SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bird deaths down 70 percent after painting wind turbine blades:
Something as simple as black paint could be the key to reducing the number of birds that are killed each year by wind turbines. According to a study conducted at a wind farm on the Norwegian archipelago of Smøla, changing the color of a single blade on a turbine from white to black resulted in a 70-percent drop in the number of bird deaths.
Not everyone is a fan of wind turbines, however, because of their impact on local populations of flying fauna like birds and bats.
[...] Previous laboratory studies have suggested that birds may not be very good at seeing obstructions while they're flying, and adding visual cues like different colored fan blades can increase birds' chances of spotting a rapidly rotating fan.
[...] And so, in 2013, each of the four turbines in the test group had a single blade painted black. In the three years that followed, only six birds were found dead due to striking their turbine blades. By comparison, 18 bird deaths were recorded by the four control wind turbines—a 71.9-percent reduction in the annual fatality rate.
Digging into the data a little more showed some variation on bird deaths depending upon the season. During spring and autumn, fewer bird deaths were recorded at the painted turbines. But in summer, bird deaths actually increased at the painted turbines, and the authors note that the small number of turbines in the study and its relatively short duration both merit longer-term replication studies, both at Smøla and elsewhere.
Journal Reference:
Roel May, Torgeir Nygård, Ulla Falkdalen, et al. Paint it black: Efficacy of increased wind turbine rotor blade visibility to reduce avian fatalities [open], Ecology and Evolution (DOI: 10.1002/ece3.6592)
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday August 27 2020, @02:56PM (19 children)
Why were they, essentially all, white to begin with? I've driven by some wind farms, they were around even when I was a kid. Every single one was white and pretty much every picture I've seen, all of the turbines were white. Even the towers themselves.
I would assume they were white, for the same reason white cars are common. They don't get as hot during the summer. Whereas a black SUV will soak up those sun rays like nothing else. Would a different color work just as well? Or is it, because most birds don't have color vision? So, white is nearly invisible to them, whereas black is as visible as it gets?
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:26PM
A agree with your assumption, white to reduce solar heating. Since these long blades are composite (epoxy-glass or other matrix-fiber combinations), they are much more sensitive to high temps than metal blades would be. Black might be OK for high latitudes, but not for hotter/low latitude sites?
While they are doing the bird strike experiment, they should also be monitoring the black blades for any structural problems.
Would also be interesting if they know about time of day for the bird strikes -- just off hand, it seems like white would be better at times of low light, while black is better in mid-day?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @04:32PM (4 children)
They should just cover them in multi-color glitter. Reflective enough that they won't get hot, and highly visible.
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:58PM (2 children)
They should put blue LEDs on them. But then they would have a problem with consumertards hitting them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @08:16PM (1 child)
iSore is probably copyrighted.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday August 28 2020, @10:12PM
It's just a quick search away, but you're looking for a trademark. It's not really practical to have single-word copyrights.
iSore [uspto.gov]
Good news! It's abandoned.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Dr Spin on Thursday August 27 2020, @07:42PM
The best answer would be to project Youtube cat videos onto them!
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:26PM
They were probably painted white so that they wouldn't be intrusive looking in the environment. Painting them "inmate orange" would probably work better than black.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:28PM (4 children)
Because white is a nice clean color that's easy to sell. There's no reason for them to be white other than that. Heat dissipation on a something rotating that quickly shouldn't even enter the equation.
As far as white cars go, that's got nothing to do with it. Ford didn't sell any white cars for quite a while after being founded, they were all black. White cars look good on the lot, but they get dirty quickly and really show the dust. Sure, they might be slightly less hot than other colors, but I doubt the difference is large enough to worry about. Plus, when the temperatures dip that becomes a negative rather than positive.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:50PM (1 child)
Wrong on both counts. Radiant absorption and emission coefficients are always equal. White cars effectively have better insulation. They are significantly cooler in summer and warmer in winter.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday August 27 2020, @10:27PM
Vehicles in the family have been white, dark blue, medium blue, dark red (plain paint) and light blue, turquoise, tropical yellow, light gray (metallic paint). Of all of them the one which looked worse dirty was the tropical yellow one. The white ones are indeed way better in the summer. The color of the interior counts too.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Friday August 28 2020, @01:40PM (1 child)
White cars also seem to have fewer collisions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2020, @07:12AM
It's pretty close but I think bright yellow just beats it.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:07PM
White is cheap. Pigments cost more, and might weigh more. And you need a considerable amount for those big parts.
Why didn't they try painting eyeballs on there like they did for the cows' butts?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday August 28 2020, @01:32PM (5 children)
Interesting that stereotypically the best anti-UV pigments have always been black not white, so you'll tend to see black plastics and black composites "most of the time".
My theory is the white windmills are FAA related. I am intimately familiar with tower regs personally and professionally. There are strict laws about the color patterns of towers and once you know them, at a glance you can tell how tall a tower is and therefore how far away it is. IF the FAA thought they could get away with it, I'm sure they'd demand rotor blades be covered in red and white LEDs for safety reasons.
Remember a couple dead birds is a minor environmental problem compared to the environmental catastrophe of a dead 747.
Meanwhile birds get eaten by other larger birds and its instinct or something that black moving shadow scares the hell out of birds making them avoid the area.
So in summary, black windmills would be longest lasting, white and red dynamic LEDs would be the aviation safest with white paint being a distant second safest, and black shadows scare birds away.
Ideally I think if money and energy were no object for solely technological reasons you'd paint the blades black during the day to scare away birds then use dynamic red and white LED lighting on the blades to scare away 747s at night.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Friday August 28 2020, @02:53PM (4 children)
While it's all well and good to make sure a 747 can see said windmills, you're likely going to die, if visibility of the windmills matters at all for a 747.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday August 28 2020, @05:29PM (3 children)
Well sure it matters in fog or if you're off course enough. Also the lighted and painted towers are great navigation points on aviation maps.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Friday August 28 2020, @05:48PM (2 children)
Ahh.., I guess they're a lot taller than I imagined. Still, doing course corrections for something 300 to 700 feet off the ground, when your average cruising height is 30k feet. Sounds to me like something catastrophic had happened already. Still, if you had a breath of a chance to lay it down on it's belly, it'd be best not to do so in a field of Wind Turbines.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday September 01 2020, @12:54PM (1 child)
Yeah in the civilized east. Out west in the mountains this is an issue.
The problem is electrical companies, given infinitely cheap land, would make the most money building generation downtown right where its used, and same pressure pushes airports to be next to the city. So plenty of planes fly in close proximity to farms. Planes have been flying around radio transmitter towers and water towers and smoke stacks for decades.
"In theory" using ultra high voltage DC transmission lines we could power NYC from a wind farm in Wyoming, but in practice its shorter range.
Well, where I live, plenty of farmers rent out their land for windmills, so ironically if you want a tree free essentially unpopulated mechanically leveled nearly perfectly flat for a mile around spot for an emergency landing, the best place is the wind farm. I mean, don't aim right at the tower itself, duh, but that field in general is probably the safest spot for miles around. So yeah more than a few general aviation little putt putt airplanes have landed at the local wind farm after an engine failure. Its a better spot than most.
I mean, heck, even the wind is generally constant and predictable at the wind farm WRT emergency landings, that's why the farm is there.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday September 02 2020, @04:27PM
I was meaning a 747 (which is what you suggested), a 747 isn't a puddle jumper that can land in a place like that. Sure, a small plane could land just about anywhere there's a nice flat surface.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @02:56PM (31 children)
The thing which stood out to me is:
So to be clear, people are worried about 18 bird deaths over three years by four turbines. That's 6 bird deaths per year... or 1.5 bird deaths per turbine per year.
Why is this a thing?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:12PM (6 children)
Because the oil companies needed to paint renewables as bad somehow.
I mean they are so loud too right? (I could hear one when I stood directly under it, but you know, it was in the middle of a corn field, and by the edge of the field, it was completely silent.)
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:47PM (5 children)
Also, funny how the people complaining about the noise of wind turbines don't care about the much louder noises of things like trains full of coal going by at 2 AM.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:18PM (4 children)
Two things:
First, an occasional loud noise can be a lot easier for many people to deal with than a constant quieter noise.
Second, loud trains are primarily a problem for poor people crammed into poor neighborhoods in the least-appealing parts of town, while windmill noise and eyesore is a problem for a much smaller number of wealthy people living in private estates on the edge of town. We'd have to live in a democracy for the poor people's concerns to be even slightly as relevant.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @08:37PM (3 children)
I don't think "Democracy" is what you are describing. In fact, I'm quite sure it is not.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday August 28 2020, @01:33PM (2 children)
In a democracy the will of the majority has at least a strong influence, and the majority is pretty much always poor-to-middling. In our system, the will of the wealthy far outweighs it - to the point that the level of public support has zero predictive power on legislative decisions.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday August 28 2020, @10:19PM (1 child)
You also have to consider that the poor, while numerous, aren't a monolithic block of votes. There would need to be coordination between the train-track-adjacent lobby, the downwind-of-the-chemical plant lobby, the near-the-landfill lobby, and so on. That gets complicated without money.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Saturday August 29 2020, @01:55AM
Yet another way that extreme wealth inequality undermines democracy.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:22PM
I guess because the worried people were worried about the number of deaths before the
represented by those 18 incidents?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by acid andy on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:25PM (3 children)
Wind farms often have hundreds of turbines, so that's a lot more deaths per wind farm. If they're easily avoidable deaths, then what exactly is your problem?
<no sarcasm> Bird Lives Matter </no sarcasm>
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @04:43PM (2 children)
All Cats Are Bastards
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @10:02PM
You sir have just earned yourself a ticket for a free bonus lynching by the Kool Kats Klan.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Friday August 28 2020, @06:36AM
No, some of them are Queens [reference.com] too.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by nostyle on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:26PM (10 children)
About once every five years a bird will fly into the window glass of my house, break its neck and die. There are about 125 million houses in the USA, so, extrapolating, there are probably 25 million birds that die every year from flying into window glass.
We need to outlaw window glass in houses before all the birds in the world are wiped out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:29PM
> outlaw window glass in houses
Less extreme suggestion -- put some stickers / dots on your windows. I believe these are sold for just this purpose.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:33PM (2 children)
Or you could just hang some things in your window (a vertical blind can work) so they're less likely to think it's empty space they can just fly straight through.
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @08:21PM (1 child)
Hang cats in your windows.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:10PM
Oh right! The ASPCA will love that!
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:18PM (1 child)
What's a much bigger problem for bird than houses are the tinted glass windows of office buildings. Those are extremely reflective surfaces even on fairly dark days, which means that somewhere between 400 million and 1 billion birds slam into them every year. Your 2-story in the suburbs presents far less of a problem than your nearest city's 50-story glass box skyscraper.
And that adds to the point that any belief that bird deaths are a good reason to hate wind power is basically BS.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by acid andy on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:13PM
But a great reason to hate office blocks and corporate culture ;)
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday August 27 2020, @11:20PM (2 children)
There was a very stupid Cardinal that kept hitting his own reflection on the in-law's front windows. He'd just keep doing it, for a goodly while. Maybe, he was defective, maybe he was protecting his territory from the other guy, beats me, but as far as I know he didn't die.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 28 2020, @05:23AM (1 child)
I'm guessing "Cardinal" is a breed of bird. My initial read of your post did bring a funny image to mind which featured another kind of cardinal.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 29 2020, @04:36PM
Yes, the cardinal is a type of bird, named such because the males are distinctively bright red.
(Score: 1) by fakefuck39 on Saturday August 29 2020, @12:12AM
No one is outlawing wind turbines. Are you telling me that if you could have a window that's functionally the same, you would still opt to have a bird break it every 5 years?
You're painting the turbine anywise. Use a different color. An no, black won't make it last less. Whatever damage is done by the heat which is immediately dissipated by the wind, it's less damage than the impact the blade takes hitting a bird.
White is used simply because it's the cheapest paint right now. Ford used black paint because it was the cheapest paint back then. But when you have this million dollar turbine, $10 more for paint on does not raise its price.
When you have a field of 50 turbines, in a fairly small area, you're going to have like 100 dead birds a year. and after 20 years (the lifespan of a turbine), you'll have a nasty smelly 2000-bird decomposing cesspool of rotting flesh, insects, and bird carcasses covering the whole area. And it seems you can avoid all that by choosing a different paint color, without doing any extra work.
But you enjoy your broken window.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:34PM (2 children)
Please read the article again, and note the number of raptor deaths. Raptors are far less common than something like barn swallows.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:41PM (1 child)
And by "far less common", we mean still enough that 20 deaths isn't significant. So, for instance, if you look at just bald eagles, there are about 150,000 bald eagles in the US, and during a typical year about 7500 die. So even if you concentrate the deaths entirely on this one relatively uncommon species, it's accounting for approximately 0.3% of their deaths.
I'm not saying "don't bother with this cheap and effective technique for protecting birds", but I am saying that most of the pearl-clutching about birds and wind turbines is really just about saying "I don't like wind power for other reasons".
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:50PM
We could argue the significance. IMO waste of life is waste of life. If a bit of paint on spinning blades is going to save half of those creatures, I would say to paint the blades. I haven't called for abolishing the blades, I am only saying that if it's possible to make them more visible to birds, let's do it.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday August 27 2020, @06:24PM (2 children)
Aside from the political maneuvering by the fossil fuel industry, there's also an issue that windmills tend to kill large birds, which mostly breed more slowly and are more likely to be endangered. For most smaller birds, an entire windfarm can't compete with a few cats.
Of course even for large bids habitat destruction is far more damaging than windmills - but habitat destruction is far too profitable for anyone to realistically attack.
But hey, it's still hard to complain about a dirt-cheap fix that mostly eliminates one of the very few environmental down-sides of wind power.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by corey on Thursday August 27 2020, @10:11PM (1 child)
Don't mention how many birds and other animals die from coal mining and power plants.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday August 28 2020, @01:14PM
Of course not. There are zero problems with clean, virtuous, non-radioactive coal. :-/
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday August 27 2020, @08:18PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday August 29 2020, @10:45PM
Nature doesn't waste. The vast majority of birds killed get taken and eaten by something before anyone spots them. That's why one rarely finds a dead animal (or fossil), most are consumed, even the bones, unless they fall someplace like the muck of a swamp where they get buried over before they get noticed. So a lot more than 18 have likely been killed.
Somewhere in the past I read the results of a similar study in which painting patterns on a turbine can reduce the number of bird impacts.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 27 2020, @03:32PM (4 children)
Not all birds see the same things. Raptors, at least some of them, see the ultraviolet spectrum. Maybe to prevent the death of raptors, they should paint the blades with UV reflective paint, or use laundry brighteners on them. I don't know what will draw other bird's attention to the hazard, but I do know that bird's eyes are not all alike.
It seems like the black paint works reasonably well for some species of birds.
They mention bats, as well. Bats can't be expected to see the same as birds, unless maybe owls. Bats and owls hunt and navigate using sound, more than vision. Maybe the blades need some kind of ultrasonic noise maker?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday August 27 2020, @10:13PM
- bird
- chip
- wat
- that's birdspeak for wat
- oh ok, i notice you don't stop anymore at the boar's nest for a drink
- i don't indeed
- why
- it's getting a bad neighbourhood. look
- where
- there
- oh i see, a black, revolving thingy
- a half blood black revolving thingy
- why half blood
- hear all that noise it does
- so?
- must have some italian in it too
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday August 28 2020, @01:28PM (1 child)
I believe most birds see the visual spectrum, they just *also* see further outside it than us (fun fact, we can actually see a fair ways into the non-thermal infrared spectrum ourselves, but the sensitivity is so low that you need to wear goggles that completely block out the visual spectrum in order to notice it)
Besides which, black and white are (often) a little bit special - "solar-white" especially is specifically designed to reflect the full solar spectrum to reduce heat absorption (often used for roofs and space craft), so it's white across the solar spectrum, unlike most white paints which have all sorts of colors outside our visual range. Meanwhile black tends to have a lot of bleed-over outside the visible spectrum thanks to pigments spanning the entire visible spectrum. And of course solar-black, used for maximum heat gain, is black cross the solar spectrum rather than just our visual one.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 28 2020, @07:10PM
I meant to imply, but failed, that we don't know how bird's eyes *work*. Do all birds rely on rods and cones, similar to human eyes? Do the lenses work the same? What do they key on? We know that human eyes are attracted to bright lights, and to motion, but we don't even understand that *really well*.
Small example of the differences in human eyes, is looking for cracks in metal. I've witnessed a lady DOT officer direct a truck around back of the station for inspection, and cite a cracked rim as the reason. With half a dozen men inspecting that rim, two failed to ever find a crack even after it was pointed out, three had difficulty locating the crack, and the remaining guy saw it after studying the rim for only several seconds. None of the men present would have spotted the crack in a casual once-over.
If there are such dramatic differences in human vision, we certainly can't assume that different species see the same thing when they view the same structure.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday August 28 2020, @01:42PM
If we're allowed to invent weird paints, how about equal effort in implementing holograms and flying drones imitating non-human predator species?
Or of course both.
Oh look that "nesting platform" with the spinny thing, is unfortunately covered in egg eating serpents oh well fly somewhere else. Oh look that hunting area with the spinny thing has a carnivorous predator bird three times my size already flying around it best move how was I supposed to know that's a quadcopter covered in paper maiche costume of a fricken 40 foot wingspan hungry pterodactyl?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tizan on Thursday August 27 2020, @04:36PM
These bird deaths are small compared to what global warming is doing fauna and flora...i think it is still better than the alternative.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:05PM (4 children)
The bird deaths are practically irrelevant. The birds are not endangered, and far more birds die in various other human-caused accidents, or due to pet cats... not to mention environmental damage from less friendly energy sources. But, Republicans don't want wind power, so they "trump" up these sorts of objections... just like Democrats used to about nuclear power. Now that Democrats are actually trying to solve problems instead of just create obstacles, they're dropping that opposition [joebiden.com].
Bats are probably more impacted by the turbines, because they have a lower natural baseline rate of death, so each added one matters more. But bats aren't cuddly, so no one talks about them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @05:48PM
The covid-19 virus would disagree with you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2020, @08:23PM (1 child)
Bats have sonar.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday August 29 2020, @10:52PM
which is totally defeated by the spinning blades of a turbine. Bats can fly through tiny openings, but only if they are not moving.
We don't need huge wind farms, that is a horrendously inefficient way to generate electricity for the masses. The wind farms are pushed by "big energy", because they can't make any money if people wise up and realize that the future will be far better served with smaller, far more locally sourced production of power, be it wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, even small nuclear or smaller, more efficient fossil fuel plants.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday August 27 2020, @10:18PM
>But bats aren't cuddly
They eat mosquitoes. That's enough to cuddle them tbh
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by leon_the_cat on Friday August 28 2020, @01:27AM
Do they just dip their wing into the paint can or do they have some special brush? Anyway glad it extends their life.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Friday August 28 2020, @06:49AM
Has anyone tried painting eyes on the blades?
This [birdbarrier.com]seems to work, so why not put that pattern on the windmill blades?
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday August 28 2020, @01:38PM
Its worth pointing out that its been a "popular science" space filler meme for journalists for about 20 years to blabber on about how cars are driving the evolution of birds.
So its a "proven fact" at least at the journalism level that high speed interstate type highways were littered with bird carcasses back when no one gave a shit about leftist environmental propaganda, but birds have rapidly evolved to avoid highway cars. Supposedly the same for squirrels.
IF windmills are rolled out slowly enough to not completely wipe out bird species, then it seems incredibly likely the survivors will evolve to avoid windmill blades pretty well.
Not entirely different from antibiotics no longer killing bacteria. By definition the genes that thrive despite the selection pressure are eventually going to thrive when the non-competitive eaters have been wiped out. Think of all the food eagles and their cure baby eagles will eat if the dumbest 50% of eagles all get killed off. Thats a lot of food on the table. (Smarter) remaining Bald eagles are gonna get as fat as corn syrup guzzling Americans, LOL.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday August 28 2020, @01:45PM
I'm just saying chick fil a is the most popular fast food out there right now, and most anti-windmill protesters will eat there.