A memorandum of understanding between Massachusetts and Nova Scotia signed this month commits both governments to work together on offshore wind development and regional power sharing — but obstacles remain.
The agreement — announced after Gov. Maura Healey unveiled her 2027 fiscal budget proposal — is an important first step to signal a coming stability to clean energy investors. However, experts say the deal, while important and symbolic, does little to change the state’s energy challenged outlook.
The three-year MOU does not commit either government to purchase power and does not sanction the construction of any new transmission lines. Instead, it lays the foundation for collaboration as Nova Scotia builds its offshore wind industry and Massachusetts policymakers look to find solutions for long-term supply.
Hannes Pfeifenberger of The Brattle Group, a consulting firm specialized in energy and finance, said one big obstacle is simply the cost.
“Part of the challenge is that with inflation and higher financing costs, the cost of offshore wind has increased significantly over the last five years,” he said.
Another factor is time.
Offshore-wind generation and transmission projects typically take a decade from planning to operation. Even under the best conditions, the benefits of the agreement would not be felt for years.
“Building a large transmission, getting it planned, getting it permitted, finding people willing to pay for it, that’s probably closer to a 10-year process,” Pfeifenberger said.
Supply-chain disruptions have added to the financial strain. Several U.S. offshore wind projects have been delayed or canceled because developers could not secure turbines within economically viable timelines.
However, the ones that have been built — such as Vineyard Wind 1 — are running smoothly and proved their worth during cold snaps. The New England wind project only just resumed construction after a suspension issued from the U.S. Departments of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management was lifted by a federal judge in January.
At the same time, the state remains heavily reliant on natural gas for electricity generation, leaving ratepayers exposed to volatile fuel markets. Natural gas prices in New England can be significantly higher than in other regions due to pipeline constraints and seasonal demand spikes.
Permitting uncertainty presents another major obstacle.
Mark LeBel of the Regulatory Assistance Project said federal permitting instability has introduced risk into projects that already operate on small margins. “When the federal government plays games with permits, it ruins the certainty and financing model for all these things,” he said.
Questions surrounding who pays for transmission, how projects are approved, and how costs are allocated remain unresolved, he added.
Meanwhile, electricity demand is expected to grow.
ISO New England projects consumer demand for electricity will increase by roughly 11% over the next decade.
Massachusetts needs additional energy resources to meet growing demand and long-term climate goals. Offshore wind is one pathway, but as of right now, the infrastructure, financing mechanisms and regulatory assurance required to carry out large-scale projects are not yet aligned with policy ambitions.
In that sense, the Nova Scotia agreement serves as a positive signal, but intent is not the same as delivering power.
Until there is action in stabilizing permitting and financing costs moderate and transmission plans advance, the state’s energy system will remain largely dependent on existing resources.
