\napproval of the Cape Wind project on Wednesday, the media coverage tended
\nto focus on the denouement of a nearly decade-long battle over the United States’
\nfirst offshore wind farm.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
And indeed, our East Coast cousins put Californians to shame
\nwhen it comes to green NIMBYism. (Not to dismiss legitimate environmental
\nconcerns over offshore wind farms, but the nine-year struggle to put 130 wind turbines
\nin the Kennedy’s backyard in Nantucket Sound makes the permitting of Mojave
\nDesert solar power plants look like a breeze by comparison.)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The fight over Cape
\n Wind isn’t over yet—the
\nproject still needs to obtain approval from other agencies, and opponents are
\nlikely to mount legal challenges.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
But what struck me is that the Obama administration’s move
\nmarks the emergence of an East Coast renewable energy industry that will help
\nnationalize the transition to green power. To be sure, there are wind farms,
\nsolar installations, and biomass plants east of the Mississippi. But Big Green power has largely
\nbeen a phenomenon of the West Coast and the Great Plains,
\nregions rich in wind and sunshine.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Plans to build massive solar power plants and turbine farms
\nhave spawned a renewable energy infrastructure of investors, bankers,
\nutilities, manufacturers, and a nascent green workforce of builders and
\ntechnicians. In other words, a political constituency to push for favorable
\nstate and federal tax incentives, renewable energy standards and climate change
\nlegislation.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Putting aside profound ideological differences, the failure
\nof Congress to pass climate change legislation and the interminable haggling boils
\ndown to regionalism—coal states versus natural gas, wind, and solar states.
\nJust witness the willingness of Texas oil
\ncompanies to bankroll a California ballot
\ninitiative that would put the Golden
\n State’s landmark global
\nwarming law on hold. (Texas
\nis becoming big wind state, but as a huge oil state it retains a much bigger
\nstake in fossil fuels.)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Now imagine the potential consequences of the federal
\ngovernment’s approval of Cape
\n Wind.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
“This will be the first of many projects up and down the
\nAtlantic coast which I expect will come online in the years ahead as we build a
\nnew energy future for our country,” Salazar said at a press conference in
\nBoston on Wednesday.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
There are currently proposals to build nearly 2,500
\nmegawatts’ worth of offshore wind farms from Massachusetts
\nto North Carolina,
\naccording to the American Wind Energy Association. Other developers want to put
\nwind farms off the Texas coast and in the Great Lakes.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Given that such wind farms would be close to major East
\nCoast population centers, there’d be no need to construct long-distance
\ntransmission lines, which would avoid some costly environmental and political
\nbattles. (Though putting such lines under water comes with its own high costs
\nand environmental considerations.)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
A series of Cape Wind-sized turbine farms—each generating,
\nat peak output, the electricity of a mid-sized coal-fired power plant—would also
\ncreate thousands of construction and maintenance jobs and put the U.S. in a
\nposition to compete in the massive megawatt offshore market now dominated by
\nEuropean companies and countries, with China not far behind.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Silicon Valley venture
\ncapitalists have shied away from investing in wind, viewing it as a relatively
\n“mature” industry that doesn’t offer many opportunities for technological
\ndisruption, the potential to upend an industry and make a lot of money. (Plus,
\nwind farms are impractical off the California
\ncoast due to the depth of the ocean and the need to build floating platforms
\nfor the turbines.)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
But the rise of offshore wind appears to be changing this
\nthinking.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Offshore turbine farms can tap stronger and more consistent
\nwinds and thus generate more electricity. But they currently do so at up to
\ntwice the cost of land-based installations. That’s due to the expense of
\nbuilding and maintaining wind farms in deep water and constructing turbines
\nthat can withstand rough seas, high winds, and corrosion.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Enter the VCs. To minimize those costs and create economies
\nof scale, companies like Vestas and Clipper Windpower are developing massive
\nturbines that can generate up to 10 megawatts each. (Most land-based turbines
\ngenerate one to 2.5-megawatts.)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
That means there’s opportunities as well for startups
\nengineering advanced gearboxes capable of operating gigantic turbines, motors
\nand other materials, according to Jim Kim, a partner at Khosla Ventures, one of
\nSilicon Valley’s leading green tech venture
\ncapital firms.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Kim was on a panel I moderated Tuesday at Nordic Green, a
\nconference held at SRI International in Menlo Park,
\nCalif., that brings together Silicon Valley
\nventure capitalists with entrepreneurs from Scandinavia,
\na region that knows a thing or two about Big Wind.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Khosla Ventures has invested in Danotek Motion Technologies,
\na Michigan
\nstartup that makes generators and other components for wind turbines. The firm
\nalso participated in a round of funding for Nordic Windpower, a Berkeley,
\nCalif.-based company that is developing new designs for wind turbines that
\npromise to cut their capital costs and maintenance expenses.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
“We’re taking a new look at wind,” said Kim. “There’s
\nopportunities in a space we have not previously played.”<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The winds of change are blowing from the East for a change.<\/p>\n
Related Links:<\/strong><\/p>\n The Climate Post: Mighty winds a-blowin’<\/a><\/p>\n Cape Wind offshore project approved by Obama admin after nine-year battle<\/a><\/p>\n Bobby Kennedy shares his hopes for renewables [VIDEO]<\/a><\/p>\n