The answer is not blowing in the wind

April 18, 2026

OPINION by SARO RIZZO

California is gripped by an electricity crisis. A “perfect storm” of structural and policy failures has saddled citizens with the highest residential rates in the contiguous United States—reaching up to 36 cents per kWh as of April 2026. This burden will only grow as EV adoption, high-speed charging, and AI data centers drive peak demand up an estimated 15% by 2030 and 50% by 2045.

The state’s aggressive retirement of fossil fuel and nuclear plants has exacerbated the problem. New green energy hasn’t arrived fast enough to buffer an aging grid that requires a multi-billion-dollar facelift just to handle intermittent solar and wind. While California often enjoys a solar surplus during the day, it faces “duck curve” scarcity from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., when production vanishes just as demand peaks.

This fear of blackouts forced Sacramento to reverse the planned 2025 closure of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. As the state’s last nuclear facility, it remains a vital anchor, providing 8% of California’s total electricity and nearly 20% of its carbon-free power. While Sacramento officially targets a 2030 retirement, the state’s dire predicament will likely force another extension until at least 2035.

Unfortunately, California leaders remain convinced they can solve this crisis through a “moonshot” of massive floating offshore wind farms. By focusing myopically on this path, they are ignoring a fiscal and environmental collision course.

The dream of 25 gigawatts (GW) of deep-water energy carries a $248 billion price tag that will tether Californians to exorbitant bills for decades. With initial generation not expected until 2036, and final buildout until 2045, this project offers zero relief for the energy shortfalls of the next ten years.

The math is staggering. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), installing floating wind on the Pacific Coast will cost roughly $7,349 per kilowatt. Factor in $12 billion for port upgrades and $36.5 billion for new transmission lines, and the price tag will balloon to nearly $10 billion per gigawatt. This will result in a wholesale financing cost of $0.21 per kilowatt-hour—over four times the cost of modern natural gas plants.

Retail markups will eventually crush working families and energy-reliant industries which are already leaving the state due to high energy costs.

Beyond financial ruin lies the gargantuan industrialization of our coastline. Idyllic communities like Avila Beach face destruction from the massive port infrastructure needed to service farms off Morro Bay.

Reaching the state’s goal will require over 2,000 ‘monstrosities,’ each rising 800 feet above the waterline across more than 373,000 acres of federal ocean lease areas. Tethered to the floor 4,000 feet below by thousands of miles of massive steel chains, these turbines will create a vast web of high-voltage cables across hundreds of miles of the ocean floor.

The environmental hypocrisy is “stomach-churning.” While the California Coastal Commission historically restricts minor developments, it has remained silent on the “abominable” impact of the largest ocean construction project in its history. How will migrating whales navigate an obstacle course of cables and nonstop acoustic pollution?

Furthermore, transmitting this power will require roughly 30 offshore converter stations—industrial platforms the size of Navy destroyers. These substations represent a glaring policy contradiction. California spent decades forcing coastal power plants to abandon “once-through cooling” due to its lethal impact on marine larvae.

Yet, these new offshore stations will be designed to suck in a combined 240 million gallons of seawater daily—acting as a biological vacuum that will destroy billions of fish larvae—before discharging it as thermal pollution.

With the current federal administration actively opposing offshore wind—even implementing a nationwide freeze on permitting and leasing—the essential approvals from Washington will not be forthcoming. This federal blockade makes California’s current planning efforts largely futile.

California leadership must abandon this lose-lose approach before we commit to this quarter-trillion-dollar mistake and pivot toward a more pragmatic, diversified energy strategy.

This might include supporting a new generation of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), which are safer, factory-built, and use liquid-metal cooling that requires zero water intake. Crucially, these advanced designs which experts believe will be ready for buildout as soon as 2030 can be fueled by recycling existing spent nuclear fuel, transforming what is currently viewed as waste into a century of clean energy.

We could pair this with next-generation solid-state battery storage to bridge our solar gaps safely. Combined with increased solar production and a strategic transition to cleaner natural gas plants that offer immediate reliability at a fraction of the cost, we can secure our grid without destroying our coastline. We must prioritize energy that is affordable, immediate, and truly protective of the marine ecosystems we claim to cherish.

Saro Rizzo is a public interest attorney in San Luis Obispo and the Vice-President of REACT Alliance. He was the lead attorney in the successful 1996 litigation against UNOCAL for the Avila Beach oil spill cleanup and currently resides in Avila Beach.