Wind Farms v Wildlife

[alan refail]

Cat attacks are one of the most common causes of bat casualties.

http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/cat_attack ... ators.html

Sorry for thread drift, but a quote from bats.org raises a strange picture:

Bats do have other natural predators (such as birds of prey) but cats, particularly, will learn the location of the bat roost and catch bats as they emerge.

Flying cats

[Johnboy]

Hi Glallotments
I managed to observe a very large flock of Wood Pigeons fly through a wind turbine. A large enough flock to to fly through all three gaps twixt the blades without so much as a swerve.
I am beginning to disbelieve articles such as the one you posted.
I rather think this whole anti campaign works entirely on guesstimates and they are about as useful as a chocolate teapot.
Guesstimates throw up some amazingly inaccurate figures and they can appear very alarming but those who really believe those figures are those against wind turbines per se.
To me it seems whatever is suggested and whatever method could be used is objected to by the very same people (in this area at least) who are against Nuclear Power.
The opening paragraph of the article is a very old chestnut about the life of Wind Turbine. At a meeting in this area it was stated that after 12 years they are worn out and then simply abandoned. This is not the case.
It is a reasonable easy job to change the blades and reinstall a replacement generator. Ready for the next twelve years!
At that meeting there were people from Kent and Sussex and Essex and Suffolk and Norfolk and Lincolnshire all making nuisances of themselves
and the meeting was on the Welsh Marches and what is more so democratic was the meeting that these invaders were allowed to vote as part of the residents in this area.
We need power and if you do not want Nuclear Power then you must be prepared to accept other forms of energy production.
I am certain that those who are campaigning against everything will be the first to campaign when power shortages begin because they will and in the not too distant future.
JB.

[glallotments]

Cat attacks are one of the most common causes of bat casualties.

http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/cat_attack ... ators.html

Sorry for thread drift, but a quote from bats.org raises a strange picture:

Bats do have other natural predators (such as birds of prey) but cats, particularly, will learn the location of the bat roost and catch bats as they emerge.

Flying cats

I had the same thoughts -

[robo]

i think any alternative to nuclear power is a must

[Johnboy]

Hi Glallotments,

Because wind farms tend to be built on uplands, where there are good thermals, they kill a disproportionate number of raptors. In Australia, the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle is threatened with global extinction by wind farms. In north America, wind farms are killing tens of thousands of raptors including golden eagles and America’s national bird, the bald eagle. In Spain, the Egyptian vulture is threatened, as too is the Griffon vulture — 400 of which were killed in one year at Navarra alone. Norwegian wind farms kill over ten white-tailed eagles per year and the population of Smøla has been severely impacted by turbines built against the opposition of ornithologists.

My comment regarding the above is; for the ten thousandth time stop exaggerating!
I have my doubts that there are that many birds of the species mentioned to be killed.
The more I read the article the more reluctant I become to accept almost anything that is being portrayed.
JB.

[alan refail]

Johnboy

The word is "scaremongering" or its more honest alternative: "lying". Its the "big number syndrome" I commented on nearly two years ago when the anti-peat furore was at its height. Throw out some "shocking" big numbers and the gullible will believe you unquestionably and rally to your cause.

[glallotments]

Hang on - I wasn't scaremongering or exaggerating - just quoting an article and trying to get a discussion going on what people have said is an inactive forum.

To be honest there is scaremongering and exaggeration going on both sides of the argument with people taking intransigent views. The BBC has been criticised for seeing just one side of the argument, so where do we get the other side from?

The BBC and others quote that scientists say when in fact if you read further only some scientists say and the others directly oppose the statement being made.

And I'm not gullible either - as I said I don't know who to believe as I don't trust many of the people making decisions.

[alan refail]

glallotments

Neither I not Johnboy were targeting you personally, just the article you posted for discussion. My point was that it is so easy for campaigners to throw round unsubstantiated "big numbers" to shock people into supporting their viewpoint. Much the same as the "Frankenfood" nonsense which some imagine passes for debate on the GM issue. When I read statements such as The most recent figures are from the Mammal Society, which estimates that the UK's cats catch up to 275 million prey items a year, of which 55 million are birds my reaction tends to be "Well they would say that wouldn't they! "Estimates" = just thought up an unprovable and undisprovable big number. As it says at the bottom of all my posts: Cred air o bob deg a glywi, a thi a gei rywfaint bach o wir.

[glallotments]

glallotments
My point was that it is so easy for campaigners to throw round unsubstantiated "big numbers" to shock people into supporting their viewpoint. Cred air o bob deg a glywi, a thi a gei rywfaint bach o wir.

Maybe it is sometimes difficult to gather intention from the written word - it's why email can be dangerous

This is coming from both sides though isn't it - it isn't just one side of the argument that is throwing numbers about and using shock tactics. This is why trying to make sense of the issue is difficult.

To go into this further taking into account that wind farms seem to have some significant negative effects, not just to wildlife but to the environment and local people's lives, and if figures are to be believed never operate to a significant capacity and don't contribute significantly to reducing CO2.

If you're interested
http://www.cambrian-mountains.co.uk/documents/windpower-analysis.pdf

Should the UK be planning more and more wind farms? Apparently Germany are hitting problem:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9559656/Germanys-wind-power-chaos-should-be-a-warning-to-the-UK.html

I accept that the Telegraph may be biased but at least they give a different viewpoint to consider to that which we seem to be being bombarded with.

I guess our leaders are fairly biased too with apparently the prime minister's father in law owning wind farms and Nick Cleggs wife working for a wind farm company in Spain.

[PLUMPUDDING]

My partner is an ecologist involved sometimes with doing these surveys and the monitoring following the installation, and as I said more care is taken over the siting of turbines in this country and they rarely find any carcasses near them nor any signs of predators clearing any up.

It does seem to be the very large birds that are more at risk from the reports quoted. You would think the birds could see them as they are so huge and don't exactly whiz round like an electric fan, and if a flock of pigeons can fly through them without harm as Johnboy says they shouldn't pose too much of a threat to a flock? of bats.

We are obviously going to be struggling to provide all the energy needed in a few years if we don't have nuclear power and as many other ways of generating it as possible. I'm surprised they haven't invented a reliable way of storing all the generated power yet as so much is wasted when it is windy and the grid can't take it, and then when there is no wind they are doing nothing. I've read somewhere that the generating companies get paid to turn them off when it is very windy.

Water powered generators are being installed in quite a few areas to provide electricity locally. When you think that all the fast flowing rivers and streams in this hilly area powered the industries in the recent past it seems an obvious source of power now, and at far less cost than the large scale projects.

[glallotments]

I've read somewhere that the generating companies get paid to turn them off when it is very windy.

I think they can be quite dangerous in high winds which is maybe why they are switched off. I remember seeing photos of turbines setting on fire and somewhere the blades had snapped off in really windy weather.

I guess we also have to take into account the fuel used to actually make the turbines. At least water power is a bit more controllable except in droughts. We would have been fine last year!