Cape Wind barge used to test locations for wind turbines in Nantucket Sound.
Alison Mead

NStar, National Grid Sever Contracts With Cape Wind

<p>The future of the Cape Wind project on Horseshoe Shoal was thrown into uncertainty this week when National Grid and NStar announced they had terminated their contracts to buy power from the private wind developer.

The future of the long-planned Cape Wind project on Horseshoe Shoal was thrown into uncertainty this week when National Grid and NStar announced they had terminated their contracts to buy power from the private wind developer.

The two major utilities both cited Cape Wind’s inability to meet the terms of its contract with them.

Each utility had agreed to purchase a large percentage of the power expected to come from the 130-turbine wind farm in Nantucket Sound. But Cape Wind failed to secure financing and begin construction by Dec. 31, as required in its contracts.

Without the power purchase agreements in place, Cape Wind now faces a major obstacle in securing financing for the wind farm, which was estimated to cost $2.6 billion.

The news drew reactions on all sides of the controversial project which has been in the works for more than a decade.

In a statement, Cape Wind said it believes the contracts were terminated wrongfully, citing a “force majeure” provision that would extend the Dec. 31 deadline. Force majeure is a legal concept common in contracts that calls for nullifying certain provisions when unforeseen events occur, usually things like natural disasters or war. “We do not regard these PPA terminations as valid due to the force majeure provision,” said spokesman Mark Rodgers in an emailed statement to the Gazette.

He also wrote: “It would be a travesty if delays caused by an interest group funded by one of the Koch brothers could stop a project that would make Massachusetts a leader in offshore wind and create good jobs and help mitigate climate change,” referring to the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, a well-funded group that has been working to block the project for years.

In letters to both NStar and National Grid dated Dec. 31, Cape Wind president James Gordon cited “extended, unprecedented and relentless litigation” by the Alliance, which he said has prevented the company “from achieving critical milestones by this date,” and asked that the contracts not be terminated. By invoking the force majeure clause, Mr. Gordon argued that the legal challenges were unusual and unavoidable and prevented the company from meeting its obligations.

In their own statements, National Grid and NStar both expressed disappointment at needing to end their contracts with Cape Wind. Both companies said they remained committed to providing energy to their customers through other means.

Meanwhile, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound hailed the news. “The decision by NStar and National Grid to end their contracts with Cape Wind is a fatal or near-fatal blow to this expensive and outdated project,” said president Audra Parker in a statement.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 01/07/2015 - 13:46

Permalink

J.P. St.Germain Vineyard Haven

A very sensible way to start the new year - I have renewed faith in the utilities! It is in the utility customers' interest to undertake 5 years of litigation with Cape Wind for stepping out of this onerous contract than paying ridiculous prices (way above market) for the energy.

Carol formerly Chilmark

Sure, great idea. Because climate change isn't real, right? What do those egghead scientists know, anyway - pshaw! Let's burn more fossil fuels, yeah! OK, so maybe the Vineyard will shrink to just Peaked Hill, but hey who cares!

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 01/07/2015 - 14:15

Permalink

Ken Edgartown

With the biggest supporter for Cape Wind, Deval Patrick gone I think this project is doomed. Maybe Nstar can cut their rate increase now. 15.9 cents a kilowatt is a little overboard dont you think.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 01/07/2015 - 18:29

Permalink

deshandra brown mvy

We have a natural gas surplus. Prices go lower every day, yet our electric bills in New England will rise 50% this month. There is a simple solution but the 'opposition' to natural gas pipelines from NIMBYs (not in my backyard types) are to thank. Every other area of the country that uses natural gas to generate clean electricity gets lower rates than we do. We also should have approved that offshore natural gas port in Fall River.
Thankfully this blight on the landscape will never be built in our pristine waters. (if you want wind power, build it where it makes sense, at a FRACTION of the price of offshore wind.. at Otis National Guard base.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 01/08/2015 - 10:48

Permalink

thomas hodgson wt

That Cape Wind has come to this is a testament to the power of money --- particularly of special interest money, and of the ability of money to purchase lawyers, to endlessly litigate, to build astroturf opposition, and to freely disseminate the best propaganda money can buy.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 01/08/2015 - 12:19

Permalink

Peter Robb Holliston and Oak Bluffs

Cape Wind was a liberal boondoggle from day one. Think Solyndra. It made no sense from any angle. Isn't energy expensive enough on the Vineyard?

Deval Patrick was disastrous for our state...the worst governor in my lifetime. Things can only get better with him being retired.

Push for the XL pipeline AND for new, more efficient technologies. The US is going to be energy independent soon and the petro-dictatorships are taking a huge hit. Good. Russia, Iran and Venezuela need Hope and Change. Hitting them in the wallet is a good incentive for them to change.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/09/2015 - 07:04

Permalink

Susan Waldrop Vineyard Haven

Cape Wind may have it's problems, but it is a step in the right direction to build wind and solar infrastructure. NSTAR has too long held a monopoly and electric prices are outrageous. Building a natural gas pipeline may be a temporary step. But, I will be pleasantly surprised if electric prices ever drop without reasonable competition.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/09/2015 - 08:58

Permalink

Helen Schwiesow Parker

Wind Won’t Work. Energy consumption simply and absolutely requires at-the-moment, on-demand energy production. Despite the claim in a MVTimes 6-3-2010 article that “the new wind turbine at Morning Glory Farm should produce enough power to supply about 10 homes with electricity,” we’ve not yet developed a technology capable of safely storing wind energy to provide reliable electricity to even a single household.

That’s why people ‘living off the grid’ have backup gas generators. That’s why any energy equation including BigWind includes crucial commercial-scale, often-idling “backup” generation which actually results in greater greenhouse gas emissions and hugely higher energy costs than were we not to defile our environment with these 400’ spinning monstrosities, on- or off-shore.

Industrial-scale wind energy proposals like Cape Wind, or like those focused on the 742,000 acres of sea south of the Vineyard touted by Senator Wolf as “the mother lode of wind,” are based purely on the presumption that government subsidies and hapless ratepayers will support off-peak, off-season, wildly fluctuating energy production simply because its proponents have won the hearts of an uninformed public and perhaps the pockets of our politicians.

Farmer5 chilmark

Helen, you'd better let the Danes in on this right away! They are satisfying nearly 30% (yes,30%!) of their electrical needs with domestic wind. It's been growing steadily each year since (and before) Cape Wind was first proposed over thirteen years ago.
Your comparison between people living off the grid and commercial, utility-scale power generation is a specious one.
Wind power will never be able to meet 100% of demand for many reasons and it has never claimed to be able to. But 30% contribution is not only considerable and laudable but it is huge carbon offset that means using less fossil fuel.
As far as 'defiling our environment with 400' spinning monstrosities' goes, I think that the belching plume of coal/oil smoke from Brayton Point and the Canal power plants are a better suited target for both your ire and mine.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/09/2015 - 09:08

Permalink

Bob Fargo Edgartown

Blame it all on George Bush! Everything which doesn't go the liberals way is his fault right?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/09/2015 - 09:32

Permalink

Donna Russell, Esq. Braddock Bay NY (formerly Edgartown)

Hear that? That's North Atlantic marine life singing this morning. The screeching, vibrating windmill towers may not drown even the whales' messages of food sources and mating interests. For people who argue that the demise of the windmills means the burning of more fossil fuel, do your part to stop using oil. Car pool, drive less, turn off extra lights, request the darkening of cities at night, lower the thermostat, put on an extra sweater, buy local. And when you find yourself holding a product packaged in plastic, contact the manufacturer... "Has this been recycled?" "How else could you have packaged this?" "When empty, will this oil product pollute our oceans as garbage?" Every day, you can become part of the solution.

Carol formerly Chilmark

They're not singing. They're screaming - because the ocean is acidifying due to the enormous increase in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere from burning fossil fuels. If you cared for marine life, you would have been a booster of this program. Not to mention that you would also have solar panels on the roof.

You know, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute is right across the water. Maybe you should talk w/someone there - someone with an actual Ph.D. - about which course is more damaging to marine life. Natural gas & other fossil fuels, or big windmills. Educate yourself.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/09/2015 - 15:51

Permalink

Marie

Vineyarders pretend to care about the environment but NIMBY trumps renewable energy. Wind power is in its infancy and you are wrong not to take the long view of this. One thing this island has a lot of is wind - human and natural.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/10/2015 - 11:25

Permalink

Paul Edgartown

Does anyone, who is for this project, realize that when the wind is not blowing enough to generate the necessary power, diesel powered generators will run to compensate for the lack of power. This will be far worse for the environment. If we become the greenest planet on earth, it will not matter a wit, if China and India do not come on board.
Secondly, if the company goes bankrupt or another renewable source of power comes online or the turbines come to the end of there useful life, who is going to be responsible for removing them, certainly not Cape Wind, since there are no provisions for this in there contract

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/10/2015 - 14:56

Permalink

Jim Powell West Tisbury

The natural conclusion of the CapeWind project is that it runs out of funding. It was always against natural law that this industrial project would go forward. We need to think about environmental impacts on the immediate area. Please remember that Horseshoe Shoals was originally a marine sanctuary where Horseshoe Shoals provides spawning grounds for many fish species and fledgling Right Whales swim through the Shoals on their way to Cape Cod Bay. The end of Cape Wind in Horseshoe Shoals further defines the importance and relevance of the thousands of acres of higher wind volume ocean area south of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. Now, we must expedite the construction of windmills south of the Islands in a vast area much larger than Nantucket Sound. Both sides of this controversial issue will be satisfied as public/private partnerships move forward with the development of the Atlantic Ocean south of the Islands. As I stated in testimony before the US Secretary of the Interior in Washington years ago, nobody is against development of the area south of the Islands. Let's move forward, keeping Nantucket Sound forever beautiful and apply fiscal responsibility as we develop environmentally responsible, green house gas reducing projects.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/10/2015 - 16:30

Permalink

Marie

No one ever said that Martha's Vineyard was eco-friendly. When seasonal residents want to build everyone screams about the impact on the environment. Just NIMBY

It must be great to have psychic abilities and know that the project will fail.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/12/2015 - 07:43

Permalink

Truthteller CA

There will be two sides of this debate as one side is emotional and one side is scientific. Does anyone see a connection between the withdrawing of funding for Cape Wind and the auction of the area south of the Island?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/12/2015 - 09:28

Permalink

William nyc

selfishly I'm glad not to look at those windmills. Sadly, by not having them we all lose long term. They are part of a bigger picture to increase alternative supply. The good news is, when they do get installed in 20 years the technology will have improved so they will be bigger and more of them.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/12/2015 - 15:25

Permalink

Sara Piazza Edgartown

Good News.
(VG - wish you'd implement comment liking or voting)

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.