Obama takes on power plant emissions ...

Obama takes on power plant emissions as part of climate plan

There are 1518 comments on the Reuters story from Jun 25, 2013, titled Obama takes on power plant emissions as part of climate plan. In it, Reuters reports that:

President Barack Obama will attempt to kick-start a global climate agenda on Tuesday with proposals including a plan to limit carbon emissions from existing U.S. power plants that is sure to face opposition from the coal industry, many business groups and Republican lawmakers.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Reuters.

“Work hard at work worth doing.”

Level 10

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1150 Aug 24, 2013
The despot has spoken...let's all burn candles, while he and his family fly to Timbuktu on the taxpayers' dime. His "do as I say, don't do as I do" mantra is getting very old, while more people are losing jobs daily because of his asenine initiatives. Part-time work is not enough to support families.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Level 1

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1151 Aug 24, 2013
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to see all bird hazards removed, including cell towers and skyscrapers, but I know it's not practical. I also know that lots of things we do will negatively affect birds and other animals. I accept that. But there are things we can do to minimize the risks. And if we are going to be killing wildlife by our energy creation, I'd rather get more bang for the buck, so to speak. It takes a whole lot more wind turbines to create the same amount of energy that a coal plant or oil refinery can.
Besides, coal and oil don't pretend to be harmless to the environment and wildlife like wind power does. They pay up when they have incidental deaths of migratory birds. Wind companies are given a pass every time. There is a double standard and I don't like it.
And another thing, oil refineries do what they can to minimize the birds risks, such as covering oil reserve pits when they realized it was a problem. Oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico actually help migrants survive, by offering them a place to land and rest if the birds get exhausted during their Trans-Gulf flight.
Do you see wind companies doing anything to minimize the risk to birds? No. Do they lower turbines on nights of heavy bird migration? No. Okay, maybe they can't lower them easily, but do they shut the lights off when the birds are near? No. They can capture the birds on radar and know when and where they are and the approximate time they'll approach the wind farm, so why not?
Instead of minimizing the risk, they are building bigger and deadlier turbines and they are placing them along migration routes and places of high bird activity!
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/contamina...
"Yes, your agenda is pretty clear, whether it's political or not."
What exactly is my "agenda" that you think is so clear?
And removing all wind turbines or shutting them down at night isn't realistic either.

MN actually did a study before placing their turbines which found the majority of birds naturally fly below or above the turbine blades, which is why their death rate is so low.

The industry has indeed taken steps to minimize the risk to birds; you just dismiss it because it doesn't go far enough to meet your unrealistic demands.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Level 1

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1152 Aug 24, 2013
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
According to this, they will pile up quicker than you think if they go ahead with all the new wind projects that the industry wants. The preferred site: Bird migration paths!
https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2012/10/11/wi...
Just more projections of what MAY happen from anti-wind energy groups.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Level 1

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1153 Aug 24, 2013
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
They could have two birds killed in seven months and then have 10,000 birds killed in one evening. Their so-called "study" means nothing. Birds have wings!
"Get proof 10,000 birds are killed by one wind turbine in one night, and THEN you might have a point."
BTW, I didn't say it was a "turbine" that killed the 10,000 birds. I said it was a tower. Lighted turbines are no more safe than lighted cell towers. Bird mortality, sometimes in very large numbers, are a well known occurrence at all tall structures.
Right, so a study which shows low kill levels "means nothing", but a "study" which supposed documented a large kill is supposed to mean something?

Of course you dismiss out of hand the study which doesn't agree with your sky-is-falling rhetoric.

Yes wind turbines kill some birds; so does everything else. Unless you can prove more are killed by wind turbines than are killed from fossil fuel use, then I'll continue to support wind power projects.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Level 1

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1154 Aug 24, 2013
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is some new math for you. New numbers just released a few weeks ago.
A newly published peer-reviewed study reports U.S. wind turbines kill 1.4 million birds and bats every year, even while producing just 3 percent of U.S. electricity. The numbers in the study from Wildlife Society Bulletin reveal President Obama’s global warming plan will kill hundreds of millions of birds and bats while doing little if anything to reduce global temperatures.
Even if no new wind turbines are ever built, turbine blades will slice 14 million birds and bats to death in midflight during the next decade. However, global warming alarmists say we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 50 or even 80 percent. President Obama’s recently announced assault on climate change appears likely to seek such numbers. Given that most global warming alarmists also vigorously oppose hydropower, natural gas power, and nuclear power, reducing emissions by 50 to 80 percent would require increasing the number of wind turbines roughly 25-fold. That means killing 350 million birds and bats in the United States every decade.
Actually, the number of bird and bat deaths would likely be much higher than that. Wind turbines produce power on an intermittent and unpredictable basis, meaning conventional power plants must remain cycling constantly, to fill minute-by-minute fluctuations in wind power. That means electricity produced by wind turbines is far from carbon-neutral.
Also, wind power companies have already cherry-picked the best locations to place turbines. As wind power companies are forced to build their industrial wind farms on less productive sites, each new wind turbine and wind farm will produce less electricity than its predecessors. Accordingly, producing 25 times as much wind power means building a heck of a lot more than 25 times more wind turbines.
Looking at the direct consequences of all these new wind turbines, it is hard to visualize so many bird and bat deaths. After all, 350 million is a huge number. And that is not a one-time number. That is the number of birds and bats that wind turbines would kill every decade.
How would bird and bat populations be able to sustain themselves under such an onslaught? The answer is, most bird and bat populations likely couldn’t, and President Obama’s climate plan would initiate an open-ended avian holocaust the likes of which we have never before seen.
Bald eagles, California condors, and whooping cranes would be among the first to go. But it wouldn’t be just endangered and threatened species that would fail to sustain their numbers. Pretty much every kind of bird you can think of would race precipitously toward unsustainability, with many facing a very real threat of extinction.
<continued>
All speculation......

“Headed toward the cliff”

Level 1

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1155 Aug 24, 2013
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<continued>
Decimated Bat Populations
Bat populations would also be decimated. Bats are already in rapid decline due to white-nose syndrome, a cold-loving fungus that is decimating bat populations in the U.S. Northeast and is spreading westward across the country. Bat populations in the Northeast have declined by approximately 80 percent, and the 888,000 bat kills resulting from wind turbines each year aren’t helping the cause. Ramp up the number of wind turbines and you ramp up the pressure on declining bat populations.
Far-Reaching Negative Consequences
Killing off so many birds and bats every year would have profound negative consequences beyond the mere deaths of birds and bats. Birds and bats are vital in keeping insect populations in check. Kill off as many birds and bats as President Obama desires, and mosquito-borne diseases will assault Americans with striking ferocity. Crops will suffer under a growing onslaught of insect attack. Farmers will have to employ more and stronger pesticides to secure our food production.
With wind turbines killing off so many birds of prey, infestations of rats and other vermin will also become more frequent and severe.
In addition, wind turbines require vast amounts of land to produce even a small amount of electricity. Even under optimum conditions, it takes approximately 400 square miles of land to produce as much electricity as a conventional power plant. Ramp up wind power production to replace conventional power plants and watch America’s remaining open spaces turn into whirring killing fields for birds and bats.
Little Justification for Turbines
If global warming actually threatened to destroy the planet, perhaps we would have to sacrifice so many birds and bats for the cause. But the reality is just the opposite. United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) lead author Hans von Storch conceded in July that computer models predicting significant future global warming cannot replicate recent temperatures and likely need to be adjusted downward to predict less warming. Hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, wildfires, etc., are all in long-term downward trends as our planet modestly warms in its recovery from the recent Little Ice Age.
Finally, sacrificing hundreds of millions of American birds and bats would do nothing to moderate global temperatures. Even if the United States immediately cut emissions by 80 percent, new growth in Chinese emissions would render our reductions useless in less than a decade.
President Obama, you keep your global warming plan, and we’ll keep our wildlife and our undeveloped lands.
More speculation.......

Level 8

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#1156 Aug 24, 2013
I read somewhere that authorities at all commercial airports around the world have implemented programs to eradicate birds to prevent bird strikes.

I don't know why the birds are striking at airports. Are they angry because airplanes are taking their jobs?

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1157 Aug 24, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>
Sep 8, 2009
Raptor in Michigan
I stand by birds and bats vs. wind power. I say the living things take precedence.
Short term memory loss or are you factually incorrect again?
I still stand by that statement. Living things ARE more important. But show me where I said wind turbines should be "banned."
PHD

North Richland Hills, TX

#1158 Aug 24, 2013
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
I still stand by that statement. Living things ARE more important. But show me where I said wind turbines should be "banned."
You have issues with the understanding of the English language. Read your statement. You tell all daily that you are smarter than a fifth grader but you fall short.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1159 Aug 24, 2013
Greenhouse warming is caused by infrared radiation, not man. Humans evolved to be blind to IR radiation, our IR manipulation is insignificant.

IR isn't red. You can see red.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1160 Aug 24, 2013
no matter wrote:
The barry is killing power plants here, but the UK has increased coal use 25% in the last 2 years and Asia forcast a huge increase of coal use for the next 2 decades. As well as China, Germany...I guess we can sell our coal to them.
Here's a stunning shot of a wind farm in your neck of the woods. What do you think of the demolition of an entire ridge of mountains so they can erect these huge bird-killing devices and then try to hush it up when they have a massive slaughter during a single night of bird migration? http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/m...

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1161 Aug 24, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>There you go again making another ASSumption of your----self. How do you know what I watch. If you spend some time in a third world country it will change your life and perspective living without out power.Sorry no such thing as a free lunch.
I believe I'd do fine without power. A little inconvenient not being able to educate you, but I'd get over it.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1162 Aug 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And removing all wind turbines or shutting them down at night isn't realistic either.
MN actually did a study before placing their turbines which found the majority of birds naturally fly below or above the turbine blades, which is why their death rate is so low.
The industry has indeed taken steps to minimize the risk to birds; you just dismiss it because it doesn't go far enough to meet your unrealistic demands.
That's true. It doesn't go far enough, if it was even studied in the first place. I have seen no proof of that.

For one thing, birds have wings. There is no set "height" at which birds fly. Swans have been reported by pilots at 29,500 feet. Mallards at 21,000 feet. Swifts at 6,600 feet. Black-bellied Plovers no higher than 2,600 feet. Most warblers (of which 57 warbler species nest and breed here in North America) usually stay below 1,600 feet.

Nocturnal songbird migration can vary in height depending on weather, cloud cover, wind direction/speed, species, etc. A strong headwind means they will fly lower to the ground.

Radar observations show birds shift altitudes to try to find the best height with the greatest amount of wind in their favor.

(Not surprisingly, this is about wind turbine height.)

These numbers taken from The Atlas of Bird Migration (Smithsonian Institution). Just one of many in my bird library.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#1163 Aug 24, 2013
Wind generation:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/24/2...

Saw megatons of them driving through northern Illinois 2 weeks ago. Truly awesome.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1164 Aug 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Right, so a study which shows low kill levels "means nothing", but a "study" which supposed documented a large kill is supposed to mean something?
Of course you dismiss out of hand the study which doesn't agree with your sky-is-falling rhetoric.
Yes wind turbines kill some birds; so does everything else. Unless you can prove more are killed by wind turbines than are killed from fossil fuel use, then I'll continue to support wind power projects.
The large kill that was documented was no "study." It was a real life occurrence! It happens at tall structures more than what you are aware! And you global warming wackos want it to keep happening.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1165 Aug 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Right, so a study which shows low kill levels "means nothing", but a "study" which supposed documented a large kill is supposed to mean something?
Of course you dismiss out of hand the study which doesn't agree with your sky-is-falling rhetoric.
Yes wind turbines kill some birds; so does everything else. Unless you can prove more are killed by wind turbines than are killed from fossil fuel use, then I'll continue to support wind power projects.
Google it yourself. Count how many birds have died by fossil fuel use. Then add up the deaths at cell towers, tv and radio towers, sky scrapers and wind turbines.

Oh never mind. You can't do that because the government won't release the turbine kill numbers. Just ask the American Bird Conservancy. They've file d a lawsuit to get those numbers under the Freedom of Information Act.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1166 Aug 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
More speculation.......
Global warming- speculation
Climate change- speculation
caused by man- speculation

Bird and bat deaths at tall structures- documented fact!

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1167 Aug 24, 2013
-Dont Panic- wrote:
I read somewhere that authorities at all commercial airports around the world have implemented programs to eradicate birds to prevent bird strikes.
I don't know why the birds are striking at airports. Are they angry because airplanes are taking their jobs?
Apparently only humans are allowed to inhabit this planet. Nothing is more important than our own self-centered wants and conveniences.

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1168 Aug 24, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>You have issues with the understanding of the English language. Read your statement. You tell all daily that you are smarter than a fifth grader but you fall short.
My height is irrelevant!

“Conserve Wildlife Habitat”

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

SE Michigan

#1169 Aug 24, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
Wind generation:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/24/2...
Saw megatons of them driving through northern Illinois 2 weeks ago. Truly awesome.
The word "progress" in human terms means "destruction."
MILLIONS of birds are being killed at wind turbines. Even more will be slaughtered in the future as the industry booms.

If you think THIS is truly awesome, you are effed in the head!!!
Nothing more I can say!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Immigration Reform Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Rose's Pub (Mar '10) 2 min jimmy krack korn 147,225
News Dear Trump Voters: The 1950's Aren't Coming Back 3 min george 1,549
News Rural America Braces for Labor Shortages After ... 33 min Katrina 86
Has Donald Trump Already Failed Us? (Nov '16) 38 min Katrina 9,707
News Arpaio pardon would refute key theme in immigra... 39 min Trump_Is_Fake 44
News Trump returns to Arizona - and a chaotic politi... 2 hr Red Crosse 12
News Why Hire More Border Patrol When Illegal Immigr... 4 hr Bomb Mexico 91
More from around the web