|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
BOSTON — Massachusetts is continuing to invest in offshore wind, selecting all three project bids submitted this year for the state’s biggest procurement yet, and tentatively securing long-term industry operations out of New Bedford.
Massachusetts announced its plans Friday to purchase about 1,000 of the 1,200 megawatts for SouthCoast Wind, all 800 megawatts for New England Wind 1 (an Avangrid project), and up to 800 megawatts of the 1,200 megawatts for Vineyard Wind 2. The Vineyard Wind project under construction south of Martha’s Vineyard is 800 megawatts.
For those in the wind industry, the announcement lent some much-desired certainty, including for port development in New Bedford.
“It allows us to move forward with the confidence and surety that we’ve all been waiting on as the developers have kind of reworked their approaches to the projects,” said Joel Whitman, president of Foss Offshore Wind, which is building a terminal just north of MassCEC’s staging terminal.
Whitman said vessels coming into the Foss terminal, be they geophysical survey boats, barges, or crew transfer vessels, can also benefit from New Bedford’s existing waterfront businesses for vessel repairs and supplies.
“That kind of ongoing work is the lifeblood of the wind farm,” Whitman said. “The value of the wind farm is how well maintained it is.”
“It is exciting to see that we have a pipeline of projects ahead of us and that the Port of New Bedford will continue to play a significant role in their advancement,” said Jennifer Downing, executive director of the New Bedford Ocean Cluster, in a statement.
“New Bedford is poised to become a leading O&M base for the industry, and this will generate long-term, good paying jobs, create new business opportunities for our local supply chain, and bring in new business that will fuel our overall economy for years to come,” Downing said.
“We in Greater New Bedford are especially excited that the largest single project selected today, SouthCoast Wind, has premised its proposal on the use of the Port of New Bedford for both project staging and as a base for operations and maintenance … the awards announced today will collectively generate lasting economic benefits for the City and the region.”
New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell
All three projects selected by the state have issued letters of intent to use the under-construction New Bedford Foss Marine Terminal for operations and maintenance work, which is meant to last as long as the turbines operate — or about three decades.
Its terminal just opened for berthing, recently hosting a geophysical survey vessel working on an Ørsted project.
SouthCoast Wind also plans to use the MassCEC terminal to marshal the major wind turbine components, an activity currently underway for Vineyard Wind 1.
Per the state, construction on SouthCoast Wind is expected to start in 2025, with the operations stage (i.e. power delivery) starting by 2030. In the coming years, MassCEC will also be undertaking expansion work at the New Bedford terminal so that the facility can accommodate the larger turbine generations on the market.
MassCEC CEO Emily Reichert in a statement stressed the importance of the state’s ports: “Offshore wind is revitalizing these underutilized spaces on both the South Coast and North Shore, and Massachusetts’ leadership on port investments is positioning us to lead this industry.”
For New England Wind 1, which will stage the major turbine components out of a new terminal in Salem (which MassCEC is partly funding), the project could be operational, and utilizing the Port of New Bedford for support services, by 2029.
The announcement also brings more certainty to plans to establish a crane manufacturing site in New Bedford. Avangrid earlier this year announced a partnership with Danish manufacturer Liftra to build a “first-in-the-nation” crane building site at South Coast Mills in the South End, contingent on its bid being selected.
The “davit” cranes are used to lift equipment for turbine repairs and maintenance. Per Avangrid, no such cranes are manufactured in the United States.
New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell, a longtime champion of the city’s role in the nascent industry, was pleased with the state’s project selections.
“New Bedford’s national leadership in offshore wind energy was bolstered by today’s announcement,” Mitchell said in a statement. “We in Greater New Bedford are especially excited that the largest single project selected today, SouthCoast Wind, has premised its proposal on the use of the Port of New Bedford for both project staging and as a base for operations and maintenance … the awards announced today will collectively generate lasting economic benefits for the City and the region.”
Massachusetts is buying most of the 2.9 gigawatts of power — its largest power purchase — with Rhode Island taking a smaller slice as a partner in the new multi-state procurement process.
“This selection is New England’s and Massachusetts’ largest offshore wind selection to date. We’ll power 1.4 million more Massachusetts homes with clean, renewable energy, create thousands of good, union jobs, and generate billions of dollars in economic activity,” said Gov. Maura Healey Friday in the announcement.
During a press conference Friday, Healey stressed that these projects will bring ratepayer relief, but when asked about the cost for ratepayers, said she would not say yet as the figures are being negotiated.
The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) reviewed the proposals quantitatively (project costs) and qualitatively (economic development and environmental or fisheries impacts, for example), and will formalize these commitments during contract negotiations.
State Sen. Mark Montigny said the news was a positive development for New Bedford, but pressed state agencies to be more critical when negotiating with developers.
“More scrutiny and proper oversight from government is essential if we are to avoid another embarrassing situation such as when companies were allowed to walk away from legally enforceable contracts following foreseeable inflationary pressures in the market or when a blade failure exposed a complete failure in preparation and public communications,” Montigny said in a statement.
“Shielding project costs and the impact upon ratepayers from this procurement until winter is not an acceptable start,” he continued. “Our residents deserve less cheerleading from regulators and other government officials and more aggressive scrutiny that’s totally transparent to the public.”
The developers had submitted their bids jointly to Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut as part of the multi-state process to leverage the states’ buying power and reduce project risk. Connecticut, though part of the multi-state agreement, did not purchase any power. Per the agreement, any two or three states could agree on a proposal and split the power.
Still, some of the port activity for the selected projects will also take place in New London, Connecticut, which is now staging turbine components for its second Ørsted project, state officials said.
Healey said Connecticut is still welcome to participate. Some of the project selections leave room for other entities — be it other states, a city or companies — to purchase some of the power in these bids.
The Healey administration estimates these three projects would meet 20% of the state’s electricity demand.
Massachusetts was getting minimal power from the Vineyard Wind project’s few fully commissioned turbines for a few months until a blade failed in July, causing the federal government to shut down all project operations.
Some construction activity has since resumed, but Vineyard Wind remains under a suspension order precluding any power delivery.
Though this news comes on the heels of a very public and visual failure at one of the nation’s first commercial-scale offshore wind farms, officials hope their actions signal to developers that states are willing and ready to keep supporting these projects.
Email Anastasia E. Lennon at alennon@newbedfordlight.org.
A big step foward for NB wind power infeastructure development utilizing the waterfront assets we have,and looking to the future .Demonstrates how,a partnership between Argavid Foss state and city can gain results for all..now if we can just get that train down here and Woods Hole Ocean Gaphic to move across the bay..Crane manufacturing here great idea and why not blades too? Has to be more cost effective and less transpo involved than to go from Europe to Gaspe instead of directly here..last time I checked geometry..Pythagoras taught us shortest distance btwn 2 pts is a,straight line..no? and,we’d have tighter quality control over blade production..just a thought!
As George queried in the previous post, I do wonder why there has been minimal discussion about domestic manufacturing of the various components used in offshore wind. These amazingly awkward components are a shipping nightmare, and those costs must be very high. Manufacturing these items in the coastal areas where they could go directly from factory to ocean seems like a potential win-win situation for both the developers and those eventually paying the bill for the power i.e. coastal states. Where am I going wrong in my analysis?
America lacks the technology.
America lacks the will.
Where do you see a suitable blade manufacturing facility being located in the New Bedford area?
They are amazing awkward components.
Until onboard a barge.
The least cost supply route is being utilized.
The developers have bean counters.
Who is paying for this massive project? What is the return for the average person versus the cost? Where is the explanation of technical usage? Where are the environmentalists to stand up for preserving coastal beauty? What is the cost of maintenance?
Environmentalists focus is on the environment, not coastal beauty.
For coastal beauty go to the Gulf of Mexico and see the oil production platforms and flare stacks.
Take a look at what happened recently after the typhoon in China. Wind turbines broken in half one after another. Take a look at what happen to cause the single simple blade break on the Vineyard Wind project. Now think about all these turbines and the true cost of maintenance. Ratepayers (read that customers) are slowly getting regressively hosed by carbon zealots, Wall Street and Union members.
How many wind turbines broke?
What caused the the blade to break on the Vineyard Project?
Was it a manufacturing defect?
Like happens to so many cars?
And planes.