I finally got around to reading my latest Nature Conservancy Magazine. The organization has had my support for decades, ever since it took the lead in restoring the San Pedro River in my home state of Arizona. With hands-on acquiring and trading of properties, the organization achieved the miracle of restoring this marvelous Riparian area. Rather than just lobbying, they did the hard work. Imagine my shock finding the Conservancy is involved in building windmills in Kenya’s Rift Valley.

Still on our bucket list, the Valley is a top tourist attraction for wildlife safaris and migratory birds. The flights through the Valley feature flamingos, vultures, pelicans, and others high on birdwatcher lists. Windmills are known as mass bird killers. Putting them right in the path of essential migration routes is folly. One might expect important conservation groups to be up in arms. Still, the well-known Nature Conservancy promotes putting windmills in the best position to wack these magnificent birds.

How does the Conservancy justify its support? It will help set up observation towers for thirty-two people with binoculars to look for “priority species” like vultures. If they see any, they tell the windmill operators to turn off the ones in the birds’ path. What could go wrong? What if several flights arrive from different directions at the same time? What happens to the “lesser birds?

I tried to imagine putting these windmills by the San Pedro River. Birdwatchers and conservationists would be up in arms. But the elites say Africa needs clean energy more than birds. Getting rid of coal and wood used for power is worth a few million birds. 

What about the effect on the other animals? Can we be sure a mass of these towers won’t mess with their life patterns? Do we have a handle on this rush to windmills?

Off the coast of New Jersey, whales keep washing up dead in numbers never seen before. The only change is locating a mass of giant windmills off the coast. Using high-powered sonar to find positions for these Eifel tower-sized structures may interfere with whale navigation, putting them in dangerous situations.

When you Google for information on what’s going on, you find primarily denials the windmill industry has anything to do with the whales’ demise. It’s just right-wing “misinformation.” Most are from early in the year, but when four washed up in four days, real environmentalists and conservationists brought their objections and data to the fore.

While the media characterized those opposing the headlong construction of Windmills on and offshore as right-wingers, people like Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, and Lisa Linowes have long records in environmental causes and are hardly on the right. These people are the impetus behind the anti-windmill documentary “Thrown To the Winds.” I have no way of knowing if the film is correct in everything, but one should view it to understand there may be a significant problem.

With onshore windmills facing opposition, significantly expanding the offshore Windmill Industry is the green-new-dealers path to zero emissions. As we become aware of its drawbacks, offshore, too, is finding hostility.

The question is, given its problems, why are we rushing headlong to erect these gigantic windmills? Building them in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Rift Valley makes little sense when Africa has plenty of natural gas to replace coal and wood to provide energy. When the wind fails to blow, you still need backup. In the U.S., substituting natural gas for coal allowed us to reduce carbon better than most nations while maintaining stability.   

Africa lags behind the rest of the world in access to electricity. Without power, millions can’t escape poverty. Yet there is money for windmills while the greens in the developed world oppose gas fields and needed infrastructure in Africa. 

How did so many of those claiming staunch environmentalism come to hold such unethical positions? In last week’s post, I showed how Columbia University teaches our journalists how to promote the Green New Deal narrative. Nuclear and fossil fuels have no place in their world. Similar to Religion, dogma is a matter of faith rather than science. Instead of debating solutions, denial and suppression of other views are the actions of choice.

These educated elites have spread throughout national and international structures. When using Google to locate information for this post, I found far more links to pro-windmill articles near the top than those opposed. The fact Google is a significant investor in the Rift Valley Windmills might give us a clue as to where its sympathies lie. Knowing Google is investing billions in offshore windmills worldwide tells us even more.

Did you know of Google’s windmill involvement? One might think something enterprising investigative reporters would delve into., but as I’ve pointed out, those educated at Columbia and other like-minded institutions are loyal to the climate change narrative.  

This narrative has boiled down to three pillars: Windmills, Solar Panels, and Electric vehicles (EVs) linked to batteries. Anything else gets short shrift. Hydrogen, nuclear, nuclear fusion, or other developments may provide a more economical solution, but we are already committing Trillions in stuff people don’t want and can’t afford. 

 One thousand six hundred scientists, including Nobel prize winners,  declared no crisis warranting a rush into government-directed solutions rather than waiting for the market to guide us to the best answers. 

This industrial policy on steroids threatens to strand untold trillions of investment. What will you do with today’s EVs in a hydrogen world? Modular nuclear plants or fusion plants may make those monstrous windmills costly eyesores. Of course, by that time, the crony capitalists involved with wind, solar, and batteries will have banked untold sums.

Some whale species may have gone extinct—slaughtering masses of birds and many chunks of the earth marred by useless windmills and solar panels. Thank you, bogus environmentalists and conservationists.

History has never been kind to industrial policies; the ones we pursue today are no exception.