Fewer people in N.J. support offshore wind, now that it’s closer to happening, poll says

As New Jerseyans get closer to seeing the state’s first offshore wind farms, residents are thinking about cherished views at the Jersey Shore, potential impacts to ocean species and — according to a new Stockton University poll — whether they still want the turbines.

A poll released Thursday by Stockton showed that while 50% of adult New Jersey residents were in favor of the state’s plans to build wind turbines and just 33% were opposed, those numbers stand in sharp contrast to just four years ago.

In 2019, about 80% of poll respondents supported offshore wind farms and roughly 15% were opposed to them, according to a survey by the university.

“When the concept of wind farms moved from abstract policy considerations to preparing for actual construction, many residents said, ‘Not in my backyard, or at least not off my beach,’” John Froonjian, director of the Hughes Center, said in a statement. “That’s especially true along the coast, where wind farms have been the focus of protests and legislative election campaigns.”

Change in opinion is even more stark when looking at just Jersey Shore residents.

Four years ago, 77% of residents living in parts bordered the ocean or a bay were in favor of offshore wind turbines and now, in September 2023, just 33% of the same respondents were in support, according to the William J. Hughes Center for Public Policy.

But Patrick Hossay, a Stockton University professor and Chair of Sustainability and Energy Science at the School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, said those results are sensible.

“It strikes me as very normal that as we get closer to the reality ... of installing wind farms — rather than a hypothetical notion for the future — more people express concern. So that seems normal and healthy to me,” Hossay said over the phone Thursday.

“The other factor, honestly, is that in the United States, we’re in a period historically where folks have a great deal of anxiety and concern about the government,” he added. “Given that higher level of anxiety, we can expect that New Jersey citizens are going to express that concern as well in their support for offshore wind. That they want to make sure that regulators and the industry are going to take the appropriate steps to protect our common interest.”

Danish renewable energy developer Ørsted plans to add up to 98 offshore wind turbines about 15 miles from the coasts of Cape May and Atlantic Counties. Spokespeople for the company said last week that plans — for what would be New Jersey’s first offshore wind turbines — are pressing forward despite recent news of a two-year delay to 2026 and reports the project could be called off entirely.

While additional approvals, including a federal permit, are needed before construction can start, Ocean Wind 1 is just one of dozens of projects drawn up for the state.

Offshore wind represents a key part of Gov. Phil Murphy’s clean energy plan, which calls for New Jersey to get 50% of its power from renewables by 2035 and 100% by 2050. The Garden State aims to have 11,000 megawatts of usage by 2040, based on new zero-emission goals announced by Murphy last fall.

But resistance to harnessing wind power through offshore wind turbines has only swelled in the last year — and the mere prospect of harm coming to sea life continues to strike a nerve.

The opposition to offshore wind development has been fueled partly by baseless claims that sonar and noise emitting from wind farm pre-construction vessels are leading to an increase in marine mammal deaths. Marine experts, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and state officials have said there is no evidence that proves such a link exists.

Nevertheless, investigations into the strandings remain ongoing and studies plan to outline what offshore wind farms could mean both for marine species and for the industries that rely on the ocean.

Environmentalists in support of offshore wind have noted that many of those with interests in the fossil fuel industry have worked to create public opposition to offshore wind. Some have even provided financial support to spread misinformation connecting the energy alternative to the beachings.

Scientists, both independent and with federal agencies, have highlighted that vessel strikes, plastic pollution and entanglement with fishing gear have been shown to harm many of the marine mammals that have washed up nearby.

A spokesperson for Ørsted said in addition to monitors onboard ships preparing to build offshore wind infrastructure, a “Vessel Strike Avoidance Plan” will be in place when turbines are built near the Jersey Shore.

But rallies against project work have not stopped including a recent one in Ocean City that ended in six arrests.

Moreover, respondents to Stockton’s poll varied on their thoughts about how offshore wind plans could provide a benefit for those seeking jobs or reliable access to electricity.

The survey was conducted via phone with 592 New Jersey adults from Sept. 16 to Sept. 26. The margin of error was plus-or-minus 4 percentage points.

As for how the feelings over offshore wind development could evolve going forward, Hossay said he is optimistic.

“I think we have some trepidation because we’re at the early stages,” he said, “but I really predict that as we move forward and folks see that these (wind turbines) do not destroy the viewscape, that they do not lead to harm for marine mammals or sea species, that folks will actually shift their positions and start to express greater support.”