Chilling wind projects doesn't serve nation's energy needs

There has been an unrelenting barrage of attacks on wind energy in the United States despite the nation's critical need for more electric power. 

Just in August, the federal government issued stop-work orders, canceled or revoked approvals, and signaled it would reconsider approvals for wind projects in Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, where the effort was almost 80% complete. 

For New York, the attacks meant a halt on Empire Wind off Long Island’s South Shore, which is about 30% built and would supply power to New York City. 

The feds also made it harder for wind projects to claim tax credits, increased scrutiny of wind farms on farmland, launched a national security investigation into imported wind turbine equipment, imposed tariffs on turbine supplies, and revoked $679 million in funding for related projects.

These policy changes are all being done under the guise of a national energy emergency but the only emergency here is the one Trump may be creating. 

COORDINATED OFFENSIVE

Under direction from the White House, the following federal agencies are coordinating the attack: The Departments of Justice, Treasury, the Interior, Agriculture, Transportation, Health and Human Services and Defense, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service.

How is this herculean government effort approaching the scale of the Apollo Space Program improving the nation’s energy supply to meet increasing demand while cutting electricity costs? Is this pushback on wind occurring solely because President Donald Trump can’t countenance the sight of wind turbines while golfing?

Earlier this year, to save Empire Wind, Gov. Kathy Hochul and Trump reached some understanding that would allow Empire to move forward if the state was more favorably disposed to advancing two natural gas pipeline projects. Hochul seems to be doing her part and Empire Wind may be spared. Meanwhile, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, in a Fox News interview, said natural gas pipelines were needed in New England. Could similar bargaining be in the works for Rhode Island’s Revolution Wind?

Still, the tempest over wind energy seems more like a concerted effort to hobble the industry, such as the Byzantine regulations making building offshore wind platforms arduous and costly. If the federal government wanted to promote wind energy, it would streamline approvals and add incentives, just as it is doing for nuclear power and fossil fuel industries, especially coal. 

Wind generally is not a substitute for baseload power — the minimum amount of juice needed to keep the lights on 24/7. Until there are better storage systems, wind will continue to augment baseload power to ease the reliance on fossil fuels, especially as AI and cryptomining demands more power. Wind accounted for about 10% of the electricity generated in the United States in 2023 and more will be needed for a resilient grid.

The arguments against wind turbines range from extinction-level events for birds and whales to a swarm of foreign undersea drones attacking U.S. coastal cities, and claims of harmful electromagnetic radiation.

SECURITY FEARS NOT CREDIBLE

Wind turbines pose a valid threat to birds, and some wildlife groups say as many as 700,000 birds a year are killed by turbines in America, although no data for birds killed by offshore wind farms is available. Other studies estimate house cats kill more than 1.4 billion birds a year and another 1 billion birds die from colliding into buildings. The other fears including the national security ones being used to hold up Revolution Wind just aren't credible.

Renewables, including solar as well, pose fewer risks than fossil fuels but they can’t supply the nation’s energy alone. We must make a Faustian bargain to continue extracting and burning fossil fuels while improving renewables, as climate change stares us in the face. 

A more attainable strategy to reduce fossil fuels needs to be articulated, pursued and achieved. Until then, Americans cannot be held hostage by the possibility of blackouts and exorbitant energy costs that will likely come due to forgoing one energy source in lieu of another.

Encouraging the offshore wind industry is a major step in the right direction. For Long Island, offshore wind farms represent a largely untapped source of much-needed supply. 

The Long Island Power Authority, in its effort to reduce fossil fuel generation, would purchase power from Orsted's Sunrise Wind. Located 30 miles off Montauk, its transmission line comes ashore in Brookhaven and feeds directly into our grid. Any shutting down of Orsted's Revolution Wind cuts down on cost effective synergies in maintenance and the supply chain that would be shared with Sunrise.

Rep. Andrew Garbarino told the editorial board Long Island wind projects aren’t "in danger." Garbarino said he and Long Island's other Republican House member, Rep. Nick LaLota, were told by administration officials that Sunrise Wind and Empire Wind are "moving forward."

In that Fox News interview Zeldin also said Trump is "not a fan of wind" in defending the effort to halt Revolution Wind. A president's personal dislike of turbines on the horizon is not a smart, future-forward national energy policy. Other federal officials say wind energy holds back America’s energy dominance yet the administration has not made clear how supporting wind power diminishes fossil fuel production. America already produces more fossil fuels than ever before. Slogans like "unleash American energy" and "Power the Great American Comeback" will provide little comfort during a blackout or to those struggling to pay their bills. 

If the administration put as much effort into assisting the wind energy industry as it is in opposing it, America would be better positioned to balance its rising demand for electricity with the increasing costs of producing it. That would not be an ill wind.