No, trains replaced steam boats and barges on the river. That's part of the reason they built the bridge.

It was the furthest there are big dams on the Missouri now that block larger boats and barges from moving down the river, kinda a shame since it would be a lot more efficient then using trains to move all that grain from montana and the dakotas to port.

There's pros and cons to both offshore and inland wind turbine farms. Offshore can be larger farms and use larger turbines, winds are also usually more predictable and stable offshore. The downside is building and maintenence, you have to move all that equipment offshore and maintain it there which cost more and adds logistical challenges. We saw offshore become very popular in Europe because there land is so valuable and not all the countries there have a lot of land to devote to inland wind farms. In the USA we have gobs of land with no one living on it and with good winds annually so we still build wind farms inland mainly. They also tend to be pretty close to population centers or industry so the transfer loss isn't terrible, and they are usually replacing existing powerplants in the area so they can reuse that transfer infrastructure dropping the cost. China also has large amounts of land that is relatively empty, but it has most of the disadvantages as offshore for them, very far from industry and transport to site would be a lot harder, building offshore puts the power plant right next to the people and industry for them.

It's bigger buildings usually like office building that get a lot of it.

Does it matter? you can't spread cancer like a virus, if they want to avoid medical techniques for some reason that only effect there lives that's there choice.