While the Trump administration takes extraordinary measures to halt the development of offshore wind power in the United States, Southern California is advancing a $4.7-billion plan to deploy hundreds of towering wind turbines in waters off the state’s coast.
The proposed Pier Wind project at the Port of Long Beach is a 400-acre terminal for the positioning, storage and assembly of some of the world’s largest offshore wind turbines, which would be towed north to federal wind lease areas some 20 miles off Morro and Humboldt bays.
Offshore wind is a key climate solution and officials say the project is crucial to helping California reach its goal of 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2045. The Port of Long Beach is one of only two areas primed for the assembly work; the other is Humboldt Harbor near Eureka. The port will create the land for the project through a massive dredge-and-fill operation in the water.
This is the second in an occasional series on the state of the energy transition in California amid opposition from the Trump administration.
California’s approach is to push forward with offshore wind preparations that fall within its jurisdiction, readying the ports and the power grid to eventually take on electricity from 1,000 turbines in federal waters. The aim is to wait out the current administration, which is notoriously hostile toward a form of renewable energy that is booming elsewhere in the world.
“We’re just moving forward with all the things in our control because the port infrastructure has a long lead time,” said Suzanne Plezia, managing director of engineering services with the Port of Long Beach, on a recent catamaran ride around the harbor’s cranes and cargo towers. The work is supposed to be completed within a decade.
“We’re in it for the long haul because we do believe offshore wind is part of our energy future,” she said.
The state’s work is in some way an act of defiance against the Trump administration, which has taken more than two dozen actions against offshore wind power since the president’s second term began in January 2025, including canceling half a billion dollars in funding for port preparations in Humboldt.
Most recently, the White House struck a series of unprecedented deals with energy companies that held offshore wind leases in federal waters, paying them nearly $2 billion to abandon their plans and instead invest in U.S. oil and gas projects. Wind lease areas are stretches of ocean designated by the U.S. government for potential offshore wind development.
One of those deals was with Golden State Wind, which held one of the five leases off the coast of California. State officials are investigating that deal, including a subpoena from the California Energy Commission seeking details about the payout.
“The operative word is not ‘resist’ — it’s ‘create,’ ” California Energy Commission Chair David Hochschild told hundreds of attendees at the Pacific Offshore Wind Summit in Long Beach recently.
A rendering of the proposed Pier Wind project at the Port of Long Beach.
(Port of Long Beach)
Among them were regulators, lawmakers, investors and industry representatives from the U.S. and abroad who said they remain optimistic about offshore wind’s prospects and vowed to keep to their plans. They point to the United Kingdom, where nearly one-fifth of electricity generation now comes from offshore wind.
But the question of whether President Trump’s actions are succeeding at slowing California and U.S. progress also percolated throughout the summit.
Much of the uncertainty surrounds financing, whether investors still see offshore wind as a smart place to put money.
“We are asking ourselves, do we want to do offshore wind at all?” said Sean Boyd, executive director of EY Parthenon, an arm of Ernst & Young that advises investors and companies, during a panel discussion.
While California is still moving toward its 2045 target, it is not on track to meet its 2030 goal of 2 to 5 gigawatts of offshore wind.
Last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom released about half of a $475-million tranche of Proposition 4 funding for offshore wind projects, but has so far not released the rest. The latest draft of Newsom’s 2026-27 budget would defer the remaining $241 million to a future year — and by default, a future governor.
But California’s efforts are also unprecedented. While much of the world’s offshore wind power is affixed to the seafloor, including off the East Coast of the U.S., the turbines off California will need to float because the ocean here is much deeper. The state’s planned lease areas are between 1,600 and 4,200 feet, far deeper than any other floating wind farms in the world.
“There’s an awful lot of risk in first-of-a-kind technology,” said Boyd. “But the single biggest fundamental risk that runs through all of this is the market risk. Is there a long-term floating offshore wind market in California?”
Many state officials say the answer is unequivocally yes.
“California cannot allow this instability in Washington to derail our long-term climate and energy goals,” said Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles). “We have to continue planning, we have to continue investing, we have to continue building, because offshore wind remains one of the most important tools we have.”
The Trump administration has turned offshore wind into a political football, describing the technology as “doomed” and a threat to national security that is restricting U.S. energy dominance. Trump argues offshore wind is costly and intermittent because it relies on the wind to blow.
But experts say it is meant to be part of a robust clean energy portfolio, complementing other renewable sources, such as solar power and battery energy storage. Many supporters are biding their time until the next election.
“Will offshore wind exist in California and the United States?” asked Jim Lanard, co-founder and chief executive of developer Magellan Wind. “I say resoundingly yes — and it will take off very quickly in 2029.”
Some of the state’s residents are opposed, however, including members of the San Luis Obispo-based REACT Alliance, which sees offshore wind as a threat to coastal communities and the marine environment. The group said it lobbied the Trump administration to make its deal with Golden State Wind, and it is now urging Equinor, another of the leaseholders, to strike a similar agreement and walk away from its plans off the Central Coast.
Other groups, including local tribes and environmental justice organizations, are watching the state’s efforts closely for potential effects such as sediment disruption and erosion, changes in whale migration and pollution from construction. Wilmington, Carson and other communities around the Port of Long Beach already face some of the worst air quality in the region.
But many offshore wind believers say the train has already left the station. Globally, the market is continuing to grow rapidly, led by China, which installed 6.6 gigawatts of new offshore wind capacity in 2025, bringing its cumulative total to 48.4 gigawatts, according to the Global Wind Energy Council.
Some said the need for the technology will only increase as artificial intelligence data centers drive energy demand, along with soaring electricity costs and constrained oil supplies from the war with Iran.
“This is a pivotal moment for energy,” said Noel Hacegaba, chief executive of the Port of Long Beach. “Rising fuel costs are sharpening the case for domestically produced power and for energy independence. … This is renewable energy’s moment.”
The enthusiasm was apparent as the catamaran bobbed around the future site of Pier Wind, which recently received a $20-million grant from the California Energy Commission. The plans include a large wharf with a staging area for the turbine components, plus a “wet storage” area for the assembled units in the water waiting to be towed away, among other elements.
Depending on the final specifications, Pier Wind would be able to assemble one or two turbines per week, each as tall as the Eiffel Tower and capable of generating 20 to 25 megawatts of wind power. Once towed to the lease areas up the coast, their electricity would flow back to land via floating underwater cables and, ultimately, tied into the state’s main grid.
“The world is watching to see what California does next,” Hacegaba said.
