Wind NIMBYs spew Trumpish nonsense
 |
| Europe already gets 20% of its energy supply from wind energy |
About 20 miles of electric cables must pass through Rhode
Island waters and Aquidneck Island to reach the transmission
system at Brayton Point in Somerset.
Proponents and opponents of wind energy filled the middle school auditorium, and the three-member EFSB listened for over four hours. Twenty-seven people spoke in favor of the project, noting the benefits of cheaper, more environmentally safe energy and the jobs the construction of the project will bring. Twenty-six people spoke against the project, most seemingly regurgitating the talking points of fossil fuel-backed right-wing think tanks.
With so many people testifying, a comprehensive overview
would be time-consuming. So instead, I chose, as best I can, a representative
testimony from each side, starting with wind energy opponent and Portsmouth
resident Sal Carceller:
“I’m a resident of Portsmouth. Not only am I a resident of
Portsmouth, with a view of the Sakonnet River. I’m blessed where I
live. It’s one of the most beautiful places in the Northeast. I’ve traveled
throughout the world. I spent considerable time at McCorrie Point with
my family, friends, and others. I even spend evenings there.
“I have a question for the siting board. Have you visited
any sites along the Sakkonet in Portsmouth? You don’t have to answer, but I
will make a suggestion. Please go to McCorrie Point so that you understand what
you’re about to approve. I don’t have an opinion, but I can tell you that it
doesn’t make sense. You are not crossing a river just to cross it. You’re
traversing that river from its mouth to Brayton Point, the entire
river, a class A, class one waterway, the only one in Rhode Island, and one of
the few. It is imperative that we get this correct.
“What’s going to happen is - I’m not a scientist, I’m a
statistical analyst by trade. I’ve done data science and analytics, so I look
at numbers. I’m going to ask the siting board to consider this: Would you ever
approve a project that you knew was destined for failure and would never be
used? You don’t have to answer that, but ask yourself while sitting at McCorrie
Point, and then let’s talk about where we are today.
“Why is offshore wind no longer favored under the current
administration? They were voted in, whether you like it or not. I’m going to go
through a couple of bullet points:
“One. Executive Order halts offshore wind expansion. In
January of 2025, the President of the United States signed an Executive Order1 that withdrew the entire outer continental
shelf from the future of offshore wind leasing. Not only did he do that, he
paused all new and renewable lease permits and rights of way for wind energy on
federal lands and waters. Next, he’s also initiated a review of the existing
leases with potential cancellation/modifications.
“Two. New federal oversight delays projects. All wind and
solar projects on federal lands and waters must now receive personal approval
from the Interior Secretary, Doug Burgum. This change adds significant
regulatory delays and uncertainty to project timelines. I’m just telling you
what the lay of the land is, compared to when we first started these
conversations. High costs from tariffs and subsidy rollbacks - tariffs on
imported steel, aluminum, and turbine components have increased project costs.
That’s going to turn into increased electric rates.
“I’m no fool. New tax legislation, signed by the President,
is rolling back clean energy tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act,
making it financially harder for offshore wind developers.
“Now let’s talk about what has been done to the industry:
industry pullbacks and writedowns. Ecuador recorded a $955 million write-down
on its U.S. offshore wind portfolio. Citing administration policy changes,
they’re divesting. Shell withdrew from the Atlantic Shores project off New
Jersey, and this one. Projects like SouthCoast Wind have been delayed by years,
losing hundreds of millions of expected value. SouthCoast wind knows it’s in
trouble. They already said they are likely going to delay by four years.
“I only have a few more points—impact on the state climate
goals. States like New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island rely
heavily on offshore wind to meet their emission targets. The targets were made
under a different administration. I don’t know if the targets are right or
wrong. What if we’re wrong? We’re going to ruin a river. That’s going to delay
timelines, create potential energy supply gaps, and pose challenges to meet the
climate mandates.
“We’ve heard that from our president’s mouth. He favors
fossil fuels and nuclear over renewables. He has repeatedly criticized wind
energy as visually unappealing, environmentally harmful, and economically
inefficient.
“This administration’s philosophical stance will make it very difficult for wind projects. So again, I’m going to ask the siting board: Would you approve a project before you know whether the energy source in that ocean will come to fruition for 20 years? I ask you. The most important thing you can do is take your beach chair down there to McCorrie Point, take a nice visit, and understand the threat of putting that power line up that river for a project that’s deeply in trouble.”
Here’s the video of everyone who spoke against the
project:
Taking the opposite point of view, resident Rachel
Rosenack presented reason, science, and the hope for a better future
in her testimony:
“I’m a resident and property owner, if that matters, of
Rhode Island. I’m here to voice my strong support for the SouthCoast Wind
Project. Rhode Island and the broader New England region are facing a real
challenge. Electricity demand is rising, yet our grid is aging, and we remain
too dependent on expensive, polluting, fossil fuels, especially peaker plants
that are extremely expensive to run and very harmful to public health. There’s
no question we need new, reliable sources of power that can be built now and
serve well into the future.
“SouthCoast Wind offers a practical and much-needed
solution. It will deliver 1200 megawatts of emission-free, reliable electricity
to the New England grid, enough to power 800,000 homes, including 125,000 Rhode
Island homes.
“That’s more than a quarter of the homes in the entire
state. That’s not just impressive, it’s essential. We won’t have enough
capacity to meet our energy needs without projects like this. From an
affordability standpoint, this project makes sense. Offshore wind offers
long-term fixed price contracts. That means Rhode Islanders are better shielded
from market shocks and price volatility. We’ve already seen how global
instability can cause our energy bills to skyrocket. If we rely only on
solutions like natural gas, we are at risk of fluctuating, unpredictable energy
costs. SouthCoast wind will help insulate us from that. It replaces costly
fossil fuel generation with stable American-made energy, ultimately saving
Rhode Islanders money.
“The project also adheres to strict regulatory standards and
has been subject to extensive, rigorous environmental permitting reviews. The
underground and undersea cables will be installed using horizontal directional
drilling, a proven method that avoids disruption to our beaches and coastal
ecosystems. This is safe and well-established infrastructure, far less invasive
than pipelines or new fossil fuel facilities.
“I also want to address that there has been a lot of
misinformation about environmental risks that are rooted in myths and
propaganda funded by outside groups aligned with the fossil fuel industry.
Scientists and marine experts overwhelmingly agree that offshore wind is not a
threat to ocean life. These projects have been built and operated successfully,
in some cases for decades, in other areas of the world, like Europe and Asia.
The biggest environmental risk we face is doing nothing, continuing to burn fossil
fuels, and delaying the better solutions we desperately need.
“Let’s also not forget about the economic opportunity. As
you’ve heard, this project supports local jobs, builds Rhode Island’s
workforce, and creates a strong supply chain of jobs and businesses in our
coastal communities. This is not going to harm our fishing industry. It’s going
to enhance and strengthen our coastal economies. It’s an investment not just in
energy infrastructure, but in the future of our coastal communities. No other
energy resource is going to bring this level of economic development to our
region.
“We know more power generation is needed. The question is
how we build it. As a relatively young person who wants to raise a family here
in Rhode Island, I want to see Rhode Island empower and embrace innovation,
low-cost energy, and real solutions to air quality and public health. We have
the opportunity to move forward on a solution that will, without any doubt,
offer cleaner air, more cost stability, enhance our energy security, and create
economic growth for our coastal communities.
“There’s no backup plan or project that comes close to
offering the solutions our region desperately needs. There’s no nuclear
project, no other project that offers this kind of economic investment and
other benefits for the region. So, I urge the board to move forward with the
SouthCoast Wind Project.”
Here’s the video of everyone who spoke in support of the
project:
RIFuture.news is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
1 In May, Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha joined a coalition of 18 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration over its unlawful attempt to freeze wind energy development. See: Attorney General Neronha joins coalition to stop Trump from halting development of wind energy
