Trump's wind farm funding freeze is so much hot air, say states as they blow sueball to Washington

The Attorneys General of 17 states and Washington, DC have sued the Trump administration over an executive order halting all federal approvals for wind energy projects. Led by New York State Attorney General Letitia James, the coalition of AGs filed a lawsuit [PDF] in Massachusetts federal court on Monday seeking an injunction …

[DS999]

They might be able to stop offshore projects

But they have zero authority to stop land based projects. In fact two of the biggest wind energy states, Texas and Iowa, are red states. I'm guessing their AGs aren't using since they don't want to upset the orange snowflake, but if not no doubt they would be rooting for this lawsuit to succeed.

[elDog]

Re: They might be able to stop offshore projects

I'm guessing your "using" was meant to be "suing". So much difference in a single transposition!

[Charlie Clark]

Re: They might be able to stop offshore projects

Well, it includes federal lands. It would have helped if the article had quoted the title of the decree: Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects. But then again, the buildout is only tangentially associated with increased demand from data centres. Restricting such abundant and cheap supply will drive up costs for other customers, because big-tech can afford to pay upfront for sweetheart deals.

[elDog]

Just put a windmill in front of his upper orifice. Clean the blades every hour or so.

I won't comment on the lower orifice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Just put a windmill in front of his upper orifice. Clean the blades every hour or so.

> I won't comment on the lower orifice.

That wind,I’ll is known as a muck spreader, it would seem one has already be fitted give the amount of muck spreading that is happening…

[Grindslow_knoll]

Throroughly confused

I thought GOP/DJT were in favor of devolving to states?

The US has a nice exponential curve in wind circa 2006 [1] (~11%), but are behind AU[2] (13%) and UK[3] (~25%) or AU.

Why is the federal govt involved in okayi'ing wind power on land?

Cheap power is a key driver for industry, another of those things I thought DJT wanted to accelerate, so I don't follow the thinking here.

The 'until review by multi-agency' is a sign they want to kill it, because those agencies have been gutted, so expect that review, if serious to be completed in a decade or so.

[1] https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/wind/electricity-generation-from-wind.php

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Australia

[3] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3e3g9xv3ylo

[veti]

Re: Throroughly confused

The thinking couldn't be simpler. Wind power is popular with most environmentalists and lefties, therefore it must be stopped.

The fact that this means funnelling more money into coal, oil and gas industries is really just gravy. What's important is winding up the Libs.

[lglethal]

Re: Throroughly confused

Dont forget that the Fossil Fuels Industry was the largest contributor to Trumps coffers (as mentioned in the article), so this is extra simple.

He's merely repaying the favour by doing his best to kill their competitors.

When history eventually looks back on the Nation once known as the United States of America, I can strongly believe that they will decide that the beginning of the end was sown when they began allowing firms and the super rich to donate as much as they wished to presidential and political parties. People (and firms) dont give multi-million dollar donations to politicians without expecting something in return. Once this open bribery was allowed, any hope for the nation was lost...

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: largest contributor

Wasn't that Elongated Muskrat with his $250M bribe?

Once upon a time, he would have supported this sueball what with him owning a plant that makes solar stuff... but now? Forget it. His DOGY crew will be busy digging up dirt on the AG's so that the Orange Pope can sling it all back at them.

[MachDiamond]

Re: largest contributor

"Once upon a time, he would have supported this sueball what with him owning a plant that makes solar stuff."

Elon doesn't own a plant making solar stuff. Tesla imports panels and tiles from China. There was a plant in NY that the state spent around a billion dollops constructing and outfitting to make solar panels. Elon bought that firm, shut their process down and installed Panasonic to make panels there for Tesla and then went off to source panels from China and Panasonic bailed with loads of product on their hands that Tesla never took delivery of. By agreement, Tesla should be paying hefty penalties to the State of New York for not employing enough people nor generating enough cash flow through the plant.

[Extreme Aged Parent]

Re: Throroughly confused

You my friend have hit the nail on the head...

He who pays the piper can call the tune...etc

This is a sorry statement to world politics today, a far cry from a group of dedicated people wanting to good for their fellow man instead of their bottom line

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Throroughly confused

But its less popular with the people who have to pay the lecy bills

[Citizen of Nowhere]

Re: Throroughly confused

Whereas they absolutely love the billions in subsidies provided to the fossil fuels companies who use that to lower leccy bills... Oh, that's right they don't use their taxpayer-provided subsidies to lower leccy bills for their customers but to pay out dividends and ludicrously high C-suite compensation while blaming renewables for their gouging. It's a great gig for the grifters whose predecessors commissioned the studies showing just how much they were fucking the planet and then chose to use taxpayers' money to fund a decades-long campaign of disinformation and water-muddying! Trebles all round!

[Filippo]

Re: Throroughly confused

>I thought GOP/DJT were in favor of devolving to states?

They aren't. I don't know whether there ever was a time when the central-government-versus-local-government axis was represented in political splits, but today no party is ideologically in favor of either central or local. They just make different choices on which bits of policy ought to be centralized or not. That tends to depend on whether the current local managers for that policy are aligned or not.

Conservative parties claim to be in favor of local, but it hasn't been true for a while. Trump has been signing order that crap over states left and right, and as far as I can tell it's not much different in other countries. Here, one of the main right-wing parties has been claiming to be strongly in favor of devolving power to local governments for nearly 30 years, and yet the major actual reforms in that direction have been enacted by left-wing governments. Meanwhile, the current right-wing government is doing things like trying to dictate school and health policy, which have been devolved powers for a long time.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whistle down the wind

The Orange Messiah is as crazy as a tornado.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Whistle down the wind

Tornados do less harm..

[streaky]

Oh good

Another one of these nonsense APA "plis give TRO and have it apply nationally" suits that won't survive 30 seconds at SCOTUS.

The response to this one writes itself. Some of these judges are extraordinarily corrupt and it isn't going to end well for them.

A court, and certainly not a district court, doesn't have the power to enjoin the executive branch in this way. They'll do it, but they'll look very silly when a competent court vacates it all. There's no irreparable harm here anyway. Appallingly bad lawyering, one wonders how these people passed the bar exam.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Oh good

A court, and certainly not a district court, doesn't have the power to enjoin the executive branch in this way. They'll do it, but they'll look very silly when a competent court vacates it all. There's no irreparable harm here anyway. Appallingly bad lawyering, one wonders how these people passed the bar exam.

Yep, but this is Letitia James, NYC's AG elected on a promise to Get Trump! And not deal with NYC's crimes. Or possibly even her own real-estate crimes. But this is politics, and publicity.

"This administration is devastating one of our nation's fastest-growing sources of clean, reliable, and affordable energy," James said of the suit in a press release.

Ohnoes! Devastating! But a couple of US offshore wind farms have already been cancelled due to them not being affordable, and that was pre-tariffs. Other countrys that have 'invested' in 'renewables' have also seen their energy costs rise and reliability decrease. So there could be sorta irreparable harm, ie wasting money on 'renewables' instead of reliable power generation. Main curiosity here is Federal vs State intervention. So Federal could presumably remove any Federal funding for wind, but my understanding is States have a fair amount of autonomy and could tilt at windmills if they so chose. If that means (and it would mean) those States electricity costs increase, along with brown and blackouts, so be it.

Meanwhile, Texas has started construction on some SMRs..

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Oh good

I believe that some offshore wind projects have been cancelled in the north east due to very high costs (it is a very hostile environment out at sea there) and issues like covering the beaches in debris from broken tubines.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/18/climate/nantucket-wind-turbine-debris/index.html

The locals up there are very much the virtue signalling type but if it actually affects them oh boy do they get upset.

Anyone remember this?

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/16/politics/marthas-vineyard-migrants-shelter-desantis/index.html

I have no doubt that the locals there will happily parrot 'no-one is illegal' but do not want the problem anywhere near where they live.

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: SCOTUS

The Orange Jesus said recently that he 'Did not know' if he had to obey the rulings of SCOTUS.

His 'I Don't Know' response showed just how demented he is.

I suspect that his next move will be to arrest all 9 judges on SCOTUS on charges of treason, suspend the constitution and declare Martial Law. That way, the elections this year, next year and 2028 will be cancelled. He promised that 'I only need your vote this once. After, it will be fixed'.

[veti]

Re: SCOTUS

He only needed the votes once because he can't stand again anyway, so he really doesn't give a shit who wins the next election.

[Adair]

As always...

follow the money. Never underestimate the power of greed to generate true idiocy.

[trindflo]

Anything to do with the trade war with China

Don't the windmills need rare earth metals? Part of China pushing back was to freeze the sale of rare earth metals to the US.

Or maybe Trump is just creating the crisis du jour to distract from his statement that he wasn't sure if he was supposed to uphold the constitution.

[Pascal Monett]

Re: he wasn't sure if he was supposed to uphold the constitution

He actually said that ?

Does he remember the televised ceremony when he had one of his pudgy little paws on the Bible and the other raised swearing to do just that, or is it just a thing he learned by heart to pass the test and get back to his position of ultra power where he thinks he can do whatever he wants (and facts are rather thin on the ground to oppose him at this point in time) ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: he wasn't sure if he was supposed to uphold the constitution

To be fair, I think he said that he didn’t know if due process had to be given to potential (non-citizen) deportees. And from a country that derived a pro-abortion stance from the constitutional right to privacy*, then I’d say anything is arguable and who knows what the Supreme Court would decide.

*IIRC, I’m no expert and please don’t mistake me for being anti-abortion.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: he wasn't sure if he was supposed to uphold the constitution

"... when he had one of his pudgy little paws on the Bible ..."

You didn't catch that, did you? He raised his one hand and never put the other hand on the Bible. Why would the unholy one do that? Now, ask him to touch the constitution. He'll ask what would it look like?

[LybsterRoy]

clean, reliable, and affordable energy,"

Hmmmmm

[MachDiamond]

"clean, reliable, and affordable energy"

Pick two of the three.

[hoola]

Amazon

In the UK there are currently adverts on the radio proclaiming that Amazon are the largest corporate buyer of renewable energy......

What it does not state is if they are also the largest corporate user of energy and what they do when that renewable energy is not available. It is greenwashing at it's finest.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Amazon

Rule 1 when talking about Amazon : They are doing the opposite of whatever their ad/press release says.. Greenwashing at its finest.

Stop using them. Your wallet will thank you.

[codejunky]

Erm

It's not as if the Trump administration is unaware of rising energy demand. Trump ordered the wind power freeze the same day as declaring a national energy emergency, the AGs point out. Trump's EO called for "a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy" in the United States - something wind energy is already helping to do, the AGs argue.

That paragraph had me laughing, the AG's argue wind is reliable? Trump is right to freeze support for wind power in a national energy emergency.

[Pussifer]

Re: Erm

I do suppose you also saw the word 'diversified' in there? There's no national energy emergency either, turn off the shit that powers Twitter, Facebook, Tik Tok, etc. and there's likely to be an abundance.

[codejunky]

Re: Erm

@Pussifer

"I do suppose you also saw the word 'diversified' in there?"

Yes, which is nullified completely by the lack of reliability. You can diversify it with people generating energy by peddling exercise bikes and somehow hooking that to the grid, doesnt make it a viable energy source nor reliable.

"There's no national energy emergency either, turn off the shit that powers Twitter, Facebook, Tik Tok, etc. and there's likely to be an abundance."

There is no energy crisis just stop using the energy? Remember when the idea was to produce energy for people to use? Since wind requires a reliable backup generator for when it isnt working, why not forget the wind and just use the reliable generator that works?

[I am David Jones]

Re: Erm

Wind energy is not fossil fuel / nuclear, it provides a significant proportion of US energy and it is cheap, hence it undeniably *helps* to provide "a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy", specifically the latter two aspects.

[codejunky]

Re: Erm

@I am David Jones

"a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy"

Reliable and affordable, when talking about wind energy. I am in the UK but you are making me laugh. We have Milibrain pushing these more expensive forms of energy on us.

[I am David Jones]

Re: Erm

Read my comment again, slowly if need be. I didn’t (and I haven’t seen anyone else) claim that wind energy is reliable. And the US dept of energy says it is cost effective, in America at least. Do you disagree with them?

[codejunky]

Re: Erm

@I am David Jones

"Read my comment again, slowly if need be."

I quoted direct from your comment-

hence it undeniably *helps* to provide "a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy", specifically the latter two aspects.

Which I clipped to- "a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy" and then laughed at reliable and affordable while my previous comment demonstrated the irrelevance of 'diversified' if the source isnt reliable see-

"Yes, which is nullified completely by the lack of reliability. You can diversify it with people generating energy by peddling exercise bikes and somehow hooking that to the grid, doesnt make it a viable energy source nor reliable.".

So please feel free to go back and read my comments again, slowly if need be.

"And the US dept of energy says it is cost effective, in America at least. Do you disagree with them?"

Yes I disagree. Militwit also claimed it would save the UK money and reverse ferreted on that promise. We were promised cheaper energy due to 'green investments' which has made energy much more expensive (remind you I am in the UK). Even simply thinking through the problem- unreliable wind requires reliable energy generator backup. Often fossil fuel which is exceptionally cheaper than wind. Hence cheaper to run just the reliable energy generator and not the wind.

AND wind requires serious infrastructure upgrades because energy isnt generated where it is needed, it needs to be transported from wherever it generates. AND is still waiting for a magical technology that still doesnt exist to store sufficient energy to make up the weeks of low/no wind.

So yes, it seems reality even disagrees with them.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Erm

>> Read my comment again, slowly if need be

> I quoted direct from your comment-

>> hence it undeniably *helps* to provide "a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy", specifically the latter two aspects.

> Which I clipped to- "a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy"

Hey, look at that, codejunky just described *exactly* how codejunky quote mines & wilfully misinterprets! Will wonders never cease?

Now, if only codejunky himself could read and understand what codejunky wrote...

[Boothy]

Re: Erm

For anyone in the UK, this site might be of interest : GB Electricity Bills

It gives a break down, based of the average annual electric bill in the UK, and how much goes to what, such as wholesale cost of the electricity itself, transmission, supplier costs, subsidies etc.

For some highlights, looking at the 2024 figures:

Only about a third (34%) of the bill, was actually for the generated electricity, and the wholesale cost there is mostly due to the current high price of gas (and the weird way the unit price is set in the UK).

About a quarter (~23%) went to transmission and grid balancing, so national grid plus local distribution up to the house itself.

Then there are the subsidies!

~11% went to the old Renewables Obligation (stopped in 2017, but still paying off the existing contracts).

A little under 4% to the Contracts for Difference (CfD), which is the new and current way to of subsidising contracts.

The old Feed-in Tariff (FiT) scheme for solar PV, which ran from 2010 to 2019, was at 2.5% (still paying as again this is existing contracts yet to run out).

So ~17.5% of a typical bill is going to subsidies.

[bombastic bob]

Re: Erm

It seems many commenters of this article failed to read Arthur C. Clarke's "Superiority", or at least did not fully integrate its obvious warning.

Wind (along with 'solar farms') is the unreliable "new tech" that seeks to replace the old RELIABLE tech (coal, oil, gas) for REALLY STUPID [climate scam FUD] reasons.

Diversifying means having many different sources, such as coal, nuclear, oil, natural gas, hydro, etc. for continuous operation, as well as peaker plants located where the demand is highest, with plenty of extra capacity available at any point in time should the need arise. This is how it WAS... until the anti-CO2 MORONS repeatedly lied often enough to SCARE people into going along with expensive "renewables", to their OWN demise...

[MachDiamond]

Re: Erm

"Diversifying means having many different sources, such as coal, nuclear, oil, natural gas, hydro, etc. for continuous operation"

Oil really isn't a big contributor to electrical power generation. There are places where other sources aren't available so diesel generators are used, but given a choice between coal and oil, coal will win. Gas is more politically viable if it's available. Hydro is mostly tapped out with plenty of groups chanting for dams to be demolished.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Erm

"turn off the shit that powers Twitter, Facebook, Tik Tok, etc. and there's likely to be an abundance."

You forgot "Crypto"

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: Erm

Tell us, Madam, how much time do you spend in the United States? Wind power has been used there since the late 1970s and has been a feature of the landscape since I can remember. It's as if you believe this is a new thing?

[codejunky]

Re: Erm

"Tell us, Madam, how much time do you spend in the United States?"

I have not been in years

"Wind power has been used there since the late 1970s"

Wind power has been used since BC in many ways, but a wind turbine was used to generate electricity in 1883. The first wind far was in New Hampshire 1980. You will notice that this history lesson doesnt change how wind is unreliable and the problems wind farms are causing on the grid and also expensive.

"It's as if you believe this is a new thing?"

Or that technology moved on and you dont seem to have noticed.

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: Erm

"Or that technology moved on and you dont seem to have noticed."

I must admit Madam, that I have not kept up-to-date with heavy current and electromechanical advances since leaving University. Where one did a small amount of study in the area of synchronous and asynchronous motors, load balancing and such like.

It was remiss of me.

How about yourself? Much time in the heavy machine lab ? What did you say you read at university...?

[MachDiamond]

Re: Erm

"You will notice that this history lesson doesnt change how wind is unreliable and the problems wind farms are causing on the grid and also expensive."

My argument is that wind isn't viable for feeding the grid due to the reasons you point out, but it is still a useful supply of energy. It has to be employed in a way that can tolerate the intermittency and variability. Much more work needs to happen on the grid so when there's wind, prices can reflect that extra supply and there are loads that can be switched on to take advantage. Just dumping the power on the grid willy nilly is going to create problems that will escalate with more wind farms coming online.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Erm

Tell us, Madam, how much time do you spend in the United States? Wind power has been used there since the late 1970s and has been a feature of the landscape since I can remember. It's as if you believe this is a new thing?

Intentionally misgendering someone is a new thing. Normally frowned on by the supposedly 'liberal left'.. But I digress.

Wind power has been a feature for a few thousand years. But thanks to advances in engineering, was obsoleted. Hence places like Altamont Pass being littered with abandoned windmills, along with dead raptors, bats etc. But a simple question for your oh so superior brain-

Led by New York State Attorney General Letitia James, the coalition of AGs filed a lawsuit [PDF] in Massachusetts federal court on Monday

Any idea why James, currently residing in Clinton Hill, NYC and having spent most of her life there would be picking this as an issue to campaign and spend money on, rather than other crime issues that blight NY? Do you think she's planning on erecting windmills in Underwood Park? Central Park? But that's 'renewables' lobbying for you. Kind of a reverse-NIMBYism. As long as they're in someone elses back yard, they're just fine I guess.

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: Erm

"Intentionally misgendering someone is a new thing. Normally frowned on by the supposedly 'liberal left'.."

Whatever are you on about you slippery synaphobranchidae?

[Jellied Eel]

Re: Erm

Whatever are you on about you slippery synaphobranchidae?

Perhaps leave the thinking to the more evolved primates, whilst you just throw poop around?

So anyway.. About those windmills. Where do you think Letitia James is planning to build them in NYC? Also on the subject of affordability-

https://orsted.com/company-announcement-list/2025/05/orsted-to-discontinue-the-hornsea-4-offshore-wind%E2%80%94143901911

This is after Orsted cancelled some windfarms in the US, prior to Trump taking office and citing unaffordability. Hornsea 4 had a CfD price of £84.97/MWh, so should have been 'affordable', if you believe the 'renewables' scumbags (and James) that wind is cheap energy. Also for the UK, gets a lil more complicated given Orsted moved allocations from Hornsea 3 into 4 to claim the more generous strike price..

[ChodeMonkey]

Re: Erm

Are you having the delirium tremens, Mr Eel? Seek medical advice. Or a glass of something.

[Xalran]

Re: Erm

In Nero's mind a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy has a single meaning : Oil and Coal.

Drill, Baby Drill... Mine, Baby Mine...

He doesn't give an $FSCK about any other type of energy.

[codejunky]

Re: Erm

@Xalran

"In Nero's mind a reliable, diversified and affordable supply of energy has a single meaning : Oil and Coal."

Lets pretend for a moment that is true, those two would be examples of reliable energy. Trump paused wind farms which are not reliable. The AGs tried to argue wind is reliable which we know is not the case by the very fact that it is unreliable and requires magical technology that doesnt exist yet to be reliable.

"Drill, Baby Drill... Mine, Baby Mine... "

Not a bad idea. The resources are needed and to pretend to be green these resources are imported (need transporting) to the US from places which may have lesser environmental controls and so are more polluting. There is a solid argument for the self sufficiency and price reductions of obtaining their own resources too.

"He doesn't give an $FSCK about any other type of energy."

Lets imagine that is true, why does it matter? He isnt banning everything except coal and oil, he isnt forcing it on anyone. If people prefer other forms of energy generation they can do it and states can fund wind themselves on state land still so whats the problem? All governments have their own ideas and opinions, the problem only starts when they inflict them upon the people.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Erm

Lets imagine that is true

If we're playing make-believe, let's imagine you have a job, instead of regurgitating Tufton Street talking point and posting them on an IT News website. Hell, knock yourself out: pretend you work for the IEA.* Then we can all go home.

*The energy one, not the bullshit producing one

[Doctor Syntax]

"shocked, if Big Tech's renewable energy ambitions aren't known in the White House"

Their money's put him where he wanted to be and now they don't matter any more. The damage tariffs are wreaking elsewhere on their interests shows that.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wont stop the crazy states

I guess they want to show the people what polluting, poor power generating, ugly and money waste they are. Then it's up to the states. But probably a good thing to have a diversity of power supplies as long as you don't put too much reliance on the ones that are subject to the weather. On the other hand if they stop chem-trailing (geo-engineering or SRM) it might give solar a chance. Also, ever tried getting planning for a small turbine in the UK? No chance only the big obtrusive corporate ones allowed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Wont stop the crazy states

> On the other hand if they stop chem-trailing

FFS are we going to start with that bollocks as well?

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Wont stop the crazy states

"On the other hand if they stop chem-trailing"

When did you stop beating your wife?

[Mitoo Bobsworth]

Missed opportunity

It's a shame nobody can figure out how to harness the hot air constantly issuing from Trumps bloviating pie-hole - truly an inexhaustible supply.

[MachDiamond]

Two issues noted

The first issue noted is the freezing of funding from the Federal government for wind turbines/farms. If they need grants, they aren't viable investments or banks would be all over it. The pull back from offering leases for farms on Federal lands is a different topic. It's hard to take a stance on that since there are so many considerations. There are Federal lands that are vast expanses of nothing that have defaulted to being Federal lands since nobody finds them of any value. In the US, all land is 'owned' by somebody/some entity. There are other lands that are very scenic and planting a bunch of turbines all over the place so some private company can lease property for $1/year/acre(or Section) for 99 years at a time should be questioned. If a wind company wants some tract of land, it obviously has some value so shouldn't be leased for what amounts to nothing. Adding a local source of energy on top of that land will also increase it's value overall.