Category Archives: Offshore

OPC rendering courtesy of Eastern Shipbuilding Group

The U.S. Coast Guard has launched a full and open competition for follow-on projects to design and build up to 11 offshore patrol cutters to complement the maritime law enforcement service's national security and fast response cutters.

USCG said Monday it will accept responses to the new OPC solicitation through May 28 and aims to name the winning contractor in the second quarter of fiscal 2022.

Panama City, Florida-based Eastern Shipbuilding Group won a $110.3 million contract in September 2016 to complete lead OPC detailed design work. The company was awarded options two years later to begin the construction project and obtain lead-long time materials for a second OPC. According to ESG, the contract includes options to manufacture up to four vessels.

The follow-on contract will have a fixed-price-incentive-firm structure and covers logistics, training and life cycle engineering services, USCG noted in the request for proposals.

OPCs will account for 70 percent of the branch's offshore cutter fleet once the new vessels reach operational status and will support maritime security operations farther than 12 nautical miles.

The service intends to procure a total of 25 OPCs.

Original post:

Coast Guard Solicits Bids for Follow-On Offshore Patrol Cutter Contract - Executive Mosaic Media

by Barby MacGowan 2 Feb 08:09 PST August 19-21, 2021

The 17th edition of the Ida Lewis Distance Race starts Thursday, August 19, 2021 and will keep its expanded format from last year to give competitors more options while the country continues to deal with changes brought about by the COVID 19 Pandemic.

The schedule consists of:

The start for the Offshore Races will be in the East Passage of Narragansett Bay on Friday, August 20th with the first Warning Signal scheduled for 1100. The start for the IN BAY Race will be in the East Passage of Narragansett Bay on Saturday, August 21st with the first Warning Signal scheduled for 1000.

Race headquarters will be located at the Ida Lewis Yacht Club, Wellington Avenue, Newport, R.I., and manned throughout the time of the races.

The offshore portion of the Ida Lewis Distance Race has become a popular late-summer racing tradition, enjoyed by veteran offshore sailors as well as those trying the "overnight sprint" for the first time. It begins off Fort Adams and ends just inside Newport Harbor where Ida Lewis volunteers can site the finish line from their clubhouse on Lime Rock before greeting each team on the water with a congratulatory bottle of Prosecco.

Unique to the Ida Lewis Distance Race, the Race Committee considers weather forecasts to decide from among four courses that range from 112 to 169 nautical miles. The goal is to get all teams back to the dock within 18-24 hours. The courses - incorporating some of the most iconic cruising grounds in New England - are named "The Montauk", "The Block Island", "The Point Judith", and "The Buzzards Bay Tower".

Classes are for boats 28 feet or longer and include IRC, PHRF, One Design, Multihull, Double-Handed, and, new for this year, Mixed Double-Handed (to debut at the 2024 Olympics). The race also Includes Youth and Collegiate Challenge categories.

The Notice of Race has been published here. For questions, contact Race Chairman Pat Kennedy,

Go here to see the original:

Ida Lewis Distance Race returns with In Bay and Offshore Races - Sail World

KINGSTON, R.I. February 1, 2021 A survey of recreational boaters conducted by a team of University of Rhode Island researchers found that offshore wind farms detract significantly from the boating experience.

Tracey Dalton, the URI professor of marine affairs who led the survey, said that while most respondents indicated that seeing offshore wind turbines far in the distance did not affect their experience, most preferred not to go boating close to the turbines.

There have been a lot of studies looking at the ecological impacts of offshore wind farms, but were interested in what happens when you put a new structure in place in the ocean and how it impacts people that have historically and culturally used that space, Dalton said.

More than 680 boaters with a hailing port in Rhode Island completed surveys in 2018. All owned Coast Guard-certified boats, meaning their vessels were at least 26-feet long. The research was published in December in the journal Marine Policy.

According to Dalton, the survey results were not homogenous among every category of boater. Those whose boating objective was fishing, for example, were less negatively affected by the turbines, perhaps because the turbine structures have been shown to attract sport fish. Non-fishermen and those who had never been close to the Block Island wind farm before indicated their experience was most negative.

We dont really know why they reacted that way, Dalton said. It could be because of navigational concerns or concerns about other boaters being nearby, since the structures attract other users and it can get crowded out there.

The Block Island wind farm is relatively close to shore, she added. Most wind farms that have been proposed along the East Coast are going to be much farther offshore, so its not clear if well see the same issues for those that we see here.

About 1.7 million acres off the East Coast are being considered for offshore wind development in the coming decade, so the results of the URI survey could have significant implications.

As we think about where were going to put wind farms, we have to be careful because were going to displace users, said Dalton. In this case, the boaters dont mind being far from turbines, so as long as theres not a wall of turbines stretched across the ocean, they can move away from them. But managers should be aware of the heterogeneity within the boating population. Fishermen feel differently than those not fishing; those whove been to the Block Island wind farm seem to feel differently than those who havent. The more people visit a wind farm, the more comfortable they might be around them.

If navigation concerns are driving some of the concerns expressed by the boaters, Dalton suggests that those responsible for managing the waters around wind farms consider providing additional training for boaters.

Im also interested in the social carrying capacity of offshore wind farms, Dalton said. Boaters dont want to be in places where there are a lot of other boaters, so one study I want to pursue is looking at how levels of use at wind farm sites are impacting users. Are they attracting so many users that its turning others away?

This study was funded by Rhode Island Sea Grant.

The rest is here:

URI survey finds offshore wind farms reduce value of recreational boating experience - URI Today

For the past week, weve reported on a series of weather systems that conspired to deliver solid surf to the Caribbean and the East Coast. Over the weekend, the islands saw their largest waves of the season so far, plus a reinforcing pulse keeping the surf well overhead to start the week. Our attention now shifts back to the mainland, where a large storm system is swallowing the East Coast. This same system is already helping to improve the conditions down in the Caribbean, while also dumping snow in the Northeast and brewing surf from the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of Maine.

Live Cam Streams: Snowy Northeast Barrels | Warm-water waves from Florida to Puerto Rico

No snow spotted on Saturday at Tres Palmas. Photo: Darren Muschett

On Monday, while Florida and the Southeast enjoy clean, offshore conditions set up by this large storm centered just off the Mid Atlantic coast, the system simultaneously funnels in moisture thats now precipitating as snow across Long Island and the rest of the Northeast. This is forecast to become the biggest snow event in years for this region, since the system wont really move much over the next day or two. Expect the snow to continue through Tuesday, and even into Wednesday morning across northern New England, before the system finally lifts north and exits through Canada on Wednesday. But amongst the flurries, there will be waves.

Detailed Forecast Analysis: New England |New York |Mid Atlantic | Outer Banks

This week, waves reach from the warm, blue waters of the Caribbean to the cold, snowy beaches of the Northeast. Watch more live streams from around the Northeast.

Look for a solid, well-overhead mix of southerly and easterly surf to come up in the Northeast on Monday and into Tuesday. The south-facing beaches of Long Island and Rhode Island are the prime locations on Tuesday as stiff, northerly offshores settle in for the day. Portions of the Mid Atlantic that face more south than east will be working, as well. Easing but fun surf continues on Wednesday far less challenging than the pumping, snowy surf thats on tap Tuesday. Breaks in northern New England should turn on midweek as the winds trend more northerly once the system is on its way out.

Premium Forecast Analysis: Southeast |North-Central Florida | South Florida | West Florida | Puerto Rico

As noted above, this massive system spans the length of the coast, and Northeast surfers wont be the only ones to benefit. West Florida (in the Gulf of Mexico) sees a few days of head-high and even bigger surf from strong NW flow set up by the system, while East Florida sees easing, long-period swell. Portions of South Florida will also see some quality shorter-period waves generated by the same NW winds that send waves to the Gulf.

Were also watching for a couple more systems to move off the East Coast between now and the start of next week. Stay tuned to your Regional Forecast to see how this activity will affect your surf.

Expert forecasts

More here:

Strong Winter Storm Brings Snow, Offshore Winds and Solid Surf to the East Coast - Surfline.com Surf News

By Dario Mulazzani, DAVI Product & Market Specialist Wind Energy & Heavy-Duty Division.

Located in such a dynamic and extremely powerfulelement as the sea, foundations represent one of the main elementsof any offshore wind farm, accounting for over one-fourth of the total equipmentcost. As they mustsupport the wind turbines, absorbing all the forces and loads and providing asafe and stable base, defining the right typologyof foundation can have a huge impact both on the economicand technical sides.

Offshore wind farms cantypically be placed in a few selected locations only. There are two mainconditions limiting the range of use of this type of installations:

The development of newtechnologies, manufacturing and construction procedures, the increase in thesize of wind farms and turbines together with higher societys awareness ofvisual and environmental impacts, have led to the displacement of theseinstallations further from the coastline than ever before.

Depending on thedepth of the seabed, as well as the surrounding conditions, different foundationsolutions can be used:

There is however a typologythat stands out above the others, both infrequency and range of use: the monopiles, being selected in more than 60% of the worldwide offshore windinstallations. Monopiles are deployed in the majority of depths andenvironments due to main characteristics, as follows:

Inorder to adapt to the needs of new more efficient and demanding wind farms,monopiles design has evolved over the years. Its main dimensions, diameter,thickness and length have steadily increased to be able to support higherand heavier more powerful turbines installed at greater depths.

It has been observed that both the length and the diameter of the piles have evolved proportionally to the power of the turbines, maintaining constant ratios which can be summarized as follows:

For instance, for a 6-7MW turbine (being the most mature capacity to date), monopiles are typically inthe 90-100m length range with diameters and thickness at bottom sections of 9mand 90-100mm respectively for an overall weight often exceeding 1500 ton.

Asmentioned, offshore installation allows for the deployment of larger turbines(both in terms of capacity and physical size), mostly due to constraintsrelated to onshore transportation of the relevant heavy and expansiveequipment: this is desirable as a wind farm comprised of larger turbines willnecessarily require lower investment and maintenance cost per installedcapacity, maximizing the project profitability.

It is hence likely thatoffshore wind turbines capacity will keep increasing with some manufacturersalready bringing to the market 12-14MW turbines (such as the GE Haliade-X,currently being tested onshore). Although the aforementioned ratios are expectedto decrease due to physical limitations, the so called XXL monopiles will weighup to 3000 tons with diameters and thickness at bottom sections rangingfrom 12-14m and 120-140mm respectively.

Other foundation typologies are expected to follow a similar increasing trend.

The manufacturing challenges

All types ofoff-shore foundations are comprised of large plates jointed together and rolledinto cans and cones; such workpieces are then assembled and welded into largestructures which, in the case of Monopile Foundations, can reach up to 120min length. With plates thickness often exceeding 140mm and increasinglylarge diameters (>12m) it becomes critical to minimize the amount ofcircumferential welding required to grow the overall length, often leading tothe selection of increasingly large plates (up to 4.5m in width, withweights often exceeding 150 tons each).

Thus, fabricatorsengaged in the manufacturing of such heavy-duty off-shore foundations will needto face and overcome two main manufacturing constraints, as follows:

For all these reasons, the fabrication of offshore foundations is certainly the most challenging and time-consuming rolling operation.

Stayahead of the Market with DAVI!

Fabricators are hence in need of a technology partner able to deliver high performance and reliable rolling solutions, capable of sustaining the demanding serial production characteristics of this Industry by increasing rolling accuracy, output and operators safety while decreasing downtimes, floor-to-floor processing time and manpower requirements.

Since 2007,when DAVI Wind Energy Division was created, DAVI has been leading theMarket thanks to its cutting-edge technology developed working alongthe most accredited project developers and towers and foundationsmanufacturers.

For instance, tobetter serve the Off-shore Wind Energy Sector, dedicated heavy-duty feeding andhandling equipment are continuously being developed and updated toensure that Fabricators entering the DAVI World are provided with the mostadvanced hardware allowing them to maintain competitiveness in a fastchanging and dynamic environment, requiring more and more challengingworkpieces to be manufactured every year.

To date DAVI isalready the technology partner selected by most major players, with over 300installations dedicated to the Wind Energy Industry worldwide andapproximately 60% of the overall Wind Energy rolling machines marketshare.

Dont miss out, stay ahead with DAVI!

Note:The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Offshore WIND.

See more here:

Evolution of Offshore Foundations - Offshore WIND

It's a sharp contrast between those who see opportunity and those who feel threatened

BRISTOL, Maine On this brilliant winter day, you could stand on the rocks at Pemaquid Point with a clear view of Monhegan Island in the distance, and feel the wind coming off the water. There is often wind over the ocean, and thats why there is such interest in developing offshore wind turbines in the Gulf of Maine.

Offshore wind power is a signature goal of the Mills administration and is seen as one of the ways to fight climate change by generating electricity without carbon emissions.

Offshore wind is a really significant opportunity for the state of Maine, for our energy future and economy, Dan Burgess, Director of the Governor's Energy Office, said.

But the image of huge, floating wind turbines has many in Maines fishing industry very worried. Among them is lobsterman Gerry Cushman of Port Clyde, a leader in both the Maine Lobstermens Association and the Maine Coast Fishermens Association.

And our message to the Governor is we hope you get behind the fishermen and help us fight this. We have no option but to fight this. We have to fight this not just for now but for our kids.

It is a sharp contrast between those who see opportunity and those who feel threatened, and the Mills dministration is trying to navigate those turbulent waters.

Offshore wind has been talked about in Maine for more than a decade, starting with former Gov. John Baldacci, who embraced a research proposal from the University of Maine to develop floating offshore platforms for huge wind turbines. Europe has deployed many wind turbines along its coast and in shallow waters, but at that time only Norway had developed a floating turbine. In the U.S., Rhode Island now has a few stationary turbines in the ocean, off Block Island, and Massachusetts now has the approval to build the latter Vineyard Wind project off Marthas Vineyard, also with stationary turbines fastened to the seafloor.

Maines vision, started by the University and embraced by Gov. Mills, is the floating platforms holding huge turbines, as tall as 600 feet, which could be anchored 20 to 40 miles out to sea, where the winds are consistently stronger. The University has received multiple federal grants for the design and built a small scale test platform, which was operated successfully in the waters off Castine.

Fishermen, and especially lobstermen have been worried about floating turbines for several years, fearing the size of the platforms, and the need for significant anchor cables running to the bottom and for large, underwater cables taking the electricity to shore will take away some of their fishing ground.

Those concerns were ratcheted up in November when Mills proposed a research array of floating turbines be located in federal waters, 20 to 40 miles offshore from the southern third of the Maine coast. The Mills administration has identified a large, general area it is considering but is asking fishermen to help identify a precise, 16-square mile portion where the proposal will be focused.

Cushman said the fishermen really dont want the turbines anywhere.

The Gulf of Maine looks huge but it's not, and 99 percent is being fished, said Cushman.

"16 miles is not a little area, and maybe just the beginning, we dont know."

He predicts fishermen will lose prime ground for lobstering, which will, in turn, cost them and the economy millions of dollars.

On Monday, Mills sent a letter to fishermen, saying she understands their concerns, but that the need for fighting climate change is too important to not pursue offshore wind. And she warned that sooner or later the development will happen.

Make no mistake about it, offshore wind is coming to the Gulf of Maine, even without my support, the Governor wrote in the letter.

Dan Burgess of the Energy Office says there is significant interest in developing offshore wind, here and elsewhere.

There is such interest in offshore wind, up and down the coast, and this research array really puts Maine in the driver's seat, Burgess said.

The Governor tried to soften the blow in her letter by pledging a 10-year moratorium on wind development in state waters, inside the three-mile limit. She said wind turbines don't belong in those areas, which are heavily fished in the summer and early fall. There have been rumors of a company called Triton planning to build a large wind array in state waters, but no actual proposal has yet been revealed or submitted.

However, there is already one floating turbine project being planned in state waters, and it is not included in the moratorium. The project is known as Aqua Ventus and is planned as a full-size test of the University's floating platform design. It would be located on a test site approved ten years ago by the Maine Legislature, nearly three miles off Monhegan island. The project is now a partnership between the University and subsidiaries of two large, international offshore wind companies. Those businesses are planning to invest as much as $100 million to build and deploy the 600-foot turbine on a 350-foot wide floating platform. The goal is to test and prove the UMaine technology, with the hope it can then be used on other sites, including the proposed research array.

Our goal ultimately is to be in the water summer of 2023, said Chris Wissman of New England Aqua Ventus, the official name of the partnership.

Wissman, too, said there is lots of interest in developing offshore wind power off Maine, calling that growth inevitable.

The Mills administration said it intends to keep pushing the proposal for the research array, seeking needed federal support to begin the needed studies for permits, hoping construction could begin on the water as soon as five years.

The Governors letter to the fishing industry said Mills hopes to continue talking about the concept with the fishing industry to identify the precise area of the ocean, and also identify problems.

A coalition of fishing groups called the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance said they also support clean energy development to fight climate change but have deep concerns about offshore wind. The groups did say it will keep talking with the Governors office about the plan.

Read the original here:

Promise of offshore wind power promoted by Mills, feared by fisherman - NewsCenterMaine.com WCSH-WLBZ

The Ninth Circuit vacated U.S. Department of the Interior approvals for a proposed offshore oil drilling and production facility in Alaska after finding its EIS improperly failed to consider impacts associated with foreign oil consumption and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Biological Opinion relied on overly vague mitigation measures and improperly failed to quantify the projects nonlethal take of polar bears. Center for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt, 982 F.3d 723 (9th Cir. 2020).

Conservation groups challenged the Bureau of Ocean Energy Managements (BOEM) approval of the Liberty Project, which proposes to produce crude oil from Foggy Island Bay off the northern coast of Alaska, for failure to comply with procedural requirements of NEPA, the ESA, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Project proponents estimated that the Project would produce approximately 120 million barrels of crude oil over a period of fifteen to twenty years. To do so, the Project would require construction of various new facilities including an offshore gravel island, wells, a pipeline to transport the oil, a gravel mine, and additional ice roads and crossings. The Project site is characterized by its ecological diversity and for providing habitat and food sources for threatened and endangered marine mammals, including polar bears.

EIS That Failed to Address Greenhouse Gas Emissions Resulting from Foreign Oil Consumption Violated NEPA

The Ninth Circuit was persuaded by one of two arguments raised by the conservation groups concerning BOEMs compliance with NEPA. The court held that BOEM had failed to analyze indirect effects of the Project as required by NEPA by arbitrarily failing to include emissions estimates resulting from foreign oil consumption in its analysis of the Projects no-action alternative. Counterintuitively, the EIS had concluded that maintaining the status quo under the no-action alternative would result in greater air emissions of priority pollutants as compared with the Project because, BOEM said, the production gap would be filled with substitutes produced from countries with comparatively weaker environmental protection standards. However, the EIR did not quantify the purported change in foreign oil consumption. BOEM argued that it could not have summarized or estimated foreign emissions associated with changes in foreign consumption with accurate or credible scientific evidence.

The court rejected BOEMs failure to either quantify downstream greenhouse gas emissions or to thoroughly explain why such an estimate is impossible. The court specifically faulted the EIR for failing to summarize existing research addressing foreign oil emissions and for ignoring basic economics principles, including changes to equilibrium price and demand effects of the Project. Moreover, the court declined to accord deference to BOEMs economic analysis of greenhouse gas emissions, stating that BOEMs area of expertise is the management of conventional (e.g. oil and gas) and renewable energy-related functions, including activities involving resource evaluation, planning, and leasing. Based on these findings, the court found that the BOEMs failure to address global emissions constituted an impermissible failure to evaluate reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts required to be analyzed under NEPA.

Reliance on Overly Vague Mitigation Measures to Demonstrate No Adverse Modification of Polar Bear Critical Habitat Violated the ESA

The court invalidated BOEMs approval of the Project on additional grounds that it improperly relied upon a legally deficient Biological Opinion prepared by FWS to satisfy consultation and take regulations under the ESA and MMPA. The Biological Opinion recognized that polar bears, which are classified as threatened marine mammals, are present in the Project area and that denning polar bears could be disturbed by aspects of Project construction and operation including construction vibrations and vehicular noise. Nevertheless, FWS concluded that the Project would not jeopardize their continued existence or adversely modify their critical habitat.

However, with respect to FWSs habitat impact finding, the court held that the Biological Opinion impermissibly relied upon mitigation measures that the court found too vague or uncertain to be enforceable. Such impermissibly vague and unenforceable mitigation measures included (i) commitments to comply with requirements of future authorizations under the MMPA, (ii) cross-reference to other possible minimization measures that would reduce effects to polar bears, and (iii) other mitigation measures [as] may be required on a case-by-case basis. In the courts view, FWSs reliance on this mix of yet unapproved and undefined mitigation measures under the MMPA, noncommittal assurances, and examples of possible strategies respectively failed to meet its burden to rely only on mitigation measures that constitute a clear, definite commitment of resources and where performance is under agency control or otherwise reasonably certain to occur.

Failure to Quantify Nonlethal Take of Polar Bears Violated the ESA

Finally, the court held that FWS impermissibly failed to quantify the amount of nonlethal take of polar bears in its incidental take statement in violation of the ESA, which required FWS to impose a numerical cap on incidental take or to explain why no cap has been provided. In the Biological Opinion, FWS supplied numerical caps only for polar bear take in the form of death or injury, but not for nonlethal harassment, including disruption of behavioral patterns [such as] migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering. As the court noted, the Biological Opinion acknowledged the potential for increased polar bear-human interactions and ground disturbing construction activities that could cause polar bears to abandon their dens. Because FWS neither attempted to quantify such harassment nor show why it could not do so, the court held that FWS had violated the ESA, and in turn, that BOEMs reliance on the Biological Opinion in issuing final Project approvals was unlawful.

[View source.]

Continue reading here:

EIS and Biological Opinion Invalidated for Offshore Alaska Oil Project - JD Supra

Specifically, the Notice allows projects constructed offshore or on federal land to satisfy the applicable safe harbor under the rules for beginning of construction if they are placed into service no more than 10 calendar years after the calendar year during which construction began. Previously, under the general safe harbor requirements, these projects would have only had four years or would have been required to prove qualification based on facts and circumstances (as discussed further below).

This is a policy change that we indicated was likely to occur in our recent client alert regarding renewable energy tax extenders included in the year-end stimulus bill. That legislation included a new benefit for offshore wind projects, allowing such facilities to elect either the PTC or the ITC, with a 30% ITC available for offshore wind farms that begin construction by December 31, 2025.

The Continuity Safe Harbor

For a taxpayer seeking to claim PTCs or ITCs, the calendar year when such taxpayer is deemed to begin construction of the facility or property establishes the applicable amount of available tax credit. The available PTCs and ITCs decline over time based on the year of construction commencement, and therefore the determination of the year when construction begins is critical to taxpayers seeking to claim these credits.

Under current law, as updated by the recent stimulus legislation discussed above, the PTC is available at a rate of 100% for wind projects that began construction before 2017, and then phases down to 80% for projects that began construction during 2017, 60% for projects that began construction during 2018, 40% for projects that began construction during 2019, and then back up to 60% for projects that begin construction in 2020 and 2021. No PTC is available for projects that begin construction in 2022. The 30% solar ITC phased down to 26% for projects that start construction in 2020 and then will be reduced again to 22% in 2023 before it drops down to 10% going forward. Solar projects qualifying for a tax credit above 10% must be placed in service before 2026. Offshore wind projects can elect either the PTC (through 2021) or the ITC. The ITC for offshore wind is 30% for projects that begin construction by December 31, 2025, without any phase out.

For purposes of qualifying for PTCs or ITCs, a taxpayer may establish that construction has commenced on a facility (in the case of the PTC) or energy property (in the case of the ITC) in a particular calendar year by demonstrating that physical work of a significant nature has begun (Physical Work Test) or, by demonstrating that 5% or more of the total cost of such facility or energy property has been incurred (5% Safe Harbor).

In addition to initially satisfying either the Physical Work Test or the 5% Safe Harbor, the taxpayer must satisfy a continuity requirement. Under this continuity requirement, if construction commencement is established using the Physical Work Test, the taxpayer must thereafter maintain a continuous program of construction. If construction begins under the 5% Safe Harbor, then the taxpayer must make continuous efforts to advance toward completion of the property. Under generally applicable IRS guidance, a taxpayer is considered to satisfy the continuity requirement for either the Physical Work Test or the 5% Safe Harbor if the relevant facility or property is placed in service by the end of a calendar year that is no more than four calendar years after the calendar year when construction began (Continuity Safe Harbor).

If the taxpayer fails to complete the project within the applicable safe harbor period, then the taxpayer must otherwise prove that it meets the continuity requirement based on applicable facts and circumstances. Proving continuity based on facts and circumstance can be challenging, so, generally, tax equity investors require developers to place projects in service within the safe harbor period, rather than rely on continuous efforts.

Notice 2021-5

The Notice recognizes that projects located offshore or on federal land are subject to delays that result in longer development timelines as compared to other projects due to stringent permitting requirements, the difficulty of installing equipment offshore, heightened environmental regulation, and required transmission upgrades. The IRS observed that these delays are ordinarily outside the control of developers and can result in project completion times of up to twice as long as those of similar projects not constructed offshore or on federal land.

Accordingly, the Notice allows the Continuity Safe Harbor to be satisfied for projects constructed offshore or on federal land if they are placed into service no more than 10 calendar years after the calendar year during which construction commenced. This relief applies to Offshore Projects and Federal Land Projects. Offshore Projects include qualified facilities or energy property construction projects that will (1) be placed in service in inland navigable waters or coastal waters of the United States and (2) require the construction of one or more high-voltage transmission lines to connect the qualified facility or energy project to the U.S. electrical grid system. Federal Land Projects include qualified facilities or energy property construction projects that will (1) be more than 50% placed in service on federal land, as determined by relative value or relative area, and (2) require the construction of one or more high-voltage transmission lines to connect the qualified facility or energy project to the U.S. electrical grid system.

While the PTC is often closely associated with wind projects, geothermal projects on federal land are also a likely beneficiary of the guidance provided by the Notice. The Notice does not adjust the deadline for solar projects to be completed by the end of 2025 in order to qualify for an ITC greater than 10%. Any change to the ITC deadline would need to come through legislation.

Final Observations

This relief provided by the Notice will be helpful to developers and investors contemplating offshore wind projects and projects on federal land. In particular, the combination of the newly available 30% ITC, combined with the 10-year Continuity Safe Harbor provided by the Notice, should provide a big boost to offshore wind projects.

Continued here:

New Guidance from IRS Extends Safe Harbor for Offshore Wind and Federal Land Projects - JD Supra

Dive Brief:

New York's commitment to offshore wind is intended to position the state as a leader in wind turbine construction.

As part of the offshore wind agreement,Equinor said it has agreed to revitalize two New York ports the South Brooklyn Marine Terminal and the Port of Albany "into large-scale offshore wind working industrial facilities that position New York to become an offshore wind industry hub."

"The U.S. East Coast is one of the most attractive growth markets for offshore wind in the world," Equinor CEO Anders Opedal said in a statement. He added that the projects will "play a major role in the state's ambitions of becoming a global offshore wind hub."

Cuomo said companies have committed to manufacture wind turbine components within New York.

"We will advance our green manufacturing capacity and the jobs that go with it," he said. "We will establish the nation's first offshore wind tower manufacturing facility at the Port of Albany, transforming a brownfield into a state of the art factory for wind towers."

The Port of Albany project will create 500 construction jobs and will employ 300 full time workers, who will build 150 of the wind turbine towers each year, said Cuomo.

"With this plan, New York State will now have five active port facilities serving the offshore wind industry, more than any other state," Cuomo said.

The contract with Equinor "positions New York as the undeniable center of gravity for the burgeoning U.S. offshore wind industry," according to a renewable energy alert from law firm Hodgson Russ.

Clean energy stakeholders hailed Cuomo's announcements,noting that the state's clean energy strategy creates a strong link between the development of carbon-free resources and bolstering the economy.

"Nothing holds more potential to get our economy humming again than clean energy,"Rich Schrader,Natural Resources Defense Council's New York political director,said in a statement. "The governor's roadmap for the year ahead reflects this understanding."

The state is "smart to recognize that clean energy is a sector poised for growth and ready to help New York's economy recover from COVID,"Anne Reynolds, executive director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, said in a statement. "It is impressive that New York now has contracts for half of the 9,000 MW of offshore wind energy we are aiming for."

The state is also making a major investment in transmission. According to the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA),utility bills in the state last year reflected approximately $1 billion in congestion costs "because of bottlenecks on our antiquated transmission grid."

Cuomo said this year New York State will construct a new, $2 billion, 250-mile "green energy superhighway," and that construction is underway on the New York Power Authority's 86-mile Smart Path project from Massena to Croghan. Construction is expected to begin soon on several "key projects" in Western New York, Mid-Hudson, and the Capital Region, according to NYSERDA.

The RFP for a possible new transmission lineis seeking "to negotiate contracts for up to an aggregate 1,500 MW but may exceed this quantity if it receives proposals that are sufficiently compelling," according to the document.The state wants to make a decision on the project in the third quarter of this year.

New York will also contract for two dozen large-scale renewable energy generation projects in 2021, Cuomo announced, including 23 solar farms and one hydroelectric facility. They will combine for 2,200 MW of capacity. In the last five years, New York has contracted for the construction of 68 new large-scale renewables projects which will add 6,100 MW and generate investment of more than $12 billion.

The state is taking steps to accelerate the development of renewables projects. NYSERDA on Jan. 13 filed an implementation plan for the state's Clean Energy Resources Development and Incentives "Build-Ready" Program. That program will seek to identify locations in New York that may be suitable for renewables development, and works to advance those sites to a competitive solicitation to private developers.

According to the proposed implementation plan, the program will prioritize development of sites "that commercial developers might elect not to pursue due to complicated development challenges," including brownfields, abandoned commercial sites, landfills or former industrial sites.

The Build Ready program was authorized in the Accelerated Renewable Energy Growth and Community Benefit Act, passed in 2020. The legislation also created New York's new Office of Renewable Energy Siting, which aims to accelerate development of facilities 25 MW or larger.

Go here to read the rest:

To bolster green economy, New York will build nation's largest offshore wind program - Utility Dive

SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has notified a targeted number of customers in small portions of Calaveras, Fresno, Kern, Madera, Mariposa, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare and Tuolumne counties about a potential Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) Monday night. Dry conditions combined with high wind gusts pose an increased risk for damage to the electric system that could ignite fires in areas with dry vegetation.

PG&E Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is open and the companys meteorologists are monitoring the situation. In addition to the potential for a PSPS event in parts of PG&E service area, strong and gusty winds may cause flying debris and vegetation which can impact power lines and cause additional outages.

Forecasts show high fire-risk conditions arriving Monday evening in the southern portion of PG&Es service area, with high winds expected to subside by Wednesday morning. Before any restoration begins, PG&E will inspect de-energized lines to ensure they were not damaged by high winds. PG&E will restore power safely and as quickly as possible once the weather all-clear is given.

There is still uncertainty regarding the strength and timing of this weather wind event, which PG&E is carefully monitoring.

Potential for Small, Targeted Public Safety Power Shutoff: What People Should Know

The potential PSPS event is still two days away. PG&E in-house meteorologists as well as staff in its Wildfire Safety Operations Center and Emergency Operations Center continue to monitor conditions. PG&E will send additional customer notifications as we move closer to the potential event.

Customer notificationsvia text, email and automated phone callbegan this afternoon, two days prior to the potential shutoff. When possible, PG&E employees will knock on the doors of customers enrolled in the companys Medical Baseline program who do not verify that they have received these important safety messages. Those visits will focus on customers who rely on electricity for critical life-sustaining equipment.

Customers by county who could potentially be affected by this PSPS event

PSPS Not Likely for Bay Area Counties

Due to recent rains, relatively high humidity levels and the lack of any Red Flag Warnings in the Bay Area, PG&E does not anticipate the need for a Public Safety Power Shutoff in any Bay Area counties during this weather event.

Potential for Wind Damage Across PG&Es Service Area

The offshore weather event is expected to produce damage-producing winds across much of California beginning Sunday and extending into early next week. While there may not be a PSPS in many areas due to recent rainfall in the northern parts of PG&Es service area, there could be wires down and outages due to flying debris and vegetation.

If you see a downed power line, assume it is energized and extremely dangerous. Do not touch or try to move itand keep children and animals away. Report downed power lines immediately by calling 911 and by calling PG&E at 1-800-743-5002.

Why PG&E Calls a PSPS Event

Due to forecasted extreme weather conditions, PG&E is considering proactively turning off power for safety. Windy conditions, like those being forecast, increase the potential for damage and hazards to the electric infrastructure, which could cause sparks if lines are energized. These conditions also increase the potential for rapid fire spread.

State officials classify more than half of PG&Es 70,000-square-mile service area in Northern and Central California as having a high fire threat, given dry grasses and the high volume of dead and dying trees. The states high-risk areas have tripled in size in seven years.

No single factor drives a PSPS, as each situation is unique. PG&E carefully reviews a combination of many criteria when determining if power should be turned off for safety. These factors generally include, but are not limited to:

Heres Where to Go to Learn More

Community Resource Centers Reflect COVID-Safety Protocols

PG&E will open Community Resource Centers (CRCs) to support any affected customers.

The sole purpose of a PSPS is to reduce the risk of major wildfires during severe weather. While a PSPS is an important wildfire safety tool, PG&E understands that losing power disrupts lives, especially for customers sheltering-at-home in response to COVID-19. These temporary CRCs will be open to customers when power is out at their homes and will provide ADA-accessible restrooms and hand-washing stations; medical-equipment charging; Wi-Fi; bottled water; and non-perishable snacks.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, all CRCs will follow important health and safety protocols including:

How Customers Can Prepare for a PSPS

As part of PSPS preparedness efforts, PG&E suggests customers:

About PG&E

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a subsidiary of PG&E Corporation (NYSE:PCG), is one of the largest combined natural gas and electric energy companies in the United States. Based in San Francisco, with more than 23,000 employees, the company delivers some of the nation's cleanest energy to 16 million people in Northern and Central California. For more information, visit pge.com and pge.com/news.

Go here to read the rest:

Potential for Small, Targeted PSPS Event in Nine Counties: Forecasted Strong, Offshore Winds and Dry Conditions Mean PG&E May Need to Proactively Turn...