Saving Seafood

Many fishermen aren’t on board with wind industry’s new plan

November 20, 2019 — The fierce competitors in the local offshore wind industry probably hoped to make a big splash with this news: They teamed up to propose a grid that creates uniform spacing between each tower and a similar orientation for the various wind farm proposals south of Martha’s Vineyard.

One of the chief goals was to assuage concerns among fishermen who worry that an uncoordinated array of hundreds of towers would make the waters hard to navigate — effectively displacing them from rich fishing grounds.

However, plenty of fishermen aren’t taking the bait. For many of them, the one nautical mile distance proposed between each giant turbine tower simply isn’t enough — especially for boats that are dragging big nets behind them.

Persuading fishermen to toe the line could be crucial to the nascent industry’s survival. Construction was about to begin on what would have been the first major offshore wind farm in the US until Interior Secretary David Bernhardt dragged out the permitting in August. Bernhardt ostensibly wants a study of the cumulative impact from all the wind farms in the pipeline, before allowing the first one to proceed.

Read the full story at The Boston Globe

US harvesters cold on wind farm industry’s proposed turbine standards

November 20, 2019 — A group of wind farming companies with hopes of building soon off the North Atlantic coast of the United States released on Tuesday their proposal to the US Coast Guard (USCG) for how to consistently position turbines across the region in a way that they believe will satisfy safety concerns raised by commercial fish and shellfish harvesters.

The proposal includes requiring a minimum of one nautical mile (1.2 miles) between each turbine and an east to west configuration, just as harvesters earlier asked.

However, the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance (RODA), a group of 160 commercial harvesters and processors with vessels spread across nine states and operating in about 30 different fisheries, said on Tuesday morning that it would rather wait on the results of a scientific study from the USCG — expected soon — before accepting the wind industry’s plan.

And the Fisheries Survival fund, a group that represents Atlantic scallop harvesters, has flat out rejected the wind industry’s proposal, saying it doesn’t meet their needs.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

First Public Meeting For Offshore Wind Task Force Will Take Place In N.H.

November 19, 2019 — New Hampshire will host the kick-off meeting of a federal offshore wind task force for the Gulf of Maine. The meeting is set for Dec. 12 at the University of New Hampshire.

It will be open to the public, with time for public input.

The task force will include state, local and tribal government officials from New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Maine, and from the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

Read the full story at New Hampshire Public Radio

New England fishing groups object to latest offshore wind layout proposal

November 19, 2019 — Groups representing New England fisheries are objecting to a recently released proposal regarding the future spacing of offshore wind turbines.

Five companies that hold leases for offshore wind projects in New England – Equinor, Mayflower Wind, Ørsted/Eversource, and Vineyard Wind – released a joint statement calling for a uniform layout of the wind turbines. The companies are calling for a 1 nautical mile spacing, arranged in east-west rows and north-south columns.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

US fisheries rebuff offshore wind’s project layout rethink

November 19, 2019 — The five developers advancing offshore wind farms off the northeast US – Equinor, Mayflower Wind, Orsted/Eversource and Vineyard Wind – have put forward a proposal to the country’s US Coast Guard (USCG) to use a uniform turbine layout for the projects, in a bid to defuse ongoing objections from the regional fishery industries.

The New England Offshore Wind Leaseholders (NEOWL), advancing more than 7GW between them, said the layout would have rows of turbines spaced one nautical mile apart, and align to the USCG’s requirement for “robust navigational safety and search and rescue capability by providing hundreds of transit corridors to accommodate the region’s vessel traffic”.

“This uniform layout is consistent with the requests of the region’s fisheries industry and other maritime users,” said the NEOWL in a joint statement. The proposed layout specifies that turbines will be spaced one nautical mile apart, arranged in east-west rows and north-south columns, with the rows and columns continuous across all New England lease areas.

Read the full story at ReCharge News

RODA Submits Comments on Proposed Changes to Interpretation on the Jones Act

November 18, 2019 — The following was released by the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance:

On Friday, the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance (RODA) submitted a letter to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection expressing serious concern with proposed modifications to ruling letters that would allow non-Jones Act compliant vessels to be utilized for a wide range of offshore activities, including offshore wind energy facility construction.

For nearly a century, fishermen have complied with the Jones Act. RODA is concerned that the proposed modifications and revocation of ruling letters to CBP’s application of the Jones Act would not hold offshore wind energy developers to the same standards. The proposed definition is too broad and violates the purpose of the Jones Act. Carving out a broad exemption for an entire new industry does nothing to aid the development of U.S. marine commerce.

As the number of proposed offshore wind energy projects continues to grow throughout the U.S., their widely promised economic benefits must accrue to the citizens who are displaced, and to U.S. coastal communities at large. For offshore wind energy-related operations that can be executed with existing American vessels and crew, this means delivering on promises to fully utilize those resources. For larger construction tasks for which there may not currently be qualified vessels, foreign-owned wind energy companies should contract with U.S. shipyards to build the necessary Jones Act-qualified boats.

The actions proposed in the notice also have significant bearing on national security and environmental protection. Monitoring and enforcement of U.S. environmental and security laws on foreign vessels poses extraordinary challenges due the additional permissions needed by the Coast Guard to board non-U.S. flag vessels.

Finally, RODA noted that CBP may only issue Jones Act interpretations relevant to these activities through a public rulemaking process and after conducting thorough interagency evaluations. Due to the highly case-specific nature of ruling letters, any CBP action that affects the maritime community or the public more broadly must follow the Administrative Procedure Act. The notice overreaches a ruling letter’s authority by proposing to adopt a new and unprecedented definition for “vessel equipment.” The inclusion of specific, previously uncontemplated activities—and the materials for use in those activities—in the definition of “vessel equipment” is a new statutory interpretation, and unfit for adoption through modification of existing ruling letters.

The proposed changes are described at page 12 here: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019-Oct/Vol_53_No_38_Title.pdf. Comments are due by November 22nd and must be submitted by postal mail.

Read RODA’s submitted comments here

MARY NEWTON LIMA: Impact of offshore wind on fisheries unknown

November 18, 2019 — I write in response to “Economic, environmental benefits power offshore wind” (My View, Nov. 5). Offshore wind is an exciting, viable and potentially productive source of electricity. But building these wind farms may significantly affect the existing blue economy, and the job numbers the authors cite are misleadingly high.

Fishing is an integral part of the blue economy, but the planned offshore wind development will affect over 100,000 acres of ocean currently used by fishermen to sustain the very industry the authors applaud. Once the Rhode Island/Massachusetts wind energy area is fully built out, an area of roughly 1,418 square miles – vastly larger than Cape Cod – will be covered in turbines roughly a mile apart. How this will affect fisheries is unknown. Many commercial fishermen in Europe will not, or cannot, fish within the farms because of safety hazards and the potential damage to or loss of gear.

Additionally, the full baseline studies that are desperately needed to examine the impacts on the ocean environment and the fishing industry are neither being presented by the developers nor required by the federal government. Placing hundreds of turbines in the ocean floor will no doubt change the ecology of the area and could either chase away commercially important species or make it so fishermen can no longer catch the species they’ve relied on for generations.

What’s really upsetting is the authors are misrepresenting the number of jobs coming to Massachusetts. The authors state “nearly 10,000 jobs will be created during the construction phase” of Vineyard Wind and the next three wind farms to be built. This sounds like nearly 10,000 permanent jobs are coming to Cape Cod and the South Coast. This is not the case. While the authors don’t identify the “recent report” they cite, the 2018 Massachusetts Offshore Wind Workforce Assessment estimated a range of 6,878 and 9,852 job-years (not jobs) would be created during the construction phase (which includes the design and permitting, not just construction). Let’s break this down.

Read the full story at the Cape Cod Times

MARYLAND: Wind turbines off Ocean City would be 200 feet taller than planned, prompting regulators to reopen debate

November 15, 2019 — Developers of two wind farms off Maryland’s Atlantic coast say they will build turbines more than 200 feet taller than those initially proposed, intensifying fears of spoiled views from Ocean City and prompting state regulators to reopen discussion about the projects two years after blessing them.

The Maryland Public Service Commission is seeking new input on the potential impact of the windmills, roughly 20 miles from shore but several hundred feet higher than Baltimore’s tallest buildings. Potential impacts could include harm to birds or commercial fishing, though the strongest opposition has focused on an expectation that wind farms visible from shore would send tourists fleeing to beaches with pristine views in other states.

The state regulatory panel, which in 2017 authorized millions of dollars in ratepayer subsidies for the wind farms, issued its call days after Gov. Larry Hogan’s administration urged the five members to consider “additional review” of the projects. The Maryland Energy Administration, which leads state efforts to reduce reliance on foreign fuel and improve the environment, said a closer look is needed given concerns from Ocean City that offshore wind plans “have drastically changed since they were first approved.”

Officials declined to speculate on what action the commission could take once it reviews public comments, which are due Friday. But a spokeswoman said the panel has the authority to rescind or amend its order granting the wind farms ratepayer subsidies — money that is key to financing projects that together will cost more than $2 billion.

Read the full story at The Baltimore Sun

Top climate hawk bashes first big offshore wind project

November 15, 2019 — For the past seven years, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse has given a weekly address about the dangers of climate change. Increasingly, some greens wonder if he is full of hot air.

The Rhode Island Democrat, one of the Senate’s top climate hawks, has emerged as a leading critic of Vineyard Wind, an 84-turbine offshore wind project proposed in federal waters 15 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard. Whitehouse has questioned the federal government’s review of the project, the first large-scale development of its kind in the United States, and criticized Vineyard Wind for failing to adequately consult fishermen.

His barbs have raised eyebrows in climate circles and in Massachusetts, where Vineyard Wind has the enthusiastic backing of the state’s political establishment, and comes as the Trump administration weighs the future of the project.

In August, Interior Secretary David Bernhardt called for an additional round of environmental review of the project (Climatewire, Aug. 12). A division of Interior, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, is currently conducting a cumulative impact study of other offshore wind projects proposed for the area.

In an interview, Whitehouse said he was simply pushing for improvements to BOEM’s permitting process to better accommodate the concerns of fishermen and other ocean users.

He argued that Vineyard Wind had already settled on the design of its project with investors before taking input from fishermen. And he cited the Block Island wind farm, a five-turbine project built by Rhode Island-based Deepwater Wind, as an example of how wind developers should approach fishermen’s concerns.

Keating said he appreciates the difficulty Whitehouse faces in balancing the concerns of fishermen next to the economic potential of offshore wind. He represents New Bedford, Mass., America’s largest commercial fishing port, and has heard similar concerns about offshore wind from some constituents. But he added: “I really feel an urgency and I feel an imperative that we have to go forward on this. This is gonna be great for our economy.”

Read the full story at E&E News

NEW YORK: A Hush-Hush Wind Powwow

November 15, 2019 — Details are scant, but a meeting between developers of the proposed South Fork Wind Farm and the New York State Public Service Commission to begin negotiations on a settlement took place on Friday morning at East Hampton Town Hall.

Orsted U.S. Offshore Wind and Eversource Energy, which jointly plan to construct and operate the South Fork Wind Farm some 35 miles off Montauk, had filed notice with the Public Service Commission in September to begin settlement negotiations in the commission’s review of their application to install the wind farm’s export cable in state waters and on the subterranean path to a Long Island Power Authority substation in East Hampton.

A meeting scheduled to take place on Oct. 8 at the commission’s offices in Albany was canceled after East Hampton Town and state officials objected to its location and to what an attorney representing the town said was unreasonably short notice.

Among the 52 parties that had registered to attend the meeting were town officials, including Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc and members of the town board, as well as members of the town trustees.

Read the full story at The East Hampton Star