Offshore Wind for DE and NJ: The Shape of Things to Come

1. Offshore Wind for DE and NJ:The Shape of Things to Come Jeremy Firestone Willett Kempton University of Delaware College of Marine and Earth Studies

2. Why Wind? • Domestic energy • CO2 threat is far more grave than previously understood • Zero pollution and zero CO2 in operation • Highest employment/MWh • The only very large, cost-competitive way to produce electricity without CO2 ... today

3. Why wind in Delaware and NJ? • Very large resource off Atlantic and Bay coasts, (almost none on land) • High public support for offshore wind • Early entry given -Coastal geography -Few hurricanes -Deep port -Protected bay + ocean

4. The area of each circle is proportional to the wind power available, i.e., the cube of the wind speed. (Garvine and Kempton 2006)

5. Source: AWS Truewind

6. Typical offshore system layout

7. Nysted Offshore Wind Farm, Denmark – Nov. 2006

8. Federal Regulation:§ 388 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 • Jurisdiction to US Minerals Management Service (MMS) to grant leases, easements and right-of-ways for “alternative” energy • Regulations due in Sept. 2007 at earliest • States share 27 percent of any rents/royalties for projects in federal waters that are within 3 nautical miles of state submerged lands

9. State movements toward offshore wind • New Jersey Blue Ribbon Panel (2006) • Test facility of 80 turbines • Delaware • ~600 MW bid (~200 turbines) in response to a request for additional power • One of three locations in Delaware Bay • Other two off the Atlantic coast

10. Bluewater Wind Proposed Offshore DE Wind Farm: Three proposed alternative locations Courtesy of Bluewater Wind

11. Potential Problems with Wind • Technical • Wind/Power fluctuations • Mismatch to load • Storage • Socio-economic/environmental • Changes to familiar land and seascapes • Avian deaths

12. Migratory bird flight & offshore wind farms (Danish studies) • 80-85% avoided the wind farm area altogether • But species specific • Gradual deflection far from farm; more dramatic changes near by • Of those that did not avoid • Tend to take the shortest route • Tend to not get too close to turbines • Fly over sweep of blades at night; under during day

13. Nysted Wind Farm, Denmark: Bird Migrations Deshlom, et al. 2005

15. Migratory bird collisions with offshore turbines (Danish studies) • Collision risk model estimates 1.2 migratory bird casualties/turbine/year • 1600 hours of monitoring one turbine • 1 collision • Comparison: 70,000 Eiders shot per year

16. DE scientific study Firestone, Kempton and Krueger (2007) Remainder of talk draws most from this study NJ poll Mills and Rosen (summer 2006) Public opinion surveys in DE and NJ

17. Delaware sample

18. Placement of wind turbines in the Bay or Ocean

19. DE, Cape Cod and NJ residents’ support for wind turbines 6 miles from coast • In Delaware overall (remainder unsure) • -78% support • -4% oppose

20. Factor most affecting decision • Ocean area opponents • Aesthetics (53%) • Marine life/Environmental concerns (23%) • Ocean area supporters • Air quality (19%) • Electricity rates (18%) • Aesthetics (15%)

21. Offshore wind versus coal or natural gas • If same initial price • 95% prefer Wind • If wind $1-30 per month more for 3 years • 91% prefer wind

22. Effect of wind turbine off the coast from last beach visited on Beach Choice Beach visit likelihood if wind turbine off the coast of less or unfamiliar beach

23. Summary • Large offshore resource • No air emissions from operation • Siting to minimize avian impacts is critical consideration • Significant public support • Possible tourism benefits

24. jf@udel.edu www.ocean.udel.edu/windpower Funded by: