It’s the feel-good story of the week, if you don’t mind taking joy from others’ misfortunes. When it comes to the wind and solar energy grifters, I don’t mind a bit taking joy from their misfortunes.
The last few days bring the news that apparently the majority of the remaining wind and solar electricity projects still in development in New York State are under imminent threat of cancelation. At this point the details are sketchy, and nobody is attributing the news to any named source as far as I can find. Nevertheless, the story is sufficiently widely-reported from normally reliable sources that I’m ready to give it credit.
The Albany Times-Union appears to have been the first with the story in a piece from April 12 with the headline “Clean energy projects in NY on hold as battle over costs escalates.” The gist is that the developers of some two dozen “clean energy” (wind and solar) projects in upstate New York have approached the State and demanded more money above agreed prices in order to proceed with previously contracted developments. Unless they get the additional funds, they are threatening to walk away from the projects. Excerpt:
Nearly two dozen of New York’s clean energy projects may be scrapped because they are financially impractical, a possible outcome that would exacerbate the state’s struggling efforts to meet increasing power demands while also ensuring the electric grid becomes less dependent on fossil fuels. The stalled wind and solar projects would power roughly 2 million homes, but the developers want to renegotiate state contracts to reflect tariffs and rising labor costs not factored in when their deals were struck between 2023 and early 2025. Without more revenue, the projects won’t be economically viable and will need to be canceled, according to a trade organization representing them.
The Times-Union piece does not contain a list of projects threatened with cancelation, nor the names of their developers in question. However, it does contain this quote from one Deanna Cohen, identified as a spokesperson for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA):
The authority “expects its developers to honor their commitments,” spokeswoman Deanna Cohen said. “The competitive bidding process is designed to protect consumers and result in fair and cost-effective contracts.”
Corroborating the Times-Union story, here is a piece yesterday from FingerLakes1.com. Excerpt:
According to Public Power NY, developers are signaling they may walk away from projects after the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority declined to renegotiate contracts to account for higher costs tied to tariffs and inflation. . . . The potential cancellations could significantly impact New York’s renewable energy pipeline at a time when the state is already behind pace on targets established under the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act.
Well, NYSERDA, what are you going to do if the developers of most of your renewable-energy projects just walk away?
Readers here with long memories may recall the nearly identical saga that played out from 2023 to 2025 involving New York’s grand schemes for offshore wind developments to replace most of its fossil fuel power plants. I covered this situation in various pieces over that time period, including this one from April 17, 2025 that included an overview of the entire history. The short version is that beginning in 2019 New York State entered into fixed-price contracts (in the range of $80-90/MWh) with big-time developers (Equinor, Ørsted, etc.) to develop 4+ gigawatts of off-shore wind turbines in the Atlantic Ocean; but in September 2023 the developers all came in and demanded big price increases and threatened to cancel. The State (through NYSERDA) initially bluffed and blustered that it was going to hold the developers to their contracts. But after multiple months of that, NYSERDA caved and re-bid the contracts, ending in early 2024 with contracts with the same developers at nearly-doubled prices in the range of $150/MWh. And then President Trump swept into office in January 2025 and blew the whole thing “out of the water” as they say. (At least one of the off-shore projects has since been revived under some kind of deal between the Trump administration and Governor Hochul. However, the rest of the off-shore projects look rather dead at this point.).
So with regard to the upstate and on-shore projects, we are now at the place where we were in September 2023 with the off-shore projects. Does the State hold any more cards this time around? It may hold even fewer cards this time, because many of these upstate developments have likely qualified for federal tax benefits that, in light of the One Big Beautiful Bill, will no longer be available to anyone who starts today from scratch.
Another option for New York, and by far the best one, would be take this opportunity to walk away from the renewable energy fantasy. In any re-bid of the on-shore wind contracts, the prices are likely to be double to triple the price that could be had from a brand new natural gas plant. And the power from a natural gas plant would be dispatchable and reliable, instead of the intermittent power from wind turbines or solar panels that is never there when you really need it. I don’t think that our Governor and bureaucrats are quite ready to go that route yet, but they are getting closer with every passing day.
New York was apparently doing a “demand the impossible” on energy, with it being a failure.
So, just another renewables “rolling cluster-fvck”?
Nek minit, the legacy press will be claiming this phenomenon is
“unprecedented”.
“It’s the feel-good story of the week, if you don’t mind taking joy from others’ misfortunes.”
Francis, that’s why sport and the internet and, well, life exists.
he he..
Does the “subsidy” money from the Government get refunded by the company..
… or it this just another way to shuffle funds to far-left companies so they can pay Democrat donations ?
The rumors are most likely true, even tho not yet confirmed. The underlying reason is pretty simple.
NY can ignore reality (renewable problems), but not the consequences of ignoring reality. Those consequences are now coming home to roost.
Without Fed subsidies, no less than Warren Buffet (who owned a bunch via his Iowa utility) said they made no sense. Trump cut the subsidies—so they make no sense.
Rud,
The Democrats want to concentrate on the grifting and grafting programs, such as FAKE SNAP, FAKE DAYCARE, FAKE WHATEVER, etc., that are more of a sure thing to produce the right $results for Democrats
Democrats have come to realize their wind, solar, battery, heat pump, EV etc., gigs are losers.
ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY
NEW YORK STATE DYSFUNCTIONAL ENERGY POLICY
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-york-state-dysfunctional-energy-policy
.
Offshore wind, owned/controlled by European governments and companies, would have serious disadvantages for the US regarding environmental impact, national security, economic competitiveness, and sovereignty
.
Western countries cajoling Third World countries into Wind/Solar and loaning them high-interest money to do so, will forever re-establish a colonial-style bondage on those recently free countries.
What is generally not known, the more weather-dependent W/S systems, the less efficient the traditional generators, as they inefficiently (more CO2/kWh) counteract the increasingly larger ups and downs of W/S output. See URL
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reductions-due-to-wind-energy-less-than-claimed
.
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 GDP.
.
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
.
Nuclear, gas, coal and reservoir hydro plants are the only rational way forward.
Ignore CO2, because greater CO2 ppm in atmosphere is essential for: 1) increased green flora to increase fauna all over the world, and 2) increased crop yields to better feed 8 billion people.
.
Net-zero by 2050 to-reduce CO2 is a super-expensive suicide pact, to:
1) increase command/control by governments, and
2) enable the moneyed elites to become more powerful and richer, at the expense of all others, by using the foghorn of the government-subsidized/controlled Corporate Media to spread scare-mongering slogans and brainwash people, already for at least 50 years, extremely biased CNN, MSNBC, NPR, PBS, NBC ABC, CBS come to mind.
.
Empire Wind
.
Owned by Norway, 810 MW; turnkey capital cost $5 Billion; Bank loans $3 Billion; Investors stake $2 Billion; Cost/kW = $5 Billion/810 MW = $6170/kW
New York State Utilities will pay foreign Owners 15.5 c/kWh for 20 to 25 years
New York State Utilities will mark this up before averaging it into their cost of purchased electricity.
Ratepayers and taxpayers are being screwed
.
Per various laws, the federal and state government will pay enough subsidies, so the foreign Owners can sell for 15.5 c/kWh, for 20 to 25 years, instead of 31 c/kWh, without any subsidies, such as:
.
1) Federal and state tax credits, up to 50% (Community tax credit of up to 10% – Federal tax credit of 30% – State tax credit and other incentives of up to 10%),
2) 5-y Accelerated Depreciation write off the entire project,
3) Loan interest deduction to reduce any taxable profits from whatever source.
Subsidies shift costs from project Owners to ratepayers, taxpayers, government debt
.
In general, utilities are forced to pay at least:
15 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from fixed offshore wind systems
18 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from floating offshore wind
.
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 far-flung 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 means 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 means 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
Total ADDER 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 11 c/kWh
.
Offshore wind full cost of electricity FCOE = 30 c/kWh + 11 c/kWh = 41 c/kWh, no subsidies
Offshore wind full cost of electricity FCOE = 15 c/kWh + 11 c/kWh = 26 c/kWh, 50% subsidies
The 11 c/kWh is for various measures required by wind and solar. Power plant to landfill cost basis.
This compares with 7 c/kWh + 3 c/kWh = 10 c/kWh from gas, coal, nuclear, large reservoir hydro plants.
“The stalled wind and solar projects would power roughly 2 million homes,”
How can they power 2 million homes when they produce nothing 2/3 of the time?
In the Pacific Northwest wind had a big week. Today (Friday the 17th) at 7:30 pm, the wind went away and power from falling water has responded.
Not to paint too broadly, but out on Whidbey Island in the past week, we had several just about windless days in a row.
Simple. Those homes are also not powered 2/3 of the time. Now, if you are a homeowner, it matters a bit which 2/3 of the 24 hour day. I suspect that on winter nights, the electric powered furnace not functioning might be a bit inconvenient.
Not to worry. Mayor Mamdani and his ‘warmth of collectivism’ will step in to save the day on those cold winter nights.
“Warmth of collectivism.” Is that the modern term for the heat generated when social dissidents, like witches and heretics, are burned at the stake?
Just asking for a friend!
No, it’s when you’re burning your government issued furniture for warmth, while eating your government issued cheese.
Problem is also, if you are a system operator, the other 1/3 of the time when your wind and solar power is producing way over demand. From excess capacity you have installed in order to have anything at all during the calm cold dark winter evenings.
Not just it doesn’t produce when you need it, it also produces way over demand when you don’t need it and cannot use it.
Yep. Here in Britain almost 45GW of unreliables were added to the grid between 2009 – 2024 whilst 33GW of dispatchable power disappeared. Total capacity increased around 20% but electricity generated fell by over 24%.
On 8th Jan 2025 NESO paid £20m in a single evening to balance the system and the grid at one time was within 1% of being overwhelmed.
Same as here in Australia; all about homes powered, never about industrial requirements
Of all time, wind is resting 65% of the time, and solar is resting 85% of the time, as are the grid extensions that tie wind and solar systems to the grid.
Somebody needs to tell these climate protesters that their beloved NY State climate law and the state’s transition to renewables are treading on thin ice.
Albany Climate Rally
Perhaps mankind we’ll learn to limit his city size, because big cities drive him mad.
Her mad
They/them mad
Sometimes the Dems attack plan “for the children and consumers” crosses wires and electrocutes itself.
Remember that when you are talking about libtards, you are speaking of the most recently and most thoroughly brainwashed! Rather than skepticism, they are programmed for gullibility; they believe that a tribal shaman is as credible as any trained scientist.
What is really surprising is how seldom they self-destruct, and how effective they have been at shaping the media narrative. I’d guess that the boatloads of funds acquired through bribery, crime, and corruption have been put to “good” use for the latter!
Wind and solar are neither “renewable” nor “clean”. And they are wholly unsuitable for grid delivered electrical power. They also are net energy negative when managed on the grid. Other than that, they’re fine.
Wind and solar are called renewables because they don’t have a long lifespan so you have to keep renewing them every few years.
So, Mrs. Lincoln, aside from that, how did you like the play?
I confess I could not understand anything which was being reported in this article.
Well seems so that lefties cry out fire when the house is already reduced to ashes, or are they slowly wisening up? Schadenfreude indeed…let them burn sarc
https://dailysceptic.org/2026/04/17/cracks-appear-in-climate-consensus-as-germanys-energy-minister-admits-renewable-energy-is-ruining-the-country/
Ya gotta hand it to the Climate Grifters with the chutzpah of demanding more money, or else. Hey Climate Grifters, HOW ABOUT NO!
This may give the Governor more leverage to push back the Climate Act targets as is now being negotiated with the Legislature.
Good points in this article. Keep the pressure on. The misconceptions about “climate” “leadership” cannot survive here in NY or anywhere. Let’s just hope the collapse happens before we are completely crushed by the misguided policies.
Francis Menton is right to have identified natural gas-fired power plants as the way forward for now. New capacity in the combined-cycle configuration would be most efficient and reliable, as new nuclear plants of advanced design are pursued for the long term.
Whatever money New York has already invested in those projects is gone. So the question is, does New York want to throw good money after bad, or just cut their losses. My money’s on cutting their losses.
It’s other people’s money, and they still are benefitting from the graft.
They will continue throwing good money after bad until there is no more money to throw.
If you consider individual human motive – more for me at someone else’s expense – then you arrive at New York leadership driving something they knew all along would not work because it was good for the New York leadership that drove it. Hochul’s political career might be a victim.
(meaning she’s making best of the sh– someone else deposited on her)
Gavin Newsom for New York Governor!
Where are all the trolls who can usually be counted on to proclaim that renewables are so cheap, they don’t need subsidies?
It seems to me that just a few days ago an article by Matt Ridley in Britain’s The Spectator emphasized that despite massive subsidies, renewables haven’t proved to be superior to fossil fuels, hydro or nuclear in reliability or cost-effectiveness. So it’s no surprise that New York is arriving at the same conclusions and needs to be commended at taking action to stop the money drain in trying to prop up what’s obviously an inferior energy source whose costs were likely to adversely affect taxpayers.
More good news.
You know what’s funny? Listening to podcasters and the like attempt to pronounce “Schadenfreude”.
“these upstate developments have likely qualified for federal tax benefits that, in light of the One Big Beautiful Bill, will no longer be available to anyone who starts today from scratch.
Another option for New York, and by far the best one, would be take this opportunity to walk away from the renewable energy fantasy”
2026 is going to be the big “walk away” year. The next two months leading up to the July 4, 2026 deadline will be glorious. It should have happened in 2008 when horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking destroyed any possible justification to continue with RE “Ruinous Energy.”