DOCSLIB.ORG

Offshore Wind 3: New Frontiers and Paradigms Updates in the American Offshore Wind Market

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Offshore Wind 3: New Frontiers and Paradigms Updates in the American Offshore Wind Market Offshore Wind 3: New frontiers and paradigms Updates in the American offshore wind market Sebastian Chivers May 2, 2018 - All-Energy Conference, Glasgow This document is confidential and is intended solely for the use and information of the client to whom it is addressed. 0 Agenda 1. Federal Policy and Leasing 2. Market Overview 3. Latest Developments in MA, NY, and NJ The Renewables Consulting Group 1 Developing, financing, constructing offshore wind projects in the United States requires two distinct and decoupled steps 1 Federal-level: Acquire a wind energy area lease from the US Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 2 State-level: Secure an agreement for power purchase and grid connection. Limit of Exclusive Lead Agency: Outer Continental Shelf US Army Corps of Economic Zone Engineers (ACOE) Lead Agency: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) States lead on supplying Federal Waters offtake to projects Lead Agency: State Waters US Coast2 Guard (USCG) Land Both steps are essential to deliver a successful offshore wind project in the United States. Source: RCG analysis The Renewables Consulting Group 2 BOEM’s OCS Renewable Energy Regulatory Framework and Leasing Process has four key stages 1 2 3 4 Planning and Analysis Leasing Site Assessment Commercial Development • BOEM publishes “Call for • BOEM determines extent of • Lessee conducts site • Lessee may conduct Information and competitive interest in site characterisation studies. additional site Nominations”. characterisation studies. • If there is competitive • Lessee submits Site • BOEM identifies priority Wind interest, BOEM notifies public Assessment Plan (SAP). • Lessee submits Construction Energy Areas (WEAs) and developers of intent to & Operation Plan (COP). • BOEM carries out offshore – sites that appear lease through Sales Notices. environmental and technical • BOEM carries out suitable for offshore wind. • BOEM holds a lease sale review of SAP; determines environmental and technical • BOEM processes unsolicited (auction) if competitive whether to approve, modify review of COP; determines application for lease. interest determined. or reject SAP. whether to approve, modify or reject SAP. • BOEM may prepare • BOEM negotiates a lease • If approved, Lessee Environmental Assessment (may be combined with plan assesses site (typically with • If approved, Lessee builds for Lease Issuance and Site approval). meteorological mast and / or offshore wind farm. Assessment Activities. buoys. Lease phase periods Preliminary term 1 year Site Assessment term 5 years Operations term 25 years Engagement with Intergovernmental Task Force Source: RCG analysis from BOEM data The Renewables Consulting Group 3 From Maine to the Carolina’s, offshore wind projects are under development, as well as the West Coast and the Great Lakes US Offshore Wind Sites, projects and leases Comments Oregon Maine Massachusetts • Despite the growing WindFloat Pacific (inactive) DeepCWind, 0.02 MW (pilot) Cape Wind, 450 MW (inactive) number of offshore wind Coos Bay unleased area Statoil Hywind, 12 MW (inactive) Deepwater ONE North, 910 MW sites and projects in the Aqua Ventus 1, 12 MW Bay State Wind, 2000 MW Vineyard Wind, 1600 MW US, only a few key Ohio 2 unleased areas locations are positioned to Icebreaker, 22 MW succeed near-term. Rhode Island • Commercial scale, Block Island, 30 MW (operational) Deepwater ONE S. Fork, 90 MW conventional projects are concentrated on the New York Atlantic coast. Statoil NY Empire Wind, 800 MW • Capacities indicated are New Jersey from developers and Fisherman’s, 24 MW (inactive) indicate maximum Ocean Wind, 1800 MW potential from lease areas. US Wind NJ, 1600 MW Delaware State-level & BOEM leasing by State Garden State, 600 MW (inactive) Skipjack Wind, 120 MW MD Other 32,737 NY 2,148 Maryland 79,350 California US Wind MD N/S, 750 MW Morro Bay unleased area DE MA 96,430 483,952 Virginia RI/MA CVOW / VOWTAP, 12 MW 97,498 Lease Dominion Virginia, 2000 MW acres VA 114,934 North Carolina NJ Hawaii South Carolina Avangrid / Kitty Hawk, 1486 MW NC 344,328 2 unleased areas 4 unleased areas 2 unleased areas 122,405 1000 acres = 4.0 km2 The Renewables Consulting Group 4 Values paid for leases have ranged from $300k to $43m, with a typical 2-3 year timeline from competitive interest to lease award North Carolina (OCS-A-0508) 2017-03-16 Avangrid Kitty Hawk ($9.1m, 74.07 $/acre) New York (OCS-A-0512) 2016-12-16 Statoil NY ($42.5m, 535.22 $/acre) New Jersey (OCS-A-0498 & 0499) 2015-11-09 Ocean Wind ($0.8m, 5.49 $/acre) & US Wind NJ ($1.0m, 5.48 $/acre) Massachusetts (OCS-A-0500 & 0501) 2015-01-29 Bay State Wind ($0.3m, 2.83 $/acre) & Vineyard Wind ($0.2m, 1.95 $/acre) Maryland (OCS-A-0489 & 0490) 2014-08-19 US Wind MD ($3.8m, 117.35 $/acre & $4.9m, 103.46 $/acre) Virginia (OCS-A-0483) 2013-09-04 Dominion Virginia Power NY ($1.6m, 14.18 $/acre) RI & Massachusetts (OCS-A-0486 & 0487) 2013-07-31 Deepwater Wind (together $3.1m, 31.69 $/acre) Jan 2011 Jan 2012 Jan 2013 Jan 2014 Jan 2015 Jan 2016 Jan 2017 Jan 2018 • BOEM has run competitive auctions for blocks of commercial offshore wind energy development on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). • The results from the auctions (shown above) indicate a typical timeline of 2-3 years from determination that there is competitive interest to closing on the winning bid. • A short period then typically elapses whilst lease negotiations are finalised. Source: RCG analysis The Renewables Consulting Group 5 Three States are competing to be the nation’s leader in offshore wind—this should help to drive further offtake and leasing Lease State Incumbent Governor RPS Auction Offshore Wind Support Scheme Latest Developments Outlook Charlie Baker (R) Results from the first (>800MW) solicitation 15% renewables by An Act Relative to Energy Diversity was Republican Party delayed by 1-month until May 23. MA 2020, additional 1% signed into Law in 2016 and requires 1 2015 - 2019 Senators introduce new Bill with goal of 5,000 each year utilities to contract 1,600 MW of offshore thereafter. MW of offshore wind power by 2035, and Massachusetts wind capacity by 2030. reducing the time between procurements. NY PSC established In State of the State address on January In January, The New York State Energy Andrew Cuomo (D) a CES in 2016 10, 2017, Cuomo announced his support Research and Development Authority Democratic Party mandating 50% of for 2.4 GW of offshore wind energy by (NYSERDA) released an Offshore Wind 2 2015 - 2019 electricity to come 2030, and called for procurement of at Master Plan, and proposed four “Areas for Consideration” to BOEM for new leasing. New York from clean energy least 800MW of offshore wind in 2018 by 2030. and 2019 “Call” announced this month by BOEM. The 2010 Offshore Wind Development Phil Murphy signed an executive order to Phil Murphy (D) 24.39% renewables Act. directed the NJ BPU to establish an increase the offshore wind target to 3.5 GW Democratic Party by 2028, increased OREC program to support at least 1,100 by 2030 and instructed the BPU to issue a 3 2018 - 2022 to 50% by 2030 MW of offshore wind. This Act stalled solicitation for 1,100MW of offshore wind. under new and was not implemented under the Gov. Strategic planning for offshore wind now Governor. New Jersey Chris Christie administration. underway by the BPU. Executive Order Bill proposed in Feb Offshore Wind (Offtake) Procurement Targets in Key US States signed in 2018 2018 to increase increasing OSW OSW target to 5GW Original Target Revised or Proposed Target MW target to 3.5GW 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,500 2,400 1,600 2,000 1,200 ?? 0 MA NY NJ Source: RCG analysis The Renewables Consulting Group 6 PSN for two previously unleased areas off MA, and a “call for information and nominations” for four new areas off NY out now Comments New York • Call for Information and Nominations published by BOEM on April 11, 2018. • Four “Call” areas – Hudson South, Hudson North, Fairways South, and Fairways North. • Companies interested in commercial wind energy leases within the proposed area need to provide nominations and comments before May 29, 2018 deadline Massachusetts • Proposed Sale Notice (PSN) published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2018. • BOEM has proposed Lease Areas (LAs) that constitute the portions of the Massachusetts WEA that went unsold in 2015. • All qualifications materials must be received by BOEM before the June 11, 2018 deadline. Source: RCG analysis The Renewables Consulting Group 7 The US has huge offshore wind potential, positive market fundamentals, and a healthy pipeline of projects Comments USA commissioning activity & forecast 2015 - 2030 (cumulative MW) by State • BOEM has leased areas capable of supporting multiple GWs 12,000 of capacity up-and-down the East coast, with more to follow. • Several promising demonstration-scale projects should be 10,000 built between now and the start of large-scale deployment 8,000 • Our latest forecast from our GRIP™ database shows the potential for >10GW of offshore wind between now and 2030. MW 6,000 • Strong competition between several key States, that will lead to increased targets, and other States starting their own 4,000 offshore wind programs. • Political risk (Trump Administration), and supply chain 2,000 challenges (The Jones Act., etc.) exist, but all are surmountable with a growing pipeline of projects to 2030 and 0 beyond. 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Year NY NJ MA NC MD VA Other Source: Global Renewables Infrastructure Projects (GRIP™) Database, April 2018 The Renewables Consulting Group 8 Company Information The Renewables Consulting Group 9 The Renewables Consulting Group About the firm Serving renewable energy markets worldwide • Founded in early 2015 in London and New York.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecological Monitoring and Mitigation Policies and Practices at Offshore Wind Installations in the United States and Europe
    Ecological Monitoring and Mitigation Policies and Practices at Offshore Wind Installations in the United States and Europe August 2020 Michael C. Allen, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Research Associate, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources, Rutgers University, Matthew Campo, Senior Research Specialist, Environmental Analysis & Communications Group, Rutgers University Prepared for the New Jersey Climate Change Alliance (https://njadapt.rutgers.edu/). Working Group Members: John Cecil, New Jersey Audubon Tim Dillingham, American Littoral Society Patty Doerr, The Nature Conservancy of New Jersey Russell Furnari, PSEG Kevin Hassell, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Anthony MacDonald, Urban Coast Institute at Monmouth University Martha Maxwell-Doyle, Barnegat Bay Partnership David Mizrahi, Ph.D., New Jersey Audubon Technical Reviews and Acknowledgments Joseph Brodie, Ph.D. Jeanne Herb Marjorie Kaplan, Dr.P.H. Josh Kohut, Ph.D. Richard Lathrop, Ph.D. Julie Lockwood, Ph.D. Douglas Zemeckis, Ph.D. https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-wn1p-cz80 1 ABSTRACT Offshore wind energy is poised to expand dramatically along the eastern United States. However, the promise of sustainable energy also brings potential impacts on marine ecosystems from new turbines and transmission infrastructure. This whitepaper informs government officials, scientists, and stakeholders in New Jersey about the current policies and monitoring methods other jurisdictions use to monitor potential ecological impacts from offshore wind installations. We reviewed policy documents in the eastern U.S. and Europe, reviewed the scientific literature, and conducted stakeholder interviews in Spring 2020. We found: 1. Short-term (3-5 year) project-specific efforts dominate coordinated regional and project life duration ecological monitoring efforts at offshore wind farms in North America and Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy in Texas: an Argument for Developing Offshore Wind Farms
    4A2EF709-5F17-08B920.DOC 6/9/2009 5:00 PM RECENT DEVELOPMENT WIND ENERGY IN TEXAS: AN ARGUMENT FOR DEVELOPING OFFSHORE WIND FARMS I. INTRODUCTION Because of the place of oil in Texas history, many find it surprising that Texas leads the nation in the development of wind energy. Even California, which many would suspect to lead the nation (though ranking second in the nation) does not produce half of the wind energy that Texas produces: 2,484 megawatts as compared to 5,317 megawatts of wind capacity.1 Texas is committed to the continued development of wind energy.2 In fact, the state is about to undertake a $4.93 billion expansion of its grid system in large part to facilitate additional wind capacity.3 Capacity upgrades to the transmission grid will allow for dramatic growth of wind farms in West Texas and allow consumers to access it.4 That is not to say that Texas does not 1. GOVERNOR’S COMPETITIVENESS COUNCIL, 2008 TEXAS STATE ENERGY PLAN 18 fig.8 (2008), available at http://governor.state.tx.us/files/gcc/2008_Texas_State_Energy_Plan.pdf. “Capacity” measures the productivity of a power production facility. AM. WIND ENERGY ASSOC., WIND ENERGY BASICS, http://www.awea.org/faq/wwt_basics.html (last visited Mar. 28, 2009) (“It compares the plant's actual production over a given period of time with the amount of power the plant would have produced if it had run at full capacity for the same amount of time.”) . 2. GOVERNOR’S COMPETITIVENESS COUNCIL, supra note 1, at 49. 3. ELEC.
    [Show full text]
  • May Flower Site Assessment Plan for Lease OCS-A 0521
    SAP Mayflower Wind Lease OCS-A 0521 Site Assessment Plan July 29, 2019 For Public Release SITE ASSESSMENT PLAN Mayflower Wind Lease OCS – A 0521 Massachusetts Offshore Wind Energy Area SUBMITTED TO: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Office of Renewable Energy U.S. Department of the Interior 45600 Woodland Road, VAM-OREP Sterling, Virginia 20166 Office 703-787-1577 Fax 703-787-1708 Attn: Jeff Browning, Mayflower Project Coordinator PREPARED FOR: Mayflower Wind Energy LLC 281 Albany Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 PREPARED BY: ESS Group, Inc. 10 Hemingway Drive, 2nd Floor East Providence, Rhode Island 02915 ESS Project No. M394-000.05 July 29, 2019 © 2019 ESS Group, Inc. – This document or any part may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording without the express written consent of ESS Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Mayflower Wind Lease OCS-A 0521 Site Assessment Plan July 29, 2019 For Public Release TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Information (30 CFR § 585.610(a)) ...................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Contact Information (§ 585.610(a)(1)) .................................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Site Assessment Concept (§ 585.610(a)(2)) .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Empire Wind Project Version 1.0
    Environmental Mitigation Plan for the Empire Wind project Version 1.0 Prepared Pursuant to Section 12.06 of the Offshore Wind Renewable Energy Certificate Purchase and Sale Agreement by and Between the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and Equinor Wind US LLC Albany, NY Prepared by Equinor Wind US LLC 120 Long Ridge Road Ste 3EO1 Stamford, CT 06902 October 23, 2019 i Table of Contents 1. Environmental Mitigation Plan Summary ..................................................................................... 1 1.1. Overall philosophy and principles ................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Overall approach to incorporating data and stakeholder feedback ............................................. 1 1.3. Existing guidance and best practices that will be followed .......................................................... 1 2. Communications and Collaboration Approach .............................................................................. 3 2.1. Overview and communication plan objectives ............................................................................. 3 2.2. Communication officers/positions, responsibilities, and contact information ............................ 3 2.3. Identification of stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 3 2.4. Participation in stakeholder and technical working groups ......................................................... 4 2.4.1. Communication
    [Show full text]
  • “The Energy Capital of the East Coast?”: Lessons Virginia Can Learn from Cape Wind Failure and European Success in Offshore Wind Energy
    William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review Volume 39 (2014-2015) Issue 3 Article 5 May 2015 “The Energy Capital of the East Coast?”: Lessons Virginia Can Learn from Cape Wind Failure and European Success in Offshore Wind Energy Lamya Moosa Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr Part of the Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, and the Sustainability Commons Repository Citation Lamya Moosa, “The Energy Capital of the East Coast?”: Lessons Virginia Can Learn from Cape Wind Failure and European Success in Offshore Wind Energy, 39 Wm. & Mary Envtl. L. & Pol'y Rev. 713 (2015), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr/vol39/iss3/5 Copyright c 2015 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr “THE ENERGY CAPITAL OF THE EAST COAST?”: LESSONS VIRGINIA CAN LEARN FROM CAPE WIND FAILURE AND EUROPEAN SUCCESS IN OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY LAMYA MOOSA* INTRODUCTION The current opportunity for a successful wind energy initiative off the coast of Virginia will serve as the springboard for future investments in offshore wind energy throughout the United States. Virginia can act as a model for the rest of the nation for the viability of future initiatives if Virginia: 1) looks at successful examples of offshore wind projects used by European forerunners and 2) tailors the process to satiate our domes- tic concerns. Given the length of the United States coastlines and the strength of wind off our coasts,
    [Show full text]
  • Offshore Wind Market and Economic Analysis
    Offshore Wind Market and Economic Analysis Annual Market Assessment Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy Client Contact Michael Hahn, Patrick Gilman Award Number DE-EE0005360 Navigant Consulting, Inc. 77 Bedford Street Suite 400 Burlington, MA 01803-5154 781.270.8314 www.navigant.com February 22, 2013 U.S. Offshore Wind Market and Economic Analysis Annual Market Assessment Document Number DE-EE0005360 Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy Michael Hahn Patrick Gilman Prepared by: Navigant Consulting, Inc. Lisa Frantzis, Principal Investigator Lindsay Battenberg Mark Bielecki Charlie Bloch Terese Decker Bruce Hamilton Aris Karcanias Birger Madsen Jay Paidipati Andy Wickless Feng Zhao Navigant Consortium Member Organizations Key Contributors American Wind Energy Association Jeff Anthony and Chris Long Great Lakes Wind Collaborative John Hummer and Victoria Pebbles Green Giraffe Energy Bankers Marie DeGraaf, Jérôme Guillet, and Niels Jongste National Renewable Energy Laboratory Eric Lantz Ocean & Coastal Consultants (a COWI company) Brent D. Cooper, P.E., Joe Marrone, P.E., and Stanley M. White, P.E., D.PE, D.CE Tetra Tech EC, Inc. Michael D. Ernst, Esq. Offshore Wind Market and Economic Analysis Page ii Document Number DE-EE0005360 Notice and Disclaimer This report was prepared by Navigant Consulting, Inc. for the exclusive use of the U.S. Department of Energy – who supported this effort under Award Number DE-EE0005360. The work presented in this report represents our best efforts and judgments based on the information available at the time this report was prepared. Navigant Consulting, Inc. is not responsible for the reader’s use of, or reliance upon, the report, nor any decisions based on the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining NIMBY Opposition to Wind Power
    Explaining NIMBY Opposition to Wind Power Eric R. A. N. Smith Department of Political Science University of California, Santa Barbara [email protected] Holly Klick Department of Political Science University of California, Santa Barbara [email protected] Abstract Public opinion polls show that the American public strongly supports the development of wind power as an alternative to fossil fuels. Yet when specific wind farm proposals are made, they often meet local opposition, which is usually described as Nimby ("not-in-my- backyard") opposition. We examine public toward wind power in depth using an internet survey. Instead of only asking about support for wind power, we investigate how people respond to advantages and disadvantages of wind power. Our data show that questions asked in national surveys about proposals such as wind farms exaggerate the support for wind farms because the answers are typically superficial, top-of-the-head responses. When people think about the advantages and disadvantages of wind farms, as they would if a wind farm were proposed for their community, their support diminishes. Therefore, to explain NIMBY effects, researchers must look at both local and national opinion. Revised version of a paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, Massachusetts, August 29, 2007 We would like to thank the Institute of Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research, U.C. Santa Barbara, for funding to support this research 1 Introduction According to national opinion surveys, Americans overwhelmingly support government investment in renewable energy resources in general, and in wind power in particular. Despite this general popularity, proposals for specific wind power farms often face resistance from individual citizens, political leaders, grassroots organizations, national interest groups, and in some cases, even environmental groups.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing: Federal Support for an Emerging Industry
    U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing: Federal Support for an Emerging Industry Michaela D. Platzer Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business December 18, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R42023 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing: Federal Support for an Emerging Industry Summary Increasing U.S. energy supply diversity has been the goal of many Presidents and Congresses. This commitment has been prompted by concerns about national security, the environment, and the U.S. balance of payments. Investments in new energy sources also have been seen as a way to expand domestic manufacturing. For all of these reasons, the federal government has a variety of policies to promote wind power. Expanding the use of wind energy requires installation of wind turbines. These are complex machines composed of some 8,000 components, created from basic industrial materials such as steel, aluminum, concrete, and fiberglass. Major components in a wind turbine include the rotor blades, a nacelle and controls (the heart and brain of a wind turbine), a tower, and other parts such as large bearings, transformers, gearboxes, and generators. Turbine manufacturing involves an extensive supply chain. Until recently, Europe has been the hub for turbine production, supported by national renewable energy deployment policies in countries such as Denmark, Germany, and Spain. However, support for renewable energy including wind power has begun to wane across Europe as governments there reduce or remove some subsidies. Competitive wind turbine manufacturing sectors are also located in India and Japan and are emerging in China and South Korea.
    [Show full text]
  • US East Coast Offshore Wind Energy Resources and Their Relationship to Peak-Time Electricity Demand Michael J
    WIND ENERGY Wind Energ. 2013; 16:977–997 Published online 25 July 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/we.1524 RESEARCH ARTICLE US East Coast offshore wind energy resources and their relationship to peak-time electricity demand Michael J. Dvorak, Bethany A. Corcoran, John E. Ten Hoeve, Nicolas G. McIntyre and Mark Z. Jacobson Atmosphere/Energy Program, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, 473 Via Ortega, MC 4020, Stanford, California, 94305, USA ABSTRACT This study characterized the annual mean US East Coast (USEC) offshore wind energy (OWE) resource on the basis of 5 years of high-resolution mesoscale model (Weather Research and Forecasting–Advanced Research Weather Research and Forecasting) results at 90 m height. Model output was evaluated against 23 buoys and nine offshore towers. Peak-time electrical demand was analyzed to determine if OWE resources were coincident with the increased grid load. The most suitable locations for large-scale development of OWE were prescribed, on the basis of the wind resource, bathymetry, hurricane risk and peak-time generation potential. The offshore region from Virginia to Maine was found to have the most exceptional overall resource with annual turbine capacity factors (CF) between 40% and 50%, shallow water and low hurricane risk. The best summer resource during peak time, in water of Ä50 m depth, is found between Long Island, New York and Cape Cod, Massachusetts, due in part to regional upwelling, which often strengthens the sea breeze. In the South US region, the waters off North Carolina have adequate wind resource and shallow bathymetry but high hurricane risk.
    [Show full text]
  • The Battle for Cape Wind: an Analysis of Massachusetts Newspapers and Their Framing of Offshore Wind Energy
    University of Vermont ScholarWorks @ UVM UVM Honors College Senior Theses Undergraduate Theses 2017 The Battle For Cape Wind: An Analysis of Massachusetts Newspapers and Their Framing of Offshore Wind Energy John Alessi University of Vermont Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses Recommended Citation Alessi, John, "The Battle For Cape Wind: An Analysis of Massachusetts Newspapers and Their Framing of Offshore Wind Energy" (2017). UVM Honors College Senior Theses. 131. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/hcoltheses/131 This Honors College Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Undergraduate Theses at ScholarWorks @ UVM. It has been accepted for inclusion in UVM Honors College Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ UVM. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Battle For Cape Wind: An Analysis of Massachusetts Newspapers and Their Framing of Offshore Wind Energy by John Alessi a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of a Bachelor of Arts Political Science & Environmental Studies Honors College University of Vermont 2017 Thesis Committee: Robert Bartlett, Professor, Political Science, UVM Brendan Fisher, Associate Professor, Environmental Program, UVM Trish O’Kane, Lecturer, Environmental Program, UVM To my grandparents, Joan Cunningham Sleeper September 6, 1930 - February 14, 2017 and Myron Simpson Sleeper June 27, 1932 - January 13, 2017 The unconditional love and support you both gave me will never be forgotten. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank all of the individuals who have guided me through the research process and have helped me complete this project. In particular, I would like to express my appreciation to Robert Bartlett for serving as my advisor during my time at UVM.
    [Show full text]
  • Offshore Wind and Maritime Industry Knowledge Exchange
    Summary Report: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s Offshore Wind and Maritime Industry Knowledge Exchange March 5-6, 2018 Baltimore, MD Offshore Wind turbine jackets for the Block Island Wind Project off Rhode Island (credit: Sid Falk, BOEM) Prepared by: Kearns & West on behalf of Contents I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3 II. Presentations ........................................................................................................................ 3 A. BOEM Atlantic Coast Renewable Energy Leases .............................................................. 3 B. What Does an Offshore Wind Energy Facility Look Like? ................................................ 5 C. The Importance of Maritime Commerce ............................................................................ 8 D. Tugboat Coastal Navigation Challenges ........................................................................... 8 E. Navigational Risk Assessments and U.S. Coast Guard Responsibilities ........................... 9 F. Environmental Review and Compliance for Offshore Wind Projects .............................. 12 III. Panels .................................................................................................................................. 13 A. Lessons Learned from Europe .......................................................................................... 13 B. Strategies for Mitigating Offshore Wind Impacts to
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH AMERICAN POWER LIST Our Guide to Wind’S Top People in the US and Canada
    NORTH AMERICAN POWER LIST Our guide to wind’s top people in the US and Canada Featuring interviews with Ray Wood from Bank of America Merrill Lynch, MUFG’s Beth Waters, and Enel’s Rafael Gonzalez CONTENTS Compiling the top 100: Advisory panel and ranking process 5 Interview: BAML’s Ray Wood on consolidation, tax and more 8 Interview: Lincoln Clean Energy’s Declan Flanagan 11 Analysing the top 100: Statistics about this year’s table 13 Profiles: Numbers 100 to 81 14 Q&A interview: Enel’s Rafael Gonzalez on securing corporate deals 16 Profiles: Numbers 80 to 51 19 Interview: Greengate’s Dan Balaban discusses Canada’s green hotspot 23 Profiles: Numbers 50 to 21 24 Interview: MUFG’s Beth Waters on tax changes and new energy buyers 28 Profiles: Numbers 20 to 6 32 Top five: The most influential people in wind in North America 34 Top 100 list: The full North American Power List for 2018 36 Coming up: Key dates for your diary in 2018 38 28 Taxing times: Beth Waters talks about why MUFG is still keen on tax equity deals despite Trump tax reforms 2 North American Power List 2018 Editorial A WORD ABOUT WIND www.awordaboutwind.com [email protected] US: +1 (917) 3103 307 EDITORIAL US: +1 512 216 7117 UK: +44 (0)20 7100 1616 Editor-in-Chief: Richard Heap Firms are looking to Associate Editor: Ilaria Valtimora Designer: Mike Ward rationalise and cut Client Services: Matt Rollason Membership: Zoe Wicker costs, to drive down Marketing: Frances Salter the price of wind as the Publisher: Adam Barber end of the production Registered office: 2nd Floor, tax credit looms.
    [Show full text]