CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
Profile
Posts: 13928
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 8:45 am
 


Chumley wrote:
I can see where the thought of it would disturb you Tattoedgirl, but on the other side of the coin, if you have spent a significant amount of time working and living in the great outdoors, it can lose its appeal for some. What you might consider a break from your hectic life is someone elses hectic life. After awhile a duck is a duck, and the thought of sitting on a couch by a fire in a Starbucks can beat the hell out of that squirrel that just won't shut up and let you get some sleep.


Never said it disturbs me...just interested me. I just have always found people that could care less about the distruction of nature or treatment of it, to be not the most caring in society...to be polite about it. I have and do spend a significant amount of time outdoors, actually cant get enough of it. Its good for the soul. Good for you, if Starbucks relaxes you...I would rather listen to a squirrel then the 10 minute spewing of how you want your hot tall skinny upside down with whip caramel macchiato... :wink:

BTW...you spelled my name wrong...no E... :lol:


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 64578
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:04 am
 


Blue_Nose wrote:
mtbr wrote:
We better start knocking down all towers, buildings etc....and stop driving.


The birds are just not safe anymore.


Nobody even remotely suggested that, so that's kind of a dumb comment.


That's not entirely true. Every building of any significant height in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley has to present as part of their Environmental Impact Report (EIR) the estimates on migratory bird mortality. Most buildings get modified to accomadate birds (usually they have to have exterior lights on at night - the Wells Fargo Tower in Sacramento has spotlights on it at night for bird mitigation) and a few structures have actually been prohibited because of estimated bird mortality.

Were a public poll presented to ask if people supported knocking down buildings to save birds I have no doubt more than a few organizations would publicly support the idea.





PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:32 am
 


TattoodGirl wrote:
when something of this nature happens, I always find it interesting to read the negative comments of others. What is shows me is a person regards for all creatures and nature in general. It also shows me a persons true inner self and how they respect the smallest of creatures, which generally reflects how a person treats and responds to the vulnerable in society. This is news to those of us, who enjoy being out in nature and sitting quietly and peacefully, if only for a moment to get away from our hectic lives.


maybe I need to get out more often...I'll shoot for 7000km of MTB and road cycling. up from last years 6000 :D Take another 6 or 7 hundred photos as well.


Offline
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 San Jose Sharks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 876
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:37 am
 


with oil prices sky high no reason they cantspend money on environment.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14063
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:43 am
 


BartSimpson wrote:
That's not entirely true. Every building of any significant height in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley has to present as part of their Environmental Impact Report (EIR) the estimates on migratory bird mortality. Most buildings get modified to accomadate birds (usually they have to have exterior lights on at night - the Wells Fargo Tower in Sacramento has spotlights on it at night for bird mitigation) and a few structures have actually been prohibited because of estimated bird mortality.

Were a public poll presented to ask if people supported knocking down buildings to save birds I have no doubt more than a few organizations would publicly support the idea.
I was obviously speaking in the context of this conversation, but nevertheless, the results of your imaginary poll were simply fascinating, and I had no idea that installing exterior lights were akin to knocking buildings down!


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
Profile
Posts: 3448
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 10:05 am
 


TattoodGirl wrote:
Chumley wrote:
I can see where the thought of it would disturb you Tattoedgirl, but on the other side of the coin, if you have spent a significant amount of time working and living in the great outdoors, it can lose its appeal for some. What you might consider a break from your hectic life is someone elses hectic life. After awhile a duck is a duck, and the thought of sitting on a couch by a fire in a Starbucks can beat the hell out of that squirrel that just won't shut up and let you get some sleep.


Never said it disturbs me...just interested me. I just have always found people that could care less about the distruction of nature or treatment of it, to be not the most caring in society...to be polite about it. I have and do spend a significant amount of time outdoors, actually cant get enough of it. Its good for the soul. Good for you, if Starbucks relaxes you...I would rather listen to a squirrel then the 10 minute spewing of how you want your hot tall skinny upside down with whip caramel macchiato... :wink:

BTW...you spelled my name wrong...no E... :lol:


Oops, sorry about the spelling. You do have a tatoo on your toe though right?
Yeah, some people who frequent starbucks will put a squirrel to shame after about half a cup.
:lol:


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4408
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 10:19 am
 


Blue_Nose wrote:
mtbr wrote:
Blue_Nose wrote:
Wullu wrote:
If this was news, would not the tens of thousands of birds that are chopped up by wind turbines each year be news?
Maybe because one pond killed almost 500 birds in a month, while one wind turbine might kill about two a year.


got any stats on that?
The National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC) completed a comparison of wind farm avian mortality with bird mortality caused by other man-made structures in the U.S.

The NWCC did not conduct its own study, but analyzed all of the research done to date on various causes of avian mortality, including commercial wind farm turbines. They report that "data collected outside California indicate an average of 1.83 avian fatalities per turbine (for all species combined), and 0.006 raptor fatalities per turbine per year. Based on current projections of 3,500 operational wind turbines in the US by the end of 2001, excluding California, the total annual mortality was estimated at approximately 6,400 bird fatalities per year for all species combined."13

This report states that its intent is to "put avian mortality associated with windpower development into perspective with other significant sources of avian collision mortality across the United States."14 The NWCC reports that: "Based on current estimates, windplant related avian collision fatalities probably represent from 0.01% to 0.02% (i.e., 1 out of every 5,000 to 10,000) of the annual avian collision fatalities in the United States."15 That is, commercial wind turbines cause the direct deaths of only 0.01% to 0.02% of all of the birds killed by collisions with man-made structures and activities in the U.S.

Utility transmission and distribution line, collisions with automobiles and trucks, collisions with tall building and residential house windows, lighted communication towers, agricultural pesticides, and cats all individually kill more birds than wind turbines, but, in a stunning display of hypocrisy, Wullu highlights wind turbines alone as a significant killer of birds.


And in a stunning display of hypocracy Bluenose uses seven year old data on the number of active wind turbines in the US to make his piss poor attack on me. California alone has over 12,500 in operation. That alone would account for over 23,000 dead birds. And where did the number of turbines in California come from? Why that would be the American Wind Energy Association's website. It is easy to find, Bluenose linked it up top.

If the rest of the US combined, only has the same number as California..... well even an engineer ought to be able to do the math.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
Profile
Posts: 13928
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 10:27 am
 


Chumley wrote:
TattoodGirl wrote:
Chumley wrote:
I can see where the thought of it would disturb you Tattoedgirl, but on the other side of the coin, if you have spent a significant amount of time working and living in the great outdoors, it can lose its appeal for some. What you might consider a break from your hectic life is someone elses hectic life. After awhile a duck is a duck, and the thought of sitting on a couch by a fire in a Starbucks can beat the hell out of that squirrel that just won't shut up and let you get some sleep.


Never said it disturbs me...just interested me. I just have always found people that could care less about the distruction of nature or treatment of it, to be not the most caring in society...to be polite about it. I have and do spend a significant amount of time outdoors, actually cant get enough of it. Its good for the soul. Good for you, if Starbucks relaxes you...I would rather listen to a squirrel then the 10 minute spewing of how you want your hot tall skinny upside down with whip caramel macchiato... :wink:

BTW...you spelled my name wrong...no E... :lol:


Oops, sorry about the spelling. You do have a tatoo on your toe though right?
Yeah, some people who frequent starbucks will put a squirrel to shame after about half a cup.
:lol:


:lol: :lol: nope no tat on the toes... 8O ...Im thinking that would hurt just a wee bit... :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14063
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 10:56 am
 


Wullu wrote:
And in a stunning display of hypocracy Bluenose uses seven year old data on the number of active wind turbines in the US to make his piss poor attack on me. California alone has over 12,500 in operation. That alone would account for over 23,000 dead birds.
Good point - I already noted that newer high capacity designs are less likely to kill birds as they operate at relatively slow speeds, so the death rate will be even lower - even at this overestimated rate, though, wind turbines still kill fewer birds than all the other things I mentioned, and constitute (at most) about a tenth of a percent of the bird deaths caused by human activity.

Regardless, if one turbine chopped up 500 birds in a month, you can be pretty sure it would make the news.

Sorry, but there's just no way you can spin it that a toxic trailings pond is less dangerous to birds than a wind turbine.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20878
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 11:17 am
 


Blue_Nose wrote:
Utility transmission and distribution line, collisions with automobiles and trucks, collisions with tall building and residential house windows, lighted communication towers, agricultural pesticides, and cats all individually kill more birds than wind turbines, but, in a stunning display of hypocrisy, Wullu highlights wind turbines alone as a significant killer of birds.


Well, in Wullu's defence, he is as dumb as a post.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8533
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:05 pm
 


Blue_Nose wrote:
Regardless, if one turbine chopped up 500 birds in a month, you can be pretty sure it would make the news.


I have to take issue with that statement. This all happened over the course of a week or so. If the cannons weren't in effect, that one pond could easily wipe out 25000 birds a year. Just the one.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11362
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 4:10 pm
 


I seem to recall that they had netting or some other device(s) to keep ducks away from those ponds. What happened?


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4247
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 4:33 pm
 


sandorski wrote:
I seem to recall that they had netting or some other device(s) to keep ducks away from those ponds. What happened?


I'm not 100% sure about the netting but I think heard something along the lines of them trying something like that when the ponds were smaller.

The big thing that happened here is that they couldn't get to the locations to install the boomers on time due to the storms we've had here recently. Doesn't excuse this from happening but they were in the process of trying to do something.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11362
PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 4:49 pm
 


dino_bobba_renno wrote:
sandorski wrote:
I seem to recall that they had netting or some other device(s) to keep ducks away from those ponds. What happened?


I'm not 100% sure about the netting but I think heard something along the lines of them trying something like that when the ponds were smaller.

The big thing that happened here is that they couldn't get to the locations to install the boomers on time due to the storms we've had here recently. Doesn't excuse this from happening but they were in the process of trying to do something.


Makes sense. It is unfortunate.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 5737
PostPosted: Fri May 02, 2008 3:34 pm
 


The theory that the new larger diameter fans turn slower (less rpm) ignores the tip-speed. But then this subject turns alarmists into a species of denier...HAW HAW

It is a pastime of mine to head south to the wind farms on Lake Erie near Port Burwell. I have yet to go and not witness a shithawk reduced to a shower of feathers. HEE HEE! You would think the dumpchickens would avoid them.

Cuisine-arts for birds.........


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sunnyways and 15 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.