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

Meta’s Bacterial Mystery Could Poison the Data Center Well

Water pollution in Wyoming has big implications for the future of data center development.

A data center and water pollution.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Did a Meta data center introduce a rare, dangerous bacteria into the sewers system of Wyoming’s capitol city? It’s an environmental pollution mystery with an answer that could decide the future of American AI infrastructure development.

Our drama begins in Cheyenne, Wyoming, where the city’s board of public utilities just wrapped up a lengthy investigation into the presence of Cupriavidus gilardii, a potentially lethal bacteria resistant to heavy metals, in the city’s wastewater treatment systems. Apparently, in February, board staff detected the contamination and shut off public access to the city’s water reuse system, a supply of treated non-potable water fed with treated wastewater and used for lawns, athletic fields, and other green spaces. Officials were worried that spraying this water could release into the environment a bacteria found to cause fatal health outcomes in immunocompromised or elderly people who are infected by it.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

How Big of a Problem Is Data Center Noise?

A conversation with Ross Marchard of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance

The Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Ross Marchard, executive director for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, a center-right advocacy group that focuses on what it sees are onerous policies potentially hindering responsible collection and use of tax dollars. TPA’s position on AI clearly skews pro-free market, as they’ve recently defended Anthropic from Trump administration attacks. TPA also recently took on the mantle of defending data centers from noise complaints, publishing a paper on Tuesday “debunking myths about data centers being excessively noisy.” The paper references various analyses of data centers by state legislators and local regulators to argue that claims the sector is generally noisy are false.

I asked TPA’s executive director to chat with me about why and how the organization will try to quell these fears. The conversation was really interesting so I decided to share it with you in full, sans light editing for clarity and consistency.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Electro-Magnetic Freakout on the Cape

And more of the week’s news around project development.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Barnstable County, Massachusetts – I have a whopper of an update on the Vineyard Wind project, which might be in operation but risks becoming fodder in the fight against offshore wind.

  • Like all offshore wind projects, Vineyard Wind has to send power to the coastline via cable. One of the three sites where these giant power lines land is Barnstable, a small shore community, where longtime residents for years have voiced concerns about electromagnetic fields or EMF.
  • Concerns about EMF are comparable to those about infrasound from data centers. We do not know whether these concerns are really rooted in legitimate health impacts, as I have written, but regardless this remains a common concern raised around large high-voltage power lines, including those for offshore wind projects.
  • On June 30, the town’s board of health heard from a group of Barnstable residents who claim to have measured EMF from the town’s wind cable. The same group, Save Greater Downes Beach, had unsuccessfully sought to stop the cables through litigation and public pressure.
  • This board of health meeting was controversial: Ahead of the meeting, the director of Sierra Club’s Massachusetts chapter wrote the board of health requesting their testimony be limited and no action be taken on the findings. “Concerns being raised about electromagnetic field exposure associated with Vineyard Wind 1’s underground export cables are not only invalid but outside of the Board of Health’s jurisdiction,” wrote chapter director Vick Mohanka, according to a copy of the letter posted to Facebook by anti-wind activist Susanne Conley.
  • This Sierra Club chapter was right to be concerned about how this meeting would affect Vineyard Wind. I watched the lengthy testimony before the board of health. Activists presented a case that the town should implore regulators with authority to deeply study the wind farm cables. They asked the board of health to back a state study on EMF and put the question before the Massachusetts permitting regulator, the Energy Facility Siting Board.
  • “We’re not asking the board to place any restrictions or limitations on the project at this time,” Gary Peters, a local medical professional and member of Save Greater Dowses Beach, told the board. “We’re asking you to put that ball in the court of EFSB.”
  • The board was receptive to this request. Board chair F.P. Lee told the group he would “take this under advisement” and said he’d talk to their legal department about it. Daniel Luczkow, the board’s vice chair, said he agreed with activists’ feelings that Barnstable residents were “guinea pigs.”
  • “It sounds like the contention is that these levels we’re measuring are much, much higher than the information given when the project was started,” Luczkow said. “We’re the only place on the planet, maybe, that actually runs these [cables] through a populated area and we have no idea what type of damage they’re causing?”
  • Should Barnstable strenuously take this issue up, I would predict it only be a matter of time before it’s also raised by organs of the federal government. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. last year asked the Centers for Disease Control to study negative health impacts from precisely this infrastructure. This kind of hyperlocal squabble is often what manifests as conversation in anti-wind opposition circles, and Vineyard Wind was already causing PR headaches for the energy transition.

2. Prince William County, Virginia – Northern Virginia is officially hostile territory for data center developers, and I learned about it through a call from my mom.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow