Company officials answer questions about wind farm status, concerns, phases, whether it’s a ‘done deal’
Editor’s note: On April 7, Sentinel editor David Nahan interviewed Marc Reimer, project development director for Danish company Ørsted, about the planned Ocean Wind wind farm project 15 miles off the coast of Cape May and Atlantic counties. Ocean Wind is expected to generate 1,100 megawatts of power if, and when, it comes online in 2024. Gabriel Martinez, media relations manager for Ørsted, also participated. The newspaper is presenting this in question-and-answer format with mild editing for clarity. The newspaper hoped to ask more questions, but the interview was limited by time constraints.
1. What exactly does it mean for the Ocean Wind project getting the Issuance of Notice of Intent?
Reimer: That’s a great question. The Notice of Intent is what actually starts the federal permitting review process. The Notice of Intent has basically deemed our COP – our Construction and Operation Plan – as complete, but only as complete. It has essentially not deemed it as reviewed or processed or anything. The Notice of Intent actually now starts the federal permitting review process.
2. You are still in the study phase – geological studies and environmental impact. What exactly are you studying in those concurrent phases?
Reimer: The federal government and the many, many different agencies – BOEM (Bureau of Ocean Energy Management) is acting as the clearinghouse for all of the many, many agencies that will touch this. The Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), the many federal agencies. Each of them will assess the environmental impact of the project itself and issue a draft EIS – a draft Environmental Impact Statement on what they believe the impact of this project will be on the various issues they are looking at. Each agency has their roster, their menu of things they are looking at.
3. Wind farms have the support of New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and President Joe Biden. Some people consider the Ørsted project a done deal? What could actually prevent it from coming to fruition?
Reimer: That’s a very interesting question. I would say that if the environmental review by the many agencies looking at the project itself basically conclude that the negative impacts of this project outweigh the positive impacts of this project then we will not be granted our OFD – One Federal Decision – to begin construction. I don’t believe it is an accurate statement to say that this is just a done deal and this is going to be rubber-stamped. Not at all. Quite the contrary. This is a very elaborate and thorough 27-month review process that obviously the government takes quite seriously, thank goodness. We’re very glad, as a citizen, that they take this review process very seriously, but it is not an accurate statement to say that this is a done deal. Quite frankly that is why we’re working closely with Ocean City and its residents because we want to make sure they’re educated on all the benefits of the project itself.
4. The company has stated it will be a $1.6 billion project featuring up to 99 wind turbines. What are the most up to date cost estimates for the project and for the number of turbines to be used?
Martinez: Ørsted has never released the project cost. That is a number that has come from the BPU (Board of Public Utilities). We as the developer have never stated the project cost. I just want to make that clear. There has been some confusion on that previously. That is a number that has come from the BPU. Ørsted has a policy of not discussing its project costs. (Queried further, Martinez said Ørsted has no plans to release that information.)
Reimer: It is still up to 99 turbines. We will not be installing more than that. We may, in fact, be installing less than that. One of the things I think you may be aware of is that we have this terrific partnership with GE (General Electric) and GE is launching some new technology that increases the size. Our hope is with the increased size of the turbines there is a potential we can eliminate some of the positions. We are still currently in the design phase and we’re sort of optimizing the system right now. By optimizing I mean optimizing it for New Jersey, optimizing it specifically for the citizens on the shoreline communities, and certainly optimizing it for the BPU and Ørsted. We’re in the design phase right now but it will not be more than 99.
5. Ocean Wind is considered Phase 1 and Ørsted has already applied to be considered for a Phase II. How many phases are planned for this project, involving how many wind turbines and will all be on the plot already designated off the coast of Cape May and Atlantic counties?
Reimer: That’s correct. We have submitted a bid for New Jersey second tranche of solicitation. There was a second as well that submitted a tranche under that. There may not be a second phase for this project. If we are lucky enough to be awarded by the BPU then we’re eager to do that for the state of New Jersey. There are no current plans for a Phase III. I think that is up to the BPU if they’ll be launching a Phase III solicitation. I can’t speak to whether we will participate in that. We would love the opportunity.
Martinez: It’s a little nuanced. Ocean Wind II, I know the names are a little confusing, is not necessarily a second phase of Ocean Wind I. It’s a completely different project. Ocean Wind I is being developed by Ørsted and PSE&G. Ocean Wind II is just our bid to the BPU’s second offshore wind solicitation for up to 2,400 megawatts of offshore wind. Ørsted submitted a bid called Ocean Wind II and another developer, Atlantic Shores, also submitted a separate bid. I understand the confusion because they’re both named Ocean Wind. I just want to make sure that is clear. (He explained Ørsted is bidding for 1,200 megawatts at Ocean Wind II and, he believes, Atlantic Shore submitted a bid for 2,300 megawatts.)
6. Although there is opposition to the wind farm in different communities along the coast, Ocean City elected officials and residents have been especially vocal. How do you go about winning them over to support the project?
Reimer: The feedback that we’ve gotten from council is basically that they’re just not sure about the details. So we have done a number of Q&A sessions with council. Obviously with COVID logistics these Q&A sessions can be challenging. We will continue to provide these sessions if council desires. I think it’s more about sort of getting the right information out there and speaking directly to council and the citizens of Ocean City to make sure that what are driving their thoughts on the project are accurate information. I did want to point out that that we did conduct a poll that two-thirds of New Jersey voters support offshore wind. The poll was released in 2020 and, quite frankly, the poll also showed that two-thirds of New Jersey voters were in favor of expanding offshore wind in the state. That was March of 2020. While there are packets or sections of opposition, rarely are there any public policy issues that garner that 66 percent favorability that offshore wind gets in New Jersey.
(Queried further if support was higher in northern New Jersey than in southern New Jersey, Reimer responded that he did not know if he would agree with that.) A lot of the infrastructure that Ørsted is building is in south Jersey, specifically the wind port of New Jersey which is currently being contemplated, and what we’re doing in Paulsboro. That is south Jersey and that has overwhelming support from everybody. (In December 2020 Gov. Phil Murphy announced a $250 million private investment to build wind turbine towers at the Paulsburo Marine Terminal on the Delaware River.) I don’t think it is a clear, distinct north versus south, Mason-Dixon Line. I think the pocket of opposition is limited to the shore communities. I don’t have any data to back that up but the support we’re getting from south Jersey is just extremely positive because I think that they recognize that offshore wind is an opportunity for the entire state. Obviously the impact is different for different stakeholders, for different citizens, but the overall impact for the state, we think, and the state believes, not just the bureaucracy, is so positive.
7. Because opponents only see the negatives with the wind farm, and there are only a limited number of long-term jobs – the web site suggests 70 to 100 – that would be spread out across southern New Jersey, has Ørsted spent any money in the community itself, or plan to spend money, such as with donations for public projects or events, political donations or promises of jobs for local residents or officials?
Reimer: We make no promises of jobs for any specific people. Full stop. That’s just not something we do. We are very hopeful that a lot of the jobs this infrastructure project will create will come from local communities, but we’re not allocating, say, this number of jobs need to come from this city, that this public official has been promised X. That is not something we’re doing.
No one is getting anything. That is not how Ørsted operates. No one has been promised anything.
We sponsor a great many NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and chamber of commerce type events. We like to be active in the community. We also sponsor and run supplier days which are basically open invite to anyone who wants to participate actively in this process, in the development or construction of the project itself. We have opened those up to the community. There were 56 total companies that participated in the last vendor day and 49 of them were New Jersey-based. We really do try to be Jersey-centric, but we make no promises of jobs to anyone specific, including elected officials. That’s just not something we do.
Martinez: For a little more background on our supplier day, our last supplier day was in August 2020. There are plans to hold another hopefully this year as well. For a little more color on the jobs number, the big promise of offshore wind is those jobs in the supply chain. The industry is much more mature in Europe. You have more of the suppliers that are European-based. As the industry matures here in the U.S., you’re going to see more of those suppliers come to the United States. When you have that, it creates almost like a cluster effect. A lot of these machines are incredibly complex. When you do come to the U.S., we will have more of those sub-suppliers to support them. That’s where the jobs within offshore wind will be. We’ll have 69 full-time jobs at the Atlantic City operations and maintenance facility, but then we’ll have about 1,000 jobs per construction year as Ocean Wind is being constructed as well
8. What, exactly, would be the financial benefit to communities such as Ocean City, or do you expect there to be support because of the proposed environmental benefits to the region and nation as a whole because of the sustainable power from wind turbines?
Reimer: One of the talking points that has been said to us is that this is a recipe that has worked for over a hundred years, this meaning how they’re working with their shores. We think the Ocean Wind project is part of the recipe that will continue the success of that region for another 100 years. We do think that the benefits far outweigh everything else. We also have a lot of information about new industry directly related to these wind farms. We have studies that point to the Block Island (R.I.) wind farm that it actually increased tourism on the island because people were going there simply to view it. AirBnB rates have actually gone up on the Block Island post-installation of the project. We have studies pointing to an increase in rec fishing based on the new ecosystems created by the foundations themselves. We have an increase in opportunity for fishing grounds where there were once none. We do think that not only creating an offshore wind industry is going to have direct benefits to Ocean City and some of those communities itself, but we think there is ample evidence to support new industry based on tourism, new industry based on fishing that will increase as a result of the wind farm itself.
9. The study by the University of Rhode Island suggested there is increased tourism on Block Island because of the wind farm there, but that was looking at AirBnB rentals over three years, two before the project and one after. The real conclusion was there wasn’t much empirical evidence one way or the other. Do you have any other studies you can point to that there will be economic benefits and not economic harm to a tourism-based economy?
Reimer: There was a study by the University of Delaware that came to that conclusion about tourism. (See link to that study.)
10. Does this go back to a green field, so to speak, after the projected 25-year lifespan of the project, and what exactly does that mean for the turbines and their bases?
Reimer: That’s another really good question and one that we get asked all the time. Let me start by saying that part of that COP, part of that Construction and Operation Plan that’s now only started to be reviewed by the federal government, contains a decommissioning plan. Ørsted is not permitted to start construction until that decommissioning plan has already been approved. We won’t get our OFD, our One Federal Decision, which is basically like the giant stamp of approval from every agency that touches this project. It all comes together and is called OFD. We won’t get OFD until that decommissioning plan is approved. There is a plan on the book to remove all this stuff from the water. That plan will be reviewed by the appropriate federal and state agencies and we will not be permitted to start until that plan has been reviewed and approved.
Obviously the towers come out, the foundations come out as well. I’m not entirely sure about the array cables, but we can find that out. The decommissioning plan has to be approved prior to start. (The foundations are removed to below ocean floor level, he noted.)
11. Ørsted says the materials will be recycled after decommissioning. What percentage of the materials can be recycled and what percentage would be destined for a landfill?
Martinez: Offshore wind as an industry has only been around since 1991. Ørsted was the first company to construct the first offshore wind farm in Denmark. That is currently the only wind farm that has been decommissioned, but we’re leading the way on recycling the turbine materials. Currently about 85 percent of the turbine can be recycled. The main issue at the moment is the blade, but we’re leading the way on turbine recycling. Some of the materials that have been recycled from those turbines are being used for highway noise barriers and other materials there. (See link for video on decommissioning wind farm.)
12. Has there been a decision on where the transmission cables for the Orsted project will come ashore, or is it still a choice of two among B.L. England via Ocean City, Oyster Creek in Ocean County and Atlantic City in Atlantic County?
Reimer: We have removed Atlantic City from the point of interconnection (between the wind farm and the power grid). It will be coming onshore and connecting to the B.L. England Substation (in Beesleys Point, Upper Township) and the Oyster Cree substation.
13. Ocean City Council has said Ørsted would need permission, because it is not a utility, for right of way to bury the cables through the city. Is that something you do have to approach Ocean City about or are there other options for you?
Reimer: We are working with Ocean City but there are other options. I guess the answer to that question is all of the above. We are engaged with Ocean City and have had those preliminary conversations and are eager to continue that dialogue, but there are other options.
14. There has been much discussion about the impact of EMF (electromagnetic fields)? According to the Ocean Wind web site, the highest intensity of that is where is it produced, and then dropping off as it gets further away, and that the studies will be done after the project is completed to make sure it is at acceptable levels? Why is this being done after the fact rather than being studied beforehand using models from other projects?
Reimer: There have been many studies conducted about EMF and submarine cables, etc., and we are relying heavily on that sort of industry standards, studies that have been done. We’re not going to reinvent the wheel, shall we say, about those studies, but we will of course monitor that once the installation is done. Modeling of EMF and submarine cables and all of that stuff is fairly known and BOEM has a poster right now. If you go to the Ocean Wind website (ocean wind.com) on the BOEM landing page, they put out a number of fliers and posters and BOEM has dedicated one to environmental studies of electromagnetic fields. That gives you a lot of information here. I think you’re asking, isn’t it like the cart before the horse with respect to when these studies are taking place. EMF is very site-specific. It matters both on the type of generator, the type of cable and the surrounding area. It’s really not possible to conduct those studies on existing impacts before it is done. We know from theoretical models what EMF is and how it behaves and all of those things. Because it is such a site-specific thing that gets affected by temperature, it’s affected by how much energy is passing through the cable at any one time, it gets affected by whether it’s sitting sub-sea or sandy material. It’s not really cart before the horse to run those studies post-construction because it’s so site-specific and instantaneous specific.
15. Exactly how far above sea level will the towers be that hold the turbine and what is the radius of the blades that will extend far about the tower?
Reimer: Sea level changes. The height off the sea will change depending on tide. From mean sea level, average sea level to where the nacelle hub is 147 meters – 482 feet off mean sea level to the hub. (The nacelle is what houses the turbine components atop the tower.) When all is said and done, from peak of that sweep (of the blades) will be under 900 feet.
16. Exactly how many lights, assuming you have them for warnings for marine vessels and airplanes, and where will the lights be on each turbine, tower and blade, and will that include the tips of the blades?
Reimer: The blades are not lit. That would look awesome for a disco, but not (for a turbine in the ocean). There are lights on the nacelles throughout the array, but we are installing … an automatic detection system that will trigger the lights when aircraft, even small aircraft, enter into appropriate air space. These things won’t be lit all the time. They’ll only be lit at night when planes fly in and out of the set detection zone. Quite honestly I can’t remember the number off the top of my head, but when I read it I thought it was incredibly low. There aren’t many planes flying at night basically over the ocean, over the coast, and because of this automatic detection system, (the lights) only get triggered at certain times when those aircraft are in proximity to the facility itself.
17. Can commercial fishing fleets work within the wind farm?
Reimer: Absolutely. The only thing they will not be permitted to do is tie off on the towers themselves. They can go in and out as often as they would like. There will be no restrictions during the operation of this facility. That’s something else we’re very glad to be cleaning up.
18. How close can recreational fishermen get to the turbine towers?
Reimer: It’s the same thing. They can get close but they can’t tie off on them.
It’s important to know. Allow me to elaborate. The original design as contemplated before I got here with Ørsted contemplated an optimized design that optimized wind flow through the farm. Because of feedback received from the fishing community, we completely redesigned the project to be this grid layout to allow for much easier travel through the lease area because it’s laid out in these straight, gridded lines. We do value feedback from stakeholders and in this particular case we sort of un-optimized it. We sort of left economics on the table because of the feedback we were getting from the fishing community to put this much more in a grid pattern for ease of movement through the lease area itself.
Martinez: I would add we have invested in a facility in Maryland called MITAGS (Maritime Institute of Technology and Graduate Studies). It’s a partnership that Ørsted has. The best way I could describe it is as an Imax movie theater with an exact replication of the Ocean Wind project – the turbine size, the distance between the turbines. It’s essentially the bridge of a ship. Mariners and commercial fishermen we have invited in to experience what it’s like to actually navigate through the wind farm. It’s so lifelike you can get seasick.
19. A Rutgers study looking at the impact of other wind farms on fishing was inconclusive about how Ocean Wind would impact fishing off the south Jersey coast because the cold pool here is much different than the other areas studied. What studies can you point to that show Ocean Wind wouldn’t have a detrimental impact on recreational and commercial fishing?
Reimer: The answer to that is no. Again, I would follow up that just like the engineer, the math and science guy in me, it’s virtually impossible to prove a negative. There is no way you can conduct a study that says something in theory won’t have an impact. That’s not offshore wind. I’m not speaking for Ørsted. I’m just speaking for myself. You can’t have a study that says something in theory won’t impact. The short answer to the question is no. But we know from our experience in operating our Block Island wind farm that offshore wind and fishing can co-exist. The sample size might be a little small for Block Island, but the sample size once you include Europe, that starts to become meaningful and they have co-existed. We are of the opinion that fishing gets improved by these, it gets better because of these artificial reefs that they are creating.
I want to take a step back. BOEM, that is in charge of issuing these lease areas, they conducted studies over years and years to see which sections of federal waters were appropriate for lease. Part of that analysis includes a great many different things. One of those things is its impact on fishing. If you’ve seen where prime fishing maps are, and you overlay that on the boundaries for where Ocean Wind I project are, there is not much happening in our lease area anyway. One of the reasons that BOEM selected that area is because, in my mind, is it’s like a desert under water. There’s not much happening there so that is why BOEM selected it as an appropriate spot to build.
20. How much and what types of oil, lubrication and other chemicals are in each wind turbine and tower, how often does that get changed and what risk does that pose for spills into the ocean?
Reimer: I’m not sure if there is any oil anymore. On the substation there may be cooling liquid. I don’t think the turbines have any kind of lubricant now that they’re direct drive. I know that it has never been an issue. There has never been a recorded incident of spilling. If there is a lubricant, I think it is biodiesel. I know from my time in developing solar, there are cooling lubricants associated with some of that heavy electrical equipment, but that all transitioned over to basically biodiesel. (Biodiesel is a form of renewable fuel derived from plants or animals, or recycled animal grease, according to https://afdc.energy.gov.) It is not your traditional oil lubricant. That really takes away a lot of the environmental concerns. If there are lubricants, standard design practices dictate not just containment but double containment. I am not aware of any of that happening on any of the offshore wind farms anywhere. I just don’t think that is a problem for offshore. I think that is a gas and oil industry thing, not a wind energy thing.