Government Deals Setback to Vineyard Wind

<p>A 2020 construction start date for the first phase of Vineyard Wind&rsquo;s project is in jeopardy after a federal agency said it would indefinitely delay the release of an EIS.</p>

A Jan. 1, 2020 construction start date for the first phase of Vineyard Wind’s project to build an 84-turbine offshore wind farm south of Martha’s Vineyard is now in serious jeopardy after a federal agency said Friday that it has indefinitely delayed the release of a final environmental impact statement (EIS).

A spokesman for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) said in an email that the agency now plans to expand its environmental review to include the cumulative impact of all American offshore wind development programs.

While Vineyard Wind’s 800-megawatt project will be the nation’s first industrial-scale offshore wind development, BOEM has also auctioned off nearly a dozen other lease areas in New York, Rhode Island, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina — as well as Massachusetts — since the inception of its renewable energy program in 2013.

BOEM, the federal agency charged with both auctioning off lease areas as well as regulating them, called Vineyard Wind and Gov. Charlie Baker’s office on Friday to inform them of the delay and the expanded review process.

“Comments received from stakeholders and cooperating agencies requested a more robust cumulative analysis,” BOEM spokesman Tracey Moriarty said in an email. “Considering such comments, and taking into account recent state offshore wind procurement announcements, BOEM is expanding its cumulative analysis of projects within its draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to also include projects that have been awarded power purchase agreements, but may not have submitted Construction and Operations Plans (COPs), and potential scenarios based on state procurements that are expected to be awarded.”

A draft EIS for the Vineyard Wind project was released early this spring. Wind farm developers have been pushing the federal agency to release the final statement, but instead there have been delays, with the most recent delay announced Friday. Disagreement among other federal stakeholders over mitigation for the fishing industry, including NOAA and the National Marine Fisheries Service, led to the delays.

Without an EIS, wind developers cannot finalize permitting with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Vineyard Wind plans to build the wind farm in two phases, with phase one, also called Vineyard Wind 1, set to go online by 2021, and the second phase set to go online by 2022. The company recently signed utility contracts that require it to go online by Jan. 15, 2022.

In order to take advantage of substantial investment tax incentives and navigate difficult supply-chain logistics, Vineyard Wind had planned to start construction on the project by the start of the new year.

But this most recent delay puts that deadline in flux. A statement issued Friday by Scott Farmelant, a spokesman for Vineyard Wind, signaled uncertainty.

“The federal government’s decision to further delay the approval of the FEIS for the Vineyard Wind 1 project comes as a surprise and disappointment,” the statement said. “While we appreciate that the discussion on cumulative impacts is driven by rapid growth of the industry beyond our project, we urge the federal government to complete the review of Vineyard Wind 1 as quickly as possible . . . Even though today’s decision will delay development of American offshore wind projects, Vineyard Wind remains deeply committed to the emerging industry’s success.”

He also said Vineyard Wind 1 is still on track, even if it cannot reach its Jan. 1, 2020 start date.

“To be clear, the Vineyard Wind 1 project remains viable and continues to move forward,” the statement said.

Ms. Moriarty said in her email that the rapid growth of offshore wind energy developments has led to the need to evaluate offshore wind projects from a cumulative, rather than individual, perspective.

“Because BOEM has determined that a greater build out of offshore wind capacity is reasonably foreseeable than was analyzed in the initial draft EIS, BOEM has decided to supplement the draft EIS and solicit comments on its revised cumulative impacts analysis,” she wrote.

Ms. Moriarty would not speculate on when the final cumulative impact statement would be completed.

“We are focusing on the supplemental EIS, and not yet prepared to set a schedule for the final EIS,” she said in an email.

Cong. Bill Keating issued a statement late Friday criticizing the Trump administration for throwing up roadblocks to a progressive clean energy project that will bring jobs to southeastern Massachusetts.

“Twenty per cent of our energy was anticipated to come from offshore wind by 2035. All this is in jeopardy now,” the statement said in part.

A request for comment from Governor Baker’s office was not immediately returned. Governor Baker has made investment in offshore wind a central tenet of his green energy platform, and he traveled to Washington last week to meet with the Secretary of the Interior in an attempt to push the Vineyard Wind project.

Although the project was approved unanimously by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission this winter, the Edgartown conservation commission voted to deny the project after hearing concerns from local fishermen. Vineyard Wind has appealed the decision to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 08/09/2019 - 23:15

Permalink

Carol formerly Chilmark

Of course they did. They're Trump appointees, and unrelentingly hostile to renewable energy. (sigh) The poor Vineyard. Chilmark Pond will be nothing but a polluted cove, in my lifetime.

BS Oak Bluffs

Actually the acting director was appointed in 2011, well before the Trump administration. Most of his program chiefs were also appointed well before President Trump came into office. Facts matter.

Ron Dagostino West Tisbury

BOEM is part of the Department of the Interior. From Wikipedia: “David Longly Bernhardt (born August 17, 1969) is an American attorney, oil industry lobbyist and government administrator serving as the 53rd United States Secretary of the Interior...On April 28, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated him to be the United States Deputy Secretary of the Interior... On January 2, 2019, he became acting Secretary of the Interior, replacing Ryan Zinke. On February 4, 2019, Bernhardt was nominated to become Secretary of the Interior. He was confirmed on April 11, 2019.”

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 08/10/2019 - 08:55

Permalink

Mark Edgartown

Good, hopefully this eyesore collapses on itself. Put it somewhere else if you must have it.

here we go again edg

I agree. However if this visual blight gets built, there better be a performance bond to make sure there is money to remove rusting collapsed windmills that will eventually outlive this venture.

SMoker Stack vineyard haven

Because we love the looks of drilling rigs, oil spills, Mountain top mining, Fly ash ponds, and spills,
and yes, of course, those lovely -build them higher -send the pollution farther away..... smokestacks.

But wait-how many train derailments of Baulkin crude?
Still waiting to witness a wind spill.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/12/2019 - 15:17

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

Permalink

Mark Edgartown

Absolutely, put a wind farm at the base of the Hudson, maybe next to the Statue of Liberty if you don’t care.

David Somerset

Mark’s comment isn’t wrong. The NE-most towers will (including blades) be a little over 500’ high and situated <10 miles SW of Gay Head. So you’ll easily be able to see them from MV. Cape Wind would have been closer; OTOH those towers were much smaller.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 08/10/2019 - 09:13

Permalink

Ben Robinson Tisbury

Massachusetts may be leading on paper when it comes to advancing a cleaner source of energy, but in reality we are losing, by a lot. Currently Gov. Baker is supporting the expansion of extremely leaky and dangerous gas pipelines. The Atlantic Bridge gas pipeline project extending all along the eastern seaboard cuts right through many vulnerable communities in our state - see the Weymouth compressor fight - affecting their health and the health of the planet. Gov. Baker says his hands are tied, and that FERC - a federal agency - holds the authority and he will not lobby for them to deny approval of the advancing pipelines. Meanwhile he will - and I applaud this effort - Lobby BOEM on offshore wind. We must be clear as a state, and our Governor must be clear, without a cleaner energy source and a rapid transition off of fossil fuels we will continue to degrade our environment, heat our atmosphere and trip uncontrollable feedback loops - see arctic wildfires, melting permafrost, ocean acidification and glacial collapse - to the point where the habitability of this planet is put into serious question. We are out of time, and immediate action is the only course if we have any desire to secure at least a small chance for future generations to exist.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/11/2019 - 11:00

Permalink

Eric Tisbury

I give our state governor Mr Baker kudos on pushing for our off shore wind farm but it seems that the current federal administration is determined to delay any cleaner energy source. We must keep pushing from below making noise and voting in our childrens and grandchildrens best interests. Funny thing about how this is turning out for the few fisherman left on island who have been making alot of noise will have to look else where to get a check if the wind farm is not built.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 08/13/2019 - 07:32

Permalink

Hal Edgartown

Would anyone do these projects if it weren’t for the receipt of a government handout? How much does the technology need to evolve before this type of project can return 15% on invested capital?

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 08/15/2019 - 15:06

Permalink

Jo Bishop Off Island

I find it interesting that the picture accompanying this article refers to "undeveloped waters".
Question: In this attempt to industrialize our precious ocean environments is there NO understanding that they are NOT barren wastelands waiting ...and needing... humans to industrialize/degrade?
When will there be a common sense approach to energy policy?
My take: Boondoggle for the sake of harvesting subsidies (just ask Warren Buffet)...
Thought: The company partnering in this endeavor is funded, to a large degree, through Danish pension funds... If I were a Danish pensioner I'd be very worried about the use of my pension money going toward investments already proven to be a loser (if not for the subsidies which could and should dry up at a moments notice).

Add new comment

Plain text

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