Robert Bryce: Backlash Against Wind Coming From Left: 90 Groups Seek Tougher Rules

In 2009, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that domestic wind turbines are killing about 440,000 birds per year. Since then, the wind industry has been riding a rapid growth spurt.

But that growth has slowed dramatically due to a tsunami of cheap natural gas and hefty taxpayer subsidies. Even worse: that cheap gas looks like it will last for many years and Congress has been unwilling to extend the 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour subsidy for wind operators that expires at the end of this year.

And now, the wind industry is facing yet another massive headache: increasing resistance from environmental groups who are concerned about the effect that unrestrained construction of wind turbines is having on birds and bats. Ninety environmental groups, led by the American Bird Conservancy, have signed onto the “bird-smart wind petition”which has been submitted to the Fish and Wildlife Service.

It’s about time. Over the past two decades, the federal government has prosecuted hundreds of cases against oil and gas producers and electricity producers for violating some of America’s oldest wildlife-protection laws: the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Eagle Protection Act. But the Obama administration — like the Bush administration before it — has never prosecuted the wind industry despite myriad examples of widespread, unpermitted bird kills by turbines. A violation of either law can result in a fine of $250,000 and/or imprisonment for two years.

But amidst all the hoopla about “clean energy” the wind industry is being allowed to continue its illegal slaughter of some of America’s most precious wildlife. Even more perverse: taxpayers — thanks to billions of dollars given to the wind industry through the production tax credit and federal stimulus package — are subsidizing that slaughter.

Energy Tribune

About these ads

One response to “Robert Bryce: Backlash Against Wind Coming From Left: 90 Groups Seek Tougher Rules

  1. Eric Baumholer

    Reminds me of a story I once heard — first-hand from one of the corporate executives involved. The corporate headquarters had a decorative pond in front of its building, frequented by migratory geese. Greens found the water to be ‘polluted’ (though geese were not affected), and the corporation was fined $200,000 for endangering migratory geese. Now you can’t stop migratory geese from going wherever they want to, but the corporation found an ingenious fix. As it turns out, migratory geese absolutely detest the flavor of the artificial food coloring used in grape soda pop. (It’s flavorless to humans and has no discernible environmental effects.) Adding it to the water worked perfectly. The geese avoided the pond. This measure, though successful, was then considered to be intentional water pollution by the environmental authorities, who levied an even bigger fine. So the corporation took another, quite obvious measure: they filled in the pond with dirt. Now it’s just part of the lawn in front of the building, and no complaints.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s