“The construction of wind farms … on the East Coast of the United States … is a big issue because it is a source of considerable noise.” (Arthur Popper, below)

In Phys.Org, Emily Nunez (University of Maryland) recently interviewed Arthur N. Popper, professor emeritus, University of Maryland’s Department of Biology, a specialist in the ecological impacts of underwater sound. “Offshore wind farms can be an energy boon,” she begins the article, “but does their noisy construction bother marine animals?”

She introduces the issue as follows:

… Popper … worries that the use of pile driving to construct offshore wind turbines could potentially harm fishes. Only two offshore wind farms are operational in the United States, but many more are in the works, including two projects planned for Maryland’s waters and a third project approved for construction off the coast of Virginia.

“Our results from a large sample of wind farms revealed significant local warming effects at night, insignificant impacts during the daytime, and the mostly negative impacts on vegetation.” (Yingzuo Qin et al., Environmental Research Letters, 2022)

Deep Ecology is a philosophy that puts nature on an equal footing with humankind. It speaks in religious tones to its broad congregation of partial and total believers. “The froth and frenzy of industrial civilization mask our deep loneliness for that communion with the world that can lift our spirits and fill our senses with the richness and immediacy of life itself,” Al Gore stated in Earth in the Balance (1992), calling for “bold and unequivocal” global action where “the rescue of the environment” is “the central organizing principle for civilization.”

Applied to the Church of Climate, the often unstated assumptions are:

1. The human influence on climate is pronounced and controlling
2. That influence cannot be positive or benign, only problematic-catastrophic
3. Global governance can and must solve this problem

To members of this philosophy-religion, the planet “has been delivered in perfect working condition and cannot be exchanged for a new one.”…

“Myth One: There is a fossil fuel funded effort to stop clean energy”. Fact: there IS a lot of fossil fuel money in the renewable energy space. But 100% of it goes to the PROPONENTS of renewable energy like the Sierra Club and Michigan Conservative Energy Forum. And the vast majority of renewable energy developers in Michigan are fossil fuel entities themselves.

How should government-enabled projects that deprecate the environment be handled by local opponents? This is a debate with two sides. Michael Giberson argues that private property rights trumps the taxpayer in such cases. I argue that government intervention to block government intervention regarding projects on private land is justified. (Debate here.)

Ideally, this controversy would be bypassed by a separation of government and energy. And it should be.…

“The levels of opposition to Leedco (now Icebreaker) have stood firm over 14 years. They are not likely to disappear.”

The Icebreaker Wind Project–six turbines offshore Cleveland in the Great Lakes–has been “temporarily” suspended, halted, or otherwise “iced.” This is very good news for taxpayers, ratepayers, and the environment, mainstream media reporting aside. The Great Lakes will not be “the Saudi Arabia of wind.” Less is always best with government-dependent industrial wind turbines.

Take aways:

• You can pepper the Great Lakes or the entire planet with wind turbines, and there will be zero impact on the climate out decades, if at all
• $50 million promised with completion of target objectives; not met, $37 million being returned to DOE
• Millions are opposed, not merely electrical unions, Audubon, Sierra, and the city of Cleveland
• Independent environmental studies are still lacking after 14 years.