Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 05/15/2025 10:02:45 PM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom
The Hidden Costs and Harms of Wind Energy: A Systems Perspective on Economic Waste, Environmental Destruction, Wildlife Impacts, and Community Powerlessness
Introduction
Wind energy, touted as a "Net Zero" solution, promises low-carbon electricity. Yet, its economic waste, vast land use, unreliability, health impacts, vista destruction, wildlife mortality, and abandonment risks--evident in Washington’s Palouse Hills and Columbia River Gorge--reveal a flawed technology driven by subsidies and eco-idealism. Fierce opposition to wind is arising in Washington and Oregon. This paper, based on discussions with a concerned citizen driving these regions, exposes wind’s true costs and urges alternatives.
Economic Inefficiency and Subsidy Dependence
Wind relies on subsidies masking high costs. The U.S. Production Tax Credit (PTC, ~$26/MWh) and Investment Tax Credit (ITC, 30% of project costs) provide ~$100 billion yearly, with Washington’s Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA) adding incentives. A 1,000 MW wind farm costs ~$1.3-2 billion, but its low energy density (0.5-2 W/m^2 vs. 500-1,000 W/m^2 for gas/nuclear) and ~35% capacity factor (idle 60-70% of the time) require added infrastructure, inflating expenses.
Conceptually, wind needs "three plants" for reliability: one for daytime power, one to charge storage (both are combined into one over-built plant), and a backup for no-wind periods, tripling costs--$6.6-12.8 billion for a 1,000 MW system with gas backup, vs. $1-1.5 billion for gas or $3-4 billion for coal. Batteries for a week’s backup (168 GWh) cost $50-67 billion, making a renewable grid (~$4.5-56 trillion nationally) impractical. Without subsidies, wind’s levelized cost (~$50-80/MWh) falters against gas (~$40-60/MWh).
Scale and Land Utilization
Wind’s low density demands vast land. A 500 MW wind farm (e.g., Shepherds Flat, OR, 845 MW) spans ~20,000-30,000 acres, vs. ~100 acres for gas or 10-50 for nuclear. In the Columbia River Gorge, ~1,000 turbines across ~75,000-100,000 acres have industrialized a National Scenic Area. In the Palouse Hills, Harvest Hills (60-100 turbines, ~20,000-30,000 acres near Colfax, WA) threatens iconic hills. This sprawl fragments farmland, scars landscapes with concrete foundations (1,000 tons/turbine), towers, roads and transmission lines, and disrupts ecosystems.
Unreliability and Backup Needs
Wind’s intermittency--producing only at 10-55 mph winds--averages a 35% capacity factor, and is idle ~60-70% of the time, as seen in the Gorge’s Shepherds Flat. This requires 100% standby power, typically gas ($1-1.5 billion for 1,000 MW) or coal ($3-4 billion), wasting capital when wind blows. Batteries are infeasible: 2025’s U.S. storage (~99-132 GWh) covers ~10 minutes of national demand; one day’s storage (11 TWh) costs $3.3-4.4 trillion. Tripling costs by 200-300%, wind’s U.S. CO2 cuts (~14% globally) are offset by China’s coal (~30%).
Destruction of Precious Vistas
Wind farms obliterate landscapes. Residents and drivers on US-97 in Oregon and I-84 in the Columbia River Gorge or US-195 near Colfax suffer extreme visual blight from wind farms. The Gorge’s ~1,000 turbines (150m tall, visible 10-20 miles) have “trashed” Mt. Hood and Columbia River vistas, once “God’s creation.” In the Palouse, Harvest Hills threatens pastoral hills, with “No Wind Farm” signs on ranches, farms, and homes signal grief for future generations. Unlike 1960s-70s oil rigs (1-acre platforms, 2-5 miles out), wind farms cover thousands of acres, rarely decommissioned, leaving scars. Eco-advocates’ silence fuels hypocrisy charges.
Infrasound: A Hidden Health Crisis
Turbines emit infrasound (0.1-20 Hz, 40-60 dB at 1 km), penetrating walls and causing insomnia, anxiety, and nausea in 10-20% of residents within 1-2 km (Frontiers in Public Health, 2014; Acoustics Australia, 2021). Wisconsin’s Shirley Wind Farm saw 17 families abandon homes; Oregon’s Klondike lost 3-5 from 120-year properties. Harvest Hills’ turbines (<1 km from Colfax farms) could expose hundreds, yet Washington’s noise rules (50 dB audible) ignore infrasound. Eco-advocates dismiss complaints, unlike their 1970s coal protests.
Wildlife Impacts: Raptors and Flying Insects
Turbines kill wildlife, disrupting ecosystems.
Decommissioning Risks: Unposted Surety Bonds and Superfund Potential
Wind farms risk becoming abandoned liabilities due to inadequate surety bonds for end-of-life removal. Turbines last ~20-30 years, but decommissioning (removal, site remediation) costs ~$200,000-500,000/turbine, or $12-50 million for a 60-100 turbine farm like Harvest Hills. Washington requires bonds (2019 law), but amounts (~$100,000/turbine) often fall way short, and enforcement is lax--only 10% of U.S. wind farms have fully funded bonds (2023 EIA data). Companies (e.g., EDP Renewables) may go bankrupt or dissolve in 50 years, leaving no entity accountable, as seen in Texas’ 2021 Brazos Wind bankruptcy, where 50 turbines remain unremoved.
This risks a future EPA Superfund to clean up thousands of abandoned turbines, with concrete bases (1,000 tons/turbine) and non-recyclable blades littering landscapes like the Palouse. A single 1,000-turbine site could cost $500 million-$1 billion to remediate, with national costs potentially reaching $50-100 billion by 2075. Eco-advocates ignore this, focusing on CO2 cuts, leaving taxpayers to fund cleanup of these “infernal machines.”
Community Powerlessness and Eco-Hypocrisy
Colfax’s ubiquitous “No Wind Farm” signs on homes, ranches and farms reflect fury against big wind ($20 billion EDP) and CETA’s mandates. The state’s Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) overrides local rules, as seen in Whitman County’s 2024 wind limits. Rural voices are drowned out by urban green agendas, with Sierra Club pushing wind while ignoring infrasound, vista destruction, wildlife kills, and decommissioning risks. In the 1960s, environmental groups complained loudly about a few oil rigs off the coastline in California and Oregon, yet there is no groundswell of complain about the extreme visual blight of wind turbines.
Alternatives and Solutions
Wind’s harms outweigh benefits; alternatives include:
Conclusion
Wind’s economic waste (200-300% cost increases), land use (20,000-100,000 acres), unreliability (60-70% idle), health impacts (infrasound), vista destruction, wildlife mortality (raptors, insects), and decommissioning risks burden regions like the Palouse and the Columbia River Gorge. Subsidies ($100 billion/year) and eco-hypocrisy drive projects like Harvest Hills, ignoring Colfax’s “No Wind Farm” pleas and risking a Superfund crisis. Nuclear, gas with CCS, or local resistance offer solutions, but policymakers must prioritize low-impact energy to preserve God’s creation.
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
I did this to explore how AI can be used to prepare position papers. The product is fair to good, nowhere near excellent. But the ability of AI to do this is amazing. The ability to "dialog" with AI and coach it toward the direction you want to go is incredible.
The paper above is the product it produced. I've done a small amount of editing.
See what you think. Comments welcome.
Later.
“Wind’s harms outweigh benefits; “
I am not aware of any benefits. However this looks very interesting and thorough and will read it later.
At least windmills keep Iranians away. But the problem is that at the same time, they also attract the Dutch... and also people from Holland.
It’s definitely a complex problem.
https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2010/04/08/wind-power-is-a-complete-disaster/
There is no evidence that industrial wind power is likely to have a significant impact on carbon emissions. The European experience is instructive. Denmark, the world’s most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power’s unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone)
Don’t forget wind mills blades lasting 1/3 of their designed life with no recycling available for those “green” blades…. 😱
“It’s definitely a complex problem.”
SNORT!! Good one.
“Wind’s harms outweigh benefits; “
Ditto. I can’t think of a single benefit.
I”m appalled at the destruction of our nation’s magnificent vistas all up and down teh western states. None of the greeniacs care about that. But their parents went berserk for a couple of oil platforms a mile off the Pacific Ocean beaches.
Yes. And millions of tons of concrete buried in the ground. Towers that will never be taken down. They will sit there rusting for decades.
Wow, those are damning statistics in Denmark, the “world’s most wind-intensive nation.” Thanks for posting.
No free lunch.
One thing I see no mention of in the Grok analysis is the high cost of connecting to the electric grid.
Cities are where the electricity is consumed, but offshore wind or remote wind farms on land require tremendous investments to get electricity to where it needs to be consumed.
Ask a few questions of Grok on that subject. I’m curious about that. Cheers.
Later
more turbine stupidity in Australia today:
7News: Wind turbine crash shuts down major Queensland highway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGYKXSMPJjo
What is not mentioned much is that every turbine requires approx. 700 - 800 gallons of oil to lubricate moving parts. The oil has to be changed periodically. I don’t care how careful they would be oil spills are a guarantee. Off shore spills would be worse, I’m sure. Also the blades need to be sprayed with an anti-freeze in the winter before a snowstorm. I can’t see how that could be done without residual spray harming wildlife. Green? I don’t think so.
Agree with this article.
I would add that wind farms need access road, so lots of landscape gets destroyed that way, even if the turbine is removed, the concrete pedestal will likely stay forever.
Finally, they net power delivered with comparison to the energy required to build them make them very poor energy sources, and often energy sinks!
Wheat is primarily self pollinated and does not require insects. Very comprehensive post. Learning more about wind than I ever wanted too. Fighting a proposed turbine project in WV.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.