By David Wojick
Who would have guessed that we would be the saviors of the desperately endangered North Atlantic Right Whales? If it can be saved from extinction, which remains to be seen. But when the green left goes uselessly industrial in the name of better weather, it starts to make sense. This seeming paradox is briefly explained below.
The North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium (NARWC) has long been the leading advocate for their namesake whales. They do lots of research and have promoted both reduced ship speeds and so-called “ropeless” fishing as ways to save the endangered North Atlantic Right Whale. Sadly. when it come to offshore wind they look to have abandoned the whales in favor of green nirvana.
The tip-off came with the email announcement of their annual meeting in October. It included a number of so-called news links, two being about offshore wind, and neither was good news for the whales.
The most important was a direct attack on us for daring to try to protect the right whales. This hit-piece is from Science Friday, a radio show I used to like. It labels us as “anti-wind”, which is true enough, but they are clearly pro-wind, hence anti-whale. They say the whales are a pawns in the game, so to push the chess metaphor, it is a pawn we are trying to protect.
The URL gives the flavor of the attack: https://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/offshore-wind-misinformation-right-whale-deaths/. It is the usual Bidenesque stuff claiming there is no evidence or even reason to believe offshore wind development harms Right Whales. No mention of the thousands of federally authorized harassment takings and their potentially deadly consequences, or the strong statistical evidence, etc.
There is one interesting bit, however, namely a link to a map of some of the alleged Right Whale protection groups and people put together by students at Brown University. In addition to many friends, there are folks on there that I was not aware of and hope to contact. But it is incomplete as I am not on it.
The extreme rhetoric that comes with the map is itself revealing. They really do not like us and here is an example: “As public relations and obstruction specialists actively engage local groups to block offshore wind projects, the climate and environmental justice consequences are dire. Offshore wind projects may struggle to get off the ground, locking us into catastrophic climate consequences experienced disproportionately by Black, Indigenous, Latino, and low-income communities.”
Anyone who believes this nonsense is likely willing to sacrifice a whale species or two. This is the fanaticism we are fighting.
The second so-called news link from the Right Whale Consortium is also revealing. It is an article from NRDC about the newly announced offshore wind lease areas in the Gulf of Maine.
They say the entire Gulf is designated as critical habitat for the Right Whales under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), but we should be happy because the lease areas avoid the most sensitive parts. NRDC is another pro-wind green group that used to be environmentalists.
We are talking about a huge projected 15,000 MW of development, so I am not comforted by this news. How does ESA allow this massive development within the critical habitat of a desperately endangered critter like the North American Right Whale? I doubt it does.
Ironically, the Consortium website says these are necessary actions:
“Eliminate human-caused mortality to right whales in critical habitats and migration corridors
Assess patterns of known critical habitat use by right whales and humans and eliminate conflict.”
Apparently, they do not regard building and operating a thousand gigantic 15 MW wind turbines within designated critical habitat as a conflict.
The Consortium itself looks like a secret society. There is no information about the organization, no staff listing, no way to join. There is a list of “Partners”, including several Biden Federal agencies, but no explanation of what that means or how to become one. The only contact information is to an unnamed person at the New England Aquarium. I doubt they would have me or CFACT as members.
So there it is. The North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium has abandoned the North Atlantic Right Whale to offshore wind. Only we who value freedom are left to defend the whale. We are its best hope for survival.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
David,
a problem as I see is that the pro wind do not realise that wind is a poor generator, practically and technically and cannot replace conventional generation and does not reduce CO2 emissions as much as is claimed. The perception is that wind is just the same, or the equivalent of conventional generators.
This message should be more widespread but how, the media are unlikely to publish such information?
but.. but… but… the wind is free! /s
“but.. but… but… the wind is free! /s”
…. but collecting it is massively expensive and requires massive environmental degradation.
I think that message is well established on the right and discounted on the left so Ideology not ignorance is the problem. Price spikes and blackouts will be the solution. But we must keep pushing.
Wind turbines are virtue signaling, as the Green Blob is innumerate. Green Prayer Wheels.
“cannot replace conventional generation and does not reduce CO2 emissions as much as is claimed.” The construction, installation, and operation of offshore wind will produce more CO2 emissions than if they were never built at all.
“So there it is. The North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium has abandoned the North Atlantic Right Whale to offshore wind.”
Maybe they have a direct financial investment in it?
“But it is incomplete as I am not on it.”
How dare them to not put you on their enemies list! 🙂
Yes I have written 34 articles on the wind whale threat. Hard to miss if they actually looked.
Same as it ever was.
It’s not just the endangered whale’s but the entire New England fishing
industry/culture that’s at stake with this. The current fisheries employees
are multi generational, if they loose their jobs there will not be any
replacements and they won’t come back.. Commercial fishermen, timber workers
and farm/ranch in that order work are the most dangerous occupations by a wide margin.
Just look at what happened when the enviros killed off the timber workers on the
west coast.. The enviros need to be put on a “endangered” list…
🤣 🤣 🤣
Save Right Whales would disagree with NARWA, not even respectfully
They are called “Right Whales” because they were the “right” ones to hunt.
It’s really touching how WUWT readers are concerned about the Right Whale, I expect to see them picketing BP and Exxon for their oil rigs. Just kidding. There is no evidence wind farms have any effect on whales https://www.factcheck.org/2023/03/no-evidence-offshore-wind-development-killing-whales/ But, hey! any opportunity to disparage green energy is a good one, right? Facts optional.
And I guess our concern for bird (and bat) deaths by windmills is stupid too. You so called environmentalists are not really for the environment–you prove it every day.
Your concern for bird deaths is also touching, So I suppose you’ll want to eliminate domestic cats that kill 1000X wind turbines, or cars that kill about 100x, or building glass that kills around 200X. What is that disappearing?- is it your concern for the welfare of birds has suddenly evaporated? I am so surprised.
https://www.engineering.com/story/the-realities-of-bird-and-bat-deaths-by-wind-turbines
https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/analysis-is-it-possible-to-have-wind-power-while-keeping-birds-safe/#
https://www.treehugger.com/north-america-wind-turbines-kill-around-birds-annually-house-cats-around-4858533
Heh! As Dan Bongino says: “liberals suck!”
Domestic cats don’t kill raptors.
Since death is already among us then a little more death to reach our goals is always a good thing, eh Tonyx?
Because that’s the argument you’re making.
I like how you think death of birds is appropriate.
Just wow, the quality of debate here is top class! Just for the record, I neither wrote, nor think, any such thing. Such imagination!
When you start by citing factcheckdotorg, you can be summarily dismissed as a very unserious person. Thanks for the concern.
What debate? Your debating skills are atrocious!
I wonder if allowing development in one ESA critical habitat, the Gulf of Maine, will end up being the legal precedent to allow development in the critical habitat of some animal which is a Sierra Club lawfare protected toad or butterfly?