Michael Schellenberger

Rank 40 of 47
|
Score -95
8/26/2025, 4:54:30 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
163d
@LinowesLisa The Empire project would effectively end the ability of the government to monitor the area.

Concluded the report, “the construction and operations of Empire Wind pose serious disruptions to NOAA’s established scientific surveys, which are vital for managing fisheries and
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
163d
Public showed the report to @LinowesLisa, a researcher who has studied the impact of wind industry boat traffic on whale deaths.

“It’s devastating,” she said. “The report reveals that NMFS scientists warned BOEM of Cholera Bank’s ecological importance and urged the agency to
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
163d
The scientist, who has decades of experience researching the marine environments of the East Coast, said, “From my lab, I can see the turbines 20 miles from here at Revolution Wind. I’m familiar with the ocean in this area and have been out there a lot. It’s not uncommon for us
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
163d
“If you were to ask a marine mammal scientist where we shouldn’t put offshore wind energy, they would say this area,” said the scientist, referring to the Revolution Wind project. “It’s what we call a ‘magical space’ for marine animals. We have a dozen marine mammal species and
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
163d
The scientist who authored the report works for the U.S. government’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which is also known as NOAA Fisheries. It is part of the Department of Commerce, and which serves in an advisory capacity to the Department of the Interior on marine
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
163d
For years, the Biden Administration insisted that offshore wind energy projects complied with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the 1970 law that requires government agencies to use the best available science to evaluate the ecological impacts of major projects before

The statement critiques the Biden administration's approach to implementing wind energy projects, suggesting that the goals were overly ambitious and potentially unachievable even by industry standards. It implies a lack of consideration for environmental and scientific concerns, as highlighted by the accompanying images and previous conversation about the impact on marine life and scientific surveys.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement raises concerns about potential harm to marine environments and scientific research, aligning with the principle of striving to do no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It respects the privacy and dignity of others, focusing on policy critique rather than personal attacks. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by highlighting potential environmental impacts, though it could be more balanced by acknowledging the benefits of renewable energy.
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism of government policy, avoiding personal attacks and focusing on policy implications. [+1]