Stephen Van Domelen’s letter regarding offshore wind energy on the East Coast is confused at best (“Let workers finish the job on offshore wind,” March 12). For example, the claim that “affordable” offshore wind is a “reliable and ready-to-go solution” is laughable. Offshore wind is unreliable, as it only works when the wind is blowing, but not blowing too much. And, if we are talking about the fantastical floating turbines proposed for California, they also don’t work during storms in extreme ocean turbulence.
Development of California’s offshore wind energy, which has not even begun, would take a decade to complete and cost $125 billion, according to a 2023 report by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab. In fact, floating offshore wind is consistently cited as one of the most expensive forms of energy, and those costs would be passed on to everyday Californians. The author’s argument that these projects should move forward because of jobs is also a headscratcher.
How about we put those billions into jobs rebuilding Pacific Palisades and other fire-damaged communities? Or maybe jobs clearing brush, securing power corridors, repairing dams, and creating new water storage to prevent destructive fires in the first place.
Nicole Dorfman
Morro Bay
This article appears in Spring Arts Annual 2026.
I totally understand the NIMBYism of folks in Morro Bay and Avila. So why don’t they just admit it? Instead, they criticize a burgeoning energy source that we badly need.
In order to be a helpful contribution to the public discourse I wish the anti-wind faction that I’ve read so much from recently would offer alternative solutions to our ever growing energy needs in the era of AI and giant data centers.
Is it nuclear? Give Diablo 40 years and build several more across the country? Or do you favor expanding oil drilling off the coast? There is plenty more oil off of Santa Barbara though the NIMBYs down there don’t like it. Or is it, as President Trump has suggested, a total reboot of coal? After all, China gets about half of their energy from the black stuff (of course, they also produce the most offshore wind energy and have pretty much cornered the market on that technology because we have been so hesitant).
So, what is your solution Mr. and Ms. NIMBY? Or do you simply not care as long as it doesn’t touch your comfortable lives?
If NIMBY mean protecting a national estuary, essential fish habitat, migrating birds and whales, and other vulnerable species, I’ll gladly wear that label!
Regarding energy needs for AI and data centers – how about the wealthy corporations building those facilities build their own energy sources on site? If they want wind turbines on their buildings or grounds – go for it – but leave our oceans alone and coastal communities be!
So then where is your letter condemning Trump’s plan to restart oil drilling off the coast of Santa Barbara? Unlike offshore wind, offshore oil spills do have a history of hurting estuaries, fish habitat, migrating birds and whales, and other vulnerable species. And please point me to the peer reviewed research studies that show offshore wind will do any of the things you claim.
As for Google or Amazon or any tech company providing their own energy sources, don’t hold your breath while Trump is president.
For research backing up claims about the harmful impact of offshore wind energy, go to https://www.reactalliance.org/research-and-media
Appear to be the same talking points from pro oil and nuclear factions such as stopthesethings.com.
What I’m asking is to be honest. You’re probably tied to the fishing industry and you fear for your future. I get it. But what I’m saying is that climate change is far, far worse for fisheries than offshore wind. Unfortunately, you have become pawns for big oil and the Trump administration, who would like to completely deregulate both the fossil fuel and nuclear industries while giving us no other options for energy.
There are many negative Impacts to our ocean and minimal impact to climate change from Offshore Wind farms. It’s foreign oil and gas corporations that want to industrialize our tranquil ports and oceans. How do you think wind farms are powered?-by osmosis? How do you think turbines make their way half way around the world from where they are manufactured?-divine intervention? How many landfills are covered with turbines that have a life span of 15 years? I could go on and on.
The hypocrisy of people that support offshore wind and of its impacts-including those mentioned above – plus the leaching into the ocean of hazardous waste, toxins and other poisons and fossil fuels used to maintain and operate them- into the ocean is overwhelming.
Maybe do a little research – past “wind is good.”
So, what is your solution then? If wind is so terrible, and I certainly don’t accept your suppositions, what are you in favor of? More nuclear, more holes in the ground to dig out fossil fuels? You do realize that climate change is far worse for the ocean than offshore wind?
I suggest you read the article “Clearing the Air on Offshore Wind,” from savethesound.org or simply Google the topic, “impacts of offshore wind.” I’m not suggesting that offshore wind is not without its downside. However, I think you’ll find with some research, that it is, in the long run, far better for the ocean than burning more carbon.
Of course, as I’ve suggested, the NIMBY attitude on the Central Coast is strong and having a constructive conversation about this topic with those who have made up their minds is probably a waste of time.
Also a waste of time is trying to change the minds of those who are profiting from offshore wind, like the unions, engineers and consuktants that have their hands out for the billions to be wasted on yet another California boondoggle.
Ugh, the nimbyism and oil industry talking points disguised as environmental concern is so boomery.
Inaptness: The window has passed on 3GWs of OSW off CA. Radar interference (we are at war), shipping lane detours burning more fuel (platform Irene had a 500 yard buffer) to get around leases, plus Nicole’s points. But really superceded by a massive solar agenda: 500/230kV Manning Sub was just approved by the CPUC to tie into the Los Banos-Gates#1 and Los Banos-Midway #2 500kV lines with two 230kV lines to Tranquility Sub. CAISO and FERC had solicited in 2023-2024 and LS Power Grid California got the project. This will be the interconnect of 21GW or 200 square miles of solar panels. Batteries will be scattered throughout the huge footprint but those locations aren’t finalized. Links: https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/news-and-updates/all-news/cpuc-permitting-puts-manning-substation-construction-ahead-of-schedule-in-san-joaquin-valley?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQPNDA5OTYyNjIzMDg1NjA5AAEeBxiu-lju617NYBnbgDfFTNHNIM9DaAM8fMpzFNU8YUU7yDH7UlNe0iElyBs_aem_YndisAhjkJBX-D96BR2I1Q
https://supercarblondie.com/tech/massive-200-square-mile-solar-farm-is-on-the-way/
https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/solar/biggest-us-solar-storage-project-california
LS Power Grid California Begins Construction of the Manning Substation https://share.google/4gV7vdrlLWZ2JRYzF