‘All the above, except wind’: GOP retools energy philosophy

By Nico Portuondo, Andres Picon | 01/23/2025 06:49 AM EST

President Donald Trump’s executive order halting new wind project approvals is challenging the Republican Party’s “all-of-the-above” energy mantra.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) speaks with reporters.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said, “I’m all for getting rid of wind stuff, and especially all of the subsidies for wind.” Francis Chung/POLITICO

President Donald Trump’s executive order blocking all leasing and permitting for wind energy on federal lands and waters is persuading Hill Republicans to call an audible on their long-held “all-of-the-above” energy message.

In recent years, Republicans have latched on to an energy talking point that, at its heart, emphasizes federal deregulation to allow for all kinds of domestic energy production to thrive. It has been a contrast to Democrats, who generally favor renewables.

Even though the GOP has long said it doesn’t want to pick winners and losers, the president made wind energy the big loser of his comback.

Advertisement

“‘All of the above’ has an asterisk at the bottom now,” said Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), whose home state will see the contentious Lava Ridge wind project scrapped because of the order. “All the above, except wind.“

Many Republicans have justified their distaste for wind by saying too many birds crash into the turbines. They have also claimed — without evidence — that offshore wind has caused whale deaths.

“I think Americans are beginning to realize that the benefit doesn’t outweigh the risk of all the whales that are dying, of all the birds that it kills, and the unsightliness of it,” said Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.). “It doesn’t matter what party you’re in, you got to realize, ‘Hey, this just ain’t working.’”

Other Republicans pointed to the industry’s troubled economics. Supply chain and cost concerns halted several projects during the Biden years.

“Wind has bigger problems than the executive order, especially with the cost basis associated with the critical minerals necessary,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.).

The comments are a bad sign for an industry that has made inroads among Republicans and has a significant footprint in red states like Texas. After Trump’s executive order on Monday, shares of wind giant Ørsted dropped as much as 17 percent.

Wind boosters have argued that critics don’t have science on their side. NOAA Fisheries has said there is no evidence that preparations to build offshore wind facilities were the cause of recent whale deaths, and blamed many of the casualties on vessel strikes. A Government Accountability Office study is pending. And even though wind farms do kill birds, researchers say its fewer than killed by cats or buildings.

But for many Republicans, skepticism of wind energy runs deep. And even GOP wind supporters in Congress — like Chuck Grassley of Iowa — did not want to buck the new president. Grassley’s website calls him the “father” of the Wind Energy Incentives Act of 1993.

In a statement this week on Trump’s orders, Grassley said, “I’m looking forward to working with President Trump and my congressional colleagues to forge a fiscally-sound path forward that bolsters both traditional and alternative energy sources and provides affordable, commonsense energy solutions for Americans.”

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said, “I’m all for [the executive order], I hate those windmills. I’m all for getting rid of wind stuff, and especially all of the subsidies for wind.”

Democrats argue the comments signal that Republicans weren’t ever really committed to their “all of the above” philosophy. The only difference now is that the GOP, Democrats say, have no reason to continue the ‘all of the above’ facade, given that they have complete control of Congress and the presidency.

“We will drill, baby, drill,” Trump said in his inauguration speech, adding, “We will be a rich nation again, and it is that liquid gold under our feet that will help to do it.”

Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.), a former clean energy entrepreneur, said, “All of the above was always a lie. It was a way to say ‘drill, baby, drill,’ without saying ‘drill, baby, drill.'”

Qualified support for wind

A row of wind turbines is silhouetted by the setting sun.
A row of wind turbines near Beaumont, Kansas, is silhouetted by the setting sun. | Charlie Riedel/AP

Some Republican lawmakers from states with significant wind energy projects or wind power potential attempted to walk a tightrope on the executive order when pressed by reporters this week.

Several declined to comment directly, saying they had not yet read the order. Others praised what they said was Trump’s move to restrict subsidies for wind energy companies.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), whose home state has two offshore wind projects in the works, compared wind to the solar industry, which is still seeking government support after decades of innovation and cost-cutting.

“There’s got to be a clear beginning, middle and end, and then they got to move on their own,” Tillis said of renewables seeking favorable treatment from the federal government.

“If they’re not a going concern, I don’t have a problem with [Trump] slowing it down. [Those] technologies have been around for a while,” Tillis said. “If, on the other hand, they are making money and they need access to federal lands to build the business plan, that’s something I’d [want to] consider.”

Trump has said he doesn’t want another wind turbine build during his time in office. But Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), who has worked for years to stop the Lava Ridge project in his home state, said he interpreted Trump’s order not as a biased assault on a single power source but rather as a check on a growing industry in need of more scrutiny.

“This doesn’t mean we’re against wind,” said Simpson, chair of the House Interior-Environment Appropriations Subcommittee. “I’m not against wind, I’m not against hydro, I’m not against solar or nuclear or anything, but that doesn’t mean any wind tower, anytime, anywhere.”

He predicted that the order would not spell doom for the industry and would simply encourage agencies to further investigate wind turbines’ environmental impacts.

Those impacts are “certainly something you ought to look at before you start putting more wind towers out in the ocean,” Simpson said. “But it’ll be part of the mix. Has to be.”

The American Clean Power Association, which has worked to make inroads with Republicans, released a lengthy statement welcoming Trump’s moves to ease permitting but rejecting the wind order.

“ACP strongly opposes blanket measures to halt or impede development of domestic wind energy on federal lands and waters. The contradiction between the energy-focused Executive Orders is stark: while on one hand the Administration seeks to reduce bureaucracy and unleash energy production, on the other it increases bureaucratic barriers, undermining domestic energy development and harming American businesses and workers,” said part of the statement.

Permitting talks

The debate over which energy technologies deserve more or less government support now threatens to spill over into lawmakers’ longstanding back-and-forth over easing permitting.

House Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman, who helped lead failed negotiations last year, has long advocated for a “technology-neutral” approach to streamlining permitting rules. He did not appear pleased with Trump’s wind order.

“I’m not sure why they’re making the decisions they’re making, but that’s totally different than what I want to do with permitting reform legislation: … create an equal access permitting process for whatever technology, whatever project,” Westerman said. He added, “It’s hard to understand everything that’s in their head. I’m still trying to understand a lot of it.”

Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who is close with Interior secretary nominee Doug Burgum, acknowledged this week that wind energy would have to be part of any permitting deal with Democrats.

Still, he voiced concerns about wind power’s intermittent nature. The energy industry has been working on better storage and grid capacity to address that issue.

“The best way — the only way — to get big permitting done where it requires a law change is to include everybody. But as a practical matter, … these [are] intermittent sources,” said Cramer, whose home state relies on wind for almost 40 percent of its electricity generation.

“I know some people don’t like the word ‘intermittent,’ but the reality is it’s intermittent, and you literally cannot provide 24-hour, seven-day-a-week electricity for an [artificial intelligence] server farm with wind or solar or both of them together.”

Reporters Kelsey Brugger and Garrett Downs contributed.

This story also appears in Energywire.