Offshore wind supply chain faces systemic pressure as 2030 clean energy targets loom – Shoreline Wind report Governments should provide clearer policies and integrate new tender criteria, while developers can empower smaller firms through standardized contracts, improved payment terms, and collaboration with specialist service providers Smaller firms are particularly vulnerable, struggling to compete and …
In early December, a new website appeared online urging Sussex County residents to contact their councilmembers and tell them to deny a permit required for a proposed offshore wind farm.
The website – StopOffshoreWind.com – materialized days before the Sussex County Council would vote on the permit, which would allow for construction of an electrical substation needed by US Wind Inc. to build its massive ocean-based power plant.
StopOffshoreWind.com included the names and contact information for Sussex County Council members, as well as an online message form that sat underneath the phrase, “Write a Letter to your Sussex County Councilmembers.”
“Tell the Sussex County Council to DENY this permit,” the website stated.
What it did not show were the names of the people or companies that had created and funded it.
Spotlight Delaware has since learned that the website was the creation of a coalition of Maryland wind farm opponents, funded and led by the government of Worcester County, Md.
Sitting just south of Sussex County along the Atlantic coastline and within Maryland’s Eastern Shore, Worcester County is home to Ocean City, Md., a summer beach hotspot that is the primary driver of the county’s tourism-centered economy.
And, many of the local business owners there believe the sight of wind turbines 15 miles offshore would make the beaches less attractive to tourists.
Zach Bankert, executive director of the Ocean City Development Corporation, said his group had led local opposition to offshore wind development in past years. But, with a staff of just two employees, he said the operation was too small to be effective, which is why the county’s Office of Tourism and Economic Development recently took it over.
“When the county came in and said, ‘Hey, you know, we might have some funds for this, we’d like to kind of take this over’ … It was a no-brainer for us,” he said.
US Wind Inc.’s proposal is to build a wind farm with more than 100 turbines off the Delmarva coastline – just south of the Delaware, Maryland state line. It would send electricity ashore in Delaware with cables buried near the mouth of the Indian River.
When announcing a federal approval in September, the Biden Administration said the wind farm could produce up to 2 gigawatts of electricity, enough to power about 700,000 homes.
But coastal opponents say that electricity comes at too high a price, claiming wind turbines will drive tourists away, damage coastal environments and devastate fisheries.
StopOffshoreWind.com also claims that the windfarm will allow “foreign investors” to collect federal subsidies – references to U.S. government incentives provided to wind energy projects, and to US Wind’s ownership.
In emailed responses to questions from Spotlight Delaware, Worcester County Tourism Director Melanie Pursel said the local government authorized up to $100,000 in public money to fund what she called a coalition of local offshore wind opponents.
According to county records, the money specifically is for a contract with a Washington, D.C.-area public relations firm called Bedrock Advocacy Communications.
Pursel also noted in her early January email that Ocean City’s municipal government intended to match the county’s contribution. Last week, the Ocean City Council approved during a regular meeting a measure to distribute up to $100,000 to an “offshore wind opposition public relations campaign.”
During the meeting, City Manager Terry McGean said the campaign would target state lawmakers in Maryland and “other issues” that may arise in Delaware.
Ocean City Mayor Richard “Rick” Meehan said Bedrock Advocacy had already done a “really good job,” noting his belief that the group “played a significant role” in the Delaware county’s denial of US Wind’s substation permit.
“We’re all in,” Meehan said about the $100,000 appropriation. “And I’d hate to miss an opportunity to really capitalize, which might be the right timing to really get our messaging out.”
Winding up the opposition
US Wind is a subsidiary of Renexia SpA, an Italian energy infrastructure company. The American investment giant, Apollo Global Management, also owns a stake in the company.
In response to critics, US Wind spokeswoman Nancy Sopko said in an emailed statement that the opposition’s campaign is filled with “blatant misinformation designed to frighten people.”
Asked for details to support the claims, Sopko pointed to what she called doctored photos from a website called SaveOceanCity.org, which is run by Bankert’s Ocean City Development Corporation.
“The complete disregard for facts, accuracy, and settled science is irresponsible and dangerous,” Sopko said.
She also asserted that state leaders in Maryland and Delaware have been “full-throated” in their support for the wind project in a region that “needs more electricity to keep the lights on, grow the economy, and support local jobs.”
The opposition to the US Wind project is nominally being led by a political nonprofit, called Stop Offshore Wind Inc.
It was formed in Delaware on Dec. 5, around the time that StopOffshoreWind.com appeared. State business records show that Florida attorney Andrew L. Asher created the company.
Asher, a solo practitioner, previously served as general counsel for the BGR Group, a powerful lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. Its biggest clients in recent years include Qualcomm Inc. and the governments of Bahrain and India.
He continues to work for BGR Group in an “of counsel” capacity, according to his website. Asher did not respond to requests for comment. Pursel said Asher’s role in Stop Offshore Wind was limited to the creation of the entity, describing it as strictly administrative.
She further said that while “several county staff members” are working with the nonprofit, the entity “is not controlled” by Worcester County.
“Stop Offshore Wind Inc. is a 501(c)4 organization formed by a coalition of concerned citizens, community-based organizations, business organizations and local governments to raise awareness about the potential negative impacts of the US Wind proposed project,” said Pursel, who also calls herself a spokeswoman for the Stop Offshore Wind Coalition.
As a 501(c)4, Stop Offshore Wind Inc. is not required to disclose its donors.
Pursel said it had raised $11,000 from private donors as of late December, with much of the money donated during a Dec. 4 fundraiser.
A flyer for the fundraiser, which charged $150 a head, said the money raised would pay for “a bold, multi-channel media blitz” opposing industrial wind farms in Ocean City.
Prior to the Sussex County vote, Stop Offshore Wind did not list any governmental funding ties. Following inquiries from Spotlight Delaware, the website now has an “about us” page that lists its affiliation with Ocean City and Worcester County.
What led to all of this?
On Dec. 17, days after StopOffshoreWind.com appeared, the Sussex County Council voted to reject the windfarm’s substation building permit application.
The 4-to-1 vote in opposition came after the Sussex County Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the county approve the permit. Three of the voting council members are leaving office in early 2025. Of those, two voted against the permit.
It is not clear if the StopOffshoreWind.com website influenced the council’s vote. Members of the county council would not comment on this story due to a pending appeal against the decision.
Still, the vote followed mounting public opposition in Sussex County to offshore wind. On the day of the vote, dozens of residents appeared at the county council meeting, with many asking to speak in opposition to the project.
The council did not allow comments, stating the public record had closed following a July meeting when they discussed, then tabled, the permit application.
Following the vote, US Wind CEO Jeff Grybowski said his company’s plan to build the offshore wind farm is “unchanged.”
“We know that the law is on our side and are confident that today’s decision will not stand,” Grybowski said.
On Dec. 26, US Wind’s subsidiary Renewable Development LLC appealed Sussex County’s permit denial through a petition asking a Delaware Superior Court judge to review the matter.
In the petition, the company’s attorneys called the council’s decision “irregular, arbitrary, capricious,” and “not supported by substantial evidence.”
On the heels of Sussex County’s rejection, Worcester County announced its own move to hinder US Wind’s plans: it would use eminent domain to buy two West Ocean City properties targeted as US Wind’s operations and maintenance facilities.
“If there ever was a worthy use of eminent domain, this is it,” Worcester County Chief Administrative Officer Weston Young said in a press release.
Also in the press release, Worcester County linked to two websites that it said provided more information “about efforts to protect Maryland’s Coast from ocean industrialization.” Those sites are StopOffshoreWind.com and SaveOceanCity.org. The latter represents the Ocean City Development Corporation’s opposition to offshore wind farms.
What’s on the horizon?
With a pending appeal and a Trump administration that opposes offshore wind, uncertainty looms over the US Wind project – as well as other wind farms proposed for the Delmarva peninsula.
According to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Danish wind farm developer Ørsted intends to build up to 72 wind turbines 16 miles off the coast of Rehoboth Beach.
In early June, the company submitted its plans to the federal government, and they currently are under review.
This month, then-Delaware Gov. John Carney and the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control announced a 25-year agreement with US Wind. As part of the agreement, US Wind must give Delaware utilities $76 million worth of renewable energy credits throughout the life of the project to help the state meet its renewable energy goals.
Through the agreement, US Wind also commits to investing $200 million to upgrade Delaware’s electricity wires and other transmission infrastructure.
In a press statement touting the agreement, state officials claim that energy from the US Wind offshore site will produce enough power to lower electric rates in Delaware by $253 million over 20 years.
“We are ready to reap the environmental, health, workforce, energy cost and community benefits from this needed transition to renewable energy,” Carney said in the statement.
A long-running local government collaboration in southwestern Minnesota is helping to insulate the region from the kind of controversies and misinformation that have plagued rural clean energy projects in other states.
The Rural Minnesota Energy Board has its origins in a regional task force that was set up during the mid-1990s as the state’s first wind farms were being built. The task force was instrumental in persuading state legislators in 2002 to create a wind energy production tax, which today generates millions of dollars in annual revenue for counties and townships that host wind projects.
The group’s scope and membership has since gradually expanded to include 18 rural counties that pay monthly dues for support on energy policy and permitting. The board represents members at the state legislature and in Public Utilities Commission proceedings. At home, it facilitates community meetings with project developers, helps draft energy-related ordinances, and educates members and the public on the benefits of energy projects.
The result, say clean energy advocates and developers, has been a uniquely consistent approach to local energy policy and permitting that makes it easier for renewable companies to do business in the region.
“The rural energy board has been a critical, important body and one of the major reasons why renewable energy has been successful in southwestern Minnesota,” said Adam Sokolski, director of regulatory and legislative affairs at EDF Renewables North America. “Their policies have encouraged good decision-making over the years and led to a stable and productive region for energy development.”
EDF Renewables has worked with the board on at least nine projects in the region. Sokolski said he’s come to admire its approach to policy making, its support for transmission projects, and its efforts to educate members on clean energy.
“It’s positive to have county leaders talking to each other about energy projects, about how … they can approach those projects so they best benefit their constituents and the public,” he said.
Southwest Minnesota has the state’s densest concentration of wind turbines and is increasingly attracting solar developers, too. Wind turbines account for more than 4,500 megawatts, or around 22%, of the state’s generation capacity, making Minnesota a top 10 state for wind production.
‘It’s all economic development’
The board counts the wind production tax among its most significant accomplishments. Large wind farms pay $1.20 per megawatt-hour of generation. Counties receive 80% of the revenue, with the remainder going to townships. A similar fee also exists for large solar projects.
The fee delivers millions of dollars annually, allowing local governments to construct buildings and repair bridges and roads without raising their levies for years. According to American Clean Power, Minnesota municipalities receive $44 million annually in taxes, and private landowners receive nearly $41 million in lease payments from wind and solar companies.
That has enabled counties to stave off opposition by pointing out that turbines and solar are economic development, according to Jason Walker, community development director for the Southwest Regional Development Commission, which manages the board, said the local government revenue generated from wind and solar projects has helped reduce opposition to projects.
“It’s all economic development here,” Walker said.
When opposition does emerge, such as around a recent 160 megawatt solar project in Rock County in the state’s far southwest corner, the board works with commissioners to make sure local leaders have factual information as opposed to misinformation.
Peder Mewis, regional policy director for the Clean Grid Alliance, praised the board for creating an information-sharing culture among members that helps prepare them for clean energy development. He said many developers appreciate that the region’s ordinances are similar because of the board, and that they have maintained good relationships with members over the years.
“There are other parts of the state that are thinking, ‘Is there something here that we could replicate or duplicate?’” Mewis said.
Jay Trusty, executive director of the Southwest Regional Development Commission, said the board plays an essential role in lobbying for state policy to support clean energy development. In addition to the production taxes, the board regularly defends the local distribution of those funds when lawmakers consider other uses for the revenue. The board more recently lobbied for changes to the state transmission permitting process, which were approved this year, and it supported an expansion for Xcel Energy’s CapX 2020 high-voltage transmission project before state utility regulators.
Minnesota Public Utilities Commissioner John Tuma recalled the board’s support for the state’s 2008 renewable energy standard, which gave Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty important rural support for signing the legislation.
“They bring an economic voice to the table,” Tuma said, adding that the board continues to be active in conversations about regional grid policies.
Nobles County Commissioner Gene Metz has served on the board for 12 years. The region’s decades of experience and collaboration on wind energy has helped make residents more comfortable with clean energy projects, he said, leading to fewer controversies.
In counties outside the board’s territory, “they’re getting more pushback, especially on solar projects,” he said.
Gene’s cousin, Chad Metz, serves as a commissioner in Traverse County, which is not a member and has a mortarium on clean energy projects. Chad Metz sees clean energy as inevitable and wants the county to join the rural energy board to protect its economic interests. “The benefits outweigh the negatives, and it will just become part of life,” he said.
The last time President Donald Trump took office, Illinois had just passed the Future Energy Jobs Act (FEJA), creating an ambitious renewable electricity mandate, solar incentive programs, green job training and equity provisions to propel the state’s clean energy economy.
That progress is offering both a blueprint and a source of hope for Illinois clean energy and environmental justice advocates as they try to keep the state’s clean energy transition on track during a second Trump presidency.
“The state policy is designed to be responsive to a lack of federal climate leadership, to the need for Illinois to step up into a position of climate leadership,” said Vote Solar deputy Midwest program director John Delurey, who added that since the 2024 election “I’m at the point where I can channel my existential dread into state-based action.”
Illinois lawmakers expanded on FEJA with the Climate & Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA) in 2021, and advocates expect another state energy bill in 2025 to prioritize energy storage and otherwise further clean energy goals, including planning for the mandatory closing of almost all fossil fuel generation by 2035.
“With CEJA we’ve mapped out an ambitious climate plan, and we’re in a strong position to further those goals even under a Trump administration,” said Madeline Semanisin, Midwest equitable building decarbonization advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This is not the first Trump administration. States and cities are more prepared this time to accelerate initiatives at the state and city level.”
That’s not to say the state won’t be affected by a president who is hostile toward clean energy policy. Several federal tax credits and grants that have helped accelerate progress in Illinois could be at risk under Trump, and a rollback of federal environmental regulations or enforcement could prolong pollution from coal ash, power plants and other sources.
James Gignac, Union of Concerned Scientists lead Midwest senior policy manager for the Climate & Energy program, said he thinks of the state’s clean energy outlook in terms of headwinds and tailwinds, which will continue to shift based on economic and political factors beyond the state’s control.
“States for many years have not been able to rely on the federal government for climate action, whether due to politics or the Supreme Court,” Gignac said. “The election results will make it harder to achieve the goals that Illinois has established. It doesn’t fundamentally change the energy policy path that the state is on, it just makes it even more urgent that state legislators pass additional policies.”
Tax credits and grants
Federal funds from the Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and other federal programs have helped Illinois and individual cities and counties carry out their clean energy goals. Illinois was awarded more than $430 million in a Climate Pollution Reduction Grant for implementation of the state’s goals on industrial decarbonization, clean energy, clean transportation and freight, climate-smart agriculture, and building energy efficiency.
Illinois was also awarded $156 million in federal Solar for All funds to bolster solar and equity goals including workforce training, residential solar deployment, and community engagement.
Illinois advocates and experts said they expect federal funds that have already been awarded to be paid out, and they don’t expect the Trump administration and Republican-dominated Congress to make major changes to the IRA or infrastructure law, especially given the financial impact those laws have had in Republican-dominated areas.
“We have seen hundreds of thousands of dollars for small businesses and farmers” paid out through the federal Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), not to mention federal IRA funds, that “overall are benefitting Republican districts” during the Biden administration, noted Angela Xu, Illinois Environmental Council municipal engagement manager.
Even if new federal funding windfalls are not available in the future, advocates say the funds awarded during the Biden administration will have lasting impact, combined with state-level programs and funding sources that will continue, and market forces that are making clean energy increasingly competitive.
“President-elect Trump has indicated his intention to roll back IRA programs, but keep in mind that when President Trump was elected last time, he and the Republican-led Senate and House were hellbent publicly on rolling back Obamacare, and that didn’t happen,” said Environmental Law & Policy Center executive director Howard Learner.
“The IRA has supported smart, sensible renewable energy development in red states and blue and purple states,” he added. “There’s no question if President Trump tries to cut back and constrain the IRA, it will have some impact on the pace of renewable energy development and other climate change solutions. On the other hand, it’s very hard to keep better technology from growing. When new technologies come to the market and they are better and cleaner and economically sensible, they tend to accelerate and capture more market share.”
Illinois Shines, the program creating lucrative Renewable Energy Credits for distributed solar, is funded through ratepayer payments — so it is not dependent on federal funding. That doesn’t mean it is immune from federal action, since the federal Investment Tax Credit and the global solar market influence the viability of projects in Illinois.
“There are levers they can pull, through an act of Congress they can change the ITC, which is an important part of the value stack for renewables,” said Delurey, of Trump and his allies in Congress. “And they could deploy tariffs which make the landscape a lot more complicated. The U.S., thanks to the IRA, is making its way towards onshoring and bringing a lot of manufacturing back stateside, but we’re not quite there yet.”
If the tax credit is reduced or solar panels get more expensive because of tariffs, Illinois’s incentives “would probably have to be adjusted accordingly,” Delurey said, with bigger incentives for each project.
“It would just mean fewer megawatts and kilowatts in Illinois. We’d still be deploying solar, but it is sensitive to the price of clean energy.”
Environmental justice
Advocates agree that the Biden administration’s Justice 40 mandate, that 40% of the benefits of many federal climate and other programs go to disadvantaged communities, is likely to be ended or ignored by the Trump administration.
Lower-income and marginalized communities could also be affected by understaffing, delays or rollbacks in federal programs like LIHEAP, which provides energy bill assistance, and energy efficiency rebates for low-income households.
“We can put things in state legislation that supports these communities,” including in the Illinois energy bill being drafted for introduction in 2025, Semanisin said. “Justice 40 is a framework we can incorporate in state legislation as well, to prioritize people who have been historically underserved.”
During his first administration, Trump made significant rollbacks to coal plant wastewater protections, and to the 2015 federal rules governing the storage and cleanup of coal ash. Both are big issues in Illinois, where eight coal plants are still operating, and coal ash is stored in 76 ponds, landfills and other sites, according to an Earthjustice analysis.
Earthjustice senior attorney Jenny Cassel said experts anticipate Trump will again try to weaken the Clean Water Act and coal ash protections. Meanwhile it’s likely the EPA under his administration will do little to enforce the coal ash regulations, which was largely the case before the Biden administration made coal ash a priority.
Illinois passed its own state coal ash rules in 2019, after lobbying by activists who wanted to make sure the rules were at least as strong as federal rules and covered legacy ponds not included in federal rules at the time. In 2024, the federal rules were expanded to cover legacy ponds as well as historic ash and coal ash landfills, but that provision is being challenged in federal court. The state rules do not cover ash historically dumped or scattered around, and they also do not cover inactive coal ash landfills.
Meanwhile the implementation of the Illinois coal ash law has been extremely slow. The law requires each site to get an operating permit with pollution limits that can then be enforced, but so far only two permits at one coal plant site have been issued, Cassel said.
“We keep hearing excuse after excuse” from the Illinois EPA that issues the permits, Cassel said. “‘We don’t have enough people, they’re tied up in administrative hearings, conditions are changing,’ every dog-ate-my-homework excuse in the book.”
“At the federal level, there’s any number of potential ways they could attempt to roll back the [coal ash] rules, or weaken areas that haven’t been fully defined,” she added. “That’s certainly what they did in round one. Illinois will really have to step up into the vacuum of protectiveness we expect at the federal level.”
Local action
Chicago — site of the 2024 Democratic National Convention — has long been a target of Trump’s ire, and Chicago officials during his last administration and today are outspoken about countering Trump’s agenda.
Chief Sustainability Officer Angela Tovar said the city will continue its work on solar, electric vehicles and building decarbonization, as well as centering environmental justice in planning, zoning and enforcement decisions.
“So much of everyone’s local regulations hinge on things like the Clean Air Act and federal standards; there is going to be this question of federal preemption, what home-rule authority do we have?” Tovar said. “Those are still outstanding questions. Every rollback will present its own set of challenges for cities and states. What I am at least grateful for in being in the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago is we do have such robust climate leadership at the state and local level.”
The city’s environmental justice ordinance requires a holistic look at pollution — from traffic and other sources — when industrial development is proposed. That could help protect communities even if federal pollution limits are relaxed. The city has also launched an interdepartmental environmental justice working group, involving “every department that touches air, land and water,” as Tovar said.
The city program Green Homes Chicago funds energy efficiency upgrades for qualifying single- and multi-family homes, which could help fill the gap if federal home rebates are reduced, Tovar noted. Chicago Recovery Plan funding from federal pandemic relief and city bond issuances could help compensate for any funding that might be lost if IRA is undermined, she added.
“The role of cities and states becomes even increasingly more important right now,” Tovar said. “We have an ability to really demonstrate leadership in this moment. For cities like Chicago that have already made some progress, it’s up to us to ensure we’re sharing best practices and working together to really create those safeguards and fortify basic environmental and health protections at a local level. We’re certainly going to maintain our commitment, make sure we are rolling out our programs, and unwavering in our pursuit of environmental justice.”
The Badger Hollow Wind Energy project in Iowa and Grant counties, Wisconsin, will generate clean, Wisconsin-made energy to help meet our state’s growing electricity demand. Ensure the approval process for this project starts strong by submitting comments to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC).
In your comments, share why you value clean energy and urge the PSC to include the benefits of Badger Hollow Wind in their environmental impact documents. Share how the 118-megawatt project will significantly reduce emissions for our state, fighting the impacts of climate change while reducing human exposure to harmful emissions.
Wind energy plays a significant role in our clean energy mix and projects like this are necessary to meet our 2050 net-zero emissions goals. Submit your comments to the PSC by the December 19 deadline to help Wisconsin add another clean energy project to the mix!
Thanks to your support, last week the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin approved the Vista Sands solar project at its full size of 1.3 gigawatts. The impact of this decision is difficult to understate, and without you this would not have been possible. Your efforts will result in the removal of more than 1.5 million tons of carbon emissions each year. Every project your support gets us closer to our net-zero goals!
$1.2 Trillion+ opportunity for Floating Offshore Wind (FOW) developers globally says UK report 1 FOW developers urged to learn lessons from European deployment Seoul, South Korea, 27 November 2024 — As the global wind industry prepares for GWEC’s Wind Energy Summit in South Korea later this week, Principle Power and Shoreline Wind demonstrate how Floating …
North Carolina regulators on Friday accepted Duke Energy’s controversial plan for curbing carbon pollution, a blueprint that ramps up renewable energy and ratchets down coal power but also includes 9 gigawatts of new plants that burn natural gas.
The biennial plan is mandated under a 2021 state law, which requires Duke to zero out its climate-warming emissions by midcentury and cut them 70% by the end of the decade.
The timing of the order from the North Carolina Utilities Commission, two months ahead of schedule, caught many advocates by surprise. But its content did not: it hewed closely to a settlement deal Duke reached this summer with a trade group for the renewable energy industry; Walmart; and Public Staff, the state-sanctioned ratepayer advocate.
But critics were dismayed by regulators’ abdication of the 2030 deadline. The ruling said Duke no longer needed a plan to make the reductions by decade’s end, instead telling it to “pursue ‘all reasonable steps’ to achieve the [70%] target by the earliest possible date.”
“Major step back on climate,” Maggie Shober, research director at the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy,” wrote on X, the website formerly known as Twitter, adding, “for those that say it couldn’t be done, Duke had a 67% reduction by 2030 in its 2020 [long-range plan.] The utility industry generally, and Duke in particular, has had opportunity after opportunity to do better. They chose not to, and here we are.”
“Duke’s plan isn’t even compliant with the latest EPA regulations related to greenhouse gas pollution,” David Rogers, deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign, said in a statement.
Concerns about the Biden-Harris rules, along with doubt that the natural gas plants could be converted to burn carbon-free hydrogen, appeared not to persuade regulators.
“The Commission acknowledges that there are uncertainties and risks associated with new natural gas-fired generation resources, but this is true of all resources,” the panel wrote.
On the contrary, regulators believe Duke can make use of gas plants after the state’s 2050 zero-carbon deadline, even if clean hydrogen doesn’t pan out.
“Accordingly,” the panel said, “the Commission determines that a 35-year anticipated useful life of new natural gas-fired generation and its assumed capital costs are reasonable for planning purposes.”
The greenlight for the gas infrastructure is not absolute, commissioners emphasized in their order, since Duke still must obtain a separate permit for the facilities. But advocates still bemoaned the anticipated impact on customers.
“This order leaves the door open for Duke Energy to stall on carbon compliance in order to develop additional resources, like natural gas, that largely benefit their shareholders over ratepayers,” Matt Abele, the executive director of the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association, said via text message.
‘Positive step’ for offshore wind
Still, Abele and other advocates acknowledged the plan’s upsides, including its increase in renewables like solar and batteries. The 2022 plan limited those resources to about 1 gigawatt per year; this year’s version increases the short-term annual addition to about 1.7 gigawatts.
Regulators’ decision to bless 2.4 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2034 and call for Duke to complete an “Acquisition Request for Information” by next summer also drew measured praise.
“This order is an overall positive step for offshore wind,” Karly Lohan, North Carolina program manager for the Southeastern Wind Coalition, said in an email, adding, “we still need to see Duke move with urgency and administer the [request for information] as soon as possible.”
With regulators required to approve a new carbon-reduction plan for Duke every two years, advocates are already looking ahead to next year, when the process begins anew.
“Proceedings in 2025 present another chance to get North Carolina back on track to achieving the carbon reduction goals as directed by state law,” Will Scott, Environmental Defense Fund’s director of Southeast climate and clean energy, said in a statement.
“By accelerating offshore wind and solar, the Commission could still set a course for meaningful emissions reductions from the power sector that are fueling the effects of climate change, including dangerous and expensive storms like Hurricane Helene.”
And like Scott, David Neal, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, isn’t giving up on the state’s 2030 carbon-reduction deadline, the commission’s latest order notwithstanding.
“We’ll continue to push for the clean energy future that North Carolinians deserve and that state law and federal carbon pollution limits mandate,” he said in a statement.
A new study on behalf of Milliken has identified the top U.S. states for sustainable energy production. The rapid rise of the sustainable energy sector worldwide has been one of the most important technological and economic stories of recent years. Continued urgency to mitigate the impact of climate change has spurred governments and companies to speed the transition …
BOONE – Engineers at Critical Materials Recycling break apart circuit boards, old transmissions and decommissioned wind turbines to extract and recycle rare earth materials.
Most recycling facilities extract things like copper and aluminum from the same scraps, but few know how to break down the batteries, meaning those rare earth material components are often lost.
Rare earth materials are a series of elements with properties like conduction or magnetism that make them essential to electronics. They’re also part of the 10%-15% of wind turbine materials that are not currently recycled.
Iowa-based Critical Materials Recycling was selected by the U.S. Department of Energy as one of six companies to receive a $500,000 cash prize and $100,000 in assistance from national laboratories. Twenty projects were selected in the initial phase of the DOE prize and awarded smaller sums, $75,000, to further develop their concepts.
The $5.1 million Wind Turbine Materials Recycling prize was funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law as part of its efforts to achieve a carbon-pollution-free power sector by 2035.
Dan Bina, Critical Materials Recycling president and CEO, said his company was already interested in wind turbine recycling but the DOE funding expedited and prioritized the project.
“The prize will give us the funding to be able to do that initial leg work, and we’ll build a team to make it happen much sooner and probably much better,” Bina said.
The need for better wind turbine recycling
Tyler Christoffel, a technology manager for materials manufacturing and design innovation at the DOE wind energy technologies office, said a big goal of the office is to create a circular economy.
“Basically looking at the ways that we can make our materials more sustainable, be able to reuse them, make them go further,” Christoffel said.
He said about 90% of the turbines, mostly the parts made of steel and concrete, have an established recycling process.
“The work in the program was really focusing on those materials that have been hard to recycle so far, developing technologies so that you can more cost effectively recycle them and then get them into secondary markets,” Christoffel said.
Those materials include the fiber reinforced composites that make up the blades, housing components and the rare earth materials found in the turbine generators.
Christoffel said increasing recycling infrastructure and technology will help reduce waste at all stages of the turbines, from the production process, to the end of life and updating stages that occur less frequently.
Critical materials recycling is a big focus for the department across various industries, not just wind technology. Most of that research is going on at the Critical Materials Innovation Hub led by Ames National Laboratory, here in Iowa.
Ikenna Nlebedim, a scientist at the hub who worked with Critical Materials Recycling, said rare earth recycling is “a key strategy” for U.S. sustainability, security and technological advancement.
“Recycling rare earth elements is crucial for the United States, particularly in the context of wind generators, electronic waste (e-waste), and electric vehicles,” Nlebedim said. “It helps reduce the environmental damage caused by mining and processing, conserves finite resources, and supports a circular economy by reusing materials.”
Most of these minerals are mined overseas, with a majority coming from China, which spurred of the U.S. to develop better recycling capacity.
The gray rectangles around the core of this old wind turbine are magnets made of rare earth materials. Critical Materials Recycling used this smaller turbine as part of its research to recycle the turbines. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
How it works
Critical Materials Recycling worked with the Ames National Laboratory to use an acid-free dissolution recycling (ADR) process that has little to no waste, saves more of the metal components and doesn’t expose technicians to dangerous acids.
Nlebedim, who led the research, said the hub invented the process in 2015 and has worked with TdVib, Bina’s other company that produces a very specific type of material used in sonar-like technologies. Bina’s team commercialized the process with its Critical Materials Recycling company.
“ADR is both environmentally friendly and efficient, eliminating the need for pre-heating and reducing pollution, making it a greener alternative to traditional methods,” Nlebedim said in a statement.
The DOE prize went to Critical Materials Recycling to apply the acid-free dissolution process to wind turbines.
The first step in the process is to break apart the various “feedstocks,” — a wind turbine, car part or other electronics brought to the company — into their components.
Computer hard drives, already shredded by the technology companies for security purposes, get tossed in a rock-tumbler like machine with a copper salt that Bina said selectively dissolves the rare earth materials and pulls them out into a solution.
The rest of the hard drive, which has copper, gold and aluminum, can go to a more traditional recycler after CMR has extracted the approximately 2% rare earth materials from the hard drives.
“We insert ourselves into the process, and actually add value, because now there’s more copper,” Bina said.
The copper salt used to pull out rare earth materials leaves a copper residue on the shredded hard drives, which adds value to the recyclers who traditionally strip the hard drives for gold, copper and aluminum. Rare earth materials are rarely extracted from hard drives because they make up a relatively small percentage of the materials and were difficult to separate with other processes.
The process is more or less the same moving up the line to larger, discarded magnets and the “swarf,” which is like magnet sawdust, accumulated from cutting them to size.
Bigger items, like a transmission from a sedan or the generator of a wind turbine, have to be taken apart before they undergo the same process. Some of these magnets can also be recut and used again in various components.
Dan Bina of Critical Materials Recycling shows the various components broken apart from a transmission to harvest the rare earth from inside. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
Each type of magnet has a slightly different process, but Bina said they go through a selective leaching process, like the hard drives in the copper salt tumbler, and come out as a rare earth solution.
The solution then goes through a series of tanks where it is precipitated into a solid form and cleaned to a rare earth material that Bina said is “exactly” like what a buyer would find on the open market.
Bina said the water used in the process goes through treatment and filtration and can be used again.
“We’re not using any strong acids throughout the entire process, we don’t produce any hazardous waste, and we almost have no waste whatsoever,” Bina said.
An acid process would break down everything but rare earth materials, which are typically such a small portion of the electronic that it rarely makes financial sense to do. Critical Materials Recycling pulls the copper and aluminum to sell to smelters, to make up for the cost of gathering the rare earth materials.
“In order to get the rare earth from something like this, you have to valorize everything,” Bina said.
Dan Bina of Critical Material Recycling said even these small, pilot-project sized tanks can process rare earth materials from over 2 million hard drives a year. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
Moving forward
Soon, as part of the second phase of the DOE prize, Bina said his team will process several of the big, 4-megawatt or larger, turbines.
“Not just looking to see if we can do it, but actually doing it,” Bina said.
He said part of the challenge is building a team and the partnerships to operate. He doesn’t have a contract in place but has been in conversation with big energy and wind companies in Iowa to work into their decommissioning plans.
Dan Bina, president and CEO of Critical Materials Recycling in Boone. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch)
A spokesperson with MidAmerican Energy said the company was aware of Critical Materials Recycling and wrote a letter of support for its project with DOE.
“We look forward to seeing how the company develops and we embrace the potential for additional recycling and disposal options,” the statement read. “The more options, the better.”
Some of the other recipients of the DOE prize are developing processes for recycling wind turbine blades, which had proven to be rather difficult, as more than one company has run into problems processing the blades quickly enough.
MidAmerican has partnered, in the past, with a company that was later sued by the state for leaving piles of wind turbine blades, destined for recycling, around the state. MidAmerican has since partnered with another facility in Fairfax for recycling the blades.
Bina hopes wind turbines become a large part of his business, which he has plans to expand into a larger space soon. But, since wind turbines are typically decommissioned en masse at intervals of 10 or 20 years, the other items, like hard drives and swarf will be constant inputs for the plant.
“We have seen numerous pieces of these feedstocks just getting thrown away, in our eyes, the rare earth anyways, because there just isn’t that technology, that industry in place to capture them,” Bina said. “
The team in Boone is at the beginning of the growing industry.
“Rare earth recycling, five years or so ago, was unheard of,” Bina said.
Christoffel said the development of a circular economy of these expensive materials will help the U.S. to more sustainably build out expanded wind and solar infrastructure.
“It’ll provide some insulation to our supply and help us to ensure a more sustainable build out of clean energy domestically,” Christoffel said.
Offshore wind faces intensified operational and maintenance challenges from bigger turbines and aging fleets, risking project efficiencies, durability, and profitability Shoreline Wind’s new white paper underscores an urgent need to review and update existing O&M strategies, as the industry enters new territories and matures globally Esbjerg, Denmark, 16th September 2024 – With the offshore wind …
Login
