Humpback breaches at Lucy Vincent

By
The Martha's Vineyard Times
-
87

Updated, Sept. 18

Several Islanders reported firsthand accounts of humpback whales breaching in waters south of the Island on Friday and over the weekend, including not far off from shore at Lucy Vincent Beach in Chilmark.

In some accounts, several beach goers cheered and goggled as the whales breached near shore.

Beach superintendent Martina Mastromonaco photographed and recorded video — available on our website — of what she believed was one whale off Lucy Vincent. She said it was the first time she’d seen a live whale off the beach in her 30 years, though she’s seen two dead whales during her tenure.

“Best day ever,” she told The Times in a text message Friday.

There were reports of other whales breaching on the south side of the Island as well, including Hancock Beach in Chilmark.

Dr. Jooke Robbins, director of the Center for Coastal Studies humpback whale studies program, said the sightings weren’t entirely abnormal. “Generally speaking, the waters south of Martha’s Vineyard can be used by humpback whales throughout the feeding season. We have come across them there in our research,” Robbins said. The feeding season is spring through fall. “Usage can vary from year to year, but it wouldn’t be unusual.”

Robbins did note that one humpback, in a photo provided to The Times, was close to shore.

“We have had whales feeding close to shore in a few places in the broader region this summer,” the humpback whale researcher said. “In these circumstances, they are typically juvenile whales and they may just be taking advantage of different opportunities than larger, older whales would consider. It unfortunately can also put them at risk when they are in places where people simply aren’t expecting them to be.”

This post was updated to include comments from Jooke Robbins

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

87 COMMENTS

  1. No mention of what or why they are coming in so close!? Maybe because there pile driving 30’ wide pilings in the areas they normally feed pathetic that no one can put these pieces together shame on this island for supporting vineyard wind

    • John you are not allowed to ask any questions that do not conform to the way the elites want you to think. Fall in line and don’t question the powers that be.

      • Car,Carl, Carl.. Who is telling anyone that they cannot
        question something ?
        Except of course, that legal Haitian immigrants are eating cats
        in Ohio, can’t question that , or that the Israeli government is
        not committing war crimes in Gaza. No no noooo —
        Question that one and you are immediately labeled a vile
        anti-semite–
        And of course, we can’t question god about her views on marriage
        or gender assignment.
        I also can’t question the claim that windmills are killing whales.
        There is not a shred of evidence that any windmill has ever
        killed any marine mammal, but to some it’s obvious.
        So I can’t question the obvious after all. Or can I ?
        What a catch 22–
        And I wonder who you think the “elites” are that form our opinions ?
        Maybe “tiny donnie” ? I think he would fall into the “elite” category.
        How about Elon Musk, Hulk Hogan,and thousands of
        other “elite” people who happen to be republicans and are
        supporting trump ?
        Do you think anyone in trump’s, family is not one of ” the elites”?
        Perhaps you should define that word before you parrot
        the right wing media dog whistle using it to describe
        wealthy people who disagree with THEIR thoughts, agenda, and philosophies. Or your’s for that matter.
        Here, let me help you out :
        https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/elite

        • Don, Don, Don, there have been several times that I have brought a dissenting opinions on Covid for example that were one denounced as crazy but proven true today. I can’t even post a dissenting opinion on climate backed up by NOAA without being “moderated”
          Yes, Don I know who elites are, they are the ones who got together and decided that a sitting president who was elected in a primary but was not good enough for them so he had to be replaced. You mean those elites?
          And Don enough with the anti semite stuff. He who doth protest thy most. You know what they say when your digging yourself a hole. But keep telling yourself that all these border crossers are legal and ignore the illegal border crossers committing crimes against children in MV and Nantucket. And Don maybe you should first use clean energy to heat your home, instead of dirty wood, before telling people they should stop idling their cars while parking. See how hypocrisy works. We can both play this game.

          • Carl– I didn’t want to bore readers here with my
            explanation of why wood is “green”, so I sent it to
            you personally.
            But it seems you still think heating with wood is “dirty”.
            So I will put my email to you dated august 8 2024.
            “I have been doing a little research on how “green” heating with wood is.
            The thing is that wood is a temporary storer of carbon. As a tree grows, it absorbs carbon from the atmosphere and stores it as wood.
            After the tree dies, as it decomposes, it releases the carbon back into the atmosphere.
            It’s like taking a glass of water out of a bathtub and freezing it for a while, then putting it back in the tub. The water level goes down for a while and then goes back to its original level.
            We can do that all the time and replace one glass of water with one glass of ice
            Now of course fossil fuels are just absorbed carbon from years ago that is being stored underground..
            Pulling them out of the ground is like turning the faucet on in the tub, and rapidly increasing the volume of water in the tub. Eventually it will overflow, and cause some problems.
            But back to the trees.
            Burning wood before it decomposes accelerates the release of that stored carbon. It releases the same amount as the tree absorbed while it was alive — burned or left to decompose.
            Now, of course, wood burning is not appropriate in all situations. Obviously not in cities.
            But in more rural areas iit is more appropriate as it doesn’t really fill the air with any significant amount of smoke.
            In my case, I have a secondary combustion chamber that significantly reduces the smoke. Of course it releases orders of magnitude more particulate matter than natural gas.
            But there is one other factor about my particular situation. That is that I have a truck, a chainsaw and a log splitter. — Of course they all use some fossil fuel to operate.
            BUT– every piece of wood that goes into my stove has been from a tree that has either died, or been cut down for other reasons.
            I get the wood that the tree companies leave by the side of the road when they are clearing power lines for instance.
            I also have a tree guy who I hire for clients and for my own property. If I need wood, I simply call him up, and he will leave larger pieces in cordwood
            length for me rather than chip them or take them to Keen’s where they grind them up and make mulch. For really big pieces he will actually deliver them to me, as sometimes my house is closer than Keen’s and Keen actually charges to take it.
            So what does this mean ?
            A cord of oak has about 24 million btus– I use about 2 1/2 cords a year.
            A gallon of propane has about 91,500 btus — That’s my “primary” source of heat.
            So lets say my stove is 80 % efficient ( manufacturer’s claim) and I actually get 19.2 million of those btu’s into my house.
            That means I do not have to burn about 200 gallons of propane. ( turning down that faucet filling that bath tub up a bit. ) At over $3 a gallon, I save over $1500 a year, get some good exercise, and share the work and the wood with friends.
            Here is a little article about the carbon cycle just so you know I am not making stuff up.
            https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/11/09/climate-curious-is-burning-wood-for-heat-carbon-neutral

          • Don,
            This is the old tried and true liberal hypocrisy of do as I say and not as I do. So since your privilege allows you to live in a place where burning wood somehow won’t pollute the atmosphere the same as if someone burns wood in a city? I guess your pollution is different than the cities?
            And you can make the same argument for coal that you are making for wood. We have clean coal technology and other technologies that allow us the burn fossils fuels so much cleaner that your wood. I am not against you burning wood just your superiority complex on all things green. You should simply practice what you preach regardless of where you live. For the good of the environment.

      • Carl, why is Island so pro wind?
        Why can’t they see the harm?
        Why do you stay among such poorly educated people?

  2. Jumping to conclusions? Correlation is not causation.
    That whale (or whales) has been happily feeding up and down South Beach for weeks now.

  3. Anyone that’s been on the water for a good chunk of their lives , know that these behaviors the past couple of years are not normal.
    I’ve seen 3 whales this summer down vineyard sound in really shallow water, in the previous 50 years I’ve only seen 2.
    NOAA , BOEM,NMFS,WHOI,URI,Dr Sean Hayes,Dr Linda Weilgart,IFAW….. All explain that this is the potential result of Mono pile driving noise.
    These behaviors, as I’ve mentioned so many times before, will continue to happen until the last Mono pile is driven. Unfortunately, that is years down the road , as more leases continue to get approved.
    Enjoy the show from the beach and be grateful the ones breaching aren’t floating around or washing up like so many others.

    https://photos.app.goo.gl/WELmWDBt6EhdvSgr8

  4. The whales are smarter than we think.
    This whale came in close so we could see it jumping
    for joy that we are trying to do something to keep
    the ocean from becoming more acidic and warmer.
    It’s pathetic that no one can put these pieces together
    shame on this island for supporting the oil companies.

    • “This whale came in close so we could see it jumping
      for joy that we are trying to do something to keep
      the ocean from becoming more acidic and warmer.”

      This type of insight into animal (and human) behavior is why I always pay close attention to Don’s comments and analyses.

  5. Don – I think we all wish this were to be the case, but unfortunately it isn’t.
    All part of species being displaced by such extreme Mono pile driving noises.

    • The behavior is directly related to Monopole driving?
      They are unaffected by climate change?
      Should the ugly windmills be replaced with oil production platforms equipped with fracking equipment?

  6. I’m with Jason and anyone else that’s on the water daily and sees the behavior on a regular basis. That’s true data.

  7. Tom- I know you live by this saying ” correlation is not causation”
    But here’s a little tid bit for dot connecting.
    The unusual mortality event (UME) started in 2016 , many proponents of OSW had said no surveys or construction of any kind was taking place then.
    Well ,we know block island was under construction at this time , and now in the VW1 updated incidental take permit, it clearly states surveying taking place in 2016.
    Dr Sean Hayes and Dr Linda Weilgart both warned us of the effect surveys and construction noises would have on many species.
    You’ve been around this island long enough to know and hopefully understand these sightings are not common place.

    Ready to connect the dots yet?

    https://photos.app.goo.gl/ieMbaPE24sQNat7S9

    • Jason– your circled photos say “may” “could” and “possibly”
      many times. Since we are speculating it could be possible that
      the windmills may have a positive effect. Since there seems to be
      a lot of “happy” whales in the area, one could reasonably argue
      that there could be good things happening in the marine environment
      as a result of all this stuff going on .You could at least acknowledge that it
      may be possible.

  8. Albert – NOAA has explained in detail the consequences of Mono pile driving noise , displacement is one of the them.

    Yes , the climate is changing and has been for sometime. Species learn to adapt but that process is slow, they don’t change their routines overnight. Which is basically what we’ve witnessed since construction began.

    If the inflation reduction act keeps pushing oil leases in order to approve new OSW leases, then we probably will see oil rigs out there.
    All backwards steps in my opinion.

    • Thank you for sticking to your guns, Jason. Anyone who thinks wind farms are “green energy” chooses to ignore the laws of unintended consequences. My heart goes out to all of the sea life who are affected by the installation of the newest way to allow humans to destroy everything around us and pretend it’s a “good thing”. It isn’t.

      • Juleann, so the lobsters 🦞 are gone
        because burning 🔥 fossil fuels
        warmed the ocean too much.
        You don’t care that my lobster 🦞
        pots are empty?
        I’m ALL for windmills.

        • Mary — if what you mean is that you are ALL for OFF shore windmills, then you must also take credit for being ALL FOR the dislocation, distress and soon-to-be extinction of whales.

          And, yes I am sorry that your lobster pots are empty. Two wrongs don’t make a right. I am not quite sure why you refuse to understand that concept.

          • You do realize that pollution, global warming, more and more fast moving boats, ships and freight barges are sharing the ocean with all sea creatures big and small. .

        • Mary – The great long island sound lobster die off of 1999 had very little to do with climate change. As I’ve mentioned to you before, it was a “perfect storm” of events.
          Overload of nitrogen from fertilizer run off created a hypoxia event, a warmer than average summer (which we know fluctuates ) , tropical storm that dumped a lot of rain all mixed with pesticides dumped in the Connecticut river.
          The lobster is a hearty creature that can withstand fluctuating temperatures but long island has always been about the farthest south they can live. So when an event like the one described took place , it was devastating.
          Climate change doesn’t kill overnight, which is what took place.

    • Jason, has NOAA explained the consequences of fracking?
      Hydrocarbon air and water pollution?
      There is a down side to every action.
      And inaction.

      Where should oil rigs be located?
      Out of your sight?
      Where the poor people live?

  9. Re “Correlation is not causation.”

    Correlation is the basis for the formation of hypotheses, and then theories.

    Theories can be tested via controlled experiments, to establish causation.
    Genuine scientists are always testing their own theories to make them ever more robust.

    Correlation is the basis for all the climate models that are now put forward as “the science.”

    These are hypotheses or, at best, theories. They are not actual scientific experiments that show causation.

    The experiments are happening in real time. The whales and other marine life didn’t ask to be part of the experiment, but they are.

    As for fracking, it continues apace:
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/09/25/climate/fracking-oil-gas-wells-water.html

    So I guess wind energy isn’t “working” to reduce fracking.
    Whaa! This wasn’t supposed to happen!

    Another real-life experiment.

    • Katherine–it is true that oil and gas production is
      continuing unabated. In fact the U.S is producing more
      than it ever has. More than any country has ever produced
      in fact. But the “conservatives” keep demanding more drilling and
      more fracking. Let me do a little correlating and hypothesizing.
      I will posit that the increase in alternative sources of energy has in
      fact slowed the rate of growth of the fossil fuels.
      In 2023 Solar panels generated 165 terawatts of power
      and wind generated 425 terawatts in the U.S
      One terawatt is 1,000,000,000 (billion) kilowatts.
      So we have produced 590 billion kilowatts from solar and wind
      That’s a lot.
      So logic would dictate that 2 things would have
      happened if not for these 2 sources of electricity.
      1) oil and gas production would have increased to meet the
      demand.
      2) oil and gas would have not met demand and rationing would
      have occurred. In this society, rationing would happen
      by the price going up.
      So what is actually happening is that solar and wind are
      allowing oil companies to meet demand without increasing the
      price.
      All those people who whine about the price of gas have wind
      and solar to thank for it being as cheap as it is.
      They should thank Mary Hansen for it.
      But I doubt any of them will because they are so
      blinded by their ideology they don’t even know they are
      benefiting from her solar panels.

      • The story is about the impact of the industrialization of the continental shelf on whales, not the price of oil, or gasoline.

        • Katherine– May I point out to you that Albert first mentioned
          fracking on this thread. Then Jackie brought Kamala into it
          as an example of Harris Derangement Syndrome
          without mentioning
          whales or the industrialization of the continental shelf.
          Then Jason said ” we probably will see oil rigs out there.”
          You brought fracking back into the conversation as an example
          that wind power wasn’t doing what its implied purpose is.
          I was merely responding to your
          comment that fracking has not been reduced.
          Please note that i agree.
          If you want to stick to whales– stick to whales.
          Don’t point a finger at me for replying to your comment
          about fracking. Sorry if you didn’t like the rational answer
          to your sarcastic ,rhetorical , off topic comment.

      • Actually, solar and wind allow people to consume as much energy as they like and pretend that consequences will not catch up with them. Unfortunately, those who promote solar and wind mistakenly also promote the notion that the use of these energy resources will allow people to continue to live as though Nothing Else Needs to Change — their lifestyle habits and choices can remain as excessive as ever b/c the energy is now “clean & green”. It isn’t. Is it better than petroleum? Of course. But a big old balloon payment will still rear its ugly head sooner than we think.

        I love having solar panels and am grateful we had the option of adding them to our property. But in addition to spending the money to install them we also have adjusted how we live in order to continue to reduce our energy consumption. The off-shore wind farms will directly cause the extinction of whales and other sea life — it is of little use to keep those blinders on so tight that you are unable/unwilling to acknowledge our role in the devastation of marine habitat just so people can live with reckless abandon.

        Humans are unwilling to “ration” unless forced to. Instead, we force nature to do the rationing while we go on our merry way. Who should I thank for that?

        • Juleann, there is no evidence that the whales will disappear. We have already lost the lobster. 🦞
          Is one animal 🦒 more important than another?
          I applaud your efforts to reduce your energy (and water?) consumption.

          • As you know, one cannot claim to reduce one’s energy consumption if they aren’t also reducing water consumption — they go hand-in-hand.

            However, I consider you to be the least conservation-minded person involved in these “chats”. You are the only one promoting the idea that with “green energy” — solar & wind — we can continue to live our consumption-energy-driven lifestyle without guilt. You more than imply that with these technologies we can continue to have two cars in every driveway, we will not need to wash our clothes in cold water and there will be no need modify our use of energy in any way.

            I understand that “there is no evidence that the whales will disappear” as a result of OSW. There is also no evidence that they won’t. I do know that the constant driving noise caused by installation of the piles causes them great distress.

            DO NO HARM.

      • Don, that’s a very good point. California (and other places) have experienced rolling blackouts and brownouts in the past. Could solar and wind energy make blackouts a relic of the past?

  10. Renewable wind is an expensive, inefficient, intermittent form of energy. Dangerous to birds, animals and marine life. Noisy sound pollution and visual pollution. Apparently not durable due to manufacturing defects, design flaws and high velocity storms leading to high cost clean ups and water contamination. Hazardous to navigation.
Higher demand for electric vehicles and AI will create higher electric prices for residential, commercial and industry. Wind and solar are not viable to expand to manage this increased demand. Our electric grid is not capable to transport and deliver renewable energy. Unfortunately Biden/Harris administration has stalled investment in oil and natural gas. In addition, the administration has delayed construction of pipelines and LNG export facilities. These issues will lead to higher inflation for everything. GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES FOR EV, WIND AND SOLAR energy projects are borne my the taxpayer. New electric infrastructure for renewables is causing higher monthly electric bills across the country. DO YOUR RESEARCH. California has the the highest percentage of renewable energy sources and their monthly electric per unit charges are the HIGHEST COST IN THE COUNTRY. Rich people gain from these high renewable subsidies but everyone else pays more for electricity.

    • Yes, definitely do the research as you say. Government subsidies for the fossil fuel industry outrank subsidies for all forms of green energy by several orders of magnitude and have since long before green technologies came to be. Since the 1950’s subsidies to fossil fuels have topped over one trillion dollars despite the companies making huge windfall profits. One political party wants to end subsidies to green energy businesses. Three guesses which party I’m referring to.

      • Mr Skydell, Yes government offers subsidies for the fossil fuel industry but the industry doesnt need them to be profitable. Solar and wind and all the other so called green stuff does need them to stay afloat. Big difference. One is inefficient the other is not. To compare the two is disingenuous. Blame the government for the subsidies to your enemy, dont blame the industry.

        • andy– if the oil companies don’t need the subsidies
          to be profitable, why are taxpayers subsidizing them ?
          And why did the ceo of exxon get paid 26.5 million of our
          tax dollars in 2023 ?
          Yeah, I do blame the government.

    • Hydrocarbon energy is dangerous to birds, animals and marine life.
      Oil drilling rigs and and production platforms are visual pollution.
      The dancing beauty of a flare stack.

      “Our electric grid is not capable to transport and deliver renewable energy.”
      Our electric grid can not tell the difference between hydrocarbon and renewable.
      Renewable tends to be smaller than than hydrocarbon requiring less grid to distribute.
      More EVs will reduce the demand for hydrocarbons.

  11. The ocean around Martha’s Vineyard is not “hot”.

    It’s fair to say that comments that are untrue, hysterical, gross exaggerations, off-topic, carry on with hate and blame, and written out of ignorance and rumor, (I knew someone who told my brother), do not inspire anyone to change their habits or beliefs. In fact, I will eat my yarmulka if anyone has stopped idling their car, bought an e-vehicle, or installed solar panels based solely on any one person’s tiresome comments in the MVTimes.

    People who have experience and expertise relating to imagining why a whale would breach so close to LVB, and are nice enough to share their knowledge in interesting, factual, and common sense comments, are appreciated. Readers know the difference between unearned blabbering and earned knowledge through experience. I thank Jason Gale for a healthy dose of reality.

    • Jackie– I agree 100% with you about the tiresome comments.
      And if you think you know what I am talking about, you do.
      Sometime I try to interject a little humor into some of
      the conversations here.
      I doubt the whales are trying to show us how happy they are about
      the windmills by jumping for joy. But I don’t think a little humor can hurt.
      But you never know– that could be it– it may be possible after all.

  12. Could we please have someone smarter
    than me tell us how many BTUs it takes
    to warm the oceans by one degree C?
    Or how the chemical gases cause a
    Greenhouse Effect?

    • Mary– I’m probably not smarter than you, but here is
      a knowledgeable article about the greenhouse effect process.
      https://www.britannica.com/science/greenhouse-gas
      As far as heating the ocean goes, it would require about
      18,326,000,000,000,000,000 BTUs to heat the world’s
      oceans one degree C.That’s a big number, so let me put it into
      perspective. Worldwide the total amount of BTUs from burning fossil
      is about 6,000,000,000,000 per year.
      While the suns puts in about 150,000,000,000,000,000 BTUs every year.
      Of course, the ocean would not heat evenly, and the numbers are
      much lower to raise the top 500 ft of ocean, but I’m not crazy enough
      to try to calculate that.
      I hope this helps answer your question. 😉

      • Don, so if the sun is providing more BTUs than fossil fuels, in order for the oceans to rise in temperature so that it can be measured, the Greenhouse Gases must be very powerful at trapping heat.

        • Mary- correct, and as the concentrations of various
          greenhouse gases increase, they will allow less
          of the infrared radiation to be reflected back into space.
          Think of a greenhouse that is covered with a thin
          layer of plastic sheathing. Then take the same
          greenhouse and put double insulated glass on it.
          Same greenhouse with same amount of sunlight,
          and you will have a significant difference in temperature.
          And just to put it out there once again, the favorite whipping
          boy of the climate deniers ( Carl Sagan) warned us about
          global warming. He was correct about that.
          He was also correct in noting that nearly all natural processes
          were pushing earth into the natural cycle that would gradually
          cool the earth for the next 30,000 years or so.
          The deniers focus on that correct observation. Here he is talking
          to congress in 1985– it’s 17 minutes — key points at 3:30
          7:00 and 11:45 and
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp-WiNXH6hI
          But the whole thing is just fascinatingly correct.
          Especially when he starts talking about China at 14:45.

  13. Don, you mentioned that
    sulfur hexaflouride (SF6) is the
    most potent greenhouse gas.
    If we were to achieve solar on
    every roof, and then exit the grid,
    then the electrical distribution system
    could theoretically go away.
    The electrical distribution system
    uses SF6 for switching medium-
    and high-voltage electrical equipment.
    There are attempts being made to
    find new technology that will allow us
    to stop using SF6.
    In the meantime, we need solar on
    every roof.
    Vote against the oil industry.

    https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/what-is-sf6-sulphur-hexafluoride-explained

    • Mary– I wonder why no one complains about fs6 being used in
      natural gas switching components.
      My guess is that most of the people who are opposed to the
      windmills don’t believe in the whole greenhouse gas
      fraud anyway.
      And it seems Jason is calling for an fs6 ban for wind generated
      electricity. Seems kinda weird to me .

      • Don, I was watching a video clip of Trump saying how windmills cause cancer and kill whales.
        Does anyone believe Trump’s nonsense?
        I don’t believe anything Trump says.
        Thank goodness Harris acts presidential!

  14. Some 35 years ago I was out fishing in a small boat not far off the beach in the Menemsha Bight area and a whale I thought to be 30–35-foot finback surfaced twice. At first glance I thought it was an upturned hull of a boat until it blew.
    My two fishing buddies and I just stared at each other speechless for several minutes before we continued fishing.

  15. Don- I’m not calling for a ban on sf6 and the OSW industry. I do , however, feel that a “Green Energy producer” should use the much safer alternative gases that most of the OSW developers agreed to in their operations plan.
    They instead, reverted back to sf6 because of the cost differential.
    Now in the true effort to save the planet, no expense should be spared , would you agree? or are the bottom line profits more important?

    https://www.energyvoice.com/renewables-energy-transition/464650/wind-and-power-seek-to-clean-up-act-on-dangerous-greenhouse-gas-sf6/

    • Jason, if every family had solar panels on their own home and disconnected from the grid, we wouldn’t need to use SF6.

    • Jason– thanks for the really informative link. I learned a lot.
      So what do we do ? As I have said, I have been aware of the properties
      of sf6 for some time.
      I was aware of chlorofluorocarbons and their effect on the ozone layer
      In the mid 1980’s — There was an international conference which resulted
      in the “Montreal Protocol” which mandated the rapid phasing out of these
      dangerous gasses. It was opposed by the republican party at every step
      of the way.
      Indeed every single one of the 30 “nay” votes was from a republican.
      https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/statement-signing-montreal-protocol-ozone-depleting-substances
      Fortunately, Reagan signed it and thoroughly endorsed it in the end.
      https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/statement-signing-montreal-protocol-ozone-depleting-substances
      Yeah. and Nixon signed the EPA into existence. Reluctantly—
      Two examples of working across the isle and compromising.
      Indeed, even today there are people who equate the climate
      “alarmist” with those who were “alarmed” at the growing ozone hole.
      They mock those who were concerned, and say ” it’s fine”— well, it’s “fine” now
      because we did something about it.
      We did something about acid rain, about rivers catching on fire,
      about not being able to see the street from the top of the
      Empire state building on a clear day. I actually experienced that personally.
      So now, we have an entrenched group of anti-environites who deny, mock
      and lie to make sure the bottom profit line is enhanced.
      So I find it particularly ironic that they focus on the least
      co2 emitting electrical generating technology on the planet and
      whine that they have fs6 in their systems.
      I’m not criticizing you, Jason.
      Let’s see what andy says—
      I think it’s great that we are talking about it.
      Time to completely ban it — as soon as possible.And not just for one industry.
      But what political party in this country and what industries do you think
      will work the hardest, spend the
      most money on propaganda, tell the most lies, and fight tooth and
      nail to defeat ANY regulation of fs6 ?

  17. Is there something funny about ruining whale habitats? From the liberal left, first it was hatred for “maggots”, then Jews, and now whale survival is the stuff of poor jokes? I don’t laugh at racist jokes, either, BTW. I also don’t know or care about unoriginal, kitchen sink, wiki plagiarized comments. Nothing cute or haha about destroying marine life.

    • Jackie– I have never seen a single comment here where
      someone stated that they “hated” maggots– I personally love
      maggots– they clean up all sorts of dead and rotting stuff
      that would otherwise overwhelm us.
      I have never seen anyone here say they hate Jews
      or whales.
      I did notice that someone you may admire did say
      “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT”
      But ok– I understand that some people are so
      miserable– even ones with children– that they can’t
      see humor in any form.
      That won’t stop me.
      Here–This is a joke– You may not think it’s
      funny, but tell it to a 10 year old and watch the reaction.
      Q–Why do giraffes have such long necks ?
      A– Because their heads are a long way from their bodies.

      So I guess I hate giraffes now , and for that matter all large
      animals.
      But here are a couple of guys you may admire
      who think this is funny
      https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/inqw4s/don_jr_and_eric_trump_hunting_endangered_animals/?force_seo=1

  18. Mary 70 percent of China electricity comes from coal and it makes it the worlds largest polluter. (avoid per capita comparisons that Keller touts). Reliability due to intermittency is a problem for China so it is slowing its growth. It also builds coal plants in other parts of the world in order to improve employment rates. You cannot reach climate goals without China reducing its emissions substantially and doing what Hansen suggests with solar panels makes not one iota of difference except for feeling good.

    • andy– please take a few seconds to get your “facts” correct.
      https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/china-cuts-coals-share-electricity-output-h1-2024-maguire-2024-07-24/
      Thats 59% in China– 19% in U.S
      Do you know what country has the worst air quality ?

      As for per capita comparisons–
      jamaica had 425 road fatalities in 2023
      The U.S had over 44,000
      I have driven a few thousand miles in Jamaica.
      I will disagree with you that it is 100 times safer
      to drive in Jamaica than the U.S

      • Keller, I dont measure per capita, You do. You say China pollutes less than USA on a per capita basis but that so called fact is irrelevant because China pollutes more than the USA in absolute terms. You are confused and continue to be. You cannot disagree with me on Jamaica because I never mentioned Jamaica. Is there something wrong?

    • China
      In 2023, China invested over $273 billion in renewable energy, and nearly $676 billion in energy transition. China is also the leader in renewable energy installations, with a capacity of around 1,453 gigawatts.

  19. Avoid the per capita that Don touts because China’s is almost half of the US.
    Reliability is not a concern in a country the size of the China, or the US.
    Scale does that.
    There is always a good breeze somewhere.
    And sunshine too.
    We can not reach climate goals until the US reduces it’s per capita down to Chinese levels.
    Every non hydrocarbon watt makes a difference.

  20. Clearly, some people are set to make a bundle of money from their investments in OSW. Those people will continue to deny any negative consequences or acknowledge the validity of reasonable concerns being expressed by people with a different point-of-view (and no financial interests to protect).

    I appreciate the efforts that proponents of OSW make to research facts (science?) and try to persuade the rest of us to go along with it. Most of their information is solid. However, I find that those “facts” are also used to obfuscate and belittle the other “truths” being expressed.

    Some of those “truths” are related to grief and sadness about our world; anger at not being able to control any of what is happening. Personally, I just have a “sense” that something is “off” with OSW. It is NOT a benign undertaking and is now set to expand ten-fold before being able to safely evaluate it’s impact. THAT is bad science. But, typical human capitalist behavior.

    • Just for the record, Juleann, I have zero financial investment in OSW.
      I’m seriously considering investing though; wind is our future, even if some people on this forum bad-mouth wind energy.
      Once again, I must respectfully disagree with your statement, “…expand ten-fold before safely evaluating impact…” Surely you have seen the Chinese windmills and know that they have been safely operating for many years.

    • Juleann, are there any people on MV who have investments in fossil fuels? Are they now, and have they in the past, made a bundle of money? 💰

  21. Precisely the opposite point is true. Green suffers intermittency and needs fossil fuels for dependability. Fossils are generally reliable and Nuclear is best if one stops fibbing about deaths. Chernobyl was terrible but due to corruption and soviet carelessness. Fukushima killed no one. It was a tsunami that caused destruction. Nuclear is safe and to mention submarines is irrelevant to the subject since those were not nuclear related accidents. 3 mile island harmed no one. So much hysteria. Sheeeeeesh.

    • andy– you are correct that for the foreseeable future we will need
      fossil fuels to insure the reliability of the grid. I don’t think anyone
      is disputing that. But it is quite reasonable to expect that wind and
      solar could reliably provide at least 60 % of our demand in the next
      20 to 30 years. Currently power for the New England grid is about 60%
      generated by natural gas. That is not because wind and solar are
      intermittent, it is because the infrastructure has not been built out
      yet. That’s what we are working on. I don’t see anything that is so
      special about natural gas or that it is environmentally friendly.
      Or that it can be depended on to be reliable. There are issues–
      look at the sabotage of the Nord stream pipeline for example.
      Natural gas lines in the U.S alone leak about 2 billion cubic ft
      of gas a year. Accidents happen. What would a well placed 5.5
      earthquake do to a pipeline ? You are wrong about Fukushima
      deaths. If you can find a link between windmills and whale deaths,
      you can find the link between radiation releases and cancer deaths.
      The insurance companies are paying out, and they don’t do that because
      they are nice people.
      And so what if there were a severe accident at the now unoperational
      Pilgrim plant and the area from Boston to Nantucket had to be
      permanently evacuated ? I would guess that in such a situation
      very few if anyone would die immediately. And you could just stay
      in Florida.
      Counting only immediate deaths from anything like that is disingenuous.
      It would be like only counting the 2259 immediate deaths that occurred
      at the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal because of corruption and carelessness, while ignoring the ensuing approximately 16,000 deaths that resulted from that
      tragic “accident”. So much denial. Sheeeeeesh.

    • Andrew, how many millisieverts are people exposed to annually in Idaho Falls?
      Why do you push lies about nuclear power?
      According to the Environmental Defense Institute, the cancer rates in the counties surrounding Idaho National Laboratory (INL) show that the airborne radiological releases are anything but benign.
      Say NO to nuclear energy.
      Say Yes to Electric Cars.
      Say Yes to Harris for president.

    • For all the people who think nuclear is better than wind, let’s see a raise of hands for who would rather have a nuclear reactor on the island instead of windmills on the horizon.
      Anyone?

  22. Mary. Respectfully, I dont share the same concerns you have about the planet emergency. Fossil fuels have lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty and continue to do so. Most of the things we wear and live in come from fossil fuels. I dont like technology that requires subsidy and is inefficient due to someone’s hysteria on climate change. I dont see oil companies as ”barons”. They are owned by hundreds of thousands of shareholders who live off the dividends and appreciation of the stock. I dont look to China for enlightenment. They were and are a thug nation that is hugely opportunistic, has their eye on Taiwan and the rest of Asia and bullies Australia. I first went there in 1973 selling chemicals to their government under MAO. Finally I dont see climate change the same way that you do. I have confidence in technology to mitigate it and I never see or hear anyone tell us how warmer weather benefits mankind versus colder weather. Cold weather kills many more people regardless of what Keller tells you. Four times more.

Comments are closed.