Wind energy is an important component in the energy transition to replace fossil raw materials and achieve climate neutrality. However, there is a lot of misinformation circulating about wind turbines that undermines their social acceptance and thus the climate goal. Although these claims have been refuted or are only partially correct, many people are picking up on the fake news: in representative surveys, over a quarter of those surveyed agreed with several general false statements about wind power. The proponents do not lack knowledge. Rather, they want to believe the statements because they fit their worldview – which makes a fact-based discussion about wind turbines more difficult.
In order to reduce their emissions, replace fossil fuels and achieve their climate goals, many Western countries want to expand wind energy. There is a lot to be said for wind turbines as a source of sustainable energy. In professional and public discourse there are definitely objective arguments and discussions about when wind power brings advantages or disadvantages. However, there are also many false or misleading claims about wind farms. For example, they are said to be harmful to the environment and health or not economically viable.
Although these claims are not true upon closer inspection or only true in specific circumstances, they are shared across the board and undifferentiated. But how much does this false information influence the public’s acceptance of wind power? “Until now, little was known about the extent to which people agree with misinformation about wind turbines,” says Kevin Winter from the University of Hohenheim.
Misinformation and rejection of wind power go hand in hand
Winter has now investigated this together with his team. To do this, the researchers conducted six representative surveys in Australia, Great Britain and the USA with a total of over 6,000 participants. The result: Over a quarter of those surveyed agreed with at least half of the 16 false or misleading claims about wind turbines mentioned. In English-speaking countries, for example, around 20 percent of respondents believe false statements about supposed health risks from wind turbines. Around 40 percent assume secret machinations and manipulated information in the expansion of wind energy. In Germany, approval ratings are somewhat lower, as a comparison with a previously conducted pilot survey showed.
“We were surprised that the approval of thematically very different false statements came from the same people,” reports senior author Kai Sassenberg from the Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID) in Trier. For example, those who believe that wind turbines have a harmful impact on health are also more likely to agree with the claim that the systems are economically inefficient – even though the two statements are not logically linked. Those who agree with such statements are also less likely to support political measures to expand wind power and are more willing to protest against the construction of wind turbines, as the team found.
Not a question of education
Whether someone agrees with false information about wind farms depends primarily on their worldview, as the surveys also show. Those who generally tend to suspect conspiracies behind social events are more likely to agree with the false information, the team reports. Knowledge and education are no match for this worldview: respondents who have extensive scientific knowledge of wind power were almost as likely to agree with false information in the surveys as uninformed people. The level of education of the respondents also did not affect their attitudes.
This explains why false information persists despite awareness campaigns. “It may be difficult to counter misinformation simply by providing facts as long as they do not fit into people’s worldview,” Winter concludes. In order to convince people with a negative attitude towards wind turbines, the researchers believe it could instead be more promising to use campaigns to show the personal benefits for citizens – for example financial participation opportunities. In addition, Winter and his colleagues argue for a different way of creating knowledge: “A more promising approach to science education appears to be the promotion of the skills required to evaluate scientific knowledge, rather than the mere teaching of facts,” the team writes.
Source: Kevin Winter (University of Hohenheim) et al.; Nature Communications, doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53278-2