undefined | Better HN

0 pointspaganel3y ago0 comments

Some of them kill a lot of birds and bats.

On top of that, they of course need access roads for maintenance crews to come do their thing once in a while, if located in a former pristine environment that isn't ideal. To say nothing of when the construction actually takes place, again, if it all happens in a pristine location then it's not ok.

0 comments

nine_k3y ago

House cats kill an order of magnitude more birds and bats than windmills. Practically no one calls domestic cats ugly, or suggests to ban them.

Access roads required for wind generator maintenance are neither large nor busy: there's no fuel to bring, and no ash to take away.

melagonster3y ago

I hope people don't let their cat go to outside. problems are problems.

1 more reply

samplatt3y ago

I've always been suspect of the 'kills birds' argument. I lived near some turbines on an extremely windy coast, and never EVER saw any dead birds anywhere near it.

Daily cleaning up the evidence with ruthless efficiency or just FUD by the NIMBYs?

mrguyorama3y ago

Some wind turbines in some places kill some birds sometimes. There is research going into reducing it with different blade coatings or paints. Fox news and AM radio turns this into "Wind turbines kill thousands of birds" as if they suddenly care about birds like some make love not war hippies.

It's an issue, but if they were that concerned about birds they would be screaming about glass windows and skyscrapers.

wasmitnetzen3y ago

The 'pristine location' you're talking about was most likely already formed by humans. There's barely any location on earth which hasn't been significantly altered by humans already. It's an arbitrary standard.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse