The Guardian’s Wind Power ‘Fact Check’ Exposed: Why Trump Was Right

OThe Guardian published an article titled Are Trump’s claims about wind power correct? claiming to set the record straight on Donald Trump’s criticisms of wind energy. The paper asserts, “facts are sacred,” yet a deeper look shows their piece is selective and misleading.

Cost

The Guardian writes, “Recent offshore wind bids were £113 per megawatt hour compared to £78 for gas.” This alone shows offshore wind is more expensive than gas, without even adding hidden costs. Independent analysis by Euan Mearns finds that when capital expenditure, fossil backup, grid balancing, and curtailment payments are included, offshore wind’s real cost doubles. Consumers fund these hidden costs through subsidies and higher energy bills, making claims of cheap wind power untrue.

Reliability and Backup

The Guardian says the UK grid “balances supply and demand” to prevent blackouts. This avoids the real issue: wind is intermittent and needs full fossil fuel backup. Calm days leave turbines generating close to nothing. Without gas and coal plants running in the background, blackouts would occur. Wind does not replace fossil fuels one-to-one; it depends on them to survive.

Recyclability

Trump stated turbines are not recyclable. The Guardian replies that work is “underway” to recycle blades. That is an admission they are not recyclable today. Thousands of blades are currently landfilled or incinerated. Other turbine components, such as towers, can be recycled, but the most problematic part remains waste.

Environmental Harm

The Guardian dismisses Trump’s point on bird deaths by saying “cats and cars kill more.” This is irrelevant. Turbines kill hundreds of thousands of birds annually, including protected species. Unlike cats or cars, turbine deaths are a systematic, predictable feature of this energy source.

On marine life, the Guardian concedes that building offshore wind farms negatively affects ecosystems. It admits “we do not yet know” the long-term operational impacts on whales and other marine animals. Absence of proof is not proof of no harm.

Grid Impact

The Guardian says wind reduces fossil fuel use. Evidence suggests the opposite. Euan Mearns describes wind as parasitical. It forces gas plants to operate inefficiently, ramping up and down, which burns more fuel and emits more CO₂ than if they ran steadily. Grid balancing costs are rising sharply because of wind’s unpredictability.

Fossil Fuel Reliance

The Guardian argues wind power helps cut reliance on fossil fuels. In reality, the need for constant fossil backup proves the opposite. Wind locks the system into ongoing gas use. Countries that rely on nuclear, such as France, have far lower carbon intensity and greater energy security. If the UK wanted to truly eliminate fossil fuels, nuclear would be the viable path, not wind.

Conclusion

The Guardian frames Trump’s comments as lies, claiming to fact-check them for readers. In doing so, it omits crucial facts, uses irrelevant comparisons, and reframes points rather than addressing them honestly. Offshore wind is not inherently cheap. It depends on fossil backup, destabilises the grid, and shifts costs to consumers. Turbines are not recyclable, they kill birds, disrupt marine life, and fail to displace fossil fuels.

Trump’s criticisms of wind power are largely correct. The Guardian, while claiming “facts are sacred,” has misled its audience on the real performance and cost of wind energy.