wind turbine causing the death of birds of prey. Eagles (Golden Eagles and the Bald Eagle)

* Posted by Danny Hunt on February 10, 2009 at 7:11am in Alternative Energy

I have some information regarding a serious issue, about the wind turbine projects. The wind turbines are causing a serious number of birds of prey deaths, In California alone it has caused thousands of Golden Eagle deaths. The new project there will do the same to the Bald Eagle. The fact that it will be causing the deaths of Bald Eagles, the US national emblem, and possibly its extinction should help you recognize a warning sign and set off some alarm bells.
The wind turbine industry has been trying to cover up this fact and information. Some of this information is from USA Today, ABC News, and the BBC so I’m not making this stuff up.
You can find more information and ideas on this website.

Reply by Steve Willmorth on February 10, 2009 at 1:01pm

Before I clicked onto your link, Danny, I knew it was gonna be about Altamont.

The Altamont Project was started over 20 years ago, before anybody knew about the possibility of bird kills. Altamont was situated in what was later defined as a bird migration route. Nobody knew the scope of what that meant in 1980. It is now known that those little bitty turbines on the short towers indeed caused a lot of bird mortality by turning multiple blades about ten times as fast as the new generation of turbines that sit a hundred or so feet higher to get above the bird flyways. All in all, I wish they would tear all those early turbines down before their planned de-comissioning date and replace them with new, taller, slower turbines and tailor their operation to those periods that birds don't migrate through there.

If there is a single good thing about Altamont, it is that lessons were learned in regard to windfarm siting. look at what is involved in todays windfarm siting here.

But, rest assured, whenever there is an article about bird kills, it is in regards to a windfarm built two decades ago.

Also,Take a look at the Cape Wind website and click on the siting link to see what exactly is the vision impact of it.


Reply by Danny Hunt on February 10, 2009 at 2:33pm

Thanks for the info Steve
The articles I've seen are from different places in the world like Smola Norway (white feathered Eagles) and Australia. What I do not like is that there have been efforts to conceal this information and efforts to conceal the number of eagle deaths. The articles are recently dated and talk about concerns for new similar projects.

Has there been any research or studies about these newer, slower, and higher turbines?
What I do know about birds of prey is that one hundred feet does not change anything given the fact that they can fly at very high distances. My guess is that one single slow (how slow) but hard blow is enough to do some serious damage and can probably break a wing in mid flight too.

And if there is no research or studies to show and prove otherwise, once these wind farms are built, if it's discovered that they are killing birds of prey, will they remain there for the next thirty years, like the ones chopping up the golden eagles?
One of the articles talks about a new project in the bald eagles habitat.

Reply by RWC1972 on February 10, 2009 at 2:43pm

I think you first have to realize that nothing is or will ever be perfect. Bird strikes are going to occur no matter what you do.

The enviornmental engineers do their due dilligence to ensure that the wind farms provide the maximum benefit for the least amount of damage. There is always a trade-off.



Reply by Danny Hunt on February 10, 2009 at 3:28pm

So what is this trade-off?
Is it pushing some of the Eagle species to extinction?
From one of the articles I've read there are plans on building wind farms in the Bald Eagles habitat. If what is now being said is that there will be birds of prey deaths, but we do not know how many, and that it's a trade-off, does this mean that these "newer" wind turbines kill birds of prey just like the older ones do? Why is this "trade-off" not exposed to the public?

This may sound negative but I do have an idea of how big business special interest groups think. They usually know what the impact of their installations are going to be, even though they do not release any official studies, before they proceed with installations. In some cases they later say "we did not know" (wind farms) or there's no proof (tobacco corporations). To push the negativity or big business way of thinking, they may even figure once it's built and installed, it's installed, we'll take the "heat" for a max of 10 years, once the Eagles are gone, problem solved.

I think this is a very serious issue, it could cause or lead to the extinction of the some eagles including the US nation emblem, the Bald Eagle. If this to you is a "trade-off" you are entitled to your opinion, just like I am, but personally I think you got your trade-offs in the wrong priority.



Reply by Steve Willmorth on February 10, 2009 at 4:30pm

Danny,
I've tried to be nice and answer some of your concerns, but I see you have your agenda. I have found that no amount of common sense can get in the way when some folks get all emotional.

This may sound negative but I do have an idea of how big business special interest groups think. They usually know what the impact of their installations are going to be, even though they do not release any official studies, before they proceed with installations. In some cases they later say "we did not know" (wind farms) or there's no proof (tobacco corporations). To push the negativity or big business way of thinking, they may even figure once it's built and installed, it's installed, we'll take the "heat" for a max of 10 years, once the Eagles are gone, problem solved.

Almost every incidence of eagle kills in the west is linked to Altamont, as I have explained earlier. Eagles are "opportunistic feeders". That means they hang around where the easy food supply is, and that is below the height of modern turbines. They prefer to eat fish, which live pretty close to ground level.

Last week, I was in Idaho, within a couple miles of the Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Center. it is foggy there this time of year, and those raptors, even though they can fly very high, were sitting on every other fencepost, watching for food.

Yes, I know my opinions are unscientific and anecdotal. But, so is your opinion of how "big business special interest groups work".

Wind farms are located as the result of scoping hearings prior to permitting. Watch for one near you, then go and see how many fellow hand wringing "environmentalists" attend.



Reply by Danny Hunt on February 10, 2009 at 8:28pm

Steve,
The eagle and birds of prey deaths are happening world wide such as the UK, Norway, Australia, and California as already stated. Why did the wind turbine advocates not know the impact this would have on the birds of prey and eagle populations? What research or studies do the wind turbine advocates have to show that these "newer" turbines will not have the same effect and continued effect on the birds of prey and eagle populations?

I think your conclusions based on your observations of the eagles is also false. Just because you see eagles in a tree, sitting on a fence, hopping around on the ground, or skimming the water to catch a fish does not mean they actually only stay at these heights or stay only at these heights when flying around.

What I do understand from other replies and other posts is that these newer turbines also kill eagles and birds of prey.



Reply by Steve Willmorth on February 11, 2009 at 4:28pm

As I said about 5 times, California, specifically Altamont, is a place where the most bird kills are recorded.

Whether there are other kills in norway, Australia, or on the moon, thats outside my realm. What I do know is what is being done in the US.

I keep saying that there are few raptor kills outside of California, and I post links to back it up.



Reply by Danny Hunt on February 11, 2009 at 5:59pm

You did not address the issue of how these "newer" wind turbines prevent eagle deaths or any research to back that claim up. As already stated, I disagree with your observations.

I do not know why you want to dismiss the eagle deaths world wide and the fact is these towers are probably different from those in California too.

You did not address the issue of why the wind turbine industry did not predict the impact the wind turbines would have on the eagle and birds of prey population.

As for cover up, I believe you are stating observations with wrong conclusions and have no research or studies to back up the information you are providing, but it is miss leading.

Another strange fact is that when you search for wind turbine eagle deaths, most of the results you get are about a wind turbine called the "Eagle Wind Turbine". Given the fact that wind turbines world wide, and in California, are killing eagles, do you have any explanation as to why someone would name a wind turbine this way?
How about showing me a few links substantiating your claims about significant raptor kills (<.005%of total bird kill) in the US outside of CA? I would like to add it to my database. And, be sure to link to any substantiated claim that "Big business wind special interest" is covering up any bird kills.



Reply by Danny Hunt on February 12, 2009 at 12:07pm

I do not know what language they are speaking, it does not sound English, but this is apparently a Bald Eagle chasing an RC plane.

http://www.madskies.com/9/eagles-fly/

There are other pictures of eagles flying at considerable heights.



Reply by RWC1972 on February 10, 2009 at 3:53pm

Is it pushing some of the Eagle species to extinction?
No proof either way AFAIK

From one of the articles I've read there are plans on building wind farms in the Bald Eagles habitat. If what is now being said is that there will be birds of prey deaths, but we do not know how many, and that it's a trade-off, does this mean that these "newer" wind turbines kill birds of prey just like the older ones do?
Do you know what "due dilligence" means? It means that those with the education and expertise will minimize risks while maximuzing returns. And no, the newer turbines do not kill as many birds as the older ones did/do

Why is this "trade-off" not exposed to the public?
Because the public is pretty dumb and would only fixate upon killed birds versus any potential benefit for our own species. Do you see what I did there?



Reply by Danny Hunt on February 10, 2009 at 4:19pm

You’ll have to forgive my lack of education. Personally I don’t think that the public is dumb, it’s just that they are often miss lead or not provided all the facts. Sometimes by those who would call themselves educated and the way they provide the information or write the information. As for our species, why not provide all the facts to our species so that our species can decide what is or are the best energy alternatives.

What I do understand is that it was said they do not kill birds of prey and now it’s that do.

As for no proof, that fits into the big business or special interest group way of thinking I described previously. “we did not know” “there’s no proof”…..for example if the Golden Eagle do go extinct, there’s really no proof it was the thousands of deaths caused by the wind farms.

“Do you see what I did there?” …you’ll have to elaborate on what you mean.




Reply by Oscar 1 day ago

Well if we shut down all the wind mills and stop the building of new wind farms we always have the option to stick with good old oil. Then you can worry about a different form of wildlife such as the after effects of oil spills. So I doubt you will ever be happy.



Reply by Danny Hunt 1 day ago

There are other alternative energy sources besides wind farms. Unfortunately big business, especially in the US, always seem to push us, manipulate us, towards solutions that can not replace or threaten oil and can also have disastrous consequences.

One of them being Ethanol. Ethanol is very costly to produce, created the food shortage, and also contributed to the economic crisis by causing a drastic rise in food cost for the middle class.

The other in my opinion is wind farms. Wind farms that cover up the land scape (scenic views) and also kill birds of prey such as eagles. The facts are hidden and covered up from the general public. Why, because it's not the right decision. There's also the fact that it takes years for them to become profitable and by the time the "newer" ones do, if ever, they maybe obsolete altogether.

The alternative fuels we all seem to agree on are natural gas. I think promoting the use of natural gas and putting the 18 wheelers on it is an excellent idea.

You may not have heard about this one, fusion power. It's not science fiction and it's very real. There's a power plant that's been built in France and testing this solution. A bigger and new power plant was scheduled to be built. This technology has to potential to replace all others including oil. Perhaps this is one reason you may not have heard much about it.

Another one that I'm sure we probably do not agree on is clean coal. (I do not want this to turn into a clean coal thread). Clean coal also has the potential of replacing oil and could eliminate CO2 emissions from cars and trucks altogether. The potential it has of replacing oil altogether probably explains with it's research was cut while Ethanol was drastically increased and subsidized. The Ethanol legislation or solution also requires the continued use of...oil.

Another is solar power. There have been great advances in solar panel technologies. They are much more efficient and light weight then people remember them or imagine. They have invented a paint that can be used to cover panels. These can be placed on the sides of buildings and windows. With energy efficient technologies implemented for buildings like light bulbs that use up to 75% less energy, timers to close most light use, and then you add solar panel technologies, these things really add up, and they add up to easy and long term solutions.

Then there is also geothermal which is already in use for some newer homes. Why has this not been promoted? Geothermal can have a serious impact on heating and air conditioning costs. Geothermal also has other possibilities but it's simple designs are already being used and implemented as already stated.

And there are still more possibilities. Like I've already said, if we do not listen to big business or oil advocates, and they are powerful, we are usually guided towards solutions that are not threatening to oil, do not make economic sense, and can have even worst impacts then oil. Personally I think the use of Ethanol and wind farms are 2 of those solutions that we have been guided towards that are not the solutions we need.



Reply by Danny Hunt 1 day ago

Timers to close most light use at night. Why do we need timers? Where is the electricity going to go if no one is using it at night?

With more cars using battery powered engines, as one solution, they will will need recharging during the night. The timers will reduce the wasted use and cost for commercial building lighting.