Wind Farms- 966 accidents, 67 Fatalities, (So Far)

Not denying that nuclear power has the potential for mass loss of life, but on the record so far, it needs to kill a lot more people to catch up to wind power. So far in the US, nobody has died from radiation or nuclear accident in a power station, and that power source provides around 9% of America’s electricity. Wind power provides only 0.7% of the electricity but has been responsible for 35 deaths. A good summary of accidents and deaths that can be attributed to wind power can be found here-

By far the biggest number of incidents found were due to blade failure. “Blade failure” can arise from a number of possible sources, and results in either whole blades or pieces of blade being thrown from the turbine. A total of 201 separate incidences were found. Pieces of blade are documented as travelling over 1300 metres. In Germany, blade pieces have gone through the roofs and walls of nearby buildings.

82 cases of environmental damage have been reported [..] All involved damage to the site itself, or reported damage to or death of wildlife. 32 instances include deaths of protected species of bird.

The trend is as expected – as more turbines are built, more accidents occur. Numbers of recorded accidents reflect this, with an average of 16 accidents per year from 1995-99 inclusive; 48 accidents per year from 2000-04 inclusive, and 103 accidents per year from 2005-10 inclusive.

With 67 deaths to their name globally, wind farms are far from the benign and environmentally friendly electricity sources their blinkered and or cronyist promoters would have us believe.

10 thoughts on “Wind Farms- 966 accidents, 67 Fatalities, (So Far)

  1. One would hope Sinner has his own wind turbine, would probably be very economic, he’s full of wind.


  2. A meaningless apples and elephants comparison befitting of the NZ Herald. You’re comparing all accidents related to wind farms, the majority of which occur are during construction/maintenance, with the smaller number of deaths due to nuclear accidents. A better (but still hopeless) comparison would be with the number of deaths during construction and maintenance of the hundreds of nuclear plants worldwide. Which would be many thousands.


  3. Perhaps that is partly correct Karl. Do you have such a comparison, and verification of your claim of thousands of deaths?

    BTW, it doesn’t appear that your read the detailed tables at the link.


  4. The list of public fatalities: Parachutist drifting into wind farm (fatality), car hits truck transporting turbine parts (fatality), farmer committing suicide in opposition to wind farms (fatality).

    If you’re going to cast the net that wide, at least be consistent.


  5. Oooh, there’s another one. Two fatalities at a wind farm construction site due to carbon monoxide poisoning when a worker and a woman snuck were found in a shed containing a fuelled generator. Do we put that one down as a diesel-related fatality? They don’t really mention the type of fuel, so probably best not to speculate and just attribute that one down to the wind farm. (Line 804)


  6. Kind of like the way watermelons attribute deaths to nuclear radiation (at Chernobyl) when the people concerned actually died of other causes?


  7. So it’s OK for you to make outrageous claims regarding deaths related to certain power sources, but you’ll gladly call bullshit when ‘watermelons’ do it?


  8. Yeah, people making shit up and claiming it to be valid proof that substantiates an assertion is pretty outrageous.

    Two-way street though.


Comments are closed.