David discusses offshore Wind, its global status, USA status and opportunities. Eric and Robert discuss with David how large is the North America wind fleet; global wind capacity ranking – annual vs cumulative; vs total installed capacity; what drives the growth in USA’S OSW market – and its recent crash; provide some context to appreciate the size of offshore wind turbines; considerations for a Canadian OSW market; and what are some technology opportunities in OSW. Offshore wind is a relatively new development in North America, with significant growth beginning around 2010. While Canada has 15 gigawatts of onshore wind, the US has 144 gigawatts, but only 240 megawatts of that is offshore (as of 2022). The first US offshore wind project only began producing power in late 2016. The capacity factor, the ratio of actual energy produced to potential energy production, is higher for offshore wind due to more consistent wind speeds. The onshore wind capacity factor is typically below 30%, while offshore can reach around 50%, approaching the capacity factor of hydroelectric power (50-60%). Fixed-bottom turbines are used in shallower waters (around 60 meters or less), while floating turbines are necessary for deeper waters. The US East Coast projects primarily use fixed-bottom turbines, while West Coast projects are exploring floating technology. Three large offshore wind projects in New York (totaling 4 gigawatts) were recently canceled due to General Electric's decision not to build the larger 18–19-megawatt turbines initially planned for the projects. A major obstacle to US offshore wind development is the lack of domestic marine infrastructure for turbine installation.

Currently, most of the specialized vessels and expertise come from Europe. Renting the large crane ships needed for offshore wind turbine installation can cost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars per day. The increasing size of turbines requires larger ships, further increasing costs. The speaker emphasizes the need to standardize turbine design to control costs. Retired nuclear and coal power plant sites are being considered for wind turbine development, particularly along the East Coast, to utilize existing grid connections and minimize transmission costs. The US and other countries are benefiting significantly from Europe's experience in developing offshore wind technology, including installation techniques and floating turbine technology. Onshore wind is significantly cheaper than offshore wind (by a factor of three or more). Offshore wind costs have been increasing due to factors like inflation and rising interest rates, which can have a disproportionate impact on project costs. Repowering, replacing older turbines with newer, more efficient models, is a common practice in the US wind industry, driven by economic and tax incentives. This is contrasted with the problem of orphan oil and gas wells, where decommissioning is often neglected. A major obstacle to further offshore wind development in the US is the need for significant upgrades to the transmission and distribution grid, particularly along the East Coast. Without these upgrades, many planned projects will not be viable. While wind energy currently accounts for about 10% of US electricity generation capacity, its actual contribution in terms of energy produced is lower. The future growth of wind energy depends heavily on grid upgrades. The speaker speculates that in the next five years, the US will add 5-6 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity, but further growth will be limited by grid constraints.

Currently, most of the specialized vessels and expertise come from Europe. Renting the large crane ships needed for offshore wind turbine installation can cost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars per day. The increasing size of turbines requires larger ships, further increasing costs. The speaker emphasizes the need to standardize turbine design to control costs. Retired nuclear and coal power plant sites are being considered for wind turbine development, particularly along the East Coast, to utilize existing grid connections and minimize transmission costs. The US and other countries are benefiting significantly from Europe's experience in developing offshore wind technology, including installation techniques and floating turbine technology. Onshore wind is significantly cheaper than offshore wind (by a factor of three or more). Offshore wind costs have been increasing due to factors like inflation and rising interest rates, which can have a disproportionate impact on project costs. Repowering, replacing older turbines with newer, more efficient models, is a common practice in the US wind industry, driven by economic and tax incentives. This is contrasted with the problem of orphan oil and gas wells, where decommissioning is often neglected. A major obstacle to further offshore wind development in the US is the need for significant upgrades to the transmission and distribution grid, particularly along the East Coast. Without these upgrades, many planned projects will not be viable. While wind energy currently accounts for about 10% of US electricity generation capacity, its actual contribution in terms of energy produced is lower. The future growth of wind energy depends heavily on grid upgrades. The speaker speculates that in the next five years, the US will add 5-6 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity, but further growth will be limited by grid constraints.

Currently, most of the specialized vessels and expertise come from Europe. Renting the large crane ships needed for offshore wind turbine installation can cost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars per day. The increasing size of turbines requires larger ships, further increasing costs. The speaker emphasizes the need to standardize turbine design to control costs. Retired nuclear and coal power plant sites are being considered for wind turbine development, particularly along the East Coast, to utilize existing grid connections and minimize transmission costs. The US and other countries are benefiting significantly from Europe's experience in developing offshore wind technology, including installation techniques and floating turbine technology. Onshore wind is significantly cheaper than offshore wind (by a factor of three or more). Offshore wind costs have been increasing due to factors like inflation and rising interest rates, which can have a disproportionate impact on project costs. Repowering, replacing older turbines with newer, more efficient models, is a common practice in the US wind industry, driven by economic and tax incentives. This is contrasted with the problem of orphan oil and gas wells, where decommissioning is often neglected. A major obstacle to further offshore wind development in the US is the need for significant upgrades to the transmission and distribution grid, particularly along the East Coast. Without these upgrades, many planned projects will not be viable. While wind energy currently accounts for about 10% of US electricity generation capacity, its actual contribution in terms of energy produced is lower. The future growth of wind energy depends heavily on grid upgrades. The speaker speculates that in the next five years, the US will add 5-6 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity, but further growth will be limited by grid constraints.

Robert goes over a news story about a coal-fired electricity plant running in Saskatchewan. The article reviews the Coal Boundary Plant project that started in the fall of 2014.The average capture rate of the CO₂ is 57%. The project’s real goal is to prolong the use of coal for making power. Costs are rising, and the project has spent 16 billion dollars already, having benefited from direct government subsidies, carbon revenues, and tax credits. One can think that such efforts would be better placed into renewable energy generation, as such an approach will be more expensive in the long run when compared to wind-solar with storage. They discuss the ineffectiveness and cost of carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects, particularly focusing on the Boundary Dam project in Saskatchewan and tar sands, and contrast it with the potential of renewable energy. It also touches upon lawsuits against fossil fuel projects and the misleading nature of carbon credits. For example, the Boundary Dam CCS project has consistently failed to meet its initial goal of capturing 90% of carbon emissions. The actual average capture rate is around 57%. This raises concerns about the cost-effectiveness of CCS technology. The project has cost nearly $16 billion, which analysts argue could be better spent on renewable energy projects. They contend that CCS prolongs the use of fossil fuels and is not a sustainable solution. The speakers clarify that the project primarily focuses on capturing carbon dioxide during fuel processing, not sequestering it permanently. Much of the captured CO₂ is used for enhanced oil recovery, which ultimately releases some of the carbon back into the atmosphere. The hosts compare the cost of CCS with the projected cost of solar and wind energy combined with battery storage. They argue that renewables are significantly cheaper and becoming even more so, making CCS an economically unsound investment. They estimate the cost of storing one kilowatt hour of electricity in a battery to be around one cent by 2050, while the energy required for CCS adds significantly to its overall cost. The discussion touches on the issue of "phantom credits," where companies receive credits for more carbon than they sequester. They also criticize the subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry, arguing that this money could be better used to support renewable energy development. They state that the subsidies for the Boundary Dam project alone could have funded a substantial increase in Canada's solar capacity. The speakers advocate for shifting the focus from carbon credits and sequestration to increasing the renewable energy ratio at the individual, community, and national levels. They believe this is a more effective and sustainable approach to addressing climate change.