In an unusual step, a US Senator is asking for comments on his draft law designed to “facilitate” offshore wind development.
The Senator is Rhode Island’s Sheldon Whitehouse, the greenest Senator going. To say this bill is pro-wind is an understatement. The heading says it is “A BILL To provide for offshore wind energy development…” To “provide for” means we are going to do it. It creates policy.
The press release with a link to the 82-page draft bill and how to comment is here:
The name of this proposed law is a joke all by itself. It is by far the longest bill name I have ever seen: the “Create Offshore Leadership and Livelihood Alignment By Operating Responsibly And Together for the Environment (COLLABORATE) Act.”
So, we will be Operating Responsibly for the Environment? Sadly, but not surprisingly, there is nothing about that in the draft.
For example, the word “whale” does not occur. Nor does the word “mammal,” so there is no reference to the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The word “endangered” is not there, leaving out the Endangered Species Act. The National Environmental Policy Act is mentioned, but mostly to exempt required studies from it.
We do have a true Mad Hatter instance, however. That is this little hummer:
“The Secretary shall ensure that any activity under this subsection is carried out in a manner that provides for—
(A) safety;
(B) the protection of the environment, which includes facilitation of the generation, transmission, and storage of low- or zero-emission electricity;
(C) the prevention of waste; ‘
(D) the conservation of the natural resources of the outer Continental Shelf”;
Section B clearly says that facilitating the generation and transmission of electricity (from offshore wind) is, by itself, protection of the environment. So apparently, there is no need to protect the environment from these things as they are themselves protection, or so it seems to say.
This absurdity is bending language until it breaks. True green newspeak. “Operating Responsibly for the Environment” here means building enormous amounts of offshore wind because that protects the environment, according to Sen. Whitehouse.
This absurdity permeates the draft Bill. But there is also something very real to be concerned about. The Bill basically calls for and legitimizes a vast underwater electric power transmission system.
A big chunk of the draft Bill is dedicated to this monster offshore wind transmission project. The idea is that instead of bringing each offshore wind facility’s power ashore nearby, there should be a massive under-ocean grid to take that power wherever it is needed up and down the entire Atlantic coast.
The federal Energy Department has a big ongoing study of this monster. See the “Atlantic Offshore Wind Transmission Study” at https://www.nrel.gov/wind/atlantic-offshore-wind-transmission-study.html
We are talking about moving huge amounts of electricity over potentially very long distances. There is nothing like this today. The biggest power lines in America can carry around 2,200 MW for distances up to 300 miles. The federal offshore wind target for 2050 is 100,000 MW along almost two thousand miles of ocean. The scale is incredible.
Clearly, the environmental impact of building, operating, and maintaining such an under-ocean grid will be monstrous. But according to this draft bill’s green newspeak cited above, “the protection of the environment … includes facilitation of the … transmission … of … electricity” from offshore wind.
Comments on this nonsense should be sent to collaborateact@whitehouse.senate.gov
Feel free to include this article. Be polite but forceful.
This green turkey will not fly.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse who wants to criminalise ‘climate change denialism’, is supporting Mann in his attack on Steyn and Simberg and now wants to facilitate the extinction of Atlantic Whales. I can think of several comments I’d like to drop on his desk, none of which are fit to print here, however.
When is NOAA going to complete the study of the effects of off-shore windmills on the whales and other creatures involved?
What is the cause of the unusually large number of whale deaths recently? Are their deaths related to the building of off-shore windmills?
What’s the answer, NOAA?
They systematically ignore your question. I have even described the needed study in some detail. See my
https://www.cfact.org/2023/07/11/the-whale-killing-study-the-feds-are-afraid-to-do/
Rhode Island spent $300 million for five 6 MW offshore wind turbines that sell electricity to utilities at 21 c/kWh, escalating at 2.5%/y for 20 years
That price would be double without 50% subsidies
Whitehouse wants more of such boondoggles to do some shilling for EUROPEAN wind companies, while the impoverished, over-taxed, over-regulated Rhode Island folks are paying through the nose for electricity
Does Whitehouse have a tin ear? He does not give a damn about driving whales, porpoises and dolphins to extinction.
https://tos.org/oceanography/article/acoustic-impacts-of-offshore-wind-energy-on-fishery-resources-an-evolving-source-and-varied-effects-across-a-wind-farms-lifetime
US Offshore Wind Electricity Production and Cost
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-s-largest-offshore-wind-system-developer-abandons-two-major
Electricity production about 30,000 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, lifetime capacity factor = 105,192,000 MWh, or 105.2 TWh. The production would be about 100 x 105.2/4000 = 2.63% of the annual electricity loaded onto US grids.
Electricity Cost, c/kWh: Assume a $550 million, 100 MW project consists of foundations, wind turbines, cabling to shore, and installation, at $5,500/kW.
Production 100 MW x 8766 h/y x 0.40, CF = 350,640,000 kWh/y
Amortize bank loan for $385 million, 70% of project, at 6.5%/y for 20 y, 9.824 c/kWh.
Owner return on $165 million, 30% of project, at 10%/y for 20 y, 5.449 c/kWh
Offshore O&M, about 30 miles out to sea, 8 c/kWh.
Supply chain, special ships, ocean transport, 3 c/kWh
All other items, 4 c/kWh
Total cost 9.824 + 5.449 + 8 + 3 + 4 = 30.273 c/kWh
Less 50% subsidies (ITC, 5-y depreciation, interest deduction on borrowed funds) 15.137 c/kWh
Owner sells to utility at 15.137 c/kWh; developers in NY state, etc., want much more.
Not included: At a future 30% wind/solar on the grid:
Cost of onshore grid expansion/reinforcement, about 2 c/kWh
Cost of a fleet of plants for counteracting/balancing, 24/7/365, about 2.0 c/kWh
In the UK, in 2020, it was 1.9 c/kWh at 28% wind/solar loaded onto the grid
Cost of curtailments, 2.0 c/kWh
Cost of decommissioning, i.e., disassembly at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites
Just in case you doubt the above numbers, here are some numbers from “the horse’s mouth”
New York State had signed contracts with EU big wind companies for four offshore wind projects
Sometime later, the companies were trying to coerce an additional $25.35 billion (per Wind Watch) from New York ratepayers and taxpayers over at least 20 years, because they had bid at lower prices than they should have.
New York State denied the request on October 12, 2023; “a deal is a deal”, said the Commissioner
Owners want a return on investment of at least 10%/y, if bank loans for risky projects are 6.5%/y, and project cost inflation and uncertainties are high
The about 3.5% is a minimum for all the years of hassles of designing, building, erecting, and paperwork of a project
The project prices, with no subsidies, would be about two times the agreed contract price, paid by Utilities to owners. That means, the effect of subsidies reduced the contract price by 50%.
All contractors had bid too low. When they realized there would be huge losses, they asked for higher contract prices.
It looks like the contract prices will need to be at least $150/MWh, for contractors to make money.
Those contract prices would be at least 60% higher than in 2021
Oersted, Denmark, Sunrise wind, contract price $110.37/MWh, contractor needs $139.99/MWh, a 27% increase
Equinor, Norway, Empire 1 wind, contract price $118.38/MWh, contractor needs $159.64/MWh, a 35% increase
Equinor, Norway, Empire 2 wind, contract price $107.50/MWh, contractor needs $177.84/MWh, a 66% increase
Equinor, Norway, Beacon Wind, contract price $118.00/MWh, contractor needs $190.82/MWh, a 62% increase
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/liars-lies-exposed-as-wind-electricity-price-increases-by-66-wake
NOTE: Empire Wind 2, 1260 MW, near Long- Island, was cancelled.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/equinor-bp-cancel-contract-sell-offshore-wind-power-new-york-2024-01-03/
It’s a bill that will go exactly nowhere. But the next time there’s another manufactured “crisis” it will end up as a “shovel-ready” project to be lumped into a massive 2,000 page “rescue” bill. Because Democrats never let a good crisis go to waste, as Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel famously preached. But just for fun . . .
Dear Sheldon,
I enjoyed reading your offshore wind proposal, especially that little joke about “the protection of the environment”. Nice one. At first I thought you were serious about building wind farms in the ocean, but that clause gave it away. You want environmentalists to kill the project with endless litigation protecting whales and sea birds from those 700 foot tall bird blenders. I like your thinking. It makes you look like you’re doing the ‘right thing’ but your crazed constituents won’t let you. Probably just as well since offshore wind farms are just about the most expensive form of electricity yet invented. Looking forward to more creative legislative proposals from your office.
Sincerely,
Bemused in Bristol (RI)
The mockery will go over his head.
He went to St Paul private school, then to Yale, then to University of Virginia to get a law degree. His parents were diplomats. Totally dyed in the wool establishment!
He has not one iota of idea regarding energy systems and their costs and impacts
He is just another one of those useless specimens promoted way above their level of competence, because of CONNECTIONS, and conniving with like-minded folks, behind closed doors, all to the disadvantage of over-taxed, over-regulated folks, trying to make ends meet in a stagnant economy, with stagnant real spendable wages after taxes, surcharges and fees, in a high-inflation, high-interest economy
Well, all bolshiecrat politicians are that because they are suited for no other livelihood. They would be parking cars otherwise.
Com’on stinkerp!
“In an unusual step, a US Senator is asking for comments on his draft law designed to “facilitate” offshore wind development.”
The senator went to the heart of the problem, there isn’t enough offshore wind! He wants to facilitate a remedy for this problem.
It’s called satire.
Clearly, the environmental impact of building, operating, and maintaining such an under-ocean grid will be monstrous.
But the wind is free and its work will set us free won’t it?
Energy bills must rise to pay for net zero, says Siemens Energy boss (yahoo.com)
Meanwhile presumably so as not to be a burden on the grid Arrival prepares to exit-
Electric van maker Arrival inches closer to insolvency – Sky News (msn.com)
While The Guardian becomes the true defender of British Capitalism-
Conservative hostility to net zero proves the party has turned its back on British capitalism (msn.com)
Remember, he’s best described as Senator Outhouse.
When will senator outhouse and his ilk realize the are pushing the proverbial up hill with a teaspoon
If you really believe (or have taken bribes) that carbon dioxide is a problem,build Nuclear
If you have taken bribes from the wind industry quit politics
If you believe that your voters want you to impoverish them with insane energy prices quit politics
Thanks, HB. Hope you don’t mind but I’m stealing your wife words for use elsewhere.
wise
He is just double-dipping, getting his government loot, plus fees from lobbyists
This proposal is more like a Green Dodo than a Green Turkey. Turkeys can fly a bit. This Dodo however will also kill Whales.
You can’t tell the climate changers anything anywhere-
‘Complete disaster’: Net zero ‘pushing up’ Australians’ power bills (msn.com)
Number of UK businesses in ‘critical’ financial distress skyrockets (msn.com)
Print more money and that’ll fix the weather.
I think you’ve already hit peak Green and it’s all downhill from here Senator-
SolarEdge to lay off 16% of workforce to trim operating costs (msn.com)
Getting harder to print your way out of it.
PS: After all this is what happens when you do and it’s called crowding out-
Australian rents hit new record amid housing crisis (msn.com)
Senator Lawfare, Senator Criminalize Speech, Senator Watermelon, take your pick. Sheldon is not the sharpest tool in the shed, but then again when your colleagues are the likes of Ed Markey and Mazie Hirono a below-average intellect seems a genius in comparison.
And how many submarines will it take to cripple our extensive under ocean power grid?
“Ukrainians” on “sailboats” are all the rage, and apparently have a pass on attacking NATO assets.
Not many as the standard design has an enormous “backbone” with something like 50 of the world’s biggest capacity power lines running together. The wind generators all feed into that and it then feeds all the State grids. So easy to bust.
Note too that subs can easily hide inside the huge wind tower arrays where external sonar cannot accurately penetrate the hundreds of steel towers.
The problem is that the science behind the building of ever more windmills and even of Net Zero itself is faulted. Just read this from senior scientists of both MIT and Princeton.
https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Challenging-Net-Zero-with-Science-digital-CO2-Coalition.pdf
That looks like a good article.
From the link:
“The authors [Happer and Lindzen] find that Net Zero – the global movement to eliminate fossil fuels and its emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases – to be scientifically invalid and a threat to the lives of billions of people.”
There it is: The Bottom Line: CO2-phobia is scientifically invalid and CO2-phobes are a threat to the lives of billions of people.
(I’ll read the rest of the paper when I get time)
For the life of me I can not understand the reason for politicians to be in charge of our energy production. Paraphrasing William F. Buckley he said he would rather be led by the first 500 names in the phone book than the current government. Government should never run or own any enterprise.
Meanwhile in Senator Whitehouse’s home state of Rhode Island:
https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/2024/01/22/environmental-laws-that-impeded-pipelines-for-years-could-trip-up-bidens-sprint-toward-offshore-wind/
They are proposing 2,000 miles of transmission lines. What are the losses through that much distance?
The Plymouth Marine Laboratory in the UK has made a survey of fishermen operating in the vicinity of offshore wind turbines.
The whole purpose of the entire wind/solar/transmission/battery system “transition” is to reduce and then eliminate CO2 emissions.
The reality is that far more CO2 will be emitted if this system is built than if it never existed.
This folly is just an elaborate perpetual motion machine which consumes fossil fuels in it’s construction, and offsets the energy consumption in both time and location to make it appear to be working. It isn’t, and never will be.
We need to promote climate realism and not try to prevent climate denial. Electric traction is, of course very sensible and attractive. Indeed the world should see far more Trolley Buses than the idiotic trams that cost us so much and which necessitates digging up the roads. However, when electric vehicles are to be powered by Lithium Cells the issue become nonsensical. In reality they should of course be powered by hydrogen fuel cells – a decision identified many years ago by the earth moving company JC Bamford. We now see many new ways of generating hydrogen cheaply and of course filling up with hydrogen is similar to filling up with petrol.
The present lunacy of lithium-battery cars makes them ridiculously expensive both to ‘buy & run’ and to insure. . It can cost tens of thousands of pounds to replace an EV’s battery – sometimes only after four or five years use since new. Check how much a Ferrari EV battery replacement costs. The second hand price of EVs is now so low that all insurance companies now scrap any EV with minor damage and their insurance rates have (in the UK) gone up by 75% in the past year. On top of that the ability to charge one’s own car at home relies on you having a house with off road access and you the owner spending about £1-2k on a home charger. Most of us living in terraced houses simply need not apply! Worse, charging en-route to almost anywhere a few miles away currently takes a long time, hours if others want to do the same as you. Who in their right mind would ever consider electric traction until hydrogen is available nation wide?
And as for the equally nonsensical goal of net zero just read this scientific analysis: https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/2023-02-23-Challenging-Net-Zero-with-Science.pdf