A

Brandi Colander is an attorneywith the Natural Resources DefenseCouncil (NRDC), an internationalenvironmental non-profit with over

400 scientists, attorneys, and 1.3million members and online activistsheadquartered in New York. Workingwith NRDC’s Air & Energy group,her expertise in energy policy focuseson industry restructuring and utility

regulation, energy efficiency, theSmart Grid and renewable energy

programs, specifically offshore wind.She is a graduate of the New York

City Environmental Law LeadershipInstitute and an Environmental

Leadership Program Fellow.Colander earned her Master’s degreeat Yale University, J.D. at Vermont

Law School and Bachelor’s degreefrom the University of Virginia.

Leila Monroe is an attorney in theOceans Program at the NRDC. She

works at both the state and federallevels on a range of issues includingocean governance, offshore oil and gasexploration and extraction, siting of

ocean renewable energy, marineprotected areas, and ocean pollution.Prior to joining NRDC, she workedfor T.C. Hoffmann & Associates, theEnvironmental Integrity Project, and

the National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration’s Officeof General Counsel for International

Law. She received a J.D. fromGeorgetown University Law Center

with a focus on international andenvironmental law. From

Georgetown’s School of ForeignService, she earned a Bachelor’s ofScience in Foreign Service with a

focus on International Politics andSecurity Studies.

ug./Sept. 2011, Vol. 24, Issue 7 1040-6190/$–

Offshore Renewable Energy:The Path Forward

Proponents have espoused the potential for offshorerenewable energy generation for many years, but to-datethere are still no commercial projects in U.S. waters. Someof the lessons learned from the struggle of offshorerenewable energy to gain a foothold involve the siting ofrenewables as well as navigation of the regulatoryframework.

Brandi Colander and Leila Monroe

I. Introduction

Our ocean and coastal areas

have long been a treasured

resource, offering vital economic,

social, and even spiritual value to

communities around the nation.

These vast water bodies are now

being closely evaluated as a new

frontier for tremendous energy

generation. The recent volatility of

fuel prices in the United States,

unrest in oil rich countries, and

Presidential approval of the

release of domestic oil reserves to

drive down gas prices for the

summer, all raise numerous

questions about alternatives to our

see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights

dependence on fossil fuels.

Furthermore, the longstanding

concerns regarding fossil fuels

that emit harmful pollutants. Both

compromise the health of

embattled oceans and human

health demonstrate a need to

seriously explore renewable

sources of energy, particularly if

the United States seeks to remain

competitive with other nations

investing heavily in renewable

energy. Increasing numbers of

extreme weather events have

serious and costly consequences

for electricity grid reliability. For

example, 2011 has tied for the year

with the largest number of billion

reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.tej.2011.07.003 23

Three years aftertheir drafting,

a set of principlesdevised by a

coalitionof 30 groups

remains substantiallyvalid.

24

dollar weather disasters on U.S.

record.1 With the right

stakeholder cooperation and good

planning, offshore renewable

energy can produce clean

renewable energy, economic

benefits, and protection of

valuable marine resources.

O ver the last five years,

environmental

organizations, such as the Natural

Resources Defense Council, have

engaged in comprehensive,

constructive dialogues with

members of the offshore

renewable energy industry,

regulatory authorities tasked with

oversight of projects that could

encumber large stretches of

ocean, and other stakeholders all

interested in identifying a path

forward for sustainable offshore

renewable energy development in

America.

This article draws upon the

collaborative engagement,

research, and writing performed

by the authors, including Brandi

Colander’s article Where the Wind

Blows. The authors will explore

specific initiatives, policies, the

regulatory approach, and lessons

learned to date. This is a

tremendously fertile segment

of emerging technologies;

we hope to inform the

discourse.

II. Guideposts in thePath Toward OffshoreRenewable EnergyGeneration

In 2008, a coalition of 30

environmental groups, academic

1040-6190/$–see front matter # 2011 Else

institutions, local government

officials, technology developers,

and utilities identified key

principles necessary for

the budding U.S. offshore

renewable energy industry

to flourish, fulfilling the

clean energy generation

potential identified by

proponents, while protecting

the health and vitality of

marine ecosystems, and

allowing for appropriate

vier Inc. All rights reserved., doi:/10.10

existing uses of the ocean to

continue with minimal

disturbance. These principles

were transmitted to the

Transition Team for the incoming

Obama Administration, and have

formed a foundation of shared

understanding about how to

advance offshore renewable

energy. These principles

included the need for:

� Strong commitment from

national leadership to support

rapid development of ocean

renewable energy, including

through the facilitation of pilot

and demonstration-scale projects,

‘‘under permitting conditions that

assure protection of ocean

16/j.

resources’’ and improvement of

regulatory efficiency and

effectiveness;

� State and federal government

assistance with compilation of

existing information that is

relevant to testing and

deployment of offshore

renewable energy, including

information about device impacts

and impact mitigation techniques;

� Coordination among

relevant agencies to achieve

efficient regulatory review, and a

mechanism that would support

federal, state, regional, and

interagency planning to support

offshore renewable energy

development; and

� Effective stakeholder

participation to minimize

conflicts between offshore

renewable energy projects and

existing ocean uses.2

T hree years after their

drafting, these principles

remain substantially valid. For

example, a high level of political

support for helping offshore

renewable energy projects is

necessary to overcome the

financial hurdles faced by the

industry. Subsidies for

conventional energy sources have

long outstripped financial

support for renewable energy

sources; this should change.

‘‘From 2002 to 2008, the federal

government subsidized five

dollars for fossil fuels for every

two dollars it subsidized for

renewable energy’’.3 The need for

improved regulatory clarity and

coordination also remains. While

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Committee (FERC) and the

tej.2011.07.003 The Electricity Journal

The successes andfailures of offshorerenewable energyhave brought intosharper focus specificapproaches thatcan help to lay thegroundwork for success.

A

Minerals Management Service

(MMS) have taken action to clarify

the regulatory process for

offshore renewable energy

projects, restructuring of MMS

into the Bureau of Ocean Energy

Management Regulation and

Enforcement (BOEMRE) after the

BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill has

substantially increased

uncertainty about how offshore

renewables will be treated in a

regulatory process designed for

oil and gas. Testing facilities and

pilot projects still need strong

levels of state and federal funding

and support, because lack of

information from real devices in

specific locations continues to

hamstring project development.

Improved comprehensive

planning and data collection to

more effectively identify the best

locations of offshore renewable

energy is much needed and will

be advanced with Coastal and

Marine Spatial Planning (CMSP),

at the state, federal, and regional

levels.

A s a follow-up to the

drafting of the 2008

principles, the collaborative

group also produced a second

shared vision to describe how

CMSP could improve siting of

offshore renewable energy.4

CMSP is institutionalized by the

recommendations of a

presidentially convened

Interagency Ocean Policy Task

Force, incorporated by reference

into President Obama’s 2010

Executive Order creating a

landmark National Ocean Policy.

It is defined there as ‘‘a

comprehensive, adaptive,

ug./Sept. 2011, Vol. 24, Issue 7 1040-6190/$–

integrated, ecosystem based, and

transparent spatial planning

process, based on sound science,

for analyzing current and

anticipated uses of ocean, coastal,

and Great Lakes areas.’’5 With

coastal and ocean resources facing

an increasing number of threats –

including pollution, habitat

destruction, over-fishing, and

climate change – CMSP can help

advance renewable energy that is

carefully sited to minimize any

additional stress on embattled

ecosystems. Effective CMSP is

founded on principles of

ecosystem protection and

restoration, it will improve the

availability of essential data

needed for appropriate citing of

offshore renewable energy, and it

will also involve essential

stakeholders to reduce conflict

between existing ocean users and

new ocean activities.

In addition to the general

principles, the successes and

failures of offshore renewable

energy experienced to date have

brought into sharper focus

specific approaches that can help

to lay the groundwork for success.

see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights

For example, until the first

projects are successfully in the

water, proponents of offshore

renewable energy should work

closely with interested

stakeholders, particularly the

environmental community, that

can provide important

information about the coastal and

marine environment and help

project proponents avoid

negative impacts that will

generate project opposition.

Industry should also work

together to make advances that

will support the industry as a

whole. This can be done through

the continued buildup of trade

associations such as the U.S.

Offshore Wind Collaborative or

the Oregon Wave Energy Trust, as

well as the creation of

development consortia for

specific projects.

The importance of these

principles and approaches will be

illustrated with examples from

the offshore wind and marine

hydrokinetic (wave, tidal, and

current) sectors that are

struggling with a variety of

challenges on the East and West

Coasts of the country.

A. Offshore wind

A recent National Renewable

Energy Laboratory report

discusses estimates that the U.S.

could harvest 54 GW from

offshore wind by 2030. ‘‘Building

54 GW of offshore wind energy

facilities would generate an

estimated $200 billion in new

economic activity and create more

than 43,000 permanent, well-paid

reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.tej.2011.07.003 25

26

technical jobs in manufacturing,

construction, engineering,

operations and maintenance –

more than 20 direct jobs for every

megawatt produced in the United

States’’.6 Despite this potential,

there are currently no offshore

wind farms in America. However,

in the Mid-Atlantic region, the

Department of Interior has

initiated action to take advantage

of the tremendous promise of

offshore wind with a program

called ‘‘Smart from the Start,’’

described further below.

Aninformational

hearing inNew Jersey inMay on solar

and windhad a heavy focuson offshore wind.

1. Regional initiatives. The

United States is well positioned

to become a competitive global

leader in the offshore wind field.

‘‘Smart from the Start’’ holds

promise to improve the process

further by identifying wind

energy areas (WEAs), areas of

expedited offshore wind

development.7 Created by the

Department of Interior, the

Smart from the Start Initiative is

designed to fulfill the principles

described above. Smart from the

Start is a welcome effort, as the

process for developing an

offshore wind farm currently

takes seven to 10 years, whereas

the coal plant development

process runs roughly two years.

These disproportionate

timelines are increasingly

becoming indefensible; Smart

from the Start can help address

this issue in a number of ways. It

provides essential political

focus and support for advancing

offshore renewable energy, and

establishes a clearer regulatory

path for project proponents,

1040-6190/$–see front matter # 2011 Elsevi

helping to coordinate oversight

between federal and state

agencies. Smart from the Start

can facilitate the assessment of

cumulative environmental

impacts and the identification

and avoidance of sensitive

habitat and key bird and

mammal migration routes.8

In this sense, Smart from the

Start has been described as an

initial form of CMSP, which

holds promise for finding the

best locations for offshore

renewable energy by reducing

environmental impacts of the

projects and conflicts with

existing ocean users.

2. State-level

developments. As the federal

government develops and

refines offshore renewable

energy policies and procedures,

states, recognizing resource

and economic development

potential, are moving forward.

New Jersey’s passage of the

Offshore Wind Economic

Development Act (OWEDA) by

Gov. Chris Christie on Aug. 19

is one example.9 To pass this

er Inc. All rights reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.

bill, New Jersey leveraged its

success with solar legislation –

it is now No. 2 in the nation for

solar energy. The New Jersey

legislation essentially creates a

carve-out for offshore wind

generation within its renewable

portfolio standard (RPS) using

commodities known as

Offshore Renewable Energy

Credits (ORECs). The goal is to

have electricity suppliers obtain

ORECs, demonstrating that

their electricity has in fact

come from offshore wind. Since

New Jersey’s RPS requires that

22.5 percent of its energy is

sourced from renewable energy

by 2021, offshore wind

generation becomes a critical

component for reaching this

goal.

T he Regional Greenhouse Gas

Initiative (RGGI) – a

multistate program designed to

lower energy costs, create good-

paying jobs, spur innovation, and

cut air pollution that threatens

public health – while using the

sale of pollution credits to

promote offshore wind in states,

attracting new development and

creating jobs.10 In May, Gov.

Christie announced a year-end

planned withdrawal from RGGI,

the impact on offshore wind

remains unclear at this time

without this program in place,

although, independent from

RGGI, Christie’s commitment to

offshore wind appears relatively

firm based on New Jersey’s most

recent Energy Master Plan.11 This

May, New Jersey also held an

informational hearing on solar

and wind, with a heavy focus on

tej.2011.07.003 The Electricity Journal

Governorsrecognize thatthe offshore windindustry couldput state citizensto work in goodjobs that cannotbe sent overseas.

A

offshore wind that indicated a

legislative interest in exploring

how best to integrate this

technology. New Jersey is also

receiving attention at the federal

level as BOEMRE sought

comments in early June on

information and nominations for

commercial leasing of offshore

wind power on the outer

continental shelf of the state.

E leven companies expressed

an interest in building

offshore wind farms in federal

waters off the coast of NJ.12 The

companies that responded to the

BOEMRE request include:

Offshore MW, Neptune Wind,

Garden State Offshore Energy I,

Bluewater Wind New Jersey

Energy, TCI Renewables, US

Mainstream Renewable Power

(Offshore), enXco Development

Corporation, US Wind, New

Jersey Offshore Wind,

Fishermen’s Energy of New

Jersey, and Iberdrola

Renewables.13 The companies

plan to build on parcels that start

eight miles from the Jersey shore

and run from Avalon near

Barnegat Bay, one of four priority

East Coast areas identified in

BOEMRE’s Smart from the Start

WEA process. The 550 square

miles are divided into 70 blocks

and two of the companies have

applied for the entire area: NJ

Offshore Wind and Fishermen’s

Energy.

As the state with the fastest-

growing population (percentage

growth from 2000 to 2010,

according to the U.S. Census

Bureau) among East Coast states,

North Carolina is also poised to

ug./Sept. 2011, Vol. 24, Issue 7 1040-6190/$–

significantly advance a clean

energy economy utilizing ocean

renewables.14 North Carolina’s

large population following New

York and Georgia uses lots of

energy. In fact, North Carolina has

the fourth highest per capita

electricity usage among East Coast

states, behind South Carolina,

Virginia, and Georgia. This large

base is well positioned to take

advantage of renewable energy

resources like offshore wind.

A June 2010 report by the

National Renewable

Energy Laboratory (NREL)

identified North Carolina as the

state with the largest offshore

wind resource on the East Coast;

the potential to develop this

abundant resource has not gone

unnoticed.15 Senate Bill 747

(‘‘S747’’), the Offshore Wind Jobs

and Economic Development bill,

was introduced in the North

Carolina legislature on April 19.16

This proposed legislation was

designed to create a state-

managed competitive request for

proposals for a total of 2,500 MW

of offshore wind energy starting

in 2017. These projects would be

see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights

developed over a seven- to 10-

year period, enabling the state to

receive proposals and evaluate

costs over time. Unlike New

Jersey’s OREC legislation, North

Carolina’s proposed legislation

utilizes a test to evaluate the

economic benefits of offshore

wind. If North Carolina, upon

analyzing the bids, finds that the

economic benefits outweigh the

costs, resulting in a net economic

benefit, they would require

investor owned utilities to enter

long-term contracts to purchase

offshore wind energy from those

proposals.

As the legislation states, studies

have demonstrated that the

waters off the North Carolina

coast have sufficient wind

resources that could generate

approximately 130 percent of the

state’s total energy use.

Furthermore, the Department of

Energy’s Energy Information

Administration released a report

in November 2010 suggesting that

it is the state with the least

expensive location in the nation to

build offshore wind generation.

North Carolina can also attract

manufacturers of the many

precision parts used in the

assembly and construction of

offshore wind farms to the state.

From an economic development

standpoint, a 2,500 MW target of

offshore wind could create over

10,000 construction jobs and 2,000

long-term operations and

maintenance jobs, with the

potential of adding more jobs to

other manufacturing export

markets. While this bill did not

move out of committee this

reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.tej.2011.07.003 27

28

session, lawmakers approved a

study of legislative proposals

designed to encourage offshore

wind and environmental

advocates are calling on the

governor to create an offshore

wind task force.17

It is important to emphasize

that under North Carolina’s

proposed legislation, no contracts

will be awarded where there is a

finding that the economic costs

outweigh the economic benefits of

a project. This approach to

offshore wind legislation seeks to

determine the offshore wind

industry’s potential in North

Carolina, with minimal upfront

financial investment from the

state. The legislation further

enables cooperative and

municipal electric utilities to opt

into the program at their

discretion and extends an existing

manufacturing tax credit for wind

manufacturing out to the 2020.

Manufacturing tax credits are

incentives for industry to identify

North Carolina as a destination

for economic development. The

manufacturing potential is a

critical component to leadership

as it provides tremendous

economic development potential

for the state that goes beyond

building offshore wind farms and

to serving as the manufacturing

hub to support the supply chain

of this industry.

N eighboring states

Maryland and Virginia

have made similar attempts to

advance offshore wind legislation

with hopes of creating a robust

ocean renewable hub in their

respective state.18 Given these

1040-6190/$–see front matter # 2011 Else

parallel attempts to advance

offshore wind legislation and

BOEMRE’s Smart from the Start

Initiative, it may make sense in

the future to explore additional

symbiotic regional approaches to

developing offshore wind and

their supportive industries here in

the United States. Governors

recognize that the offshore wind

industry could put their citizens

to work in good jobs that cannot

be sent overseas. Ratepayer

impacts are often cited as the most

significant hurdle for offshore

wind. However, offshore wind

offers what traditional fossil fuels

do not: price stability. Fixed-price

contracts hedge against rising

volatile fossil fuel prices and wind

is always free. While passing

progressive legislation is always a

heavy lift, leadership is banking

on the notion that their citizens

will support the prospect that

these legislative efforts will result

in reducing their dependence on

fossil fuels, stabilizing fuel costs,

and enhancing the nation’s

energy security.

Wind strengths are also strong

off the West Coast and floating

vier Inc. All rights reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.

turbine technology may soon

allow for the consideration of

offshore wind projects that have

not yet been feasible, because of

the depth of waters off the West

Coast. Recent estimates show that

California’s average wind energy

potential developable annually is

513–661 TWh.19 Some 90 percent

of that potential is in deep waters

of 50–200 meters; 51–93 TWh

exists in waters 0–50 m.

Manufacturing, installment, and

maintenance of offshore energy

conversion devices could create

much-needed jobs in California.

B. Marine hydrokinetic

energy

United States coasts and ocean

areas hold significant energy

generation potential from marine

hydrokinetic sources: waves,

tides, and current. Wave energy

potential is stronger off California

and Oregon than anywhere else in

the U.S., while Alaska, and Maine

have large tide differences

necessary to generate tidal

energy. One estimate judges it

technically possible for wave

energy alone to generate 23

percent of California’s 2005

electricity consumption.20

Developers in New York and

New Jersey have also taken out

preliminary permits for very

small projects.

S ince 2002, with FERC’s first

evaluation of the licensing

requirements for pilot wave

energy project (the Makah Bay

Ocean Energy Pilot21), the

development of offshore

renewable energy has progressed

tej.2011.07.003 The Electricity Journal

A

in fits and starts. Marine

hydrokinetic energy produced

from ocean waves, tides, and

currents22 have been given the

most serious consideration on the

West Coast, because the rapid

dropoff of the continental shelf

and deep waters close to shore has

made these technologies more

technologically and economically

feasible than offshore wind,

although that calculation may be

changing with the development

of floating turbine technologies.

D evelopers in California,

Oregon, and Washington

have struggled to overcome

technological, regulatory, and

financial challenges in the race to

become the first to generate

electricity from the sea.

Numerous projects have been

proposed, received their

preliminary permits, but failed to

advance beyond the pilot permit

stage. A number of projects have

stalled because of the difficulty of

obtaining financing and the

challenges of gathering baseline

environmental data necessary for

completion of regulatory

documentation. Some projects

experienced technological

hurdles, such as the sinking

of Finavera’s wave buoy off

Oregon. Other projects

encountered fierce resistance and

concern from existing ocean users

such as fishers and recreational

users.

As of June 2011, there were 35

active FERC preliminary permits

for marine hydrokinetic projects

(wave and tidal) projects on the

U.S. coasts and ocean.23 This

includes: four wave and one tidal

ug./Sept. 2011, Vol. 24, Issue 7 1040-6190/$–

project off California; two wave

projects off Oregon; two tidal

projects in Washington state

waters; one wave project off

Hawaii; six tidal and one wave

project off Alaska; and eight tidal

projects in Maine. The Ocean

Power Technologies (OPT) Wave

Park off Reedsport Ore., is on track

to become the first commercial

wave park on the West Coast. Its

first-phase deployment of a single

PB150 PowerBuoy, scheduled for

late 2011, will generate 1.5 MW of

power. If deployment of the first

buoy is successful and a full license

is issued from FERC for nine

additional PowerBuoys, the

project has a maximum energy

generation potential of 50 MW.24

At first glance, this would appear

to constitute a healthy landscape of

possible projects, but the viability

of the majority of the projects is not

certain. A number of the

developers holding preliminary

permits have not demonstrated

the financial capacity to finance

preparation of environmental

documentation. Following the

withdrawal of Pacific Gas &

Electric’s third WaveConnect

see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights

project and its preliminary permit

due to a combination of cost and

internal decisions, the confidence

of investors and developers has

ebbed, as partly evidenced by lack

of any new preliminary permits

pending at the time of this writing.

Off the East Coast, Verdant

Power initiated its Roosevelt

Island Tidal Energy (RITE) project

in 2002, and it is currently in

operation in New York City’s East

River. RITE is designed to operate

in three phases – prototype

testing, demonstration, and

megawatt-scale build – from 2002

to 2012.25 Verdant Power makes

and installs tidal power and

hydroelectric systems for energy

generation, its most prominent

device being an underwater

turbine designed to harness

energy from river currents.

The challenges experienced by

the budding marine hydrokinetic

industry are not atypical for new

industries. Important lessons are

emerging, as well as necessary

next-steps; these will help pave

the way for the first successful

projects.

C. Planning, oversight and

regulation of new offshore

renewable energy

res

1. Challenges of agency

jurisdiction and regulatory

structure. While the U.S. is

currently witnessing robust

state efforts to advance offshore

renewable energy, for years an

ill-fitting, federal regulatory

process hampered the

advancement of offshore

renewable energy projects.

erved., doi:/10.1016/j.tej.2011.07.003 29

30

Wielding a patchwork of legal

authority originally intended

for oversight of offshore oil and

gas and other industrial

activities, FERC and the now

disbanded MMS struggled to

agree on a clear and

appropriate process for new

offshore renewable energy

projects that present a very

different set of issues and needs

than conventional ocean energy

extraction. Jurisdictional

disputes between the two

entities were partially resolved

with a memorandum of

understanding (MOU).26

MOUs have also been

negotiated between MMS,

FERC, and various states in an

effort to facilitate a cooperative

siting process for offshore

renewable energy projects.27

However, the agency

restructuring that followed the BP

Deepwater Horizon oil spill once

again increased uncertainty about

the oversight and the regulatory

structure relevant to offshore

renewables. On May 19, 2010,

Secretary Ken Salazar issued

Secretarial Order 3299 separating

and reassigning the

responsibilities previously

performed by MMS into

BOEMRE.28 Although this set the

stage for long overdue reform of

the old faulty and ineffective

system for regulating offshore oil

and gas activities, it was uncertain

how renewable energy would fare

in this upset.

A s it has reformed oversight

and regulation of offshore

oil and gas activities, the

Administration acknowledged

1040-6190/$–see front matter # 2011 Else

the need to treat offshore

renewable energy differently

from offshore oil and gas, given

that the activities have

significantly different revenue

generating capacity,

environmental impacts, and

industry histories.29 In June 2010,

the Department of Interior

formed the Atlantic Offshore

Wind Energy Consortium30 to

help advance permitting for

renewable energy projects on the

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS),

and Smart from the Start,

discussed above, was launched in

November 2010. NOAA,

BOEMRE, and DOE also

announced eight joint research

awards totaling nearly $5 million

to support the siting of offshore

renewable energy projects.31 In

February 2011, BOEMRE and

DOE’s Department of Renewable

Energy also signed an MOU to

advance the siting of offshore

renewable energy in the OCS.

G iven the numerous federal

entities involved in

offshore renewable energy

development, it is important to

provide adequate context for the

vier Inc. All rights reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.

role of two key federal agencies in

advancing the deployment of

offshore renewables. BOEMRE is

focused on providing access to the

OCS, essentially serving as the

‘‘landlord of the OCS’’ whereas

FERC is responsible for

transmission integration, grid and

tariff obligations associated with

offshore renewable energy. To

that end, the first generation of

offshore wind being advanced

under BOEMRE’s purview, with

the assistance of initiatives like

Smart from the Start, appear to be

strategically designed to get

projects built and in an effort to do

so, focused on areas where there

is limited resistance to proposed

project sites. This is intended to

increase the likelihood of the

success of development while

familiarizing the general public

with this new technology and

accounting for environmental

impacts. This effort should be

applauded as it demonstrates a

commitment to enhancing the

likelihood of successfully scaling

up a second generation of

offshore renewables that can offer

a competitive alternative to fossil

fuels.

2. Coastal and Marine Spatial

Planning. The collaboration

initiated by the MOUs and

other programs should also be

integrated into a more

comprehensive Coastal and

Marine Spatial Planning

(CMSP) process, described

above.

BOEMRE actively seeks a

consistent approach to deploying

offshore wind in a manner that is

tej.2011.07.003 The Electricity Journal

A

consistent with CMSP in three

ways. First, BOEMRE has

partnered with NOAA to develop

a multi-purpose marine cadastre

providing important data about

potential project sites in the

OCS.32 BOEMRE partnered with

critical environmental

stakeholders, like The Nature

Conservancy, to assist in filling

some of the data gaps in order to

produce this effective resource.33

Second, the intergovernmental

task forces created by the federal

government are aimed at

identifying opportunities to

better identify and coordinate

resources and mitigation for

offshore wind development.

Finally, the agency seeks to

leverage the expertise

and resources of the Coast

Guard, being certain to treat

each state independently based

on their unique composition,

resources, and concerns.

Successful integration of

CMSP with BOEMRE’s approach

will be critical and closely

reviewed.

R enewable energy

development in the

ocean also requires unique

sensitivity to the environment,

and CMSP can assist in mitigating

negative impacts by avoiding

sensitive habitat or areas

strongly valued by other ocean

users. Although continued

political and government support

is necessary to reap the many

benefits of a robust, globally

competitive U.S. renewable

energy industry, CMSP is

expected to significantly assist in

the often difficult siting process of

ug./Sept. 2011, Vol. 24, Issue 7 1040-6190/$–

offshore renewable energy

projects.

se

3. Limitations in transmission

capacity. An additional

challenge to scaling up offshore

renewables is the lack of

transmission capacity to carry

energy from devices where the

energy is generated to places

where it the energy is

consumed. The federal

government is keenly aware of

the additional transmission

capacity that must accompany

a ramp-up in offshore energy

generation to ensure this power

source can be reliable and

competitive in the market. The

Atlantic Wind Connection

(AWC) has received a great

deal of attention as a potential

solution to this problem for

offshore wind, given its more

common association as the

offshore wind transmission

backbone.34 The AWC

essentially seeks to streamline

anticipated transmission needs

for Mid-Atlantic offshore wind

projects. At the completion of

its slated five phases, the AWC

e front matter # 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights res

is expected to be able to connect

up to 7,000 MW of offshore

wind – enough power to

serve roughly 1.9 million

households.35 BOEMRE

must carefully balance the

permitting process of this

extensive project while

concurrently executing the

permitting process for the first

ever American offshore wind

farms, weighing the proposals

and coordinating timelines will

be critical in this endeavor and

ultimately determine the OCS

landscape that will

accommodate offshore energy

development.36

D. Lessons learned

There is some consensus that

two areas are most essential for

focus, if the U.S. is to realize the

potential of a robust offshore

renewable energy industry. First,

coordination among interested

parties is essential to improve the

federal regulatory process that

has hampered offshore renewable

energy. Though some positive

steps have been taken (e.g., Smart

from the Start), significant and

sustained political will is needed

to demonstrate a firm

commitment to advancing

renewable energy that provides

regulatory certainty, investor

assurance and an improved

process, without undermining

cornerstone environmental

review laws. Political will among

elected official and regulators can

be improved by delivery of a

coordinated, unified message

from the offshore renewable

erved., doi:/10.1016/j.tej.2011.07.003 31

32

energy industry players, as well

as other stakeholders.

There are important

opportunities to improve the

management and application of

federal regulatory review of these

projects, for example by

developing an effective CMSP

process; ensuring that BOEMRE

and FERC have sustained support

for maintaining sufficient staff

capacity, training, and resources

and commitment to successfully

shepherd offshore renewable

energy projects through the

regulatory process; and with

limited legislation that provides

assistance such as power

purchase agreements. Smart from

the Start could also be replicated

and built upon in other regions of

the country, particularly off the

West Coast for the siting of

marine hydrokinetic projects.

S econd, as illustrated by the

challenges faced by marine

hydrokinetic projects off the West

Coast, new data and information

must be gathered and integrated

into a planning process that can

quickly identify those areas

where offshore renewable energy

projects can be sited with minimal

negative impacts, conflicts with

existing uses, and community

opposition.

As the offshore renewable

energy moves forward, with

speeds varying among the

different industry sectors, it is

clear that gaps in information and

real data about the potential

benefits and natural resource

impacts of this new form of energy

generation (i.e., based on careful

testing of pilot projects) present a

1040-6190/$–see front matter # 2011 Else

significant challenge. There is a

tender balance between advancing

projects while data gaps still exist,

versus halting all progress in

pursuit of perfect knowledge and

in fear of the unknown.

Environmental groups have

collectively explored what

research areas and studies should

prioritize to continue sustainably

advancing offshore renewable

energy. These groups have

identified four core areas,

requesting that the federal

government conduct

comprehensive marine bird

surveys, also conduct marine

mammal and sea turtle surveys,

map benthic habitats, and map

important ecological areas. All of

these efforts will require the

Department of Interior to

coordinate, prioritize, and direct

resources to fill these data gaps,

distinguish ecological

characteristics and coordinate

heavily with other federal entities.

BOEMRE sought to address many

of their concerns regarding data

gaps at their Atlantic Wind Energy

Workshop; an invitation only

event for key stakeholders held in

vier Inc. All rights reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.

July 2011. This workshop was a

follow-up to a similar session held

in 2007 and sought to coordinate

knowledge of key data needs,

identify potential opportunities

for additional studies, and

prioritize research gaps and

environmental studies from all

stakeholders in offshore

renewable energy. BOEMRE

prepared a document and

providing a synopsis of federal

and state regulatory and research

activities of offshore wind in the

U.S.37

C MSP is a process that can

help achieve this end, but it

requires a commitment of federal

resources and engagement of a

coordinated body of developers.

Furthermore, it will require that

the CMSP process be integrated

with NEPA and other

environmental review on a clear,

aggressive timeline that moves

both CMSP and permitting of

renewable energy. CMSP, if

vested with political and agency

support, can create a process that

is not only transparent but

predictable. This is important for

many reasons: first, it gives

investors the confidence

necessary for investing; second, it

engages the public in a

meaningful debate, one in which

stakeholders feel they are actually

participating in decisions made38;

and third, rather than creating

additional layers of bureaucracy,

as some detractors argue, it will

actually better organize and

coordinate the existing layers of

regulatory review so that they can

be navigated both more

effectively, and more efficiently.

tej.2011.07.003 The Electricity Journal

A

III. Conclusion

BOEMRE and other federal

agencies must continue to

diligently focus on improving the

offshore renewable energy

process. An analysis of developer

perspectives indicates that the

federal agencies have been the

source of the greatest delay and

uncertainty for these projects.39

Both political and administrative

commitment is needed to advance

offshore renewable energy: every

moment spent discussing

offshore oil and gas is a serious

lost opportunity to advance new

innovative technologies with

demonstrated success abroad,

thereby compromising America’s

ability to become a global

competitor of these technologies

while creating domestic economic

development opportunities and

reducing our dependence on

fossil fuels. Federal agencies

need to harness CMSP to help

identify the best places to site

offshore renewable energy,

avoiding negative environmental

impacts and conflicts with

existing ocean users, while

reducing deployment timelines.

Additionally, building

community-based support

from the beginning and a

coalition of industry leaders who

can focus on specific,

concentrated tasks of

policymakers and regulators

while closely engaging effectively

in CMSP with environmental

organizations are all critical steps

in properly administering

domestic offshore renewable

energy.&

ug./Sept. 2011, Vol. 24, Issue 7 1040-6190/$–

Endnotes:

1. Jason Samenow, Ties Record for MostBillion Dollar Weather Disasters inUnited States, WASHINGTON POST, July26, 2011, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/2011-ties-record-for-most-billion-dollar-weather-disasters/2011/07/26/gIQAvMd7aI_blog.html.

2. Jack Sterne et al., The SevenPrinciples of Ocean Renewable Energy: AShared Vision and Call for Action, 14

ROGER WILLIAMS U.L. REV. 600, Summer2009 Symposium, at 604–605.

3. In the seven years between FY 2002and 2008, $72 billion in subsidies wereprovided for fossil fuels, while only$29 billion was provided to supportrenewable energy - and over half ofthat $29 billion was to support cornethanol. Environmental Law Institute,Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies toEnergy Sources: 2002-2008, at 6, 21(2009), at http://www.elistore.org/Data/products/d19_07.pdf.

4. Ocean Renewable Energy and theMarine Spatial Planning Process: ACollaboration Between OceanRenewable Energy Interests andOcean Conservationists, Oct. 2009(Unpublished statement of principles).

5. Exec. Order No. 13547, 3 C.F.R.43023 (2010), at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-18169.pdf. White House Councilon Environmental Quality InteragencyOcean Policy Task Force, FinalRecommendations of the Interagency

see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights

Ocean Policy Task Force, 75 FederalRegister 45606 (July 19, 2010): 45606–45607.

6. Large-Scale Offshore Wind Power inthe United States: Assessment ofOpportunities and Barriers, NationalRenewable Energy Laboratory, Sept.2010 at 2, at http://www.nrel.gov/wind/pdfs/40745.pdf.

7. United States Department ofInterior’s Bureau of EnergyManagement Regulation andEnforcement, Smart from the StartInitiative available at http://www.boemre.gov/offshore/renewableenergy/smartfromthestart.htm.

8. See NRDC Comments on Mid-Atlantic WEA Regional EA, submittedMarch 11, 2011; see also DanWilhelmsson et al., Greening BlueEnergy: Identifying and Managing theBiodiversity Risks and Opportunitiesof Offshore Renewable Energy, IUCN(2010).

9. New Jersey Offshore WindDevelopment Act Assembly No. 2873,June 24, 2010, available at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/A3000/2873_S1.PDF.

10. Governor Christie’s Mayannouncement on RGGI is availableat: http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552011/approved/20110526a.html.

11. New Jersey Energy Master Plan,at: http://www.nj.gov/emp/.

12. New Jersey Department ofEnvironmental Protection at: http://www.state.nj.us/dep/newsrel/2011/11_0075.htm.

13. Department of Interior, Bureau ofOcean Energy ManagementRegulation and Enforcement, NewJersey company list, at: http://www.boemre.gov/offshore/RenewableEnergy/PDFs/stateactivities/NJ/NJTableofResponsesFinal.pdf.

14. Census report highlighting NorthCarolina’s significant populationgrowth, at: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-01.pdf.

15. NREL Report listing grossoffshore wind resource for the United

reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.tej.2011.07.003 33

34

States, at: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/45889.pdf.

16. North Carolina Offshore WindOrganization S747 Bill Info, at: http://www.ncoffshorewind.org/policy.html.

17. Environment North Carolina,Legislative Agenda, PromotingWind Power at http://www.environmentnorthcarolina.org/legislature/legislative-agenda.

18. Brandi Colander, O’Malley’sProposal to Ramp up Offshore WindPower Is a Jobs Generator(Commentary), WASHINGTON POST,Feb. 21, 2011, at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/18/AR2011021805727.html.

19. Michael Dvorak, et al., CaliforniaOffshore Wind Energy Potential,RENEWABLE ENERGY 35 (2010) 1244–1254,at http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/dvorak-archer-jacobson-2009.pdf.

20. California Ocean Wave EnergyAssessment, Draft Report, PublicationNo. CEC-500-2006-119, May 2006, athttp://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-500-2006-119/CEC-500-2006-119-D.PDF.

21. On April 29, 2002, AquaEnergyGroup, Ltd. (later renamed Finavera)filed a Declaration of Intentionconcerning its proposed Makah BayOcean Wave Energy Pilot Project,FERC Docket No. DI02-3-00, to belocated in Clallam County, Wash. In2009, this wave buoy later sank; withthe 2008 decision by the CaliforniaPublic Utilities Commission to denyfunding for a Humboldt projectbetween Finavera and PG&E, FinaveraRenewables surrendered its FERCproject license for the Makah Bay andthe Humboldt Bay projects inFebruary 2009.

22. For a description of the underlyingprinciples and background on types ofWave Energy Conversion devices, seePower and Energy from the OceanEnergy Waves and Tides: A Primer, athttp://www.oceanrenewable.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/power-and-energy-from-the-ocean-waves-and-tides.pdf.

1040-6190/$–see front matter # 2011 Else

23. At http://www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/indus-act/hydrokinetics.asp.

24. At http://www.oceanpowertechnologies.com/reedsport.htm.

25. Verdant Power, RITE Project, at:http://verdantpower.com/what-initiative/.

26. Memorandum of UnderstandingBetween the U.S. Department of theInterior and Federal EnergyRegulatory Commission, April 9. 2009,at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/maj-ord-reg/mou/mou-doi.pdf.

27. E.g. Memorandum ofUnderstanding Between the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission andthe California Natural ResourcesAgency, the California EnvironmentalProtection Agency and the CaliforniaPublic Utilities CommissionRegarding Coordinated Review ofHydrokinetic Facility Authorizationsin Marine Waters Within the State ofCalifornia, May 2010, at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/maj-ord-reg/mou/mou-ca.pdf.

28. Later referred to as the Bureau ofOcean Energy Management,Regulation and Enforcement. See U.S.Dep’t of the Interior, Secretarial OrderNo. 3299, Establishment of the Bureauof Ocean Energy Management, theBureau of Safety and EnvironmentalEnforcement, and the Office ofNatural Resources Revenue, May 19,2010, at http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=32475 (revoking the MMS’sduties and assigning them to two newbureaus and an office); see also U.S.Dep’t of the Interior, Secretarial OrderNo. 3302, Change of the Name of theMinerals Management Service to theBureau of Ocean Energy Management,Regulation and Enforcement, June 18,2010, at http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=35872 (renaming the MMS asthe Bureau of Ocean EnergyManagement, Regulation andEnforcement).

29. NRDC Switchboard, LeilaMonroe, at: http://switchboard.

vier Inc. All rights reserved., doi:/10.1016/j.

nrdc.org/blogs/lmonroe/what_do_interiors_reform_and_r.html.

30. Department of Interior, at: http://www.boemre.gov/ooc/PDFs/AtlanticConsortiumMOU.pdf.

31. BOEMRE, DOE and NOAAAnnounce Nearly $5 Million for JointEnvironmental Research Projects toAdvance Ocean Renewable Energy,NOAA NEWS, Oct. 26, 2010, athttp://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20101026_renewableenergy.html.

32. BOEMRE Maps and GIS Data, at:http://www.boemre.gov/offshore/mapping/index.htm.

33. The Multipurpose MarineCadastre overview and list of partners,at: http://www.marinecadastre.gov/SiteCollectionDocuments/MMC_FactSheet_04.12.2011.pdf.

34. The Atlantic Wind Connection, at:http://atlanticwindconnection.com/about-us/.

35. Atlantic Wind Connection Intro,at: http://atlanticwindconnection.com/awc-intro/.

36. Brandi Colander, SwitchboardNRDC, Offshore Wind Gets a Boostfrom Google and Good Energies:Introducing the Atlantic WindConnection, at: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/bcolander/offshore_wind_gets_a_boost_fro.html.

37. Atlantic Wind Energy Workshophandouts, at https://www.atlanticwindworkshop.com/AWEW%20Handout_Synop_Fed_State_RegsResearch.pdf.

38. Michelle Portman, Involving thePublic in the Impact Assessment ofOffshore Renewable Energy Facilities,MARINE POLICY 33 (2009) 332–338 at 332(looks particularly at the role of thepublic in the environmental impactassessment process).

39. F.B. Van Cleve and A.E. Copping,Offshore Wind Energy Permitting: ASurvey of U.S. Project Developers,Nov. 2010, Pacific NorthwestNational Laboratory, at http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-20024.pdf.

tej.2011.07.003 The Electricity Journal