DUI Lawyers in Long Beach, NJ

Click here for important updates to our privacy policy.

OPINION

3-minute read

Regarding "If not with wind, then how will we address New Jersey's energy affordability crisis?," NorthJersey.com, Jan. 9:

Save Long Beach Island has repeatedly asked Atlantic Shores to participate in an open public forum to address significant concerns regarding its offshore wind projects, but has repeatedly been ignored. Instead, AS has embarked on a slick public relations campaign using opinion pieces and paid advertising to champion its message.

This is a shrewd move as its foreign owners await an imminent decision from the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on a new bid to secure additional ratepayer subsidies for the projects. Atlantic Shores’ approach betrays its “good neighbor” posturing by avoiding dialogue with the people who will be most impacted and whose concerns have not been addressed with honesty and transparency.

In the recent opinion piece, “If not wind, then how will we address NJ’s energy affordability crisis,” Atlantic Shores Chief Financial Officer Juan Carlos Puente never really answers the question posed in the title. Rather, he recites a litany of alleged benefits of offshore wind projects. Nor does he lay out the expected costs of these projects. Instead he offers a vague claim of “more than $2 billion in positive economic impact” from Atlantic Shores Project 1, or AS1.

As CFO, Puente knows that the costs of this project to the U.S. taxpayer and the New Jersey ratepayer will be multiple times his claimed economic benefit. As noted in an independent economic analysis by Whitestrand Consulting LLC (see https://whitestrandllc.com/), the estimated ratepayer subsidy for AS1 alone will exceed $10 billion and the taxpayer subsidy will be around $2.7 billion.

Puente also chooses to ignore realities that contradict his rosy public narrative, starting with the negative impact that the uniquely bad siting of this project will have on the New Jersey tourism industry and shore communities (estimated at $6 billion). Starting less than 9 miles off the coastline, the project’s towering 1,000-plus-foot turbines will be closer to shore communities than any other large project in the entire world. Puente also ignores the negative impact of the higher electricity pricing Atlantic Shores projects will impose on the New Jersey economy — estimated at $21 billion for AS1 alone.

The Atlantic Shores CFO further makes the truly astounding statement that “…the business case and long-term economics of offshore wind remain rock-solid.”

How is a business case that requires massive subsidies to survive “rock-solid”? In 2023, Ørsted canceled its New Jersey projects even after the NJ BPU granted an additional $1 billion in ratepayer subsidies, and ultimately paid a $125 million penalty for the privilege of canceling. Atlantic Shores is now before the BPU asking for billions of dollars in additional rate subsidies for AS1 — much more than the amount it had previously agreed. Those new numbers have not yet been released, but Whitestrand estimates an increase of $6 billion to the previous rate subsidies. Other projects previously committed to by other developers have been canceled or are on the verge of collapsing due to project economics — despite the massive subsidies.

Other inaccurate and misleading claims are sprinkled throughout Puente’s op-ed piece:

Finally, Puente ignored several other issues in his op-ed, including (to name a few): noise levels at the shore during construction and operation, decommissioning requirements and feasibility, reliability of the turbines (including during hurricanes and other storms), and additional requirements on the grid for backup power.

The public deserves honest answers before ratepayer money is committed to these projects. Yet Atlantic Shores has not provided any. We agree with Puente’s concluding statement: “Let’s fight skyrocketing energy costs while protecting our environment and growing the economy.” But the close-to-shore Atlantic Shores projects will amplify skyrocketing energy costs, threaten marine and human environments and further drag down the New Jersey economy, which already is burdened by high taxes and high electric costs.

John Deitchman is a longtime supporter and former board member of Save Long Beach Island, Inc.

Four-minute read

Asbury Park Press

The long-awaited Northern Ocean County beach replenishment project is likely to begin this winter after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. has been awarded a $73.5 million contract to complete the work.

Stephen Rochette, spokesman for the Corps' Philadelphia District, said the work is likely to "be ongoing in the winter and early spring months." Rochette said he expects more information about scheduling should be coming soon from the Houston-based contractor.

"We're all very excited," Toms River Mayor Daniel Rodrick said of the contract award. "It's a long time coming!"

The federal government will pay 50% of the cost of the replenishment project, with the state and county expected to pick up the rest of the cost.

Toms River's Ortley Beach section is slated to receive 426,000 cubic yards of sand, and the shoreline is expected to be redesigned in an effort to help prevent the constant wave scouring that happens during severe storms. Toms River has paid $1.3 million to shore up beaches in Ortley over the last several years, since the Army Corps finished a massive beach replenishment project in northern Ocean County in 2019.

Bay Head and Point Pleasant Beach are slated to receive 495,000 cubic yards of sand. Most of that will be in Bay Head, with a smaller amount tapering into southern Point Pleasant Beach.

Mantoloking will receive 392,000 cubic yards; Brick, 227,000; Seaside Heights, 219,000; Lavallette, 184,000; northern Toms River beaches, 135,000, and Seaside Park, 27,000, which will taper in from Seaside Heights.

"After several contracting delays, this long-awaited project to restore our beaches that have suffered considerable erosion over the past years is finally ready to move forward," said U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J. Smith lobbied to get $30.2 million in infrastructure funding in 2022, to pay the federal share of the beach repair work.

The timing of the work will be of keen interest to barrier island beach communities that are heavily reliant on summer beach tourism.

Smith said that while the work schedule is yet to be finalized, he is hopeful that the project will be completed quickly.

"I am confident that the Army Corps will work closely with the contract awardee to help see that this important operation, now finally awarded, is not derailed again,” he said.

The Army Corps finished a nearly $130 million, 14-mile-long beach replenishment project in northern Ocean County in 2019. The project added sand to beaches in Ortley and other areas that took the brunt of Superstorm Sandy's record-setting surge and also built dunes along the beachfront.

Ortley Beach, the site of an inlet called the Cranberry Inlet in colonial times, has long been vulnerable to erosion. Superstorm Sandy caused catastrophic damage in Ortley in 2012.

The Army Corps finished a nearly $130 million, 14-mile-long beach replenishment project in northern Ocean County in 2019. The project added sand to beaches in Ortley and other areas that took the brunt of Superstorm Sandy's record-setting surge.

As part of that project, the Corps agreed to return to the area to make repairs for 50 years on a regular basis, and on an emergent basis after severe storms.

Dunes and wider beaches provide a buffer for oceanfront homes and businesses during storms, helping to protect property from pounding waves. While the dune line has been damaged several times, there have been no breaches in Ortley or other parts of the northern Ocean barrier island which could have allowed ocean water to reach homes and businesses.

Two bid protests blocked award of a contract for the beach replenishment work for many months.

Since 1922, more than $2.6 billion has been spent to shore up New Jersey's fragile coastline. Over $500 million of that was spent in Monmouth and Ocean counties since Sandy struck in 2012.

Anglers argue that beach replenishment is wrecking local fishing grounds, as sand for the beachfront is pumped onto the shore from dredge pits offshore. Others say that dumping sand on the shoreline only encourages more development in vulnerable spots that New Jersey should be encouraging people to leave.

But tourism in Monmouth and Ocean counties, driven in large part by the Shore's beaches, generates billions in revenue annually: nearly $9 billion in 2023. And oceanfront communities generate large amounts of tax revenue as well.

Mayor Rodrick said he would still like to try additional ideas for beachfront protection in Ortley, including the possibility of piloting a nearshore reef project. Such reefs are constructed offshore to mitigate wave action, and can also create additional fishing grounds. "They have been very successful in other parts of our country and the world," the mayor said.

He said, "We need to pursue new and innovative strategies for Ortley Beach, as this is only a temporary fix."

Jean Mikle covers Toms River, Seaside Heights and several other Ocean County towns. She's also passionate about the Shore's storied music scene. Contact her: @jeanmikle, jmikle@gannettnj.com.