Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Climate

Americans on the Coast Actually Love Offshore Wind, a New Poll Shows

The whales will be fine.

Wind turbines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Last year, I got two kinds of stories about offshore wind in my inbox. One was about the industry’s struggle with inflation and higher interest rates. The other was about rampant claims that the industry was killing whales — an idea for which there is no evidence, and which was found to be spread by groups with ties to the fossil fuel industry.

But while both narratives have set the industry back to some extent, neither appears to have damaged public support for building wind farms in the ocean. Americans living on the coasts largely support offshore wind and want to see the industry continue to grow, according to a new poll.

The poll was conducted in November 2023 by Climate Nexus, a climate change strategic communications group, and Turn Forward, an offshore wind advocacy nonprofit that says it does not receive funding from wind farm developers.

A representative sample of 2,038 adults living in coastal counties along the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and Gulf of Mexico were asked about their views of offshore wind. More than two-thirds responded that they support offshore wind farm construction, and 63% responded favorably when asked specifically whether they supported offshore wind farms near where they lived. Nearly 60% endorsed the U.S. government selling more leases to expand the industry’s development.

Public sentiment, for the most part, was positive across party lines. The majority of Republican respondents also said they supported offshore wind, both in general (57%), and near where they live (52%).

A more polarizing question was whether respondents preferred offshore wind development to expanding offshore oil and gas, with 71% of Democrats opting for wind but only 33% of Republicans. (26% of Republicans said they had no preference.)

One of the more intriguing parts of the poll tried to suss out what people had heard and read about offshore wind, and where they were getting information about the emerging industry. Local opposition groups like Protect Our Coast New Jersey have developed large followings on Facebook, where members share their fears that wind turbines will harm marine mammals, tourism, and property values — and also argue against the basic facts of climate change. Several grassroots groups, including Protect Our Coast New Jersey, have been found to have financial relationships with fossil fuel-funded think tanks like the Caesar Rodney Institute.

Conservative outlets like Fox News have also fueled the narrative that offshore wind development is killing whales. Media Matters, a media watchdog, found that Fox has “aired at least 54 segments suggesting that offshore wind development is causing whale deaths.” A report published last year by researchers at Brown University that mapped out the networks of anti-offshore wind groups in the U.S. suggested that social networks and conservative news outlets like Fox function as “a feedback loop of opposition and misinformation.”

According to the new poll, 53% of coastal Americans have received information about offshore wind on TV news, and 48% have seen posts about it on social media. Those were the two top sources of information, followed by newspapers, family and friends, and TV ads. But even so, most respondents — 56% — said that everything they have seen, read, or heard about offshore wind has been more positive than negative.

But while the poll may be a good temperature check on public sentiment, it doesn’t necessarily change some of the headwinds that offshore wind development faces. An earlier report from Columbia University researchers found that local opposition to renewable energy projects, including offshore wind projects, is growing. The report specifically documents instances where community groups have passed laws to block projects or filed lawsuits against developers or local officials.

There are currently four lawsuits pending in federal court against Vineyard Wind, a project that is already under construction, from a group called Nantucket Residents Against Turbines. In New Jersey, at least two communities passed resolutions last year calling on state and federal officials to impose a moratorium on offshore wind projects, citing whale deaths. And last October, a group called Protect Our Coast LINY celebrated a victory when New York Governor Kathy Hochul vetoed a bill that would have greenlit placing an offshore wind transmission cable under the sand in Long Beach, which the group had been fighting.

Even if the majority of coastal citizens support an American offshore wind industry, a vocal minority can still wield a lot of power to hold it back — especially when they have the backing of fossil fuel money.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Elections inspire hyperbole. Every two years, we have “the most important election of our lifetime,” America’s future constantly “hangs in the balance,” and the stakes perennially “couldn’t be higher.”

But this year, some breathlessness does seem appropriate. 2024 marks the first presidential election since the January 6, 2021 insurrection attempt, which historians and constitutional scholars have described as the gravest threat to the peaceful transfer of power since the Civil War. No less existentially, tomorrow’s election will also have global consequences. Americans will either elect a leader who continues the build-out of renewable energy and prioritizes a healthy, clean environment, or they will elect a leader whose retrograde embrace of the fossil fuel industry would, in the space of one presidential term, “negate — twice over — all the savings from deploying wind, solar, and other clean technologies around the world over the past five years,” as Carbon Brief writes.

Keep reading...Show less
Green
Politics

Renewable Energy Has a Swing Voter Problem

Counties that veered from Obama in 2008 to Trump in 2016 are more likely to oppose renewables development.

Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

In Texas, the Oak Run Solar Project would have been a slam dunk.

Developers would install 800 megawatts of solar panels — enough to power 800,000 homes — across nine square miles of unused land. It would devote some of its acreage to new farming practices that incorporate solar panels. And it would sell its electricity cheaply — and profitably — because it was near the state capital and because it could take advantage of a pre-existing onsite connection to the regional power grid.

Keep reading...Show less
Climate

AM Briefing: Shorter Showers for New Yorkers

On dry conditions in the Big Apple, biodiversity goals, and the future of the IRA

Drought Hits New York City
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: Schools are closed this week in Lahore, Pakistan, due to unprecedented pollution • An extreme red alert for torrential rain has been issued in Barcelona • A storm system in the Caribbean could strengthen into a hurricane by Wednesday.

THE TOP FIVE

1. Biodiversity summit ends without key agreements on nature protection

The COP16 biodiversity summit in Colombia came to a disappointing close over the weekend, with negotiators failing to agree on how the world can monitor and fund nature restoration. There were high hopes that the meeting would produce a roadmap for protecting large swathes of land, water, and degraded ecosystems by 2030, but rich nations blocked a proposal for a new fund to help pay for poorer nations’ efforts. “This COP was meant to be a status check on countries’ progress toward saving nature and all indicators on that status are blinking red,” said Crystal Davis, the World Resources Institute’s global director of food, land, and water. There were some bright spots, though, including the creation of a subsidiary body that will ensure Indigenous peoples have a seat at the negotiating table in future UN conservation talks, and a plan to encourage corporations that derive biotechnology products from nature to pay into a conservation fund.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow