article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (6) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
April 24, 2009

Obama & Salazar Release Framework for Renewable Energy Development on OCS

Washington, D.C., United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

In an Earth Day speech at a wind turbine tower manufacturing plant, President Barack Obama announced that the Department of the Interior has finalized a long-awaited framework for renewable energy production on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).

The new program also establishes methods for sharing revenues generated from OCS renewable energy projects with adjacent coastal States.

The framework establishes a program to grant leases, easements and rights-of-way for orderly, safe and environmentally responsible renewable energy development activities, such as the siting and construction of off-shore wind farms, on the OCS.

“It is fitting that on Earth Day President Obama is taking this bold step toward opening America’s oceans and new energy frontier, so that we can wisely build a clean energy economy that will create millions of new jobs across the country,” Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar said. “This new framework will enhance our energy security and create the foundation for a new offshore energy sector that will employ Americans developing clean and renewable energy.”

The new program also establishes methods for sharing revenues generated from OCS renewable energy projects with adjacent coastal States.

Additionally the framework will enhance partnerships with Federal, state, and local agencies and tribal governments to assist in maximizing the economic and ecological benefits of OCS renewable energy development. The Final Framework has been submitted to the Federal Register.

The Interior Department and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) cleared the way for the publication of these final rules by signing an agreement on April 9, 2009 that clarifies their agencies’ jurisdictional responsibilities for leasing and licensing renewable energy projects on the OCS.

Under the agreement, the MMS has exclusive jurisdiction with regard to the production, transportation, or transmission of energy from non-hydrokinetic renewable energy projects, including wind and solar. FERC will have exclusive jurisdiction to issue licenses for the construction and operation of hydrokinetic projects, including wave and current, but companies will be required to first obtain a lease through MMS.

The proposed wind farm off Nantucket Sound, known as Cape Wind, has been undergoing review independently of the rule making process, and no decision is being made on the project at this time. If approved, it will be subject to the terms of the final framework.

“The step announced today by President Obama and Secretary Salazar represents the biggest federal step forward to date for clean energy in the United States. The Administration deserves a great deal of credit for moving ahead to deliver sustainable offshore wind energy for America," Civil Society Institute president and founder Pam Solo and Clean Power Now executive director Barbara Hill said in a statement. "The Department of Interior and its Minerals Management Service did an exemplary job conducting the regulatory review process that issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement on Cape Wind.  Now, it’s time for the Obama Administration to take the next step and issue a Record of Decision on Cape Wind as soon as possible so we can begin to move aggressively to exploit the abundant offshore wind energy potential with a shovel ready project."

For Further Information
Please Note: RenewableEnergyWorld.com does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.
Reader Comments (6)
 
No image available
April 29, 2009
How expensive does this make the energy we buy?
Comment 1 of 6
No image available
April 29, 2009
Aditi Pant,
do you mean expensive,
as in dollars per kilowatt,
or expensive in terms of CO2 released per kilowatt, or
do you mean expensive in terms of climate change?
Are you asking about the expense to the next generation, or the expense right now on your electricity bill?
All above mentioned expenses are relevant.
All affect our future.
Comment 2 of 6
No image available
April 29, 2009
Aditi Pant:

Great question. "How expensive does this make the energy we buy?"

World's largest manufacturer of wind turbines, Vestas, President and CEO Ditlev Engle stated of the Cape Wind project proposal to the Boston Globe:

"And, therefore, I am really wondering why anybody wants to put them up offshore because it's twice the price. So just as an outsider, I am just scratching my head saying, "Why?"

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/09/21/the_answers_to_him_are_blowing_in_the_wind/

Senior VP of Vestas Peter Kruse:

"The only way forward is more turbines in virgin ground onshore," and, "Politicians want offshore so they can avoid the Nimby discussion, but they are allowing a tiny minority to force the rest of the population to pay double for renewable energy."

http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2217931/vestas-calls-greater-focus

It gets worse. Cambridge Energy Research Associates, and other sources state that we must invest in the offshore installation vessels first.

The DOE finds that wind energy requires transmission upgrades. ISO NE alone may cost up to $3.9 bn. states the DOE.
Comment 3 of 6
No image available
April 29, 2009
Thank you Barbara for the background information. Very enlightening. The experts know the cost and the enormity of the governments statements. It took a century to form our current energy distribution system. This dramatic change will have many shortfalls for the locals on shore and the facts of wind power reliability and redundancy should be presented to all.

The Cape Cod project has been held up by the Kennedys due to "deformation of their visage". Highly NIMBYand their vote weighs more than mine. The Northeast has been decommissioning power plants for the last 10 -15 years so they are buying from the more western states aka coal power generators because of the NIMBY attitude. They could have their own power generation, but just will not pay the local price. SO, they are already paying a higher price then needed.

Without government intervention of withholding viable resources (gas, oil, shale and coal) from development, the renewable projects would not be gaining any ground. They wouldn't havet made real progress since the 70's if government, our taxes, hadn't subsidized it.This action artificially inflates the cost of the current power which will be passed onto the consumer as the cost of doing business. So when you talk of double the price which is conservative, people should look at their electric and gas bills and ask themselves, "Do I want to pay double, triple or more for an uneconomic government project?"

As for the offshore installation vessels, only Europeans have them...Where are the American jobs? Just the on-shore work while there would have to be thousands of wind generators off shore?

As to Frank's comments, Show me the peer reviewed scientific papers that your comments come from and not the emotional media packages. Junk science is not a suitable foundation to base our future on...
Comment 4 of 6
No image available
April 29, 2009
The expense of extreme climate change (models suggest worse case scenarios are expected) will make the costs associated with moving forward quickly (avoiding the NIMBY issue) even with energy costs increasing by a factor of 2 or 3 ... pale in comparison.
Comment 5 of 6
No image available
April 29, 2009
Do we really understand the impact of these projects on the ocean and water ways? My feeling is we've done enough damage to the oceans with overfishing, oil platforms, etc and there are a lot of other renewable energy options out there to pursue without putting oceans and waterways under further stress. If it is twice the price to boot, what is the point?
Comment 6 of 6
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
HUBER+SUHNER American Solar Energy Society Euro Akadem - Academy for European Management GmbH Standard Solar Inc. Schüco KACO new energy, Inc.
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo