• Offshore wind opponents say internal docs show Biden admin took shortcu

    From Trump was Right@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 19 12:39:38 2025
    XPost: alt.energy.renewable, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns
    XPost: sac.politics, alt.society.liberalism

    Offshore wind opponents expressed disappointment as Norway-based Equinor this month quietly started construction on Empire Wind, a wind project off the coast of Long Island. After President Donald Trump placed a moratorium on offshore wind leases, they
    had hoped their concerns would be heard.

    This week, their hopes were buoyed as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum informed the developer that the department is halting construction of the project pending a review of the “rushed” manner in which the Biden-Harris administration approved the
    project.

    “We’re elated. We've been working towards this for over two and a half years. We have done everything to get our elected officials’ attention, and to have them fight for us in the federal government. And finally, they're hearing us,” Christina
    Tisi-Kramer, a resident of Long Island, New York, told Just the News.

    3,000 steel and plastic behemoths
    Tisi-Kramer is an offshore wind activist who heads a group called Protect Our Coasts — LINY. It’s one of dozens of grassroots coastal groups opposing offshore wind, and they say the previous administration ignored their concerns.

    The department’s review of the Biden-Harris administration’s offshore wind approvals comes as commercial fishing companies petition the Supreme Court to review a lower court’s decision to uphold the approval of Vineyard Wind, a project off the
    coast of Nantucket.

    Former President Joe Biden had planned a rapid expansion of offshore wind farms, with a goal to have 30 gigawatts of capacity by 2030 — roughly 3,000 turbines, each of which would be up to 1,000 feet tall.

    A “friend of the court” brief filed by the Save Right Whales Coalition in support of the fishing companies’ petition details some of the shortcuts that the previous administration took to bring the democrats' green dream to fruition. The brief
    argues that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) rewrote requirements in a way that expanded the agency’s discretion, making it easier to dismiss the impacts the offshore wind industry would have on the fishing industry — and it was done
    without following rulemaking regulations.

    The Supreme Court largely curtailed such self-regulated agency discretion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The 6-3 decision in that case, delivered on June 28, 2024, effectively overturned the 40-year-old "Chevron doctrine," which had previously
    granted courts deference to federal agencies' interpretations of arguably ambiguous laws.

    Burgum: "Without sufficient analysis"
    In his memorandum, The Washington Free Beacon reported, Burgum cited President Donald Trump’s executive order enacting a moratorium on offshore wind leasing pending a review of the impacts of these projects.

    Burgum said that the Department of the Interior “obtained information that raises serious issues” over the approval of Empire Wind. The Biden-Harris administration, Burgum wrote, rushed the approval “without sufficient analysis or consultation
    among the relevant agencies.” According to The Wall Street Journal, Equinor is weighing legal options, including an appeal.

    In a letter to Equinor on Wednesday, BOEM informed the company that it could not proceed with construction until its review of feedback the agency received is complete. "BOEM is acting to ensure that all activities...are carried out in a manner that
    provides for the protection of the environment, among other requirements," BOEM wrote.

    File
    boem-director039s-order-empire-wind.pdf
    Vineyard Wind, which is much further along in construction and has some operational turbines, has faced multiple lawsuits over its permitting. ACK 4 Whales sued the federal government, arguing that agencies failed to follow requirements of the Endangered
    Species Act (ESA) in permitting the project. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld a district court's decision to dismiss the suit, the group appealed to the Supreme Court. Their petition argued that the agencies didn’t consider
    the cumulative impacts of other planned projects when they approved Vineyard Wind, which violated the ESA. The high court declined to hear the case.

    Six commercial fisheries also filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing in 33 separate claims under various laws that the approval of Vineyard Wind violated federal law by ignoring multiple legal protections for
    impacted stakeholders, including conducting environmental assessments and allowing for timely public comment.

    The district court deferred to the Biden administration’s interpretation of federal law in permitting the project, and the companies filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court. The federal government on Wednesday waived its right to respond
    to the petition.

    Reasonable uses
    In their amicus brief, the Save Right Whales Coalition (SRWC) argues that BOEM unlawfully reinterpreted the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) to expand its discretionary authority and bypass statutory protections for ocean users and marine
    ecosystems.

    The OSCLA contains a provision that says the Interior Secretary, in approving any projects, must prevent interference with other reasonable uses of the outer continental shelf, which includes commercial fishing. In April 2021, the Department of Interior
    Deputy Solicitor issued an opinion that the SRWC’s brief says artificially expanded the agency’s discretion over what qualifies as “reasonable uses” and what level of interference is permissible.

    BOEM failed to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the reinterpretation of the OSCLA, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act, until January 2023. The notice requirement allows the public time to review the rule and comment before it’s
    finalized.

    The rule was finalized in July 2024. Between April 2021 and July 2024, the Department of the Interior approved Vineyard Wind, South Fork Wind, Ocean Wind 1, Revolution Wind, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind, Empire Wind, New England Wind 1, and Atlantic
    Shores. Each Record of Decision (ROD) for these projects cites the April 2021 opinion, which had not been finalized at that point.

    Compensation funds as a substitute for prevention
    Instead of preventing interference with commercial fishing, the ROD for Vineyard Wind relies upon after-the-fact compensation for displaced fishermen. It estimates that commercial fisheries expect to lose a total of $14 million over the expected 30-year
    lift time of the project. Vineyard Wind, the ROD explains, established compensation funds to mitigate these losses.

    “The law says they have to prevent interference. If you're going to set up a program where you're going to pay someone because they cannot fish anymore, you've interfered with them. Financial compensation is not prevention,” Lisa Linowes,
    spokesperson for SRWC, told Just the News.

    No fishing can take place within the boundaries of an offshore wind farm. Not only does it destroy habitat for marine species, the infrastructure presents potentially deadly hazards for fishing vessels and their crews.

    It’s also not clear how committed the Biden-Harris administration was to compensating the fishermen. In the final days of the Biden-Harris administration, the Department of Interior issued guidelines for mitigating impacts on commercial and
    recreational fisheries on the outer continental shelf. In it, the department claimed it wasn’t under any legal obligation to compensate the fishing industry.

    “There are no existing federal regulations that require compensation for economic loss from displacement attributed to offshore wind energy installations,” the document states.

    Linowes said that, even putting aside that compensation isn’t prevention, the agency’s guidelines create a lot of uncertainty for the fishermen whose industry will be impacted by these projects. A 2020 study from the University of Connecticut
    reported that more than 41,172 workers were employed in the commercial fishing industry in the region at the time.

    “The wind company could just walk away from that. There are no teeth in there, because BOEM doesn't have the legal authority to force it on anyone,” Linowes explained.

    Environmental impact deniers fight back
    Proponents of offshore wind are vowing to fight Trump’s efforts to review the Biden-Harris administration’s permitting shortcuts.

    "Trump's idiotic attacks on offshore wind development are killing our clean energy future. This stop-work order could shutter one of the largest offshore wind projects in the country, and for what? It’s certainly not a concern for environmental impact,"
    Jason Walsh, executive director of the Blue Green Alliance, which advocates for the renewable energy industry, said in a statement.

    Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a statement that halting Empire Wind will hurt the state economically. “As Governor, I will not allow this federal overreach to stand. I will fight this every step of the way to protect union jobs, affordable energy and New
    York’s economic future,” Hochul said.

    Since Trump took office, Hochul has said she would defy Trump’s “unleashing American energy agenda” and continue to follow the climate agenda of the Biden-Harris administration. While she argues that the Trump administration’s actions will hurt
    New York’s economy, multiple analyses of the New York Climate Act say that it will in fact cause rapidly rising energy rates and the state may suffer blackouts.

    Writing on his "Manhattan Contrarian" blog, Francis Menton, a resident of New York City's West Village and retired partner of the law firm of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, questioned Hochul's claim that the project would help the state's economy. The New
    York State Energy Research and Development Authority estimated in 2018 that the all-in development cost of the project was $83.36 per megawatt hour. In September 2023, the developers canceled their contracts. To secure the building of Empire Wind and
    other offshore wind projects, New York signed new contracts at a price of $150.15 per megawatt hour — an 80% increase over the 2018 estimated cost.

    Tisi-Kramer with Protect Our Coasts/LINY said that Hochul is ignoring the concerns of the residents of Long Island who will be most impacted by this project.

    “She’s a melting witch right now. When Kathy Hochul takes it upon herself to make decisions for Long Islanders that she doesn't even know, that's an overreach. And we want our local elected officials to make decisions for us, because we voted them in,
    ” Tisi-Kramer said.

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/offshore-wind-opponents-say-internal-docs-show-biden-admin-took-shortcuts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From tommy@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 20 18:05:29 2025
    XPost: alt.energy.renewable, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns
    XPost: sac.politics, alt.society.liberalism

    On 19 Apr 2025, Trump was Right <lets@go.brandon> posted some news:20250419.123938.2c5c4021@msgid.frell.theremailer.net:

    Offshore wind opponents expressed disappointment as Norway-based
    Equinor this month quietly started construction on Empire Wind, a wind project off the coast of Long Island. After President Donald Trump
    placed a moratorium on offshore wind leases, they had hoped their
    concerns would be heard.

    This week, their hopes were buoyed as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum
    informed the developer that the department is halting construction of
    the project pending a review of the “rushed” manner in which the Biden-Harris administration approved the project.

    Aw c'mon. You know that pair would cross every t and dot every i.

    not.

    “We’re elated. We've been working towards this for over two and a
    half years. We have done everything to get our elected officials’ attention, and to have them fight for us in the federal government.
    And finally, they're hearing us,” Christina Tisi-Kramer, a resident
    of Long Island, New York, told Just the News.

    3,000 steel and plastic behemoths
    Tisi-Kramer is an offshore wind activist who heads a group called
    Protect Our Coasts — LINY. It’s one of dozens of grassroots
    coastal groups opposing offshore wind, and they say the previous administration ignored their concerns.

    The department’s review of the Biden-Harris administration’s
    offshore wind approvals comes as commercial fishing companies petition
    the Supreme Court to review a lower court’s decision to uphold the
    approval of Vineyard Wind, a project off the coast of Nantucket.

    Former President Joe Biden had planned a rapid expansion of offshore
    wind farms, with a goal to have 30 gigawatts of capacity by 2030 —
    roughly 3,000 turbines, each of which would be up to 1,000 feet tall.

    Not possible.

    A “friend of the court” brief filed by the Save Right Whales
    Coalition in support of the fishing companies’ petition details some
    of the shortcuts that the previous administration took to bring the democrats' green dream to fruition. The brief argues that the Bureau
    of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) rewrote requirements in a way that
    expanded the agency’s discretion, making it easier to dismiss the
    impacts the offshore wind industry would have on the fishing industry
    — and it was done without following rulemaking regulations.

    The Supreme Court largely curtailed such self-regulated agency
    discretion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The 6-3 decision
    in that case, delivered on June 28, 2024, effectively overturned the 40-year-old "Chevron doctrine," which had previously granted courts
    deference to federal agencies' interpretations of arguably ambiguous
    laws.

    Burgum: "Without sufficient analysis"
    In his memorandum, The Washington Free Beacon reported, Burgum cited President Donald Trump’s executive order enacting a moratorium on
    offshore wind leasing pending a review of the impacts of these
    projects.

    Burgum said that the Department of the Interior “obtained
    information that raises serious issues” over the approval of Empire
    Wind. The Biden-Harris administration, Burgum wrote, rushed the
    approval “without sufficient analysis or consultation among the
    relevant agencies.” According to The Wall Street Journal, Equinor is weighing legal options, including an appeal.

    In a letter to Equinor on Wednesday, BOEM informed the company that it
    could not proceed with construction until its review of feedback the
    agency received is complete. "BOEM is acting to ensure that all activities...are carried out in a manner that provides for the
    protection of the environment, among other requirements," BOEM wrote.

    Well done.

    File
    boem-director039s-order-empire-wind.pdf
    Vineyard Wind, which is much further along in construction and has
    some operational turbines, has faced multiple lawsuits over its
    permitting. ACK 4 Whales sued the federal government, arguing that
    agencies failed to follow requirements of the Endangered Species Act
    (ESA) in permitting the project. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for
    the First Circuit upheld a district court's decision to dismiss the
    suit, the group appealed to the Supreme Court. Their petition argued
    that the agencies didn’t consider the cumulative impacts of other
    planned projects when they approved Vineyard Wind, which violated the
    ESA. The high court declined to hear the case.

    Six commercial fisheries also filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District
    Court for the District of Columbia, arguing in 33 separate claims
    under various laws that the approval of Vineyard Wind violated federal
    law by ignoring multiple legal protections for impacted stakeholders, including conducting environmental assessments and allowing for timely
    public comment.

    The district court deferred to the Biden administration’s
    interpretation of federal law in permitting the project, and the
    companies filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court. The
    federal government on Wednesday waived its right to respond to the
    petition.

    Reasonable uses
    In their amicus brief, the Save Right Whales Coalition (SRWC) argues
    that BOEM unlawfully reinterpreted the Outer Continental Shelf Lands
    Act (OCSLA) to expand its discretionary authority and bypass statutory protections for ocean users and marine ecosystems.

    The OSCLA contains a provision that says the Interior Secretary, in
    approving any projects, must prevent interference with other
    reasonable uses of the outer continental shelf, which includes
    commercial fishing. In April 2021, the Department of Interior Deputy Solicitor issued an opinion that the SRWC’s brief says artificially expanded the agency’s discretion over what qualifies as
    “reasonable uses” and what level of interference is permissible.

    BOEM failed to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the reinterpretation of the OSCLA, as required by the Administrative
    Procedure Act, until January 2023. The notice requirement allows the
    public time to review the rule and comment before it’s finalized.

    The rule was finalized in July 2024. Between April 2021 and July 2024,
    the Department of the Interior approved Vineyard Wind, South Fork
    Wind, Ocean Wind 1, Revolution Wind, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind,
    Empire Wind, New England Wind 1, and Atlantic Shores. Each Record of
    Decision (ROD) for these projects cites the April 2021 opinion, which
    had not been finalized at that point.

    But Joe got paid.

    Compensation funds as a substitute for prevention
    Instead of preventing interference with commercial fishing, the ROD
    for Vineyard Wind relies upon after-the-fact compensation for
    displaced fishermen. It estimates that commercial fisheries expect to
    lose a total of $14 million over the expected 30-year lift time of the project. Vineyard Wind, the ROD explains, established compensation
    funds to mitigate these losses.

    “The law says they have to prevent interference. If you're going to
    set up a program where you're going to pay someone because they cannot
    fish anymore, you've interfered with them. Financial compensation is
    not prevention,” Lisa Linowes, spokesperson for SRWC, told Just the
    News.

    No fishing can take place within the boundaries of an offshore wind
    farm. Not only does it destroy habitat for marine species, the
    infrastructure presents potentially deadly hazards for fishing vessels
    and their crews.

    It’s also not clear how committed the Biden-Harris administration
    was to compensating the fishermen. In the final days of the
    Biden-Harris administration, the Department of Interior issued
    guidelines for mitigating impacts on commercial and recreational
    fisheries on the outer continental shelf. In it, the department
    claimed it wasn’t under any legal obligation to compensate the
    fishing industry.

    “There are no existing federal regulations that require compensation
    for economic loss from displacement attributed to offshore wind energy installations,” the document states.

    Linowes said that, even putting aside that compensation isn’t
    prevention, the agency’s guidelines create a lot of uncertainty for
    the fishermen whose industry will be impacted by these projects. A
    2020 study from the University of Connecticut reported that more than
    41,172 workers were employed in the commercial fishing industry in the
    region at the time.

    “The wind company could just walk away from that. There are no teeth
    in there, because BOEM doesn't have the legal authority to force it on anyone,” Linowes explained.

    Environmental impact deniers fight back
    Proponents of offshore wind are vowing to fight Trump’s efforts to
    review the Biden-Harris administration’s permitting shortcuts.

    "Trump's idiotic attacks on offshore wind development are killing our
    clean energy future. This stop-work order could shutter one of the
    largest offshore wind projects in the country, and for what? It’s
    certainly not a concern for environmental impact," Jason Walsh,
    executive director of the Blue Green Alliance, which advocates for the renewable energy industry, said in a statement.

    Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a statement that halting Empire Wind will
    hurt the state economically. “As Governor, I will not allow this
    federal overreach to stand. I will fight this every step of the way to protect union jobs, affordable energy and New York’s economic
    future,” Hochul said.

    Good. Hochul needs to feel some pain.

    Since Trump took office, Hochul has said she would defy Trump’s “unleashing American energy agenda” and continue to follow the
    climate agenda of the Biden-Harris administration. While she argues
    that the Trump administration’s actions will hurt New York’s
    economy, multiple analyses of the New York Climate Act say that it
    will in fact cause rapidly rising energy rates and the state may
    suffer blackouts.

    Writing on his "Manhattan Contrarian" blog, Francis Menton, a resident
    of New York City's West Village and retired partner of the law firm of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, questioned Hochul's claim that the
    project would help the state's economy. The New York State Energy
    Research and Development Authority estimated in 2018 that the all-in development cost of the project was $83.36 per megawatt hour. In
    September 2023, the developers canceled their contracts. To secure the building of Empire Wind and other offshore wind projects, New York
    signed new contracts at a price of $150.15 per megawatt hour — an
    80% increase over the 2018 estimated cost.

    Tisi-Kramer with Protect Our Coasts/LINY said that Hochul is ignoring
    the concerns of the residents of Long Island who will be most impacted
    by this project.

    “She’s a melting witch right now. When Kathy Hochul takes it upon
    herself to make decisions for Long Islanders that she doesn't even
    know, that's an overreach. And we want our local elected officials to
    make decisions for us, because we voted them in,” Tisi-Kramer said.

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/offshore-wind-opponents- say-internal-docs-show-biden-admin-took-shortcuts

    If the Biden Harris mess proceeds, Trump will be blamed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From hedley@21:1/5 to Mitchell Holman on Sun Apr 20 19:23:51 2025
    XPost: alt.energy.renewable, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns
    XPost: sac.politics, alt.society.liberalism

    On 4/20/2025 11:26 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
    tommy <tc@fake.com> wrote in news:vu3d18$qc2$3@toxic.dizum.net:



    If the Biden Harris mess proceeds, Trump will be blamed.



    Trump is totally in charge
    and totally not responsible.

    You have no idea what you just wrote.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)