What If Wind Power Was More Widely Adopted?

The Actual History

Wind power represents one of humanity's oldest energy technologies. Windmills have been used for grinding grain and pumping water for over 1,000 years, with the earliest documented examples appearing in Persia around the 9th century CE. Traditional windmills became a common sight across Europe by the Middle Ages, particularly in the Netherlands where they were crucial for draining lowland areas and milling grain.

The first electricity-generating wind turbine was built in 1887 by Scottish academic James Blyth, who used it to power his holiday home. In the United States, Charles F. Brush built what was then the world's largest wind turbine in 1888 in Cleveland, Ohio. Despite these early innovations, wind power remained limited to niche applications as fossil fuels became the dominant energy source during the Industrial Revolution.

The modern wind power industry began to take shape following the 1973 oil crisis, which prompted many countries to explore alternative energy sources. The U.S. Department of Energy invested in wind technology research and development, while Denmark emerged as an early leader in the field. The Danish manufacturer Vestas, originally an agricultural equipment company, produced its first wind turbine in 1979 and would later become the world's largest wind turbine manufacturer.

Early commercial wind farms appeared in the 1980s, with California leading the way due to favorable tax incentives and regulations. However, when these incentives expired and oil prices dropped, wind development slowed considerably in the United States. Meanwhile, European countries, particularly Denmark, Germany, and Spain, continued steady development through consistent policy support.

The 1990s and early 2000s saw gradual improvements in turbine design, reliability, and cost-effectiveness. Wind turbines grew from generating tens of kilowatts to several megawatts each. Despite this progress, wind power remained a relatively small contributor to global electricity generation, facing challenges including intermittency, grid integration issues, aesthetic concerns, and competition from cheaper fossil fuels.

The last two decades have witnessed accelerated adoption as climate change concerns intensified and technology costs declined dramatically. Global installed wind capacity grew from about 24 gigawatts in 2001 to over 837 gigawatts by the end of 2022. China has emerged as the world leader in total installed capacity, followed by the United States and Germany. Offshore wind, initially pioneered by Denmark in 1991, has expanded significantly, allowing for larger turbines and steadier wind resources.

Despite this growth, wind power still faces challenges. As of 2023, wind energy provides about 7% of global electricity, though this percentage is significantly higher in countries like Denmark (approximately 50%), Ireland, Portugal, and Spain. Intermittency remains a technical challenge, though advances in battery storage, grid management, and hybrid power systems are addressing this limitation. Additionally, opposition to wind projects based on visual impact, wildlife concerns, and land use issues continues to slow development in some regions.

The wind industry has begun consolidating, with major players including Vestas, Siemens Gamesa, GE Renewable Energy, and Goldwind dominating the market. Technological innovations continue, with floating offshore platforms extending wind power into deeper waters and digital technologies improving maintenance and efficiency. Though wind power has grown dramatically, its full potential remains unrealized in our current energy landscape.

The Point of Divergence

What if wind power had been more aggressively developed and widely adopted decades earlier than in our timeline? In this alternate history, we explore a scenario where a series of different decisions, technological breakthroughs, and policy choices in the 1970s set the world on a path toward much earlier and more comprehensive wind power adoption.

The divergence centers on the aftermath of the 1973 OPEC oil embargo. In our timeline, this crisis sparked interest in alternative energy that waned as oil prices eventually stabilized. However, in this alternate world, several key differences emerged:

First, the NASA Lewis Research Center's wind energy program, which designed the experimental MOD turbines, could have achieved earlier breakthroughs in reliability and cost-effectiveness. In this timeline, their 1975 MOD-0 design quickly progressed to commercially viable designs by 1978 rather than remaining largely experimental. These advanced designs were rapidly licensed to manufacturers, creating a technological head start of nearly a decade.

Second, Denmark's response to the energy crisis took an even stronger turn toward wind power. In our timeline, Denmark eventually became a wind power leader, but in this alternate world, the Danish government implemented more aggressive policies promoting domestic wind manufacturing and deployment immediately following the oil shock. The Danish wind industry pioneer Henrik Stiesdal might have partnered with Vestas several years earlier, bringing his innovative three-bladed design to market by 1976 rather than 1979.

Third, and perhaps most critically, the U.S. federal wind energy tax credits established under President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s could have been structured differently. Rather than the temporary incentives that expired in the mid-1980s, this alternate timeline sees the establishment of permanent production tax credits, similar to those enjoyed by the fossil fuel industry. This policy stability encouraged long-term investment in the sector rather than creating the boom-and-bust cycle that hampered early U.S. wind development.

Finally, public perception might have shifted earlier if wind power had been more effectively positioned as a matter of energy independence and national security rather than primarily an environmental concern. A different framing could have created broader bipartisan support that survived the political transitions of the 1980s.

Any one of these changes might have incrementally accelerated wind power adoption, but together they created a powerful synergy that fundamentally altered the trajectory of global energy systems.

Immediate Aftermath

The California Wind Boom (1978-1985)

In this alternate timeline, California's wind power boom began earlier and proceeded more strategically than in our history. With improved technology from NASA's accelerated development program and stable federal tax incentives, the wind farms of Altamont Pass, Tehachapi, and San Gorgonio took shape as early as 1978, rather than the early 1980s.

Unlike our timeline, where rapid, somewhat haphazard development led to problems with bird mortality and visual clutter, this accelerated but more carefully planned deployment incorporated early environmental studies. Turbine designs and placements were modified to reduce bird strikes, particularly for raptors in the Altamont Pass area. The improved reliability of these second-generation turbines also meant higher capacity factors and better economics.

By 1985, California had installed over 5 GW of wind capacity—more than triple what existed in our timeline—supplying nearly 7% of the state's electricity. This success created a powerful demonstration effect both nationally and internationally.

Industry Formation and Early Growth (1980-1988)

The steady policy environment created a manufacturing base that looked markedly different from our timeline. Rather than the boom-bust cycle that drove many early U.S. manufacturers out of business when tax credits expired, companies like U.S. Windpower (later Kenetech) maintained continuous operations and scaled more effectively.

General Electric, which in our timeline exited the wind business in the 1980s only to re-enter decades later by acquiring Enron Wind in 2002, instead maintained and expanded its wind division. By 1986, GE had established itself as a dominant global player, competing vigorously with the Danish manufacturers Vestas and Bonus Energy (which would become Siemens Wind Power in our timeline).

This industrial base created significant employment in manufacturing regions. In states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, which were suffering from early deindustrialization, wind turbine and component manufacturing provided alternative employment for skilled workers from the automotive and steel industries. By 1988, the U.S. wind industry employed over 100,000 people—about ten times the number in our timeline at that point.

European Expansion (1982-1990)

Denmark's early policy commitment to wind energy created a powerful demonstration effect for neighboring European countries. Germany, facing significant anti-nuclear sentiment following the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, embraced wind power more quickly and comprehensively than in our timeline.

The German Electricity Feed-In Law, which in our world was passed in 1990, was instead implemented in 1987, providing guaranteed grid access and favorable tariffs for wind-generated electricity. This earlier implementation, combined with more mature technology from Denmark, accelerated German wind deployment significantly.

By 1990, Germany had installed 2.5 GW of wind capacity, about five times what existed in our timeline at that point. The North Sea coastal states of Lower Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein became early centers of wind development, with turbine manufacturing creating an economic renaissance in previously struggling port cities.

Early Offshore Development (1987-1992)

Perhaps the most significant technological leap in this alternate timeline was the earlier development of offshore wind technology. Rather than Denmark's small 11-turbine Vindeby project in 1991 (the world's first offshore wind farm in our timeline), a more ambitious 50 MW project was commissioned in Danish waters in 1987.

This earlier move offshore was driven by the more mature state of wind technology overall and by the earlier recognition of land-use constraints. The success of this project led to rapid offshore expansion in Denmark, Germany, and the United Kingdom. By 1992, over 1 GW of offshore wind capacity had been installed in European waters—a milestone not reached until the mid-2000s in our timeline.

These early offshore projects drove innovation in foundation designs, installation vessels, and marine operations. They also demonstrated the higher capacity factors possible in the steady ocean winds, improving the economic case for wind power generally.

Political and Public Response (1985-1992)

The political reception to wind power in this alternate timeline transcended traditional partisan divides more effectively than in our world. The framing of wind energy as a matter of energy security and industrial policy rather than primarily an environmental issue broadened its political appeal.

In the United States, the Reagan administration, while skeptical of many environmental regulations, maintained support for wind power development as a matter of energy independence and domestic manufacturing. Secretary of Energy James Edwards, who in our timeline focused primarily on nuclear and fossil fuels, in this alternate world championed wind as part of a diversified "all-of-the-above" energy strategy.

Public perception was also shaped by the visible economic benefits in manufacturing communities and rural areas where wind farms provided new revenue streams for farmers and local tax bases. Wind power became associated with rural economic revitalization rather than being viewed as an urban environmental priority imposed on rural communities.

Long-term Impact

Evolution of the Global Energy Mix (1990-2010)

By the early 1990s, the accelerated development of wind power began to fundamentally reshape global electricity systems. Wind energy's share of global electricity production reached 5% by 1995—a level not achieved until around 2015 in our timeline. This early penetration provided valuable experience in managing variable renewable energy at scale.

The experience gained managing wind's variability drove earlier innovations in grid management, forecasting, and eventually storage technologies. Battery technology development received increased funding as its value for grid stabilization became apparent earlier, accelerating improvements in energy density and cost reduction.

The more robust wind industry also changed investment patterns in other energy sources. Natural gas was still developed as a complement to wind's variability, but the "dash for gas" of the 1990s was moderated. New coal plant construction peaked earlier and began declining by 2000 rather than continuing to grow well into the 21st century as in our timeline.

The accelerated wind deployment altered the economics of nuclear power as well. With wind providing increasing portions of baseload power at declining costs, the economic case for new nuclear construction weakened earlier. However, existing nuclear plants remained valuable for their zero-emission baseload characteristics, leading to more life extensions of existing plants rather than new construction.

Technological Evolution (1995-2015)

Wind turbine technology evolved more rapidly in this timeline. The average turbine size reached 2 MW by 2000, about a decade earlier than in our world. This rapid scaling was driven by the more mature industry, greater R&D investment, and the earlier move offshore where larger turbines were more economical.

Digital technologies were integrated earlier as well. Sophisticated SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) systems became standard by the mid-1990s, improving turbine performance and maintenance scheduling. By 2005, early applications of machine learning were being applied to wind forecasting and predictive maintenance, further improving the economics of wind energy.

Offshore technology saw particularly dramatic advances. Floating wind platforms, which in our timeline only began commercial deployment in the late 2010s, were already being installed at scale by 2008 in this alternate world. These platforms opened up deeper water sites with superior wind resources, particularly off the coasts of Japan, the western United States, and southern Europe.

Materials science advances were accelerated as well, with carbon fiber blades becoming standard earlier and blade designs incorporating more sophisticated aerodynamics. These improvements increased energy capture while reducing weight, allowing for even larger rotors.

Geopolitical Implications (2000-2025)

The faster transition to wind power fundamentally altered energy geopolitics. Oil-producing nations faced the prospect of "peak demand" rather than "peak supply" much earlier than in our timeline. This recognition drove greater economic diversification efforts in countries like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Russia starting in the early 2000s rather than the 2010s.

The reduced dependence on Middle Eastern oil modified U.S. foreign policy calculations. While the region remained strategically important, the imperative to secure oil supplies was diminished. This shift subtly altered the risk calculations surrounding military interventions and diplomatic priorities in the region.

European energy dependence on Russian natural gas, which became a critical vulnerability in our timeline, was significantly reduced in this alternate world. With wind providing a larger share of electricity and more advanced electric heating systems reducing gas demand, the leverage Russia could exert through gas supplies was diminished. This energy independence strengthened the European Union's position in dealing with Russian aggression earlier.

For China, the alternate timeline presents a fascinating divergence. Rather than becoming the world's largest carbon emitter through coal-powered development, China in this scenario leapfrogged directly to wind and other renewables earlier in its development process. Seeing the economic success of Western wind industries, China's 10th Five-Year Plan (2001-2005) placed much greater emphasis on renewable manufacturing and deployment than in our timeline.

Economic Transformations (2005-2025)

The earlier and more comprehensive adoption of wind power reshaped economic structures in profound ways. Energy-intensive industries like aluminum smelting, steel production, and chemical manufacturing began migrating to regions with abundant wind resources rather than cheap coal or gas. The U.S. Great Plains, northern Europe, and eventually the coastal regions of China became new industrial hubs leveraging their wind wealth.

Job markets transformed as well. The manufacturing and maintenance of wind turbines created millions of jobs globally—far more than the equivalent fossil fuel generation would have provided. In the United States alone, wind-related employment exceeded 500,000 by 2015, creating a powerful constituency for continued policy support.

The economics of transportation began shifting earlier too. With abundant clean electricity from wind, the case for electric vehicles strengthened. Major automakers began serious EV development in the early 2000s rather than the 2010s, accelerating the transition away from internal combustion engines by nearly a decade.

Financial markets recognized these trends earlier as well. Fossil fuel divestment movements gained traction in the early 2000s rather than the 2010s. Major institutional investors began limiting fossil fuel exposure as early as 2005, accelerating the capital shift toward renewable energy and storage technologies.

Climate Change Response (2010-2025)

Perhaps the most profound difference in this alternate timeline is the trajectory of carbon emissions and climate change response. With wind power displacing significant fossil fuel generation starting in the 1990s, global carbon emissions peaked around 2010 rather than continuing to rise well into the 2020s as in our timeline.

This earlier peak and subsequent decline in emissions meant that by 2025, atmospheric CO2 concentrations were nearly 20 ppm lower than in our timeline. While still elevated from pre-industrial levels, this reduction improved the odds of limiting warming to less dangerous levels.

The demonstrated success of wind power also changed the tenor of international climate negotiations. Rather than the often contentious debates about burden-sharing and sacrifice, negotiations focused more on technology transfer and replicating successful transitions. The Paris Agreement, reached in 2015 in both timelines, contained more ambitious targets in this alternate world, backed by greater confidence in the economic viability of the energy transition.

By 2025, in this alternate timeline, wind power provides approximately 30% of global electricity—more than double its share in our world. Combined with other renewables and nuclear power, low-carbon sources generate over 75% of global electricity, putting the world on track for deep decarbonization well before mid-century.

Cultural and Social Impacts

The visual presence of wind turbines on landscapes worldwide altered cultural perceptions of energy infrastructure. Rather than being hidden in distant power plants, energy production became a visible part of daily life. Wind turbines evolved into cultural symbols, appearing in art, literature, and design far more prominently than in our timeline.

Educational systems adapted earlier to prepare workers for the wind economy. Technical schools and community colleges developed specialized programs in wind turbine maintenance, composite materials manufacturing, and electrical systems as early as the 1990s. Universities expanded renewable energy engineering programs, creating a pipeline of skilled workers that further accelerated innovation.

The more visible success of wind power also altered public attitudes toward climate action generally. The demonstrated ability to shift energy systems while creating economic benefits reduced climate fatalism and increased support for complementary policies addressing transportation, buildings, and industrial emissions.

Expert Opinions

Dr. Vesna Markovic, Professor of Energy Transition History at MIT, offers this perspective: "The critical difference in this alternate timeline isn't just the earlier start of wind power deployment, but the creation of virtuous cycles between policy stability, technological improvement, and economic benefits. In our actual history, the stop-start nature of renewable policy, especially in the United States, created damaging boom-bust cycles that undermined investor confidence and industrial development. The counterfactual of stable, long-term policy frameworks demonstrates how much time we lost to political vacillation rather than technological limitations."

Mark Richardson, former Chief Strategy Officer at General Electric Renewable Energy, provides an industry perspective: "What's fascinating about this alternate timeline is how it reshapes corporate histories. Companies that missed the early renewable transition and had to acquire their way back in—like GE buying Enron Wind in 2002 or Siemens acquiring Bonus Energy in 2004—instead maintained continuous development of their capabilities. The alternate GE would have decades more institutional knowledge in wind technology, potentially changing the competitive landscape entirely. It illustrates how seemingly minor corporate decisions during energy transitions can have profound long-term consequences."

Dr. Li Wei, climate policy researcher at Tsinghua University, addresses the global implications: "This scenario demonstrates the narrow framing we often apply to energy transitions. In our actual history, we treated wind power primarily as an environmental technology for too long, missing its significance for energy independence, rural economic development, and industrial policy. Countries like China that recognized these broader benefits earlier were able to capture larger shares of the growing industry. In this alternate timeline, the earlier recognition of these co-benefits created broader constituencies supporting wind development across the political spectrum, particularly in Western democracies where climate policy became unfortunately polarized."