Trump administration pays wind developer to walk away from California offshore lease 76%
By Hayley Smith0%
4/27/2026, 9:53:18 PM
Topics: Climate Change
BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Biased Writer Voice, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 18.9% saturation with 157 hits. Analysis detected 1,205 faulty-reasoning hits from 832 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 68.8% and a BS Rank of 76% (4,061 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 75.90% of the article peer group.
The Trump administration on Monday said it will pay two more energy companies, including one developing a wind project off Morro Bay, to abandon their projects in federal waters.
The U.S.
Department of the Interior said it will pay a total of $885 million to Bluepoint Wind and Golden State Wind to voluntarily end their offshore wind leases, with both agreeing to instead invest in “reliable conventional energy projects.”
The move follows a similar $1 billion deal with the French firm TotalEnergies — which agreed in March to walk away from offshore wind leases off the North Carolina and New York coasts — and is yet another escalation of President Trump’s efforts to obstruct clean energy projects in favor of oil, gas and coal.
Golden State Wind was one of five leaseholders off the coast of California with a wind lease located off of Morro Bay.
Under the agreement, the company will be eligible to recover about $120 million in lease fees after it makes an equal investment to develop U.S. oil and gas assets, energy infrastructure or liquefied natural gas projects along the Gulf Coast, the Interior Department said.
The California project was expected to generate up to 2 gigawatts of clean offshore wind energy, or enough to power about 1.1 million homes, according to the company, which is a joint venture between developers Ocean Winds and Reventus Power.
“We welcome the opportunity to engage constructively with the administration on this agreement and acknowledge the clarity they have provided with this decision and deal,” read a statement from Michael Brand, chief executive of Ocean Winds North America.
“Our priority remains disciplined capital allocation and delivering reliable energy solutions that create long-term value for ratepayers, partners, and shareholders.”
New Jersey-based Bluepoint Wind is a partnership between Ocean Winds and Global Infrastructure Partners, which is part of BlackRock.
Its project was 2.4 gigawatt wind farm in the early stages of development off the coast of New Jersey and New York.
In its place, the company has committed to invest up to $765 million in a U.S. based liquefied natural gas facility, the amount of its original wind power bid under the Biden administration.
The government will reimburse the company for the full amount of its investment upon completion.
Both companies have “decided not to pursue any new offshore wind developments in the United States,” the Interior Department said.
President Trump has been notoriously hostile toward offshore wind, including canceling federal funding and ordering halts to wind projects nearing completion along the East Coast.
Last year, his administration terminated nearly half a billion dollars in support for offshore wind development in Northern California's Humboldt Bay.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who has also been critical of offshore wind, said Monday the industry was “propped up by massive taxpayer subsidies” when the companies bid for their leases in 2022.
“Now that hardworking Americans are no longer footing the bill for expensive, unreliable, intermittent energy projects, companies are once again investing in affordable, reliable, secure energy infrastructure,” Burgum said.
Environmental groups said the move could undermine California's progress on affordable energy and called Golden State Wind's departure a “missed opportunity.”
“Offshore wind stands out as a vital clean energy solution that perfectly complements our existing solar and storage investments,” said Laura Deehan, state director with the nonprofit Environment California.
“It harnesses the strongest winds off our coast specifically during peak evening demand, providing a clean alternative that stabilizes energy prices for everyone.”
Others, including Democratic lawmakers, have questioned the legality of paying the companies to walk away, and their use of taxpayer dollars.
In an April 6 letter to the Interior Department and the Department of Justice, California Rep.
Jared Huffman and Maryland Rep.
Jamie Raskin described the $1 billion deal with TotalEnergies as “outrageous” and “almost certainly unlawful.”
“There is no clear legal basis for this closed-door settlement, which allows the administration to subsidize its preferred energy sources regardless of what's best for the American people,” the lawmakers wrote.
“President Trump has been relentless in his attacks on affordable, clean energy.
This backdoor deal to cancel these projects will undeniably have negative economic, environmental, and national security impacts for which this administration must answer.”
It was not immediately clear what Monday's agreement will mean for California's broader offshore wind goals, which include 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2045.
Four leases, including two off Humboldt Bay and two more off Morro Bay, remain intact.
Adam Stern, executive director of the trade group Offshore Wind California, was optimistic the state can stay the course.
Much of California's strategy so far has been to focus on land-side preparations within its jurisdiction.
“We expect that when California is ready to put steel in the water, there will be a full slate of developers on board to help build out this important renewable energy resource as a key part of the state's clean power future,” he said.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.