Quantcast

Comments about ‘Study: Wind farms killed 67 eagles in 5 years’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Sept. 11 2013 11:59 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Baron Scarpia
Logan, UT

The wind industry is quite proactive in working with non-government organizations and government officials on the potential "bird kill" of wind turbines -- a stance that fossil fuel companies have yet to take. One of the issues with fracking for natural gas, for example, is that vast pools of polluted back-water sit out in the open and attracts birds, which attempt to bathe in the mucky, chemical-laced pools of water. The laws for birds are quite stringent for the wind industry, but other industries and causes of bird kill remain largely unregulated (e.g., glass-clad buildings are a major killer of birds).

There are solutions. First Wind in Hawaii actually has a hatchery for exotic birds and releases birds into the wild regularly. It even has biologists on staff that monitor wind farms for potential bird deaths.

No energy source is completely "safe," but compared to nuclear and fossil fuels, wind is cheap, clean, has no toxic clean up costs (think nuclear waste, uranium tailings or coal pollution that have to be socialized across society for clean up), requires no wars to procure, and has a relatively low impact on wildlife.

jsf
Centerville, UT

Researchers at Duke and Princeton Universities determined a large windmill array could influence the local climate, raising temperatures by about 4 degrees Fahrenheit for several hours. The rotating blades also redirect high-speed winds down to the Earth's surface, boosting evaporation of soil moisture. Their statement was turbines require more demands for cooling loads and an increase use of water for farm production. The impact covers a number of miles from the turbines.
Electricity produced from windmills costs more than that produced from traditional sources like natural gas and coal. Wind farms produce electricity at an efficiency rate of 30 percent, compared to a 70 percent efficiency rate from natural gas and coal. Wind energy is also unreliable. Electricity can't be stored: it must be produced on demand, wind is inherently unpredictable. Back-up generators are needed to make sure enough electricity is available to meet demand. (this means use of wind turbines by needing backup sources create the same pollution as not having wind turbines.

The materials used in the turbines comes from the earth, mining. In 2007 estimates were 25,000 to 37,000 birds were being killed each year. How many more now?

dale richards
Green River, Utah

Let's dot up our valley's, deserts, and mountains like
California and see only one tenth if that many in use.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

67 eagles over the past 5 years, divided by 60 months = >1.116 per month.

Coal miners in America [Human Beings] --
average is 36 per year / 12 months = 3 per month.

Not to mention the 10,000+ that die each year from Black Lung disease.

BTW - Since when did Coal burning Conservative Republicans start caring about the animals?
[Let me guess -- when it suits their agenda.]

====

jsf
Centerville, UT
"In 2007 estimates were 25,000 to 37,000 birds were being killed each year. How many more now?"
--

Household cats kill over 2 BILLION birds a year, and windows kill about little less than 1 Billion.
But don't let that skew and blind your reality.

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

Carbon fuels are evil. They pollute. We need to stop mining and using them, say the environmentalists. Make dams for electricity because they don't pollute.

So we do and then they make us take them out because they interfere with the fish.

Make wind farms instead because they don't pollute, say the environmentalists.

So we make them, and then they complain that they kill too many birds.

I wonder what solar panels will kill too many of?

It looks like the environmentalists have found the key to job security for themselves.

Baron Scarpia
Logan, UT

@ jsf

Wind power development is booming right now, with many states procuring more than 10 percent of their electricity needs from wind, including Idaho and Colorado. Iowa and South Dakota are in excess of 20 percent.

The problem with the 24/7 argument of coal-fired and nuclear power is that it means that power must be produced when it is not needed. These technologies from bygone eras cannot be easily ramped up or down to match load demands. Natural gas is easily ramped up and down, making it a perfect match for renewable's inherent variability. Indeed, windmills can be shut off as well when not needed.

Solar and wind are quite predictable -- check out how Spanish Fork's winds are so reliable, the utilities have had little problem integrating it onto the grid, allowing the utility to burn less fuel -- and saving money. Solar works best during the mid-day when everyone has their air conditioners running, making it ideal for meeting peak demand loads.

As we transition out of coal and expand/modernize our grid, the integration of renewables with flexible natural gas will become the dominant logic of power infrastructure.

jsf
Centerville, UT

"The problem with the 24/7 argument of coal-fired and nuclear power is that it means that power must be produced when it is not needed." Not so, coal and nuclear can be ramped up and down based on demand. They are not any different than natural gas. All three in large producing plants use steam to drive turbines.

I will admit Bountiful City uses direct drive turbines for backup demand. Their turbines are dual fuel.

And since when does a liberal care about human souls, (late term abortions & eugenics) when it suits their agenda.

jsf
Centerville, UT

Lachlan Markay | March 17, 2011 “According to the Caithness Windfarm Information Forum, there were 35 fatalities associated with wind turbines in the United States from 1970 through 2010. Nuclear energy, by contrast, did not kill a single American in that time.
The meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 did not kill or injure anyone.
Nuclear accounts for about nine percent of America's energy, according to the Energy Information Administration, and has yet to cause a single fatality here.
Wind, on the other hand, provides the United States with only 0.7 percent of its energy, and has been responsible for 35 deaths in the United States alone.
At that rate at a 20 percent contribution rate wind deaths would be about 1,000., or about 25 per year. I know it's a projection based on past numbers actual results may vary. But as liberal points out, coals miners die, wind turbines kill, and nuclear is the best alternative in human life costs.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments