A presidential memorandum signed by President Donald Trump on Jan. 20 suspended the leasing and permitting of federal spaces for offshore wind development, rattling faculty and students in Tufts’ offshore wind energy engineering programs at the graduate level.
Barbara Kates-Garnick, professor of practice in energy policy at The Fletcher School, expressed concern over the order’s potential impacts to Massachusetts’ climate goals but is not concerned about the future of the industry.
“We are very distressed by that order,” Kates-Garnick said. “We don’t think it’s good public policy. Because we have such a robust ongoing program, we will be able to withstand the storm and all of the upsets that may come our way, but we have long-term faith in the industry.”
Kates-Garnick emphasized that Massachusetts’s ambitious state initiatives will allow clean energy innovation to continue making progress, regardless of federal policy.
“Massachusetts is committed to a clean energy future, and there are many laws in place that will enable Massachusetts during this period of time to maintain its momentum and its focus on clean energy,” she said. “This is a period of hibernation, but I don’t think at all that we see it as the end to the work that [we and our students] are doing.”
Eric Hines, professor of the practice in civil and environmental engineering and director of the offshore wind program, agreed that their work remains relatively stable. Hines believes that the clean energy sector, like any new industry, will inevitably face challenges in its beginning stages.
“I would say that our students are concerned, and rightfully so. There was a big shock with the election of the new administration,” Hines said. “This is the right thing to be working on, but it’s not for the faint-hearted. When you’re building a new industry, … there are a lot of highs and there are a lot of lows, and what is really important is to be able to ride those out.”
Hines further clarified misconceptions surrounding energy policy, including the sources of funding for the program’s projects.
“A lot of our funding comes from the state [and] from private sources,” Hines said. “A lot of the work that we’re doing is ongoing work. … There are several projects that are coming to fruition now that we have been working on for several years. So, at the moment I would say that funding-wise, research-wise, our work is relatively stable.”
Hines also stressed the limits of federal power and the authority of state discretion.
“Energy policy is primarily driven by the states and always has been,” Hines said. “A lot of these wind energy areas are in federal waters, so the federal government oversees that. But in terms of the pricing and in terms of purchasing the power, these are state level issues.”
Kates-Garnick said that Tufts is in a unique position to be doing work in offshore wind because of the interdisciplinary nature of the field and the university.
“To be very truthful, Tufts is totally the best place to be doing all of this,” Kates-Garnick said. “We’re a university that has the right components to do this kind of work.”
To Hines, the setback from the federal government is intimidating but not hindering tangible progress.
“In some ways, what has come to a halt is the exuberance and the sense of really, really lofty goals,” Hines said. “But I would say the people who [have been] on the ground working hard this whole time are still doing exactly what they’ve been doing. And I think the biggest concerning aspect of this is how it feels, and the worry and the uncertainty.”
Amid the anxiety from federal pushback, Hines believes that the agency of individual people to contribute toward a cleaner energy future is underestimated.
“I just want to encourage everybody to take an interest in this, to realize they can learn about it and then to realize that the more people know, the more forward momentum we’ll have,” Hines said. “There really are opportunities to make a contribution at all levels.”
