Wind energy skeptics have long pointed out that turbines are all but useless when there is no wind or when temperatures drop too low. But Americans are now increasingly learning that wind energy projects also present a host of serious environmental and even national security concerns, shattering left-wing environmentalist talking points about wind power as “clean” energy.
As wind turbines have become more widespread, so have fires resulting from lightning strikes to the hulking metal structures, some of which rise more than 330 feet off the ground – taller than the Statue of Liberty.
In February, lightning struck a wind turbine in Breckenridge, Texas, “causing the rotor of the Stephens County turbine to break off and continue to burn on the ground,” according to Fox Weather. Another wind turbine caught fire in Iowa in mid-April, and another caught fire in March in Pennsylvania.
In addition to potentially sparking deadly wildfires, these blazes also spread pollution into the surrounding farmland where the turbines are often located.
To make matters worse, farmers who want to remove damaged wind turbines from their land can run into a whole host of other issues. As Just the News reported, “A farm in eastern Iowa has dust and debris from shattered wind turbine blades spread out over 240 acres, and they say the wind farm owner won’t clean it up.” The farmer could be out millions of dollars as a result.
While the company was working on removing some of the damage, officials wanted to use explosives to deconstruct the turbines. That would mean even more massive pieces of metal and potentially toxic chemicals spreading into fertile farmland.
“Now that the harvest is underway, the debris is hurting the family’s agricultural business,” according to Just the News. “As the blade debris becomes more embedded in the topsoil, the family worries it will contaminate their corn.”
Even when those pieces are eventually removed, they will become just one of the tens of millions of used turbines stacking up in landfills around the world. Turbine blades are made of a thick material so they do not easily break down – but that means it is difficult to recycle them for other purposes, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Climate Portal.
As Chemist Jeremiah Johnson explained, “there’s no way to melt it down and remold it into its original components like most other plastics” so most used blades end up in the landfill.
Sometimes, turbine blades don’t even make it that far. Just the News also reported on a “blade disintegration” off the coast of Massachusetts that has left residents and beachgoers dealing with pieces of the turbine washing up on shorelines in Massachusetts, New York, and Rhode Island.
To make matters worse, wind turbines could pose major safety and even national security concerns.
Because wind turbines are so large, they can cause serious issues with radar detection. “The steel support towers can reflect electromagnetic waves, making it more difficult for radar to pick up nearby objects,” The New York Times reported on May 4.
The rotating blades can also cause headaches for tracking objects, as they “can create a ‘blade flash’ on a radar screen, appearing to be another object where there is none,” the newspaper reported. This makes it difficult to track airplanes or the weather, according to the Department of Energy.
Supporters of the turbines argue that there are ways around these problems. The Times quotes “experts” who say new turbines and radar systems can be designed to minimize these problems.
Still, a 2024 Biden Department of Energy report concluded that adjustments come with their own problems.
“The clutter created by wind turbines typically increases the false alarm detection rate of a radar,” the bipartisan report stated. “To suppress this, the radar system will raise the threshold for what is considered a detection and, as a result, may miss actual targets.”
The Times suggests that radar technology could be changed or that turbines could be “coated with radar-absorbing carbon.” But either of these solutions would impose enormous costs that taxpayers end up paying one way or another – whether through higher taxes to build new radar units or higher energy costs.
Because of these concerns, President Donald Trump has paused around 150 ongoing wind turbine projects pending a national security review.
Critics argue that all types of energy production have some sort of risk – oil tankers can spill, natural gas pipelines can leak, and nuclear reactors can melt down. But none of these industries gets a free pass from Democrat lawmakers and left-wing activists – not to mention a corporate media that brands wind turbines as “eco-friendly.”
Not only that, but the wind industry is also heavily dependent on massive taxpayer subsidies. “From 2016 to 2022, the federal government spent approximately $18.7 billion on subsidies for wind power alone,” the Competitive Enterprise Institute reported in 2024. Still, there was a decrease in overall wind power production in 2023, despite massive backing from the Biden administration.
One reason for the loss in wind power was “slower wind speeds [in 2023].” Without fast wind, wind turbines are not as effective.
As anyone who has driven through a rural area can tell you, when there is no wind, the turbines are just sitting there, blocking radar, and waiting to catch on fire.
Left-wing environmentalists say wind turbines are clean and reliable forms of energy. But history shows that they are certainly not reliable, and the evidence is piling up that this “clean” energy source is piling up in landfills while potentially poisoning the air we breathe and the food we eat.
Matt Lamb is an AMAC Newsline contributor and associate editor for The College Fix. He previously worked for Students for Life of America, Students for Life Action, and Turning Point USA. He previously interned for Open the Books. His writing has also appeared in the Washington Examiner, The Federalist, LifeSiteNews, Human Life Review, Headline USA, and other outlets. The opinions expressed are his own. Follow him @mattlamb22 on X.
