Fresh insights into the ecological devastation caused by onshore wind turbines around the world are contained in a shocking new paper published last month by a group of ecologists in Nature. The paper is paywalled and has attracted little mainstream media interest, but it highlights research that illustrates that the effect of utility-scale wind energy production “can be far reaching and sometimes have large and unexpected consequences for biodiversity”. An annual figure of around one million bats are killed in the countries with the highest number of turbines, but harmful effects are seen in many other parts of the ecosystem. The number of top predators such as jaguars, jungle cats and golden jackals can be changed by turbines in tropical forest gaps leading to the “possibility for cascading effects” along similar latitudinal levels.
In short, the science team notes that turbines can kill birds, bats and insects, change animal behaviour, physiology and demography and alter ecosystems. The installation of wind turbines invariably results in habitat degradation, but it is regions rich in biodiversity with minimal existing infrastructure that suffer the most. The authors state that wind facilities “are recognised as an important driver for losses and degradation of irreplaceable habitats that are important for conservation.” Such areas, of course, can be found in the windy highlands of Scotland. For City-dwelling eco zealots, it is a case of out of sight, out of mind. Net Zero is all about money and power – bats and eagles have neither.
The Nature paper is a wake-up call about the increasing damage that is being inflicted on natural habitats by wind turbines that are steadily increasing in size and destructive potential. It is a summary of the latest findings about the effect of turbines and it is not sanguine about the future. “Perhaps the greatest unknown in predicting future effects of wind power on biodiversity lies in the scope of the potential expansion of the technology and the cumulative consequences of this expansion for species and ecosystems”. A 2021 USA report on the potential pathways to Net Zero emissions is noted and this suggests using up to 13% of the land area for wind farms. The new Trump Administration is likely to put a stop to this madness which the scientists observe could have “dramatic consequences for biodiversity”.
The BP Deepwater Horizon accident is generally considered the worse US offshore oil spill. Estimates vary but it is thought to have led to the deaths of around 600,000 sea birds and the incident led to widespread condemnation by environmentalists that continues to this day. Slightly less publicity is given to the 500,000 bats killed onshore in the US by wind turbines every single year. In the UK, 30,000 is the estimated annual kill number, with Canada at 50,000 and 200,000 in Germany.
Many bird species are also at risk, with large raptors a conspicuous example. It is admitted that limited information is available on population-level consequences, but available evidence suggests the turbines could threaten certain species with local extinction, particularly those at risk with low reproduction rates. Possible population collapse has been predicted for cinereous and griffon vultures in Europe and the Eurasian skylark in Portugal. Other predictions suggest population declines for hoary bats in North America, lesser kestrel in France and black harriers in South Africa. Population declines have been reported in central Europe for animals with high-collision risk such as the noctule bat, while nearly 50% of bird species evaluated in one study in California were said to be subject to turbine-induced population decline. Meanwhile, the mortality of golden eagles at Altamont Pass Wind Resource in California is said to be so frequent that local populations are sustained by immigrants. Finally, the authors report that the globally endangered Egyptian vulture in Spain has a lower survival rate, population growth rate and size in the presence of wind facilities.
Who really cares? The UK Bat Conservation Trust states that climate change poses a “significant threat” to UK bat populations. “We need energy-efficient housing and renewable energy to help mitigate for climate change for the benefit of bats, people and the wider environment”, it adds. It is fair to say that similar understanding is not extended to developers encountering the presence of bats other than ‘Green’ entrepreneurs.
The giant turbines regularly sweep the countryside of insects, and the report notes that fatalities can be great enough to contribute substantially to the build-up of debris on blades. In fact, one of the report’s authors, Professor Christian Voigt, has stated in earlier work that it was necessary to evaluate if 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.
Mass slaughter of bats and raptors is already known, but this new report casts fresh light on the cascading effects on the natural world of increasing numbers of giant wind turbines. That said, the report admits that biodiversity impacts have been documented for only a few small taxa, but the impacts are “not negligible”. Proponents of wind power often claim that wind energy’s impacts on biodiversity will be less than climate change, it is noted. The authors find this “plausible”, but the assumption is said to be “untested”.
Yet another untested assumption driving the destructive madness of Net Zero, others may conclude.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.
People often whine about Cats taking more birds than wind farms. While it’s true on the surface, there are only around 400,000 large and small wind turbans globally. While cats number 600,000,000 globally. Over a thousand times the number of wind turbines. Wind turbines produce around 7% of global electricity.
The US has about 76,000 wind turbines which are reported to kill up to 328,000 birds yearly. About 4.5 birds per turbine.
If Wind turbines were as plentiful as cats 600,000,000 turbines would easily kill close to 600Mx4.5=27,000,000,000 (27 Billion Birds) every year. How long would birds last if wind turbines were as plentiful as cats?
At 50,000,000,000 (50 Billion) About 2 years!
Unfortunately, you have repeated wind lobby propaganda that the average wind turbine kills only 4.5 birds per year. The real figure is 2 orders of magnitude higher.
This link shows bird mortality per turbine in various countries.
Spain: 333-1000 birds/bats per year
Germany: 309 birds per year.
Sweden: 895 birds per year.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230331030649/https://windmillskill.com/blog/spanish-wind-farms-kill-6-18-million-birds-bats-year
Even the Propaganda, as diluted as it is, still spells certain death for all birds within 2 years if wind turbines were as plentiful as cats. If I’m off by 2 orders of magnitude then half as many turbines would still decimate all avian life (bird and bat) likely in the first year. Although they’re installed at a slow enough pace that birds and bats would be long gone by the time we reached 300,000,000 turbines.
I also suspect that the number of birds killed by cats is one snatched from thin air, and very likely highly exaggerated.
Yes the numbers are impossible.
Cats mostly eat ground vermin such as small mammals, small snakes (really!), that sort of thing. Catching birds does happen, but it’s a tough gig-birdies are quite quick and-whodathunkit-they can fly away.
I live on a small farm in the woods. Birds and ground vermin (including snakes) are abundant. For my two cats I would argue the ratio is somewhere around 50:1 or 100:1 in favor of the mice. Birds are highly sought after, but not as easy prey as them critters. The cats share from their abundance. We now have one mouse living under the fridge, one under the bookshelf and one under the piano. But two dead snakes this summer alone.
The ordinary moggie hunts mostly in crepuscular times before most of the diurnal birds are awake. The “foreign” breeds (Burmese, Siamese, etc.) derive from diurnal jungle small cats and hunt in the daytime. Thus, to the extent that genes from these cats get mixed into domestic cats, there will be an increase in bird kills.
If cats are indoors in city apartments, it is highly advantageous to have a kitty that sleeps at night.
It was based on an attribution model.
Far too much deception by the anti – environmentalists crowd (that would be the pro-green energy proponents).
Bryan mentions one of the many fallacies used by the pro renewables. Another difference is the cats kill a lot of the older and sicker birds while the turbines kill healthy birds
Cats aren’t killing eagles, hawks, probably not bats either.
The damage is just getting started. Birds, bats, insects, and offshore, as well, plus fisheries, whales, and on and on. Wind turbines are a true ecological and climate disaster built to purpose.
Von der Leyen is all in, along with Milliband, etc. Why are they still inflicting themselves on Europe?
No mention of air stilling in this article.
I expect that time will show air stilling is a bigger threat than mincing wild life. Not that I want to downplay the slaughtering of wind creatures. But air stilling can change entire landscapes for the worse.
All of Australia/s wind turbines are now stranded assets because they cannot compete with rooftop solar. They will not be replaced. I expect the same for USA but for different reason.
Hopefully the climate and ecological damage will stop them being replaced everywhere. They are a creation of evil minds. Who would design and build something to mince birds in the most gruesome manner.
I just checked on the amount of copper in onshore wind turbines.
A 3 megawatt wind turbine has 14.7 tons of cooper. Copper is now about
US $5.00 per pound. There is US$147,000 worth of copper in the turbine.
When will the thieves start robbing the turbines of their copper? Are idled turbines protected against theft?
Only by their inaccessibility being 450-500 feet up in the air.
I can think of a workaround.
The decline in wind speed is nothing new and is best documented at the Blue Hill Weather Observatory outside of Boston. See https://bluehill.org/annual-mean-wind-speed/
We don’t have a satisfactory explanation for it, there are probably multiple factors ranging from land use changes to warming poleward temperatures.
There is simple physics at play that may explain at least part of it.
WTG transform kinetic energy (aka wind) into electricity. That means the air has less kinetic energy and thus wind speed is reduced. On a single turbine basis it is probably negligeable. We are not talking about single turbines, but rather “farms.”
One ant can move 1 grain of sand. One million ants can move a beach.
Why do they keep moving it into my shoes though???
What do you wash your toes with? 🙂
Too bad to hear about the stranded assets (wind turbines) since solar can’t produce anything remotely useful (utterly useless) from 4pm until 8am and only marginally useful from 8am until 4pm.
Though Wind is equally useless under blocking high situations
Or when the wind is below 9mph
Or when the wind is above 55mph
The thing is, any population impact resulting from ‘renewable’ energy installations will reflexively be blamed on climate change. We’ve already seen it happen with the decline in frogs and bee numbers – even though this decline had nothing to do with warming.
When the inevitable happens and the farmland sacrificed for green energy results in lower yields, and arcing from thousands of kilometres of additional transmission lines – most of it strung remotely – ignites a forest fire = climate change!
If the eco worriers were serious about the well being of nature and its inhabitants, they would be championing nuclear power. I do not know of any species of plant or animal that has been negatively impacted by a 24/7/365 operating nuclear power plant.
Why do the greens want to wipe out rare birds and bats by their endless support for the systems killing those rare and precious creatures every day?
Noble cause corruption
Though in that case…
Noble cause delusions
The Conversation has just published an article explaining that wind power has saved 100 billion pounds for British consumers.
I’ll take a few dead birds in exchange for 100 billion pounds.
That’s a flat out lie.
The savings or the article?
https://theconversation.com/wind-power-has-saved-uk-consumers-over-100-billion-since-2010-new-study-266702
I’m open to an alt.evaluation of the natural gas price/demand elasticity mentioned in the article, but it is obviously directionally correct. That component of savings would also apply to Texas wind power. US shale oil economics are flipping and burning as we speak and that that would have happened years ago but for wind power replacement. But I’ve not seen it estimated.
Then you are willing to Extinct all bird life for a trillion pounds. Is that what avian life is worth to you…A few pounds?
Funny how nearly doubling electricity prices “saves” 100 Billion Pounds.
😆🤣😅😂
The claim that wind is cheaper than fossil fuels has been disproved so many times, that only the willfully blind still push it.
-and the deliberate liars and green frauds.
Using w&s generation costs in LCOE computations is fraud by omission.
Omitted are –
The Conversation article is getting hammered in the comments.
Er, no. They seem to be pretty much 180 out with those here…
They don’t restore the land. They leave the concrete footings in place and cover them with more mounded soil. Then sink the new footing for the replacement generation in an adjacent location near there access road. Wind, over the average lifespan of Nuclear Generation uses more than twice as much concrete
Yes, I have read quite a few instances where removal of the concrete base was not intended.
I some cases, munching the top 6 – 12″ of the base off, carting away the rubble, then dumping soil & grass seeds there.
Then explain why british electric rates have risen at a rate faster than non renewable countries
Freedom is slavery.
War is peace.
I love Big Brother.
The price of electricity in the UK debunks that claim.
PDF available at hawkwatch.
Thank you for that.
Article has some details on the direct climate impacts like loss of moisture and loss of greening etc
Hawkwatch.org is hosting a pdf copy here.
Text version of link: https://hawkwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Katzner-et-al_2025_impacts-of-onshore-wind-energy-production-on-biodiversitySI-1.pdf
The internet is quite amusing. For posting a link to a legitimate website hosting a pdf of the paper in question, which is paywalled at the Nature Reviews link provided in the article, my comment was downvoted…..
“Shock report?” There isn’t much new in it.
When the alarmists use hyperbole, the skeptics have not choice but to counter.
Is this really a good example when is claims wind power is credibly increasing and it can offset human effects of climate change?
Bat bashing, raptor ripping, eagle eviscerating, hawk hacking, songbird slicing, ave graves.
Wind and solar are expensive, short lived, a danger to the grid, intermittent, kill enormous numbers of wildlife, are ugly, have a huge footprint, get preference to the grid, get paid for not producing energy, get guaranteed prices, aren’t recyclable, consume huge quantities of rare resources and can not function without huge amounts of government support both monetary and in the form of mandates. Wind and solar are a lose lose endeavor stop building them.
You left out that they are entirely dependent on having traditional thermal backup power plants.
The climate fascists deny that vast fields of windmills will affect the weather. If a windmill makes 1,000 Mw (number is random just for an example)of electricity then there is 1,000 Mw no longer in the atmosphere. What will millions of windmills scattered across the world do to the weather?