Bat-ter up! Enviros say no to green energy

Senator John Thune is quoted in the Washington post today commenting on an enviro-mental proposal to slow down wind energy development because of concerns that bats and birds might have trouble navigating the big blades:
John Stroud, the co-chairman of Mountain Communities for Responsible Energy, is fighting a wind power project in Rahall's district, saying it will spoil scenic views and endanger bats.


GOP Sen. John Thune, who has introduced legislation that would give the industry more incentives, was more blunt.

"This proposal is badly misguided and is a step in the wrong direction," said Thune of South Dakota, one of the windier states. "Congress should not be blocking the development of one of the nation's cleanest energy resources ... I will fight any efforts to stymie its development because of unfounded concerns for bats and birds."

Read it all here.

Is it just me, or does it seem a bit nutty that after they've beat the drum of greener energy for decades, when people and industries have found ways to make that kind of technology feasible, now the enviromentalists find reasons so they don't want us to start using it?



Ken said…
you have to realize, PP, the environmental wackos are just, well, wacko. they will never be happy. now that South Dakota is tapping a great energy resource like wind (which Dakota has lots of), which is the cleanest possible fuel source, the greenies are attacking it. good for Thune for fighting them
Anonymous said…
Just think, though: maybe huge windfarms WOULD kill lots of bats and birds, and maybe there would be some big consequence to that which we don't see right now.

Sort of like honeybee populations, which are collapsing nationwide...less honeybees, less polinization; less polinization, less harvest, etc. There are real consequences there that matter to people and farmers. If some environmental "wacko" (as ken descirbed them) 10 years ago was telling you about the impending honeybee collapse, you'd have laughed in his face and called him a, well, wacko.
Stacie said…
if the greenies are going to oppose wind energy, which causes NO pollution whatsoever and is as renewable of a resource as exists, then i've lost all hope. if they oppose this, they will oppose everthing and nothing will ever get done and we'll be stuck with a carbon-heavy economy. I hope Thune keeps after the wind deal even if the enviros resist.
Anonymous said…
the environmental nuts will screw up wind development in South Dkaota if you aren't careful
Anonymous said…
Well, we have been siting on the wid energy issue forever. We sit and sit and no one will move, no one will help get wind energy going. WE will be bypassed once again for sitting on our hands and not moving.
This is not a new issue, nor a new study, nor a new anything.

People need to get it together!
Haggs said…
Y'know, whenever I see terms like "enviro-mental" or "environmental wacko" I have a hard time stopping my eyes from rolling into the back of my head. Why is it that if someone is concerned about the environment, they are labeled a "wacko" or "nutjob?" I think it's especially surprising to see that attitude coming from conservative Christians. God has charged us to be stewards of this planet and that includes the environment. So caring about the environment is a good thing.

But, in this case, I agree with PP and Senator Thune. Wind energy is very important and I think we shold continue to support it. I haven't looked over any evidence that those wind blades might be harmful to birds and bats. Have there been any reports of current wind farms having harmful effects like that? This is the first I've heard of it.
Anonymous said…
Is there a possibility that it’s not the “greenies” behind this? But rather “Big Oil & Gas” pretending to be environmentalist. Do you remember Enron? They pulled this stunt.
greatplains said…
" . . . I will fight any efforts to stymie its development because of unfounded concerns for bats and birds." (John Thune)

OK, PP and John Thune, how about paying attention to the actual arguments and science behind the issue?

What's that? Pheasants are one of the bird species at greatest threat from incorrectly placed wind turbines (not all turbines, just poorly placed turbines)? Hmmm, looks like maybe South Dakota should have a keen interest in making sure wind farms are planned carefully.
edumicated idjit said…
Its called NIMBY.....Not In My Backyard. Its OK for the environment, cleaner, renewable and long-lasting (wind never stops or so it seems). What SD must do is to allow wind generator companies to put the energy back into the grid easily and with little problems from the existing energy companies. Once that's done the wind energy can flow freely into homes, businesses and farms to reduce consumption of coal and natural gas.
Anonymous said…
It is to bad that when someone does not agree with your positions or has a different view, you go to name calling. I think society needs to move forward with wind power , but be aware of the hazards it will cause to migrating birds and others, and plan the farms accordingly, is it wrong to go into something slowly it is just like corn based Ethanol....perhaps we should not put all of our eggs in one type of energy production. But if someone spoke against Ethanol he would be Anti farming and Anti Agriculture, wouldnt all of you have fun calling me names?
Anonymous said…
Survival of the fittest I say.

Those birds and bats that can't dodge those slow moving wind blades are the weakest of their species. Their rotting carcasses will make a fine meal for scavengers, like those posting on this blog.

Popular posts from this blog

Why should we be surprised?

That didn't take long