Green Oceans says federal defense assessments document radar risks from large offshore wind turbines
Nonprofit that intervened on the federal government's side in the Revolution Wind case, in a press release quoting its president
“Federal defense assessments dating back to 2007 document that large offshore wind turbines can interfere with early-warning radar systems, including PAVE PAWS, the only land-based radar protecting the East Coast from submarine-launched ballistic missiles”
Source and context
Official statement
About this source
Press release from the organization that intervened in the litigation on the federal government's side, issued the day after the January 12 ruling. It cites radar-interference concerns and says the organization will continue a separate legal challenge to the project's federal approvals.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Judge Lamberth had granted Revolution Wind's request for a preliminary injunction against the December 22 suspension the day before. Green Oceans said it had intervened in the case to support the federal government's authority to act on national-security grounds and that it respected the Court's decision, while raising concern that construction could continue before its separate 2024 lawsuit challenging the project's federal approvals was resolved.
After the quotation
The release also disputes the project's job and cost claims and says Green Oceans will continue its separate 2024 lawsuit challenging the project's federal approvals.
How this statement is classified
Responding to: Doug Burgum said the offshore-wind pause, which included Revolution Wind, addressed emerging national-security risks from evolving adversary technology and projects near East Coast population centers.
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to the justification for the halts, the organization backs the government's security basis by citing documented radar-interference risks, while accepting the court's ruling. Accepting the ruling does not change its support for the security rationale, so this is a defense rather than a mixed position.
- Recorded on
- Published here
Was the federal government justified in halting Revolution Wind construction?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“The new pretext was national security risks that had supposedly emerged in the previous thirty days.”Read statement
“Once again, a court has struck down Trump’s senseless stop work order on Revolution Wind because the administration has failed to produce a single shred of evidence to support its fantastical claims.”Read statement
“Today’s ruling reaffirms what was already clear. The Trump Administration’s second attempt to halt the Revolution Wind project is driven by the President’s longstanding personal vendetta against offshore wind, not any genuine national security concerns. The Revolution Wind project has been repeatedly reviewed and cleared over the years by the Department of Defense.”Read statement