Windmills and Eagles

[RobG]

No energy source is perfect, but compared to strip mining for coal they are far better even if they bury the blades.

I'm sure lead poisoning from lead bullets is a far bigger problem for raptors. https://raptor.umn.edu/about-us/our...l clinic,to alleviate their extreme suffering.

 

[kwyeewyk]

Sounds like a scam to get that "slow" cousin we all have a cushy job counting dead birds. Do you know if sights get a maximum amount of take permits? Would a sight be shutdown if it exceeded that? I understand getting a consultation before installing a sight to insure it's not in a bad spot like nesting areas, migration paths, etc. But after it's built what good would a consultant be other then counting dead birds?

Nobody's slow cousin gets the cushy dead bird counting job (well maybe a few), that's usually done by independent contractors or possibly federal biologists who typically do lots of other things that require at least a moderate intelligence level. As mulecreek and wllm have pointed out, the permitting is not a simple process but it should be taken seriously.

In this case I assume the project was on private property so there was no Section 7 consultation for the site. In that case it would be Section 10 permitting only, which would evaluate the site and identify potential for take, conservation/mitigation measures to reduce take to an acceptable level, and then permit take at the identified acceptable level.

The goal really is to protect species from the start, but once a site is built without proper permitting, the only recourse is to monitor actual take and basically fine the offender to encourage/force compliance with ESA. The company gave themselves a financial advantage over competitors by skipping the process and avoiding direct and indirect costs associated with reducing take, so that action is discouraged through financial punishment . In theory the fines should have at least partially been used for post take mitigation to help offset the excessive take.

https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/fee.2193

 

[PrairieHunter]

There are new wind technologies coming that will make these giant windmills obsolete. There are a couple of them going through an energy accelerator at Colorado State that I am also involved with. Things like different shapes, some just wiggle.

Vortex Bladeless | Innovative Wind Power

Vortex is a radically new form of wind energy without rotation or blades, simpler, low-maintenance and bird-friendly.

vortexbladeless.com

 

[rogerthat]

No energy source is perfect, but compared to strip mining for coal they are far better even if they bury the blades.

I'm sure lead poisoning from lead bullets is a far bigger problem for raptors. https://raptor.umn.edu/about-us/our-research/lead-poisoning#:~:text=The Raptor Center's medical clinic,to alleviate their extreme suffering.

Far better from a carbon standpoint? As the spider web of roads and sites and visual footprint increases rapidly on the giant farm being built between Miles City and Jordan, on what was generally traditional farm and ranchland. I am not seeing it as better. I think they are a great talking point but the reality sucks. Every road, culvert, and site has an impact. At least a coal mine just trashes a small area. This farm is huge.

 

[rogerthat]

There are new wind technologies coming that will make these giant windmills obsolete. There are a couple of them going through an energy accelerator at Colorado State that I am also involved with. Things like different shapes, some just wiggle.

Vortex Bladeless | Innovative Wind Power

Vortex is a radically new form of wind energy without rotation or blades, simpler, low-maintenance and bird-friendly.

vortexbladeless.com

Welcome news. As an engineer I always thought to myself "This is the best we have come up with?" It was like a third grader looked at a pinwheel and said lets make this really big.

 

[Deleted member 18333]

Far better from a carbon standpoint? As the spider web of roads and sites and visual footprint increases rapidly on the giant farm being built between Miles City and Jordan, on what was generally traditional farm and ranchland. I am not seeing it as better. I think they are a great talking point but the reality sucks. Every road, culvert, and site has an impact. At least a coal mine just trashes a small area. This farm is huge.

It will be very interesting to see the world in 50 years after all the first world thermal coal mines and power plants are done and replaced with the variety of alternatives we have or will have in 50 years. Will it be a better place from an environmental standpoint? Will the warming have stopped? Will the sea levels have stabilized. Will the regional haze be less. I find it hard to believe that the answer to any of those questions will be yes. Hope to live long enough to see if I'm correct.

 

[RobG]

Far better from a carbon standpoint? As the spider web of roads and sites and visual footprint increases rapidly on the giant farm being built between Miles City and Jordan, on what was generally traditional farm and ranchland. I am not seeing it as better. I think they are a great talking point but the reality sucks. Every road, culvert, and site has an impact. At least a coal mine just trashes a small area. This farm is huge.

From a carbon footprint everything I’ve seen indicates wind or solar is a hands down winner. I don’t know how you can relate carbon to footprint [i.e. acreage], but to that point coal and fracking impacts on the landscape are far greater than the hole in the ground.

 

[PrairieHunter]

From a carbon footprint everything I’ve seen indicates wind or solar is a hands down winner. I don’t know how you can relate carbon to footprint, but to that point coal and fracking impacts on the landscape are far greater than the hole in the ground.

Look for biomass with biochar production to take the lead quickly. Windmills and solar panels don't actually remove carbon from the atmosphere. But utilizing biomass to generate energy and turning that biomass into a stable form of carbon that can be added to the soil are earning carbon credits already and that will continue to grow.

Trees pull carbon out of the atmosphere but normally release it back as they decompose or burn. If you stop that process and turn the wood into a stable form of carbon you can sequester about half the carbon from the process and you still have half the energy to utilize in the form of heat.