California Energy Commission subpoenas Golden State Wind for possible illegal federal buyout to abandon its offshore wind projects

The California Energy Commission (CEC) has issued a subpoena to Golden State Wind as part of its investigation into whether the company illegally accepted a buyout from the Trump administration to abandon its plans for a major offshore wind project off of the coast of California. The investigation revolves around  the premature relinquishment of Lease OCS-P 0564, the circumstances surrounding it, and potential violations of law in connection with offshore wind lease buyouts.

Photo Credit: Golden State Wind website (Fair Use)

With the subpoena, the CEC is asking for documents and information related to its recent agreement with the U.S. Department of the Interior to voluntarily abandon its offshore California wind lease in exchange for a $120 million payout and agreeing to make an equivalent investment in oil and gas projects outside of California. That agreement would not only result in Golden State Wind abandoning its existing lease in the Morro Bay Wind Energy Area off of the Central California coast but also forgoing any future offshore wind projects in the United States.

According to Golden State's website, its planned floating offshore wind project was “expected to generate up to 2 gigawatts (GW) of clean offshore wind energy” and “help California meet its 100% clean electricity by 2045 goal.”

“The Trump Administration is recklessly spending billions of taxpayer dollars on backroom deals that would turn back the clock on innovation” said CEC Chair David Hochschild. “Californians deserve immediate answers about the nature of this payout. Taxpayer dollars should be used to build a sustainable energy future, not to pay to make projects disappear.”

 

In the subpoena, a copy of which is available here, CEC asserts that "...the buyout deal undermines significant investments made by the State of California and other public entities in California to develop the transmission and port infrastructure necessary for offshore wind projects, which were made in reliance on commitments by Golden State Wind and other companies who hold leases to develop offshore wind projects off the coast of California, as well as by the federal government."

According to the CEC, those commitments exceed $100 million dollars, which include, but are not limited to: 

1. $42.75 million awarded through the Waterfront Facilities Improvement Program to five port projects to support the staging, integration, operations, and/or maintenance of offshore wind turbines. 

2. $10.5 million awarded to the Humboldt Bay Harbor District to develop an offshore wind port facility to support staging, integration, operations, and maintenance of offshore wind turbines. 

3. $42 million awarded to technology providers and national laboratories to develop innovative anchoring systems, mooring lines, floating substation designs, and environmental monitoring tools.

4. $3 million for offshore wind monitoring and ecosystem protection research and development at the Ocean Protection Council. 

5. $1 million to develop the AB 525 Offshore Wind Energy Strategic Plan and its various technical sub-reports, the AB 3 Second Phase Port Readiness Study, and Offshore Wind Supply Chain Study.

Additionally according to the subpoena, "Golden State Wind’s lease also includes bid credit commitments of more than $24 million for workforce training and supply chain (p. C-22 of the lease), and $6 million in Lease Use Area Community Benefits Agreements (p. C-27 of the lease), plus any applicable interest and penalties. The company’s strategy for how to fulfill these funding commitments was included in its December 2022 lease auction bid package and indicates how they would have conferred direct benefits to California and other in-state entities and must be paid back if the company forfeits its lease."

 

Trump ignores science and uses a shaky legal argument to repeal EPA's previous greenhouse gas regulations

Today, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary and the objections of many, President Donald Trump's EPA finalized a rule that repeals the agency's previous decision that greenhouse gases endangered public health and welfare. By doing so, Trump reverses actions the EPA has taken to regulate the emissions of such pollutants.

As a result of this ruling, Trump's EPA can argue that it no longer has the legal authority to regulate greenhouse gases and the resultant global warming/climate change impacts they have. Additionally, EPA will now finalize the repeal of existing regulations that required strict tailpipe emission standards for cars and light trucks. 

The decision is destined to be challenged by numerous groups, however, using some of the following arguments:

1. The ruling is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.

2. Previous U.S. Supreme Court precedent (Massachusetts v. EPA, 2007) established that greenhouse gases are air pollutants subject to regulation by the EPA if they are found to endanger public health.

3. Today's decision is based on a shaky legal argument that ignores existing climate science that should result in challenges by experts in the field.

4. A slim possibility exists that Congress could develop a new law specifically directing EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. However, this will be practically impossible as long as Trump remains in power and his supporters maintain majorities in the House and Senate.

A frustrated California Governor Newsome at COP30: "What the hell is going on?"

There's a major, annual climate change conference going on in Belém, Brazil - COP30, the Conference of the Parties. Almost all of the world has sent governmental representatives there to address the biggest environmental problem the planet faces - Climate Change.

Photo credit: By United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change - https://cop30.br/en, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=177710910

But, where are the federal government representatives from the United States? Probably back home pushing President Trump's nonsense that climate change is a hoax.

However, Governor Gavin Newsome of California is there. Newsome, whose state represents the 4th largest economy in the world, is incredulous that no one from USEPA or any other branch of the federal government is attending. As Governor of California, he has overseen perhaps the strongest set of environmental regulations and policies of  ANY of the 50 U.S. states and has worked with other states and countries to address these problems for years now.

But, as to the current administration's failure to acknowledge the problem by ignoring COP30, he had this to say:

"What the hell is going on?" 

"We're in Brazil, one of our great trading partners, one of the world's great democracies. I mean, hell, home to all the rare earth metals we need. This is the country we should be engaging with instead of giving the middle finger with 50% tariffs."

What do you think? How big of a problem is it that no federal representatives from the United States are there? How much longer can the U.S. continue to bury its head in the sand and ignore this problem?

NAS report rips to shreds Trump's EPA's claims that existing greenhouse gas regulations should be rescinded.

President Trump and his EPA appointees have proposed rescinding a 2009 regulation in which EPA had previously determined that greenhouse gas emissions were harmful and needed to be regulated more stringently. The Trump administration claims that the data was inaccurate and wrong based upon evidence since then that they claim shows otherwise.                             

                                Photo attribution: NASA

HOWEVER, today the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) released a new study which reviewed that past determination and the scientific information since 2009 and concluded that not only was EPA correct in 2009, but also, the most recent peer reviewed data shows things are getting worse. (Please note that this NAS study itself was peer reviewed.)

The new report "... says the evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused greenhouse gases is beyond scientific dispute."

The report says "EPA’s 2009 finding was accurate, has stood the test of time, and is now reinforced by even stronger evidence. Much of the understanding of climate change that was uncertain or tentative in 2009 has now been resolved by scientific research."

 

“This study was undertaken with the ultimate aim of informing the EPA, following its call for public comments, as it considers the status of the endangerment finding,” said Shirley Tilghman, professor of molecular biology and public affairs, emeritus, and former president, Princeton University, and chair of the committee that wrote the report. “We are hopeful that the evidence summarized here shows the strong base of scientific evidence available to inform sound decision-making.”

In short, NAS basically ripped to shreds Trump's EPA's claims that the regulation should be rescinded.