Quantcast

Comments about ‘Wind power company fined $1 Million for killing birds’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Nov. 23 2013 10:40 p.m. MST

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

14 eagles since 2009 -- that's about one bird take every three to four months, from what is otherwise a clean, price-stable, and low maintenance electricity source that provides economic benefits in rural communities. Do occasional bird deaths warrant banning wind power?

In Smithfield, we have some bozo(s) shooting hawks for the "sport" of it, with seven dead in the matter of a couple of weeks. Significantly more raptors are killed each year by illegal poaching than wind turbines. Glass buildings kill significantly more birds, but there's no movement to ban them due to their bird take consequences.

Bird take from wind farms is an issue, but needs to be viewed in context. These are unintended consequences that the wind industry is working to mitigate. In Hawaii, First Wind literally has biologists on the ground and a bird hatchery to replace bird take found around their wind farms.

No energy source is completely risk-free. Nuclear dumps hot water into lakes, killing fish and waterfowl. Fracking for oil and gas results in pools of polluted backwash on the ground that birds dive into for bathing and feeding. Power lines kill raptors, sometimes causing fires.

DN Subscriber 2
SLC, UT

The enviro/critter lover fringes will be delighted that the "evil power companies" got hit with a million dollar fine.

Those of us who actually use electricity will not be happy with having to pay an extra million dollars.

When will the left be happy? Windmills kill birds. Hydro power blocks rivers and migrating fish. Coal causes some pollution, but even a trace is now too much by EPA diktat. Solar is a fantasy scheme which enriches Obama's cronies but turns on not a single light bulb.

Nothing in life is risk free or without some costs. That includes humans even being alive- where mere breathing creates deadly carbon dioxide. If the enviro extremists want show their sincerity and commitment, they need to look at their own contribution to the problem...

wrz
Phoenix, AZ

Those eagle deaths are not the responsibility of the power company. If the bird is dumb enough to fly into a moving propeller or try to land on one, the tragedy is the responsibility of the bird. Birds are smart enough to not roost on the back of a grisly bear or other carnivores, right? So, what's the difference?

And just how did the birds die? Seems no one can say. So, what measures will be instituted to protect them from death? Furthermore, there's plenty of golden and other type eagles flying around the country so what's the fuss about a few dead ones? They all die eventually anyway.

And, who's gonna pay the million dollar fine? Not the power company, that's for sure. The company will simply add the fine to the power consumer's bill. Oh, so that would be you and I. So it ends up being just another way the government has found to exact a tax.

Nan BW
ELder, CO

I think it is good that the owners of these companies are being forced to mitigate bird deaths. I don't think they should be expected to eliminate them entirely. However, I am just as concerned that wind energy is not cost effective. Anytime I drive by these wind installments, I see some that appear to be broken, and I know that everyone of them has access to the blades for maintenance. I also wonder why some are in places where there is not consistent wind blowing. Any expensive problems with these devices are just passed on the consumers.

to comment

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