Bats 158
Here’s a bit of fun: energy environmentalists versus endangered species environmentalists.
From The Washington Post:
Workers atop mountain ridges are putting together 389-foot windmills with massive blades that will turn Appalachian breezes into energy. Retiree David Cowan is fighting to stop them.
Because of the bats.
Cowan, 72, a longtime caving fanatic who grew to love bats as he slithered through tunnels from Maine to Maui, is asking a federal judge in Maryland to halt construction of the Beech Ridge wind farm. The lawsuit pits Chicago-based Invenergy, a company that produces “green” energy, against environmentalists who say the cost to nature is too great.
The rare green vs. green case went to trial Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt.
It is the first court challenge to wind power under the Endangered Species Act …
At the heart of the Beech Ridge case is the Indiana bat, a brownish-gray creature that weighs about as much as three pennies and, wings outstretched, measures about eight inches. …
The case probably will come down to a battle of bat experts.There is no question turbines in other locations have killed tens of thousands of bats. Some strike blades. Others die from a condition known as barotrauma, similar to the bends that afflict divers. It occurs when the swirl of the blades creates low-pressure zones that cause the bats’ tiny lungs to hemorrhage. …
‘Wee, sleekit, cowrin, tim’rous beastie, O, what a panic’s in thy breastie!’ – not the bat, but the environmentalist, torn between one moral imperative and another incompatible one.
Wind 98
The US has ample oil and gas waiting to be drilled for both on and off shore, and nuclear power plants could be built, but the governing Democrats will have none of that and prefer to provide the nation with energy from wind.
James Delingpole writes in the Telegraph about wind turbines in Britain:
They don’t work when there’s no wind.
They don’t work when it’s too windy.
They produce so little power – and so unreliably and erratically – that even if you put one on every hill top in Britain you’d still need to rely on nuclear, coal and gas-generated electricity for your main source of energy.
They chew up flying wildlife and scare horses.
They produce a subsonic hum which drives you mad if you’re downwind of them.
They turn pristine landscape into Teletubby-style horror visions.
They destroy property values.
They steal light.
They’re visible for miles around so that just when you’re thinking you’ve got away from it all you’re reminded of man’s grim presence by the whirling white shapes on the horizon.
They’re environmentally damaging: their massive concrete bases alone requiring enough concrete to fill two Olympic-size swimming pools; then there’s the access roads that have to be built through the unspoilt landscape to put them up in the first place.
They’re twice as expensive as conventionally-produced electricity.
They make you feel a bit queasy, especially the three-bladed ones whose asymmetry is disturbing.
To supply the equivalent output of one nuclear power station you’d need a wind farm the size of Greater Manchester.