REUTERS
"Shell exits US SouthCoast wind farm contract, agrees to pay penalty"
Reuters
November 2, 2023
LONDON, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Shell's finance chief said on Thursday the firm had exited a power purchase agreement (PPA) for the planned SouthCoast windfarm off the coast of Massachusetts, agreeing to pay a penalty rather than face rising costs for building the project.
Energy firms from BP to Orsted have announced hefty writedowns in recent days for their U.S. windfarm projects in the face of high inflation.
Reporting by Shadia Nasralla and Ron Bousso
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-02/
WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"Ship shortage dealt death blow to Orsted's NJ offshore wind hopes"
By Scott Disavino
November 3, 2023
Nov 3 (Reuters) - Danish energy firm Orsted's shock decision to cancel two offshore wind farms off New Jersey this week was based in large part on big delays securing the ship it needed to build the project, company officials said.
The world's biggest offshore wind farm company on Tuesday said it would cease all development on the Ocean Wind projects even as it moves forward with developments off neighboring New York, triggering an angry response from New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy.
The decision came as a surprise in part because New Jersey had passed a law letting offshore wind developers like Orsted keep federal tax credits that were previously destined for ratepayers to offset their power costs, a concession intended to keep the projects alive.
"People did not anticipate (Orsted) backing out of Ocean Wind," said Timothy Fox, VP at research firm ClearView Energy Partners.
Orsted CEO Mads Nipper, on a call with analyst the day after announcing the cancellation said: "Significant delays on vessel availability ... in the entire market has now meant that it would implicate a multi-year delay of the entire project."
He said those delays would put Orsted in "a situation where we would need to go out and recontract all or very large scopes of the project at expectedly higher prices."
MOVING AHEAD IN NEW YORK
In New York, Orsted is moving forward with construction of its 704-megawatt (MW) Revolution project and is taking "a cautionary approach" to its 924-MW Sunrise project.
Nipper told analysts that unlike Ocean Wind, Orsted is still pursuing Sunrise for several reasons, including the fact that the company has already lined up a vessel to build it.
He added that Orsted believes it can secure a 10% bonus federal tax credit for Sunrise – reserved for projects that use a certain amount of domestically-produced content - and more money for its power by rebidding the project in an expected expedited solicitation in New York.
Under the most accelerated proposal, the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority said it could release the next offshore wind request for proposals in late November or early December.
Bidders would have four weeks to prepare proposals and awards could be made as early as late January.
Analysts had expected Orsted and a joint venture between European energy firms Equinor and BP, which has developed three other offshore wind projects, to cancel their contracts to sell offshore wind power in New York after state regulators earlier this month refused to renegotiate those agreements.
Instead the companies announced writeoffs of up to $5.6 billion for Orsted, $540 million for BP and $300 million for Equinor.
The Ocean Wind cancellation was the latest setback for the nascent U.S. offshore wind industry in recent months, which U.S. President Joe Biden and several states have counted on to fight global warming.
Other energy firms have canceled contracts to sell power from offshore wind in Massachusetts and Connecticut because those deals, agreed upon before inflation and interest rates soared, were out of the money due to rising equipment, labor and financing costs as well as supply chain bottlenecks.
Governor Murphy said New Jersey should receive $300 million if Orsted's projects fail to proceed and directed his administration to "review all legal rights and remedies and to take all necessary steps to ensure that Orsted fully and immediately honors its obligations."
Reporting by Scott DiSavino and Jarrett Renshaw in New York and Nichola Groom in Culver City, California; Editing by Bill Berkrot
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodi ... 023-11-03/
"Ship shortage dealt death blow to Orsted's NJ offshore wind hopes"
By Scott Disavino
November 3, 2023
Nov 3 (Reuters) - Danish energy firm Orsted's shock decision to cancel two offshore wind farms off New Jersey this week was based in large part on big delays securing the ship it needed to build the project, company officials said.
The world's biggest offshore wind farm company on Tuesday said it would cease all development on the Ocean Wind projects even as it moves forward with developments off neighboring New York, triggering an angry response from New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy.
The decision came as a surprise in part because New Jersey had passed a law letting offshore wind developers like Orsted keep federal tax credits that were previously destined for ratepayers to offset their power costs, a concession intended to keep the projects alive.
"People did not anticipate (Orsted) backing out of Ocean Wind," said Timothy Fox, VP at research firm ClearView Energy Partners.
Orsted CEO Mads Nipper, on a call with analyst the day after announcing the cancellation said: "Significant delays on vessel availability ... in the entire market has now meant that it would implicate a multi-year delay of the entire project."
He said those delays would put Orsted in "a situation where we would need to go out and recontract all or very large scopes of the project at expectedly higher prices."
MOVING AHEAD IN NEW YORK
In New York, Orsted is moving forward with construction of its 704-megawatt (MW) Revolution project and is taking "a cautionary approach" to its 924-MW Sunrise project.
Nipper told analysts that unlike Ocean Wind, Orsted is still pursuing Sunrise for several reasons, including the fact that the company has already lined up a vessel to build it.
He added that Orsted believes it can secure a 10% bonus federal tax credit for Sunrise – reserved for projects that use a certain amount of domestically-produced content - and more money for its power by rebidding the project in an expected expedited solicitation in New York.
Under the most accelerated proposal, the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority said it could release the next offshore wind request for proposals in late November or early December.
Bidders would have four weeks to prepare proposals and awards could be made as early as late January.
Analysts had expected Orsted and a joint venture between European energy firms Equinor and BP, which has developed three other offshore wind projects, to cancel their contracts to sell offshore wind power in New York after state regulators earlier this month refused to renegotiate those agreements.
Instead the companies announced writeoffs of up to $5.6 billion for Orsted, $540 million for BP and $300 million for Equinor.
The Ocean Wind cancellation was the latest setback for the nascent U.S. offshore wind industry in recent months, which U.S. President Joe Biden and several states have counted on to fight global warming.
Other energy firms have canceled contracts to sell power from offshore wind in Massachusetts and Connecticut because those deals, agreed upon before inflation and interest rates soared, were out of the money due to rising equipment, labor and financing costs as well as supply chain bottlenecks.
Governor Murphy said New Jersey should receive $300 million if Orsted's projects fail to proceed and directed his administration to "review all legal rights and remedies and to take all necessary steps to ensure that Orsted fully and immediately honors its obligations."
Reporting by Scott DiSavino and Jarrett Renshaw in New York and Nichola Groom in Culver City, California; Editing by Bill Berkrot
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodi ... 023-11-03/
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
The Daily Caller
"Biden’s Climate Bill Boosted An Offshore Wind Giant, But His Economy Brought It To The Brink"
Story by Nick Pope
4 NOVEMBER 2023
* President Joe Biden’s climate agenda and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) appeared poised to help Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer, become a leader in the burgeoning American industry, but the past several years’ mounting economic problems has forced the company to cancel two of its signature East Coast projects.
* Orsted has cited inflationary pressure, high interest rates and considerable logistical and supply chain challenges as key reasons behind the cancellations.
* “It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
President Joe Biden’s sweeping climate agenda once pumped up a major offshore wind developer, but the state of his economy has forced the company to cancel two of its signature projects.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the legislative cornerstone of the administration’s push to transition the American economy away from fossil fuels, included robust tax credit provisions to incentivize companies like Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer with a North American subsidiary, to invest in and build major projects.
Analysts and investors had high hopes for the company when Biden first assumed office promising to pass a major green energy subsidy bill, which eventually manifested as the IRA in the summer of 2022, but the inflation, rising interest rates and supply chain backups that have largely defined the Biden economy have forced the company to walk away from two of its key East Coast projects.
“Macroeconomic factors have changed dramatically over a short period of time, with high inflation, rising interest rates, and supply chain bottlenecks impacting our long-term capital investments,” David Hardy, the CEO of Orsted North America, said when the company announced the cancellations.
The state of the economy left the company “no choice” but to pull the plug, he said.
The IRA included numerous provisions designed to incentivize offshore wind investment, including a 30% tax credit for companies that comply with prevailing wage requirements and meet certain domestic sourcing criteria, according to the Congressional Research Service.
With the help of these IRA tax credits, it was thought that offshore wind developers like Orsted could offset the higher costs of building out and providing wind energy and still be profitable enough to appeal to investors.
The Biden administration has established a goal for the industry to provide enough power to provide electricity for 10 million American homes by 2030, but the financial problems that are hurting Orsted and other developers are jeopardizing that goal.
The two canceled projects would have accounted for more than 6% of the overall 2030 generation target.
“It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
”Furthermore, it’s also becoming apparent that if the goal is to avert climate change, then these policies will have next to no impact in doing so.”
Orsted’s stock price reached a peak of about $75 per share in early January 2021, just prior to Biden’s inauguration, according to data available on Google Finance.
The company’s shares were trading at about $13 per share on Thursday, and they are down by about 60% over the course of 2023 alone.
Meanwhile, S&P has indicated that it is considering decreasing the company’s credit rating in light of the massive losses, according to the Financial Times.
Inflation has dogged the U.S. economy since Biden took office, which some analysts attribute in part to his robust spending on executive programs and legislative packages like the IRA and bipartisan infrastructure law.
Inflation, often referred to as a “hidden tax,” has driven prices up for almost everything across the U.S. economy, from energy to Halloween candy to the component parts needed to construct enormous wind turbines.
The company recognized that inflation threatened its projects by eating into profit margins that are based on agreed-upon rates set in contracts with utility companies, known as power purchase agreements (PPAs).
Orsted, along with other green energy developers, petitioned the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) for permission to renegotiate its PPA prices to account for the inflationary pressure, a move which would have resulted in significant increases for ratepayers covered by the agreement.
The NYPSC rejected the request, a decision which Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul suggested was motivated by concern for the ratepayers.
However, inflation was not the only macroeconomic trend to contribute to Orsted’s serious troubles.
Just after Biden took office in January 2021, the Federal Reserve’s interest rates were almost at 0%; as of Friday, the rate has soared above 5%.
The rate hikes are in response to the rampant inflation, intending to cool down an economy that is running too hot by making credit more expensive.
In Orsted’s case, the higher rates made refinancing its obligations too costly to be a sensible escape from its mounting financial difficulties.
On top of the monetary issues, the company also cited considerable supply chain and logistical issues as reasons for the cancellations.
Mads Nipper, CEO of Orsted, told financial analysts on Wednesday that a shortage of specialized vessels needed for the construction process would have imposed multiyear delays, especially to Ocean Wind 1.
“The most fundamental issue is that what the administration is trying to do is artificially get the wind industry going when it is not ready yet,” Dayaratna previously told the DCNF.
“When you try to do that, things cost more and keep getting even more expensive.”
Neither Orsted nor the White House responded immediately to requests for comment.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... fe8c&ei=21
"Biden’s Climate Bill Boosted An Offshore Wind Giant, But His Economy Brought It To The Brink"
Story by Nick Pope
4 NOVEMBER 2023
* President Joe Biden’s climate agenda and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) appeared poised to help Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer, become a leader in the burgeoning American industry, but the past several years’ mounting economic problems has forced the company to cancel two of its signature East Coast projects.
* Orsted has cited inflationary pressure, high interest rates and considerable logistical and supply chain challenges as key reasons behind the cancellations.
* “It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
President Joe Biden’s sweeping climate agenda once pumped up a major offshore wind developer, but the state of his economy has forced the company to cancel two of its signature projects.
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the legislative cornerstone of the administration’s push to transition the American economy away from fossil fuels, included robust tax credit provisions to incentivize companies like Orsted, a Danish offshore wind developer with a North American subsidiary, to invest in and build major projects.
Analysts and investors had high hopes for the company when Biden first assumed office promising to pass a major green energy subsidy bill, which eventually manifested as the IRA in the summer of 2022, but the inflation, rising interest rates and supply chain backups that have largely defined the Biden economy have forced the company to walk away from two of its key East Coast projects.
“Macroeconomic factors have changed dramatically over a short period of time, with high inflation, rising interest rates, and supply chain bottlenecks impacting our long-term capital investments,” David Hardy, the CEO of Orsted North America, said when the company announced the cancellations.
The state of the economy left the company “no choice” but to pull the plug, he said.
The IRA included numerous provisions designed to incentivize offshore wind investment, including a 30% tax credit for companies that comply with prevailing wage requirements and meet certain domestic sourcing criteria, according to the Congressional Research Service.
With the help of these IRA tax credits, it was thought that offshore wind developers like Orsted could offset the higher costs of building out and providing wind energy and still be profitable enough to appeal to investors.
The Biden administration has established a goal for the industry to provide enough power to provide electricity for 10 million American homes by 2030, but the financial problems that are hurting Orsted and other developers are jeopardizing that goal.
The two canceled projects would have accounted for more than 6% of the overall 2030 generation target.
“It’s now becoming clear to everyone that there have been unforeseen issues with these approaches,” Kevin Dayaratna, chief statistician and a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
”Furthermore, it’s also becoming apparent that if the goal is to avert climate change, then these policies will have next to no impact in doing so.”
Orsted’s stock price reached a peak of about $75 per share in early January 2021, just prior to Biden’s inauguration, according to data available on Google Finance.
The company’s shares were trading at about $13 per share on Thursday, and they are down by about 60% over the course of 2023 alone.
Meanwhile, S&P has indicated that it is considering decreasing the company’s credit rating in light of the massive losses, according to the Financial Times.
Inflation has dogged the U.S. economy since Biden took office, which some analysts attribute in part to his robust spending on executive programs and legislative packages like the IRA and bipartisan infrastructure law.
Inflation, often referred to as a “hidden tax,” has driven prices up for almost everything across the U.S. economy, from energy to Halloween candy to the component parts needed to construct enormous wind turbines.
The company recognized that inflation threatened its projects by eating into profit margins that are based on agreed-upon rates set in contracts with utility companies, known as power purchase agreements (PPAs).
Orsted, along with other green energy developers, petitioned the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) for permission to renegotiate its PPA prices to account for the inflationary pressure, a move which would have resulted in significant increases for ratepayers covered by the agreement.
The NYPSC rejected the request, a decision which Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul suggested was motivated by concern for the ratepayers.
However, inflation was not the only macroeconomic trend to contribute to Orsted’s serious troubles.
Just after Biden took office in January 2021, the Federal Reserve’s interest rates were almost at 0%; as of Friday, the rate has soared above 5%.
The rate hikes are in response to the rampant inflation, intending to cool down an economy that is running too hot by making credit more expensive.
In Orsted’s case, the higher rates made refinancing its obligations too costly to be a sensible escape from its mounting financial difficulties.
On top of the monetary issues, the company also cited considerable supply chain and logistical issues as reasons for the cancellations.
Mads Nipper, CEO of Orsted, told financial analysts on Wednesday that a shortage of specialized vessels needed for the construction process would have imposed multiyear delays, especially to Ocean Wind 1.
“The most fundamental issue is that what the administration is trying to do is artificially get the wind industry going when it is not ready yet,” Dayaratna previously told the DCNF.
“When you try to do that, things cost more and keep getting even more expensive.”
Neither Orsted nor the White House responded immediately to requests for comment.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... fe8c&ei=21
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
POLITICO
"Pressure builds on New York to rescue Biden’s climate plan"
Story by Marie J. French and Ry Rivard
5 NOVEMBER 2023
In the long-running sibling rivalry between New Jersey and New York, the Garden State finally thought it had the upper hand.
The state, led by Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy, decided it could become one of the greenest in the country with offshore wind as its main pillar.
But Murphy’s ambitious plans to make New Jersey's power supply carbon-free by 2035 collapsed days ago when the developer Ørsted canceled two of the state’s three offshore wind projects.
Now, if President Joe Biden ever wants to meet his energy goals for the nation, New York and other Northeastern states are going to have to pick up New Jersey’s slack.
And New York — the bigger sibling, the one with more money, more power and more attention — is poised to snatch away factories and jobs that New Jersey hoped for.
“We’re certainly the state with the greatest ambition at this point,” said Fred Zalcman, director of the New York Offshore Wind Alliance, which advocates for the industry.
New York has a lot riding on the success of offshore wind too.
New efforts to save or replace at-risk projects the state has already approved are even more important after the New Jersey projects evaporated.
Offshore wind has long been seen as an essential power source for densely populated coastal states to meet ambitious climate targets.
Wind farms don’t have to compete with people for land and send power to waterfront cities.
Approving new wind farms became a sometimes-competitive cause célèbre for Democratic leaders who wanted to expand maritime ports, open new factories and create union jobs.
It also became something of a zero sum game, even though they share the same coastal waters.
Greenest governor
Murphy, who campaigned on promises to end the use of coal and natural gas in the state and was praised by state environmentalists as the nation’s greenest governor, wanted to jump ahead of the pack.
No other governor was so ambitious — not his national rival for greenest governor, Gavin Newsom of California, not his neighbor to the north, New York’s Kathy Hochul.
In 2019, Murphy’s administration awarded Ørsted, a Danish developer, the largest offshore wind project in American history.
At the time, the governor promised the deal would “revolutionize the offshore wind industry here in New Jersey and along the entire East Coast.”
In 2021, the state approved more projects — a second by Ørsted and a third project known as Atlantic Shores — a deal that was again the largest of its kind.
Murphy again cheered that the state remained a “leader in the offshore wind industry in the United States.”
But, just two years later, the industry is faltering before fulfilling those big dreams, with canceled projects like New Jersey’s piling up and even more teetering on the edge of failure.
Earlier this year, Maryland, Virginia, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York and New Jersey had more than 17 gigawatts of offshore wind projects under contract — enough power for more than 5 million homes.
Nearly two-thirds of that has now been canceled or is at risk.
For New Jersey, the collapse of the deal struck with Ørsted means Murphy’s ambitious goal of making New Jersey's grid carbon-free by 2035 is most likely out of reach, though the governor said he still wants the state to be a global leader in offshore wind.
Ørsted had planned two 1,110 megawatt projects in the Garden State, enough to power a million homes.
For the region, the loss is also a big deal.
The demise of the New Jersey projects is “unfortunate,” said Rhode Island acting commissioner for the Office of Energy Resources, Chris Kearns.
“These projects and the components that go into them are of significant scale, so it requires a regional economic development kind of hub for this activity to occur,” he said.
“So we need projects being built up and down the Northeast.”
States reset
Ørsted’s decision in New Jersey is largely due to factors facing many of the earliest offshore wind projects in the Northeast.
The companies promised to build the projects for a price they can no longer meet because of inflation and supply chain issues they blame on the pandemic and war in Ukraine.
But the projects have also lost political support because of loud and well-funded opposition from coastal homeowners.
Energy companies have been going up and down the coast asking states for more money.
In New York, where Ørsted also has projects, officials slammed the door in the company’s face and rejected requests to redo contracts from all renewable developers seeking higher prices.
The rejection at first seemed like a catastrophe for offshore wind, but Hochul immediately stepped in to reassure the industry and, within days, the state issued new contracts with other companies for enough new projects to power three million homes.
New York’s energy authority also asked developers for input on a new round of bids for offshore wind that could be issued before the end of the year.
This could save some of the at-risk projects — and help the state meet its clean energy goals.
In New Jersey, Ørsted got what it wanted after Murphy and Democratic lawmakers rushed through a bill meant to boost the company’s bottom line — but it still wasn't enough.
Unlike New York, New Jersey isn’t ready to immediately approve new projects.
On top of that, legislative elections this month could erase Democratic majorities in both chambers, injecting even more uncertainty because Republicans generally oppose offshore wind.
There is a lot of pressure now on Atlantic Shores, the only approved wind farm left in New Jersey, and EEW, a German company that set up shop in South Jersey in part to supply Ørsted and other companies with major infrastructure for their wind farms.
Both companies are now in talks with state officials about their future.
Despite the setback in New Jersey, state officials there and in other East Coast states say they are confident in the future of the offshore wind industry.
Several officials said offshore wind is the biggest clean energy source available to them.
States are also starting to work together in the face of the industry’s challenges.
Last month, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island announced plans to band together to support regional projects.
The aim is to get lower prices for each state from larger projects.
“We're navigating these challenges in the offshore wind industry very carefully to ensure that we can secure these clean energy resources at prices that are competitive and that are affordable for our ratepayers,” said Katie Dykes, the commissioner of Connecticut's Department of Energy & Environmental Protection.
Ørsted also delivered some positive news with a decision to build the Revolution Wind project, which will serve Rhode Island and Connecticut.
In New York, South Fork Wind is under construction for New York’s Long Island publicly-owned utility with components heading from a Connecticut port to be installed.
Vineyard Wind I for Massachusetts is also moving forward.
Maryland is grappling with Ørsted’s financial woes.
The company has asked the state’s utility regulator to let the company keep more of its federal tax incentives.
“We would like to avoid the interruptions witnessed in the Atlantic coastal states, but we also want to remain vigilant of any additional costs shouldered by rate-payers,” said Maryland Energy Administration Director Paul Pinsky.
For now, New York has the largest amount of offshore wind power under contract and major promises from General Electric companies to build factories for blades and nacelles, the inner guts of the turbine that transform the energy from the spinning blades into electricity.
To make the factories viable, the state is putting in $300 million and energy companies have promised to buy parts from GE.
At one time, GE considered putting a facility at New Jersey’s much-heralded “wind port,” a flagship part of Murphy’s offshore wind plans.
But that didn’t happen.
New Jersey officials have spent hundreds of millions of dollars preparing ports for offshore wind.
State Republicans are now calling for an examination of this spending.
States have been competing to secure the U.S. supply chain for the nascent industry, linking in-state investments to bid evaluations and offering subsidies for port and other projects.
But Zalcman, of New York’s wind alliance, said that should start to change after the New Jersey cancellations.
“It’s more of a clarion call for the region to work together and for states not to try and go it alone,” he said.
“We’re all dependent on the supply chain maturing without disruption.”
Environmental advocates and other boosters of the industry are undaunted by rising costs and uncertainty.
Offshore wind, once it’s up and running, would help insulate electricity prices from volatility in the oil and gas market, they say.
Ironically for Northeastern Democrats who have been competing for wind projects, the largest offshore wind project that is on track is in Virginia — a state with a Republican governor.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... dc65d&ei=8
"Pressure builds on New York to rescue Biden’s climate plan"
Story by Marie J. French and Ry Rivard
5 NOVEMBER 2023
In the long-running sibling rivalry between New Jersey and New York, the Garden State finally thought it had the upper hand.
The state, led by Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy, decided it could become one of the greenest in the country with offshore wind as its main pillar.
But Murphy’s ambitious plans to make New Jersey's power supply carbon-free by 2035 collapsed days ago when the developer Ørsted canceled two of the state’s three offshore wind projects.
Now, if President Joe Biden ever wants to meet his energy goals for the nation, New York and other Northeastern states are going to have to pick up New Jersey’s slack.
And New York — the bigger sibling, the one with more money, more power and more attention — is poised to snatch away factories and jobs that New Jersey hoped for.
“We’re certainly the state with the greatest ambition at this point,” said Fred Zalcman, director of the New York Offshore Wind Alliance, which advocates for the industry.
New York has a lot riding on the success of offshore wind too.
New efforts to save or replace at-risk projects the state has already approved are even more important after the New Jersey projects evaporated.
Offshore wind has long been seen as an essential power source for densely populated coastal states to meet ambitious climate targets.
Wind farms don’t have to compete with people for land and send power to waterfront cities.
Approving new wind farms became a sometimes-competitive cause célèbre for Democratic leaders who wanted to expand maritime ports, open new factories and create union jobs.
It also became something of a zero sum game, even though they share the same coastal waters.
Greenest governor
Murphy, who campaigned on promises to end the use of coal and natural gas in the state and was praised by state environmentalists as the nation’s greenest governor, wanted to jump ahead of the pack.
No other governor was so ambitious — not his national rival for greenest governor, Gavin Newsom of California, not his neighbor to the north, New York’s Kathy Hochul.
In 2019, Murphy’s administration awarded Ørsted, a Danish developer, the largest offshore wind project in American history.
At the time, the governor promised the deal would “revolutionize the offshore wind industry here in New Jersey and along the entire East Coast.”
In 2021, the state approved more projects — a second by Ørsted and a third project known as Atlantic Shores — a deal that was again the largest of its kind.
Murphy again cheered that the state remained a “leader in the offshore wind industry in the United States.”
But, just two years later, the industry is faltering before fulfilling those big dreams, with canceled projects like New Jersey’s piling up and even more teetering on the edge of failure.
Earlier this year, Maryland, Virginia, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York and New Jersey had more than 17 gigawatts of offshore wind projects under contract — enough power for more than 5 million homes.
Nearly two-thirds of that has now been canceled or is at risk.
For New Jersey, the collapse of the deal struck with Ørsted means Murphy’s ambitious goal of making New Jersey's grid carbon-free by 2035 is most likely out of reach, though the governor said he still wants the state to be a global leader in offshore wind.
Ørsted had planned two 1,110 megawatt projects in the Garden State, enough to power a million homes.
For the region, the loss is also a big deal.
The demise of the New Jersey projects is “unfortunate,” said Rhode Island acting commissioner for the Office of Energy Resources, Chris Kearns.
“These projects and the components that go into them are of significant scale, so it requires a regional economic development kind of hub for this activity to occur,” he said.
“So we need projects being built up and down the Northeast.”
States reset
Ørsted’s decision in New Jersey is largely due to factors facing many of the earliest offshore wind projects in the Northeast.
The companies promised to build the projects for a price they can no longer meet because of inflation and supply chain issues they blame on the pandemic and war in Ukraine.
But the projects have also lost political support because of loud and well-funded opposition from coastal homeowners.
Energy companies have been going up and down the coast asking states for more money.
In New York, where Ørsted also has projects, officials slammed the door in the company’s face and rejected requests to redo contracts from all renewable developers seeking higher prices.
The rejection at first seemed like a catastrophe for offshore wind, but Hochul immediately stepped in to reassure the industry and, within days, the state issued new contracts with other companies for enough new projects to power three million homes.
New York’s energy authority also asked developers for input on a new round of bids for offshore wind that could be issued before the end of the year.
This could save some of the at-risk projects — and help the state meet its clean energy goals.
In New Jersey, Ørsted got what it wanted after Murphy and Democratic lawmakers rushed through a bill meant to boost the company’s bottom line — but it still wasn't enough.
Unlike New York, New Jersey isn’t ready to immediately approve new projects.
On top of that, legislative elections this month could erase Democratic majorities in both chambers, injecting even more uncertainty because Republicans generally oppose offshore wind.
There is a lot of pressure now on Atlantic Shores, the only approved wind farm left in New Jersey, and EEW, a German company that set up shop in South Jersey in part to supply Ørsted and other companies with major infrastructure for their wind farms.
Both companies are now in talks with state officials about their future.
Despite the setback in New Jersey, state officials there and in other East Coast states say they are confident in the future of the offshore wind industry.
Several officials said offshore wind is the biggest clean energy source available to them.
States are also starting to work together in the face of the industry’s challenges.
Last month, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island announced plans to band together to support regional projects.
The aim is to get lower prices for each state from larger projects.
“We're navigating these challenges in the offshore wind industry very carefully to ensure that we can secure these clean energy resources at prices that are competitive and that are affordable for our ratepayers,” said Katie Dykes, the commissioner of Connecticut's Department of Energy & Environmental Protection.
Ørsted also delivered some positive news with a decision to build the Revolution Wind project, which will serve Rhode Island and Connecticut.
In New York, South Fork Wind is under construction for New York’s Long Island publicly-owned utility with components heading from a Connecticut port to be installed.
Vineyard Wind I for Massachusetts is also moving forward.
Maryland is grappling with Ørsted’s financial woes.
The company has asked the state’s utility regulator to let the company keep more of its federal tax incentives.
“We would like to avoid the interruptions witnessed in the Atlantic coastal states, but we also want to remain vigilant of any additional costs shouldered by rate-payers,” said Maryland Energy Administration Director Paul Pinsky.
For now, New York has the largest amount of offshore wind power under contract and major promises from General Electric companies to build factories for blades and nacelles, the inner guts of the turbine that transform the energy from the spinning blades into electricity.
To make the factories viable, the state is putting in $300 million and energy companies have promised to buy parts from GE.
At one time, GE considered putting a facility at New Jersey’s much-heralded “wind port,” a flagship part of Murphy’s offshore wind plans.
But that didn’t happen.
New Jersey officials have spent hundreds of millions of dollars preparing ports for offshore wind.
State Republicans are now calling for an examination of this spending.
States have been competing to secure the U.S. supply chain for the nascent industry, linking in-state investments to bid evaluations and offering subsidies for port and other projects.
But Zalcman, of New York’s wind alliance, said that should start to change after the New Jersey cancellations.
“It’s more of a clarion call for the region to work together and for states not to try and go it alone,” he said.
“We’re all dependent on the supply chain maturing without disruption.”
Environmental advocates and other boosters of the industry are undaunted by rising costs and uncertainty.
Offshore wind, once it’s up and running, would help insulate electricity prices from volatility in the oil and gas market, they say.
Ironically for Northeastern Democrats who have been competing for wind projects, the largest offshore wind project that is on track is in Virginia — a state with a Republican governor.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... dc65d&ei=8
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"Orsted pulls out of Norway offshore wind consortium"
Reuters
November 13, 2023
OSLO, Nov 13 (Reuters) - Orsted has pulled out of a consortium that was due to bid for offshore wind projects in Norway ahead of a pre-qualification deadline, one of its partners said on Monday.
Earlier this month the Danish company, the world's largest offshore wind developer, also scrapped two U.S. offshore wind projects, flagging $5.6 billion in related impairments as costs ballooned due to rising interest rates and supply bottlenecks.
"Orsted has informed us that due to a prioritisation of investments in the portfolio, it will withdraw from pursuing participation in offshore wind developments in Norway, and therefore their participation in the partnership will discontinue," Norway's Bonheur ASA said in a statement.
Orsted said in an email to Reuters that it has decided not to prioritize offshore wind development in Norway for now as it seeks to adjust its business development and bidding activities, particularly in some new markets.
Orsted together with Bonheur's wholly owned subsidiary Fred. Olsen Seawind ASA, formerly called Fred. Olsen Renewables AS, and Norwegian power producer Hafslund formed the Blaavinge consortium in 2021 to take part in planned offshore wind tenders in Norway.
Norway set Nov. 15 as a deadline to submit interests to pre-qualify for a bottom-fixed offshore wind tender where the country plans to offer support for building up to 1.5 gigawatt (GW) of capacity.
Fred. Olsen Seawind and Hafslund will not be able to participate in the bottom-fixed wind tender now that Orsted has pulled out of the consortium, Bonheur said.
However, they still plan to work on a tender for floating offshore wind turbines.
Norway has yet to announce the date for a floating offshore wind tender.
Reporting by Nerijus Adomaitis; Editing by Susan Fenton
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-13/
"Orsted pulls out of Norway offshore wind consortium"
Reuters
November 13, 2023
OSLO, Nov 13 (Reuters) - Orsted has pulled out of a consortium that was due to bid for offshore wind projects in Norway ahead of a pre-qualification deadline, one of its partners said on Monday.
Earlier this month the Danish company, the world's largest offshore wind developer, also scrapped two U.S. offshore wind projects, flagging $5.6 billion in related impairments as costs ballooned due to rising interest rates and supply bottlenecks.
"Orsted has informed us that due to a prioritisation of investments in the portfolio, it will withdraw from pursuing participation in offshore wind developments in Norway, and therefore their participation in the partnership will discontinue," Norway's Bonheur ASA said in a statement.
Orsted said in an email to Reuters that it has decided not to prioritize offshore wind development in Norway for now as it seeks to adjust its business development and bidding activities, particularly in some new markets.
Orsted together with Bonheur's wholly owned subsidiary Fred. Olsen Seawind ASA, formerly called Fred. Olsen Renewables AS, and Norwegian power producer Hafslund formed the Blaavinge consortium in 2021 to take part in planned offshore wind tenders in Norway.
Norway set Nov. 15 as a deadline to submit interests to pre-qualify for a bottom-fixed offshore wind tender where the country plans to offer support for building up to 1.5 gigawatt (GW) of capacity.
Fred. Olsen Seawind and Hafslund will not be able to participate in the bottom-fixed wind tender now that Orsted has pulled out of the consortium, Bonheur said.
However, they still plan to work on a tender for floating offshore wind turbines.
Norway has yet to announce the date for a floating offshore wind tender.
Reporting by Nerijus Adomaitis; Editing by Susan Fenton
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-13/
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
State Of The Union
"Biden’s Green Agenda Threatens Power Grid"
Story by Andrew Rodriguez
14 NOVEMBER 2023
The North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC) has warned of an elevated risk of blackouts in over half of the U.S. this winter due to increased demand, power generation shortfalls, and potential fuel delivery challenges.
The Biden administration’s energy policies have been highlighted as a major threat to the power grid.
The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) cited factors such as rising electricity demand, reduced generation, and permitting delays as contributors to the risk.
NRECA criticized the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed power plant rule, arguing it could threaten electric reliability and affordability, as it utilizes “unproven technologies and unrealistic compliance timelines” and “threatens electric reliability and affordability for every American.”
The EPA defended its new carbon pollution standards, emphasizing their role in addressing the climate crisis and protecting public health.
“By proposing new standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants, EPA is delivering on its mission to reduce harmful pollution that threatens people’s health and well-being,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said.
“EPA’s proposal relies on proven, readily available technologies to limit carbon pollution and seizes the momentum already underway in the power sector to move toward a cleaner future.”
The NRECA labeled current federal energy policies as “reckless and irresponsible,” emphasizing the dangers of a mismanaged energy transition.
“The industry can’t be any clearer about the escalating dangers posed by a mismanaged energy transition,” NRECA stated.
“Just as the grid is in desperate need of policy support, policymakers are ignoring the warning signs of eroding reliability and continuing to push reckless and irresponsible policies forward.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... a095&ei=31
"Biden’s Green Agenda Threatens Power Grid"
Story by Andrew Rodriguez
14 NOVEMBER 2023
The North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC) has warned of an elevated risk of blackouts in over half of the U.S. this winter due to increased demand, power generation shortfalls, and potential fuel delivery challenges.
The Biden administration’s energy policies have been highlighted as a major threat to the power grid.
The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA) cited factors such as rising electricity demand, reduced generation, and permitting delays as contributors to the risk.
NRECA criticized the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed power plant rule, arguing it could threaten electric reliability and affordability, as it utilizes “unproven technologies and unrealistic compliance timelines” and “threatens electric reliability and affordability for every American.”
The EPA defended its new carbon pollution standards, emphasizing their role in addressing the climate crisis and protecting public health.
“By proposing new standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants, EPA is delivering on its mission to reduce harmful pollution that threatens people’s health and well-being,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said.
“EPA’s proposal relies on proven, readily available technologies to limit carbon pollution and seizes the momentum already underway in the power sector to move toward a cleaner future.”
The NRECA labeled current federal energy policies as “reckless and irresponsible,” emphasizing the dangers of a mismanaged energy transition.
“The industry can’t be any clearer about the escalating dangers posed by a mismanaged energy transition,” NRECA stated.
“Just as the grid is in desperate need of policy support, policymakers are ignoring the warning signs of eroding reliability and continuing to push reckless and irresponsible policies forward.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... a095&ei=31
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"U.S. renewable, grid battery projects battle transformer shortage"
By Nicole Jao
November 15, 2023
NEW YORK, Nov 15 (Reuters) - U.S. developers building renewable energy projects and power storage for grids are scrambling to procure critical components, leading to rising costs and project delays.
Supply chain problems have tightened supply of high-voltage transformers necessary to connect wind and solar farms and batteries to the grid, projects that are key to the energy transition.
The long lead-time for delivery of the transformers, which can be the size of a large truck and need to be custom built, has forced some project developers to order equipment before commercial agreements to sell power from the projects are in place, said Vanessa Witte, senior energy storage analyst at Wood Mackenzie.
That and the higher prices they are paying for the equipment means developers are having to take a big bet on getting all the deals and approvals they need to make a project viable, she added.
"It's incredibly risky," she said.
The delivery time for transformers and other associated equipment has grown from 50 weeks a year ago to 150 weeks now, said Ben Pratt, CEO of Nova Clean Energy, a utility-scale project developer based in Chicago.
"We just have to be open and honest with the off-takers about the impact of delays as we move along," Pratt said, referring to buyers of power from renewable projects.
"We realistically can't hit the original commercial operation date we've been discussing."
Some large developers stockpiled transformers and associated equipment before measures to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy in the government's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) triggered another spike in demand.
"It was a situation that was easily predictable... but the IRA accelerated something that was already in process," said Reagan Farr, CEO of Silicon Ranch, a solar farm developer.
Silicon Ranch spent over $100 million stockpiling transformers and switchgears, Farr said.
Developers that did not pre-order equipment are paying a lot more for large transformers and have a lead time for delivery of at least three years, he said.
The IRA, signed into law in August 2022, provides billions in green energy tax credits to accelerate and increase the installation and deployment of renewable energy.
LONGER LEAD TIMES
Large-scale battery projects to store energy on grids and to smooth out the variance of wind and solar power are also seeing longer lead times.
They are taking around 12 to 18 months to complete, around six months longer than they would take without the supply issues, said Andrew Waranch, chief executive of battery energy storage system developer Spearmint Energy.
That has improved since the summer, when completion time reached about 100 weeks, he said.
"The biggest bottleneck I face today, and most developers face today is (procuring) transformers, substation equipment ... simple, old-fashioned electrical engineering equipment," Waranch said.
Developers added a record 1,510 megawatts (MW) of grid-scale battery storage in the second quarter, according to a report from Wood Mackenzie and the American Clean Power Association.
That, however, was lower than anticipated because of the supply chain problems.
For the full year, developers and power plant owners plan to add 9,400 MW of battery storage capacity to the existing total of 8,800 MW, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
The capacity is expected to nearly double again to reach 30,000 MW by 2025.
Swiss-based Energy Vault, which provides equipment and other services to power producers in the U.S., has started to bake in longer timelines and higher costs for storage projects to minimize the impact of delays, said Marco Terruzzin, chief commercial and product officer.
Utility AES Corp has stockpiled supplies of the equipment it needs to build battery storage projects through 2025, a company spokesperson said.
A shortage of raw materials that has contributed to transformer supply delays is unlikely to ease soon, manufacturers said.
Electrical steel supplies have been tight since the pandemic due to factory shutdowns in China, said Doug Banty, president and chief operating officer at MGM Transformer, a California-based transformer manufacturer.
"This is an industry that is not accustomed to rapid production expansion ... most of us are playing catch up," Banty said.
Export restrictions imposed on Russia after it invaded Ukraine exacerbated the shortages, said Banty.
The supply-demand dislocation has worsened with the rapid scale-up of wind, solar and storage projects.
U.S. producers have been slow to expand capacity due to the expense, John Darby, president of Niagara Transformer, a New York-based manufacturer.
Reporting by Nicole Jao; Editing by Simon Webb and Nick Zieminski
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-15/
"U.S. renewable, grid battery projects battle transformer shortage"
By Nicole Jao
November 15, 2023
NEW YORK, Nov 15 (Reuters) - U.S. developers building renewable energy projects and power storage for grids are scrambling to procure critical components, leading to rising costs and project delays.
Supply chain problems have tightened supply of high-voltage transformers necessary to connect wind and solar farms and batteries to the grid, projects that are key to the energy transition.
The long lead-time for delivery of the transformers, which can be the size of a large truck and need to be custom built, has forced some project developers to order equipment before commercial agreements to sell power from the projects are in place, said Vanessa Witte, senior energy storage analyst at Wood Mackenzie.
That and the higher prices they are paying for the equipment means developers are having to take a big bet on getting all the deals and approvals they need to make a project viable, she added.
"It's incredibly risky," she said.
The delivery time for transformers and other associated equipment has grown from 50 weeks a year ago to 150 weeks now, said Ben Pratt, CEO of Nova Clean Energy, a utility-scale project developer based in Chicago.
"We just have to be open and honest with the off-takers about the impact of delays as we move along," Pratt said, referring to buyers of power from renewable projects.
"We realistically can't hit the original commercial operation date we've been discussing."
Some large developers stockpiled transformers and associated equipment before measures to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy in the government's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) triggered another spike in demand.
"It was a situation that was easily predictable... but the IRA accelerated something that was already in process," said Reagan Farr, CEO of Silicon Ranch, a solar farm developer.
Silicon Ranch spent over $100 million stockpiling transformers and switchgears, Farr said.
Developers that did not pre-order equipment are paying a lot more for large transformers and have a lead time for delivery of at least three years, he said.
The IRA, signed into law in August 2022, provides billions in green energy tax credits to accelerate and increase the installation and deployment of renewable energy.
LONGER LEAD TIMES
Large-scale battery projects to store energy on grids and to smooth out the variance of wind and solar power are also seeing longer lead times.
They are taking around 12 to 18 months to complete, around six months longer than they would take without the supply issues, said Andrew Waranch, chief executive of battery energy storage system developer Spearmint Energy.
That has improved since the summer, when completion time reached about 100 weeks, he said.
"The biggest bottleneck I face today, and most developers face today is (procuring) transformers, substation equipment ... simple, old-fashioned electrical engineering equipment," Waranch said.
Developers added a record 1,510 megawatts (MW) of grid-scale battery storage in the second quarter, according to a report from Wood Mackenzie and the American Clean Power Association.
That, however, was lower than anticipated because of the supply chain problems.
For the full year, developers and power plant owners plan to add 9,400 MW of battery storage capacity to the existing total of 8,800 MW, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
The capacity is expected to nearly double again to reach 30,000 MW by 2025.
Swiss-based Energy Vault, which provides equipment and other services to power producers in the U.S., has started to bake in longer timelines and higher costs for storage projects to minimize the impact of delays, said Marco Terruzzin, chief commercial and product officer.
Utility AES Corp has stockpiled supplies of the equipment it needs to build battery storage projects through 2025, a company spokesperson said.
A shortage of raw materials that has contributed to transformer supply delays is unlikely to ease soon, manufacturers said.
Electrical steel supplies have been tight since the pandemic due to factory shutdowns in China, said Doug Banty, president and chief operating officer at MGM Transformer, a California-based transformer manufacturer.
"This is an industry that is not accustomed to rapid production expansion ... most of us are playing catch up," Banty said.
Export restrictions imposed on Russia after it invaded Ukraine exacerbated the shortages, said Banty.
The supply-demand dislocation has worsened with the rapid scale-up of wind, solar and storage projects.
U.S. producers have been slow to expand capacity due to the expense, John Darby, president of Niagara Transformer, a New York-based manufacturer.
Reporting by Nicole Jao; Editing by Simon Webb and Nick Zieminski
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-15/
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"Siemens Gamesa's turnaround plan underwhelms, shares fall"
By Christoph Steitz and Tom Käckenhoff
November 21, 2023
Summary
* Siemens Gamesa to cut 400 mln euros in costs by 2026
* Reviews capacity cuts outside Europe - Siemens Gamesa CEO
* Siemens Energy shares down 6.3%
FRANKFURT/DUESSELDORF, Nov 21 (Reuters) - Struggling wind turbine maker Siemens Gamesa said on Tuesday it would cut costs and capacity on its long path towards profit, sending shares in parent Siemens Energy sharply lower as investors had hoped for more radical steps.
The move, announced at Siemens Energy's capital markets day, caps weeks of turmoil for the German energy equipment maker, including a landmark agreement last week for 15 billion euros ($16.4 billion) in guarantees it needed to secure its 112 billion order book.
Shares in Siemens Energy have recovered strongly since then but fell as much as 11.7% on Tuesday after focus shifted again to Siemens Gamesa, the world's largest maker of offshore wind turbines, where quality issues and ramp-up problems caused a 4.6 billion euro annual net loss.
One Frankfurt-based trader said the investor event, where Siemens Gamesa disclosed around 400 million euros in cost cuts by 2026, was bringing "no new insights".
At 1610 GMT, shares in Siemens Energy, in which Siemens AG owns a direct 25.1% stake, were still down 6.3%.
"The turnaround of Siemens Gamesa remains our highest priority and we now have a defined path and action plan to reach break-even for the wind business in fiscal year 2026 and to return to profitability thereafter," Siemens Energy CEO Christian Bruch said.
"We will be very strict with capital allocation."
Siemens Gamesa will likely cut onshore turbine capacity outside Europe and outsource the production of some components, the division's Chief Executive Jochen Eickholt said, outlining the group's restructuring roadmap.
Reuters last month reported that Siemens Gamesa was considering shutting plants and sales offices as well as outsourcing some production.
Measures will include a review of its onshore product offering as well as the markets it is catering to, streamlining its service organisation as well as looking into supply chain partnerships, the company said.
Siemens Gamesa will also reduce the number of turbine variants it sells and pause any wind product initiatives in what it says are "adjacent fields", singling out hydrogen.
At the root of the problem are quality issues at Siemens Gamesa's two newest onshore turbine models, 4.X and 5.X, which it currently is taking no orders for from clients.
Eickholt said he hoped that would soon change, confirming Siemens Gamesa was still carrying out onshore repowering projects where it is upgrading older turbine models.
Reporting by Christoph Steitz and Tom Kaeckenhoff; Additional reporting by Danilo Masoni; Editing by Madeline Chambers, Miranda Murray and David Evans
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-21/
"Siemens Gamesa's turnaround plan underwhelms, shares fall"
By Christoph Steitz and Tom Käckenhoff
November 21, 2023
Summary
* Siemens Gamesa to cut 400 mln euros in costs by 2026
* Reviews capacity cuts outside Europe - Siemens Gamesa CEO
* Siemens Energy shares down 6.3%
FRANKFURT/DUESSELDORF, Nov 21 (Reuters) - Struggling wind turbine maker Siemens Gamesa said on Tuesday it would cut costs and capacity on its long path towards profit, sending shares in parent Siemens Energy sharply lower as investors had hoped for more radical steps.
The move, announced at Siemens Energy's capital markets day, caps weeks of turmoil for the German energy equipment maker, including a landmark agreement last week for 15 billion euros ($16.4 billion) in guarantees it needed to secure its 112 billion order book.
Shares in Siemens Energy have recovered strongly since then but fell as much as 11.7% on Tuesday after focus shifted again to Siemens Gamesa, the world's largest maker of offshore wind turbines, where quality issues and ramp-up problems caused a 4.6 billion euro annual net loss.
One Frankfurt-based trader said the investor event, where Siemens Gamesa disclosed around 400 million euros in cost cuts by 2026, was bringing "no new insights".
At 1610 GMT, shares in Siemens Energy, in which Siemens AG owns a direct 25.1% stake, were still down 6.3%.
"The turnaround of Siemens Gamesa remains our highest priority and we now have a defined path and action plan to reach break-even for the wind business in fiscal year 2026 and to return to profitability thereafter," Siemens Energy CEO Christian Bruch said.
"We will be very strict with capital allocation."
Siemens Gamesa will likely cut onshore turbine capacity outside Europe and outsource the production of some components, the division's Chief Executive Jochen Eickholt said, outlining the group's restructuring roadmap.
Reuters last month reported that Siemens Gamesa was considering shutting plants and sales offices as well as outsourcing some production.
Measures will include a review of its onshore product offering as well as the markets it is catering to, streamlining its service organisation as well as looking into supply chain partnerships, the company said.
Siemens Gamesa will also reduce the number of turbine variants it sells and pause any wind product initiatives in what it says are "adjacent fields", singling out hydrogen.
At the root of the problem are quality issues at Siemens Gamesa's two newest onshore turbine models, 4.X and 5.X, which it currently is taking no orders for from clients.
Eickholt said he hoped that would soon change, confirming Siemens Gamesa was still carrying out onshore repowering projects where it is upgrading older turbine models.
Reporting by Christoph Steitz and Tom Kaeckenhoff; Additional reporting by Danilo Masoni; Editing by Madeline Chambers, Miranda Murray and David Evans
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-21/
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
Reuters
"Giant batteries drain economics of gas power plants"
Story by Sarah McFarlane and Susanna Twidale
23 NOVEMBER 2023
LONDON (Reuters) - Giant batteries that ensure stable power supply by offsetting intermittent renewable supplies are becoming cheap enough to make developers abandon scores of projects for gas-fired generation world-wide.
The long-term economics of gas-fired plants, used in Europe and some parts of the United States primarily to compensate for the intermittent nature of wind and solar power, are changing quickly, according to Reuters' interviews with more than a dozen power plant developers, project finance bankers, analysts and consultants.
They said some battery operators are already supplying back-up power to grids at a price competitive with gas power plants, meaning gas will be used less.
The shift challenges assumptions about long-term gas demand and could mean natural gas has a smaller role in the energy transition than posited by the biggest, listed energy majors.
In the first half of the year, 68 gas power plant projects were put on hold or cancelled globally, according to data provided exclusively to Reuters by U.S.-based non-profit Global Energy Monitor.
Recent cancellations include electricity plant developer Competitive Power Ventures decision announced in October to abandon a gas plant project in New Jersey in the United States.
It cited low power prices and the absence of government subsidies without giving financial detail.
British independent Carlton Power dropped plans for an 800 million pound ($997 million) gas power plant in Manchester, northern England, in 2016.
Reflecting the shift in economics in favour of storage, this year it launched plans to build one of the world's largest batteries at the site.
"In the early 1990s, we were running gas plants baseload, now they are shifting to probably 40% of the time and that's going to drop off to 11%-15% in the next eight to 10 years," Keith Clarke, chief executive at Carlton Power, told Reuters.
Without providing price detail, which companies say is commercially sensitive, Clarke said Carlton had struggled to finance the planned gas plant in part because of uncertainty over the revenues it would generate and the number of hours it would run.
MODELS UNDER SCRUTINY
Developers can no longer use financial modelling that assumes gas power plants are used constantly throughout their 20-year-plus lifetime, analysts said.
Instead, modellers need to predict how much gas generation is needed during times of peak demand and to compensate for the intermittency of renewable sources that are hard to anticipate.
"It does become more complex," Nigel Scott, head of structured trade and commodity finance at Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, said.
Investors are putting increased scrutiny on the modelling, he added.
Banks are focused on financing plants that have guaranteed revenues, three bankers involved in energy project finance said, asking not to be named because they were not authorised to speak to the press.
Many countries world-wide, but especially in Europe, provide payments for standby power plants through capacity markets.
In these markets, power producers bid to be back-up suppliers.
The system has long been criticised by environmental campaigners on the grounds it can amount to a subsidy to fossil fuel.
Its advocates say it is necessary to ensure the smooth integration of renewable power and that the payments can also reward batteries.
Those selected to provide back-up generation are paid to keep plants ready to come online at short-notice to meet peak demand, or to cover for outages at other plants, or to compensate for variance in wind or solar power generation.
These payments can improve the economics for gas-fired plants, but are insufficient to guarantee long-term profits.
Carlton Power secured a capacity auction contract for its planned UK gas plant, but had to relinquish it because of delays in securing investment due to uncertainty over the project's future revenues.
The UK first introduced a capacity market in 2014, and more than a dozen countries followed with similar schemes.
Battery and interconnector operators are also participating in these auctions, and have begun to win contracts.
The cost of lithium-ion batteries has more than halved from 2016 to 2022 to $151 per kilowatt hour of battery storage, according to BloombergNEF.
At the same time, renewable generation has reached record levels.
Wind and solar powered 22% of the EU's electricity last year, almost doubling their share from 2016, and surpassing the share of gas generation for the first time, according to think tank Ember's European Electricity Review.
"In the early years, capacity markets were dominated by fossil fuel power stations providing the flexible electricity supply," said Simon Virley, head of energy at KPMG.
Now batteries, interconnectors and consumers shifting their electricity use are also providing that flexibility, Virley added.
RISING RISKS
The start-up in March of UK energy company SSE's Keadby 2, a gas power plant in eastern England, was supported by a 15-year government contract signed in 2020 to provide standby electricity services to the grid from 2023/24.
The plant was financed by the company before it had the standby contract, and took four-and-a-half years to build.
The economics for such a plant would look different now, said Helen Sanders, head of corporate affairs and sustainability at SSE Thermal.
"I don't think we'd be taking an investment decision without revenue security through some sort of mechanism now because of the inherent risk associated with revenue security," Sanders said.
"If you're investing in something purely based on merchant market exposure, you're really going to have to see very, very high power prices, if you're only running for a lower number of hours."
Efforts to cut carbon emissions may add another cost to fossil-fuel plants: countries including the UK and the United States are considering requiring operators to retrofit plants with carbon capture infrastructure.
European Union rules introduced in January require gas plants seeking to access green finance to be built with carbon capture or be able to switch to using low carbon gases such as hydrogen from 2035.
OFF SWITCHES, EVs
As the energy transition gathers pace, other developments may reduce the need for back-up plants.
UK energy retailer Octopus Energy last year ran trials that offered to pay households a small fee to stop using electricity for an hour at a time during periods of strong demand.
The trials covered the equivalent amount of power demand that a small gas plant would meet, or what could be saved by turning off more than half of London for an hour.
Electric vehicles are a further disrupter as they can be charged when demand is weak and then power homes or send power back to the grid during peak demand periods.
A typical EV sits parked 90% of the time with a battery capable of storing enough energy to power the average modern home for two days, energy software platform Kaluza said in a report published in December.
In Europe, 40 million electric vehicles are expected by 2030, capable of displacing around one third of the region's gas power capacity, according to Kaluza.
"There are lots of things the grid can look to when it starts to look away from conventional generation," Carlton's Clarke said.
(Reporting By Sarah McFarlane and Susanna Twidale; Editing by Simon Webb and Barbara Lewis)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo ... 95a8&ei=16
"Giant batteries drain economics of gas power plants"
Story by Sarah McFarlane and Susanna Twidale
23 NOVEMBER 2023
LONDON (Reuters) - Giant batteries that ensure stable power supply by offsetting intermittent renewable supplies are becoming cheap enough to make developers abandon scores of projects for gas-fired generation world-wide.
The long-term economics of gas-fired plants, used in Europe and some parts of the United States primarily to compensate for the intermittent nature of wind and solar power, are changing quickly, according to Reuters' interviews with more than a dozen power plant developers, project finance bankers, analysts and consultants.
They said some battery operators are already supplying back-up power to grids at a price competitive with gas power plants, meaning gas will be used less.
The shift challenges assumptions about long-term gas demand and could mean natural gas has a smaller role in the energy transition than posited by the biggest, listed energy majors.
In the first half of the year, 68 gas power plant projects were put on hold or cancelled globally, according to data provided exclusively to Reuters by U.S.-based non-profit Global Energy Monitor.
Recent cancellations include electricity plant developer Competitive Power Ventures decision announced in October to abandon a gas plant project in New Jersey in the United States.
It cited low power prices and the absence of government subsidies without giving financial detail.
British independent Carlton Power dropped plans for an 800 million pound ($997 million) gas power plant in Manchester, northern England, in 2016.
Reflecting the shift in economics in favour of storage, this year it launched plans to build one of the world's largest batteries at the site.
"In the early 1990s, we were running gas plants baseload, now they are shifting to probably 40% of the time and that's going to drop off to 11%-15% in the next eight to 10 years," Keith Clarke, chief executive at Carlton Power, told Reuters.
Without providing price detail, which companies say is commercially sensitive, Clarke said Carlton had struggled to finance the planned gas plant in part because of uncertainty over the revenues it would generate and the number of hours it would run.
MODELS UNDER SCRUTINY
Developers can no longer use financial modelling that assumes gas power plants are used constantly throughout their 20-year-plus lifetime, analysts said.
Instead, modellers need to predict how much gas generation is needed during times of peak demand and to compensate for the intermittency of renewable sources that are hard to anticipate.
"It does become more complex," Nigel Scott, head of structured trade and commodity finance at Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, said.
Investors are putting increased scrutiny on the modelling, he added.
Banks are focused on financing plants that have guaranteed revenues, three bankers involved in energy project finance said, asking not to be named because they were not authorised to speak to the press.
Many countries world-wide, but especially in Europe, provide payments for standby power plants through capacity markets.
In these markets, power producers bid to be back-up suppliers.
The system has long been criticised by environmental campaigners on the grounds it can amount to a subsidy to fossil fuel.
Its advocates say it is necessary to ensure the smooth integration of renewable power and that the payments can also reward batteries.
Those selected to provide back-up generation are paid to keep plants ready to come online at short-notice to meet peak demand, or to cover for outages at other plants, or to compensate for variance in wind or solar power generation.
These payments can improve the economics for gas-fired plants, but are insufficient to guarantee long-term profits.
Carlton Power secured a capacity auction contract for its planned UK gas plant, but had to relinquish it because of delays in securing investment due to uncertainty over the project's future revenues.
The UK first introduced a capacity market in 2014, and more than a dozen countries followed with similar schemes.
Battery and interconnector operators are also participating in these auctions, and have begun to win contracts.
The cost of lithium-ion batteries has more than halved from 2016 to 2022 to $151 per kilowatt hour of battery storage, according to BloombergNEF.
At the same time, renewable generation has reached record levels.
Wind and solar powered 22% of the EU's electricity last year, almost doubling their share from 2016, and surpassing the share of gas generation for the first time, according to think tank Ember's European Electricity Review.
"In the early years, capacity markets were dominated by fossil fuel power stations providing the flexible electricity supply," said Simon Virley, head of energy at KPMG.
Now batteries, interconnectors and consumers shifting their electricity use are also providing that flexibility, Virley added.
RISING RISKS
The start-up in March of UK energy company SSE's Keadby 2, a gas power plant in eastern England, was supported by a 15-year government contract signed in 2020 to provide standby electricity services to the grid from 2023/24.
The plant was financed by the company before it had the standby contract, and took four-and-a-half years to build.
The economics for such a plant would look different now, said Helen Sanders, head of corporate affairs and sustainability at SSE Thermal.
"I don't think we'd be taking an investment decision without revenue security through some sort of mechanism now because of the inherent risk associated with revenue security," Sanders said.
"If you're investing in something purely based on merchant market exposure, you're really going to have to see very, very high power prices, if you're only running for a lower number of hours."
Efforts to cut carbon emissions may add another cost to fossil-fuel plants: countries including the UK and the United States are considering requiring operators to retrofit plants with carbon capture infrastructure.
European Union rules introduced in January require gas plants seeking to access green finance to be built with carbon capture or be able to switch to using low carbon gases such as hydrogen from 2035.
OFF SWITCHES, EVs
As the energy transition gathers pace, other developments may reduce the need for back-up plants.
UK energy retailer Octopus Energy last year ran trials that offered to pay households a small fee to stop using electricity for an hour at a time during periods of strong demand.
The trials covered the equivalent amount of power demand that a small gas plant would meet, or what could be saved by turning off more than half of London for an hour.
Electric vehicles are a further disrupter as they can be charged when demand is weak and then power homes or send power back to the grid during peak demand periods.
A typical EV sits parked 90% of the time with a battery capable of storing enough energy to power the average modern home for two days, energy software platform Kaluza said in a report published in December.
In Europe, 40 million electric vehicles are expected by 2030, capable of displacing around one third of the region's gas power capacity, according to Kaluza.
"There are lots of things the grid can look to when it starts to look away from conventional generation," Carlton's Clarke said.
(Reporting By Sarah McFarlane and Susanna Twidale; Editing by Simon Webb and Barbara Lewis)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo ... 95a8&ei=16
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
Fox Business News
"Grid operator sounds alarm as coal plant shutdown threatens power for millions"
Story by Thomas Catenacci
23 NOVEMBER 2023
A power grid operator that serves millions of Americans across the mid-Atlantic is warning that a planned coal-fired power plant shutdown will severely threaten electricity supplies and occur before new power sources come online.
PJM Interconnection — which coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia, serving 65 million consumers — said the forthcoming shutdown of Brandon Shores coal power plant located outside of Baltimore will disrupt the reliability of the region's grid.
The plant's operator, Texas-based Talen Energy, intends to deactivate the plant in June 2025 as part of a settlement with the left-wing eco group Sierra Club.
"There has been a strong push for quite some time to get coal power out of Maryland," Christopher Summers, the founder and president of the Maryland Public Policy Institute, told Fox News Digital in an interview.
"In this accelerated timeline of exiting from coal-fired power plants in the coming 12 to 24 months, I think it's going to create a major reliability concern for the state."
"The loss of power poses a real danger to the well-being and livelihoods of Maryland families and businesses," Summers said.
"Until these current risks to our grid are fully dealt with, it's a mistake to close reliable, baseload power plants too soon."
"That should be a concern to consumers in Maryland and businesses in Maryland that rely on dependable power."
In 2020, Talen Energy announced it had reached an agreement with Sierra Club to shutter Brandon Shores and two other major coal power plants in the region.
The decision was made in exchange for an agreement from the Sierra Club which aims to avoid future litigation or permit disputes related to coal at Talen Energy's "transitioning sites."
Ralph Alexander, the then-CEO of Talen Energy, said at the time that his company's move was part of its transition to green energy and its broader environmental, social and governance (ESG)- focused future.
According to the company's current ESG commitments, it plans to entirely eliminate the use of coal in its wholly-owned generation facilities like Brandon Shores, which generate more than 5,000 megawatts of power nationwide.
However, according to PJM Interconnection, prematurely shutting down Brandon Shores — which has a capacity of 1,295 megawatts, enough to power more than a million homes — would spark an imbalance in the grid.
Shuttering such a vital power source requires the regional grid operator to divert electricity generated elsewhere, but transmission upgrades in Maryland aren't expected to be finished until 2028, three years after the planned Brandon Shores closure.
"The PJM region and the state of Maryland are facing future reliability challenges as a result of the announced retirement of the Brandon Shores units," Jeff Shields, a spokesperson for PJM Interconnection, told Fox News Digital.
"Specifically, PJM analyses showed that the deactivation of the Brandon Shores units would cause severe voltage drop and thermal violations across seven PJM zones, which could lead to a widespread reliability risks in Baltimore and the immediate surrounding areas."
"Therefore, there is an urgent need to upgrade the transmission system in order to maintain reliability and the flow of power to the 65 million people we serve," Shields said.
"The chosen transmission solutions include in-service estimates in the 2027-2028 timeframe."
Because of the tight timeframe, PJM has requested that Brandon Shores remains in operation through 2028 under a so-called Reliability Must-Run Agreement until transmission upgrades are completed.
However, Shields noted Talen Energy's agreement with Sierra Club prevents such an agreement from moving forward.
Additionally, while Talen Energy previously said it would convert Brandon Shores to rely on another, less emitting fuel source, it ultimately abandoned that plan and opted to completely close the facility, potentially increasing future reliability concerns.
Both PJM and Talen Energy confirmed they are currently engaged in negotiations with the Sierra Club and Maryland state officials to find a solution.
"Talen is currently in discussions with PJM and others regarding the reliability issue claimed by PJM," Taryne WIlliams, a spokesperson for Talen Energy, told Fox News Digital in an email.
"We are always mindful of regional electric system reliability and how it relates to electricity consumers in Maryland," added Maryland Public Service Commission spokesperson Tori Leonard in a statement, noting that PJM is responsible for reliably operating the regional transmission grid.
Earlier this month, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) intervened and green-lit PJM's nearly $800 million emergency plan for transmission upgrades to blunt the Brandon Shores closure.
FERC Commissioner Mark Christie said on Nov. 8 that, without proper upgrades, the shutdown could cause "severe voltage collapse in Baltimore and the surrounding zones, including Northern Virginia, the District of Columbia, Delaware and southeastern Pennsylvania," adding such a scenario would be "potentially catastrophic."
"Closing an efficient, low-cost energy producing plant like Brandon Shores is just one more way America is surrendering our energy advantage to China and Russia," Rep. Andy Harris, the sole Republican member of Maryland's congressional delegation, told Fox News Digital in a statement.
"It is foolish to think that anything will come of this short-sighted energy policy, cooked up by the out-of-touch liberals who run Maryland, other than even more expensive electricity bills for hard-working, over-taxed Maryland families," he said.
Maryland has pursued some of the nation's most aggressive clean energy goals.
As part of that agenda, the state last year enacted the Climate Solutions Now Act which requires Maryland to achieve a state-level "net zero" greenhouse emissions mandate by 2045.
Democratic Gov. Wes Moore, who entered office in January, has called for the state's power grid to be entirely powered by green energy by 2035 through reducing energy consumption and "supercharging investments" in wind and solar developments.
"Governor Moore remains committed to a vision for Maryland’s future that includes 100 percent clean energy — a commitment that will bring countless jobs and hundreds of millions in economic investment across the state," Carter Elliott, a spokesperson for Moore, told Fox News Digital.
"Earlier this year, the governor was proud to sign the POWER Act and partner with Ørsted to announce Maryland’s First Offshore Wind Turbine Component Center at Tradepoint Atlantic."
"Ørsted's projects will support the creation of thousands of jobs in Maryland, power nearly 300,000 homes with renewable energy, and help the state achieve its goals of 8.5 gigawatts of offshore wind energy by 2031."
"At every opportunity, the governor has worked aggressively to help Maryland meet its energy goals, and he will continue to lead the state with that goal at the top of mind while maintaining grid reliability and protecting ratepayers."
The spokesperson declined to comment on the Brandon Shores closure.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... f6e1&ei=20
"Grid operator sounds alarm as coal plant shutdown threatens power for millions"
Story by Thomas Catenacci
23 NOVEMBER 2023
A power grid operator that serves millions of Americans across the mid-Atlantic is warning that a planned coal-fired power plant shutdown will severely threaten electricity supplies and occur before new power sources come online.
PJM Interconnection — which coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia, serving 65 million consumers — said the forthcoming shutdown of Brandon Shores coal power plant located outside of Baltimore will disrupt the reliability of the region's grid.
The plant's operator, Texas-based Talen Energy, intends to deactivate the plant in June 2025 as part of a settlement with the left-wing eco group Sierra Club.
"There has been a strong push for quite some time to get coal power out of Maryland," Christopher Summers, the founder and president of the Maryland Public Policy Institute, told Fox News Digital in an interview.
"In this accelerated timeline of exiting from coal-fired power plants in the coming 12 to 24 months, I think it's going to create a major reliability concern for the state."
"The loss of power poses a real danger to the well-being and livelihoods of Maryland families and businesses," Summers said.
"Until these current risks to our grid are fully dealt with, it's a mistake to close reliable, baseload power plants too soon."
"That should be a concern to consumers in Maryland and businesses in Maryland that rely on dependable power."
In 2020, Talen Energy announced it had reached an agreement with Sierra Club to shutter Brandon Shores and two other major coal power plants in the region.
The decision was made in exchange for an agreement from the Sierra Club which aims to avoid future litigation or permit disputes related to coal at Talen Energy's "transitioning sites."
Ralph Alexander, the then-CEO of Talen Energy, said at the time that his company's move was part of its transition to green energy and its broader environmental, social and governance (ESG)- focused future.
According to the company's current ESG commitments, it plans to entirely eliminate the use of coal in its wholly-owned generation facilities like Brandon Shores, which generate more than 5,000 megawatts of power nationwide.
However, according to PJM Interconnection, prematurely shutting down Brandon Shores — which has a capacity of 1,295 megawatts, enough to power more than a million homes — would spark an imbalance in the grid.
Shuttering such a vital power source requires the regional grid operator to divert electricity generated elsewhere, but transmission upgrades in Maryland aren't expected to be finished until 2028, three years after the planned Brandon Shores closure.
"The PJM region and the state of Maryland are facing future reliability challenges as a result of the announced retirement of the Brandon Shores units," Jeff Shields, a spokesperson for PJM Interconnection, told Fox News Digital.
"Specifically, PJM analyses showed that the deactivation of the Brandon Shores units would cause severe voltage drop and thermal violations across seven PJM zones, which could lead to a widespread reliability risks in Baltimore and the immediate surrounding areas."
"Therefore, there is an urgent need to upgrade the transmission system in order to maintain reliability and the flow of power to the 65 million people we serve," Shields said.
"The chosen transmission solutions include in-service estimates in the 2027-2028 timeframe."
Because of the tight timeframe, PJM has requested that Brandon Shores remains in operation through 2028 under a so-called Reliability Must-Run Agreement until transmission upgrades are completed.
However, Shields noted Talen Energy's agreement with Sierra Club prevents such an agreement from moving forward.
Additionally, while Talen Energy previously said it would convert Brandon Shores to rely on another, less emitting fuel source, it ultimately abandoned that plan and opted to completely close the facility, potentially increasing future reliability concerns.
Both PJM and Talen Energy confirmed they are currently engaged in negotiations with the Sierra Club and Maryland state officials to find a solution.
"Talen is currently in discussions with PJM and others regarding the reliability issue claimed by PJM," Taryne WIlliams, a spokesperson for Talen Energy, told Fox News Digital in an email.
"We are always mindful of regional electric system reliability and how it relates to electricity consumers in Maryland," added Maryland Public Service Commission spokesperson Tori Leonard in a statement, noting that PJM is responsible for reliably operating the regional transmission grid.
Earlier this month, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) intervened and green-lit PJM's nearly $800 million emergency plan for transmission upgrades to blunt the Brandon Shores closure.
FERC Commissioner Mark Christie said on Nov. 8 that, without proper upgrades, the shutdown could cause "severe voltage collapse in Baltimore and the surrounding zones, including Northern Virginia, the District of Columbia, Delaware and southeastern Pennsylvania," adding such a scenario would be "potentially catastrophic."
"Closing an efficient, low-cost energy producing plant like Brandon Shores is just one more way America is surrendering our energy advantage to China and Russia," Rep. Andy Harris, the sole Republican member of Maryland's congressional delegation, told Fox News Digital in a statement.
"It is foolish to think that anything will come of this short-sighted energy policy, cooked up by the out-of-touch liberals who run Maryland, other than even more expensive electricity bills for hard-working, over-taxed Maryland families," he said.
Maryland has pursued some of the nation's most aggressive clean energy goals.
As part of that agenda, the state last year enacted the Climate Solutions Now Act which requires Maryland to achieve a state-level "net zero" greenhouse emissions mandate by 2045.
Democratic Gov. Wes Moore, who entered office in January, has called for the state's power grid to be entirely powered by green energy by 2035 through reducing energy consumption and "supercharging investments" in wind and solar developments.
"Governor Moore remains committed to a vision for Maryland’s future that includes 100 percent clean energy — a commitment that will bring countless jobs and hundreds of millions in economic investment across the state," Carter Elliott, a spokesperson for Moore, told Fox News Digital.
"Earlier this year, the governor was proud to sign the POWER Act and partner with Ørsted to announce Maryland’s First Offshore Wind Turbine Component Center at Tradepoint Atlantic."
"Ørsted's projects will support the creation of thousands of jobs in Maryland, power nearly 300,000 homes with renewable energy, and help the state achieve its goals of 8.5 gigawatts of offshore wind energy by 2031."
"At every opportunity, the governor has worked aggressively to help Maryland meet its energy goals, and he will continue to lead the state with that goal at the top of mind while maintaining grid reliability and protecting ratepayers."
The spokesperson declined to comment on the Brandon Shores closure.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... f6e1&ei=20