Whales abandoned by environmental groups, but advocates take opposition to offshore wind to SCOTUS

A grassroots Nantucket-based group opposed to the development of offshore wind energy is asking the Supreme Court to consider an appeal of a lower court’s decision that it says violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

“We feel really excited about it, but I think it’s a shame we’ve had to go this far,” Amy DiSibio, board member with Nantucket Residents Against Turbines (ACK For Whales), told Just the News. 

Cumulative impacts

In 2021, ACK For Whales sued the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management over its approval of "Vineyard Wind," a 62-turbine wind farm off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard.

The lawsuit argues that the agency failed to follow a requirement in the ESA to use “the best available scientific and commercial data available.” Even though analyses of the project found that it would “contribute to stressors that affect” the critically endangered North Atlantic Right Whale, and that “the loss of even one individual a year” could reduce the species’ recovery, NMFS and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management created an exception to the ESA requirement.

“There's a critically endangered North Atlantic Right Whale out there, and you are materially changing its safe haven. In fact, you're destroying it,” DiSibio said.

In April 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld a district court's decision to dismiss the suit, ruling that it had to defer to the federal agencies’ interpretation of the ESA requirements.

With the ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the "Chevron deference" that allowed broad latitude in interpreting laws when Congress hasn’t provided specific guidelines, ACK For Whales is hoping they’ll be granted an opportunity for the merits of their case to be considered.

Their petition argues that the agencies didn’t consider the cumulative impacts of other planned projects when they approved Vineyard Wind, which violated the ESA.

“They looked at what the impact of a handful of turbines would be, not the fact that there will be over 1000 turbines out there. We really believe that permits were issued full pedal to the metal, without really looking at the cumulative impacts whatsoever,” DiSibio said. 

Greenish foam

In July, a 350-foot blade from one of the turbines broke off and fell into the ocean. Nearly three months later, residents are still finding pieces of the blade washing up on shore. 

Mary Chalke, who lives in Nantucket, regularly posts videos of the debris on X, from the Nantucket beach as well as crews continuing to clean it up. Her latest was posted on October 1. DiSibio, who also lives in Nantucket, said debris has been found as far away as Rhode Island and Montauk, New York. She’s held pieces of it herself.

They are a “greenish foam board that deteriorates in your hand,” she said.

Without an engineering background, she said she can’t be sure how long the pieces of the football field-sized blade will be washing up on shore, but she wouldn’t be surprised if years from now wreckage continues washing ashore. “That piece that’s on the floor isn’t sitting in a static state,” DiSibio said.

DiSibio said that none of the construction planning documents or the environmental impact statements for the Vineyard Wind project even mention the potential for a blade breaking off a turbine. 

Betrayed

The incident created controversy for the offshore wind industry, but environmental groups have for the most part ignored the impacts the debris could have. The Sierra Club issued a statement urging people not to let the incident diminish their support for offshore wind.

“Now we must all work to ensure that the failure of a single turbine blade does not adversely impact the emergence of offshore wind as a critical solution for reducing dependence on fossil fuels and addressing the climate crisis,” Nancy Pyne, Sierra Club senior advisor for offshore wind, said in a statement.

Greenpeace hasn’t issued any statements about the blade incidents specifically, but it’s a vocal proponent for the offshore wind industry and has stated that there’s no evidence the industry is harming whales.

ACK For Whales is one of dozens of small, grassroots organizations whose members live in communities on the East and West Coast trying to raise concerns about the environmental impacts of offshore wind, including the threats to the endangered whales. DiSibio said environmental groups have ignored them.

“All of these environmental organizations have huge clout, huge power, huge credibility, and the decision makers listen to them,” DiSibio said. “Not only do we feel betrayed, I think America should feel betrayed.” 

Conspiracies

The media have likewise ignored them, DiSibio said. That is, when they’re not actively smearing them. For example, in an article last year, The Guardian interviewed J. Timmons Roberts, a professor of environmental studies at Brown University, who claims that the entire offshore wind opposition is nothing more than right-wing conspiracy. The Guardian disclosed that the article was "supported by" Open Society Foundations, which was founded by billionaire George Soros, who also has investments in renewable energy.

Roberts, along with a group of undergraduate students, produced a report last year claiming that these environmental groups are part of a conspiracy by conservative groups and fossil fuel companies.

“That is really an interesting piece of fiction. They've just decided that all of these grassroots organizations are tied together. It's quite a conspiracy piece,” DiSibio said.

The report relies heavily on the climate activist news site DeSmog, which maintains a database of what it calls “deniers.” This is anyone who questions the “climate crisis” narrative or the energy transition. The list includes highly credentialed climate researchers, such as Dr.Judith Curry, president of the Climate Forecast Applications Network, and Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., retired professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

“The reports are riddled with errors and lazy journalists just cite those reports to say, you know, you guys are under the thrall of big oil or conservative think tanks,” Marr Herr, spokesperson for ACK For Whales, told Just the News.

Contrary to the conspiracies, DiSibio said, ACK For Whales is not funded by oil companies. While environmental groups with billions of dollars between them ignore the impacts of offshore wind, small environmental groups on shoestring budgets have been left to fend for endangered whales.

“We have struggled to raise money. We are entirely funded by donations from people here, basically friends and family and people on Nantucket. We've never taken one corporate penny,” DiSibio said.

More litigation

ACK For Whales is not the only grassroots organization asking the courts to protect whales. Save Long Beach Island sent a letter last week to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, warning them the group will pursue litigation if their concerns, which are similar to those ACK For Whales raises in its petition, are not addressed.

DiSibio said she understands that people around the world are very concerned about climate change. While they are looking to offshore wind to be a solution, she said, it accomplishes little for a big cost.

“You can't ask the world to jump onto an unreliable, intermittent source of energy that trashes the universe. It just doesn't make sense,” DiSibio said.