Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (6164)	1/25/2004 4:14:13 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 20773

Like I said: Wind Power: Green? or Red? by Arthur Feinstein Director of Conservation & Education As the popularity of hydroelectric and nuclear power as “clean” sources of electricity has declined, wind power is increasingly promoted as the new “clean” and guilt-free energy source. Wind turbines have been proposed for the middle of the Bay on the old Berkeley Pier, at the base of San Francisco’s Bayview Hill next to Candlestick Point, and on the San Francisco watershed lands in Alameda County. San Francisco voters recently passed several bond measures that could provide funding for wind power projects as well as for solar power. A row of wind turbines can be lethal for birds But before these proposals are implemented, perhaps we need to look a little more closely at this supposedly clean source of power. Wind power, while innocent of toxic discharges into the air, is a bloody source of power if situated in the wrong location. On Altamont Pass, for example, approximately 40 Golden Eagles die every year as a result of collisions with the wind turbines there. Hundreds of Red-tailed Hawks and other raptors suffer the same fate, as do smaller birds such as Meadowlarks. Those gleaming blades drip with blood. The fatality numbers have been documented by years of study performed under the auspices of the Avian Subcommittee of the National Wind Coordinating Council. Actually, only 25 percent of the turbines at Altamont are responsible for a majority of the bird deaths. Scientists, however, do not know why only certain turbines kill birds. They have tried different tower designs, painting turbine vanes so birds could see them better, and having them emit sounds to scare off birds. None has made a difference. And engineers say that placing screens around the turbines would deflect so much wind, they would become ineffective. After nearly a decade of research, scientists still cannot figure out how to make wind turbines safe for birds. At their May 2000 meeting, the Avian Subcommittee of the National Wind Coordinating Committee concluded that “[N]othing is known for sure to reduce avian fatalities significantly…Avoidance of areas with high bird use is the only proven way to avoid high levels of avian fatalities.” New larger turbines are now being used in the hope that their larger, slower blades will kill fewer birds. Studies have yet to support this conclusion. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a guidance for the siting of wind turbines on September 20, 2000, stating that such projects should, “Avoid siting towers in or near wetlands, or near other known bird concentration areas…Avoid areas with a high incidence of fog or low-cloud ceilings, especially during spring and fall migrations.” Does that sound familiar? It defines the Bay Area. Obviously, the key is siting. Wind power makes no sense where there are lots of birds. The San Francisco Bay Area is still a bird haven. One million shorebirds migrate through here every year, the largest concentration of shorebirds on the entire west coast of North and South America. A total of 500,000 migrating ducks pass through the Bay Area, and 20,000 to 40,000 hawks and eagles migrate across the Golden Gate and through San Francisco every year. Hundreds of thousands of songbirds migrate along our California coastline and thus through the Bay Area. San Francisco’s watershed lands in Alameda County are one of the few places in the Bay Area that host Bald Eagles. Let’s not make the Bay Area a bird death trap. Let’s put wind power where it can do no harm and indeed can be a “clean” power source. The City of San Francisco is actively considering the use of wind energy. At a recent San Francisco Board of Supervisors committee hearing on wind energy, GGAS and the Audubon California state office brought the issue of avian deaths due to wind turbines to their attention. We suggested that the City seek funds for several years of bird population studies in San Francisco locations where wind turbine farms or even individual wind turbines might be proposed. (Bird populations can vary significantly, so more than one year of study is recommended). How You Can Help If you live in San Francisco, contact your District Supervisor and express your concern about the impacts of wind turbines on birds. Suggest that before any wind turbines are established in San Francisco, the proposed sites should be monitored for one year, preferably two, to determine bird presence and to reject sites that demonstrate heavy bird usage. Address: (your) District Supervisor San Francisco City Hall 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Plaza San Francisco, CA 94102 goldengateaudubon.org

To: Brumar89 who wrote (6164)	1/25/2004 8:14:07 PM
From: cosmicforce	Respond to of 20773

California is liberal, but only in the cities. We have more windmills than anyone else in the US. We also have more geothermal than anyone else in the world. Your argument is falacious: is like saying I saw a robin run into my window and presuming that only robins run into windows. Or that birds only run into my windows. Who in the 50 states has nobody that says not in my backyard hypocritically. I had a hick tell me I didn't have the right to set up my telescope along a country and public road because I live in the city. My relatives came to California and Oregon on the respective trails of those names. Where does my hick get his ideas? The fact is he never analyzes his position. I didn't leave and even though he was drunk and beligerant, I calmed him. But I can't say that most hicks act that way. Little do they know, I'm of hick ancestry. I understand how hicks think, it is just very parochial and myopic.