SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Meanwhile, a report from Scottish Renewables suggests that onshore wind farms could compete subsidy-free in the UK, as long as they were allowed to take part in the country's competitive auction process. (Known as contracts for difference, or CfD, the competitive auction process does not currently include onshore wind.)
Finally, while the loss of incentives and tax credits might have less impact than it once did—thanks to ongoing cost reduction and technological improvement—we are right to be concerned that political obstructionists can still do a lot of damage to the future of renewables. (The exclusion of wind from the aforementioned CfD process in the UK is one example.) But here too, there are signs of progress—because oil giant Shell is lobbying for the Dutch government to quadruple its offshore wind target for 2030 to an installed capacity of a whopping 20 gigawatts (GW). As Shell joins the likes of Statoil—which recently quit tar sands in favor of offshore wind—the shift of political and lobbying power starts to shift.
More signs that the pivot point in the energy economy is upon us.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @12:16AM (3 children)
great! there were too many birds anyways. super inefficient and polluting wind power to the rescue!
(Score: 2, Interesting) by leftover on Thursday April 20 2017, @12:22AM (1 child)
There are many low-flying birds close to shorelines but not so many
as you get into open ocean. Migrating birds fly at altitudes far above
the windmills.
So, in truth and effect, this argument is for the birds.
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:20AM
I've dirtbiked under windmill farms in my friends pastures in California. (He makes more money from the windmills than the cattle.) The bird deaths are a myth. In a full day looking around we didn't find one dead bird. Did find one dead calf that attracted quite a few buzzards.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday April 20 2017, @09:46AM
great! there were too many birds anyways.
Wow, I thought that old lie was thoroughly debunked years ago. OK, here we go again:
Yes, some older wind farms caused some bird deaths. However, those events have been exhaustively studied, and the lessons learned are now routinely applied. Any wind farm built in the last 20 years uses better planning (ie avoiding migration paths and feeding areas) and better technology (slower-moving blades) to almost completely mitigate bird deaths.
Furthermore, even in their worst ever year, the number of bird deaths caused by wind turbines were not even a rounding error compared to bird deaths caused by double glazing and domestic pets. Hell, even fossil fuels and nuclear were more dangerous to birds. If you really give a shit about birds (as opposed to disingenuously making your factually-incorrect objections based on some kind of fossil-fuel lobby agenda, for example) then go brick up your windows and kill a cat. Perhaps then you will take the time to spend 3 minutes checking online before regurgitating outdated and untruthful right-wing talking points.
First hit on google for "bird deaths from wind power statistics": https://www.carbonbrief.org/bird-death-and-wind-turbines-a-look-at-the-evidence [carbonbrief.org]