Green Movement’s Selective Outrage Over Endangered Species
To nobody’s surprise, the reaction of activists to the new interpretation of the US Endangered Species Act, has been extreme. But where was the outrage when the Biden administration permitted the killing of bald eagles and whales to erect its politically favoured wind turbines?
President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that his administration had returned the Endangered Species Act (ESA) “to how it was intended to be,” invoking the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s reading of the statute and initiating the crocodile tears of anti-development activists.
The administration’s view is that regulators committed to regulatory expansion had turned the 1973 law into an automatic impediment to human activity rather than a targeted protection of threatened species. In 2012, Justice Scalia called regulators’ broadening of the statute from guarding against injuring animals to protecting habitat “a terrible interpretation” of congressional intent. He rejected the notion that every form of ecosystem modification should automatically count as prohibited “harm.”
To nobody’s surprise, the reaction of activists has been extreme. The administration action “guts protections for threatened wildlife,” announced the Center for Biological Diversity. Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles said, “This broad attack on endangered wildlife is un-American.”
But where was this outrage when the Biden administration permitted the killing of bald eagles and whales to erect its politically favored wind turbines? Many of the same voices have spent years promoting large “green” energy projects that inflicted harm on birds, bats, marine mammals, and sensitive habitats.
Permission Slips for Slaughter
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issues incidental take permits that authorize operators to injure or kill eagles as a cost of turbine operation. A 2024 rule went further, creating streamlined general permits so that qualifying projects could register for coverage rather than endure case-by-case review.
Biologists have warned that eagle mortality at wind facilities is widespread and badly undercounted. California regulators are now scrambling to protect golden eagles from the very machines the state subsidized into existence.
The press has largely averted its eyes. Legacy outlets grant turbines a free pass on bird kills that would trigger front-page fury if a refinery caused them. The carnage extends well beyond eagles. Studies document how wildlife pays the bill for so-called clean power across three continents. In my own country of India, transmission lines and turbine arrays are pushing the Great Indian Bustard toward oblivion.
Whales nobody mourns
Move offshore and it gets worse. Federal regulators have granted harassment authorizations that permit developers to disturb and even kill whales during seismic surveying and pile driving for offshore wind projects along the Atlantic seaboard.
Research has raised concerns that this acoustic disturbance may be directly related to whale injuries and deaths. When the administration ordered a review of federal leasing and permitting practices for offshore wind, the same activists weeping about the ESA revision called the pause an assault on the planet.
North Atlantic right whales’ numbers have dwindled to the low hundreds. Dead humpbacks washed ashore in New Jersey and New York through the survey years, and the groups that would have filed emergency legal motions over a single oil spill explained why nothing was connected to anything.
You do not have to oppose offshore wind energy to acknowledge that marine wildlife deserves the same level of concern regardless of which energy source is involved. The same biased pattern extends onto land through utility-scale solar as well. Large solar installations require vast tracts of open space. Those projects often proceed with enthusiastic backing because they satisfy political agendas.
Residents across New York are resisting 18 planned solar developments that would carpet protected and agricultural land, kill wildlife and deliver modest electricity in return. These are farmers and hunters who traffic in the habitat themselves. Career environmentalists sided with solar.
The Tell
A movement that meant what it said would have fought hardest where the killing was authorized, measured and ongoing. It would have demanded that every turbine or solar panel face the scrutiny natural gas compressors do. It would have treated a 30-year eagle take permit as the scandal it plainly is.
Instead, the activists chose sides by fuel. Wildlife deaths caused by hydrocarbons were a moral travesty. Identical deaths caused by subsidized wind and solar became an acceptable trade, a transition cost, a footnote to “saving the world.” That is a political program wearing conservation as a costume.
This commentary was first published at American Greatness on 22 August 2026.

Vijay Jayaraj
Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.
The article you have just read was made possible by our donors.
Every day, Clintel publishes articles on climate, energy and science. We also translate and share international analyses in multiple languages, produce videos, publish reports and organize conferences and events around the world.
We receive no government funding and rely entirely on the support of our donors. Your support helps us promote independent research and contribute to a more open and balanced debate on climate and energy issues.
Would you like to support our work? Choose the option that suits you best:
• Become a Friend of Clintel – support us with an annual contribution
• Make a recurring donation – provide ongoing support and help us plan ahead
• Make a one-time donation – every contribution helps
Thank you for your support.
Maybe a title
Voorbeeld: However, some people are so concerned about the ways to push climate change and CO₂ reduction that they are going out of their minds, according to Lindzen. “They’re showing this temperature graph. And I think they’re realizing people are saying, you know, you draw it like this (going sharply up – HS), but this is one degree. That’s not much. And they’re worried: this is not getting people worried enough. So they’re saying: well, showing them a flood, showing them a storm, that would be visually convincing,” he says. And as it happens, there are always places on Earth that suffer from extreme weather in a way that occurs only once in a hundred years. “And people don’t figure it out that a once in a hundred years event is occurring some place on Earth every month, or five places every month. You have a picture of that. You now put that on television and you can associate ‘climate change’ with something dramatic,” Lindzen says. “The fact that they had to go to that to convince people suggests it was a fake issue because they’re clearly using something that would be normally called false advertising,” he adds.
Voorbeeldtekst: However, some people are so concerned about the ways to push climate change and CO₂ reduction that they are going out of their minds, according to Lindzen. “They’re showing this temperature graph. And I think they’re realizing people are saying, you know, you draw it like this (going sharply up – HS), but this is one degree. That’s not much. And they’re worried: this is not getting people worried enough. So they’re saying: well, showing them a flood, showing them a storm, that would be visually convincing,” he says. And as it happens, there are always places on Earth that suffer from extreme weather in a way that occurs only once in a hundred years. “And people don’t figure it out that a once in a hundred years event is occurring some place on Earth every month, or five places every month. You have a picture of that. You now put that on television and you can associate ‘climate change’ with something dramatic,” Lindzen says. “The fact that they had to go to that to convince people suggests it was a fake issue because they’re clearly using something that would be normally called false advertising,” he adds.
more news
Greenland’s icecap grew (a little bit) this year
At present rates it would take Greenland 27,000 years to melt away. The 2025/26 season actually saw a small increase of 6 Gt in Greenland’s ice cap.
We Passed Peak “Climate Change” Research
There is still some cachet for scientists in “climate change”, but that is obviously waning, says statistician William Briggs. Unless somebody comes up with a new angle to intrigue other scientists on how we’re all doomed, then fatigue will continue driving the numbers of climate change articles lower.
Well-known weatherman on Dutch TV: stop eating meatballs
Gerrit Hiemstra, a well-known retired Dutch TV weatherman, was given the opportunity to ramble on for several minutes about the hot and dry summer in Europe during a highly-rated talk show on public service television. Naturally, according to him, the summer was the result of climate change, and Hiemstra also had a solution: stop filling up your car and eating meatballs. In the article below, Marcel Crok picks apart the claims made by Hiemstra.
The post Green Movement’s Selective Outrage Over Endangered Species appeared first on Clintel.
Please consider helping!
Awake Freedom TV On Roku is Broken! 🙂

I could no longer maintain the costs on my own, so I moved the off of a dedicated server which was needed for the TV platform to work. On top of that, I want to build an app Awake Freedom TV app, for mobile phones. We need your help to first resurrect our TV channel, and then build the mobile app. In order to do that, I need a minimum of 800/month on subscription payments. Please help anyway you can with the form below.











Leave A Comment