In addition to becoming more prone to catastrophic failure, the
turbines also become less efficient at higher speeds because they become more like a wall
than a rotor, blocking the
wind from flowing past the rapidly rotating blades, says Asfaw Beyene, a professor of
engineering at San Diego State University in California, who was not involved with the work.
> Okey doke; let's agree that windpower is a good thing, generally, that it's desirable that
engineering solutions be sought to (further) minimize and certainly monitor the effect on bird life — especially raptors — and that the «cats kill more birds
than wind turbines» argument isn't a stellar example of a well - reasoned scientific argument addressing a legit scientific concern.
«
Wind power's ecological footprint is so small — a million times smaller than ethanol's — that if all the cars driven in the United States were battery - electric, they could be fueled by wind turbines whose total land footprint, not counting spacing in between, takes up less than 1.2 square miles, Stanford University environmental engineering professor Mark Jacobson found.&ra
Wind power's ecological footprint is so small — a million times smaller
than ethanol's — that if all the cars driven in the United States were battery - electric, they could be fueled by
wind turbines whose total land footprint, not counting spacing in between, takes up less than 1.2 square miles, Stanford University environmental engineering professor Mark Jacobson found.&ra
wind turbines whose total land footprint, not counting spacing in between, takes up less
than 1.2 square miles, Stanford University environmental
engineering professor Mark Jacobson found.»