The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Q&A

Can Labor Save Offshore Wind?

A conversation with Ryan Murphy of Climate Jobs Massachusetts

Ryan Murphy of Climate Jobs Massachusetts.
Heatmap Illustration

Today we’re chatting with Ryan Murphy, executive director of the labor-enviro coalition group Climate Jobs Massachusetts. Last week his group along with labor organizations in Rhode Island and Connecticut released a report detailing how they envision the offshore wind industry moving forward in the near term — which Murphy was quick to tell me was in the works before Trump won the election. The report’s conclusion? Labor’s support is going to be necessary for the industry to stand a chance at maintaining growth. You can read it in full here.

The following is an abridged version of our conversation…

Simply put – why’d you do this?

It’s become clear over time that we need a strong, coordinated regional approach that’s led by the states and people in those states, especially in New England, because this is a regional industry [there]. Vineyard Wind 1 was built by workers and residents in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. There are state lines involved, and there are also federal lines involved. We wanted to make sure there’s a coordinated approach, that we’re all working together to move this industry forward and make sure we can finish the job.

Coming on the heels of the election, did that have an influence on this work?

This report has been researched for many, many months. We feel regardless of the federal landscape this was a really important time to draw attention to this.

How do you develop an offshore wind industry given the federal landscape?

We think state leadership is very important here. Since the beginning of the industry, states have led the way to lift this industry up. We think it takes everybody. It’ll take the people building these projects to move it forward, the good union workers in construction and other industries. It takes developers moving these projects forward. It takes the state governments and regional officials. It takes environmental groups to advocate for the completion of these projects. It’s a team effort across the board.

I think we wait and see what happens. We are going to keep moving forward in every way that we can. It’s not a black-and-white issue and I think its going to take a lot of coordination, a lot of conversations. We know this industry employs thousands and thousands of working class people that make these projects run. It’s important for American energy independence. We think it’s important for lifting up manufacturing and construction jobs. And we hope to work with people who are going to support those issues.

In the event the administration is particularly unkind in spite of all that, how do states push forward on offshore wind independent of federal support?

There’s already fully leased offshore wind areas in federal waters that will support up to 15 gigawatts of offshore wind. We plan to move forward with the projects that are already planned.

As far as future plans, this is an industry that didn’t just get off the ground, it’s been in the works for a very long time in all different phases of planning.

We’re just going to have to see what happens when it comes to different issues at the federal level if any arise.

How does the labor constituency help with getting support on the ground for building offshore wind projects?

Union workers are the ones who actually build projects. Vineyard Wind 1 could not have and would not have been built without union workers. What we’re hoping to see is construction and operation and maintenance of supply chain facilities, manufacturing facilities for offshore wind cables, for cement that’s needed to build them, and to actually build out the ports and build vessels that are going to be able to support these projects. When it comes to building policy, I think labor has an absolutely critical role and is positioned to be extremely helpful.

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
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
Spotlight

How the Tax Bill Is Empowering Anti-Renewables Activists

A war of attrition is now turning in opponents’ favor.

Massachusetts and solar panels.
Heatmap Illustration/Library of Congress, Getty Images

A solar developer’s defeat in Massachusetts last week reveals just how much stronger project opponents are on the battlefield after the de facto repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Last week, solar developer PureSky pulled five projects under development around the western Massachusetts town of Shutesbury. PureSky’s facilities had been in the works for years and would together represent what the developer has claimed would be one of the state’s largest solar projects thus far. In a statement, the company laid blame on “broader policy and regulatory headwinds,” including the state’s existing renewables incentives not keeping pace with rising costs and “federal policy updates,” which PureSky said were “making it harder to finance projects like those proposed near Shutesbury.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Midwest Is Becoming Even Tougher for Solar Projects

And more on the week’s most important conflicts around renewables.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Wells County, Indiana – One of the nation’s most at-risk solar projects may now be prompting a full on moratorium.

  • Late last week, this county was teed up to potentially advance a new restrictive solar ordinance that would’ve cut off zoning access for large-scale facilities. That’s obviously bad for developers. But it would’ve still allowed solar facilities up to 50 acres and grandfathered in projects that had previously signed agreements with local officials.
  • However, solar opponents swamped the county Area Planning Commission meeting to decide on the ordinance, turning it into an over four-hour display in which many requested in public comments to outright ban solar projects entirely without a grandfathering clause.
  • It’s clear part of the opposition is inflamed over the EDF Paddlefish Solar project, which we ranked last year as one of the nation’s top imperiled renewables facilities in progress. The project has already resulted in a moratorium in another county, Huntington.
  • Although the Paddlefish project is not unique in its risks, it is what we view as a bellwether for the future of solar development in farming communities, as the Fort Wayne-adjacent county is a picturesque display of many areas across the United States. Pro-renewables advocates have sought to tamp down opposition with tactics such as a direct text messaging campaign, which I previously scooped last week.
  • Yet despite the counter-communications, momentum is heading in the other direction. At the meeting, officials ultimately decided to punt a decision to next month so they could edit their draft ordinance to assuage aggrieved residents.
  • Also worth noting: anyone could see from Heatmap Pro data that this county would be an incredibly difficult fight for a solar developer. Despite a slim majority of local support for renewable energy, the county has a nearly 100% opposition risk rating, due in no small part to its large agricultural workforce and MAGA leanings.

2. Clark County, Ohio – Another Ohio county has significantly restricted renewable energy development, this time with big political implications.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

How a Heatmap Reader Beat a Battery Storage Ban

A conversation with Jeff Seidman, a professor at Vassar College.

Jeffrey Seidman.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Jeff Seidman, a professor at Vassar College and an avid Heatmap News reader. Last week Seidman claimed a personal victory: he successfully led an effort to overturn a moratorium on battery storage development in the town of Poughkeepsie in Hudson Valley, New York. After reading a thread about the effort he posted to BlueSky, I reached out to chat about what my readers might learn from his endeavors – and how they could replicate them, should they want to.

The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow