Off Shore Wind Capacity Was Designed To Serve Growth In Power Demand Resulting From Electrification
Murphy’s Energy Master Plan Integrated Wind With Continued Reliance On Fossil Gas Power
(Source: NJ BPU Energy Master Plan)
The back stabbing betrayal by foreign corporate off shore wind developer Orsted was a humiliating blow to NJ Gov. Murphy’s off shore wind program, but it will have no impact on NJ’s greenhouse gas emissions or air quality (and while we are pointing fingers, let’s not forget that NJ based corporate PSE&G recently abandoned the wind program, too).
That is because the 2,200? megawatts of electric power projected to be produced by the Orsted project was planned to serve growth in electric demand resulting from electrification of vehicles and buildings.
Gov. Murphy, environmental and climate groups, and media have been misleading the public about this basic fact from day one.
Here is there typical lie from NJ Spotlight:
Offshore wind is intended to provide approximately 27% of New Jersey’s electricity by 2050, according to the state’s Energy Master Plan. Solar energy is currently projected to supply about one-third, and the bulk of the rest is projected to come from nuclear power.
That claim is misleading and false (by omission), and reporter Tom Johnson knows it.
Under Murphy’s Energy Master Plan, electric demand will more than double by 2050.
Modeling for the Integrated Energy Plan found that by 2050, assuming annual demand increased by a factor of two to roughly 165 TWh due to increased end-use electrification
The off shore wind capacity will serve that increase in demand. Existing fossil will not be replaced by off shore wind, but will continue to operate and produce greenhouse gas emissions.
Under Murphy’s Energy Master Plan, off shore wind is explicitly technically integrated with continued reliance on fossil natural gas:
11 “Clean firm” generating resources means dispatchable, carbon-neutral capacity within New Jersey to provide power during weather events where wind and solar resources produce little energy across the region. This is further discussed earlier in the box, “Renewable Energy, DER, and the Integrated Energy Plan.”
Here is that same concept again, from the EMP’s technical support document, known as the Integrated Energy Plan (IEP):
Firm capacity increases from 12 GW to 17.5 GW by 2050. This is driven by the need for reliability when renewable output is low. By 2050 the least cost option for providing firm capacity is burning 100% clean gas (biogas and small amounts of hydrogen) in existing and new gas generators.
Under the Murphy Energy Master Plan, best case, at least 8% of NJ electric generation will be supplied by fossil sources in 2050 (very likely more as allowed by the definition of “clean firm generating sources“, which means existing fossil gas plants, and the legal definitions of “renewable energy” (which includes GHG emitting garbage incinerators), “renewable energy credits” (which includes out of state fossil based power), and “net zero” (which allows all sorts of manipulations and abuses based on underlying quantification and measurement methods and data):
New Jersey must shift from a predominantly fossil fuel-based electricity system to a system predominantly based on carbon-free resources. Modeling from the Integrated Energy Plan showed that on a least-cost pathway, New Jersey could supply 94% of its electricity from in- and out- of-state carbon-free resources, and meet the remaining 6% with “clean firm” generating resources,11 which today would include biogas co-fired in existing natural gas fired generators, but may include other non-fossil fuel-based technologies in the future (see Figure 16).
No BPU or DEP regulatory approval or contract included any linkage between off shore wind capacity and mandatory displacement of current existing fossil power capacity.
The electric power generation sector is responsible for only about 20% of NJ greenhouse gas emissions. With a doubling of electric demand, even best case wind makes very small reductions in just 20% of emissions.
The toothless NJ Global Warming Response Act (GWRA) does not mandate anything, and does not apply to wind.
The Murphy DEP’s narrow power sector CO2 emissions regulation actually allows emissions to increase (and it ignores methane emissions).
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) does not apply to wind and the emissions reduction caps are far above the goals of the NJ GWRA goals or even the flawed concept of “net zero”. The RGGI allowance prices are a pittance, less that 10% of the social costs of carbon, and a cost of doing business that have no impact on corporate energy strategy decisions
There are no teeth in any of these laws and programs when it comes to actual real GHG emissions. But there is no need to take my word for any of this.
For an explanation and solid analysis of how renewables serve new demand growth and will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions, see: