[joypulv]

I'm trying to think of a well known scientific fact that hasn't been refuted, often over and over, and who is to say when it's over.
Why the sky is blue, I guess.

[tomder55]

At best ,the speculation I've seen about climate change are hypothesis . It really didn't help the man made anthropogenic climate change crowd when their scientists were caught falsifying data .

[speechlesstx]

Speaking of false data, seems the Obama administration is vastly underestimating the number of victims of wind energy companies it refuses to prosecute.

A new study found that the federal government underestimated the number of birds that die colliding with wind turbines across the country.

In fact, bird deaths were found to be 30 percent higher than previous estimates given by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2009.

“I estimated 888,000 bat and 573,000 bird fatalities/year (including 83,000 raptor fatalities) at 51,630 megawatt (MW) of installed wind-energy capacity in the United States in 2012,” writes K. Shawn Smallwood, author of the study that was published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin.

“As wind energy continues to expand, there is urgent need to improve fatality monitoring methods, especially in the implementation of detection trials, which should be more realistically incorporated into routine monitoring,” Smallwood added.

Wind turbines have been a dividing issue among environmental groups, as different priorities are placed on promoting renewable energy to curb global warming versus saving wildlife.

“It is the rationale that we have to get off of carbon, we have to get off of fossil fuels, that allows them to justify this,” said Tom Dougherty, a former National Wildlife Federation employee. “But at what cost? In this case, the cost is too high.”

Last month, environmentalists and bird enthusiasts watched in horror as the rare White-throated Needletail flew into a wind turbine and died on the Outer Hebrides.

Read more: Feds underestimate how many birds killed by wind turbines | The Daily Caller

Meanwhile, as Virginia's two Democratic senators introduced legislation to end Obama's offshore drilling ban while the House passed their own version, the admin joyously announced an auction of 112,800 acres off the Virginia coast for wind energy leases instead.

Save the birds from this reckless and ugly expansion!

[joypulv]

A recent study revealed that 1.4 - 3.7 BILLION birds are killed by cats in the US each year. It was part of a three-year Fish and Wildlife Service-funded effort to estimate the number of birds killed by predators, chemicals and in collisions with wind generators and windows.

Could be the same source that your 573,000 birds killed by wind turbines came from.

Sure, those big blades are a concern. So is the entire problem of huge gulping consumption of finite energy sources.

Oh - and cats.

[speechlesstx]

A recent study revealed that 1.4 - 3.7 BILLION birds are killed by cats in the US each year. It was part of a three-year Fish and Wildlife Service-funded effort to estimate the number of birds killed by predators, chemicals and in collisions with wind generators and windows.

Could be the same source that your 573,000 birds killed by wind turbines came from.

Sure, those big blades are a concern. So is the entire problem of huge gulping consumption of finite energy sources.

Oh - and cats.

It's not illegal for cats to kill sparrows and I'm sure they're no match for a bald eagle.

It is illegal to kill birds protected by the Eagle Protection and Migratory Bird Treaty Acts, yet only wind energy companies are being exempted from penalty and prosecution while others are not - while the administration is underestimating the impact. Why is that?

[joypulv]

It's not illegal for cats to kill sparrows and I'm sure they're no match for a bald eagle.

It is illegal to kill birds protected by the Eagle Protection and Migratory Bird Treaty Acts, yet only wind energy companies are being exempted from penalty and prosecution while others are not - while the administration is underestimating the impact. Why is that?

Good point. Probably the same old reason - once the wheels are in motion, etc.

[speechlesstx]

More unintended consequences of the war on global warming. Aside from the fact that paper grocery bags "require more energy to produce and transport" and those reusable bags can be hazardous to your health, it's come to this...

Plastic bag ban leads to nationwide increase in shoplifting rates

[paraclete]

Not only that speech but you have to cut down trees to make paper bags, whatever are they thinking. Around here we are insisting on biodegradable bags and that thing with the green bags, it has come and gone

[speechlesstx]

Trees are renewable, recyclable and biodegradable plus our forest growth has exceeded the harvest since the 40s.

[paraclete]

Ok so forest products it is then, filthy great paper mills, pollution, etc its preferable to a bi-product of petroleum which is there anyway

[speechlesstx]

Ok so forest products it is then, filthy great paper mills, pollution, etc its preferable to a bi-product of petroleum which is there anyway

I love wood, love to saw, cut, carve, nail, paint and stain it. Wonderful stuff.

[tomder55]

Trees are renewable, recyclable and biodegradable plus our forest growth has exceeded the harvest since the 40s.

We have maintained the same levels of forest in the US since 1900 and many areas in the plains have been returned to wild as our farmlands became more productive and efficient

[paraclete]

Some how you don't get it, using wood puts CO2 in the atmosphere sooner or later, there is a great deal of waste in the forest products industry, yes wood is renewable but it still has a footprint and is better left absorbing carbon. This is a planet wide thing it isn't about whether you have more or less forest, it is whether you are a consumer of rain forest timbers or worse still the soya grown where the forest was cut down. How efficient are your farmlands when farmers are sucking on the government teat? Stop fooling yourself and stop growing corn for fuel

[tomder55]

some how you don't get it, using wood puts CO2 in the atmosphere sooner or later, there is a great deal of waste in the forest products industry, yes wood is renewable but it still has a footprint and is better left absorbing carbon. this is a planet wide thing it isn't about whether you have more or less forest, it is whether you are a consumer of rain forest timbers or worse still the soya grown where the forest was cut down. How efficient are your farmlands when farmers are sucking on the government teat? stop fooling yourself and stop growing corn for fuel

God left us as stewards of the planet to use the resources . A forest over grown is a forest that will burn . The US is a net carbon sink because we for the most part properly MANAGE the forests (at least we did until foolhardy environmentalists took steps to prevent managed logging )

[speechlesstx]

Yep, we actually do have more trees than 100 years ago...

In the United States, which contains 8 percent of the world's forests, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Forest growth nationally has exceeded harvest since the 1940s. By 1997, forest growth exceeded harvest by 42 percent and the volume of forest growth was 380 percent greater than it had been in 1920." The greatest gains have been seen on the East Coast (with average volumes of wood per acre almost doubling since the '50s) which was the area most heavily logged by European settlers beginning in the 1600s, soon after their arrival.


This is great news for those who care about the environment because trees store CO2, produce oxygen — which is necessary for all life on Earth — remove toxins from the air, and create habitat for animals, insects and more basic forms of life. Well-managed forest plantations like those overseen by the Forest Stewardship Council also furnish us with wood, a renewable material that can be used for building, furniture, paper products and more, and all of which are biodegradable at the end of their lifecycle.

[tomder55]

stop fooling yourself and stop growing corn for fuel

Completely agree... Me ;I burn logs in my fireplace ;not corn.

[speechlesstx]

some how you don't get it, using wood puts CO2 in the atmosphere sooner or later, there is a great deal of waste in the forest products industry, yes wood is renewable but it still has a footprint and is better left absorbing carbon. this is a planet wide thing it isn't about whether you have more or less forest, it is whether you are a consumer of rain forest timbers or worse still the soya grown where the forest was cut down. How efficient are your farmlands when farmers are sucking on the government teat? stop fooling yourself and stop growing corn for fuel

Dude, almost every scrap of wood is utilized it's very efficient. More trees suck up more CO2, and our levels of emissions are at a 20 year low - without any silly emissions trading schemes.

[speechlesstx]

completely agree ... Me ;I burn logs in my fireplace ;not corn.

Don't have a fireplace but I use plenty of apple, cherry, hickory and mesquite during grilling/smoking season. I don't think corn would give the desired result.

[talaniman]

We need a lot more trees then to arrest the rising CO2 emission from refineries, and all that shale oil bubbling out of the ground in many locations in the US, and Canada, not to mention another oil rig burning in the gulf. Heck we never cleaned up from Exxon Valdez!

Drill baby drill and frack some more jack, and let the trees clean up the mess.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1792167.html

Also, while natural gas burns cleaner than coal, it still emits some CO2. And drilling has its own environmental consequences, which are not yet fully understood.

"Natural gas is not a long-term solution to the CO2 problem," Pielke warned.

[paraclete]

Yep, we actually do have more trees than 100 years ago...

I don't know what those managed forests look like where you are but here they are softwood, not native to the land, they create a monoculture where animals don't live, Nothing lives there but the trees, they are clear felled and replanted every twenty five years and the spores in the air cause asthma. Our wonderful cedar forests were all lost a century ago. I suspect you might have something similar