🔒Offshore wind plans vie for money, support

For more than six years, Habib Dagher has been championing the idea that offshore wind power can solve two of Maine’s biggest economic problems — a declining manufacturing base and the net loss of $5 billion spent annually by Maine residents on oil and gas produced out of state. On May 31, that vision took […]

Already a Subscriber? Log in

Get Instant Access to This Article

Subscribe to Mainebiz and get immediate access to all of our subscriber-only content and much more.

UMaine's VolturnUS

Developer: UMaine-led consortium of 30 industry partners
Scale: A one-eighth scale prototype, followed by two 6MW turbines in 2016
Materials: Concrete, composites
Est. Kwh price: 10 cents/kilowatt hour for commercial-size project
Commitment to Maine: Pledges to use Maine materials and people in design, construction and operations

Pilot

Est. cost: $96 million
Technology: New, untested
Location: Off Monhegan Island
PUC rate: None yet

Statoil Hywind Maine

Developer: Statoil, international energy company based in Norway
Scale: Four 3MW turbines by 2016
Materials: Steel
Est. Kwh price: 10–15 cents/kilowatt hours for commercial-size project
Commitment to Maine: Will use Maine suppliers as much as possible

Pilot:

Est. cost: $120 million
Technology: In use since 2009
Location: 12 nautical miles southeast of Boothbay Harbor
PUC rate: 27 cents/kilowatt hour for 20 years

What's holding back offshore wind?

Despite its huge potential for renewable energy and job creation, Joan Bondareff, a partner with the Washington, D.C., law firm Blank Rome Maritime, says “the threat of changing policies and a lack of a level playing field with other sources of energy” are two fundamental challenges making it difficult for the offshore wind industry to compete in the United States’ energy marketplace.

“Unlike oil and gas programs, where lessees know that refineries will purchase the oil they find, offshore wind developers are left largely to their own devices to identify the companies who will purchase their resource,” she writes in a Feb. 20 article in Windpower Engineering and Development. “The lack of extensive coordination between state and federal laws and policies has been one factor that has stymied development of offshore wind. The other is the price point at which offshore wind can be delivered compared to the decreasing cost of natural gas.”

And, unlike the European Union, which has fostered offshore wind development through feed-in tariffs and renewable energy requirements, she says the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management “cannot dictate to states and consumers whether to accept or buy the power generated by the wind farms. This is left strictly in state hands. And the policies for purchasing and encouraging offshore wind have varied greatly among the Atlantic states.”

One example of a state initiative to encourage the offshore wind industry, she says, is the law Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley signed in April that places a $1.50/month surcharge on ratepayer’s electricity bills to offset the higher cost of producing about 200 MW of wind energy. The subsidy would amount to $1.7 billion over 20 years, but would only begin when offshore wind farms are built off Maryland’s coast.

Likewise, the power purchase agreement approved by the Maine Public Utilities Commission for the Statoil Hywind Maine pilot project, she says, should enable that project to proceed more quickly.

Bondareff says both examples illustrate how coordination between the federal government (which leases offshore areas to commercial wind farms) and states (which can create policies that enable wind power to be sold to consumers in a highly competitive energy market) can encourage offshore wind as a renewable source of energy.

On the other hand, she says, offshore wind developers don’t know whether the Production Tax Credit will continue beyond this year. And they must solve the challenge of bringing all that wind-generated power ashore.

– Digital Partners -