We are residents, homeowners, business owners, fishermen and visitors of the New Jersey coastal communities. Join The Fight To Protect Our Coast From Ocean Industrialization!

Protect Our Coast is a united non-partisan group with one common goal, Stop The Wind Turbines Off Of The New Jersey Shoreline And Prevent The Industrialization Of The Oceans. Large scale offshore wind developments were expedited without detailing the true effects on New Jersey’s tourism, fisheries, wildlife and coastal communities. All local, state and federal meetings have strongly bias in favor of offshore wind and are structured with intent to imped public comment and engagement.

Please research offshore wind for yourself. The topics are deep. Below we have listed a few topics below as well as some links for more info. Whether for or against, as long as you are informed! But we are confident you too will join our fight.

Please support Protect Our Coast NJ today to stop the industrialization of our ocean by offshore wind energy. We are actively challenging these projects in the courts. We need your support as it’s the only way to stop this boondoggle.

Please consider a monthly contribution to Protect Our Coast NJ.
Click the link below and then check the box, “Make this a monthly donation.”

The Tide Has Turned Against Offshore Wind

Offshore wind was broken from the start and as time goes on, the truth comes out. It has gotten hard for developers to see profitability as costs scream higher and their house of cards fall. The more more we fight, the more expensive it becomes and the less likely they will continue. Developers are already looking to terminate their contracts. Orsted, the global leader in offshore wind, backed out of their two mega-projects at the Jersey Shore. Orsted’s decision to cease development of Ocean Wind 1 & 2 was a major win for us! If they can’t do it with a $1 billion from NJ residents and huge political support at state and federal level they never will. These projects were underestimated and over promised from the start. But the offshore wind solicitations keep coming from the state of NJ and other state. But we are not backing down! As more leases are added we only grow in numbers and strength! Read this May 9, 2023 letter to the CEO & Board of Orsted written by two concerned citizens defending our state and natural treasure, the New Jersey Shore. We have active lawsuits and we are going to win!

Big Wind Is In Big Trouble - Full Blown Panic Mode!

So far in 2025 a large black cloud has been parked over offshore wind. Shell Pulls Out! Atlantic Shores(AS) was a 50/50 joint venture between Shell & EDF with three offshore wind energy lease areas (400sq miles) off of the south Jersey Coast. In the early days of February, Shell paused its involvement in AS booking a $1B impairment. Then the NJ Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) rejected/canceled their 4th offshore wind solicitation… NJBPU President Christine Guhl-Sadovy said, "A number of reasons led to this decision, notably Shell backing out as an equity partner in the AS project as well as uncertainty driven by federal actions and permitting.” This crushed AS as the deal would have given them the necessary funding for their AS South project. This is not the end of offshore wind, but a heavy knockdown in our offshore wind fight. To the naysayers, this fight win-able. We have broadened our fight and we are going to win!

Energy needs to be affordable, reliable, efficient, safe and clean. Offshore wind falls short on these. Our ocean, sea life, birds are all counting on us. It’s up to us to raise awareness and Protect Our Coast!

JOIN the Protect Our Coast NJ Facebook Group Today! All are welcome to join in on the discussions. Also please use the contact us form to let us know you want to volunteer and help POCNJ fight against the industrialization of our ocean.

Stop The Insanity - Our latest fundraiser at the Icona Avalon was a success. Thank you to all who contributed and attended.

If you would like to support Protect Our Coast NJ there are many ways. None easier than purchasing our logo wear.

Protect Our Coast NJ Logo Wear Fundraiser

Offshore Wind Hearings

On August 13th Congressman Jeff Van Drew a staunch opponent of offshore wind energy development held Part 3: An Examination Into Offshore Wind Industrialization at the Brigantine Community School. Many topics were discussed about the impacts of offshore wind energy, rising utility costs as well as other harms and environmental impacts. Below is the live stream from the event. To help save time here are some important parts on the timeline…

2:05:00 - Vince Sera, Mayor of Brigantine - Mayor Sera kicks off the event sharing how important the topic offshore wind is and how the communities were lied to from the beginning with these projects.

2:34:00 - Dianne Solomon, a former Commissioner at the NJ Board Of Public Utility - Mrs. Solomon presents information about utility costs with regards to offshore wind energy development.

2:38:00 - Robert Rand, Acoustics Engineer, Rand Acoustics - Mr. Rand shares a deep dive into sound pollution in the marine environment the risk it poses to the ecosystem.

2:50:30 - Amy DiSibio, Nantucket Community Leader & board member of ACK For Whales - Mrs. DiSibio shares her first hand stories from Nantucket and more information about the threats that offshore wind poses to the environment, the economy and our electric bills.

2:57:00 - Meghan Lapp, Sea Freeze a commercial fishing company - Mrs. Lapp provides testimony about the current status of BOEM’s preferential treatment of offshore wind developers by waiving and granting departure request of financial assurances (decommissioning bonds).

DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS PLANNED FOR THE NEW JERSEY SHORE? HERE’S A FLIER DETAILING THE PROJECT, POLITICAL CONCERNS AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.

Why the huge rapid push to sell off and industrialize the oceans? It’s the most common question we get and it’s a simple answer, POLITICS & MONEY!!!

All under the guise of environmental action, the feds and many states have aligned to expedite radical energy initiatives with “clean energy” goals. These mandatory goals, mostly by executive order, make selling off enormous ocean leases and forging large deals (power purchase agreements, investments, etc) with billion dollar energy corporations easy. All along the way prominent political figures use scare tactics stating, “we must act now to combat the existential threat of the climate crisis..”

Well we aren’t here to debate climate change but we can share facts straight from Vineyard Wind 1 FEIS Appendix A Table A.8.1-1 which provides clarification that the current big wind politics and big wind money does not solve what the master plan set out to address, the threat to our existence. Offshore wind does not. It’s just opening up a huge new set of issues.

”Overall, it is anticipated that there would be no collective impact on global warming as a result of offshore wind projects, including the Proposed Action alone, though they may beneficially contribute to a broader combination of actions to reduce future impacts from climate change.”

National Security Threat

The massive build out of offshore wind off the United States North East and Mid-Atlantic coastline is a threat to the national security of the USA. Collaboration between BOEM, DOD, DOE, FAA and NOAA should have started long before the leasing process. While late to the party, BOEM’ Radar Interference Report in 2020 came out when developments began to accelerate. The working group was far too late to the process. This memo of understanding between BOEM and DOD did not come out until October 29, 2024.

There are major defense concerns both in the air and sea. It’s well studies, offshore wind turbines interfere and disrupt radar. It is also found that offshore wind developments disrupt submarine detection sensors. While a lot of this topic remains classified there are details if you search. You may also find on American Clean Power’s Blog the opposite in their “fact check” by Tom Vinson on January 26, 2017 however actions speak louder than words… Most recent news on the topic comes from the Baltic Sea where Sweden blocked the construction of 13 offshore wind developments over concerns that they would affect their missile attack early warning systems. Read about it here.

One look into Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) will show radical cost overruns. 2019 estimates were $8B, then by the end of 2021 raised to $9.8B. February 3, 2025 Dominion Energy submitted the estimated total CVOW project costs of $10.7B to the Virginia State Corporation Commission.

ATLANTIC SHORES OFFSHORE WIND WILL RAISE ELECTRIC RATES

The recent op-ed by Juan Carlos Puente, CFO of Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind (If not with wind, then how will we address New Jersey’s energy affordability crisis?, January 9. 2025) proposes that offshore wind projects such as his will help reduce NJ electric prices. This is like advising firefighters in Pacific Palisades to switch from water to high octane gasoline to tamp down the flames.

Offshore wind is not economically feasible without massive subsidies in the form of Federal tax credits and guaranteed ratepayer subsidized prices for their power. (At the tim of this article, January 10, 2025) Atlantic Shores has a pending bid before the NJ Board of Public Utilities for a project to build 200 thousand-foot tall wind turbines 9 miles off Long Beach Island. The tax credits will have US taxpayers pick up 40% of the capital cost of the projects or over $5 billion.

In addition, as shown below, over the life of this project, NJ ratepayers will pay Atlantic Shores 20 cents/kwhr, more than three times the wholesale market price (6 cents/kwhr) for power available on the PJM grid to NJ utilities.

The market price is set by nuclear and natural gas plants that are dispatchable and run round the clock as needed. Offshore wind is intermittent and supplies power only about 40% of the time and so needs backup from the nuclear and gas units to meet demand when the wind doesn’t blow - or blows too hard than is safe for the turbines to turn. Besides the direct subsidy cost to ratepayers, Atlantic Shores if approved will negatively impact shore tourism, require additional transmission costs and the higher rates will result in lower wages and cost jobs in the general economy. It is estimated that the project will have a net cost to NJ of over $70 billion, dwarfing the $2 billion in offshore wind jobs or economic value Mr Puente says it may provide. This clearly violates NJ law which requires the benefits of offshore wind projects to outweigh costs.

As CFO, Mr Puente knows all this so his claim that offshore wind will provide affordable power is an outright fabrication. NJ does need new, affordable and reliable generating capacity and nuclear and gas can meet that need. Offshore wind will raise rates 55% for residential, 70% for commercial and 85% for industrial customers if Governor Murphy’s goal to have 11,000 MW in operation by 2040. It’s time to put down this accelerant driving electric rates higher and look to proven sources that will keep costs down while ensuring the lights stay on.

Edward P’ O’Donnell
Whitestrand Consulting LLC

Mr. O’Donnell is a consultant on energy economics and rates. He has over 35 years in the nuclear industry and has written extensively on offshore wind economics.

BILLIONS IN COSTS & MINIMAL IMPACT ON CLIMATE

SaveJersey.com, "New Jersey ratepayers are facing tens of billions of dollars in direct costs, and the end result looks to be a less-than-minimal impact on the climate.” Learn more by watching this video where energy expert Dr. Jonathan Lesser breaks down the basics.

PJM's latest 2024-2039 demand forecast shows a dramatic change from 2023. For the NJ utilities (AE, JCPL and PS), it has gone from negative growth to a 26% increase in summer peak (23,000 MW) and an 85 % increase in winter peak (21,000 MW). Total annual demand increases 38% to 107 GWH by 2039. These increases are not due to utility forecasts but to incorporating Murphy's policy targets in his Executive Order 316 which projects electrification of 400,000 homes and 20,000 commercial spaces by 2030. Thus it assumes increased electric usage for heating, cooking, water, etc. It also assumes a bold 5 million EVs in NJ by 2039.

All of this is of course a pipe dream but PJM must plan for it anyway. It projects that NJ will need 5000 MW of new reliable capacity to meet both summer and winter peak demand in 2039. Wind and solar will add little capacity for meeting peak demand, particularly in the winter. Even 11,000 MW of offshore wind only gets PJM credit for about 2000 MW because of intermittency. So where would the rest come from? Natural gas except that Murphy won't let that happen. Battery storage? Even Murphy projects only 2000 MW of 4 hour duration by 2030. Filling the gap with multi-day battery storage could cost a TRILLION DOLLARS. And the transmission and local distribution infrastructure must be built out to accommodate all this new power going to homes and businesses.

PJM will have to deal with this scenario in its upcoming grid reliability update. Last year's study showed peak margins being reduced from 25% now to 3% under a high electrification scenario. That is unacceptable. Maybe shining a light on the danger of green policies like Murphy's will force a change in the political support for them.

Moving from reliable base load power to inconsistent weather-dependent renewable sources comes with a higher cost and consequences. Lives depend on reliable electricity but wind does not always blow when needed! Mandated Wind Makes Electric Bills Soar

The European pioneers of offshore wind current have an energy crisis right now. The fact they are firing up coal at nosebleed prices is appalling. As per the WSJ price to ratepayers is up 300% right now. They are proposing to now label nuclear and natural gas as green sources to meet their 2035 green energy targets. Doesn't this prove to the world the leaders in the ESG space can't cut it with wind and solar. They need base load capacity.

Our friends at SaveLBI.org shared the Economic Analysis of the Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind Project that is a must read!

NJ BPU Offshore Wind Transmission Rick Technical Conference

Diversified Energy Portfolio & Climate Change

by Bob Percopo of Farmingdale, N.J., and Beach Haven West is an economist. Now retired, he has 45 years of experience in global infrastructure, energy and power and finance. He has advised members of the House and Senate Energy committees and worked on Mitt Romney’s energy team during Romney’s presidential bid.

Let’s take a step back and look at climate and energy generation from a rational perspective, including sustainability, reliability, economics and a comprehensive mix. Any analysis needs to be a realistic application on a global basis.

All forms of energy should be in the mix. This includes wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, gas and coal.  Knee-jerk reactions by politicians to extremist groups need to be less a factor in decision making than scientific vetting. First investigate, then draw a conclusion and propose an action plan.

Read The Entire Article Here

Why Renewables Can’t Save The Planet

Michael Shellenberger has been a climate and environmental activist for over 30 years, journalist and North America’s leading public intellectual on clean energy. He advises policymakers around the world including in the U.S., Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Belgium. In January, 2020, Shellenberger testified before the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the U.S. House of Representatives. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change invited Michael in 2019 to serve as an independent Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report.

The Myth of WWS 100% Renewable Energy by 2050 & the Flawed Green New Deal

“The nation’s largest proposed offshore wind-power facility is still in its infancy and already encountering rough seas, with costs at least $2 billion more than the $8 billion originally estimated.” Read more about the massive cost overruns.

The University of Chicago found that wind has driven up electricity prices to consumers. Offshore wind is a very expensive way to generate electricity, it is 2.6 times more expensive as onshore wind power.

Intermittency & Transmission

The grid must perform and meet the demands of life.

The NJ grid is currently not ready for a new flow of energy from east to west that is opposite from the current flow. Re-routing the flow of energy is not a cheap! Onshore substations need upgrades and the cost will likely run into the billions, for each state.

The inconsistent injection of energy from OSW is also very challenging to the grid. No wind = No Power! Without having both short term and long duration storage solutions (technology isn't there yet) as well as an updated grid the development of OSW faces major transmission issues. The development's cost will be a huge burden to ratepayers for the next 20+ years. Right now the return on investment is at this point very much a guess. Will you be able to afford your electric bill if it was double?

Did you know? One mile of transmission line can cost $1 million!

Block Island Wind is an ant compared to what is planned for New Jersey and the NY Bight!

The debatable success of the Block Island Wind Farms known as “Deepwater Wind Farm” (DWF) is commonly mentioned, BUT, DWF has five deep water jacketed style foundation 6MW wind turbines that are 600’ tall. The area is primarily a hard rock bottom. The lease sites in NJ are drastically different with possibly HUNDREDS/THOUSANDS of shallow water (sand bottom) turbines with monopile style foundations 12MW turbines at 850-1000’+. It’s not practical to compare such radically different projects.

Is Orsted’s Block Island Wind Farm the poster child? If so the project in so many facets… Right out of the gate there was problems and they’ve compounded over the years; Story 1, Story 2, Story 3, Story 4, there’s lots more. The turbines rarely turn and remember we are only talking five turbines! Isn’t this a tell tale sign that a developer’s actions speak louder than their words?

Imagine if all of these many proposed lease areas were all broken down industrial forest of turbines. This nightmare is a possibility but we are fighting tooth and nail to preserve our oceans.

Conflicts of Interest

Many environmental conservation organizations (ENGO’s) have accepted donations from the offshore wind industry. These donations represent a conflict of interest for groups that should be holding wind companies accountable. Many of these groups have released statements in favor of offshore wind, or declined to comment. All documentation of these conflicts of interest can be found in this file.

Threat To Marine Mammals

Marine mammals (whales, porpoise, seals) are sensitive to underwater sound and are extremely vulnerable to harm during offshore wind survey and construction. Damage to their hearing kills their ability to navigate and communicate temporarily and injuries can be permanent. Even with special mitigation measures like bubble curtains it’s not enough.

NOAA estimates “only 350 right whales are believed to survive in the North Atlantic.“ The North Atlantic Right Whale is severely endangered YET ALL proposed wind energy sites are located directly in the Right Whales’ migration route as well as other whales’ routes. Right whales were documented in the Ocean Wind Power Ecological Baseline Studies Vol3, Table 5-3 and 5-4. Section 5.2.2.2 “The North Atlantic right whale calls were detected located 12NM from shore at a depth of 79ft.” This study shows that sensitive marine mammals call the NJ lease sites home.

Research by Rand Acoustics, acoustics consultancy company, shows there is a lack of adequate protections for whales that migrate along this corridor where offshore wind energy surveys and developments are taking place. Last year, after unprecedented whale deaths Rand produced an independent investigation of underwater noise levels from geo-survey vessels working for offshore wind energy companies.

The study found that the incidental harassment authorizations do not impose sufficient mitigation requirements to protect marine animals. He sent the findings off to the NOAA & BOEM, but never never received any response.

His latest study surveyed the noise from pile driving, which is when developers drive a giant steel monopile into the seabed by pounding on it. He took sound measurements as the 5000-pound, 700-foot long pile-driving vessel Orion was driving monopiles into seabed off the coasts of Nantucket Island for the Vineyard Wind project.

Rand’s conclusions suggest federal agencies are underestimating the impact to whales from offshore wind development. “This investigation discovered a substantial underestimation of both impulsive and continuous noise levels by current regulatory standards, suggesting that the actual exposure to harmful noise levels from pile driving for marine mammals like the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale is substantially greater than NMFS [National Marine Fisheries Service] acknowledges in its existing protective measures,” Rand wrote in his report.

Save The Whales!

Based on extensive offshore wind projects in Europe, it is known that offshore wind projects are harmful to some marine species. The construction and operation of these projects in the North Atlantic right whale habitat and migration route will put this critically-endangered species under even more stress. Many other other threatened and endangered marine mammals are put at risk too.

Whales, offshore wind surveying and ocean turbines do not coexist well. This photo (on the right) of the dead whale on the beach with wind turbines on the horizon is photoshopped however it paints the real picture of what’s to come. The risks are real! And what do you know?

The Jersey Shore’s dead whale events are debatably linked to the ongoing survey activities. Numerous dead whales washing up at beaches in close proximity to where active geophysical and geotechnical surveying is taking place (Ocean Wind & Atlantic Shores) was too large of a red flag for us! Seeing both the survey vessels (via AIS) and whales (via buoy pings) in the same area and then the events on the beach made us speak out!

What really enraged the concerned public was when the experts claim many had an “unknown cause of death” and some mentioned bruises so instantly it is chalked up to a ship strikes. But few reports talk about the ITA’s held by developers… NOAA’s Incidental Take Authorization (ITA) Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Here’s a list of the ITA’s for renewable energy activities.

NOAA’s own Chief of Endangered Species Dr. Sean Hayes bravely sounded the alarm, writing this letter to Lead Biologist at BOEM, noting that not only the construction but also the operation of wind turbines could result in extinction.

Dead Whales On Beaches Near Offshore Wind Survey Work

Could the ongoing geophysical and geotechnical offshore wind energy survey activities in the NY Bight and the many dead whale events be a coincidence? NOAA says no. BUT, no matter what, these events should raise concern and warrant further investigation. Failure to fully investigate the cause of death is irresponsible and appalling.

MUST READ - Oceanic Preservation Society Response to BOEM & NOAA

Turbidity & Break Down Of the Cold Pool

Turbines disrupt the waters.

The waters off of New Jersey is home to very unique water dynamics which support the fisheries. One of the world’s most radical ocean temperature ranges are found off of New Jersey in the area called the NY Bight. In the winter it can be near frozen and in the summer tropical. What’s very special is the cold dense blanket of water that is present, the Cold Pool.

These cold waters are nutrient rich and support the fisheries ability to flourish. The offshore wind turbines will disrupt the Cold Pool and the mixing of the waters may cause thermal stresses with critical consequences to shellfish (sea scallops, surf clams) and many species of fish. This mixing could even cause algae blooms and oxygen depletion. As shown in the photo, turbines cause turbidity in the water and can create harmful sediment plumes which via satellite look like smoke trails.

The cumulative affect of wind turbines has never been studied to fully understand the lasting impact on the Mid Atlantic Bight.

Have you experienced NJ’s Cold Pool?

In the summer anglers in NJ can catch a warm water fish like a mahi mahi near a sea grass line and then drop a bait to the bottom and catch a cold water fish like a cod. Did you ever experience ice cold water on the Jersey Shore beaches in the middle of summer when just days earlier it was very warm? This is the cold pool waters being upwelled due to persistent southerly winds. The winds and the Coriolis effect push the warm surface water away from the beach which allows the deep waters from the cold pool to fill in.

Negative Construction Effects

Extreme vibration, sound & turbulence during construction process.

Vibrations from driving 36’ diameter steel piles 150’ into the sea floor will radiate for miles (7.5 miles away) and loud sounds curing construction travel 50+ miles even with the proposed bubble curtain mitigations. This quaking and booming noise will negatively effect sea life and drive them out of our local waters. The close proximity to NJ’s five artificial reef sites and sensitive Essential Fish Habitat in and near the lease sites is especially concerning. During construction of bases and cabling suspended sediment will NOT help local fisheries. The construction process will take many years to complete.

The addition of a multitude of turbines will dramatically change the habitat and migratory patterns of fish. Click read more for a detailed assessment of the effects of noise and vibration from offshore wind farms on marine wildlife. Also the video below details great information on the effects offshore wind farms on marine mammals listed below.

A Heavy Wind: The Threat To An American Heritage

The story from generational fishermen who are threatened by foreign owned offshore wind developers and the large scale industrialization of the ocean. Offshore wind developments will disrupt and destroy the fisheries American depends upon.

While most think ocean wind energy is clean, All Stages (the manufacturing, construction, operation/maintenance, decommissioning and disposal process) are very dependent on fossil fuels.

Governor Murphy Announces Offshore Wind Solicitation Schedule Of 7,500 MW through 2035. That’s 50% of New Jersey’s electric power needs. Simple math states that their goal is to have 468 turbines running within 14 years. We’ll be looking at ~1000 turbines by 2050! Where are they all going? Their plan is to have them dominate the Jersey Shores.

Most shore communities depend on their reputation for top quality beaches with a beautiful view shed. A horizon lined with very visible wind turbines will be detrimental to Jersey Shore tourism and will hurt the communities businesses and real estate values.

Tourism & Offshore Wind Turbines

Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Development: Values and Implications for Recreation and Tourism

Be sure to take a look at the section below on the topic of Visual Impact.

Let’s Take A Look At The Massive Size Of Two South Jersey Projects

The chart below (published by Orsted/BOEM/NOAA) overviews the “Mid-Atlantic North” developments. Lease OCS-A 0499 is Atlantic Shores Area. Lease OCS-A 0498 is Ocean Wind Area. Lease OCS-A 0519 is Skipjack Area.

The area offshore of New Jersey contains approximately 43 whole Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) blocks and 34 partial blocks. The boundary begins 7 nautical miles from the shore and extends roughly 23 nautical miles seaward. It spans approximately 45 nautical miles from the waters off of Cape May up to Long Beach Island’s Barnegat Light. The entire area is approximately 418 square nautical miles. That’s 354,000+ aches!

According to the US Dept of Energy more than 25 offshore wind projects are being planned, mainly off of the US Northeast and Mid-Atlantic coasts. This is massive industrialization of the Western Atlantic. Here’s a look at BOEM’s March 2021 v2 Outer Continental Shelf Renewable Energy Lease Map Book

Visual Impact Assessment

This is what’s listed in the Ocean Wind COP. Please note this is provided by Ocean Wind which is off of Atlantic City. The Atlantic Shore Lease Site is significantly closer to shore, ~7-10 NM off of LBI. While this graphical representation provides a little bit of info it isn’t as accurate at looking at local land marks in real life at different distances.

Is the Jersey Shore viewshed very important and concerning to you? Here’s info on photo simulations posted on BOEM’s website.

Atlantic Shore View from Seaside Park Beach

Atlantic Shore View from Loveladies, LBI

Atlantic Shore View from Beach Haven, LBI - Take note of both the daytime and nighttime simulations!

Atlantic Shore View from North Brigantine

Atlantic Shore View from Boardwalk Hall, Atlantic City

Atlantic Shore View from Lucy The Elephant, Margate

Thanks for visiting the website. Hopefully the information provided sheds light on the environmental and ecological impacts offshore wind turbines have on coastal waters and communities. Let your voice be heard! Contact your local and state government officials today!

NJ’s Move Away From Coal

Coal-fired power plants are bad for the environment. Coal is responsible for almost 50% of carbon dioxide emissions worldwide and about 75% of total green house gases emission from the electric sector. But it’s cheap and abundant so it has a large role in providing affordable energy and alleviating energy poverty. Fortunately NJ is moving away from coal (BL England closed in 2019 and Logan in Gloucester County & Carney’s Point in Salem County was planned to shut down in 2020) in order to make a cleaner South Jersey.

During this time natural gas (the cleanest fossil fuel energy source) has offered a domestically sourced, affordable, dependable and efficient fuel. While natural gas is not the perfect (no source is) it is a solution for the current state of technology. This video below by Shell (parters in the Atlantic Shore Wind Development Lease Site) shares “why natural gas is good.” It’s available, flexible and environmentally sustainable. *Looks like Atlantic Shores / Shell have “caught wind” that we liked and shared their video; therefore turned it private.

It must be pointed out, that the offshore wind projects are not necessary to meet government goals for carbon free renewable energy. Onshore projects can supply a reduction in carbon emissions, without industrializing the oceans. These onshore alternatives include advanced nuclear, hydrogen, anaerobic digestion of organic wastes, carbon capture of fossil energy emissions, and increased efficiency at existing natural gas power plants by adding combined cycle systems thereby reducing carbon emissions. Many of these technologies are already in use in the U.S. and around the world. Due to the remarkable advances in renewable energy technology in the past 5-10 years, BOEM needs to do a sincere job of evaluating the No Action alternative. Are they capable of doing that since their charter is to develop the outer continental shelf. A No Action alternative is not in their interests. In 2020 Canada adopted an energy strategy to have hydrogen meet 30% of its energy needs by 2050, thereby reducing carbon emissions and providing reliable energy.

We need a diverse, reliable, cost effective energy grid that is not overly dependent on intermittent energy sources like offshore wind!

Additional Links:
https://scemfis.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ColdPoolReview.pdf

https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2688-8319.12034

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1umXxOOwexwuKRXWeFbzjqCvD1sm5KRKo/view?usp=sharing

https://jeb.biologists.org/content/223/13/jeb219683

https://scemfis.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ColdPoolReview.pdf
https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/documents/renewable-energy/Vineyard-Wind-1-Supplement-to-EIS.pdf

https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2016/04/08/oil-leaks-at-wind-turbines-in-the-thumb-not-a-rarity/

https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php

https://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/Efficiency_of_Wind_Energy

The Cost and Economic Impact of New Jersey’s Offshore Wind Initiative - http://www.beaconhill.org/BHIStudies/NJ-Wind-2011/NJWindReport2011-06.pdf