Trump has vowed to kill US offshore wind projects. Will he succeed?

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — Opponents of offshore wind energy projects expect President-elect Donald Trump to kill an industry he has vowed to end on the first day he returns to the White House.

But it might not be that easy.

Many of the largest offshore wind companies put a brave face on the election results, pledging to work with Trump and Congress to build power projects and ignoring the incoming president's oft-stated hostility to them.

In campaign appearances, Trump railed against offshore wind and promised to sign an executive order to block such projects.

“We are going to make sure that that ends on Day 1,” Trump said in a May speech. “I’m going to write it out in an executive order. It’s going to end on Day 1."

“They destroy everything, they’re horrible, the most expensive energy there is,” Trump said. “They ruin the environment, they kill the birds, they kill the whales.”

Numerous federal and state scientific agencies say there is no evidence linking offshore wind preparation to a spate of whale deaths along the U.S. East Coast in recent years. Turbines have been known to kill shorebirds, but the industry and regulators say there are policies to mitigate harm to the environment.

Trump has railed against offshore wind turbines spoiling the view from a golf course he owns in Scotland. But numerous environmental groups say the real reason he opposes offshore wind is his support for the fossil fuel industry.

There is almost 65 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity under development in the U.S., enough to power more than 26 million homes, and some turbines are already spinning in several states, according to the American Clean Power Association.

Currently operating projects include the Block Island Wind Farm in Rhode Island, the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind pilot project and the South Fork Wind Farm about 35 miles (56 kilometers) east of Montauk Point on New York’s Long Island.

Trump is unlikely to end those projects but might have more leverage over ones still in the planning stage, those in the debate say.

Bob Stern, who headed an office in the U.S. Energy Department responsible for environmental protection during the Ford, Carter and Reagan administrations, said Trump can get Congress to reduce or eliminate tax credits for offshore wind that were granted in the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act. Those credits are an integral part of the finances of many offshore wind projects.

Stern, who leads the New Jersey anti-offshore wind group Save LBI, said Trump also could issue executive orders prohibiting further offshore leases and rescinding approval for ones already approved while pushing Congress to amend federal laws granting more protection for marine mammals.

The president-elect also can appoint leaders of agencies involved in offshore wind regulation who would be hostile to it or less supportive.

Opponents of offshore wind, many of them Republicans, were giddy following the election, saying they fully expect Trump to put an end to the industry.

“I believe this is a tipping point for the offshore wind industry in America,” said Robin Shaffer, president of Protect Our Coast NJ, one of the most vocal groups opposing offshore wind on the East Coast. "They have been given a glidepath by Democrat-run administrations at the federal and state level for many years. For this industry, (Tuesday's) results will bring headwinds far greater than they have faced previously."

But Tina Zappile, director of the Hughes Center for Public Policy at New Jersey's Stockton University, noted that in 2018, Trump Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke voiced strong support for offshore wind. And even though the president-elect has bashed the technology, she predicted he won't just make it go away.

“Offshore wind might appear to be on the chopping block — Trump’s explicitly said this was something he’d fix on the first day — but when the economics of offshore wind are in alignment with his overall strategies of returning manufacturing to America and becoming energy-independent, his administration is likely to back away slowly from this claim,” she said in an interview. “Offshore wind may be temporarily hampered, but its long-term prospects in the U.S. are unlikely to be hurt.”

Commercial fishermen in Maine said they hope the Trump administration will undo policies designed to help build and approve offshore wind projects, saying regulators attempted to “future-proof” the industry against political change. Jerry Leeman, CEO of the New England Fishermen’s Stewardship Association, called on Trump to reverse a commitment to deploy 30 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030.

The offshore wind industry is taking an optimistic stance, pledging to work with Trump his political allies. National and New Jersey wind industry groups, and several offshore wind developers including Atlantic Shores and Denmark-based Orsted, issued similarly worded statements highlighting terms likely to appeal to Republicans including job creation, economic development and national security.

“By combining the strengths of all domestic energy resources, the Trump administration can advance an economy that is dynamic, secure, and clean,” Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, said in a statement. "We are committed to working with the Trump-Vance administration and the new Congress to continue this great American success story.”

But few Republicans were in a welcoming mood following the election. New Jersey Assemblyman Paul Kanitra listed the major offshore wind companies in a Facebook post, saying, “It’s time to pack your bags and get the hell away from the Jersey Shore, our marine life, fishing industry and beautiful beaches.”

Kanitra said he was looking forward “to your stock prices tanking.” And that was starting to happen.

The stock prices of European offshore wind companies, many of which are planning or building projects on the U.S. East Coast, plunged amid fears the new administration would seek to slow or end such projects. Orsted closed down nearly 14% on Wednesday and was down 11% over the past five days. Turbine manufacturer Vestas Wind Systems was down nearly 24% over that same period.

Rep. Jeff Van Drew, a New Jersey Republican, hosted Trump at a rally earlier this year at which Trump again vowed to kill offshore wind.

“We are currently working out the specifics of what that will look like once he takes office again this January," VanDrew said. “President Trump is a good friend of New Jersey, and he understands the devastating impact these projects will have on our communities.”

Follow Wayne Parry on X.

Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump gestures at a campaign rally at the Santander Arena, Wednesday, Oct. 9, 2024, in Reading, Pa. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Trump has vowed to kill offshore wind in the US. Will he succeed?

Trump has vowed to kill offshore wind in the US. Will he succeed?

Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump waves as he walks with former first lady Melania Trump at an election night watch party at the Palm Beach Convention Center, Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — A pregnant woman filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to restore the right to an abortion in Kentucky in the latest challenge to the state's near-total ban on the procedure.

The suit, filed in state court in Louisville, claims that Kentucky laws blocking abortions violate the plaintiff’s constitutional rights to privacy and self-determination. It asks that both state laws be struck down by a judge in Jefferson County Circuit Court.

The woman, a state resident identified by the pseudonym Mary Poe to protect her privacy, is about seven weeks pregnant, the suit said. She wants to terminate her pregnancy but cannot legally do so in Kentucky, it said.

The decision about whether to become or remain pregnant is among the “most personal and consequential decisions a person will make in their lifetime,” the suit said. Her legal team includes attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Without the ability to decide whether to continue a pregnancy, Kentuckians have lost the right to make critical decisions about their health, bodies, lives and futures,” the suit said.

The plaintiff said in a statement that ending her pregnancy is the best decision for her and her family.

“I feel overwhelmed and frustrated that I cannot access abortion care here in my own state, and I have started the difficult process of arranging to get care in another state where it’s legal,” she said in the statement issued by the ACLU of Kentucky. “This involves trying to take time off work and securing child care, all of which place an enormous burden on me.”

Defendants in the latest suit include Russell Coleman, Kentucky’s Republican attorney general.

“It’s the attorney general’s responsibility to defend the laws passed by the General Assembly, and we will zealously work to uphold these laws in court,” Coleman said in a statement.

The suit was quickly denounced as meritless by David Walls, executive director of The Family Foundation, a conservative group staunchly opposed to abortion.

“The ACLU’s suggestion that the Kentucky Constitution somehow secretly contains a hidden right to terminate the life and stop the beating heart of an unborn human being, despite Kentucky’s clear 150-year pro-life history, is absolutely absurd,” Walls said in a statement.

The suit is seeking class-action status to include others who are or will become pregnant and want the right to have an abortion. It is challenging Kentucky’s near-total trigger law ban and a separate six-week ban, both of which were passed by Republican legislative majorities.

The trigger law took effect when Roe v. Wade was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 and bans abortions except to save the life of the patient or to prevent disabling injury. It does not include exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

The lawsuit is similar to legal action taken nearly a year ago, also by a pregnant woman who sought the right to an abortion in Kentucky. That challenge was dropped after the woman learned her embryo no longer had cardiac activity, but abortion rights groups said the legal fight was far from over.

In 2022, Kentucky voters rejected a ballot measure that would have denied any constitutional protections for abortion, but abortion rights supporters have made no inroads in the Republican-controlled Legislature at chipping away at the laws.

Kentucky's Supreme Court refused last year to halt the near-total ban, resulting in abortion access remaining virtually shut off in the. Abortion rights groups have searched for plaintiffs to challenge the ban.

Brigitte Amiri, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, said Tuesday that bans in Kentucky and elsewhere have “wreaked havoc on people’s lives.”

“Those who can scrape together the resources may be able to travel out of state to get care, but others will be forced to carry their pregnancies to term against their will, often at great cost to their health or lives,” Amiri said in a statement.

The plaintiff in the new lawsuit said the decision whether to end her pregnancy should be hers.

"I am bringing this case to ensure that other Kentuckians will not have to go through what I am going through, and instead will be able to get the health care they need in our community,” she said.

FILE - Abortion-rights supporters chant their objections at the Kentucky Capitol, April 13, 2022, in Frankfort, Ky. (AP Photo/Bruce Schreiner, File)