Iowans not Buying Trump’s Wind Turbine/Cancer Connection

August 13, 2019

Iowans know wind power.

The state has a higher percentage of it’s electricity coming from wind than any other state. (although some are close..)
Real world results tell us: The more you know about renewables, the better you like them.

Time Magazine:

Since the early days of his administration, Donald Trump has sought to use his presidency to slow the country’s transition to clean energy, blocking key environmental regulations and lending his support to the fossil fuel industry whenever he can. 
But his distaste for wind power has been particularly strong. He’s frequently called wind turbines “ugly” and dismissed them as a blight on local communities. In April he said that “the noise” from the turbines “causes cancer,” a false claim dismissed by the American Cancer Society.

In Iowa, a key presidential state where the wind industry is thriving, only 1% of registered voters agree with Trump that wind turbines cause cancer, according to a new poll from Yale and George Mason universities. The poll, shared exclusively with TIME, shows that 84% know that wind power doesn’t cause cancer while 15% say they don’t know for sure. 
The finding represent just one example of the challenge Trump faces with environmental issues in the lead up to the 2020 election: Americans understand the science of climate change and polling shows that they support many of the solutions to stop it that Trump has panned.

Renewable energy sources like wind and solar rank at the top of that list. Even in many places Trump won, like Iowa, clean energy sources enjoy bipartisan support. The industry creates jobs and supports the tax base. Some landowners even receive payments for leasing their land. More than three quarters of Iowans say they would support requiring local utility companies to get 100% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2050, according to the poll. Majorities all said they thought that such a transition would have a positive impact on the state’s economy, electricity costs and rural communities. The survey of 519 Iowa registered voters has a margin of error of 4.6 percentage points.

“Republican, Democrat doesn’t matter, they all support wind energy because it’s economic,” says Tom Kiernan, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association, from the Iowa State Fair. “We’re helping rural America.”

Below, University of Michigan researcher talks about the huge tax benefits small towns and rural communities are getting from wind development.

4 Responses to “Iowans not Buying Trump’s Wind Turbine/Cancer Connection”

  1. dumboldguy Says:

    Didn’t Trump also say that wind turbines cause autism?

  2. rsmurf Says:

    I hear the way to fix the cancer thing with windmills, is to store nuclear waste next to them they offset.

  3. Manny Good Says:

    You can go on and on about Trump if you want to. Politics as usual. If you want to talk about solar, wind, and coal that is a different matter altogether. Coal is dying in america for a number of reason, pollution is one, economics is another. One solves the pollution and cost problems by switching to natural gas which no thanks to Obama is in larger supply thanks to fracking. That is not the case in many other parts of the world like Africa and Asia. There coal is still king and many power plants using coal are being built. Export of american coal to those areas is already occurring and will continue.

    Wind and solar are increasing in the USA. The reason is economics, both have large tax subsidies and legal protections which make them economical to the builder and uneconomical to the economy as a whole. If you tax somebody and give that tax to somebody else as a subsidy they do not benefit from, you are in effect stealing the money using government to do it. Dumping the money into foreign countries, almost all the wind and solar components are built overseas, a large part in China, removes the money from our economy and puts it into that foreign economy. Doing that removes jobs and prosperity from here and puts it overseas. Since the removal is small in relation to the entire economy, the damage is simply covered up by the larger economy. When you charge the customer more for that energy than alternative energy, the damage is simply made worse.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: