[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Editorial: Not all agree 'green' is beneficial 

Sometimes it’s a little hard guessing what the people who seek “green” energy alternatives really want to accomplish.

Some of the most vociferous critics of fossil fuels have also started coming out against such renewable resources as wind, hydroelectric and solar power.

What’s wrong with wind energy? Well, those massive turbine blades can do excessive damage to migrating birds that might happen to fly into them.

“Birds and bats, and possibly beneficial insects such as butterflies, are killed in substantial numbers,” Eric Rosenbloom, president of National Wind Watch, told the Door County Advocate recently. “This toll is not mitigated by a greater benefit – our observation is that no significant or even measurable reduction of carbon emissions is caused by wind turbines on the grid.”

Hydroelectric power? Dams do create massive changes when they are first built, but how does one explain calls to tear down structures that have been providing electricity for millions of people for decades?

A campaign has been waged for years, for example, to remove four dams along the Klamath River in the Pacific Northwest, built between 1918 and 1962, because they blocked access to what were salmon spawning grounds many years ago.

Wisconsin Public Service Corp. drew some fire this spring when it attempted to alter the state budget to lift a cap that prevented the utility from buying electricity from a Canadian supplier of hydroelectric power.

While the proposal rightfully should be debated as a separate bill, not a budget item, lifting the cap could at least serve the purpose of alleviating Wisconsin’s dependence on burning fossil fuels for energy.

Even solar power has drawn some criticism because the large numbers of solar panels that would be needed could mar the landscape, destroy habitat, etc.

In a May 30 guest column in the Wall Street Journal, Shikha Dalmia of the Reason Foundation – a think tank affiliated with libertarian Reason magazine – said the environmental movement always has been torn between “‘conservationists’ seeking to protect nature for man – and ‘preservationists’ seeking to protect nature for its own sake,” but that lately the preservationists have taken over.

That’s why even renewable energy sources are scrutinized as potentially harmful to the environment. It’s no longer enough that they free us from fossil fuels.

And forget nuclear power – despite the efforts of state Rep. Jim Soletski, D-Green Bay, who recently retired from the nuclear power industry, don’t look for the moratorium on nuclear plant construction to be lifted as long as Democrats control the state Senate and the governor’s office. The “no nukes” crowd is firmly in control there.

That pretty much leaves energy conservation as the only option everyone can agree on, and the challenge won’t be resolved simply by building more energy-efficient devices and turning off the lights in rooms we’re not using.

Either the “green” movement needs to lighten up on alternatives to fossil fuel or get used to the idea that we’re going to be burning a lot of coal and natural gas for the long haul.

Green Bay Press-Gazette

6 June 2007

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky