Paris Apodaca
Energy Fellow
Oregon and Washington joined a broader legal challenge to the Trump administration’s pause on new wind energy approvals, arguing the freeze threatens planned projects, grid reliability and state clean-energy mandates.
In 2025, Washington state generated the most hydroelectric power compared to any other state, accounting for 85% of its renewable power — with wind at 11%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Also in 2025, hydroelectric power made up 45% of Oregon’s total electricity net generation and wind contributed 14%.
Oregon’s Department of Justice did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
“We need the resources to meet demand, maintain reliability, and keep energy affordable, especially as we phase out polluting fossil fuels that make our communities sick and fuel disasters through climate change, Washington has state laws that require the phaseout of these polluting fuels,” Mike Faulk, deputy communications director for the Washington state attorney general’s office told the DCNF.
Washington State Attorney General Nick Brown also cited five different energy projects on hold due to the federal freeze. (RELATED: Socialist-Run Seattle Now Leads Nation In Alarming Statistic)
“Climate change is also a threat to hydro power as droughts and extreme heat have become more common, as the International Hydropower Association acknowledges,” Faulk concluded.
“The federal government claims we’re in an energy emergency and yet unlawfully stands in the way of projects seeking to harness an excellent renewable source of energy—wind,” Brown said in a press release. “We’re determined to fight this administration’s obstruction of projects needed to power our economy, increase clean energy supply, and protect Washington’s air and water.”
Oregon also cited similar claims, stating the blue state needs wind power to comply with its green energy priorities.
“Oregonians are counting on these wind projects for good paying jobs and cleaner energy,” Oregon Attorney General Rayfield told local Oregon outlet KGW8. “The federal administration’s actions are unfair and unlawful, and we’re fighting to keep Oregonians’ energy priorities moving forward.”
Sorry Hactivists, pausing unreliables (Wind) does not negatively affect grid reliability…
Policies that act to eliminate Reliable generation sources (Gas, Coal and Nuclear) do negatively affect grid reliability though. Only Gas, Coal and Nuclear can guarantee to generate power on demand.
.
You can’t DEMAND the wind to blow if nature says no!
Nor can you command the Sun to shine at night during Peak Demand!
Pausing Wind can not affect grid reliability because Wind hasn’t been part of the energy grid
for most of the time – and the grid problems only started when wind became part of the mix.
On top of that wind needs renewable backups to keep the grid reliable.
The most interesting thing in case of the wind is –
Why are those who call themselves progressive so hellbent on
installing tech from the dark ages?
To maybe bring us back to the Dark Ages? Less food, less people, manure being burned for fuel and more control and power to our “betters”?
Solution to Oregon and Washington, place the generation on State Owned Property and build and subsidize with State Funding. States can still do most anything without Federal $$$ being involved.
And, from what I know (which I’m sure will be corrected by any more knowledgeable than I) the Feds can’t tell the States how and where to spend their own funds.
The feds can block spending on programs that are unconstitutional, such as programs that benefit only one race.
There is only one race, everything else is culture
They can if windmills interfere with radar for airline safety and/or national defense.
The green zealotry about the unreliables is desperate to survive and refuses to recognize reality, insisting on lies to support their case. The IRGC should be impressed.
I didn’t count the lies on my first reading of the original post. I might need more than one hand.
I came up wth six (-:
Correct –
the IRCG should finally accept Trumps truth that the USA has won on day 2,
that the war will only last 3-4 weeks – after winning on day 2.
Surrendering to a country that hasn’t won a war in decades is the only option.
They should stop shooting down US air vehicles all the time as all their air defenses
got destroyed months ago,
and stop hitting US bases as the US destroyed 99% of their missile stockpiles.
And refusing to recognize the reality that the USA breaks all agreements whenever they want to
and agreeing to an obvious ruse (an MOU that was by Trumps standards way worse than the JCPOA)
whose only intention was to have a pretend peace for the 250 year celebration and to protect the Space X IPO was indeed a huge mistake.
Trump just destroyed about 75 percent of Iran’s offensive capability to begin with, which he acknowledged. He paused to allow the Ayatollahs to come to their senses. They did not, so Trump is going after the other 25 percent now.
All that peace stuff goes out the window when we are faced with suicidal, religious maniacs acquiring nuclear weapons. We can’t afford to allow them to get that dangerous.
About Pick Axe Mountain, the place the Mad Mullahs are using to rebuild their nuclear program: I hear some pundits wringing their hands over Pick Axe Mountain because the facilities are buried too deep for our most powerful bombs.
Whether we can reach that far, I don’t know, but what I do know is that every buried structure requires an entrance and American firepower can certainly destroy the entrance to Pick Axe Mountain. If the door doesn’t work, those inside are trapped, and those outside stay outside. No work gets accomplished.
If the Mad Mullahs try to open the door, bomb it again. We can blow it up easier than they can rebuild it.
Can someone tell me what SxyxS’ rant has to do with wind facilities in the State of Washington. Then I can convey the information to Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell.
Deflection from the topic of conversation.
Sophistry.
Since you’ve gone totally off topic, let me bring you back on topic a little.
Perhaps the Mullah’s will propose a new MOU that will open the Straits of Hormuz and allow them to sell oil on the world market and donate the removed proceeds to Washington and Oregon’s wind power projects.
That would please all TDS democrats immensely wouldn’t it? Too bad they haven’t thought of this instead of chanting “Death to America” for 47 years.
Too bad Trump hadn’t thought this thru before starting a war America is already losing.
Story Tip (UK)
So here we have it, massive Scottish wind farm has a 20 year life and a £1.5billion repowering (albeit slightly uprated) cost.
The original total build cost (it was phased) is already about the same £1.5billion according to Google AI.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgl9vp4vqvo
With regard to the UK, I’m surpised that there has been no mention (I’m aware of) of the demise of Ed Miliband as Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero. (He’s now the Foreign Secretary.) But before you start celebrating, here’s the bad news. His replacement could be even worse.
https://order-order.com/2026/07/21/every-eco-mad-energy-policy-backed-by-burnhams-new-net-zero-secretary/
And I can only imagine the troubles he can cause as Foreign Secretary.
It appears the Andy Burnham wants to replace Mad Ed with someone who will make Milliband look good by comparison.
Block wind as a Establishment of Religion
issue, as the level of evidence in favor of
Renewables is essentially religious doctrine.
Can’t the Climate and Energy Liars come up with new material? It’s always the same old crap, and it’s boring and tiresome.
Morons. Adding wind to a grid, and prioritizing its use over dispatchable sources, DESTROYS “grid reliability.”
And “climate change” in the form of global warming does NOT increase frequency or severity of droughts – no matter what ideologically compromised “body” says so. Even the IPCC can’t hide that FACT.
How would you know?
Sounds like a sense of entitlement. But maybe the AGs will back up their “unlawful” claim with a specific description of a relevant law and how it is being violated. This is bluster in search of a Judge Boasberg.
MAGA is all in favor of limited federal government — until they decide that a local government accepts science , unlike the Orange Freak. So his cronies all salute, click their heels, and show their true authoritarian colors by cancelling a local wind project. The only hoax in this scenario seems to be MAGA’s commitment to states rights and science.
Another mindless harangue.
+100
Your demo buddies in Washington and Oregon are suing the Federal Government specifically on the basis of “States Rights”. Their State governments think they have a right to federal dollars. There is no other argument to be made.
Washington and Oregon are suing, not because they THINK they have a right. They KNOW they have a Constitutional right if the Congress has appropriated the funds.
All those windmill jobs Washington and Oregon politicians are talking about will be going to China.
Stick a fork in human-caused climate change. It’s dead, Jim!
The atmosphere will be surprised to learn what you say.
These people are simply odious mouthpieces for a variety of ideologies and financial interests. The very same people who claim to worry about grid resilience are often in favor of removing dams that provide hydro-power which help to balance the idiotic wind plants in the Northwest.
Informational:
These are the dams most mentioned regarding removal. The lower Snake River dams, including Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite, are classified as “run-of-river” dams. This means they rely on the natural flow of the river and have limited water storage capacity, which affects their power generation. Nevertheless, they are important for barge traffic and electricity. A prior State administration (and Biden Adm) claimed they could be removed (for salmon ehancement) only after their current contrbutions were replaced.
These States and the companies that have constructed these wind farms should be sued for every bird (all flying animals) that are killed by these machines. There really is no difference between a negligent person on a roadway (trucker driving into a row of stopped vehicles) and the blades of these wind turbines interfering in the paths of these eagles and bats and others. These birds did not deserve to die. The sky’s used to be safe for them.
These wind machine companies need to be forced to put on “blade guards” similar to the blade guards used to protect our kids in our houses from these turning fan blades that we stand on our floors, to cool our bodies.
Since far more birds are killed by buildings, they should first sue you, as the presumed owner of a home.
So tell us poor schmucks how many Golden Eagles fly into buildings, or bats for that matter, not to mention all the other ecological damages. FO and go bother somebody else.
Buildings are a far greater threat to birds than wind turbines. In the United States, collisions with building windows and glass kill up to 1 billion birds annually. In contrast, wind turbines are responsible for roughly 200,000 to 1 million bird deaths each year. Source: MIT
We can’t do without buildings. We darn sure can do without windmills.
Ok. But use that argument. The bird argument is silly, as the numbers show
The Democrat leaders of Washington State are like blue mold on a loaf of bread, although I doubt the mold has TDS or is even aware of Donald. The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) already has to balance about 11% wind and that intermittent carp requires considerable adjustments, about every 3rd day, with the water flow of the Columbia River. Meanwhile the lone nuclear facility [Columbia Generating Station] steadly provides just over 4% of the power.
Real leaders would be encouraging the building of several nuclear plants.
It would be interesting to read the Environmental Impact Statement that was prepared prior to these projects being approved.
I would not be surprised if a number of critical aspects were omitted.
Proof these blue areas don’t care about the environment or actual power generation.
And there you have it. Washington and Oregon are suing for subsidies. If wind power was such a great idea, they would not need to do that, all projects would pay for itself.
Since wind and solar are cheaper to build own and operate vs coal or gas plants, they eventually pay for themselves ( and most utilities earn a guaranteed return on investment) — but capital is needed first for any power plant.
Capital comes from private investors. If-and I mean IF-there was a profit to be made they would be at the door with checks in their hands. No profits, no investors. QED.
If the capital for this project came from private investors and not Congress, what gives the President the right to kill the project?
Swing and a miss, again.
You don’t know the answer either?
It’s 4:00 PM in Texas right now. The Texas Grid has 40,586 MW of installed wind capacity as of this moment. Currently, wind is producing………………….wait for it………….2,976 MW. That is 7.3% of its installed capacity. Right now our demand is 90,876 MW which is a record or very close to one. Reliability and wind nor solar should not to be in the same sentence….heck story.
For those of you who are recent newcomers to WUWT and who haven’t seen this comment before, here it is again:
TOPIC:
A Hypothetical 3,000 MW Baseload Wind & Solar Capacity Expansion for the US Northwest
BACKGROUND:
Here in the US Northwest, all future additions to the region’s power generation capacity will be coming from wind and solar. Recent analysis by the Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee (PNUCC) projects that 30,000 megawatts nameplate of new wind & solar will be needed by 2035 to support an annual average of 9,000 new megawatts of daily operational capacity.
The PNUCC predicts that periods will occur where that 30,000 MW nameplate of new wind and solar has such a low capacity factor it doesn’t produce nearly enough output to cover currently projected increases in daily demand.
THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM:
No one in the region’s power planning organizations has a clue as to how 30,000 new megawatts of nameplate wind and solar can be installed by 2035 in order to achieve 9,000 average new megawatts annually. Nor does anyone have a clue as to how the problem of very low capacity factors occurring in the summer and winter doldrums might be addressed.
AN EXERCISE IN POWER PLANNING:
Suppose we greatly reduce the expectation of 9,000 average annual megawatts and specify instead that a hypothetical wind and solar expansion will support 3,000 megawatts of new wind & solar baseload generation operating 24/7/365. The emphasis here is on ‘new baseload‘.
SYSTEM SPECIFICATION:
— The hypothetical wind & solar expansion matches the 24/7/365 performance of four new-build 1,100 MW nuclear reactors.
— The expanded wind & solar capacity produces 72,000 megawatt-hours daily; 3,000 megawatts instantaneous demand; for a total of 26,280,000 megawatt-hours per year.
— The integrated wind-solar-battery system includes 9,000 megawatts of nameplate wind; 9,000 megawatts of nameplate solar; and 3,600,000 megawatt-hours of battery storage.
— A 6X combined wind & solar overbuild reduces the volume of battery storage needed.
— Battery storage capacity is driven by seasonal requirements. A substantial drawdown occurs in late fall and winter. A substantial recovery occurs in early spring.
— Battery operating range: 0-100% full; 0-3.6 TWh stored; 0-50 days reserve at 72,000 MWh per day; 8% loss on charge; 12% loss on discharge.
— Winter storage is exhausted once every decade for periods of up to seven days. Total system output then falls from 72,000 megawatt-hours per day to 6,000 megawatt-hours per day.
— The hypothetical system supplies all ancillary grid support services; e.g. frequency & voltage stabilization, reactive power, inertia, etc.
GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS:
This first graphic illustrates the wind & solar capacity factors experienced by the Bonneville Power Administration within its area of load balancing authority between 06/21/2022 and 06/21/2024. Note the powerful influence of seasonal variation in capacity factors as opposed to daily/weekly variation.
For the hypothetical 3,000 MW baseload of wind & solar, a second graphic illustrates: (1) which portion of the daily generation goes directly to baseload; (2) which portion goes into battery storage; (3) which portion is either exported or else curtailed; and (4) which portion is drawn from battery storage in order to reliably produce 72,000 megawatt-hours per day.
COSTS:
The initial capital cost of this hypothetical 3,000 megawatt baseload expansion is possibly two trillion dollars if both system purchase costs and system installation costs are fully included. In other words, roughly twenty-five times the initial capital cost of four new-build 1,100 MW reactors at 20 billion dollars per reactor.
Moreover, while a nuclear power plant can operate for sixty years or more, possibly even a hundred years, a wind & solar capacity expansion must be repeated every 20 to 25 years at a similar capital cost for the next replacement cycle.
There are two sides to most stories. This is only one side.
Can you give us even the slightest hint as to what the other side might be?
Reasoned analysis.
For the past 4 days wind in the BPA mix has been bouncing of the bottom [near Zero to about 500MW] with current wind speeds {4pm 7/22/26} of 4 to 7 mph on the hills east of the Cascades. The Ellensburg airport [KELN] reports 100°F, Tri-cities airport [KPSC] posted 101°. I suspect there are a few A/Cs on. 🙂
John, roughly 2800 MW of nameplate wind is installed within the BPA’s area of load balancing authority.
The annual average capacity factor for wind in the BPA’s area of load balancing authority is 25%. A quick look at today’s BPA real-time power generation graph would put wind’s average capacity factor for the past four days at roughly 10%.
In the last four years, we have seen periods lasting twelve to fifteen days in January and early February where wind’s capacity factor in the US Northwest drops to 5% and even less.
Washington state’s official plan for a wind and solar future depends in large part on building new capacity in other states, much of it in Montana and Wyoming; and then building new transmission capacity across Idaho to feed Washington and Oregon.
In a brief sentence or two, the official plan contains words which imply that the 38 separate areas of load balancing authority within the Western Interconnection must be merged into one gigantic area of load balancing authority in order for the state’s plan to become a reality.
Who is going to pay for this, and what will it take in time and money to get that merging of areas accomplished? As far as I am aware, no studies have been done which get a handle on either the costs or the schedule.
Thanks for the 2800 number. I could not find one and would have had to guesstimate.
Any balanced assessment of wind/solar/battery systems will conclude that they are net energy negative. That’s why they cost three to five times per kw/hr more than coal, natural gas, nuclear, and hydro power systems. The cost difference pays for the conventional energy used to make the “renewables”.
Prove me wrong, give me any examples of a “renewable” system using predominantly its own power to produce more “renewables”. I’ll wait….
Citation?
That the best you got? Go home.
So you have no sources or citations either. It seems WUWT is filled with amateurs who invent stuff out of thin air.
That’s why the air is thin. All need to stop using it to invent stuff. Sasquatches, Pikas, and Mountain Goats are the major culprits — I notice when I hike the air gets thinner as I reach their normal elevations.
That explains a lot.
So you have no sources or citations either. It seems WUWT is plagued with amateur ideologists who invent stuff out of thin air, then insult the community trying to establish an appeal to authority (your authority) that you know all and are honestly discussing the topic at hand.
Flame Warrior.
Oh yes I do have a source. The peer reviewed science. You can verify the validity of my posts by going to the IPCC Sixth Assessment, reports from the National Academy of Science, NASA Earth Sciences, or any major University.
But since WUWT amateurs prefer to self-produce malarkey , they usually reject the IPCC, NAS, or NASA.
“The federal government claims we’re in an energy emergency and yet unlawfully stands in the way of projects seeking to harness an excellent renewable source of energy—wind,” states AG Brown. If only we could produce energy from the hot air emitted from AG Brown’s mouth.