How the San Gorgonio Pass Became a Landscape of Wind Turbines
The wind, energy policies and generations of machines that transformed the western gateway to the Coachella Valley.
Why did this particular stretch of desert become a landscape of wind turbines? The answer begins with the mountains, but it also runs through energy policy, private investment and the evolution of the machines themselves.
Government records from 1982 capture the scale of the early ambition. Mark Miller’s photographs show the landscape more than four decades later.
- The pass supplied a concentrated wind resource; policy and investment helped turn it into an industry.
- Early-1980s government filings document major proposals on public and state land.
- Repowering can replace many older turbines with fewer, larger machines.
Why did all of this happen here?
For anyone arriving from the west, the turbines announce that the desert is close. They stand beside a landscape already shaped by movement: mountain passes, highways, rail lines and wind. The striking part is not simply how many machines you can see. It is that this particular opening in the mountains became a place where an emerging industry could take hold.
The San Gorgonio Pass lies between the San Bernardino Mountains to the north and the San Jacinto Mountains to the south. These mountains channel airflow through the gap. NASA describes the region’s passes as natural wind tunnels suited to wind generation. The same opening that offers a route for transportation also concentrates a useful energy resource.
That explains the location, but not the timing. The wind existed long before the turbines. Turning it into a commercial landscape required equipment, investors, electricity buyers and decisions about land.
Sources: 1
The wind was here first. The market came later.
The 1970s oil crises helped set the stage. The Energy Information Administration identifies the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978—PURPA—as a turning point in creating a market for independently generated electricity.
California research identified San Gorgonio, Altamont and Tehachapi as strong wind-resource areas. Investment tax credits and utility contracts helped make projects financeable. Wind alone did not explain why construction accelerated; the financial conditions mattered, too.
A turbine was no longer only a machine someone hoped would work. It could become part of a business with a buyer and a financial plan. The turbines visible from the road were the physical result of that change.
Sources: 2
1982: a new landscape appears in the public record
A government filing received June 29, 1982 captures the scale of the ambition. The draft environmental-impact-statement record for San Gorgonio Pass Wind Energy Projects described turbine fields across approximately 12,780 acres of public land. It also identified grid connections, substations and access roads.
This was infrastructure, not just rows of towers. Electricity had to leave the site, crews had to reach the equipment, and land managers had to consider how the development would fit into an existing landscape. The filing listed aesthetics, wildlife, noise, cultural resources and cumulative effects among the issues to examine.
The record names the U.S. Department of the Interior as lead agency and identifies the Bureau of Land Management working with California energy and utility agencies. The wind boom had private developers, but it also had a substantial public decision-making process.
Sources: 3
A separate September 1982 notice described Unique Partners’ proposal for 28 ESI-54 turbines on approximately 39 acres of state land. By June 1983, an Edom Hill amendment record described expansion involving 1,897 acres and 580 small turbines. Read together, these records show projects of very different sizes advancing through the same early period.
Those numbers describe the filings, not a verified count of machines built or operating today. Their historical value is the scale and pace of what developers were proposing.
The work behind the skyline
The rotor attracts the eye; much of the work is less visible. Surveying, foundations, electrical connections, access roads and maintenance make the difference between an impressive object and a functioning power facility. Seen from above, the service roads form a second pattern beneath the towers.
The turbine itself converts moving air into electricity. Aerodynamic forces turn the blades and rotor, which drive a generator directly or through a gearbox. The familiar three-bladed machines are horizontal-axis turbines, generally oriented so their rotors face the wind.
Mark’s closer photograph helps connect those ideas to a real machine: the tower supports the rotor and the equipment at its top, while the blades sweep a much larger area than the tower’s footprint suggests. The photograph does not establish its model, rated power or installation year.
Sources: 8
A boom with complications
Fast development did not mean every investment succeeded. The EIA’s history describes how expiring incentives, falling oil prices and technology that did not always meet expectations slowed the early boom. Encouraging installation was easier than guaranteeing reliable production.
Land use brought another set of questions. A 1987 USGS publication examined the roads and disturbance associated with large California wind developments, including San Gorgonio. The clean-energy promise did not remove the need to consider soils, habitat and the visible transformation of open country.
Both parts belong in the history. These projects helped establish a new source of electricity, and they changed a real place. Understanding the landscape means keeping the achievement and the tradeoffs in view together.
Fewer machines, a different skyline
Repowering means replacing older generating equipment with newer technology. It can alter the appearance of a wind field dramatically: fewer individual towers, but much larger machines.
Mesa Wind offers a documented local example. The BLM’s May 2020 proposal notice described a 30-megawatt project built in 1983, with approximately 460 older turbines, most no longer operating, proposed for replacement by up to 11 new machines.
The final decision matters. On September 30, 2020, the BLM approved a reduced alternative allowing removal of approximately 460 old turbines and installation of up to nine new ones. The agency said this alternative met the project’s energy-generation goal while reducing visual impacts and ground disturbance.
One project: Mesa Wind, September 2020 approval. These are decision figures, not today’s pass-wide inventory or a claim that all authorized work was completed.
This is why counting towers alone tells an incomplete story. A landscape with fewer turbines may represent replacement rather than retreat. Conversely, a permission to build is not proof of completed construction or measured electricity production.
How to read the landscape on your next drive
Start with the mountains. Then look at the spacing of the towers, the shape of the supporting structures and the roads connecting them. Several visual patterns can occupy the same view because the wind-energy landscape developed in stages.
The useful question is not “How many windmills are left?” It is “What changed here, and when?” An older photograph, a project decision and a present-day view each answer a different part of that question.
For more context on the air moving through the region, see why the Coachella Valley gets windy. The windmills place guide brings together more of Mark’s imagery. These are working facilities; use permitted public viewpoints and authorized access.
Watch: Why Are There Windmills Near Palm Springs?
Mark’s Desert Oasis Insider video brings movement and scale to the landscape shown in these photographs. The historical discussion above is based on the dated records listed below.
Dates that explain the change
| When | What the record shows |
|---|---|
| 1978 | PURPA helped create a market for independent wind generation. |
| June 1982 | A federal review record described large wind fields on roughly 12,780 acres of public land. |
| September 1982 | A separate state-land proposal described 28 turbines on about 39 acres. |
| June 1983 | The Edom Hill amendment described expansion with 580 small turbines. |
| September 2020 | Mesa Wind’s approved reduced alternative allowed replacement of about 460 older turbines with up to nine new ones. |
At a glance: three distinctions worth remembering
- A wind resource is not a wind farm. The location also needs equipment, land access, investment and a route to the electricity market.
- Approval is not completion. Historical permit figures should not be presented as today’s operating inventory.
- Power is not energy. Megawatts describe a rate or capacity; megawatt-hours describe energy produced over time. Tower counts alone establish neither.
The turbines have become a familiar arrival scene, but familiarity can hide how much changed. The pass supplied the wind. A particular moment in energy policy helped turn it into an industry. Generations of machines—and decisions about replacing them—continue to shape what we see.
Questions about the San Gorgonio wind farms
Why were wind farms built in the San Gorgonio Pass?
The mountain gap concentrates a strong wind resource. Commercial development also depended on land access, equipment, grid connections and policies that helped create a market for wind-generated electricity.
When did the modern wind-energy boom reach the pass?
Large wind-field proposals appear in government records from 1982, with additional expansion records in 1983. These documents establish early development activity; they are not a count of every turbine built.
Why are some older turbines being replaced?
Repowering replaces older generating equipment with newer technology. Mesa Wind’s September 2020 decision authorized replacement of about 460 older turbines with up to nine new machines, an example of how one project’s skyline can change.
Is the whole wind field one project?
No. The historical records include separate developments on different land parcels, including the federal wind-field proposals, the Unique Partners state-land project and Edom Hill. Mesa Wind’s figures refer to one project, not the entire pass.
Are the photographs historical images from the 1980s?
No. The article uses Mark Miller’s original photographs from September 2, 2025. They show the more recent landscape; they do not document the original installations or identify specific turbine models.
Sources, photo credits & research notes
Researched October 10, 2026. Project figures retain their original scope and dates. The 1982–1983 CEQAnet entries describe proposals or review documents; the September 2020 Mesa Wind entry is an approval, not verification of construction completion. This article does not present a current pass-wide turbine count, ownership inventory or generation total.
- NASA Earth Observatory — Wind Farm in San Gorgonio Pass, July 7, 2005
- U.S. Energy Information Administration — Wind Energy Developments: Incentives in Selected Countries, February 1, 1999
- California CEQAnet — San Gorgonio Pass Wind Energy Projects, draft EIS record received June 29, 1982, SCH 1982050303
- California CEQAnet — Unique Partners / 28 Generators, notice received September 13, 1982, SCH 1982032910
- California CEQAnet — Edom Hill right-of-way amendment, final document received June 27, 1983, SCH 1983062703
- Bureau of Land Management — Mesa Wind Repower public-comment notice, May 2020
- Bureau of Land Management — Mesa Wind Repower approval, September 30, 2020
- U.S. Department of Energy — How Do Wind Turbines Work?
- U.S. Geological Survey — Wind energy development in California, USA, 1987
All article photographs: Mark Miller, September 2, 2025, from the existing DOI archive. No AI-generated images are used. Photograph dates do not identify turbine installation dates. Video: Why Are There Windmills Near Palm Springs?, Desert Oasis Insider; channel and title verified through YouTube’s metadata. The video is included for visual context, not as the source for the dated project figures.
