Just a year ago, the energy landscape in New England and parts of the UK seemed poised for a renewable revolution. Offshore wind farms were set to transform the region’s power mix, and ambitious plans were being drawn up for new green energy infrastructure in Lincolnshire. But as of September 2025, a wave of political resistance and regulatory setbacks has thrown these projects—and the jobs, investment, and climate goals attached to them—into uncertainty.
In New England, the promise of a clean energy boom has been stymied by a series of aggressive moves from the Trump administration. According to The Boston Globe, at least seven massive offshore wind farms were on the drawing board for coastal waters, with the first expected to be operational this year. These projects, once heralded as game-changers for a region with some of the highest electricity rates in the country, have all but collapsed. Eight months into President Donald Trump’s current term, only one project remains technically alive—and even that is now mired in controversy and political headwinds.
“The attacks from the Trump administration have been relentless, and they seem to be gaining speed in recent weeks and days,” Kat Burnham, a senior principal at Advanced Energy United, told The Boston Globe. The administration revoked permits for three key projects that, if completed, would have delivered enough electricity to power 1.7 million homes across Massachusetts and Rhode Island. In what many in the industry describe as a devastating blow, $679 million in federal funds earmarked for port infrastructure was also canceled. The Revolution Wind project in Rhode Island, a flagship development already 80 percent complete, was hit with a stop-work order—an unprecedented move for a project so close to the finish line.
The official justification? National security. Matthew Giacona, acting director of the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, cited concerns that the wind farm could interfere with U.S. defenses against undersea drone attacks. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum elaborated in an interview with CNN, saying, “People with bad ulterior motives to the United States could launch a swarm drone attack through a wind farm. The radar gets very distorted if you’re trying to detect and avoid if you’ve got drones coming.”
To many experts, this rationale doesn’t hold water. Larry Chretien, executive director of the Green Energy Consumers Alliance, dismissed the concerns as “absurd.” He pointed out that Revolution Wind “had its site assessment reviewed by the Pentagon during Trump I,” and argued that, especially after the upheaval in energy markets following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, offshore wind “enhances national security.”
Ørsted, the developer behind Revolution Wind, has not ruled out legal action. The company stated on its website that it is “considering a range of scenarios, including legal proceedings,” in response to the stop-work order. Unlike other projects that were still seeking permits, Revolution Wind was fully approved and under contract to supply 700 megawatts to the New England power grid by next summer. The regional grid operator, ISO-New England, sounded the alarm: “Delaying the project will increase risks to reliability,” the group warned in a statement.
The timing could hardly be worse. As these wind farms stall, older fossil fuel plants are shutting down. The 1,400-megawatt Mystic Power Station closed its doors last year, and three more plants—Schiller Station, Merrimack Station, and Middletown Power—are slated to go offline by mid-2028. Dan Dolan, president of the New England Power Generators Association, cautioned that the region’s ability to handle energy spikes and outages will be severely compromised. “That’s a disaster,” said Elizabeth Wilson of Dartmouth College’s Arthur L. Irving Institute for Energy and Society. “You’re wasting people’s time and you’re wasting people’s money. People are losing jobs, and our communities are not getting the power that we’re planning on.”
Meanwhile, opposition to offshore wind isn’t limited to the federal government. Lawsuits from groups like ACK for Whales, which challenge wind projects on environmental grounds, have also contributed to the revocation of permits off Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket. Thomas Stavola Jr., an attorney for the group, said the administration’s actions “signify a critical inflection point: the federal agencies are now recognizing what Plaintiffs have long argued—that the project’s approvals are fatally flawed and violate numerous environmental statutes.”
Despite these setbacks, advocates like Chretien hope New England will press forward. He urged states to continue soliciting proposals and investing in port infrastructure, warning against “total hibernation.” Amy Boyd Rabin, vice president of policy at the Environmental League of Massachusetts, offered a long-term perspective: “Energy in 2050 is going to come from renewables, otherwise we won’t be able to afford it. So we will come back to our senses. We will come back to building these projects, and we will eventually have offshore wind.”
Across the Atlantic, a parallel debate is raging in Lincolnshire, England. Labour MP Hamish Falconer, who also serves as the parliamentary under-secretary of state for the Middle East, publicly criticized the Reform UK-led county council for its opposition to renewable energy initiatives. According to LincolnshireLive, Falconer argued that “renewable energy projects and new grid infrastructure are essential if we are to cut energy bills, tackle the climate crisis, and secure our supply of power.” He warned that Reform UK’s resistance “risks holding back investment and costing Lincolnshire good jobs in industries of the future.”
The local controversy centers on National Grid’s proposal to build 60 kilometers of pylons between Weston Marsh and East Leicestershire, and another 140 kilometers between Grimsby and Walpole in Norfolk. Council leader Sean Matthews (Reform UK) has made it clear he prefers more oil and gas projects over green initiatives like solar panels and pylons. “The pylons and solar farm eyesores that are being earmarked for Lincolnshire will change the face of our great county beyond recognition,” Matthews insisted. He claims most residents share his concerns about the visual impact on Lincolnshire’s countryside and prime agricultural land.
To rally opposition, Matthews joined forces with Boston and Skegness MP Richard Tice and Greater Lincolnshire’s mayor Dame Andrea Jenkyns to launch the Lincolnshire Opposes Renewable Eyesores group. “We’re listening to residents’ concerns and leading the charge against the mass industrialisation of Lincolnshire’s countryside being driven by non-sensical Net Zero targets,” Matthews declared.
The clash in Lincolnshire reflects a broader tension playing out across the UK and the U.S.: how to balance the need for rapid decarbonization and energy security with local concerns about landscape, livelihoods, and the pace of change. As policymakers, industry leaders, and communities wrestle with these questions, the future of renewable energy—and the jobs and stability it promises—hangs in the balance.
For now, the path forward remains fraught with political, legal, and practical obstacles. But as advocates on both sides of the Atlantic remind us, the stakes—climate, jobs, and the reliability of tomorrow’s electricity—are too high to ignore for long.
