1950 Shares

Why does state controlled media not acknowledge the deaths of thousands of birds a day due to wind turbines?

Why does state controlled media not acknowledge the deaths of thousands of birds a day due to wind turbines? Topic: Media research theory
April 26, 2019 / By Babe
Question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRSAvD8VAbI @got wild, don't need wind turbimes to generate electricity. @tonalc, I don't believe those numbers and neither should you. There are power lines all around the city I live in and I have never seen a bunch of dead birds laying dead underneath them. @smells, believe me this is in EXACLY the correct section. You theory smells. The libs have been covering up these incidents for their own political gains. All that can be done is to show the truth. @Tom, air travel is the fastest way to get from one place to another. However, we do not have to kill birds by the hundreds of thousands to generate electricity. We always generated electricity before without slaughtering birds.
Best Answer

Best Answers: Why does state controlled media not acknowledge the deaths of thousands of birds a day due to wind turbines?

Abrianna Abrianna | 6 days ago
The vast majority of research shows that wind turbines kill relatively few birds, at least compared with other man-made structures. Collisions with wind turbines account for about one-tenth of one percent of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year. Power lines: 130 million -- 174 million [source: AWEA] Windows (residential and commercial): 100 million -- 1 billion [source: TreeHugger] Pesticides: 70 million [source: AWEA] Automobiles: 60 million -- 80 million [source: AWEA] Lighted communication towers: 40 million -- 50 million [source: AWEA] Wind turbines: 10,000 -- 40,000 [source: ABC]
👍 180 | 👎 6
Did you like the answer? Why does state controlled media not acknowledge the deaths of thousands of birds a day due to wind turbines? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Media research theory


Abrianna Originally Answered: How many Wind Turbines would you need to power a city?
Sounds fairly easy, unless you consider the reality. Some numbers that will help: A normal home in a city will average about 1 kW, maybe 1.2 kW. This is about 1,000 Watts So you are probably looking at a total average power demand of about 130,000 to 150,000 kW. In this range they start referring to power in terms of MegaWatts (MW), which equals 1000 kW. So your required average Power Demand is about 150 MW, or 15,000 kW. The average for a single wind turbine is about 1.5 MW at full power. So if wind conditions are right --- and constant -- you would need about 100 Wind Turbines to supply the city. Now the reality: Wind is NOT constant --- and is not dependable. I think you need at least about a 7 mph wind, just to begin turning the propellers. If the wind can not remain at better than 7 mph, you get ZERO power. What then? So then in addition to the wind turbines, you need at least 150 MW of "other" generation -- such as Natural Gas Turbines (basically a stand alone jet engine) , or a coal fired power plant. So now you have expensive costs for "redundant" generation. In addition -- this is their "maximum" generation at say a 15 mph wind. What happens when the wind is only 10 mph? You maybe get only 50 MW when you need 150 MW. Big Problem. Then, the biggest problem: On a hot 95 degree summer day -- when everyone needs power the most -- everyone is running their Air Conditioning all out. But now that is the days the wind is NOT blowing. If the wind was blowing -- it would be much cooler. So on the hottest days, when the most power is required -- the wind does not blow --- and the wind turbines produce no power. Then the maintenance issues are so bad on these wind turbine units that many companies are just abandoning these wind units in place, and just walking away. They are not economical at all. Without massive "Government" subsidies -- free money from the Government -- our tax money -- no one would even touch these. The installed costs are high -- the maintenance costs to keep them running are high --- there are additional cost for the "back-up" generation that they were supposed to replace, but in reality can't replace. It may be a Politically Correct policy right now --- but in reality not a good or rational decision.

Syd Syd
I doubt the mainstream media especially Fox News would ignore wind turbines killing off birds. Millions more dead fish have turned up in Maryland following fish and bird deaths in Arkansas. Reports of dead animals have been flooding the Internet since New Year's Eve of 2012 when 5,000 blackbirds fell from the sky in Beebe, Arkansas. The very next day about 100,000 dead drum fish washed up along a 20-mile stretch of the Arkansas River. Officials are looking into the deaths of an estimated 2 million juvenile spot fish in Chesapeake Bay. Bats are disappearing, from the northeastern United States to the Midwest. Honey bees are dying. This is a global phenomenon and a worldwide problem affecting food availability.
👍 70 | 👎 0

Paul Paul
Funny, I just read an article on that last week. They were discussing how in recently installed turbines, such deaths are several magnitudes lower. See in non-conservative circles, science is used as a basis to improve ideas, rather than an excuse to rant about them using data from twenty years ago. When you're trapped in the past, you're trapped in the past. Which is why conservatives can't grasp that they're not discussing this in the right section. Or if they do grasp that their anti-wind rant is in the wrong section, it's because they know they get their clocks cleaned int he environmental science section every time.
👍 65 | 👎 -6

Lorne Lorne
how many human beings and animals die a year by way of automobile crashes, deer getting hit, canines, cats, even birds. Your question and your element does not carry a 'ethical extreme floor' fee. because of the fact its all related. so a techniques as how lots it takes to construct wind generators, I by no potential researched how lots paintings easily is going into erecting one in each and every of them, yet i will enable you recognize that it could pay off after it sluggish. only like a automobile, how lots oil does is take to run a truck or your automobile? Do you not get a oil substitute each and every so usually? you spot, its not approximately extreme floor right here. Your attempting to instruct some thing that desires no data. A fowl that gets killed by way of a oil spill is the two worse, because of the fact its all mans doing. so a techniques as guessing on how lots is going in. i might say its a similar because of the fact the motor vehicle you tension and enjoy. How lots is going into vehicles and truck. way greater desirable than a wind turbine i might wager. you're against liberal techniques, yet yet this may well be an extremely liberal question, with a liberal physique of techniques. I cant stand the liberal physique of techniques, so i assume you acquire your *** exceeded to you by way of your person variety. Your attempt in attempting to get a element for the time of is first rate, yet your purpose grow to be to not instruct something yet your intelligences greater desirable than all of us else, which isn't very sensible, and thats why the worldwide is how that's.
👍 60 | 👎 -12

Jaydon Jaydon
Probably because we really aren't going to stop and change everything just because some birds are being killed. It's a tragedy, but I doubt anyone will do anything about it anytime soon.
👍 55 | 👎 -18

Jaydon Originally Answered: How long will scientitsts keep saying the dying fish and birds in their thousands is normal for?
It's funny how scientists are trying to cover up the mass animal deaths and say it's 'normal'. The fact is this should be a worry and a cause for concern even if it appeared to be considered 'normal'. No animals should not just suddenly drop dead in their thousands. Animals dropping dead shouldn't be considered 'normal' in any case. The question is, WHY are masses of animals dropping dead to begin with? It's not normal in any case. Now imagine if human beings started dropping dead in the masses..would that be considered 'normal'? I think not. Guaranteed they would start making a BIG fuss over it. Just because they are animals I guess they think it's alright then? If you, me and the next ordinary human being suddenly dropped dead would that be normal too? Just because their are animals falling dead it still should be a cause for concern. How they can say it's 'normal' is beoynd me.

If you have your own answer to the question media research theory, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.