Wind Farm in Michigan's Thumb. Ever notice how, among the "wind power is too ugly" crowd, other towers seem invisible, even when they're right in with the wind towers?
Some of you have expressed a common concern on the facebook page: that wind power is clean but too destructive to birds (check out intern Liz Bizer's Jan. 21 wind-power post). It was time to look into this. It seemed as though, before looking up numbers, that electricity from coal just has more opportunities to kill birds. It has the mining itself, with explosions, storage of slag, air pollution, and destruction of habitat. The coal must be moved by truck, train, and freighter for very long distances; the mere transportation causes a huge impact. Coal plants take up quite a bit of space and the huge mounds of coal waiting to be burned cover some amount of ground. When the coal is burned, of course, it releases mercury, among other toxins. And the climate change and acid rain adds to the mortality, as do power lines (which will, of course, happen whether the energy comes from coal or wind.)
Ornithologist Laura Erickson's book, 101 Ways to Help Birds, covers the range of ways our electrical use kills birds, and her recommendation # 14 is simply to conserve energy. While the environmental movement has rallied, often very successfully, behind seeking out large polluters and investigating the ways they pollute, then using the information to lobby and protect habitats on large scales, we often ignore our nation's high carbon footprints, including our own. Our best direct response to coal, to fracking, to oil pipelines, is to make sure we're each using as little of the toxic, polluting stuff as possible. Then, as Dr. King said in his Letter from a Birmingham jail, we're "self-purified" for the OUTER fight, after that inner change.
On facebook a few days ago, we posted a few links showing numbers for bird mortality from different sources. Wind does kill birds. Apparently the smaller single-home types, which spin fast, kill more than the large ones shown above. If you're interested in this subject, you can find lots of data by googling "wind turbines and birds". Here's a start, from my own search, and this article from Carbon Lighthouse points out that the National Audubon Society "strongly supports" wind power. From the article:
"If we simply count up the birds based on the amount of electricity generated by each source, it means Wind Farms kill about 7,000 birds per year, Nuclear power plants kill about 327,000 birds per year, and coal and natural gas plants combined kill about 14,500,000 birds per year."
From Audubon's wind statement:
"Audubon strongly supports properly-sited wind power as a clean alternative energy source that reduces the threat of global warming. Wind power facilities should be planned, sited and operated to minimize negative impacts on bird and wildlife populations."
That statement goes on with an inconvenient truth: that scientists say we need to reduce our CO2 emissions 80%. Can that happen aside from Extreme Personal Conservation? I doubt it. Anyway, there's little more satisfying than turning the thermostat down, the lights off, getting the vampires on power strips, KNOWING it's saving something, somewhere, and will continue to do so, keeping that carbon out of production forever, out of the atmosphere for good. Carter was right about sweaters. We don't need a warmed-up space, just warm bodies.
Post and photo by Sierra Club volunteer Rebecca Hammond
0 comments:
Post a Comment