In a stunning reversal for the renewable energy sector, the Trump administration has issued a stop-work order on Ørsted’s Revolution Wind project, an offshore wind farm that was already 80% complete off the coast of Rhode Island. The directive, handed down by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), cites unspecified national security concerns and aligns with President Trump’s longstanding skepticism toward wind power, which he has repeatedly derided as unreliable and harmful to wildlife.

The 704-megawatt project, a joint venture between Danish energy giant Ørsted and Eversource Energy, was poised to deliver clean power to roughly 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut starting next year. With 45 of its 65 turbines already installed, the halt represents a potential multibillion-dollar setback, exacerbating Ørsted’s financial strains amid rising costs and supply-chain disruptions.

A Blow to Ørsted’s Ambitions

Ørsted, the world’s largest offshore wind developer, saw its shares plunge as much as 19% to a record low following the announcement, wiping out significant market value and complicating a planned 60 billion Danish kroner ($9.4 billion) share sale. According to reporting from Reuters, the company’s stock tumble reflects broader investor fears over U.S. policy shifts under Trump, who has prioritized fossil fuels and vowed to dismantle what he calls “green scams.”

Industry analysts note that Revolution Wind had secured all necessary federal permits under the previous administration, including environmental reviews that addressed concerns over marine life and fishing impacts. The abrupt stoppage, detailed in a New York Times article, underscores the administration’s aggressive stance against renewables, potentially delaying U.S. climate goals and stranding investments in a project that was mere months from operation.

Ripples Through the Energy Sector

The decision has drawn sharp criticism from environmental groups and state officials in New England, where the farm was expected to play a key role in meeting carbon-reduction targets. NPR reported that Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee called the halt “a step backward,” highlighting the project’s potential to create hundreds of jobs and reduce reliance on imported energy.

For Ørsted, this is the latest in a series of challenges. The company has faced escalating costs from inflation, higher interest rates, and supply-chain bottlenecks, as evidenced by prior impairments on U.S. projects totaling billions. Posts on X (formerly Twitter) from industry observers reflect growing sentiment that Trump’s policies could accelerate the firm’s crisis, with some users noting the irony of halting a near-complete initiative amid global pushes for energy transition.

Broader Implications for Renewables

Energy experts warn that the Revolution Wind stoppage could deter future investments in U.S. offshore wind, a sector that has struggled to gain momentum despite ambitious targets. AP News coverage emphasizes how the project, valued at around $4 billion, exemplifies the vulnerabilities of renewables to political whims, potentially increasing costs for developers who must now navigate regulatory uncertainty.

Trump’s administration has signaled further reviews of existing permits, per insights from Offshore Wind, which could affect other projects like Vineyard Wind or South Fork Wind. This move fits into a pattern of favoring oil and gas, with officials arguing that wind farms pose risks to national security, though specifics remain vague.

Looking Ahead: Challenges and Responses

Ørsted has pledged to engage with federal authorities to resume work, but legal battles could ensue, drawing parallels to past disputes over projects like Keystone XL. ABC News notes that the halt might force renegotiations with suppliers and offtake agreements, further straining finances.

As the sector grapples with this upheaval, insiders are watching closely for signals on whether other developers, such as Equinor or BP, might face similar scrutiny. The episode highlights the precarious balance between policy, economics, and environmental imperatives in America’s energy future, with Ørsted’s fate serving as a bellwether for the industry’s resilience.