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 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 are being expedited without comprehensive research detailing the true effects on New Jersey’s tourism, fisheries, wildlife and coastal communities. All local, state and federal meetings continue to be strongly bias in favor of offshore wind and are structured with intent to imped public comment and engagement.

Please dig in and research offshore wind for yourself. The topics are deep. Below we have listed some topics as well as many 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 the Protect Our Coast NJ Legal Defense Fund today to stop the industrialization of our ocean by offshore wind energy. We have strong active lawsuits challenging the projects. We need your support as it’s the only way to stop this debacle.

IT’S NOT TOO LATE! Their glass is broken and it’s getting hard for developers to see profitability. Their costs are screaming high and the 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, back out of their two mega-projects at the Jersey Shore… Orsted’s decision to cease development of Ocean Wind 1 & 2 is major good news for all of us anti offshore wind warriors! 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!

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.

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 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.”

cartoon-bills copy.jpg

Increased Energy Cost To Ratepayers

Are you ready to Pay A LOT MORE on your electric bill and get an unreliable service?

There’s no way around it… wind energy is expensive and intermittent! Ratepayers (that’s all of us) take on the burden and risk and are left naked especially without performance guarantees in place as protection. With the current inflationary pressure one can prudently assume cost will continue to balloon. Be sure to read Jonathan Lesser’s October 10, 2023 article, The Offshore-Wind Boondoggle - Green advocates remain undaunted by the energy source’s surging costs and questionable efficiency.

Learn More

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 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!

nj-energy-transmission.jpg

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.

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.

Save Right Whales Coalition

The Save Right Whales Coalition, a group of scientists, conservationists, and community leaders, has discovered that many environmental conservation organizations have accepted donations from the offshore wind industry. Donations from the wind industry 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.

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.

Cold Pool Break Down

Rotating turbine blades & bases disrupt the waters & cold pool.

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, the turbines are know to create harmful sediment plumes that look like smoke trails via satellite.

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.

EMF-ill copy.jpg

Electro Magnetic Field (EMF)

EMF from high voltage cables affect fish.

The cumulative impacts of EMF from hundreds of turbines and immense webs of cabling poses large risk. Studies indicate EMF from high voltage cables have a negative impact on some bottom dwelling, demersal species. Also sharks, skates and sturgeon have special organs (ampullae of Lorenzini) making them electroreceptive creatures that are highly sensitive to EMF.

Dr. John W. King who is a specialist on this topic said, ”Right now the government is pushing full speed ahead to get these things built, and I don’t think they really care that much about their impacts. More studies need to be done. We must understand the effects and how it translates into impacts before they are built.”

King is also worried that the results of his studies are being downplayed by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (who funded the research) because of political pressure. “They (wind developers) produced a public document about our studies, and minimized EMF as a concern and misinterpreted our study,” King said.

Undersea cabling running (N-S) perpendicular to important fish migratory paths (E-W) recklessly jeopardizes the fisheries, most importantly summer flounder which contributes hundreds of millions of dollars annually to the state of NJ. Within the fishing community an important EMF concern is referred to as the “Flounder Fence.”

Read More
atlantic-flyway2.jpg

Effect On Wildlife & Habitats

Ocean wind turbines threaten wildlife.

Impacts from offshore wind construction and operation raise serious red flags with regards to ecosystem dangers in the air space to the sea floor. There are protected and endangered species in jeopardy.

With regards to birds, ALL wind energy sites are located directly in the Atlantic Flyway, an airspace that 500 bird species (both shore birds and sea birds are at risk) use for migration. Much of the Atlantic Flyway is over or close to the Atlantic Waters of the East Coast. The Audobon Society and the US Fish & Wildlife Service acknowledge wind turbines kill up to 500,000 birds per year. Take a look at the American Wind Wildlife information Center’s Summary of Bird Fatality Monitoring Data.

Read more at the link below.

Read More

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.

radar-screen.jpg

Risk To Navigational Safety

Added challenges for mariners!

Offshore wind turbine complexes add navigational hazards for mariners. Not only do they force routine detour routes, adding time and cost) but more importantly they make traversing in times of foul weather dangerous and with mechanical failure possibly deadly. It is known that offshore wind turbines interfere with radar reducing seamanship ability to safely navigate via instrumentation in times of limited visibility. Read the report by National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.…

Offshore Wind Farms Can Interfere with Ship Radar and Navigation

Concerns also arise in emergency situations with high seas rescue via vessel or helicopter. Just recently a bulk container ship hit a turbine base in the North Sea.

Read More

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.

oil-leaking-windmill.jpg

Environmental Hazards.

There’s no place for leaking oil, especially in the ocean!

Wind turbines are not immune to failure. Leaking oil and grease spotting is real and these events are documented.

Read this 2017 news article about wind turbines leaking oil at an EDF’s (Electricite de France, EDF is one of the Atlantic Shore partners) wind farm in Oaxaca, Mexico.

Another example is in 2011 at the Clyde wind farm in Abington, Lanarkshire. Leaking oil from turbines forced emergency clean up. The Ocean Wind Emergency Response Plan (Appendix A) should be public information; however, is not published because “it contains confidential information.”

Read More

Ocean Wind’s Construction & Operations Plan Vol1 Section 8.1 Chemicals - Turbines and substations will contain hazardous chemicals; hydraulic oils, lubricants, coolants and fuels. Table 8.1-1 summarizes volumes PER Wind Turbine Generator (WTG).

As per Table 8.1-2 each substation could have up to 79,000gal transformer oil and 50,000gal of diesel fuel!

Did you know SF6 is called one of the world’s worst greenhouse gas? It is classified as a High Global Warming Potential Gas which is 23,000x more potent than CO2? The global installed base of SF6 is expected to grow by 75% by 2030.

Annual global SF6 emissions are the equivalent to yearly CO2 emissions produced by approximate 100 millions cars

Monitoring, maintenance and emergency action is much more difficult offshore than onshore. Weather on the high seas can make emergency access impossible. For such “green” machines they sure do depend on a lot of fossil fuels and have a lot of non-recyclable parts and a short life span (~15-20 year).

It’s safe to say green energy sourced from wind turbines are hypocritical.

Here’s an article mentioning the “World’s Worste Gas Accompanies Turbines” from Jay Mann, Managing Editor at the Sandpaper the newsmagazine of Long Beach Island and the Southern Ocean County

 
turbine-blade-graveyard.jpg
new-jersey-wind-map.png

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? Take a look to the right and you’ll see all of the lease sites and planning areas. Take note that Atlantic Shore (green) and Ocean Wind (purple) dominate the south and central Jersey coastline and are very close to the beaches.

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 The 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

nj-ocean-wind-site.png

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 governme…

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. We’ll leave it up for now as a way of saying thanks to them.

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 Resources:

http://www.windaction.org/ - Facts, analysis, exposure to industrial wind energy’s real impacts.

https://www.joinrfa.org/ - Recreational Fishing Alliance

http://www.fishconserve.org/ - Fisheries Conservation Foundation

https://www.rosascience.org/ - Responsible Offshore Science Alliance

https://rodafisheries.org/ - Responsible Offshore Development Alliance

https://saveourbeachview.com/ - Save Our Beach View by Caesar Rodney Institute

Literature Review

Academic, Peer Reviewed journal articles

Bailey, Helen, et al. "Assessing environmental impacts of offshore wind farms: lessons learned and recommendations for the future." Aquatic Biosystems, vol. 10, no. 1, 2014. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A540640104/AONE?u=pl2668r&sid=AONE&xid=69bcfd1a. Accessed 14 Feb. 2021.

Cohn, Jeffrey P. "How ecofriendly are wind farms?" BioScience, vol. 58, no. 7, 2008, p. 576+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A182663781/AONE?u=pl3119r&sid=AONE&xid=298a4699. Accessed 12 Feb. 2021.

Hoagland, Porter. "Which way will the wind blow? Marine scientists have a key role to play in the debate over wind farms in the coastal ocean." Oceanus, vol. 43, no. 1, 2005, p. 56+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A129628400/AONE?u=pl2668r&sid=AONE&xid=40cb7c0c. Accessed 14 Feb. 2021.

Hutchison, Z.L., Gill, A.B., Sigray, P. et al. Anthropogenic electromagnetic fields (EMF) influence the behaviour of bottom-dwelling marine species. Sci Rep 10, 4219 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60793-x

Kastelein, Ronald A., et al. "Swimming Speed of a Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) During Playbacks of Offshore Pile Driving Sounds." Aquatic Mammals, vol. 44, no. 1, 2018, p. 92+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A535156409/AONE?u=pl3119r&sid=AONE&xid=2450f259. Accessed 12 Feb. 2021.

KINTISCH, ELI. “Out of Site.” Science, vol. 329, no. 5993, Aug. 2010, pp. 788–789. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1126/science.329.5993.788.

Lawson, Michael, et al. "An investigation into the potential for wind turbines to cause barotrauma in bats." PLoS ONE, vol. 15, no. 12, 2020, p. e0242485. Gale Academic OneFile,link.gale.com/apps/doc/A647157207/AONE?u=pl3119r&sid=AONE&xid=84504a33. Accessed 12 Feb. 2021.

"NEW PLATFORM AGAINST WINDFARMS." European Social Policy, 2009, p. 251551. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A201836605/AONE?u=pl3119r&sid=AONE&xid=6dda023e. Accessed 12 Feb. 2021.

Parent, O. and A. Ilinca. “Anti-icing and de-icing techniques for wind turbines: Critical review.” Cold Regions Science and Technology 65 (2011): 88-96.

Santangeli, Andrea, et al. "Mapping the global potential exposure of soaring birds to terrestrial wind energy expansion." Ornis Fennica, vol. 95, no. 1, 2018, p. 1+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A535618904/AONE?u=pl3119r&sid=AONE&xid=3ce06059. Accessed 12 Feb. 2021.


Additional links to information:
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
http://www.beaconhill.org/BHIStudies/NJ-Wind-2011/NJWindReport2011-06.pdf