By David Wojick
A New Years’s retrospective. Many of these 41 CFACT articles were sent to key NOAA whale protection people when published over a period of 2.5 years. All have been carefully ignored, an ongoing deception. Trump has promised action.
1. Capping marine mammal harassment constrains offshore wind
https://www.cfact.org/2024/12/09/capping-marine-mamma-harassment-constrains-offshore-wind
2. The California offshore wind environmental impact statement is full of holes
3. Feds must rethink authorizing harassment of whales by offshore wind
https://www.cfact.org/2024/08/14/feds-must-rethink-authorizing-harassment-of-whales-by-offshore-wind
4. Offshore wind whale deaths indicated by statistical analysis
https://www.cfact.org/2024/07/22/offshore-wind-serial-whale-deaths-indicated-by-statistical-analysis
5. Feds say “damn the whales” in the Gulf of Maine
https://www.cfact.org/2024/07/01/feds-say-damn-the-whales-in-the-gulf-of-maine
6. Freedom advocates are the Right Whale’s best hope
https://www.cfact.org/2024/06/03/freedom-advocates-are-the-right-whales-best-hope
7. Offshore wind cumulative impact issue analysis
https://www.cfact.org/2024/05/13/offshore-wind-cumulative-impact-issue-analysis
8. Boston Globe’s whale protection contradiction
https://www.cfact.org/2024/04/02/boston-globes-whale-protection-contradiction
9. Dominion Energy’s absurd reply to CFACT’s whale protection lawsuit
https://www.cfact.org/2024/03/26/dominion-energys-absurd-reply-to-cfacts-whale-protection-lawsuit
10. CFACT calls for banning offshore wind monopiles in favor of suction buckets to save whales
11. CFACT blasts offshore wind multiple-site assessment as ridiculous
https://www.cfact.org/2024/03/06/cfact-blasts-offshore-wind-multiple-site-assessment-as-ridiculous
12. CFACT says offshore wind violates Clean Air and Clean Water Acts
https://www.cfact.org/2024/03/04/cfact-says-offshore-wind-threatens-air-and-water-quality
13. Offshore wind has a big up and down week
https://www.cfact.org/2024/02/01/offshore-wind-has-a-big-up-and-down-week
14. Fed’s first multi-site offshore wind EIS is ridiculous
https://www.cfact.org/2024/01/16/feds-first-multi-site-offshore-wind-eis-is-ridiculous
15. NAS study raises concern over offshore wind harming endangered whales
16. Offshore wind is systematically violating the Marine Mammal Protection Act
17. A tale of two whale protection groups
https://www.cfact.org/2023/09/18/a-tale-of-two-whale-protection-groups
18. Offshore wind a greater threat to whales than oil
https://www.cfact.org/2023/08/07/offshore-wind-a-greater-threat-to-whales-than-oil
19. The whale killing study the Feds are afraid to do
https://www.cfact.org/2023/07/11/the-whale-killing-study-the-feds-are-afraid-to-do
20. NOAA proposes massively cruel offshore sonar survey
https://www.cfact.org/2023/06/05/noaa-proposes-massively-cruel-offshore-sonar-survey
21. Feds play shell game with wind / whale impacts
https://www.cfact.org/2023/05/23/feds-play-shell-game-with-wind-whale-impacts
22. Feds admit offshore wind can kill whales!
https://www.cfact.org/2023/04/27/feds-admit-offshore-wind-can-kill-whales
23. NOAA proposes hammering 208% of vanishing Right Whales
https://www.cfact.org/2023/04/24/noaa-proposes-hammering-208-of-vanishing-right-whales
24. Ignoring dead whales, NOAA proposes another site survey off New Jersey
25. Proposed House Resolution calls for offshore wind moratorium
https://www.cfact.org/2023/03/31/proposed-house-resolution-calls-for-offshore-wind-moratorium
26. Whale death confusion abounds and some is deliberate
https://www.cfact.org/2023/03/10/whale-death-confusion-abounds-and-some-is-deliberate
27. Offshore wind impact probe proposed
https://www.cfact.org/2023/02/20/offshore-wind-impact-probe-proposed
28. Whale hell looms in Massachusetts
https://www.cfact.org/2023/02/16/whale-hell-looms-in-massachusetts
29. Feds push ignorance defense for whale killing by offshore wind development
30. Evidence says offshore wind development is killing lots of whales
https://www.cfact.org/2023/01/23/evidence-says-offshore-wind-development-is-killing-lots-of-whales
31. The silly giant scale of US offshore wind development
https://www.cfact.org/2023/01/07/the-silly-giant-scale-of-us-offshore-wind-development
32. Ten whale groups slam Atlantic OSW
https://www.cfact.org/2022/12/21/ten-whale-groups-slam-atlantic-osw
33. Official Coalition Comments on BOEM right whale offshore wind strategy
34. Dominion’s silly denial of the great threat to whales
https://www.cfact.org/2022/10/22/dominions-silly-denial-of-the-great-threat-to-whales
35. NOAA says Right Whales are “desperately endangered”
https://www.cfact.org/2022/10/18/noaa-says-right-whales-are-desperately-endangered
36. How to kill whales with offshore wind
https://www.cfact.org/2022/09/27/how-to-kill-whales-with-offshore-wind
37. Wishes and secrets fill Dominion’s offshore wind Plan
https://www.cfact.org/2022/09/21/wishes-and-secrets-fill-dominions-offshore-wind-plan
38. Dominion hides OSW threat to whales
https://www.cfact.org/2022/09/15/dominion-hides-osw-threat-to-whales
39. Threat to endangered whales gets LOUDER
https://www.cfact.org/2022/07/26/threat-to-endangered-whales-gets-louder
40. Are the Feds hiding the Virginia endangered whales?
https://www.cfact.org/2022/07/22/are-the-feds-hiding-the-virginia-endangered-whales
41. Virginia’s offshore wind proposal threatens endangered whales
https://www.cfact.org/2022/07/13/virginias-offshore-wind-proposal-threatens-endangered-whales
Why do I care about whales?
You might wish to care about Governments (Federal and State) following “the Science” rather than reality.
If you don’t care about damage being done to the environment, nobody can force you to.
Because.
First they came for the squirrels, but I said nothing because I wasn’t a squirrel.
Then they came for the whales, but I said nothing because I wasn’t a whale.
……
I’m with you and the Krill Liberation Front with these mass murdering vacuum cleaners of the sea but I’m skeptical of the recycle bin trope with the climate changers-
What Happens to Solar Panels and Turbines at the End of Life?
Thank goodness GreenPiss care about whales
Save the Whales! And seabirds, and migrating birds, and the power grid these rent seeking boondoggles are on.
How would all of those wind turbine anchor lines look to a whale on his echolocation?
I would assume the nearest cable would be obscured in a “white noise” background of all of the returns from the slightly more distant cables in the background.
I can’t imagine how whales could possibly navigate safely through that environment. “Safe” green energy causing more deaths seems like poor policy to me.
Good point!
Baleen whales do not use echolocation. They use ‘songs’ to communicate with other baleen whales. It’s possible they may scrape against or run into anchor lines at night.
How would that impact kill a large baleen whale? An infection from the wound that is left by the cable might eventually kill the whale, but I think that would be rare.
Besides, I can’t imagine an offshore wind farm being sited on the known path of migrating baleen whales.
Toothed whales use echolocation from a long distance to track prey and a higher frequency echolocation at shorter distances to catch prey during the day and night.
Toothed whales can zero in on a mouthful of prey amongst a scattering large shoal of fish trying to evade being eaten by a pod of whales. The chances of a toothed whale hitting an anchor cable are vanishingly small, day or night.
“Besides, I can’t imagine an offshore wind farm being sited on the known path of migrating baleen whales.”
How sweetly naive you are !!
So you read zero of the linked articles and papers?
If you were a whale, your assertion might carry more than zero cred.
The anchor lines only apply to floating wind turbines, not ones that use pylons. They are being explored for use in Maine and the west coast, but none exist in North America.
This doesn’t detract from your point about the potential impact of such anchor lines.
It is clear that the Dem leadership doesn’t get agitated about extinction crises just for the sake of the endangered animals. They are always politically motivated.
Do you remember their indignation over snail darter crisis in the 1970’s? A tiny fish about the size of a paper clip. Based on size alone, they should be a jillion times more indignant about the whales.
The conservationists of the 1970s who got agitated about extinction crises are living vicariously through their children’s Facebook pages. The kids stopped updating regularly 15 years ago but outdated pictures of grandkids are still more compelling than extinction crises. That’s how I can ask “Why do I care about whales?” and get responses that are not about whales.
“key NOAA whale protection people” … I’m sure someone is paid to have that title
No that general category includes several offices charged with either enforcing the Marine Mammal Protection Act or doing research on threats to whales. Want a list? I send my articles to the heads of such offices.
Everyone knows that the “leftist wind energy promoters” are a bunch of blowhards on the green payroll of the b.s. corporate alt-energy who are in it just for self enrichment / greed… to make money.
“All have been
carefullyignorantly ignored…”fixed it
Except they are not ignorant on this issue. Ignoring it is a deliberate deception.
I’ve had similar experiences with the IPCC and the EPA.
We have a new outbreak of dead whales on the Atlantic coast. As of yesterday 13 dead in 31 days. There are at least ten projects authorized to harass whales acoustically at this time. Several are doing it and I am waiting for data on the rest.
See https://www.climatedepot.com/2025/01/02/offshore-winds-fatal-folly-13-dead-whales-in-31-days-latest-mortality-is-humpback-on-beach-in-westport-ma/
Most of the harassment authorizations are off MA, NY and NJ which is where most of the dead whales are.
Here is the list so far:
Dec 3 minke cape may, NJ- still alive-euthanized
Dec 10 humpback east of shark river inlet, nj. offshore-dead
Dec 10 humpback, plymouth ma young male, dead
Dec 12 minke, Wellfleet MA, dead
Dec14 humpback, Brewster MA, dead
Dec 18 humpback, Amagansett, LI (NY) dead
Dec 18 minke, Quonnie beach Charlestown RI, dead
Dec 26 humpback, Marshfield MA, dead
Dec 27 humpback, Kitty Hawk, NC, dead
Dec 27 humpback? Unk decomposed whale west side Hudson Canyon-could possibly be same as seen east of shark river inlet on Dec 10. Not counted
Dec 28 minke, Tobay beach Town of Oyster Bay Long Island NY dead
Dec 29 unk sighted 50 miles due south of VW lease area, dead
Dec 30 juvenile humpback Roosevelt Beach Long Beach LI (NY) dead
January 1, 2025 on Westport land conservation trust land on Richmond Pond Beach, Westport, Massachusetts Humpback dead
Could microplastic kill the whales? Ships discharge waste water at sea. Could this water have toxins that kill the whales? Red tide algae is another possibility.
I have seen no studies of microplastic and the possible consequences for whates.
I consider it to be a possibility that needs to be transparently locked down (aka researched and reported).
Water toxins are always a concern. Even fluoride needs to be considered as we are dumping vast amounts into the environment’s water systems.
CFACT is suing to force the Feds to acknowledge the cumulative impact of offshore wind on whales and then do something about it.
Donations needed and welcome: https://www.cfact.org/2024/12/31/time-to-win/
David – I just googled whale deaths –
Google has about 100+ hits all of which are stating that wind turbines are not causing the deaths. None of which provide any explanation as to why the increase in whale deaths are happening.
All the articles stating that wind turbines are not the cause of the whale deaths are very similar to the multitude of studies and articles that came out in the Spring of 2020 explaining why it was impossible for covid to have been a lab leak.
It seems they get their science from Skeptical science.
Just to be clear – Skeptical science is perhaps the leading anti science website
Just to be clear (again)
I dont know what is causing the surge in whale deaths, but the manner in which they are denying the association with the wind turbines seems suspect.
Of all the many things that could be killing whales everyone knows it just couldn’t be anything to do with offshore wind turbines – it’s obvious, isn’t it? Alluding that Google may harbor denialists is offensive.
It must be true if it is on the internet. The internet says so.
Google has been persuaded by the UN to list only pro climate catastrophe rhetoric suppressing anything that does not agree with the alarmist positions.
Google “climate” and one scans down more than 15 pages before finding anything that discusses the science and much further to anything that argues the hypothesis of AGW or CAGW.
Try a different search engine. Google is all in with the mischief.
I always chuckle at the huge marine positives created in California’s Santa Barbara Channel by the closed, truncated and capped oil platforms. Yes, the historic spill was a turning point but since then these thriving sanctuaries and the massive reduction of tar balls on the beaches from natural seeps have been desirable consequences. Sea lane traffic in the channel has been somewhat inconvenienced by speed limits and tight travel corridors but the results are uncontested. If offshore wind projects were held to similar standards not a one would be allowed.
What we really need is to cap marine mammal harassment authorizations. That would stop almost all offshore wind development.
https://www.cfact.org/2024/12/09/capping-marine-mamma-harassment-constrains-offshore-wind/
Here is the thing if you built a 1000 megawatt nuclear plant and a 1000 megawatt offshore wind farm what could we expect? The nuclear plant would produce close to 1000 megawatts, the offshore wind farm would produce 300-400 megawatts. The nuclear plant will last 60 plus years, the wind farm maybe 30-40 years. The nuclear plant won’t present a danger to flora and fauna, the wind farm will and we know it is a direct threat to an endangered species, the Right Whale. The nuclear plant will probably receive minimal tax preferences and subsidies compared to the wind farm. If we acted sensibly we could reuse the used nuclear fuel with different types of nuclear plants. The wind farm can’t be recycled or reused but must be buried in huge dumps leaking god knows what into the ground for a long, long time. Nuclear plants are not a threat to the grid wind farms are. It isn’t even close nuclear power is the preferred source by orders of magnitude. It’s as simple as that.
30 – 40 years? Have you had to maintain anything in a salt marine environment. I doubt they will last 15 years, more likely 10 or less. And those blade projectiles will cause a lot of damage.
You are likely more right than me.
Calculated by structural engineers, the mean time to failure for a wind turbine is just over 4 years. I forget the percentage of failures that can be repaired versus the failures that require major replacements, but it is not a pretty economic picture.
A 3000 MW nuclear power plant produces 1000 MW of electricity. The efficiency of a nuclear power plant is between 33-37%.
Nuclear power plants aren’t without their ‘dangers’ from worker overexposure to radiation, to theft/ loss/ misplacement of radioactive sources and equipment, to stress corrosions of safety injection systems, to loose control rods falling into reaction vessels, etc. as recorded on the IAEA Information Channel on Nuclear and Radiological Events (News).
A 1000MWe nuclear generating station will have a ~3000MWth reactor.
Extracting the rare earths for a wind turbine usually involves dealing with radioactive materials that are commonly found in rare earth ore. Maintaining wind turbines also involves potential safety hazards with workers climbing the towers for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance.
“A 3000 MW nuclear power plant produces 1000 MW of electricity.”
That’s gibberish. !
Nuclear power is one of the safest ways of producing energy.
The US Department of Energy says you’re talking through your backside.
What is the source of your erroneous claim?
Power versus energy. W is power (voltage times current) W-sec (Joule) is energy.
All steam turbine generators, regardless of fuel run at 35 +/- % conversion of thermal energy into electrical energy. Not all nuclear reactors are steam turbine generators.
Conciseness in terminology and definitions is critical to science.
Yeah, and that 35% is about the theoretical maximum possible due to the second law of thermodynamics. How does wind generation compare?
It is NOT “New Years’s” but New Years’. Do get the grammar and spelling correct.
Never thought I’d see a pro-Greenie article on WUWT! Hope this is not the start of a trend.
WUWT has always cared much more about real environmental problems that the marxist left, solar and wind apostles, ever have.
It’s anti-wind power, especially those huge maintenance cost offshore ones. Where’s Greenpeace ?
The enemy of your enemy is your friend….etc….
“Never thought…” I’d hazard that most the regular writers and commenters here at WUWT, like me, have been proud environmentalists for decades; many possibly longer than you have been alive! The main difference is that we generally have a scientific or engineering background that makes it difficult for us to swallow the hokum spewed by GangGreen! We come by our skepticism by looking at the ridiculous claims and the use of models with inadequate parameters!
You, on the other hand, “Never thought…” I think that sums it up rather nicely!
I prefer to identify myself as a conservationist.
Conservationism has a place for environmental concerns, of course, but we can not continue as if the natural resources of this planet are unlimited. In every endeavor, sooner or later, there are consequences and some of those are not healthy.
CO2 is not a pollutant.
WUWT cares about science.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/about2/