By James FitzPatrick
Contributing Writer
More than 6,200 pages of data and scientific discussion in just 45 days.
That’s what the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has asked the public to review in the draft environmental impact statement for the massive 200-turbine offshore wind project known as Atlantic Shores South.
That’s too much in too little time, say leaders of local coastal communities.
“With over 6,200 pages, it’s simply unrealistic to expect the public to fully understand a document of this magnitude within such a limited time frame,” said Brigantine Mayor Vince Sera.
Right now the closeout date for comment is July 3. Sera, who has been leading the call for a pause on offshore wind development since marine mammal deaths began happening late last year, is asking for a 90-day extension.
Longport is making a similar request, calling for an extension of up to 135 days.
“Contrary to the stated intention, the sheer length of the document and the limited review period of 45 days precludes meaningful public input, and is not consistent with a number of provisions of the Council of Environmental Quality’s National Environmental Policy Act rules,” wrote Longport Deputy Mayor Daniel J. Lawler in a June 7 letter to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.
“Our citizens must be provided a reasonable amount of time to comprehend this vast document and prepare their comments.”
The public will have the opportunity to meet with BOEM officials 5 p.m. Thursday, June 22 at the Atlantic City Convention Center to ask questions. It’s the second of two in-person public meetings, the first being Wednesday, June 21 in Manahawkin.
There will be no stepping up to a microphone and addressing a panel before a crowd. Instead it will be an informal open house. There will be a series of project information posters staffed by BOEM experts who will share information on an individual basis. You can also leave questions or comments in writing, or provide oral comments by meeting with a court reporter.
Reports and documents up for review include the draft environmental impact statement, construction and operations plan and appendices, scoping summary and appendix, and a cumulative historic resources visual effects analysis. Counting appendices, in all there are 72 documents available for review and a list of acronyms in the glossary that tops 200. Follow this link to access all of them: https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/state-activities/atlantic-shores-deis-virtual-meetings
The documentation is massive because the project is massive.
The two-part Atlantic Shores South, a joint venture between Shell New Energies, LLC and Offshore Development, LLC, calls for up to 200 wind turbine generators, between 105 and 136 for Project 1 and between 64 and 95 for Project 2. Turbines will be located 8.7 miles from shore at their closest point with up to 10 offshore power stations.
Part 1 would be able to produce 1,510 MW of electricity; Part 2 targets 1,327 MW. It’s all routed through nearly 600 miles of high-voltage cable buried 6 feet under the ocean floor.
Both would be by spinning turbine blades with a maximum tip height of 1,048.8 feet – taller than the Eiffel Tower. Turbines will be visible not just from the beach, but from points inland as well.
From fish to birds, bats to sea mammals, all will be impacted in various ways, the documents explain in minute details and scientific jargon.
There is a separate document called Appendix I: Finding of Adverse Effect for National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which documents how the project would “cause adverse effects on historic property by altering, directly or indirectly, characteristics that qualify the historic property for inclusion in the National Register.”
Affected sites include well-known locations such as Atlantic City Boardwalk Hall, Gillian’s Wonderland Pier, Lucy, The Margate Elephant, Margate Fishing Pier, Missouri Avenue Beach (Chicken Bone Beach), and the Ocean City Music Pier plus a number of historic districts in between.
Meanwhile, more and more groups are coming forward to say that what inspired those historic properties to be built in the first place – a beautiful ocean – is being put at risk.
Clean Ocean Action says while it can support reasonable and responsible wind energy development, the current process is “fast-track large-scale industrialization without due diligence, transparency, and robust scientific baseline information and is not reasonable or responsible.
“The federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) released the 2,000 + page draft environmental impact statement, for oil giant Shell’s Atlantic Shores South. The public only has 45 days to review this monstrous document for offshore and onshore impacts. Demand more time for review!”
Standing apart from the crowd is Cape May County Government, which is fully opposed to the projects by the Danish company, Orsted, that have been approved off of Cape May County beaches: Ocean Wind 1, and Ocean Wind 2.
On June 13 the Cape May County Board of Commissioners unanimously voted to beef up its legal team.
Former New Jersey Superior Court Judge Michael Donohue has been leading the county’s efforts related to offshore wind since 2020. Now the county is hiring Cultural Heritage Partners based in Virginia to defend historic resources in the county. The county has also brought in the Washington, D.C. based Marzulla Law Firm, which specializes in challenging federal regulatory decisions.
Anthony Bocchi of Cullen, Dykman in New York and Washington, D.C., will look at the permits issued to Orsted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
Donohue will continue working for the county challenging approvals issued to Orsted by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities in the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court.
Cape May County Commission Director Len Desiderio said unless studies can prove that the marine mammal deaths were not caused by the offshore wind surveying, the work should be halted.
“And if those studies show that our losses will be severe, then these windmills should not be built,” Desiderio said. “Our serious legal team will be looking for avenues to stop these projects from damaging our environment and our economy.”
He noted that Orsted has acknowledged that the windmills will be visible from every beach in Cape May County. The county also cites a Harvard study that concluded offshore wind will do more harm than good by blocking cooling sea breezes and could potentially be more harmful to the climate than burning fossil fuels.
Yet another front in the battle against Orsted was opened when on June 16, Save LBI, Defend Brigantine Beach and Protect Our Coast NJ teamed up to file a suit in Superior Court against NJDEP and Orsted over state approval of federal wind turbine leases off Atlantic City and Ocean City. The suit alleges that the decision “ignores evidence that turbines will cause major environmental damage to coastal zones.”
The case challenges NJDEP’s approval of Ocean Wind 1. The 98 turbines, each weighing up to 5 million pounds “will crush and destroy the seabed.”
“DEP has acknowledged the wind turbines will destroy marine habitat, compress the seafloor, severely damage marine communities, compromise migration corridors for endangered marine mammals, cause commercial fishing stocks to decline, and injure the beach economy,” said Bruce Afran, attorney for the three groups.
“Yet, the state persists in the bizarre belief that this massive engineering project will not injure our state’s coastal zone, one of the most important marine communities on the East Coast and the core of New Jersey’s $47 billion tourist industry,” he added.
Push back against offshore wind is also coming from Congress.
On June 15, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) agreed to investigate New Jersey’s offshore wind development program for its potential impact on the environment, the fishing industry, military operations, and navigational safety, Rep. Chris Smith announced.
Smith and Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R 2nd) have been two of the loudest voices in Congress suggesting that there’s something fishy about the way the offshore wind policy is being pushed through at the state and national levels in spite of its potential harms and costs.
“This aggressive, independent investigation into the ocean-altering impacts of the 3,400 offshore wind turbines slated for the Jersey Shore will help address the wide-ranging questions and concerns that the Biden Administration and Governor (Phil) Murphy continue to dismiss as they plow full steam ahead with this unprecedented offshore wind industrialization of our shore,” the 4th District Republican said.
Smith said a May poll shows New Jersey residents oppose continued offshore wind development by a margin of 42 to 33 percent in light of concerns over the spate of whale and dolphin deaths along the shore.
Despite the growing backlash, Gov. Murphy remains pleased with the way things are going.
“BOEM’s announcement of the draft environmental impact statement for Atlantic Shores South represents an inflection point not just for this pivotal project, but for New Jersey’s clean energy future,” said Murphy in a press release.
“Responsible offshore wind development remains integral to our pursuit of a 100 percent clean energy economy by 2035, a pursuit that has only become more necessary and urgent as a result of the worsening climate crisis. In addition to limiting greenhouse gas emissions and powering more than 600,000 homes, Atlantic Shores South will generate thousands of good-paying jobs and nearly $2 billion in economic impact for the Garden State.”
For those who cannot make it June 22, there will be Zoom/telephone meetings 1 p.m. Monday, June 26; and 5 p.m. Wednesday, June 28. Click here to access Zoom links and other commenting guidelines and options, including by mail or online.
Copy editor and Contributing Writer James FitzPatrick has been a community journalist in Atlantic and Cape May counties for more than 30 years, including 20 years as editor of The Current Newspapers. He lives in Hammonton.
