US: Industry points to broader effects of Vineyard Wind 1 permitting decisions

If the approval of the U.S. Vineyard Wind 1 offshore wind farm is further delayed, or if the project’s permitting process ends up with a rejection, the industry could take it as a signal to pour its offshore wind money in Europe and Asia, according to comments submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) on the recently issued Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the project.

The offshore wind project already encountered a delay in its permitting process, affecting its planned construction timeline.

BOEM was scheduled to release the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) in August 2019. However, a month before that the authority said the FEIS would be postponed and, the following month, asked for a supplemental EIS.

The Record of Decision on the FEIS and the approval of the Construction and Operations Plan (COP) is now scheduled for mid-December 2020, with a few final authorisations and permits set to be issued in March 2021.

Vineyard Wind 1, developed by Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners and Avangrid Renewables, was initially planned to enter the construction stage in 2019 and to start commercial operation by 2022. At the beginning of 2020, the developer informed that the project timeline would be revised and that the wind farm would not be operational in 2022.

Meanwhile, the offshore wind developers and the wider industry are keeping a close eye on the permitting process for the 800 MW offshore wind farm, since it would be the first large-scale offshore wind project in the U.S.

Whilst the availability of SEIS was welcomed as the next milestone toward project’s final permits, the industry pinpointed the stumbling stone in BOEM’s document and expressed its support for Vineyard Wind’s proposal in responses during the comment period.

Namely, BOEM’s SEIS comprises another layout of the offshore wind farm, whereas a 4-nautical-mile-wide transit lane has been added, moving the wind turbines that would have been placed at that area further south within the lease zone.

The SEIS has added the Alternative F in response to the Responsible Offshore Development Association (RODA) layout proposal from January 2020, which includes a total of six transit lanes, but only one intersects the Vineyard Wind 1 site, according to BOEM.

“The purpose of the proposed northwest/southeast transit corridor would be mainly to facilitate vessel transit from southern New England ports— primarily New Bedford—to fishing areas on Georges Bank. The WTGs that would have been located within the transit lane proposed to intersect the Wind Development Area would not be eliminated from the Proposed Action; but instead, the displaced WTGs would be shifted south within the Vineyard Wind lease area. Therefore, the number of placement locations would remain the same as assumed under the Proposed Action. This is the same approach that is utilized for Alternatives D1 and D2”, the SEIS reads.

However, the industry is urging BOEM to drop the Alternative F, as it adds an “unnecessary 4 NM-wide additional transit lane that has significant negative impacts”. The addition of a 4 NM transit lane would displace a number of wind turbines from their locations in the original proposal and similar layout alternatives, enlarging the wind farm development site within the lease area.

The size of the offshore wind farm (construction) site within the lease area could increase by up to 61 per cent if a wider transit lane is added (2 NM or 4 NM), with up to 34 wind turbines relocated further south, leading to up to a 37 per cent increase in additional inter-array cabling.

Most importantly, one of the challenging aspects BOEM listed in the SEIS for this alternative is that its implementation would delay proposed project construction if significant additional survey work is required.

Furthermore, the potential construction delays could lead to more overlapping with construction schedules of other offshore wind projects, which could increase cumulative impacts on resources sensitive to overlapping construction activities, according to BOEM.

“Alternative F is detrimental to offshore wind lease areas and projects throughout the Massachusetts/Rhode Island Wind Energy Area. The Joint Developer Agreement Layout utilizes a standard and uniform configuration with 1×1 NM spacing and complies with U.S. Coast Guard navigational safety requirements”, said Brandon Burke, director of policy and outreach at the Business Network for Offshore Wind.

The industry is voicing its support to the uniform 1×1-nautical-mile layout (Alternative D2), which aligns the project’s wind turbines in an east–west orientation with a 1-nautical-mile spacing between them.

After the draft EIS was issued and in response to stakeholder feedback, Vineyard Wind and other Rhode Island and Massachusetts offshore wind leaseholders committed to implementing a grid layout equivalent to Alternative D2, which has also been determined by the U.S. Coast Guard as the one to “maximize safe navigation”.

American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), RENEW Northeast, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, WindSTAR Center at UMass Lowell, and The National Wildlife Federation have all expressed their support to the uniform 1×1 NM layout.

“The 1 x 1 nautical mile layout, agreed to by all New England offshore wind leaseholders to provide ample and uniform navigation transit lanes, is larger spacing than in any other wind facility currently operating in the world”, RENEW Northeast, a regional renewable energy organisation, stated in a press release from 22 July.

The options under Alternative F consider either a 2 NM or a 4 NM transit lane added to Vineyard Wind’s originally proposed layout or to Alternative D2.

Nevertheless, organisations have welcomed BOEM’s statement in the SEIS, where the authority says that the development of approximately 22 GW of offshore wind capacity off the U.S. East Coast is “reasonably foreseeable”.  This includes 17 active wind energy lease areas and erection of around 2,000 wind turbines over a 10-year period.

In order to break the ice for large-scale offshore wind development and to open the road to investments and job-creation, the industry has urged BOEM to approve the project (with the 1×1 NM spacing) and to finish the permitting process “in a timely fashion”.

“By approving the full configuration of the Vineyard Wind project, the Department of the Interior will send an unambiguous message to investors waiting for the green light that the U.S. offshore wind industry is open for business”, said Liz Burdock, president and CEO of the Business Network for Offshore Wind. “Investment will flow into shipbuilding, manufacturing facilities, port improvements, and grid infrastructure”.

The Network’s Brandon Burke called for the authority, and its parent organisation Department of Interior, to act in accordance with the President’s Executive Order from June, which guides the federal and state agencies to speed up infrastructure investments to strengthen the U.S. economy amid and post- the current global COVID-19 crisis.

Laura Morton, AWEA’s Senior Director of Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Offshore, said: “By finishing the environmental review in a timely fashion, BOEM will signal that U.S. offshore wind is about to take off, attracting the 83,000 American jobs and $25 billion in annual economic investment this industry represents”.

“On the other hand, additional delays and regulatory uncertainty will likely cause these careers and dollars to flow to Europe and other countries whose policies support clean, safe, and affordable offshore wind”, Laura Morton said.

Business Network for Offshore Wind also pointed out that the approval of Vineyard Wind 1 is significant for the U.S. economy and future development of offshore wind in the country, as well as for keeping the investments in the U.S. from being redirected to European ad Asian offshore wind projects.

“The failure to issue an approval for Vineyard Wind could lead investors to conclude that it is unlikely that U.S. offshore wind projects can complete the needed permitting process. Seeing this continuing uncertainty, firms may elect to continue investing in more certain European markets, or expand Asian investments, rather than invest in the U.S.”, Liz Burdock said.

According to a recent study from Wood Mackenzie, commissioned by AWEA and three more energy industry groups, 28 GW of leased offshore wind areas and $ 1.7 billion of U.S. Treasury revenue are achievable by 2022, with the sector supporting 80,000 jobs annually by 2035.

Offshore wind investments could also reach $ 17 billion by 2025, $ 108 billion by 2030 and $ 166 billion by 2035, with the addition of new lease areas.