Reports are multiplying around the world: dead whales are washing up onto beaches in rapidly growing numbers.

Why? Well, the New York Times (“a former newspaper”—Andrew Klavan) blames online shopping and climate change, an interesting take that spurred a humorous jab by the Manhattan Institute’s Jonathan Lesser.

Whales navigate by their God-given sonar systems. Other sonar signals, likely including those used by offshore wind developers to map the sea floor, mess with those systems, and whales flee from them, “sometimes to their deaths.” So do loud noises to which whales aren’t accustomed, like those from ocean-floor blasting and pile driving necessary to build offshore wind turbines. So also do confusing vibrations, like those from operating offshore wind turbines.

So, in addition to the hundreds of thousands of bats and birds—including Bald and Golden Eagles and other top raptors—killed by onshore wind factories, now we get to count scores, and soon hundreds, of whales possibly killed by offshore wind turbines.

All in the name of fighting global warming.

You’d think Green activists, for whom “save the whales” was one of the first rallying cries, would be up in arms. Think again. They brush off the problem, if they’re forced to mention it at all.

NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) actually condones the (accidental) killing of whales by the offshore wind industry. It sets limits of whale (and other marine mammal) disruptions (which can mount to kills) permissible by offshore wind-factory projects by two “levels” of “harassment” defined by the Marine Mammal Protection Act:

Level A harassment means any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance that has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild.

Level B harassment refers to acts that have the potential to disturb (but not injure) a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by disrupting behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering.

Limits are set per offshore wind project. Here they are, for May 1, 2023 through April 30, 2024, for “Vineyard Wind 1,” a project planned off the coast of Massachusetts:

That’s 28 possible whale kills (or lesser injuries) and 307 instances in which whales can have their “behavioral patterns” disrupted. In the latter case, “disrupting” isn’t supposed to include “injuring,” hence possibly killing. But when you disrupt a whale’s navigation pattern, beaching can ensue, and death can follow that. And when you disrupt its breeding pattern, you can wind up with lower whale fertility. Both lead to fewer live whales.

Now, the Marine Mammal Commission says, “Despite several reports in the media, there is no evidence to link these strandings to offshore wind energy development.” And the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management agrees. But if there’s no evidence to link the strandings, why does NOAA have to set limits on Level A and Level B “harassment”—which can lead to strandings?

Oh, and note the numbers for dolphins and porpoises: 81 Level A and 6,011 Level B “harassments.” And who cares about dolphins, porpoises, and seals (6 Level A, 845 Level B), anyway?

Apparently not advocates of offshore wind energy.

Photo by Rémi Boudousquié on Unsplash.