{"id":367414,"date":"2025-02-24T08:00:02","date_gmt":"2025-02-24T07:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367414"},"modified":"2025-02-24T08:00:04","modified_gmt":"2025-02-24T07:00:04","slug":"coastal-virginia-offshore-wind-pause","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367414","title":{"rendered":"Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Pause"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Steve Haner<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When your friends think you wrong and your opponents are saying nice things, a reevaluation of your position might be in order. Did it. It was still correct for the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy to put Virginia\u2019s energy ratepayers first and express concern for the financial harm they might suffer if a wind turbine project gets cancelled. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dominion Energy Virginia\u2019s offshore wind project, now with a $10.7 billion price tag (not including decades of profit), is about half complete<\/a>.  A call to pause and perhaps cancel it was issued by a consortium of wind energy opponents from multiple states.  President Donald Trump\u2019s Executive Order has called for a review of pending projects, but it apparently did not pause Dominion\u2019s and three other projects already under construction. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy was invited to sign the petition to pause them all and did not.  It then explained the rationale to Virginians, mainly to be sure they fully understood that the stranded costs and other financial impacts of any cancellation could land entirely on them.  Here<\/a> is the report we made, which also links to the letter<\/a> sent to Trump\u2019s Department of Interior.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was a bit of an explosion on the right for us not moving in lockstep, but it was uncalled for. We did not dispute the underpinnings of the petition to Interior, and the complaints about how President Joe Biden\u2019s team gamed the system in favor of wind approvals may be totally valid.  The concerns about harm to marine mammals may be totally valid.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That was followed by a round of applause from the left, also largely uncalled for.  This article<\/a> appeared in a publication that appears to be a wind energy booster, delighting in the apparent rift among offshore wind skeptics.  The author lumps the Thomas Jefferson Institute in with Heritage Foundation and Project 2025.   We had no hand in the drafting of that.  Her lumping us in the \u201call of the above\u201d camp is a major oversimplification, given that often includes pipedreams about hydrogen and carbon capture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The decision on what to do with a half- or more than half-finished project is an economic call.  Yes, offshore wind is, as I told the reporter (and she didn\u2019t quote me) too much money for too little energy.  But to cancel it now or soon would put the following risks on Dominion\u2019s 2.6 million Virginia customer accounts:<\/p>\n\n\n\n