Offshore wind developers are starting to make good on their job-creation promises, but that hasn’t ended opposition to their projects.

Danish wind power company Ørsted A/S on Friday announced a $70 million contract with a Maryland steel company to supply components that will be used in the wind turbine foundations for Ørsted’s Mid-Atlantic offshore projects, its second supply-chain announcement this month.

The contract with Crystal Steel Fabricators in Federalsburg, Md., will create jobs for up to 50 welders, fitters, machinists and others who will manufacture turbine foundation boat landings, ladders, platforms, railings, gratings and other items for least three Ørsted projects: the Skipjack Wind project off Ocean City, Md. and Ocean Wind 1 and 2 in New Jersey. Crystal Steel will begin construction of new facilities to accommodate the work this month.

On Oct. 6, Ørsted announced it will spend $20 million to build an operations and maintenance center in Worcester County, Md., which will house up to three zero-emission crew transfer vessels to service the Skipjack wind farm. The facility will provide 110 temporary and permanent full-time jobs, a fraction of the almost 1,400 jobs the company says its 120-MW Skipjack 1 project will create across the state.

Press releases announcing the two deals included congratulatory quotes from Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) and U.S. Sens. Ben Cardin (D) and Chris Van Hollen (D), who like politicians up and down the East Coast have embraced offshore wind as an economic development engine.

Concerns over Fishing, Tourism

But the projects also have sparked opposition from the fishing industry and tourism-dependent businesses. The Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) must decide by Dec. 18 whether to approve Ørsted’s Skipjack 2.1, which could be as large as 882 MW, and US Wind’s proposed Momentum Wind project, which will also be located east of Ocean City. (Case No. 9666)

The Clean Energy Jobs Act of 2019 directed the commission procure at least 1,200 MW of offshore wind projects in its second solicitation. In 2017, the PSC approved 368 MW in OSW by Skipjack and US Wind. (See Md. PSC OKs 368 MW in Offshore Wind Projects.)

Ocean City, a town of just under 7,000 residents that swells with beach visitors in the summer, is perched on a narrow barrier island known as Fenwick Island.

At  PSC public hearings Sept. 28 and 30 on Skipjack 2.1 and Momentum Wind some speakers welcomed the projects, while others objected, with particular criticism of the planned location of US Wind’s site, which could come as close as 13 miles to Ocean City.

Resident Danny Robinson, who said he works in a local restaurant, said the projects would lead to the “complete looting of our local resources and tourism industry” to benefit the “big wind cartels.”

The 13-mile figure came in testimony filed at the PSC Aug. 25 by Matthew Filippelli, technical director of US Wind. He explained that the first of the turbines for the project will be built in the easternmost portion of the lease area, in federally owned waters approximately 22 miles offshore of Ocean City, extending westward to between 13 and 18 miles from shore, depending on the project size. Deborah Henry, project development director for Ørsted, testified her company’s turbines will be a minimum of 20 miles from shore.

Elected officials were also split on the projects. Evan Richards, representing the office of state Sen. Katherine Klausmeier (D), said she supports both wind farms, calling the development “one of her proudest legislative accomplishments.”

Jennifer Aiosa, chief sustainability officer for Baltimore County Executive Johnny Olszewski, also spoke forcefully in favor, saying, “How often are we offered the opportunity for large-scale economic development that actually improves the quality of our environment?”

But Maryland state Sen. Mary Beth Carozza, a Republican whose district encompasses the town, said “the Ocean City way of life for both residents and visitors may be no more with the latest proposals. Why would we put all this at risk? The turbines should be moved further offshore.”

Terry McGean, city engineer for Ocean City, warned of “a wall of turbines across the entire Ocean City beach horizon.”

Ocean City Mayor Richard Meehan also expressed concern. “We support offshore wind, but not at the expense of the future of the town of Ocean City. It was supposed to be more than 20 miles offshore — allowing it to be closer contradicts the commission’s own opinion.”

PSC Communications Director Tori Leonard said she was not certain what “opinion” Mayor Meehan was referring to.

The commission’s 2017 order awarding US Wind and Skipjack offshore wind renewable energy credits (ORECs) in its first OSW solicitation directed U.S. Wind to locate its project “in the eastern-most portion of the Maryland Wind Energy Area that can reasonably and practicably accommodate” it.

“Notwithstanding the legal permissibility of a proposed OSW project to locate as close as 10 miles off the coast of the state, we find that there is a strong public interest in ensuring that impacts to the viewshed as a result of an OSW project are minimized to the fullest extent possible,” the order said. (Case 9431)

In its 2020 order approving Skipjack’s request to increase the size of the turbines it planned to use, the commission noted that it had required Skipjack to “use best commercially-reasonable efforts to minimize visual impacts. Nowhere did the commission require that the project be invisible from the shore. For these reasons, the commission finds that it is not commercially reasonable to require the project to be moved beyond the visibility of Ocean City’s shore.” (Case 9629) (See Md. PSC Approves Larger OSW Turbines.)

Project Doubled

Skipjack’s proposal to add up to 882 MW of turbines in Phase 2.1 more than doubles the 335 MW it planned for Phase 2 as of last December. Henry testified that the company had made the more modest plan before Congress extended the Investment Tax Credit to offshore wind. “The extension of the Investment Tax Credit allowed Skipjack to revisit its plans and submit a second, larger option that builds on economies of scale and provides even greater investment in, and benefits to, the state of Maryland,” she said.

Since the Maryland PSC approved Skipjack 1 in 2017, Ørsted says it has invested nearly $40 million in the state, including more than $13 million at Tradepoint Atlantic, a port in Baltimore County where it is creating an offshore wind staging center on the site of the former Sparrows Point steel mill. (See Former Steel Mill Eyes OSW Future.)

Ørsted, which said it expects to begin commercial operations at Skipjack 1 in the second half of 2026, did not respond to multiple requests for comment as to when construction will begin.

US Wind, majority-owned by Italian renewable energy developer Renexia SpA, filed three applications to Maryland for ORECs — for 411.6 MW, 808.5 MW and 1205.4 MW. It said it would begin construction in 2025 and start commercial operations on the 411.5 MW in 2026.

US Wind’s Filippelli testified that Momentum Wind “represents up to $10.7 billion in industry output, nearly 2,000 full time jobs, and approximately $575 million in state and local taxes from construction through the 25-year operating life.”

Filippelli added that “for larger OREC 2 awards US Wind may also consider a much larger service operations vessel, requiring use of Baltimore or another port in addition to the Ocean City area, which is both space and water depth constrained.”