When a development project causes damage to the landscape, disrupts habitat, causes financial, physical, or emotional distress to neighbors, etc., it is sometimes required to balance the adverse impacts with more positive gestures. These might include setting aside some acreage to not be developed, buying off communities or interest groups in various ways, and so on. This is called “mitigation”, but such actions do not in fact relieve or reduce the harm.
When a project must be “mitigated”, it has already been judged to provide benefits that justify the harm it causes. This is, however, assumed rather than proven in the case of wind energy projects. Therefore, the charade of mitigation adds only insult to injury, because the claim of benefits is also a charade.