Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

US Offshore Wind Project Updates

By Graham Jesmer, Staff Writer
December 16, 2009   |   25 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
Possibly the largest challenge facing U.S. offshore wind energy developers however is the lack of a stable policy and incentive regime that would bring more players into the industry.
25 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 25
December 16, 2009
Does the Jones Act really apply? Foreign-flagged vessels are use all the time for construction activities for oil and gas operations in the Gulf of Mexico, sea-bed fiberoptic cable installations, and even pipeline installations (similar to laying electrical power cable on ocean floor).

For example, jacket structures for offshore oil platforms are many times built in the US. A US flagged barge and tugboats carry them out to sea, and a foreign flagged derrick barge picks them up and installs them.
Comment
2 of 25
December 16, 2009
Appropriate RECs-based monetary reform will provide a genuine, free and fair, market-based manufacturing economy by giving people incentives to do the right thing:

JPChance.wordpress.com

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GlobalRelations
Comment
3 of 25
December 16, 2009
Cape Wind will never produce electricity in Nantucket Sound, or ever benefit citizens or the environment.

Citizens need reliable and affordable energy while Cape Wind can produce neither nor. Cape Wind spec'd GE. 3.6 MW wind turbines are "discontinued" not because the performed or were reliable offshore Arklow.

The Cape Wind lead federal permit reviewing entity Minerals Management Service estimates that Cape Wind energy cost would be "twice that of the public market and this is after the full benefit of tax and RPS incentives."

Cape Wind is "not economically viable" according to the U.S. EPA comments on the final Cape Wind MMS environmental impact statement.

Cape Wind premium cost (hidden) is coincident to the National Grid announcement of a $44 million dollar price increase. While Cape Cod Light Compact has considerably reduced their price of energy, and local N Star turns their back on Cape Wind excessive cost from ratepayers and taxpayers perspectives...

National Grid identifies the bad economics of "more than triple the current rate of traditional electricity", net, net, net, for offshore wind.

Providence Business Journal
'N. Grid rejects Deepwater Wind proposal'

"...But in a letter to the PUC, Grid called Deepwater's proposal "not commercially reasonable" and said "in pure financial terms, [it] is uneconomic by a significant margin for Rhode Island customers for the entire term."

"National Grid estimated the cost of electricity generated by Deepwater's wind farms at 30.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, more than triple the current rate for traditional electricity, which in Rhode Island is mostly generated using natural gas. Deepwater put the cost closer to 20 cents per kilowatt-hour."

http://www.pbn.com/detail/45500.html

Gatehouse News Service 12/15:

http://www.wickedlocal.com/weymouth/news/lifestyle/columnists/x1431151890/Mom-Pop-share-concerns-over-electricity

http://www.epa.gov/NE/nepa/pdfs/2009/EPACapeWindFEIS.pdf
Comment
4 of 25
December 17, 2009
Isn't it kind of silly to worry about losing your ocean view when your beach house and even the beach could be destroyed by rising sea levels and severe storms? I agree that wind farms should be built as far offshore as possible to avoid bird migrations, view impact and to get better wind, but we must learn to walk before we can run so buck up. Traditional energy sources are only more economic because their devastating pollution, climate effects and political effects are not fully reflected in their price. Oil production is declining and more expensive to extract. One must remember how soon we've forgotten $149/bbl oil, $14/mcf gas and Saudi/Iranian funded insurgencies. Jones Act vessels must be used within 3 nm of shore or between two US ports but if a foreign vessel uses the same port and always goes beyond the 3 mile limit for each commercial transit, it can be used. We will need dozens of US turbine installation vessels eventually and we could sure use the jobs building them.
Comment
5 of 25
December 17, 2009
Reforestation is emerging as the preferred way for New Englanders to meet their obligation to reduce CO2 emissions. With millions of acres of underutilized grass and forest lands; it is far cheaper and much more rewarding to maximize the carbon uptake of plantings than to go with expensive off shore wind installations.

We have seen several scandals involved grossly oversold big wind projects---Saco and Kittery have non-functioning wind turbines, either company has gone into bankruptcy, so they can't get routine maintenance and repairs done; or the machine is only producing a fraction of what the promoters promised it would...Bangor Daily News shocked the wind community with an expose a few weeks ago; followed up by similar stories in other media.

The sites for the 'floating' wind turbines have just been announced, and as if on cue, new groups representing commercial and sport fisherman and sailors have announced their concerns.

There is a market where alt. energy production is worthwhile; but the rationale using CO2 reduction is losing ground fast to REFORESTATION strategies....both the 'cool cities' and 'transition town' groups like planting trees over cap n' trade & carbon credit schemes.
Comment
6 of 25
December 17, 2009
Tom:

I don't have a view of the ocean, but I defend the rights of others' to defend theirs. I see value in the preservation of unique views, NHLs, historic whaling ports, Sacred Land and sunrises, mountain ridges, vacation destination locations, National Monuments, etc.

Wind enery has not demonstrated reduction of harmful emissions as a redundant source of energy that is as relliable as the wind. Assumptions that triple the current cost of energy will provide enviornmental benefits are bad ones.

The President of Mass Audubon Cape Wind DEIS comment Reference File No. NAE-2004-338-1, EOEA No. 12643:

"By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year."

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/CapeWindDEIS.pdf

The February 2009 Department of Energy DOE contracted study on wind energy states that wind energy integration for 6.8 GW requires a transmission upgrade, at a cost of up to $3.90 billion, to ISO New England.

http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-1471e.pdf

Cambridge Energy Research Associates CERA:

"One of the major factors in the rise of costs is the lack of a sufficient number of purpose-built installation vessels to install the turbines, resulting in less efficient and more costly options being used."

"With this pinch point companies should consider investment in installation vessels, as this part of the supply chain is where the higher value will be found," Brown said."

http://www.cera.com/aspx/cda/public1/news/pressReleases/pressReleaseDetails.aspx?CID=9512

Policy that commints $4 billion in public funding for grid upgrades; then spends ? millions more for offshore wind installation vessels; to produce triple the current cost energy; by installation of 440' steel and fiberglass icons that produce unreliable energy as they harm wildlife is clearly misguided. No?
Comment
7 of 25
December 17, 2009
Plant trees, not turbines. That's an affordable, reliable, effective, attractive and environmentally friendly strategy, Tom Heller. Thank you.

The Petro/Wind/Solar multinationals anxious to transfer our monetary and resource wealth their way may not see its merits.
Comment
8 of 25
December 18, 2009
The further we get offshore the less birds, bats and people will be affected but some local impacts are worth the prospect of developing the marine industry that will eventually build the deepwater sites, (walk then run). The fossil fuels industry has a choke hold on our climate, health, natural resources, economy and our governments and the only way to get them back is to develop the renewable power industry to diminish the value of oil and counterbalance their economic/political clout. We must surely develop the most cost effective and benign renewables and after geothermal, it's deepwater wind that has the most potential and least impact on species and land use. It's all too easy to say offshore wind is too expensive when you don't pay for the damage caused by fossil fuels in your power bill or at the pump. We must both absorb GHGs and stop producing them to restore the earth's heat balance not to mention the need to reverse toxic and carcinogenic effects of hydrocarbons and heavy metals along with the lung disease inflicted by particulates. Even if no more fossil energy were produced starting today it would still take decades to reverse climate and health effects so plant your trees AND bite the bullet on offshore wind. I'll have more sympathy for those with beach views, (who are surely blocking or defiling someone else's view), when they take in 1,000 displaced Bengalis each. I also love forests but will not burry my head in one.
Comment
9 of 25
December 18, 2009
Barbara Durkin's comments reveal her true intent as an anti-wind activist -- pasting together whatever comments she can take out of context to raise doubts and imply problems that do not exist. All forms of generation come with upsides and downsides -- but wind power is one of the most cost-effective and cleanest forms of electricity generation. Off-shore wind projects will indeed have challenges but more and more people and state leaders recognize the importance of tapping this US-based indigenous resource -- as this article clearly indicates.

Most people are able to see both the forest and the trees with respect to the huge upside potential of US off-shore wind power. Anti-wind activists like Barbara just want people to see not the forests nor the trees with their head-in-the-sand mentality.

Learn the facts on wind power at http://www.awea.org/faq/ and www.20percentwind.org

Jeff Anthony, AWEA
Comment
10 of 25
December 18, 2009
Jeff; What does the AWEA think about the Aerogenerator VAWT design as a method to reduce head mass and therefore floating platform size and mooring requirements? Any VAWT using a unitary vane and tower concept that allows placing the bearings and generator at the base should do the trick and should allow closer spacing and ganging of floating platforms for even less mooring requirements and deployment costs. Wave and current generators could be mounted on the cables between floats.
No image available
Comment
11 of 25
Anonymous
December 18, 2009
Al Gore Gets It Wrong at Copenhagen Talks

Today -- It is an inconvenient time for Al Gore to be fudging numbers on global climate change.

With the specter of the "Climategate" e-mails hanging ominously over the Copenhagen climate change summit, the former vice president told a crowd there on Monday that one scientist had predicted the polar ice cap would have no summer ice in five to seven years.

"These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr. Maslowski that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years," Gore told the audience.

But the scientist Gore quoted, Dr. Wieslaw Maslowski of the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., told the Times of London that he never said such a thing.



Al Gore should lose his Oscar as a result of Climategate, two Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences members say. Roger L. Simon and Lionel Chetwynd, two right-wing (who knew?) Academy members, want Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" Oscar rescinded after allegations that British scientists with the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit falsified data to support claims of global warming. Gore's anti-global warming flick won Best Documentary at the 79th Academy Awards .
No image available
Comment
12 of 25
Anonymous
December 18, 2009
Stop the proposed Massachusetts Wind Energy Siting Reform Act before it returns us to the days of the Magna Carta ----Energy costs will soar above 160 %
No image available
Comment
13 of 25
Anonymous
December 18, 2009
All of you are wasting your time with the numbers. If you want the wind energy developers to go away stop using electricity. The only reason wind developers exist is because of demand for electricity and lack of fossil fuel generators to change their ways. I repeat stop using electricity(like the computer that you are using now), and electrical prices will drop along with developers' jobs.
Comment
14 of 25
December 18, 2009
TOM...as far as Maine goes; there are millions of migratory birds who fly along the thousands of islands that line the coast of Maine. What is of concern to Maine Audubon and ornithologists are rare and endangered species who won't be able to avoid stalled wind turbines in the dark or foggy weather. I'm not sure offshore flyways are that well documented and incorporated into the four sites selected two days ago.

What will probably happen is a turbine will be erected, dead birds---perhaps, an endangered species will be found, and lawsuits will fly.

p.s. Maine Public Broadcasting's new HDTV towers have dead birds and bats around the base; but it's not p.c. to enjoin public broadcasting!
Comment
15 of 25
December 18, 2009
We will indeed make lots of scientific discoveries/progress as we invest or spend on the wide variety of renewables ... but much of it will certainly be written in to books and not really contribute to change. The fastest way to impact is EFFICIENCY of use. Consumer BEHAVIOR change ... smaller cars, shorter-fewer trips, climatically appropriate clothing rather than HVAC extremes, etc.
Comment
16 of 25
December 18, 2009
Important to note as well are projects in New York State. LIPA et al are proposing an up-to-700MW project off Long Island, and NYPA is exploring Great Lakes offshore potential. Each of these efforts appears to be gathering steam.

Clifford Rohde
http://windpowerlaw.info
Comment
17 of 25
December 18, 2009
Tom,
What in the world does offshore wind, and renewable electricity generation in general have to do with oil use? Oil is predominantly a transportation fuel. We can install 10 million wind turbines tomorrow or ten million geothermal generators and still need almost all the oil we need today. We just won't need as much coal or natural gas.

Unless we change to electric transportation, and get rid of fuel oil heaters in residential homes, we need oil.
Comment
18 of 25
December 18, 2009
Renewable electricity will both directly and indirectly displace oil and coal for virtually every use, (e.g. Direct- PHEVs; EVs; resistive heating Indirect- displaced gas generation will keep gas so cheap that it wil be compressed and liquified for transportation fuels using electric prime movers; electro-chemical processes will be used to create transportation/heating fuels like H2 for fuel cells).
Comment
19 of 25
December 19, 2009
Jeffrey Anthony:

My "true intent" is to attempt to keep the AWEA honest. As monetary and environmental costs far exceed any benefits the wind industry is capable of delivering. Wind energy is not cost effective, reliable or environmentally beneficial. And, it's quite disingenous for you take the position that my offerings are taken out of context as I consistently provide links to my information source.

Your suggestion that wind energy is one of the most cost effective sources of energy is preposterous, at least from rate and taxpayers' perspectives.

"Indeed, wind technology mirrors the subprime mortgage scams that wreaked havoc with the economy. Both are enabled by wishful thinking; bogus projections; no accounting restraints, no accountability, or transparency; no meaningful securitization; and regulatory agencies that looked the other way, allowing a few to make a great deal of money at everyone else's expense while providing no meaningful service."

Jon Boone

http://www.northnet.org/brvmug/WindPower/WindBall.pdf

Nettie Peña's wind damning documentaries set the record straight:

They're Not Green Episode 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCGuaRqv8No

They're Not Green Episode 2b
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7uYj14_iAQ

They're Not Green Episode 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QopWQQ_zTE

They're Not Green Episode 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QopWQQ_zTE

They're Not Green Episode 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGSGtb5GnFw

They're Not Green Episode 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x93VxC5Vn8

They're Not Green Episode 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzrsopSpIV4

They're Not Green Episode 7 http://web.me.com/thrnotgreen/thrnotgreen/Home.html

I referred to Frank Heller as "Tom" earlier. Please accept my apology, Frank.
Comment
20 of 25
December 20, 2009
Barbara; I watched your videos and if those are your concerns, then you should be supporting moving wind offshore, as far as possible, because virtually all other large scale energy sources have a greater impact. I'm a victim of the Exxon Valdez and I surveyed almost 50 miles of oiled Prince William Sound beaches and you haven't seen dead birds and ecological devastation until you've seen a big oil spill. Yes, there are horrible administrators that make bad turbine siting decisions, (we have an oil terminal that has been damaged twice by volcanic lahars), that you have to fight tooth and nail, but you should start with the worst offenders and work your way down and offshore wind is near the bottom of that list, (I'm still battling the major oil cos and the state on oil spill plans). We need to displace evey drop of oil and coal use possible and offshore wind is one renewable source near the top of the list for cost-effectiveness and minimal impact. The cost of wind is only high relative to fossil fuels because the rate payers haven't ever paid for the real price of the adverse impacts of using those fuels, but that's not to say bad siting of wind turbines in bird and bat flyways should be allowed either. It's just that all external costs of all energy alternatives must be considered before you start to rant. If not wind, what energy impacts should we endure?
No image available
Comment
21 of 25
Anonymous
December 20, 2009
Italian finance police have arrested two prominent businessmen — including one with ties to a former investor in the Cape Wind project in Nantucket — in the wind energy sector on charges of fraud. Arrested were Oreste Vigorito, head of the IVPC energy company and president of Italy's National Association of Wind Energy, and Vito Nicastri, a Sicilian business associate, according to the Financial Times.

We need to see the public documents in the Massachusetts State House scandal. Former speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi was indicted on federal corruption charges. The state paid for thousands of Massachusetts government documents requested by federal investigators many of which include the Oceans Act and now the Wind Energy Siting Reform Act

The federal documents handed over include the drafting of a piece of legislation that ultimately became the Massachusetts Oceans Act of 2008. The bill sought to provide comprehensive environmental management of the state's coastal waters. One of the potentially affected development proposals was from DiMasi's friend, a construction magnate of the "Big Dig" , who was looking to build some 120 wind turbines in Buzzards Bay, a project hotly opposed by environmental groups and local activists.Next the Wind Energy Siting Reform Act takes residential property rights and control from local cities and towns under the leadership of the new Speaker of the House .
Comment
22 of 25
December 20, 2009
And just look at who is writing MA Acts and policies to direct development of wind energy on an offshore, Anonymous, and as a wind developer no less. Paul Gaynor of First Wind that changed their name from UPC.

"The driver behind IVPC is US wind developer UPC through its UPC International Partnership CV &…"

http://www.projectfinancemagazine.com/default.asp?page=7&PubID=4&ISS=10883&SID=432546

DEVAL L. PATRICK
Governor
TIMOTHY P. MURRAY
Lieutenant Governor
Ian A. Bowles
Secretary
March 30, 2009 - For immediate release:
Patrick-Murray Administration Appoints Business, Science Leaders to Chair Climate Advisory Committee

Energy efficiency and renewable energy;
Paul Gaynor, President and CEO, First Wind

First Wind

"Experienced leadership"

"The management team of First Wind brings over 140 years of collective industry experience to every project. Including former principals from Italian Vento Power Corporation (IVPC), whose team has built and operated over 650 MW of wind power since 1995."

http://www.firstwind.com/utilities/benefits.cfm

"Last year, police confiscated seven wind farms with 185 turbines in Sicily linked to IVPC."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/59fe9474-cf2b-11de-8a4b-00144feabdc0.html

Congressman Massa's letter to President Obama:

http://batr.net/cohoctonwindwatch/CohoctonWindmillsTOObama.pdf

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Tom. I'll respond ASAP.
Comment
23 of 25
December 21, 2009
Tom,
I still don't see how "developing renewable energy" will diminish the value of oil. Couldn't coal-fired generation be used to develop all of the things you mention? Isn't coal-fired generation cheaper than any form of renewables (even a few decades from now) since we don't pay the full price? Why wouldn't all of these things you mention have gone through without renewable power?

I just don't see the indirect ties you indicate as being very strong. All the advancements you mention are for completely different and independent industries from power generation.
Comment
24 of 25
December 21, 2009
EPA must regulate GHGs under court order unless Congress acts and the Dems won't deprive it of its authority without passing carbon cap & trade. Renewable Portfolio standards are spreading like wildfire across states and there may even be a federal standard. Gas wil still be cheap even with carbon credits and EPA regulation of frac water disposal from shale fields, (hey there's an issue you can rant about), because the Alaska Gas Pipeline will be built and RPSs will limit gas use for power generation. Carbon credits along with new mercury and other pollution abatement cost will make coal too expensive to use. The economic shake out will force gas producers to find new markets and they will exploit the transportation market with propane, compressed NG and LNG as they have done in Europe and Asia. Propane is actually the most used alternative vehicle fuel worldwide, the rest of the planet calls it LPG. Compressed and liquid NG are gaining in transportation markets fast but they will have to compete with battery EVs and fuel cells which are still more expensive but dropping in price fast. If fuel cells drop enough in price, gas producers will crack methane for the hydrogen or build cheap reformers.
Comment
25 of 25
December 21, 2009
In short, after cap & trade and pollution regulation makes coal and oil uneconomic for power generation, renewables will displace gas as the only affordable fossil fuel for power generation and gas will then be forced into the transportation sector to obtain a market for what is now estimated to be more than 2,000 tcf of domestic gas reserves. With gas so abundant/cheap, it will displace more expensive oil for all possible uses.
Remember, even when oil and coal prices fall from disuse/oversupply, cap & trade is designed to raise the price of carbon credits until acceptible atmospheric CO2 concentrations are reached.
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

Graham Jesmer

View Graham Jesmer's Profile
About: I am currently a second year Law Student at Vermont Law School where I work as a Research Associate at the Institute for Energy and the Environment writing and ... more »

Advertise With Us

Intertek Solar Power International 2011 DNV Schiller Midwest Renewable Energy Association SMA America, LLC Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters