BOEM diminishes the credibility of their important (and generally excellent) scientific, lease administration, and regulatory work with over-the-top wind energy promotion. The tweet below is a recent example.
This is not a good look for the bureau that is expected to objectively evaluate offshore wind projects. Leave the hype to the wind industry and its NGO supporters.
Offshore wind is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build a new clean energy industry, tackle the climate crisis, and create good-paying jobs, while ensuring economic opportunities for all communities.
Kudos to BOEM for sponsoring this important study which identifies the potential ecological effects of offshore wind farms on the endangered North Atlantic Right Whale.
BOEM must now consider, and presumably implement, the committee’s recommendations. This could prove to be especially challenging given BOEM’s prominent wind advocacy role.
All 9 of the study committee members are scientists with appropriate backgrounds and specialties (see Appendix A of the report).
As a rule, the NAS notes potential conflicts of interest in the biographical statements. Two possible conflicts were identified: one committee member was a “compensated member of a review panel for Ortsted’s Offshore Wind Research Plan in 2021,” and another works for a firm that “has been partially funded by offshore wind development companies.”
The panel recommends robust monitoring during all phases of wind development and operations in the North Atlantic region. Is that sufficient given that hundreds of turbines could be installed before the data have been acquired and analyzed?
. Background graphics, excerpts, and recommendations are pasted below.
Important excerpts:
p.2: A single offshore wind turbine can alter local hydrodynamics by interrupting circulation processes through a wake effect and induce turbulence in the water column surrounding and downstream of the turbine supporting structure, the pile. Moving away from single turbine effects and looking at arrays of turbines in a wind farm or at multiple adjacent offshore wind farms, these effects become more complex with implications for both local and regional circulation.
p.4: At the wind farm scale, the potential impacts include reductions in ocean current speeds, stratification, ocean surface wind speed, and deflection of the pycnocline. At the regional scale, perturbations due to offshore wind turbines are difficult to quantify because of the natural processes that drive significant environmental variability across the region.
p.6: Recommendation: The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, and others should support, and where possible require, the collection of oceanographic and ecological observations through robust integrated monitoring programs within the Nantucket Shoals region and in the region surrounding wind energy areas before and during all phases of wind energy development: surveying, construction, operation, and decommissioning. This is especially important as right whale use of the Nantucket Shoals region continues to evolve due to oceanographic changes and/or the activities and conditions relevant to offshore wind farms.
p.7: Recommendation: The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, and others should support, and where possible require, oceanographic and ecological modeling of the Nantucket Shoals region before and during all phases of wind energy development: surveying, construction, operation, and decommissioning. This critical information will help guide regional policies that protect right whales and improve predictions of ecological impacts from wind development at other lease sites.
NJ Governor Murphy, an offshore wind promoter, is not pleased:
“Today’s decision by Orsted to abandon its commitments to New Jersey is outrageous and calls into question the company’s credibility and competence,” the Democratic governor said. “As recently as several weeks ago, the company made public statements regarding the viability and progress of the Ocean Wind I project.”
Perhaps the Governor’s credibility and competence is also taking a hit, as is staking the State’s energy future on highly uncertain, intermittent, and facility-intensive power systems. .
Some northeast states and their public utilities may be in a bit of a bind. Either they accept higher electric rates and the likely public backlash, or they deviate from their staunch anti-gas, anti-nuclear orthodoxy. Similarly, oil companies that have invested heavily in offshore wind may find that they are not just less profitable, but (even) less popular.
According to the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, this would result in an average 54% price hike across their portfolio. The strike prices would rise from $118.38 to $159.64/MWh for Empire Wind 1, from $107.50 to $177.84/MWh for Empire Wind 2, and from $118.00 to $190.82/MWh for Beacon Wind.
Unsurprisingly, Orsted management assumes no responsibility for the company’s poor performance, blaming supply chain problems, high interest rates and “a lack of new tax credits.” Outsiders might suggest that there were other factors such as irrational exuberance in the acquisition of wind leases at inflated prices, and unrealistic expectations regarding a complementary power source that is dependent on government mandates and subsidies.
“The situation in U.S. offshore wind is severe,” Chief Executive Mads Nipper told reporters on a conference call.
Only 1 of the 3 tracts was sold, and the amount bid was a modest $5.6 million. Given the extensive lease sale planning and promotion, this would seem to be a rather embarrassing outcome.
RWE Offshore US Gulf LLC won the Lake Charles tract. Neither of the 2 Galveston tracts received bids. RWE’s headquarters are located in Essen, Germany.
Record low exploratory drilling: 2023 will be the third consecutive year with fewer than 50 deepwater exploratory well starts. The only other year this century with <50 deepwater exploratory well starts was 2010 when there was a post-Macondo drilling moratorium.
Low participation: Only 8 companies have started deepwater exploratory wells in 2023 YTD. Anadarko, Chevron, and Shell drilled 78% of the wells, with Shell alone accounting for 48%. Compare these numbers with 2001, when 24 companies drilled 149 deepwater exploratory wells.
Absence of new field discoveries: Per BOEM’s database, no deepwater fields have been discovered since March 2021 and there were only 3 discoveries in the past 5 years (see chart below)
Leasing and regulatory uncertainty: When will the 5 year leasing plan be finalized and how much will leasing be restricted? What will be the effect of the expanded Rice’s whale area on deepwater operations? To what extent is this expansion justified? What other legal and regulatory threats are on the horizon?
Unrealistic expectations regarding the “energy transition:” In a stunning introductory statement, the Proposed 5 Year Leasing Plan expressed concerns that new leases would produce too much oil and gas for too long. OPEC+ must love the way the US sanctions its own energy production, most notably the oil and gas resources of the OCS. More than 96% of the OCS is off-limits to oil and gas leasing, and the 5 year plan proposed to constrain leasing in the only areas that remain. The favored offshore wind program was intended to be a complement to, not a replacement for, the oil and gas program. Wind energy is limited by intermittency, space preemption, navigation, and wildlife protection concerns.
Some companies have visions of the GoM as a carbon dumping hub: The largest US oil company, which hasn’t drilled a well in the GoM in nearly 4 years and operates just one production platform, seeks praise and profit by sequestering CO2 beneath the Gulf while maximizing oil production elsewhere. How will this sustain economically and strategically important GoM oil and gas production?