Jump to content

Rare bird last seen in Britain 22 years ago killed by wind turbine

Recommended Posts



Rare bird last seen in Britain 22 years ago killed by wind turbine in front of crowd of twitchers who turned up to catch a glimpse

There had been only eight recorded sightings of the white-throated needletail in the UK since 1846. So when one popped up again on British shores this week, twitchers were understandably excited.

A group of 40 enthusiasts dashed to the Hebrides to catch a glimpse of the brown, black and blue bird, which breeds in Asia and winters in Australasia.

But instead of being treated to a wildlife spectacle they were left with a horror show when it flew into a wind turbine and was killed.

And I bet that most of those people voted for the socialists who promoted those wind turbines.



MISSOULA — Montana bird advocates have high hopes for President Obama’s climate change policy announcement on Tuesday, because they’ve already documented climate-related threats to several species.

“Climate impacts are the No. 1 long-term threat for the health of birds in the foreseeable future,” Montana Audubon Society executive director Steve Hoffman said during a teleconference on Monday. “If we don’t deal with this climate issue, most of our birds are going to be in a lot of trouble.”

See what I mean?

Never mind that the whole AGWthesis is garbage ...




An estimated 573,000 birds were killed last year in the U.S. by wind turbines, the AP reported, citing a study published in March in the journal Wildlife Society Bulletin. About 83,000 of those were estimated to have been raptors.

From the AP article:


Each death is federal crime, a charge that the Obama administration has used to prosecute oil companies when birds drown in their waste pits, and power companies when birds are electrocuted by their power lines. No wind energy company has been prosecuted, even those that repeatedly flout the law.

Where is the outcry from these bird "advocates"?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never jeard of other companies being sue over bird or animal deaths.




http://blogs.kqed.org/science/2013/05/21/animal-advocates-sue-caltrans-over-highway-101-bird-deaths/ "Animal Advocates Sue Caltrans Over Highway 101 Bird Deaths"


http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20130520/ARTICLES/130529974 "Wildlife advocates file suit over bird deaths at Petaluma River bridge project"


And even better ...


http://plainsdaily.com/entry/oil-companies-arraigned-in-federal-court-for-28-bird-deaths-in-nd/ "Oil Companies Arraigned in Federal Court for 28 Bird Deaths in ND"


http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=56835 "The Obama Administration’s hostility to oil and gas exploration is well known, but last week it took an especially fowl turn. The U.S. Attorney for North Dakota hauled seven oil and natural gas companies into federal court for killing 28 migratory birds that were found dead near oil waste lagoons."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a rare bird. It's rare to see it in England. There are plenty of them elsewhere in the world.

Not rare in England anymore.



So, just what were the reasons the bird became so endangered in the first place?

Black bird.





btw Plutocracy sucked so I support Goofycracy instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the blackbirds killing each other? :huh:


Black on black crime is rampant. That's also the reason they buried this crime for 22 years. Media racism.

It's like Jimmy Hoffa as far as the mystery. Why did it take 22 years to find this bird? No one looked for him.

Some of the NHB folks will back me on this.



Piss poor photoshop



Those are actually propellors mounted on an iceberg nearing LA. See all the dead flying fish?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


What kind of stipend do you get from the oil companies. To be this dead set against a non fossil fuel, you have to have some alterior motive.

You really really like dirty fuels don't you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be this dead set against a non fossil fuel, you have to have some alterior motive. You really really like dirty fuels don't you.


No, I just don't see the economics of wind and solar, es.


If the economics don't work, it isn't sustainable.


No matter how much you wish it were.


And if you think that wind power (and solar) have no environmental impacts, think again.


Consider wind ...


First of all, producing power with wind uses land. Lot's of it. At least 5 acres per generator.


In fact, some opponents of the idea, say it takes about 50 acres of land per megawatt (http://www.wind-watch.org/faq-size.php ). So it looks like it takes about 15,000 to 20,000 acres (or more) to install the same generation capacity as a conventional power plant occupying about 150 acres. And all that land is often in very fragile or pristine natural environments. And here I thought you liberals were uber-concerned about nature? But I guess not.


Then there is the matter of birds. As I already pointed out.


Wind power also creates visual pollution.


Think that's not a problem?


Then why do the elite liberals on Cape Cod, Martha Vineyard and Nantucket fight wind turbines?


And guess who led that effort? None other than that liberal icon, Ted Kennedy.


And speaking of visual pollution …




How'd you like to live there?


But that's far from all the environmental damage that Wind Power creates.


Relying on wind generation will require more use of storage devices … i.e., batteries.


Batteries create lots of harmful residues, in both their building and disposal … so much harm that in some states you are now required by law to take your used batteries to hazardous waste collection centers rather than just throwing them in the everyday trash receptacle.


Even the turbines themselves produce lots of harmful residues during their construction. Here's an article, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html , describing the damage that making magnets for Britain's wind turbines has caused in China. You see, those magnets require the processing of rare earths, such as neodymium. From that source:


On the outskirts of one of China’s most polluted cities, an old farmer stares despairingly out across an immense lake of bubbling toxic waste covered in black dust. He remembers it as fields of wheat and corn.


… snip …


Live has uncovered the distinctly dirty truth about the process used to extract neodymium: it has an appalling environmental impact that raises serious questions over the credibility of so-called green technology.


The reality is that, as Britain flaunts its environmental credentials by speckling its coastlines and unspoiled moors and mountains with thousands of wind turbines, it is contributing to a vast man-made lake of poison in northern China. This is the deadly and sinister side of the massively profitable rare-earths industry that the ‘green’ companies profiting from the demand for wind turbines would prefer you knew nothing about.


Hidden out of sight behind smoke-shrouded factory complexes in the city of Baotou, and patrolled by platoons of security guards, lies a five-mile wide ‘tailing’ lake. It has killed farmland for miles around, made thousands of people ill and put one of China’s key waterways in jeopardy.


This vast, hissing cauldron of chemicals is the dumping ground for seven million tons a year of mined rare earth after it has been doused in acid and chemicals and processed through red-hot furnaces to extract its components.


Rusting pipelines meander for miles from factories processing rare earths in Baotou out to the man-made lake where, mixed with water, the foul-smelling radioactive waste from this industrial process is pumped day after day. No signposts and no paved roads lead here, and as we approach security guards shoo us away and tail us. When we finally break through the cordon and climb sand dunes to reach its brim, an apocalyptic sight greets us: a giant, secret toxic dump, made bigger by every wind turbine we build.


So you go on believing that wind power "leaves no residue".


You might as well believe in fairies.


And guess where America is buying the turbines touted under Obama's failed *green* *stimulus* program? Why China, of course:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40565987/ns/business-oil_and_energy/ .


Then there are clean up costs …




Wind farm cleanup cost at issue


… snip…


there's no set standard for setting aside funds to decommission wind turbines and related facilities.


"That's probably one of the largest areas of concern I hear as a policymaker," said Sen. Jim Anderson, R-Glenrock.


And who is going to eventually pay for the cleanup of that toxic lake and the land around it in China? Hmmmmmmm? Americans, the largest consumer of Chinese goods, of course. Who is going to pay for disposal of the batteries needed to make reliance on wind and solar feasible? The US consumer and taxpayer, of course. But did those costs get included in your estimate of the cost of wind power? I suspect the answer is unequivocally no.


As this article, http://www.redstate.com/bobsordahl/2011/02/13/clean-wind-powers-dirty-little-secret-china/ , concludes:



In the next twenty to fifty years we may see new discoveries and advancements in truly clean energy production. With a little luck, they may actually be efficient and profitable. But as of today, wind power in the United States or Great Britain is not clean energy. As long as it contributes to ill health and environmental damage in another part of the world, it is the dirtiest and most costly of energy sources.


So I object to Obama and the left's wind boondoggles for all the above reasons.


And because the technology isn't sufficiently advanced to deploy full scale in an economical fashion. The wind farm industry is heavily subsidized.


A study was just released saying that in the UK it's subsidized to the equivalent of £100,000 per job … a huge embarassment for UK leaders.


I bet it's subsidized just as much in the US if not more.


Now that's not to say there aren't situations where wind makes sense, but for Obama to destroy the oil and coal industries, refuse to build nuclear plants, and not even look into LENR, while promising wind and solar as the answer to all our prayers right now, is UTTERLY FOOLISH.


The urgency to throw out fossil fuels just isn't there yet. And remember that saying … *haste makes waste*. Well, the haste of the leftist environmental movement to toss out proven technologies and substitute unproven ones will in the end make much more waste than a slow deliberate transition via a free market economy, which history has proven over and over is MUCH better at allocating scarce resources than ANY government or socialist has ever been.


And by the time you leftists get around to having efficient, cost effective, clean solar and wind technology, the competing energy sources will have improved as well.


Here's a small example of what's now happening ...





Making Gasoline from Bacteria

A biotech startup wants to coax fuels from engineered microbes.





The nation’s energy diet is prompting a flurry of novel reactor designs - all bidding to jumpstart a moribund industry.







The truth is that you leftists are destroying America's economy with your AGW LIES for no other reason than to increase your political power and enrich yourselves.


How's that for "alterior (sic) motives", es? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hundreds of thousands of species of animals extinct since oil first produced in 1859.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hundreds of thousands of species of animals extinct since oil first produced in 1859.




So what?


They disappear daily but then we've been wrong lots of times. They aren't all big as elephants. Some living ants and fleas are bound to be listed that moved to a lower taxed state or something. We just think they're all dead.






Windmills suck. Overpriced, loud, critter killers. On top of that, worst of all, PROGS like them! Damning evidence right there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


No, I just don't see the economics of wind and solar, es.


If the economics don't work, it isn't sustainable.




The truth is that you leftists are destroying America's economy with your AGW LIES for no other reason than to increase your political power and enrich yourselves.


How's that for "alterior (sic) motives", es? :P


His ulterior motives rest deep within his belief system. He has shown himself to be a hypocrite (one of NHB's best) over and over.

To him and a couple others, it is MORE IMPORTANT where the facts come from than that they are facts at all.


Pathetic stupidity.

Just the sheer ability to admit you're wrong once in a while (as human beings are) would be a baby step toward credibility. He doesn't need that credibility to continue his quest as Lord of the Idiots.





George Costanza was much better at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...