The Devastating Ecological Carnage Wrought by Wind Turbines

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

Evidence continues to grow that onshore wind turbines are causing heavy ecological carnage, with increasing concern focused on the removal of a vast tonnage of insect life. For obvious political, Net Zero reasons, insect decimation is not a well-funded research area, but work in Germany in 2016 put the loss across the country at 1,200 tonnes a year. Recently, the Heartland Institute extrapolated the individual annual insect loss worldwide at 13,640,000,000,000 (13.64 quadrillion) insects, and of course it can be noted that the figures are nearly a decade out of date. Other scientific work has reported that flying insects destroyed include bees, flying beetles and butterflies. Curiously, the many institutions apparently concerned with wildlife stay silent on the slaughter. For its part, the UK Natural History Museum (NHM) offers a Build Your Own Wind Turbine kit. Fun for all the family and if the kiddies are lucky they might get to whack a passing fly or a couple of moths.

The German work estimated insect losses at 40 million per turbine during the plant-growing season. Commenting on the findings, the mathematician and evolutionary ecologist Professor Christian Voigt felt it was necessary to evaluate if these fatalities added to the decline of insect populations, “and potentially the extinction of species”. In a 2022 paper, Voigt reported that turbines can change the nearby microclimate, while vibrational noise may reduce earthworm abundance with likely cascading effects on soil quality and vegetation. In addition, he noted findings that wind turbine facilities led to displacement of nesting and wintering birds.

Recent work from researchers at the University of Wyoming suggests that moths, butterflies, beetles, flies and true bugs may be the most vulnerable to the giant revolving blades. Wind turbines create vortices, sucking in wildlife and causing problems for both bats and large birds such as eagles. “The vast amount of avian and insect deaths at the hands of wind turbines is disastrous in and of itself, from a conservation and ecological standpoint,” states Heartland.

Insect loss and extinctions are of course very popular in the Net Zero fear-mongering business. In 2022, the NHM ran with an improbable tale that flying insects in the UK had declined by 60% in just 20 years. Too good of course for national treasure Sir David Attenborough to pass up and he repeated the scare during his BBC Wild Isles series, a green agitprop co-production with the World Wildlife Fund and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. The evidence proved to be anecdotal and mostly arose from ‘citizen scientists’ counting bugs on car number plates. Missing from the research was a note that vehicle registrations have tripled in the UK since 1970, while cars have largely changed shape from angular boxes to aerodynamic wedges that sweep insects out of the way.

Despite these obvious flaws in the story, the NHM claimed the astonishing loss was caused by rising temperatures and fragmented habitats. The tiny temperature rises over the last 20 years are hardly likely to affect insects that much, while slightly longer growing seasons in the northern hemisphere and a recent 14% ‘greening’ of the Earth due to higher levels of carbon dioxide are almost certain to have been extremely beneficial.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the conservation of wildlife is little more than an after-thought when it comes to pushing the Net Zero fantasy world of unreliable, expensive renewable energy. Almost invariably those crying loudest about insect decline are those pushing hardest for green energy boondoggles such as wind turbines. Yet it is known that turbines attract insects with their colour, lights and ambient heat. More attracted insects lead to more bats and birds which lead to more avian casualties, which lead to more ground animals scavenging, which in turn attracts larger raptors that cannot escape the turbine-generated wind currents. And so the 150 mph revolving skyscraper-high blades set up their own circular killing fields.

The loss of insects is particularly disastrous since they are decomposers, crop pollinators and a crucial basis of the entire food chain. In April 2023, the Royal Entomological Society welcomed the opportunity to respond to a UK Government department on the issue of insect decline and food security. There was plenty to say on climate change of course and some interesting observations on the boom-and-bust nature of insect populations, but not a peep on the dead, wide areas of countryside created by wind turbines.

It might not worry the establishment insect brigade but the colliding critters can be a big problem for turbine operators. Professor Voigt noted that insect remains collected during low wind periods disrupt airflow and can halve power generation during high wind periods. These days cleaning this muck off turbine blades is big business. Based in Glasgow, Balmore Wind Services offers a specialist rope access service for the difficult biomatter cleaning required by insects and bird fouling. One thing is certain, concludes Heartland: “Wind turbines undoubtedly cause massive avian and insect deaths on a yearly basis.”

With all the learned societies and institutions continuing to turn a blind eye, it is hard to see who will step forward to draw attention to this developing ecological disaster. Who will be the first to suggest that the proper place for a windmill is in a museum?

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
4.9 37 votes
Article Rating
62 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bryan A
February 11, 2025 10:20 pm

With Solar it doesn’t matter if the “Fuel is Free” the 26% capacity factor means to get 2 GW of generation you need 8GW of installed capacity. Then to make the (2 GW x 24 hrs) 48 GWh of generation available when needed you need 48 GWh of battery storage. Then the Winter capacity factor of around 10% demands even more installed capacity (20GW) and storage to produce and deliver the same 48 GWh when needed.
With Wind it doesn’t matter if the “fuel is free” with the capacity factor of under 40% to get 2GW of generation you need 5GW installed capacity and 48 GWh of battery storage capacity to make the power available when needed

However, with Nuclear you need 2 GW of capacity to get 48 GWh a day and no storage needed because its available 24/7 AND only needs refueling once every two years.

(just to get a jump on Nick “But the Fuel is Free” Stokes)

Reply to  Bryan A
February 11, 2025 10:47 pm

“But the Fuel is Free””

But the implementation into the grid is VERY expense.

IEE Japan did study on just implementing VRE (variable renewable energy) into the Việt Nam grid..

Didn’t include things like material costs, energy cost to build, or recycling cost.

VRE-Costs
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 12:33 am

Nick may say the insects are free, and who is to argue?

Humor aside, I am not sure of the veracity of this post – the claims seem a bit arbitrary.

Surely someone would have collected data …..

Voo will eat grubs and bugs and love zem …..

Yours sincerely,

Dr Bill Johnston
http://www.bomwatch.com.au

Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
February 12, 2025 1:13 am

Nice, but insects are also killed by the million by insect zappers – you can sit at your favorite restaurant and hear them frizzle. You can even buy these things because that is what they do.Where are the studies – what proportion, how many?

And what about driving up the highway in spring and autumn someplace in Turkestan. Where are the studies about “high engine temperatures related to gender-confused insects blocking radiators due to global warming” that could have been funded by USAID in some university in Ireland or Iraq?

So, while they are useless for real reasons anyway, what is so important about hooking insects to wind-turbines in particular?

Cheers,

Bill

MarkW
Reply to  Bill Johnston
February 12, 2025 8:41 am

Numbers matter.
How many bug zappers are there compared to the number of windmills. Not just the number of windmills now, but the number required to power the whole world. While a bug-zapper may manage to kill a few dozen a night, how many bugs does each windmill kill and how many bug zappers are needed to equal the toll?
The same goes for cars.

Reply to  MarkW
February 12, 2025 1:53 pm

In the overall scheme of things are insects the main issue?

Or is the gross destruction of ecosystems – clearing, road construction, power-lines, towers and blades arriving at a port from China, then being transported ….. The huge up-front costs for no real benefit.

Lies being told by politicians, activists, clever-dicks at CSIRO and universities …. and what about the cost to communities – the have’s vs the have not’s.
 
Then there is the destruction wrought by solar ‘farms’ that no longer produce anything useful, and the cost that loaded onto consumers.

The pretense of jobs that don’t exist, the hydrogen green-dream for which there is no viable process – the $$$$$ passed to rich-listers never to be seen again; green-steel – really! More like no Whyalla one of just two remaining blast-furnaces in Australia.
 
While bird-kills have always been known to be a problem (dead birds and other roadkill occur along roads too), looked at by scale, even though it may be true, I don’t think the insect story rates very highly.
 
As no weather station datasets in Australia even remotely suggest the climate is warming, why are they wrecking the economy for no foreseeable benefit.
 
Yours sincerely,
Dr Bill Johnston
http://www.bomwatch.com.au
 

Reply to  Bill Johnston
February 12, 2025 9:07 am

Bill, the answer to your final question is in my post here.

Enjoy.

w.

Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
February 12, 2025 2:22 pm

Yes I get it Willis and I don’t disagree, However as a selling point to the anti-wind farm lobby?

See:
https://youtu.be/YbxpieEQ7bc

Cheers,

Bill

KevinM
Reply to  Bill Johnston
February 12, 2025 12:51 pm

One more vote yes for killing insects… DDT got a bad rap

Reply to  KevinM
February 13, 2025 11:59 am

Maybe restrict windmills to swamps to fight the spread of malaria?

hdhoese
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
February 12, 2025 12:03 pm

There has long been a marine fisheries problem producing the earliest models especially about species with migratory young stages. Frustrating, one serious student–“…no eggs, no recruits….” This goes along with not so good terrestrial numerical comparisons like oak trees, weeds, etc.. Some marine species like the “Blackened Redfish,” now politically correct named red drum, which I know a lot, but not enough about, would only require a very few pair’s production to numerically populate its range which is true of many other species.

With a mass of complexity like gregarious reproduction, unpredictable predation, difficult to see parasites, physical limitations, etc. and the necessary time in the equation humans do modify all these. There certainly is a threatening limit which sometimes produces claims of linear effects which get too often bent and floppy. There is also a religious sort of devotion to the necessity value of some to all species, now even sharks. Management has changed often from particular species to the ecosystem. Try the “grocery store” metaphor!

Ron Long
Reply to  Bill Johnston
February 12, 2025 2:30 am

Bill, I can’t verify the numbers presented by Chris Morrison, but I can verify the general carnage associated with terrestrial windmills. I have several times mentioned at WATTS my experience early a Monday morning walking along a line of giant windmills, just NE of Casper, Wyoming. I saw at least 50 dead birds along a 3 windmill stretch, including meadowlarks, an eagle, several buzzards, and one falcon. Around 8:30 in the morning a crew arrived in a company pickup and the two persons started throwing dead birds into the back, me previously referring to these guys as the “Cleanup Crew”. This is more than normal windmill kill, but the windmills were along the crest of a ridge, where birds rode the updraft for free (and the windmills got some added windspeed), in a grassland environment.

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Ron Long
February 12, 2025 5:53 am

The hummmm attracts the insects which attract the smaller birds which attract the bigger birds and the all get chopped.

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Ron Long
February 12, 2025 6:06 am

Getting ahead of Nick the Stokes.

There are estimated 7b -8b birds in the US. A study done by windmill advocates claims that approx 700m – to 1.2B birds a year are killed by a) flying into buildings, B) fossil fuels/fossil/fuel plants, c) powerlines, d) other man made structures and other human activities. The only thing surprising is why anyone would believe 10-15% of the bird population was being killed by human activities every year.

Reply to  joe-Dallas
February 12, 2025 10:56 am

fossil fuels/fossil/fuel plants,”

Yet, whenever asked, no-one can produce any physical evidence of birds killed by fossil-fuel power stations.

Reply to  Ron Long
February 12, 2025 4:23 pm

Thanks Ron,

I don’t have an issue about insects. However, if we want to stop these things, the focus has to be on people and communities affected by them in totality – the destruction they cause.

The other day I thought I’d update the Wellington climate dataset, one of six research stations run by the then Soil Conservation Service (I was located at Wagga Wagga, and had been to Wellington many times).

First-things-first, so I went to Google Earth Pro for a peek (BoM ID 65035; Latitude -32.51, Longitude 148.97), the whole joint is being covered in solar panels – there is no research station left!

The loonies are in charge!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfEUZotRyLI

Cheers,

Bill

Graeme4
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 2:47 am

Not sure where the 26% CF figure for Australian solar comes from, as the National Grid solar average over a year is only 16.16%, not much above the UK and Europe solar CF figures. So much for “sunny” Australia”.

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Graeme4
February 12, 2025 5:55 am

26% figure should be for the US, where most of the solar is in the southern states. The 16% is for europe because much of europe is futher north than the US. While the summer has longer hours, the direct sunlight is still less than in the southern regions of the NH.

Reply to  joe-Dallas
February 12, 2025 9:22 am

Per the Statistical Review of World Energy, actual solar capacity factor in the US is 21%. The average for Europe is 12%.

Global average capacity factor (global generation/global nameplate capacity) = 14%.

Real numbers from 2022, not theory.

w.

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
February 12, 2025 12:19 pm

Willis – I was estimating from memory so I at least was reasonably close. In either case, we are both correct that the performance of solar (along with wind not always blowing somewhere) is inadequate for any deep penetration. Also worth noting is Jacobson’s 100% study, he used actual capacity rates for solar in the 29% range (as I recall from memory) and a similar overstatment of actual capacity for wind.

Jacobson also uses a projected annual electric usage of 979 GW (not GWh) in the year 2050. What is a dead giveaway is that the current annual usage in the US is approx 4,000 TWh. Did anyone cross check his work –

Reply to  joe-Dallas
February 12, 2025 2:31 pm

Thanks for the clarification, Joe. And you’re right, Jacobson is a joke.

w.

Bryan A
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
February 12, 2025 9:41 pm

I was using the figures from Topaz Solar Farm (Topaz Subsidy Farm) in the California Central Valley

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 5:51 am

Winter is even worse – 7-8% of nameplate capacity for solar north of the 42n latitude. Especially worse is the demand during the winter is the highest for heating.

Bryan A
Reply to  joe-Dallas
February 12, 2025 11:09 pm

Yep, both Winter and higher latitudes pose other problems for dependence on Solar including even greater overcapacity requirements which equates to greater overproduction in Summer.

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Bryan A
February 13, 2025 5:21 am

Bryan – correct – the need for redundancy to cover the periods of underproduction during the winter creates overproduction (generation greater than demand) especially during the spring and fall when demand is lower. That overproduction becomes wasted/unused. The result is the LCOE computation becomes a phantom number. The denominator needs to be the electric generation “used” instead of total electric generation. The revised LCOE at deep penetration is 1.5x to 2.0x of the advertised number. Then adding in the additional balancing, firming costs, the total lcoe becomes 2x – 5x of advertised costs

MarkW
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 8:29 am

You also need to increase the number of solar panels installed by enough to fill those batteries while the sun is shining.

Nick is also famous for declaring that he has never proposed getting rid of all fossil fuel plants. Completely ignoring the fact that he has just mandated the building and maintaining of two power systems. Enough wind and sun to power the world, while the sun shines and the wind blows, plus enough fossil fuel to power the world for when wind and sun are worthless.
It also ignores the fact that these fossil fuel plants will be burning almost as much fossil fuels under Nick’s scheme as they do now. The reason for this is simple, but apparently too complicated for some to understand.
It takes hours to days to take a thermal plant from cold to operating temperature. As a result, if you want those sources to be ready to take over in a matter of minutes, you have to keep them warm to hot, all of the time. The only way to do that is to burn fossil fuels in them, but produce no power while doing so.

This has been explained to Nick many times.

Bryan A
Reply to  MarkW
February 12, 2025 11:13 pm

About 10GW of dedicated capacity to pump 40GWh (80% ish) into a 48 GWh battery on a “Good Sun Day”

And that’s to recharge the battery in the Summer. Winter would need 20+GW of dedicated capacity to do the same due to lower solar angle. Though no solar overcapacity will recharge batteries on sunless days, the batteries will be depleted and subsequently micro damaged.

Dedicated Capacity: Solar Generation utilized for nothing but back-up battery recharging

KevinM
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 12:49 pm

Solar … 26% capacity factor … Winter capacity factor of around 10%

Is 26% the Summer capacity factor, or the year-average capacity factor? Based on 2-season year or 4-season year?

Bryan A
Reply to  KevinM
February 12, 2025 11:20 pm

26% Summer and 10% winter about 16% average
Of course those are “Good Sun Days” not every day is a good sun day with some “Bad Sun Days” lasting a week or more at a stretch

ethical voter
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 5:28 pm

It seems to me that all energy is free at some point. Wind farms are offensive on every level. Pure fantasy promoted by madmen.

observa
Reply to  Bryan A
February 12, 2025 9:03 pm

…and you need a lot of very expensive spaghetti to connect up all their little meatball generators everywhere-
Déjà vu on transmission project cost blowouts as price of EnergyConnect doubles | RenewEconomy
That’s where their dodgy accounting comes in with all their coal fired Chinese imports to begin with. The shucksters can’t hide from the power bills in the long run.

February 12, 2025 2:08 am

For its part, the UK Natural History Museum (NHM) offers a Build Your Own Wind Turbine kit.

85% plastic

observa
Reply to  Redge
February 12, 2025 9:13 pm
February 12, 2025 2:11 am

The German work estimated insect losses at 40 million per turbine during the plant-growing season.

In fairness, these figures greatly decline on cold, windless days during winter

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Redge
February 12, 2025 6:00 am

There definitely a decline due to the much shorter days ie less sunlight.

There is an actual increase in electric generation when temps go from 100f to 70f. I dont know at what point there is a drop in electric generation when temps drop below a certain point such as below 40f or 30f or 20f. Most of the pro solar websites dont address that issue ( half truth by omission? maybe)

February 12, 2025 3:29 am

Wind Turbines could also cause the very warming they pretend to stop….

Large-scale US wind power would cause warming that would take roughly a century to offset | ScienceDaily

“Researchers report the most accurate modelling yet of how increasing wind power would affect climate, finding that large-scale wind power generation would warm the Continental United States 0.24 degrees Celsius because wind turbines redistribute heat in the atmosphere.”

Bruce Cobb
February 12, 2025 3:45 am

The eras of humanity:
Classical Era: 500 BC to 500 AD.
Medieval Era: 500 AD to 1500 AD.
Early Modern Era: 1500 AD to 1800 AD.
Modern Era: 1800 AD to 2000 AD
Stupid Era: 2000 AD to ?

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 12, 2025 4:03 am

I think the end of the Stupid Era will be when the UK and Germany go bankrupt trying to implement the Net Zero insanity.

From what I’m reading in the news, it may not be long. Automobile companies in both are having serious problems. Some may move manufacturing to the United States.

It’s not looking good for the victims of Net Zero.

Bryan A
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 12, 2025 4:40 am

Hopefully …
Stupid Era: 2000 AD to 2025 AD
Common Sense Era: 2025 AD to…

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 12, 2025 4:42 am

I think the Stupid Era is what they refer to in intellectual and academic circles as the Post-Modern era.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 12, 2025 5:43 am

All is better stated as follow:

the cold dark ages of chaos, poverty, hunger and disease from 500 to 1000
the medieval warm period economic boom from 1000 to 1450
the cold little ice age of chaos, poverty, hunger and disease from 1450 to 1850
the warm modern era economic fossil fuel boom from 1850 to 1990
the leftist CO2-evil nutcase era of economic decline from 1990 to the present

Bryan A
Reply to  wilpost
February 12, 2025 7:57 am

I like it!

February 12, 2025 3:55 am

From the article: “With all the learned societies and institutions continuing to turn a blind eye, it is hard to see who will step forward to draw attention to this developing ecological disaster. Who will be the first to suggest that the proper place for a windmill is in a museum?”

My bet would be on Donald Trump.

He doesn’t have anything good to say about windmills.

feral_nerd
February 12, 2025 4:34 am

How about a Federal law banning wind turbines from any major migratory pathways for aerial critters, vertebrate and non-? It’s what Gaia wants.

abolition man
Reply to  feral_nerd
February 12, 2025 6:27 am

Shouldn’t we call the flyways sacred ground? Gaia is surely getting pissed at all the destruction by those invoking her name!

MR166
February 12, 2025 5:50 am

The green movement used nature as a tool to gain support for the political movement. DEI is another tool used by the same group. Using guilt to get the West to destroy its economic base has been very effective.

Kevin Kilty
February 12, 2025 6:33 am

40% of golden eagle deaths in Wyoming are due to wind turbines. What this is doing, and what it will do even more effectively when another 1,000 square miles, literally, are covered in the monstrosities is wipe out the indigenous eagle population (mortality rates of 28% per year of Bald Eages too as estimated by the FWS themselves) now eagles, bald and golden eagles move from outside into what they see as an open niche. They get wiped out. Repeat. Let’s not even talk about the Migratory birds that are “protected” by the Migratory Bird Protection Act (1918).

We have turned a source area for these animals into an ecological sink instead. All for no gain — oh there are the subsidies, of course.

Reply to  Kevin Kilty
February 13, 2025 4:52 am

Using windmills is outrageous.

Using windmills is unnecessary. There are better alternatives like nuclear (for the CO2-phobes).

Look at the havoc the Temprature Data Mannipulators have caused. They lie about the temperature profile and give idiots and greedy so-and-sos, an excuse to kill millions of creatures.

CO2-phobes have created a disaster for many creatures, including human beings.

abolition man
February 12, 2025 6:37 am

I have come up with a solution for cleaning insect, bird and bat muck off of turbine blades.
My proprietary formula includes 15 or 20 kilos of C4 daisy-chained around the base, and an artillery unit of the local national guard in need of some exercise. For a mere $1,000,000/turbine I will guarantee a permanent fix that I have named BlueUp; since it is Green adjacent. Does anyone know the number for USAID funding!?

MarkW
Reply to  abolition man
February 12, 2025 8:49 am

Hopefully, it’s a little late for any USAID funding.

MarkW
February 12, 2025 8:27 am

For some reason, I doubt that the cost of removing this bio-waste from the blades is included in the maintenance costs for these pinwheels of death.
I also doubt that the drop in efficiency between cleanings, is taken into account when guestimating how much power these things can be counted on as well.

Idle question: Does a windmill blade that is covered with bug guts, ice over more or less readily?

Dave Andrews
February 12, 2025 8:49 am

Don’t know if insects normally travel far over water but do know that offshore wind turbines are getting bigger and bigger.

The Vestas V236 15MW turbines have a rotor diameter of 280 metres. Several Chinese turbines have rotor diameters of 260 to 292 metres and in October 2024 Chinese Dongfang Electric Corporation began production of nacelles with a rotor diameter of 310metres.

Editor
February 12, 2025 9:05 am

Thanks, Chris. I wrote about this issue some years ago on WUWT … how many years? Hang on … OK, almost 5 years ago. My post was called “Explaining Wind Turbine Lethality“, and as this current post shows, my post has held up quite well.

w.

D Sandberg
February 12, 2025 9:55 am

Liberals love Monarch butterflies and wind turbines. They better start understanding they can’t have both

Sparta Nova 4
February 12, 2025 12:08 pm

Again it comes down to, in order to save the planet we have to destroy it.

KevinM
February 12, 2025 12:45 pm

Sounds like a crop yield advance is possible – plant turbines in the middle of crops and convert consumers to fertilizer.

observa
February 12, 2025 8:19 pm

You’re going in the right direction-
Reform sets out windfall tax on renewables in bid to undo Net Zero | Watch

…but what you really want is a level playing field for consumers. Ipso facto ALL tenderers of electrons to the communal grid must reasonably guarantee them 24/7/365 along with FCAS or keep them and use them for themselves. So they either invest in battery firming to lift their average tender and/or partner with dispatchables and pay them their just dues for that or some combination of the two. Then we’ll see just how cheap these fickle electrons really are at the meters.

Reply to  observa
February 13, 2025 4:56 am

I like it!

Mary Jones
February 12, 2025 9:55 pm

Recently, the Heartland Institute extrapolated the individual annual insect loss worldwide at 13,640,000,000,000 (13.64 quadrillion) insects, …

I realize that the author is using a direct quote, but the number above is 13.64 TRILLION.

A trillion has two definitions: on the short scale, it is 10^12, while on the long scale it is 10^18. Either way, the above number is not 13.64 quadrillion.

13.64 quadrillion would be 13,640,000,000,000,000.

Bryan A
Reply to  Mary Jones
February 13, 2025 6:22 am

Maybe they did their math like so many others do and simply misplaced the decimal?

February 13, 2025 12:03 pm

Just scrape the bugs off the blades and sell the bug-puree to climate-friendly restaurants?