Connect with us

Business

Defying Trump, California continues to bet big on offshore wind

Published

on

Defying Trump, California continues to bet big on offshore wind

While the Trump administration takes extraordinary measures to halt the development of offshore wind power in the United States, Southern California is advancing a $4.7-billion plan to deploy hundreds of towering wind turbines in waters off the state’s coast.

The proposed Pier Wind project at the Port of Long Beach is a 400-acre terminal for the positioning, storage and assembly of some of the world’s largest offshore wind turbines, which would be towed north to federal wind lease areas some 20 miles off Morro and Humboldt bays.

Offshore wind is a key climate solution and officials say the project is crucial to helping California reach its goal of 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2045. The Port of Long Beach is one of only two areas primed for the assembly work; the other is Humboldt Harbor near Eureka. The port will create the land for the project through a massive dredge-and-fill operation in the water.

This is the second in an occasional series on the state of the energy transition in California amid opposition from the Trump administration.

Advertisement

California’s approach is to push forward with offshore wind preparations that fall within its jurisdiction, readying the ports and the power grid to eventually take on electricity from 1,000 turbines in federal waters. The aim is to wait out the current administration, which is notoriously hostile toward a form of renewable energy that is booming elsewhere in the world.

“We’re just moving forward with all the things in our control because the port infrastructure has a long lead time,” said Suzanne Plezia, managing director of engineering services with the Port of Long Beach, on a recent catamaran ride around the harbor’s cranes and cargo towers. The work is supposed to be completed within a decade.

“We’re in it for the long haul because we do believe offshore wind is part of our energy future,” she said.

The state’s work is in some way an act of defiance against the Trump administration, which has taken more than two dozen actions against offshore wind power since the president’s second term began in January 2025, including canceling half a billion dollars in funding for port preparations in Humboldt.

Advertisement

Most recently, the White House struck a series of unprecedented deals with energy companies that held offshore wind leases in federal waters, paying them nearly $2 billion to abandon their plans and instead invest in U.S. oil and gas projects. Wind lease areas are stretches of ocean designated by the U.S. government for potential offshore wind development.

One of those deals was with Golden State Wind, which held one of the five leases off the coast of California. State officials are investigating that deal, including a subpoena from the California Energy Commission seeking details about the payout.

“The operative word is not ‘resist’ — it’s ‘create,’ ” California Energy Commission Chair David Hochschild told hundreds of attendees at the Pacific Offshore Wind Summit in Long Beach recently.

A rendering of the proposed Pier Wind project at the Port of Long Beach.

A rendering of the proposed Pier Wind project at the Port of Long Beach.

(Port of Long Beach)

Advertisement

Among them were regulators, lawmakers, investors and industry representatives from the U.S. and abroad who said they remain optimistic about offshore wind’s prospects and vowed to keep to their plans. They point to the United Kingdom, where nearly one-fifth of electricity generation now comes from offshore wind.

But the question of whether President Trump’s actions are succeeding at slowing California and U.S. progress also percolated throughout the summit.

Much of the uncertainty surrounds financing, whether investors still see offshore wind as a smart place to put money.

“We are asking ourselves, do we want to do offshore wind at all?” said Sean Boyd, executive director of EY Parthenon, an arm of Ernst & Young that advises investors and companies, during a panel discussion.

While California is still moving toward its 2045 target, it is not on track to meet its 2030 goal of 2 to 5 gigawatts of offshore wind.

Advertisement

Last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom released about half of a $475-million tranche of Proposition 4 funding for offshore wind projects, but has so far not released the rest. The latest draft of Newsom’s 2026-27 budget would defer the remaining $241 million to a future year — and by default, a future governor.

But California’s efforts are also unprecedented. While much of the world’s offshore wind power is affixed to the seafloor, including off the East Coast of the U.S., the turbines off California will need to float because the ocean here is much deeper. The state’s planned lease areas are between 1,600 and 4,200 feet, far deeper than any other floating wind farms in the world.

“There’s an awful lot of risk in first-of-a-kind technology,” said Boyd. “But the single biggest fundamental risk that runs through all of this is the market risk. Is there a long-term floating offshore wind market in California?”

Many state officials say the answer is unequivocally yes.

“California cannot allow this instability in Washington to derail our long-term climate and energy goals,” said Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles). “We have to continue planning, we have to continue investing, we have to continue building, because offshore wind remains one of the most important tools we have.”

Advertisement

The Trump administration has turned offshore wind into a political football, describing the technology as “doomed” and a threat to national security that is restricting U.S. energy dominance. Trump argues offshore wind is costly and intermittent because it relies on the wind to blow.

But experts say it is meant to be part of a robust clean energy portfolio, complementing other renewable sources, such as solar power and battery energy storage. Many supporters are biding their time until the next election.

“Will offshore wind exist in California and the United States?” asked Jim Lanard, co-founder and chief executive of developer Magellan Wind. “I say resoundingly yes — and it will take off very quickly in 2029.”

Some of the state’s residents are opposed, however, including members of the San Luis Obispo-based REACT Alliance, which sees offshore wind as a threat to coastal communities and the marine environment. The group said it lobbied the Trump administration to make its deal with Golden State Wind, and it is now urging Equinor, another of the leaseholders, to strike a similar agreement and walk away from its plans off the Central Coast.

Other groups, including local tribes and environmental justice organizations, are watching the state’s efforts closely for potential effects such as sediment disruption and erosion, changes in whale migration and pollution from construction. Wilmington, Carson and other communities around the Port of Long Beach already face some of the worst air quality in the region.

Advertisement

But many offshore wind believers say the train has already left the station. Globally, the market is continuing to grow rapidly, led by China, which installed 6.6 gigawatts of new offshore wind capacity in 2025, bringing its cumulative total to 48.4 gigawatts, according to the Global Wind Energy Council.

Some said the need for the technology will only increase as artificial intelligence data centers drive energy demand, along with soaring electricity costs and constrained oil supplies from the war with Iran.

“This is a pivotal moment for energy,” said Noel Hacegaba, chief executive of the Port of Long Beach. “Rising fuel costs are sharpening the case for domestically produced power and for energy independence. … This is renewable energy’s moment.”

The enthusiasm was apparent as the catamaran bobbed around the future site of Pier Wind, which recently received a $20-million grant from the California Energy Commission. The plans include a large wharf with a staging area for the turbine components, plus a “wet storage” area for the assembled units in the water waiting to be towed away, among other elements.

Depending on the final specifications, Pier Wind would be able to assemble one or two turbines per week, each as tall as the Eiffel Tower and capable of generating 20 to 25 megawatts of wind power. Once towed to the lease areas up the coast, their electricity would flow back to land via floating underwater cables and, ultimately, tied into the state’s main grid.

Advertisement

“The world is watching to see what California does next,” Hacegaba said.

Business

Sony Pictures invests $100 million in virtual reality venue Cosm

Published

on

Sony Pictures invests 0 million in virtual reality venue Cosm

Sony Pictures will invest $100 million and take a minority stake in virtual reality venue operator Cosm, as the studio continues to build a business in communal experiences.

As part of the investment, Sony Pictures Chief Executive Ravi Ahuja will also join Cosm’s board of directors, the studio said Wednesday. The size of Sony’s minority stake was not disclosed.

The El Segundo-based Cosm currently operates three venues — one at Hollywood Park in Inglewood, and the others in Dallas and Atlanta. The company plans to open additional venues in Detroit and Cleveland.

Cosm bills itself as a “shared reality venue,” and its facilities center around a massive, wraparound screen that is intended to envelop viewers with additional digital effects. The company has largely focused on sports, though it has also shown Cirque du Soleil shows and done several collaborations with Warner Bros., including recent screenings of 2001’s “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” in honor of the film’s 25th anniversary.

Advertisement

“Cosm sits at the intersection of several trends shaping the future of entertainment,” Ahuja said in a statement. “We’ve followed Cosm since before launch and have been impressed with the quality of the experience and the enthusiasm it’s generating with audiences.”

The investment is Sony’s latest venture into experiential entertainment. In 2024, the Culver City-based studio acquired dine-in theater chain Alamo Drafthouse Cinema.

Continue Reading

Business

Los Angeles tries again to phase out urban oil production

Published

on

Los Angeles tries again to phase out urban oil production

The Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday unanimously advanced an ordinance to halt new oil and gas drilling and phase out all existing production over the next 20 years. L.A. is home to more than 2,000 active oil wells.

The measure revives a similar ban passed in 2022, which was struck down by a judge following legal challenges from the oil and gas industry.

It must pass a second vote before final adoption later this summer, and would make L.A. the largest city in the United States to phase out existing oil wells.

“Today, Los Angeles is making a decision that aligns with our need to turn the page on urban oil drilling,” Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky said during Tuesday’s council meeting. “The absence of an enforceable oil ordinance has had real consequences for our communities.”

Advertisement

The ban in 2022 was seen as a historic move for a region built on the petroleum industry.

But in 2024, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge invalidated the law, ruling that the state, not the city, has jurisdiction over petroleum production. The legal challenge was brought by oil companies including Warren Resources, which operates a large oil field in Wilmington. Much of the field is beneath the city of Long Beach, but it also extends under Los Angeles.

Shortly after that, state legislators advanced Assembly Bill 3233, which reaffirmed city and county authority to regulate oil and gas activity. It was largely seen as the missing piece that made the original ordinance vulnerable.

“It’s now unequivocal that cities have the authority to regulate, limit and prohibit oil and gas operations within our jurisdiction,” Yaroslavsky said.

The new ordinance, written by the Department of City Planning, prohibits new oil and gas extraction, including drilling, redrilling or deepening existing oil wells for the purposes of production. It also designates all existing and active idle wells as “nonconforming uses,” meaning they may only operate during the phaseout period and are no longer compliant with current zoning.

Advertisement

Warren Resources, which led the lawsuit against the previous ban, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company previously argued that the 2022 ban was rushed and would lead to more oil imports to the area, causing increased emissions from tankers and trucks and other environmental consequences.

Many wells in the city operate near schools, homes and parks. Most are concentrated in low-income areas and communities of color, such as Wilmington and the harbor district, West L.A. and South L.A., where residents have long reported respiratory issues, headaches, throat irritation and other health problems. Studies have found oil wells can emit carcinogens and are linked to adverse health effects.

“This ordinance is such an important step toward giving every frontline community in Los Angeles access to clean air,” Silvia Esparza, a South L.A. resident and member of environmental justice group Stand-L.A., said in a news conference ahead of Tuesday’s vote.

Ashley Hernandez, a Wilmington resident and organizer with the nonprofit Communities for a Better Environment, said bloody noses and noxious fumes were a regular part of life in the neighborhood growing up.

She noted that in addition to oil drilling, L.A. residents continue to face other environmental hazards, such as the recent oil pipeline rupture that sent crude into the L.A. River or the ongoing cold storage warehouse fire in Boyle Heights that is spewing toxic smoke.

Advertisement

“I’m here to remind L.A. city and these toxic neighbors that Wilmington residents are more important than any ‘black gold’ under their homes,” Hernandez said. “We need our city to protect our families now and to stop the oil industry’s reign of power in our city. A passage of the oil phaseout ordinance today gives the city a chance to correct this wrong.”

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Business

SpaceX stock returns to Earth after record IPO

Published

on

SpaceX stock returns to Earth after record IPO

Shares in Elon Musk’s rocket company SpaceX halted their three-day slide that had erased roughly $600 billion off its market value.

SpaceX shares closed at $156.11 with a nearly 1% gain on Tuesday, a slight recovery from a 16% fall on Monday.

That loss dropped the stock below $160.95, where it ended the day June 12 after a 19% surge during its record initial public offering. The IPO gave it a market cap of $2.2 trillion, making SpaceX one of the world’s most valuable public companies.

It also turned Musk into the world’s first trillionaire, a status he retains despite the sell-off.

The downturn probably reflects investor unease over the company’s spending plans and potential debt load, analysts say.

Advertisement

SpaceX raised a total of $86 billion after underwriters exercised their right to sell additional shares, on top of the $75 billion initially raised. It was the largest IPO in history.

A little more than half a billion shares were distributed to institutional and retail investors at a price of $135, with the stock opening at $150 as some holders immediately flipped shares for a profit.

Shares rose as high as $176.52 during the IPO before settling at the $160.95 price. In the weeks since, shares reached a high of $225.64, meaning that some investors lost money or are underwater with paper losses.

Since the IPO, SpaceX has dropped some big bucks.

It announced last week that it was acquiring AI coding startup Cursor for $60 billion in a deal expected to close in the third quarter. The San Francisco company, founded in 2022, enables engineers to instruct software in English to run coding tasks autonomously.

Advertisement

It also sold $25 billion in bonds on Tuesday , unusual for a company that just went public, much less for one that just raised a record sum.

The IPO surpassed the 2019 offering by Saudi Aramco, Saudi Arabia’s state-owned oil giant, which raised $29.4 billion, the prior record holder.

S&P Global issued a report last week that assigned SpaceX a “BBB” credit rating, the lowest possible rating to qualify as an investment grade credit risk. It noted the company will have “elevated capital expenditure” through 2029.

SpaceX rivals OpenAi and Anthropic filed this month for initial public offerings that, while not expected to be as large as Musk’s company, will be large in their own right.

Wedbush analyst Dan Ives, who has been bullish on SpaceX stock, said the market is digesting “massive debt and equity raises from Big Tech players” in the coming years.

Advertisement

“This is part of an industry wave of debt offerings on Wall Street, like Alphabet and SpaceX among others,” he wrote in an email.

With the stock already giving up gains since the IPO, it will be further tested when tranches of locked-up shares held by current and former employees are released.

At least 20% of the shares will be released after second-quarter results are disclosed sometime in the coming months, with all the lockups expiring in December.

SpaceX, based in Texas, is the leading launch services company in the world, with its Falcon 9 rocket accounting last year for the vast majority of satellites sent into space.

It is also the leading satellite-based broadband provider with its Starlink service. But the extraordinary interest in the IPO was driven by Musk’s plans to make the company an AI leader — including plans to launch orbiting satellite data centers powered by the sun that crunch AI data.

Advertisement

He merged his xAI artificial intelligence company into SpaceX this year, with the combined entity recently announcing it was leasing computer power to rivals Anthropic and Google at two terrestrial data centers it has constructed.

Musk moved the company’s headquarters from Hawthorne to Texas in 2024, but it retains large operations in the South Bay city and blasts off regularly from Vandenberg Space Force Base in Santa Barbara County.

Investment research firm Morningstar placed a $780-billion valuation on SpaceX, focusing on its core rocket and Starlink broadband satellite businesses. It suggested investors wait a few months for the stock to settle before buying in.

“I think the day-to-day stock price movements are usually based on market sentiment,” said report co-author Nicolas Owens, an equity analyst at Morningstar. “So I was not surprised when it went way up right after the IPO — and I’m not surprised it [came down]. Not much has really changed in the fundamentals.”

Mike Alves, founder of Pasadena’s Vida Vision Fund, has a stake in SpaceX that accounts for 46% of his AI and robotics fund.

Advertisement

He said he was not perturbed by the stock drop, noting that Facebook fell under $18 a share just months after its May 2012 IPO closed at $38 a share. It has since risen more than 1,000% above its offering price.

“The volatility doesn’t really matter because you’re going to multiply your best investment many times, so I’m not so worried about it,” he said, adding that investors seeking shares could now “scoop them up at a good deal.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending