PHOTOS: Biden's ‘ambitious climate goals' go down in literal flames by popular American beach
A major part of a first-of-its-kind green energy project, which the Biden administration bragged about, is now lying in ruins and polluting some of America's beautiful ocean and seashore in Nantucket, Massachusetts.
Exclusive images obtained by Fox News Digital show the shattered remains of what is left of an ocean wind turbine constructed by Vineyard Wind in a green energy project touted by the Biden administration.
The turbine was recently struck by lightning and destroyed just months after one of its blades dangerously fell into the Atlantic Ocean, dropping non-biodegradable fiberglass shards into the water, some of which washed ashore, forcing six Nantucket beaches to close.
The Cape Cod Times reported that the broken turbine was hit by lightning on Feb. 27 and "caught fire, and detached."
Today – just a few years after the Biden administration announced the project in 2021 – the turbine sits in ruins with its interior materials being exposed just about 14 nautical miles from Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts.
In May 2021, the Biden-era Department of Interior announced the approval of the construction and operation of the Vineyard Wind project, which it said would be the first large-scale, offshore wind project in the United States. The administration touted the project as contributing to their green energy goals.
Former President Joe Biden's Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland called the project an "important step toward advancing the Administration's goals to create good-paying union jobs while combating climate change and powering our nation."
She said it was "one of many actions we are determined to take to open the doors of economic opportunity to more Americans."
Biden's Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo said, "This project is an example of the investments we need to achieve the Biden-Harris administration's ambitious climate goals, and I'm proud to be part of the team leading the charge on offshore wind."
However, after the project went down in literal flames, local residents had much more choice words to say about the Biden administration's "ambitious climate goals."
"Everybody wants a healthy planet, but when the ones advocating for a green planet are the ones damaging it, it makes you pause," Barstool Sports President Dave Portnoy, a Nantucket homeowner, told Fox News Digital after the blade detached and fell into the ocean.
Portnoy lamented those who paid good money only to be unable to visit the closed beaches.
"Families save up for years to take a vacation to Nantucket only to have it ruined by negligence," he said.
Mary Chalke, another local resident, posted on X on Mar. 23 that she was continuing to find blade fiberglass debris washing ashore on a Nantucket beach on the south side of the island.
The Vineyard Gazette reported that the broken blade had a manufacturing defect that was not caught during inspections and that there were 66 other blades in the project that could potentially have the same problem. The outlet reported that Vineyard Wind has been ordered to remove all the potentially defective blades.
The outlet said that as of January, only one turbine of the 62 planned was running.
A source familiar with the project said its catastrophic failure is a "shining example of how these failed green energy projects pose a hazard to the environment."
"It wasn't by chance that this wind turbine was struck by lightning just months after it fell apart into the ocean," the source said.
On his first day in office, President Donald Trump paused new or renewed approvals, rights-of-way, permits, leases or loans for offshore wind projects pending a review of federal wind leasing and permitting practices. He also issued a memorandum temporarily withdrawing the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
25 minutes ago
- Business Insider
What A-list economists are saying about Trump's tax bill as Musk rebels against it
Elon Musk has departed his role as a "special government employee" in Trump's White House — and he's using his time outside the administration to hammer the GOP spending bill that's a cornerstone of the president's agenda. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination," Musk wrote on X earlier this week. Trump responded by saying Musk's criticism of the legislation is "disappointing." President Trump's tax bill will likely face a vote in the Senate in the coming weeks after passing the House in May. It would reduce the tax rates of lower-income workers, particularly those earning less than $107,200, and eliminate taxes on tips, social security, and overtime. The bill would also cut spending on social programs like Medicaid and SNAP benefits, which provide food assistance to low-income Americans. Like Musk, investors and economists are seemingly concerned that the bill will cause the national debt to balloon and further widen the US budget deficit. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said this week that it would grow the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade . Trump and his allies have pushed back, arguing that higher economic growth from lower taxes would help boost government revenue. Here's what top economists are saying about the bill. Phillip L. Swagel, director of the Congressional Budget Office Despite the lower tax rates for low earners, Swagel said in a May 20 letter that the bill would negatively impact poorer Americans. "CBO estimates that household resources would decrease by an amount equal to about 2 percent of income in the lowest decile (tenth) of the income distribution in 2027 and 4 percent in 2033, mainly as a result of losses of in-kind transfers, such as Medicaid and SNAP," he wrote. "By contrast, resources would increase by an amount equal to 4 percent for households in the highest decile in 2027 and 2 percent in 2033, mainly because of reductions in the taxes they owe." William McBride, chief economist at the Tax Foundation McBride, along with several colleagues at the non-partisan Tax Foundation think tank, said in a May 23 report that while the bill would support economic growth, it wouldn't be enough to offset the revenue loss from tax cuts. "Our preliminary analysis finds the tax provisions included in the House-passed bill would increase long-run GDP by 0.8 percent," the report said. "The bill's tax and spending changes would increase the 10-year budget deficit by $2.6 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the deficit would increase by $1.7 trillion over ten years before interest costs." It continued: "The bill's tax provisions alone would reduce federal tax revenue by $4.1 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the revenue reduction would fall by nearly 22 percent to $3.2 trillion over 10 years before added interest costs." 6 Nobel Laureates Six Nobel Prize-winning economists — including Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Peter Diamond, Paul Krugman, Oliver Hart, and Joseph Stiglitz — said in a June 2 letter that the bill would worsen wealth inequality in the US. "The combination of cuts to key safety net programs like Medicaid and SNAP and tax cuts disproportionately benefiting higher-income households means that the House budget constitutes an extremely large upward redistribution of income. Given how much this bill adds to the U.S. debt, it is shocking that it still imposes absolute losses on the bottom 40% of U.S households," the letter said. "The House bill addresses none of the nation's key economic challenges usefully and exacerbates many of them," it added. Ken Rogoff, professor of economics at Harvard University Rogoff, former chief economist at the IMF, cast doubt on the notion that the bill would boost growth in a piece for Project Syndicate this week. "Trump and his acolytes argue that his "big, beautiful bill" will supercharge economic growth, generating enough revenue to make up for sweeping tax cuts. But history offers little support for such claims," he wrote. "While both Democratic-led spending sprees and Republican-backed tax cuts have fueled the growth of US debt over the past two decades, tax reductions have accounted for the lion's share of the increase. Moreover, the notion that tax cuts pay for themselves was already discredited in the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan's tax cuts led to soaring deficits rather than self-sustaining growth." He added: "Will America's rising debt ultimately trigger a full-blown crisis? Perhaps, but a continued upward drift in long-term interest rates is more likely." Desmond Lachman, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute Lachman, a former IMF official who currently works for a conservative-leaning think tank, said in a June 4 post that rising bond yields, a declining dollar, and appreciating gold prices could be harbingers of an economic crisis brought on by Trump-driven policy volatility. Trump's tax bill is adding to investors' fears due to its inflationary implications. But one of its clauses undermines confidence in the reliability of the returns on Treasurys, he said. "That bill includes a clause that has to be sending shivers down foreign investors' spines. According to Section 899, the US Treasury can impose additional taxes of up to 20 percent on income earned by foreign entities from countries that enact taxes deemed 'unfair' to US interests."
CNN
27 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump's autopen fixation, explained
President Donald Trump first focused on Joe Biden's use of the autopen in March, leaning into the idea that the former president's use of the tool to sign documents showed that he wasn't in charge while in the White House and that his actions were 'null and void.' At the time, conservative executive authority scholar John Yoo wagered to CNN that Trump was 'just having fun at Biden's expense.' Trump on Wednesday sought to take this outside the realm of mere 'fun.' He ordered an investigation of Biden's use of the autopen and its supposed links to Biden's 'cognitive decline.' The move is guaranteed to breathe even more life into a story that has proven to be catnip for conservative media eager to keep the focus on the alleged coverup of Biden's decline. And Trump has certainly shown a talent for seeding baseless conspiracy theories for political gain (see: birtherism and the false notion that the 2020 election was rigged, among them.) But it's difficult to see how this leads anywhere, for a few reasons. The first is that there is nothing evidently wrong or unlawful about using the autopen. In 2005, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (under Republican President George W. Bush) conducted an extensive review of the legality of a president using the autopen. It found that 'the President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill to sign it within the meaning of Article I, Section 7.' Trump has most often focused his autopen theory on Biden's pardons. (The idea that these are invalid would ostensibly allow Trump's Justice Department to investigate and charge the people Biden preemptively pardoned.) But there too, established legal advice from past administrations undermines the claim. A 1929 memo from the US solicitor general noted that the Constitution didn't even prescribe a method for issuing pardons. That means they don't necessarily even need to be publicly documented. (You might have heard in recent years about the prospect of 'secret' pardons.) And the memo explicitly says that pardons 'need not have the president's autograph.' The other key point is that many presidents have used this practice in one form or another. Thomas Jefferson bought and used such a machine back when it was first patented in 1803, according to the Shapell Manuscript Foundation. And even Trump himself has acknowledged using the autopen for certain things. Trump said back in March he has used it but 'only for very unimportant papers.' He specifically cited responding to people's letters. But in another case, Trump rather curiously seemed to indicate that he hadn't signed a major proclamation that bore his signature – the one at issue in his attempt to rapidly deport migrants using the Alien Enemies Act. That proclamation is a major issue in litigation that has already reached all the way to the Supreme Court. 'I don't know when it was signed, because I didn't sign it,' Trump said, adding: 'Other people handled it, but (Secretary of State) Marco Rubio has done a great job and he wanted them out and we go along with that.' Given the proclamation bore Trump's signature, that seemed to raise the possibility that the administration might have used the autopen for it. The White House later claimed Trump had in fact signed the proclamation and that he was instead referring to not having signed the original Alien Enemies Act. (But that argument strained credulity, given Trump cited how 'other people handled it' and the fact that the Alien Enemies Act dates to 1798. That means there is no way anyone could ever believe Trump might have signed it. The question Trump responded to also specifically referenced the proclamation, not the 1798 law.) In another way, Trump's Wednesday night memorandum isn't really about the autopen. It's about using that as a shorthand for something else entirely: what the memo calls Biden's 'cognitive decline.' Trump's order isn't just about reviewing whether any autopen signatures used by Biden were lawful; it also cites the idea that people used it as part of an effort to 'unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President.' 'I'm sure that he didn't know many of the things – look, he was never for open borders, he was never for transgender for everybody, he was never for men playing in women's sports. All of these things that changed so radically, I don't think he had any idea … what was going on,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday. 'Essentially, whoever used the autopen was the president.' This theory – if ever somehow proven – would actually matter. The 2005 Bush Justice Department memo, for instance, made clear that while presidents could outsource the signing of documents, that doesn't mean they could necessarily outsource the decisions to sign the documents. The OLC memo emphasizes that 'we do not question the substantial authority supporting the view that the President must personally decide whether to approve and sign bills.' But however compelling the evidence that Biden administration officials covered up his decline, there remains no evidence that he wasn't actually making decisions to sign things. That's taking things to an entirely different level. Biden's advisers have denied any coordinated effort to conceal from the public his deteriorating condition during the final years of his presidency. And the 2005 DOJ memo suggests it would have to prove more than just that Biden wasn't particularly engaged, but that he didn't make the final decisions. Trump was asked Thursday if he had uncovered 'anything specific' that was signed without Biden's knowledge or by people in his administration who acted illegally. Trump said, 'No.' Biden, for his part, issued some strong statements late Wednesday. 'I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations,' the former president said. 'Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false.' The former president also called this 'nothing more than a distraction' to obscure Republicans' push for a dicey Trump agenda bill, which features Medicaid cuts in the House-passed version. The Congressional Budget Office estimated Wednesday that this could lead to millions of people losing their health insurance. Indeed, the political utility of the theory underlying Trump's memo is readily apparent. It's wildly popular in conservative media, with Fox News already devoting dozens of stories and extensive coverage to it. That includes this week when other outlets were focused on a decidedly less helpful story for the Trump administration: Elon Musk bashing the president's domestic policy bill. It's also nearly impossible to disprove it. History suggests that arriving at actual proof of Trump's theory is often besides the point for Trump. It's about repetition and seeding doubt. And Wednesday's action is clearly in line with that history.
Hamilton Spectator
33 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Trump suggests Biden aides acted without then-president's knowledge — but says he has no evidence
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump alleged Thursday that officials in Joe Biden 's administration might have in effect forged their boss's signature and taken broad actions he wasn't aware of — while acknowledging he had no evidence that actually happened. Meeting in the Oval Office with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz , Trump repeated his long-standing allegations that the Biden White House relied on an autopen to sign presidential pardons, executive orders and other key documents, and said that cast doubt on their validity. 'Essentially, whoever used the autopen was the president,' Trump said. 'And that is wrong. It's illegal, it's so bad and it's so disrespectful to our country.' Trump went on to suggest that rogue elements within Biden's administration were faking his signature and governing without his knowledge, pushing the administration farther to the left than the president himself would have gone. 'He didn't have much of an idea what was going on,' Trump said. But pressed by reporters on whether he had evidence of specific items that were signed without Biden's knowledge, or by others in the administration acting illegally, Trump responded, 'No. But I've uncovered, you know, the human mind.' He referenced the disastrous debate performance that forced Biden to abandon his reelection bid last summer and said, 'I was in a debate with the human mind and I didn't think he knew what the hell he was doing.' Biden, in a statement Wednesday night, rejected any suggestion actions were taken without his knowledge, saying, 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false.' That came after Trump directed his administration to investigate Biden's actions as president, alleging aides masked his predecessor's 'cognitive decline' and suggesting that the use of the autopen undermines scores of his actions. The president directed Attorney General Pam Bondi and White House counsel David Warrington to handle the investigation, a significant escalation in Trump's targeting of political adversaries that could lay the groundwork for arguments by Republicans that a range of Biden's actions as president were invalid. The Justice Department under Democratic and Republican administrations has recognized the use of an autopen to sign legislation and issue pardons for decades. Also, the president's absolute pardon power is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Trump's intensifying allegations against Biden reflect his fixation with his predecessor, who defeated him in 2020 . Trump never conceded the 2020 election and continues to falsely claim it was rigged against him. Even on Thursday, Trump invoked his allegations about the 2020 election. Trump frequently suggests that Biden was wrong to use an autopen, a mechanical device that replicates a person's authentic signature. Trump said Thursday that he himself had used it, including as a way to save time when signing large numbers of letters from young people. Still, he argued that Biden's use of it constituted 'the biggest scandal, maybe in the last hundred years in this country.' Biden issued pardons for his two brothers and his sister shortly before leaving office in January, hoping to shield them from potential prosecution under Trump, who had promised retribution during last year's campaign. Other pardon recipients included members of a congressional committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Trump often suggests that his political opponents should be investigated, and he has directed the Justice Department to look into people who have angered him over the years. They include Chris Krebs, a former cybersecurity official who disputed Trump's claims of a stolen election in 2020, and Miles Taylor, a former Department of Homeland Security official who wrote an anonymous op-ed sharply critical of the president in 2018. Meanwhile, House Oversight Chairman James Comer of Kentucky, a Republican, requested transcribed interviews with five Biden aides, alleging they had participated in a 'cover-up' that amounted to 'one of the greatest scandals in our nation's history.' 'These five former senior advisors were eyewitnesses to President Biden's condition and operations within the Biden White House,' Comer said in a statement. 'They must appear before the House Oversight Committee and provide truthful answers about President Biden's cognitive state and who was calling the shots.' Comer also reiterated his call for Biden's physician, Kevin O'Connor, and other former senior White House aides to appear before the committee. He warned subpoenas would be issued this week if they refuse to schedule voluntary interviews. Rep. Brandon Gill, a freshman Republican from Texas, said 'the American people didn't elect a bureaucracy to run the country.' He added, 'I think that the American people deserve to know the truth and they want to know the truth of what happened.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
