Contrary to politicians' claims, offshore wind farms don't kill whales. Here's what to know.

MicroWave@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 373 points – Contrary to politicians' claims, offshore wind farms don't kill whales. Here's what to know.
apnews.com

Unfounded claims about offshore wind threatening whales have surfaced as a flashpoint in the fight over the future of renewable energy.

In recent months, conservatives including former President Donald Trump have claimed construction of offshore wind turbines is killing the giant animals.

Scientists say there is no credible evidence linking offshore wind farms to whale deaths. But that hasn’t stopped conservative groups and ad hoc “not in my back yard”-style anti-development groups from making the connection.

The Associated Press sorts fact from fiction when it comes to whales and wind power as the rare North Atlantic right whale’s migration season gets underway.

62

If a conservative is against it:

  • their claims are likely untrue
  • the thing they’re against will cost them money
  • the thing probably helps you or others like you
  • the thing isn’t something they’re invested in, otherwise they’d be for it
  • taken out of the context of politics, a normal, well adjusted person would probably be in favor of the thing

And they don’t actually care about the criticism they levee at it. Who honestly believes they gave a fuck about the whales?

There are valid concerns about building these in sensitive coastal ecosystems (such as kelp forests), but this is the first time I've heard someone suggest that whales could be endangered.

I'm concerned, too, but I guess relying on fossil fuels will devastate the ecosystems even further eventually.

There are probably plenty of areas to use that aren't as sensitive.

Sure they kill whales. All whales that jump several hundred feet up in the air right into the blades.

Contrary to politicians claims

Eh? What politician would clai...

Oh, right, as you were, it's them again 😂

Since when did conservatives care about whales?

When they could weaponise it against people trying to make the world better.

Like Republicans are anti-whaling anyways... 🙄

The selective outrage over animal rights is such manufactured bullshit. But if I am being honest, democrats, progressives and leftists are all equally culpable in these do nothing virtue signal outrages. If you are wearing leather, eating meat and financing animal factory farming, I don't wanna hear about your crocodile tears when an imaginary whale or a fictional dog is hurt.

If you are ... financing animal factory farming,

only bankers do that

What exactly do you think happens to the money you spend at the grocery store on bacon? It goes to the people producing it. And then they make more.

they were already paid before the store bought or received the bacon. and after you spend money, it's not yours and you can't decide what happens to it.

Lmao. I hope you are just trolling because that's a 2nd grade answer. There is no way you are a serious person who has serious opinions about the world.

you can’t decide what happens to it.

But what DOES happen with it? The store restocks.

But what DOES happen with it? The store restocks.

what happens when you buy beans on june 25? the store takes your money, and increases their orders of hotdogs and hamburgers using your money in preparation of july 4. the fact that the store is making that decision is not your fault, it's theirs. it's their decision to make.

There is no way you are a serious person who has serious opinions about the world.

this is a personal attack.... and an appeal to ridicule, not a rebuttal

6 more...
6 more...
6 more...
6 more...

Imagine being a leftist and not opposing animal exploitation.

iknorite?

Cows are the finest example of the proletariat. The only service they provide to the economy is their body itself, so they are literally stripped of it to enrich others with more power, just an endless cycle of suffering.

The amount of cheese I had last night says otherwise

Cows also give us milk, which is a massive industry with lots of different products.

9 more...

Last night someone was telling me that the resin they use to make the blades deteriorates over time and covers the area in microplastics. Oh and each turbine needs 40 tonnes of cement which is not carbon neutral.

They main contributors for micro plastics are polyester clothing and car tires. Those people likely use both.

I just want to jump and say that that’s not a good argument. It’s next to impossible to get away from that kinda stuff, same as how saying that a person using an iPhone to write about capitalism being bad is just silly.

The absolute majority of my clothes is 100% cotton. I get jackets and stuff being synthetic, but how often if at all do you even wash them unless you're going hiking a lot of whatever? And yes, it's absolutely possible to get away from a lot of this stuff. Just like it is also complete bullshit to claim that wind turbines are major contributors for microplastics. That's literally flat Earth levels of stupid.

we gonna get you on board the fuck cars movement if microplastics are a big enough concern to not build renewable energy? Cus boy let me tell you about tire wear and microplastics.

The old “silver bullet” argument, eh? “X is not a perfect one size fits all solution with no downsides, so must be equally as bad as not doing anything”

I mean thats not really wrong but it reminds me of one of the dipshit oilfield guys I worked with in the wind industry.

"*hyuk hyuk* whats that greasing the gearbox? is that oil? in a so called green energy turbine?"

yeah dude a 2MW tower going through a few dozen gallons of lubricant a year is the same an oil fired plant burning 10,000 barrels in a year for a similar power output(napkin math explained here). You've exposed the big secret man, these things are equivalent because there are oil products in both. Numbers are a scam made up to trick god-fearing texans.

The only actual solution is to consume less power, but no one wants to talk about that yet.

What a silly thing to say.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't want to use less power.

I suspect what you really mean is that you want to reduce power requirements by some authoritarian policy.

No, there are many people who explicitly don't want to use less power. They usually point towards a correlation between societal development and power usage, and imply that using less power would mean we're sliding back.

A very obvious example of post hoc ergo propter hoc. I've never heard anyone believe that, certainly not a majority.

It's not a common position, but it definitely occurs. I've seen it on Lemmy a couple of times, and much more often on Hacker News.

I’ve only heard it in the negative. “Economists used to believe that economic progress was tied directly to increased energy use but this data from the last ten years shows otherwise”

What I want is to save the world from overconsumption, and yes, that's going to require governments rationing power and enforcing efficiency.

Calling that "authoritarian" is nonsense, though. It doesn't require the army going house to house and killing people with incandescent lightbulbs or something. Grow up.

Sure mate, I guess the question of whether it's authoritarian is subjective. Suffice to say rationing would be daft. What about roof top solar?

We can't do that without an extremely exploitative supply chain that uses child slaves to mine for cobalt and lithium, that is built on an imperialist supply chain that subjugates nations under the boot-heel of the likes of the US and France, that releases massive amounts of CO2 and causes huge amounts of deforestation from mining and shipping and manufacturing and installing this "green" technology.

We also can't do that on a reasonable timeline that will prevent catastrophic warming. The majority of estimates put us past 2040.

Also? You aren't going to get rooftop solar to replace coal and gas without "authoritarian" measures like mandates and penalties.

What?!? Astro turfed NIMBYism lied to me?

I'm shocked.

I think a great way to offset a windmill's presence in the ocean bed is to integrate it as an artificial reef. I wonder what other ways it could be a benefit.

Do they only kill flying whales or are the others at risk of accidently jumping into the blades, too?