Supposed Guardians of Rhode Island’s Waters Sell Out To Big Wind
Is Save the Bay Still Rhode Island’s Ocean Watch Dog?
Once considered Rhode Island’s most esteemed environmental Non-Profit, Save the Bay Rhode Island is now failing to operate in accordance with its mission. With the nation’s first offshore turbine farms, one of the largest marine construction projects in history, going live in waters just 12- 24 miles off the Rhode Island coasts – locals, preservationists, fisherman, and boating enthusiasts are asking, “Where is Save The Bay?”
Since the 1970’s, when citizens came together to fight an oil refinery proposed in Tiverton, Save The Bay has been considered the leader of environmental stewardship in Rhode Island. For over forty years, Save the Bay has “worked to protect, restore, and improve the ecological health of the Narragansett Bay.”
They honor that legacy by claiming to serve, “as the eyes, ears and voice for Narragansett Bay.” Overseen by a board of directors and a board of trustees, as an organization, Save the Bays daily operations are run by Executive Director Topher Hamblett. The board of trustees, appointed Hamblett to his position last January.
A quick review of their website revealed that this project, one that will have implications for the State of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay, its watershed and adjacent coastal waters for generations to come – is not mentioned. It is not mentioned in their advocacy work or in their legislative agendas. In a web tab titled BAY ISSUES , the organization reminds us that, “Narragansett Bay is truly an environmental treasure that connects communities in Rhode Island and Southeastern Massachusetts with the Atlantic Ocean.
It is our greatest public asset and the symbol of the region’s history and culture.” Why then, is the largest ocean industrialization project in this nation’s history, a project using Narragansett Bay as its electromagnetic cable route, as a wind vessel refuge, and as a cargo lane from shore to farm, not even listed as a bay issue?
To recap, in an auction bidding process, close to one Million acres of Rhode Island and Massachusetts ocean was leased to 9 separate wind companies. These companies have been selected to develop wind farms off the coast of Rhode Island. Upon completion, along with hundreds of miles of cables running up Narragansett bay, 1,000 turbines standing btw 800-1300 feet tall, covering over a million acres of ocean, along with five Substations (with living quarters and helicopter pads for maintenance) will be erected within this lease area.
According to an April 26, 2024 TAX FILING , the organization’s mission and most significant activities include, “the protection, restoration, and improvement of the ecological health of the Narragansett Bay region, including its watershed and adjacent coastal waters…” With the sonar, ship traffic and construction of these projects levying severe adverse impacts to our fisheries, marine life, habitats and ecosystems, where is the concern from Save The Bay?
Since submitting testimony in 2021, on proposed construction in the critical habitat known as Coxes Ledge, Save the Bay has remained oddly silent. With cable lay preparation currently taking place in the bay, and with the federal government suspending the Vineyard Wind project after the now infamous July 13th blade failure, caused by a manufacturing issue that left Nantucket, Cape Cod and Rhode Island beaches littered with fiberglass and styrofoam, many are concerned.
The blade incident, coupled with sharks, whales and dolphins washing up on both Rhode Island and Massachusetts shores, has many asking – where is the concern of our “ocean watchdog group”?
The organization’s ‘strategy of silence’ when it comes to offshore wind is even more surprising when comparing the issues they do speak vocally about. This past May, Save the Bay joined forces with the Rhode Island Attorney General’s office to rally the public against a small stone wall erected at a local country club.
With fanfare, Save the Bay and the Rhode Island Attorney General’s office held a seaside press conference where they invited local leaders and the public to share in the outrage. Save the Bay has dedicated an entire webpage to educating the public on this illegal golf course wall which was erected at Quidnessett Country Club .
They partnered again with the Rhode Island Attorney General’s office in its attempt to change the structure of the RI Coastal Resource Management Council (CRMC). In a May 22nd Press Release from the Attorney General’s office, Topher Hamblett, Executive Director of Save The Bay said, “Narragansett Bay is the heart of Rhode Island,” he continued, “Important decisions impacting our coastal resources should not be left in the hands of a council of volunteer political appointees.
No one person, nor the council as an entity, is accountable for bad decisions and overriding expert staff recommendations.” This comment is especially interesting when you consider that Sandra Thornton Whitehouse, wife of our most vocal environmentalist, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, chaired this board for over four years. Save The Bay has added a page for legislative activism, against CRMC, to its website.
Save The Bay and the RI Attorney General’s office partnered again with efforts to take on metal recyclers issuing a RI Recycled Metals Press Statement stating, “For over a decade, Rhode Island Recycled Metals has shown a blatant disregard for environmental laws that protect our right to clean air and water.”
This is important work but these actions only highlight the organizations silence on the recycling needs of Off Shore Wind materials. Thousand’s of steel monopolies, weighing in at 2,000 tons a tube, are being hammered 200 ft deep into our seabeds, covering an area larger than the entire State of Rhode Island.
There has been no press statement by Save The Bay on how 1,000’s of these monopiles will be decommissioned at their end of life (10-15yrs.). The amount of steel used in an offshore wind turbine’s monopile can vary depending on the depth of the water and other factors, but it can be as much as 2,500 tons per turbine. Each Monopile is 40 ft in diameter with a 5 inch thick wall.
Wind Turbine Blades Not Recyclable
There has also been no concern raised over turbine blades themselves. These blades are not recyclable nor are they biodegradable. They are made up of a composite of very fine strands of plastic and glass, which is extremely difficult to process at the point of recycling. According to Cleanpower.org, “The blades are made of composite materials (e.g., Fiber-Reinforced Plastics, mostly fiberglass and carbon fiber) and pose a more significant recycling challenge to the wind industry and the composite materials sector. As Fiber-Reinforced Plastics (FRPs) are complex to recycle, the majority of rotor blades are currently going to either landfills or incineration facilities.”
In its 2022 fact sheet, Solid Waste Management officials reminds us that, “ most wind turbine blades are landfilled when decommissioned because as noted above, the materials used to manufacture wind turbine blades render them difficult to recycle or repurpose.”
They did however hold a press conference a few weeks ago with Governor Dan McKee pushing for a $53 million dollar Green Bond that will be on the ballot this November. This is in addition to the $50 million dollar Green Bond voted on two years ago in 2022. A major chunk of these new bonds are for Offshore wind cable infrastructure where the cables come ashore.
From what we can gather, the most significant shift in Save The Bays’ operational actions, going from ocean watchdog to State policy lapdog, align with the 2019 expansion of the organization’s advocacy wing. In April of 2019, Save The Bay hired Jed Thorpe as their first ever Advocacy Coordinator. For the last five months he has served as the organization’s new Director of Advocacy.
In discussing his work with the organization Mr. Thorpe explains, “I’ve always followed the theory that there are two forms of power in politics: money and people.” “Ultimately, Save The Bay’s political strength comes from the people who support our work and our policy proposals. My role will be to translate our existing “people power” into “political power.” He continues, “I see a huge amount of latent political power out there that can be thoughtfully and strategically mobilized to advance our agenda to protect and improve Narragansett Bay. I love working with and empowering people and helping them engage in the political process. Many folks think “politics” is a dirty word, but politics is simply the process of deciding who gets what, when and how.”
In response to our questions about why Save The Bay has not made OffShore Wind concerns a priority Mr. Thorpe responded, “So, it’s not that we don’t think offshore wind is a legitimate concern. But, most of the activity is well outside of the Bay.” But, offshore wind electromagnetic cable lay is currently happening in the heart of Narragansett Bay through November 6, 2025.
With cable routes being dredged up the bay, the unprecedented number of marine life strandings we have seen and the Nantucket turbine debris still washing up, the lack of public concern for our bay and adjacent waters is surprising.
“We hold state and federal agencies accountable for enforcing the laws that protect Narragansett Bay. We are the citizens’ watchdog—and the eyes, ears and voice—for Narragansett Bay.” – Jed Thopre, Director of Advocacy Save The Bay
With politics, Orsted money and energy market agendas infusing environmental organizations up and down the East Coast, is it a coincidence that they are remaining silent about the adverse impacts we are seeing? Does the ‘strategy of silence’ come from the top? Is the Board of Trustees aware of its fiduciary responsibility to the organization and of their charge to ensure the organizations actions align with their stated mission?
The people of Rhode Island have lost their seat at the table
Save The Bay was founded on the community’s desire to protect our most precious resource — Narragansett Bay (and adjacent waters). While much remains in question, the organization that once spoke for the people of Rhode Island seems to have abandoned its grass root community in favor of political action and agendas.
With its mission in question and its priorities now laser focused on agenda driven, government political action work — does Save The Bay RI deserve to hold its title as the state’s leading environmental watchdog any longer?
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Only if your building a short rock wall
Installing wind turbines at sea are an even worse idea than placing them on land. The ocean environment is harsh, meaning that the turbines deteriorate rapidly, and, making maintenance and repairs complicated. And, that’s on top of the intrinsic stupidity of wind-generated power, with its characteristic and unavoidable intermittency and its inability to scale up output to meet grid demand.
” *is* an even worse idea”
It is a vile idea, isn’t it?
Whales don’t have enough money to pay off the traitors
They went from saving the whales to killing the whales. Why do Progressives LOVE to kill beautiful things for their hateful agenda??
They have no actual principles beyond the party line, and for them, the end justifies the means. They only “care” about what the party tells them they should care about on any given day. They’re nothing but mindless amoral drones.
Rich
rich, not rice
Eggs are beautiful. Marxists see only their vile omelets.
We used to kill whales for Oil. Now, we kill whales for Wind.
It seems pretty obvious who got rice from this, another organization hijacked by an asset thief.
I’m guessing since the Blackstone and other rivers leading into the bay have been cleaned up, Save The Bay is just a name. The ecosystem of RI’s waters reach far beyond Narragansett bay, and these wind farms spell disaster. I won’t be surprised if some day “wind turbine fragments“ are found to be just as deadly as asbestos.
It seems like just yesterday when the one wind turbine on Block Island back in the 70’s was shut down quickly for all sorts of complaints – a bird being killed, tv reception interference, and being just plain ugly. Now? Anything goes.
Only if wind turbine fragments lead to some companies coming into being after buying enough votes in Congress to require expensive remediation steps be taken under threat of crushing fines.
Yes. I am that cynical.
The plastic erosion from the turbine blade is already happening with land based turbines. They have grossly underestimated how quickly the ocean will eat away at them. Toxic plastic falling directly into our local food source will be happening soon – if it has not started already.
Much easier to go after the low hanging fruit of protesting some country club (definitely capitalists/probably other ists/isms by innuendo) than deep pocketed, politically juiced big projects. Similar to how some DA/LEO Agencies seem to prefer going after nonviolent, middle-class folks for a permit/code violation v spending time running down violent offenders. Much easier and far less risky.
Remember: the first priority of a LEO is to get home safelu to his family each night. So, the easy stuff is preferred.
My electric bill is 2/3 “distribution” and 1/3 energy. Anybody selling power back to the power company should pay the power company 1/3 of the value of the power, since he should pay for the distribution the other way which is only half offset by the value of the energy.
Is your bill divided into two components with X charge based on cost to produce the electricity consumed and Y charge for costs of installing/maintaining power lines, substations?
IMO, the best way forward for power companies and consumers as more folks choose to install residential solar/wind is to have separate fees;
1. Cost of electricity consumed based on only generation costs and costs to purchase electricity from other producers if required.
2. Cost of grid distribution infrastructure for installation and maintenance.
This way there’s no ‘free riding’ by folks with solar/wind systems as there would be if the costs of distribution were not separate and was contained in one charge per kWh.
Thats going to be dead zone for marine habitat, and bird shredding machines.
Not to mention to the industrial blight with loss of view.
There is no way to prove it will lower temps by 1 degree.
Correction? – There is no way to prove it will lower temps by .01 degree.
In fact, according to their own documentation which can be found at BOEM, the turbines slow down ocean wind causing temps to rise along the coast line. Also, the HVAC cooling stations (used to cool the stations and the energy to send it through the cables to shore) heat and chemically treat the water around them with an openloop system. We will have 33 on the east coast. Yes, really.
When the guardians of “public” land are non-profits, political bias is exactly what you always get.
Contrast with the private-enterprise “guardians of the fishery,” the New England Fishermen’s Stewardship Association, whose livelihood defines their principles, and so they do not waver.
Why does everyone hate on green energy? It’s for your own good so shut up
I hated “because I said so” when my parents used that line. I’ll be damned if I’m going to take it from my inferiors (most every politician).
A whole lot of pockets are getting lined in RI! https://www.golocalprov.com/news/4.3M-in-Donations-to-Enviro-Groups-from-Wind-Industry-Raises-Questions-Abo
That was an excellent article. We need an updated version.
The environmental movement has always been more about money than anything else. Whether controlling economic decisions or lining the pockets of environmental special interest industries, the actual environment is a far lesser concern than controlling the behavior and finances of the people in that environment.
It is wealth-redistribution communism in one of the purest forms. The term “green” can mean green like grass, leaves, etc. But it also has another meaning: money. That’s really the end goal of the environmental movement, with maybe the exception of the handful of true believers who would rather force everyone to live preindustrial existences.
I can never hear mention of green groups without the “watermelon” slur coming to mind — they are green on the outside, but red on the inside. The entire thrust of green groups is to erode your right of ownership. You buy your property, you pay taxes on your property, but you can no longer do what you like on it — they will tell you what you can and can’t do. But they won’t pay any of the freight, that’s all on you.
Locally, our town has one two-story structure — the original railroad station/hotel from the turn of last century. It was unoccupied and unused since about 2005, when the bar/general store inside failed. Around 2010, some idiot had it added to the National Registry of Historic Whatevers, which to potential buyers was like filling it with garlic and crucifixes. NOBODY wanted to buy a big white elephant and then be micro-managed for every repair or improvement they wanted to make.
Since Save The Bay’s founding, progressive politics has divided its (progressivism’s) supporters (and their agendas) into increasingly fragmented interest groups. Almost inevitably, this resulted in a “ranking” of the value of each group, and of each group’s agenda. It seems that the green/alternative-renewable energy/anti-fossil fuels agenda ranks above the marine habitat preservation agenda.
That was an excellent article. We need an updated version.
If given enough time, that is the end result for every progressive movement. Just look at the state of gender politics. The continuum is defined so diversely that it is difficult to pick logical allies. So, you end up with LGBT… fanatics aligning with rapid Islamists who would execute them over in the Middle East for what the Koran would define as abhorrent behavior.
Jordan Peterson has pointed out that if the fractionization of people into ever smaller units continues, progressives will find that the smallest (indivisible and arguably the most important) unit is the individual.
Out of state leftists have been trying to destroy the lobster industry in my state, all in the name of “saving” whales which have never once become entangled in trap lines.
Now those same leftist grifters want to build one of these offshore abominations in those very same waters.
There is no “climate crisis” and these people don’t give a damn about the so-called “environment” they claim to love so much.
It is people with entirely too much time on their hands. And, if they want to Do Something so badly, how about reading to comatose hospital patients; volunteering with Boys and Girls Clubs or at the Y; teacher aide; volunteer help at the senior center?
We all know why not.
Volunteering at the Y means supporting a trans-crazy organization; teacher aides are ally/slaves to the Teachers’ Union; and reading to comatose hospital patients is too much like writing your “representatives.”
There’s an old saying: “Money talks, Bulls#$t walks.”
Excellent article! The Connecticut River Gateway Commission is another organization composed of little Nazis who whore themselves to the big boys in order to delight in persecuting the average Joe.
I was up at Block Island in August and the fishery was all messed up; captains were blaming the wind farm—its possible but it could also be the cold North Atlantic this year.
Ill be back up there this weekend fishing for blackfish (tautog), RI is the black fishing capital of the world; Ive only ever had spectacular black-fishing there, Im hopeful but if the striped bass fishing of this summer is any indication of how the fishery has changed I think I will be disappointed.
It certainly seems as though the RI Govt has purposely self-harmed.
The baby sized Block Island 5 (used as a test case for the monster turbines being tested in our waters now) were never running last summer. Was out there a few times and was also sent videos of them. Not one moving. What a waste.
Here are 10 fundamental questions that climate pant-soilers never answer.
https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1848359716180869290
Typos (a twofer):
“Thousand’s of steel monopolies…”
Try:
“Thousands of steel monopiles…”
Leave a Comment