If we are concerned about the future of the planet and our wildlife then we
should not care too much about aesthetics. Whilst it is true that windfarns
kill birds (and bats), it is also true that global warming kills them as
well (as do building collisions and cars!). It would be interesting to see a
comparison of the number of birds likely to be killed by a windfarm to the
number likely to be killed by the pollution/warming that the windfarm would
prevent. Of course the species would be different, but it is an argument
that the "green" movement (which I hope most birders support) has to be able
to answer
On 15/05/06, michael hunter <> wrote:
Windfarms ARE unsightly except to the aesthetically impaired or
blind,
the residents of Cape Cod know it, they don't just "fear" that the
turbines
would be unsightly.
Jerome Collins of the Sierra Club wants a bit each way, wants to
protect birds and landscapes, but supports wind-power!
The difference windfarms can possibly make to reducing global
warming
is hugely offset by their visual pollution and the wildlife fatalites and
injuries they cause.
It's all very depressing. Please pass the Prozac.
Michael
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
==============================www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
=============================
|
