Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Sparks

The World’s Biggest Offshore Wind Developer Had a Horrible 2023, and It’s America’s Fault

Orsted came out with some not-great earnings.

Wind turbines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Danish energy developer Orsted delivered a withering verdict on its experiment trying to build wind farms in the United States: Bad. It’s lost a ton of money, the company said Wednesday, so it’s going to do less of that going forward, and take on way less risk.

That Orsted had struggled in the U.S. offshore wind market was no secret — late last year, it cancelled two projects in New Jersey — but its earnings report put some grim figures on it.

The company said that it had 9.6 billion Danish kroner worth of fees (about $1.4 billion) related to one New Jersey project, Ocean Wind 1, and had booked $4 billion of losses, most of which were due to Ocean Wind 1’s cancellation. Overall, it reported a loss of almost $3 billion in 2023, entirely due to the fees and impairments it reported. Otherwise, the company would have had a more than $2 billion profit.

The company’s offshore wind misadventure won’t just weigh on its balance sheet or stock price. Investors, including the Danish government, will miss out on the company’s dividend for three years, through 2025. And the company’s chairman, Thomas Thune Andersen, said he would step down next month.

All this also meant that the company expects to have far less installed renewable capacity developed by the end of the decade than it had previously targeted, down to 35 to 28 gigawatts from the 50 GW it had projected as recently as last year. (It has just under 16 GW at the moment.) The company will cut its planned investment by more than half, according to Morningstar analyst Tancrede Fulop.

Orsted and other wind developers have blamed a combination of supply chain issues, high interest rates, and inflexibility in the contracts signed with state governments for the failures, delays, and cancellations of projects up and down the East Coast last year. In New York, Orsted and other developers failed to get their contracts adjusted to account for higher costs, and so were forced to cancel and, in some cases, re-bid.

The company said in a presentation to investors that it was “now focused predominantly on the Northeast,” essentially throwing in the towel on anywhere south of New York, having withdrawn from the New Jersey project and declaring that its Maryland project, Skipjack, will continue development “with minimal spend.”

The trouble wasn’t just in the United States, though — Orsted also said it was pulling out of Norway, Spain, and Portugal, while it was “deprioritising development in other markets including Japan.” It does, however, seem committed to maintaining some presence here, having submitted a new bid for Sunrise Wind, a planned wind farm off the east coast of Long Island.

In a call with analysts, the company’s chief executive Mads Nipper said that Orsted will spend far less money on projects before making the final approval to go forward with construction. The company also said that it will “pursue offtake opportunities where attractive with low pre-FID commitments and inflation protection” — in other words, bid for projects with low upfront costs and someone else around to absorb rising costs.

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
Sparks

SCOTUS Says Biden’s Power Plant Rules Can Stay — For Now

They may not survive a full challenge, though.

The Supreme Court.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Supreme Court allowed the Environmental Protection Agency to move forward with its rule restricting climate pollution from power plants on Wednesday, meaning that one of the Biden administration’s key climate policies can stay in place. For now.

The high court’s decision will allow the EPA to defend the rule in a lower court over the next 10 months. A group of power utilities, trade groups, and Republican-governed states are suing to block the greenhouse gas rule, arguing that it oversteps the EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act.

Keep reading...Show less
Green
Sparks

What Happens to a Landfill in a Hurricane?

The trash mostly stays put, but the methane is another story.

A hurricane and a landfill.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

In the coming days and weeks, as Floridians and others in storm-ravaged communities clean up from Hurricane Milton, trucks will carry all manner of storm-related detritus — chunks of buildings, fences, furniture, even cars — to the same place all their other waste goes: the local landfill. But what about the landfill itself? Does this gigantic trash pile take to the air and scatter Dorito bags and car parts alike around the surrounding region?

No, thankfully. As Richard Meyers, the director of land management services at the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County, assured me, all landfill waste is covered with soil on “at least a weekly basis,” and certainly right before a hurricane, preventing the waste from being kicked up. “Aerodynamically, [the storm is] rolling over that covered waste. It’s not able to blow six inches of cover soil from the top of the waste.”

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Sparks

How Climate Change Is Supercharging Hurricane Milton

And made Helene so much worse, according to new reports from Climate Central and World Weather Attribution.

Helene destruction.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Contrary to recent rumor, the U.S. government cannot direct major hurricanes like Helene and Milton toward red states. According to two new rapid attribution studies by World Weather Attribution and Climate Central, however, human actors almost certainly made the storms a lot worse through the burning of fossil fuels.

A storm like Hurricane Helene, which has killed at least 227 people so far and caused close to $50 billion in estimated property losses across the southeast, is about two-and-a-half times more likely in the region today compared to what would be expected in a “cooler pre-industrial climate,” WWA found. That means Helene, the kind of storm one would expect to see once every 130 years on average, is now expected to develop at a rate of about once every 53 years. Additionally, WWA researchers determined that extreme rainfall from Helene was 70% more likely and 10% heavier in the Appalachians and about 40% more likely in the southern Appalachian region, where many of the deaths occurred, due to climate change.

Keep reading...Show less