Wind Energy Has Killed More Americans Than Nuclear

Wind farms are more dangerous than nuclear power plants

The damage done to the nuclear power stations in Japan by the Tsunami, has given every gong banging moon barking Green Libtard the opportunity to bray endlessly about nuclear holocaust scenarios and how nuclear power is finished, and the only answer lies in those globally hated symbols of the Church of Climatology, the wind turbine.

In the United States, since 1970 accidents on wind farms have killed 35 people, in the same time period no one was killed in a nuclear accident.

Wind farms provide America with just 0.7% of it’s energy needs:

There has been quite a bit of hysteria among some major media outlets in the past few days regarding the potential dangers of nuclear power. Some have even suggested that the benefits of nuclear energy do not outweigh its potential dangers to human life.

The dangers of nuclear power, while serious, need to be put in perspective. To that end, here’s an interesting fact you won’t be hearing from the mainstream press: wind energy has killed more Americans than nuclear energy.

You read that right. According to the Caithness Windfarm Information Forum, there were 35 fatalities associated with wind turbines in the United States from 1970 through 2010. Nuclear energy, by contrast, did not kill a single American in that time.

The meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 did not kill or injure anyone, since the power plant’s cement containment apparatus did its job – the safety measures put in place were effective. Apparently the safety measures associated with wind energy are not adequate to prevent loss of life.

Nuclear accounts for about nine percent of America’s energy, according to the Energy Information Administration, and has yet to cause a single fatality here. Wind, on the other hand, provides the United States with only 0.7 percent of its energy, and has been responsible for 35 deaths in the United States alone. So if we’re trying to weigh the costs and benefits of each, it seems wind fares far worse than nuclear. Yet no one seems to be discussing plans to halt production of all new wind farms until Americans’ safety can be guaranteed.

It is doubtful that this story will ever appear in the MSM, they are far too busy pushing scary nuclear holocaust stories and acting like the devastated landscapes around the power station were ground zero, not the full force of a weather event, which was not caused by whatever the AGW scam is currently called.

About these ads

About Tory Aardvark

Climate Realist, Conservative and proud NRA member. I don't buy into the Man Made Global Warming Scam, science is never settled. http://toryaardvark.com @ToryAardvark on Twitter ToryAardvark on Facebook

Posted on March 18, 2011, in Anthropogenic Global Warming, Cancun COP16, Church Of Climatology, Climategate, COP16, Fear, Green Jobs Lie, Greenpeace, IPCC, ManBearPig, Oh FFS, US Politics, Wind Power and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 12 Comments.

  1. AreYouSerious

    This may be true,but consider this. This article only speaks of America. In the 1986 Chernoyl accident, there were over 50 deaths the first day alone,1800 documented cases of thyroid cancer children, the entire Northern Hemisphere was shrouded in detectable radiation for 2 years. The radiation release was 200 times what was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. Strontium-90 and Casium-137 are still detectable to this day. Uranium has a half life of 4 billion years. Chernobyl is still uninhabitable. What do you think the Japanese people will do when they cant use part of their country for the next 1000 years? Do a little research,this is not just Uranium, it has Plutonium in reactor 3. Chernoblyl released just 50 tons into the air-Japan has over 1200 tons of potential release, as well as 600,000 spent fuel rods. This can and will have a global effect for a long time to come. The wind farms seem a little safer now huh? Nuclear is dangerous and everyone knows it. Ask the kids with skulls twice their normal size, or spinal defects. Heck just google Chernobyl and read that. Dont believe every news article you read. G.E. built those reactors and incidentally owns many of the news outlets. Think youre getting the whole story??

    • “Are you serious” says ‘don’t believe every news article you read’ – I think you need to take your own advice.
      Chernobyl has been studied over and over. Here’s a link to a discussion of the most recent actual scientific report from the International Atomic Energy Commission, the World Health Organization and 6 other UN groups. Your information must come from some alarmist anti-nuke groups. There are no 1800 children affected. Try reading dispassionate factual information for a change.

      http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article563521.ece

      Some 56 in total died in the last 25 years since Chernobyl – a good number died in the initial explosion. It was a stupid russian design, but hey everything they designed was stupid. It releases Iodine and Cesium products. Iodine has a half life of 5 days and Cesium about 30 years, but both are beta particle emitters. They are about the same strength as ultraviolet rays from the sun. There is no uranium and no plutonium in the ground from Chernobyl. The Fukushima products are the same as the other ones – Iodine and Cesium. The Iodine is gone for all purposes within a few days. And because of that, Chernobyl runs tourist tours there presently.

      Fukushima as it turns out was probably the safest place to be during that earthquake and tsunmai. Everything else got wiped out and killed over 10,000. The plant didn’t. What does that tell you about its strength and safety?

      Besides not providing any useful amounts of electricity, wind farms are also bird cuisinarts. They kill tens of thousands a year, and many of those are raptors.

      Quite frankly, the cheapest power sources to build and to operate and to deliver the cheapest electricity are coal and gas plants. I’m sure you hate to hear the facts.

  2. Using this logic the most dangerous job in America is being President ? 43 presidents 4 killed ..Great post below

  3. Even Above * AreYouSerious :)

  4. Tory, I took your own words and I’m playing them back to you with a slight twist:

    “There has been quite a bit of hysteria among some bloggers regarding the potential dangers of wind power. Some have even suggested that the benefits of wind energy do not outweigh its potential dangers to human life.

    The dangers of wind power, while serious, need to be put in perspective.”

    Get the point? You need to follow your own advice.

  5. I can’t believe what I have been reading here. You people seem informed to some degree but I didn’t think it was possible to be that ignorant at the same time. The people who died working on the wind farms could have met an accident in the building an construction phase or could have simply been electrocuted. Basically work place accidents which happen every day in any industry including the nuclear power industry. Do you have figures to show how many work place fatalities have occured in the nuclear power industry? Stop paying so much attention to the Simpsons and check into the real world. Go and take that tour of Chernobyl, ingest that radioactive material through your airways and skin and talk to us in 20 years with all your health problems. Its not just about fatalities…. Wake up!

  6. Tory Aardvark, keep up the good work. Nuclear is by far not only the safest and cleanest energy form around, it is also much more affordable than all the wind and solar energy that comes whenever it wants and not whenever we need it. Who wants to pay for the extra grid that has to be build, the storage and the backup power plants?
    People always think of Chernobyl, why dont they think of the hundreds of thousands killed by the Banqiao hydro plant? I would like to say hydro is the second most deadliest energy right after liquid gas, before coal and oil and gas, but that would be a lie, biomass energy kills far more people than any other.
    When people get on a jet, an Airbus or a Boeing, do they consider the number of deaths from the britisch Constellations to find their own risk of crashing on their flight? Strange why they cant think straight when it comes to nuclear and why they ignore the facts about nature destruction by ethanol or hydro.
    The whole thinking is wrong, we do not need to save energy at all, we have today enough known affordable uranium sources for the next billion years, with breeding for the next 100 billion years, and before that runs out, we will have fusion for sure. We could behave like gods and do anything we wanted, make the whole Sahara into a green oasis with desalinated ocean water, it is only those silly childish anti-humanist environmentalist, that are keeping people in poverty and hunger.

  1. Pingback: Wind Energy Has Killed More Americans Than Nuclear (via Tory Aardvark) | MibsBlog

  2. Pingback: Global Warming Hoax Weekly Round-Up, Mar. 24th 2011 « The Daily Bayonet

  3. Pingback: Wind farms useless! |

  4. Pingback: Britain 3421 Wind Turbines Installed, 1500 Accidents In 5 Years « Tory Aardvark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,001 other followers

%d bloggers like this: