🌬️ Japan built hundreds of wind turbines in a green energy rush. Now, 420 of them have been torn down — and the bill is staggering. As government subsidies expire and 20-year-old equipment wears out, municipalities across Japan face an impossible choice: spend millions on repairs for turbines that can no longer turn a profit, or spend millions more to tear them down. Here's what went wrong — and what it means for the future of wind power in Japan.

The Great Wind Turbine Retirement: 420+ Gone in a Decade

According to the Japan Wind Power Association (JWPA), a total of 425 wind turbines were decommissioned across Japan over the 10 years through fiscal year 2024. The pace has accelerated dramatically: roughly 80% of these retirements — 335 turbines — occurred in just the last five years, starting in 2020. In 2021 alone, 114 turbines were taken offline in a single year, followed by 46 to 77 per year since.

Two factors are colliding to create this wave of shutdowns.

The first is mechanical aging. Under international standards, large wind turbines are designed for a service life of about 20 years. Japan's wind construction boom took place in the early 2000s, spurred by the Kyoto Protocol and a surge of enthusiasm for renewables. Two decades later, that first generation of turbines has reached its physical limits.

The second is the expiration of Japan's Feed-in Tariff (FIT). Introduced in 2012, this government program guaranteed fixed electricity purchase prices for 20 years, making wind farms financially viable. As those 20-year contracts expire, the guaranteed price disappears and revenues drop by half or more, suddenly making continued operation unprofitable.

In short, Japan's early wind turbines are breaking down at the same time they're losing their main source of income.

The Numbers Behind the Pain

The financial reality facing Japanese municipalities is stark.

Daisen, Tottori Prefecture built a single 120-meter turbine in 2005 for approximately $2.9 million, envisioning it as a "symbol of environmental conservation." The 1,500 kW unit generated enough electricity for 450 households and brought in about $260,000 in annual revenue. But when its FIT contract expired in May 2025, projected revenue dropped by half. With over $230,000 in repair costs looming just to keep the aging turbine running, the town pulled the plug. Demolition cost roughly $700,000, of which the town paid $310,000.

Setana, Hokkaido was home to Japan's first offshore wind turbines — two units built in 2004 for approximately $4.6 million. They earned about $330,000 annually in electricity sales. But after repeated breakdowns forced both turbines offline in 2023 and 2024, and with FIT revenues set to drop by over $130,000 per year, the town decided to tear them down at a cost of approximately $2.3 million. While the turbines had generated a cumulative profit of about $280,000 over their lifetime, that figure is wiped out many times over by the demolition bill.

Shonai, Yamagata Prefecture — a region ironically known for one of Japan's "three worst winds" — spent approximately $990,000 to remove a turbine built in 2002, stating that keeping it running "would have resulted in losses."

Why Japan's Wind Turbines Struggle to Turn a Profit

Several structural challenges make wind power particularly difficult in Japan compared to Europe or North America.

Typhoons and lightning: Japan faces multiple typhoons annually, along with frequent lightning strikes. Unlike Europe's steady westerly winds, Japan's turbulent weather causes severe damage to turbine components. There are documented cases of lightning strikes disabling turbines for months, with some facilities managing only about 10 operating days per year.

High humidity: Japan's hot, humid climate accelerates the degradation of electronic and mechanical components. Identical equipment that lasts 25-30 years in Northern Europe may deteriorate faster in Japan's environment.

Small-scale, scattered installations: Many turbines from the 2000s were municipal pet projects — one or two turbines built as "green symbols" rather than commercially optimized wind farms. Without the economies of scale that come with large wind farms, maintenance costs per unit are prohibitively high.

Foreign equipment dependency: The vast majority of wind turbines operating in Japan were manufactured overseas. When breakdowns occur, sourcing parts and arranging repairs involves international logistics, adding weeks or months of downtime and significant cost.

The Bigger Picture: Japan's Wind Sector Is Actually Growing

Despite the headline-grabbing retirements, Japan's wind power sector is actually on an upward trajectory.

As of December 2024, Japan's cumulative installed wind capacity reached 5,840 MW across 2,720 turbines. In 2024 alone, new installations hit a record 703 MW (170 turbines) — far outpacing the 40 MW (50 turbines) that were retired. New turbines average 3.7 MW per unit, compared to the 1-1.5 MW machines from 20 years ago.

Major offshore wind farms are now operational — the Ishikari Bay facility in Hokkaido features 8 MW turbines, while projects in Akita and Noshiro are already generating power. Japan's 7th Strategic Energy Plan targets wind power at 4-8% of the energy mix by 2040, with an ambitious goal of 15 GW of floating offshore wind.

In other words, the 420 retired turbines represent Japan's first-generation growing pains — not a retreat from wind energy.

A Global Challenge: What to Do with Aging Turbines

Japan is not alone in facing this reckoning. Worldwide, an estimated 275 GW of onshore wind capacity will hit 20 years of operation between 2023 and 2033. In Europe alone, over 34,000 turbines are expected to require end-of-life decisions by 2030, particularly in Germany, where thousands of turbines are losing government subsidy support.

However, the response differs significantly between Japan and other markets.

In Europe, lifetime extension (LTE) has become the go-to strategy. By upgrading key components such as blades, gearboxes, and control systems, operators can add up to 10 additional years of service life at a fraction of the cost of building new. In Denmark and Spain, turbines running 25-30 years are common, with mandatory third-party safety inspections for units past their design life.

Repowering — replacing old turbines with larger, more efficient models at the same site — is another major trend. Global annual repowering capacity is forecast to reach 19 GW by 2033, with China already emerging as the leader.

There is also a growing market for second-hand turbines: retired European and American turbines are refurbished and sold to developing countries at roughly 40% less than new models, extending their useful life by another 8-10 years.

Japan has begun developing policies to support repowering, but the domestic supply chain for end-of-life turbine management is still in its infancy.

Looking Ahead: From "Green Symbols" to Competitive Power

The wave of decommissioning marks the end of Japan's first chapter in wind energy — one characterized by subsidy-driven, small-scale municipal projects built more as environmental statements than as competitive power infrastructure.

The next chapter is already being written. With larger turbines, offshore wind development, and evolving support mechanisms like the FIP (Feed-in Premium) system, Japan's wind sector is transitioning from a subsidized experiment to a genuine pillar of the national energy strategy.

The critical question is whether Japan can build the domestic maintenance infrastructure, regulatory frameworks, and supply chains needed to support turbines not just for their first 20 years, but for 30 or 40 years of productive operation — as Europe is learning to do.

Japan's wind power story is a reminder that building renewable energy infrastructure is only the beginning. The real challenge lies in sustaining it over decades — through aging equipment, changing policies, and evolving economics. How does your country handle the "afterlife" of renewable energy projects? What happens when subsidies end and turbines grow old? We'd love to hear your perspective.

References