Green Energy Groups Sue to End Pentagon’s ‘de facto moratorium’ on Wind Power

Green Energy Groups Sue to End Pentagon’s ‘de facto moratorium’ on Wind Power

Renewable energy may be “green,” but it’s not bulletproof, and now America’s wind warriors are in open legal combat with the Pentagon.

Renewable energy trade groups have filed a federal lawsuit against the Pentagon, arguing that the Department of War has effectively frozen national security reviews for new onshore wind farms on private land.

Renewable energy groups are suing the U.S. military because they say national security reviews for new wind farms on private land have been effectively frozen for months. The groups say this logjam jeopardizes $47 billion in investments and thousands of jobs in 21 states.

President Donald Trump has frequently talked about his hatred of wind power and calls turbines ugly. Currently, about 10% of the electricity generated in the United States comes from wind farms, making it the nation’s largest source of renewable energy. Solar is the fastest-growing.

The lawsuit against the Pentagon and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon by nine groups, including Renewable Northwest and the Advanced Power Alliance. They allege that a policy of inaction “poses an existential threat to the wind energy industry across the nation by effectively halting all new development activity.”

The Pentagon says it has to balance new sources of energy against military needs. A military office known as the siting clearinghouse, which checks energy projects for national security risks, is actively evaluating these projects — but it’s a complex process where different agencies have to work together, the Pentagon says. The Pentagon evaluates land-based wind energy projects during the Federal Aviation Administration review.

Immediately upon taking office, President Donald Trump took significant action against offshore wind projects. He signed an executive order that halts all new and renewed approvals, permits, leases, and loans for both onshore and offshore wind projects.

Late last year, a number of large-scale windfarm projects were paused.

• Vineyard Wind 1
• Revolution Wind
• CVOW – Commercial
• Sunrise Wind
• Empire Wind 1

However, as of February, a series of judicial rulings have allowed these monstrosities to proceed.

It turns out that the Pentagon approach may be the nation’s best line of defense against the green energy grift.

Before any large wind farm can begin construction, its developers need to apply for clearances from the Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates the national airspace. As part of that process, the F.A.A. refers the application to the Pentagon, which checks to see whether a project might interfere with military radar or nearby air bases.

In the past, many wind projects have quickly received “no hazard” determinations, allowing them to move forward. But some projects do create issues, and they typically need to reach a mitigation agreement with the Pentagon. That might involve the company paying to upgrade nearby radar systems or modifying the layout of its turbines.

This process was for years considered routine and predictable, with deadlines set by Congress. But since last August, wind developers began encountering severe delays, the lawsuit said. Companies that had negotiated mitigation agreements could not move forward because top Pentagon officials would not deliver the final signatures needed.

Then, in April, the review process halted entirely, and Pentagon staff were directed to stop work on wind projects, the lawsuit says. Meetings with developers were suddenly canceled.

An American Clean Power (ACP) expert says that it is a “de facto moratorium” on these windfarms.

However, Jason Grumet, CEO of ACP, said there has never been anything remotely comparable to a backlog of this size or a near-systemwide halt in transmittals back to FAA. Calling it a “de facto moratorium” on new land-based wind energy development, he said if the projects remain stalled, it would dramatically obstruct the industry at a time when the power is needed to meet skyrocketing demand and help lower utility bills.

More than 250 projects are pending in over 30 states, totaling at least 30 gigawatts of energy that could power millions of homes if the wind farms are built, ACP said.

As a reminder, Americans opposing these projects have been ignored by previous administrations and local politicians.

Residents objected to the visual impact of turbines, cited concerns over property values, and complained about noise and changes to the local seascape (especially in the wake of the Vineyard Wind incident).

Fishermen warned about the potential loss of fishing grounds, the disruption of fish habitats, and difficulties navigating safely within and around turbine arrays. They feared impacts to fish populations due to noise, surveys, and construction.  They also argued that substantial portions of valuable fishing areas may become inaccessible, threatening their livelihoods.

Environmentalists regularly complain about threats to marine biodiversity, such as risks to birds, marine mammals, and ocean ecosystems during both construction and operation.

The renewable energy industry’s legal blitz against the Pentagon includes an army of lawyers and “experts”, but it collides directly with a wall of bipartisan statute and documented military necessity.

Classified Pentagon assessments completed in late 2025 identified specific vulnerabilities tied to large-scale wind development near critical defense infrastructure, the kind of hard intelligence no activist judge or ACP press release can wish away.

For years, green energy developers steamrolled fishing communities and coastal residents, treating the approval pipeline as a rubber stamp. The Pentagon’s pause is simply the first time a federal institution has had both the legal authority and the political will to say no.

We will see if the Department of War will be forced to certify that gutting America’s national security is an acceptable price for tax-credit-subsidized electricity.

I sure hope not.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.