New Jersey’s offshore wind initiatives are in complete disarray. The first two offshore wind leases, the 1.1 GW Ocean Wind 1 (originally scheduled to go online this year) and 1.1 GW Ocean Wind 2, were canceled by Orsted in October 2023. The third, the 1.5 GW Atlantic Shores, was a partnership between Shell New Energies and EDF Renewables. Shell withdrew from the project in January, EDF Renewables just a couple of months later. In June, Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind formally requested the NJBPU to terminate its contract. The fourth wind lease area, the 2.4 GW Leading Light Winds project, was delayed in September 2024; its future is uncertain.

The simple truth is that the business cases for these wind projects no longer make sense in the post-COVID economy. Inflation and supply chains have made these once-lucrative projects unprofitable, even with generous tax subsidies offered by the federal government; Orsted received $1B in subsidies from the Biden administration and still canceled their projects. There is little expectation that the economic factors needed to make these projects viable (low interest rates, low/predictable inflation, mature local supply chains, favorable/supportive public policy, etc…) will return in the foreseeable future.

As a result, the 220-acre Paulsboro Wind Port, on the Delaware River south of Camden, sits unused. It was supposed to be the on-shore staging area for the construction of hundreds of wind turbines for these projects. With the offshore wind industry not currently viable and New Jersey facing a one-two punch of rising electricity rates and the risk of energy shortages (both due in part to the failed offshore wind projects), how can the Paulsboro Wind Port be repurposed to address these pressing needs, and how much energy can be produced there?

Here are the pluses and minuses of each energy source:

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are next generation nuclear reactors that are much smaller than current nuclear reactors, with many of the components constructed in a factory instead of on-site, with higher quality control, and cost-savings from standardized designs.

Pluses

1. Scalability and Flexibility: SMRs are compact and can be constructed in modules, allowing for scalability to meet energy demands without the need for a massive upfront investment in a large plant.
2. Safety Features: SMRs incorporate advanced safety mechanisms, such as passive cooling systems, which minimize the risk of catastrophic accidents.
3. Low Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Like all nuclear power, SMRs produce virtually no greenhouse gas emissions during operation, contributing significantly to climate change mitigation efforts.
4. Reduced Construction Costs: Due to their modular design, SMRs can be constructed in factories and shipped to the site, reducing overall construction timelines and costs compared to traditional large reactors.
5. Long-term Energy Supply: Nuclear fuel is relatively efficient and can provide a long-term, stable energy supply with fewer refueling intervals.

Minuses

1. High Initial Capital Costs: While SMRs have lower construction costs than large reactors, they still require significant upfront capital investment compared to some fossil fuel plants.
2. Waste Management Issues: SMRs, like other nuclear plants, produce radioactive waste that requires careful long-term storage and management.
3. Economic Uncertainty: As a newer technology, the commercial viability of SMRs is yet to be proven at scale, with uncertainties around maintenance costs and deployment timeframes.
4. Electricity Costs: Although SMRs could reduce costs in the long run, the relatively small output per unit may lead to higher electricity costs during the initial adoption phase.

Natural Gas Power Plants

Natural gas power plants are extremely efficient in terms of land use requirements.

Pluses

1. Lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions than Coal: Natural gas combustion emits about 50-60% less CO₂ compared to coal, making it a cleaner option among fossil fuels.
2. Affordability and Efficiency: Natural gas plants are cost-effective to construct and operate, with relatively lower fuel costs and high efficiency in electricity generation.
3. Quick Ramp-Up: Natural gas plants can quickly adjust to fluctuations in electricity demand, making them ideal for grid stability and as a complement to renewable energy sources.
4. Abundant Supply: With advancements in extraction technologies, natural gas remains widely available, providing a reliable energy source.

Minuses

1. Methane Emissions: While cleaner than coal, natural gas extraction and distribution can result in methane leaks, a potent greenhouse gas that exacerbates climate change.
2. Price Volatility: The cost of natural gas is subject to market fluctuations, potentially impacting electricity costs for consumers.
3. Infrastructure Dependency: Dependence on pipelines and storage infrastructure makes natural gas plants vulnerable to supply disruptions and geopolitical factors.
4. Environmental Concerns: Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) used for natural gas extraction can lead to water contamination, habitat disruption, and other environmental issues.

Coal-Fired Power Plants

New Jersey’s last coal-fired plants, the Logan Generating Plant in Swedesboro and the Chambers Cogeneration Plant in Carneys Point, both ceased operations in 2022. Could coal come back to New Jersey?

Pluses

1. Abundant and Reliable: Coal is widely available and has historically been a dependable energy source, ensuring consistent electricity supply.
2. Low Upfront Costs: Coal-fired plants have lower initial construction costs compared to nuclear or advanced gas technologies, making them an attractive option for some economies.
3. Job Creation: Coal mining and plant operation create jobs, often benefiting communities in coal-rich regions.

Minuses

1. Significant Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Coal-fired plants are the largest contributors to CO₂ emissions in the energy sector, making them a major driver of climate change.
2. High Environmental Impact: Coal mining and combustion lead to air and water pollution, including acid rain, mercury emissions, and particulate matter that affects public health.
3. Rising Costs for Pollution Control: Modern coal plants face increasing costs to comply with environmental regulations, such as installing scrubbers to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions.
4. Higher Electricity Costs Long-Term: Despite low upfront costs, the operational and environmental compliance costs can make coal less competitive over time, particularly as carbon pricing schemes are implemented globally.

Solar Farms

Pluses

1. Clean Energy: Produce zero greenhouse gas emissions or air pollutants during operation, directly combating climate change.
2. Renewable Resource: Harness an inexhaustible energy source – sunlight – ensuring a long-term, sustainable power supply.
3. Low Operating Costs: Once constructed, solar farms have minimal ongoing fuel costs and relatively low maintenance requirements.
4. Rapid Deployment: Can be installed and brought online faster than many other large-scale power generation facilities.
5. Versatile Siting: Can be built on otherwise unusable land, such as landfills or degraded sites. Agrivoltaics (co-locating solar with agriculture) offers dual land use.

Minuses

1. Significant Land Use: Require large tracts of land, which can lead to conflicts with agriculture, habitat disruption, and altered landscapes.
2. Intermittent Power: Only generate electricity when the sun is shining (daytime, clear skies), requiring backup power sources or expensive energy storage solutions.
3. High Upfront Costs: The initial investment for land acquisition, panels, inverters, and grid connection can be substantial.
4. Manufacturing Impact: The production of solar panels involves energy-intensive processes, mining for raw materials (e.g., silicon, metals), and the use of some hazardous chemicals, which have an environmental footprint.
5. Geographic Limitations: Efficiency is highest in regions with abundant, consistent sunlight, limiting optimal performance in certain geographic locations.

The choice among these technologies depends on balancing environmental priorities, electricity costs, and long-term energy strategies. While SMRs and natural gas plants offer pathways to cleaner energy, coal-fired plants are becoming less viable due to their environmental and economic challenges.Solar energy’s land use requirements makes it less impactful at the Paulsboro site. 

SOURCES

• Siemens Energy Factsheet – Small Modular Reactors (SMR): https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/home/press-releases/factsheet—small-modular-reactors–smr-.html
• World Nuclear Association – Small Nuclear Power Reactors: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-reactors/small-nuclear-power-reactors
• Idaho National Laboratory – Advanced Small Modular Reactors: https://inl.gov/trending-topics/small-modular-reactors/
• Decarbonization Channel – Visualized: The Four Benefits of Small Modular Reactors: https://decarbonization.visualcapitalist.com/visualized-the-four-benefits-of-small-modular-reactors/
• Our World in Data – How does the land use of different electricity sources compare?: https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-per-energy-source
• Freeing Energy – How much land is required for solar, wind, coal, nuclear, and hydro?: https://www.freeingenergy.com/math/land-use-compare-coal-nuclear-solar-wind-m129/
• NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) – Land-Use Requirements for Solar Power Plants in the United States: https://docs.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56290.pdf
• BKV Energy. “Pros and Cons of Solar Energy.” https://bkvenergy.com/learning-center/solar-energy-pros-and-cons/
• Deye ESS. “Pros and Cons of Solar Farms: Weighing the Benefits and Challenges of Large-Scale Sun Power.” https://deyeess.com/solar-farms-pros-and-cons
• Earth.Org. “The Advantages and Disadvantages of Solar Energy.” https://earth.org/what-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-solar-energy/
• Environment.co. “What You Need to Know About the Pros and Cons of Solar Farms.” https://environment.co/solar-farms-pros-and-cons/
• Investopedia. “Solar Energy: Benefits and Drawbacks.” https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/053015/pros-and-cons-solar-energy.asp
• SolarReviews. “Pros and Cons of Solar Energy: 2025 Expert Guide.” https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/pros-and-cons-of-solar-energy
• Shielden. “Solar Farms: Types, Pros and Cons.” https://www.shieldenchannel.com/blogs/solar-panels/solar-farms
• VPS. “Are Solar Farms Actually Environmentally Friendly?” https://www.vpslp.com/blog/solar-farms/
• Decarbonization Channel (Visual Capitalist). “Visualized: The Four Benefits of Small Modular Reactors.” https://decarbonization.visualcapitalist.com/visualized-the-four-benefits-of-small-modular-reactors/
• European Commission Energy. “Small Modular Reactors explained.” https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/nuclear-energy/small-modular-reactors/small-modular-reactors-explained_en
• Nation Thailand. “How is SMR Different from Conventional Nuclear Power Plants?” https://www.nationthailand.com/sustaination/40044432
• U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). “Benefits of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).” https://www.energy.gov/ne/benefits-small-modular-reactors-smrs
• EnergyCentral. “SMRs Vs. Renewables: Benefits and Challenges to Clean Energy.” https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/smrs-vs-renewables-benefits-and-challenges-clean-energy-7CmuByHwqDgeUf8
• Our World in Data. “How does the land use of different electricity sources compare?” https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-per-energy-source
• Princeton University (Net-Zero America). “Energy and Land Use Final Printable.” (PDF document contains land use estimates for various energy sources). https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/img/energy-land-use-finalprintable-2021.pdf
• Environmental Science: Advances (RSC Publishing). “The life cycle land use of natural gas-fired electricity in the US Western interconnection.” https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2023/va/d3va00038a