Does it matter if a bird is killed by oil or by a wind turbine? The question may be more political than you realize...

I am not being facetious when I ask for a logical counter-response to this passage (I suggest you read the whole article), specifically as it relates to the bird kill numbers, but you don't have to confine it to only that. I can think of at least one, but will save it to see if anyone addresses it. THANKS! (HT: Carpe Diem)

"Affect heuristic'" is a fancy name for a pretty obvious concept, namely that we discount the drawbacks of things we are emotionally in favor of. For example, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill certainly killed about 1,300 birds, maybe a few more. Wind turbines in America kill between 75,000 and 275,000 birds every year, generally of rarer species, such as eagles. Yet wind companies receive neither the enforcement, nor the opprobrium, that oil companies do."" from Matt Ridley in WSJ