Duke nixes offshore wind energy

In a recent letter to the North Carolina Utilities Commission, Duke Energy shared a report containing research supporting the idea that offshore wind energy production is not currently the most reliable, cost-effective energy source, and the energy company would not be issue requests for proposals to pursue these projects.

Duke was acting in compliance with NCUC directives to complete an Acquisition Request for Information (ARFI), which gathered “detailed market data from the three-wind energy area (‘WEA’) leaseholders off North Carolina’s coast”—Avangrid Power, LLC; Cinergy Corp.; and TotalEnergies Carolina Long Bay, LLC—who together submitted “eight offshore wind development project proposals.”

The report identifies several new factors adding to uncertainty over the future of offshore wind development. They include President Donald Trump’s January 20 executive memorandum halting new offshore wind leasing and requiring a review of federal permitting for existing projects; provisions in the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” that restrict federal tax credit eligibility for wind and solar facilities; Trump’s July 7 executive order directing the Treasury Secretary to revoke those tax credits; and broader risks such as geopolitical tensions and trade tariffs affecting critical supply chain inputs.

“Duke’s filing reinforces what we have shown for years: offshore wind is a very expensive source of electricity. Even with the Carbon Plan, it is prohibitively expensive,” Jon Sanders, director of the Center for Food, Power and Life at the Jon Locke Foundation, told the Carolina Journal. “Now that the legislature has passed the Power Bill Reduction Act getting rid of the Carbon Plan’s interim goal of 70 percent reduction of CO2 emissions by 2030, our power grid can rely more on reliable, on-demand natural gas power plants to transition to zero-emissions nuclear rather than be forced to get power from expensive, unreliable, weather-dependent sources like wind and solar.”

The Background

In 2021, House Bill 951 was signed into law as a bipartisan energy bill with regulatory guardrails prioritizing reliability and least-cost energy generation, while pursuing then-Gov. Roy Cooper’s carbon reduction goals.

The 2023 Carolinas Resource Plan – Duke Energy’s long-term strategy to meet future energy needs – evaluated offshore wind as one option in a diverse energy portfolio to support the Carolinas’ growth. Following a July 2024 settlement with stakeholders and a directive from the NC Utilities Commission (NCUC) on Nov. 1, 2024, Duke Energy issued an Acquisition Request for Information (ARFI) to the three entities holding federal offshore wind energy leases off the North Carolina coast: Avangrid (Kitty Hawk WEA), and TotalEnergies along with Cinergy (a Duke Energy non-regulated subsidiary) for the Carolina Long Bay tract near Wilmington.

The ARFI, released on January 29, sought information for up to 2,400 megawatts of offshore wind by 2035, including confidential pricing details to assess whether offshore wind could be a least-cost, reliable resource. The process—overseen by independent evaluator Power Advisory to ensure fairness, transparency, and confidentiality—was non-binding and spanned several months. Results were filed with regulators on August 11 and confirmed offshore wind is not currently economically viable as a least-cost option. Consistent with the NCUC’s November 2024 order, Duke Energy will not procure any of the three WEAs at this time, a conclusion also supported by the independent evaluator.

Nevertheless, the data gathered through the ARFI will inform Duke Energy’s 2025 Carolinas Resource Plan, which is scheduled for filing on October 1, and will guide future long-term planning considerations.

“The ARFI process determined that offshore wind is not cost-competitive at this time, so no RFP will be issued – this decision is supported by the independent evaluator that oversaw the proceedings,” Bill Norton, spokesperson for Duke Energy, told the Carolina Journal. “Nonetheless, the evaluation process provided valuable project, cost, and schedule data that will inform long-term planning assumptions for the Carolinas Resource Plan being filed later this year.”

Power Advisory collaborated with the NCUC’s Public Staff to establish a reference price, which was used as the benchmark for determining whether offshore wind generation is currently cost-effective compared to other available resources.

The development of the reference price is critical, as it determines the cost benchmark used to evaluate offshore wind, according to a report from JLF. This context is crucial because the ARFI report occurred before the July 29 passage of the Power Bill Reduction Act (SB 266), which removed the Carbon Plan’s interim target of reducing CO2 emissions from electricity by 70 percent by 2030. That target disproportionately shaped NCUC’s resource modeling and, if left in place, would have imposed an additional $13 billion burden on state ratepayers.

“Not having to worry about wind facilities being built off the shores of North Carolina is good news for reasons other than costs to electricity consumers,” concluded Sanders. “It removes a serious threat to the coast’s two biggest industries, fishing and tourism, and a deadly one to critically endangered whales, sea turtles, and other marine creatures and birds. It means military training and exercises won’t be compromised, and mariners won’t be endangered by marine vessel radar interference. Finally, remembering the ecological damage brought about from just one broken wind turbine blade from the Vineyard Wind facility, it means there won’t be 876 turbine blades sitting in North Carolina’s uniquely hurricane waters (think about, most recently, Hurricane Erin) which are up there with Florida’s as the coastal waters most frequently visited by hurricanes.”

Offshore wind not cost-effective or environmental

Sanders’ recent report “Big Blow,”on offshore wind development raises concerns about the potential impacts beyond cost and reliability. He found that the projects have not demonstrated clear economic or environmental benefits for the state and may present significant challenges.

According to the report, high construction and operating costs could increase energy burdens for residents already facing energy poverty. He estimates that he cost of building 8 GW of offshore wind capacity in North Carolina would range from $55.7 billion to $71.5 billion.

It also cautions that offshore wind development could affect coastal industries, including commercial fishing and beach tourism. The report states that turbine arrays and lighting may alter the natural landscape, with the planned structures becoming the tallest artificial features along North Carolina’s coast.

Environmental concerns are also highlighted. The report points to risks for endangered species such as the North Atlantic right whale, referencing whale deaths recorded in 2024 near offshore wind development areas off Virginia and North Carolina. It also raises questions about national security, maritime safety risks, and the long-term disposal of turbine blades, which are difficult to recycle, and suggests this could create lasting waste management challenges.

The post Duke nixes offshore wind energy first appeared on Carolina Journal.

The post Duke nixes offshore wind energy appeared first on First In Freedom Daily.