Tag: Vineyard Wind

Vineyard Wind’s Troubles Mount Despite Political Victory Lap

Vineyard Wind 1, the first large-scale U.S. offshore wind farm (800 MW, 62 turbines off Massachusetts), has faced persistent technical, contractual, and operational challenges even after completing physical installation in March 2026.

From Watts Up With That?

From Legal Insurrection

Troubled windfarm is producing less than half the promised output, sensors are repeatedly tripping offline, and it’s engaged in a legal battle with its turbine manufacturer.

Posted by Leslie Eastman

Two summers ago, we began following the saga of the Vineyard Farms offshore wind project and its blade failure near Nantucket.

After one blade failed and fell into the water, the beaches were littered with sharp fiberglass shards, creating a suboptimal condition at the height of the summer tourist season.  The continuing investigation into the cause of this environmental contamination incident determined that a manufacturing flaw in the blade was responsible for the failure.

Subsequently, residents of Nantucket began demanding the end of these mammoth offshore wind farms, and fishermen protested at the site of the blade failure.

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey declared victory last month, celebrating the completion of Vineyard Wind as a shining beacon of “energy independence” that would slash electricity costs.

“Vineyard Wind is a key part of our all-of-the-above strategy to lowering energy prices,” Healey said. “Throughout one of the coldest winters in recent history, Vineyard Wind turbines powered our homes and businesses at a low price and now that price goes even lower with the activation of these contracts. Especially as President Trump is taking energy sources off the table and increasing prices with his war in Iran, we should be leaning into more American-made wind power to lower costs, create jobs, and make our country more energy independent.”

This past winter, Vineyard Wind lowered electricity prices by competing in wholesale electricity markets. In those markets, it consistently offered lower prices than other sources of electricity. This activation of the utilities’ contracts further lowers the price of electricity generated by Vineyard Wind.

However, the celebration may have been premature. Apparently, the wind farm is producing barely 300 megawatts (less than half the promised output), and sensors are repeatedly tripping offline.

In a May 1 court filing, Vineyard Wind CEO Klaus Moeller said the project’s current average output is roughly 300 megawatts, and 13 of the 62 turbines are not yet activated.

Significant remedial and repair work is needed to address “recurrent operational issues,” Vineyard Wind officials said in court documents.

The problems include sensors that repeatedly trip, causing the turbines to shut off and curtailing their performance and power generation.

Furthermore, the developer is locked in a bitter $853 million lawsuit to stop turbine-maker GE Vernova from walking away from the project, which would essentially leave it a “dormant wind farm graveyard”.

A Boston judge has affirmed his own ruling that temporarily blocks GE Renewables from exiting its contract with Vineyard Wind, compelling the subsidiary of GE Vernova to continue servicing and maintaining the wind farm southwest of Nantucket.

Judge Peter Krupp this week rejected a pair of motions from GE Renewables that asked him to reconsider his previous order and send the case to arbitration. GE Renewables, the manufacturer of the offshore wind turbines used by Vineyard Wind, has been trying to leave the project, arguing that the offshore wind company owes them $300 million.

Vineyard Wind has countered by claiming that it is actually GE Renewables that owes them $500 million stemming from the collapse of a GE-manufactured turbine blade in July of 2024, which littered Nantucket’s beaches with debris and forced the wind farm to temporarily shut down while the cause of the break was identified. Ultimately, more than 60 blades had to be replaced. Vineyard Wind has also said that GE Renewables’ exit would endanger the very existence of the project, possibly leaving behind a “dormant wind farm graveyard”. So far, the courts have sided with Vineyard Wind.

Meanwhile, Massachusetts’ latest offshore wind procurement round has been delayed yet again, pushing the contract completion deadline to January 29, 2027, and leaving the process roughly two and a half years behind schedule.

Massachusetts selected 2,678 megawatts of offshore wind power spread across three projects in September 2024, kicking off contract talks that are expected to result in higher prices for power than past projects. During the repeated delays, one of the selected projects has removed itself from consideration and another raised the potential for a multi-year delay.

Officials say contract negotiations are still ongoing and are expected to result in higher power prices than in previous rounds, extending uncertainty for developers, ratepayers, and the region’s climate and energy planning.

It appears that when you build a $4.5 billion monument to green ideology on the Massachusetts coast, break a 351-foot turbine blade and dump 57 tons of fiberglass debris onto Nantucket’s beaches, then run out of money to pay the contractor who installed your turbines, the laws of physics and finance remain very strongly in place.

Here’s hoping the good people of the region have enough energy for both “heat domes” and the winter season.

Looming ‘clean’ energy disasters off our coasts

Photos of oil-covered seals and birds from California’s 1969 Santa Barbara blowout helped launch the environmental and stop-oil movements. More recently, the 2010 Deepwater Horizon drillship disaster killed eleven workers and blasted 3-4 million barrels of oil and enormous amounts of natural gas into the Gulf of Mexico.

From CFACT

By Paul Driessen

Photos of oil-covered seals and birds from California’s 1969 Santa Barbara blowout helped launch the environmental and stop-oil movements. More recently, the 2010 Deepwater Horizon drillship disaster killed eleven workers and blasted 3-4 million barrels of oil and enormous amounts of natural gas into the Gulf of Mexico.

These accidents spurred industry to implement better blowout-prevention technologies and procedures.

Such industry actions, of course, never placated environmentalists who wanted them banned forever. But now the question is whether they will apply the same standards for wind energy today.

A recent mishap off the coast of Nantucket, an island in Massachusetts, underscores yet another reason why hundreds or thousands of monstrous wind turbines should not be permitted in America’s coastal waters. Shards, chunks and finally the rest of a turbine blade fell into the ocean. One blade … from a 62-turbine project that is only three-fourths completed.

The blade was broken by its own weight, not even by a storm. And yet it was enough to force the closure of beaches amid peak tourist season, while crews picked up pieces of fiberglass-resin-plastic-foam. Boats were also forced to dodge big pieces floating in the water. Worse, Vineyard Wind, the company behind the project, didn’t even warn Nantucket officials about the problems until two days after the blade began disintegrating.

Each blade is 350 feet long and weighs 140,000 pounds. That’s more than a fully occupied Boeing 737 jetliner. The Vineyard Wind project involves 186 blades, or 65,000 feet (12 miles) in total combined length and a combined 26,000,000 pounds in weight.

The Biden-Harris offshore wind plan calls for 30,000 megawatts of generating capacity by 2030. That would require 2,500 gigantic 12-megawatt offshore turbines. Offshore wind’s contribution toward meeting future demands for all Atlantic Coast states could easily require 5,000 such turbines. That means 15,000 blades, weighing a combined 2 billion pounds and spanning a combined 5,250,000 feet (995 miles).

That’s a lot of potential ocean-bound junk.

Every year, the entire Atlantic coastline is hurricane country. The only questions are how many hurricanes, how powerful, and where each one will hit. NOAA records for landfalling hurricanes — those that actually hit U.S. beaches and cities — reveal that 105 Category 1-5 hurricanes struck the Atlantic seaboard, from Florida to Maine, from 1851 through 2023. Add in those that remained at sea, where the turbines will be, and that number could double.

Of that total, 23 were Category 3 through 5, meaning their winds were 111 miles per hour of higher. Most struck Florida, Georgia and South Carolina, but 39 made landfall between North Carolina and Delaware. Nineteen hit Northeastern states, including nine Category 2-3 monsters (96 to 129 mph winds).

Mind you, these turbines will be weakened by constant corrosive salt spray and frequently by sub-hurricane storms. When the inevitable big hurricane roars up the coast, devastation will follow.

Kamala Harris is bullish about offshore wind. For the last three-and-a-half years, she has helped run an administration that’s determined to convert the nation to wind, solar and battery power, expedite permits for onshore and offshore “clean energy” projects, and even waive requirements that offshore wind developers post bonds and pay for removing damaged, broken and obsolete offshore wind towers. She supports banning plastic straws, but has she ever considered how many plastic straws it would take to equal 15,000 offshore wind turbine blades?

Harris, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) and other wind advocates dismiss worries about hurricanes as anti-wind-energy fearmongering. Yet history says otherwise.

The 1935 Labor Day Hurricane clobbered Florida with 200-plus mile-per-hour devastation and Georgia with Category 1 winds. The Great New England Hurricane of 1938 smashed into New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts with 115-120 mph force. The Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 — punished the coast from North Carolina to New Jersey and Massachusetts with Category 2 winds.

Hurricane Edna hit the Northeast with Category 2 winds in 1954, Donna did it again in 1960, and Gloria clobbered the region with 96-115 mph blasts in 1985, even reaching New Hampshire and Maine. Isabel hit North Carolina and Virginia in 2003. The “minor” Category 1 hurricane of 2012, better known as Superstorm Sandy, was also devastating.

This is just a sample of the kind of weather that will hit our planned forests of offshore turbines. Whether they are fixed to the seafloor or sitting atop enormous floating platforms, the likelihood approaches 100 percent over time of a massive failure that makes this summer’s trouble in Nantucket seem mild by comparison.

Replacing hundreds or thousands of torn, damaged and smashed turbines and blades could take years, perhaps decades, to say nothing of the cleanup process or environmental damage.

Before we rush further into this “renewable energy transformation,” can we first have some realistic, common-sense analysis?

This article originally appeared in The Hill

Peak Stupidity: Wind & Solar Transition Claims Beyond Comprehension

Once upon a time, those charged with delivering affordable power, as and when we needed it, were responsible, stoic and serious. These days, the energy domain has been overrun by a group of delusional zealots, who act as the spearhead for a band of cynical, billionaire rent-seekers.

Politicos love them, and are always keen to shower them with other people’s money.

From STOP THESE THINGS

Once upon a time, those charged with delivering affordable power, as and when we needed it, were responsible, stoic and serious. These days, the energy domain has been overrun by a group of delusional zealots, who act as the spearhead for a band of cynical, billionaire rent-seekers.

Politicos love them, and are always keen to shower them with other people’s money.

In Australia, billions of taxpayers’ money is being squandered on the falsehood that, in the not-too-distant future, every single watt of power will be generated by nothing other than sunshine and breezes.

There is no better example of the level of idiocy that has overtaken energy policy, than the ‘plan’ (childish pipe dream?) by a billionaire software developer, Mike Cannon-Brookes to carpet the Australian outback with millions of solar panels and then send the power generated (for about 6-7 hours a day – cloud and cyclones permitting) 4,200 km along an undersea cable to Singapore, of all places.

As Nick Cater outlines below, Australia is neck-and-neck in the race to peak energy stupidity.

The sun is setting on our renewables ‘superpower’ fantasy
The Australian
Nick Cater
26 August 2024

Renewable energy superpower status is supposedly in Australia’s grasp now the government has given Mike Cannon-Brookes the green light to export solar power to Singapore.

Tanya Plibersek announced environmental approval for the tech billionaire’s eccentric proposal last week, taking a swipe at Peter Dutton’s “expensive nuclear fantasy that may never happen”.

By contrast, the Environment Minister would have us believe Cannon-Brookes’s plan to siliconise the NT Outback is a done deal. All that’s left to do is raise $35bn in capital, install 120 square kilometres of solar panels, build a modest 788km transmission line to Darwin, and lay a 4200km high-voltage cable on the seabed, and we’re good to go.

The Sun Cable AAPowerLink project feels like it was stolen from a Heath Robinson cartoon: a convoluted, unnecessarily elaborate, and impractical contraption designed to accomplish a mundane task. It may mark the beginning of the end of the renewable romance, the point at which the transition to wind, solar and hydropower collapses under the weight of its own absurdity.

There is increasing evidence the US has reached the point of peak renewables, as the pool of private investors shrinks and winning community approval becomes harder. Research by the Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory showed roughly one-third of utility-scale wind and solar applications submitted over the past five years were cancelled, while about half of wind and solar projects experienced significant delays.

The US Department of Energy says the national electricity network needs to grow by 57 per cent by 2035, the equivalent of approximately 21,000 km a year. Last year’s total was around 200 km, down from just over 1000 in 2022.

Meanwhile, the challenges of grid synchronisation and storage remain unresolved, and the technical problems for offshore wind turbines, in particular, are mounting. Last week, turbine manufacturer GE Vernova announced an investigation into a blade failure in the 3.6GW Dogger Bank project in the North Sea off the coast of the UK. It is the third blade failure this year.

In July, a newly installed blade crumbled at the Vineyard Wind offshore plant, creating debris that washed up on Nantucket Island, Massachusetts. At 107 metres long and weighing 55 tonnes, they are the most enormous blades deployed commercially. The failure of three in quick succession suggests the quest to increase output by installing ever-larger blades has reached its natural limits.

Yet the imperative of expanding generating capacity is hardening. The principal driving force is not electric vehicles but the rapid growth of artificial intelligence. AI requires at least 10 times the power of conventional computing programs.

In the US, data centres account for about 2.5 per cent of power and demand could rise to 7.5 per cent by 2030, according to Boston Consulting Group. In Ireland, data processing and storage use 12 per cent of electricity produced, forcing the authorities to limit the number of connections to the grid.

Silicon Valley has long abandoned the notion it can be powered by silicon photovoltaic panels while burying stray emissions in the Amazon forests.

In April, the tech giant Amazon paid the best part of $1bn ($US650m) for a sizeable block of land next to Pennsylvania’s Susquehanna nuclear power station. It will be the site for a data centre powered by up to 480MW of carbon-free electricity delivered reliably around the clocky.

Shares in US nuclear power companies such as Consolidated Energy, Talem and Vistra have soared by between 80 per cent and 180 per cent in the past year. So-called green energy stocks, on the other hand, are static or falling, while coal is making an unexpected comeback.

In May, the Financial Times reported that the retirement dates for coal-fired power stations are being pushed back as operators become concerned about grid security. Allianz Energy has delayed the conversion of its Wisconsin plant from coal to gas for three years to 2028. Ohio-based FirstEnergy announced in February that it was scrapping its 2030 target to phase out coal, citing “resource adequacy concerns”.

The effect of AI on electricity demand was largely unanticipated at the beginning of the decade. AI chips will undoubtedly become more efficient, but there is no telling how much further the demand for AI will grow since the technology is in its infancy. Nor can we begin to guess what other power-hungry forms of technology might be developed by 2050.

What we do know, however, is that if Australia’s demand for electricity exceeds 313 TWH a year in a 2050, we’re in trouble. That’s the target the Australian Energy Market Operator has set in its updated blueprint for the great electricity transition.

As Chris Bowen points out, that’s going to take a lot solar panels and wind turbines. The Energy Minister says we need 22,000 new solar panels a day and a new 7MW wind turbine every 18 hour s just to meet our 2030 target of a mere 202 TWH. For the record, the speed of the rollout in the first two years of Labor government is less than a tenth of that.

One of the hallmarks of the anointed is an unwavering conviction in the integrity of their analysis and the effectiveness of their proposed solutions. They feel no need to hedge their bets by factoring in contingency arrangements should their predictions turn out to be wrong. Nothing in AEMO’s Integrated System Plan indicates its experts have given any thought to scaling up electricity production in line with actual demand, which may well be considerably higher than they’ve anticipated.

If they had, they would have to acknowledge that there are limits to the renewable energy frontier determined by energy density, the demand for land and the requirement for firming. The silicification of northern Australia cannot continue forever, nor can we expect to rely on China for most of the hardware and pretend there are no geopolitical consequences.

As for our nuclear-phobic Prime Minister’s dream of turning Australia into the Saudi Arabia of green hydrogen, while simultaneously sitting at the cutting edge of quantum computing, forget it. In 2006, as the shadow minister for the environment, Anthony Albanese gave a speech at the Swansea RSL on avoiding dangerous climate change.

“Why on Earth would we want to take the big health and economic risk of nuclear energy when we have a ready-made power source hovering peacefully in the sky every day?” he asked.

If Albanese doesn’t know the answer to that question 18 years later, he probably never will.
The Australian

New England Fishermen Stage Floating Protest at Vineyard Wind Site

I am continuing to keep an eye on the Vineyard Farms offshore blade failure near Nantucket. A few weeks ago the facility was closed because of the failure of Vineyard Wind’s newly installed wind turbines, and the city was poised to sue.

From Watts Up With That?

Reposted with permission from Legal Insurrection

by Leslie Eastman

I am continuing to keep an eye on the Vineyard Farms offshore blade failure near Nantucket.  A few weeks ago the facility was closed because of the failure of Vineyard Wind’s newly installed wind turbines, and the city was poised to sue.

After one blade failed and ended up in the water, the beaches were cluttered with sharp fiberglass shards, which is a sub-optimum condition at the height of the summer tourist season.  Continuing investigation into the cause of this environmental contamination incident  determined that a manufacturing flaw in the blade was responsible for the failure.

Now this weekend, a “flotilla” of about two dozen commercial and recreational fishing vessels steamed to the wind farm on Sunday to protest offshore wind development.

The vessels, hoisting anti-offshore wind flags and blasting air horns, departed early Sunday morning from ports in New Bedford, Nantucket, Martha’s Vineyard, Rhode Island and along the Cape, converging at about noon on the site of the crippled Vineyard Wind turbine.

“The blade collapse was an eye-opener to a lot of people who before didn’t know that offshore wind is a disaster for the ocean,” said Shawn Machie, 54, who is captain of the New Bedford scalloper F/V Capt. John.

…The “flotilla” protest was organized by the New England Fisherman’s Stewardship Association (NEFSA). Plans kicked into gear when Dan Pronk, captain of lobster boat F/V Black Earl, was collecting turbine debris that had washed up on the shores of Nantucket. He called Machie and other New England fishermen who said they felt they had to “do something before it’s too late,” Machie said.

“We feel like our jobs are just accepted as collateral damage,” Machie said. “We are regulated for sustainability. And that makes sense. We need regulation. But offshore wind is allowed to kill fish and wreck nurseries without any manageable stopping point.”

The protesters indicate the impact on their industry will be more significant than many appreciate…because they can’t trawl on former fishing grounds.

Otto Osmers, a commercial fisherman from Martha’s Vineyard, made the journey from Menemsha at 7 am on Sunday, arriving at the Vineyard Wind site around 10:30 am. Osmers conceded that offshore wind projects like Vineyard Wind can block trawling and crab trap routes, but had other concerns about the project. “The ocean is one of the last undeveloped places on earth,” he remarked about the sight of so many large turbines peppering the horizon. “We put cables down there but it’s largely undeveloped. It’s sad to see that go away.”

Others were more passionate in their displeasure. Sue Zarba, who along with her husband John who fish recreationally, said seeing the scale of the turbines was emotional. “That was the first time I was up close to the turbines, and I was sobbing,” she said in an interview after the protest. “After you’ve seen this offshore wind farm, you cannot unsee it. Soon over one thousand acres just off the coast will be filled with turbines. We will never be able to undo this man-made environmental disaster.”

“This cannot continue because that’s where we fish,” said Zarba. “They’re developing on a tuna fishing ground. You can’t fish around turbines, you can’t trawl.” She added that her son, who attended the protest, was initially skeptical of her protesting but changed his mind once he saw the turbines.

However, their protests are being met with a deaf ear. The National Marine Fisheries Service issued a new biological opinion for flagship offshore wind project Vineyard that finds no adverse effects to endangered whales and other marine wildlife stemming from driving the array’s last 15 monopiles.

“It will have no effect on any designated critical habitat,” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries said in a statement. “NOAA Fisheries does not anticipate serious injuries to or mortalities of any ESA-listed whale including the North Atlantic right whale.” The agency said that with mitigation measures, “all effects to North Atlantic right whales will be limited to temporary behavioral disturbance.”

Scenes from the @fishstewardship flotilla protest at the Vineyard Wind farm today. pic.twitter.com/iVFpGHasYd— Nantucket Current (@ACKCurrent) August 25, 2024

In conclusion, the fishermen are doing the work that environmentalists used to do.

Watch: Morano on Fox talking Vineyard Wind offshore pollution disaster:

‘The fishermen are forced to do what the environmentalists should be doing’ https://t.co/66B8a5yDt4 pic.twitter.com/IfVM6KIcQx— Marc Morano (@ClimateDepot) August 28, 2024

Can American conservation survive ‘Green’ energy?

It’s summer, the ACs are cranking, SUVs are loaded, and families are hitting the road for beaches, forests, mountains, and National Parks. Thanks to our unique history of conservation and a culture of preservation, Americans have, for many decades, taken for granted their access to natural beauty. Reverence, even love of that natural beauty, is epitomized by our country’s 400 National Parks, hundreds of miles of protected coasts, and 800 million acres of forest, only 40% of which falls under government management.

From CFACT

By Portia Roberts

It’s summer, the ACs are cranking, SUVs are loaded, and families are hitting the road for beaches, forests, mountains, and National Parks. Thanks to our unique history of conservation and a culture of preservation, Americans have, for many decades, taken for granted their access to natural beauty. Reverence, even love of that natural beauty, is epitomized by our country’s 400 National Parks, hundreds of miles of protected coasts, and 800 million acres of forest, only 40% of which falls under government management.

Organizations like Save the Bay and thousands more founded by concerned citizens serve to champion habitat restoration and protection. Indeed, such was the very foundation of the modern environmental movement spawning nonprofits that advocate for policy, educate, install oyster beds, guard sea turtles, clean woodlands, “save the whales,” remind drone operators about the negative impacts of unmanned vehicles on wildlife, and, of course, constrain or prevent drilling and mining projects to preserve species and habitats.

But now, the environmental movement is at odds with itself. The movement’s full-throated embrace of so-called “green energy,” successfully amplified by unprecedented government mandates and subsidies, is leading to habitat-invading and beauty-destroying energy projects at scales that not only rankle onlookers but also those environmentalists still committed to stewardship and conservation—and would shock the founders of the preservation movement.

In California, a 2,300-acre solar project requires destroying thousands of 150–200-year-old Joshua Trees, also the habitat of endangered desert tortoises. Locals object. Officials approve. The power generated in the eastern part of the state will reportedly benefit communities hundreds of miles west.

Disputes in Maine about where to put massive wind turbine projects pit environmental groups against conservationists intent on protecting wilderness and wildlife. Paradoxically, the state has the nation’s strictest mining laws, precluding any possibility of directly sourcing even a portion of the raw materials necessary to construct the turbines and solar panels slated for deployment to Maine’s electrical grid. Meantime, in Vermont, a solar panel project that would cover 227 football fields of pristine landscape is being vigorously opposed.

These so-called “green” technologies, useful in generating intermittent power in discrete conditions and geographies, not only impact the visual environment but also have, as yet, unknown impacts on our environment when deployed at scale. However, we are starting to get some indications.

Scientists are still studying impacts of massive off-shore wind installations on sea temperatures and marine life. Only now are some communities and environmental groups coming to terms with the monumental scale of non-recyclable plastic blade trash on the horizon as those turbines age out. Just this month at Vineyard Wind, a partial blade from a single Eiffel Tower-sized wind turbine failed, dropped into the ocean, and necessitated several beach closures. Add to this other newly discovered consequences such as, for example, studies showing that massive solar installations often proposed for the Sahara Desert would contribute to higher global temperatures. We also know large-scale solar installations cause loss of habitat, confuse birds, drive runoff, pollute waterways, degrade soil health, and disrupt animal migration.

Despite ample evidence that we should proceed with caution regarding industrial-scale  deployment of land-invading green energy, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) promises trillions to subsidize such projects. So-called green energy, with the notable exception of nuclear, is—from mine to deployment—extraordinarily land and resource intensive. Some environmental groups are beginning to raise alarms about both deep sea mining and expanding conventional mining for the vast quantities of critical materials needed for aggressive electrification and large-scale solar and wind projects.

In total acres used per megawatt, coal, natural gas, and nuclear power have tiny footprints compared to wind and solar. A solar power plant typically requires 5 to 10 acres per megawatt, while a natural gas plant uses less than a half an acre per megawatt. These estimates don’t even account for the increases in land mined for the necessary metals and mining.

In the 100 years since modern environmental conservation began, we have become increasingly more efficient in the resources and land we use to supply energy. But now, ‘green’ energy policies come at the expense of far greater land and water use. ‘Green’ policies also ignore increased foreign resource dependence and environmental impacts overseas. The production of useful energy, which drives economic productivity, is always about tradeoffs. Americans are unlikely to tolerate increasingly obvious ‘green’ tradeoffs.

A future with denser, cleaner urban footprints that preserve natural habitats requires that we continue to decrease the natural resources and land we consume, particularly with our population predicted to peak anywhere from 20 to 60 years from now. In addition to affordable cars, air conditioners, and smartphones, virtually all Americans want clean air and abundant, biodiverse seas and wide-open spaces our 19th-century forebearers helped to realize.  You can bet future generations will, too. It’s in our nature. And our energy policies and choices should reflect that.

Portia Roberts is the Policy Director for the National Center for Energy Analytics and holds an MA from Johns Hopkins SAIS.

This article originally appeared at Real Clear Energy

Offshore wind nightmare strikes Nantucket

In Episode 450 of District of Conservation, Gabriella unpacks the fall-out and attempted cover-up of the Vineyard Wind 1 turbine disaster unfolding in Nantucket, MA. She taps Bonnie Brady and Meghan Lapp, two commercial fishing industry activists and Big Wind opponents, to deconstruct what’s happening and why ocean industrialization is harmful to conservation efforts. Tune in to learn more!

From CFACT

By Gabriella Hoffman

“The project is still under construction. That’s just kind of ironic. It’s not even built yet. And it’s already breaking. The total project. Yes, it is for, like, 62 turbines and a substation. And I believe they have piled driven like they have to take a giant pole, essentially, and slam it into the ocean floor. And then they build the turbine. On top of that, they still have 15 left to pile drive. They have some of the towers and the blades up on the ones that they’ve already piled driven, but not all of them. I think, you know, a very small handful of them, quote-unquote, went into operation earlier this year, but the majority of them are still under construction or have not been built yet.” – Meghan Lapp

In Episode 450 of District of Conservation, Gabriella unpacks the fall-out and attempted cover-up of the Vineyard Wind 1 turbine disaster unfolding in Nantucket, MA. She taps Bonnie Brady and Meghan Lapp, two commercial fishing industry activists and Big Wind opponents, to deconstruct what’s happening and why ocean industrialization is harmful to conservation efforts. Tune in to learn more!

Listen on Apple Podcasts

EP 579: BAAJA Blast: Permitting Reform or Bust – District of Conservation

In Episode 579 of District of Conservation, Gabriella discusses the permitting reform bill – aka BAAJA – that is gaining traction in Congress now. The Senate will hold a cloture vote starting at 3:30pm ET in a motion to proceed. Gabriella discusses the status quo without permitting reform, how BAAJA is good for the environment and affordability. Tune in!SHOW NOTESBipartisan Policy Center: BAAJA ExplainerEstimating the US Energy System Impacts of the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act
  1. EP 579: BAAJA Blast: Permitting Reform or Bust
  2. EP 578: Midterms, CO Amendment 83, Disneyland Goes Electric
  3. EP 577: Kaylyn Glenn – Florida Gladeswoman & Conservationist
  4. EP 576: Chiricahua National Park & Energy Security Index
  5. EP 575: Menhaden Madness (ft. Whit Fosburgh, Forage Fish Campaign)

SHOW NOTES

⁠Bonnie Brady⁠ & ⁠Meghan Lapp⁠

⁠Texas Public Policy Foundation brings fishermen’s lawsuit against Vineyard Wind⁠⁠ Vineyard Wind Shut Down By Feds After Turbine Blade Failure⁠

⁠Meghan Lapp on Local News Talking Nantucket Wind⁠

⁠‘Ruined by negligence’: Dave Portnoy blasts Nantucket wind farm after broken blade shuts down beaches⁠

⁠Part One: Women Fighting for Freedom for the Coast and Fisheries⁠⁠⁠

⁠Part Two: Women Fighting for Freedom for the Coast and Fisheries⁠

⁠July 19 Update – Vineyard Wind Turbine Blade Crisis⁠

⁠Why Did Vineyard Wind Wait Two Days To Alert The Town About Its Damaged Turbine?

Photo Credit: Conservation Nation EP15: Save the Whales from Ocean Industrialization

Shattered wind turbine closes Nantucket beaches feds suspend Vineyard Wind

A massive wind turbine blade shattered causing an extensive debris field that shut down beaches on tony Nantucket Island.

From CFACT

By Craig Rucker

A massive wind turbine blade shattered causing an extensive debris field that shut down beaches on tony Nantucket Island.

As workers in protective clothing resembling hazmat suits rushed to contain the damage, “the federal Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement said Wednesday that operations at Vineyard Wind have been suspended until it can be determined whether the ‘blade failure’ impacts other turbine blades on the development,” according to The Associated Press.

Check out the photos above, which were taken by whale protection activist Mary Chalke.

The Vineyard Gazette reports that Vineyard Wind is “the first approved and currently largest offshore wind energy project in the country… The Vineyard Wind turbines are over 800 feet tall, with blades as long as a football field. As of last month, Vineyard Wind had 10 turbines in operation, generating about 136 megawatts of power. About a dozen more were under construction. The turbines are manufactured by GE Vernova, and the company is responsible for them as they are initially installed.”

GE Vernova stock plummeted 9.3% following the federal order to suspend operations.

A GE Vernova turbine blade failed at the U.K.’s massive Dogger Bank wind installation this spring, and another broke several blades in Germany this fall.

Last month, America Electric Power filed suit against GE Vernova over quality and warranty concerns, alleging that “within only two to three years of commercial operation, the GE wind turbine generators have exhibited numerous material defects on major components and experienced several complete failures, at least one turbine blade liberation event, and other deficiencies.”

Wind turbine blades are made from fiberglass, or fiber-reinforced plastic, and cannot be recycled.  CFACT has yet to see any serious proposal as to what to do with the mountain of waste that will result when thousands of turbine blades reach the end of their useful lives in 10-20 years.

CFACT has actively challenged the Biden Administration’s rush to transform America’s coasts into industrial wind turbine sites, focusing on the threat they pose to marine mammals, the power grid, and the economic hazards of mining rare earths and other materials in developing nations.

Our federal “watchdogs” should call a halt to wind turbine construction until the potential hazards they pose to the Jersey Shore, the Virginia coast, and the rest of our national waters are genuinely understood.

Beautiful Nantucket Island and neighboring Martha’s Vineyard are the chosen summer playgrounds of America’s rich and famous, including Barack and Michelle Obama.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis quipped last night that the wealthy Left “support open borders allowing millions and millions of illegal aliens to pour into our country and to burden our communities, but just don’t send any to Martha’s Vineyard then they get really upset.”

Let’s see how the beautiful people, who have been so vociferous in pushing wind and solar on the rest of us, enjoy picking fiberglass shards out of their beach picnics.

Vineyard Wind: Catastrophic Failure (‘sharp fiberglass shards’ close Nantucket beaches)

“The Biden Administration’s offshore wind ambition, not only Vineyard Wind, is going the way of the EV debacle. It is time to end the charade, even before the Presidential election.”

From Master Resource

By Robert Bradley Jr.

“The Biden Administration’s offshore wind ambition, not only Vineyard Wind, is going the way of the EV debacle. It is time to end the charade, even before the Presidential election.”

All the current political news is keeping this week’s implosion of the fledgling U.S. offshore wind industry off the front pages. “Vineyard Wind shut down after turbine failure sends ‘sharp fiberglass shards’ onto Nantucket beaches,” reported CBS News out of Boston. The worst case event could spell the end of another Biden anti-economic, anti-ecology “climate” program, with only the 132 MW South Fork Wind project off the coast of Long Island under construction.

Vineyard Wind, a joint venture between Avangrid and Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, was at the 10-turbine, 136 MW mark of a planned 62 turbines totaling 806 MW. GE Wind (formerly Enron Wind), the blade-maker, is in trouble too.

Reported Newport Buzz:

Operations at Vineyard Wind have come to a screeching halt after a catastrophic incident over the weekend scattered wind blade debris across Nantucket Sound and shut down Nantucket beaches, federal safety officials announced Tuesday. They stated that work at Vineyard Wind is “shut down until further notice.”….

The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) reported a “turbine blade failure incident” at the Vineyard Wind 1 site on Saturday, a revelation that Vineyard Wind reluctantly disclosed Monday afternoon.

“There were no injuries reported, but operations are shut down until further notice,” a BSEE spokesperson stated. “BSEE is coordinating with the United States Coast Guard and state officials to ensure comprehensive information sharing. A team of BSEE experts is onsite to work closely with Vineyard Wind on an exhaustive analysis of the incident and the necessary next steps.”

In a move to mitigate the fallout, the company and the U.S. Coast Guard have established a 500-meter safety zone around the compromised turbine, situated approximately 15 miles south of Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard.

It was a worst-case event impacting tourism and beachgoers.

Nantucket’s harbormaster reacted swiftly, closing the island’s southern beaches to swimming on Tuesday morning. The harbormaster’s office warned via social media about “large floating debris and sharp fiberglass shards,” urging beachgoers, “You can walk on the beaches, but we strongly recommend wearing footwear due to sharp, fiberglass shards and debris.”

The repercussions of the failure were starkly visible as pieces of fiberglass and foam from the broken blade littered Nantucket’s south shore beaches. Each blade at the wind farm stretches roughly 350 feet from tip to turbine, underscoring the scale of the debris spread.

Conclusion

The Biden Administration’s offshore wind ambition, not only Vineyard Wind, is going the way of the EV debacle. With only one other project in construction, the offshore 30,000 MW goal by 2030 is in shambles. Yet the U.S. Department of Energy claims, “The U.S. offshore wind industry is currently in its infancy, but based on all this progress, a sizable growth spurt is just beyond the horizon.”

Vineyard Wind should have never happened. Ever since it was proposed in 2018, the government-enabled project has encountered environmental opposition in addition to ratepayer concerns. Other offshore wind projects are radically uneconomic (including from the ‘wake effect‘); environmentally intrusive (pile driving, avian mortality) and are open targets for weather-related destruction. It is time to end the charade, even before the Presidential election.