Rules can and do change over time, especially environmental rules. Lots of people have bought the house lot of their dreams on the ocean or a lake with plans to build in the future. A few years later they find out they cannot build on their lot because the rules have changed to protect the environment. Same for the companies that built coal fired power plants, then the rules changes such that it is not economically feasible to install newly required emissions controls. Same with Shell, sure you can drill in the Chukchi Sea, but now that you are here, you cannot make any noise that might bother the Whales, only one rig can drill at a time, etc.etc. etc . So far the courts have allowed these rule changes. I bet it’s the same in Norway.
Dear god, can you not collect it in one post?
Nope! Trying to derail this particular thread
And when I’m done with wind I’ll start with solar!
p.s. Don’t be too hard on our Norwegian friends.
It’s a very big deal. It’s a very big deal. It’s a great opportunity to scale new business," Rothstein says. “And if Massachusetts is one of the first hubs for this kind of activity then Massachusetts companies will have the expertise over the whole Eastern region of the U.S.”
A local supply chain does not exist yet, so the first wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts will largely be built with parts from Europe. Those generators and blades are enormous and getting bigger. The biggest turbines in Europe, which now produce electricity that’s cost competitive with fossil fuels, are taller than New England’s highest building (formerly called Hancock Tower).
The cost of getting the machines here will be very expensive.
Jeff Grybowski, head of Deepwater Wind, one of the companies competing for the Massachusetts offshore contract, says that a homegrown supply chain makes sense in the long run.
“We’re at the beginning of an industry that I think will be built out over decades and decades and that’s a good thing because what we’d like to do as an industry is to build a few projects up and down the coast, every two years,” Grybowski says. “So we’re talking about an industry that will sustain jobs for decades.”
The promise of sustainable jobs, a sustainable industry and sustainable energy — a triple bottom line now in the works off, and on the coast, of Massachusetts.
“This competition that’s happening in Massachusetts is really a key to what happens in the U.S. and that will be a watershed moment for our industry,” Grybowski says.
The winning bid will be announced next summer, with the first steel in the water a year or two later.
While Massachusetts’ goal for offshore wind over the coming decade is ambitious, it pales in comparison to Europe, where offshore wind over the last 25 years has become a $100 billion industry.
Well, also trying to prove a point - I keep getting called out of touch with the world because it’s my opinion that offshore wind in the US really isn’t going to kick off the way it is in Europe. I’ll be nice to them if they be nice to me!
You must be joking, cchick001 is a pipsqueak. Lots of feathers and noise but no substance.
Sticks and stones my Norwegian Friend!
I’m assuming that when you’re referring to a government corporate welfare program you’re referring to one besides the longest one running, Big Oil, right?