An April 2025 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) affirms what critics of President Joe Biden’s wind-energy spree have long argued: offshore wind is an expensive, environmentally damaging solution in search of a problem. Offshore wind is neither necessary nor justified to fight climate change or for any other purpose other than to line the pockets of politically connected corporations and to please virtue-signaling politicians who are pushing it as part of the effort to prevent climate change.

The GAO’s report was produced against a background of changing fortunes for offshore wind. The Biden administration pushed offshore wind as part of its all-of-government effort to fight climate change, pushing to expedite more than 30,000 megawatts of offshore wind with relatively little review or concern about the broader impacts of the technology on the environment, wildlife, and the economy. I have previously written about the dangers of Biden’s offshore wind ambitions and the complications that stymied a large percentage of the offshore leases Biden issued. In fact, The Heartland Institute has joined our friends at CFACT as a party to a long-running lawsuit to block a wind project off the coast of Virginia.

Despite the political, environmental, and economic headwinds, the Biden administration pushed stubbornly along with its offshore wind initiatives. “As of January 2025, [the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management] had granted 39 offshore wind leases to commercial developers,” the GAO study reports.

While many of the projects had already been abandoned or delayed due to economic concerns, many others continued on, until most, but not all, came to a crashing halt with the swearing in of Donald Trump as president. On multiple occasions, Trump has publicly stated he hates offshore wind, calling the large industrial developments “ugly,” “horrible,” “expensive,” and “not good,” and he issued an executive order temporarily halting offshore wind development and leasing.

Against this backdrop, the GAO examined the potential benefits and drawbacks of offshore wind:

As the pace of offshore wind development has accelerated, state and local communities, Tribes, and nongovernment entities could experience the potential effects of offshore wind development.

GAO was asked to review offshore wind development in federal waters. This report examines (1) what is known about the potential impacts of offshore wind energy development, and (2) what mechanisms BOEM, in coordination with other agencies, has in place to oversee offshore wind energy development and to what extent they address potential impacts. …

[U]ncertainty exists about long-term and cumulative effects, and the extent of impacts will vary depending on the location, size, and type of offshore wind infrastructure. …

Among such impacts, development and operation of offshore wind energy facilities could affect marine life and ecosystems, including through acoustic disturbance and changes to marine habitats. Wind development could bring jobs and investment to communities. At the same time, it could disrupt commercial fishing to varying degrees. Turbines could also affect radar system performance, alter search and rescue methods, and alter historic and cultural landscapes.

The GAO examined the potential positive and negative impacts of offshore wind on climate and public health; marine life and ecosystems; the fishing industry; economic and community development; tribal resources; defense and radar systems; and maritime navigation and safety.

The GAO seems to think the DOD had significant input into the offshore wind siting and operations and is satisfied that the industrial wind facilities thus far permitted will not hamper national security or military readiness. For every other category, by contrast, significant uncertainties remain, and GAO argues many of the siting and permitting decisions were not made transparently, with input from affected parties such as tribes and the fishing industry solicited but evidently ignored.

Will offshore wind improve public health or mitigate climate change as the Biden administration claimed? The GAO says the question is still open and any benefits are uncertain. Will the offshore wind facilities harm marine life? Once again, the experts assembled by the GAO are unsure. Marine species might be harmed, even killed, directly or indirectly by the impact on habitat and prey species, but they can’t be sure. Will communities benefit economically or otherwise? It depends. The point is, it is unclear, after examining the GAO’s review, whether the substantial costs and possible negative impacts of offshore industrial wind will produce any real-world benefits to the wider community beyond those accruing to the corporations and politicians profiting from them.

In addition, the GAO noted the government failed to establish an effective monitoring and enforcement mechanism to ensure permit requirements were followed and actions and damages not allowed in the permits are avoided and/or punished if they occur.

One thing that is clear is that the permitting process was expedited for political reasons and lacked transparency, and the public input process was truncated. GAO recommends the following:

• improving tribal consultation transparency,
• documenting how fisheries’ concerns are incorporated,
• issuing enforceable standards for community engagement,
• establishing regional field offices, and
• requiring data-sharing for environmental monitoring.

Trump should halt all offshore wind activity until all of GAO’s concerns are answered and the uncertainties about the environmental, historic, and economic damage these facilities might cause are clarified.

Sources: Watts Up With That; U.S. Government Accountability Office

This article first appeared at the Heartland Institute’s website and is used by permission.

Photo by Jesse De Meulenaere on Unsplash.