REUTERS
"Orsted CEO says US offshore wind targets still possible but not easy"
By Scott Disavino and Nichola Groom
September 18, 2023
Sept 18 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden's plan to deploy 30,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind by 2030 is still possible, although not easy, the CEO of Orsted, the world's largest offshore wind developer, said on Monday at the Climate Week NYC event in New York.
The remarks by Orsted CEO Mads Nipper come as soaring costs and supply chain delays have increasingly cast doubt on the Biden administration's goal, a cornerstone of its plan to fight climate change.
The Danish company said at the end of August that it may see U.S. impairments of $2.3 billion due to the market challenges.
"We’ve seen dark clouds gather," Nipper said, noting that interest rates going from largely 0% to 4%, which is having a "very dramatic impact on renewables because the fuel of the renewable industry is capital."
"We don’t need gas or oil or coal."
"It's capital and that overnight has become significantly more expensive," Nipper said.
Other challenges include "financially fragile" supply chains, "relatively uncertain policy frameworks," and rising costs for "everything we need" from turbines to foundations and substations, Nipper said.
Policymakers and the industry need to accept that "for a little while the price of renewable power will have to go up, but we will bring it down again," Nipper said.
The Biden administration has passed lucrative subsidies aimed at helping companies build new offshore wind power capacity to help decarbonize the power sector and revitalize domestic manufacturing.
But offshore wind developers have said that certain tax credits in the Inflation Reduction Act, Biden's landmark climate change law, are insufficient and are lobbying for less stringent rules around qualifying for the credits.
Last week, the governors of six Northeastern states urged Biden to direct his administration to take actions to support struggling offshore wind projects.
In a letter to Biden, the governors of Maryland, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island asked for leniency in qualifying offshore wind projects for new clean energy tax credits, speedier permitting, and the establishment of a program to direct a portion of the revenue generated by federal offshore wind leases to states.
"Without federal action, offshore wind deployment in the U.S. is at serious risk of stalling because States' ratepayers may be unable to absorb these significant new costs alone," the governors said in the letter.
Offshore wind is crucial to the targets of Northeast states who want to move away from fossil fuel-fired electricity.
Many have mandates to install large amounts of the technology in the coming decade.
Reporting by Scott DiSavino in New York and Nichola Groom in Los Angeles; Additional reporting by Shariq Khan; Editing by Mark Porter and Marguerita Choy
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-09-18/
WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
The Messenger
"Why is the US Afraid of Offshore Wind Power?"
Story by Dave Levitan
26 SEPTEMBER 2023
Why is the US Afraid of Offshore Wind Power?
In 2022 China had more than 700 times as much offshore wind power generating capacity than the United States.
What’s holding us back?
This is part of an occasional series examining the slow, stalled or nonexistent progress building out clean tech.
The first, on geothermal energy, was published earlier this year.
Two decades ago, the creators of a project called Cape Wind announced a plan to construct “America’s First Offshore Wind Farm” —130 turbines installed across 46 acres in Nantucket Sound that would, they promised, generate enough electricity to power three-quarters of Cape Cod.
Years of lawsuits and delays followed.
And in 2017, America’s first offshore wind-farm-that-wasn’t finally gave up the ghost, without ever putting up a turbine.
Meanwhile, as offshore wind power proliferated around the coasts of Europe, China and a few other countries, the U.S. seemed to wait for that controversy-plagued “first,” lagging stubbornly behind.
The first turbines in American waters, at the modest Block Island Wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island, came online in 2016.
An even smaller project in Virginia followed in 2020.
And those two projects, totaling just seven turbines and 42 megawatts of capacity, is where the country stands today.
In comparison, just one of the United Kingdom's many wind projects, Hornsea 2, has 165 turbines and 30 times the total offshore electricity generation capacity of the US.
China installed more than five gigawatts of offshore wind in 2022 alone; one would need more than 800 of the six-megawatt Block Island turbines to reach that capacity.
If the U.S. is to meet its climate change targets, that stagnation will have to change.
The Biden administration has set a goal of having 30 gigawatts’ worth of offshore turbines spinning by 2030, or 700 times the capacity already installed, enough to power more than 10 million homes.
And while some larger farms are now under construction or moving through the approvals process, opposition not unlike that seen over Cape Wind’s harrowing 15-year journey continues to pop up.
Still, experts see light on the horizon.
“I am hopeful,” said Erin Baker, a professor and faculty director of UMass Amherst’s Energy Transition Institute.
“Developers are very excited and willing to make the investment in time as well as money to get turbines in the water here.”
Roadblocks in the ocean
Offshore wind power is a relatively young industry.
The first offshore farm was built in Denmark in 1991 (the country now gets around half of its electricity from on- and offshore wind).
Since then the technology has progressed dramatically, with turbines continually increasing in size and generation capacity, and certain countries have made installing offshore farms look easy.
In 2022, a total of 8.8 gigawatts of offshore wind were installed globally, and more than half of that was in China, which now boasts about 49% of all offshore wind capacity in the world.
China is followed by the U.K., Germany, and the Netherlands.
With its measly 42 megawatts, the U.S. accounts for around a tenth of a percent of global capacity.
So what has held the U.S. back?
Baker thinks it's regulatory and permit issues.
“It is not tech-specific —the east coast is a wonderful place for offshore wind,” she said.
(The potential truly is staggering: The U.S. could support upwards of 4,000 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity, if you include the less-proven technology of floating turbines. That’s almost four times all the installed electricity in the country today.)
One regulatory roadblock: The Jones Act, which requires U.S.-flagged vessels bring cargo from one U.S. port to another.
Specialized ships are needed to install the massive turbines, and at the moment, most of those are not American.
“The tendency of Americans to sue and use the legal system is also probably a reason slowing it down,” Baker said.
For a long time, Cape Wind was the primary face of that issue, drawing lawsuits from a variety of angles; the opposition to it was extremely well funded thanks to billionaire Bill Koch.
Koch, along with some other critics including the late Senator Ted Kennedy, argued the turbines would create "visual pollution" for their beachfront compounds.
They also objected on economic grounds, arguing that it would raise electricity costs (the opposite was likely true, according to some studies done more than a decade ago) and were joined by a variety of groups including in the fishing industry, which said it could interrupt their livelihood.
(Some research says this may not be a major problem, like a 2021 study showing no effect of wind farms on a major lobster fishery in the U.K.)
In total the group filed more than a dozen lawsuits, managing to tie up the permitting and approvals process for years.
“The project unfortunately demonstrated that well-funded opposition groups can effectively use the American court system to stop even a project with no material adverse environmental impacts,” Ian Bowles told the New York Times in 2017.
Bowles was the Massachusetts secretary of energy and environmental affairs under former Gov. Deval Patrick, who had supported Cape Wind while in office.
The scattershot energy policies of the United States are also an issue, especially in comparison to countries in Europe.
“In some of those countries, they’ve had a very focused national energy policy and the creation of national incentives that help build the industry and create a market,” offshore wind expert David Bidwell, of the University of Rhode Island, said last year.
“That has not happened in the U.S."
"We don’t have a national energy policy.”
A nascent industry
Though many factors have conspired to slow domestic progress on offshore wind, there are rumblings of an awakening.
Vineyard Wind, a 62-turbine project sited farther off the Massachusetts shores than Cape Wind was, and thus not subject to “don’t spoil our view” complaints, is now under construction and slated to come online by the end of this year.
South Fork Wind, a 12-turbine project off of Long Island, is expected to deliver power by the end of 2023.
Other wind farms in New Jersey, Virginia, New York, and elsewhere are also in the pipeline, with target completion dates ranging from 2024 through the end of the decade.
The companies that build these projects are eager to jump in the water.
Last year, an auction held for the rights to build offshore wind across six sites in a region called the New York Bight drew in $4.37 billion, the highest grossing offshore lease sale of any kind in U.S. history, including those for oil and gas.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration has made some moves to streamline the federal approval process, which Baker said could be a “game changer” for the industry.
An August report from the Global Wind Energy Council saw good things ahead.
“A leap in governmental support and investment, along with ambitious plans for nationwide leases, means the industry is getting ready to unleash its true potential,” the report said.
The U.S., it said, has “one of the most ambitious project pipelines” for offshore wind, at 50 gigawatts in total.
The passage of the Inflation Reduction Act is also a “significant step forward” for the industry, with provisions offering up $100 million for offshore wind transmission planning, among other things.
But with such a rocky past and that 2030 target looming closer and closer, there are also some ominous signs for the industry.
Whales and oil money
“We oppose your company’s efforts to turn our ocean, coastal ecosystems, and shore communities into industrial electricity generation and transmission power plants.”
So reads just one bullet point of a letter sent to the CEO of Ørsted, a Danish energy company slated to build the Ocean Wind 1 project, which will put 98 turbines 15 miles offshore of New Jersey.
The letter was sent in May of this year by two concerned New Jersey residents, and supported by groups including Protect Our Coast NJ —groups that, reportedly, have a lot of oil industry money behind them.
Opposition to the growing offshore wind industry is growing right alongside it.
The loudest concern this time around seems to surround the wind farms’ effect on whales, which at least one expert has called nothing more than a “conspiracy theory.”
Still, the opposition has spread to local and state officials, and some state government opposition to further development does seem to be having a chilling effect: while that New York Bight lease sale brought in billions in competitive bids, the first-ever such auction for territory in the Gulf of Mexico, held in late August, landed with a disappointing thud.
After just two rounds of bidding (the Bight sale needed over 60 bidding rounds), one company ended up paying $5.6 million for about 100,000 acres; two other sites received no bids at all.
There is speculation that companies’ reluctance to jump in the Gulf relates to Texas’s “antagonistic political climate.”
Capital costs for offshore farms are also rising, making some companies skittish to jump in the water.
Still, experts like Baker think good things are coming for U.S. offshore wind.
“I am confident that innovation can address all the hurdles, including innovation in regulation, like streamlined processes; civic innovation, in how developers work with communities and fishermen; technological innovation to help address so many of the challenges,” she told The Messenger.
“I am not fully confident we will have the political will to see all of this innovation, but I don’t think any of these things are unsolvable.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 3c48&ei=19
"Why is the US Afraid of Offshore Wind Power?"
Story by Dave Levitan
26 SEPTEMBER 2023
Why is the US Afraid of Offshore Wind Power?
In 2022 China had more than 700 times as much offshore wind power generating capacity than the United States.
What’s holding us back?
This is part of an occasional series examining the slow, stalled or nonexistent progress building out clean tech.
The first, on geothermal energy, was published earlier this year.
Two decades ago, the creators of a project called Cape Wind announced a plan to construct “America’s First Offshore Wind Farm” —130 turbines installed across 46 acres in Nantucket Sound that would, they promised, generate enough electricity to power three-quarters of Cape Cod.
Years of lawsuits and delays followed.
And in 2017, America’s first offshore wind-farm-that-wasn’t finally gave up the ghost, without ever putting up a turbine.
Meanwhile, as offshore wind power proliferated around the coasts of Europe, China and a few other countries, the U.S. seemed to wait for that controversy-plagued “first,” lagging stubbornly behind.
The first turbines in American waters, at the modest Block Island Wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island, came online in 2016.
An even smaller project in Virginia followed in 2020.
And those two projects, totaling just seven turbines and 42 megawatts of capacity, is where the country stands today.
In comparison, just one of the United Kingdom's many wind projects, Hornsea 2, has 165 turbines and 30 times the total offshore electricity generation capacity of the US.
China installed more than five gigawatts of offshore wind in 2022 alone; one would need more than 800 of the six-megawatt Block Island turbines to reach that capacity.
If the U.S. is to meet its climate change targets, that stagnation will have to change.
The Biden administration has set a goal of having 30 gigawatts’ worth of offshore turbines spinning by 2030, or 700 times the capacity already installed, enough to power more than 10 million homes.
And while some larger farms are now under construction or moving through the approvals process, opposition not unlike that seen over Cape Wind’s harrowing 15-year journey continues to pop up.
Still, experts see light on the horizon.
“I am hopeful,” said Erin Baker, a professor and faculty director of UMass Amherst’s Energy Transition Institute.
“Developers are very excited and willing to make the investment in time as well as money to get turbines in the water here.”
Roadblocks in the ocean
Offshore wind power is a relatively young industry.
The first offshore farm was built in Denmark in 1991 (the country now gets around half of its electricity from on- and offshore wind).
Since then the technology has progressed dramatically, with turbines continually increasing in size and generation capacity, and certain countries have made installing offshore farms look easy.
In 2022, a total of 8.8 gigawatts of offshore wind were installed globally, and more than half of that was in China, which now boasts about 49% of all offshore wind capacity in the world.
China is followed by the U.K., Germany, and the Netherlands.
With its measly 42 megawatts, the U.S. accounts for around a tenth of a percent of global capacity.
So what has held the U.S. back?
Baker thinks it's regulatory and permit issues.
“It is not tech-specific —the east coast is a wonderful place for offshore wind,” she said.
(The potential truly is staggering: The U.S. could support upwards of 4,000 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity, if you include the less-proven technology of floating turbines. That’s almost four times all the installed electricity in the country today.)
One regulatory roadblock: The Jones Act, which requires U.S.-flagged vessels bring cargo from one U.S. port to another.
Specialized ships are needed to install the massive turbines, and at the moment, most of those are not American.
“The tendency of Americans to sue and use the legal system is also probably a reason slowing it down,” Baker said.
For a long time, Cape Wind was the primary face of that issue, drawing lawsuits from a variety of angles; the opposition to it was extremely well funded thanks to billionaire Bill Koch.
Koch, along with some other critics including the late Senator Ted Kennedy, argued the turbines would create "visual pollution" for their beachfront compounds.
They also objected on economic grounds, arguing that it would raise electricity costs (the opposite was likely true, according to some studies done more than a decade ago) and were joined by a variety of groups including in the fishing industry, which said it could interrupt their livelihood.
(Some research says this may not be a major problem, like a 2021 study showing no effect of wind farms on a major lobster fishery in the U.K.)
In total the group filed more than a dozen lawsuits, managing to tie up the permitting and approvals process for years.
“The project unfortunately demonstrated that well-funded opposition groups can effectively use the American court system to stop even a project with no material adverse environmental impacts,” Ian Bowles told the New York Times in 2017.
Bowles was the Massachusetts secretary of energy and environmental affairs under former Gov. Deval Patrick, who had supported Cape Wind while in office.
The scattershot energy policies of the United States are also an issue, especially in comparison to countries in Europe.
“In some of those countries, they’ve had a very focused national energy policy and the creation of national incentives that help build the industry and create a market,” offshore wind expert David Bidwell, of the University of Rhode Island, said last year.
“That has not happened in the U.S."
"We don’t have a national energy policy.”
A nascent industry
Though many factors have conspired to slow domestic progress on offshore wind, there are rumblings of an awakening.
Vineyard Wind, a 62-turbine project sited farther off the Massachusetts shores than Cape Wind was, and thus not subject to “don’t spoil our view” complaints, is now under construction and slated to come online by the end of this year.
South Fork Wind, a 12-turbine project off of Long Island, is expected to deliver power by the end of 2023.
Other wind farms in New Jersey, Virginia, New York, and elsewhere are also in the pipeline, with target completion dates ranging from 2024 through the end of the decade.
The companies that build these projects are eager to jump in the water.
Last year, an auction held for the rights to build offshore wind across six sites in a region called the New York Bight drew in $4.37 billion, the highest grossing offshore lease sale of any kind in U.S. history, including those for oil and gas.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration has made some moves to streamline the federal approval process, which Baker said could be a “game changer” for the industry.
An August report from the Global Wind Energy Council saw good things ahead.
“A leap in governmental support and investment, along with ambitious plans for nationwide leases, means the industry is getting ready to unleash its true potential,” the report said.
The U.S., it said, has “one of the most ambitious project pipelines” for offshore wind, at 50 gigawatts in total.
The passage of the Inflation Reduction Act is also a “significant step forward” for the industry, with provisions offering up $100 million for offshore wind transmission planning, among other things.
But with such a rocky past and that 2030 target looming closer and closer, there are also some ominous signs for the industry.
Whales and oil money
“We oppose your company’s efforts to turn our ocean, coastal ecosystems, and shore communities into industrial electricity generation and transmission power plants.”
So reads just one bullet point of a letter sent to the CEO of Ørsted, a Danish energy company slated to build the Ocean Wind 1 project, which will put 98 turbines 15 miles offshore of New Jersey.
The letter was sent in May of this year by two concerned New Jersey residents, and supported by groups including Protect Our Coast NJ —groups that, reportedly, have a lot of oil industry money behind them.
Opposition to the growing offshore wind industry is growing right alongside it.
The loudest concern this time around seems to surround the wind farms’ effect on whales, which at least one expert has called nothing more than a “conspiracy theory.”
Still, the opposition has spread to local and state officials, and some state government opposition to further development does seem to be having a chilling effect: while that New York Bight lease sale brought in billions in competitive bids, the first-ever such auction for territory in the Gulf of Mexico, held in late August, landed with a disappointing thud.
After just two rounds of bidding (the Bight sale needed over 60 bidding rounds), one company ended up paying $5.6 million for about 100,000 acres; two other sites received no bids at all.
There is speculation that companies’ reluctance to jump in the Gulf relates to Texas’s “antagonistic political climate.”
Capital costs for offshore farms are also rising, making some companies skittish to jump in the water.
Still, experts like Baker think good things are coming for U.S. offshore wind.
“I am confident that innovation can address all the hurdles, including innovation in regulation, like streamlined processes; civic innovation, in how developers work with communities and fishermen; technological innovation to help address so many of the challenges,” she told The Messenger.
“I am not fully confident we will have the political will to see all of this innovation, but I don’t think any of these things are unsolvable.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 3c48&ei=19
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
CNET
"Renewable Energy Is Reckoning With Its Perception in Rural America"
Story by Jon Reed
30 SEPTEMBER 2023
Middle America is blanketed with flat, open land that has, for generations, been used to turn the soil, rain and sun's rays into corn, soybeans, wheat and more.
But if the US is going to transition from an energy system based on burning fossil fuels into one that relies on renewable energy sources, some of that land is going to be transformed into solar and wind farms.
One hurdle: The clean energy industry hasn't done a great job of convincing rural America that a solar farm can be just as good of a neighbor as a cornfield.
"There's definitely skepticism, rightly so," said Samantha Sawmiller, director of development at Open Road Renewables, a Texas-based renewable energy developer.
The problem, according to Sawmiller, is one of communication.
And the industry has struggled with it.
Sawmiller grew up on a farm in southwestern Ohio.
She still lives in the state, which has seen significant political pushback against rural solar and wind development in recent years.
Opposition that ultimately defeated a planned solar farm in one Ohio village was the subject of a yearlong investigation by Inside Climate News and ABC News.
And in 2021, the state passed a law effectively allowing county officials to bar new renewable energy development in their jurisdictions.
It isn't just Ohio.
Even in Texas, a national leader in renewable energy, some communities have tried to block new projects altogether.
A study by researchers at UC Santa Barbara found opposition to wind farms in the US was more prevalent in the Northeast, and in areas where the population is wealthier and whiter.
The clean energy transition faces a political problem not in Washington, which is ready to funnel billions of dollars toward the effort, but in statehouses, courthouses and farmhouses across the country: How do you convince the neighbors to let you move in?
Rural Americans have doubts
Protests against renewable energy projects take the forms typical of political movements in 21st century America: Yard signs with catchy slogans and Facebook arguments where the most vocal on both sides trade talking points.
But the loudest voices aren't always a representative sample.
Rural Americans aren't necessarily against renewable energy, but they are skeptical.
That's the takeaway from a survey conducted by the polling firm Embold Research and presented at the RE+ renewable energy industry conference in September.
The online survey of more than 2,600 rural residents found 63% believed that while rural areas hosted these projects, they would primarily benefit other communities, and that 62% believed they wouldn't bring as many high-paying jobs as promised.
"The economic messages aren't being received well because [rural Americans are] not seeing them as valid," said Robin Pressman, head of Embold Research.
"They don't believe that the economic benefits are going to fully follow."
The majority of those surveyed (54%) said they didn't think renewable energy sources could ever meet 100% of the country's energy needs, and 57% believed the US should rely on a mix of fossil fuels and renewables.
That was the top concern cited in the poll.
Concerns identified by a significant number of people also included that projects take up too much farmland, that they might cause higher utility bills, that they ruin the appearance of the landscape and that the benefits mostly go to those outside of their community.
But the survey also showed that misinformation by some renewable energy opponents -- namely that living near a solar or wind farm causes significant health risks -- isn't the main driver of opposition.
Only 5% said fears that wind and solar farms are bad for people's health were a top concern.
"When we asked an open-ended question, [health] was not raised at all as a negative," Pressman said.
"It was raised occasionally as a positive, because of air pollution getting better, but there's not a lot of stickiness to the misinformation on health."
Despite all those concerns, when it came down to it, support for renewable energy projects outpaced opposition.
While projects earn more support when they are in "communities across your state" rather than "on a property near yours," a majority supported solar projects.
The weakest support was for wind projects "on a property near yours," with 49% support and 44% opposition.
"The bottom line is that there's actually a pretty darn good match between what rural Americans see their communities as needing and what renewable energy can deliver," said Mike Casey, president of TigerComm, a renewable energy public affairs firm that presented the research alongside Embold Research.
"The industry has not, so far, been convincing that they can and will deliver those things."
"Therein lies the challenge and the opportunity."
Building support
Renewable energy companies aren't seen as a reliable source of information, according to the poll -- to the tune of 65% saying they didn't trust them too much or at all.
Only people in state government and social media sites were trusted less.
Who was trusted?
Farmers and ranchers earned the top spot, with 78% reporting they trusted them some or a lot.
Veterans were second, followed by friends and family.
That rings true with Sawmiller, who grew up on a farm and served four years of active duty in the US Marine Corps.
The most important thing is building trust in communities where developments are being built, she said.
"People just want to be heard," she said.
"A lot of people are afraid of change and have fear of the unknown, which is what we're seeing with a lot of these projects."
Sawmiller, who was not involved in the poll but saw the presentation at RE+, pointed to one of the survey's findings about what rural Americans find compelling about renewable energy: It helps national security by reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels.
Messaging should emphasize "connecting the dots for people that our national security is dependent on diversifying our energy portfolio here in the United States and removing our dependence on foreign sources of energy," she said.
Part of the argument is just demonstrating that there are benefits to renewable energy -- and that they accrue even to the folks living near the solar and wind farms.
Nate Owen, the CEO of Ampion, a community solar technology company, said saving money is a big selling point.
"It's very hard for people to argue against cost savings at a time when we're seeing historical highs for electricity across most of the major markets in the country," he said.
Casey said the research showed that renewable energy can align with the interests of rural Americans: He said the industry can improve infrastructure, provide good jobs and opportunities for the future and offer low-cost, locally produced energy.
"What we need to change is not what we're offering but how we're offering it," he said.
"Renewable energy is a match for what they want."
"It's on us to accommodate the realities of rural America in 2023."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 8e1&ei=102
"Renewable Energy Is Reckoning With Its Perception in Rural America"
Story by Jon Reed
30 SEPTEMBER 2023
Middle America is blanketed with flat, open land that has, for generations, been used to turn the soil, rain and sun's rays into corn, soybeans, wheat and more.
But if the US is going to transition from an energy system based on burning fossil fuels into one that relies on renewable energy sources, some of that land is going to be transformed into solar and wind farms.
One hurdle: The clean energy industry hasn't done a great job of convincing rural America that a solar farm can be just as good of a neighbor as a cornfield.
"There's definitely skepticism, rightly so," said Samantha Sawmiller, director of development at Open Road Renewables, a Texas-based renewable energy developer.
The problem, according to Sawmiller, is one of communication.
And the industry has struggled with it.
Sawmiller grew up on a farm in southwestern Ohio.
She still lives in the state, which has seen significant political pushback against rural solar and wind development in recent years.
Opposition that ultimately defeated a planned solar farm in one Ohio village was the subject of a yearlong investigation by Inside Climate News and ABC News.
And in 2021, the state passed a law effectively allowing county officials to bar new renewable energy development in their jurisdictions.
It isn't just Ohio.
Even in Texas, a national leader in renewable energy, some communities have tried to block new projects altogether.
A study by researchers at UC Santa Barbara found opposition to wind farms in the US was more prevalent in the Northeast, and in areas where the population is wealthier and whiter.
The clean energy transition faces a political problem not in Washington, which is ready to funnel billions of dollars toward the effort, but in statehouses, courthouses and farmhouses across the country: How do you convince the neighbors to let you move in?
Rural Americans have doubts
Protests against renewable energy projects take the forms typical of political movements in 21st century America: Yard signs with catchy slogans and Facebook arguments where the most vocal on both sides trade talking points.
But the loudest voices aren't always a representative sample.
Rural Americans aren't necessarily against renewable energy, but they are skeptical.
That's the takeaway from a survey conducted by the polling firm Embold Research and presented at the RE+ renewable energy industry conference in September.
The online survey of more than 2,600 rural residents found 63% believed that while rural areas hosted these projects, they would primarily benefit other communities, and that 62% believed they wouldn't bring as many high-paying jobs as promised.
"The economic messages aren't being received well because [rural Americans are] not seeing them as valid," said Robin Pressman, head of Embold Research.
"They don't believe that the economic benefits are going to fully follow."
The majority of those surveyed (54%) said they didn't think renewable energy sources could ever meet 100% of the country's energy needs, and 57% believed the US should rely on a mix of fossil fuels and renewables.
That was the top concern cited in the poll.
Concerns identified by a significant number of people also included that projects take up too much farmland, that they might cause higher utility bills, that they ruin the appearance of the landscape and that the benefits mostly go to those outside of their community.
But the survey also showed that misinformation by some renewable energy opponents -- namely that living near a solar or wind farm causes significant health risks -- isn't the main driver of opposition.
Only 5% said fears that wind and solar farms are bad for people's health were a top concern.
"When we asked an open-ended question, [health] was not raised at all as a negative," Pressman said.
"It was raised occasionally as a positive, because of air pollution getting better, but there's not a lot of stickiness to the misinformation on health."
Despite all those concerns, when it came down to it, support for renewable energy projects outpaced opposition.
While projects earn more support when they are in "communities across your state" rather than "on a property near yours," a majority supported solar projects.
The weakest support was for wind projects "on a property near yours," with 49% support and 44% opposition.
"The bottom line is that there's actually a pretty darn good match between what rural Americans see their communities as needing and what renewable energy can deliver," said Mike Casey, president of TigerComm, a renewable energy public affairs firm that presented the research alongside Embold Research.
"The industry has not, so far, been convincing that they can and will deliver those things."
"Therein lies the challenge and the opportunity."
Building support
Renewable energy companies aren't seen as a reliable source of information, according to the poll -- to the tune of 65% saying they didn't trust them too much or at all.
Only people in state government and social media sites were trusted less.
Who was trusted?
Farmers and ranchers earned the top spot, with 78% reporting they trusted them some or a lot.
Veterans were second, followed by friends and family.
That rings true with Sawmiller, who grew up on a farm and served four years of active duty in the US Marine Corps.
The most important thing is building trust in communities where developments are being built, she said.
"People just want to be heard," she said.
"A lot of people are afraid of change and have fear of the unknown, which is what we're seeing with a lot of these projects."
Sawmiller, who was not involved in the poll but saw the presentation at RE+, pointed to one of the survey's findings about what rural Americans find compelling about renewable energy: It helps national security by reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels.
Messaging should emphasize "connecting the dots for people that our national security is dependent on diversifying our energy portfolio here in the United States and removing our dependence on foreign sources of energy," she said.
Part of the argument is just demonstrating that there are benefits to renewable energy -- and that they accrue even to the folks living near the solar and wind farms.
Nate Owen, the CEO of Ampion, a community solar technology company, said saving money is a big selling point.
"It's very hard for people to argue against cost savings at a time when we're seeing historical highs for electricity across most of the major markets in the country," he said.
Casey said the research showed that renewable energy can align with the interests of rural Americans: He said the industry can improve infrastructure, provide good jobs and opportunities for the future and offer low-cost, locally produced energy.
"What we need to change is not what we're offering but how we're offering it," he said.
"Renewable energy is a match for what they want."
"It's on us to accommodate the realities of rural America in 2023."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 8e1&ei=102
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
The New York Post
"The wheels are coming off New York’s insane alternate-energy plans"
Opinion by Post Editorial Board
16 OCTOBER 2023
New York state’s insane renewable-energy plan is starting to implode; the sooner Gov. Kathy Hochul and other leaders admit the truth, the better.
On Thursday, the state Public Service Commission nixed a request for vastly greater subsidies — about $12 billion worth — for 90 alternate-power projects that are supposed to provide a quarter of the state’s electricity by 2020.
That would have doubled public support, most likely meaning huge increases for ratepayers in a state where power already costs far above the national average and rates are even now rising to help pay for this “transformation.”
The companies involved say they’re facing far higher costs, thanks to inflation, supply-chain issues and other developments since they inked the original deals.
Many, likely most, will now look to exit.
Hochul, meanwhile, released a new “10-Point Action Plan” that rhetorically doubles down on the state’s commitment its goals but doesn’t hold a hint of how to pay for it.
The state’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act requires cutting fossil-fuel emissions 40% by 2030 and 85% by 2050.
Solar and (mostly offshore) wind plants are supposed to replace that electricity.
Oh, and cover the natural growth in demand for power.
Plus, New York wants everyone switching to electric cars, electric heat and electric cooking, so these green dreams require even more growth in electricity generation.
Again, the PSC’s (wise) ruling means the wheels are coming off the entire alternative-energy scheme.
Fishermen, activists protest offshore wind farms near Montauk, cite recent whale deaths
Nor is that the only blow.
For example, part of the supply-chain issue is the utter lack of ships that can actually build the vast fields of offshore wind towers that New York’s leaders want.
The only vessels with that capability are foreign-flagged, and so prohibited under the federal Jones Act, a sacred cow for the American labor movement.
Then, too, plans for a battery factory in the Hudson Valley are on the brink of collapse after its CEO resigned, its stock cratered and its workers got laid off.
Vancouver-based Zinc8 Energy Solutions had won $68 million in state tax credits for a Kingston plant to manufacture long-duration energy storage systems.
Its implosion means the imagined renewables-heavy electric grid would lack crucial help in maintaining service when the sun isn’t shining or wind isn’t blowing.
Meanwhile, the folks in charge of overseeing the state electric grid have warned that this “transition” risks leaving New York City facing blackouts as soon as 2025.
By the way, statewide conversion to electric heat would mean peak power demand will come in the coldest months, not the hottest: So the blackouts won’t leave people sweating uncomfortably but instead freezing in the dead of winter.
The entire US and Western drive to end carbon emissions is a ruinous wild-goose chase.
New York’s rush to lead the way, begun simply to boost then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s presidential hopes, only guarantees that Empire Staters will suffer the worst ruin before reality comes crashing down.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 5279&ei=23
"The wheels are coming off New York’s insane alternate-energy plans"
Opinion by Post Editorial Board
16 OCTOBER 2023
New York state’s insane renewable-energy plan is starting to implode; the sooner Gov. Kathy Hochul and other leaders admit the truth, the better.
On Thursday, the state Public Service Commission nixed a request for vastly greater subsidies — about $12 billion worth — for 90 alternate-power projects that are supposed to provide a quarter of the state’s electricity by 2020.
That would have doubled public support, most likely meaning huge increases for ratepayers in a state where power already costs far above the national average and rates are even now rising to help pay for this “transformation.”
The companies involved say they’re facing far higher costs, thanks to inflation, supply-chain issues and other developments since they inked the original deals.
Many, likely most, will now look to exit.
Hochul, meanwhile, released a new “10-Point Action Plan” that rhetorically doubles down on the state’s commitment its goals but doesn’t hold a hint of how to pay for it.
The state’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act requires cutting fossil-fuel emissions 40% by 2030 and 85% by 2050.
Solar and (mostly offshore) wind plants are supposed to replace that electricity.
Oh, and cover the natural growth in demand for power.
Plus, New York wants everyone switching to electric cars, electric heat and electric cooking, so these green dreams require even more growth in electricity generation.
Again, the PSC’s (wise) ruling means the wheels are coming off the entire alternative-energy scheme.
Fishermen, activists protest offshore wind farms near Montauk, cite recent whale deaths
Nor is that the only blow.
For example, part of the supply-chain issue is the utter lack of ships that can actually build the vast fields of offshore wind towers that New York’s leaders want.
The only vessels with that capability are foreign-flagged, and so prohibited under the federal Jones Act, a sacred cow for the American labor movement.
Then, too, plans for a battery factory in the Hudson Valley are on the brink of collapse after its CEO resigned, its stock cratered and its workers got laid off.
Vancouver-based Zinc8 Energy Solutions had won $68 million in state tax credits for a Kingston plant to manufacture long-duration energy storage systems.
Its implosion means the imagined renewables-heavy electric grid would lack crucial help in maintaining service when the sun isn’t shining or wind isn’t blowing.
Meanwhile, the folks in charge of overseeing the state electric grid have warned that this “transition” risks leaving New York City facing blackouts as soon as 2025.
By the way, statewide conversion to electric heat would mean peak power demand will come in the coldest months, not the hottest: So the blackouts won’t leave people sweating uncomfortably but instead freezing in the dead of winter.
The entire US and Western drive to end carbon emissions is a ruinous wild-goose chase.
New York’s rush to lead the way, begun simply to boost then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s presidential hopes, only guarantees that Empire Staters will suffer the worst ruin before reality comes crashing down.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 5279&ei=23
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
"Offshore wind finance crisis affects ports in Albany, Coeymans - State said no more price increases for massive wind farms, which are slated to use Capital Region facilities to assemble components"
Rick Karlin, Albany, New York Times Union
Oct. 15, 2023
ALBANY — When the state Public Service Commission on Thursday said it wouldn’t allow higher wholesale rates for New York’s emerging offshore wind projects, developers said it raised questions about whether some of the projects will be completed.
“Sunrise Wind’s viability and therefore ability to be constructed are extremely challenged without this adjustment."
"We will evaluate our next steps and communicate the status of the project as soon as possible,” said David Hardy, CEO for Orsted Wind’s U.S. division.
Likewise at another wind company: “These projects must be financially sustainable to proceed,” said Molly Morris, the president of Equinor Renewables Americas.
It too will review whether to advance projects it has been awarded.
All of this could have consequences on the effort to build a wind tower factory at the Port of Albany, which could create an estimated 300 jobs.
And it could impact efforts to fully develop facilities a few miles south at the Port of Coeymans, with an estimated 870 jobs.
In 2021, local lawmakers and business boosters cheered the news that the Canadian-based Marmen Welcon partnership would build offshore wind towers at a new factory in the Port of Albany.
Those towers were going to be used by Equinor in the same projects now in doubt due to cost increases.
That’s not the only challenge facing the Port of Albany.
After a series of permitting delays, port officials in February said inflation has driven up the estimated cost to build the wind tower plant, from $350 million to $604 million and that more funds would be needed.
Gov. Kathy Hochul’s administration rebuffed entreaties for more money, leaving port boosters to hope that one of the wind development firms or an additional investor will step in with additional funding.
“We look forward to NYSERDA’s response related to the third round of offshore wind procurement that they plan to announce shortly,” Port of Albany CEO Richard Hendrick said regarding news that the Long Island projects were in peril.
Hendrick’s reference to the third round is the latest solicitation for bids on what is envisioned as the state’s third major wind farm array off Long Island’s coast.
The bids go to NYSERDA, or the New York State Energy Research Development Authority, which put out the solicitation and in coming months is expected to select winning bids.
These bids could be crucial for the ports of Albany and Coeymans.
That’s because the proposals for current and third-round projects call for using the Albany and Coeymans plants to build offshore components.
General Electric/Vernova is looking to build wind turbine nacelles, or turbine units, at the Port of Coeymans.
Another firm, LM, is slated to build the massive blades there.
And Orsted is currently working on building wind tower foundation units at Coeymans.
Another proposal calls for Equinor and BP, formerly British Petroleum, to cooperate on a project, meaning Equinor could use the Port of Albany for the Marmen Welcon towers.
Also in the mix is the New York State Offshore Wind Port, an undeveloped 112-acre spot on the east side of the Hudson River in East Greenbush across from the Port of Albany.
Orsted, which is proposing a project in this third solicitation, has said it would use turbine blades from Vestas North America.
Vestas has an option to buy 66 acres at the East Greenbush location to build blades there, meaning there is a third, potential port in play.
The precise status of this all-important third round is unclear.
NYSERDA was originally supposed to open and award the bids in June, but that was delayed.
It said it was to allow companies to adjust their bids in light of new tax implications from the federal government.
But it could also allow bidders to adjust their cost estimates upward.
NYSERDA officials now say they expect the bids to be awarded by the end of the year.
Another factor that could impact the need for ports at Albany, Coeymans and East Greenbush is the possibility that the projects which have already been awarded, abandon their current plans but bid again, presumably with more up-to-date and realistic cost projections.
Hochul and NYSERDA officials have stressed that is a possibility.
At the least, the state’s decision not to allow higher prices — and consumer rates — for these wind towers has led to a brief pause in plans for how to proceed, said Penny Vavura, spokeswoman for the Port of Albany.
“With this ruling it is putting things on hold right now for people to figure out what’s next,” she said.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... 423957.php
Rick Karlin, Albany, New York Times Union
Oct. 15, 2023
ALBANY — When the state Public Service Commission on Thursday said it wouldn’t allow higher wholesale rates for New York’s emerging offshore wind projects, developers said it raised questions about whether some of the projects will be completed.
“Sunrise Wind’s viability and therefore ability to be constructed are extremely challenged without this adjustment."
"We will evaluate our next steps and communicate the status of the project as soon as possible,” said David Hardy, CEO for Orsted Wind’s U.S. division.
Likewise at another wind company: “These projects must be financially sustainable to proceed,” said Molly Morris, the president of Equinor Renewables Americas.
It too will review whether to advance projects it has been awarded.
All of this could have consequences on the effort to build a wind tower factory at the Port of Albany, which could create an estimated 300 jobs.
And it could impact efforts to fully develop facilities a few miles south at the Port of Coeymans, with an estimated 870 jobs.
In 2021, local lawmakers and business boosters cheered the news that the Canadian-based Marmen Welcon partnership would build offshore wind towers at a new factory in the Port of Albany.
Those towers were going to be used by Equinor in the same projects now in doubt due to cost increases.
That’s not the only challenge facing the Port of Albany.
After a series of permitting delays, port officials in February said inflation has driven up the estimated cost to build the wind tower plant, from $350 million to $604 million and that more funds would be needed.
Gov. Kathy Hochul’s administration rebuffed entreaties for more money, leaving port boosters to hope that one of the wind development firms or an additional investor will step in with additional funding.
“We look forward to NYSERDA’s response related to the third round of offshore wind procurement that they plan to announce shortly,” Port of Albany CEO Richard Hendrick said regarding news that the Long Island projects were in peril.
Hendrick’s reference to the third round is the latest solicitation for bids on what is envisioned as the state’s third major wind farm array off Long Island’s coast.
The bids go to NYSERDA, or the New York State Energy Research Development Authority, which put out the solicitation and in coming months is expected to select winning bids.
These bids could be crucial for the ports of Albany and Coeymans.
That’s because the proposals for current and third-round projects call for using the Albany and Coeymans plants to build offshore components.
General Electric/Vernova is looking to build wind turbine nacelles, or turbine units, at the Port of Coeymans.
Another firm, LM, is slated to build the massive blades there.
And Orsted is currently working on building wind tower foundation units at Coeymans.
Another proposal calls for Equinor and BP, formerly British Petroleum, to cooperate on a project, meaning Equinor could use the Port of Albany for the Marmen Welcon towers.
Also in the mix is the New York State Offshore Wind Port, an undeveloped 112-acre spot on the east side of the Hudson River in East Greenbush across from the Port of Albany.
Orsted, which is proposing a project in this third solicitation, has said it would use turbine blades from Vestas North America.
Vestas has an option to buy 66 acres at the East Greenbush location to build blades there, meaning there is a third, potential port in play.
The precise status of this all-important third round is unclear.
NYSERDA was originally supposed to open and award the bids in June, but that was delayed.
It said it was to allow companies to adjust their bids in light of new tax implications from the federal government.
But it could also allow bidders to adjust their cost estimates upward.
NYSERDA officials now say they expect the bids to be awarded by the end of the year.
Another factor that could impact the need for ports at Albany, Coeymans and East Greenbush is the possibility that the projects which have already been awarded, abandon their current plans but bid again, presumably with more up-to-date and realistic cost projections.
Hochul and NYSERDA officials have stressed that is a possibility.
At the least, the state’s decision not to allow higher prices — and consumer rates — for these wind towers has led to a brief pause in plans for how to proceed, said Penny Vavura, spokeswoman for the Port of Albany.
“With this ruling it is putting things on hold right now for people to figure out what’s next,” she said.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... 423957.php
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"New York throws support behind offshore wind with three project awards"
Reuters
October 24, 2023
Oct 24 (Reuters) - New York officials on Tuesday said the state has awarded conditional contracts to three offshore wind projects as part of a massive renewable energy procurement that will provide 12% of the state's power needs in 2030.
The announcement, which the state billed as the nation's largest ever investment in offshore wind, comes less than two weeks after New York regulators rejected requests by three offshore wind developers to renegotiate their contracts because of soaring costs.
In response, Governor Kathy Hochul pledged to support renewable energy projects to meet the state's climate change goals.
The new awards, to projects under development by France's TotalEnergies, Germany's RWE, Britain's National Grid, and Denmark's Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, are still under negotiation, the state said.
The more than 4 gigawatts of offshore wind power the projects will be capable of generating is the largest share of 6.4 GW of renewable energy procurement the state unveiled.
Collectively, the offshore and onshore wind, solar, and hydroelectric projects will be able to power 2.6 million New York homes, the state said.
"Today, we are taking action to keep New York's climate goals within reach, demonstrating to the nation how to recalibrate in the wake of global economic challenges while driving us toward a greener and more prosperous future for generations to come," Hochul said in a statement.
The Biden administration, which has made offshore wind development a cornerstone of its plan to decarbonize the nation's power grid, applauded the move.
John Podesta, a White House senior adviser on clean energy, said, "New York is showing that clean energy - including offshore wind - has a bright future here in America."
The projects include Attentive Energy One, a facility being developed by TotalEnergies, Rise Light & Power and Corio Generation; Community Offshore Wind, a joint venture between RWE and National Grid; and Excelsior Wind, which is under development by CIP's Vineyard Offshore.
All three projects are expected to start generating power in 2030 and will add about $2.93 per month to customer bills over their lifetime.
New York is also committing $300 million to the development of offshore wind component manufacturing facilities planned by GE Vernova.
New York Offshore Wind Alliance Director Fred Zalcman said the announcement "will go a long way towards instilling confidence in a market that has recently faced tremendous headwinds."
Reporting by Nichola Groom; Editing by Bill Berkrot and Jonathan Oatis
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-10-24/
"New York throws support behind offshore wind with three project awards"
Reuters
October 24, 2023
Oct 24 (Reuters) - New York officials on Tuesday said the state has awarded conditional contracts to three offshore wind projects as part of a massive renewable energy procurement that will provide 12% of the state's power needs in 2030.
The announcement, which the state billed as the nation's largest ever investment in offshore wind, comes less than two weeks after New York regulators rejected requests by three offshore wind developers to renegotiate their contracts because of soaring costs.
In response, Governor Kathy Hochul pledged to support renewable energy projects to meet the state's climate change goals.
The new awards, to projects under development by France's TotalEnergies, Germany's RWE, Britain's National Grid, and Denmark's Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, are still under negotiation, the state said.
The more than 4 gigawatts of offshore wind power the projects will be capable of generating is the largest share of 6.4 GW of renewable energy procurement the state unveiled.
Collectively, the offshore and onshore wind, solar, and hydroelectric projects will be able to power 2.6 million New York homes, the state said.
"Today, we are taking action to keep New York's climate goals within reach, demonstrating to the nation how to recalibrate in the wake of global economic challenges while driving us toward a greener and more prosperous future for generations to come," Hochul said in a statement.
The Biden administration, which has made offshore wind development a cornerstone of its plan to decarbonize the nation's power grid, applauded the move.
John Podesta, a White House senior adviser on clean energy, said, "New York is showing that clean energy - including offshore wind - has a bright future here in America."
The projects include Attentive Energy One, a facility being developed by TotalEnergies, Rise Light & Power and Corio Generation; Community Offshore Wind, a joint venture between RWE and National Grid; and Excelsior Wind, which is under development by CIP's Vineyard Offshore.
All three projects are expected to start generating power in 2030 and will add about $2.93 per month to customer bills over their lifetime.
New York is also committing $300 million to the development of offshore wind component manufacturing facilities planned by GE Vernova.
New York Offshore Wind Alliance Director Fred Zalcman said the announcement "will go a long way towards instilling confidence in a market that has recently faced tremendous headwinds."
Reporting by Nichola Groom; Editing by Bill Berkrot and Jonathan Oatis
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-10-24/
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"US offshore wind writedowns seen soaring with Orsted earnings"
By Scott Disavino
October 31, 2023
Oct 31 (Reuters) - European energy companies, including Denmark's Orsted, will likely write down more of their U.S. offshore wind investments this week after BP and Equinor booked $840 million in impairments in recent days.
Orsted, the world's largest offshore wind developer, said in August it may see impairments of 16 billion Danish crowns ($2.3 billion) on its U.S. offshore developments due to supply chain problems, soaring interest rates and a lack of new tax credits.
Orsted, which was not immediately available for comment, will post its third quarter earnings on Wednesday.
Soaring costs from rising inflation, interest rate hikes and supply chain delays have cast doubt on plans by U.S. President Joe Biden and several states to use offshore wind to replace fossil fuels in energy production and reduce carbon emissions.
Analysts said Orsted has already warned it will write down at least 5 billion Danish crowns and noted that those impairments could reach as much as 16 billion Danish crowns if interest rates in the U.S. are above a certain level.
"You could say it looks pretty certain that they (Orsted) won't be able to stick to the 5 billion" Danish crowns in impairments, Jacob Pedersen, senior analyst at Sydbank, a Danish bank, told Reuters.
On Tuesday, energy major BP wrote down $540 million in the third quarter on wind projects after officials in New York state rejected a request for better terms to reflect what BP referred to as "inflationary pressures and permitting delays."
Norway's Equinor, BP's partner on those New York offshore wind developments, booked a $300 million impairment on the projects on Friday.
BP paid Equinor $1.1 billion in 2020 for a 50% stake in the venture to develop the Empire and Beacon wind projects off New York, which have a combined capacity of 3,300 megawatts (MW), capable of powering about 2 million homes.
Analysts said BP, Equinor and Orsted will likely cancel some contracts to sell power in New York, like other offshore wind developers have already done in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
Orsted has a contract to sell power in New York from its 924-MW Sunrise Wind project off Rhode Island and Massachusetts.
In Massachusetts, two offshore wind developers, SouthCoast Wind and Commonwealth Wind, agreed to pay local utilities to terminate deals that would have delivered around 2,400 MW of energy.
SouthCoast is owned by units of Shell, which will report earnings on Thursday, and Ocean Winds.
Ocean Winds is owned by units of Portuguese energy company EDP Energias de Portugal majority-owned EDP Renovaveis and France's ENGIE.
Commonwealth is a unit of Avangrid, which is majority owned by Spanish energy company Iberdrola.
Avangrid also canceled a contract to sell power in Connecticut from its proposed 804-MW Park City offshore wind farm.
"Avangrid only lost our guarantees of $48 (million) and $16 million before taxes to terminate the respective contracts for Commonwealth Wind and Park City Wind - before making material investments in the projects," a spokesperson from Avangrid said in an emailed statement.
Avangrid avoided billions in write-offs and preserved the significant value of its lease areas, the spokesperson said, adding the company still expects to deliver the first power from its Vineyard Wind 1 project in 2023.
Reporting by Scott DiSavino in New York, Louise Breusch Rasmussen in Copenhagen and Ron Bousso in London; additional reporting by Deep Vakil in Bengaluru; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Josie Kao
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-10-31/
"US offshore wind writedowns seen soaring with Orsted earnings"
By Scott Disavino
October 31, 2023
Oct 31 (Reuters) - European energy companies, including Denmark's Orsted, will likely write down more of their U.S. offshore wind investments this week after BP and Equinor booked $840 million in impairments in recent days.
Orsted, the world's largest offshore wind developer, said in August it may see impairments of 16 billion Danish crowns ($2.3 billion) on its U.S. offshore developments due to supply chain problems, soaring interest rates and a lack of new tax credits.
Orsted, which was not immediately available for comment, will post its third quarter earnings on Wednesday.
Soaring costs from rising inflation, interest rate hikes and supply chain delays have cast doubt on plans by U.S. President Joe Biden and several states to use offshore wind to replace fossil fuels in energy production and reduce carbon emissions.
Analysts said Orsted has already warned it will write down at least 5 billion Danish crowns and noted that those impairments could reach as much as 16 billion Danish crowns if interest rates in the U.S. are above a certain level.
"You could say it looks pretty certain that they (Orsted) won't be able to stick to the 5 billion" Danish crowns in impairments, Jacob Pedersen, senior analyst at Sydbank, a Danish bank, told Reuters.
On Tuesday, energy major BP wrote down $540 million in the third quarter on wind projects after officials in New York state rejected a request for better terms to reflect what BP referred to as "inflationary pressures and permitting delays."
Norway's Equinor, BP's partner on those New York offshore wind developments, booked a $300 million impairment on the projects on Friday.
BP paid Equinor $1.1 billion in 2020 for a 50% stake in the venture to develop the Empire and Beacon wind projects off New York, which have a combined capacity of 3,300 megawatts (MW), capable of powering about 2 million homes.
Analysts said BP, Equinor and Orsted will likely cancel some contracts to sell power in New York, like other offshore wind developers have already done in Massachusetts and Connecticut.
Orsted has a contract to sell power in New York from its 924-MW Sunrise Wind project off Rhode Island and Massachusetts.
In Massachusetts, two offshore wind developers, SouthCoast Wind and Commonwealth Wind, agreed to pay local utilities to terminate deals that would have delivered around 2,400 MW of energy.
SouthCoast is owned by units of Shell, which will report earnings on Thursday, and Ocean Winds.
Ocean Winds is owned by units of Portuguese energy company EDP Energias de Portugal majority-owned EDP Renovaveis and France's ENGIE.
Commonwealth is a unit of Avangrid, which is majority owned by Spanish energy company Iberdrola.
Avangrid also canceled a contract to sell power in Connecticut from its proposed 804-MW Park City offshore wind farm.
"Avangrid only lost our guarantees of $48 (million) and $16 million before taxes to terminate the respective contracts for Commonwealth Wind and Park City Wind - before making material investments in the projects," a spokesperson from Avangrid said in an emailed statement.
Avangrid avoided billions in write-offs and preserved the significant value of its lease areas, the spokesperson said, adding the company still expects to deliver the first power from its Vineyard Wind 1 project in 2023.
Reporting by Scott DiSavino in New York, Louise Breusch Rasmussen in Copenhagen and Ron Bousso in London; additional reporting by Deep Vakil in Bengaluru; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Josie Kao
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-10-31/
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
POLITICO
"Offshore wind company pulls out of New Jersey projects, a setback to Biden's green agenda"
Story by Ry Rivard
1 NOVEMBER 2023
Orsted, the company that Democrats up and down the Eastern Seaboard have been counting on to build offshore wind farms, is pulling the plug on two of its largest projects, a setback for President Joe Biden’s clean energy goal.
The Danish energy company said Tuesday night that it was killing plans to build a pair of wind farms in New Jersey.
The decision dents Biden’s climate change plans and also dashes New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy’s hopes of his state being a clean energy leader before he leaves office in 2026.
It also comes a week before legislative elections in New Jersey, where Democrats are trying to hold their majorities in the face of Republican attacks over wind power.
For months, Orsted has been teasing financial problems for its two New Jersey projects, Ocean Wind 1 and Ocean Wind 2.
Now both are being scrapped.
David Hardy, the head of the company’s American operations, blamed macroeconomic factors, like inflation and supply chain issues.
“We are extremely disappointed to have to take this decision, particularly because New Jersey is poised to be a U.S. and global hub for offshore wind energy,” Hardy said in a statement.
Ocean Wind 1 would have been New Jersey’s first offshore wind farm — a project 15 miles off the South Jersey coast big enough to generate power for a half-million homes.
It was expected to help launch a multipart supply chain in the state and provide hundreds of new jobs.
But now New Jersey has gone from the aspirational epicenter for offshore wind to a graveyard of Orsted projects.
Murphy trashed Orsted and said the state would still become a "global leader" in offshore wind.
"Today’s decision by Orsted to abandon its commitments to New Jersey is outrageous and calls into question the company’s credibility and competence," the governor said in a statement.
"As recently as several weeks ago, the company made public statements regarding the viability and progress of the Ocean Wind 1 project."
There was good news for other states.
Orsted is all in on Revolution Wind, a project off the coast of Connecticut and Rhode Island, and is continuing construction of South Fork Wind in New York.
Other projects in New York and Maryland have an uncertain future but remain alive.
The Biden administration pointed to active projects in New York and Virginia, one of which was advanced earlier on Tuesday by federal regulators, as concrete results of their push to boost offshore wind.
"While macroeconomic headwinds are creating challenges for some projects, momentum remains on the side of an expanding U.S. offshore wind industry — creating good-paying union jobs in manufacturing, shipbuilding, and construction; strengthening the power grid; and providing new clean energy resources for American families and businesses," White House spokesperson Michael Kikukawa said in a statement.
In New Jersey, Orsted’s announcement leaves Murphy and state Democrats holding a doggy bag of political headaches.
One of the Murphy administration's top legislative priorities this year was a law meant to save Ocean Wind 1 from financial ruin by allowing the company to keep federal tax incentives that would have otherwise been used to lower ratepayer bills.
The Legislature narrowly approved the bill amid intense opposition from Republicans and coastal voters before recessing this summer ahead of the election, in which all 120 legislative seats are on the ballot.
Now, a week before that election, Republicans will be able to point to the unpopular vote being all for naught.
Murphy administration officials on Tuesday night began pushing back against criticism they expect of the law.
They argued that the law, called a bailout by some, has not resulted in any money going to Orsted because the project wasn’t built.
They argue instead that the company had put $300 million on the table that the state gets to keep thanks to the law — though $100 million of that will almost certainly be subject of a dispute between the company and state.
"I have directed my Administration to review all legal rights and remedies and to take all necessary steps to ensure that Orsted fully and immediately honors its obligations," Murphy said in his statement.
New Jersey utility regulators have approved three wind farms in recent years by agreeing to direct ratepayer dollars to buy power from them.
Only one is alive following Orsted’s exit — Atlantic Shores, a company that is considered to be a more straightforward and accommodating partner.
Atlantic Shores has said its costs have gone up 30 percent since the project was approved by the state in 2021.
But now it’s unclear if there is any political support to help the company, especially after lawmakers put their careers on the line to help a company that jumped ship months later.
The Murphy administration — which has perhaps the nation's most ambitious offshore wind energy goal — is currently entertaining bids from four energy companies to build other wind farms.
The administration also hopes that other states will use products by EEW, a wind-related manufacturer that has set up shop in South Jersey.
Broadly speaking, the offshore wind industry has been struggling to fulfill its early promise, and a whole generation of projects that were approved before or during the pandemic have been asking for money to deal with inflation and other rising costs.
Biden, Murphy and other Democrats have said that they are fighting climate change by moving toward clean energy, a large part of which was supposed to be offshore wind.
In New York, regulators recently declined to prop up offshore projects that were asking for money, but then quickly approved other offshore projects to keep momentum going in the industry.
It's unclear if New Jersey is ready to move that quickly, but the industry certainly has boosters at the state Board of Public Utilities, where officials are often seen wearing pins depicting wind turbines on their lapels.
Support for offshore wind in New Jersey is complicated by opposition from coastal residents who don’t like the sight of wind farms and by critics of Murphy’s clean energy agenda who argued it was too costly.
“This is the sad but always inevitable conclusion to the story — the underlying math never added up, and no amount of state or federal bailout money could change that fact,” said Michael Makarski of Affordable Energy for New Jersey, a business and labor group critical of offshore wind.
Support for the industry was also ruined by the unfounded claim that projects were contributing to a spate of dead whales washing ashore.
State Sen. Michael Testa (R-Cumberland) posted an image on social media Tuesday night that said #SavedTheWhales and, in another post, said, “The people of NJ have officially sunk the wind out of Ørsted & @GovMurphy’s sails.”
At one point, support for the industry was bipartisan and included labor unions, environmental groups and industry advocates.
In New Jersey, a law to encourage the industry was signed by then-Gov. Chris Christie.
Kelsey Tamborrino contributed to this report.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... ed93&ei=35
"Offshore wind company pulls out of New Jersey projects, a setback to Biden's green agenda"
Story by Ry Rivard
1 NOVEMBER 2023
Orsted, the company that Democrats up and down the Eastern Seaboard have been counting on to build offshore wind farms, is pulling the plug on two of its largest projects, a setback for President Joe Biden’s clean energy goal.
The Danish energy company said Tuesday night that it was killing plans to build a pair of wind farms in New Jersey.
The decision dents Biden’s climate change plans and also dashes New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy’s hopes of his state being a clean energy leader before he leaves office in 2026.
It also comes a week before legislative elections in New Jersey, where Democrats are trying to hold their majorities in the face of Republican attacks over wind power.
For months, Orsted has been teasing financial problems for its two New Jersey projects, Ocean Wind 1 and Ocean Wind 2.
Now both are being scrapped.
David Hardy, the head of the company’s American operations, blamed macroeconomic factors, like inflation and supply chain issues.
“We are extremely disappointed to have to take this decision, particularly because New Jersey is poised to be a U.S. and global hub for offshore wind energy,” Hardy said in a statement.
Ocean Wind 1 would have been New Jersey’s first offshore wind farm — a project 15 miles off the South Jersey coast big enough to generate power for a half-million homes.
It was expected to help launch a multipart supply chain in the state and provide hundreds of new jobs.
But now New Jersey has gone from the aspirational epicenter for offshore wind to a graveyard of Orsted projects.
Murphy trashed Orsted and said the state would still become a "global leader" in offshore wind.
"Today’s decision by Orsted to abandon its commitments to New Jersey is outrageous and calls into question the company’s credibility and competence," the governor said in a statement.
"As recently as several weeks ago, the company made public statements regarding the viability and progress of the Ocean Wind 1 project."
There was good news for other states.
Orsted is all in on Revolution Wind, a project off the coast of Connecticut and Rhode Island, and is continuing construction of South Fork Wind in New York.
Other projects in New York and Maryland have an uncertain future but remain alive.
The Biden administration pointed to active projects in New York and Virginia, one of which was advanced earlier on Tuesday by federal regulators, as concrete results of their push to boost offshore wind.
"While macroeconomic headwinds are creating challenges for some projects, momentum remains on the side of an expanding U.S. offshore wind industry — creating good-paying union jobs in manufacturing, shipbuilding, and construction; strengthening the power grid; and providing new clean energy resources for American families and businesses," White House spokesperson Michael Kikukawa said in a statement.
In New Jersey, Orsted’s announcement leaves Murphy and state Democrats holding a doggy bag of political headaches.
One of the Murphy administration's top legislative priorities this year was a law meant to save Ocean Wind 1 from financial ruin by allowing the company to keep federal tax incentives that would have otherwise been used to lower ratepayer bills.
The Legislature narrowly approved the bill amid intense opposition from Republicans and coastal voters before recessing this summer ahead of the election, in which all 120 legislative seats are on the ballot.
Now, a week before that election, Republicans will be able to point to the unpopular vote being all for naught.
Murphy administration officials on Tuesday night began pushing back against criticism they expect of the law.
They argued that the law, called a bailout by some, has not resulted in any money going to Orsted because the project wasn’t built.
They argue instead that the company had put $300 million on the table that the state gets to keep thanks to the law — though $100 million of that will almost certainly be subject of a dispute between the company and state.
"I have directed my Administration to review all legal rights and remedies and to take all necessary steps to ensure that Orsted fully and immediately honors its obligations," Murphy said in his statement.
New Jersey utility regulators have approved three wind farms in recent years by agreeing to direct ratepayer dollars to buy power from them.
Only one is alive following Orsted’s exit — Atlantic Shores, a company that is considered to be a more straightforward and accommodating partner.
Atlantic Shores has said its costs have gone up 30 percent since the project was approved by the state in 2021.
But now it’s unclear if there is any political support to help the company, especially after lawmakers put their careers on the line to help a company that jumped ship months later.
The Murphy administration — which has perhaps the nation's most ambitious offshore wind energy goal — is currently entertaining bids from four energy companies to build other wind farms.
The administration also hopes that other states will use products by EEW, a wind-related manufacturer that has set up shop in South Jersey.
Broadly speaking, the offshore wind industry has been struggling to fulfill its early promise, and a whole generation of projects that were approved before or during the pandemic have been asking for money to deal with inflation and other rising costs.
Biden, Murphy and other Democrats have said that they are fighting climate change by moving toward clean energy, a large part of which was supposed to be offshore wind.
In New York, regulators recently declined to prop up offshore projects that were asking for money, but then quickly approved other offshore projects to keep momentum going in the industry.
It's unclear if New Jersey is ready to move that quickly, but the industry certainly has boosters at the state Board of Public Utilities, where officials are often seen wearing pins depicting wind turbines on their lapels.
Support for offshore wind in New Jersey is complicated by opposition from coastal residents who don’t like the sight of wind farms and by critics of Murphy’s clean energy agenda who argued it was too costly.
“This is the sad but always inevitable conclusion to the story — the underlying math never added up, and no amount of state or federal bailout money could change that fact,” said Michael Makarski of Affordable Energy for New Jersey, a business and labor group critical of offshore wind.
Support for the industry was also ruined by the unfounded claim that projects were contributing to a spate of dead whales washing ashore.
State Sen. Michael Testa (R-Cumberland) posted an image on social media Tuesday night that said #SavedTheWhales and, in another post, said, “The people of NJ have officially sunk the wind out of Ørsted & @GovMurphy’s sails.”
At one point, support for the industry was bipartisan and included labor unions, environmental groups and industry advocates.
In New Jersey, a law to encourage the industry was signed by then-Gov. Chris Christie.
Kelsey Tamborrino contributed to this report.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... ed93&ei=35
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
"Filings show N.Y. green energy could cost 64 percent more on wholesale level - Solar, wind and power line builders tell the state they'll need to get paid more for their electricity in order to be viable"
Rick Karlin, Albany, New York Times Union
Updated: Aug. 30, 2023
ALBANY — Wholesale electricity prices from some producers could rise 64 percent in order to cover inflation and the higher-than-anticipated costs that are becoming apparent in New York’s shift to renewable energy, according to a leading state agency.
“The impact of implementing ACE (Alliance for Clean Energy) NY’s requested relief … would be an increase in weighted average strike (base) prices of 64 percent,” reads part of the comments from the New York State Energy Research and Development Agency, which sets contracts for electricity sales by solar and wind developers.
That strike price represents what is essentially a baseline wholesale cost paid to energy providers who are building new solar and wind plants.
It doesn't apply to existing generators.
NYSERDA stressed that costs to consumers should be far lower since the increase would only apply to the new solar and wind plants requesting increases.
According to NYSERDA, the wholesale strike price increase, if approved, would translate into an estimated ratepayer increase for a residential customer of up to 1.48%, or approximately $1.57 per month compounded.
The monthly increases would run for the life of a solar or wind project -- most are expected to last 20 to 25 years.
The comments were filed this week with the state Public Service Commission, which must approve the wholesale energy prices.
They came as part of an earlier request by ACE, a trade group, to increase the amount of money that solar and wind developers will get for the energy they produce.
NYSERDA's comments about the increase are not an endorsement of the increase request.
While ACE’s request in June cited the rising costs of converting from fossil fuels to renewables, the comments filed with the PSC on Monday brought those concerns into sharper focus.
Monday marked the deadline for petitions and comments on ACE’s request.
Late in the day, nearly three dozen documents were filed with the PSC.
They came from wind and solar energy developers, unions representing the workers who are building these projects as well as environmental groups.
The over-arching message was that many projects that are planned or under development won’t be viable without guarantees of more money for the power they plan to produce.
Nor has the inflation been limited to energy generators, or those developers building solar and wind farms.
The Champlain Hudson Power Express, which is building a transmission line largely under the Hudson River to bring Quebec hydropower to New York City, also said it will need to charge more for carrying the electricity.
“Like the other many developers that have filed petitions, petitioners faced global supply chain shortages and market disruption, and the substantial negative impacts of inflation and interest rate increases on construction costs in both the United States and Canada,” reads part of the comment filed by Champlain Hudson Power Express.
“For this reason, the CHPE Project is similarly situated to the other major New York renewable energy project petitioners seeking cost adjustments and should be treated equally.”
Also seeking an increase is the Clean Path NY green energy generation plan.
They are also building a transmission line but that's not included in this filing.
According to the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, New York is supposed to have 70 percent renewable energy by 2030 and zero emissions by 2040.
Indications that the cost of this will be higher than expected have been coming in for a while, especially since the pandemic three years ago created supply chain snags and job vacancies.
CHPE, for example, last year requested and received from the PSC permission to increase its borrowing to $6 billion from the earlier sum of $4.5 billion.
And in February, the Port of Albany said the costs to build a wind tower factory have grown to $604 million from earlier estimates of $350 million, necessitating more aid.
This month, wind developers Equinor and BP said they would need to renegotiate contracts in light of inflation.
The strike price represents a base line that power generators are guaranteed for their electricity.
And NYSERDA’s 64 percent estimate represents an average increase, weighted by the size of the projects, if all the increases for so-called Tier I, that is relatively newer solar and wind projects, were approved. NYSERDA was not endorsing the increase, only predicting what the cost might be if ACE's requests were approved.
Business groups who have questioned the green transition, were quick to note that the cost will be a problem, especially for industrial customers who require large amounts of electricity.
“The filings make clear that these projects are going to cost far more than what was originally bid."
"owever, what's truly astonishing is that virtually nobody knows exactly how much money it is going to ultimately cost utility customers."
"Those numbers simply are not being made public,” Justin Wilcox, executive director of Upstate United, said in a prepared statement.
Upstate United is a group that supports lower taxes and regulation in order to boost the region’s economy.
There are some broad indications of the cost of building these projects, though.
One group that filed comments, the Multiple Intervenors, or collection of energy interests, noted that "Department of Public Service Staff (“Staff”) reported recently that the Commission already has approved approximately $43.8 billion of funding obligations, that have been or will be paid by customers, in an effort to achieve a portion of the CLCPA requirements."
They also said those costs could rise by half.
To be fair, the strongest supporters of CLCPA have said building more solar and wind power will have new economic benefits, in the form of construction jobs and savings in oil and gas purchases which would be supplanted by these new sources.
Currently, the largest contributors to the state's power grid are gas fired generating plants, hydroelectric stations and nuclear power.
Still, at least one energy developer was critical of how the state has proceeded in granting contracts to green energy projects.
“AES Clean Energy, LLC (“AES”) opposes the method and basis for the price increase,” reads the comments from that company, which is building solar and wind farms across the state.
The company believes NYSERDA should cancel contracts on projects that aren’t economically viable and invite them to rebid.
Since 2016, just 12 of 113 projects approved in Tier I, or the renewable energy group, are operating so far.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... 336313.php
Rick Karlin, Albany, New York Times Union
Updated: Aug. 30, 2023
ALBANY — Wholesale electricity prices from some producers could rise 64 percent in order to cover inflation and the higher-than-anticipated costs that are becoming apparent in New York’s shift to renewable energy, according to a leading state agency.
“The impact of implementing ACE (Alliance for Clean Energy) NY’s requested relief … would be an increase in weighted average strike (base) prices of 64 percent,” reads part of the comments from the New York State Energy Research and Development Agency, which sets contracts for electricity sales by solar and wind developers.
That strike price represents what is essentially a baseline wholesale cost paid to energy providers who are building new solar and wind plants.
It doesn't apply to existing generators.
NYSERDA stressed that costs to consumers should be far lower since the increase would only apply to the new solar and wind plants requesting increases.
According to NYSERDA, the wholesale strike price increase, if approved, would translate into an estimated ratepayer increase for a residential customer of up to 1.48%, or approximately $1.57 per month compounded.
The monthly increases would run for the life of a solar or wind project -- most are expected to last 20 to 25 years.
The comments were filed this week with the state Public Service Commission, which must approve the wholesale energy prices.
They came as part of an earlier request by ACE, a trade group, to increase the amount of money that solar and wind developers will get for the energy they produce.
NYSERDA's comments about the increase are not an endorsement of the increase request.
While ACE’s request in June cited the rising costs of converting from fossil fuels to renewables, the comments filed with the PSC on Monday brought those concerns into sharper focus.
Monday marked the deadline for petitions and comments on ACE’s request.
Late in the day, nearly three dozen documents were filed with the PSC.
They came from wind and solar energy developers, unions representing the workers who are building these projects as well as environmental groups.
The over-arching message was that many projects that are planned or under development won’t be viable without guarantees of more money for the power they plan to produce.
Nor has the inflation been limited to energy generators, or those developers building solar and wind farms.
The Champlain Hudson Power Express, which is building a transmission line largely under the Hudson River to bring Quebec hydropower to New York City, also said it will need to charge more for carrying the electricity.
“Like the other many developers that have filed petitions, petitioners faced global supply chain shortages and market disruption, and the substantial negative impacts of inflation and interest rate increases on construction costs in both the United States and Canada,” reads part of the comment filed by Champlain Hudson Power Express.
“For this reason, the CHPE Project is similarly situated to the other major New York renewable energy project petitioners seeking cost adjustments and should be treated equally.”
Also seeking an increase is the Clean Path NY green energy generation plan.
They are also building a transmission line but that's not included in this filing.
According to the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, New York is supposed to have 70 percent renewable energy by 2030 and zero emissions by 2040.
Indications that the cost of this will be higher than expected have been coming in for a while, especially since the pandemic three years ago created supply chain snags and job vacancies.
CHPE, for example, last year requested and received from the PSC permission to increase its borrowing to $6 billion from the earlier sum of $4.5 billion.
And in February, the Port of Albany said the costs to build a wind tower factory have grown to $604 million from earlier estimates of $350 million, necessitating more aid.
This month, wind developers Equinor and BP said they would need to renegotiate contracts in light of inflation.
The strike price represents a base line that power generators are guaranteed for their electricity.
And NYSERDA’s 64 percent estimate represents an average increase, weighted by the size of the projects, if all the increases for so-called Tier I, that is relatively newer solar and wind projects, were approved. NYSERDA was not endorsing the increase, only predicting what the cost might be if ACE's requests were approved.
Business groups who have questioned the green transition, were quick to note that the cost will be a problem, especially for industrial customers who require large amounts of electricity.
“The filings make clear that these projects are going to cost far more than what was originally bid."
"owever, what's truly astonishing is that virtually nobody knows exactly how much money it is going to ultimately cost utility customers."
"Those numbers simply are not being made public,” Justin Wilcox, executive director of Upstate United, said in a prepared statement.
Upstate United is a group that supports lower taxes and regulation in order to boost the region’s economy.
There are some broad indications of the cost of building these projects, though.
One group that filed comments, the Multiple Intervenors, or collection of energy interests, noted that "Department of Public Service Staff (“Staff”) reported recently that the Commission already has approved approximately $43.8 billion of funding obligations, that have been or will be paid by customers, in an effort to achieve a portion of the CLCPA requirements."
They also said those costs could rise by half.
To be fair, the strongest supporters of CLCPA have said building more solar and wind power will have new economic benefits, in the form of construction jobs and savings in oil and gas purchases which would be supplanted by these new sources.
Currently, the largest contributors to the state's power grid are gas fired generating plants, hydroelectric stations and nuclear power.
Still, at least one energy developer was critical of how the state has proceeded in granting contracts to green energy projects.
“AES Clean Energy, LLC (“AES”) opposes the method and basis for the price increase,” reads the comments from that company, which is building solar and wind farms across the state.
The company believes NYSERDA should cancel contracts on projects that aren’t economically viable and invite them to rebid.
Since 2016, just 12 of 113 projects approved in Tier I, or the renewable energy group, are operating so far.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... 336313.php
Re: WINDMILLS AND SOLAR FARMS
REUTERS
"SolarEdge forecasts dour Q4 revenue as demand concerns loom; shares plunge"
Reuters
November 1, 2023
Nov 1 (Reuters) - SolarEdge Technologies on Wednesday forecast fourth-quarter revenue below Wall Street estimates on weak demand for its solar inverters, sending the company's shares down 22.3% in extended trade.
Growth for solar in Europe has slowed due to excess inventories and weakening demand in key markets as fossil fuel prices have scaled back from record highs reached last year.
While in the United States, higher interest rates and a metering reform in California, the country's largest solar market, have dented demand for solar.
The company, whose market capitalization has dropped more than half this year, forecast current-quarter revenue between $300 million to $350 million, far below analysts' estimates of $687.9 million, as per LSEG data.
SolarEdge had trimmed its third-quarter revenue expectations last month due to high inventories and a slowdown in installation which led to substantial cancellations and backlog clearing from its European distributors in the quarter.
The renewable energy firm also reported an adjusted net loss of 55 cents per share for the quarter ended Sept. 30, compared to analysts' expectations of a profit of 89 cents per share.
"The results for the third quarter fell short of our prior expectations and are reflecting a slow market environment," said CEO Zvi Lando.
Quarterly revenue of $725.3 million also came in below estimates of $768.38 million.
SolarEdge forecast adjusted gross margin in the range of 5% to 8% for the fourth quarter.
Peer Enphase had also forecast a weak fourth- quarter revenue.
Reporting by Sourasis Bose in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-01/
"SolarEdge forecasts dour Q4 revenue as demand concerns loom; shares plunge"
Reuters
November 1, 2023
Nov 1 (Reuters) - SolarEdge Technologies on Wednesday forecast fourth-quarter revenue below Wall Street estimates on weak demand for its solar inverters, sending the company's shares down 22.3% in extended trade.
Growth for solar in Europe has slowed due to excess inventories and weakening demand in key markets as fossil fuel prices have scaled back from record highs reached last year.
While in the United States, higher interest rates and a metering reform in California, the country's largest solar market, have dented demand for solar.
The company, whose market capitalization has dropped more than half this year, forecast current-quarter revenue between $300 million to $350 million, far below analysts' estimates of $687.9 million, as per LSEG data.
SolarEdge had trimmed its third-quarter revenue expectations last month due to high inventories and a slowdown in installation which led to substantial cancellations and backlog clearing from its European distributors in the quarter.
The renewable energy firm also reported an adjusted net loss of 55 cents per share for the quarter ended Sept. 30, compared to analysts' expectations of a profit of 89 cents per share.
"The results for the third quarter fell short of our prior expectations and are reflecting a slow market environment," said CEO Zvi Lando.
Quarterly revenue of $725.3 million also came in below estimates of $768.38 million.
SolarEdge forecast adjusted gross margin in the range of 5% to 8% for the fourth quarter.
Peer Enphase had also forecast a weak fourth- quarter revenue.
Reporting by Sourasis Bose in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 023-11-01/