Solar Power Towers Are 'Vapourizing' Birds

[HawkMan]

unless he's breeding and releasing foxes he's BS'ing you." bird dogs" are just a category of different dogs used by hunters. They fetch birds because they're trained to, they also shouldn't eat them, and even if they did, your imaginary numbers if like s hundred kits to big.

[DocM]

they retrieve them and then eat them. hubby's step dad breeds them

Bullhockey. Any bird dog who ate the hunters prey would lose his job doublequick.

The whole idea is for the bird dog to have a "soft mouth," meaning they return the bird intact so the hunter can take it home and eat it.

Speaking as the past owner of pointers and especially Labrador retrievers.

[Guest]

 

• An estimated 1.4-3.7 billion birds are killed each year by cats;
• As many as 980 million birds crash into buildings annually;
• 174 million birds die from power lines every year;
• Up to 340 million birds perish from vehicles/roads;
• Approximately 6.8 million birds die flying into communications towers;
• As many as one million die annually in oil and gas fluid waste pits; and
• Up to 330,000 die each year from wind turbines

 

 

You forgot the most important stat. Up to a few thousand per year are roasted by towers.

[siah1214]

Can't we just build more nuke plants? Greenpeace is a natural disaster.

 

remixedcat, bird dogs don't kill birds, they retrieve already dead ones. 

[theyarecomingforyou]

The number of birds killed by solar power generation is trivial in comparison to the environmental havoc caused by fossil fuels and nuclear power. Certainly anything that can be done to mitigate the harm should be but let's keep things in perspective here. Humans kill over 56 billion animals each year for food, so a few birds for a relatively safe form of energy is acceptable to me. The priority has to be phasing out fossil fuels, which are horrific for the environment.

[neufuse Veteran]

All that space and it only does 110 megawatts? Doesn't look very efficient.

It'd be easier to just put solar cell panels on everyones roof. at least you aren't wasting space at that point, it's space already used up and grid tie them all together... but in that scenario the eclectic company can't charge you for power... *gasp*

[HawkMan]

It'd be easier to just put solar cell panels on everyones roof. at least you aren't wasting space at that point, it's space already used up and grid tie them all together... but in that scenario the eclectic company can't charge you for power... *gasp*

 

except this one also "makes" power at night from stored energy and is far more efficient per square meter than solar panels.

 

solar panels are inefficient, only makes power during daylight,  so what about winter times in the north, requires expensive installations on roofs everywhere. can and will easily break. May require you to build a new roof if you have an old house, requires more wiring and equipment for your house and servicing. also snow...

[Rohdekill]

All that space and it only does 110 megawatts? Doesn't look very efficient.

110 megawatts powers roughly 2200 homes.  But you're right...looking at the space it consumes as you look at the buildings to the left, it looks like you could easily fit 2200 homes in the same space.  Not very efficient when you consider that land is a very limited resource.

[siah1214]

What harm is actually being done by nuclear power? 

[streetw0lf]

What harm is actually being done by nuclear power? 

Chernobyl?

[geertd]

What harm is actually being done by nuclear power? 

fukushima and Chernobyl stands out 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster 

many more incidents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents

[remixedcat]

REALLY??? that was built by idiotas and shouldn't be based on anything. nuclear is a good option if dumbasses don't manage it.

[geertd]

REALLY??? that was built by idiotas and shouldn't be based on anything. nuclear is a good option if dumbasses don't manage it.

 

are you shure the closest nuclear powerplant by your place is well maintained and well managed ?

not against nuclear energy but we should move toward fusion energy 

[theyarecomingforyou]

REALLY??? that was built by idiotas and shouldn't be based on anything. nuclear is a good option if dumbasses don't manage it.

Modern designs are extremely safe but the few nuclear disasters we've seen have been quite substantial in their impact. Fukushima could have easily ended up a lot worse. Further, there is still no way to safely dispose of nuclear waste - it is simply buried and there are concerns regarding the safety of doing so. Modern designs substantially reduce the amount of waste but they aren't a long term solution. They should only be considered as an intermediary measure to reduce our reliance upon fossil fuels. Nuclear fusion is being actively worked on and that would be a much better solution for the long term.

[compl3x]

Modern designs are extremely safe but the few nuclear disasters we've seen have been quite substantial in their impact. Fukushima could have easily ended up a lot worse. Further, there is still no way to safely dispose of nuclear waste - it is simply buried and there are concerns regarding the safety of doing so. Modern designs substantially reduce the amount of waste but they aren't a long term solution. They should only be considered as an intermediary measure to reduce our reliance upon fossil fuels. Nuclear fusion is being actively worked on and that would be a much better solution for the long term.

 

If nuclear power was adopted a few decades ago, instead of the being turned into the boogie man by blind green groups, then perhaps the amount of waste would have been significantly reduced and there would have been a motivation to find some other uses for the waste. It would have been commercially and economically important to make the tech more efficient because it was being utilised. It's hard to criticise a technology to not progressing when as greenies do when they were the ones who ignorantly stood in its path.

 

I live in Australia where we have access to an almost inexhaustible amount of material to be used to create nuclear energy but instead of using it to create cheap, clean energy we sell it to other parts of the world who use it for that purpose. More specifically, I live in the state of Victoria where we have this filthy effing thing.

 

I'd happily have a nuke power plant in my state, and yes, I would have it in my own backyard (NIMBY). I'd live next door to it. Hell, I'd live inside the damn thing.

[DocM]

We have a nuclear plant nearby which provides power to a big chunk of SE Michigan. No problem. Wildlife seems to like the warm discharge water when it's -20

[siah1214]

fukushima and Chernobyl stands out 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster 

many more incidents

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_and_incidents

Alright lessons learned:

1. Don't let your nuclear power station be built and managed by Soviets

2. Don't build your nuclear power station on a fault line. 

 

The US could definitely use a lot more nuclear power, way too many gas and coal fired plants out there. 

[Joe User]

Alright lessons learned:

1. Don't let your nuclear power station be built and managed by Soviets

2. Don't build your nuclear power station on a fault line. 

 

The US could definitely use a lot more nuclear power, way too many gas and coal fired plants out there. 

 

3. Don't let power companies run them.

[geertd]

Alright lessons learned:

1. Don't let your nuclear power station be built and managed by Soviets

2. Don't build your nuclear power station on a fault line. 

 

The US could definitely use a lot more nuclear power, way too many gas and coal fired plants out there. 

did you read the article on nuclear incidents

 

Worldwide there have been 99 accidents at nuclear power plants.^[7] Fifty-seven accidents have occurred since the Chernobyl disaster, and 57% (56 out of 99) of all nuclear-related accidents have occurred in the USA. 

dont blame the sovjets for everything going bad 

[DocM]

An incident doesn't mean it was dangerous. You can score an incident from relatively benign causes which the safety system traps and shuts things down just in case.

I'm more worried about coal plants which spew more radioisotopes than all the nuclear incidents have, and the heavy metal pollution endemic to solar panel production and disposal.

[ctebah]

Nuclear power is not safe and it never will be.  We need to move away from it ASAP.

 

 

The nuclear industry

[The Evil Overlord]

Lol at the hate for 'soviet power plants' 3 mile island anyone?

I'll freely admit 2 wrongs don't make a right, but if you're going to bring up chernobyl and fukushima, then 3 mile needs to be added to the list too.

[TAZMINATOR]

 

• An estimated 1.4-3.7 billion birds are killed each year by cats;
• As many as 980 million birds crash into buildings annually;
• 174 million birds die from power lines every year;
• Up to 340 million birds perish from vehicles/roads;
• Approximately 6.8 million birds die flying into communications towers;
• As many as one million die annually in oil and gas fluid waste pits; and
• Up to 330,000 die each year from wind turbines

 

We had the sliding doors at my house...  birds usually fly into our door glass which we have a dining table by the sliding doors..  BAM! birds go down on the deck. Sometimes they make it, sometimes they don't, depends on how fast they fly toward the glass. And how high from the deck to the glass impact.

 

If windows tint are on the sliding doors, the birds won't go toward the glass..

[DocM]

Nuclear power is not safe and it never will be. We need to move away from it ASAP.

A great many green groups now disagree with you.

Nuclear is nearly carbon free, and many modern reactor designs physically cannot melt down even if all the coolant flow disappears. It would take a reversal of the thermodynamic laws to make them do it.

Better yet, many new designs can "burn" the nuclear waste from older plants while producing much less waste themselves. The result is less active, shorter lived waste. Better yet, their primary fuel, thorium, is more plentiful than uranium being a byproduct of mining other materials. Basically, free for the taking.

China, with US Dept. of Energy help under a CRADA agreement, starts work on their first molten salt thorium reactor soon, and no doubt will be cranking them out like sausages. India is right behind them. This high level of electric power generation will give them a manufacturing edge beyond today's level. If the West is to be economically competitive we should build them here.

CRADA: Cooperative Research And Development Agreement

[ctebah]

A great many green groups now disagree with you.

Nuclear is nearly carbon free, and many modern reactor designs physically cannot melt down even if all the coolant flow disappears. It would take a reversal of the thermodynamic laws to make them do it.

 

A great many green groups have changed their tune after the recent incident in Japan.  The main problem with nuclear is that you can have 99.99% of plans working safe their whole life but all it takes is one plant to fail and the fallout is immense.  Nice way to ignore that the majority of incidents records have come from the US, where safety is supposed to be top notch.  

 

 

 

Better yet, many new designs can "burn" the nuclear waste from older plants while producing much less waste themselves. The result is less active, shorter lived waste. Better yet, their primary fuel, thorium, is more plentiful than uranium being a byproduct of mining other materials. Basically, free for the taking.

 

Many of those "new designs" are nowhere near being implemented.

 

 

 

China starts work on their first thorium reactor this year, next year at the latest, and soon will be cranking them out like sausages. India is right behind them. This high level of electric power generation will give them a manufacturing edge beyond today's level. If the West is to be economically competitive we should get cracking.

 

Nothing but speculation there:  

 

 

 

China has pushed back the intended completion date for its test thorium molten salt reactor, from 2017 to 2020, the head of the project indicated here today.