An Iowa farmer’s opinion on industrial wind….

Abigail Maas

For those who are still getting to know me on here and wondering why I am fighting wind energy, here is a brief explanation. Believe it or not, there is a lot more to it than this!
😂

🧐 In my opinion, wind energy is one of the largest scams of my time. It is marketed and sold under terminology such as green and clean, when it isn’t either. The blades are not recyclable and are already inundating land fills before we’ve even reached the lifespan of the majority of the turbines in the US. The manufacturing, transportation and construction of wind turbines relies heavily on fossil fuels and contributes to a large amount of CO2 emission. So when a wind turbine is “reducing CO2 emissions”, what they likely mean is it’s making up for the CO2 emitted during its construction and the emissions from its backup sources. Wind energy can not sustain itself without a backup source. Typically wind energy actually means wind + natural gas due to wind’s unpredictable and uncontrollable energy output. In Iowa, we are closing a 0% CO2 emission nuclear plant to replace it with wind + gas which will emit CO2. Wind energy is not 100% green like advocates would have you believe.

🌳 Not only do wind turbines involve CO2 emissions, they also require the extraction of rare earth materials and metals. According to the 2017 World Bank Report, If we built enough wind turbines to convert the world’s energy production to wind energy, it would take a staggering 34 million metric tons of copper, 40 million tons of lead, 50 million tons of zinc, 162 million tons of aluminum, and no less than 4.8 billion tons of iron. This is a huge impact on our earth and its sustainability and completely negates the claim that wind energy is totally green. Also please don’t forget about the human impact of those mining in other countries.

🦅🦇☠️ Wind turbines are known to kill large amounts of bats and birds. As a farmer, I am concerned about the bat loss because they provide approximately $74/acre in insect suppression services. If we lose our bat population, we will suffer financially due to reduced yield and increased pesticide application costs. Our environment will suffer the consequences of increased pesticide application too. The scientific publication, Biological Conservation, recently published a study which found wind turbines may be threatening the survival of one of North America’s most widespread migratory bats. Yet, the wind industry continues to claim their damage to wildlife is minimal.

💲💸 Wind energy is nothing more than a tax credit collecting scheme our filthy rich energy companies are employing. They will never produce enough electricity to be a main source and raise electricity rates immensely. Alliant Energy recently proposed and received a rate increase and cited the change was to pay for wind energy. According to Robert Bryce, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute Center for Energy Policy and the Environment, to produce just the global incremental increase in electricity demand (meaning the amount more we use each year) we would have to cover the entire state of Minnesota with wind turbines. That’s just to cover incremental demand growth and not existing electricity usage.

💸🏠 The property value loss is a widely disputed complaint about wind turbines but common sense lends a helping hand. It is pretty simple to understand that most buyers do not want to live next to wind turbines. If given the choice between a property with vs without, most will choose the latter. The number of interested buyers can play a heavy role on the sale price of the property. Wind turbines will most likely decrease property values for rural homes. There are studies out there to confirm this information too.

🙅‍♀️😰🙉 Wind turbines produce infrasound, which is an inaudible frequency. It penetrates human tissue up to and activates areas of the brain which normally manage stress. It is semi-perceptible which means you can’t hear it but you don’t have the ability to ignore it. The US Army even researched it as a weapon. Retired US Army Colonel, John B. Alexander was one of the men who in charge of designing unorthodox weapons in the 1980’s, one of which was infrasound. He found people experience nausea, dizziness, psychological issues, fear factor, and inability to think. They found that infrasound did not affect everyone equally so they abandoned the idea of it as a military weapon. Many of the wind-supporters claim the people who complain about effects from living next to wind turbines have it “in their heads.” However the research suggests the effects of infrasound are very real but it depends on the person. Approximately 10-30% of people react to it. Scientists note distinct effects on heart muscle tissue- reducing it’s strength. Professor Christian- Friedrich Vahl theorizes that the energy of the infrasound causes some of the heart muscle to get out of rhythm with other parts of the heart muscle which weakens the strength of it because they are not acting at full capacity- in accordance with each other. Infrasound does occur in nature and in many areas of life. I don’t believe that means we should continue to construct even more sources of infrasound and place them next to people’s homes, especially when multiple studies have shown it can be detected 20km away. Wind energy companies, Power Up Iowa, and the Iowa Environmental Council will have you believe these health effects are completely false by paying for research to negate other studies.

🤑 I do think we need to do our best to improve our environment but wind energy is a green hoax that needs to be exposed. Are coal and natural gas the better alternative to wind energy? Probably not- especially when looking at CO2 emissions alone. Nuclear is the clear answer when solely looking at CO2 emissions but also has its own drawbacks. I don’t fight wind energy because I think these other sources are so much better, rather to help Americans realize wind energy isn’t as perfect as its painted. I think the way to reducing our impact on the environment is to reduce our own personal reliance on hydrocarbons (i.e. plastics) and our electricity consumption. Many of us have become lazy and wasteful and need to realize how much we are personally contributing. These multi-billion dollar companies aren’t looking to save the world. They are looking to make money and want to take away the power from the people to control our own energy sources and how much they will cost. If these companies really wanted to help, they would incentivize instead of penalize, individuals for using solar panels on their homes and farms.

Sincerely,
Abigail Maas