WASHINGTON - April 20 - Leaders of a diverse group of labor, trade, industry and environmental organizations announced today the creation of a broad coalition working to strike language in a Coast Guard Bill unfairly targeting the Cape Wind project. Cape Wind is America’s first proposed offshore wind farm and is being reviewed by seventeen Federal and State agencies in a process that began in 2001.

American Wind Energy Association Legislative Director Jaime Steve began the Press Conference with this announcement, “Today, we are sending out a letter from 55 labor, trade, industry and environmental organizations to every Member of the Senate and House of Representatives urging them to reject the backdoor anti-offshore wind power language that was inserted in Conference Committee.”

Steve added, “Speaking for the American Wind Energy Association, we think it is imperative that as the Coast Guard Bill goes to the Floor that Congressmen and Senators speak out against this unfair provision and not vote for a bill that contains it.” Steve continued, “The United States is already 15 years behind Europe in offshore wind, Cape Wind provides us the chance to catch up and reap the benefits of providing clean offshore wind power to our coastal population centers, this is not the time for Congress to torpedo offshore wind development,” Steve added.

Speaking for the National Ocean Industries Association, Public Affairs Director Michael Kearns stated, “The provision giving a Governor Veto power over an energy project in federal waters would set a dangerous precedent and harm America’s ability to develop its own domestic energy resources to become more energy independent. At a time when energy costs are rising, our government should be working to remove impediments to developing new supply. This provision would do exactly the opposite,” Kearns added.

Lehman Brothers Managing Director Ted Roosevelt IV voiced concern that this legislative provision could deter the financial community from investing in offshore renewable energy projects, having an impact far beyond Cape Wind: “The language slipped into the Coast Guard Conference Bill would create a random political risk for offshore wind projects that the financial community could not quantify. That would have a very strong chilling effect in the offshore wind industry for probably a decade, if not a generation," Roosevelt added.

For Bruce Burton, International Representative of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), Cape Wind and offshore wind offer job growth potential for his members and he stated that IBEW would fight this anti-offshore wind provision. Burton noted, “Projects like Cape Wind provide jobs with good salaries and benefits for working Americans. At a time of record high oil prices it just doesn’t make sense to close the door on offshore wind power.”

For others in the Coalition, the need to correct a flawed legislative process is the most important consideration. "Cape Wind is a promising clean energy project that should not be killed by a backroom deal," said Anna Aurilio, Interim Director of the US Public Interest Research Group. Aurilio continued, "Congress should not let a handful of special interests corrupt the political process at the expense of an important project with broad public support. The section that threatens wind power is unrelated to the navigation and security issues dealt with in the Coast Guard Reauthorization, it has not been debated on the floor of either chamber. Congress should strip this language from the Coast Guard Reauthorization Conference Report."

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) also voiced concerns, "This amendment, and the tactics used to insert it, represent the wrong way to go in crafting sound, national energy policy,” said Katherine Kennedy, NRDC’s Director of the Northeast Energy Program, “At a time when we need to end America's addiction to fossil fuels, this misguided approach would stifle investments in offshore wind and undermine our energy security."

John Passacantando, Executive Director of Greenpeace USA said, “America needs to get its energy from sources like offshore wind if we are going to fight global warming that is raising sea levels and eroding vulnerable coastal areas like Cape Cod. We’ve watched the successful experience in Europe with offshore wind, they have reduced pollution without harming wildlife and have become more energy independent. If anything, we need to speed up Cape Wind’s approval process, not further slow it down”, Passacantando added.

Conservation Law Foundation President Philip Warburg spoke of the importance of Cape Wind to Massachusetts. “The people of Massachusetts support Cape Wind by a margin of six to one. We are a community that has committed to one of the most ambitious climate action plans in the nation, and Cape Wind is the most promising project to help us reach our goals. Now, an unjust and secretive special interest maneuver threatens to snatch it from our grasp. People in Massachusetts are reacting with outrage and disgust, and are feeling abandoned by the leaders they trusted with their health and safety,” Warburg said.

Matt Palmer, Executive Director of Clean Power Now said, “We are a grass roots volunteer organization based on Cape Cod with over 5,500 members representing the voice of the local support of the Cape Wind project. We are proud to be part of a coalition that is going to work tirelessly to ensure that the Coast Guard bill is liberated from a special interest provision that unfairly targets offshore wind power.”

Cape Wind President Jim Gordon expressed gratitude for the broad support for Cape Wind and for standing up for an open and transparent government and regulatory process, “All we have ever asked is that the 17 Federal and State agencies be allowed to finish their work without political interference and render their judgment. We are convinced these agencies will find that Cape Wind is in the public interest.”

American Wind Energy Association, Cape Wind, Clean Power Now, Conservation Law Foundation, Greenpeace USA, Lehman Brothers, National Ocean Industries Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, U.S. Public Interest Research Group

###