Click here to subscribe to our Patreon, where you'll get free merch and receive exclusive access to The Pebble, which features Ethan's full monthly column and snippets of The Sweaty Penguin's latest climate solutions stories.
A little over two years ago, my home state of Connecticut got some bad news. Park City Wind — an offshore wind project from Avangrid promising to provide the equivalent of 14% of the state’s electricity supply, $890 million in direct economic development, improved grid reliability during the winter and the opportunity to slash over 25 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions — was canceled. And not in the “tweeted something unsavory as a teenager” way.
Knowing I’d be losing some future relief on electric bills and a major climate solution in my backyard (well, my current apartment is on the water, so I think that counts?), I wanted to find out what went wrong. I failed to reach anyone directly involved, but wrote an article for WSHU interviewing a few experts including my state representative who chairs Connecticut’s House Select Committee on Sustainable & Renewable Energy.
Fast forward to today, and many have declared offshore wind “dead” in the United States, possibly permanently. It seemed to be the story of 2025, as the Trump administration issued stop work orders, revoked permits, clawed back funding, and just before the Christmas holiday, imposed another 90-day delay on five projects over “national security” concerns, despite the military already having evaluated and approved all of the projects. It wasn’t just the president that got attention for opposing offshore wind — media pundits, political organizers, and even local environmental groups made headlines in a year that saw the industry seemingly grind to a halt.
I agree that offshore wind was the story of 2025 for U.S. climate solutions. China has 177 operational offshore wind farms, the UK has 45, and Germany has 32. The United States, meanwhile, has 3.
But I would push back on the idea that a few actors — even in Washington — hold all the power over the offshore wind industry’s fate. I watched Park City Wind collapse under lawmakers who strongly supported the project, and in 2025, every other American clean energy sector saw tremendous growth despite federal opposition. That’s why I believe the bigger issue for offshore wind is its unique regulatory environment, which creates an inordinate amount of added costs for developers and pathways for opponents to delay and dismantle projects. As long as it’s playing by different rules, offshore wind won’t get a fair shake.
If a future administration wants to revive offshore wind to address climate change and bring down energy prices, they’ll need a lot more than a supportive status quo. Offshore wind will only become competitive and resilient if lawmakers start by reforming permitting laws, maritime shipping restrictions, and any other regulations standing in offshore wind’s way.