[hvb2]

> Dozens of new GW+ wind farms came online in the last four years.

Thats not that much is it given the size and energy demand of the country? And that's over the past 4 years, you'll only see the true impact of this in the next 6 years.

> This concerns a few projects in a few particular locations that are exposed to federal interference

Markets are driven by a lot of feelings too. If you're trying to build a wind farm now, why on earth would you do that in the US? There are just many better options.

Your private businesses will happily skip over the US if they understand markets. Don't row upstream, find a place where your investment is wanted

[cm2187]

Electricity doesn't travel continents the way shipping containers do. So it's not like anyone wants to build a wind farm and wonders where in the world they are going to place it. Plus if you are a major single customer (eg datacenter, factory), you need reliable energy, so would be odd to build a wind farm. As far as I am aware wind farms only makes sense when you sell to the grid, and where there is an alternative on demand source of energy to take over the weeks there is no wind.

[hvb2]

> So it's not like anyone wants to build a wind farm and wonders where in the world they are going to place it.

No, but there's demand everywhere. So it's all down to how likely you are to get your money back?

And this is for adding power to the grid, if you have a major single customer you're already adding a ton of risk to your project... What if the datacenter is no longer needed after a few years or isn't completed ever?

[themafia]

> Thats not that much is it given the size and energy demand of the country?

What is it relative to these 5 projects?

> you'll only see the true impact of this in the next 6 years.

Are these the _only_ new projects that could _possibly_ be built in that time frame?

> a lot of feelings too

The feelings of those with money not of the general population.

> If you're trying to build a wind farm now, why on earth would you do that in the US?

You just said. "The size and energy demand of the country." Or are you proposing that no one would build unless we remove absolutely all risk for them? I'm not sure you and I mean the same thing when saying "private business."

> happily skip over the US

I believe this is a worn out trope. Please show some evidence this has actually occurred.

> find a place where your investment is wanted

Ah.. the "amazonification" of America. "Businesses shouldn't compete or take risks!" You seem to say. We must bend over and make them happy before they can deign to take our dollars. Perfectly modern and utterly ridiculous.

[hvb2]

> Are these the _only_ new projects that could _possibly_ be built in that time frame?

No, but a lot of the coastal waters are federal land (water? :D) which is why this is a problem to begin with. Wind at sea has a lot of benefits, no neighbors, nothing to interfere with the wind, typically very predictable power generation. So yes, you can build a lot on land, the US has plenty of space for that but that'll be subject to a LOT more pushback from the general public.

> The feelings of those with money not of the general population

And those with money are the ones making the investment decisions, no?

> You just said. "The size and energy demand of the country." Or are you proposing that no one would build unless we remove absolutely all risk for them? I'm not sure you and I mean the same thing when saying "private business."

You've followed all the rules, got all the permits, you're building and have invested x amount. And NOW the rug is pulled from underneath you? That's not a very comforting world to be investing in.

Or to put it in more general public sense. You want to build a house in city X. You get a plot of land, get an architect to draw up what you'll build, you get all the permits and are halfway through construction and THEN the city revokes your permit. You tell me, but I wouldn't try building anything there again because they are just unreliable. You go to the city next door.

> I believe this is a worn out trope. Please show some evidence this has actually occurred.

Happy to, compare these 2 charts.

USA: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-st...

Europe: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-st...

The US is basically just switching to gas power. And if you look at % of energy mix you'll see that wind is mostly flat as a % of the whole electricty generation. So yes, much much more money/investment is going into renewables in Europe. And as unpredictable as policy can be there too, they typically have the understanding to only change rules for NEW projects not existing ones.

> Ah.. the "amazonification" of America. "Businesses shouldn't compete or take risks!" You seem to say. We must bend over and make them happy before they can deign to take our dollars. Perfectly modern and utterly ridiculous.

Businesses should take risks and be rewarded for them. But take the building a house example above, would you agree that in general rules shouldn't be changed during the game/on existing projects?