Reflections of a bird collision monitor

Re:Reflections of a bird collision monitor by cjensen on Tuesday April 09, 2024 @10:13PM (#39986307)

I don't know the literal answer to your question, but I think it's hard to compare these things in a simple way because they are different kinds of damage and occur to different kinds of species.

For example, wind energy in the Bay Area tends to cause damage to daytime soaring birds like eagles, vultures, and hawks. The small migratory birds that make up the bulk of the numerical losses from San Francisco's high-rises are almost entirely unaffected by wind energy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Reflections of a bird collision monitor by Terr_ on Wednesday April 10, 2024 @12:26AM (#39986950)

Yeah, in generic raw bird-lives wind-power wins easily. Even turbines designed by Vlad the Impaler aren't going to kill as many birds as the same systematic extraction and burning of fossil-fuels. [0]

> A 2012 study found that wind projects kill 0.269 birds per gigawatt-hour of electricity produced, compared to 5.18 birds killed per gigawatt-hour of electricity from fossil fuel projects.

That said, localized effects are another matter, if someone erects a bunch of wind farms around birds that are in some way vulnerable to them.

[0] https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/do-wind-turbines-kill-birds

[ Parent | on HN ]