OPINION:
As swimmers enjoy the beach this summer, massive chunks of debris, including sharp fiberglass shards, have been washing ashore on the once-pristine coast of Nantucket island, Massachusetts. The culprit? A single damaged turbine blade that broke off at a nearby wind farm.
It’s not the first time this has happened, and it won’t be the last.
This fiasco highlights not only the physical hazards posed by wind turbines, but also their environmentally irresponsible and unreliable nature as an energy source — despite the Biden administration’s vigorous support of wind power.
Onshore wind farms require eight times the amount of critical minerals as natural gas power plants do. Offshore wind farms require 13 times as much. The staggering quantities of such materials, such as copper and rare earth metals, are environmentally damaging. Mining is vital for economic progress, but the excessive extraction required for wind turbines is out of proportion to the energy produced.
Consider that for every megawatt of power capacity, a natural gas power plant requires about 1 ton of critical minerals, while a nuclear power plant needs 6 tons. In contrast, onshore wind plants require 11 tons, and offshore wind demands 17 tons of critical minerals — for the same megawatt of energy output.
Wind energy requires vast expanses of land. According to a study by the Breakthrough Institute, wind energy takes about 30,000 acres per terawatt-hour of electricity generation annually, whereas nuclear energy uses 18 acres. Moreover, wind energy takes six times as much space as a natural gas power plant.
The biggest U.S. onshore wind farm — the Alta Wind Energy Center — generates an estimated 3.29 TWh per year with its 582 wind turbines. But the biggest Palo Verde nuclear power plant generates 33.7 TWh annually — more than 10 times as much.
In addition, wind turbines have a disposal problem. Although some components can be recycled, used wind blades that do not fall into the sea are usually thrown into landfills. The blades, which are built for durability, use materials that are difficult to separate and recycle. As a result, the United States is projected to have about one-fifth of the world’s blade waste of over 47 million tons by 2050.
Wind turbines kill over 1 million birds a year, according to the American Bird Conservancy, and hundreds of thousands of bats, crucial in pest control. Offshore wind companies, such as Atlantic Shores and Orsted’s Ocean Winds, request permission in their environmental impact statements to harm whales, dolphins, seals and porpoises through sound waves produced.
Even if the U.S. managed to solve all these problems, one fundamental weakness will persist: the unreliability of wind power. Because the wind does not always blow, these turbines are running at maximum power only about 35% of the time. That is low compared with nuclear power plants with a capacity factor of 93% and natural gas power plants built since 2010, which run 64% of the time.
Because the wind doesn’t always blow, wind turbines disregard the fundamental principle of our grids: The supply of electricity must meet demand in real time. On calm days, wind might generate unnecessary power; and during peak usage periods, turbines might generate nothing. When the wind stops, smaller, less-efficient natural gas power plants kick in, increasing capital investment and electricity costs.
Wind energy also lacks the versatility of natural gas and oil. While natural gas and oil are integral to a wide range of applications including electricity generation, heating and transportation, wind energy is confined to only electricity generation.
Despite wind’s disadvantages, it is heavily subsidized. Renewable energy sources, including wind energy, will receive an estimated $425 billion in subsidies between 2023 and 2033 in addition to about $200 billion in other green energy subsidies.
These subsidies are essential to wind power. In a study published on Joule, wind plants were found to have a significant decline in performance in their 10th year, just as they lose their eligibility for the production tax credit.
On a state level, wind energy has benefited immensely from renewable portfolio standards, which require a share of electricity sales to come from renewable energy sources. California aims to obtain 60% of its electricity from renewables by 2030 and 100% by 2045 — although it hasn’t ruled out purchasing power made by legacy fuels from other states.
Far less wind power would be built if subsidies, credits and mandates were removed. Politicians need to reconsider support for environmentally damaging, unreliable wind power.
Swimmers in Nantucket will thank them.
• Austin Gae is a research associate at The Heritage Foundation.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.