For years now, as the number of offshore wind farms has increased, controversy surrounding the green energy industry has grown. The primary impetus behind green energy development is environmental protection, but if it turns out these wind farms are actually harming wildlife, wouldn’t that disqualify the reason for building them in the first place?
With reports of whale deaths increasing in regions where offshore wind farms have been built, a growing number of folks are wondering whether these massive windmills are to blame.
But another element that has received less attention is questions regarding the potential negative impact these wind farms may be having on the lives and well-being of humans, specifically commercial fishermen.
In that light, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. directed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to launch an investigation into offshore wind farms and their impact on the health and safety of local fishermen.
Kennedy directed the CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to research the issue months ago and to report its findings. That research has been delayed, as a HHS spokesman recently explained, “Work on this report has been halted solely due to the Democrat-led shutdown.”
What motivated Kennedy’s directive to investigate these massive windmills is likely tied to Donald Trump’s aversion to these eyesores. Earlier this year, prior to taking office, Trump chided the British government for eschewing gas and oil and for expanding their green energy production, stating, “The UK is making a very big mistake. Open up the North Sea. Get rid of Windmills!” Again, over the summer, Trump expressed his disdain for windmills after returning from Scotland. Europe should “stop windmills all over the place,” he argued. “It’s really hurting — you know, it’s a con job saying the environmentalists want it because I can’t believe they really want it. It kills the birds, ruins the look, they’re noisy. If you see them from your house, your house is worth like 50% or more less. I just think it’s a very bad thing.”
Trump isn’t wrong. These massive windmills are both eyesores and dangerous for birds and whales. But exposing their dangers to humans may also help put an end to these problematic and honestly ridiculous efforts to “go green.”
What scant research that does exist raises some alarming findings. According to a study released this past January by the University of Portsmouth in the UK, “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.” It further noted, “Offshore wind farms release thousands of [tons] of aluminum, zinc, and iridium each year.”
Gordon Watson, a professor from the university’s School of the Environment and Life Sciences, observed, “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.”
In 2023, New England-based Green Oceans released a study titled “Offshore Wind and Human Health,” in which it found that “offshore wind turbine blades erode over time, releasing harmful contaminants into the ocean, including microplastics and Bisphenol A.” The report also noted that the failure rate of the massive windmill turbines is higher than advertised and that 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 have been tied to higher cancer risks and microplastics to higher rates of heart disease.
Still, we need more studies on the potential negative impacts on human health, as well as on animals and the environment. The reality is that no technological development comes without a negative effect. The key is to ascertain the degree and scope of that impact relative to the overall positive benefit. And if the negatives outweigh the positives, the prudent decision would be to abandon further implementation of that technology until such negative consequences can be eliminated or significantly mitigated.
It will be interesting to learn the findings from the HHS’s report.
