Green Energy Threatens All Flying Creatures

On July 4, President Obama gave permission for wind farms to kill the national bird.

ScreenHunter_2082 Aug. 19 00.07

Solar is just as bad, or worse

ScreenHunter_2084 Aug. 19 00.09Emerging solar plants scorch birds in mid-air – The Washington Post

Environmental organizations have permitted their mindless fear about CO2, to completely corrupt their core principles.

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Green Energy Threatens All Flying Creatures

  1. Don Penim says:

    From the AP:

    “Emerging solar plants scorch birds in mid-air”…

    …”every two minutes”

    …estimates of “28,000 birds per year”…

    IVANPAH DRY LAKE, Calif. (AP) — Workers at a state-of-the-art solar plant in the Mojave Desert have a name for birds that fly through the plant’s concentrated sun rays — “streamers,” for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair
    Federal wildlife investigators who visited theBrightSource Energy plant last year and watched as birds burned and fell, reporting an average of one “streamer” every two minutes, are urging California officials to halt the operator’s application to build a still-bigger version.

    The investigators want the halt until the full extent of the deaths can be assessed. Estimates per year now range from a low of about a thousand by BrightSource to 28,000 by an expert for the Center for Biological Diversity environmental group.

  2. tom0mason says:

    Tallbloke blog is running the same issue where I commented –

    I have also read that some of the birdwatchers in the area have seen flock of migratory bird shift direction towards the solar roasting hole. They have surmised that the birds maybe under the mistaken impression that the glittering light is water and therefore head for it. Either way they are a huge hazard to birds and insects.
    I wonder what the efficiency of this madcap scheme is and is it worth the avian loss.
    An old blog from December last year –

  3. Ed Martin says:

    Progress? They sure have a knack for killing innocent creatures.

  4. Robertv says:

    If he can do it with the constitution he can do it with the bird. Most politicians would sell their mother/father and wife/husband and sister/brother to gain more power. Politicians have no friends and they certainly don’t work for We The People.

  5. philjourdan says:

    Ya think Ronco is leading the green energy movement? They got the Ronco Bird chopper and now the Ronco bird toaster. At this rate, there will be no CO2, but no birds either.

  6. Don B says:

    “IVANPAH DRY LAKE, Calif. (AP) — Workers at a state-of-the-art solar plant in the Mojave Desert have a name for birds that fly through the plant’s concentrated sun rays — “streamers,” for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair

    “Federal wildlife investigators who visited the BrightSource Energy plant last year and watched as birds burned and fell, reporting an average of one “streamer” every two minutes, are urging California officials to halt the operator’s application to build a still-bigger version.”

  7. Dave N says:

    The biggest issue is that environmentalists are silent about it, yet they’ll scream blue murder if far less creatures are affected by an oil spill; they’re mindless hypocrites.

  8. elmer says:

    Talk about heating up the atmosphere.

  9. pesce9991 says:

    “The main concern is that an American Bald Eagle was found dead about 10 miles from the busy Memphis airport”, the article states.

    The article continues: “Republicans claim they have always been concerned about the decline of species but it took the death of an American Bald Eagle to be a wake up call. The Republican House of Republicans passed legislation demanding that Obama step up to the plate and in a shocking development Obama caved and did not veto the legislation.’

    Can you spell hypocrite?lol

    • mjc says:

      Just go away and crawl back into whatever cave you came out of, troll.

      It’s YOUR side that has always cried, moaned, passed legislaton forcing this or that ban, restrict activities, make it criminal to kill, harm, gather feathers or almost, even look at. Your side was the one that brought about the widespread use of plastic for shopping bags (because we need to save the trees), bottled water (tap water will KILL you…it’s the chemicals in it) and a host of other ‘wonderful’ ideas…that are now reviled by the same folks who promoted them, in the first place. So, now, it seems that wildlife is not or was not ever the main reason behind all that has been done.

    • philjourdan says:

      Yes, it is pesce in Italian.

      How do you like your crow? Minced or fricasseed?

    • Justa Joe says:

      Any articles about the myth of wind turbines generating any useful electricity ?

      • Gail Combs says:

        A professional engineer did the study: Wind Power Fraud

        This the book exposes the utter uselessness of wind power, including how:

        * Wind turbines rarely produce their advertised full power. On average, wind turbines only produce about 20% of their nameplate rating.

        * Wind power is unreliable and undispatchable. When it is needed most, it will likely be unavailable to provide any power when it is needed most.

        * Wind power is not clean. It takes a lot of dirty energy to make the materials, manufacture and install a wind turbine facility.

        * Wind turbines are not environmentally friendly. They are noisy, unsightly, kill bats and birds, interfere with radars, and have been shown to be responsible for a slew of health problems.

        * Wind turbines consume electricity whether operating or not. Often this power is not even metered. Care to guess who is paying the bill for this power?

        * In theory, if 20% of US electric generation was replaced by wind power, the decrease in CO2 emissions would be an unnoticeable 0.00948%.

        * In reality, wind power doesn’t reduce CO2 emissions at all, because backup fossil power plants have to cycle wildly and inefficiently trying to keep up with erratic wind power output.

        * Wind power will not replace fossil fired power plants. Germany estimates that by 2020 up to 96% of its wind power capacity will need to be backed up by new coal fired power plants.

        * Wind power will not reduce US dependency on foreign oil. If wind power replaced 20% of US electric generation, the resulting decrease in oil imports would be a measly 0.292%.

        * Wind turbines have an embarrassingly low Energy Returned On Energy Invested value of 0.29. The manufacture, installation and operation of wind power facilities will consume more than 3 times the energy they will ever produce.

        Wind Power is Big Business. The big winners will be developers, land owners, brokerage houses, banks, manufacturers, governments, the “green” movement, environmentalists, researchers, academia, and the news media. The big losers will be the taxpayers and electric bill payers….

        • mjc says:

          Wind does have a place…but it isn’t making electricity. It’s much better driving actual wind mills or pumps…direct mechanical applications.

    • Jl says:

      “Can you spell hypocrite?” Why, yes I can. It’s spelled “climate astrologer”.

  10. Shazaam says:

    Yeah, I could picture the laughingstock-in-chief being that stupid.

    Yet that moron would only do it for his democratic base. He would not piss on the repubs if they were on fire.

    Thus your premise is fatally flawed and ignores the bird flash cookers and choppers issue.

    Maybe the CAGW industry could open-up a Mohave Flash-fried chicken franchise on site to raise money for green-energy research?

    When circumstances hand you flash-fried bird (streamers), turn ’em into “research” fundage.

  11. catweazle666 says:

    Saving the World – one dead bird at a time.

  12. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Dead humans too:

    Killing people with “concern”? Biofuels led to nearly 200,000 deaths (est) in 2010.

    That is just biofuel policy, not including GMO policies or DDT bans. They make ISIS look like amateurs.

    • rah says:

      Bruce, this is one I don’t buy into at all. I’ve read up on this and used to work in a business that supported agriculture. We produce plenty of food in the world for all. To believe otherwise is to agree with the anti humanists that promote the Population Bomb and such.

      What we can’t do is get it to some of those that are starving. I don’t support the subsidization of bio fuels simply because I am a capitalist, but the the diversion of corn and soya beans used to produce them are not the cause of starvation. You wanna blame someone or something for unnecessary famines then look right there at the UN where the majority of the seats are taken up by ambassadors for totalitarian thugs that use hunger as a weapon or graft away the aid that is given. That is where the majority of the unnecessary hunger comes from.

      Those that don’t believe that is the case and feel the need to preach about such things need to turn in their computers right now for recycling because extractions for soya beans and possibly corn were used in it’s production. While they’re at it they can also never drink another alcoholic beverage since they all are extracted from foods. And don’t even think about drinking that soft drink because it most likely has sweeteners produced from corn. The list of non nutritional food and non food uses for the extracts from corn and soya beans is almost beyond comprehension.

  13. George Voll says:

    Why has the Washington post article been deleted?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *