Virginia Beach, a planned offshore wind energy hub, hosts international conference
Offshore wind professionals from across the world have gathered in Virginia Beach to discuss the current status of the renewable power industry.
As part of the 2025 International Partnering Forum, or IPF, the conference brings together developers, elected leaders, public utility officials and others in the offshore wind supply chain for a week of panel discussions. On Tuesday, Virginia Beach Mayor Bobby Dyer welcomed guests to the city, which hosts the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project about 27 miles away from the beach. Once finished, more than 170 turbines are slated to generate enough energy to power up to 660,000 homes. The project will help avoid carbon emissions equivalent to 1 million cars each year, according to the company. It's scheduled to be completed in 2026.
Dyer said he and other members of city leadership are positioning Virginia Beach to become 'one of the main offshore wind energy hubs' in the United States.
'Just as winds have filled the sails of ships and transported them around the world — since the earliest ages of man — we are now harnessing that energy to provide for local governments, towns, cities, homes and businesses around the world,' Dyer said. 'When you look at the Atlantic Ocean and Virginia Beach, we are a natural fit for offshore wind development. Our mid-Atlantic location places us in the center of the American offshore wind industry. In fact, I'll go so far to say that if you look at Virginia Beach, you're looking at the heart and future of all wind energy in this United States.'
Liz Burdock, president and CEO of Oceantic Network, said recent strains on offshore wind have been 'unsettling and unprecedented and deeply unfair.' Since his inauguration, President Donald Trump has put offshore wind in the political crosshairs. At least one project has been issued a stop-work order from the federal government. Earlier this year, Trump signed an executive order temporarily halting offshore wind lease sales in federal waters and pausing the issuance of approvals, permits and loans for all wind projects.
Burdock said working with Republican lawmakers, like Dyer and Gov. Glenn Youngkin, is crucial to the future of the industry. On Monday, undersea cable company LS Greenlink USA broke ground on its $680 million development in Chesapeake as part of the week's festivities. The 750,000-square-foot plant is expected to create more than 330 full-time jobs. Burdock added that she hopes this week's conference will 'unlock the full force' of the industry's creativity and potential.
'We can bring a new generation online,' Burdock said. 'If there is an energy crisis, it's one of our own making. By holding back offshore wind, our federal government denies the nation a true all-of-the-above energy strategy. If we're allowed to move forward, we could have 10 gigawatts on the grid by the end of the decade and another 10 gigawatts ready to go. That's reliable base load power coming directly into our cities that will actually lower energy bills. Just like it's doing here in Virginia, it will also keep utility bills in check in New York and New England.'
Eliza Noe, eliza.noe@virginiamedia.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Scofflaw Strongman
DONALD TRUMP SAYS HIS LATEST VENTURE into dictatorship—deploying the National Guard and Marines against American citizens, over the opposition of state and local officials—is about safeguarding the rule of law. 'If we see danger to our country and to our citizens, we'll be very, very strong in terms of law and order,' Trump told reporters on Sunday, as protests escalated in Los Angeles against his deportations. 'It's about law and order.' Don't believe it. Trump is using the Guard and the military to enforce his will, not the law. The evidence of his insincerity is what he did four years ago: When rioters were on his side, he didn't call in the Guard. He embraced the criminals, pardoned them, and purged the law enforcement officials who prosecuted them. He's a despot and a scofflaw. In the Los Angeles uprising, Trump—like every authoritarian before him—claims to be saving his country from chaos. 'Violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our Federal Agents,' he declared on Sunday afternoon. 'These lawless riots only strengthen our resolve.' A few hours later, he called for 'bringing in the troops . . . RIGHT NOW!!! Don't let these thugs get away with this.' And on Monday afternoon, he ridiculed any suggestion that the protesters were peaceful. 'Just one look at the pictures and videos of the Violence and Destruction,' he wrote, 'tells you all you have to know.' Insurrectionist mobs. Lawless riots. Videos of violence. We've heard such alarming descriptions before. And on January 6, 2021, we saw how little Trump cared about them. Share AT 1:21 P.M. THAT DAY, AS TRUMP returned to the White House after instructing his supporters to march on the Capitol, he was told twice by a member of his staff, 'They're rioting down at the Capitol.' The exact moment of this encounter was captured in a photograph. Trump replied, 'All right, let's go see.' He went to his dining room and watched on TV as the riot proceeded. For the next hour, TV networks aired videos of the violence and destruction. Like this week's videos from Los Angeles, they told the president all he needed to know. But Trump did nothing. Toward the end of that hour—somewhere between 2:13 and 2:24 pm, according to the final report of the House January 6th Committee—Trump's chief of staff, Mark Meadows, informed White House Counsel Pat Cipollone that Trump 'doesn't want to do anything' about the ongoing assault. A few minutes later, Cipollone was heard to tell Meadows, 'They're literally calling for the Vice President to be F'ing hung.' And Meadows was heard to reply, 'You heard him, Pat. He thinks Mike [Pence] deserves it. He doesn't think they're doing anything wrong.' Meanwhile, in a phone call, House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy warned Trump that the rioters 'literally just came through my office windows, and my staff are running for cover. I mean, they're running for their lives. You need to call them [the assailants] off.' Trump responded by rebuking McCarthy: 'Well, Kevin, I guess they're just more upset about the election theft than you are.' These conversations took place as Fox News, which Trump was watching, reported that police had been injured and that rioters inside the Capitol were 'feet from the House chamber.' On the screen, according to the House committee report, Fox 'was showing video of the chaos and attack, with tear gas filling the air in the Capitol Rotunda.' Throughout the afternoon, Trump's aides, family, and friends implored him to tell the rioters to go home. He refused. Not until 4:17 p.m., nearly three hours after being informed about the riot, did he comply. Join now TRUMP NOW CLAIMS that he told the rioters to be peaceful and that he offered ten thousand National Guard troops to protect the Capitol. The first claim is misleading. The second is a lie. The House report shows that before and during the assault, Trump resisted entreaties to call for peace. On January 6th, a text message to one of his top aides, Hope Hicks, said Trump 'should tweet something about Being NON-violent.' Hicks wrote back: 'I suggested it several times Monday and Tuesday and he refused.' At one point in his incendiary speech that morning, Trump did ask his followers to march to the Capitol 'peacefully.' But that phrase, according to the House report, was 'scripted for him by his White House speechwriters.' The main theme of the speech was to 'fight like hell.' Another Trump aide, Sarah Matthews, told the committee that once the riot was underway, Trump resisted pleas to call for peace. He did use the term 'peaceful' in a tweet at 2:38 p.m., but only grudgingly. Trump's press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, told Matthews that Trump 'did not want to include any sort of mention of peace in that tweet.' Trump's other January 6th story, about the National Guard, is also a sham. His acting defense secretary, his Army secretary, and his chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all testified that he never ordered the Guard to deploy that day. He never even spoke to these officials. Instead, during the riot, he used his phone to press members of Congress to do what the mob wanted: overturn the election. It's true that before the attack, Trump talked about the possibility of needing guardsmen. But it was never about protecting the Capitol. It was, in Meadows's words, to 'protect pro Trump people' from anti-Trump protesters. In short, everything Trump decries in Los Angeles happened on January 6th, and more. A violent, insurrectionist mob swarmed and attacked police. And instead of bringing in the Guard 'RIGHT NOW,' Trump watched the assault, encouraged the mob, and waited to see whether it would keep him in power. In fact, when he returned to office this year, Trump pardoned nearly everyone who had pleaded guilty to or had been convicted of assaulting police on January 6th. He said the insurrectionists were right: 'They were protesting a crooked election.' He purged the prosecutors who had handled those cases. And in a speech at the Department of Justice, he boasted that he had 'removed the senior FBI officials' who, in his words, had persecuted the 'J6 hostages.' Share NOW, AS HE DEPLOYS THE MILITARY against protesters in an American city, Trump invokes 'law and order' as a bogus excuse. And he vows to go further. On Monday, he announced a policy of escalation against protesters. 'If they spit, we will hit,' he wrote on Truth Social. 'This is a statement from the President of the United States. . . . The Insurrectionists have a tendency to spit in the face of the National Guardsmen/women, and others. . . . IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before.' On Tuesday, speaking to troops at Fort Bragg, Trump said he was seizing control of the National Guard and ending the tradition of consulting governors. 'We will use every asset at our disposal to quell the violence and restore law and order right away,' he declared. 'We're not going to wait . . . for a governor that's never going to call.' And in remarks in the Oval Office, Trump said his policy of escalating state violence would apply to anyone who protests the military parade on June 14, his birthday. 'If there's any protester [who] wants to come out, they will be met with very big force,' he warned. 'For those people that want to protest. . . . They will be met with very heavy force.' This is not a man defending the rule of law. This is a man continuing the project he began in his first term and tried to complete on January 6th: replacing the rule of law with himself. Share The Bulwark
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Much Money You Would Have If the U.S. Made These 3 Policy Changes
Policy changes at the federal level can impact your personal finances. It can either put thousands of dollars back in your pocket or quietly drain your wallet over time. Here are three policy changes that can have a positive impact on your finances if they become law. For You: Read Next: The most immediate financial relief could come from Senate Bill 381, which proposes capping credit card interest rates at 10%. This change would provide substantial savings for millions of Americans struggling with high-interest debt. 'One policy change that could significantly impact the average American is the pending Senate Bill 381, which proposes a cap on credit card interest rates at 10%,' said Josh Richner, founder and senior advisor at FaithWorks Financial. Discover Next: As of February 2025, the average credit card APR stands at 21.37% and the average credit card debt per American is approximately $6,455, according to TransUnion, one of the three major credit reporting agencies. 'At today's average APR, carrying a $6,455 balance results in roughly $1,380 in interest over a year. If interest were capped at 10%, the annual interest would drop to around $645, saving the average consumer more than $735 a year,' Richner said. For individuals with higher credit card debt, the savings become even more significant. Another proposed policy under Trump Accounts, dubbed the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' would create a federally-funded savings account with a $1,000 deposit for children born between Jan. 1, 2025 and Jan. 1, 2029. Families could contribute up to $5,000 per year until the child turns 18. 'Assuming a family contributes the maximum $5,000 annually and the account earns an average annual return of 7%, the account could grow to approximately $170,000 by the time the child reaches 18,' Richner added. 'If families make no additional contributions, the initial $1,000 federal seed investment could grow meaningfully over 18 years, depending on the investment's annual return. Assuming the same 7% annual return, the $1,000 could grow to approximately $3,380 by the time the child turns 18.' This nest egg could go toward college, a first home or starting a business, giving the next generation a meaningful financial head start. Monetary policy changes that lower interest rates could deliver big savings across multiple areas of households' financial lives. 'Lower interest rates can have a ripple effect on the entire economy, influencing everything from consumer spending and business investments to the housing market and job creation,' said Aaron Razon, personal finance expert at Couponsnake. 'If borrowing costs decreased even by 1%, households might save thousands of dollars annually in loan and mortgage payments.' More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 8 Common Mistakes Retirees Make With Their Social Security Checks 5 Types of Cars Retirees Should Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on How Much Money You Would Have If the U.S. Made These 3 Policy Changes Sign in to access your portfolio
Axios
34 minutes ago
- Axios
Behind the Curtain: A decades-in-the-making immigration war
President Trump undoubtedly stands on strong political ground, backed by most Americans, in cases where he's deporting convicted criminals. Now comes a new test, literally 40 years in the making: How comfortable are Americans with deporting millions of immigrants who paid taxes, built families and committed no crimes after coming here illegally? Why it matters: That's the heart of the standoff in LA, as well as the broader Trump effort to expel potentially millions of immigrants who broke the law to get here and then played by U.S. rules. "I said it from Day 1: If you're in the country illegally, you're not off the table," Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, told the N.Y. Times. "So, we're opening that aperture up." The backstory: Congress, going back to 1986, has sought and failed to find a pathway to citizenship for those who fit the precise description above. Many current GOP senators were among those seeking said solution. But concerns about border security and rewarding illegal behavior killed every effort. Now, Trump, Republicans, some Democrats and much of the U.S. public are supportive of mass deportation instead. An estimated 14 million unauthorized immigrants live here — many of them working and paying taxes. They often fill jobs other Americans won't do — hotels, construction sites, landscaping and child care. Expelling them would sink some businesses, slow services in many communities, and hit close to home for lots of U.S. citizens. Will public enthusiasm wane when this reality becomes clear? Trump and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller are pushing to hit a target of 3,000 immigration arrests a day, as first reported by Axios' Brittany Gibson and Stef Kight. That's triple the number of daily arrests that agents were making in the early days of Trump's term, Axios found. The only way to pull that off is by casting wider nets beyond convicted criminals to larger worksites. So raids could rise sharply at factories, restaurants and Home Depots, where people living here illegally often gather to seek day labor on job sites. "Wait till you find out how many trillions we have to spend on illegal aliens," Miller wrote Tuesday in reply to a tweet by California Gov. Gavin Newsom about a Pentagon estimate that the National Guard deployment in LA will cost $134 million and last 60 days. The big picture: Accelerated deportations are a top personal priority for Trump, who relishes visibility for the raids. Amid the unrest in LA on Monday, Miller posted on X: "You can have all the other plans and budgets you want. If you don't fix migration, then nothing else can be fixed — or saved." White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told us: "If you are present in the United States illegally, you will be deported. This is the promise President Trump made to the American people and the Administration is committed to keeping it." A CBS News/YouGov poll taken last week showed 54% approval of the Trump administration's program to deport immigrants illegally in the U.S. White House communications director Steven Cheung tweeted that finding and added: "And the approval number will be even higher after the national guard was sent to LA to beat back the violence this weekend." And MAGA media is egging the president on. Charlie Kirk, one of the most influential pro-Trump podcasters, tweeted Tuesday: "President Trump is getting more popular. Deportations are popular. We need more. ... America is demanding mass deportations." Asked for comment for this column, the Department of Homeland Security pointed us to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's " CBP Home" app, which lets aliens notify the government of their intent to leave the country. "Tap 'Departing Traveler' to begin," the instructions say. "We are offering those in this country $1,000 and a free flight to leave the country and preserve the potential to return the right, legal way," DHS assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin told us. Under current law, those taking that option will be barred from coming back for either three or 10 years, or permanently, depending on how long they've been in the U.S. illegally. How it works: It's important to understand how people pay taxes even though they're here illegally: In 1996, the U.S. government created an alternative to the Social Security number for undocumented immigrants — the individual taxpayer identification number (ITIN). This allows people to pay taxes while being here illegally and awaiting a path to citizenship. Those people have been paying taxes, believing it would enhance their chances of getting citizenship. A portion of those taxes helps fund Social Security. Under that law, if they eventually get citizenship, those taxes will count toward their retirement. The amounts are substantial. Undocumented immigrants paid $96.7 billion in federal, state and local taxes in 2022, according to a tally by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. More than a third of what they pay funds programs they can't even access. Now, those ITIN numbers could be used to track people down. Deportation fears triggered a decline in tax filings this year in some immigrant communities in the D.C. suburbs, the Washington Post found. That sets the stage for a humanitarian showdown unlike any witnessed in U.S. history: Trump is willing to use the U.S. military inside America to protect U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents during roundups. The bottom line: There's no clear mechanism to differentiate between someone who came here recently alone versus a father of three, whose wife and children are living here legally, and have been here paying taxes and committing no crimes for a decade. In the eyes of the current law, illegal is illegal. When TV explodes with images of burning cars and lawlessness, Trump wins. But what about families torn apart or longtime neighbors yanked from their homes and taken away in handcuffs? That's when America's rawest views of immigration will be revealed.
