The organizations that represent power generators and the electric grid across New England are warning that President Donald Trump’s suspension of the in-progress Revolution Wind project puts the region’s energy reliability at risk.
Revolution Wind is 80% complete and was expected to start delivering power to Connecticut and Rhode Island next year. On Friday, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management ordered a halt to the project, and project developer Ørsted has said it wants to resolve the stoppage “expeditiously” and is evaluating its options including litigation.
In statements since the Trump administration’s latest antagonistic action towards the offshore wind industry, ISO New England and the New England Power Generators Association each said the federal freeze will have negative consequences as they work to keep the lights on across New England.
“The ISO is expecting this project to come online and it is included in our analyses of near-term and future grid reliability. Delaying the project will increase risks to reliability,” grid operator ISO-NE said.
The grid operator over the years has regularly assured ratepayers that it is prepared to meet power demands.
ISO-NE seldom comments on any specific project or source of electricity, but its comments on the Revolution Wind project emphasized that the project’s power had been baked into assumptions about the ability to reliably match energy supply and demand, and to support growing industries that rely heavily on electricity.
“Recent heatwaves in New England drove demand for electricity to very high levels and demonstrated that our region needs all generation resources with market obligations to be available to meet demand and maintain required reserves,” ISO-NE said. “Beyond near-term impacts to reliability in the summer and winter peak periods, delays in the availability of new resources will adversely affect New England’s economy and industrial growth, including potential future data centers.”
Upstream, among the outfits that generate power to supply the grid, there is concern over the way the Trump administration threw new roadblocks in front of a project that has met every legal requirement, secured financing, and committed to support grid reliability. Whether they are offshore wind or other sources, those projects “should not face the rules being changed midstream,” the head of the generators association said.
“Actions like this erode investor confidence and jeopardize long-term electric reliability in the region,” Dan Dolan, president of the New England Power Generators Association, said in a statement. He added, “It is deeply troubling to see billions of dollars invested, with facilities nearly completed, now placed at risk of failure because of policy reversals. That undermines reliability, raises costs, and damages the credibility of our energy markets. New England needs forward momentum, not abrupt stops that put both consumers and suppliers in a worse position.”
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management said in its order that it was halting the Revolution Wind project “to address concerns related to the protection of national security interests of the United States and prevention of interference with reasonable uses of the exclusive economic zone, the high seas, and the territorial seas.”
ISO-NE earlier this year projected that the push from Massachusetts and other states for more widespread electric heating and transportation will push grid demand up about 11% over the next decade.
ISO-NE’s report projected that demand this year will peak at 24,803 megawatts in summertime and at 20,056 MW in wintertime. By 2034, the forecast expects summertime peaks of 26,897 MW and wintertime peaks of 26,020 MW. The all-time high levels of demand for ISO-NE are 28,130 MW in summer (2006) and 22,818 MW in winter (2004). Demand for electricity from the New England grid fell to its lowest level ever, 5,318 MW, on April 20 this year.
“As demand for electricity grows, New England must maintain and add to its energy infrastructure. Unpredictable risks and threats to resources—regardless of technology—that have made significant capital investments, secured necessary permits, and are close to completion will stifle future investments, increase costs to consumers, and undermine the power grid’s reliability and the region’s economy now and in the future,” the grid operator said in its statement on Revolution Wind.
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont and Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee issued statements together over the weekend and said they “will pursue every avenue to reverse the decision” to stop work on Revolution Wind.
It is at least the second time that this Trump administration has moved to snuff out an offshore wind project. The administration in April ordered a halt to Equinor’s Empire Wind project for New York, but work on that was allowed to continue the next month after New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and others became involved.
When a deal was reached to allow Empire Wind to continue construction, Hochul’s press release made reference to her having “reaffirmed that New York will work with the Administration and private entities on new energy projects that meet the legal requirements under New York law.” And Interior Secretary Doug Burgum later thanked Hochul on social media for “her willingness to move forward on critical pipeline capacity.”
“Americans who live in New York and New England would see significant economic benefits and lower utility costs from increased access to reliable, affordable, clean American natural gas,” Burgum wrote in the post.
The White House said in a May statement to E&E News that Hochul agreed to allow “two natural gas pipelines to advance” through New York “because she knew it was the only way to save her flailing offshore wind project.” But Hochul’s office told POLITICO that there was no explicit wind-for-pipeline tradeoff.
Massachusetts deals with some of the highest energy prices in the country and whether the state needs more natural gas pipeline capacity has been a long-running debate among state leaders. The Baker administration had a desire to increase natural gas capacity into the New England region, but Maura Healey and many Democratic lawmakers have instead argued that additional capacity is not the best solution to meet the state’s longer-term energy needs.
In 2015, a study produced by Healey’s office during her time as attorney general concluded that new interstate pipeline capacity would have consumer price benefits, but it would also carry significant up-front costs with risks for ratepayers of long-term commitments to pay for new infrastructure.
The Conservation Law Foundation this spring flagged that pipeline company Enbridge is in the early stages of a proposal to expand New England’s natural gas pipeline system with what it is calling Project Maple. The project involves an expansion of the 1,100-mile Algonquin Gas Transmission Pipeline that already runs from New Jersey through New York and into Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts.
