[John Stossel] "Green Double Standards"

[Knightskye]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/johnstossel...standards.html

Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, you can be prosecuted if you kill protected birds. Recently, ExxonMobil was fined $600,000 fine for killing 85 birds that came into contact with crude oil or other pollutants on company property.

Robert Bryce points out that while hundreds of these cases have been brought against energy companies, one form of energy seems immune: wind power. Yet wind turbines kill many more birds:

Michael Fry of the American Bird Conservancy estimates that U.S. wind turbines kill between 75,000 and 275,000 birds per year. Yet the Justice Department is not bringing cases against wind companies.

"Somebody has given the wind industry a get-out-of-jail-free card," Mr. Fry told me. "If there were even one prosecution," he added, the wind industry would be forced to take the issue seriously.

According to the American Wind Energy Association, the industry's trade association, each megawatt of installed wind-power results in the killing of between one and six birds per year ... a "very small fraction of those caused by other commonly accepted human activities and structures—house cats kill an estimated one billion birds annually." That may be true, but it is not much of a defense. When cats kill birds, federal law doesn't require marching them to our courthouses…

... This is a double standard that more people—and not just bird lovers—should be paying attention to ... Federal law-enforcement officials are turning a blind eye to the harm done by "green" energy.

Of course there’s a double standard. The big energy companies are evil. Wind producers are “green," so they receive a free pass.

If it's Exxon, the response would, "Fine those suckers $1 million a bird."

If it's wind energy, the response would be, "Those birds were asking for it."

How do liberals sleep at night?

[carmaphob]

Nice. Thanks.

[Objectivist]

The same thing can be said of energy, while reprocessing fuel rods is viable and used abroad(with US technology), people such as Al Gore made sure we continue to use and build more coal fired power plants, plants that spew thousands of tons of radioactive waste up the pipe and then in slag out on the ground. Reprocessing eliminates waste in nuclear power plants and new FBRs create fuel from existing fuels.

http://www.worldenergysource.com/art...od_WE_v7n4.cfm
http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/...t/colmain.html

[phill4paul]

Thanks ...I can't wait to bait some liberal friends with this. Fish-ON!

[Objectivist]

You should ask them about all the people that have died working in the Wind Energy Industry..... nobody has died working at a Commercial Nuclear Power Plant.

[SimpleName]

You should ask them about all the people that have died working in the Wind Energy Industry..... nobody has died working at a Commercial Nuclear Power Plant.

What kind of deaths are these exactly? Any links?

[Objectivist]

What kind of deaths are these exactly? Any links?

Yeah, read Paul Gipe's book "Wind Power". Paul has been in the Wind Business since the 70s and has the stat in his book, which has been updated repeatedly. Or you can search online..... I'll find you some links as I cannot send you my valued resource over the net.

AS I suspected Paul had a story posted. Take note that deaths will increase as the number of turbines increase. Turbines need regular maintenance and a number of deaths are from that alone.
http://www.wind-works.org/articles/BreathLife.html

[Knightskye]

Yeah, read Paul Gipe's book "Wind Power". Paul has been in the Wind Business since the 70s and has the stat in his book, which has been updated repeatedly. Or you can search online..... I'll find you some links as I cannot send you my valued resource over the net.

AS I suspected Paul had a story posted. Take note that deaths will increase as the number of turbines increase. Turbines need regular maintenance and a number of deaths are from that alone.
http://www.wind-works.org/articles/BreathLife.html

The high number of deaths in the USA may be connected to the typically frantic nature of year-end, tax-subsidy driven installation booms.

Imagine when we're allocating $100 billion a year toward them.

[Objectivist]

Imagine when we're allocating $100 billion a year toward them.

I'm very PRO-Wind but I always take into consideration the dangers of any source of energy. There IS a danger in using wind turbines, there are also costs associated with maintaining them. Do they provide a relatively clean energy source? Yes they do. Do they need the wind to blow at certain speeds to produce energy? Yes they do. Are there problems with load surge? Yes there are. Can you run a first world economy on Wind? NOPE!

[roho76]

You should ask them about all the people that have died working in the Wind Energy Industry..... nobody has died working at a Commercial Nuclear Power Plant.

***Chernobyl****

That's a lot of dead people.

I don't know of anybody dying from a wind turbine unless they fell building it or fixing it and I'm sure there have been people who've died from building Nuclear Power plants too.

[Objectivist]

***Chernobyl****

That's a lot of dead people.

I don't know of anybody dying from a wind turbine unless they fell building it or fixing it and I'm sure there have been people who've died from building Nuclear Power plants too.

Did you miss the part where I stated clearly......"Commercial Nuclear Power Plant" that excludes 1950s designed communist government controlled nuclear power plants like Chernobyl. WHich Western countries called to be shut down in the 1960s because it lacked a CONTAINMENT FACILITY.

WOuld you like to try again?

Maybe you'd like to get up to date on CURRENT Nuclear Technology before making anymore ignorant comments.

ANd I posted a link to deaths on wind turbines, then I've read a few books on the subject including Paul's "Wind Power" which covered some of it.

And please feel free to refute my comments anytime. But source your belief that someone has died operating a Commercial Nuclear Power Plant.

[Ian A.]

As I read this, I was watching a Stossel piece some might like:

YouTube - Part 6: 5/8/09 John Stossel's "You Can't Even Talk About It"

[devil21]

^^^^
That video explains the reason for the entire "Health Care Reform" agenda. As usual, government has NO foresight and the promises of 40 years ago are coming home to roost.

[Flirple]

From John's blog:

I'm Moving to FOX

09/10/2009 2:26 PM


It's time for a change.

In one month, I leave ABC News.

In October, I will join the folks at Fox.

I plan to do a one hour prime time show every week on FBN, the Fox Business Channel, and contribute to various existing programs on Fox News Channel.

I’m grateful to ABC News for allowing me to do stories that challenged conventional wisdom, and occasionally enraged many of its viewers. But it’s said that everyone should change jobs every 7 years. I’ve been at ABC for 28 years ...

In my new job, I want to dig into the meaning of the words “liberty” and “limited government”. ABC enabled me to do some of that, but Fox offers me more airtime and a new challenge.

I’m still considering what I will do with my own show, one hour each week. Economics certainly. Exercises in understanding libertarianism. My “take” on the issues of the day. Kind of like this blog. In fact, maybe we’ll call it, Stossel’s Take?

I ask you for your ideas. A studio audience? Should I wander around Congress?

To be continued...

[devil21]

FBN? He's getting pigeon-holed.

[Knightskye]

FBN? He's getting pigeon-holed.

You don't think any of the "conservatives" who watch FBN need some Stossel persuasion?

[devil21]

You don't think any of the "conservatives" who watch FBN need some Stossel persuasion?

You mean people actually watch FBN?

[Knightskye]

You mean people actually watch FBN?

Oh, christ, I hadn't even looked at the ratings. 21,000?

No wonder they had Ron Paul and Peter Schiff on all the time...

Well, FOX News as a network is available to a lot more people. The Wikipedia entry for FBN said it was available to 49 million.

I guess that's why they're adding Imus and Stossel to the channel, to try to get people to watch it.

21,000 is ridiculous, though. How do they afford keeping all those shows afloat?

[Flirple]

Yes Stossel's new show will have a small fraction of the viewers he had for his specials on 20/20. But on the other hand he will be able to have much more freedom to go even further with his libertarianism and not have to share time/space with the lame news magazine crap he had to do on ABC.

And if he gets good ratings (for FBN that is) who knows, they may put him on Fox news with his own daily show after Beck or something.

But what I think is even more important than him having his own show on the business channel, is the news that he will be contributing to various existing shows on Fox's main network. That will be hugely helpful and more his cup of tea. He's never been an anchorman type anyways, he's really more of a consumer reporter/ contributor anyways.

FOX News Channel (FNC) & FOX Business Network (FBN) have signed a multi-year deal with award-winning journalist John Stossel to anchor a weekly program on FBN and make regular appearances on FNC, announced Kevin Magee, Executive Vice President.

The one-hour FOX Business program, entitled Stossel, will debut during the fourth quarter of 2009 on FBN's primetime line-up, featuring in-depth reports and discussions surrounding libertarian issues in the United States and abroad. Each week Stossel will be joined by experts to explore consumer-focused topics such as free-market economies, civil liberties, the business of health care, social security, and free trade.

Stossel will also make regular daytime and primetime appearances on FNC as well as host and produce a series of one-hour specials for the news network. In addition, his blog Stossel's Take, will be published on both foxbusiness.com and foxnews.com.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/...fox_130603.asp