Friday, July 8, 2022
CapitalPress.com 9
Energy: ‘I will fight to protect my family, our community’
longer before any wind turbines are
in operation.
“You’re going to have to balance
the benefits with ... how they affect
existing uses around fishing, and the
effect they’ll have on the environ-
ment,” he said.
Continued from Page 1
The push to harness wind energy
in the Pacific Ocean has raised con-
cerns within Oregon’s $1.2 billion
commercial fishing industry, with
families such as the Retherfords
worried it will limit access to highly
productive fisheries and impact the
marine ecosystem.
“There’s got to be better
options,” Kelley Retherford said. “I
will fight to protect my family, our
community, our fisheries and our
livelihoods.”
More questions
Development areas
On April 27, BOEM published
details about two call areas desig-
nated for offshore wind develop-
ment in Oregon.
The Coos Bay Call Area begins
13.8 miles offshore of Charles-
ton, Ore., and is 67 miles long and
41 miles wide. The Brookings Call
Area begins 13.8 miles offshore of
Gold Beach, and is 46 miles long and
22 miles wide. Together, the areas
encompass 3,759 square miles.
A 60-day comment period ended
June 28 for developers to nomi-
nate locations within the two areas
that would be best suited for wind
projects.
At least one builder, Deep Blue
Pacific Wind, nominated three such
locations in its bid to build the North-
west’s first floating offshore wind
farm.
Deep Blue Pacific Wind is a joint
venture between Simply Blue Group,
an offshore wind developer based in
Ireland, and TotalEnergies, a French
energy company with its U.S. head-
quarters in Houston. In January,
the venture hired Peter Cogswell as
director of government and external
affairs.
Cogswell is based in Portland,
and is the former director of inter-
governmental affairs for the Bonne-
ville Power Administration, which
markets electricity produced in the
region. He said Oregon is particularly
attractive for offshore wind due to a
“world class” resource and policies to
achieve 100% “clean” electricity by
2040.
Rather than being fixed to the sea-
bed, turbines in the Pacific would
have to be built on floating platforms
to capture wind where it blows the
hardest. Cogswell estimated it would
take between 50 and 60 turbines to
generate 1 gigawatt of energy.
“There’s a lot to like about this
resource,” he said. “It’s a very high
(capacity) for a renewable form of
generation.”
Dueling processes
BOEM spokesman John Romero
said the call areas are meant to iden-
tify where offshore wind “may be
safely and responsibly developed,”
while soliciting feedback from the
public.
Getting to this point took years
of planning, Romero said. In 2010,
then-Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski
requested an intergovernmental task
force be formed between BOEM and
state agencies, led by the Department
of Land Conservation and Develop-
ment, to study offshore wind.
That process emphasized col-
laborating with local governments,
tribes, coastal communities and other
ocean users to identify the call areas,
Romero said.
At the same time, Oregon law-
makers passed House Bill 3375
George Plaven/Capital Press
Kelley Retherford with a painting of her family’s trawlers heading out to sea at her home in Newport,
Ore.
George Plaven/Capital Press
Chris Retherford
Christian Retherford harvests
pink shrimp aboard the Coast
Pride during a recent fishing
trip off the Oregon coast.
during the 2021 legislative session.
The bill directs the state Department
of Energy to analyze how it can inte-
grate 3 gigawatts of offshore wind
energy onto the electrical grid.
Jason Sierman, a senior policy
analyst for the department, is lead-
ing the study, which is due back to the
Legislature on Sept. 15.
Their goal, Sierman said, is to gain
a better understanding of the chal-
lenges and benefits related to offshore
wind.
“It would provide a great resource
to meet those 100% clean energy tar-
gets,” he said. “Three gigawatts is a
big number, but in order to meet the
100% clean targets of all these west-
ern states, it’s going to require hun-
dreds of gigawatts of new resources
to be built somewhere.”
On the other hand, part of the
challenge is where exactly to site the
wind farms and how to mitigate their
impact on ocean users, he said.
“Economic impact to the fish-
ing economy is a big one I’ve heard
a lot about,” Sierman said. “Fishers
may potentially have their customary
ocean areas inaccessible — at least
a fraction of them — from projects
being potentially sited in these ocean
areas.”
Losing ground
Losing fishing grounds inside the
call areas could be harmful to fish-
ermen along the Oregon coast, said
Heather Mann, executive director of
the Midwater Trawlers Cooperative.
The areas are particularly boun-
tiful due to the California Current,
which provides a strong upwelling
of water and nutrients for seafood.
Mann estimated more than 25% of
Chris Retherford and his son, Christian, perform maintenance work
aboard the Coastal Pride, a fishing trawler docked at the Port of
Newport’s commercial marina.
Pacific whiting harvested in the last
decade has come from the two call
areas proposed by BOEM.
Pacific whiting is the largest com-
mercial fishery off the West Coast
of the U.S. and British Columbia,
Canada.
“The wind resource that the devel-
opers want is part of the (Califor-
nia) Current benefit that also creates
great fishing opportunities,” Mann
said. “People have been harvesting
(seafood) out of those two areas for
decades and generations. They have
been very productive fishing areas.”
The Retherfords are one example,
with three generations of the family
taking to life on the ocean.
Aboard the Coastal Pride, Chris
Retherford and his 16-year-old son,
Christian, worked alongside the crew
performing maintenance and fill-
ing the boat with diesel fuel before
heading out to catch pink shrimp.
Trips typically last one to four days,
depending on the season.
On the bridge, where Retherford
captains the ship, he flips on his auto-
matic identification system, a com-
puterized map that allows him to
view other boats broadcasting their
locations. The system shows fishing
boats crossing through BOEM’s des-
ignated call areas where large wind
generators would be anchored.
“We go to where the fish are,” he
said. “Up and down the whole coast,
the waters are alive and well. We use
most of the waters out there.”
Need for renewables
The drive for 100% clean energy
in Oregon has raised the stakes for
building new renewable energy proj-
ects statewide — including offshore
wind generators.
House Bill 2021, signed by Gov.
Kate Brown in 2021, requires retail
electricity providers to reduce green-
house gas emissions from electricity
sold to Oregon consumers by 80%
by 2030, 90% by 2035 and 100% by
2040.
To get there, Nicole Hughes, exec-
utive director of Renewable North-
west, a Portland-based advocacy
group, said offshore wind is vital.
Renewable Northwest was part
of a coalition that published a study
in July, analyzing what it will take for
Oregon to achieve the benchmarks
set under HB 2021.
“The one thing that was consis-
tent across all scenarios was that off-
shore wind is needed,” Hughes said.
“Our view is that this is an amaz-
ing opportunity for the state, both
as being needed to meet our clean
energy goals but also as an economic
opportunity.”
Hughes said the push for offshore
wind could give rise to a new indus-
try in Oregon, providing manufactur-
ing jobs and infrastructure in coastal
communities that have been econom-
ically depressed with the decline of
the timber industry over the last four
decades.
“We need to make sure we’re
going to do it right so it benefits all
Oregonians,” she said.
Cogswell, with Deep Blue Pacific
Wind, said he expects the agency to
hold a lease auction later this year
if everything goes according to
schedule.
Across the country, developers
spent $4.4 billion in February pur-
chasing offshore wind energy rights
in the New York Bight between Long
Island and New Jersey.
Once a specific project is pro-
posed, Cogswell said it will initiate a
deeper environmental analysis before
going ahead with construction. He
said it would likely be a decade or
Caren Braby, marine resources
program manager for the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, said
that while the BOEM task force has
exchanged plenty of data, more time
is needed to comprehend what it all
means for the ecosystem.
“I think it’s fair to say there isn’t a
place within either of these call areas
where something isn’t happening,”
Braby said.
In addition to displacing fisher-
men, Braby said turbines might at
least partially interrupt wind from its
natural function of upwelling ocean
water. She compared it to blowing
on a cup of coffee, stirring cream up
from the bottom of the cup.
“The turbines are, by design, cap-
turing wind,” she explained. “There’s
just one total of wind resource. You
are, by definition, splitting it. It’s
not clear how much impact that will
have, but it is measurable.”
However, Braby also acknowl-
edged that climate change is having
an impact on the ocean, contributing
to acidification and low-oxygen areas
impacting key fisheries.
“It is with that frame that we look
at renewable energy development
proposals,” Braby said, adding that
ODFW is “very interested in allevi-
ating some of our reliance on fossil
fuels.”
Slowing down
Mann, with the Midwater Trawl-
ers Co-op, said she hopes the indus-
try’s concerns will prompt state agen-
cies and BOEM to slow down their
process.
“We see an opportunity with HB
3375 to actually understand what
these risks and benefits are,” she
said. “I feel confident that if the study
comes out and is truthful, that legisla-
tors will look at that say, ‘Wow, this is
akin to the oil and gas exploration we
banned.’”
Several state and federal lawmak-
ers are also urging BOEM to slow
down and fully consider impacts on
coastal communities before moving
forward with leasing.
In a letter to BOEM Director
Amanda Lefton, Oregon Sen. Ron
Wyden and Rep. Peter DeFazio
said the Coos Bay and Brookings
call areas should be moved beyond
a depth of 1,300 meters to minimize
displacing commercial fishing.
“Fishing grounds have been
steadily shrinking for decades and
coastal communities up and down
the Pacific coast continue to suffer
economic and cultural loss,” they
wrote.
Further limiting fishing grounds
in the call areas “could spell eco-
nomic disaster for these towns,” the
letter continued.
Kelley Retherford said the fish-
ing industry will continue to push
back against the call areas, fighting
for their livelihoods.
“We don’t want new jobs. We
don’t want a different career,” Reth-
erford said. “We spent our lives as
a fishing family, and we’re going to
spend our future as a fishing fam-
ily. We will survive, and we will be
resilient.”
Costs: Fuel cost 67% more this May than it did in May of 2021
Continued from Page 1
when compared to a year
ago. The May 2022 cost of
fertilizer was 77% higher
than it was in May 2021.
Chemical costs remained
static between April and
May of 2022, but prices
this May were 33% higher
than last May.
The May fuel index was
up 6% from April, and fuel
cost 67% more this May
than it did in May of 2021.
USDA data shows that,
compared to the month
prior, May prices were
higher for diesel and gaso-
line but lower for LP gas.
Machinery in May cost
0.6% less than it did in
April — one of the few
areas where input costs
decreased. Prices slightly
declined
for
tractors,
self-propelled
machines
and other machinery. How-
ever, machinery costs were
19% higher than a year
ago.
In a statement this week,
American Farm Bureau
President Zippy Duvall
said American farmers and
ranchers continue to “grap-
ple with increased costs of
growing food and fiber.”
“While some ranch-
ers are seeing increases in
commodity prices, their
gains are being eaten up
by higher expenses,” said
Duvall. “Many farmers
and ranchers are concerned
they won’t be able to break
even, much less make a
profit.”
Irrigators: BiOps updated every five years or as new scientific information is available
Continued from Page 1
change the landscape and geomor-
phology in the Klamath River,”
Person said.
Under the Endangered Spe-
cies Act, Reclamation is required
to consult with both the National
Marine Fisheries Service and U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure
the Klamath Project does not jeop-
ardize the survival of imperiled
fish.
The resulting Biological Opin-
ions, or BiOps, dictate project oper-
ations for roughly 200,000 acres of
farmland straddling Southern Ore-
gon and Northern California.
There are two BiOps for the
Klamath Project — one for coho
salmon in the lower Klamath
River, and one for Lost River and
shortnose suckers in Upper Klam-
ath Lake. The suckers are also
known as C’waam and Koptu by
the Klamath Tribes.
BiOps are typically updated
every five years or as new scien-
tific information is available, Per-
son said. However, the most recent
BiOps were scrapped in 2019 after
the agencies received “erroneous
data” from an outside consultant
during their development.
The Yurok Tribe, Pacific Coast
Federation of Fishermen’s Asso-
ciations and Institute for Fisher-
ies Resources had also sued the
agencies for not providing enough
water in the Klamath River to
prevent an outbreak of C. shasta
infecting salmon. The fish-killing
parasite thrives in slow-moving,
warm water.
In response, Reclamation
adopted the interim operations plan
to stay in compliance with the ESA
while new BiOps take shape. But
that too has been much maligned.
Three consecutive years of
George Plaven/Capital Press File
Water flows from Upper Klam-
ath Lake into the A Canal, part
of the Klamath Project.
record drought have only exacer-
bated tensions in the basin. This
year’s water diversions for the
Klamath Project are just 15% of
full demand for irrigators, while
the Project was shut down entirely
in 2021.
The Klamath Tribes, mean-
while, are suing the government
for failing to meet minimum
water levels in Upper Klamath
Lake needed to provide shoreline
spawning habitat for suckers.
In a letter sent June 17 to Ernest
Conant, Reclamation’s regional
director, the Klamath Water Users
Association outlined deficien-
cies in the interim operations plan,
claiming “it is based on erroneous
data, flawed hydrologic assump-
tions and a proposed action that
does not comport with current
operations.”
“The three years of attempted
operation under the (plan) has
been a period of chaotic, ad hoc
decision-making,” the letter states.
“KWUA has, for well over a year,
emphasized the lack of any coher-
ent regulatory construct for the
IOP. That point is further under-
scored by the fact that the IOP has
required Reclamation to do things
that literally are impossible.”
Officials from the Interior
Department wrapped up a two-day
visit to the Klamath Basin on June
29 during which they heard con-
cerns raised by both the irrigators
and tribes.
Person said the primary asser-
tion is that the interim operations
plan simply does not work in such
extreme drought, when there is so
little water available in the system.
Rather than extend the interim
plan pending assessments for post-
dam removal, Person said stake-
holders asked if agencies can do
annual consultations each year to
determine project supplies and
protections for endangered fish.
“Reclamation is still evalu-
ating that request,” Person said.
“There will be some follow-up
discussions.”