Burning birds

[98elise]

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

Windows kill far more birds than windmills or solar collectors.

How did you reach that conclusion?

I didn't reach that conclusion. Its a fact that millions of birds strike windows every year and a high proportion are fatal. Birds hit things, and birds die. Windmills are not unique in this feature.

[Jimbeaux]

speedchick said:

something big, scary and black hang about the car park at work seem to be rather partial to KFC, chicken leftover, fries and beans seems to be the favourite, they don't both with the corn!

I think you are being racist.

[JensenA]

Jimbeaux said:

speedchick said:

something big, scary and black hang about the car park at work seem to be rather partial to KFC, chicken leftover, fries and beans seems to be the favourite, they don't both with the corn!

I think you are being racist.

I think you're the only person who thought of that Jim.......a bit worrying really mate. (Especially as you took the trouble to edit it)

[mybrainhurts]

98elise said:

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

Windows kill far more birds than windmills or solar collectors.

How did you reach that conclusion?

I didn't reach that conclusion. Its a fact that millions of birds strike windows every year and a high proportion are fatal. Birds hit things, and birds die. Windmills are not unique in this feature.

It was more your assertion that windows kill more birds than windmills I was questioning.

[98elise]

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

Windows kill far more birds than windmills or solar collectors.

How did you reach that conclusion?

I didn't reach that conclusion. Its a fact that millions of birds strike windows every year and a high proportion are fatal. Birds hit things, and birds die. Windmills are not unique in this feature.

It was more your assertion that windows kill more birds than windmills I was questioning.

Again I didn't come to that conclusion it was something I read. The number of birds killed by windows/cats/cars/planes etc were all listed (and predated windmills). The stats for windmills were no where near as big as windows.

Of course internet myths do trump any form of study or evidence

[SpudLink]

98elise said:

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

Windows kill far more birds than windmills or solar collectors.

How did you reach that conclusion?

I didn't reach that conclusion. Its a fact that millions of birds strike windows every year and a high proportion are fatal. Birds hit things, and birds die. Windmills are not unique in this feature.

It was more your assertion that windows kill more birds than windmills I was questioning.

Again I didn't come to that conclusion it was something I read. The number of birds killed by windows/cats/cars/planes etc were all listed (and predated windmills). The stats for windmills were no where near as big as windows.

Of course internet myths do trump any form of study or evidence

Yesterday evening, I saw a dead pigeon in a neighbor's front garden.
On the the window was a mark that looked like the impact site of the pigeon.
Is that a bizarre coincidence, or is someone on here throwing pigeons at windows to prove their argument?

I've put a photo of the window here...
http://flic.kr/p/oyJtyp

Edited by SpudLink on Friday 22 August 09:28

[mybrainhurts]

98elise said:

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

mybrainhurts said:

98elise said:

Windows kill far more birds than windmills or solar collectors.

How did you reach that conclusion?

I didn't reach that conclusion. Its a fact that millions of birds strike windows every year and a high proportion are fatal. Birds hit things, and birds die. Windmills are not unique in this feature.

It was more your assertion that windows kill more birds than windmills I was questioning.

Again I didn't come to that conclusion it was something I read. The number of birds killed by windows/cats/cars/planes etc were all listed (and predated windmills). The stats for windmills were no where near as big as windows.

Of course internet myths do trump any form of study or evidence

Depends on the quality of the study or evidence "you read", of course. How did this study determine the number of birds killed by windows, cats, cars and aeroplanes? I'm having difficulty with that one. Assuming it's not a myth, of course.

[Oakey]

It's a bit simplistic to say "cats / windows / whatever kill X number of birds ergo this is no big deal". It makes less of an impact if millions of sparrows or pigeons are killed by cats / windows / whatever when there are billions of them, it's a different matter if it's something like raptors being smashed up by a wind turbine or incinerated by solar death rays.

[MarshPhantom]

That's put me off my hot wings.

[anonymous-user]

Are any of you saying that cars are rubbish because they squish hedgehogs, badgers, and bunnies? None? Funny, that.

[fatboy b]

1. Other Birds
2. Cats
3. Whales
4. Cars
5. Sharks
6. Seals
7. Shot guns
8. Solar death ray's
9. Baking Soda and water within close proximity
10.Gin and bread
11.Jet engines
12.Runaway lawnmowers
13. Bird Flu
14. Keith Harris
15. Bird eating spiders
16. KFC
17. Hit by flying cans of Red Bull
18. Bicycles
19. Fossil Fuel
20. Cypriots (they love a bit of pickled sparrow)
21. Windows

[marksx]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27426866

[otolith]

Breadvan72 said:

Are any of you saying that cars are rubbish because they squish hedgehogs, badgers, and bunnies? None? Funny, that.

Those are commonplace, though. The question for the solar array is whether the species being killed are likewise unthreatened populations.

[mybrainhurts]

Breadvan72 said:

Are any of you saying that cars are rubbish because they squish hedgehogs, badgers, and bunnies? None? Funny, that.

You're missing the point by a mile.

Governments' policies to "combat climate change", as well as being pointless, are driving up energy bills and elderly people are dying because they can't afford to keep warm.

Subsidies for solar and wind producers are part of those policies, so any downsides, like exploding birds, are to be exploited to the full.

[anonymous-user]

My point is that most if not all technologies have undesirable side effects, but some are subjected to more scrutiny because of political positions that people take. As for the argument that there are lots of cars, that can be tested by saying: OK, what if you build lots of solar panels or windmills so that there will be lots of those and the same point will apply to all?

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 23 August 08:13

[hidetheelephants]

Breadvan72 said:

Serious question: how does harnessing solar energy make you an idiot, well intentioned or otherwise? Forget fracking, wind power, nukes, and all that other faffing about. Tapping into the main power source in our bit of the Galaxy has got to be the way ahead. If we could think of a way to guard them from Bond villains and terrorists, we should have huge fuggoff solar collector set ups in the Sahara, central Australia etc. Even better, put a mega-enormo one on the Moon. We won't, though, as we are too busy arsing about.

It makes people well-intentioned idiots when they build wildly expensive solar arrays that make other means of generation look cheap; all the whizz-bang generatey stuff in the world won't make any difference if it's not cheap enough to undercut the cheapest(which at the moment is coal and gas) and persuade developing economies to use them in preference.

[anonymous-user]

The only idiots are those that don't do all they can to reduce the impact of foreign nations on their energy supply.

[anonymous-user]

hidetheelephants said:

Breadvan72 said:

Serious question: how does harnessing solar energy make you an idiot, well intentioned or otherwise? Forget fracking, wind power, nukes, and all that other faffing about. Tapping into the main power source in our bit of the Galaxy has got to be the way ahead. If we could think of a way to guard them from Bond villains and terrorists, we should have huge fuggoff solar collector set ups in the Sahara, central Australia etc. Even better, put a mega-enormo one on the Moon. We won't, though, as we are too busy arsing about.

It makes people well-intentioned idiots when they build wildly expensive solar arrays that make other means of generation look cheap; all the whizz-bang generatey stuff in the world won't make any difference if it's not cheap enough to undercut the cheapest(which at the moment is coal and gas) and persuade developing economies to use them in preference.

A fair point, especially as persuading developing economies not to repeat our old mistakes is important, and difficult; but query additional costs of various generation modes (one of which might be "too many dead birds"). See for example http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23246069 (I am not vouching for that study, simply pointing out that it exists).