Wind farm contractors admit Wind Turbines kill dolphins and whales

[Vambram]

Wind Farm Contractors Acknowledge Harm to Whales, Dolphins

Wind farm contractors admit that their offshore operations harm whales and dolphins, contradicting claims made in a recent AP article.

www.dailysignal.com

Maybe the off shore wind turbines ain't a good idea after all?

 

[iluvatar5150]

Wind Farm Contractors Acknowledge Harm to Whales, Dolphins

Wind farm contractors admit that their offshore operations harm whales and dolphins, contradicting claims made in a recent AP article.

www.dailysignal.com

Maybe the off shore wind turbines ain't a good idea after all?

I read the NPR article he was complaining about. I read one of the impact assessments he cited.

Dude is just whining. Companies have to file a projected impact statement when they do this work, but the one I read said that none of the equipment they would be using would produce sound levels high enough to cause permanent damage. It could bother them, which isn't good, but the animals would have to be fairly close to the equipment for that to happen.

He tried to imply that the beachings are because of windfarms, but didn’t provide any evidence and the scientists shut that down pretty clearly in the original article.

 

[Paulos23]

Anything to make wind power look bad, eh?

 

[durangodawood]

Heritage Foundation. Who I look to for obfuscation and disinformation on anything energy and climate related.

Wind power is not 100% clean by any means. But stack it up against fossil fuel combustion for a proper understanding.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Anything to make wind power look bad, eh?

It would seem that way. IIRC, it was the NPR article that said that 40% of the whale carcasses found showed signs of entanglement with fishing equipment or ship strikes. I await the Heritage Foundation's guidance on how we should modify maritime commerce so as to be more eco-friendly.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

How does the harm to marine life from this compare to the harm done to marine life within the various facets of the forms of energy we're currently using?

For instance, is the number whales & dolphins killed by the offshore wind turbines in excess of the whales that are killed, by say, an oil carrying vessel at sea? (point of reference, collisions with vessels kills about 20,000 whales per year, and 40% of all vessels at sea are used for transporting coal, and oil)

Per the article, it states that (for an entire wind farm) "it stated that acoustic waves associated with the siting of the wind turbines would likely affect 10 whales" (that's just the process of moving and placing the wind turbines during the initial setup, after they're in place, that's no longer an issue unless a one-off whale accidentally swims into one of the beams underwater at full speed or something...but the same risk would be there for a giant rock sticking up)


So it doesn't really seem like this a very compelling critique against wind power.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Heritage Foundation. Who I look to for obfuscation and disinformation on anything energy and climate related.

Wind power is not 100% clean by any means. But stack it up against fossil fuel combustion for a proper understanding.

I have. I think petroleum is a much better and cleaner alternative, especially as we have massively cleaned up over the last several decades the pollution it creates. Now, the only thing people complain about is its production of CO2, which is actually a GOOD element. We need more of it.

 

[Paulos23]

I have. I think petroleum is a much better and cleaner alternative, especially as we have massively cleaned up over the last several decades the pollution it creates. Now, the only thing people complain about is its production of CO2, which is actually a GOOD element. We need more of it.

You have to be kidding.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

You have to be kidding.

Dead Serious. On a related item, I don't think we should applaud lots of folks buying EV's until we build a few dozen more nuclear reactors.

 

[iluvatar5150]

How does the harm to marine life from this compare to the harm done to marine life within the various facets of the forms of energy we're currently using?

For instance, is the number whales & dolphins killed by the offshore wind turbines in excess of the whales that are killed, by say, an oil carrying vessel at sea? (point of reference, collisions with vessels kills about 20,000 whales per year, and 40% of all vessels at sea are used for transporting coal, and oil)

Per the article, it states that (for an entire wind farm) "it stated that acoustic waves associated with the siting of the wind turbines would likely affect 10 whales" (that's just the process of moving and placing the wind turbines during the initial setup, after they're in place, that's no longer an issue unless a one-off whale accidentally swims into one of the beams underwater at full speed or something...but the same risk would be there for a giant rock sticking up)


So it doesn't really seem like this a very compelling critique against wind power.

In addition to the risk from fishing and ship traffic, Mr Heritage also neglects to account for the future dangers of changing ocean chemistry brought by warmer temperatures and higher co2 levels.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

In addition to the risk from fishing and ship traffic, Mr Heritage also neglects to account for the future dangers of changing ocean chemistry brought by warmer temperatures and higher co2 levels.

Meh. It's cyclical.

 

[Paulos23]

Meh. It's cyclical.

It is happening now, forcing oyster farming industries to set up in Hawaii rather than in the Puget Sound, and the sea water is rising in acidity there as well. And it is tied to the amount of CO2 in the air.

The fact that they have never had to move before indicates it is not cyclical.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It is happening now, forcing oyster farming industries to set up in Hawaii rather than in the Puget Sound, and the sea water is rising in acidity there as well. And it is tied to the amount of CO2 in the air.

The fact that they have never had to move before indicates it is not cyclical.

It might be cyclical on the order of millennia.

 

[SimplyMe]

It might be cyclical on the order of millennia.

If that were true, we should have found some evidence of this occurring in past millennia. This would be particularly true when examining the layers of sediment that have accumulated over millennia, that some layers would have increased acidity at this level -- but no such evidence appears to exist.

 

[Paulos23]

It might be cyclical on the order of millennia.

In which case we don't have records of it or the skills to deal with it yet. But life in the ocean should have some strategy for it, but we are not seeing that.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

It is happening now, forcing oyster farming industries to set up in Hawaii rather than in the Puget Sound, and the sea water is rising in acidity there as well. And it is tied to the amount of CO2 in the air.

The fact that they have never had to move before indicates it is not cyclical.

They've never had to move before because they've not been around that long.

 

[7thKeeper]

Meh. It's cyclical.

Problem is that when the cycle is getting accelerated and is powerful enough, we as a species or other species might not make it through said cycle.
But I see from your flippant attitude that you don't really care about the long term implications.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Problem is that when the cycle is getting accelerated and is powerful enough, we as a species or other species might not make it through said cycle.
But I see from your flippant attitude that you don't really care about the long term implications.

My "flippant attitude" is based on my strong and educated belief that there is no crisis. At all. We're fine.
This video may help (to get it to work, remove the period from "http.s": http.s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJv1IPNZQao&list=PLPu9up22tsDRcRyVLY9wS6iYLfdQqoTdR&index=5&pp=gAQBiAQB

 

[Pommer]

My "flippant attitude" is based on my strong and educated belief that there is no crisis. At all. We're fine.

Link to video that explains your “thinking” is borked.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Link to video that explains your “thinking” is borked.

Take the period out of HTTP.S and it should work. I can get to it through any other means except linking it from this site for some reason. It does exist.
Maybe this will work: