The Trump administration’s decision to halt the Sunrise Wind turbine project has intensified scrutiny of New York’s long-term energy strategy, raising concerns about rising electricity costs, grid reliability, and the state’s ability to meet surging future demand driven by population growth, business expansion, and artificial intelligence.
Federal officials shut down Sunrise Wind and other offshore wind installations currently under construction, citing Pentagon concerns that the turbines could interfere with military radar and communications systems. Officials also signaled broader opposition to Green New Deal policies that eliminate fossil fuels.
The Sunrise project, located off Montauk Point and connected to the mainland by a 123-mile transmission cable, was roughly 40 percent complete and expected to power nearly 600,000 homes.
The move sent Ørsted, the Danish company building the turbines, scrambling for options, including engaging with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and other federal permitting agencies in an effort to reverse the decision, while also evaluating potential legal action. The developer said it is complying with the 90-day suspension order and taking steps to halt construction in a manner that protects health, safety, and the environment.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said the administration was pausing leases for “five expensive, unreliable, heavily subsidized offshore wind farms,” adding that “one natural gas pipeline supplies as much energy as these five projects combined.” Burgum said President Trump is “bringing common sense back to energy policy and putting security first.”
The projected cost of the massive 84-turbine project—the country’s largest offshore wind farm—is unknown. Based on a recent $9.4 billion Ørsted stock offering, with $6.27 billion earmarked for Sunrise Wind, the final tab appears to be skyrocketing.
Gov. Kathy Hochul criticized the move, accusing the administration of undermining clean energy and job creation. “They will look for any excuse to continue their assault on clean energy and the thousands of good-paying jobs these projects bring,” she said, adding that “there is no credible justification for this stoppage.” The real threat to national security, Hochul charged, is “undermining our energy independence.”
Hochul has acknowledged that renewable energy alone cannot meet New York’s future electric needs. She has publicly stated that nuclear power will be required to maintain grid reliability—an admission that underscores the long lead times, regulatory hurdles, and massive costs associated with building new nuclear capacity.
Analysts and lawmakers warn that the state’s heavy reliance on wind, solar, and controversial battery storage facilities, while restricting clean-burning natural gas infrastructure, reflects a fundamental failure of energy planning. Modern natural gas plants emit far fewer pollutants than older facilities, cost significantly less to build, and can be brought online far faster than offshore wind or nuclear projects, they argue.
Critics have long warned that the result of New York’s Green New Deal policies will be higher electric bills and outages, particularly as AI-driven data centers place unprecedented demands on the grid. Failing to meet the state’s energy needs will deepen the economic strain on residents already paying some of the highest taxes and fees in the nation.
While Hochul is poised to blame rising costs on the Trump administration’s decision to halt offshore wind projects, opponents argue the state’s energy challenges stem from years of policy decisions that ignored cost, reliability, and the continued importance of natural gas in powering New York’s economy. The state sits atop a Saudi Arabia–sized supply of gas that could lift the economic prospects of millions, yet Green New Deal politicians such as Hochul and the Democrats who control Albany won’t let it be touched.