The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Spotlight

Trump Hasn’t Been Advancing New Wind Farms During Permitting Talks

Only upgrades for pre-existing wind projects have been approved.

•
Donald Trump.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

In September, the Trump administration told a reporter that the president directed the Pentagon to finally process wind projects through routine airspace approvals as required under a court order. By doing this, it created the appearance of real headway and good faith in talks with Democrats in Congress on energy permitting legislation before the November midterm elections.

But the White House’s assurances are not what they seem.

All of the projects the administration has reportedly advanced over the past week are repowerings, meaning they’re only upgrades of existing projects, and two of the “projects” they’ve advanced were just two individual turbines, the American Clean Power Association on Tuesday told members involved in litigation with the administration.

Over the course of his presidency, the president’s team has turned what was once a sleepy bureaucratic check for radar or flight interference into a weapon against wind energy in the United States. You need Federal Aviation Administration clearance for any structure above 200 feet in the air and that process includes a Pentagon review. By claiming wind projects suddenly needed new scrutiny for national security reasons, the Pentagon held up FAA airspace approvals for apparently hundreds of projects.

This has been a key part of bipartisan energy legislation talks back in D.C., as Democrats in Congress have demanded at least some semblance of regular order be returned to renewable energy in federal permitting. The permitting bill ostensibly has ways to strengthen wind companies’ hand in dealing with a hostile Trump administration but negotiators, including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, have also previously called attacks on wind projects during negotiations harmful to a final deal becoming law.

In September, Politico reported Trump told his aides he would agree to direct the Defense Department to “start clearing its queue of long-delayed onshore wind projects to strike a deal” citing “two people familiar with the talks and granted anonymity.” Among the commitments Politico reported were made: to approve about 30 projects awaiting a countersignature from the Pentagon on a mitigation agreement related to airspace impacts.

In federal court, the renewable energy trade groups who brought the lawsuit clearly don’t think the Trump administration actually followed through with that promise.

On Oct. 20, after updates from the Justice Department showed little signs of progress (which I wrote about), the trade groups filed a motion to enforce the judge’s stay on their air clearance freeze, saying that very little had advanced since the ruling in early August, and that none of the 30 projects awaiting countersignature on their mitigation agreements actually had advanced from Pentagon review. In addition, they said the government was now asking project developers to sign onto a litany of new requirements in exchange for a sign-off on mitigation agreements. They submitted a joint declaration from subject matter experts, including from former military personnel, who described these requirements as a vast departure from precedent with little basis in security rationale that they said also had terms that could violate state or local laws, like a blanket prohibition on aircraft detection light systems. (You can read the declaration here.)

Two days later, on Oct. 22, it started to look like we were getting somewhere when news outlets reported the Trump administration was "advancing" two “wind projects” in South Dakota and Maine, citing statements from the White House and the Pentagon.

Bob Ditchey, a spokesperson for the Pentagon, told us in an email that the two “wind projects” were Crowned Ridge, which he said consisted of 87 turbines in “Grant, SD,” and “Blue Sky/Hill,” which he said was made up of 19 turbines in “Hancock, ME.” Ditchey described them both as “proposed” wind energy “developments.”

“Following rigorous evaluation of potential impacts on military readiness, radar installations, and airspace operations, the DoW has cleared both projects to proceed to the next phase of federal evaluation,” Ditchey said in an email. “The projects have been formally referred to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for final aeronautical study and determination.”

The South Dakota wind project Trump officials are referencing is likely NextEra’s Crowned Ridge wind farm, which has 87 turbines and has been operational since 2019. On Oct. 5 a NextEra project consultant submitted a litany of height clearance requests for a “repowering project” on behalf of Crowned Ridge Energy Center, LLC, according to the Federal Aviation Administration’s public database. The requests are for turbines in Grant County.

There is no Maine wind project with the name “Blue Sky/Hill,” as far as we can tell, but there is a project in Hancock County that was completed in 2012 called “Bull Hill” that consists of 19 turbines, and which also has pending applications for repowering in the FAA’s database.

Neither NextEra nor Bull Hill’s developer, TerraForm Power, responded to our requests for comment. The Pentagon also did not respond to questions about these projects or the additional ones it said it had advanced.

In addition, as of this story’s publication, all of the air clearance requests for these two projects are all listed as “pending” online.

If you’re wondering why operational wind farms might need air clearances for construction, all of the wind farms’ requests describe the projects as “repowering,” an industry term that applies to upgrading, modifying, altering or restarting pre-existing wind farms. A repowering can mean anything from fixing turbine blades to changing turbine height, or moving a turbine, or commissioning new turbines entirely. Crucially though it’s not really considered a “new wind farm” in the colloquial sense. As my colleague Matthew Zeitlin has explained, repowerings are seen by the energy sector as a simple pathway to the most juice for the squeeze from what has already been permitted and built.

On Tuesday, Punchbowl News reported that the White House was advancing three more wind projects in Illinois and Iowa. After this story ran, American Clean Power told members involved in the airspace litigation clarifying that all of the projects thus far are “repowerings” and that the two Illinois “projects” each were only individual wind turbines. None of the projects were new utility scale projects.

On Wednesday, just before this story went to press, Punchbowl News reported another two wind projects were advancing, calling it “more permitting goodwill from the White House.” We have not yet been able to confirm what these projects are or whether they are also repowering projects.

American Clean Power endorsed the bipartisan Senate permitting bill and called for its passage. The group provided a comment from Frank Macchiarola, their chief advocacy officer: “To date, the administration has moved forward only a handful of the total number of projects they agreed to approve. In order to pass BAAJA and bring down costs for Americans, the Administration needs to get serious about building clean power.”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

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

GoodPower Is Sussing Out What People Actually Want from Data Centers

Talking with Leah Qusba, the CEO of GoodPower.

•
Leah Qusba.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Leah Qusba, CEO of GoodPower, which recently released a survey experiment you need to read. Conducted with Data for Progress, the project, published Monday, takes a unique approach to asking people why they opposed data centers for artificial intelligence and whether constructing renewable energy instead of gas power moves the needle at all in their support for AI infrastructure near them. Instead of just asking polling questions, they posed various hypothetical project designs to people — and the results were eye-popping. Turning to solar instead of gas? Might not be a panacea for gaining approval at the local level. Protecting electricity rates from going sky-high? Now that’s a way to get buy-in.

The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

A First-Of-Its-Kind State of Emergency — Over a Permitting Pause

And more of the week’s top fights around development.

•
The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Umatilla County, Oregon – A small town in Oregon this week declared a state of emergency over fears that a statewide pause on data center permits will harm its economy.

  • Five of the six people on the Umatilla city council voted to adopt a resolution formally calling for a state of emergency “due to the threat of widespread financial loss.” Umatilla City Manager Dave Stockdale told the council before the vote that the data center pause enacted by Governor Tina Kotek puts millions in tax revenue at risk. Other city staffers told the council that current budget reserves are healthy, but this could complicate a bond for a new police station and delay executing their city’s master plan.
  • Umatilla is home to more than 20 data center projects currently operating or under development, equal to roughly one-fifth of the state’s data center sector. Oregon law expressly grants cities and towns permission to declare a state of emergency over “financial loss.” And the Umatilla resolution is a clear legal threat; its text calls for “immediate reconsideration” of Governor Kotek’s directive pausing data center permits and “authorizes the city manager to coordinate with affected governments and legal counsel to pursue appropriate administrative and judicial remedies.”
  • To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time a municipal government has threatened legal action or declared a state of emergency over a state-wide permitting pause against data center development. It goes to show that what comes around goes around.

2. Saratoga County, New York – Is Trump’s country music superstar-turned-power-project combatant John Rich preparing to debut a new song about solar farms, or something more?

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

The Most Important Data Center Election You’ve Never Heard Of

The race for the top job in McCracken County, Kentucky, might hinge on the importance of a community benefit agreement.

•
Paducah, Kentucky figures.
Heatmap Illustration/Library of Congress, U.S. Department of Energy

An election-season battle is brewing over what could be the nation’s first massive data center operating on federal land. And you almost certainly have never heard of it.

Come with me to McCracken County, Kentucky, just outside its largest city, Paducah, where the Energy Department is allowing new development at a large brownfield property. First constructed in the 1950s, the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant was once the country’s only uranium enrichment facility, but it closed in 2010. Since then, and after years of cleanup, Paducah city officials and the McCracken County government have sought to revitalize and reindustrialize the site.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow