The recent shutdown of the Bernagues wind farm in Hérault, France, marks a long-overdue reckoning with the lethal impacts of wind energy on wildlife—particularly raptors like the golden eagle. On April 9, 2025, a French court ordered the entire site to cease operations for one year following the confirmed death of a golden eagle, a protected species, that collided with one of the farm’s turbine blades in January 2023. The decision also slapped Energie Renouvelable du Languedoc (ERL), the farm’s operator, with a €200,000 fine, half of which was suspended, and imposed an additional €40,000 fine on the company’s director.
This isn’t just a one-off judicial reaction. It represents a seismic shift in how the French legal system—and perhaps the broader public—are beginning to confront the uncomfortable truth about wind energy’s collateral damage. Despite the Green orthodoxy that surrounds renewables, wind turbines kill birds. And not just any birds. In this case, the victim was the breeding male of a golden eagle pair that had nested just three kilometers from the turbine site, a distance well beyond typical disturbance buffers used in wildlife protection.
Environmental groups hailed the court’s decision as a victory, but the implications go much deeper. For years, bird deaths caused by wind turbines have been ignored, downplayed, or dismissed as unfortunate but tolerable trade-offs in the race toward “net zero.” But the Bernagues case shatters that illusion. Here, a single incident carried enough legal weight to halt energy production for a year—an implicit admission that the risks to protected species may outweigh the supposed benefits of wind energy.
And this isn’t happening in isolation. Another French wind farm in Aumelas was also ordered to suspend operations just two days earlier, along with a €5 million fine against EDF Renewables. Add to this the December 2023 ruling from the Nîmes Court of Appeal ordering the demolition of the Bernagues wind farm for lacking a valid building permit, and a pattern begins to emerge: the renewable energy sector, long shielded from scrutiny, is now being subjected to long-overdue consequences.
What’s changing? In part, a growing recognition—backed by research—that wind farms are not as benign as their PR teams suggest. Two recent studies underline the broader threat to golden eagles. One, in Ecological Applications, shows that annual mortality already exceeds the threshold that eagle populations can sustain. Another, in Biological Conservation, tracks a rise in turbine-related eagle deaths in the western U.S., from 110 in 2013 to 270 in 2024. These are not rounding errors. They are statistical red flags.
And yet, the political and ideological machinery behind wind power continues to roll forward, impervious to facts. The push for “green” energy is not driven by data but by dogma. It’s a crusade rooted in carbon hysteria and the romanticization of renewable energy, regardless of ecological consequences or economic efficiency. Wind power has become the cathedral of the climate faithful, and turbines their spires—never mind the feathered corpses accumulating at their base.
This is not rational policymaking; it’s ideological fixation dressed up as science. If the goal were genuinely to balance human needs with environmental stewardship, the conversation would look very different. We’d be assessing energy sources on their real-world merits—reliability, cost, land use, ecological impact—not blindly throwing subsidies at whichever technology aligns with green slogans.
France’s court system has done what most governments have failed to do: impose real accountability on an industry that’s been operating with impunity. The Bernagues decision should serve as a precedent, not an anomaly. It’s a milestone in holding the wind industry to the same environmental standards it pretends to uphold. And it invites a critical question: if even the eagle—the emblem of nature’s majesty—isn’t safe from the blades of climate dogma, what exactly are we saving?
H/T alexander v
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Green Prayer Wheels are bird and bat choppers, and provide nondispatchable power. Offshore, the pilings kill whales. So very Green!
The money is “green” (in American colored money)-so follow the money and sue the living F out of the operators, backers, and maybe a bought politico or two. Love your definition of green prayer wheels…cold, but ever so sweet.
There’s nothing green about them.
“Pinwheels of Climate Redemption” – spin faster, and we’ll atone for our carbon sins maybe?
More countries need to take a hard look at renewables, not merely at their negative effects on wildlife, but how much good the massive subsidies are doing in providing safe, affordable energy supplies that are also having a genuine effect on reducing carbon emissions. If they’re just costing consumers more in taxes, energy bills, and green products and having only a minuscule effect on the supposedly harmful carbon output from fossil fuels, who are they really benefiting, beyond those who are profiting from them?
Hate the word renewables. It was chosen for its obvious emotional impact.
Solar voltaic and wind turbine generators are more accurate.
Unreliables is far more accurate.
Ruinables
I like this decision but I fear this decision. The ugly truth is that while the environmentalists have seemingly woken up to the folly of their support for windfarms, keep in mind they will use the exact same tactics to stop pretty much anything that gets their attention. In theory there’s an endangered species pretty much everywhere if you look hard enough. Announce a new mine, or highway, or pipeline, and off they go searching for some obscure variant of some obscure species in order to shut the project down. This is a double edge sword that has been cutting one way for a long time, so celebrate that it cut the other way for a change, but don’t forget it cuts the other way too.
Question – why would France have windfarms at all? They’ve got enough nuclear power that they can export a lot of it. Since nuclear is already CO2 free, they are saving nothing. In fact they are probably increasing CO2 levels because it takes a lot of CO2 to build a windmill, and if you’re not displacing a CO2 emitting source, then you’re contributing to the “problem” you claim to be solving.
The Climate Alarmists and their Green army have been using any and every threat to wildlife they can muster to advance their delusions of Green energy priority, already.
This is the first time a court has shut down one of the core Green energy options because it contravened actual laws in place to protect endangered wildlife.
Let us hope this represents the crack in the dam that precedes the destruction of a form of energy that is anything but environmentally sound.
I also like the court’s decision to fine the director of the operation directly rather than just fining the company itself. No doubt directors insurance will pay the fine but at last the courts have acted in a way that supports actual laws we all have to abide by.
That would be because of an EU Commission “Energy White Book” directive in 1995 that “suggested” member states get to 6-12% “renewables” by 2010.
NB : The EU definition of “renewables” specifically excluded “nuclear”.
The French “industry, post and telecommunications” ministry responded by launching the “Eole 2005” program in February 1996, ordering EdF — the state electricity supply monopoly, at the time — to install 200-250 MW “capacity” of wind turbines by 2005.
The insanity will continue until the Earth is “saved”.
Why? Well… the 59 nuclear plants were built (using taxpayer money) starting late 60s by EDF State-owned electricity generator and grid operator. EDF, in line with EU rules, had to be denationalised but the French State still kept a 75% (I think) stake in it. On privatisation EDF was split into generator and retailer – EDF, and EfDF which handled distribution. This allowed competition in the generator and retail business since ErDF was grid operator and in theory at least EDF had no better position than other generator and retail outfits.
But – there is always a but. EDF was left with 59 reactors most nearing the end of their lives and not enough money to replace them. As a by the way – those 59 reactors had a deliverable capacity significantly in excess of demand (reasons – for another debate) which is why they were able to meet 80% of demand and export a sizeable excess.
A decision was made – Government involved of course – to shut down some of the reactors, partly due to maintenance costs, the fact they were near end-life, and overcapacity, and replace them with wind and solar. Hurrah!
New Government. The mood changed perhaps because the intermittency of wind was a factor, realisation they would need to build gas plants as back-up, and the fact that France’s nuclear electricity was the cheapest in Europe. Then came the recent crisis, shortage of gas particularly in Germany, demand for French electricity to keep the lights on in Europe and suddenly the French nuclear fleet made sense – and wind didn’t.
But (again), half the nuclear fleet had to be taken out of service for maintenance – neglected for a number of years – and it was realised by Emperor Macron that the fleet would have to be replaced with new stuff.
But (ever present) EDF could not raise the cash needed to renew the fleet, so the French Government has renationalised EDF so they can stick the taxpayer with the bill… again.
When Governments try to run economies – even just little bits, it always turns out so well, and when Net Zero gets involved the results are even better.
Footnote: ironically EDF in partnership with a Chinese outfit is building a nuclear reactor in the UK to replace two going out of service. Started in 2016 due to open 2019ish, then 2026, now 2029/30ish. It has over doubled in cost, and requires a guaranteed lifetime, inflation adjusted wholesale price of £128 per MWh, up from £24 per MWh when the project first given the green light in 2012. Wisely the UK Govt refused to bail out the project with taxpayer cash, the Chinese refused to put in more so it looks like EDF (French taxpayer) is doing the heavy lifting to finish the project.
As a former resident of the area, I am vastly relieved!
Oh, the irony. France would have been about the last country I would have expected to kill “green prayer-wheels” (love that name Tom) because they harm wildlife. In the USA it is illegal for a non-Indian (feather not dot) to even own an eagle feather, yet dozens and maybe hundreds of eagles are dying from these stupid installations. Shut the damn things down!
France has always been willing to buck the pressure and opinions of outside nations. It’s practically a national sport.
Hundreds of golden eagles a year are killed but they falsely claim to have an offset practice that gives an equal number of eagles life. I hope to have a piece on that here soon.
The US economy can survive the 40 yearlong wind and solar nightmare, but for what advantage? We’ve already wasted $100’s of billions on the impossible dream. After decades of wasted capital by 2022 wind provided 3.85% of primary energy and solar 1.87% total= 5.72%.
Low information voters are confused by the intentionally misleading EIA and other agencies and fraudsters that confuse 1) dispatchable vs non-dispatchable W&S, 2) installed capacity and net generation, and 3) electrical generation vs all energy uses.
W&S, despite the drivel on the internet, is grossly expensive when all the hidden subsidies and “gap filling”, what Lazard calls “firming”, is accounted for in a futile attempt to overcome intermittency. Lazard understands that “firming” beyond 4 hours is forever too expensive (a week of battery storage costs >10x the cost of turbines and panels).
A week of cloudy and calm destroys any possibly for W&S ever providing more than 1/3rd of primary energy. Low information voters are expected to continue supporting W&S for at least another 10 years, by that time, when we are at 2–3 times as much junk power, even the slowest among us will realize that W&S only make electricity more expensive and does nothing but harm to the environment.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/203325/us-energy-consumption-by-source/
Slowly, but surely, the tide is turning against NetZero. People are realizing that the cost is too high for something that is questionable at best and destructive at worse. All the media propaganda can’t overcome what the people see, read, and hear. The waste of humanity and environment is becoming obvious.
The tide is turning but Don’t call me Shirley
Thursday morning there was a Bald Eagle, a Turkey Vulture, and a Magpie on the road near the end of my driveway. I disturbed lunch and when I got home there was nothing to see except a dark spot.
More progress.
These disused monuments to stupidity will not last the test of time. They will rust away and eventually collapse.
There will be a brief window for a few generations to be reminded of how their ancestors were scammed by the UN and other globalists offering perfect weather if the Plebs sacrificed their living standard to build monuments to the weather gods.
God hopes this sets a world wide precedent!!
Me, too. 🙂
The world won’t know about it because the MSM won’t mention it.
Penalty for possession of eagle feather in United States:
https://www.fws.gov/law/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act
Wow, that goes back to 1940. I had no idea that anybody cared about those birds so far back to protect them.
Every wind facility needs an Eagle Act permit to kill eagles. Issuing these has been stopped by Trump’s wind EO pending a study. Hopefully no more will be issued.
https://www.cfact.org/2025/03/10/lift-the-veil-on-wind-power-killing-eagles/#
While the French slowly come to their sense, Miliband tilts at windmills.
The guy is a Net Zero fanatic.
But wind energy is sooooo green!
Story Tip
https://youtu.be/CcFDj68paIs
Tom Nelson shows that the BBC is one of the world’s leading climate malinformation and propagandist in the world.
Thanks for that. I’ve watched Tom’s podcast for years but didn’t know about the Gorilla Science site. Just subscribed. I think it’s even better than the movie he released a year or two ago. Everyone here should watch it and pass it on. 🙂
I watched a video of a raptor getting hit by a turbine blade. Horrible. It’s wing was broken, and it just cartwheeled down.
On a 3 MW turbine the tip speed is 200 mph so a lot of the blade is over 100. A direct hit can throw the body far away. The dead birds reported are just a small fraction of those killed, like a third or so.
Not for the first time:
https://stopthesethings.com/2024/03/23/licence-cancelled-top-french-court-strikes-down-unlawful-wind-farm-planning-rules/
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/french-onshore-wind-power-project-halted-by-court-2025-04-04/
https://brusselssignal.eu/2023/12/french-wind-farm-must-be-demolished-after-golden-eagles-killed-court-rules/
Where is Nick Stokes to tell us these bird strikes don’t count?
Because cars and cats.
Typical Leftist logic: bird strikes are not a problem because birds are killed by cars and cats.
And yet they can’t produce the cat which takes on a large bird of prey…
As lo as the BBC has global reach the lunacy is bound to continue (reaches 60 million people in the US with its green agenda, although its funding from UAS Aid has now been discontinued).
Fran Unsworth, then head of news, issued these guidelines to all BBC staff (2020)
‘After a summer of heatwaves, floods and extreme weather, environment stories have become front of mind for our audiences. There are a number of important related news events in the coming months – including the latest report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Green Great Britain Week in October – so there will be many more stories to cover. Younger audiences, in particular, have told us they’d like to see more journalism on the issue.
With this in mind, we are offering all editorial staff new training for reporting on climate change. The one hour course covers the latest science, policy, research, and misconceptions to challenge, giving you confidence to cover the topic accurately and knowledgeably.
Please book now by choosing a time from MyDevelopment (you’ll be prompted to login first), searching ‘reporting climate change’ on MyDevelopment, or emailing XXXXXX@bbc.co.uk to set up a tailored session for your team.
In the meantime, you can read the Climate Change for BBC News crib sheet, and the Analysis and Research website by searching ‘climate change’ which cover the basics.’
Read more at https://www.carbonbrief.org/exclusive-bbc-issues-internal-guidance-on-how-to-report-climate-change/
and top it off with a dollop of YouTube at https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2025/04/20/bbc-exposed/#comments
In future wind turbine owners might not need to worry about killing birds.
The Trump administration on Wednesday proposed a rule to redefine what it means to “harm” a protected species under the Endangered Species Act, a move conservationists say will strip vulnerable plants and animals of habitat they need to survive.
The proposal advanced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service would limit the meaning to taking direct action to kill or injure endangered or threatened wildlife — removing the prohibition against habitat destruction that leads to those ends.
Under the proposed meaning, it would take something like the actual shooting of an owl to qualify. (LA Times)
Turning on a windmill *is* actually shooting the birds and bats.
Don’t forget the beneficial bats. All they have to do is get close to a windmill and it kills them, collapsing their lungs.
We need to shut the windmill industry down. Windmills are not fit for purpose, are dangerous to wildlife and electrical grids, and people’s electric bills, and are a blight on the landscape.
Windmills have no redeeming qualities for the public. They are something only a Subsidy Farmer could love.
Wind blades destroy eagles not habitat. Nor are they endangered. Eagles (and whales) have their own protection laws. Neither is being properly enforced.
It’s not just the birds, but the bats too. I literally cannot think of another environmental atrocity given as hard a pass as wind energy in the name of “justice”; except maybe setting Teslas on fire with a molotov cocktail.
As a result of it Nuclear policy, France has the lowest per capita CO2 emissions in the developed world. This diagram emphasises the pointlessness of considering Weather-Dependent “Renewables” at all.