“It is my duty, as President of the World Council for Nature, to bring to your attention the true extent of the carnage which is taking place at wind farms around the world, including in Australia. The deception being staged by consultants in order to fool people and their governments will have unfathomed consequences for wildlife, biodiversity, natural habitats, and the health of forests and agriculture. We are facing widespread corrupt behavior, which is putting private interests ahead of the common good.”

Distinguished Senators of the Commonwealth of Australia:

Australian members of our organisation have complained to us that mortality predictions being used in Australia to assess the impacts of wind turbines on birds and bats are minimised to a level that thoroughly misleads decision makers. To wit, in a widely used report prepared for the Australian Government by consultant Biosis Research Pty Ltd, we read (p.…

“But the true intent of AWWI’s study is not about accurate mortality estimates. It’s about deflecting the avian mortality problem…. The fact is, many more birds (and bats) are dying at operating wind plants than we know, and as the turbines spread, mortality will increase. Now is not the time to relax our concern and look elsewhere. Rather, we should [demand] … that the industry be held accountable for bird mortality once and for all!”

Nobody really knows how many birds are destroyed annually in wind turbine related collisions. [1] Wind proponents have long discounted the carnage by pointing at other sources of bird mortality including cats, windows, and communications towers [2], but the issue still haunts developers.

This month, the American Wind Wildlife Institute (AWWI) released its latest analysis of bird fatalities with the focus on small passerines (commonly referred to as songbirds).…

“In areas where wind farms are being developed, invasive species can harm … industries by reducing fish populations, damaging habitats, and deterring tourists who seek intact and diverse marine environments.” – Kieran Kelly, Ocean Integrity (below)

‘It is hard being green, particularly when “green” means being one-dimensional against carbon dioxide (CO2) at the expense of virtually every other metric. Consider wind power, the onshore problems of which (failed past, government dependency, intermittency, site depletion, local warming, noise, avian mortality, health effects) are only magnified offshore (cost premium, wake effect, blade failure, industrialization, hurricanes, pile driving, political bribes).

Kieran Kelly, CEO of Ocean Integrity, “a global organization that aims to reduce ocean plastic pollution and create positive social impact,” recently reported on social media about a particular ecological issue: invasive filter feeders.…

“Getting wind projects built is getting a lot harder. The low-hanging fruit, the easier access places are gone.” (Sandhya Ganapathy, EDP Renewables North America, quoted below)

The New York Times article, “As Solar Power Surges, U.S. Wind Is in Trouble” (June 4, 2024), discussed the problems of wind problems, such as site depletion. But the article has nary a quotation, much less mention, from the legion of critics of the aged, doomed technology for economical, reliable grid power.

In order of appearance, the seven chosen by authors Brad Plumer and Nadja Popovich were:

Trevor Houser, Rhodium Group; Sandhya Ganapathy, EDP Renewables North America; Matthew Eisenson, Columbia University; Ben Haley, Evolved Energy Research; Michael Thomas, energy writer; John Hensley, American Clean Power Association; Ryan Jones, Evolved Energy Research.

Where were the real critics on industrial wind’s cost, aesthetics, health, and ecological issues?…