“A growing body of research illustrates that the effects of utility-scale wind energy production can be far reaching and some times have large and unexpected consequences for biodiversity. Furthermore, achieving renewable energy targets will require converting large areas of land to support wind power . . . often located in remote and high-biodiversity areas.” (- Nature Reviews Biodiversity, below)

MasterResource has long given voice to the ecological problems of industrial wind power, onshore and offshore, including:

Wind vs. Ecology in Australia (Nick Cater reports) (October 18, 2024)

Industrial Wind vs. Deep Ecology: Surface Impacts (January 16, 2024)

Industrial Wind Plants: Bad Economics, Bad Ecology (Jon Boone: October 24, 2009)

Vineyard Wind: Catastrophic Failure (‘sharp fiberglass shards’ close Nantucket beaches) (July 18, 2024)

Offshore Wind: Ecologists Tip-Toe into the Negatives (August 23, 2022)

Wind Turbines and Birds: Latest from the American Bird Conservancy (June 14, 2021)

Add to the literature an article recently published in Nature Reviews Biodiversity, “Impacts of Onshore Wind Energy Production on Biodiversity” (September 8, 2025).…

“There is no evidence that UN COP meetings and more than $10 trillion spent on renewables over the last 30 years have affected the climate. The average atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, which is blamed for global warming, has been rising over the last 50 years without any change to the trend.”

World leaders are in turmoil. For 30 years, the United Nations, World Economic Forum, and International Energy Agency, among business and political leaders called for a shift from hydrocarbon fuels to renewable energy. Thousands of laws were enacted to try to force a net zero energy transition. But it’s now clear that green energy is unable to meet the needs of growing developing nations or support the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution in advanced nations.

Since the founding of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992, the UN has led efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to try to fight human-caused global warming.…

“Will Rebecca F. Eliott dare investigate the other side of her favored arguments and dare again, alter her perspective? Will her readers and the New York Times allow her to do so? The times are a changing….”

An article in the New York Times last month on Harold Hamm was in the long tradition of Big Oil, Big Politics, Big Corruption. “The Oilman Who Pushed Trump to Go All In on Fossil Fuels” (December 12, 2025) was authored by Eric Lipton and Rebecca F. Eliott.

Eliott’s bio is titled “I cover energy for The New York Times” and reads in part:

“Many of my stories explore how energy shapes — and is shaped by — politics and economic policy…. I joined The Times in 2024 from The Wall Street Journal [and] … The Houston Chronicle…..”

“All of these E.S.G. funds are wrong. They weren’t going to generate better returns. They are not going to make the world a better place. E.S.G. as an investment thesis should be entirely shut down.”

– Terrence Keeley. Quoted in “How Wall Street Turned Its Back on Climate Change,” New York Times, January 18, 2026.

“Six years after the financial industry pledged to use trillions to fight climate change and reshape finance,” the New York Times front-page article began, “its efforts have largely collapsed.” The reality documented in “How Wall Street Turned Its Back on Climate Change“? Net Zero and decarbonization are unnatural, uneconomic modes of business and economic organization, and businesses are getting back to the basics of fiduciary duty and consumer service. [1]

“2025 may go down as the easiest year in history to retreat on climate pledges,” stated UK climate activist Chris Bowden on social media.…