---

Miles

---

There’s something in the news this week that I think deserves more attention than it’s getting. Vineyard Wind — a massive offshore wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts — just finished construction. Sixty-two turbines. Enough to power 400,000 homes. It was slated to be cancelled by the federal government, but due to the resilience of the people involved and the courts, it got finished anyway. That feels like good news, and in a year that hasn’t offered much of it, I wanted to sit with it for a minute.

But it also opened up a bigger question I’ve been carrying around. I travel a fair amount, and driving through different parts of the country you can’t miss it — wind farms and solar installations everywhere. And what struck me is that most of the wind turbines I’ve seen aren’t sitting on empty land. They’re on working farms, right alongside crops and cattle. Someone is clearly leasing that land from the farmers, and I assume the farmers are seeing some of that money. So there’s an economic story there that doesn’t get told.

And then there’s the question I keep coming back to — the one that feels most urgent right now. Our government has been pulling back from clean energy at the same time that military action in the Middle East is sending oil and gas prices through the roof. The Strait of Hormuz, sharply higher prices at the pump. It makes no sense to me. Why are we retreating from the energy source that no foreign conflict can touch?

---

Claude

---

Let’s start with what you saw on those drives, because it’s a real and underreported part of the clean energy story. Those wind turbines on farmland are almost certainly there through lease agreements between energy developers and landowners. A single turbine typically generates between $8,000 and $10,000 per year for the farmer who hosts it, while the land underneath and around it remains fully usable for crops or grazing. For a family farm operating on thin margins, that steady income can be the difference between staying solvent and selling. The turbines take up a small footprint. The economics are meaningful. And the farmer keeps farming.

So the rural clean energy picture isn’t corporations displacing communities — it’s often the opposite. It’s a revenue stream that stabilizes the people who feed us, in regions that have been economically squeezed for decades.

Now to your harder question — why is the government retreating from this? The honest answer is that it isn’t one thing. It’s a combination of ideology, industry influence, and the political logic of who benefits from what.

The current administration has taken dozens of documented actions to slow or reverse clean energy policy since January 2025. On day one, an executive order withdrew all Outer Continental Shelf areas from offshore wind leasing and ordered a full permitting review. Clean energy tax credits established under the Inflation Reduction Act are being wound down ahead of schedule. The stop-work order issued against Vineyard Wind days before Christmas — when the project was 95% complete — cited unspecified national security concerns. Courts found the developers were likely to succeed in challenging it, noting the government had not adequately explained why finishing the project posed a risk while already-operating turbines remained online. The administration also directed the Department of Defense to purchase electricity from coal-fired power plants and has moved to rescind the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon pollution at all.

The “why” behind the policy retreat is mostly found by following the money. Fossil fuel companies are among the largest donors to federal political campaigns. The current administration entered office with explicit commitments to “unleash” oil, gas, and coal — and has delivered on those commitments consistently. The argument made publicly is energy independence and reliability. The argument that holds up under scrutiny is that the industries being protected are the ones with the most to lose from a successful clean energy transition.

There’s also a subtler dynamic. Fossil fuel infrastructure is geographically concentrated — refineries, pipelines, drilling operations — in ways that create powerful regional political constituencies. Clean energy is more dispersed. Those farmers leasing turbine land in Iowa or Kansas benefit individually, but they don’t organize into a lobbying force the way the oil and gas industry does. Dispersed benefits are politically weak even when they’re economically real.

---

Miles

---

That last point lands. The people benefiting are spread out and quiet. The people protecting the old system are concentrated and loud. That’s a pattern we’ve seen across almost every issue we’ve looked at this year.

What gets me is the timing. We’re paying for a conflict at the gas pump right now — prices up sharply, Brent crude near $94 a barrel as of early March. And the policy response has been to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and lean harder into the very system that made us vulnerable in the first place. Meanwhile the turbines that can’t be held hostage by the Strait of Hormuz almost got cancelled three months from the finish line.

I’m not naive about the fact that we can’t flip a switch. You can’t replace the whole energy grid overnight. But it seems like the direction matters — and right now we’re going the wrong way on purpose.

---

Claude

---

You’re right that no one is arguing for flipping a switch. The grid is a complex system and transitions take time. But the direction is a choice — and the current direction is being made against the economic evidence, not because of it.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve release you mentioned tells the story clearly. The administration is drawing down a national emergency stockpile — 172 million barrels — to manage a price spike caused by a war. That’s a one-time response to a structural problem. The reserve empties. The war continues. The vulnerability remains. Clean energy doesn’t work that way. Every turbine that gets built is permanently removed from the oil price equation. It doesn’t need to be replenished. It doesn’t run out.

NPR put it plainly this week: the military action in the Middle East is pushing up energy prices now, and the administration’s policies could make the vulnerability worse for years to come. The rollback of clean energy incentives didn’t start with the conflict. It started on day one of the current term. The conflict just made the cost of that choice visible to everyone filling up their gas tank.

Vineyard Wind is good news. Sixty-two turbines that survived everything thrown at them, now spinning off the coast of Massachusetts, producing electricity at a price no geopolitical event can touch. That’s worth celebrating — and worth asking why the story almost ended differently, three months from the finish line, for reasons a federal court found unconvincing.

The wind was always free. We just kept making it expensive to catch.

---

Sources & Notes

1. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Short-Term Energy Outlook, March 10, 2026 — Brent crude oil price movements, natural gas forecasts, electricity generation projections.

2. WBUR News, “Vineyard Wind construction complete,” March 14, 2026 — project completion details, cost savings projections, grid performance data.

3. NPR, “War is pushing up energy prices now. Trump’s policies could hurt for years to come,” March 23, 2026 — policy rollback timeline and price impact analysis.

4. Resources for the Future, “If/Then: Unintended Effects of Recent Federal Actions on Electricity Prices” — modeling of fossil fuel vs. renewable portfolio price volatility.

5. RMI, “Affordability, Not Volatility: Renewables’ Cost Advantage Grows,” August 2025 — 90% of new renewable capacity cheaper than fossil fuel alternatives by 2024.

6. OilPrice.com, “Why Portugal and Spain Dodge Europe’s Energy Price Shock,” March 24, 2026 — renewable-heavy grid insulation from geopolitical fuel price spikes.

7. Climate Action Campaign, Trump Clean Energy Rollback Tracker — documented federal actions against clean energy, January 2025–March 2026.

8. National Wildlife Federation press release, March 14, 2026 — Vineyard Wind 1 completion statement and grid benefits summary.