Saving Seafood

Offshore wind firm Orsted expands U.S. business with $510 million acquisition

October 9, 2018 — The following is an excerpt from a story originally published by Reuters:

Orsted, the world’s largest offshore wind developer, said on Monday it would buy U.S.-based Deepwater Wind LLC for $510 million as part of its strategy to expand in a major growth market.

The still small U.S. offshore wind sector is seen as one of the most important markets outside the core European region, where subsidies that have underpinned the industry since the early 1990s are starting to be wound back.

Deepwater Wind, the builder of the only operating U.S. offshore wind farm, has a portfolio with a capacity of around 3.3 gigawatts (GW). Orsted’s U.S portfolio currently has a capacity of 5.5 GW.

Orsted has so far lost out on auctions in the nascent market, while Deepwater Wind has been more successful and currently has the right to develop wind farms in Rhode Island, New York and Connecticut.

Read the full story at Reuters 

Wide-scale US wind power could cause significant warming

October 5, 2018 — It’s expanded 35-fold since 2000 and now provides 8% of the nation’s electricity. The US Department of Energy expects wind turbine capacity to more than quadruple again by 2050.

But a new study by a pair of Harvard researchers finds that a high amount of wind power could mean more climate warming, at least regionally and in the immediate decades ahead. The paper raises serious questions about just how much the United States or other nations should look to wind power to clean up electricity systems.

The study, published in the journal Joule, found that if wind power supplied all US electricity demands, it would warm the surface of the continental United States by 0.24 ˚C. That could significantly exceed the reduction in US warming achieved by decarbonizing the nation’s electricity sector this century, which would be around 0.1 ˚C.

“If your perspective is the next 10 years, wind power actually has—in some respects—more climate impact than coal or gas,” coauthor David Keith, a professor of applied physics and public policy at Harvard, said in a statement. “If your perspective is the next thousand years, then wind power is enormously cleaner than coal or gas.”

Specifically, the “avoided warming” achieved by eliminating fossil-fuel sources could surpasses any warming from wind in about a century in the studied scenario, as emissions reductions accumulate.

Keith and lead author Lee Miller, a postdoc at Harvard, stress that the conclusions mean scientists and policymakers should take this side effect of wind power seriously—and carefully consider what role the resource should play in the shift to clean energy.

“Our analysis suggests that—where feasible—it may make sense to push a bit harder on developing solar power and a bit less hard on wind,” Keith said in an e-mail.

Notably, the warming effect from wind in the studied scenario was 10 times greater than the climate effect from solar farms, which can also have a tiny warming effect.

Read the full story at MIT Technology Review

The down side to wind power

October 4, 2018 — When it comes to energy production, there’s no such thing as a free lunch, unfortunately.

As the world begins its large-scale transition toward low-carbon energy sources, it is vital that the pros and cons of each type are well understood and the environmental impacts of renewable energy, small as they may be in comparison to coal and gas, are considered.

In two papers — published today in the journals Environmental Research Letters and Joule — Harvard University researchers find that the transition to wind or solar power in the U.S. would require five to 20 times more land than previously thought, and, if such large-scale wind farms were built, would warm average surface temperatures over the continental U.S. by 0.24 degrees Celsius.

“Wind beats coal by any environmental measure, but that doesn’t mean that its impacts are negligible,” said David Keith, the Gordon McKay Professor of Applied Physics at the Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) and senior author of the papers. “We must quickly transition away from fossil fuels to stop carbon emissions. In doing so, we must make choices between various low-carbon technologies, all of which have some social and environmental impacts.”

Keith is also professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School.

One of the first steps to understanding the environmental impact of renewable technologies is to understand how much land would be required to meet future U.S. energy demands. Even starting with today’s energy demands, the land area and associated power densities required have long been debated by energy experts.

Read the full story at The Harvard Gazette

Judge Tosses Seafood Industry Challenge to East Coast Wind Farm

October 3, 2018 — A seafood industry challenge to a $42.5 million lease for a wind farm off the coast of New York was filed prematurely, a federal judge has ruled.

Led by the Fisheries Survival Fund, the plaintiffs in the case said the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management failed to adequately consider how the Statoil Wind US LLC wind energy facility would impact fishermen, along with other environmental and economic impacts.

The plaintiffs also argued that the agency failed to consider adequate alternatives or prepare an environmental impact statement, which the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management said was unnecessary after determining that there were no foreseeable environmental impacts that would significantly impact the human environment.

But U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, while finding that  the Fisheries Survival Fund and the other  plaintiffs had standing to bring claims under the National Environmental Policy Act, ruled Sunday they were not yet ripe.

That’s because Statoil Wind US LLC, the company developing the 26-mile wind farm roughly 11 miles out from Long Island, must first submit its construction and operations plans, along with a site assessment, while the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management retains authority to reject any or all of those.

“The presence of these ‘conditions’ does not transform the lease into an irretrievable commitment of resources,” the 24-page ruling says.

Chutkan later adds: “The lease sale does not represent the final word on anything, nor does it commit any resources, even putting aside the question of whether it does so irretrievably,” the 24-page ruling says.

If its site assessment plan is approved, Statoil will have five years to conduct surveys and propose construction and operations plans.

Read the full story at Courthouse News

Court upholds BOEM lease for New York offshore wind energy

October 3, 2018 — Seafood industry groups were dealt a setback Sept. 30 when a federal court judge in Washington, D.C., refused to grant a ruling in their challenge of a federal lease for an 80,000-acre offshore wind energy project near New York.

The Fisheries Survival Fund and its allies sought a summary judgement from U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington, D.C., to overturn the federal Bureau of Offshore Energy Management’s grant of a $42.5 million lease to Norway-based Equinor, formerly Statoil, for its Empire Wind project. 

Fishermen argued BOEM ignored potential impacts on the environment and fishing. On Sunday the judge ruled that challenge to the initial December 2016 leasing was premature, as the agency has yet to review a construction and operations plan from the company.

But other court precedents have held that offshore leaseholders “gain more rights as development proceeds, and as more time and money are invested in a project,” the Fisheries Survival Fund said in a prepared statement. “That means that the further development proceeds, the more difficult it becomes for plaintiffs to overturn a leasing decision.”

The decision comes as wind energy companies are vying to lock in agreements with state governments in New York and New Jersey – and get priority for ratepayer subsidies that will help develop a U.S. industry.

The judge has found the fishing industry and affected communities; including scallop fishing ports like New Bedford, Mass., have standing to contest the wind farm proposal. The challengers say the “unsolicited bid procedure allowed BOEM to decide, behind closed doors, what area of the ocean was to be leased.”

Read the full story at WorkBoat

Fisheries Survival Fund Expresses Concern Over Recent Ruling in NY Wind Farm Case

October 1, 2018 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the Fisheries Survival Fund:

Late yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied a ruling for summary judgment in the ongoing lawsuit against the leased wind farm area in the New York Bight. While the Fisheries Survival Fund (FSF) is pleased that the court found that the fishing industry and affected port communities have standing to bring claims in the case, we are concerned with other aspects of the ruling.

Specifically, we are troubled by the court’s finding that our claims under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are not ‘ripe.’  The court held that, because the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) retains some authority to preclude surface disturbing activities in the period between issuing a lease and the approval of a construction and operations plan, the lease itself does not constitute the irretrievable transfer of resources required under NEPA. The court found that the “lease sale does not represent the final word on anything, nor does it commit any resources, even putting aside the question of whether it does so irretrievably.”

This suggests that the court views the lease as something akin to a ‘ticket’ to proceed, rather than a guarantee of any rights.  Just as a concertgoer’s ticket can be revoked by a venue for inappropriate behavior, the court seems to contend that the leaseholder’s ‘ticket’ for at-sea development can be revoked by BOEM at any time. But in fact, judicial precedent interpreting the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) has held that the leaseholder gains more rights as development proceeds, and as more time and money are invested in a project.  This means that, the further development proceeds, the more difficult it becomes for plaintiffs to overturn a leasing decision.

We are concerned that the court’s view of the case as premature at the leasing stage, combined with case law finding a leasing challenge too late at the construction and operation plan phase, leaves plaintiffs with no opportunity to challenge this siting decision.

We are encouraged the court never contested our view that the unsolicited bid procedure allowed BOEM to decide, behind closed doors, what area of the ocean was to be leased. But we are troubled by the court’s ruling that our OCSLA claims are barred because we did not comply with the provision requiring 60 days notice of an intended filing. We were not able to provide 60 days’ notice, because BOEM scheduled the lease sale only 45 days after publication of the Final Sale Notice.

The court held that we were not excused from compliance with the 60-day notice period because the statute does not require BOEM to schedule its lease sales with sufficient time to accommodate potential claimants. If the court’s position is upheld, BOEM apparently would have the ability to lease any portion of the ocean unchallenged, and would deny any harmed parties their right to challenge a proposed lease sale under the OCSLA.  We believe given these circumstances that we should have been granted an exemption from this requirement.

About the Fisheries Survival Fund
The Fisheries Survival Fund (FSF) was established in 1998 to ensure the long-term sustainability of the Atlantic sea scallop fishery.  FSF participants include the vast majority of full-time Atlantic scallop fishermen from Maine to North Carolina.  FSF works with academic institutions and independent scientific experts to foster cooperative research and to help sustain this fully-rebuilt fishery.  FSF also works with the federal government to ensure that the fishery is responsibly managed.

NEW BEDFORD STANDARD-TIMES: BOEM should do ocean study before awarding NY wind leases

September 24, 2018 — Sometimes big issues seem to appear as if out of nowhere.

Residents of SouthCoast may have been feeling that way this week upon learning that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is about to decide on the future of some of the New Bedford scallop fleet’s prime fishing grounds just next month, in October.

Mayor Jon Mitchell and others gave their testimony to BOEM Tuesday about the plans of New York state to award wind turbine leases in a 2,300-square-mile section of ocean known as the New York Bight. The area just happens to be the spot where 40 to 50 percent of the scalloping grounds fished by New Bedford’s fleet are, according to scalloper Eric Hansen.

The federal agency has indicated to developers that 80,000 of the 1.5 million acres contained in the region would be a reasonable turbine size but local officials are worried.

Mitchell called for a scientific study and analysis of where the turbines should go, and recommended against a hasty awarding of leases.

“These decisions are permanent,” he said, explaining that the North Atlantic is far larger and more complex than the areas of Northwest Europe where previous wind turbine studies have been done. There needs to be a hard assessment of the cumulative effects of the wind farms and the locations of the scallops, squid and other species.

In just one area where a lease is being considered, over the last five years New Bedford has taken an annual average of 56 million scallops. That’s a good chunk of the 354 million scallops the city fleet has taken on average over the last five years.

“This is a big deal,” Mitchell told the BOEM officials.

Read the full opinion piece at the New Bedford Standard-Times

NEW JERSEY: Offshore wind energy: Fishermen ask for relief

September 21, 2018 — Offshore windmills may be the future of energy here, but they’re presently a source of agitation to commercial fishermen.

A vocal group of them, who aren’t necessarily opposed to windmills but just the placement of them on or near fishing grounds, which if you ask them is anywhere the water is salt, gave the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management their two cents at a public meeting Thursday.

BOEM oversees offshore wind for the U.S. Department of Interior and is in the planning stages of selecting ocean floor off the New Jersey coast for windmill placement.

The agency was at the Long Branch Public Library to present information collected in a recent public comment period and call for interest among offshore energy companies.

“All of these areas are prime scallop grounds. We’re not going to take any of this lying down,” said Arthur Osche, a member of the Point Pleasant Fishermen’s Dock Co-operative.

Osche was referring to fishing grounds in Hudson North and Hudson South, two designated wind farm lease sites that start about 17 miles east of the coastline here.

The two sites are grouped into the New York Bight Call Area, which also contains two lease sites off the Long Island. The four sites total 2,047 square nautical miles, which is equivalent 2,710 square miles on land.

BOEM’s officials announced they have nine energy companies waiting to potentially make a bid on the lease areas.

Scallops are the state’s most valuable seafood commodity. In 2016, the commercial scallop harvest brought in $123 million, according to National Marine Fisheries Service data.

Fellow co-operative dock member Jim Lovgren said if their access to the grounds is restricted by the windmills then they should be paid for the economic loss.

“Mark off the area and then compensate us,” said Lovgren.

U.S. commercial fishermen can be compensated for property and economic loss due to energy development on the outer continental shelf through the Fishermen’s Contingency Fund.

Read the full story at the Asbury Park Press

‘You’re impacting the whole resource’

September 19, 2018 — Fishermen and city officials raised the alarm Tuesday about potential wind turbines in prime fishing and scalloping grounds south of Long Island.

About 55 people attended a meeting with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to discuss the agency’s evaluation of possible offshore wind locations within a 2,300-square-mile portion of the New York Bight, between Long Island and New Jersey.

Scalloper Eric Hansen said 40 to 50 percent of the scalloping grounds fished by New Bedford scallopers is within the area the federal government is considering leasing to wind developers, and if fishing there becomes dangerous, people will fish harder in the remaining places.

“You’re impacting the whole resource,” he said.

Bureau staff said they want to narrow down the areas to be leased for wind turbines, not use the entire space.

“We have no intention of leasing that whole area,” BOEM spokesman Stephen Boutwell said in an interview before the meeting.

But fishermen were skeptical.

“That’s a hope and not a promise right now, from our perspective,” David Frulla, a scallop industry attorney, said in an interview. “We think this is way overboard and needs to be reconsidered. And we’re actively opposing it.”

New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell addressed the meeting, calling the potential effect on fishing “very alarming.”

“There’s a right way and there’s a wrong way to allow for the development of offshore wind,” he said.

The federal agency has indicated to developers that 80,000 acres would be a reasonable project size — compared to the nearly 1.5 million acres contained within the four areas under consideration: Fairways North, Fairways South, Hudson North and Hudson South.

The mayor cited government data showing a quarter-billion dollars’ worth of scallops were harvested in the four areas over a five-year period ending in 2016. He said a small fraction of the total acreage would satisfy New York’s renewable energy goals, and that those goals could be satisfied by unused areas off Massachusetts that have already been through this process.

Amy Stillings, an economist with BOEM, said Mitchell framed the conversation well, and research does show a lot of fishing happens in the New York Bight.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times