Opposition To ‘Renewable’ Projects Grows In Australia
The backlash against so-called ‘renewable’ energy projects is real, it’s global, and it’s growing
For proof of that, look no further than Australia, where local communities from Perth to Brisbane are telling Big Solar and Big Wind to take their projects and put them where the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.
This week, the Institute of Public Affairs unveiled a new database, which is a “national record of over 150 community-led rejections of ‘renewable’ energy projects since 2008. It highlights a growing grassroots movement of Australians who reject the imposition of these projects upon them.”
The project, led by the IPA’s Mia Schlicht, documents the opposition across Australia to wind, solar, battery and transmission projects. I don’t claim any credit for the IPA’s efforts.
That said, Schlicht graciously notes that the IPA Renewables Rejection Database was “inspired” by the work I’ve been doing on the Renewable Rejection Database over the past 15 years or so. (More on the RRD in a moment.)
The IPA’s database is searchable, detailed, and comprehensive. It includes the names of the project owners, as well as the elected officials in the state where the project is being developed.
One of the most newsworthy findings in the database is that about 75 percent of the alt-energy projects in Australia are being promoted by foreign corporations.
In a press release, Schlicht said the database, “gives a voice to mainstream Australians who have had a gutful. They are standing up for their communities, for affordable energy, and for Australian prosperity.”
Schlicht was even more forceful in a TV interview yesterday on Sky News. She said:
For too long, we have heard from pro-renewable groups spinning this narrative that opposition to renewable projects are somehow isolated or they are fringe. Our experience is that’s not the case.
There are farmers and landowners all across the country who are furious about the net-zero policy and the way the rollout is affecting their land, and they are banding together to say enough is enough.
She added:
“The opposition is not isolated, it’s national, and it’s growing and it’s organized.”
Her conclusion matches what I have found in my reporting on the alt-energy land-use conflicts all over the world. But don’t expect that viewpoint to be reported by legacy media outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, or National Public Radio.
It doesn’t fit the narrative about ‘renewable’ energy. Nevertheless, the IPA’s database shows yet again, that wind and solar simply require too much land, and that land-use conflicts are the binding constraint on the growth of ‘renewable’ energy projects all over the world.
Speaking of land-use conflicts, 2025 is already a record year for solar rejections around the globe. As can be seen in the new and improved Renewable Rejection Database, there have already been 117 rejections or restrictions of solar energy projects around the world since January 1 of this year.
That tally exceeds the 114 rejections that were recorded in all of 2024. Overall, the tally of rejections now stands at 1,122. Furthermore, as I have reported in the past, the UK remains the epicenter of the backlash against wind, solar, and battery projects.
Since January 1, there have been 61 rejections or restrictions of wind and solar in England, Ireland, and Scotland. To cite just one example, earlier this month, a proposed 28-hectare solar project was rejected by local officials in Bath and Northeast Somerset.
According to a news report, people living near the village of Burnett were opposed to the project because their landscape would be “blighted with an industrial-scale eyesore.”
Finally, thanks to the excellent work of my webmaster and son, Michael Bryce, the Renewable Rejection Database is now fully searchable by keyword, country, state, year, and type.
Additionally, Michael has added a cool new feature. If you click on an entry in the database, a new window will pop up that contains full details on that rejection or restriction.
I’m really proud of the look and feel of the Renewable Rejection Database, which is the only free, global, searchable database of its kind. If you have a moment, please take a look.
A few weeks ago, I was talking to a TV producer about the Renewable Rejection Database and the global opposition to alt-energy projects. The producer asked why so many people are opposed to alt-energy projects.
I explained that the issues are usually the same: concerns about property values, viewsheds, noise, tourism, and the character of their neighborhoods. I went on to say that my personal opposition to Big Wind is fueled, in part, by my love of birds and birdwatching, and that the wind industry is having a deadly impact on birds and bats.
The producer, who was doing a segment on electricity demand, audibly scoffed and then said something to the effect of “Well, I suppose you are opposed to skyscrapers, too?”
The implication, of course, was that because birds sometimes die after colliding with tall buildings, I must be some sort of Luddite. Or worse, that I don’t really understand the scale of human-caused bird mortality.
My response was less than charitable and was along the lines of “you’ve got to be joking.”
I reminded him that I’ve been reporting on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for more than 30 years, that numerous studies have found that wind turbines are killing hundreds of thousands of birds per year, that they have a major impact on raptors, and that Big Wind has repeatedly ignored federal wildlife officials and purposely put their turbines in known habitats for Golden Eagles and Bald Eagles. (For more on that, see my 2022 Newsweek article on NextEra Energy’s atrocious behavior in Wyoming.)
That bit of history is relevant because of a news report from Ireland, which shows again, that wind turbines are particularly deadly for eagles and other birds of prey. On October 2, the Donegal Daily reported that:
Wind turbines in Donegal have killed three White-tailed Eagles in less than a year…The birds of prey were fatally injured by wind turbines in Killybegs and Inver between October 2024 and May 2025.
Two tagged male eagles were killed by the same turbine in the Anarget Windfarm on Meenacloghspar, Inver. The third eagle, a female, was killed by a turbine at Cornacahan near Killybegs in November 2024.
The article continued, noting that “the actual bird mortality rate may be higher than recorded…as the deaths of untagged eagles may go unrecorded if removed by scavengers.”
It further noted that county officials are raising concerns about Golden Eagles, because a proposed wind project in the area “lies between two breeding territories of the species. Ireland’s entire Golden Eagle population consists of just five breeding pairs, all in Donegal.”
Furthermore, White-tailed Eagles were once extinct in Ireland. The species was reintroduced in the country under a conservation program that began in 2007. And yet, now due to climatism and renewable energy fetishism, some of those very same eagles are being killed by giant wind turbines.
I’d call that insane, but it’d be an insult to crazy people.
The White-tailed Eagle deaths should kill the plans for an eight-turbine wind project proposed for construction near the town of Graffy. In a report, County Donegal officials said the proposed wind project is “not a suitable location due to a number of factors, including the high-quality habitat and obvious use of the area by both of the eagle species.”
The eagles killed in Ireland are part of a global realization that Big Wind is bad for birds. Last month, Greek authorities rejected a proposed wind project in the Cyclades and Dodecanese islands due to the regions status as a biodiversity hotspot for threatened bird species.
As reported by a local news outlet, the project “would have installed wind turbines on islets and rocky outcrops near Anafi, Astypalaia, Nisyros, Amorgos, and Leros. The Environment Ministry had already rejected environmental licensing in May 2021, citing negative assessments and critical gaps in ecological studies.”
A few days ago, I was on the Financial Sense podcast with my friend, Jim Puplava. We discussed my recent article, “Broke Down,” on the national debt.
But we spent most of the time talking about China and, as the show notes explain, “how China has weaponized the periodic table, and what it means when a superpower can’t afford to defend itself. With commodity prices surging and supply chains vulnerable, this episode reveals the hard realities investors and policymakers can no longer ignore.”
I always like talking to Jim because he is so focused on financial issues.
Again, here’s a link to the show.
See more here substack.com
Header image: Windmills Kill
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.