A Political Nor’easter: Super-Expensive, Empire Offshore Wind Project Hits a Wall

A Political Nor’easter: Super-Expensive, Empire Offshore Wind Project Hits a Wall

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/a-political-nor-easter...

By Charles Rotter

.

With a clear grasp of both the policy mechanics and the public frustration behind them, Welborn outlines a story that encapsulates much of what’s wrong with our current approach to green energy development.

The Empire Wind Scheme

Empire Wind 1, pushed by Norwegian energy firm Equinor, with the eager backing of New York’s woke Governor Kathy Hochul, and the leftist Biden administration, was intended to be a showcase for offshore wind.

.

Instead, it showcased something else entirely: how to push through a $3 billion project with double the national average energy costs and virtually no comprehensive review.

Welborn lays it out clearly:

“What was not a bargain were the rates the company locked in with the state of NY, behind closed doors, before a single survey had been done—they were going to be at least twice the national average.”​

https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2025/04/17/burgum-takes-the-...

.

From environmental impacts to national security risks to economic irrationality, Empire Wind had it all—yet the project barreled ahead.

Executive Action and Bureaucratic Course Correction

President Trump’s January 20, 2025 executive order called for a pause and reassessment of offshore wind projects—a direct response to the rushed approvals and dubious oversight seen under the previous administration.

Equinor, apparently eager to get ahead of that review, jumped the gun.

They began construction efforts offshore, quietly deploying ships and robotic equipment to lay the groundwork for their turbine bases.

New Jersey Congressmen Jeff Drew and Chris Smith were outraged at Equinor’s actions in the face of President Trump’s pretty succinct Executive Order, which paused approvals for new farms until their original initial review process could be thoroughly reexamined.

https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2025/04/17/burgum-takes-the-...

“Out of nowhere, a bell suddenly rang, and Equinor’s time was up.”

https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2025/04/17/burgum-takes-the-...

.

That bell came in the form of Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who ordered an immediate halt to all Empire Wind construction.

Burgum cited deficiencies in the permitting process and a lack of consultation among federal agencies, calling the Biden-era greenlight “rushed” and analytically insufficient​.

.

The Trump administration is halting construction of a massive offshore wind project being built in federal waters off the coast of New York and ordering a sprawling review of existing offshore wind permits, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum directed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management on Wednesday to order foreign energy developer Equinor to cease all construction activities on its Empire Wind project, according to a memorandum obtained by the Free Beacon

Burgum said the Biden administration green-lit permits for the project and ultimately approved it without conducting proper analysis.

Approval for the project was rushed through by the prior administration without sufficient analysis or consultation among the relevant agencies as relates to the potential effects from the project,” Burgum wrote. 

He said the halt on Empire Wind will be in effect indefinitely until further review is completed to “address these serious deficiencies.”

Burgum additionally ordered Interior Department staff to continue a review of federal wind permitting practices related to both existing and pending permits and approvals.

COALITION OF COMMON SENSE

The resistance to Empire Wind wasn’t isolated to a few concerned locals.

It was a broad coalition—commercial fishermen, legal advocates, radar and defense experts, and elected officials—who consistently raised concerns about environmental harm, economic waste, and procedural shortcuts.

.

Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey summed up the concern:

“It’s an alarming development… NEPA review process under the Biden Administration… was slipshod, completely inadequate.”​

https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2025/04/17/burgum-takes-the-...

.

And Rep. Jeff Van Drew called the project’s halt “a big offshore wind victory,” citing his collaboration with the Trump administration to bring these issues to light​.

While climate cultists and industry advocates went into delicious swoons of doom and despair.

https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2025/04/17/burgum-takes-the-...

.

The Empire Wind saga is a reminder of why process matters.

Energy infrastructure—particularly projects with national security, environmental, and economic implications—cannot be waved through without scrutiny.

EWoke-style inane enthusiasm for complicated technical projects should never override the need for transparency, due diligence, and cost-benefit analysis.

Thanks to the Trump administration’s intervention and the vigilance of critics across the spectrum, the brakes have been applied to a project that had all the signs of a bureaucratic runaway train on steroids.

And thanks to journalists like Beege Welborn, the public is better informed about what’s really going on behind the green curtain.

Views: 14

Comment

You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by Willem Post on April 19, 2025 at 10:44am

HIGH COST/kWh OF W/S SYSTEMS FOISTED ONTO A BRAINWASHED PUBLIC 

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-cost-kwh-of-w-s-s...

By Willem Post

.

What is generally not known, the more weather-dependent W/S systems, the less efficient the other, traditional generators, as they inefficiently counteract the increasingly larger ups and downs of W/S output. See URL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reduction...

.

W/S systems add great cost to the overall delivery of electricity to users; the more W/S systems, the higher the cost/kWh, as proven by the UK and Germany, with the highest electricity rates in Europe, and near-zero, real-growth GDPs
At about 30% W/S, the entire system hits an increasingly thicker concrete wall, operationally and cost wise.

The UK and Germany are hitting the wall, more and more hours each day.
The cost of electricity delivered to users increased with each additional W/S/B system

.

Base-load nuclear, gas and coal plants are the only rational way forward, plus the additional CO2 is very beneficial for additional flora and fauna growth and increased crop yields to feed hungry people.

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/we-are-in-a-co2-famine

.

Subsidies shift costs from project Owners to ratepayers, taxpayers, government debt:

1) Federal and state tax credits, up to 50% (Community tax credit of 10 percent – Federal tax credit of 30 percent - State tax credit and other incentives of up to 10%);

2) 5-y Accelerated Depreciation write off of the entire project;

3) Loan interest deduction

.

Utilities pay 15 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from fixedoffshore wind systems

Utilities pay 18 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from floating offshore wind

Utilities pay 12 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from larger solar systems

.

Excluded costs, at a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience: 

- Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect distributed W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh

- A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which leads to more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh

- A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which leads to more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh

- Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if not curtailed, about 1 c/kWh

- Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh

- Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh

- Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh

Some of these values exponentially increase as more W/S systems are added to the grid
.
The economic/financial insanity and environmental damage of it all is off the charts.
No wonder Europe’s near-zero, real-growth economy is in de-growth mode.

That economy has been tied into knots by inane people.

YOUR tax dollars are building these projects so YOU will have much higher electric bills.

Remove YOUR tax dollars using your vote, and none of these projects would be built, and YOUR electric bills would be lower.

Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on April 19, 2025 at 1:15am

Here is the One Thing Trump Needs to Do That Changes EVERYTHING: Prove the 2020 Election was Stolen
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/04/here_is_the_one_th...

Comment by Willem Post on April 18, 2025 at 10:20am

BATTERY SYSTEM CAPITAL COSTS, OPERATING COSTS, ENERGY LOSSES, AND AGING
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...

by Willem Post

Utility-scale, battery system pricing usually is not made public, but for this system it was.

Neoen, in western Australia, has just turned on its 219 MW/ 877 MWh Tesla Megapack battery, the largest in western Australia.

Ultimately, it will be a 560 MW/2,240 MWh battery system, $1,100,000,000/2,240,000 kWh = $491/kWh, delivered as AC, late 2024 pricing. Smaller capacity systems will cost much more than $500/kWh

.

Annual Cost of Megapack Battery Systems; 2023 pricing
Assume a system rated 45.3 MW/181.9 MWh, and an all-in turnkey cost of $104.5 million, per Example 2
Amortize bank loan for 50% of $104.5 million at 6.5%/y for 15 years, $5.484 million/y
Pay Owner return of 50% of $104.5 million at 10%/y for 15 years, $6.765 million/y (10% due to high inflation)
Lifetime (Bank + Owner) payments 15 x (5.484 + 6.765) = $183.7 million
Assume battery daily usage for 15 years at 10%, and loss factor = 1/(0.9 *0.9)
Battery lifetime output = 15 y x 365 d/y x 181.9 MWh x 0.1, usage x 1000 kWh/MWh = 99,590,250 kWh to HV grid; 122,950,926 kWh from HV grid; 233,606,676 kWh loss
(Bank + Owner) payments, $183.7 million / 99,590,250 kWh = 184.5 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (tax credits, 5-y depreciation, loan interest deduction) is 92.3c/kWh

Subsidies shift costs from project Owners to ratepayers, taxpayers, government debt
At 10% throughput, (Bank + Owner) cost, 92.3 c/kWh
At 40% throughput, (Bank + Owner) cost, 23.1 c/kWh

Excluded costs/kWh: 1) O&M; 2) system aging, 1.5%/y, 3) 20% HV grid-to-HV grid loss, 4) grid extension/reinforcement to connect battery systems, 5) downtime of parts of the system, 6) decommissioning in year 15, i.e., disassembly, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites. Excluded costs would add at least 15 c/kWh
 

COMMENTS ON CALCULATION

Almost all existing battery systems operate at less than 10%, per EIA annual reports i.e., new systems would operate at about 92.4 + 15 = 107.4 c/kWh. They are used to stabilize the grid, i.e., frequency control and counteracting up/down W/S outputs. If 40% throughput, 23.1 + 15 = 38.1 c/kWh. 

A 4-h battery system costs 38.1 c/kWh of throughput, if operated at a duty factor of 40%.

That is on top of the cost/kWh of the electricity taken from the HV grid to feed the batteries

Up to 40% could occur by absorbing midday solar peaks and discharging during late-afternoon/early-evening, which occur every day in California and other sunny states. The more solar systems, the greater the peaks.

See URL for Megapacks required for a one-day wind lull in New England

40% throughput is close to Tesla’s recommendation of 60% maximum throughput, i.e., not charge above 80% and not discharge below 20%, to achieve a 15-y life, with normal aging.

Owners of battery systems with fires, likely charged above 80% and discharged below 20% to maximize profits.

Tesla’s recommendation was not heeded by the Owners of the Hornsdale Power Reserve in Australia. They excessively charged/discharged the system. After a few years, they added Megapacks to offset rapid aging of the original system, and added more Megapacks to increase the rating of the expanded system.

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-hornsdale-power-res...

Regarding any project, the bank and Owner have to be paid, no matter what. I amortized the bank loan and Owner’s investment

Divide total payments over 15 years by the throughput during 15 years, you get c/kWh, as shown.

There is about a 20% round-trip loss, from HV grid to 1) step-down transformer, 2) front-end power electronics, 3) into battery, 4) out of battery, 5) back-end power electronics, 6) step-up transformer, to HV grid, i.e., you draw about 50 units from the HV grid to deliver about 40 units to the HV grid, because of A-to-Z system losses. That gets worse with aging.

A lot of people do not like these c/kWh numbers, because they have been repeatedly told by self-serving folks, battery Nirvana is just around the corner.

.

NOTE: Aerial photos of large-scale battery systems with many Megapacks, show many items of equipment, other than the Tesla supply, such as step-down/step-up transformers, switchgear, connections to the grid, land, access roads, fencing, security, site lighting, i.e., the cost of the Tesla supply is only one part of the battery system cost at a site.

.

NOTE: Battery system turnkey capital costs and electricity storage costs likely will be much higher in 2023 and future years, than in 2021 and earlier years, due to: 1) increased inflation rates, 2) increased interest rates, 3) supply chain disruptions, which delay projects and increase costs, 4) increased energy prices, such as of oil, gas, coal, electricity, etc., 5) increased materials prices, such as of tungsten, cobalt, lithium, copper, manganese, etc., 6) increased labor rates.

Comment by Willem Post on April 18, 2025 at 10:18am

Europe Attempts to Entangle US with Expensive Offshore Windmills that Produce Expensive Electricity
Net zero by 2050 Euro elites tried to entangle the US, with help of the unpatriotic, leftist Biden clique, into going down the black hole of 30,000 MW by 2030 of expensive, highly-subsidized, weather-dependent, grid-disturbing offshore windmill systems, which would need expensive, highly subsidized, short-lived, battery systems for grid support.
.
The windmills would have produced electricity at about 15 c/kWh, about 2.5 times greater than from domestic US gas, coal, nuclear, hydro plants, which would have made the US even less competitive in world markets.
Any tariffs would greatly increase turnkey capital costs/MW and electricity costs/ kWh.
.
Almost the entire supply of the projects would be designed and made in Europe, then transported across the Atlantic Ocean by European specialized ships, then unloaded at new, $500-million storage/pre-assembly/staging/barge-loading areas, then barged to European specialized erection ships for erection of the windmill systems. The financing would be mostly by European pension funds, that pay benefits to European retirees.

Hundreds of people in each seashore state would have jobs during the erection phase
The other erection jobs would be by specialized European people, mostly on cranes and ships
.
Hundreds of people in each seashore state would have long-term O&M jobs, using mostly European spare parts, during the 20-y electricity production phase.
.
Conglomerates owned by Euro elites would finance, build, erect, own and operate almost all of the 30,000 MW of offshore windmills, providing work for many thousands of European workers for decades, and multi-$billion profits each year.
.
That Euro ruse did not work out, because Trump was elected.
Trump hating Euro elites are furious. Projects are being cancelled. The European windmill industry is in shambles, with multi-$billion losses, lay-offs and tens of $billions of stranded costs.
.
Trump spared the US from the W/S evils inflicted by the leftist, woke Democrat cabal, that used an autopen for Biden signatures, and used on-the-beach/in-the-basement Biden as an increasingly dysfunctional Marionette.
.
Trump declared a National Energy Emergency, and put W/S/B systems at the bottom of the list, and suspended their licenses to put their glossy environmental impact statements, EIS, under proper scrutiny.
.
Euro elites used the IPCC-invented, “CO2-is-evil” hoax, based on its own “science”. They used the government-subsidized Corporate Media to propagate scare-mongering slogans.
Wall Street elites saw an opportunity for tax shelters for its elite clients.
Woke politicians were “cut-in” on $juicy deals to pass subsidies, favorable rules and regulations, and impose government mandates.
Euro elites wanted the US to deliver electricity to users at very high c/kWh, to preserve Europe’s extremely advantageous trade balance with the US.
 https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/international-trade-is...

 

Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power

 

Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT

******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********

(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/

© 2025   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service