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
Q&A

Why the Wilderness Society Backs a Data Center Moratorium

Talking with Dan Hartinger, the land conservation group’s senior policy director.

•
The Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s Q&A is with Dan Hartinger, senior policy director for The Wilderness Society, a prominent land conservation organization in D.C. that this week called for a moratorium on data center development on public land. The public statement was relatively scant on details about the group’s stance, and a decade of reporting on policy in Washington has taught me that its positions are quite influential, especially in more traditional outdoor recreation and conservationist circles that are also often bipartisan. So I reached out and asked if someone could further explain the society’s position, and Dan obliged.

The following chat was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Data Center Outrage Catches Up to Renewables Outrage in Michigan

Plus more of the week’s biggest development fights.

•
The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Central Michigan – I regret to inform you of this back-and-forth between candidates running for Congress and a would-be constituent because it’s a warning sign for the renewable energy sector (and sort of broke my brain).

  • This week brought the first and likely only debate between Rep. Tom Barrett and Sunrise Movement cofounder Will Lawrence, who are locked in a tight contest over the Michigan 7th congressional district. As I’ve written, their race is a must-watch not only for control of the U.S. House but also the political fortunes of the data center sector.
  • The debate contained a remarkable exchange: Moderators played taped remarks from Paula Caltrider, identified as “a local resident” in the city of Mason to ask the candidates a question about data centers. Instead, she offered a comment. “You know, you can’t be a part of this no data center movement without renouncing the large solar farms and dangerous battery storage facilities that power these data centers.” (Quick TL;DR on Caltrider: She’s been quoted in national media coverage of the data center backlash and last year won a legal settlement after allegedly being fired for refusing a vaccine mandate.)
  • Barrett then ran with Caltrider’s baton. “I appreciate Paula linking these together, the stripping away of local control that took place in pursuit of this Green New Deal agenda in Lansing that took away control from communities” – a reference to the state’s primacy law that other Michigan Republican candidates have opposed.
  • Lawrence, whose support for a federal data center moratorium made him a national political test case, did not take the bait, nor did he criticize renewable energy. Instead, this part of the debate became a tit-for-tat about whether the sitting congressman once backed tax breaks for data centers. “He stuck his finger up into the wind, saw which way it was blowing, did a complete 180 on this issue,” Lawrence said. Then Barrett and Lawrence got into a confusing back-and-forth about whether the Inflation Reduction Act was a giveaway to data centers.
  • To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time the Data Center Trojan Horse has reared its ugly head on any kind of prominent debate stage, but it won’t be the last. For example: The Wisconsin gubernatorial debate is Oct. 21, and we’ve warned you about that one.

2. Doña Ana County, New Mexico – I suggest you pay closer attention to the federal permitting fight playing out over Oracle’s Project Jupiter.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

The Data Center Backlash Is Coming for Permitting Reform

The Senate’s compromise bill enters the chat at a moment when federal land and anti-pipeline advocates are already quite activated.

•
The Capitol and a data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The AI data center backlash is getting louder in D.C. ahead of the midterms – and it’s poised to collide head-on with the new permitting reform deal being negotiated in Congress.

This week, major environmental advocacy organizations are taking large public steps to lean in on the data center fight. The League of Conservation Voters and Natural Resources Defense Council, I’ve been told, are imminently announcing a $250,000 ad buy in the Washington, D.C. market focused entirely on decrying fossil fuel-powered data centers and Trump administration policies to speed up their construction. The Wilderness Society, a prominent land conservation organization, announced it now supports a moratorium against data centers on “public lands” focused on the roughly half billion acres under the Interior Department’s stewardship. And Earthjustice on Thursday did a detailed report claiming that 80% of the data centers under development “bringing their own power” are going to rely on gas generation.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow