Setbacks for Offshore Wind Industry

Interior Secretary Dougbergham recently dealt a significant blow to the offshore wind sector by withdrawing all designated wind areas (WEAs) from the US External Continental Shelf (OC). This decision comes as part of ongoing actions by the White House and the Department of the Interior (DOI) to fulfill President Trump’s campaign promises, effectively targeting the US offshore wind industry.

Since the Biden administration’s aggressive push for rapid approvals, the offshore wind industry has faced its share of controversies and accidents. Concerns have arisen regarding plans that allow large industrial sites to be placed in well-known whale migration routes and rich fishing grounds.

• Northeast commercial fishermen are voicing strong objections, with lawsuits underway, fearing that increased vessel traffic will harm their livelihoods.
• Disturbingly, there has been a rise in whale and marine mammal carcasses washing up on the northeast coast, linked to offshore developments.
• A major incident occurred when a large turbine blade from a vineyard wind turbine collapsed, creating dangerous debris on local beaches, causing a stir in Nantucket and neighboring coastal areas.

The reputational damage from these events has raised concerns among offshore developers and regulators, particularly after the Biden administration denied allegations related to fishing and whale safety. The fallout from the turbine collapse was too notable for regulators to overlook, prompting an operational shutdown for research and cleanup efforts.

Since Trump’s inauguration, there hasn’t been any significant support from Washington for the offshore wind industry. His administration’s attempts to dismantle Biden’s initiatives began with an executive order on his first day, and there’s been a continuous flow of additional directives in recent months. In early July, Congress also got involved, changing provisions in a major bill related to tax credits and subsidies for the wind sector.

Dougbergham has acted decisively to meet presidential goals. Notably, on July 29th, just before he revoked the offshore wind area designations, he announced policy updates that ended preferential treatment for both offshore and onshore wind projects.

These updates included:

• Ending priority treatment for wind projects.
• Reviving the principle of multiple uses for public lands and waters, a concept upheld by all past presidents.
• Enhancing stakeholder engagement access as per the Management Procedure Act.
• Mandating research on the wind industry’s effects on migratory birds.

This last point could prove particularly detrimental to the wind sector, especially for major projects situated along known migratory routes. Interestingly, even some states often considered “red,” like Texas and those in the Great Plains, have overlooked the impacts of wind energy on avian wildlife, perhaps to maintain a favorable image.

Earlier this week, during a press event with Scotland’s EU President Ursula von der Leyen, the president reiterated his stance on wind energy, calling it “the worst form of energy, the most expensive.” His comments were particularly striking, given Burgham’s recent policy changes, leaving the offshore wind industry’s future uncertain, and the outlook for onshore projects not much brighter.

As elections near, it seems vital for politicians across the spectrum to find alternative ways to showcase their environmental credentials.