admin
When Megyn Kelly sat down with U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew this week, they did more than trade talking points — they sounded an alarm for the Jersey Shore and the hardworking people who depend on it. Van Drew laid out the real risks that come with rushing offshore wind projects: dead whales, disrupted fisheries, and the toxic fallout most politicians refuse to discuss.
Scientists are now ringing warning bells that wind infrastructure is not as benign as the green lobby insists. A peer-reviewed assessment in Ocean Sustainability calculates that corrosion-protection systems on offshore turbines could leach thousands of tons of aluminum, zinc, and other trace elements — amounts that, when taken up by shellfish and seaweed, could push concentrations past tolerable weekly intakes for humans. That’s not hypothetical; it’s a sober, data-driven red flag for anyone who eats seafood.
Federal biologists have even admitted the obvious: some projects are “likely to adversely affect” whales and other marine mammals — a phrase that should terrify every parent and fisherman on the Eastern Seaboard. The NOAA biological opinion on the Atlantic Shores area acknowledges impacts short of extinction, yet still admits damage will occur, undermining the sell that these projects are harmless. Washington can no longer wave away consequences with warm rhetoric about green virtue.
If you think this is just coastal paranoia, consider the audit work by the Government Accountability Office showing glaring oversight gaps in Interior’s management of offshore wind development. The GAO found the federal process has holes big enough for economic and environmental harms to slip through, and yet bureaucrats keep racing projects forward as if public trust and coastal livelihoods are mere collateral. That kind of negligence deserves scrutiny, not applause.
Communities and conservation groups are already fighting back in court because pile driving and construction have immediate, brutal effects on marine life and the fishing industry that feeds families from New Jersey to New England. Local organizations and fishermen have documented pile-driving harms and sought emergency relief to stop work that threatens whales, seafloor habitat, and the seafood supply chain — and lawmakers like Van Drew have stood with them instead of siding with distant corporate interests.
This debate isn’t about being anti-progress; it’s about being pro-common sense and pro-American families. Conservatives should demand an honest accounting of costs — environmental, economic, and national — before shipping our coastlines and dinner plates off to corporate experiments with unproven long-term consequences. We can support energy innovation without sacrificing our oceans, our fisheries, or our children’s health to a bureaucratic stamp of approval.
Congress must hit pause, conduct rigorous independent testing, and put fishermen, scientists, and local communities at the center of any decision that affects their livelihoods. The left’s one-size-fits-all green obsession has too often ignored inconvenient facts; leaders like Van Drew are reminding us that stewardship means protecting people first, not projects. If Washington won’t act, the people will, and history will remember who stood up for common-sense conservation.
Hardworking Americans deserve energy policy that prioritizes resilience, jobs, and safety — not virtue signaling that hands the sea over to foreign developers and quiet regulatory capture. It’s time to put patriotic responsibility ahead of political theater, to demand transparency, and to ensure our coasts remain productive and safe for generations to come.
