Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Climate

Is Offshore Wind Out of the Woods?

2023 was, in a word, bad. But there are reasons to think this year might be better.

A wind turbine.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Billion-dollar losses, cancelled contracts, accusations of whale murder — 2023 was not a good year for offshore wind. A variety of companies involved in the business, from developers to turbine manufacturers told analysts and investors about how bad it was when it came time to report their full-year earnings. Orsted, the Danish energy company, told investors last week that it would have been $2 billion in the black if it were not for its U.S. business; instead it was $3 billion in the red. The head of General Electric’s renewables business, meanwhile, told analysts that offshore wind was “challenging” in 2023 and reported a $1.1 billion loss. And BP, after one executive called the offshore wind market “fundamentally broken” last fall, said this month that it had written down its offshore wind investments by $1.1 billion and was also getting out of a joint venture with Norwegian wind energy giant Equinor.

But that could very well be the worst of it. “We are bullish [on] Offshore Wind value creation given most 2023 issues were related to new US market and cyclical pressures rather than structural challenges,” Morgan Stanley analysts wrote in a report earlier this month. Or to put it another way, 2023 was a weird — and very expensive — year.

The contracts that fell through in the past year, the analysts said, “relate to a specific vintage of projects, which secured revenues in a lower cost environment in 2018-2021” — that is, they were written for a world without the huge run up in costs due to Covid-era inflation and supply chain issues. “Looking ahead, we believe most of these issues have been addressed,” the Morgan Stanley analysts wrote.

For another thing, offshore wind still plays a key role in several states’ climate policies, particularly in the Northeast. Whatever issues around costs and contracting might still exist, state governments have incentives to work around them. Now, analysts and advocates predict, contracts will be written with today’s cost environment in mind, making it easier to share costs to connect projects to the grid. “A number of states like New York have now adopted mechanisms that help de-risk projects,” Fred Zalcman, director of the New York Offshore Wind Alliance, told me.

If all goes well, New York and other states’ decision not to go forward on some contracts due to cost disagreements with developers will only delay the projects — it was the contracts that were the problem, not the projects themselves. Those same developers can rebid for a new, more comfortable deal.

Later this month, New York is expected to award new contracts as part of a new program to fast track procurement following regulators’ refusal to adjust existing contracts for higher costs; both Orsted and Equinor submitted new bids for their Sunrise and Empire Wind projects. Earlier this year, New Jersey, where Orsted had previously cancelled two projects, awarded contracts for more than 3 gigawatts of new capacity , and Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island — all three of which have had offshore wind deals fall through or not go forward because of high costs — decided to coordinate to bid on future offshore wind projects.

Even after the industry’s annus horribilis, utility-scale projects off the coast of New York and Massachusetts are now producing power, expanding the industry past its small-scale existence off Rhode Island and Virginia. 2024 “will be a period for the industry to basically reboot,” Zalcman told me. “We have a number of procurements in process and planned that should hopefully more than compensate for the attrition in the pipeline.”

It is, unfortunately, worth mentioning that even if these projects continue to move forward, neither ambitious states like New York nor the Biden administration — whose 30 GW by 2030 goal analysts have, for months, thought was essentially unattainable — are likely to meet their development timelines.

If 2023 was the year of failure for offshore wind, 2024 might at least be the year of failing better.

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
Energy

All the Nuclear Workers Are Building Data Centers Now

There has been no new nuclear construction in the U.S. since Vogtle, but the workers are still plenty busy.

A hardhat on AI.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Trump administration wants to have 10 new large nuclear reactors under construction by 2030 — an ambitious goal under any circumstances. It looks downright zany, though, when you consider that the workforce that should be driving steel into the ground, pouring concrete, and laying down wires for nuclear plants is instead building and linking up data centers.

This isn’t how it was supposed to be. Thousands of people, from construction laborers to pipefitters to electricians, worked on the two new reactors at the Plant Vogtle in Georgia, which were intended to be the start of a sequence of projects, erecting new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors across Georgia and South Carolina. Instead, years of delays and cost overruns resulted in two long-delayed reactors 35 miles southeast of Augusta, Georgia — and nothing else.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Q&A

How California Is Fighting the Battery Backlash

A conversation with Dustin Mulvaney of San Jose State University

Dustin Mulvaney.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is a follow up with Dustin Mulvaney, a professor of environmental studies at San Jose State University. As you may recall we spoke with Mulvaney in the immediate aftermath of the Moss Landing battery fire disaster, which occurred near his university’s campus. Mulvaney told us the blaze created a true-blue PR crisis for the energy storage industry in California and predicted it would cause a wave of local moratoria on development. Eight months after our conversation, it’s clear as day how right he was. So I wanted to check back in with him to see how the state’s development landscape looks now and what the future may hold with the Moss Landing dust settled.

Help my readers get a state of play – where are we now in terms of the post-Moss Landing resistance landscape?

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

A Tough Week for Wind Power and Batteries — But a Good One for Solar

The week’s most important fights around renewable energy.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Nantucket, Massachusetts – A federal court for the first time has granted the Trump administration legal permission to rescind permits given to renewable energy projects.

  • This week District Judge Tanya Chutkan – an Obama appointee – ruled that Trump’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has the legal latitude to request the withdrawal of permits previously issued to offshore wind projects. Chutkan found that any “regulatory uncertainty” from rescinding a permit would be an “insubstantial” hardship and not enough to stop the court from approving the government’s desires to reconsider issuing it.
  • The ruling was in a case that the Massachusetts town of Nantucket brought against the SouthCoast offshore wind project; SouthCoast developer Ocean Winds said in statements to media after the decision that it harbors “serious concerns” about the ruling but is staying committed to the project through this new layer of review.
  • But it’s important to understand this will have profound implications for other projects up and down the coastline, because the court challenges against other offshore wind projects bear a resemblance to the SouthCoast litigation. This means that project opponents could reach deals with the federal government to “voluntarily remand” permits, technically sending those documents back to the federal government for reconsideration – only for the approvals to get lost in bureaucratic limbo.
  • What I’m watching for: do opponents of land-based solar and wind projects look at this ruling and decide to go after those facilities next?

2. Harvey County, Kansas – The sleeper election result of 2025 happened in the town of Halstead, Kansas, where voters backed a moratorium on battery storage.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow