5 ms·

> For now, the US has just two small wind farms off the coasts of Rhode Island and Virginia. That is astonishingly disappointing. Why is that? China and Europ

by ralfd 3y ago

> For now, the US has just two small wind farms off the coasts of Rhode Island and Virginia. That is astonishingly disappointing. Why is that? China and Europe have both more than 25 GW offshore windpower installed.

quags 3y ago
New Jersey is planning wind farms so that number should continue to rise over time. I grew up in New England but moved out many years ago. I remember wind farms off cape cod being extremely NIMBY and the argument was cape cod is unique and a wind farm should be else where - essentially I assume the argument of anyone living near an area that is going to get a wind farm. These are probably one of the more expensive areas of the state due to being by the water.
hulitu 3y ago
I would really want to know what is the impact of those wind farms on the marine ecosytem. We treat the ocean like a big dump place.
- MarkMarine 3y ago
  If putting up wind keeps CO2 out of the ocean, I would think it is net positive. Ocean acidification, less calcium available for making shells, and then the affect of ocean warming on coral and knock on effects of losing those coral ecosystems are pretty terrible for the whole marine ecosystem. A couple pylons for turbines, I doubt that scratches the surface. Everything thing in the ocean seems to LOVE structure. They build on our detritus as easily as rocks
- Analemma_ 3y ago
  It's probably very positive, actually. Provided you don't do something stupid like make them out of loose tires, structures in the ocean form an anchor around which ecosystems develop which wouldn't exist otherwise. Not to mention the effects on the ocean of rising temperatures, CO2 and deoxygenated dead zones are awful.
  - coredog64 3y ago
    In the Pacific (at least) there’s the concept of a “fish aggregating device” (FAD). Fishing boats build and deploy smallish structures that create a local environment that eventually results in the production of commercially valuable fish. Usually it’s just logs, rope, and such. Apart from the energy, an offshore wind farm would be a great sanctuary for fish. If you need to visit regularly for maintenance, bringing along a few extra FADs and the occasional marine biologist isn’t going to break the bank.
- dotnet00 3y ago
  Similar to how rocket launch sites make great wildlife sanctuaries due to keeping away human settlements, I would think that wind farms make great sanctuaries for marine life by keeping the area clear of normal fishing.
  - ForestCritter 3y ago
    yes and killing off the sea birds
- micromacrofoot 3y ago
  there’s some concern in new england about how they could affect the critically endangered right whales, but there’s little practical evidence of risk… and sometimes the risk is overblown by nimbys and fossil fuel companies who will align with anyone that agrees with them at this point the ocean temperature is a much greater risk
- tda 3y ago
  At least in the North Sea, wind parks have created large area's in which trawlers fishing is prohibited. This is really significant, as I believe the entire Dutch North Sea EEZ is trawled multiple times per year. This is really a massive undertaking, and is even permitted in the Natura2000 area's. Really nothing could stop the fishing lobby from destructing the bottom life on which the industry depends in a giant tragedy of the commons kind of way. Except now for wind farms. Now huge areas are off limits for fishing boats
- ako 3y ago
  So far seems to be positive for windfarms in the north sea: * https://www.ecowatch.com/marine-animals-offshore-wind-farm-habitats.html https://www.ecowatch.com/marine-animals-offshore-wind-farm-h... * https://energytransition.org/2022/02/in-europes-north-sea-wind-parks-offer-sanctuary-to-marine-life/ https://energytransition.org/2022/02/in-europes-north-sea-wi...
Analemma_ 3y ago
Because oceanfront property, especially on the east coast is almost entirely in the hands of wealthy (read: politically influential) people, who throw a shitfit at the thought of offshore wind farms.
- bilsbie 3y ago
  Why not just put them below the horizon?
  - Analemma_ 3y ago
    They do: pretty much all the proposed farms are far enough out that you can't see them from the shore. It doesn't matter, the people throw a fit anyway.
  - eclipticplane 3y ago
    You mean where their sailboats and yachts can see them?
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    Even if not they are quickly at the limit of visibility. Here in NL there are a whole bunch of them just North of IJmuiden and you have to really strain to make out the individual machines. When the light catches a blade just so it is a bit easier but they're definitely not so visible that they would have to be placed even further out. Better still: do both and put up more wind power.
- mdorazio 3y ago
  This is funny to me because off the shore of Southern California (some of the most expensive land in the country), the horizon is dotted with oil rigs and cargo ships.
  - lokar 3y ago
    The issue in California is the water gets very deep very fast.
matthewdgreen 3y ago
There are two big 800 MW projects going in right now, one off Martha’s Vineyard and the other in Connecticut, both of which will begin generating power in the next year or two (the actual construction speed for these projects is amazing!) These projects were supposed to happen before the pandemic, but the Trump administration delayed them by 2-3 years. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-windpower-offshore/u-s-agency-again-delays-key-permit-for-first-major-u-s-offshore-wind-farm-idUSKBN27S2NH https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-windpower-offshore/u-...
- jacquesm 3y ago
  > the actual construction speed for these projects is amazing! Yes, from start to finish in well under a year in some locations depending on whether or not they can set up a nice pipeline and start producing as soon as one of the turbines is completed. The time consuming parts: permitting, infrastructural changes to the grid, environmental assessments + possible delays, foundation work. Once the foundation is in the ground I've seen operational turbines six weeks later. For a whole windpark from start to finish the times vary from two to eight years, with off-shore the longer part of that. There is a new option called a floating windfarm, which is self evident from the name, that cuts deployment time to an absolute minimum but has some long term risks and maintenance pros and cons. Still, it is a very interesting development.
  - tda 3y ago
    "Once the foundation is in the ground" is of course the big thing, as each foundation is unique (even if they all look the same they are specced to exactly the water depth and local spil conditions), and a lot of the installation risks are in the foundation. Rock may be harder than expected, or there might be a boulder hiding in the sandy soil. After the foundations are in, the installation of the tower, nacelle and blades is repetitive work. There should be little variance between sites left then. Weather is probably the most significant differtiating factor left.
mastax 3y ago
The US permitting process is shockingly bad. It is both far too complex and also overseen by understaffed agencies so projects get delayed by years which is very expensive. NIMBYS can either use political pressure or environmental lawsuits to delay projects almost indefinitely at low cost to themselves because they are upset about any number of things. Second, the Jones act and other regulations prohibit using most of the knowledge and infrastructure that Europe has built up over two decades. We can't use their ships or sailors. We can't use many of their products while being eligible for federal subsidies. So rather than let their industry build up ours we have to start from scratch. No economies of scale, high risk, less competition, etc. The size of the subsidies available are so large that it'll probably work eventually, and there are some discussions happening about improving permitting. But it's a bit like one department is spending a lot of money to put concrete barriers in the road and then another department is spending a lot on subsidies to install tank treads to be able to drive over the barriers. "But think of all the jobs created in the tank tread installation industry!"
lkbm 3y ago
To be clear, the US has something like 140 GW[0] of wind farms—it's just all inland. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_State...

by ralfd 3y ago

quags 3y ago

New Jersey is planning wind farms so that number should continue to rise over time. I grew up in New England but moved out many years ago. I remember wind farms off cape cod being extremely NIMBY and the argument was cape cod is unique and a wind farm should be else where - essentially I assume the argument of anyone living near an area that is going to get a wind farm. These are probably one of the more expensive areas of the state due to being by the water.

hulitu 3y ago

I would really want to know what is the impact of those wind farms on the marine ecosytem. We treat the ocean like a big dump place.

MarkMarine 3y ago
If putting up wind keeps CO2 out of the ocean, I would think it is net positive. Ocean acidification, less calcium available for making shells, and then the affect of ocean warming on coral and knock on effects of losing those coral ecosystems are pretty terrible for the whole marine ecosystem. A couple pylons for turbines, I doubt that scratches the surface. Everything thing in the ocean seems to LOVE structure. They build on our detritus as easily as rocks
Analemma_ 3y ago
It's probably very positive, actually. Provided you don't do something stupid like make them out of loose tires, structures in the ocean form an anchor around which ecosystems develop which wouldn't exist otherwise. Not to mention the effects on the ocean of rising temperatures, CO2 and deoxygenated dead zones are awful.
- coredog64 3y ago
  In the Pacific (at least) there’s the concept of a “fish aggregating device” (FAD). Fishing boats build and deploy smallish structures that create a local environment that eventually results in the production of commercially valuable fish. Usually it’s just logs, rope, and such. Apart from the energy, an offshore wind farm would be a great sanctuary for fish. If you need to visit regularly for maintenance, bringing along a few extra FADs and the occasional marine biologist isn’t going to break the bank.
dotnet00 3y ago
Similar to how rocket launch sites make great wildlife sanctuaries due to keeping away human settlements, I would think that wind farms make great sanctuaries for marine life by keeping the area clear of normal fishing.
- ForestCritter 3y ago
  yes and killing off the sea birds
micromacrofoot 3y ago
there’s some concern in new england about how they could affect the critically endangered right whales, but there’s little practical evidence of risk… and sometimes the risk is overblown by nimbys and fossil fuel companies who will align with anyone that agrees with them at this point the ocean temperature is a much greater risk
tda 3y ago
At least in the North Sea, wind parks have created large area's in which trawlers fishing is prohibited. This is really significant, as I believe the entire Dutch North Sea EEZ is trawled multiple times per year. This is really a massive undertaking, and is even permitted in the Natura2000 area's. Really nothing could stop the fishing lobby from destructing the bottom life on which the industry depends in a giant tragedy of the commons kind of way. Except now for wind farms. Now huge areas are off limits for fishing boats
ako 3y ago
So far seems to be positive for windfarms in the north sea: * https://www.ecowatch.com/marine-animals-offshore-wind-farm-habitats.html https://www.ecowatch.com/marine-animals-offshore-wind-farm-h... * https://energytransition.org/2022/02/in-europes-north-sea-wind-parks-offer-sanctuary-to-marine-life/ https://energytransition.org/2022/02/in-europes-north-sea-wi...

Analemma_ 3y ago

Because oceanfront property, especially on the east coast is almost entirely in the hands of wealthy (read: politically influential) people, who throw a shitfit at the thought of offshore wind farms.

bilsbie 3y ago
Why not just put them below the horizon?
- Analemma_ 3y ago
  They do: pretty much all the proposed farms are far enough out that you can't see them from the shore. It doesn't matter, the people throw a fit anyway.
- eclipticplane 3y ago
  You mean where their sailboats and yachts can see them?
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Even if not they are quickly at the limit of visibility. Here in NL there are a whole bunch of them just North of IJmuiden and you have to really strain to make out the individual machines. When the light catches a blade just so it is a bit easier but they're definitely not so visible that they would have to be placed even further out. Better still: do both and put up more wind power.
mdorazio 3y ago
This is funny to me because off the shore of Southern California (some of the most expensive land in the country), the horizon is dotted with oil rigs and cargo ships.
- lokar 3y ago
  The issue in California is the water gets very deep very fast.

matthewdgreen 3y ago

There are two big 800 MW projects going in right now, one off Martha’s Vineyard and the other in Connecticut, both of which will begin generating power in the next year or two (the actual construction speed for these projects is amazing!) These projects were supposed to happen before the pandemic, but the Trump administration delayed them by 2-3 years. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-windpower-offshore/u-s-agency-again-delays-key-permit-for-first-major-u-s-offshore-wind-farm-idUSKBN27S2NH https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-windpower-offshore/u-...

jacquesm 3y ago
> the actual construction speed for these projects is amazing! Yes, from start to finish in well under a year in some locations depending on whether or not they can set up a nice pipeline and start producing as soon as one of the turbines is completed. The time consuming parts: permitting, infrastructural changes to the grid, environmental assessments + possible delays, foundation work. Once the foundation is in the ground I've seen operational turbines six weeks later. For a whole windpark from start to finish the times vary from two to eight years, with off-shore the longer part of that. There is a new option called a floating windfarm, which is self evident from the name, that cuts deployment time to an absolute minimum but has some long term risks and maintenance pros and cons. Still, it is a very interesting development.
- tda 3y ago
  "Once the foundation is in the ground" is of course the big thing, as each foundation is unique (even if they all look the same they are specced to exactly the water depth and local spil conditions), and a lot of the installation risks are in the foundation. Rock may be harder than expected, or there might be a boulder hiding in the sandy soil. After the foundations are in, the installation of the tower, nacelle and blades is repetitive work. There should be little variance between sites left then. Weather is probably the most significant differtiating factor left.

mastax 3y ago

The US permitting process is shockingly bad. It is both far too complex and also overseen by understaffed agencies so projects get delayed by years which is very expensive. NIMBYS can either use political pressure or environmental lawsuits to delay projects almost indefinitely at low cost to themselves because they are upset about any number of things. Second, the Jones act and other regulations prohibit using most of the knowledge and infrastructure that Europe has built up over two decades. We can't use their ships or sailors. We can't use many of their products while being eligible for federal subsidies. So rather than let their industry build up ours we have to start from scratch. No economies of scale, high risk, less competition, etc. The size of the subsidies available are so large that it'll probably work eventually, and there are some discussions happening about improving permitting. But it's a bit like one department is spending a lot of money to put concrete barriers in the road and then another department is spending a lot on subsidies to install tank treads to be able to drive over the barriers. "But think of all the jobs created in the tank tread installation industry!"

lkbm 3y ago

To be clear, the US has something like 140 GW[0] of wind farms—it's just all inland. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_State...