The development of wind energy is increasingly becoming a topic of public discussion. Along with issues of energy security, economics and the future of the energy mix, concerns about the impact of wind farms on nature are particularly prominent.
But to what extent are these concerns based on scientific data and to what extent are they the result of common perceptions, fears or insufficient information?
This is where the role of science becomes crucial.
Prof. Pavel Zehtindzhiev of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, professor of ecology and ecosystem protection at the Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Studies, emphasizes the need for decisions to be based primarily on proven expertise:
„I would like decisions regarding the impact or assessment of the impact of wind energy on the environment to be made only on the basis of substantial and proven scientific data, views and qualifications, and all other opinions can be accepted as additional information. We must learn to value scientific expertise and titles and respect the knowledge accumulated in science.“
This position sets out an important principle: the impact of wind farms on the environment should neither be underestimated nor exaggerated.
There is no universal answer that applies equally to every place.
The assessment must be specific and take into account the geographical location, the peculiarities of the ecosystem, the migratory routes of birds, the presence of protected species, the characteristics of the project and the accumulated scientific data.
That is why environmental impact assessments, preliminary field studies, subsequent monitoring and the use of new technologies are of key importance in the planning and operation of wind farms.
Modern methods allow for increasingly accurate monitoring of the natural environment. Data can show where real risks exist, where additional measures are needed and where concerns are not confirmed by observations.
In this way, the debate can be taken out of the realm of assumptions and transferred to the basis of measurable facts.
What does the experience of other European countries show?
The debate on wind energy is not only taking place in Bulgaria. In a number of European countries, the sector has already reached a scale that allows the results to be assessed not only through forecasts, but through real data.
Denmark is one of the clearest examples. In 2025, 92.4% of the electricity produced in the country will come from renewable sources, with wind energy playing a leading role.
In Spain, wind energy will again be the leading technology in national electricity production in 2025. It provides 58,801 GWh, or 21.6% of total production, and renewable sources as a whole reach over half of the electricity mix.
Portugal also shows a high degree of integration of renewable energy. In 2025, 82.9% of the country's electricity is produced from renewable sources, mainly hydro and wind power.
The United Kingdom follows a different model, with a particular emphasis on offshore wind power. At the end of 2025, the country will have around 16.65 GW of installed offshore capacity, and in 2026, a further 8.4 GW of projects have been contracted through a new tender.
These countries are not proving that every wind project is automatically suitable or that there are no environmental risks.
They are showing something else:
Wind energy can be developed on a large scale when decisions are based on long-term planning, clear procedures, a modern electricity grid, scientific expertise and constant environmental monitoring.
This experience is also important for Bulgaria.
The question is not whether the country should mechanically copy Denmark, Spain, Portugal or the UK.
Bulgaria has a different nature, a different electricity system and different regional conditions.
The more important question is whether decisions will be made on the basis of measurable data and scientific assessment, or mainly influenced by fears, rumors and preconceived notions.
Concerns should be verified, not ignored
Public concerns should not be underestimated.
When people have questions about birds, noise, landscape, agriculture or the impact on local nature, these questions deserve an answer.
But the answer should neither be automatically “no problem“ nor automatically “the project is dangerous“.
The scientific approach means that every claim should be verified.
Where do the migration corridors pass?
What species are found in the specific area?
What is the real risk to them?
What measures can be implemented?
Are there any previous observations?
And what does monitoring after the construction of the facilities show?
Only with such an approach can a real risk assessment be made.
Science as a basis for decisions
The main question is therefore not whether there are concerns in society.
They are a natural part of any large infrastructure project.
The more important question is:
Are these concerns supported by sufficient scientific evidence?
When decisions are made about the development of wind energy, they must be based on scientific research, professional expertise and real environmental monitoring.
Only in this way can a balance be found between the use of natural energy resources and the need for effective protection of nature.
Because sustainable development does not mean choosing between energy and nature.
It means making decisions that protect both.
This is also one of the main questions posed by the upcoming documentary:
„WIND - MORE THAN ENERGY“
The film examines wind energy not only as a technology, but as a topic where science, nature, society, economics and the future of the energy system meet.