Ex-Navy secretary demands halt to RI wind farm that will ‘obliterate quality of life’ and won’t ‘ever’ reduce carbon emissions 

A former US Navy secretary and long-serving diplomat has called on the Biden administration and Congress to halt plans for immense offshore wind farms near Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

J. William Middendorf warned in an Oct. 24 letter to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the projects were being “ramrodded through a deficient regulatory process despite the controversy over their acknowledged impacts and questionable benefits,” according to a copy exclusively obtained by The Post.

The 99-year-old Middendorf predicted to Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr. that the developments “will destroy the ocean habitat, decimate marine animal populations, cripple ocean-dependent industries, and obliterate the quality of life that proximity to the ocean gives residents and visitors.

“They will also enrich foreign national energy companies at the expense of American taxpayers and jeopardize national security, military operations, and maritime safety,” Middendorf added. “Offshore wind complexes will raise energy costs and create an enormous environmental liability that will endure until the last turbine falls – all without ever reducing our carbon emissions or taking a single fossil fuel plant offline.”

Brown did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Middendorf served as Navy secretary under former Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford before moving on to become US ambassador to the Organization of American States and envoy to the European Union under President Ronald Reagan.

In addition to Brown, Middendorf also sent copies of his letter to Rhode Island’s congressional delegation, Biden administration officials and other members of Congress, urging all North Atlantic windmill projects to stop until two earlier government investigations about their effects conclude.

Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed, both Rhode Island Democrats who received copies of the letters, did not respond to requests for comment. Neither did Reps. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) or Gabe Amo (D-RI).

In September, a fishing regulatory board in the Ocean State resigned en masse after being sidelined from the regulatory process, which could OK as many as 16 wind farms to be built by 2025.

The Government Accountability Office is currently probing whether offshore wind development negatively affects maritime activities, and the Transportation Department’s Inspector General will audit the effects of the windmills on air and military traffic as well as radar screening.

“I fail to understand why our coastal states’ leadership seems to welcome the destruction of their oceans for foreign profit, as it has become clear that offshore wind developments do not reduce carbon emissions or dependence on fossil fuels,” Middendorf added, apparently referring to Orsted.

The Danish wind farm producer has been in line for billions of dollars in subsidies and tax credits from the Biden administration and state legislators – only to pull out of some projects early.

The renewable energy push came about as a result of President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, a $739 billion piece of legislation to ostensibly beat back climate change.

But Middendorf said much of the investment will not cut down on fossil fuel use or reduce carbon emissions.

“Because wind is intermittent, and neither the technology nor manufacturing ability exists to provide adequate battery storage, the grid needs fossil fuel generators ready to supply 100% of electricity needs,” he wrote.

“These projects will not replace a single fossil fuel power plant. Moreover, on-demand cycling from low production to full capacity means backup fossil fuel generators will emit more [carbon dioxide] than they would under a consistent demand scenario,” he added, pointing to a US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) assessment that the wind turbines will have “no measurable influence on climate change”

Middendorf also noted the potential for interference with US military operations, referencing a decision by BOEM to not develop on 700 square miles off the coast of North Carolina near US Navy and Air Force training grounds.
What do you think? Post a comment.

“A hurricane barreling up the east coast, which happens with increasing frequency as the earth warms, could not only disable but destroy thousands of turbines, leaving a fractured grid and an ocean strewn with huge pieces of debris,” he said.

“Who will bear these costs? Not the energy companies who are developing these offshore wind complexes, but American taxpayers.”