GRAPHIC: SATINA SACKIE ’27/THE HAWK
President Donald Trump put stop work orders on $679 million worth of federally funded offshore wind projects Aug. 29. Trump claims this decision was due to the cost of wind energy and the amount of birds it kills. But are these genuine concerns about wind energy, or is this just an excuse for Trump so he can back his friends in the fossil fuel industry?
While offshore wind energy is considered a more costly alternative to other renewable energy sources, experts believe as the industry matures, costs will decrease. Regarding wind energy’s impact on the bird population, the numbers are shockingly lower than one may expect. Annually, an estimated 1 to 3 billion birds die per year from human activity, but only about 0.05% of this estimation is attributed to wind turbines. The top three killers of birds are actually cats, building collisions and vehicle collisions. Based on these numbers, using the effect on the bird population as an excuse to halt grants to these wind projects is not a valid enough reason.
In terms of positive environmental impacts, offshore wind farms can create artificial reefs, displace fishing and become protected marine areas. The major negative effects of wind turbines consist of increased noise pollution and habitat displacement caused by these sites, but that is not why Trump canceled these funds. Trump instead based his reasoning on statistics that are not as consequential as he wants his followers to believe. This decision was based on his refusal to accept renewable energy sources and instead stay loyal to the fossil fuel industry that financially backs him. Ultimately, Trump’s decision is not based on genuine concern for cost or wildlife but a deliberate attempt to undermine renewable energy.