Wind farms should be shuttered because they're an economic sinkhole and an environmental sham, masquerading as a sustainable solution. The closure of Codrington Wind Farm in Victoria, Australia's first commercial wind project, lays bare the harsh reality: the costs—financial and ecological—far outweigh the benefits.

Economic Failure: Wind farms are a money pit. Codrington, operational since 2001, is being decommissioned in 2027 because upgrading it is too expensive. Pacific Blue, the operator, admitted that modern turbines need costly grid upgrades and new siting rules make repowering unviable. Over two decades, the farm's returns couldn't cover its costs—a damning indictment of wind's profitability. The article notes this isn't a one-off; nearby Yambuk Wind Farm faces a similar fate. Subsidies prop up these projects, but when the cash dries up or turbines age out, operators cut and run. Why sink billions into a system that collapses under its own weight when cheaper, reliable alternatives like natural gas or nuclear exist?

Environmental Fraud: Wind power's "green" label is a lie. Decommissioning Codrington exposes the dirty secret: turbines are an ecological burden. The composite blades—unrecyclable—head to landfills, piling up as toxic waste. The metal can be scrapped, but the 20,000-tonne concrete foundations stay buried, scarring farmland forever and locking it out of productive use. Newer, bigger turbines demand fresh foundations, doubling the damage. Far from saving the planet, wind farms litter it with junk and disrupt ecosystems—all for intermittent energy that needs backup from fossil fuels anyway. Compare that to a coal plant: dirty up front, but at least it delivers consistent power without pretending to be saintly. And technology is making coal ever-cleaner.

Systemic Flaw: The Codrington case isn't an outlier—it's a preview. As older wind farms hit their 20-30 year lifespans, the cycle repeats: high replacement costs, low returns, and a growing heap of waste. The article warns of more closures to come, straining energy security while taxpayers foot the bill for "responsible decommissioning." Meanwhile, the grid falters, and blackouts loom. Wind's promise of clean, cheap energy crumbles when you factor in the full lifecycle—build, run, scrap, repeat. It's a hamster wheel of inefficiency.

The Fix: Shut them down, and don't build any more. Redirect funds to proven, dense energy sources—nuclear for the long haul, gas for the now—that don't leave behind a graveyard of blades and buried concrete. Codrington's failure isn't just a local flop; it's a wake-up call. Wind power's economics don't add up, and its environmental toll mocks the green agenda. Time to pull the plug.

Wind advocates might argue it's still cleaner than fossil fuels over time, citing carbon savings during operation. But that ignores the upfront emissions from manufacturing, the land disruption, and the waste nightmare at the end. The numbers only look good if you squint and skip the fine print.

https://dailytelegraph.co.nz/world/first-australian-wind-farm-shuts-down-as-costs-outweigh-benefits/

"The closure of Australia's first commercial wind farm, Codrington Wind Farm in Western Victoria, has exposed the financial and environmental shortcomings of the renewable energy sector, critics say.

Despite being heralded as the future of "clean energy", the site's decommissioning highlights the economic unviability of wind farms and the environmental costs that often go unspoken.

Pacific Blue, the company that operates Codrington, confirmed that repowering the 18.2 MW facility is simply too expensive. The wind farm, which began operation in 2001, will cease generating power in 2027, and the company has no plans to replace the aging turbines with newer models.

"At this stage, Pacific Blue is not pursuing a repowering option for Codrington, as the site's grid connection would require significant upgrades and today's turbine siting requirements would preclude the installation of latest generation turbines, resulting in a non-financially viable project," a spokesperson stated.

The decision to decommission rather than repower Codrington underscores the economic fragility of wind power. In its two decades of operation, the returns on investment have been less than the total expenditure—raising serious questions about the long-term viability of wind energy projects.

The company's decision also highlights the costly reality of wind farm infrastructure, but says it is committed to the "responsible decommissioning" of Codrington.

Modern turbines are significantly larger and more powerful than their predecessors, making upgrades logistically and financially challenging. New turbines require new foundations, different spacing, and updated grid connections—essentially forcing developers to start from scratch.

While wind energy is often touted as a clean alternative to fossil fuels, Codrington's closure also exposes the industry's environmental pitfalls. Unlike other forms of energy infrastructure, wind turbines are notoriously difficult to recycle.

The turbine blades, made from composite materials, have no viable recycling solution and will be sent to a landfill.

The metal components will be scrapped, but the sheer volume of materials involved in decommissioning poses a significant environmental burden.

The 20,000-tonne concrete foundations will remain buried in the farmland, permanently altering the landscape and limiting future land use.

The same fate likely awaits the neighbouring Yambuk Wind Farm, which began operation in 2007 and is approaching the end of its operational life. Pacific Blue has not confirmed its plans for Yambuk at this stage.

Codrington's closure is a stark reminder that wind energy is not the cost-free, green solution that its advocates claim. As older wind farms begin reaching the end of their lifespans, more decommissioning projects will follow—raising concerns about financial sustainability, environmental impact, and long-term energy security.

Despite government subsidies and strong political backing, the wind energy sector faces a reckoning. When the cost of replacing turbines is too high and decommissioning is the cheaper option, it signals a fundamental flaw in the economic model of renewable energy.