciate your thoughtful reply. Thank you.
As for whether wind will go away, I'll simply repeat something I've said elsewhere: "Wind power involves capturing the energy from [the sun heating earth], but it's a very inefficient form of solar power. It makes more sense to me to capture solar energy and skip a step."
Of course, by that measure, hydroelectric power (which I support) is also a roundabout way to harness solar energy (Sun heats water, water forms clouds, water falls as rain into a lake, dam harnesses power from water). But we know we can generate power efficiently from dams, we hope we can generate power efficiently from windmills.
actually, the word "conservationist" comes from the word "conservative" and "conserve" and it no longer describes many of those who classify themselves as "conservatives" because they're not about conserving at all anymore.
oh I AGREE BUT when you think ALL the sources that don't agree with your views are biased -- then do you think there is a problem?
I do.
I accept both sides of the argument when they come from more than one credible source and there is some level of agreement - not just conclusions but on the data and evidence.
the anti-wind-turbine crowd believes NOTHING that contradicts their view. that's not "common sense" - that's nonsense...
we have way too many global conspiracies these days - in my view.
wind turbines do have a place - they're not the sole solution by a long shot and probably never will be but there are places where wind turbines make sense.
to say that they never make sense anywhere AND that they kill birds while ignoring the downsides of other energy sources is just dumb. Each source has advantages and disadvantages.
Island nations without coal often pay more per kwH for imported coal-generated power than the marginal cost of wind.
but wind is never 100% and always needs a backup. A mix of the two would be no worse than coal alone and may be better.
If you had not had a rural electrification subsidy program - even today, wind might be more cost effective for remote areas - that are currently still subsidized.
Our cat was stalking a bird outside the kitchen window. We looked for a sparrow or something of similar size. Only a seagull. The cat jumped on the birds back, the seagull took off...We howled with laughter after the cat fell off (about a 10 ft. drop).
Just say no to useless wind turbines. They are a fancy niche toy and not very productive.
If the threat of prosecution is putting their windmill farm in jeopardy = that's a sign that the law is working the way it was intended.
I don't even know why I'm talking to this cull. Fuck off windmill merchant. Go sell snake oil to your mamma, cretin.
Coming in here with a pretense. From your first post. Bullshit about birds flying into windows.
That's not a good faith argument. That's the argument of a vested interest. That's the argument of a con artist.
The title Wind farms are killing our eagles of the secion I posted above is the link.
(like this one, which is the same title and link).
To Larry Gross,
Thanks for that link. Here is another one.
Hawaiian Energy
This discusses some of the factors affecting the cost of electricity in Hawaii.
There are political factors preventing Hawii from importing LNG. Instead, they import residual fuel oil, and the Jones Act requires them to use expensive American ships.
I note that Hawaii is paying subsidies to renewable fuel sources and wind energy. This is suspicious, because no subsidy is needed to promote truly cheaper energy sources. Low income residents are being hurt by mandates to switch to supposedly more efficient water heaters, but which require large up-front investments in new equipment.
Political decisions seem to be distorting the energy market in Hawaii. They may be adopting "clean" energy due to politics rather than economics.
Mining Neodymium in China
3/22/11 at Dinocrat [edited]
=== ===
Neodymium is commonly used as part of a Neodymium-Iron-Boron alloy (Nd2Fe14B) used to make the most powerful magnets in the world.
It’s been used in small quantities in common technologies for quite a long time – hi-fi speakers, hard drives and lasers, for example. But only with the rise of alternative energy solutions has neodymium really come to prominence, for use in hybrid cars and wind turbines. A direct-drive permanent-magnet generator for a top capacity wind turbine uses 4,400 lb of neodymium-based permanent magnet material…
(about the results of mining)
The lake instantly assaults your senses. Stand on the black crust for just seconds and your eyes water and a powerful, acrid stench fills your lungs. For hours after our visit, my stomach lurched and my head throbbed. We were there for only one hour, but those who live in Mr Yan’s village of Dalahai, and other villages around, breathe in the same poison every day.
=== ===
Here's Larry's argument in a nutshell.
"It's alright for me to kill off the last few California big horn sheep, because American drivers run over (insert huge guesstimated number here) possums and raccoons every year!"
Sure pal. Tell your story walkin.
You know what's missing from this and every other comment that Larry has made?
A smidge of concern for the natural environment. Look through the twenty or so comments he's made here. See for yourself.
And isn't that an odd thing for a serial commenter in a post titled environmentalist vs. environmentalist?
So it's alright for Larry Co. to chop down the Giant Sequoias because the rest of you chopped up a mess of oak for the fireplace last winter.
And it follows from Larry's logic that it's alright for him to exterminate Gray Wolves, because Americans accidentally run over and kill thousands of stray dogs a year.
The wind industry has a get out of jail free card. Obama gave it to them himself. It's alright for them to kill eagles, owls, and condors, because your cat took out a pidgeon once.
LOL, The word "neodymium" is a link to a similar article.
WARREN!! You should change the system if you can to make links more visible. The small color shift that gets applied is far too subtle, IMNSHO. I presume this is at least slightly under your control, through some kind of manual setting about how links are displayed.
At the least, an underline Would Be A Real Good Thing to make them stand out.
If that isn't under your control, by all means, complain to the software writers (or give us a link so we can do it for you in droves) so they'll add that feature.
}}} Now I want you to tell me when we're going to outlaw , cars, cats, communication towers, and buildings?
it's as if all along people believe that birds are not killed - unless we build wind turbines.....
Larry, no one claims that cars, cats, communication towers and buildings ought to be subsidized because they are "green".
No one is touting the environmental benefits of relying on cars, cats, communication towers, and buildings over some alternative.
You are making a false analogy.
LOLZ. LMFAO.
}}} we have eagle kills on a regular basis on some of the local interstates.
Really, Larry? Cite your source, please. I'm sure they happen, I think I hit a small raptor one time on a highway as it was closing in on a bird and it flew down in front of me (I am pretty sure the bird got the front grill, the raptor hit the side of the car), so I'm not saying it doesn't happen ever, I'm just betting birds mostly learn not to fly too near to highways except to land for the tea and crumpets cars set out for them.
}}} and of course DDT.
Yeah, Larry. This is why we don't trust your claims without full cites.
}}} It makes more sense to me to capture solar energy
No, the problem with both is the same. While it's a consistent source of energy over time, it is locally inconsistent and highly dispersed.
All our systems for producing useful power from energy require a substantial gradient, and a consistent one, to be even vaguely efficient. And even in the best cases (The Carnot Cycle) it appears the best we can get without a major physics/engineering breakthrough is about 65-70% efficient -- that is, for every kW of energy you put in, you get not MORE than .65 kW of energy/power back out. With something as dispersed as the sun and wind, this is environmentally catastrophic. Call it Entropy Tax. The only known thing more powerful than Congress at exacting tolls.
So far as I have seen, the only earth-based solar power system that appears to show any promise to work AT ALL is Ocean Thermal, which essentially uses the entire ocean surface as a collector. And even there, it requires development of low-gradient power extraction methods to get really effective, as the energy gradient from the surface of the ocean to 60-100 feet lower down is hardly astronomical.
}}}}} http://www.sibleyguides.com/co...
From the above:
}}} estimates of bird kills are impossible to make because of the lack of data, but totals could easily be over 5 million birds/year
Translation: "We pulled this number straight out of our asses"
Ya, I can see how you take them seriously, Larry.
LOLZ
BTW, I'm going to note something here that no one appears to have even mentioned, and that is BATS.
Windmills also kill lots of bats at night -- not just by striking into them (one thing the bats are likely less prone to than birds, perhaps) but because those big blades going 'whoop whoop whoop' actually generate an overpressure wave that bursts the little bastards' lungs if they get near them.
Do some research on that.
It's not selective, Larry, you're just refusing to ack that we consider the other causes to be unavoidable consequence of existence. While for windmills, it's yet another collateral damage to the environment that they are supposed to be protecting and so worth the OBVIOUS and UNDENIABLE added expense to every kW they generate as opposed to other sources.
}}} Eagles get killed on high tension power lines - but we're not fining the companies that put them up.
}}} links please.
Is it too much work for you, Larry?
search on:
Eastex Advocate eagles pacific death fine
gets this link aggregate
http://news.yahoo.com/local/eastex-advocate-7010044-12791362.html
which has this:
http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/eastex/opinion/wind-farms-are-killing-our-eagles/article_5a7ed1a1-ce88-586b-a99f-db3c315938bd.html
In case you were about to whine -- we ask YOU for links because you just throw out random numbers with no additional source possible to infer from the context. The above provided sufficient info that you could check it for yourself, even though it should have included the link and perhaps did not as an oversight.
PacifiCorp operates coal plants in Wyoming. In 2009 they were fined more than $10.5 million because 232 eagles were electrocuted along power lines at its substations.
and
It has been estimated that there are over 573,000 birds killed by winds farms every year. Of this number, about 83,000 are hunting birds. The real number is impossible to report because the wind companies are not required to report the number of birds killed to the government. When they are reported, the Obama administration refuses to make them public.
Contrast that figure of yours:
}}} 33,000 birds killed by wind turbines
which appears to be off by a factor of about 12.5, or 2.5x if you're going to claim the 33k was "raptors only".
BTW, in Larry's defense, I'll note that the first time i hovered over the link it didn't show up as a link, hence my own comment about how easy it was to find without the link thanks to context you'd provided.
Blame Word Press... as well as Larry being too lazy to take the 30 seconds to find it for himself. Much easier to reject it until he gets the link.
I will generally kvetch if there is no link provided, but I'll spend 15-30 seconds doing a search on my own if there's enough context to help find it on my own. :-/
there are LOTS of islands without native coal guy. Dozens, Hundreds and can you tell me how much LNG would cost to import and use to generate electricity?
Are there any islands that use LNG instead of coal because it is cheaper?
Have you looked at Bermuda or other islands?
re: killing eagles - yes.. it happens....no question about it.
Have you read this guy:
" Bald eagle crossing signs up along I-95 as strikes becoming more common"
http://bangordailynews.com/2013/02/23/news/state/bald-eagle-crossing-signs-up-along-i-95-as-strikes-becoming-more-common/
why don't you admit it guy- that you are opposed to wind turbines and just lining up arguments?
Have you ever been concerned about eagles prior to wind turbines?
Andrew - have you been to West Va to see what mountaintop removal does and the streams that are so acid that fish do not live in them?
how about were Canadian oil sands are being mined? have you seen that?
there are impacts guy - there have ALWAYS been impacts - why do you focus ONLY ON ONE KIND?
Yep. I have been to West Virginia. And I have been to Alberta. What takes place there is not in the same ball park as what is happening in the development of rare earths in China.
Larry, sometimes you come off as a thinking individual. And sometimes you come off as an elitist who cannot conceive that anybody doesn't fit where you pigeonhole them.
When wind farms came into our area, the bat population was decimated. Do I care about bats. . . well, maybe not so much. BUT the mosquito population surged after the bats were decimated by the the windmills. Now I care very much. I imagine that the non-thinking activist will point to the surging mosquito popluation as a consequence of global warming -- when actually the problem was caused by the activists.