I had a 40 gallon sears bladder type metal water tank for a well pump I was using with the bladder taken out to hold used veggie oil for a house heater and it could would start to make a high pitched resonating noised (kinda loud) when cars approached my house a block and a half away. At a block away I could start to hear the car it's self. This same kind of resonating oil bladder is found in many whale heads. Devoting 1/3 of your head to hear sounds means that sounds are very important to life it's self. A wind mill may actually make a high pitched sound all the time, and in a off shore wind farm, the entire area may be a noise producing disorienting death trap for whales. Has anybody with a brain that works even looked into that kind of stuff ? What under water sounds do wind farms produce ? Ultrasonic is an underwater/liquid type thing. Whales talk great distances since the density of water carries sound better/faster than compressible air. Solids transfer sounds very well like a string between to cans. I can see you, can you hear me? Magnetism is required to produce electricity & many animals use the earths magnetic field for directional travel. Does a wind farm disturb a compass ? or an animal ? Many electrical devices are grounded to the water table, are off shore wind mills grounded to the water table also creating an electrical problem for life in the area? Some fish or sharks use the slight electrical signal produced by the muscles of other animals to detect those animals. So some under water creatures are very sensitive to electricity. Humans are actually idiots to the point that they don't understand that they don't understand, so they don't even bother to try to understand what they are doing and the impact of their actions before they do the action. Like build a huge wind farm. Well, there are some thoughts to ponder anyway...
Wow... They invited this person on the show for Bri to tell him his stance is wrong and for Robbie to imply it's not really a big deal in the first place? Gee thanks.
Yes, and Bri seems to be saying whale deaths are one of the costs of addressing climate change. Why do we need to lose one thing to gain another? There are alternatives.
Michael Shellenberger is a fraud and so is his documentary. The data provided in his own documentary disprove his claim. Sonar exploration is not only used for wind turbine but many industries. The worst being oil rigs. But he only mentions wind turbines for some strange reason. Shellenberger isn’t a scientist and he doesn’t care about the science either. This is a political propaganda fabrication against renewable energies and nothing more.
@@RodHayward Bri would be wrong, since windfarms don't hurt whales. That's not according to the government, it's according to Shellenberger's own data --- he carefully avoids showing the data side by side, which reveals the years in which offshore windfarms go up have no impact on whale deaths. The real correlation is ocean temperature and whale death. The former drives whales into areas that are high traffic, and also feature mainstream fishing giants who use nets that aren't safe for whales.
She fot the last word alright. You could see she didnt like be made a fool of. So she had to bloviate at about nukes instead of whales. mike just smiled and realized she was way over her head and let her go on.
The sound pollution of wind farms is minimal. There is no correlation between them and whales deaths. The sound pollution of oil exploration is vastly greater, (they need to make far louder sounds so they can see _beneath_ the ocean floor,) and actually does harm whales by injuring their ears, yet there's still no correlation there, either. What is driving whales death percentages is ocean temperature, as increased temperature has pushed whales to migrate to areas with more traffic in pursuit of food.
Nuclear energy makes more sense, but apparently wind energy makes more money. Everything the politicians do is in relation to how much tax money can be forwarded to donors.
@@pjacobsen1000 - That's not true, especially not if one considers the *holistic cost* of providing a *reliable supply* of electricity.... People who advocate wind power (who are either dishonest or ignorant "useful idiots") will typically point to certain figures for supposed *per-kw/h* costs of wind power. The thing is though that electric consumers have no use for randomly and sporadically generated kw-hours of electricity. They need to be able to turn on the switch and have that energy available *on demand* - regardless of weather conditions at that particular moment. So this means that the electric companies have to build, maintain, and staff fossil fuel power plants and have them ready to produce whenever the wind (and/or solar) is not producing. In terms of *holistic* costs, wind/soar are simply much much more expensive, and would never be used to power electric grids were it not for subsidies and mandates.
It's marine biologists who say there is no correlation. Because there is none, EVEN ACCORDING TO SHELLENBERGER'S OWN GRAPHS. Oil exploration is louder, and actually loud enough to damage the ear drums of whales. The correlation, though, is between ocean temperature and whale deaths. And there's an actual PROVEN causal mechanism: whales migrate to places with higher boat traffic, and places where mainstream fishing companies use nets that aren't whaleproof.
Most of a wind turbine is made of metals, all of which can easily be recycled/re-smelted. The blades are made of glass fiber / carbon fiber / balsawood. Like all composite materials, those are harder to recycle. A dizzying array of industrial products are made of composite materials and have been for decades. Traditionally, those materials have been ground down and used as filler in road beds or other places where filler is needed. There is no evidence that wind turbines present a bigger waste problem than any other industrial product.
Also, the very large magnet that's needed to power wind turbines is 2 tons of rare earth materials. All which are extremely bad for the environment to gather, and mostly come from the C C P
@@howardj602 that's such a trope. Power plant waste is stored on-site in dry casks at the power plants. Do you seriously believe there's piles and piles of nuclear waste that we can't store? 😂 Idiot
Briahna is becoming a very strong contender for runner up in the "world's stupidest smart person" stakes. Sam Harris has got first place securely locked down, but the silver medal is almost in Briahna's reach at this point.
The problem for the obvious choice of nuclear base load energy is that it leaves politicians with one less "burning platform" issue that they can pretend to solve.
When the host starts talking, he is a perfect example of how current day young liberals think, shallow. I would bet even Michael Shellenberger was shocked to hear his response. In just one generation we went from SAVE the WHALES to meh, whatever, attitude.
She and her staff even doubled down , by doing quick research to prove her anti-nuclear stance. Then dumping it last minute so he could respond. What a bunch of……….
He’s actually libertarian, so I guess how liberals think lol. New viewer? I thought the liberal minded one gave a good counter argument, and Robbie gave a good chance for shellenberger to address the right’s argument
Michael should get other real environmental scientists to prepare solid evidence to prove how much worse wind farm against nuclear power plant. Many on YT have presented such analysis, for instance Thoughty2.
I could pretty much gumtree you nuclear is at least in this way significantly better, the main thing that would effect aquatic life would be thermal pollution, but that can be address with cooling ponds before the water is released into the ocean. Like Nuclear reactors leak stupidly small amounts of radiation due to the tight regulations around them, coal plants for example emit many times more radiation and the main concern around them isn't radiation it's particulates and the amount of CO2 they release.
Sorry for the multiple posts, but I think you can tell my opinion on nuclear power and renewables is quite nuanced, I'm basically pro everything apart from coal and natural gas and just using what makes sense where it makes sense. Really sunny place where it's sunny pretty much all year around use solar, really windy place or you are surrounded by ocean use wind, where you have the natural geography to minimally impact the environment use hydro, where you have none of those options use nuclear and a little bit of renewable and build HVDC power lines in conjunction with places where renewables makes sense and build pumped hydro storage to sell back energy over those HVDC lines back to places with lots of renewables when the wind isn't blowing or the sun isn't shining.
Nuclear power is SAFE AND EFFECTIVE, you science denier. Nuclear power is cleaner, more efficient and cheaper on the long run than any other source of power.
No. And the noise of the turbine alone interferes with delicate balance of aquatic life. All of these “green” solutions are nonsense and simply enrich another revenue stream for those who continue destroying and pillaging the planet.
@@Bike_Lion Piles can be drilled or hammered. The type of pile is decided at the design phase. The problem is the design does not seem to have taken into account the environmental impacts on whales.
@@Alex_Plante - Whether you're drilling or hammering, it creates a lot of noise either way. And then of course there's the boat traffic to and from for installation and maintenance. Agree though that they didn't take the impact on whales into account.
I have thought for decades now that all innovations in science and engineering should be tested and evaluated for cost and benefit. When an armament is invented the boffins begin finding an armament that will overcome it. When governments capture an armament from another power they take it away and analyse it We should have an international agency which looks at anything that enters the public domain to see what it's implication are for the public good.
Marine biologists and others have already been analyzing wind farms effect on whales. There is no correlation, positive or negative. Michael is a spin maestro for oil. The correlation is between whale deaths and ocean temperature --- as is the causation, as we know the migration patterns of whales is influenced by marine ecosystems, which are influenced by temperature, and the increase in temperature has caused whales to seek food in places that require them to navigate higher traffic areas. Also, oil exploration is so loud it actually damages the ears of whales. Michael here is an antienvironmentalist spin doctor for oil, has been for a long time.
Nuclear is not a bad idea, but wind farms don't harm whales. Shellenberger is a spin doctor for oil, has been for a long time. If sound pollution did cause whale deaths, we'd see much more from the oil industry.
So, just to be clear, what you're saying is that it's NOT the wind turbines themselves that cause the trouble, it's the construction techniques used to install them, along with all the associated surface traffic. Seems to me like the obvious solution is simply to figure out how to do all this quietly.
@@reinsmano Did I say it would be quiet? No. It just needs to be _quiet enough._ For example, drilling, as you helpfully pointed out, is not silent. However, it is a helluva lot quieter than pile-driving, which is the method they're currently using. And they don't need to eliminate surface traffic, they just need to make it less intrusive and less noisy. There are ways to do that too. And of course, since Right Whales are migratory, you could also just wait until they're far away to do the work. We've been drilling for oil for many decades without this kind of impact on the whales. And of course we've been driving boats all over the place for just as long. Surface traffic can be minimized by using larger vessels for fewer trips, and ferrying crew and supplies by air whenever feasible. Once the turbines are installed, they can go for months without maintenance, so _living with them_ is not much trouble for the whales, whereas installing them (using pile-drivers) would be like trying to sleep while somebody's running a jackhammer across the street. I think we can do better than that.
Not surprised to hear that Shellenberger got this wrong. His own data doesn't even agree with his thesis. There's no correlation between windfarm construction and operation and whale death.
First off, not one of these generators have produced enough power to even pay for itself! Do people really not know this? The Cost and Maintenance is far more expensive than a generator can make in is lifetime.
I recently watched an episode of Nova on PBS ,about plight of the whales. They blamed climate change but showed no evidence. Made me if the wind farms were the cause? There is not enough breeding happening also. The whales histrionic breeding grounds.
Even Shellenberger's own graphs in his documentary show no correlation between wind farms and whale deaths. Marine biologists all agree that there's no correlation, let alone any evidence of _causation._ His hypothesis is also pretty ridiculous considering that oil rigs make more noise, and oil exploration uses a kind of sound probing that is VASTLY louder than ANYTHING used in finding places to put wind farms. This is because oil exploration needs to _find oil,_ which means surveying deep beneath the surface, and you need louder noises to detect the echoes than if you were just surveying the sea floor. But Shellenberger has for a very long time been very pro oil, and you'll never hear a peep about any of this from him. Warmer oceans cause changes in marine ecosystems that have been pushing whales to migrate to different areas. Statistically, these areas have tended to be high in traffic, and also areas patrolled by mainstream fishing boats. The latter tend to use nets that are dangerous to whales, unlike coastal, small fishermen who use safer nets. The graphs show a clear link between temperature and whale death, and we also have a causal mechanism that isn't a just so story.
An explosion at the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico killed 11 workers and led to the release of approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil over 87 days. Response workers observed more than 1,400 marine mammals in the surface slick. Bottlenose dolphin, coastal and shelf dolphin, and oceanic whale were all injured.
Vote republican and save whales, your children, your 20 years of hard work for retirement, your rights, your religious freedoms, your individual speech and thoughts, your family legacy, your country and bloodline, and most importantly; your children’s freedom to be the best it can be.
Michael Shellenberger is a fraud and so is his documentary. The data provided in his own documentary disprove his claim. Sonar exploration is not only used for wind turbine but many industries. The worst being oil rigs. But he only mentions wind turbines for some strange reason. Shellenberger isn’t a scientist and he doesn’t care about the science either. This is a political propaganda fabrication against renewable energies and nothing more.
Those corps aren't really mega, yet. Anyhow, marine biologists all agree there's no correlation between whale deaths and wind farm construction. Shellenberger is just spin doctoring for oil, as he tends to do... in fact, his OWN graphs disagree with him!
How about not building them there at all? There are many more reasons not to build them than there are to build them. The first one I can think of is this; The ocean is a very harsh environment for something like a wind turbine. Just because they're not in your line of sight doesn't mean they're not causing great environmental harm.
@@wheel-man5319 There is, I find myself stating once again, no correlation, according to both marine biologists, independent studies, and Shellenberger's _own data,_ between wind farms and whale deaths.
Johangoris, oil exploration is magnitudes louder. They need to survey beneath the ocean, which takes bursts of sound that are magnitudes louder, loud enough to actually damage the eardrums of whales. This is because they need to bounce noise off strata deep beneath the surface of the ocean floor, and need to hear the echo produced, because they don't just need to know the shape of the floor, but where oil is beneath it.
The unforeseen environmental impacts of “green energy” are devastating. As if carbon emissions are the only threat to the environment. Of course they aren’t, but others aren’t as profitable. I hope we figure this out before the consequences are irreversible. Don’t like offshore drilling? You should oppose this just as hard
Oil is vastly more profitable than wind farms, why else do you think there's so many oil rigs and refineries???? And wind farms don't hurt whales, Shellenberger is making it all up. His own graphs show there's no correlation. Besides, oil rigs are louder.
Cost benefit of nuclear? One of the most crucial is surely that it’s the safest form of power production the world has. Fukushima, Three Mile Island wasn’t the direct cause of any death.
Three mile island was a minor accident. Chernobyl was indeed a direct cause of deaths not to mention massive radiation contamination. And Fukushima is a radioactive waste problem which is poisoning the Pacific ocean and currently there seems to be no good way to stop it. That however is not Nuclear powers fault per se but he result of morons that figured it was a good idea to build a plant on the shore of the country that gave the world the word Tsunami.
"That loud you noise you hear which is the sonar mapping of the ocean floor eventually will be pile driving to build those wind turbines" - Michael Schellenberger. To be clear then, the wind turbines are not disrupting whale migration patterns, but sonar is. Sonar is any device that surveys ocean floors using sound. These are used anywhere from submarines, commercial shipping, weather/hurricane detection, fishing boats...but he chooses to go after wind turbines. Hmmm...
@@topomusicale5580 Perhaps, but Shellenberger's own data disagrees with him. There's no correlation between whale deaths and offshore wind farm construction or operation.
She is pushing back on allegations made without evidence. That is the right way to do it. Note Shellenberger using terms like "we see", "correlated", "we think", "would cause deaths". These are all beliefs, not evidence.
Disappointing segment. The point isn’t to trade various methods of wind to various methods of nuclear, it’s that obviously the siting and environmental impact statement generation wasn’t done correctly (this is the assertion made by Shellenberger anyway). Stick to facts and ways to quickly resolve the issue of this particular project. Debate nuclear energy on another video.
IF you've ever eaten at a sushi restaurant in Tokyo as the little boats on the counter top moat float by....u no there are MANY people more about eating whales (within 15 min of serving) then saving them...
I dunno about any of that, I have never seen whale served anywhere here, but I do want to point out that Shellenberger is wrong --- his own data shows no correlation.
@@ricinroif humans hadn't started using fire intensely there is a reasonable possibility that all life on earth would have died due to a dearth of co2. But the communists at the heart of the green movement will not let you learn that at college. Plant death (and yours) occurs at 160ppm co2. It is a scientific fact that co2 is the gas of life.
I hav been c/o this for ages keep on making it happen and I’m still waiting for the next episode of this show.Keep on keeping up with the new episodes of this series.please where are Save The Whales 🐳 these beautiful animals need more love and attention keep up with this coverage
Michael Shellenberger is a fraud and so is his documentary. The data provided in his own documentary disprove his claim. Sonar exploration is not only used for wind turbine but many industries. The worst being oil rigs. But he only mentions wind turbines for some strange reason. Shellenberger isn’t a scientist and he doesn’t care about the science either. This is a political propaganda fabrication against renewable energies and nothing more.
Shellenberger is not interested on saving whales from sound pollution, or he'd complain about the much louder oil industry. There is no correlation at all between wind farm construction and whales deaths, only whales deaths and ocean temperature. Shellenberger is a pro oil spin doctor.
Nuclear plants will last a whole lot longer than any of these wind turbines they may only last 10 years then you have to change the blades. The blades are in environmental disaster they should change from blades. To eggbeater types which rotate on their own circumference
From what I understand, they're using materials in the wind blades that are more easily disposed of anti-inflammatory. Also, Shellenberger's own data shows no correlation between whale deaths and windfarm construction / operation. Not antinuclear, I'm just not antiwind.
Usually, Bri makes me angry. I was incredibly impressed at the pushback, fact checking, and actual logical debate she brought in, and not the ideological arguments she brings in sometimes. Incredibly refreshing for me
“I’m no way or against” this but then say everything in disagreement of what he said while reading it off a teleprompter. He countered all their arguments very well it just seems like those 2 had an agenda and weren’t listening at all.
Of course he did... But the only reason that 'green' energy is cheaper is because the govt is subsidizing it. When the true cost of either not having electricity when you need it, or building 100% backup (whether that's batteries [not currently practical] or NG fired turbines) then the cost of 'renewables' becomes practically infinite.
Oh my people are causing more harm lol not surprising. Maybe just maybe invest in your youth and they will actually come up with a good solution but no.
Yeah the lady is going to save the whales by talking about nuke plants for the whole show. God she can be goofy at times. Kind of like that mess called Ball
Over 300,000 whales and dolphins die every year in fishing nets, your map there with a dozen or so dead whales and your claim of 60 dying is nothing compared to fishing, also over fishing is killing them as you take away their food source........kind of makes me wonder who's paying for your research.
Whales have been beaching themselves for thousands of years through out history with records dating back hundreds of years. The largest beaching of whales was in 1918 on the Coast of New Zealand with 1,000 whales. I don't think we had Wind Turbines.
This is a ridiculous *straw man* argument. *Literally nobody* is saying that whales being beached *only* happens due to wind turbine construction. What they're saying is that industrial wind construction/maintenance now is causing it to happen *at a much higher rate* than it did a decade ago.
You're either incredibly ignorant and incapable of interpreting basic concepts of comparative analysis or you're acting in bad faith. Neither is a great look.
Omg Bri Was stewing about looking ridiculous re: her nuclear power plant being shut down. She couldn’t let it go - you need to be able to realize when your own argument has been destroyed ! She needs to let it go…she’s a good commentator, but made herself look very silly’s 😅
اني سنان وحيد العراق كركوك بداية حديثي اليكم سلامي من يدي على قناتكم اتابعكم على يوتيوب حتى باراك اوباما محترم اكثر اخبار لقاءة على يوتيوب يقول لي سنان تعال الى اين اي شخص يقول لك تعال الى اي مكان تذهب هذا شيء مجهول شعب صدام يمنعوني على فيديو مباشر وبيت ابيض مثلهم نفس كلام لم افهم من هذا رئيين متفقين على قتلي شعب صدام يقول اذا صورت امريكا يقتلك وبيت ابيض يقول اذا صورت شعب صدام يقتلوك جميع عالم فسرو هذا شيء بين اثنين شي تحيتي من يدي ونضري من عيني ونبض من القلب شكرا
seems like these northeast windfarms are not a wise use of important resources so many problems with huge wind equipment in this location. if they will try a smaller project to prove if there is a cost benefit, maybe. but when it is government spending tax money its often done badly. solar project Solyndra in 2009 USA tax money spent -- $560 Mil = 770 million today,, market changed & by 2011 Solyndra bankrupt. loss of all.. all because projects starting too large and rushed too fast to see the flaws.
@pe North Atlantic wind farms are in fact perfectly placed to harvest some of the strongest, steadiest winds in the world near a huge population center. Because the insane right wing in the US has delayed climate action for decades, further delay can be catastrophic. Offshore wind is a crucial climate solution that needs to be built as fast as possible. In fact, the Solyndra project was part of a renewable energy program that was overwhelmingly successful and made the taxpayers more than $5 billion. So let's look at just a tiny fraction of a percent of the CONG (coal, oil, nukes, gas) failures in recent years: Kingston, Tenn. and 47 other concurrent coal ash spills: 94 Solyndras LUST (Leaking Underground Storage Tanks): 58 Solyndras Federal oil and gas subsidies: 8 Solyndras/yr for >half a century. BP's Deepwater Horizon: >130 Solyndras. Hundreds more oil spills, coal mine disasters, 10 million deaths a year globally from fossil fuels, plus the enormous financial costs of death and debilitation that come with those, and the $6 trillion a year externalized from the cost accounting of their effects. Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository: 180 Solyndras Hanford Nuclear Reservation cleanup: 224 Solyndras Department of Energy's non-energy work: 35 Solyndras/yr FutureGen and FutureGen 2.0: 5.6 Solyndras VC Summer reactor: 18 Solyndras Georgia’s nuclear revival: 28 Solyndras Vogtle delays, cost overruns: 52 Solyndras Hinkley Point C: 336 Solyndras and rising Flamanville: 16 Solyndras Olkiluoto reactor: ? France’s Areva implosion: ? South Korea’s nuclear program scandal: ? TMI, 12 year clean up: 2 Solyndras, not adjusted for inflation. Chernobyl: 136 Solyndras, another huge undercount. Fukushima: As with most corporate disasters, we’ve been plagued by corporate/government lies and underestimates of damage since the first day of the disaster; of course even 10 years later no one knows how much it will finally cost since the accident is still happening and is likely to go on for generations. The underestimates keep rising, but reasonably conservative honest guesses run from half a trillion to a trillion dollars. Split the difference and call it: 1500 Solyndras
Sonar from Submarines is a terrible killer for all kinds of anmials including dolphins and wales, and i guess it would be much more useful to take care for looking there, as wind turbines are an extremely useful and clean powersource that we definitely need to finally being able to stop burning this crazy amounts of coal and oil.
Is there anyone more convinced of their brilliance more than Brianna Gray ? I very much want to hear all sides of an argument. But why are her’s so illogical, filled with incorrect facts and frankly…lame. She can’t stand being proved wrong so during the interview she quickly googles wiki to throw back out “facts” at Shellenberger and then cuts off the interview so she doesn’t get shown up again. What a journalistic loser. Both of them were so shown to be not at the level of Shellenberger’s journalistic level.
I didn't watch the video, so I have no idea about Brianna Gray's argument, but Potholer54 die a fantastic job of showing that Shellenberger's own graphs don't agree with him.
This guy is an overt liar. His own data shows no correlation. Marine biologists agree there is no correlation. Wind farms gave zero quantifiable impact on whale deaths. And oil exploration is louder, anyways.
There’s only 340 of these whales left and they’re killing them left and right the greed is so strong that the governor Murphy of New Jersey won’t listen to anyone he’s been questioned about it and he just blows it off. He’s gotta get those bird chopping and those whale killing machines going. He’s got too much money invested in it.
@Bri Except, Bri.... WIND TURBINES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH WHALES! Whales are mostly killed by fishing nets, ship collisions, & climate catastrophe. You’ve gotta get people to stop using fossil fuels & eating fish. (Moving fossil fuels is 40% of global shipping.) "'Thrown to the wind' - are wind farms really killing whales?" potholer54 video
It's not necessarily the pile driving and boat traffic that's detrimental to the whales/marine mammals. It's the seismic testing needed to find suitable bottom to set these offshore structures on, similar to building a bridge. These offshore wind projects require huge areas of testing right from Maine all the way down to Virginia. The Diamond offshore wind project in Maine alone requires 1800 square miles. The seismic testing machines used is similar to the testing used for the offshore oil industry. The machines can produce up to 250 decibels. The hypocrisy from some of these environmental groups actions on this offshore wind testing vs the testing from gas and oil companies is hilarious if not for the effects on the marine life. Another thing of comedy, the company leading the charge in the US offshore wind ,Orsted, is an old Danish oil company still full of old oil execs. They sure know how to play environmentalists like a fiddle.
The oil exploration needs to be that loud because they are trying to see underground. Wind farms only need to see the surface and therefore make way less noise to see the bottom. There is no evidence that wind farm preparations cause any more trouble than standard ships at sea. If wind farms need to be stopped because it is too loud, shipping and more importantly noisy oil rigs would need to stop too. The data provided in this documentary actually disproves the correlation between wind farm and whale deaths they claim to expose…
They aren't the same machine, and the sound they make is more like 50 decibels. Shellenberger is a spin doctor. Marine biologists all agree that wind farm construction has nil impact on whales. This anti wind farm thing is itself just more mindgames from oil execs, probably because they'd rather redirect the funding to oil, which is more profitable. Reminds me of the propagandist's cliche, "in chaos, there is opprtunity."
@@peppermintgal4302 On a side note, that very project, Ocean II along with Ocean I ceased operations recently citing increases in material cost along with inflation.. Previous to the announcement, they had requested increases from the already large subsidies they receive ,with the Biden administration refusing.
@@peppermintgal4302 Have no idea why my comments get deleted. Maybe someone is reporting. I'll try again. "They aren't the same machine, and the sound they make is more like 50 decibels" Nope. Been there, done that. I worked in the geophysical industry for 4 years. Yes , the technology has advanced, still harmful to marine life AND it's not like the oil industry still uses older technology. It's all bad. "Marine biologists all agree that wind farm construction has nil impact on whales." Lolol. Yeah. All of them. You live in clown world? Probably why Offshore Wind Companies are covering their tracks with Marine Mammal incidentals for Offshore surveys. From the Federal Register. On October 1, 2021, NMFS received a request from Ocean Wind II for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to high-resolution geophysical (HRG) marine site characterization surveys offshore of New Jersey. On March 3, 2023, NMFS received a request from Ocean Wind II for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to HRG marine site characterization surveys offshore of New Jersey in BOEM Lease Area OCS-A 0532 and associated ECR area. Ocean Wind II's request is for take of 16 species (comprising 17 stocks) of marine mammals. But hey, they say there will likely be no deaths, so nothing to see here, .Move along. "This anti wind farm thing is itself just more mindgames from oil execs" The old Danish oil company Orsted is leading the charge on this . The CEO of Diamond offshore wind is a former Exxon CEO. Lol. So what you're saying is it's oil vs oil.
@@peppermintgal4302 How's about that Ocean Wind II with their taking a marine mammals incidental to high-resolution geophysical ? Isn't that wonderful? I have no idea why an old oil company would do that. I hear this offshore wind geophysical is all but a simple tickle for whales ,.
