this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
144 points (100.0% liked)

News

37675 readers
1383 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Trump administration has brought US onshore wind development to a halt citing national security concerns, representing a major escalation in the president’s crusade against renewable energy.

Approvals for about 165 onshore wind projects on private lands are being stalled by the Department of Defense, including wind farms that were awaiting final sign-off, others in the middle of negotiations, and some that typically would not require oversight by the department, according to the American Clean Power Association (ACP) and people close to the matter.

Wind farms require routine approval from the Defense Department to ensure they do not interfere with radar systems. This typically involves the level of risk being assessed and the developer paying an agreed sum for the army to update its radar filter system so it can locate the windmill. Some projects can be deemed not to pose a risk due to their distance from army facilities and flight paths. Normally these assessments can take as little as a few days to complete.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 41 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We MUST Ensure that our Energy is ~~RUN and Protected by US!~~ Under control of ENEMY Countries!

-National Security Republicans!

[–] Seaguy05@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Gotta protect the oil and coal companies who continue to write me those checks. -- the orange Cheeto

[–] trailee@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I mean, he’s right to panic about the growth of cheap renewable energy as a threat to national security. The shrinking global demand for oil being sold in US dollars will decimate the ability of the US to impose economic sanctions on countries it doesn’t like. That will directly lead to less national security.

The problem is that while he can frustrate domestic demand to build this stuff, he can’t stop it globally, and building clean energy will continue exponentially. The oil decline is unstoppable, so the primary result of these actions will be to make the US further behind the energy future and economically disadvantaged on top of the petrodollar decline.

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ironically, starting a war with Iran seems to be quickening the global pace of EV sales and renewable energy adoption.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZRTntfabOA

[–] deliriousdreams@fedia.io 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, but he did that so he could look cool in front of his crush, Netanyahu.

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Trump loves it when multiple people ~~pay~~ bribe him for the same action.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The shrinking global demand for oil being sold in US dollars will decimate the ability of the US to impose economic sanctions on countries it doesn’t like. That will directly lead to less national security.

Isn't messing with other countries what leads to more threats to the US, aka less security?

[–] backalleycoyote@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

The greatest threat to national security doesn’t come from the outside, it’s the people inside that aren’t onboard with the regime’s plans. The idea of threats from abroad results in the erosion of liberty at home under the guise of homeland security. We’re the ones they’re securing their homeland from.

[–] trailee@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

It’s a very complicated picture in the details and you’re not wrong. I’m just pointing out that while invoking “national security” as a reason to deny windmills (that he openly hates even when not indebted to Big Oil’s $1B political contributions) sounds ludicrous at first, there is undoubtedly some twisted logic to the claim.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Fuck this guy, he is singlehandedly trying to stop energy independence in the U.S.

Oh wait, that's not what this is about. The orange bafoon is mad he can't control the global supply of oil anymore if renewable energy is the dominant energy source.

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

He got half a billion dollars from the oil industry. It was a good investment for them. Sure, it fucked over farmers, truckers and working class people but rich people got to get a lot richer and that's the most important thing.

[–] ButtermilkBiscuit@feddit.nl 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Trump's recipe is to weaken the US globally. Meanwhile every other country in the world is building renewables as quickly as possible. The petro dollar is fucked, trump is a pedophile and a fucking idiot. We're losing a race we could easily dominate because half of the US to too fucking dumb to tie their shoes.

[–] cheat700000007@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

He's not an idiot, his family is making bank. When everything's fucked they can just leave.

Absolutely evil, but they are meeting their objectives. It's the true American way: "I got mine, fuck you"

[–] kyub@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you read "national security" as a reason anywhere, you can read that as "bullshit". True for any administration.

They probably threw "think for the children" in for good measure

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

Russian national security.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

I mean with oil so cheap whats the point of renewals. /s

[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

good luck USA if they start having a Coal/Gas crisis.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago