Beset by soaring prices, an increasingly hostile regulatory climate, and growing public opposition in coastal communities, offshore wind faces a new challenge from a powerful public official and erstwhile booster of strict climate policies.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to investigate wind projects’ effects on the health and safety of commercial fishermen, Bloomberg News reports. Specifically, Kennedy in late summer quietly instructed CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to prepare such research. The office of the U.S. Surgeon General is also involved in the assessment.
Originally, the research was to be wrapped up within a couple of months, but its completion has been delayed by the government shutdown. “Work on this report has been halted solely due to the Democrat-led shutdown,” a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) told Reuters.
Human Health Effects
To date, research on the human health effects of offshore wind turbines has been spotty, with a 2011 literature review finding “no peer-reviewed articles demonstrate a direct causal link between people living in proximity to modern wind turbines, the noise they emit and resulting physiological health effects,” according to The Hill.
But a study released in January by the University of Portsmouth in the U.K. warned of potentially harmful levels of metals from turbine protection systems. “The materials used to protect wind turbines from corrosion leach into the surrounding water, which could pose risks to ecosystems, seafood safety, and human health,” the study found. “Offshore wind farms release thousands of [tons] of aluminum, zinc, and iridium each year.”
Professor Gordon Watson of the university’s School of the Environment and Life Sciences supports wind farms because of their role in reducing carbon emissions but adds, “There is limited data on how these metals affect the environment near operational offshore wind farms, so it’s hard to assess the full risks.”
Other Research
Green Oceans, a New England-based nonpartisan community group formed in 2023 “to protect the ocean against industrialization,” released a report in January titled “Offshore Wind and Human Health.”
“Offshore wind turbine blades erode over time, releasing harmful contaminants into the ocean, including microplastics and Bisphenol A,” the report found. “Blades fail more frequently than previously recognized. A collapsed blade can scatter over 50 tons of PVC foam, PET, epoxy resins, forever chemicals (PFAs), styrene, formaldehyde, and phthalates into the ocean. These chemicals are associated with an increased risk of cancer, endocrine disruption, and immune system alteration.”
“Studies have found microplastics in marine mammal tissues and the human cardiovascular systems,” the study adds. “Microplastics correlate with an increased risk of heart disease.”
The concerns raised in these studies provide ample justification for the report Secretary Kennedy has ordered. While offshore wind farms’ effect on marine life, including the endangered right whale along the Mid- and North Atlantic coasts, has garnered much attention, the human element has been largely neglected. Commercial fishermen who earn their living by entering waters where gigantic wind turbines, their platforms, and undersea cables are commonplace are exposed daily to any contaminants emanating from this “clean” source of energy.
Trump’s Aversion and Bill Gates’ Conversion
President Donald Trump has made no secret of his hostility to offshore wind, which to him is a matter of both aesthetics and revulsion over the gobs of taxpayer money that have been lavished on these monstrosities. If the CDC concludes that commercial fishermen are at risk from offshore wind installations, investors will have another reason to think twice before providing capital for these projects — something businessman Trump understands only too well.
Kennedy’s action on offshore wind coincides with the eye-popping statement from longtime climate warrior Bill Gates that climate change “won’t lead to humanity’s demise.” Gates is a shrewd enough operator to know when the winds are shifting. The sun is setting on wind and solar power, and the climate agenda he once championed is no longer in vogue. He’s moving on.
This article originally appeared at The Federalist
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Not the approach I would prefer, but given the abuse of “health” claims by the Green Blob, it is karma.
Gorilla Science:
https://rumble.com/v71lmdg-the-green-blob-what-is-it.html?e9s=src_v1_upp_a
How about the health effects of onshore wind turbines?
Good question!
Trump doesn’t like land-based windmills, either.
I’m pretty sure if he had the choice, he would do away will all the windmills, where ever they might be located. I would applaud him for doing so.
Yes, RFK, jr. needs to study the effects of onshore windmills on people and other innocent creatures.
Trump said in the past that if a windmill is put up within sight of your home, that you lose 50 percent of the home’s value. I don’t doubt it.
Except reduced local water and fresh water rather than brine, and the detritus falls onto the ground and gets into the soil rather than the ocean, and, and, and, probably the same or worse.
Ever in search of profit, there is as little regard for the health and safety of commercial fishermen as for their prey…b****r all..!
Long shot. Waste of resources. Study the effects on people where they live.
Maybe, maybe not. Side effects of new industrial operations always need examination…and long shots can payoff. Especially since we already know the obvious effects, like bird and whale deaths, and evidence of noise damamging wildlife, and humans.
Where they live?
Fishermen live on the oceans. Their families live on the ocean shore.
Another Study Shows Low-Frequency Vibrations From Wind Turbines Can Harm Human Health
I’ve read that. Yes.
No, the point is to go all “precautionary principle” on wind developers, and drag it out to where they lose funding.
As long as the linear no-threshold (LNT) model is not applied and science is.
Hang on a second, the enviros are constantly telling us how plastic is killing the oceans, this article reveals offshore wind is doing exactly the same thing, plus the other damage to sea and bird life.
Apparently, there are more risks that should be looked into by RFK etc. Did you know wind can affect your old age?
Sweden’s pension funds are facing eye-watering losses after they invested heavily in Net Zero projects that are now going bust, leaving the retirement savings of millions at risk.
Two of the country’s flagship green manufacturers have run into serious financial difficulties, sparking a row over potentially eye-watering pension fund losses.
The challenges in Sweden serve as a stark warning to Rachel Reeves, the UK’s Chancellor, who is considering forcing large pension funds to invest in national assets in a bid to boost Britain’s struggling economy. – Daily Sceptic
Rachel from accounts is quite a character. Pretending to be a chess champion – she came 23rd – and an economist; in Customer Complaints, no less.
Fun fact. Nobody in the Labour government has worked in the private sector, started a business or managed any business organisation.
You can see why the UK is where it is; they have a religion and, er, that’s it.
-1
Why does the down voter have no argument to offer?
Answers on a digital postcard…
It may be a timing issue, but I see no downvotes?????
Some one negated it a while after. ie an upvote.
But the point remains, at least say why you disagree… make a point.
There is one reason and one reason only. Communism is a hobby.
But the point remains, at least say why you disagree
Which is why I don’t use either up or downvotes with one exception: I’ll upvote a comment I think is unfairly downvoted.
It’s the same with the BBC.
You state a reasoned argument, receive no replies, but get downvoted by people who can’t think for themselves
But it seems quite appropriate that no on in the Labour Government “has worked in the private sector, started a business or managed any business organisation.” Isn’t the labour movement against business?
The Labour movement was about worker representation up until the early 1970s. Then it began to morph into a middle and upper class university educated party.
It decided its original core vote was racist, xenophobic, homophobic, islamophobic etc etc.
Once Labour party MPs had been down the mines, worked in the factories etc etc. That world is long passed.
upper class ^twit^ university educated party
😉
As I recall, there is historical precedence.
Henry VIII established the Church of England.
Apparently supplanted today with the Church of Climate Alarmism.
Obvious alternative explanations.
Both can happen;
So WTGs are not clean and the pollution they release is “known” to be hazardous to human health.
This seems to me to be too much of a stretch. Be careful what you wish for.
What’s next, an investigation into the release of materials from the hulls of the fishermen’s boats? From the diesel engine exhaust? From the propellers? Are “forever chemicals” leached from the nets and lines?
Just my thoughts. A sense of proportion seems prudent here.
Extracting gigawatts of energy from the atmosphere using wind turbines carries as much health risk as extracting the same amount of energy from underground.
An joule is a joule after all.
Maybe the Beeb could have a new programme named “The Joule in the Crown”.
Simplified to The Crown Joule.
I see your point but when you take in mining and everything else, it goes far beyond ergs.
A sense of proportion would be prudent.
LNT should not be applied.
The mass of detritus from the fishing boats compared to the mass of detritus from the WTGs would be enlightening.
What’s next, an investigation into the release of materials from the hulls of the fishermen’s boats?
Good point.
However, without the fisherman, we’d have no fish. Without the wind turbine, we’d have a stable power system.
Interesting part of this is that Louisiana doesn’t have enough wind which decreases from south Texas west to Florida panhandle across most of where I have some coastal marine experience. Florida a pleasure except for one mild norther this time of year. South Texas does have the wind and has put in more than a few which produce other problems. Old Texas farmers knew about wind necessary for pumping water.
I have also sailed at night through petroleum platforms off Louisiana, obviously wouldn’t be healthy through a wind field.
https://www.kplctv.com/2025/11/10/offshore-wind-energy-falls-flat-under-trump-louisiana-businesses-wait-hope/
It is fine that we are looking at the health effects of wind mills but the science needs to be rock solid. The last thing we need is more pressure on the plastic industry. The reason we don’t want wind and solar is because they don’t work, they can’t sustain the grid or a modern society, Build power generators that work, fossil fuel and nuclear work. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators, build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators, remove all wind and solar from the grid.
And this science as it relates to BPA is quicksand.
This article and his references significantly misrepresent the “presence” of bisphenol A in wind turbine blades, confusing the thermoset epoxy matrix with thermoplastic polycarbonate.
BPA is an intermediate in the production of the most common epoxy resin which is the diglycidyl ether of BPA and higher molecular weight homologs. BPA is reacted with epichlorohydrin to form the resin, a covalently bonded monomer, which is then reacted with a “hardening agent” to form a thermosetting polymer. For reinforced composites, the epoxy is a viscus liquid as is the hardener (which is most typically an amine such as diethylene triamine; DETA, triethylene tetra amine, etc.) which are mixed and impregnated into the reinforcement (fiberglass, carbon fibers, etc.) before the ingredients significantly react. The reaction is exothermic, and the resulting thermoset polymer is fixed and, unlike thermoplastic polymers, cannot be melted or reformed once set. Cured epoxy composites have no free BPA. BPA is not “encapsulated in the epoxy matrix”.
Note that BPA-based epoxy-acrylic coatings are the predominant FDA-complying coatings used to form the liner in beer, soft drink, and many food canned containers. Because of their chemical inertness, cured epoxy are especially suitable for acidic conditions, such as can lining for tomatoes.
I spent several years as a chemist developing composite applications for epoxy and other thermoset resins. I refer you to the textbook Reaction Polymers: Chemistry-Technology-Applications-Markets, Oxford University Press, 1992. (I am one of the chapter authors).
While composites (and coatings and adhesives) based on aromatic raw materials such as BPA form strong, durable, and chemically inert products, they are subject to degradation from ultraviolet radiation (sunlight). Hence, for example, they are the basis of the electrolytically deposited base coating over automotive bodies but must be overcoated with UV stable pigmented topcoats of thermoset polyurethane polymers. The same is true for wind turbine blades, albeit using hydrophobic coatings that sluff off water and impede icing.
This durability inherent in epoxy-based composites does create a problem of end-of-life disposal (as is the case for any thermoset composite such as found in polyester boat structures). Landfill seems to be the only economical option at this point.
Polycarbonate (thermoplastic) once used in baby bottles –> leachable BPA
Cured Epoxy (thermoset plastic), used in wind turbine blades (and can coatings, and adhesives and a multitude of other structural composites) –> not leachable. (no free BPA precursor).
“Offshore wind farms release thousands of [tons] of aluminum, zinc, and iridium each year.”
Thousands of tons of iridium? Today’s spot price of iridium is $4,500 per troy ounce, $342.16 more than the price for the same weight of gold. I’d like to set up a recovery system for that!
Iridium, by the way, is biologically inert. It has no adverse health effects.
RFK jr raped a dead bear carcass. Says all that is needed to know. The federal government is being run by rapists
Are you taking your medication, dear?