Greg Dale saw it coming. In August, the letter he’d been dreading arrived in the mail, notifying his harbor’s office that the federal government was withdrawing $427 million in funding for the construction of a wind terminal in Humboldt Bay, California.

As Humboldt Bay Harbor District’s commissioner, Dale had been worried about the offshore wind port ever since President Donald Trump campaigned to stop the rise of renewables, which he denounced as the “scam of the century.” Federal funds make up half of the port project’s total projected cost, and for now, state grants are enough to keep it going until construction starts. “We are taking it one day at a time,” Dale said.

The Humboldt Bay terminal, a heavy-duty port, would facilitate the final assembly of 600-plus-foot-tall floating turbines before they’re hauled out to sea. It would play a critical role in the installation of wind farms in the Pacific Ocean, where no turbines are currently spinning.

The terminal is just one casualty of the Trump administration’s war on both offshore and onshore wind. In addition to slashing funding, the federal government has used the federal permitting process to hamper wind projects that are on the verge of coming online. Meanwhile, developers are forced to place projects on indefinite hold or scramble for alternative plans. Experts say that Trump’s anti-wind crusade threatens the country’s green energy future by driving up costs and threatening power reliability.

PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS ASSAILED wind since his first day in office, when he signed an executive order declaring a moratorium on permits, new leases and lease renewals for all wind projects. In response, Washington, D.C. and 17 states, including six in the West, sued the administration in a case that is still ongoing.

The federal government says it is simply ending the unfair advantages that the Biden administration gave to renewable energy development. “Where actions have paused or been rescinded, the rationale centers on reliability, national security, stewardship and eliminating policies that gave wind/solar preferential treatment,” said Elizabeth Peace, a spokesperson for the Department of the Interior, told HCN in an email.

In September, the Department of Energy announced plans to claw back $13 billion in funding for clean energy projects, including subsidies for wind, though it didn’t specify which programs will be impacted.

The Trump administration has gone after offshore wind with particular gusto. Humboldt Bay was just one of 12 port development projects that lost previously awarded federal funding. On the East Coast, where the offshore wind industry is further along than in the West, wind farms have been thoroughly pummeled, with approvals frozen and projects canceled amid a flurry of mixed messages. In August, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management halted construction for a wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island, even though it was already 80% complete. In late September, a federal judge ruled that the project can continue.

Because all offshore wind projects occur in federal waters, they need approval from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management before construction can begin. This makes offshore wind particularly vulnerable to the whims of an administration like Donald Trump’s. Onshore wind is less at risk, because projects can sidestep most federal permitting if developers set up shop on state or private lands.

But even land-based projects are feeling the impact of the administration’s anti-wind agenda. In July, the Department of the Interior mandated that all projects go through additional layers of review from its leadership, a move that experts say stymies permitting. Less than a month later, Interior cancelled Idaho’s Lava Ridge Wind Project, a Biden-approved venture that Trump had singled out in his executive order.  

CARBON COUNTY, WYOMING is a microcosm for how wind projects are faring in today’s turbulent political climate. Some projects are safe, while others await approval and remain vulnerable. 

The projects closest to breaking ground are most at risk of disruption. BluEarth Renewables’ Two Rivers Wind Project had completed lengthy impact reviews and was awaiting its permit from the Bureau of Land Management when Trump issued his executive order blocking new wind projects. “It would not be economically feasible for (BluEarth developers) to back up and rethink,” said Carbon County Commissioner Sue Jones. BluEarth declined HCN’s request for comment.

Construction is already underway for the Chokecherry and Sierra Madre Wind Energy Project, slated to be the largest in the U.S. The project seems to have skirted danger for now, given that the developer secured its final permit last year. The Lucky Star Wind Project is still in the planning stages, nimble enough for BluEarth to pivot on location. According to Jones, BluEarth initially proposed to erect turbines on a combined spread of federal and private lands. It has since modified its plans and will build entirely on private holdings.

“The public really needs to be involved in the consideration of these projects.”

But relocating wind projects from federal to private land is not a perfect solution. Wind developers may encounter more expensive leases from private landlords, which could translate to steeper energy prices for customers when the turbines finally start spinning. Projects on private ground also don’t have to undergo the same extensive environmental reviews and public comment process that their public-land counterparts do. “There are ways to site energy in a way that reflects community values,” said John Robison, the public lands and wildlife director of the advocacy group Idaho Conservation League. “The public really needs to be involved in the consideration of these projects.”

ELSEWHERE IN THE WEST, investment in future wind energy projects is grinding to a halt as companies take note of the new restrictions, even in states that have been pushing for renewable energy development.  

In the last five years, New Mexico quadrupled the number of wind projects on state land. But now, that growth is sputtering. “We are seeing a real slowdown in our office on inquiries, applications and requests for information around big renewable projects,” said Stephanie Garcia Richard, New Mexico’s commissioner of public lands.

A year ago, Garcia Richard said, “we couldn’t keep up with the demand for new projects.” But since January 2025, no power companies have approached her office to propose wind construction.  

New Mexico is one of the top five states with the greatest wind energy potential, but a third of its budget still comes from fossil fuels sales. Stalled wind investments will keep the state hooked on hydrocarbons, even as it works to diversify its energy sources. Fewer wind projects translates to lost economic opportunities for the state, where revenue from wind projects primarily goes toward supporting public schools. Nationwide, stifling planned wind energy projects means losing out on the thousands of jobs projects would create, as well as millions of dollars in tax and lease revenues.

For now, states and energy companies with diverse portfolios are pulling back on wind investment, doubling down instead on other renewable resources to meet their emission targets. But experts say the federal blitz on wind probably won’t sink the sector entirely — wind energy makes financial sense, since it’s cheaper than burning fossil fuels — only delay its progress. It also serves as an indispensable tool for slashing the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change.

“The wind industry is not going to die,” said Mark Jacobson, energy and atmospheric scientist at Stanford University. “It’s going to come back, because it’s so beneficial.”

For these reasons, Dale remains optimistic that the Humboldt Bay port will materialize. Construction is still slated for 2026, with the goal of erecting California’s first floating turbine in 2030. By that time, political favor may shift again, perhaps even favoring the industry, but the importance of wind power likely won’t change. “I’m believer in the industry,” Dale said. “It’s a no-brainer.”