California’s ambitious plan to generate clean electricity from offshore wind suffered a considerable blow recently when the Trump administration canceled nearly half a billion dollars in federal funding for the state’s largest project. But industry insiders, experts and officials told The Times they aren’t slowing the pursuit of this up-and-coming technology.
The Golden State last year approved a landmark plan for developing 25 gigawatts of floating offshore wind by 2045. Five ocean leases have already been granted to energy companies off the coast of Humboldt and Morro Bay, with the potential to produce up to 10 gigawatts of electricity.
The plan eventually could see 1,600 turbines as tall as the Eiffel Tower in federal waters 20 to 50 miles offshore, producing enough electricity for 25 million homes. It is a climate solution and key component of the state’s goal of reaching 100% carbon neutrality by 2045.
Floating offshore wind is relatively new compared with fixed offshore wind, which involves attaching turbines directly to the sea floor. Most offshore wind around the world so far is fixed. California has been exploring floating turbines because the Pacific Ocean is so deep. The floating technology has been successfully deployed in Norway, France, Portugal and China.
Federal officials last year said California’s offshore wind efforts would help combat climate change, lower consumer costs and create jobs. But the Trump administration has an aversion to climate efforts and to wind power in particular: On his first day in office, the president issued a memorandum halting offshore wind leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf and ordered officials to review all existing leases to look for legal grounds for termination.
Trump, who received record donations from fossil fuel companies during his 2024 presidential campaign, went on to call for increased production of oil, gas and coal, and slashed funding for renewable energy projects including solar and wind. At the end of August, the administration said it was cutting $679 million for “doomed” offshore wind projects — including $427 million that had been earmarked for California.
“Wasteful, wind projects are using resources that could otherwise go towards revitalizing America’s maritime industry,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a news release about the cancellation. “Thanks to President Trump, we are prioritizing real infrastructure improvements over fantasy wind projects that cost much and offer little.”
The state is persevering.
Last year, voters approved Proposition 4, the California climate bond measure that authorized $10 billion for climate and environmental projects. It included $475 million for development of offshore wind — the first $228 million of which was approved last week for spending in 2025-26.
“California isn’t backing down on offshore wind,” said Jana Ganion, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s senior advisor for offshore wind. “We’re planning for up to 25 gigawatts by 2045 because it’s essential that we meet our clean energy goals, create good-paying jobs, and keep the state competitive globally.”
Adam Stern, executive director of the trade group Offshore Wind California, pointed to a recent survey by the Public Policy Institute of California that found 75% of voters support wind energy off the coast.
“Despite the unfortunate federal headwinds this year, California is staying the course on its commitment to offshore wind,” Stern said. “Over the next three and a half years, California has much of what it needs to continue moving forward on offshore wind — on ports, transmission, and more.”
Indeed, most of the Proposition 4 funds approved for immediate spending will not go toward work in the water but rather toward port upgrades and other land-based projects that fall under the state’s jurisdiction.
That’s because unlike fixed turbines, which are constructed in the water, the massive floating offshore turbines are typically assembled on land and towed out to sea. The ports anchoring this effort in California — the Humboldt Bay Harbor District and the Port of Long Beach — will require upgrades to meet those needs, as will the state’s transmission infrastructure in order to receive the power, which will be transmitted by underwater cables.
“The federal government decided that this project wasn’t aligned with the current goals — no hard feelings,” said Chris Mikkelsen, executive director of the Humboldt Bay Harbor District, the recipient of Trump’s now-canceled grant funding. “But it just empowers us to want to push all that much harder to get it done.”
Mikkelsen said the port is planning upgrades to wharfs and access roads, improved on-site utilities, and dredging and environmental restoration, among other efforts to accommodate the wind equipment. While the loss of federal funding was a “setback,” he said he is determined to press on.
“The state has been behind us from the beginning, but they’re already engaging even more than they were before and working with us on solutions to how we make this happen,” Mikkelsen said. “So hats off to the state and the California Energy Commission. I hope we show America how this is done.”
The California Energy Commission, one of the main entities overseeing the work, said it is continuing to advance offshore wind along the state’s central and northern coasts through planning, permitting, infrastructure investment and public engagement.
“It is deeply troubling that the federal government is undermining a growing U.S. industry that already spans more than 40 states, supporting union jobs in shipbuilding, ports, steel, and manufacturing,” said Ganion, in Newsom’s office. “At a time when countries like China and France are doubling down on offshore wind, the U.S. risks ceding technology leadership and job creation to our competitors.”
The relative newness of the floating technology may work in the state’s favor, as it will probably be several years before any work begins in the water. Last month the White House shocked many in the industry when it halted a major project off the coast of Rhode Island and Connecticut that was already 80% complete, prompting lawsuits from the developer and the states in return.
Molly Croll, Pacific offshore wind director with the nonprofit American Clean Power-California, said the state should use the next few years to concentrate on work in its jurisdiction, including port development and transmission upgrades “that will ultimately be necessary to support the industry.”
“There’s a lot that the state can do, and is doing, and that’s really the focus that we have right now,” Croll said.
However some industry experts fear the government actions could have a chilling effect on private companies looking to invest in offshore wind. Several sources involved with California’s wind projects declined to speak on the record out of concern over retaliation from the Trump administration.
It is also not clear whether the existing California leases are secure. The leaseholders include Norwegian and German energy giants Equinor and RWE, and the U.S. company Invenergy.
Officials with the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which oversees federal offshore leasing, said it has begun assessing whether existing wind energy leases “should be amended or terminated due to security, ecological, economic, and environmental concerns” in accordance with Trump’s memorandum.
“As the review is currently ongoing, BOEM is not able to speculate on the timeframe for completion, or whether it may impact specific offshore wind projects,” the agency said in a statement to The Times.
Offshore wind is also not without its downsides. Opponents have expressed concern that it could create coastal access issues for tribal groups and the fishing industry, and that it could potentially affect marine life by disrupting migration patterns, generating underwater noise and vibrations or emitting electromagnetic fields from underground cables. The state says it is studying these questions and looking carefully at whether it needs to minimize or mitigate impacts.
Still, experts and officials say it is crucial for California to proceed. Offshore wind alone could represent 10% to 15% of the state’s energy portfolio by 2045, and will act as an important complement to solar power, geothermal energy, hydropower, nuclear and other clean sources.
“Everyone recognizes that this is an additional set of challenges, but we also recognize that in order to meet our climate goals, we have to do this,” said Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, who has championed offshore wind through legislation such as Assembly Bill 3, which required the state to develop its plan for seaport readiness, and helped carve out the $475 million for offshore wind in Proposition 4.
The work isn’t only important for addressing climate change but also creating jobs and boosting U.S. manufacturing, Zbur said. He said he is confident the state can still meet its goals.
“The state of California is committed to moving forward with this, and we have a lot of work to do that isn’t necessarily affected by where the federal government is right now,” he said.
Since Trump took office, more than 120 clean energy projects across the country have been canceled or delayed or are laying off staff, according to the nonprofit Climate Power. That amounts to nearly 14 gigawatts, enough to power more than 8.4 million homes.
Mikkelsen, of the Humboldt Bay Harbor District, said he has no qualms about persevering, even in the face of such federal setbacks.
“This is ‘no regret’ development,” he said. “We want to be fully permitted and ready to go, so when the industry does emerge, we’re in line, we’re there.”
He added that Trump ran on a platform of investing in rural America, building out a U.S. supply chain, modernizing infrastructure and creating well-paying jobs — all of which can be achieved through offshore wind development in California.
“It takes years to get to wind, and look what we’ve done in the meantime,” Mikkelsen said. “We believe wind will happen.”
The post California isn’t backing down on offshore wind power despite Trump cancellation appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
