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.
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.
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...
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
@@peppermintgal4302 Northern right whales feed primarily on Copepods, a small free swimming crustacean. Some people call crustaceans such as lobster/crab a fish , although really a shellfish. How dare he call them a fish. " His own data doesn't even agree with his thesis." Do share, please, "There's no correlation between windfarm construction and operation and whale death." First, go look up the term "Correlation" in a dictionary, then look at all the incidents with whale and dolphin standings that occurred in that short 2 and a half month period all coinciding with 6 ships in the area in question performing geophysical testing with Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS), and then proceed to collect average whale stranding/death data from NOAA and rethink what you said. And for a bonus, go read peer reviewed studies(Before this issue became polarized and political with 2 teams )on Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS) Geophysical testing and their effects on Marine mammals. Then make a decision on who's brainwashed.
@@Grow3GlowIf you take the time to study co2 and how much plants need, as well as historic levels of co2 then you might be very much not concerned about having too much co2 in the atmosphere.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
@@peppermintgal4302 Apostolos Gerasoulis, a Rutgers professor emeritus of computer science dome a study on whale deaths and sonar exploration. He came to the conclusion that there is indeed a strong correlation with High Intensity 3D sonar exploration and whale deaths. We're not talking about an average professor here, He's one of five people in the world who builds search engines, a computational science expert. He's certain it's the cause. And no, he's not working for oil companies. Is there any evidence Shellenberger is? Here's the kicker though, the large corporation leading the charge (Orsted ) is an old Danish oil company. Their execs are all old oil guys. The CEO of one of their sub companies , Diamond Offshore Wind, is the former CEO of Exxon. Isn't that hilarious?
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.
More like an oil shill. His own data shows there's no correlation between whale death and wind farm construction or activity. He is always careful not to show the graphs together, and simply suggests a spike in one correlates with a spike in the other, even though they are entirely different years.
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.
@@matthewjackson337 So potholer54 would also defend Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS) geophysical testing for the oil and gas industry? He'd go against Greenpeace's stance on this oil and gas sonar exploration? Here's a statement form Greenpeace a few years ago regarding seismic testing "seismic occurrences in the ocean, including SONAR, can result in temporary and permanent hearing loss, abandonment of habitat, disruption of mating and feeding, beach strandings and even death”. "a deaf whale is a dead whale”, They've recently been silent on the offshore wind seismic surveys, which is odd Did he mention Orsted's 2 large wind projects Oceanwind I and Oceanwind II requesting marine mammal incidentals from the NMFS. (that's on a government website) Why did they ask for it if Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS) is so safe "On October 1, 2021, NMFS received a request from Ocean Wind I 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." It's simple, Offshore oil and gas should be banned along with the industrialization of the ocean with wind farms.
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.
@@mrg0th1er83 "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." That's correct, but the issue in question is the Eastern Seaboard where the highest population of whales occur and Oil exploration does not. Isn't there a moratorium on Oil Exploration on the East Coast of the US ?
When he tells the truth for once, maybe. Marine biologists agree there is no impact on whales from wind farm construction or exploration. The equipment they use is like a fifth the volume of oil exploration. This guy doesn't even get the diets of right whales correct.
What you need to look at is the changes in fish populations related to global warming , lots of fish populations are moving north, so a changing food resource in the area could be a very important reason for whale deaths. Michael Shallenberger is a rightwing activist and nuclear and fossil fuel activist posing as an environmentalist
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.
@@peppermintgal4302 The cancellation of Oceanwind I and Oceanwind II projects off New Jersey say otherwise. The parent company Orsted (Ironically an old danish oil company) signed approved contracts with the Trump Administration for subsidies amounting to 30% of the cost of both projects. Citing an increase in cost of product and inflation as the result of Covid, Orsted asked for a 40% subsidy from the Biden administration and were refused (Hence the cancellation).
@@peppermintgal4302 "there is no correlation even in his own data." I've never watched his documentary, but I did read Rutgers professor emeritus of computer science Apostolos Gerasoulis' study last year on the increase in whale deaths that coincided with and increase in Ultra High Resolution 3D Sonar geophysical exploration.. Gerasoulis is an expert in computational sciences and One of only 5scientists in the world tbuild search engines. The man is a genius. His data eliminated all variables/factors He came to the conclusion that the increase in UHR3D was the link. .
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.
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.
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.
@@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.
How is this woman a suitable person for discussing this topic when obviously she is regurgitating false information like global warming, declining arctic species, algae blooms, etc. etc?
Global warming is, at this point, a fact so obvious even my very conservative family largely agrees on it. Not sure about the whole nuclear causing algae blooms, first I heard about it. But Shellenberger is wrong, his own data shows no correlation between whale deaths and offshore wind farm construction / activity.
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.
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.
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.
@Ash And I hate it when people spread lies about climate catastrophe & renewable energy. But we don’t always get what we want. Wind & solar are immensely better than fossil & fissile fuels in every way. “Setting the Record Straight About Renewable Energy” Susan Tierney & Lori Bird, May 12, 2020 “Solar Waste Stream is Tiny, Compared to Current Fossil Fuels” This Is Not Cool, October 9, 2023 “A Reality Check About Solar Panel Waste and the Effects on Human Health” The coming surge in photovoltaic panel waste is tiny compared to other categories, and most health concerns about solar equipment are unfounded. Dan Gearino October 12, 2023 “Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic module toxicity and waste are slowing decarbonization” Heather Mirletz, et al. Nature “A Fossil Fuel Economy Requires 535x More Mining Than a Clean Energy Economy” Michael Thomas, Distilled, March 29, 2023 “New Video: Clean Energy = Less Mining” This Is Not Cool, September 15, 2022 "Mining quantities for low-carbon energy is hundreds to thousands of times lower than mining for fossil fuels” Hannah Ritchie, Jan. 18, 2023 “Low-carbon tech needs much fewer materials than it used to; this matters for resource extraction in the future” Hannah Ritchie Nov. 11, 2024 “By 2042, Chinese Battery Maker Will No Longer Need Mining as Recycling Takes Over” This Is Not Cool, May 22, 2024 …CEO of CATL, the world's largest battery company…says they're becoming so good at recycling… (already at 99.6% for Nickel and Cobalt) “NREL: How Much Land for Renewables?” This Is Not Cool, March 1, 2023 [The RE land figures given here must be cut in ½ to reflect RE energy savings, ½ again for rapid tech advances, ½ again because the US could do it all with offshore wind & rooftop solar. Even though it won’t, those will save enormous amounts of land.] “Solar Much More Efficient Use of Land vs Ethanol” This Is Not Cool, January 22, 2022
@@zanderterblanche When they’re known, the causes of whale deaths are mostly ship collisions & entanglement in fish nets. Know what would eliminate 40% of world shipping? That’s right, GETTING RID OF FOSSIL FUELS! 40% of global shipping is just moving fossil fuels around. “'Thrown to the wind' - are wind farms really killing whales?” potholer54 And as potholer points out, changing the methods & equipment used by fishing ships would reduce whale deaths, too. So would people eating fewer fish, just like eating fewer cows, pigs, chickens, & water buffalo would lead to less deforestation, ocean dead zones, & fewer mass bird deaths. “When Did Big Oil Decide to Save the Whales?” THINC Blog, 3/9/2023 “ship collisions are a top cause of death for Alaskan marine mammals, including whales, sea lions and porpoises.” “Steller sea lions top list of Alaska marine mammals killed by human activities” Alaska Beacon, November 23, 2023 What a Living Whale Is Worth - and Why the Economy Should Protect Nature | Ralph Chami | TED AGAINST THE WIND Brown University Climate and Development Lab A Map of the Anti-Offshore Wind Network in the Eastern United States December, 2023
@@zanderterblanche When they’re known, the causes of whale deaths are mostly ship collisions & entanglement in fish nets. Know what would eliminate 40% of world shipping? That’s right, getting rid of fossil fuels! 40% of global shipping is just moving fossil fuels around. “'Thrown to the wind' - are wind farms really killing whales?” potholer54 As potholer points out, changing the methods & equipment used by fishing ships would reduce whale deaths, too. So would people eating fewer fish, just like eating fewer cows, pigs, chickens, & water buffalo would lead to less deforestation, fewer ocean dead zones, & fewer mass bird deaths. “When Did Big Oil Decide to Save the Whales?” THINC Blog, 3/9/2023 “ship collisions are a top cause of death for Alaskan marine mammals, including whales, sea lions and porpoises.” “Steller sea lions top list of Alaska marine mammals killed by human activities” Alaska Beacon, November 23, 2023 What a Living Whale Is Worth - and Why the Economy Should Protect Nature | Ralph Chami | TED Against The Wind Brown University Climate and Development Lab A Map of the Anti-Offshore Wind Network in the Eastern United States December, 2023
“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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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 😅
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
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
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.
@@RodHayward because it is a death cult
@@RodHayward
Sacrifices need to be made:
If we decrease the population there will be more oxygen for children- VP Harris
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.
So one problem that is not talked about enough is sound pollution.
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.
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...
Micheal just telling Bri “No that didn’t happen” and then say facts was refreshing.
Then she ends the segment with some nonsense intentionally giving michael no chance to respond to it
@Ja He didn’t say any facts; only lies. Read my comments here for the facts.
@@IAmInterested-cc4hr Why should she give him a forum to tell more lies?
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.
Hey don't say common sense things.
well nuclear energy is more expensive, otherwise they would have more money to forward to politicians and change the narrative
Not only does it make more money, it also saves more money for the electricity consumer.
It only makes more money due to subsidies. Nuclear is much cheaper to produce.
@@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.
There’s not enough landfill space to dispose of wind turbines that degrade 2 times faster than promised.
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
@@elmastro-ye9lw Yeah they are only placed directly in friggin salt water lol. Can't imagine why they would degrade......
@@elmastro-ye9lw cause it’s made of fiberglass
@@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
Bri can’t let it go and insists on getting the last word … again.
🐱🐱
She is a control freak. Have to get the last word. I am never wrong. Kinda narcissistic of her
🤯
said it once and ill say it 1000 more times they only green is MONEY.
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.
Also that snicker journalist is as sxtxuxpxixd as it get.
@@Etheoma I agree 100%. I've been making similar comments all over for at least 10 years now.
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.
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
From my understanding Michael Shelinburger used to be a liberal:
@@nomnomnooma - Since when did "save the wales!" become "the right’s argument"????
Glad the whales have him on their side,God Bless him
The government isn’t going to help keep these wind people accountable, the government and this aspect of green energy are hand in hand
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.
Not to mention the vibratory infrasound that they generate. It adversely affects human, animal and bird nervous systems.
Note for Michael: right whales are baleen whales. They don't feed on fish. They don't hunt. They eat zooplankton.
Michael Shellenberger is lying about everything else, not surprised to hear that that was a lie, too.
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.
@@peppermintgal4302
Northern right whales feed primarily on Copepods, a small free swimming crustacean. Some people call crustaceans such as lobster/crab a fish , although really a shellfish. How dare he call them a fish.
" His own data doesn't even agree with his thesis." Do share, please,
"There's no correlation between windfarm construction and operation and whale death."
First, go look up the term "Correlation" in a dictionary, then look at all the incidents with whale and dolphin standings that occurred in that short 2 and a half month period all coinciding with 6 ships in the area in question performing geophysical testing with Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS), and then proceed to collect average whale stranding/death data from NOAA and rethink what you said.
And for a bonus, go read peer reviewed studies(Before this issue became polarized and political with 2 teams )on Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS) Geophysical testing and their effects on Marine mammals. Then make a decision on who's brainwashed.
How do they control the blowouts from these things when they they go bad at all that oil and everything leaks into the water explain that they won’t
That's why I refer to them as ruinables.
Attempts to save the planet will destroy the planet.
Exactly. If we had more whales and trees and nature was thriving....we would naturally reduce co2
@@Grow3GlowIf you take the time to study co2 and how much plants need, as well as historic levels of co2 then you might be very much not concerned about having too much co2 in the atmosphere.
Small modular nuclear is the answer. It works. Its safe. It is needed now.
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.
It's possible to have off-shore wind turbines without driving piles into the seabed.
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.
No, actually it's not possible.
@@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.
@@Bike_Lion Floating offshore wind is very much a thing, so yes it is.
Notice how she just spews out, democratic talking points she’s a shell
the word is shill.
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.
Let us know once you figure that out
@@jerm5466 Not my job, thankfully, though I have some ideas on it. But whoever does figure it out will be very rich, so it's just a matter of time.
Really? Yeah western people are strange.
How do you drill quietly? And how do you bring the materials and equipment to build without boat traffic? What you’re asking for is impossible
@@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.
We could avoided this by going more Nuclear.
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.
@@peppermintgal4302 Spin doctor for nukes, too
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.
Big Wind mega-corps couldn't care less about the environment. As usual, it's just about the $.
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!
@@peppermintgal4302
Apostolos Gerasoulis, a Rutgers professor emeritus of computer science dome a study on whale deaths and sonar exploration.
He came to the conclusion that there is indeed a strong correlation with High Intensity 3D sonar exploration and whale deaths. We're not talking about an average professor here, He's one of five people in the world who builds search engines, a computational science expert. He's certain it's the cause.
And no, he's not working for oil companies. Is there any evidence Shellenberger is?
Here's the kicker though, the large corporation leading the charge (Orsted ) is an old Danish oil company. Their execs are all old oil guys.
The CEO of one of their sub companies , Diamond Offshore Wind, is the former CEO of Exxon. Isn't that hilarious?
Shellenberger is a global treasure.
omg lol
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.
More like an oil shill. His own data shows there's no correlation between whale death and wind farm construction or activity. He is always careful not to show the graphs together, and simply suggests a spike in one correlates with a spike in the other, even though they are entirely different years.
Sugar cane field runoff of fertilizer is why we get algae blooms
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.
Thank you for the work done!
Saw the video about how whales deaths and the construction of wind turbines is corelated. Im confused - where is this corelation?
there is none, this video is just complete bs, watch potholer54's breakdown of the video
@@matthewjackson337
So potholer54 would also defend Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS) geophysical testing for the oil and gas industry?
He'd go against Greenpeace's stance on this oil and gas sonar exploration?
Here's a statement form Greenpeace a few years ago regarding seismic testing
"seismic occurrences in the ocean, including SONAR, can result in temporary and permanent hearing loss, abandonment of habitat, disruption of mating and feeding, beach strandings and even death”.
"a deaf whale is a dead whale”,
They've recently been silent on the offshore wind seismic surveys, which is odd
Did he mention Orsted's 2 large wind projects Oceanwind I and Oceanwind II requesting marine mammal incidentals from the NMFS.
(that's on a government website)
Why did they ask for it if Ultra high resolution 3d seismic (UHR3DS) is so safe
"On October 1, 2021, NMFS received a request from Ocean Wind I 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."
It's simple, Offshore oil and gas should be banned along with the industrialization of the ocean with wind farms.
Coal will win in the end.
Bri just repeats like a parrot whatever woke ideologists say. She doesn't think for herself nor does proper research on the subject.
This is so sad 😢😢 Poor dear whales, they've been around for millions of years. This has to be stopped.
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.
@@garysarela4431 😢😢😭
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.
@@mrg0th1er83
"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."
That's correct, but the issue in question is the Eastern Seaboard where the highest population of whales occur and Oil exploration does not.
Isn't there a moratorium on Oil Exploration on the East Coast of the US ?
No science backing up this claim by Shillenberger.
“Let me appear to correct you with something I just googled then end the interview before you can respond.”
If we had more whales we could naturally reduce co2
We need net-zero impact on these whales.
Thats why you shouldnt have kids doing a news show.
When is Michael going to receive his Pulitzer Prize
When he tells the truth for once, maybe. Marine biologists agree there is no impact on whales from wind farm construction or exploration. The equipment they use is like a fifth the volume of oil exploration. This guy doesn't even get the diets of right whales correct.
When he concedes his own data shows his thesis is wrong. There is no correlation between whale deaths and wind farm construction or operation.
I thought the right whale deaths were being caused by lobster fishing or so I was told
as long as we got air conditioning it's all OK.
Environmentalists lost their minds years ago when some Ducks died on a tailings pond in Alberta Canada, a Whale on the verge of extinction...🤐🤐🤐
What you need to look at is the changes in fish populations related to global warming , lots of fish populations are moving north, so a changing food resource in the area could be a very important reason for whale deaths. Michael Shallenberger is a rightwing activist and nuclear and fossil fuel activist posing as an environmentalist
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.
Windfarm tech is profitable at this point. And Shellenberger is an overt liar, there is no correlation even in his own data.
@@peppermintgal4302
The cancellation of Oceanwind I and Oceanwind II projects off New Jersey say otherwise.
The parent company Orsted (Ironically an old danish oil company) signed approved contracts with the Trump Administration for subsidies amounting to 30% of the cost of both projects.
Citing an increase in cost of product and inflation as the result of Covid, Orsted asked for a 40% subsidy from the Biden administration and were refused (Hence the cancellation).
@@peppermintgal4302
"there is no correlation even in his own data."
I've never watched his documentary, but I did read Rutgers professor emeritus of computer science Apostolos Gerasoulis' study last year on the increase in whale deaths that coincided with and increase in Ultra High Resolution 3D Sonar geophysical exploration..
Gerasoulis is an expert in computational sciences and One of only 5scientists in the world tbuild search engines. The man is a genius.
His data eliminated all variables/factors He came to the conclusion that the increase in UHR3D was the link. .
Typical, also nuclear solves this.
Hey don't say common sense things like that.
We need the whales - who's going to contact the probe in the 24th century?
Construction noise, sure.
The real problem is the infrasound the field will create. And it comes from more sources than you know.
@@motorheadmike1477 Disney did a experiment and made a dozen employees real sick.
There is no evidence of even a correlation between whale death and wind farm activity or construction. Shellenberger's own graphs disagree with him.
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...
They said sonar and then the actual pile driving to install them.
Yeah, very sneaky in his dialect.
All this faux outrage is hysterical. Where have they been all these years? It's all the not in my back yard syndrome.
@@topomusicale5580 Perhaps, but Shellenberger's own data disagrees with him. There's no correlation between whale deaths and offshore wind farm construction or operation.
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.
IT'S GREEN ENERGY WE HAVE TO HAVE IT $$$$$$ 💵 💲 🤑
Possible thinking how we can reduce the noice in the sea when we place new windmills.
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.
Save the whales!
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.
Our nuclear plant in Cape Town attracts marine life with the runoff . There are no algae blooms etc .
@ja It would be great if you would point us to the scientific journal you published those results in.
Fossil Fuels aren't the problem... the problem is people who think it is...
Fossil fuels have been proven over decades to be the problem. That’s not at issue…it’s the ppl who are in denial that are…
Oh God I can see the hate coming.
true, if we just left oil/coal in the ground it would not have doubled the PPM of atmospheric CO2 which has cause rapid climate change.
Indeed! If they're all fossil fuels anyway....
@@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.
How much damage to the coral reefs?as well I agree corrupt government!!! From top down
Correlation does not prove causation.
The marine life needs to protest!
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.
Shellenberger's own data shows there is no correlation between wind farm construction and operation and whale deaths.
On the bright side we can use the dead whales to heat are lamps.thats a joke by the way
How is this woman a suitable person for discussing this topic when obviously she is regurgitating false information like global warming, declining arctic species, algae blooms, etc. etc?
Global warming is, at this point, a fact so obvious even my very conservative family largely agrees on it.
Not sure about the whole nuclear causing algae blooms, first I heard about it.
But Shellenberger is wrong, his own data shows no correlation between whale deaths and offshore wind farm construction / activity.
Its all about money
Someone was regurgitating the last statement for her to repeat, but the fact remains, closure of Indian Point is an act of climate terrorism.
Where's Don Quixote when ya need him??
I liked this comment, ironically. Being that Don Quixote fought an imaginary villain - windmills.
@@liamfisher9230 yeah it's a joke.
Yup, my apologies. I misunderstood your context.
😂
@@liamfisher9230 no worries! hard to tell context online
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.
Why is Bri pushing back on this? Why does she hate whales?
@@fotoguru222how the duck do you think those things are bad?
Why do you hate black people?
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.
nope
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.
Try actually watching a report next time.
Wind energy is NOT green energy, I hate it when they use that term.
Exactly it (wind energy) is neither green, not renewable.
@Ash And I hate it when people spread lies about climate catastrophe & renewable energy. But we don’t always get what we want.
Wind & solar are immensely better than fossil & fissile fuels in every way.
“Setting the Record Straight About Renewable Energy”
Susan Tierney & Lori Bird, May 12, 2020
“Solar Waste Stream is Tiny, Compared to Current Fossil Fuels”
This Is Not Cool, October 9, 2023
“A Reality Check About Solar Panel Waste and the Effects on Human Health”
The coming surge in photovoltaic panel waste is tiny compared to other categories, and most health concerns about solar equipment are unfounded.
Dan Gearino October 12, 2023
“Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic module toxicity and waste are slowing decarbonization”
Heather Mirletz, et al. Nature
“A Fossil Fuel Economy Requires 535x More Mining Than a Clean Energy Economy”
Michael Thomas, Distilled, March 29, 2023
“New Video: Clean Energy = Less Mining”
This Is Not Cool, September 15, 2022
"Mining quantities for low-carbon energy is hundreds to thousands of times lower than mining for fossil fuels”
Hannah Ritchie, Jan. 18, 2023
“Low-carbon tech needs much fewer materials than it used to; this matters for resource extraction in the future”
Hannah Ritchie Nov. 11, 2024
“By 2042, Chinese Battery Maker Will No Longer Need Mining as Recycling Takes Over”
This Is Not Cool, May 22, 2024
…CEO of CATL, the world's largest battery company…says they're becoming so good at recycling… (already at 99.6% for Nickel and Cobalt)
“NREL: How Much Land for Renewables?”
This Is Not Cool, March 1, 2023
[The RE land figures given here must be cut in ½ to reflect RE energy savings, ½ again for rapid tech advances, ½ again because the US could do it all with offshore wind & rooftop solar. Even though it won’t, those will save enormous amounts of land.]
“Solar Much More Efficient Use of Land vs Ethanol”
This Is Not Cool, January 22, 2022
@@wheel-man5319 It absolutely is renewable, & vastly more safe, clean, healthy, cheap, fast, reliable, resilient, democratic...better in every way.
I understand both points of view should be represented, but Bri was hilarious in this.
@za There was only 1 view, & Shellenberger’s lies.
@J4Zonian point one out
@@zanderterblanche
When they’re known, the causes of whale deaths are mostly ship collisions & entanglement in fish nets. Know what would eliminate 40% of world shipping? That’s right, GETTING RID OF FOSSIL FUELS!
40% of global shipping is just moving fossil fuels around.
“'Thrown to the wind' - are wind farms really killing whales?”
potholer54
And as potholer points out, changing the methods & equipment used by fishing ships would reduce whale deaths, too. So would people eating fewer fish, just like eating fewer cows, pigs, chickens, & water buffalo would lead to less deforestation, ocean dead zones, & fewer mass bird deaths.
“When Did Big Oil Decide to Save the Whales?”
THINC Blog, 3/9/2023
“ship collisions are a top cause of death for Alaskan marine mammals, including whales, sea lions and porpoises.”
“Steller sea lions top list of Alaska marine mammals killed by human activities”
Alaska Beacon, November 23, 2023
What a Living Whale Is Worth - and Why the Economy Should Protect Nature | Ralph Chami | TED
AGAINST THE WIND
Brown University Climate and Development Lab
A Map of the Anti-Offshore Wind Network in the Eastern United States
December, 2023
@@zanderterblanche Answer seems to have been Nacht und Nebeled. .
@@zanderterblanche When they’re known, the causes of whale deaths are mostly ship collisions & entanglement in fish nets. Know what would eliminate 40% of world shipping? That’s right, getting rid of fossil fuels!
40% of global shipping is just moving fossil fuels around.
“'Thrown to the wind' - are wind farms really killing whales?”
potholer54
As potholer points out, changing the methods & equipment used by fishing ships would reduce whale deaths, too. So would people eating fewer fish, just like eating fewer cows, pigs, chickens, & water buffalo would lead to less deforestation, fewer ocean dead zones, & fewer mass bird deaths.
“When Did Big Oil Decide to Save the Whales?”
THINC Blog, 3/9/2023
“ship collisions are a top cause of death for Alaskan marine mammals, including whales, sea lions and porpoises.”
“Steller sea lions top list of Alaska marine mammals killed by human activities”
Alaska Beacon, November 23, 2023
What a Living Whale Is Worth - and Why the Economy Should Protect Nature | Ralph Chami | TED
Against The Wind
Brown University Climate and Development Lab
A Map of the Anti-Offshore Wind Network in the Eastern United States
December, 2023
Save the whales ❤
Scandal is right
Excuse me but why not use a coolant system to cool the water coming from a nuclear plant?
Save the 🐋
Because industry in the US goes for cheap instead of quality.
“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.
@sto Why would they? Everything he says is a lie.
They do hear in Florida. Heat yes!!!
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.
Glad someone is finally saying it!!
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.
Where can we see this documentary
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.
What is meant that we want to protect species to a point? Would there be more outrage if the species was harpooned to death?
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
How arrogant does one have to be, to believe they know more about the environment than Michael Shellenberger?!? Wish I could say I miss Brianna.
The post is flagged. So it must be hitting the truth.
It is so much easier to attack wind farming than sonars, fisheries and shipping caused whale deaths.
Did Rob say that green energy is cheaper?
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.
@@elmastro-ye9lw how?
The Hill hates whales, apparently. Odd choice.
The conclusions you reach when you're ignorant of how things work. What a joke of a "theory"
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 😅
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
Saving the Whales went out of style or bribed.
Schellenberger angling for a spot on Fox
You hate whales?
@@qwerty6574 Whales have become a danger. They're sinking yachts in off Gibraltar. Climate denial is a sad way to make a living.
@@qwerty6574 Hate ‘em.
Shellenberger is a nuclear energy tool.
Subsidies. That's the real reason for the turbines as well as for solar panels. Follow the money.
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
Bingo
Where did the Bison go?
Shooters