The Avian and Wildlife Costs of Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power

“…Within the uncertainties of the data used, the estimate means that wind farm-related avian fatalities equated to approximately 46,000 birds in the United States in 2009, but nuclear power plants killed about 460,000 and fossil-fueled power plants 24 million…”

Benjamin K. Sovacool

Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy – Centre on Asia and Globalisation

June 30, 2012

Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences vol. 9, no. 4, December 2012, 255-278
Vermont Law School Research Paper No. 04-13

Abstract:
Environmentalists and environmental scientists have criticized wind energy in various forums for its negative impacts on wildlife, especially birds. This article highlights that nuclear power and fossil-fuelled power systems have a host of environmental and wildlife costs as well, particularly for birds. Therefore, as a low-emission, low-pollution energy source, the wider use of wind energy can save wildlife and birds as it displaces these more harmful sources of electricity. The paper provides two examples: one relates to a calculation of avian fatalities across wind electricity, fossil-fueled, and nuclear power systems in the entire United States. It estimates that wind farms are responsible for roughly 0.27 avian fatalities per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity while nuclear power plants involve 0.6 fatalities per GWh and fossil-fueled power stations are responsible for about 9.4 fatalities per GWh. Within the uncertainties of the data used, the estimate means that wind farm-related avian fatalities equated to approximately 46,000 birds in the United States in 2009, but nuclear power plants killed about 460,000 and fossil-fueled power plants 24 million. A second example summarizes the wildlife benefits from a 580-MW wind farm at Altamont Pass in California, a facility that some have criticized for its impact on wildlife. The paper lastly highlights other social and environmental benefits to wind farms compared to other sources of electricity and energy.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 26

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2198024_code1250463.pdf?abstractid=2198024&mirid=1

January 9, 2013 - Posted by arclight2011 | Uncategorized

1 Comment »

And a complete load of rubbish here

Of all the many lies put out by the subsidy-troughing scum-suckers of the wind industry and their greenie fellow travellers, the biggest porkie of the lot is this: that wind turbines are eco-friendly.
In order to believe this tosh, you’d first have to accept the warped view that being eco-friendly can legitimately entail wiping out millions of bats and birds. It is a measure of just how intellectually and morally corrupt Big Green has grown over the last few decades that many self-professed environmentalists actually cleave to this belief. Why else would they expend so much energy trying to defend – or distract from – the indefensible truth: that wind farms around the world are destroying rare species on an industrial scale?

Dr Hambler has his suspicions:
First, because the wind industry (with the shameful complicity of some ornithological organisations) has gone to great trouble to cover it up — to the extent of burying the corpses of victims. Second, because the ongoing obsession with climate change means that many environmentalists are turning a blind eye to the ecological costs of renewable energy.

By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: January 5th, 2013

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100196794/wind-industry-big-lies-no-3-wind-turbines-are-eco-friendly/

Comment by arclight2011 | January 9, 2013 | Reply

nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope