NationStates Jolt Archive

In another chapter of pro-environmental activity that has anti-environmental consequences, we find that wind turbines are dangerous. Duh! But not to humans, it's birds and bats that face the greatest dangers. So let's put any kind of development on hold until we figure out whether or not birds and bats are going to suffer... Just put some nets under the blades so the clean up is easier.
http://www.highton.com/jpegs/altamontpass.jpg
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070503/ap_on_sc/wind_farms_1

WASHINGTON - Wind farms could generate as much as 7 percent of U.S. electricity in 15 years, but scientists want to spend more time studying the threat those spinning blades pose to birds and bats.


Let's just recognize that any action has consequences. Probably the best method to generate electricity, with the fewest unanticipated consequences is to use nuclear power.

Makes sense. I don't see why additional testing to ensure environmental safety is a bad thing. We should be doing more of that testing, if anything, not less.

I actually read an interesting article on the dangers of wind farms due to the energy they will extract from the atmosphere and the changes that it will cause to the weather.

Let's just recognize that any action has consequences.

Considering those blades are much smaller than what they could be, which would stop any rotors hitting the animals (due to much slower speed).

That and they do not actually kill that many.

I actually read an interesting article on the dangers of wind farms due to the energy they will extract from the atmosphere and the changes that it will cause to the weather.

Source?

I fail to feal sympathy for a creature whose biggest predators are: Windows, and Windmills.

In another chapter of pro-environmental activity that has anti-environmental consequences, we find that wind turbines are dangerous. Duh! But not to humans, it's birds and bats that face the greatest dangers. So let's put any kind of development on hold until we figure out whether or not birds and bats are going to suffer... Just put some nets under the blades so the clean up is easier.
http://www.highton.com/jpegs/altamontpass.jpg
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070503/ap_on_sc/wind_farms_1


Let's just recognize that any action has consequences. Probably the best method to generate electricity, with the fewest unanticipated consequences is to use nuclear power.

Colour me unpersuaded by yet another lame excuse to do nothing - or worse, to fall back on the new God, the atom.

Makes sense. I don't see why additional testing to ensure environmental safety is a bad thing. We should be doing more of that testing, if anything, not less.
One thing I have learned in my years of producing products, rather than papers, is that sometimes you just have to say, "enough". Then do the job. I'm sure that a few birds and bats will be killed by windmill blades. I'm sure a few opossum will be killed on back roads in Georgia. That doesn't mean we need to stop driving to investigate autos anymore than it means we need stop building wind farms to give us more time to investigate avian deaths.

I'll preface by saying that I agree, Nuclear Energy is the best, safest, and most reliable solution to the Global Climate Crisis.

However, we are building bigger and bigger blades on Windmills, and slowing them down. Not only does this increase efficiency, it also lowers the number of bird kills.

Source?


Honestly can't remember.

It was just an idea that interested me, perhaps one of our resident mathmaticians could work out the impact the enough wind frams to power the world would have on the energy in the atmosphere.

I actually read an interesting article on the dangers of wind farms due to the energy they will extract from the atmosphere and the changes that it will cause to the weather.

That's pretty much a no brainer, though isn't it?

I'll bet if the sizable portion of the earths surface was covered in solar panels it would cause global warming too.

That's pretty much a no brainer, though isn't it?

I'll bet if the sizable portion of the earths surface was covered in solar panels it would cause global warming too.

Surely that would cause cooling as the panels would absorb and convert energy that usually warms the planet? :confused:

Surely that would cause cooling as the panels would absorb and convert energy that usually warms the planet? :confused:

Well by trapping it, you are turning it into energy (heat eventually), rather than bouncing it back into space. It would change the albedo. Rather like painting the Sahara black.

How much it would warm things I don't know. Probably quite a bit I imagine.

But isn't the whole point of solar panels is that it takes the energy from the sun and converts it, via photoelectric effect, into electricity, not heat?

It's not simply comparable to say...asphalt. Solar cells specifically transform solar radiation into electricity, so I don't think they'd heat up as much as normal surfaces, given that if they did t would run counter to their purpose.

But isn't the whole point of solar panels is that it takes the energy from the sun and converts it, via photoelectric effect, into electricity, not heat?

It's not simply comparable to say...asphalt. Solar cells specifically transform solar radiation into electricity, so I don't think they'd heat up as much as normal surfaces, given that if they did t would run counter to their purpose.

A great deal of that electricity is going to turn back to heat eventually anyway through losses, final use and what not. So pretty much 100% of what it traps is going to end up heating up things anyway.

They also have a poor efficiency <20%. So even though they do convert some of the solar energy into electricity they also, being a lot darker than the normal earths surface, tend to absorb a lot more and heat up, rather than reflecting it back into space. So in fact they do heat up more than 'normal' surfaces.

I don't suppose it makes much difference if you put them around places that have a low albedo anyway - like rooftops. But if there were enough of them in places like deserts, it would make a difference.

Let's just recognize that any action has consequences. Probably the best method to generate electricity, with the fewest unanticipated consequences is to use nuclear power.

Unfortunately fission requires a non-renewable source - and our mastery of fusion is still nowhere near good enough.

In another chapter of pro-environmental activity that has anti-environmental consequences, we find that wind turbines are dangerous. Duh! But not to humans, it's birds and bats that face the greatest dangers. So let's put any kind of development on hold until we figure out whether or not birds and bats are going to suffer... Just put some nets under the blades so the clean up is easier.
http://www.highton.com/jpegs/altamontpass.jpg
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070503/ap_on_sc/wind_farms_1


Let's just recognize that any action has consequences. Probably the best method to generate electricity, with the fewest unanticipated consequences is to use nuclear power.

I agree. Birds and bats are valuable, and we should definitely should avoid the nesting grounds of endangered species, but other than that, fuck em. ;p

Birds fly in a genetically planned route. So the ones that avoid the wind farms will breed more birds that avoid the wind farms. it's a self-correcting problem. :)

I suppose we should also stop the development of cars, as cats, dogs, and deer sometimes wander onto the road and get hit. I mean, if they are dumb enough to stand in the path of a fast moving object, how can we expect them to be able to help themselves?

You know, not considering the long term impact of an energy source is what got us in this problem in the first place.

You know, not considering the long term impact of an energy source is what got us in this problem in the first place.

Touche' Pussycat! ;)

You know, not considering the long term impact of an energy source is what got us in this problem in the first place.

Long term impact doesn't see to be the most pressing issue now. I dare say it was not considering long term supply that's the trouble.

oh gee...

"Naval sonar is killing whales and dolphins.. we must stop using sonar."

"Military Live fire exercises are killing plants and animals... that must stop." (an argument used alot here.)

"Fossil fuels are killing animals by damaging the environment. we have to stop using fossil fuels."

"Drilling for oil kills owls, deer and other animals in the area... we must stop drilling for oil."

"Windfarms are killing birds and other flying creatures..." *the silence is deafening.*

there comes a time when sacrifices need to be made. what sacrifice should be made now? stop pollution or stop killing birds. you decide.

You know, not considering the long term impact of an energy source is what got us in this problem in the first place.well you can blame that on the scientists of the 18th and 19th century when they found that Coal was a good source of energy. :D

So.... a very cheap, efficient, and simple solution tot his problem would be..

ahem

PUT LITTLE GRATES ON THE DAMN FANS SIMILAR TO THE ONES YOU PUT ON HOUSE FANS YOU STUPID SMART PEOPLE.

End of statement

So.... a very cheap, efficient, and simple solution tot his problem would be..

ahem

PUT LITTLE GRATES ON THE DAMN FANS SIMILAR TO THE ONES YOU PUT ON HOUSE FANS YOU STUPID SMART PEOPLE.

End of statement

Hehehe. I can imag...

Wait, you are kidding right?

So.... a very cheap, efficient, and simple solution tot his problem would be..

ahem

PUT LITTLE GRATES ON THE DAMN FANS SIMILAR TO THE ONES YOU PUT ON HOUSE FANS YOU STUPID SMART PEOPLE.

End of statement... err... did you see the size of those blades? do you realize how big those grates would be?

then there is the weight of the whole thing. extra support will be needed.

add to that the whole thing has to still be maneuverable enough to turn to catch the wind...

then multiply that for each tower... realizing that some will have to be removed since the mass was just increased...

neither cheap, efficient, simple, and definatly not little.

I was being fescicious...

Unless the "green" wackos plan to return to living in caves, not even using wood fires for heat, we need some form of fuel, and they all have some problem or other. Either give us an alternative to fossil fuels or STFU!

Edit: Post #1,000! W00t!

I was being fescicious...
oh... seriously tho, that idea also popped into my head and I did seriously think about it. thus my reply. :p

So.... a very cheap, efficient, and simple solution tot his problem would be..

ahem

PUT LITTLE GRATES ON THE DAMN FANS SIMILAR TO THE ONES YOU PUT ON HOUSE FANS YOU STUPID SMART PEOPLE.

End of statement
I don't know that you have to go that far. It seems to me, and I'm no expert so there might be something I'm missing, that you really need only two things to change-the moving blades have to be visible enough to birds that they recognize them as moving or at least there, and to have a perch higher than the blades like they did when they found out power lines were getting larger birds whose wing spans would connect wires.

Perhaps installing 'whistles' on a few select turbines (not all of them, driving through Fairfield is irritating enough) could redirect birds as well.

Just superheat the blades so that when they slice into a bird or bat they instanly flash cook the animal... have a ground crew collect the carcasses, and then feed them to the poor!

Now thats killing two birds with one fan!

I was being fescicious...

I'm not much of a spelling nazi, but I don't think people should be facetious unless they're able to spell facetious. :p

So I refuse to use spellcheck! Microsoft is evil <.< >.>

Actually, I just honestly don't care about my spelling while typing online.

So I refuse to use spellcheck! Microsoft is evil <.< >.>

FireFox does it for you automatically. And doesn't recognize itself as a correct spelling...

So I refuse to use spellcheck! Microsoft is evil <.< >.>.

Google is not evil[tm]. Have faith[tm] in google. It offers $1 for your soul !

Just superheat the blades so that when they slice into a bird or bat they instanly flash cook the animal... have a ground crew collect the carcasses, and then feed them to the poor!

Now thats killing two birds with one fan!

Any counterpoints to my newest solution?

Firefox does it for you automatically. And doesn't recognize itself as a correct spelling...
That is because you did type it wrong.

That is because you did type it wrong.

Firefox.

Whadya know.

Any counterpoints to my newest solution?

WOuldn't it just cauterize the animal?

Firefox.

Whadya know.

I think the Mozilla Co. just added the spell checker so that people would get the capitalization correct.

I actually read an interesting article on the dangers of wind farms due to the energy they will extract from the atmosphere and the changes that it will cause to the weather.

Not having seen such an article, I'm not going to speculate too harshly... but it does seem a little unlikely that a few (even a few hundred, or thousand) windfarms are going to have a much more noticable effect on global weather-patterns than global construction has.

Not having seen such an article, I'm not going to speculate too harshly... but it does seem a little unlikely that a few (even a few hundred, or thousand) windfarms are going to have a much more noticable effect on global weather-patterns than global construction has.

I wonder just what sort of effect global construction has had...

Any counterpoints to my newest solution?
... oh, so is this a serious solution? :p


just making sure...

I refuse to believe that nothing can be done to make windmills bird-friendly. Is there not some kind of sonic device we can put on them that'd drive wildlife away?

In any case, I scoff at those who say "too bad for the birds." The point of switching to wind energy is to help creative a renewable power source that, ideally, has a minimum impact on the planet. What's the point of using environmentally friendly power if we're just going to let it kill things in ways that don't involve pollutants?

Some of these can be pretty dangerous to high-flying, long-migration endangered species, too. I'd have half a mind to go out to one of those windfarms and plant some fertilizer bombs, just to get my point across.

I wonder just what sort of effect global construction has had...

It's a thought worth pursuing, perhaps. I wonder if the US had weather quite so horrendous before the dawn of the Skyscraper era?

Any counterpoints to my newest solution?

Is "Go fuck yourself." a counterpoint?

Alright, let's try a different solution.

How about a tight, non-tangling mesh web that goes in front of and behind the fan blades? There could be a little lip beneath so that birds that hit it and fall wouldn't be wounded. It's cheap, it would be light-weight enough to allow the fans to pivot, and it wouldn't require extra ground support.

Alright, let's try a different solution.

How about a tight, non-tangling mesh web that goes in front of and behind the fan blades? There could be a little lip beneath so that birds that hit it and fall wouldn't be wounded. It's cheap, it would be light-weight enough to allow the fans to pivot, and it wouldn't require extra ground support.

So...It's going to levitate?

... oh, so is this a serious solution? :p


just making sure...

No, but people too my last solution was taken as a serious answer as well, so I figured I would try.

Is "Go fuck yourself." a counterpoint?

I think somebody is about ready for nappy time. Its ok, I'll keep big bird company ok Whitey-white-man?

So...It's going to levitate?

No, no, there'd be hollow aluminum or plastic struts. Light-weight.

I think somebody is about ready for nappy time. Its ok, I'll keep big bird company ok Whitey-white-man?

I'm not a man, I'm a gryphon.

And you didn't answer my question.

For once, I agree with Myrmi. Of course, that doesn't mean we rule it out altogether - can't put all our eggs in one basket - but Nuclear must be an option, especially IFR.

I'd like the record to show that as much as I love fantasy realms and stories (I play DnD weekly) I would have to suspend my disbelief to agree you were an actual gryphon, and frankly I lack the energy.

And no, 'Go fuck yourself' is not an appropraite counter point for anything. I made a jest, I thought it was pretty funny and I'm sure other people thought it was too, doesn't mean I honestly think it would work, or that I would implement such a plan, or even that I meant it as anything but harmless fun.[/disclaimer] I have enough faith in the scientific community (beleive it or not) that I think they'll put thier heads together and after mutliple concussions come up with a solution, likely similar to one or more solutions offered here.

I made no jabs at you until you started making inapropriate remarks toward me; so please spare me the flaming, I've got to go home from work anyway.

No, no, there'd be hollow aluminum or plastic struts. Light-weight.

This is a bigass net we're talking about. And whence do the struts originate?

No, but people too my last solution was taken as a serious answer as well, so I figured I would try.
oh...

err... doesn't stop the problem of killing birds...

and flash frying doesn't mean the meat is cooked properly.

add to that... a small bird like a sparrow won't feed much...

A way to harvest energy and meat at the same time. This could be turned into a whole new operation: use the wind energy to run electric heating grids, have the birds and bats fall into nets which will dump into large bins. The animals will then be de-furred/feathered and dumped onto the heating grids. Free food.

I'd like the record to show that as much as I love fantasy realms and stories (I play DnD weekly) I would have to suspend my disbelief to agree you were an actual gryphon, and frankly I lack the energy.

And no, 'Go fuck yourself' is not an appropraite counter point for anything. I made a jest, I thought it was pretty funny and I'm sure other people thought it was too, doesn't mean I honestly think it would work, or that I would implement such a plan, or even that I meant it as anything but harmless fun.[/disclaimer] I have enough faith in the scientific community (beleive it or not) that I think they'll put thier heads together and after mutliple concussions come up with a solution, likely similar to one or more solutions offered here.

I made no jabs at you until you started making inapropriate remarks toward me; so please spare me the flaming, I've got to go home from work anyway.

Don't take it too hard, snappy retorts are how I entertain myself! I tend to take bird-related matters personally, but you seem like a nice guy, so I apologize if I offended you.

I will, however, argue that "Go fuck yourself." *can* be an appropriate counter-point for some things. For instance, unresolved sexual tension.

This is a bigass net we're talking about. And whence do the struts originate?

Top of the windmill with the struts in an ascending, very wide "V" shape. Granted, it's not perfect, but it *is* workable.

Alright, let's try a different solution.

How about a tight, non-tangling mesh web that goes in front of and behind the fan blades? There could be a little lip beneath so that birds that hit it and fall wouldn't be wounded. It's cheap, it would be light-weight enough to allow the fans to pivot, and it wouldn't require extra ground support.

and the mesh needs to be designed in such a way so that it...
1) makes repair easy.
2) does not get tangled into the blades no matter what the reason.
3) doesn't do damage should the mesh or any part of the mesh, falls.

Don't take it too hard, snappy retorts are how I entertain myself! I tend to take bird-related matters personally, but you seem like a nice guy, so I apologize if I offended you.

I will, however, argue that "Go fuck yourself." *can* be an appropriate counter-point for some things. For instance, unresolved sexual tension.

Touche! You've got me there.

You seem a decent fellow as well and I always tend to take being told to fuck myself as an insult, as I'm sure most people would. Have agood one and I'll stop spamming here for a few days, ta.

A way to harvest energy and meat at the same time. This could be turned into a whole new operation: use the wind energy to run electric heating grids, have the birds and bats fall into nets which will dump into large bins. The animals will then be de-furred/feathered and dumped onto the heating grids. Free food.

I don't think you've had experience eating something which was "cooked" with all its blood and organs still intact. Ever see a severe burn victim? They don't look very appetizing, believe me.

I will, however, argue that "Go fuck yourself." *can* be an appropriate counter-point for some things. For instance, unresolved sexual tension.
and however fun it is to say it... more entertainment can be gotten should the person actually try to follow that advice. :D :D :D

and the mesh needs to be designed in such a way so that it...
1) makes repair easy.
2) does not get tangled into the blades no matter what the reason.
3) doesn't do damage should the mesh or any part of the mesh, falls.

1) It's a mesh. Replacement would be a better solution than repair, so it should be made out of an easily recycled material.

2) It would be taught enough on the struts that it wouldn't get tangled in the blades.

3) I'm not an engineer, so I couldn't tell you the intricacies of designing this project, but ideally it would not fall. A windmill falling over would be pretty dangerous anyway.

But isn't the whole point of solar panels is that it takes the energy from the sun and converts it, via photoelectric effect, into electricity, not heat?

It's not simply comparable to say...asphalt. Solar cells specifically transform solar radiation into electricity, so I don't think they'd heat up as much as normal surfaces, given that if they did t would run counter to their purpose.

The conversion ratio is very small - the biggest drawback of Solar cell tech.

1) It's a mesh. Replacement would be a better solution than repair, so it should be made out of an easily recycled material.ten the struts have to be strong enough to hold the weight of the mesh as well as the weight of those replacing it. if you are going by helicopter.. then that adds cost.

I don't think there is any crane tall enough to reach it, while being maneverable enough to get to those towers...

2) It would be taught enough on the struts that it wouldn't get tangled in the blades.then it will kill the birds. anything with the give to not kill animals would be affected by the breeze. a strong enough wind can push the mesh into the blades. and if it's taught, then there is either a frame on the bottom or weights. adding to the weight for the structure and possibly then needing support for the wind tower.

3) I'm not an engineer, so I couldn't tell you the intricacies of designing this project, but ideally it would not fall. A windmill falling over would be pretty dangerous anyway.I meant peices of the mesh. :p

ten the struts have to be strong enough to hold the weight of the mesh as well as the weight of those replacing it. if you are going by helicopter.. then that adds cost.

I don't think there is any crane tall enough to reach it, while being maneverable enough to get to those towers...

then it will kill the birds. anything with the give to not kill animals would be affected by the breeze. a strong enough wind can push the mesh into the blades. and if it's taught, then there is either a frame on the bottom or weights. adding to the weight for the structure and possibly then needing support for the wind tower.

I meant peices of the mesh. :p

The struts wouldn't hold the workers, dammit. I'm sure they could put a ladder on the windmill or something. This is an idea, not a blueprint, and besides that I don't see anyone else attempting to provide even remotely sensible solutions.

There can be enough give to not harm the birds while not going far enough back to get tangled in the blades. The struts might have to be a little longer, but again, a lightweight material would be needed. The whole thing would be monstrously ugly, but if aesthetics are more important to people than the safety of endangered wildlife than I might as well just go with my original plan of blasting them to shit.

I don't see how pieces of the mesh would come off, and even if it did.. it's fabric or possibly plastic. It's not going to hurt anyone by fluttering lightly down to earth.

The struts might have to be a little longer, but again, a lightweight material would be needed.

Two tons of feathers is still two tons. If we want a net big enough to cover the blade, give enough not to harm the birds, far enough away to never catch in the blades...Struts included(assuming they're even physically possible), that's still a lot of weight, no?

The struts wouldn't hold the workers, dammit. I'm sure they could put a ladder on the windmill or something. This is an idea, not a blueprint, and besides that I don't see anyone else attempting to provide even remotely sensible solutions. someone had an idea for whistles and other noise makers. another was to stick to Nuclear power.

and those towers are huge. so a ladder to reach a point where the blades will be covered...

There can be enough give to not harm the birds while not going far enough back to get tangled in the blades. The struts might have to be a little longer, but again, a lightweight material would be needed. The whole thing would be monstrously ugly, but if aesthetics are more important to people than the safety of endangered wildlife than I might as well just go with my original plan of blasting them to shit.aesthetics be damned... save Tweety! :p

those blades are HUGE! long enough to cover them means long enough to get tangled into them. a framework would work... but the materials to cover the area...

I don't see how pieces of the mesh would come off, and even if it did.. it's fabric or possibly plastic. It's not going to hurt anyone by fluttering lightly down to earth.extremly light weight then. even greater chances of being affected by winds. lightweight and thin materials also increase chances of it breaking off.

another idea is small mirrors to reflect light to scare them away. again tho, it has the possiblity of affecting pilots and nearby communities.

and as I said earlier, I've seriously thought about the mesh idea... for several years when they first noticed that birds were being hit by those blades. :p

someone had an idea for whistles and other noise makers. another was to stick to Nuclear power.

and those towers are huge. so a ladder to reach a point where the blades will be covered...

aesthetics be damned... save Tweety! :p

those blades are HUGE! long enough to cover them means long enough to get tangled into them. a framework would work... but the materials to cover the area...

extremly light weight then. even greater chances of being affected by winds. lightweight and thin materials also increase chances of it breaking off.

another idea is small mirrors to reflect light to scare them away. again tho, it has the possiblity of affecting pilots and nearby communities.

and as I said earlier, I've seriously thought about the mesh idea... for several years when they first noticed that birds were being hit by those blades. :p

Hey, I mentioned sonic devices too. I'm just not sure how plausible they would be.

Anyway, my point was to show that solutions are possible.

And we're not talking about tweetie, here. A lot of victims of windfarms tend to be the high soarers, such as this White Tailed Eagle which collided with a windmill in Japan and was bisected:

http://www.d1.dion.ne.jp/~akaki_ch/w-t.eagle.collision01.jpg

Here, a golden eagle was beheaded, presumably at Altamont Pass:

http://www.dartdorset.org/images/6_beheaded_golden_eagle_Altamont_Pass.jpg

This gryphon vulture was killed, likely by those stubby windmills seen in the background, at Tarifa.

http://www.dartdorset.org/images/5_smashed_griffon_vulture_Tarifa.jpg

And lastly, a juvenile Red Kite was wounded by a windmilll impact, having its wing completely severed at the joint. Though it survived, it later had to be euthanised:

http://www.dartdorset.org/images/DSCN6011_0011.jpg

Though those pictures are a little graphic, I just don't want anyone to think what I'm getting uppity about is a few pigeons getting killed. These are endangered species, and raptors important to a number of ecosystems, that are at risk. Everything has its downsides, certainly, but what we see here is something that is destroying species which we've made special legislation to protect. If more is not done to bird-proof these windfarms, we are undermining a whole ecological platform. Why is it ok for "green" power to kill off wildlife, but not "dirty" power such as coal? Can we really say a power source is environmentally friendly if it has such an effect on such a sensitive portion of the ecosystem?

The problem is not an easy one to solve. Windmills by their very nature have to be unobstructed and free to turn, and so they don't loan themselves well to bulky contraptions like cage guards, sonic and light emitters are hit-or-miss.. and I don't think anyone's willing to build a 120 foot chain link fence.

But we need to try. We owe it to ourselves and to these birds. There are many who see an eagle or hawk, and stop and gaze. They are majestic birds; it is a raptor, after all, that was picked as the national emblem for the United States. I may be a bird fanatic, but it is far from unusual to watch a bird of prey soar effortlessly through the air and not feel a part of its freedom ourselves; difficult to watch one stoop to the ground in a laser-like dive for food and not feel our heart quicken. I think, for all the pleasure we take from watching, for all the utility they give us in keeping pest levels down and acting as environmental indicators, for all the people out there that have ever marveled at a passing hawk..

We need to try. And if we do, we will succeed.

Unfortunately fission requires a non-renewable source - and our mastery of fusion is still nowhere near good enough.
Ever heard of bombarding non-radioisotopes and low emission radioisotopes with neutrons? That's how they turn u238 (depleted uranium) into good ol' plutonium fuel, ripe and ready for use in reactors. So yeah, you can actually make new fuel out of old radiation sheilding.

Unless the "green" wackos plan to return to living in caves, not even using wood fires for heat, we need some form of fuel, and they all have some problem or other. Either give us an alternative to fossil fuels or STFU!

Edit: Post #1,000! W00t!
If we go back to caves then where the hell are the bears going to hibernate!? Think of the bears man!

In another chapter of pro-environmental activity that has anti-environmental consequences, we find that wind turbines are dangerous. Duh! But not to humans, it's birds and bats that face the greatest dangers. So let's put any kind of development on hold until we figure out whether or not birds and bats are going to suffer... Just put some nets under the blades so the clean up is easier.

And this is why you're not a scientist. It's perfectly reasonable to examine the potential dangers to birds and bats...both form integral parts of ecosystems throughout the world, and as such we should not endanger them needlessly.

Besides...wind farms are atrociously inefficient and should be replaced with zero emission coal reactors instead. (You know, those neat kinds of coal reactors that can have their CO2 redirected to verticle farms.)

Here's a fun question: How many birds, fish, other animals and even humans have been killed by environmental pollution from coal and uranium mining, natural gas drilling, deforestation for biomass, and habitat destruction from flooding and disruption for hydroelectric power? I can guarantee you all of them kill a lot more things in a lot more areas than wind ever could.

The problem is, all of these have an environmental impact and there is no way to eliminate it. You can minimize it, but you're not going to get rid of it. That's just the way things are going to be as long as we produce energy on Earth using materials extracted from the planet. At the very least, wind power, along with solar, tidal, and geothermal, offer some of the most abundant and most environmentally friendly power sources in existence. Bigger turbines cut down on bird fatalities considerably. Just update older turbines to larger, newer models, and the problem would be significantly reduced. Animals will be hurt and killed by these turbines, but far more are lost thanks to our continued dependence on fossil fuels for electricity generation. That's where the problem lies, not with wind power. Wind is cheap, highly efficient, and abundant...it's not the single solution to our needs, but it's one of the best ones out there.

Here's a fun question: How many birds, fish, other animals and even humans have been killed by environmental pollution from coal and uranium mining, natural gas drilling, deforestation for biomass, and habitat destruction from flooding and disruption for hydroelectric power? I can guarantee you all of them kill a lot more things in a lot more areas than wind ever could.

I agree. I still would like an examination to reduce the environmental risk to an absolute minimum. Call me enviro-crazy, but I would prefer to preserve ecosystems and species rather than resorting to resurrecting them later via leftover DNA, presuming such a thing is even possible and not just fictional.

The problem is, all of these have an environmental impact and there is no way to eliminate it. You can minimize it, but you're not going to get rid of it. That's just the way things are going to be as long as we produce energy on Earth using materials extracted from the planet. At the very least, wind power, along with solar, tidal, and geothermal, offer some of the most abundant and most environmentally friendly power sources in existence. Bigger turbines cut down on bird fatalities considerably. Just update older turbines to larger, newer models, and the problem would be significantly reduced. Animals will be hurt and killed by these turbines, but far more are lost thanks to our continued dependence on fossil fuels for electricity generation. That's where the problem lies, not with wind power. Wind is cheap, highly efficient, and abundant...it's not the single solution to our needs, but it's one of the best ones out there.

It's still massively inefficient compared to verticle farms powered by coal generators that concentrate the CO2 from burning coal into growing food.

...and yet, it would be a nice backup system. I like redundency in my power generation capability, to be sure.

Meh, I like windmills more that I like birdshit on my car.

They look nicer, too. (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y79/Goomg/newcam/outforawalk077.jpg)

You know, I wonder...most bird species are sensitive to sounds, and bats definitely are since they use ecolocation...what if each windmill were broadcasting a specific tone that would drive the bird and/or bat away but have no effect on humans? This would be easily achieved by setting the tone at a frequency we cannot hear.

I agree. I still would like an examination to reduce the environmental risk to an absolute minimum. Call me enviro-crazy, but I would prefer to preserve ecosystems and species rather than resorting to resurrecting them later via leftover DNA, presuming such a thing is even possible and not just fictional.

Not to mention that ecosystems aren't good at dealing with new species, even if they are reintroduced and had existed there before. It could be disasterous to revive a species and put it back in to an ecosystem that has already adjusted to function without it, far more so than the original extinction itself.

This is a problem that can be minimized, though; bigger turbines not only reduce the risk to birds but actually have a higher capacity per unit, boosting the maximum capacity of the entire farm.

It's still massively inefficient compared to verticle farms powered by coal generators that concentrate the CO2 from burning coal into growing food.

...and yet, it would be a nice backup system. I like redundency in my power generation capability, to be sure.

Well, yes. Wind by itself doesn't work too well, but if you combine it with solar, geothermal, coal, nuclear, natural gas, tidal, hydro, and so on, it is an excellent source of power.

More diversity is good because it can respond to more conditions without disruption.

Not to mention that ecosystems aren't good at dealing with new species, even if they are reintroduced and had existed there before. It could be disasterous to revive a species and put it back in to an ecosystem that has already adjusted to function without it, far more so than the original extinction itself.
Part of why we should avoid causing such extinction. If extinction is natural, so be it, but I would rather not have humanity responsible for extinctions if it can be avoided.

This is a problem that can be minimized, though; bigger turbines not only reduce the risk to birds but actually have a higher capacity per unit, boosting the maximum capacity of the entire farm.

Indeed, as that was my whole point.


Well, yes. Wind by itself doesn't work too well, but if you combine it with solar, geothermal, coal, nuclear, natural gas, tidal, hydro, and so on, it is an excellent source of power.

More diversity is good because it can respond to more conditions without disruption.
You have a point there.

I do think we should slow down on building windmills for the moment and concentrate more on the coal-powered verticle farms, as they would be easier to build and would provide far more power, thus ensuring our ability to construct these other power systems. You can't diversify your power infrastructure if said infrastructure suddenly cannot supply the power needed while it is being worked upon.

Part of why we should avoid causing such extinction. If extinction is natural, so be it, but I would rather not have humanity responsible for extinctions if it can be avoided.

Wouldn't that be natural too? Yanno, one species killing off another? I daresay it's all this endangered specis stuff that's unnatural.

Now, we can talk about good or bad, but I don't see the relevance of 'natural'.

Wouldn't that be natural too? Yanno, one species killing off another? I daresay it's all this endangered specis stuff that's unnatural.

Now, we can talk about good or bad, but I don't see the relevance of 'natural'.

...

I was going to start talking about technology and the tools we use, but you're right...it's all just an extension of said natural order.

So, alright, I'll avoid using that term from now on. Still, unlike other species we can examine the potential effects of the extinction of species and can prevent it if we choose to do so, and as such we have a responsibility to do just that.

...

I was going to start talking about technology and the tools we use, but you're right...it's all just an extension of said natural order.

So, alright, I'll avoid using that term from now on. Still, unlike other species we can examine the potential effects of the extinction of species and can prevent it if we choose to do so, and as such we have a responsibility to do just that.

Effects on us, or for everything?

Effects on us, or for everything?

At the minimum, effect on us, but preferably for everything, though to be honest I'm not seeing much of a difference...whatever would effect us will effect everything else as well, so it is for the mutual benefit of all the life forms on this planet.

Now, don't get me wrong...I'm no hippie seeking to protect lower animals(in terms of intelligence) over humans, but I do recognize just how reliant we are on a sustainable environment, and I see no reason to needlessly harm it when we have alternatives that do not result in severe economic losses.

At the minimum, effect on us, but preferably for everything, though to be honest I'm not seeing much of a difference...whatever would effect us will effect everything else as well, so it is for the mutual benefit of all the life forms on this planet.

Hmm? Effect might'n necessarily be negative.

Now, don't get me wrong...I'm no hippie seeking to protect lower animals(in terms of intelligence) over humans, but I do recognize just how reliant we are on a sustainable environment, and I see no reason to needlessly harm it when we have alternatives that do not result in severe economic losses.

Perhaps. Course, before we focus on "coal powered vertical farms" how about, like, a normal vertical farm to start? Something, a proof of concept, a prototype mebbe.

Hmm? Effect might'n necessarily be negative.


I was speaking specifically of negative effects, Dinaverg. You know that, or so I would hope, since I respect your debating skills.

Perhaps. Course, before we focus on "coal powered vertical farms" how about, like, a normal vertical farm to start? Something, a proof of concept, a prototype mebbe.
Well, obviously. I'm not saying we go forth with something blind...that's exactly what I'm saying we SHOULDN'T do, whether it comes to verticle farms or to windmills.

I was speaking specifically of negative effects, Dinaverg. You know that, or so I would hope, since I respect your debating skills.

Ah, well, it just seemed we were starting off from the position "extinction=bad". Well, no, wew started from birds being killed=bad, then we...um...assumed windmills would made some birds go extinct or something. Actually, I'm not sure how we got to extinction.

Ah, well, it just seemed we were starting off from the position "extinction=bad". Well, no, wew started from birds being killed=bad, then we...um...assumed windmills would made some birds go extinct or something. Actually, I'm not sure how we got to extinction.

I think it was me overstating my case yet again...I have a seriously bad habit of doing that and I need to stop.

But basically I was worried that continued development left unchecked, with the impression given in the original post implied serious destruction to some bird and bat species populations, and I followed that to its natural conclusion.

It's not as if humans have not done this before...Colorado is a fantastic example. We eliminated almost all of the native wolves and as such we must now conduct serious sport hunting every year to prevent the deer and elk populations from becoming too large and overwhelming the foliage they feed upon. It's that same sort of thing I would like to prevent lest we need to take such measures to counter our own ignorant policies.