Kansas Windscape

Wind-energy myths
and disinformation

James S. Aber and
Susan E.W. Aber

Table of contents
Diurnal wind Variable wind
Wind droughts Texas energy fiasco
More myths Fossil fuel competition
References

A number of myths and considerable disinformation surround the subject of wind energy. Distortions and fake news have become increasingly common in recent years. Wind energy is not immune from this problem, which is driven by dubious news sources, social media, political agendas, and economic competition. Some of these myths are examined below based on factual historic information, technical data, and current scientific understanding.

Diurnal wind

One common myth is that most wind-generated electricity is produced at night when less electricity is needed. This oft-repeated claim is accepted uncritcially as a serious limitation for wind energy. This may be true in a few special circumstances, but it is simply wrong most of the time for most places. In fact, at most locations around the globe it is more windy during the daytime than at night (DWIA 2003). Afternoon peak in average daily wind speed is the norm in nearly all locales around the world (Aber et al. 2015). Passing storm systems or other atmospheric disturbances may, of course, upset this pattern for short time periods. But wind energy depends on long-term averages, not short-term deviations.

The diurnal (24-hour) pattern of wind reflects daily heating from the Sun and cooling at night. Across the Great Plains of North America, for instance, wind is often nearly calm at sunrise and early morning. As the ground warms during the day, wind speed increases and typically reaches maximum velocity in the afternoon. As evening approaches, wind begins to lessen and may dissipate during the night. The peak interval for potential wind energy, thus, is during the hottest part of the day when electricity for air conditioning is most in demand during summer months.

Variable wind

Wind direction and speed change frequently in response to short-term weather events and seasonal conditions. Simply put, the wind is not constant at the ideal speed for turbines to produce their rated output continuously. In fact, local topography may induce substantial variations in near-surface wind, and individual turbines may respond in quite unexpected ways by facing in different directions.

Adjacent working and rotating turbines face in different directions at nearly right angles. Vestas V120 turbines in the Busch Ranch II wind farm on the High Plains near Walsenburg, Colorado.

Periods of light wind or calm happen from time to time, during which a single wind farm or local area would generate little or no electricity. One day in April 2022, for example, turbines in the Waverly Project were either still or barely turning, but just 20 miles (~30 km) away turbines were spinning at full speed in the Reading Wind Facility—both sites equally exposed to wind from all directions on the Missouri-Arkansas drainage divide in eastern Kansas.

Turbines not operating in low-wind conditions. Turbines face in different directions, and the blades are feathered vertically parallel to the towers. Sany Electric turbines in the Huerfano River Wind Project on the High Plains near Walsenburg, Colorado.

For opponents of wind energy, this has been a convenient argument against further harnessing of wind resources, which some people view as unreliable—another myth. This argument ignores the regional or dispersed nature of wind energy and the grid systems used to distribute electricity to consumers—see electricity grid. Wind energy is harvested over large areas and may be transmitted to other regions where the electricity is needed.

Wind droughts

The term wind drought was coined in connection with a prolonged interval of low wind speed in the United States during the first three months of 2015, and this substantially reduced electric-power generation of wind farms. Similar calm periods on the high seas have been known to sailors for centuries. Nonetheless, wind droughts are another myth about the viability of wind energy.

In general, it is well known that average wind speed over North America is related to climatic conditions in the Pacific region. The 2015 episode of low wind has been attributed to the North Pacific Mode state—and more specifically to high sea-surface temperatures (Lledó et al. 2018). Similar wind droughts have taken place in other locations, such as the United Kingdom in 2021 (Bloomfield 2021).

It should be noted that power generated by a turbine is related to the cube of the wind speed, thus, small changes in average wind speed have large consequences for generating electricity (Musgrove 2010). Projected global warming may lead to long-term reduction in wind speed in some areas, but cause increases in other places, according to some climate models (Bloomfield 2021). In general, much of the western and eastern United States may experience decreased average wind speeds. On the other hand, the central U.S. could develop increased wind in some seasons, particularly for the southern Great Plains (Chen 2020).

Indeed, a new scientific discipline has emerged, known as energy meteorology, in which climate is viewed as a resource, particularly for wind and solar energy (Olsson 1994). As our understanding of climate, especially wind variability and droughts, improves so will our decisions about wind energy and its deployment and operation in Kansas and around the world.

Texas energy fiasco

The energy infrastructure of Texas suffered its worst failure in February 2021 as a result from a series of severe winter storms. More than 4˝ million homes and businesses lost power; there were shortages of water, food, and heat, and about 250 people died as direct or indirect results. Texas Governor Abbott and others initially blamed frozen wind turbines and solar panels—another deception.

Hindsight has demonstrated the primary cause for this calamity was due largely to the failure of natural-gas-powered generators (Homeland Security 2021). This led to partial shutdown of the electric-grid system by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCoT), which is independent of other electric-grid interconnections—see electricity grid. The disconnection of ERCoT made it difficult, in fact nearly impossible, to import electricity from outside the state.

Texas had been warned a decade before that its electric-grid system was vulnerable to failure during cold weather. But this warning went unheeded. In fact, cold weather had caused previous system-wide rolling blackouts, most noteably in 1989 (Homeland Security 2021), long before wind energy came to Texas. So the potential for cold-weather impact on ERCoT was well known.

Wind turbines and natural gas certainly may be prepared for operation in extreme cold conditions, such as the northern Great Plains. Wind turbines, in particular, are abundant in Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming, states known for bitter cold winters, as well as the Canadian Prairie region. Nickel-stainless-steel alloys are used for key components along with other cold-climate options for low-temperature turbine operation. Typical Vestas turbine models, for instance, are rated for operation down to -30 °C (-22 °F) and for withstanding ambient temperature as low as -40 °C (-40 °F). See Vestas cold climate.

Wyoming wind turbines
Wind farms near Glenrock in central Wyoming. Pioneer Wind Park (left) reaches 2100 m (6900 feet) elevation. Rolling Hills (right) is at 1650 m (5400 feet) elevation; both are equipped with GE Wind turbines. Winter low temperature in this vicinity may dip below -30 °C (-22 °F). See Glenrock temperature record.

Much finger-pointing and disinformation was circulated at the time in Texas. For instance, a picture of a helicopter de-icing turbine blades, supposedly from Texas, turned out to be an experiment in Sweden. But the simple truth is that ERCoT neglected to prepare its electrical infrastructure for severe cold weather conditions, in spite of warnings and previous failures. Such preparations are routine elsewhere, and really have nothing to do with the potential for wind energy. The go-it-alone attitude in Texas also contributed to this disasterous power calamity.

Back to beginning.

More myths and disinformation

Anti-wind politics – conservative politicians across the United States are promoting legislation at the state level that would restrict development of wind farms (Miller 2023). They have branded wind energy as a "liberal symbol" that should be opposed on cultural rather than technical grounds. Election of President Trump to a second term may exacerbate this situation. This point of view is divisive, shortsighted, self-serving, and cynical, given the large economic impact of wind energy.

Yard sign in opposition to wind turbines displayed
in Belleville, Republic County, north-central Kansas.

Wind turbines kill birds – some sources claim that wind turbines kill tens of millions of birds annually worldwide (Wiegand 2013). Such claims are not supported by biological research (USFWS 2017) and serve to polarize public perception over the issue of wind-turbine risk for birds. Many large environmental organizations, such as Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and Birdlife, support wind-energy development as a means to reduce use of fossil fuels, carbon emissions, and resulting climate change. The Nature Conservancy, for example, supports the rapid expansion of renewable energy while protecting wildlife and natural habitats (TNC 2022).

Rolling Hills wind farm in central Wyoming. One black blade could greatly reduce bird mortality, particularly for golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos). According to Audubon (George 2023), the black-blade experiment is guided by the theory that contrast painting reduces motion smear, the visual effect where fast-moving objects appear blurry. The idea is that birds and bats could perceive fast-moving blades better and, thus, reduce collisions significantly.

Offshore wind turbines kill whales – this myth started with whales offshore from the eastern United States and now has spread to other countries. However, scientific studies have not supported this claim. The primary cause of whale deaths is fishing gear entanglement, not wind turbines (Westervelt 2024). Early Danish research demonstrated that offshore wind farms, if placed right, can be engineered and operated without significant damage to the marine environment and vulnerable species, and that under the right conditions, even big wind farms pose low risks to birds, mammals and fish (Danish Offshore Wind 2006).

Aerial view of the Block Island Project that includes five GE Wind turbines with a total capacity of 30 MW. Located in coastal Rhode Island, the project went online in 2016 and was the first operational offshore wind farm in the U.S. Total height of turbines is 181 m (594 feet). According to NOAA (2023), there are no known links between large whale deaths and ongoing offshore wind activities.

Wind turbines cause cancer – in spite of the repeated and unfounded claims by some politicians, absolutely no scientific evidence exists to link any form of human cancer with exposure to wind turbines. In fact, greater exposure to wind turbines does not appear to increase cancer incidence (Semprini 2019).

Wind-turbine syndrome – many maladies supposedly are linked to wind turbines including vertigo, nausea, autism, tinnitus, fatigue, memory loss, depression, and migraines, to name a few. Taken together, wind-turbine syndrome is not a medically recognized diagnosis. According to the Ohio Department of Health, there is no significant body of peer-reviewed, scientific evidence that clearly demonstrates a direct link between adverse physical health effects and exposures to noise (audible, LFN, or infrasound), visual phenomena (shadow flicker), or EMF associated with wind turbine projects (ODH 2022).

Wind-turbine radiation – exposure to electromagnetic field (EMF) radiated by turbines. Wind turbines do cause interference for AM radio reception, and some people have complained about this. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, field measurements show EMF levels near wind turbines are well below any existing regulatory guidelines with respect to human health and are, in fact, lower than those produced by many common household electrical devices (EPA Safety 2024).

GE Wind turbines of the Buffalo Ridge wind farm date from 2022. The local resident farmer informed us that he had only one objection to these turbines—they interfer with his AM radio reception. This, in fact, is a problem with all high-voltage transmission lines regardless of their locations or electricity sources, and it has no health impact. Near Lake Benton, southwestern Minnesota.

Fossil fuel competition

Many people involved with the fossil-fuel industry regard wind energy as an economic competitor. This point of view is questionable given rapid global increases in use of fossil fuels, which grew by nearly 50% between 2000 and 2023 (Ritchie and Rosado 2024). Nonetheless, fossil-fuel producers have waged long-running and well-financed disinformation efforts against climate science and wind energy (Negin 2022).

As recently as 1999, for example, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) rejected the likelihood that human activity, namely burning fossil fuels, has any influence on global climate change (Bean 2012). AAPG has since softened its position on this subject, but opposition to development of wind energy remains strong even today among many in the fossil-fuel industries.

According to the Global Wind Energy Council, disinformation campaigns against wind energy are orchestrated and financed by fossil-fuel interest groups (GWEC 2025). Various other disparate groups have joined the anti-wind movement as well. Furthermore, many large wind farms are owned and operated by major oil companies, which leads to a complicated situation (Westervelt 2024).

Frank and Ernest. Adapted from Emporia Gazette, April 22, 2025.

Back to beginning.

References

Back to beginning.

Text and images © J.S. and S.E.W. Aber.
All rights reserved.

Return to Kansas windscape homepage.
Last update: July 2025.