The US president has made no bones about his disdain for wind energy, which for years he has falsely claimed causes cancer and is responsible for the deaths of whales in the Atlantic Ocean.
But since he assumed office, his anti-air sentiments have assumed new dimensions. During that time they erected barriers at every turn to stop the expansion of air. From withdrawing permits to issuing stop work orders and paying energy companies to halt offshore projects in favor of oil and gas drilling.
Still, Trump will likely oversee the largest expansion of wind in the country’s history. By 2027, the country is expected to have about 35 times more offshore wind capacity than it did when he took office.
“It’s a tale of two cities,” Jeremy Firestone, professor emeritus at the University of Delaware’s School of Marine Science and Policy, told DW.
And at a time when fuel prices are high, electricity demand is rising due to AI data centers, and planetary warming is getting worse, clean energy advocates say taking the air out of that story will have consequences for consumers.
“With the real focus on data centers and the price of electricity and the price of oil and the price of fuel, it would be even more ridiculous to continue to block clean energy projects and drive electricity prices even higher,” says Ted Kelly, director of clean energy at the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).
War on the air – and fight
Yet obstruction is exactly what Trump is intent on doing. On the first day of his second term, he issued an executive memorandum banning the granting of leases on new wind projects – dubbed the “wind ban” by campaigners.
He then issued orders to halt work on all five supported offshore initiatives under construction and withdrew permits from other approved projects, citing classified national security concerns.
The interference has not stopped here. One of his most recent moves involves paying energy companies to move away from wind power. In March, the administration gave nearly $1 billion (€854 million) to French energy giant TotalEnergies, which had bought leases to develop offshore wind projects near North Carolina and New York.
A month later, he offered to pay two other companies a total of $885 million. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said a move would help “reduce everyday energy costs” for Americans who “will no longer pay the bill for expensive, unreliable, intermittent energy projects.”
Despite the pushback of forces against wind energy, it remains in the legal spotlight. “When offshore wind goes to court, it’s winning,” said Pasha Feinberg, an offshore wind strategist at the U.S. nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.
Last December, a judge struck down Trump’s wind ban, saying it exceeded his jurisdiction. And while the administration is appealing, other courts have also ruled that construction can resume on all five offshore projects issued with stop-work orders.
Meanwhile the administration’s tax cut legislation, the One Big Beautiful Act bill — which eliminated clean energy tax credits created under former President Joe Biden — has produced a sprint for developers to break ground on renewable projects before it expires in July.
New offshore wind farms are expected to add about six gigawatts to the grid by 2027 – enough to power about 2.5 million homes. Equinor, a Norwegian energy company, has the Empire Wind project south of Long Island. First affected by the shutdown order, now following the shutdown order, it will use turbines so powerful that a single blade rotation is set to provide a day and a half of energy for a household.
What does wind do to Americans’ electric bills?
In 2025, wind will generate about 10% of US electricity, followed by natural gas at 40% and nuclear power at about 17%. Even without subsidies, utility-scale onshore wind and solar power are some of the cheapest new electricity sources in the US, according to financial advisory firm Lazard. Offshore is cheaper, but still broadly competitive with new gas plants and far cheaper than nuclear.
Once the turbines are built, wind costs next to nothing, so wind farms can sell wholesale electricity far more cheaply than gas or coal plants, keeping prices down for everyone. “Ratepayers are going to save a lot of money because it’s going to lower these hourly prices,” Firestone said.
The impact is already visible: Energy prices should have been driven up by a cold snap in New England last December, but Vineyard Wind – a nearly completed offshore project off Massachusetts – was churning with strong winter sea winds, displacing price-volatile natural gas. EDF estimated that this saved ratepayers across the region $2 million per day.
Wind projects generate an estimated $2 billion annually in state and local tax and land-lease payments. The industry employs 133,000 people, while about 115,900 people were employed in oil and gas exploration and extraction in 2024. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, wind turbine service technicians are one of the two fastest growing occupations in the US this decade.
future wind story
Still, political instability is hurting investor confidence even where Trump has lost in court, analysts say. Before the US President returned to power, BloombergNEF had projected 39 gigawatts of US offshore wind capacity by 2035. The firm expects a maximum limit of six gigawatts for now.
“We don’t see any new offshore wind projects coming online without significant policy changes,” said Harrison Sholer, wind analyst at BloombergNEF.
Amid ever-increasing demand for electricity and concerns over energy bills, advocates argue that wind’s economic argument will ultimately win out. The top three coastal producing states – Texas, Iowa and Oklahoma – are all largely red. And according to polling by the offshore wind advocacy group Turn Forward, more than eight in 10 American voters support more renewable energy, including 77% of Republicans.
“We have no choice but to use it if we are to meet our energy demands,” Feinberg said. “This will take the day.”
Edited by: Jennifer Collins