ENB Pub Note: This will be an interesting lawsuit from the Democrat-led states. The article following the summary of wind and types of electricity in these states filing the lawsuits will help understand the costs of offshore wind. Offshore wind does not support grid stability, resulting in a cost increase for consumers. It is a net negative benefit. Costs in states with hydroelectric or nuclear power are the only states that can put in wind and still keep prices down.
-
New York:
-
Onshore:
-
South Fork Wind (132 MW, operational 2023, offshore but serving NY)
-
Maple Ridge Wind Farm (321.8 MW, operational)
-
-
Offshore:
-
Sunrise Wind (924 MW, under development, expected 2026)
-
Empire Wind (2,076 MW total, phased development)
-
-
New York has over 4,400 jobs supported by wind projects and aims for 70% renewable electricity by 2030.
-
-
Massachusetts:
-
Onshore:
-
Berkshire Wind Power Project (15 MW, operational)
-
-
Offshore:
-
Vineyard Wind 1 (804 MW, operational since January 2024, largest in U.S.)
-
New England Wind 1 (formerly Park City Wind, 800 MW, expected 2025)
-
SouthCoast Wind (2,400 MW, in development)
-
-
Massachusetts has 8,189 MW in its offshore wind pipeline.
-
-
Arizona:
-
Onshore:
-
Dry Lake Wind Power Project (63 MW, operational)
-
Chevelon Butte Wind Farm (477 MW, under construction, expected 2025)
-
-
Arizona’s wind capacity is limited, with 268 MW installed by 2023.
-
-
California:
-
Onshore:
-
Alta Wind Energy Center (1,548 MW, largest onshore in U.S.)
-
Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm (705 MW)
-
-
Offshore:
-
Morro Bay and Humboldt Bay lease areas (6,102 MW in pipeline, development stage)
-
-
California has 5,510 active turbines and significant solar competition.
-
-
Colorado:
-
Onshore:
-
Limon Wind Energy Center (601 MW, 8th largest in U.S.)
-
Rush Creek Wind Project (600 MW)
-
Cedar Creek Wind Farm (551 MW)
-
-
Colorado’s capacity is 3,706 MW, with 10% of electricity from wind.
-
-
Connecticut:
-
Onshore:
-
Colebrook Wind (5 MW, only onshore project, operational 2015)
-
-
Offshore:
-
Revolution Wind (300 MW for CT, expected September 2025)
-
New England Wind 1 (800 MW, contract canceled 2023, rebidding)
-
-
Connecticut targets 2,000 MW offshore wind by 2030.
-
-
Delaware:
-
Onshore:
-
No utility-scale projects; 2 MW installed capacity
-
-
Offshore:
-
Skipjack Wind (120 MW, in development)
-
-
Delaware has minimal wind development but is part of offshore lease areas.
-
-
District of Columbia:
-
No wind projects (onshore or offshore) due to lack of suitable land and coastal access.
-
-
Illinois:
-
Onshore:
-
Twin Forks Wind Farm (400 MW, operational)
-
Rivian Electric Turbine (multimegawatt, distributed, operational)
-
-
Illinois has 249,882 MW potential capacity at 80m hub height, with significant manufacturing presence.
-
-
Maine:
-
Onshore:
-
Mars Hill Wind Farm (42 MW, operational)
-
Stetson Wind Farm (57 MW)
-
-
Offshore:
-
Maine Aqua Ventus (11 MW, floating turbine, planned for 2023 but delayed)
-
-
Maine has high offshore potential in the Gulf of Maine.
-
-
Maryland:
-
Onshore:
-
Criterion Wind Project (70 MW, operational)
-
-
Offshore:
-
MarWin (300 MW, in development)
-
Momentum Wind (planned, part of 5,251 MW East Coast pipeline)
-
-
Maryland is expanding offshore wind with federal lease support.
-
-
Michigan:
-
Onshore:
-
Gratiot County Wind Project (150 MW, operational)
-
Lake Winds Energy Park (100 MW)
-
-
Michigan’s wind capacity contributes over 5% of state electricity.
-
-
Minnesota:
-
Onshore:
-
Nobles Wind Farm (201 MW, operational)
-
Zephyr Wind Turbine (Mahtomedi High School, distributed, educational)
-
-
Minnesota has 4,139 MW capacity, targeting carbon-free electricity by 2050.
-
-
New Jersey:
-
Onshore:
-
Jersey-Atlantic Wind Farm (7.5 MW, operational)
-
-
Offshore:
-
Ocean Wind 1 (1,100 MW, in development)
-
Atlantic Shores (1,510 MW, planned)
-
-
New Jersey leads with over 20,000 MW in offshore pipeline.
-
-
New Mexico:
-
Onshore:
-
Roosevelt Wind Project (250 MW, operational)
-
Red Cloud Wind Farm (200 MW)
-
-
Over 10% of electricity from wind, with 2,811 MW installed.
-
-
Oregon:
-
Onshore:
-
Shepherds Flat Wind Farm (845 MW, 3rd largest in U.S.)
-
Biglow Canyon Wind Farm (450 MW)
-
-
Oregon’s 3,123 MW capacity provides 11% of state energy.
-
-
Rhode Island:
-
Onshore:
-
No significant utility-scale projects.
-
-
Offshore:
-
Block Island Wind Farm (30 MW, operational since 2016, first U.S. offshore)
-
Revolution Wind (400 MW for RI, expected 2025)
-
-
Rhode Island relies heavily on offshore wind for renewable goals.
-
-
Washington:
-
Onshore:
-
Wild Horse Wind Farm (343 MW, largest in state)
-
Lower Snake River Wind Project (343 MW)
-
-
Washington has 3,400 MW capacity, with a 126 MW farm planned for 2025.
-
-
New York: 22.90 cents/kWh (high due to dense urban demand, taxes, and offshore wind investment)
-
Massachusetts: 28.50 cents/kWh (highest in Northeast, driven by offshore wind costs and high residential demand)
-
Arizona: 12.80 cents/kWh (moderate, benefits from solar and some wind) –
-
California: 25.70 cents/kWh (high due to renewables mandates, grid upgrades, and urban demand)
-
Colorado: 12.60 cents/kWh (moderate, balanced by wind and natural gas)
-
Connecticut: 26.10 cents/kWh (high, driven by offshore wind contracts and limited local generation)
-
Delaware: 13.90 cents/kWh (moderate, limited wind but benefits from regional grid)
-
District of Columbia: 15.40 cents/kWh (higher than average, no local generation, relies on imports)
-
Illinois: 14.20 cents/kWh (moderate, large wind capacity offsets costs)
-
Maine: 22.30 cents/kWh (high, rural grid and offshore wind potential increase costs)
-
Maryland: 15.10 cents/kWh (moderate, offshore wind development adds to costs)
-
Michigan: 14.80 cents/kWh (moderate, wind growth helps stabilize prices)
-
Minnesota: 13.50 cents/kWh (moderate, strong wind penetration lowers costs)
-
New Jersey: 17.80 cents/kWh (higher, offshore wind and dense population drive costs)
-
New Mexico: 12.40 cents/kWh (low, wind and solar keep prices competitive)
-
Oregon: 11.90 cents/kWh (low, wind and hydropower abundance)
-
Rhode Island: 27.60 cents/kWh (high, small state, offshore wind reliance)
-
Washington: 10.80 cents/kWh (lowest, dominated by cheap hydropower, wind supplementary)
-
High-Cost States (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, California, New York, Maine): These states have prices above the national average, often due to heavy investment in offshore wind (which has higher upfront costs, 8–12 cents/kWh to generate), dense populations, and complex grid infrastructure. For example, Massachusetts and Rhode Island rely on offshore projects like Vineyard Wind and Block Island, which increase retail prices despite long-term carbon benefits.
-
Moderate-Cost States (New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, District of Columbia, Delaware): These states balance wind (onshore and offshore) with other sources like natural gas or nuclear, keeping prices near or slightly below the national average. Illinois and Minnesota benefit from large onshore wind capacity, which is cheaper (2–4 cents/kWh) than offshore.
-
Low-Cost States (Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona): These states have abundant renewables (wind, solar, hydropower) and lower population density, reducing grid strain. Washington’s hydropower dominance (70% of generation) and Oregon’s wind-hydro mix keep prices low. New Mexico and Colorado leverage cheap onshore wind, while Arizona’s solar-wind mix is cost-effective.
-
Onshore Wind: States with significant onshore wind (e.g., Minnesota, New Mexico, Colorado) tend to have lower electricity costs due to wind’s low levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), around 2–6 cents/kWh. For example, Minnesota’s 4,139 MW of wind helps keep prices at 13.50 cents/kWh.
-
Offshore Wind: States like Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York face higher costs due to offshore wind’s higher LCOE (8–12 cents/kWh) and construction challenges.
-
No Wind (D.C.): The District of Columbia’s lack of wind projects means reliance on imported power, leading to above-average costs (15.40 cents/kWh).
-
Electricity prices are from EIA’s 2023 data unless otherwise noted, reflecting all sectors.
-
Wind project data is compiled from multiple sources, including EIA, DOE, and industry reports.
-
Costs vary monthly and by sector (residential prices are often higher than industrial). Check EIA’s Electric Power Monthly for updates.
-
Some states (e.g., Delaware, D.C.) have minimal wind, limiting their project lists.
A total of 18 attorneys general filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging US president Donald Trump’s order to shut down offshore wind projects, stating that such a move was “unlawful and can jeopardise the continued development of a power source critical to the states’ economic vitality, energy mix, public health, and climate goals.”
The court action, filed in the U.S. District Court in Boston, is brought by 17 state attorneys general joined by the attorney general from the District of Columbia. New York and Massachusetts are the states spearheading the move since the Trump administration hit offshore wind projects in those states the hardest.
The lawsuit names New York, Massachusetts, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington State as the plaintiffs.
The complaint stated that neither the president nor any executive branch agencies offered “any detailed justification to explain the abrupt change in longstanding federal policy supporting the development of wind energy”.
This move puts more oil on the offshore wind debate fire, which saw Trump attempt to completely halt the sector and push the country towards fast-tracked oil and gas developments.
“Executive actions encouraged domestic energy development – that is, all but wind and other renewable energy – and directed agencies to shortcut environmental reviews for other forms of energy, the very same reviews the Wind Directive labels as inadequate for wind energy,” the complaint stated.
The Wind Directive has stopped most wind-energy development despite it creating billions of dollars in economic activity and tax payments, and supplying more than 10% of US electricity.
“I am united with [New York] attorney general Letitia James, governor Hochul, and the 17 other states alongside New York for the logical resumption of wind energy projects and to move them forward to secure a reliable and abundant energy supply for future generations,” said Doreen Harris, president and CEO of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.
The post 18 US states suing Trump over shutdown of wind projects appeared first on Energy News Beat.
Energy News Beat