By David Wojick
Three environmental groups have formally petitioned NOAA to revoke its prior marine mammal harassment authorizations citing new science that harassment can be deadly. The specific target of the petition is the Empire Wind project, but the grounds given clearly apply to all offshore wind development.
The Petition includes a number of recent studies as attachments and links to these are included in the press release (PR) here.
Central to this action is the pioneering work of Professor Apostolos Gerasoulis that I reported on a year ago here.
Gerasoulis is now president of Save the East Coast Inc. which is one of the three petitioning groups. Here is his succinct summary from the PR:
“Our petition provides robust scientific evidence demonstrating that offshore wind activities —notably seismic sonar surveys and pile-driving — pose significant and immediate threats to endangered marine mammals, especially the endangered North Atlantic right whale and protected humpback whales.”
For each offshore wind project, NOAA authorizes the harassment of thousands of protected marine mammals, harassment that is otherwise illegal under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The big Dominion project off Virginia is authorized to harass almost 60,000 critters.
NOAA takes the position that all this harassment is harmless, but the new science says otherwise. Gerasoulis presented his findings to NOAA last December, but they chose to ignore him. Now the confrontation is official.
In cases of willful neglect like this, a petition is required before the agency can be sued for ignoring the issue, if that is what happens. In colorful lawyer speak it is called “exhausting your administrative remedies.” This gives petitions great weight, so time will tell.
The other two groups are Protect Our Coast–Long Island and Green Oceans. The Petition calls for the immediate revocation of NOAA’s Empire Wind Letter of Authorization (LOA), which currently permits harm to a long list of marine mammals during the construction of the Empire Wind industrial offshore wind facility in the NY/NJ Bight.
Here is how the three groups put it:
“This Petition calls on NOAA to abrogate Empire Wind’s LOA due to substantial evidence that the permitted taking will have more than a ‘negligible’ impact on marine mammals, especially the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale. In fact, the contemporaneous pile driving of multiple projects from Virginia to New England is placing the NARW at imminent risk of devolving closer toward extinction. These takes are not merely behavioral disruption; the impact includes injury and death.”
Thanks to the new science, they are able to cite specific numbers that help quantify the threat to whales and other marine mammals. Here are three examples:
“Six concurrent offshore wind projects within critical whale migration routes threaten approximately 43% of the critically endangered NARW population annually. Over five years of construction, the cumulative impact could potentially affect up to 76% of the population, clearly violating the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).”
“NOAA continues to utilize an outdated acoustic harassment threshold of 160 dB, ignoring modern research advocating a significantly lower and safer threshold of 120 dB. Independent acoustic studies by Rand Acoustics recorded sonar noise levels up to 226 dB near OSW survey vessels, substantially exceeding safe limits, thus posing severe risks of permanent auditory and physiological harm.”
“Research indicates pile-driving noise is approximately 3.2 times more harmful to whales than sonar surveys, dramatically increasing risks of permanent auditory injuries and fatalities.”
With this Petition, the issue of NOAA ignoring the threat to whales from offshore wind takes on a new level of scientific seriousness. How will NOAA respond? Stay tuned to CFACT to see how this deadly issue plays out. Save the whales from offshore wind.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, the Trump administration is no fan of wind in general, so I really doubt any vigorous defense of the Biden era NOAA permits.
There was a compromise in the reconciliation bill to allow for some offshore wind, but any rationale to stop it will be taken.
And in Idaho…
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scott-mcclallen/2025/08/08/trump-administration-cancels-large-wind-farm-in-idaho-n2661586
But but but, what’s more important – saving a few whales or saving the planet?
Eagles
Well, Joey Biden had priorities….like $5.5 million in taxpayer’s money to Uganda for DEI programs….and millions to other countries too for similar Left Wing priorities…..whales can wait.
“Fossil Fuels”, specifically Kerosene saved the whales once already.
Perhaps cow flatulence and other methane can save the whales again…
Oops. Beat me too it.
Do petitions have any traction in the US or are they like ours?
In the UK the petition system has been cynically set up as a form of public pressure relief valve (keyboard warrior version). A petition may even get debated in the House. And then…
Next
So, in our case, they are an utter waste of time.
As I understand it a petition is step 1 and gives everybody time to get their attitudes in order…and give the lawyers time to arm up on both sides. That said, petitions can have real juice particularily if the “people” are really serious and really PO’d. Petitions are a well loved and well used American tradition and be quite effective at stirring the pot at all levels of Gov-local and Fed. The process isn’t necessarily fast, but the “people” are pretty PO’d about this bird, bat and whale killing business and Trump is on board, so I hope a faster solution. Besides, those things are ugly and are being forced on citizens by the Dems and greeniewhacks, and the resentment is very strong, partic with the urban/rural divide. Interesting times.
In cases of willful neglect like this, a petition is required before the agency can be sued for ignoring the issue, if that is what happens. In colorful lawyer speak it is called “exhausting your administrative remedies.” This gives petitions great weight, so time will tell.
Yes, those wind killing whales are a real problem…
You did that on porpoise!
Couldn’t resist it!
Waddaya call a Barbie Mermaid costume?
A Doll Fin!
Oh, ouch!
That’s a powerful tale, not just a fluke.
It’s a powerful tail.
Interesting…who gets to count how many “Critters” actually get “harassed” so it becomes known WHEN they have reached their Harassment Allotment and can get fined for exceeding their maximum harassment limit?
No one. It is a sham.
Or perhaps it is a Shamu?
It would be hilarious if they used Sonar pulses to search for the whales.
“environmental groups”. Lol 😂. Three right wing anti wind groups with ties to fossil energy companies
Might one consider the EPA to be an “environmental group” with ties to big government?
Are you saying that unless a group is left wing politically it can’t qualify as an “environmental” group?
Sounds a bit like Mann and others implying that unless a scientist supports “The Cause” they are not a “Climate Scientist”.
Nope. Not what I said. Why do deniers have such reading comprehension issues?
That is precisely what you said, it’s just that you are too immature to realize it.
Not what I said. Deniers lie
Why do leftists have such limited vocabularies –
they always refer to everyone / anyone who expresses doubt, need for additional info, a contrary viewpoint, etc, etc as “deniers”.
I guess it’s a symptom of ideology capture.
Because ideology and rationality cannot occupy the same mind space at the same time.
Did the mean word hurt your feelings 😢
No hurt feelings. Simply offended.
No “deniers” here.. (except you)
Tell us what is “denied” that you can provide solid scientific proof for.
Logic and reason are denied
By you, yes. We noticed.
As opposed to ties with big wind companies? But what is a tie? These three groups are not funded by fossil companies.
They are environmental because saving whales from wind is an environmental issue.
Your comments play on semantic confusion. A green syndrome.
Like most climanistas, he doesn’t need evidence or proof. He just knows that everyone who disagrees with the cult is evil.
“green” as in greed.
Translation: I can’t refute anything that has been said, so I’ll attack the messenger instead.
attack?.. with the equivalent of a soggy lettuce leaf. !
Yep, must be right-wing, as there are no left-wing groups that actually care about the environment. !!
It’s fossil energy that is killing marine creatures
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/sea-turtles-dolphins-and-whales-10-years-after-deepwater-horizon-oil
Fossil energy, particularly in the form of kerosene, put the final nail in the coffin of the whaling industry; thereby saving marine creatures.
Yep.
In direct analogy, you are basically saying it’s NOT the people that improperly use guns who kill people with them, it is the guns themselves that kill people.
OK, got it.
Beyond this, however, you need to know the following:
“Recent global estimates of crude-oil seepage rates suggest that about 47% of crude oil currently entering the marine environment is from natural seeps, whereas 53% results from leaks and spills during the extraction, transportation, refining, storage, and utilization of petroleum. The amount of natural crude-oil seepage is currently estimated to be 600,000 metric tons per year, with a range of uncertainty of 200,000 to 2,000,000 metric tons per year. Thus, natural oil seeps may be the single most important source of oil that enters the ocean, exceeding each of the various sources of crude oil that enters the ocean through its exploitation by humankind.“
—ref: “Natural seepage of crude oil into the marine environment”, K.A. Kvenvolden and C.K. Cooper, Geo-Marine Letters, 2003 {my bold emphasis added}
(https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70025353 )
In comparison, the 87-day Deepwater Horizon oil spill released 3.19 million barrels (134 million gallons) of oil into the ocean (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/news/deepwater-horizon-10-years-later-10-questions ) . . . those 3.19 million barrels would be equivalent to about 430,000 metric tons, or less than one year’s estimated amount of natural seepage!
In direct analogy you are trying to claim the killing of marine creatures by fossil energy companies doesn’t matter because animals die from natural causes. Once more it’s shown that deniers don’t care about logic or reason
Pot – kettle, Eric. You need to think. You are clearly a product of an education system that indoctrinates instead of teaching you to think for yourself. It is sad. I wonder if it is even possible for you to recover at this stage.
No, I never made or implied such a ridiculous claim.
Do you think for one second the operators/managers of the Deepwater Horizon oil well platform intentionally decided to allow that rig’s failure and to just dump oil worth (at the time) around USD $250 million into the waters of the Gulf of Mexico?
Then again, maybe you really do believe that accidents (even those originating from human stupidity) just do not happen in real life.
Finally, do you youself have any qualms about eating seafood that is the direct result of “killing of marine creatures” before they die from natural causes?
Now there’s a business idea – vegan end-of-spawn-run salmon.
Already skinned (it just fell off by itself).
Unsalted of course
Mmmmm.
There were intentional decisions made
which led to the killing of sea creatures
By offshore wind companies, certainly.
We are pleased you finally grok it.
Commonly known as fishing, shrimping, harvesting crabs and lobsters and abalone and octopuses, and harvesting algae . . . even whaling in more barbaric times. Now, we even have marine “farms” to enhance our ability to kill certain “sea creatures” for food.
Oh, and you probably don’t know (or respect) the fact that four of Jesus’ twelve disciples were known to be fishermen: Simon (Peter), Andrew, James, and John.
Stop “denying” that fossil fuels saved the whales from extinction.
No need for whale oil, whale bone etc etc..
Only denier here seems to be you.
Jeez, get a grip. There’s always been oil seeps unrelated to drilling-Hellzbelles, oil can be found in geodes -it’s pretty much everywhere; it’s a natural thing…see LA and La Brea, etc.for example.
My god you are an idiot. You really think because animals have from natural causes in the past that means humans can not cause animals to die 🤦♂️
It really is sad how hard you work to avoid seeing what you don’t want to see.
An alternative explanation is that his income depends on his not seeing or acknowledging it. Upton Sinclair noted a century ago that “it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not undertanding it.”
I’ll stick with reality.
Whose?
WTF logic is that? You high or what? Get out and look-really look-at the world as a whole and local geography anywhere-hydrocarbons are freaking everywhere in one form or another.
and vice-versa
So you want to install onshore and offshore wind turbines that you KNOW are going to kill birds and marine animals.
That is just truly disgusting. !
His reality is constantly killing the sea and avian life perpetually is much better than a limited accident.
Glad you understand the killings those offshore (human created) obscenities are causing.
The spill damage is not on the scale of offshore wind harassment. To date almost a million harassments have been authorized. Yet NOAA refuses to consider the death toll. That is what this petition is about.
Even if true, so what? Are you saying that because other things kill whales, it doesn’t matter that offshore wind kills whales?
Yes that is the standard empty reply, usually shipping killing whales. We can’t do without shipping but we sure can do without these ridiculous wind towers.
Shipping lanes were planned to avoid whale immigration paths as much as possible… to try to avoid whale collisions.
Off shore wind turbines push more whales into the shipping lanes, thus increasing whale collisions.
But leftist pseudo-environmentalists JUST DON’T CARE.
Accidents happen.
But what the offshore wind companies do is ON PURPOSE. !!
Just like onshore wind companies KNOW they are going to kill eagles and other first tier birds…
.. but JUST DON’T CARE !!
Wait, I know. They can just come up with a fake plan to “offset” the harm done to those whales by “helping” other whales. Problem solved!
Just like eagles!
Sounds like they got caught raising money to save whales but spending it on windmills.
If that is so then Sea Shepherd and Paul Watson may want to have a long and unpleasant discussion with them.
The irony.. fossil fuels basically saved the whales ( no killing for their oil). Now renewables looks like it’s starting the killing up again.
Oops. A few noted the irony already..
Where is Green Peace to defend the whales? Oh right, they may exist anymore.
I have a problem with a department having the authority to okay the harming or killing of animals especially animals that you and I would be punished for harming or killing. If there were no alternative energy sources and we would be forced to go without energy that would be one thing but we do have alternatives. Our alternatives are a much better source of energy so I see no reason for NOAA to allow any harassment or death. This is BS.
Well said, as usual Bob ! 🙂
I find it fascinating that those that protest oil as evil do so on electronics they would not have were it not for oil over an internet infrastructure that would not exist were it not for oil. Such hypocracy.
I also find it interesting comparing one or another oil spill/leak accident to sonic killings. What is missing is the amount of oil consumed in manufacturing, construction, operation, maintenance, and infrastructure when comparing to one or more oil spillage accidents. The point being those atrocities are intentional. Oil spills are accidents. To claim so much thought went into oil rigs and tankers completely ignores all the thinking and decisions that were employed to construct off shore whale killers and on shore raptor killers.
Try to debate with an alarmist and what do you get? Diversion, redefinitions, and insults.
Using the old dueling expression, it is not worth the powder.