“An environmental ruling on a rare parrot threatens Australia’s expansion of wind power, as well as a $3.8b national energy project and climate targets, the renewable energy industry fears,” The Australian reported on Friday.
The Australian‘s article is behind a paywall but James Macpherson has extracted the important parts of it for us and made some remarks to put them into context.
A rare bird threatens to destroy investment in wind farms and completely derail Australia’s pursuit of Net Zero.
The orange bellied parrot migrates every year to Tasmania and its flight path takes it directly through a proposed wind farm.
No problem, according to Tasmania’s Environment Protection Authority, the proposed $1.6 billion wind farm to be built at Robbins Island, in the state’s far northwest, will just need to sit idle during the five-month migratory season.
Industry sources complain that the ruling will destroy the project and, worse, set a precedent for other wind farms around the country, making them completely unviable.
An imported subsidised wind turbine, or a beautiful bird? You’ll forgive me if I roar with laughter for the next couple of hours, won’t you?
Woke climate change alarmists have been stopping mines, developments and dams for decades because they endanger a rare this or that.
Now those same ideologues can’t build their ugly wind farms because of a rare bird.
But what do you know? Suddenly there are more important things than rare species.
Clean Energy Council generation and storage director Nicholas Aberle complained …
Delaying clean energy projects puts climate goals at risk.
But the birds! Why do you hate birds?
Aberle continued …
Climate change is considered a far greater risk to the species than the impacts of wind farms.
Really? It’s difficult to believe that slightly warmer days are a greater threat to the orange bellied parrot than a flight path interrupted by hundreds of 52m long blades spinning at around 289km/h.
The best part for me was this line in The Australian article …
Aberle warned Australia’s climate targets were at stake and questioned the science behind the Robbins Island decision.
My eyes are watering and my sides are hurting. A climate catastrophist questions the science?!?!