Shattered Green Dreams - The environmental costs of wind and solar - Highlighted Article

From: American Experiment

By: Sarah Montalbano

Date: June 2025

Shattered Green Dreams - The environmental costs of wind and solar

Executive Summary

Wind turbines, solar panels, battery storage, and other “green energy” technologies are too often hailed as unqualified goods for the environment. However, there are no solutions, only tradeoffs, and the same is true for energy production and its environmental impact. All human activities have an impact on the environment.

Debates about the U.S.’ energy mix almost entirely overlook or minimize the negative environmental impacts of wind, solar, and batteries while diminishing the positive impacts of oil and gas, coal, and nuclear. Policymakers must consider the costs of wind and solar and the benefits of oil and gas, coal, and nuclear when determining the desirability and feasibility of ambitious energy transition goals. Further, communities ought to be fully informed of the costs of wind and solar when debating the merits of proposed projects in their areas.

This executive summary is offered based on the findings of this report.

• Every form of energy generation comes with its own set of challenges and benefits. All renewable and hydrocarbon energy sources — wind and solar, hydropower, coal, natural gas, and nuclear — have environmental impacts. The mining of raw materials, manufacturing, and construction, the landscape footprints and ecological impacts of utility-scale wind and solar projects, and repowering and recycling costs must be considered.
• The negative impacts of wind and solar on the environment are too often overlooked. A wide variety and large quantity of minerals are used in solar panels, wind turbines, battery storage, transmission lines, and more. The U.S. currently sources most of its minerals from foreign countries that do not adhere to modern environmental or worker health and safety standards, which exacerbates environmental impacts that could be managed with domestic mining.
• The positive impacts of nuclear, natural gas, oil, and coal are rarely discussed. These sources of energy are highly reliable, 24/7 power sources that provide baseload and peaking power to the grid. They are scalable, affordable, and have small landscape footprints.
• Existing estimates of material intensity of net-zero carbon emissions, both U.S. and global, reflect the enormity of this industrial undertaking. Some methodologies may be significant underestimates due to optimistic capacity factors for wind and solar, high uptake of recycling, and other model assumptions.
• Every form of energy production requires real estate. The low electricity density of wind and solar generation means that they require at least 10 times as much land per unit of power produced as coal- or natural gas-fired power plants. If the U.S. were powered entirely by wind turbines, the land area necessary would exceed two Californias.
• The ecological impacts of wind and solar cannot be discounted. Evidence is growing that offshore wind turbines are disruptive to whale populations and wind turbines strike bird and bat populations. Habitat fragmentation disrupts nesting, migration, and wintering activities of some species. Large land use footprints exacerbate habitat loss and disruption to wildlife, endanger prime agricultural lands, and lead to zoning conflicts with residents.
• Decommissioning and repowering wind and solar energy is required more often than other forms of electricity generation, compounding costs. The operating lifespan of wind turbines and solar panels is between 20 and 25 years at maximum, while natural gas plants may operate for 40 years, and nuclear plants operate between 40 and 80 years. Repowering often occurs well before expected lifespans, which further exacerbates the environmental impacts of wind and solar.
• Some components in wind turbines and solar panels are hazardous, with few commercial recycling pathways. Current recycling pathways are uneconomic and underutilized, which means that decommissioned wind turbines and solar panels often end up in landfills.
• Recycling and technological advances may help reduce mineral needs, but they will not entirely mitigate the need for new materials. Technological advances may eventually change the types and quantities of minerals needed for wind and solar power but are unlikely to radically change system-wide material intensity, as it is not possible to recycle materials that have not been manufactured.
• Debates about the feasibility and desirability of an “energy transition” should include the negative impacts of wind and solar. If voters and policymakers decide the benefits outweigh the costs, it should only be done with a clear accounting of both. (continue reading)

Shattered Green Dreams - The environmental costs of wind and solar