Opinion: Offshore wind power will save Rhode Islanders money

Key Points

• A rebuttal to a previous column argues that the Revolution Wind project will save Rhode Island ratepayers money.
• The authors contend that comparing new project costs to market prices from existing power plants is misleading.
• Offshore wind projects in Massachusetts and Connecticut are projected to save customers billions of dollars over time.
• The article disputes claims about offshore wind’s performance, citing high capacity factors for the nearby South Fork Wind project.

In his column, Miles Bidwell (“RI’s offshore wind power is unreliable, raises consumer costs,” Commentary, April 25) purports to explain why offshore wind is a bad deal for Rhode Islanders. Instead, he misdirects and misrepresents – with numerous factual errors. While Mr. Bidwell claims ratepayers will be on the hook for offshore wind costs, the reality is Revolution Wind will save ratepayers hundreds of millions.

First, Mr. Bidwell cites a $39.50/megawatt-hour (MWh) average real-time market price. This is misleading – the full average energy market price in 2025 was twice as high ($77/MWh). Moreover, it’s apples-and-oranges to compare new project costs with market prices from existing power plants built long ago with cheaper inputs and lower inflation. At $98/MWh, Revolution Wind is a bargain, easily cost-competitive with bringing any new power plant online – with full predictability through fixed pricing.

Consumers buy both contracted wind power and market-priced power every day. Savings come from reducing the market clearing-price, set by the most expensive power plant needed to meet demand. Wind adds new, low-cost supply into the market with bids reflecting its free fuel, pushing higher‑cost plants out and suppressing prices.

For example, if Revolution Wind produces 200 MWh in an hour, it costs $19,600. That reduces demand that must be met by other power plants from 20,200 MWh to 20,000 MWh. The increase in low-cost supply “pushes out” the most expensive plants, and the clearing price – paid to all plants – is lowered. Even a $1 reduction across 20,000 MWh yields $20,000 in savings, leaving ratepayers ahead (saving $400). This simplified dynamic happens year-round, with Revolution Wind’s annual output (18% of state load) driving outsized savings for the large majority of power purchased from the market.

The upshot: offshore wind is a huge cost-saver. Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey recently announced Vineyard Wind contracts will save customers $1.4 billion over 20 years. Connecticut estimated that Revolution Wind will save $500 million a year by 2028. Other analysis found offshore wind would have saved at least $400 million last year, lowering prices by 11% and insulating against expensive, volatile natural gas (which drove a 67% price increase from 2024-2025). A $40‑versus‑$98 comparison isn’t analysis – it’s misdirection.

Mr. Bidwell is also wrong about offshore wind’s performance. Citing a one-third capacity factor is blatantly incorrect – conflating with onshore wind. South Fork Wind, with the same turbines as and directly next to Revolution Wind, averaged a 53% capacity factor in the first half of 2025 (on par with gas) and reached 60% in March 2025.

And, contrary to Mr. Bidwell’s baseless claim that offshore wind would not have operated during the 2025 heatwave, South Fork hit an astounding 87.4% capacity factor during critical evening hours on June 24, alleviating grid strain and providing enormous savings.

Finally, it is inaccurate to claim natural gas should be prioritized as more reliable. From 2023 to 2025, there was a 66% surge in gas power plant costs, and since 2024, 5-to-7 year waiting queues have developed for gas turbines. Local offshore wind will reduce exposure to the volatility of international markets and conflicts, as natural gas prices have increased over 60% since 2024 and are forecast to stay high through at least 2027, depending on the conflict in Iran.

Despite its reputation, under extreme conditions gas is actually notoriously unreliable; while renewables outperformed during Winter Storm Fern by tens of thousands of megawatts, gas and coal experienced high outage and underperformance rates, with gas underperforming between 14,000-21,500 MW by region.

The bottom line: Offshore wind is an invaluable resource for Rhode Island and the Northeast, saving money and reducing reliance on the fuels that drove this affordability crisis. Basic facts must still matter for the region’s energy policy.

Emily Koo, Rhode Island program director, and Anastasiya (Anya) Poplavska are senior policy advocates for the climate and clean energy nonprofit Acadia Center.

To read the op-ed in the Providence Journal, click here.