U.S. Offshore Wind Funding Changes Overview

Last week the New York Public Service Commission rejected the petitions by Empire Wind, Beacon Wind (both are Equinor & BP affiliates) and Sunrise Wind (Orsted & Eversource) to increase their contract prices to offset the impacts of inflation, supply chain constraints and higher interest rates. The offshore wind developers now need to assess if they can make the economics of these projects work without increases in their contract prices. Given Commonwealth Wind’s, Park City Wind’s and Southcoast Wind’s experience, where the developers elected to pay security deposits and terminate the projects, it seems very unlikely that the developers will proceed with these projects under their existing contracts. This will have significant impacts on the pace of development of the US offshore wind sector. The emerging offshore wind supply chain faces a major setback, with the pace of project development noticeably slowed. This is likely to result in increased supply chain bottlenecks with the development and construction schedules for projects overlapping at a time of significant supply chain constraints including in particular limited port facilities, vessels and labor force. Nimbly, #NYSERDA issued a “10-Point Action Plan for Large Scale Renewables” shortly after the Commission issued its decision indicating how it would respond. First, NYSERDA will announce “historic awards” (i.e., one of the largest ever) of offshore and onshore renewable energy projects. This suggests that NYSERDA will go deep into the competitive bids for its 2022 offshore wind RFP, going beyond the two project awards that characterized its previous two offshore wind procurements. NYSERDA also indicated that the announcement will be accompanied by major supply chain announcements enabled by the RFP's provisions for Supply Chain Investment Plans. This will be welcome good news for the US offshore wind supply chain. Second, NYSERDA indicated that it will announce an accelerated offshore wind and onshore renewable procurement schedule including simplifying bid requirements and create an opportunity for the previously contracted projects to rebid. This can create interesting competitive dynamics as these more mature projects seek to capitalize on their anticipated higher project viability scoring (typically 10% of points for NYSERDA offshore wind RFPs).  In addition, these projects should be able to utilize the offshore wind supply chain enabled by the 2022 RFP. A second possible benefit is that this procurement can reflect progress that New York has made on coordinated transmission development, e.g., the New York City Public Policy Transmission Need. However, the transmission interconnection strategies for the first two tranches of NYSERDA offshore wind projects are well developed, limiting the ability for these projects to benefit from these developments. #offshorewind

Is US Offshore Wind Now a High Risk Asset Class? 💥$28 Billion and 5.8 GW Frozen Overnight The US Interior Department just ordered an immediate pause on federal lease activity for 5 major East Coast offshore wind projects. Roughly $28B of investment is now in limbo. Here’s what was hit and why energy markets should care... 🏗️ 5 projects (5.8 GW total) Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (Dominion Energy): 2.6 GW Sunrise Wind (Ørsted): 920 MW Empire Wind 1 (Equinor): 810 MW Vineyard Wind 1: 800 MW (already partly operating) Revolution Wind (Ørsted): 704 MW The official reason: 🛰️ National security and radar interference Interior cites classified assessments and “emerging risks” with turbine radar “clutter” framed as a key issue. Critics argue these risks were already reviewed during permitting, so the move reads as policy risk, not engineering discovery. Who wins and who bleeds? 📉 Direct losers Developers and supply chain. Delays mean higher financing costs, contract renegotiations, and potential impairments. 🔥 Relative winners Gas generation and gas infrastructure, because utilities still need firm capacity while load rises. Onshore solar plus batteries, because they face fewer federal gating items than offshore wind. Nuclear uprates and life extensions, because “reliability” arguments get stronger when big projects stall. 💡The US power market is entering an AI-driven load growth cycle. If multi gigawatt offshore wind timelines slip, the gap gets filled by the fastest scalable substitutes. In practice, that usually means gas-fired capacity in the near term and hardening the grid. Possible outcomes? Short pause, new mitigation framework: projects restart, but with higher costs and tougher DoD sign off. Long pause, capital resets: offshore wind becomes financeable only with higher returns, stronger guarantees, or redesigned contracts. Structural pivot: East Coast clean build out shifts toward onshore renewables, storage, and gas-backed reliability. The US offshore wind risk premium just repriced. Do you think this is a temporary permitting shock or the start of a freeze that reshapes the US power stack? (do not forget to subscribe to my newsletter in the above link) #OffshoreWind #Energy #NaturalGas #Renewables

$1 Billion to not build. The US offshore wind landscape just shifted from the courtroom to the balance sheet. 🏗️⚖️ If you’re in Marine Construction or Estimation, you’ve been watching the legal battles over offshore wind. But this morning, the game changed. The US administration’s $1B deal with TotalEnergies to forfeit their leases isn't just a political headline—it’s a massive "Pivot to LNG" that reshapes the project pipeline for the next decade. Here is the Monday Wrap-up for my network: 🔹 The Policy Shift: Saddly TotalEnergies is exiting US offshore wind entirely, redirecting that $1B into the Rio Grande LNG export facility. This signals a strategic move toward gas infrastructure over offshore renewables for some major players. 🔹 The "Steel" Reality: Don't count wind out yet. Vineyard Wind finished construction this weekend. Revolution Wind is officially delivering power. The courts have protected these projects, proving that once you start, the momentum is hard to stop. 🔹 Infrastructure Bets: While the energy source is debated, the need for hulls is not. The expansion of Steelpointe Shipyard to 17 acres in Connecticut shows that firms are still betting big on the long-term maritime service "arms race." For my colleagues in estimation and project management: We are entering a dual-track market. One track is the completion of the "First Wave" wind farms; the other is a massive surge in LNG and Port Modernization. ❓ Is the "TotalEnergies Exit" a sign of a broader trend, or is the "resilience" shown by Vineyard Wind enough to keep the supply chain confident? Can't there be path for a variety of energy sources to cohexit during the enegergy transition phase? Or are in your opinion, each of the economic interestes above all? I’m seeing a split in the 2026/2028 planning—where are you placing your bets? 👇 #MarineConstruction #OffshoreWind #LNG #MaritimeIndustry #EnergyTransition #RMZmarine

US Offshore Wind: the market just entered a new risk phase Over the past few weeks, the US offshore wind sector has experienced a meaningful shift — not driven by technology readiness, turbine availability or cost curves, but by regulatory and political risk at federal level. In late December, the US Department of the Interior / BOEM issued stop-work orders affecting several offshore wind projects already under construction. These include high-profile developments such as Vineyard Wind, Empire Wind, Sunrise Wind, Revolution Wind & CVOW — projects that until recently were viewed as the “de-risked core” of the US offshore pipeline. Developers have initially complied with the orders, but have then moved rapidly to litigation, seeking preliminary injunctions that would allow construction activity to continue while the legal process unfolds. A few observations from the last three months of announcements and press releases: 🔹 This is not about early-stage or speculative projects The intervention affects assets that are fully permitted, financed, contracted and physically under construction. That distinction matters — it changes how risk is perceived not just for individual projects, but for the credibility of the overall federal framework. 🔹 Schedule risk just became non-linear Offshore construction windows are highly seasonal. A 60–90 day pause can cascade into missed weather windows, vessel availability conflicts, remobilisation inefficiencies and knock-on cost escalation across the supply chain. 🔹 State & federal signals are diverging While offshore works are paused at federal level, several states — most visibly New York — continue to invest in ports, marshalling yards, manufacturing capability & workforce development. This divergence suggests strong local political commitment even as federal uncertainty increases. 🔹 No mass developer exits — but risk is being repriced There has not been a new wave of formal developer withdrawals in the last quarter. Instead, we’re seeing a quieter but important repricing of federal intervention risk in boardrooms: more conservative assumptions, higher contingencies, selective bidding strategies & a growing focus on sell-downs, partnerships & balance-sheet exposure management. 🔹 Contracts, claims & change-in-law now matter more than ever Suspension provisions, force majeure, change-in-law clauses, vessel availability & remobilisation exposure have moved from being “legal fine print” to board-level considerations that directly influence value and bankability. Bottom line: US offshore wind hasn’t stopped — but the market has clearly entered a tougher, more complex phase where regulatory durability and policy stability matter just as much as turbine supply, financing costs or LCOE. 👉 If you’re active in US offshore wind & reassessing project risk, schedules or contracting strategy, I’m always happy to compare notes — feel free to comment or message me. #offshorewind #floatingwind