The Delaware Senate passed Senate Bill 265, requiring the state to seek bids on power generated from offshore wind sources. The vote was 15-6.
The bill calls on the state Energy Office, working with the Public Service Commission, to solicit bids for offshore wind projects, not only from developments off the coast of Delaware but also on a regional basis.
The bill was amended to allow lower minimum power purchase limits and require any power source to have a project labor agreement that generally requires union workers. Utilities can opt out if they can provide their plan for renewables. The buying power cost must be within the ballpark of current rates.
The bill now heads to the House.
Delaware has, until now, avoided offshore wind projects, citing cost issues. However, the state is mandated to get 40% of its power from renewable sources by 2035. Delaware has limited options, with limited land for solar projects and virtually no sites for onshore wind.
In a related development, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources has received applications for permits that would bring ashore electric cables from the US Wind project off the Maryland coast. (See headline below).
The US Wind project is moving forward, while nearby, Ørsted has put its Skipjack project on hold.
Offshore wind projects have been facing challenges related to rising costs, supply chain issues, and a lack of vessels that can be used to erect wind turbine towers.
State Sen. Stephanie Hansen, D-Middletown, sponsored the bill, which passed along party lines.
Republican legislators in Delaware and southern New Jersey have opposed such projects, citing costs, alleged dangers to aquatic life, and possible damage to ocean views. The Glasgow-based Caesar Rodney Institute has launched a crusade against offshore wind in Delaware, New England, and the Mid-Atlantic claiming the source of generation will add hundreds of dollars to already rising electric bills.
CRI has denied ties to fossil fuel interests that allegedly aid citizen groups opposed to offshore wind.
Correction: In a previous version of this story, the bill was incorrectly listed as Senate Bill 226.
