Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy

Superfact 87: Wind energy is a clean, renewable, and sustainable power source that produces no atmospheric emissions or water pollution during operation. Manufacturing and installation have a small carbon footprint that is much smaller than the carbon footprint of the fossil fuels they potentially replace.

Wind turbines with a background of mountains, clouds and a blue sky. | Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy
Photo from pexels.com

There is a lot of disinformation being spread about wind power. One recent example is the TV series Landman which presents demonstrably false claims as facts. In Texas where I live the problem with deceitful anti-renewable propaganda is especially severe. It is important to check with reputable sources before you believe what you come across. Wind energy is not 100% clean and not without issues but it is much safer and cleaner than the fossil fuels they potentially replace. Below is a two minute video that explains this.

The graph below from Our World in Data depicting lifetime greenhouse gas emissions (construction, operation, disposal) show that the lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of coal power are 88 times higher than those of wind power and kill 615 times as many people as wind power. The lifetime greenhouse gas emissions of natural gas are 40 times higher than those of wind power and kill 460 times as many people as wind power. The difference is staggering. When someone tells you that there’s nothing clean about wind power, they are not just lying to you, they are lying very big.

In the graph below, greenhouse gas emissions is measured of CO2 equivalents per Gigawatt-hour of electricity over the lifecycle of the power plant. 1 Gigawatt-hour is the annual electricity consumption of 150 people in the EU. Death rate from accidents and air pollution is measured as deaths per Terawatt hour of electricity production. 1 terawatt hour is the annual electricity consumption of 150,000 people in the EU.

The graph depicts death rates and greenhouse gas emissions per unit for different energy sources including coal, oil, natural gas, biomass, hydropower, wind, nuclear power, and solar.
Death rates from fossil fuels and biomass are based on state-of-the art plants with pollution control in Europe and are based on older models of the impacts of air pollution on health. This means these death rates are likely to be very conservative. For further discussion see our article: OurWorldinData.org/safest-sources-of-energy. Electricity shares are given for 2021. Data sources: Markandya & Wilkinson (2007); UNSCEAR (2008: 2018); Sovacol et al. (2016); IPCC AR5 (2014); UNECE (2022); Ember Energy (2001). OurWorldinData.org – Research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems. Licensed under CC-BY by the authors Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser. Citation : Hannah Ritchie (2020) – “What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy?” Published online at OurWorldinData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://archive.ourworldindata.org/20260202-100556/safest-sources-of-energy.html’ [Online Resource] (archived on February 2, 2026).

As you can see wind power is safe and emits very little greenhouse gases over its lifetime. In addition, there is no water impact associated with the operation of wind turbines, but a relatively small amount is used in manufacturing. There are other issues with land use, sounds, rare earth mining, waste, and effects on wildlife particularly birds.

However, these issues are in general smaller than depicted must be compared to issues with the fossil fuels they replace. For example, 15 billion tons of fossil fuels (including 9 billion tons of coal) are mined every year and burned whilst the annual mining for all clean energy technologies is around 7 million tons (2,000 times less). More about birds in the next section. Overall wind energy is a clean, renewable, and a sustainable power source. You can read more about this here, here, here, or here.

I am referring to this fact as a super fact because, it is true, an important topic, and yet it’s a fact that is difficult for many people to believe. Too much misinformation has been spread about wind power. I expect some people to dismiss this fact out of hand. But that is the point of super facts, they are true but hard to believe for many, or surprising, and perhaps even shocking.

Wind power saves a lot more birds than it kills

It may come as a surprise to some, but wind power is not a major cause of bird death. Wind farms are estimated to be responsible for losing less than 0.4 birds per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity generated, compared to over 5 birds per GWh for fossil fueled power stations. This means that replacing fossil fuels with wind power saves a lot more birds than wind power turbines take. In addition, cats, windows, cars, poison and powerlines are examples of things that kill a lot more birds than wind power does. Cats kill thousands of times more birds than wind power does, and this usually does not bother us. Note I love both dogs and cats.

It is difficult to make exact estimates of bird deaths but below are some interesting graphs from reputable sources, confirmed by many other studies and analysis, such as this overview from MIT and this analysis by Hannah Richie. The numbers aren’t the same, but they make the same point. You can read more about this here.

The graph shows that Wind Turbines kill 328,000 birds per year in the US, Electrocutions kill 6,250,000 birds, Collisions with powerlines kill 32,500,000 birds, Poison kills 72,000,000 birds, Vehicle collisions kill 214,500,000 birds, Collisions with glass kill 676,500,000 birds, and cats kill 1,850,700,000 birds per year in the US.
From Wikipedia: Universiteit van Nederland, CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Bar graph showing cats killing an estimated 2,400 million birds per year, buildings killing an estimated 599 million birds per year, automobiles killing an estimated 200 million birds per year, pesticides killing an estimated 67 million birds per year, powerlines killing an estimated 28 million birds per year, communication towers killing an estimated 6.6 million birds per year, and wind turbines killing an estimated 1.2 million birds per year. | Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy
An alternative graph taken from Hannah Richie / Our World in Data, using alternative sources essentially showing the same thing. Sources: Loss et al. (2015), (2013), US Fish and Wildlife Service; Subramnayan et al. (2012), American Bird Conservancy (2021).

That does not mean we shouldn’t do our best to reduce bird deaths from wind power stations. However, don’t fall for the misinformation that is trying to paint it is a big problem specifically for wind power.

Wind power turbines by the seashore. The sun is setting. | Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy
Photo from pexels.com

Wind Power is Inexpensive

Finally, a bit of a deviation from the main topic. In addition to being a relatively clean, renewable, and sustainable power source, wind power is now relatively cheap, which explains its recent success around the world. I am bringing this up because another widespread myth about wind power is that it is expensive and wouldn’t survive without subsidies.

Practically all energy sources are subsidized, and fossil fuels have a long history of government subsidies. Below is the average unsubsidized levelized cost of energy according to Lazard. Levelized means that construction costs, land rent, and other costs not directly caused by electricity generation are taken into consideration. Notice how cheap wind is (blue line). This graph is for the United States.

The image shows 8 graphs representing the price of Nuclear, Gas (peaker), Thermal Solar, Coal, Geothermal, Natural Gas, Solar Panels, and Wind. Today Wind is the cheapest.
Average unsubsidized levelized cost of energy. Notice that the light blue line indicates that wind power is pretty cheap. Mir-445511, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Windpower is not only relatively cheap. Wind power is one of the most efficient and sustainable energy sources available. The energy required to manufacture, install, and maintain wind turbines is small compared to the energy they produce over their lifespan. This is known as their energy return on investment (EROI), which is quite favorable for wind energy. The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) states that the average wind farm will pay back the energy that was used in its manufacture within 3-5 months of operation. This article in the journal Renewable Energy found that the average windfarm produces 20-25 times more energy during its operational life than was used to construct and install its turbines. It included data from 119 turbines across 50 sites going back 30 years.

It is important to be aware that there are many false claims floating around about wind power. The sound from wind power stations does not cause cancer, it does not use any other energy sources while operating; it solely harnesses the kinetic energy from the wind to generate electricity, meaning it only relies on wind to function as its primary energy source. Windpower is not a major cause if bird deaths. To read more about false claims about wind power click here.

Conclusion

There are positive and negative aspects of wind power, like any other source of energy. One issue with wind power (and solar) is that it is an intermittent source of energy. When the wind is not blowing you need other sources of energy (until there is sufficient energy storage). This is less of a problem when you have a mix of energy sources and in practice it has not been a big problem so far. However, what we know is that Wind Energy is indeed clean energy, much cleaner than the fossil fuels they potentially replace, and also relatively cheap, even without subsidies.

Other Posts by Me Related to Wind Power

To see the Other Super Facts click here

Unknown's avatar

Author: thomasstigwikman

My name is Thomas Wikman. I am a software/robotics engineer with a background in physics. I am currently retired. I took early retirement. I am a dog lover, and especially a Leonberger lover, a home brewer, craft beer enthusiast, I’m learning French, and I am an avid reader. I live in Dallas, Texas, but I am originally from Sweden. I am married to Claudia, and we have three children. I have two blogs. The first feature the crazy adventures of our Leonberger Le Bronco von der Löwenhöhle as well as information on Leonbergers. The second blog, superfactful, feature information and facts I think are very interesting. With this blog I would like to create a list of facts that are accepted as true among the experts of the field and yet disputed amongst the public or highly surprising. These facts are special and in lieu of a better word I call them super-facts.

36 thoughts on “Wind Energy is Indeed Clean Energy”

  2. Yes, I am familiar with the advantages and disadvantages of wind power and including all the outright falsehoods about it as well. Amazing what people will do or say to avoid change or new technologies and to maintain their power base. Thanks for your timely and thorough piece about this issue, Thomas.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much for your kind and supportive comment Lynette. Yes I have to admit that find the flood of negativety against renewables both uninformed and surprising. I don’t as much of it in Sweden as I do here in Texas where I live now.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    2. I can add that I believe you are right about “maintaining their power base”. The fossil fuel industry is a massive multi-trillion dollar industry that in the past has recieved an enormous amount of subsidies with the help of politicians. The anti-renewable stance is also deeply ingrained within certain political organizations that stand to lose a lot of prestige by backtracking. Data, scientific studies, and fair comparisons is a problem for them.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    1. Yes, unfortunately you are right Java Bean. Some people say that facts don’t matter. However, a closer analysis of the related studies shows that politely correcting people’s misconceptions actually help in the long run for most people, but not always. People who are too emotionally invested in a false belief are not likely to even want to hear about the data and the facts. Then, like you point out, there are people who intentionally spread disinformation and are working very hard at doing so. They are a loud minority but they have a lot of influence.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  4. Hi Thomas, thank you for sharing this excellent information about wind power. I saw a number of wind power turbines along the coast in the UK. The weather in the UK is well placed for sustainable wind power. In South Africa, solar power is better in the interior of the country.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Yes I can imagine South Africa being a great place for solar power and UK a great place for wind power. It may come as a surprise to many but for ERCOT – the Texas grid – the overall fuel mix for 2025 was 37% solar and wind, 23% wind and 14 % solar (all types of natural gas 43%, coal 13%, nuclear 8%). That does not include roof top solar. Solar is growing quickly in Texas. It may come as surprise because Texas is a fossil fuel state and the hostility towards renewables in Texas is pretty big among politicians as well as among a segment of the population. They are trying to shut it down but it is still growing.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  7. Thanks for pointing out the facts and fallacies about wind power, Thomas! Canada is embracing it more than the U.S., and there is less negativity about it here.

    https://knowledge.energyinst.org/new-energy-world/article?id=140002

    I remember you wrote about the inaccuracies spouted by characters in the TV show, Landman. These actors are merely repeating lines. IMO, they are portraying typical attitudes of Texas oilmen, who obviously are against wind power. Nobody should think what they are saying is accurate. It’s not a documentary, and meant to be mere entertainment.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much Debbie and that was a very interesting article. The amazing thing is that despite the negative attitude towards wind in Texas it keeps expanding. You are right about Landman, it is entertainment and no one should really believe it. However, the attempted rebuttal by female lawyer was so feeble that it appeared to me as intentional propaganda. I am afraid people will believe it.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  9. Thank you for the informative and balanced post about wind power. From all I’ve read, it’s definitely a resource worth utilizing.

    I have had conversations with people who have been misled by the false claims about wind power and many do believe the false claims about the number of birds killed by windmills. In one such conversation, I suggested that if the person was so concerned for bird safety, they should remove the glass from their windows. I then showed them a graph similar to the ones you’ve shown. I think the statistics surprised them. Unfortunately, I also think they still tend to get much of their news from sources that spread false claims.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much David. It sounds like you had an interesting conversation and I am glad you were able to informed him on the topic. You are right, there is so much misinformation and disinformation on this topic. False claims are everywhere and unfortunately some people are emotionally attached to the misinformation.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply
  10. Pingback: Do You Know About Super Facts – Leonberger Life

  12. I surely don’t know as much as you about all of this but from experience with family who have large wheat farms and family that worked in the land arena , this is another side… the windmills are taking over the farms, wildlife is near none in these areas, now over this last 6 years I’ve seen them destroy farmers and families.. where windmill companies leased farmers lands and promised years of shared profits , the windmill companies planted the windmills , ran w the money and then left many , so many farmers losing their land to the windmill companies that left after they installed.. arms of windmills were buried when broken , leaving land destroyed and farmers titles being tied to liens more than their properties are worth. Some refused windmills and they are the only farmers left standing and more and more are losing their land to these companies shenanigans. Profit before people.
    So my take on windmills has another depth to it. They do no good when they are not installed with integrity and purpose but only profit.
    My opinion is based on proven and seen with my own eyes facts, if that helps .

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Yes, what you bring up is an aspect of wind power that I did not discuss and that I do not know much about. You are right, no energy source is perfect, and windmills need to be installed with integrity. Companies should not take advantage of people. I should say that based on what I’ve heard from the farmers here in Texas they are happy about the extra income they get, but that may not be true for everyone everywhere. Companies to be honest about what will happen and what the true income will be. Thank you for your comment, Kerri.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

        1. Yes you are right Kerri, and not just different areas but different companies too. Here in Dallas there are solar installation companies that are doing a good job and solar installation companies that are cheating their customers.

          Like

          Reply

  13. Wind energy is indeed clean energy, and so is solar energy, but what about hydroelectric power? For one thing, is hydroelectric energy bad for aquatic ecosystems? Wind turbines are a very minor cause of bird deaths, but is hydroelectric power a major cause of fish deaths? How the hydroelectric carbon foot print compares to wind and solar? Anything else?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Hydro is considered clean energy, but it is a relative term. With respect to greenhouse gas emissions Hydro generate double as much as wind but 20-30 times less than gas and coal, so definitely clean in that regard. Hydro is 20-40 times riskier than wind and solar but 10-20 less risky than gas and coal. (see the graph above). With respect to fish and other eco systems it depends a lot on how you implement it. You can build fish ladders, elevators, or pneumatic tubes to protect fish. I don’t have any numbers to compare fish wellbeing between hydro and gas and coal but carbon emissions are destroying coral reefs and causing ocean acidification, which is very bad for shellfish and for many saltwater fish. You always have to compare, and whether you call it clean or not I think depends on how it compares with gas and coal.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a reply to Debbie D. Cancel reply