Energy Zone Raises Doubts

Feasibility of Proposed Area Close to Tuckernuck May Be Years Away;
Need Grows for Clean Energy

By IAN FEIN

Selectmen across the Island this spring hailed a proposal to
designate an area southeast of Chappaquiddick as a renewable energy
zone, where they would promote offshore projects to supply the Vineyard
and Nantucket with clean electric power.

Given the lure of federal funding, the concept was openly embraced
by town officials and other groups who are opposed to the offshore wind
farm proposed in Nantucket Sound. They presented the publicly sited area
as a better alternative to the Cape Wind project, which a private
developer has proposed on Horseshoe Shoal in Nantucket Sound.

But more than two months after extolling the idea, town officials
acknowledged this week that they know virtually nothing about the
details of the proposed zone.

At present, the zone exists only as a mention in a few letters sent
to various federal officials. No funds have been secured, no legislation
has been filed, nor have any new studies been conducted to determine
whether potential projects south of Tuckernuck island are as yet
economically feasible.

A number of regional energy officials said this week that any viable
offshore project in that area would likely be years away, perhaps even a
decade or more.

Facing severe electricity shortages in the region, and a dire need
to move away from fossil-fuel burning sources, Vineyard energy advocates
this week called the renewable energy zone an admirable goal for the
future.

But they also warned against approaching the idea as a viable
alternative to Cape Wind, which is more than five years into permitting
and would use proven technology already in wide use throughout Europe.

Earlier this week, Cape Wind officials released data this week
suggesting that their wind turbine project would offset almost 900,000
tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year. Had the project been up and
running, Cape Wind officials said, it would have produced more than 400
megawatts of power per hour on June 27 – one of the top 10 days
for electricity demand in the history of New England.

\"There\'s a reality check that needs to be made here.
People have to level with themselves,\" said Peter Cabana, a member
of the Martha\'s Vineyard Commission and the Tisbury representative
to the Cape Light Compact.

\"You can talk about what you want to do 10 or 20 years from
now, but in the meantime we need to start using the clean fuel
that\'s already available to us,\" Mr. Cabana said.
\"When you face the reality that low-cost, carbon-free electricity
can be produced at Horseshoe Shoals, how can you keep that off the
table? How is it you can keep saying ‘No, not there\'?\"

The comments underscore a philosophical debate that has beset the
Cape Wind project since it was unveiled nearly six years ago as the
nation\'s first proposed offshore wind farm: Should the country
first establish a comprehensive plan for how to manage its oceans? Or,
in the absence of such a framework, should the country let private
enterprise pursue alternative energy projects on the water?

The stakes have escalated in the proceeding years, as more
developers have come forward with new technologies and proposals, while
state and federal lawmakers have dragged their feet in addressing the
issue. Meanwhile, the Vineyard finds itself quite literally in the
middle of the debate - surrounded on three sides by offshore
renewable energy proposals, including Cape Wind and two tidal power
projects.

At this point, virtually everyone agrees that the United States must
quickly begin to harness the vast potential of offshore renewable energy
sources, and that the nation has lagged far behind its European
counterparts in preparing for and embracing such technologies. But as of
today, no wind turbines yet stand in American waters.

So the question then becomes: How does the country best achieve that
goal?

\"Unless we designate which parts of our oceans ought to be
utilized in an appropriate manner, it simply feeds the gold-rush
mentality,\" said Mark Forest, chief of staff to Cong. William
Delahunt, whose legislative district encompasses the Cape and Islands.

An early and vocal supporter of offshore zoning, Congressman
Delahunt has opposed the Nantucket Sound wind farm proposal as an
inappropriate site.

\"Massachusetts ought to be a home for ocean development, but
we have to have the building blocks in place first,\" Mr. Forest
said. \"And in the six or seven years we\'ve been debating the
whole concept of ocean zoning, others in Europe have done it.\"

A Cape Wind spokesman countered that the United States cannot hold
up the private sector while public officials struggle to straighten out
their differences. He noted that multiple efforts to adopt comprehensive
ocean zoning on the federal and state levels have faltered thus far.

\"Just as America is getting ready to take its first steps in
this arena, I think it would be a mistake to decide to wait until some
sort of master plan for the oceans is developed - because that
could take decades,\" said Mark Rodgers, communications director
for Cape Wind.

He also said that the ongoing regulatory process already in place
will ensure that public agencies on both the state and federal levels
find that the benefits of Cape Wind outweigh any negative impacts.

\"They\'re going to have to find that the project on
balance is in the public interest, that the site is appropriate, and
that the project is not dangerous for navigation. We will have to pass
all those tests,\" Mr. Rodgers said. \"It\'s a higher bar
than any fossil fuel plant in Massachusetts has ever had to pass. And if
we want to encourage more forms of renewable energy, how much higher are
we going to set that bar?\"

Greg Watson, vice present of the Massachusetts Technology
Collaborative and a senior advisor to Massachusetts Secretary of Energy
and Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, said yesterday that the nation
clearly must develop a thoughtful framework for reviewing offshore wind
energy development. But at the same time, any pending projects must be
looked at in the context of global climate change. Secretary Bowles this
spring said that building the Cape Wind project would be equivalent to
taking 175,000 cars off the road.

\"In terms of offshore renewables, we are talking about using a
resource that is a public trust. But we\'re also talking about
developing projects that would address our greatest threat,\" Mr.
Watson said. \"Given the severity and gravity of the climate change
problem, we need to be doing everything we can, and we need to be doing
it as soon as possible.\"

Energy officials say a key flaw in the south-of-Tuckernuck proposal
is that potential wind projects there may not be economically feasible
at any time in the near future.

The ocean depths are far greater than the shallow waters of
Nantucket Sound, and so-called deep water turbines face longer
transmission cables, higher wave heights, larger capital costs and more
difficult maintenance challenges than near-shore projects like Cape
Wind.

While deep-water projects are the subject of much research and
investment, and will almost certainly play a role in future development
because winds are stronger further offshore, the technology is still
five to 10 years away from being commercially viable, Mr. Watson said.

Town officials on the Vineyard and Nantucket this week acknowledged
that a primary reason for their preference of the south of Tuckernuck
site is that it would be farther away from homeowners and recreational
boaters than the Cape Wind proposal in Nantucket Sound. Edgartown
selectman Arthur Smadbeck and Oak Bluffs selectman Kerry Scott, who both
support the Tuckernuck idea but oppose Cape Wind, also acknowledged that
they had done no further work at the local level to actually pursue the
offshore zone.

\"There are appropriate places to put things, and places not to
put things,\" said Mr. Smadbeck, who championed the offshore energy
zone on the Vineyard. \"Nantucket Sound is a place where people do
a lot of recreation. People fish, they sail, they boat.\"

The Tuckernuck zone originated at the Nantucket planning and
economic development commission. Nantucket officials then got in touch
with Mr. Forest, who quickly embraced the idea and introduced it to
Vineyard officials at an invitation-only meeting held at the
Martha\'s Vineyard Commission this April.

At that meeting, Mr. Smadbeck saw the proposal for the first time
and lent his strong support to the zone. Later that day, the Edgartown
selectmen formally endorsed the idea.

But other Vineyard energy advocates who attended the invitation-only
meeting were less enthusiastic.

John Abrams of West Tisbury, who has long been a supporter of wind
turbines on the Vineyard, said that to his knowledge neither Congressman
Delahunt nor Mr. Forest had every visited the Island before to speak in
favor of a wind project.

Because only one selectman was invited from each town, the gathering
avoided requirements of the Massachusetts open meeting law. The meeting
was not posted or publicized in any fashion.

\"I don\'t think they wanted the public to know what they
were doing,\" said Mr. Cabana, a retired civil engineer who spent
his career in the energy industry.

Mr. Cabana said he asked Mr. Forest at that meeting why the site
near Tuckernuck was preferable to Horseshoe Shoal for offshore renewable
energy development. He was told his question was inappropriate.

The following week, Mr. Cabana wrote in an e-mail to Mr. Forest:
\"For clarification, I would like to ask again what advantage does
the area south of Tuckernuck island have over Horseshoe Shoals for
generating electricity?\"

In a reply, Mr. Forest said he would \"be back in touch\"
about the question. Mr. Cabana said he never received a further
response.

Mr. Forest this week said Congressman Delahunt is pursuing the
Tuckernuck zone as an initiative completely separate from the Cape Wind
debate. He said the congressman is waiting to hear back on the idea from
the Minerals Management Service, an agency within the U.S. Department of
Interior that has lead authority over renewable energy projects in
federal waters.

A spokesman for the Minerals Management Service said yesterday that
the agency does not see the creation of such a zone as fitting with its
mandate, and that the service was not giving any additional weight to
Congressman Delahunt\'s proposal than to any of the other thousands
of comments it received regarding the development of offshore renewable
energy policies.

For his part, Mr. Rodgers maintains that Horseshoe Shoal is the most
viable site for an offshore wind farm in the region. He noted that the
Minerals Management Service will soon release a comprehensive
alternative site analysis with its larger Cape Wind environmental
report, perhaps as early as next month.

\"We won\'t know until we see it, but we believe that kind
of analysis will validate what we\'ve been saying about this for
several years now. We think it\'s going to raise real questions
about south of Tuckernuck, especially for offshore wind at any time in
the near future,\" Mr. Rodgers said.

\"Eventually the technology will advance, the economics will
improve, and many more sites like that will become viable,\" he
said. \"That will be an exciting day, but we think that\'s 10
to 20 years from now.\"

\"Rather than wait for that, we can make substantial progress
now by building America\'s first offshore wind farm here in the
waters of Nantucket Sound, and provide the Cape and Islands with
three-quarters of its electric supply,\" he said. \"And by
giving people that experience, we feel that will help the deep-water day
come sooner.\"