Monday, March 20 2023 Sign In   |    Register

News Quick Search



Front Page
Power News
Today's News
Yesterday's News
Week of Mar 20
Week of Mar 13
Week of Mar 06
Week of Feb 27
Week of Feb 20
By Topic
By News Partner
Gas News
News Customization


Pro Plus(+)

Add on products to your professional subscription.
  • Energy Archive News

    Home > News > Power News > News Article

    Share by Email E-mail Printer Friendly Print

    Sabin Center Urges BOEM to Consider Climate Change Risks to Offshore Wind Projects, as Well as Climate Change Impacts to Wildlife if Offshore Wind Projects Are Not Constructed

    January 18, 2023 - Climate Law Blog


      By Matthew Eisenson

      In March 2021, the Biden Administration announced a target of deploying 30,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind capacity by 2030, enough energy to power approximately 10 million homes. As of May 31, 2022, only 42 MW of offshore wind capacity was in operation, less than 1% of the Administration’s 30,000-MW target. While very few offshore wind projects have been completed, the U.S. Department of Energy has reported that projects comprising more than 40,000 MW of capacity are in the pipeline at various stages of development.

      One such project is Empire Offshore Wind, which would add 2,086 MW of capacity to the country’s offshore wind portfolio, approximately 7% of the Biden Administration’s deployment goal. As proposed, Empire Wind would include up to 147 wind turbines more than 14 miles from shore in the shallow waters of the New York Bight between Long Island and New Jersey.

      Caption: Empire Wind is divided into two sections, EW1 and EW2. The submarine export cable for EW1 would make landfall in Brooklyn, while the cable for EW2 would make landfall in Nassau County.

      This week, the Sabin Center submitted comments on the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for Empire Offshore Wind. In those comments, we encouraged the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) to fully analyze: (1) the climate change risks facing the project; and (2) the climate change risks facing marine mammals if the project does not move forward, including, in particular, the extent to which climate change poses a population-level risk to marine mammals.

      First, we noted that the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) new interim guidance explicitly directs federal agencies to “consider the ways in which a changing climate may impact the proposed action and its reasonable alternatives, and change the action’s environmental effects over the lifetime of those effects.” We further argued that considering climate change impacts is consistent with the federal government’s responsibility under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to attain the most “beneficial uses of the environment” without “undesirable or unintended consequences.” In light of these authorities, and to ensure that the project is appropriately designed to withstand the increasing impacts of climate change, we recommended that BOEM analyze the climate change risks facing the project as well as the project’s resilience to those risks under each of the alternatives being considered.

      Second, we urged BOEM to analyze the extent to which the impacts of climate change, absent the project at issue, pose a population-level threat to marine mammals. As BOEM already acknowledges in the DEIS, “[w]arming and sea level rise could affect marine mammals through increased storm frequency and severity, altered habitat/ecology, altered migration patterns, increased disease incidence, and increased erosion and sediment deposition.” BOEM also finds that the project will result in a reduction of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that cause climate change. However, the DEIS does not address the extent to which marine mammal populations will be affected by climate change absent the project.

      We noted that BOEM has performed this analysis in other environmental reviews, including, for example, by noting in the DEIS for Ocean Wind 1 that, absent the project, “[i]mpacts associated with climate change have the potential to reduce reproductive success and increase individual mortality and disease occurrence, which could have population-level effects.” BOEM has also previously noted in the final EIS for South Fork Wind that “populations that are already vulnerable, such as [North Atlantic Right Whale] may face increased risk of extinction as a consequence of climate change.” We argued that an analysis of the likelihood of population-level impacts to marine mammals absent the project is essential for BOEM to accurately establish the environmental baseline against which to evaluate impacts of the project. We further argued that, since a large-scale buildout of wind projects (including offshore wind) is a central element of the U.S. effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, this analysis would help readers assess what would happen to marine mammal populations if this large-scale buildout does not occur.

      The views expressed in content distributed by Newstex and its re-distributors (collectively, "Newstex Authoritative Content") are solely those of the respective author(s) and not necessarily the views of Newstex et al. It is provided as general information only on an "AS IS" basis, without warranties and conferring no rights, which should not be relied upon as professional advice. Newstex et al. make no claims, promises or guarantees regarding its accuracy or completeness, nor as to the quality of the opinions and commentary contained therein.


    Other Articles - Utility Business / General


       Home  -  Feedback  -  Contact Us  -  Safe Sender  -  About Energy Central   
    Copyright © 1996-2023 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Energy Central® and Energy Central Professional® are registered trademarks of CyberTech, Incorporated. Data and information is provided for informational purposes only, and is not intended for trading purposes. CyberTech does not warrant that the information or services of Energy Central will meet any specific requirements; nor will it be error free or uninterrupted; nor shall CyberTech be liable for any indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including lost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connection with the use of, operation of, or inability to use Energy Central. Other terms of use may apply. Membership information is confidential and subject to our privacy agreement.