Invest, expand and stay smart

Europe has been in the offshore wind energy business for 30 years. Its infrastructure is mature and includes fine-tuned methods for rapidly deploying offshore wind turbines safely, efficiently and economically. For comparison, the existing and planned U.S. marshaling ports comprise less than a third of the area and deployment capacity of Europe’s top three most used ports for marshaling.

“And yet, in the U.S. we're looking to install twice as much power capacity over a shorter amount of time than the EU has accomplished over the last 20 years,” Parkison said.

To have the best chance of success, it will be important to use near-term alternatives while building out as much marshaling area as possible. The U.S. will need to “make do” with existing marshaling area by using alternative methods, such as feeder barges situated offshore that can ferry equipment from port to installation vessels located at sea—kind of like a relay for turbine parts. The approach, however, is not without its hurdles.

“Feeder barges are in limited supply, less safe and take longer to finish installations, causing other problems further down the line,” explained Parkison.

Resulting delays could mean fees and penalties for developers that need to extend port leases beyond agreed-upon dates and will cause setbacks in “turning on” the power — all of which can hinder other projects in the pipeline. It will have ramifications for meeting other loftier ambitions, such as the federal targets of 30 gigawatts by 2030 and 110 GW by 2050, too.

“At this rate, those targets won't be met,” Parkison said. In the bigger scheme of things, it also will mean delays in the nationwide, multi-level attempt to try and mitigate climate change.

Doing more turbine assembly in port would provide less dependency on vessels that themselves are not keeping pace with growing turbine sizes. But in-port assembly methods also point to a need for more marshaling room for today and for future growth.

“You need ports that are capable of not only marshaling 10- or 12-megawatt turbines, but also moving towards the capacity for 15-, 20-, 25-megawatt turbines that are going to outpace what we currently have,” said Parkison.

Upgrading smaller ports is a start. For example, a 30-acre marshaling port already exists in New England and there is a 60-acre port planned for New Jersey.

Considering larger ports will also be necessary. Marshaling ports around 100 acres are a more economically sound and logistically advantageous method of getting turbines out to sea more quickly and safely than some of the alternative methods.

According to Parkison, European developers have stated they will travel 200 miles for a sizable port that allows them to use efficient deployment methods. The conceptual Delaware port suggested in the 2020 UD market analysis is an example where 100 acres of marshaling area could be achieved. And while some have wondered if having a 100-acre marshaling port in Delaware and another 60-acre marshaling port across the Delaware Bay in New Jersey is too much, Parkison disagrees.

“If you look at the sum of all existing and planned area, it still amounts to less than half the area that's needed,” she said. “So, neither marshaling port will pull business away from the other; instead they'll both be contributing to a massive market need.”

Transitioning to a cleaner economy will take commitment, cooperation and collaboration, but the benefits to the nation, and planet, would be many.

“Meeting the Biden Administration’s targets on time means that we can sooner provide an alternative energy source to displace more of our fossil-fuel-burning resources,” Parkison said. “It also means another source of energy security—more energy produced at home that's less reliant on international geopolitics.”

The costs of waiting are greater than just financial or logistical. They include things people might not typically consider, such as the social cost of carbon to health, ecosystems and sea level rise, a particular concern in Delaware.

Claire Richer, director of Offshore Wind with the American Clean Power Association, called the report a useful tool to help justify funding for expansion of offshore wind infrastructure to Congress.

“The report demonstrates the need for a substantially resourced Port Infrastructure Development Plan in a budget reconciliation bill such as Build Back Better,” said Richer.

Kempton, UD professor of marine science and policy and associate director and founder of the Center for Research in Wind (CReW), agreed, adding, “The report lays out the overall infrastructure needed for offshore wind deployment, quantifies shortfalls and identifies precisely what is needed to overcome them. This is significant because it provides states and port developers the specific guidance needed to build the infrastructure to meet state and federal offshore wind targets.”