Why Some See Wind Farms as a Threat, Not a Solution

During a European Union trade deal press conference, former US president Donald Trump attempted to segue into a conversation about renewable energy sources. “Wind turbines,” he said, are a “con job,” according to The Guardian. “It puts the whales loco,” he added. Turbines also kill birds, he continued, before saying that wind power is also harmful to human health: “Windmills are very dangerous for people.”

At first glance, these comments are just another dose of Trump showboating, a magician’s flourish to distract from the day’s message. On closer inspection, there’s more evidence of a worrying global trend of anti-renewables conspiracy theories, which are as old as wind power and renewables, in general.

Renewables ‘cause’ electrosmog, wind turbines ‘cause’ cancer, cleaner energy means government control and even blackouts, conspiracy theorists say. Turbines are sometimes referred to by climate deniers as “windmills.” Trump is fond of using the term, but he’s not the first.

Research into these baseless conspiracy theories and related “public panics” suggests a far deeper root to these irrational fears and phobias. In a 2012 article, lead researcher Kevin Winter and his colleagues concluded that “identifying misconceptions and correcting misinformation about wind energy will not change people’s minds.” This is a concern for national governments, local authorities, industry, and advocacy groups that are all trying to speed up the clean energy transition.

Origins of anti-wind conspiracy theories

Despite climate science raising the alarm since at least the 1950s that carbon dioxide emissions could cause extreme and relatively near-term environmental changes, early advocacy for renewables was, in some cases, sold to the public not as essential but as a way to break up the power of fossil fuel monopolies and companies.

A famous satirical example of this was a The Simpsons episode, which features the tycoon Mr. Burns building an enormous tower to block out the sun and force residents to buy his nuclear power.

The cartoon example was an absurd exaggeration, but it was emblematic of a real-world debate—that fossil fuel interests would stymy renewable energy uptake for as long as possible. And indeed, they have. For example, in 2004, then–Australian prime minister John Howard called together a group of fossil fuel executives as part of the Low Emissions Technology Advisory Group. Instead of encouraging and funding swift decarbonization, their remit was to find ways to slow the growth of renewables.

Public resistance to wind farms also had to be overcome. Coal mines, oilfields, and nuclear power plants often occur at or near the site of extraction. Wind turbines are different. Highly visible from the ground, they are often sited on ridgelines or open plains.

The visibility of wind turbines made them highly visible “targets” for both community concerns and conspiracy theorists. Myths such as “wind turbine syndrome”—a purported “non-disease” as described by medical experts—circulated for years despite a lack of scientific evidence.

Academic research into anti-wind farm sentiment also suggests that a certain segment of the public is dug in against wind turbines, but that the most important factors have less to do with demographics and more with people’s belief systems. A 2012 study led by Kevin Winter found in Germany that “conspiracy thinking is a much better predictor of opposition to wind farm projects than demographics.” Age, gender, education level, and political orientation had less influence than people’s willingness to see ulterior motives behind a government-approved wind farm.

Research published in 2022 built on Winter’s findings and involved surveys in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. This study found that respondents who scored high on “conspiracy mentality” were also more likely to see wind turbines as dangerous. Conspiracy mentality is a tendency to see hidden motives behind events and situations in society. Whether people believed wind turbine-related conspiracy theories or other, broader-ranging theories about climate change, government control, or energy security, their beliefs about wind turbines were also more negative.

When someone is affected by a conspiracy mentality, fact-checking is likely to have limited influence over their views on a given topic. It is not that these people are ignorant of the facts about wind farms not poisoning groundwater or causing mass blackouts. It is rather that their opposition to wind farms is not based on a misunderstanding of the technology but a worldview that wind turbines are another encroachment on their rights.

Wind farms are highly visible, whether people like that or not. They are battle flags for both supporters and opponents. Supporters see them as beacons of progress, innovation, and climate action; opponents see them as symbols of government overreach, loss of control, and unwanted change.

Running deep beneath the surface are other, more existential issues. Fossil fuels drove a century of global prosperity, and for some, the reckoning with that source of wealth and power is an attack on that past success. This phenomenon, variously termed, has been called “anti-reflexivity” by scholars, referring to the refusal to even acknowledge the negative impacts of fossil fuels.

Trump’s rhetoric often romanticizes the age of coal, oil, and gas and fits squarely into this anti-reflexive frame.

Identity politics is in play, too. In certain online groups, such as parts of the “manosphere” sphere of men’s rights activism, talk of climate change is cast as weak or effeminate. For many baby boomers, especially white heterosexual men, the changing energy economy represents a very real and disorienting loss of power in a world where their social dominance once felt natural.

Wind turbines aren’t just new technology; they’re a new culture and a perceived threat to the old order.