Bishop Hill Never trust a green
Mar 13, 2014 Energy: gas Greens The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the National Trust have just issued a joint report into the impact of shale gas development on the UK's environment. These being green organisations it's always fun to go and do some fact checking.
I picked on the "Wildlife disturbance" section, because in itself this seemed a bit unlikely. When I visited Dart Energy's sites near Stirling I noted their proximity to the M9 motorway. The iGas site near Manchester is right alongside the M62. And besides, the drilling process only lasts a few weeks, so it's hard to imagine any long-lasting impact.
The report makes this claim:
...in the Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado, 64 compressors (associated with shale gas extraction) outside the protected area, resulted in an average 34.8 decibel (dBA) rise above typical ambient sound within the park. Along the eastern border of the park, nearest to the highest density of compressors, sound levels increased by a mean of 56.8 dBA above ambient conditions. This compares to the US Environmental Protection Agency recommended “safe noise level” of 55 dBA.
A recent study modeled the impacts that compressors from oil and gas operations might have on Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado. The study found that the sound of 64 compressors outside Mesa Verde elevated the sound level within the park by 34.8 decibels on average, and by 56.8 decibels on the eastern side of the park (which sits closest to the compressors).
Yes folks, you read that right - it's not a measurement of actual sound levels, this is a simulation (the original study is here) that has been reported as fact by our green friends.
As an aside, you might also like to consider how realistic this simulation is. As I understand it compressors are used as part of the drilling and fracking process. So I wonder about the likelihood of 64 sites operating simultaneously within a relatively small area.
Bishop Hill
In the comments, Chris notes that after a while the gas pressure drops off and compressors are required. But he also says the noise levels are unlikely to disturb the birds next to a motorway.
Reader Comments (56)
Funny how the RSPB rarely speaks out about the birds being sliced up by wind turbines.
I wonder what financial connections there are between the RSPB and Big Wind.
You have to say from the results of the model "so what". It was going to get loud but for how long and what effect would it have on the environment. 55dBA is not loud -what is the noise of a thunderclap? What about a anti-fraccing protest rally?
Birds are quite happy to try and nest at the end of airport runways. Animals live in artillery ranges. They can tolerate a lot of noise if the other factors compensate.
If a bit of noise is the biggest danger they can come up with, they are really scraping the bottom of the barrel
And here is a noise survey for the Becconsall exploration site.
Although the document is assessing what the noise impact will be, it uses real measurements from real drilling rigs.
This is nice example of "climatese whispers". The misleading passage you quote comes from the summary report. But in the main report it says
"(Barber et al., 2011) modelled the noise impacts of compressors from oil and gas operations on the Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado..."
Reminiscent of the IPCC SPM and main report.
Those noise levels are as nothing compared to the noise emitted by bird-mincing wind turbines. The impact of the noise also depends on the frequency of the noise, its variability with time and the atmospheric conditions. The noise from compressors can be suppressed, unlike the noise from wind turbines.
Re: Paul Mathews
I see. So you can lie and mislead as much as you want in the summary report as long as the truth is somewhere in the main report?
The Royal Society for the Promulgation of Bullsh1te.
Confirmation, as if we needed it, that the RSPB has been taken over by eco-nutters, big green is more important to them than their actual remit. I'll add the RSPB to the growing list of logo's I avoid when purchasing anything.
One might wonder why the RSP needs a 'head of energy and climate change'. The amount of money these charities and other organisations waste must be enormous. Only the other day I was listening on the radio to words of wisdom from the NFU's climate change advisor. One would hope most farmers are too savvy and aware of the variability of the weather to take notice of advice about the future climate.
Terry, yes, that's right, and in the next stage of the whispers process, the summary report will be exaggerated and further distorted by the media for presentation to the public.
Charmingquark, see this from the you-couldnt-make-it-up department.
I wonder what financial connections there are between the RSPB and Big Wind.
Mar 13, 2014 at 8:56 AM | Unregistered CommenterCharmingQuark
BIG MONEY. RSPB receives huge sums of money for the bird mincers on their land as do all large land owners including the plonker prince.
Mesa Verde=green table
I do find it somewhat disturbing that the RSPCA can invest so much time in to reports like this and so little time in to reports on the impact a metal wing has on rare and endangered bird life travelling at 100mph.
Mailman
No mention of the noise generated by the vehicles of the ornithologists and scientists all the time they're driving anywhere, particularly around town.
The noise values given are irrelevant without justifying the distance and field criteria. Eg @1m Free Field.
From Aunty today:
"Harry Huyton is head of energy and climate change at the RSPB.
He told BBC News: "We have found that there are serious potential risks to the environment from fracking.
"......This could mean lots of well pads all around the landscape. All of these could have an impact on wildlife."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26553117
I must have missed Harry's condemnation of the pads for windmills, and the areas occupied by solar panels.
Did any BH reader, by any chance, see them?
If you see an RSPB stand at your local shopping centre, aside from all the pretty pictures it will inevitably include the laughable phrase 'Stop Climate Chaos'. Ask them what that means. It always makes me chortle at the nonsense replies.
When presented with such information I always think back to the photograph here:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2013/7/21/energy-impact.html
http://www.reliableplant.com/Read/27499/How-loud-wind-turbine
To compare. A wind turbine is 105db at source, dropping to 50db at 100m, 40db at 500m. I imagine some of the noise is also transmitted to the ground and the ocean. I wonder what they sound like to dolphins? Unfortunately the noise doesn't upset the birds or there wouldn't be so much bird pâté. The noise is intermittently transmitted for the lifetime of the turbine.
Another fine example from "The truth is a bourgeois construct" division of Progressivism.
Hmm wouldn't a study of the effects of noise on animal and bird life be better done at one of the numerous sanctuary's that exist next to airports and military airfields ? judging by the number of bird strikes each year the birdy's ain't that bothered that they leave the areas never to return ?
Compressors are used to raise the pressure of low pressure gas to transmission pipeline pressure
There can be one compressor for many wells in an area and noise abatement measures can and probably would be required by regulation.
Sample noise levels:
http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/loudness.html
But Paul (9:17 AM)
They've got to slice up the birds now, it's for the long-term survival of all wildlife later. Seen correctly this is a heroic view of birdlife: they make the sacrifice for the good of all. And the RSPB is on hand to make sure they do. The Royal Society for Pioneering Bloodbaths. Please give your last tweet in support.
these are not independent institutes anymore
these are cheap shills and propaganda offices where the scum establishment parks buddies of theirs
fascism in construction
It would appear the green chant is 'why tell the truth when a lie is much more effective'.
The other thing they fail to mention is the type of compressor used for their modelling exercise and if they are temporary or permanent sited. If temporary they would be open units and if permanent they would be enclosed in a sound shield.
Is it just me or *all* charities converging on the same thing?
For want of a better word it's an agenda of "guardianity".
I asked a question of a local Green as to why the RSPB wasn't concerned about the lack of information on death rates of raptors near wind farms. He triumphantly produced a paper which concluded there was no case to answer. The paper was a study of Dunlin nesting sites.
The report refers to an increase in decibel levels but since the decibel scale is logarithmic it isn't clear what this means in terms of real noise, ie the power of the noise signals. An increase of 56.8 decibels above an ambient 10 decibels is only 1/1000th of the increase of 56.8 above an ambient 40 decibels.
Even the BBC discovered this morning the strategic importance of fracking, thanks to Vladimir and the Crimea. Expect charities to become softer and softer on the topic.
This made me laugh..
“given that water resources in many parts of the [country] are already under pressure” (Broderick et al., 2011).
Yeah the pressure of far too much water now.....how things change dramatically when you have a linear view of a highly nonlinear system.
Thing is, RSPB, would you believe Kate Moss if she told you that she's only 25? No. That's the problem of using models: you can't believe a word they say.
I can hear the traffic from the M40 whilst in my garden a few hundred yards away, but not having a noise meter I have no idea how loud it is. But there seem to be plenty of birds around, and they are nesting as usual. They don't seem to be unduly disturbed by the motorway or my motor mower. Has the RSPB ever done a study of the effects on birds of the noise from motorways? Surely these cover a far greater area than any number of fracking sites.
Does the RSPB also have a view on the dangers of large scale solar farms frying birds? It has been extensively reported.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/13/the-2-2-billion-bird-scorching-solar-project-at-californias-ivanpah-plant/
Maybe we should stop Farmer's using agricultaral equipment?
The world is full of gas compressors. The world is not full of people complaining about the noise of gas compressors. Very few people outside the industry know that they exist or where they are located.
This 2007 paper from the EIA gives some idea of the size of this non-issue.
http://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/natural_gas/analysis_publications/ngcompressor/ngcompressor.pdf
People concerned about the effect of noise on wildlife should look at the number of deer vs. car collisions on freeways or the number of aircraft bird strikes in and around airports. If noises associated with human commerce have a negative effect on wildlife, I wouldn't have deer eating my shrubs or birds at my birdfeeder.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2009-05-28-seattle-hawks-move_N.htm
http://www.iii.org/press_releases/deer-vehicle-collisions-are-on-the-rise-make-sure-you-have-comprehensive-coverage-on-your-auto-policy.html
A small point: the Barton Moss site is alongside the M62, not the M6. [BH adds: Thanks! fixed]
Another set of wells alongside a motorway is at Palmer's Wood, just South of the M25 and West of Oxted, Surrey and close to Mahommed al Fayed's home in Hogtrough Lane. These have been in operation since the first well was spudded in September 1983. True, they are oil, not gas, so they have nodding donkeys.
To compare: a 3MW windmill will produce perhaps 600kW on average, or 5.25Gwh p.a. for 20 years (probably less). That is about 3,100 boe per year, or 62,000 boe over its life. Palmer's Wood is expected to produce a total of almost 3.5 m bbl by the time it is scheduled to be abandoned in 2025. That makes it equivalent to 565 windmills in energy output. So far, 10 wells have been drilled at the two wellpad sites.
I love birdlife and I love our national heritage, but it's become impossible to support these organisations (and others like them), knowing that they divert their energies and our donations to promote the falsified theory of CAGW, which in any case was only tangentially related to their primary missions.
Big green is a big enemy.
"Mahommed al Fayed's home in Hogtrough Lane"
It's not often I get a good laugh here!
Harry Passfield: It's not considered good form to use models but if a 25-year-old Kate Moss will keep throwing herself at you I can understand. :)
Neil, I think Yeo, Deben and Oxburgh live there too.
The RSPB, the RSPCA and the World Wildlife Fund have all departed from their core principals and have become political agitators. A great shame.
In the meantime, those windymills which the RSPB are so keen on/quiet about, are producing a TRULY MASSIVE 572MW, 1.4% of (currently modest) electricity demand, or 8.5% of installed capacity...
But - hey - we're supposed to ignore the IDIOCY of relying on the weather to provide our electricity - because us plebs out here in the real world are not capable of rational thought...
Oops - its gone down to 551MW/1.3% of demand...
(Sigh) - 481MW/1.1%....
Don't worry - I'm not going to keep this up all afternoon...
Acoustic cabinets for large compressors are pretty efficient these days.
It doesn't add up...says:
That's a good comparison to convert the windmill output to boe (barrels of oil equivalent). Does that include the efficiency of burning fossil fuel to generate electricity or is it a straight energy comparison?
"We know that with the right design and location wind turbines have little or no impact on wildlife".
http://www.rspb.org.uk/reserves/guide/t/thelodge/windturbine/
Charmingquark asks if the RSPB are linked to Big Wind. Indeed they are, receiving a £60 bounty for every member who signs up to Ecotricity's supply.
I terminated my membership due to this deal. The RSPB are obsessed with climate change, blaming it for unlikely ills such as erosion of the east coast (I believe mainly geological sinkage) and decline of kittiwake populations due to collapse in sandeel numbers (it couldn't be anything to do with commercial sandeel fishing, could it?)
Decibel scale
•Near total silence - 0 dB
•A whisper - 15 dB
•Normal conversation - 60 dB
•A lawnmower - 90 dB
•A car horn - 110 dB
•A rock concert or a jet engine - 120 dB
•A gunshot or firecracker - 140 dB
Assuming that the Mesa Verde National Park is pretty quiet and the 34dB is "real", the 34 + 15db = 49db i.e. some 10 x less noisy than a normal conversation.
Time was when I was rather fond of the RSPB, but now they have been hollowed out and reborn as a green scum organization, full of dullards who are primarily watermelon zealots who couldn't care a fig for song birds [or the environment for that matter] but last on their list would be human beings.
A walk in the countryside, is a joy when the Blackbirds are bursting with song - as they are now. In the city, I love the sound of Sparrows too but alas they're not so common now, the RSPB love of raptors does not help either the Blackbirds or Sparrows - not the whole problem - but part of it.
I have to have an ironic laugh, STOR relies on rank upon ranks of diesel generators to save us from outages - what does the RSPB think?
Another gutteral laugh when you think that, these tree hugging bunnies prefer bird mincers to fracking sites - how irrational is that....................I can only think - I've come across that type of equivocal dissonance before and in all sorts of fields of study and walks of life, political correctness and for the sake of raising the decibel level to ear splitting - I cannot go any further along that particular road.