NJ wind energy: What NJ elected officials say is a lack of transparency from the State 

At the recent Manasquan Council Meeting, the governing body provided an update on the pending offshore wind energy project progressing under the Biden and Murphy Administrations. This article – the fourth in a seven-part series on Wind Energy-focuses on transparency and accountability at the State level.

Taking on offshore wind energy is a massive undertaking for any state or country, and striving for cost-effective clean energy is admirable. Nowhere in the world are there operational offshore wind projects of the size and scale that NJ and a few other states have planned. Such a project demands extensive due diligence and strategic planning. Given the many unknowns related to potential impacts and risks, thorough testing is essential before breaking ground. Additionally, a comprehensive communication plan for stakeholders, especially towns that may be negatively impacted, is crucial.

Numerous conversations with town, county, state, and federal officials have highlighted a significant lack of transparency and accountability from the Murphy Administration and the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU). At a recent Manasquan council meeting, Mayor Mangan noted that after months of attempting to get the State and NJBPU to explain their decision to proceed with offshore wind energy, they were finally able to have a call with NJBPU staff. Councilman Holly expressed his frustration, stating, “We appreciate you speaking to us, but you are all secondary sources. You have a responsibility to tell us who the primary sources are and have them explain themselves to the public.”

Other shore towns impacted by the Wind Energy projects have had similar reactions. Sea Girt Business Administrator Justin Macko stated, “We received information about the Wind & Pre-Build Infrastructure project primarily from bidders involved in laying infrastructure and transmission lines through Sea Girt and neighboring towns. There was no prior notification from the State or its agencies before bids were submitted. The State did not share its comprehensive Wind Energy plan, nor data to support laying a massive transmission line, or provide a rationale for selecting Sea Girt as the landing site without local feedback. In late May, Borough representatives finally met with senior staff at the Board of Public Utilities to address concerns. To date, the Borough has not held a meeting with the NJ Department of Environmental Protection.” To see our earlier story on Offshore Wind Transmission Lines, click here.

Councilman Holly of Manasquan continued, “We’ve been kept in the dark on this. No one told us what was going on. I don’t think anyone on the call was really responsible, and they said they will attempt to become more transparent, but when, where, or how remains to be seen. We did ask whose idea this was, and they said it started under the Christie administration.”

Governor Christie initiated NJ’s offshore interest in passing the Offshore Wind Economic Development Act (OWEDA) in 2010, almost 14 years ago, with similar goals of Governor Murphy, aimed at promoting renewable energy via offshore wind projects and creating green jobs. However, despite this early support, actual progress under his administration was limited. Key projects like Fishermen’s Energy faced significant hurdles, with the NJBPU ultimately rejecting the project due to concerns over its economic viability and net benefits to the state. The BPU argued that the project posed significant financial risks and would lead to higher electricity prices for consumers. To see our earlier Economic Viability story, click here.

According to Industry publisher Energywire, Christie began vetoing wind energy programs, including a 2016 bill (S-988) for a 25-megawatt Wind Farm off Atlantic City, citing high costs to utility customers. Christie argued the measure would usurp BPU’s authority in managing state energy matters. Specifically, the Board cited that the project would require substantial subsidies and federal grants to be economically feasible, which had not yet been secured, potentially leaving consumers with a $240 million bill over two decades​.”

Even though Christie’s BPU rejected the offshore wind project in 2014 due to economic viability concerns, ten years later, the market still shows a lack of economic viability for these projects. Our third article in this series highlighted that major wind developer Orsted, contracted to build two wind farms off Atlantic City, backed out due to lack of economic viability. Orsted took a $4 billion charge against earnings, lost 40% of their company valuation, and paid NJ state $125 million of a $300 million contractual obligation. Despite a $1 billion incentive from the Murphy administration, Orsted still rejected the project.

Given the precedent set by Christie’s administration, what analysis, if any, has been made by the current BPU and Murphy Administration to address these critical questions? The Administration has not shared any analyses with the towns impacted or the public. We have reached out to the NJBPU Chief of Staff’s office but have not yet received a response. We will update this story if we do.

In New Jersey, offshore wind developers are required to communicate and negotiate with impacted towns. Developers like Orsted, involved in projects like Ocean Wind 1, were required to maintain transparency with residents, businesses, and stakeholders through regular updates, town hall meetings, and accessible information about construction impacts and timelines. The NJBPU’s solicitation guidance documents mandate detailed communication plans from developers, including strategies for continuous engagement and regular updates to keep residents informed about project progress and potential disruptions. These measures aim to address concerns, mitigate impacts, and ensure that towns have a voice in the development process, particularly regarding construction and environmental management.

As stated by many of the same elected officials, many at different levels of the government hierarchy, the approach and requirements being stuffed into contractor bidding agreements do not eliminate the responsibility of the governing body itself from addressing all planning, testing, economic viability evaluations, net benefits to NJ resident assessment, and necessary communication to all stakeholders including the public and allow them to weigh in. As Mayor Mangan highlighted, “they need to come clean. They need to come down here and tell the truth.”

This issue became evident in New York when Governor Hochul had to withdraw plans for an offshore wind farm in Long Beach due to community pressure. Hochul shifted blame to developers, stating, “It is incumbent on renewable energy developers to cultivate and maintain strong ties to their host communities.” It seems Governor Hochul believes it was not her responsibility either.

NJ State Senate Minority Leader Jon Bramnick criticized the current process, stating, “The legislature does not vote on these proposals. This should change immediately. The legislature should scrutinize the cost-effectiveness of offshore wind and decide how we address our energy needs, not the BPU. Decisions regarding our energy future should be made by elected officials. The prior experience with Orsted highlights the importance of this. All actions regarding offshore wind should stop until the legislature reviews the proposals and votes.” We at TAPinto Gold Coast have reached out to State Senate President Scutari for a response but have not heard back. We will update the story if we receive a reply.

Assemblyman Paul Kanitra, who oversees District 10, including much of Ocean County and parts of Monmouth County, was more direct: “It is building as one of the biggest scams on the American taxpayer. Transparency should also disclose how much money has been taken in politically from these global oil and gas companies. Without tax incentives and the ability to raise utility rates, the economics would have stopped companies bidding years ago. The electric grid itself cannot sustain this type of power. The grid would have to be re-built, a massive undertaking. Where is Governor Murphy and the NJBPU with that analysis? What analysis has been done on the full impact of offshore wind energy?”

As comments came to a close at the Manasquan Council meeting, Mayor Mangan said, “Everyone on this dais feels frustration and is opposed to this offshore wind, but we have limited tools at the local level. The best we can do is organize, provide information, and let people voice their frustration and opposition.” During the call with the NJBPU, Mayor Mangan asked “how much energy would be going through the pipeline across our towns and if that amount had ever been tested? The BPU’s answer to the first question was that the amount was pretty much what we and others had calculated. The answer to the second question pertaining to testing done on the volume of energy going through the pipe was NO, but they assured us it was not a problem.”