Title: Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects
Main points:
New leases: Immediately withdraws all OCS areas from wind leasing
Existing leases: Secretary of the Interior shall conduct a comprehensive review of the ecological, economic, and environmental necessity of terminating or amending any existing wind energy leases, identifying any legal bases for such removal, and submit a report with recommendations to the President
Review of Leasing and Permitting Practices: The Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and the heads of all other relevant agencies, shall not issue new or renewed approvals, rights of way, permits, leases, or loans for onshore or offshore wind projects pending the completion of a comprehensive assessment and review of Federal wind leasing and permitting practices.
Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS) will independently finance, build, own, and operate a grid-scale fusion power plant in Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Dominion Energy will provide non-financial collaboration, including development and technical expertise as well as leasing rights for the proposed site.
This pioneering plant will generate 400 MW of continuous energy on 25 acres (total site is 100 acres). By comparison, Dominion Energy’s offshore wind project, which will include 176 turbines and 3 offshore substations, will intermittently produce (on average) 1092 MW (2600 MW x 0.42 capacity factor).
Gov. Youngkin emphasized that the project will be financed entirely by CFS, with no costs passed on to Dominion Energy ratepayers. (Good news for us Dominion Energy customers! 😀)
Fusion technology works by combining hydrogen isotopes — deuterium extracted from water and tritium from lithium — under extreme heat and pressure, using powerful magnets to fuse the elements. The process generates heat, which boils water to create steam that spins a turbine, producing electricity. The byproduct is helium.
Why BOE, and most everyone else, likes nuclear fusion:
Clean and sustainable power source.
Unlike traditional nuclear power plants that rely on fission, fusion replicates the energy-producing process of the sun.
Modest space requirements.
Generates four times more energy per kilogram of fuel than fission and nearly four million times more energy than burning oil or coal.
No radioactive waste
Safe energy source; no risk of a meltdown event
Nuclear Regulatory Commission has determined that fusion technology, unlike fission, does not require a federal license.
The implications of advanced nuclear technology, not only the holy grail of fusion energy, but also modular fission reactors, for intermittent wind and solar power are substantial.Ultradeep geothermalis on a similar timeframe, and could also supersede wind and solar.
The logic behind costly offshore wind projects is therefore questionable, and the regulators better make sure that the decommissioning of these facilities is fully funded. The most likely long-term scenario is for natural gas to continue meeting most power generation needs as the nuclear and ultradeep geothermal alternatives are phased in.
More about fusion. Most of you can start at Level 3. 😉
From the Protect Our Coast – NJ Facebook page: “During his interview with Radio Host Dom Giordano on Monday, December 23, NJ Congressman Jeff VanDrew (pictured), stated an executive order, to be signed by President Trump on January 20, 2025 will place a 6 months pause on further construction of Offshore Wind Turbines while our new administration reviews all aspects of these highly controversial structures in our ocean.“
We’ll see what transpires, and if this post is accurate, await clarification and reactions.
Per a provision in the “Inflation Reduction Act,” no offshore wind leases may be issued after 12/20/2024, the one year anniversary of the last oil and gas lease sale (no. 261).
Although the 4 leases receiving bids at the most recent wind sale (10/29/2024, Gulf of Maine) have presumably been issued, BOEM’s lease table does not reflect that. If those leases have not been issued, it’s too late now.
Assuming that the Gulf of Maine leases have in fact already been issued, the legislative restriction on issuing new leases should not be an issue. A qualifying oil and gas lease sale will likely be held in the Gulf of Mexico in the first half of 2025.
The bigger question is whether the new administration will hold any wind lease sales. Pre-election energy policy comments imply that new wind sales are unlikely.
The table below illustrates the dramatic decline in bidding for Atlantic wind leases over the past 2 years. (The California sale is also included in the table.)
offshore area
sale date
leases sold
acres leased
bonus bids ($ millions)
$/acre
NY/NJ
2/2022
6
488,000
4,370
8955
California
12/2022
5
373,268
757.1
2028
Central Atl.
8/2024
2
277,948
92.65
333
Gulf of Maine
10/2024
4
439,096
21.9
50
Accepting that bidding at the 2/2022 sale, which averaged nearly $9000/acre, was irrationally exuberant, bidding at this week’s sale was still incredibly weak. Even the bids at the Central Atlantic sale, just 2 months ago, averaged $333/acre, 6.7 times higher than the Gulf of Maine bids.
Do the Gulf of Maine bids pass BOEM’s fair market value tests? Apparently so; the sale notice established $50/acre as the minimum bid, and that is where the bidding started and ended. Invenergy and Avangrid had no competition and presumably got the tracts they wanted at the lowest possible price. We’ll see how this works out for the companies and power consumers.
While the Orsted acquisition does not appear to have been directed by the Norwegian government, the State’s 2/3 ownership of the company no doubt influences renewable energy targets and broader corporate strategy.
The initial market reaction to the Orsted purchase was negative (see chart below). On a day when most oil companies’ share prices rose in response to the jump in oil prices, Equinor shares opened sharply lower.
As a boy, my grandfather owned a home “down the shore” on Long Beach Island (LBI). From the beach, all we saw were swimmers, surf fishers, porpoises, and an occasional vessel on the horizon. The offshore wind industrialization will change the island dramatically.
Attached is the release announcing Save LBI’s intent to sue. Their issues are summarized below:
Constructing and operating hundreds of wind turbines directly in a prime migration path for the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale.
Operational noise from the larger and noisier turbines Atlantic Shores plans to build.
Cumulative impact of the East Coast wind-turbine projects on the right whale’s migration.
Interference with other uses of the ocean including fishing and national security.
No plan or capability, technically or monetarily, to remove turbines and other facilities at the end of their useful life, upon their failure during normal operation, or in the aftermath of a hurricane or other extreme storm event.
Failure to account for structural failures such as the Vineyard Wind turbine blade incident, the damage from such failures to the ocean and beaches, and how that damage will be remediated.
Excessive electric bill increases under the State’s Offshore Wind Energy Development Act.
The Endangered Species Act issues are similar to those that the Nantucket group ACK for Whales is trying to elevate to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps not the best choice of graphic if you want to sell the project as being environmentally benign and compatible with other uses.
The Nantucket non-profit ACK for Whales (ACK is the FAA abbreviation for Nantucket Airport) has petitioned the Supreme Court to review the 1st Circuit’s ruling on the Vineyard Wind project. Per the Supreme Court filing (full document attached):
Despite the agencies’ explicit statutory duty to consider all “best information available,” regarding the impacts its actions might have on an endangered or threatened species and those habitats, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), did not consider the cumulative impacts of other planned projects when they authorized and issued permits to construct the Vineyard Wind 1 Project.
Will the Supreme Court accept the case?
“Hail Mary:” Per the Nantucket Current, the odds that the Supreme Court justices will accept the case are exceedingly slim. Of the 7,000 cases that the Supreme Court is asked to review each year, only 100 to 150 of them – about 2 percent – are accepted.
“Really good chance:” Per Val Oliver, ACK for Whales founding director, “In light of the recent Chevron decision, we think we have a really good chance. That was about government overreach and that is what this (Vineyard Wind) has felt like since the beginning: go, go, go, and we’ll figure it out as we go. That’s just not responsible.“
Regardless of the outcome of this case, there is a profound inconsistency in the administration of the Endangered Species Act as evidenced by our comparison of the operating restrictions for the Right whale (Atlantic wind) and Rice’s whale (Gulf of Mexico oil and gas). Note that the more onerous Rice’s whale restrictions were removed by court order.
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 