New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Trump Administration Targets Offshore Wind Farms, Citing National Security Concerns

The U.S. Department of the Interior announced it would “pause” leases for five large offshore wind farms, imperiling the fast-growing clean energy industry

People on a boat looking at a wind turbine in the water nearby.

Pilot project turbines for the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Program, slated to be completed in 2026.

Kendall Warner/The Virginian-Pilot/Tribune News Service/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The Trump administration on Monday announced it was “pausing—effective immediately” leases for five large offshore wind farms being built off the East Coast. In the announcement, Department of the Interior secretary Doug Burgum cited “emerging national security risks” for the decision, but the agency provided no evidence as to what risks had been found.

The five projects affected by the pause are offshore of New York State, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Virginia. Around 5.8 gigawatts of offshore wind was expected to come online in the U.S. between 2025 to 2029—enough to power millions of homes across the Eastern Seaboard. Some $10 billion has been invested in the U.S. wind industry since 2021. The Trump administration decision imperils both that investment and future energy capacity.

A statement announcing the decision on Monday indicated that wind turbines caused radar “clutter,” referencing a 2024 Energy Department report that looked into wind turbines’ effect on radar systems.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That report warned that clutter from wind turbines in the line of sight of defense and civilian radar systems can cause interference and lead to false alarms. One strategy to mitigate this problem, the report noted, is to lower radar detection thresholds—which reduces the clutter but could result in missing “actual targets.” Another option the report proposed is to ensure wind farms aren’t built in a radar’s line of sight.

"We should not be kneecapping America’s largest source of renewable power, especially when we need more cheap, homegrown electricity," said Ted Kelly of U.S. Clean Energy at the Environmental Defense Fund, in a statement. "Instead, this administration has baselessly and unlawfully attacked wind energy," he added.

One of the affected projects, the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project, was sited “in close coordination with the military,” according to a spokesperson for Dominion Energy, which operates the wind farm, in comments to the New York Times. Indeed, wind farm operators, scientists and the military have collaborated on minimizing radar effects of wind farms for decades. Burgum on Monday told Fox Business that the decision to pause the projects came because the Department of Defense “has come back conclusively that ... these large offshore wind programs create radar interference.”

The Department of the Interior and the Department of Defense did not respond to a request for comment.

Dan Vergano was formerly senior editor, Washington, D.C., at Scientific American. He has previously written for Grid News, BuzzFeed News, National Geographic and USA Today. He is chair of the New Horizons committee for the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing and a journalism award judge for both the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

More by Dan Vergano

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe