Acknowledgements
Written by: Margaret Hartzell, Policy Advocate, Environment North Carolina Research and
Policy Center and Whitney Knapp, Stanback Intern, Environment North Carolina Research and
Policy Center.
Special thanks to reviewers: Dr. Pete Peterson, University of North Carolina Institute of Marine
Sciences; Brian O’Hara, Southeastern Coastal Wind Coalition; and Tony Dutzik, Frontier Group.
Affiliation listed for identification purposes only and does not imply organizational support or
agreement.
© 2012, Environment North Carolina Research and Policy Center
The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our
funders or those who provided editorial review. Any factual errors are strictly the responsibility
of the author and editor.
For additional copies of this report, please visit our website at:
www.environmentnorthcarolina.org/center
Environment North Carolina Research and Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization working to
preserve the Blue Ridge, protect the Outer Banks and repower the state with clean, renewable
energy.
I.
Summary
The winds off North Carolina’s coast powered the Wright Brothers’ first flight in 1903, and
they’ve been going strong ever since. In fact, just over 100 years after the first flight,
converting just a fraction of the winds off our shores to energy could provide all of North
Carolina’s energy needs.
North Carolina has more potential for offshore wind than any other Atlantic state. Combine
that with our world-class research institutions and existing green energy incentives, and North
Carolina can chart a clean energy future, with offshore wind at the forefront.
Despite our enormous potential for offshore wind energy and the boon it would be for North
Carolina’s environment and economy, too many opinion leaders remain focused on promoting
energy sources of the past, such as offshore drilling.
This report details the environmental benefits of offshore wind power, documents the risks of
drilling off of North Carolina’s prized coast, and compares estimated job creation benefits of
pursuing each offshore energy source.
The results are simple: offshore wind is estimated to create up to three times as many jobs as
offshore drilling, without putting the state’s beaches, or its tourism economy, at risk of a
devastating spill.
North Carolina policy makers should reject calls for drilling off of our coast, and instead adopt
initiatives to speed the development of offshore wind.
II.
Benefits of Offshore Wind in North Carolina
As the Wright Brothers found more than 100 years ago, the winds off the North Carolina coast
are abundant, in large part due to its wide and shallow coast. The National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) estimates that North Carolina has 297.5 GW of wind power potential within
50 nautical miles of its shores, the largest offshore wind resource along the East Coast.i
There are more than 2,800 square miles of area along the North Carolina coast and the Sounds
ripe for offshore wind development. If all of that area was developed, it could support 55,000
MWh of capacity—130 percent of North Carolina’s total energy use in 2007.
Source: “Coastal Wind for North Carolina. Energy for North Carolina’s Future. A Study of the Feasibility of Wind
Turbines in the Pamlico and Albermarle Sound and in Ocean Waters off the North Carolina Coast.” Pg. 28. June
2009.
Environmental Benefits
The vast majority of North Carolina’s electricity comes from dirty, dangerous fuel sources that
increase air and global warming pollution and risk our safety. In fact, the state’s twenty-five
coal-fired power plants cause 47 percent of the state’s carbon dioxide pollution.ii In addition,
North Carolina ranks in the top 25 in the country in mercury emissions from coal-fired power
plantsiii, while the Charlotte area had more unhealthy air days due to smog and soot pollution
in 2011 than all but seven other cities nationwide.iv
Reducing our reliance on coal-fired power plants will reduce the pollutants that threaten public
health and fuel global warming. North Carolina decision makers must focus their attention on
clean, renewable resources like offshore wind.
For example, a large offshore wind farm with 450 3.6 MW turbines with a 40 percent capacity
factor would generate about 5.7 million megawatt hours of electricity per year, initially
offsetting between 3 and 5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, and more than 50 million
metric tons of carbon dioxide during the life of the project. This is comparable to replacing 9
million cars or the yearly emissions from 11 coal-fired power plants.v
Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, State Carbon Dioxide Emissions:
Emissions Detail by State, February 2008 (2004 levels)
Economic Benefits
With the recession continuing to bear down on the Tar Heel state, renewable energy, and in
particular offshore wind, is a bright spot in an otherwise downturned economy.
According to a U.S. Department of Energy projection, by 2030 50 GW of offshore wind will
come from the East Coast, with 5 to 10 GW coming from North Carolina—the equivalent of
seven and a half to 15 power plants averaging 667 MW per power plant.vi The Department of
Energy estimates that developing this much offshore wind—just a fraction of our overall
potential—could create between 10,000 and 20,000 new manufacturing jobs in North
Carolina.vii
In addition, North Carolina could stand to gain $22.1 billion in total economic benefit during
construction and operational phases under an offshore wind scenario presented by the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory.viii
III.
The Costs of Offshore Drilling—What is at Stake?
Environmental Costs
The BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 is a perfect example of
the impact offshore drilling can have on a coastal environment. According to government data,
the BP oil spill was responsible for 6,100 dead birds, 605 dead sea turtles and almost 100 dead
marine mammals.ix
While there are numbers to document the harm that has been done due to the BP disaster, it is
worth noting that the long-term environmental impacts are still largely unknown, and are likely
the tip of the iceberg.
Absent a massive spill like the Deepwater Horizon disaster, oil and gas drilling off our coast
would still negatively impact our coast. Oil exploration and production has been blamed for
some of Louisiana’s loss of wetlands.x Since the 1930’s, Louisiana has lost 1,900 square miles of
wetland, about the size of Rhode Island.xi Scientists estimate that one third of those losses are
due to subsidence and dredging for canals and pipelines by the oil industry. xii
The same areas thought to have economically recoverable gas and oil deposits are also
ecologically significant. On the coast of North Carolina, specifically off the coast of Cape
Hatteras, there is a wide array of marine wildlife. The nearby Gulf Stream sweeps in seaweed,
providing refuge for hatching sea turtles and a wide array of fish.xiii
Since the 1960’s live coral reefs have been observed off the coast of North Carolina, including
the world’s largest deep water system of coral reefs, designated a National Monument by
President George W. Bush.xiv
Economic Benefits
While there are economic benefits to drilling off our coast, they pale in comparison to clean
uses of our coast. According to government estimates of economically recoverable natural gas
off our coast, coastal tourism and fishing generate $4 in revenue for every $1 that would be
generated by oil or natural gas.xv By contrast, more than 67,000 North Carolinians work in
coastal tourism or fishing, industries that generate $3 billion in revenue each year,xvi four times
the revenue estimated from extracting oil and gas off our shores.
Offshore drilling does have job creation benefits. According to the pro-drilling Southeast
Energy Alliance, offshore drilling would create 6,700 new jobs in North Carolina.xvii Thus,
assuming the job creation estimates of drilling proponents, offshore wind is still a more potent
job creator, creating up to three times as many jobs for North Carolina.
IV.
The Clear Path
There are many factors to take into consideration when charting a path to North Carolina’s
energy future—the economy, the environment, and the quality of life of all North Carolinians.
While we know that offshore wind could displace much of the electricity from coal-fired power
plants and reduce pollution in North Carolina, offshore drilling poses serious environmental and
economic threats to our state.
The choice is clear—North Carolina’s path to a clean energy future travels through offshore
wind. The Obama Administration has recognized this as well, putting on hold any plans to drill
off North Carolina’s coast between 2012 and 2017, while finding ways to expedite the
permitting of offshore wind farms in an environmentally sensitive way.
While North Carolina is in a great position to utilize offshore wind, other states along the
Atlantic Coast have jumped out ahead of us. For example, in New Jersey utilities are required
to purchase offshore wind energy, with the goal of having at least 1,100 MW of offshore wind
energy.
In order for North Carolina to be competitive with other states and promote offshore wind
energy, state leaders can take three key steps:
Offshore Wind Goal for North Carolina
In 2007, the North Carolina General Assembly passed Senate Bill 3, the Renewable Energy and
Energy Efficiency Standard. Senate Bill 3 requires 12.5 percent of North Carolina’s electricity to
come from renewable energy and energy efficiency by 2021. Senate Bill 3 was the first
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Standard in the Southeast, landing the Tar Heel state
as a leader in renewable energy. North Carolina should continue to be a leader in clean energy
by setting an offshore wind goal of 5,000 MW, while increasing our renewable energy standard
accordingly.
Power Purchase Agreements
Since offshore wind energy would be transmitted to the utility companies, North Carolina
needs to create requirements for utility companies to purchase energy produced from offshore
wind farms, also known as Power Purchase Agreements. (PPA’s)
In 2011, Maryland proposed the Maryland Offshore Wind Energy Act. This Act required the
Public Service Commission (PSC) to order utilities into long-term PPA’s with offshore wind
generators.xviii Part of this Act sets up the process for the PSC to issue a request for proposals
and criteria to evaluate proposals received, including dates when these steps need to be
completed.xix Requirements were created for how much offshore wind energy each utility
would have to purchase, proportional to their average megawatt load.xx While the bill did not
pass, it was a first step in moving offshore wind forward to benefit the economy and
environment along the Atlantic coast.
Tax Credits for Offshore Wind Developers
Since one of the goals of offshore wind development is to create economic development in the
state, North Carolina needs to provide incentives to attract wind developers and manufacturers
to the state, such as tax credits. North Carolina also needs to require that developers apply for
and take advantage of available funding to make the project more cost effective.
i
“Offshore Wind in the Atlantic. Growing Momentum for Jobs, Energy Independence, Clean Air, and Wildlife
Protection.” National Wildlife Federation. Pg. 52. December 2009.
ii
U.S Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, State Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Emissions Detail
by State, February 2008 (2004 levels)
iii
“America’s Biggest Mercury Polluters. How Cleaning up the Dirtiest Power Plants will Protect Public Health.”
Environment North Carolina Research and Policy Center. November 2011.
iv
“Danger in the Air. Unhealthy Air Days in 2010 and 2011.” Environment North Carolina Research and Policy
Center. September 2011.
v
“Coastal Wind. Energy for North Carolina’s Future. A Study of the Feasibility of Wind Turbines in the Pamlico and
Albermarle Sounds and in Ocean Waters Off the North Carolina Coast.” Pg. 4-5. June 2009.
vi
Id. Note i
vii
Supra note i. Even the conservative think tank, Civitas Institute reports that 1,000 MW would create
approximately 3,000 new jobs. For the purposes of this report, we used the more conservative numbers from the
Department of Energy.
viii
Supra noteii.
ix
“Too Much at Stake: Don’t Gamble with North Carolina’s Coast.” Environment North Carolina Research and Policy
Center. November 2010.
x
Id. Note viii
xi
Id. Note viii
xii
Id. Note viii
xiii
Id. Note viii
xiv
Id. Note viii
xv
Id. Note viii
xvi
Id. Note viii
xvii
http://consumerenergyalliance.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/sea-exec-summary2.pdf
xviii
Maryland House Bill 1054. 2011.
xix
Id. at pg. 5-6.
xx
Id. at pg. 6.