BSEE statement:
BSEE’s report on the initial (7/13/2024) blade failure has still not been released.
Archive for the ‘Offshore Wind’ Category
BSEE: Lightning protection system was not operational on Vineyard Wind turbine
Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, tagged blade failure, BSEE, lightning protection, lightning strike, Vineyard Wind, wind turbine on March 5, 2025| Leave a Comment »
“Groundhog Day” on Nantucket?
Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, tagged blade failure, Groundhog Day, lightning strike, Nantucket, Vineyard Wind on March 5, 2025| 1 Comment »
The same Vineyard Wind turbine blade that failed last summer has now been struck by lightning:
“Lightning struck the fractured stub of Vineyard Wind’s broken turbine blade in the early morning hours on Friday (2/27), according to representatives from Vineyard Wind and the Coast Guard. It was the remnants of the broken blade that snapped this July that were still attached to the turbine.”
“It appears the town (Nantucket) was not informed of the lightning strike by Vineyard Wind until it received media inquiries about it, over 48 hours after it happened.”
BOEM rescinds controversial Rice’s Whale requirements
Posted in Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, Offshore Wind, tagged biological opinion, BOEM, court order, deadline, NTL, rescinded, Rice's whale on February 27, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Although Rice’s Whale lease stipulations were deleted from Sale 261 leases by court order, similar NTL restrictions remained in effect for all oil and gas operations in the Gulf of America. Those NTL restrictions, some of which may be excessive and premature, have now been rescinded.
A previous post compared the Rice’s Whale restrictions applicable to Gulf oil and gas operations with the less onerous Right Whale restrictions for the Atlantic wind industry.
Of course, this is not the end of the Rice’s Whale dispute. A Federal judge in Maryland has ordered the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) to prepare a new biological opinion that better protects the Rice’s whale. The deadline for the new biological opinion was extended to May 21, 2025. After that date, no new Gulf leases may be issued and no new operating plans may be approved pending a new biological opinion that is acceptable to the Court.
Stay tuned.
Letter requesting the withdraw of wind project permits
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Atlantic wind, CFACT, incidental takes, letter to Burgum, withdraw wind permits on February 21, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Groups and individuals opposing Atlantic wind projects sent the attached letter to Interior Secretary Doug Bergum asking for the withdraw of wind permits.
The groups cite serious problems with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Letters of Authorization (LOA) for Incidental Take of endangered and threatened species. The LOAs authorized cumulative Takes of 548 individuals from a population of around 338.
The groups’ “no list” (project analysis deficiencies):
- No EIS for the NMFS Incidental Take Authorization
- No consideration of the impact of harassment in the Biological Opinion including cumulative impacts
- No harassment authorization for the turbine installation ship
- No consideration of using suction caissons instead of pile driving
- No consideration of sediment plumes from ocean currents flowing through wind facilities
- No assessment of a project’s contribution to the overall effects of multiple wind projects
- No consideration of continuous operating noise
- No consideration of physical presence-based harassment
Nantucket Board is not pleased
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged environmental impacts, Nantucket, Select Board displeasure, turbine lights, Vineyard Wind on February 20, 2025| Leave a Comment »
From the Nantucket Current on X.
We “feel misled” Nantucket Select Board member Dawn Hill Holdgate gives State Rep Thomas Moakley and State Sen. Julian Cyr an earful on Vineyard Wind.
“We as a board, and the community at large even more vehemently, really feel misled by the representations we were given back in 2020…”
“The visual simulations we were given were not accurate.”
“The promises on the lighting, they have been fully lit for quite a long time now. That never should have happened.”
“The safety and the environmental impacts on the sea life are just far greater than the information we were provided when we were offered a financial settlement based on just the visual impact on our historic landmark, which is far more impactful than the simulations we were shown.”
Blade replacement update: “They’ve removed four complete sets to date,” Nantucket Select Board chair Brooke Mohr said tonight. That would mean 12 of the 66 compromised blades Vineyard Wind is required to remove have been taken down.
Congressman Van Drew calls out NJ Board of Public Utilities
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Congressman Van Drew, NJBPU, Offshore Wind, rate increases on February 14, 2025| Leave a Comment »
WSJ blasts NJ Governor Murphy
Posted in climate, energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Gov. Phil Murphy, New Jersey, Offshore Wind, WSJ on February 10, 2025| Leave a Comment »
WSJ: “How many multibillion-dollar projects must go bust before a Governor comes to his senses? The answer is blowing in the wind, but New Jersey’s Phil Murphy doesn’t seem to be listening.”
Ouch!: Note how it’s always the developers that give up on these projects and never the state, despite the awful prospects for ratepayers. Gov. Murphy has treated renewable energy as a sacred cause no matter the costs since 2018. That includes a bill he signed to let Ørsted pocket federal credits it had promised to pass on to customers, though he clawed money back when the projects died.”
Offshore wind: NJ reluctantly accepts reality
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Atlantic Shores, BOEM, BPU, Congressman Chris Smith, New Jersey, Offshore Wind on February 7, 2025| Leave a Comment »
- New Jersey will not provide financial backing to new offshore wind projects.
- “The NJ Board of Public Utilities will not proceed with an award in New Jersey’s fourth offshore wind solicitation,” said Christine Guhl-Sadovy, President, New Jersey Board of Public Utilities.
Not a single offshore wind turbine will be installed offshore New Jersey during the reign of Gov. Murphy, a leading proponent of offshore wind. How much did his wind advocacy cost NJ taxpayers?
Meanwhile, management of what is left of the Atlantic Shores partnership continues to deny the obvious – that there is no realistic path forward for their projects.
Finally, NJ Congressman Chris Smith is questioning any further action by BOEM on offshore wind projects. See the attached letter.
Another major setback for offshore wind as Shell exits the Atlantic Shores project
Posted in energy policy, Offshore Wind, tagged Atlantic Shores project, Equinor, irrational exuberance, Shell withdraw, US offshore wind on January 31, 2025| Leave a Comment »
The irrational exuberance that peaked at the Feb. 2022 New York Bight Wind Sale already seems like a distant memory.
In their quarterly earnings report released on Jan. 30, Shell disclosed a $996 million impairment associated with their withdraw from the controversial Atlantic Shores wind project offshore New Jersey.
Shell is no longer a participant in any US offshore wind projects. This leaves Equinor (2/3 Norwegian govt ownership) as the only major oil company pursuing US offshore wind development.
Those Atlantic states that have linked their economic future to offshore wind better be reassessing their energy strategy.
Equinor taking heat from Norwegian investors
Posted in climate, Norway, Offshore Energy - General, Offshore Wind, tagged Empire Wind, Equinor, green agenda, Norway, Offshore Wind, Orsted on January 22, 2025| Leave a Comment »
Equinor’s investment in Orsted and their Empire Wind project in the US Atlantic are featured in this DN article (translated to English). Excerpts follow:
Equinor’s investment of over 26 billion kroner in the Danish wind power company Ørsted has so far been a financial disaster – and now it’s going from bad to worse.
“We are very negative about the whole green initiative, as the return on the investments they make is far too low. When they also buy minority stakes in other green companies that we cannot count on, such as Ørsted, it means that we would rather own other oil companies.” Gaute Eie, Eika Kapitalforvaltning
The market has long been concerned that Equinor will throw money at renewable projects with low or no profitability.
In a recent note, Pareto analysts Tom Erik Kristiansen and Olav Haugerud point out that the Ørsted writedown does not bode well for Equinor’s own US projects either. They foresee a writedown of up to $1.1 billion, given that Equinor faces the same type of challenges as Ørsted.
Eie believes there is no reason why Equinor in particular should have a green initiative:
Aker BP is not doing green, Vår Energi is not doing green, and all the big oil companies are going back on this. Then we’ll see if Equinor has the guts to buy even more Ørsted shares, because now it’s 35 percent cheaper. If they do, we’ll have even fewer Equinor shares.
Sissener believes Equinor should rather focus on dividends and concentrate on oil and gas projects.
– We generally stay away from companies where the state is a major owner, because there you have to be so politically correct all the time. What we need are shareholder-friendly board representatives who know how to run a business and maintain control. In a broader perspective, this helps to destroy trust in Norwegian business.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 