David T. Stevenson has spent 12 years as the director of the Center for Energy & Environmental Policy for the Caesar Rodney Institute.
Senate Bill 159 overturns Sussex County Council’s well-considered rejection of a permit for a power station that would have supported US Wind’s offshore wind project. The state has long recognized, in law, that counties and towns are better suited to consider local zoning issues.
The bill is based on the false premise that the offshore wind project will solve the real concern that our regional electric grid will face blackouts during peak demand periods as soon as this year. This power shortage has been caused by the early closure of reliable baseload power plants, like our local Indian River facility. Reliable coal- and natural gas-fired generators have faced state and federal pressure, from carbon taxes, regulations and huge mandates and subsidies for unreliable wind and solar projects. Efforts to pass Delaware legislation this year to end the carbon tax and freeze the wind and solar mandates were opposed by the very people pushing SB 159.
US Wind’s own construction plan forecasts that one-quarter of the project will not be generating power until 2029, with the rest not available until 2031. It is not a short-term fix. We know from existing turbines that most of the power is produced in the spring and fall, when electric demand is lowest. In Texas, with about 20% of its power coming from wind and solar, during blackouts, only about 2% of power comes from those sources.
The US Wind project faces federal and state lawsuits; President Donald Trump’s executive orders to review highly questionable, approved project permits; and the recent U.S. House of Representatives legislation to withdraw critical 30% investment tax credits. It is unlikely the project will ever be built.
Meanwhile, County Council followed its rules in denying the substation. A conditional use permit must “promote the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of Sussex County, and the conditional use must be for the general convenience and welfare of the inhabitants of Sussex County.” The federal environmental impact statement notes that the project, just 9 miles off our coast, will have a major negative impact on our ocean sights, changing them from “pristine to developed with turbines dominating the view.” Several surveys indicate that that will lead to lost tourism (one of Delaware’s largest industries), lost jobs and lower property values.
In January, then-Gov. John Carney signed an agreement to receive payments from US Wind over a 20-year period. Those payments would be wiped out by the loss of just 1.5% of our tourist business in the project’s first year. In addition, the impact statement admits that commercial fishing will abandon the lease area; that radar interference will hurt civilian aircraft and shipping, as well as national security; and that there will be more vessel collisions. No wonder our survey of 14,000 property owners within 1 mile of the beach found that 86% oppose offshore wind.
Sussex County Council considered all these issues and made the right decision. The state needs to butt out!
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
