As East Coast ramps up offshore wind power projects, much remains unknown about how the facilities could affect the environment

POINT PLEASANT BEACH — As the United States races to build offshore wind power projects, transforming coastlines from Maine to South Carolina, much remains unknown about how the facilities could affect the environment.

And that worries some people, particularly those who depend on the sea for their livelihoods.

“We don’t have the science to know what the impact will be,” said Jim Hutchinson, managing editor of The Fisherman magazine in New Jersey. “The attitude has been, ‘Build it and we’ll figure it out.’ ”

The wind power industry disputes such claims, citing years of studies.

So far, four offshore wind projects have been approved by the federal government for the U.S. East Coast, according to the American Clean Power Association. Vineyard Wind will place 62 turbines about 15 miles off Martha’s Vineyard, generating enough electricity to power 400,000 homes.

South Fork Wind will place 12 turbines in the waters off Long Island, N.Y., about 35 miles east of Montauk Point, to power 70,000 homes. And Ocean Wind I, the first of two Orsted projects in New Jersey, will place 98 turbines about 15 miles off Atlantic City and Ocean City, generating power for 500,000 homes.

Those projects are in addition to the planned Revolution Wind development, about 15 miles southeast of Point Judith, R.I., with 65 turbines powering nearly 250,000 homes. Numerous others have been proposed, and the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management plans to review at least 16 offshore wind projects by 2025.

“All this is happening so fast,” said Greg Cudnik, a recreational fisherman, bait and tackle shop owner, and party boat captain from Ship Bottom, N.J. “Science takes time.”

A joint study in March by two federal scientific agencies and the commercial fishing industry documents numerous impacts that offshore wind power projects could have on fish and marine mammals, including noise, vibration, electromagnetic fields, and heat transfer that could alter the environment.

Like numerous existing studies, the report pointed out the complexities of how the structures and cables might interact with marine life. For instance, turbines can attract some fish and repel others.

The March study said large underwater platforms are rapidly colonized by smaller, bottom-dwelling marine life, including shellfish and crabs, which in turn attract larger predators such as black sea bass. At the same time, cloudy water from turbine operations, noise, vibrations, and electromagnetic fields could also make species leave an area.

In most instances, report authors agreed that more studies are needed.

Research in other countries also is also nuanced. Some European studies have shown that crabs and lobster are attracted to harder sea bottoms that support wind turbines. Others, including flatfish and whiting, were shown to leave those areas.

Substantial research already exists. The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has posted a half dozen or more studies on its website every year since 2016; in several instances the studies called for further investigation and analysis.

Phil Sgro, a spokesperson for the American Clean Power Association, said the industry believes sufficient scientific studies exist to establish that offshore wind development can be done “in a manner that is both economical and environmentally responsible.”

Opponents blame ocean floor preparation for causing or contributing to the deaths of 70 whales on the East Coast since December. But three federal agencies say there is no evidence the two are related.

The U.S. fishing industry — both commercial and recreational — has numerous concerns about offshore wind impacting operations in places long available for fishing with minimal interference.

Fishermen fear electromagnetic fields emitted from underwater power cables could deter or harm some marine life. They worry about being able to safely navigate around the turbines, and about being prohibited from productive fishing grounds on which they have relied for generations.

They also worry that unforeseen consequences could reduce catches and trigger government limits on how much can be caught if fish stocks diminish.

And while some companies have voluntarily agreed to compensate fishermen for any economic damage, there is no mandate requiring it. The federal government has endorsed — but not required — compensation to the fishing industry for negative effects from offshore wind. Eleven states are considering setting up a regional fund to administer such payments.

Cudnik, the New Jersey boat captain, worries about prime species being driven away by changes to the ocean floor.

“Clams, scallops, flounder, and sand eels are associated with soft sand bottoms,” he said. “Striped bass, sea bass, mahis — everything eats these eels. When they are in abundance, it’s awesome fishing. All these offshore wind areas are in that prime habitat.”

And Keith Craffey, president of the Baymen’s Protective Association on New Jersey’s Raritan Bay, worries that power cables from a New York project coming ashore in New Jersey will be placed across productive clam beds his members use, potentially rendering the areas off-limits.

“If we have to lay off 50 guys because of it, are the offshore wind companies going to pick those 50 guys up?” he asked.

On Monday, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management released an environmental-impact statement for the proposed Empire Wind project in New York, designed to power 700,000 homes. It determined that the project could have “moderate to major” impacts on commercial fisheries, and “minor to moderate” impacts for recreational fishing, although minor beneficial effects could also occur from the creation of an artificial reef that will attract some fish.

New Jersey’s commercial fishing industry had nearly $690 million in sales in 2020, not including imports, according to the U.S. Commerce Department. The recreational sector generated $724 million in sales that year.

Sgro said the wind power industry has worked closely with the government and the fishing industry to address concerns, including agreeing to avoid placing turbines in the areas most heavily used by anglers. He said a study in the waters off southern New England determined that heat and electromagnetic fields from buried cables will not negatively affect important fish species in the area.

Orsted, the developer behind two of New Jersey’s approved projects, said it has worked hard to “avoid, minimize, and mitigate” negative impacts on fishing.

Orsted says it will compensate boat crews for damage to or loss of gear; pay direct compensation to recreational and commercial vessels adversely impacted, and create a navigational safety fund. It also plans to coordinate with state and federal authorities on seasonal operating restrictions to protect flounder and herring.

U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., a New Jersey Democrat, supports the compensation “if the industry experiences economic losses as a result of the transition to offshore wind power.”