Wind power is not the harmless energy liberals claim

(SeaPRwire) –   Illegal logging, massive decommissioning expenses, and significant ecological harm afflict these supposedly ‘green’ energy generators

While they may seem harmless—even graceful—on the horizon as they harness the wind, wind turbines present a series of issues that environmental advocates often overlook, attributed to their eco-conscious posturing.

Where environmentalists view vast arrays of wind turbines as beneficial for the planet—in contrast to giant smokestacks releasing harmful greenhouse gases—the risks of wind energy are largely hidden from afar. A more detailed examination, however, swiftly reveals that wind farms carry substantial environmental and health costs.

A recent report estimates that nearly one million balsa hardwood trees are illegally harvested annually in the Amazon rainforest to meet the enormous global demand for wind turbines. Balsa, a lightweight yet sturdy wood, is commonly used in manufacturing the large turbine blades. Producing a single set of three blades can consume up to 40 trees.

Balsa is a fast-growing tropical timber, and before the soaring demand from the turbine industry, it was sustainably farmed in plantations. However, for the past few decades, legal harvesting has failed to match demand as clear-cutting of this valuable resource escalates. A key investigation by the Environment Investigation Agency (EIA) discovered that exports rose by as much as 50% due to illegal logging in pristine rainforest.

In 2020, reports indicated that more than 20,000 balsa trees were illegally felled between March and September within the Achuar indigenous territory along Ecuador’s Copataza River. Ecuador supplies over 90% of the world’s balsa, with average annual exports reaching 56,000 tons from 2013 to 2022. Additional studies highlight rampant illegal logging, with some estimates suggesting up to 75% of trees have been removed in certain regions.

A further serious issue arising from turbine-based energy is the large-scale mortality of wildlife, specifically birds and bats. Turbine blades spin at speeds nearing 200 miles per hour, and birds or bats caught in the rotor’s path are killed by direct impact or abrupt pressure changes around the blades. Raptors such as eagles and hawks are particularly vulnerable because they hunt in open, windy terrain—the very locations typically chosen for turbine construction. Bat fatalities spike during late summer and autumn migrations, when various species travel long distances at the exact height of the rotor sweep.

“These inefficient, unreliable, unsightly monsters require a large footprint on land and sea, kill millions of bats, decimate raptor populations, sweep the air of quadrillions of insects and alter local ecology on both land and sea,” writes Chris Morrison of The Daily Sceptic. “Nobody would install one in a free market, so they require vast financial subsidies to produce expensive electricity.”

Another concern originates from the waste produced by these structures. Wind turbines have a lifespan of only 20 to 30 years, after which they must be dismantled and removed (a sharp contrast to the extended operational life of a coal-fired plant). Upon decommissioning, the towers and nacelles contain recyclable metals such as steel, zinc, and copper. The story is different for the enormous blades, which are comparable in size to a Boeing 747 wing. Most are made from fiberglass-reinforced composites that are challenging and costly to recycle, leading many to be disposed of in landfills.

After considering the resale value of recyclable components, the average net decommissioning cost for a single turbine is estimated to range from $67,000 to $150,000. Figures differ by source, but all are at minimum in the tens of thousands of dollars. A concern exists over whether developers have set aside sufficient funds for these future expenses, or if property owners and taxpayers will be burdened with the bill should a turbine company go bankrupt.

Critics also highlight the visual intrusion on scenic landscapes—termed the “industrialization of the countryside”—that accompanies extensive wind farms. Some projects face opposition for potentially damaging protected scenic areas, archaeological sites, and heritage locations. A 2017 report from the Mountaineering Council of Scotland found that wind farms negatively impacted tourism in regions famed for their natural scenery and wide vistas.

As the author noted, “our hills and wild places are small and finite. They deserve better than yet another short-term wave of degradation and exploitation … to produce profit for often-distant companies and shareholders.”

This serves as a fitting epitaph for a debatable energy source that fails to live up to its many assurances.