These deals, with accompanying maintenance contracts, could add up to $13 billion, estimates Shashi Barla, principal wind analyst at Wood Mackenzie, a market research firm.

The waves made by the G.E. machine have pushed Siemens Gamesa to announce a series of competing turbines. Vestas, which until recently had the industry’s biggest machine in its stable, is also expected to unveil a new entry soon.

“We didn’t move as the first one, and that of course we have to address today,” said Henrik Andersen, the chief executive of Vestas.

To pull off its gambit, G.E. had to start “pretty much from scratch,” Mr. Schellings said. The business unit called G.E. Renewable Energy is spending about $400 million on design, hiring engineers and retooling factories at St. Nazaire and Cherbourg in France.

To make a blade of such extraordinary length that doesn’t buckle from its own weight, G.E. called on designers at LM Wind Power, a blade maker in Denmark that the company bought in 2016 for $1.7 billion. Among their innovations: a material combining carbon fiber and glass fiber that is lightweight yet strong and flexible.

G.E. still must work out how to manufacture large numbers of the machines efficiently, initially at the plants in France and, possibly later, in Britain and the United States. With a skimpy offshore track record, G.E. also needs to show that it can reliably install and maintain the big machines at sea, using specialized ships and dealing with rough weather.

“G.E. has to prove a lot to asset owners for them to procure G.E. turbines,” Mr. Barla said.

Bringing out bigger machines has been easier and cheaper for Siemens Gamesa, G.E.’s key rival, which is already building a prototype for a new and more powerful machine at its offshore complex at Brande on Denmark’s Jutland peninsula. The secret: The company’s ever larger new models have not strayed far from a decade-old template.

“The fundamentals of the machine and how it works remain the same,” said Mr. Rasmussen, the unit’s chief technology officer, leading to a “starting point that was a little better” than G.E.’s.

There seems to be plenty of room for competition. John Lavelle, the chief executive of G.E.’s offshore business, said the outlook for the market “gets bigger each year.”

Developer presents new draft plan for 931-unit, mixed-use development at Mystic Education Center

Erica Moser  Groton — Following concerned and critical comments from several residents of Boulder Court and Hancock Drive at a special meeting of the Groton Planning & Zoning Commission on Tuesday night, developer Jeff Respler laid out his latest vision for Mystic River Bluffs, a luxury 931-unit, mixed-use development at the Mystic Education Center property, site of the former Mystic Oral School.

Jonathan Reiner, director of planning and development for the town, stressed that presentation of the draft master plan was "very preliminary" and there's no application yet.

He said the commission is working on regulations that will lay out a permitting path for an application, which would then be heard at a public hearing. Deb Jones, assistant director of planning and development, said the presentation was so the commission could visualize what might happen based on the regulations it's developing.

Respler first saw the 240 Oral School Road property in December 2016, and after the town issued a request for proposals in December 2017, he submitted a proposal. Respler Homes was selected as the preferred developer, with Respler saying it was because it "hit the needs of the community" and "handled a lot of problems with local labor."

Respler noted that most Electric Boat and Pfizer employees don't live in Groton, so the town misses out on the economic benefits of having workers live there. He also said people from EB and Pfizer have expressed that they struggle to recruit top talent because there's nowhere nearby that young workers — who seek amenities and entertainment — want to live.

Respler Homes announced conceptual plans in November 2019, and Respler said the team did public outreach from last December until the pandemic hit.

The number of planned units has since increased to 931 — including 798 in multifamily housing, 51 low-density townhouses, 72 garden-style flats, and 10 low-density duplexes. This includes 462 one-bedroom units, 408 two-bedroom units and 61 three-bedroom units.

The townhouses, which Respler said are to handle executive housing needs, are a new addition. They're situated on the 16.3-acre former Firgeleski property at 221 Oral School Road, which Respler purchased in September, town records show. That property extends to Cow Hill Road, allowing for a second entrance to the development.

That entrance would be the beginning of a road that loops around the property and connects with Oral School Road to north.

Respler said the new plan also has wider roads, with sidewalks and bike lanes on each side. The state has agreed to an easement that would create a trail to River Road.

Potential uses for the Oral School building include a market, restaurant, event space, day care and commercial space, and the plan calls for indoor recreation, available to the public, in the 44,645-foot Pratt Building.

The new plan has the public parking garage closer to the Pratt Building. Ray Kehrhahn, a member of the development team, said the topography change means the garage, with apartments planned on top, now sits lower.

Respler said the project will be done in phases, with a site plan per phase, and the first phase would have a minimum of 272 units and a maximum of 332.

Residents share concerns

Prior to Respler's presentation, based on the drawings and information in the agenda packet for the meeting, Boulder Court resident Scott Westervelt said the project "has morphed into something so much larger than it started." He referenced the parking garage, a high-rise with four floors for parking and four for residences, and a five-story building.

Regarding the new perimeter road, Westervelt asked about considerations for runoff and about how the road impacts a buffer for Boulder Court residents.

Matthew Richardson, also of Boulder Court, said he hasn't heard back regarding questions on environmental and traffic impacts, inquired about how much blasting will be needed and asked to see the study showing there would be enough people who wanted to live there in the planned price range.

Harold Robb of Hancock Drive said he didn't think two roads could take all of the traffic coming in and out, if many cars with EB and Pfizer workers are leaving around the same time, and also voiced concern about building heights.

Respler noted he doesn't have accurate information on building heights yet, saying the pictures are representative but not 100% accurate. Kehrhahn said the parking garage would be a little taller than the Pratt Building, which is about 40 feet.

Mystic resident Mike Whitney asked how many school-aged children will be living in the development, saying it "would be well-advised to have estimates early so the school system could plan ahead," and asked if the existing landmark cupola could still be seen from the Mystic River when the project is complete.

He and Hancock Drive resident Penelope Miller asked about the existing RU-20 zoning, which "is designed to encourage one- and two-unit dwellings in more traditional suburban settings," according to the town's zoning website. Whitney said any proposed changes should be scrutinized and strongly justified, while Miller "strenuously" objected to changing the zoning of the former Firgeleski property.

Becca Welt said she shares her neighbors' concerns and asked about sewer capacity, noting there's already a bad smell coming off Oral School onto Cow Hill in the summer.

In response to a question from commission member Hal Zod about whether the developers have talked about having shuttle service, Respler said yes and that EB is interested because it has "a tremendous parking problem; they don't want more cars going down there."

Commission member Michael Kane said he has a lot of questions, noting, "Maybe I'll submit them to staff, and as we proceed, we can go a little further into the weeds." The commission didn't take any action at its meeting.

Tourism, Traffic, Migrating Fish and Birds — All Part of Planning the Swing Bridge Overhaul

Steve Jensen  EAST HADDAM – The first alert is a loud rapid-fire clang of a warning bell like at a railroad crossing, followed in quick sequence by flashing red lights and the wail of a siren.

As the sound fades into the air high above the Connecticut River, vehicle-blocking gates on either side of the East Haddam Swing Bridge drop into place. Foot-high steel barriers rise from the deck as further precaution.

In a small room over the bridge with windows on all sides, an operator scans live video monitors to ensure all is clear, then presses a series of buttons on a control panel.

The massive engines and spinning gears under the bridge engage with a rumble, shuddering the control room as the easternmost span rotates from its middle to the south, creating a wide opening straight down the river.

And for the next eight minutes or so during the opening and closing, it gets very quiet.

The distinctive and persistent metallic hum of vehicles rolling on the open-grid steel deck is shushed, as vessels with masts or equipment too tall to pass under the 25-foot-high span when closed glide silently through the gap.

It’s a familiar ritual to virtually everyone who lives in the area — scenic or aggravating depending on how much of a rush you’re in — since the iconic bridge opened in 1913 to a Ford Model-T parade and a concert drawing thousands.

 But now with a major overhaul scheduled to begin in the spring of 2022, drivers can expect delays and occasional extended closures on a much more regular basis. Instead of the typical 8-minute wait, closings will sometimes last for up to 63 hours as the span is rehabilitated and a new pedestrian walkway is installed along its south side.

“A project of this size and complexity is always going to be invasive,” said Andy Cardinali, lead engineer in the bridge-design unit at the state Department of Transportation. “But we try our best to minimize the impact to the public and before we start we want everyone to understand what’s going on.”

The $57 million project — with an 80 percent federal match — was launched when inspectors determined that the bridge’s superstructure had deteriorated to the point that it was jeopardizing its reliable operation. Corroding steel on the deck and the supportive structure under it, and an aging electrical system that often failed and caused the bridge to get stuck in the open position, were among the major areas of concern.

What Cardinali calls “band-aid” work was performed a few years ago to mitigate issues with the opening and closing mechanism, but it was clear it was time for a full-on renovation.

“In order to keep this bridge in a state of good repair a major overhaul is needed every 25 to 30 years,” he said, adding that the bridge is safe and drivers should have no fear crossing it.

Much of the renovation work will restrict traffic to alternating one-way directions.

During full closings, drivers will be detoured up to 29 miles through local roads to reach one of only two other bridges that cross the Connecticut River in the southern half of the state – the Arrigoni Bridge on Route 66 between Middletown and Portland and the Baldwin Bridge on Interstate 95 between Old Lyme and Old Saybrook.

The 63-hour closures — which will be scheduled midweek from Monday to Thursday to minimize impacts to tourist traffic — will allow deck-replacement work that would otherwise be impossible.

Construction also will be adapted to accommodate weekend Broadway shows at the historic Goodspeed Opera House. The landmark stage sits just feet from the bridge’s east end, and is perhaps the most popular attraction in the immediate area.

“We don’t want to interfere with people coming and going and to have all that noise going on during the shows,” Cardinali said.

River travel by oversized boats and barges, which can now rely on regular hourly openings in temperate seasons, will be limited and sometimes completely shut down from passage.

The bridge will remain closed to marine traffic during the winter of 2023-24 to allow work to be done on the complex electrical system that powers the motors and enormous ring gears that open and close the bridge. Passage by smaller boats may also be restricted when work is being done directly in the river channel under the bridge.

And then there’s the sturgeon.

A big, bony fish native to the river, it was once extirpated but is now making a comeback under the watchful eye of state and federal agencies.

Concerns that the intensely bright lights that will be used in nighttime bridge repairs may interfere with the sturgeon’s annual spring spawning migration downriver means the work will be scheduled around their runs.

An array of federal and state agencies have a say in the project, including the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection.

“All of these different groups have input on when we can do certain things,” said Rahbi Barakat, a principal department engineer on the project. “The permits get very complicated.”

The 6-foot-wide walkway, cantilevered to the outside of the bridge, will allow pedestrians and bicyclists to cross from the Goodspeed Opera House driveway on the east side to the Eagle Landing State Park access road along the west bank in Haddam.

Street-level sidewalks approaching the bridge on either side will be installed to give access to the walkway, and both will be built for use by those with disabilities. Planned safety features include lighting, a new camera system for the bridge operator to monitor traffic, and pedestrian warning gates.

A steel osprey nest platform that has housed the fish-eating raptors for years will be moved from the south side of the bridge to the north to prevent large sticks and other debris from falling onto the walkway and its users.

Area officials say the walkway project will magnify the bridge’s role as a spark and literal conduit for tourism and commerce in the area.

“It will give us a new vantage point to naturally appreciate the Connecticut River from above like never before,” said State Sen. Norm Needleman, D-Essex. “It will provide new recreation and transportation opportunities, making Haddam and East Haddam more connected and walkable.”

State Rep. Irene Haines, R-East Haddam, who is also the town’s economic development administrator, said the walkway “will strengthen our combined commitment to the two towns’ partnership as well as the entire region’s tourism and economic development.”

Sam Gold, executive director of the regional planning organization, RiverCOG, said the bridge and sidewalk projects have the potential to do nothing less than reinvent the area and infuse it with tourists’ dollars.  

He envisions a scenario in which visitors can take the Essex Steam Train from Old Saybrook to Haddam, walk across the bridge to East Haddam and attend a show and have dinner before getting back on the train.

And if a proposal materializes for shops and a boutique hotel to be built in East Haddam as part of a planned commercial development of the downtown village, he said, that scenario could expand into an overnight stay and lunch and shopping and other pursuits the next day there or in other towns in the area.

“The longer a person stays in a place the more money they spend,” Gold said. “We have all these opportunities, but they haven’t been strung together in a way that creates this multiplying effect.”

Acknowledging the disruption that the bridge work will cause, Gold said the long-term benefits far outweigh any temporary setbacks.

“It’s like sending a car out for a major overhaul,” he said. “You put up with it because when you get that car back it’s going to be souped-up with all kinds of add-ons.”

New London mayor announces opposition to port development plans

Greg Smith  New London — It was nearly a year ago that New London Mayor Michael Passero had expressed cautious optimism that the city was in line to reap some of the benefits of the planned overhaul of its port.

After months of negotiations, The Connecticut Port Authority had agreed to a $157 million harbor redevelopment plan that would remake State Pier, thanks in large part to a partnership between the state and the joint venture of Danish wind company Ørsted and energy company Eversource.

The deal would transform the port into a modern facility with increased capabilities and see it come alive with activity from the offshore wind industry for at least 10 years. The state, meanwhile, would come closer to meeting its renewable energy goals.

Passero was at the time hoping for an average of $1.3 million a year for city coffers while the wind industry was operating at the new facility.

Plans are moving forward for the redevelopment of the pier but Passero's optimism has dwindled as negotiations for the host community agreement have stalled. His voice of disapproval has grown louder, as evidenced by his address to the CPA at its annual meeting in December:

"The CPA has turned over an amazing asset in the city of New London to two huge for-profit corporations and given them a free pass from their property tax obligation to the city,” he said. “You are in fact acting like a colonial power, stealing the assets of the City of New London to build your own revenues and to fill the corporate pockets of two huge corporations, one which pays its CEO an obscene $20 million a year."

He repeats and expounds on those comments in a Sunday op-ed in The Day.

The city is now gearing up to oppose the redevelopment plan on several fronts, perhaps most importantly by planning roadblocks to the CPA’s permit application with the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. Permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and DEEP are crucial to making the State Pier transformation a reality. DEEP is expected to announce a date for a public hearing in the coming weeks.

Negotiations for a host community agreement with Ørsted and Eversource have been stalled since March, Passero said. The transfer of State Pier property to the Connecticut Port Authority has left the city without a means to collect the $125,000 a year it was getting through a Payment in Lieu of Taxes, or PILOT, program when it was owned by the state Department of Transportation.

Passero has loudly voiced his disapproval of the Connecticut Port Authority, plagued with internal issues over the past two years, for its lack of transparency and what he has called a string of broken promises, which include a seat on the port authority’s board. Local legislators have vowed to support securing that seat.

With the redevelopment, Passero said he sees an opportunity for what he has called “just compensation” after years of neglect to his distressed municipality.

“The city’s hope and expectation was that the port authority would begin to remedy the historic inequality of grossly inadequate compensation to the city for lost property tax revenue. This has not happened,” Passero said at the CPA’s annual meeting last month.

State Pier is operated by Gateway, the state's largest port terminal operator. The agreement with the state, Gateway, the CPA and Ørsted/Eversource is for a sublease of State Pier for a minimum of 10 years for use of the facility for pre-assembly of wind turbine generators in support of offshore wind projects. Ørsted and Eversource have promised $77.5 million toward the redevelopment and $20 million in rent over the 10-year period.

Ørsted has not commented on the stalled negotiations for a host community agreement with New London. Passero previously has said the two sides had agreed in principle to yearly minimum payments to the city — $750,000 per year for the first two years of the agreement to cover a prior commitment and $500,000 per year in subsequent years.

What Ørsted/Eversource has not agreed to is compensating the city for lost PILOT funds, currently at $125,000 annually. Passero argues that figure should increase as the value of State Pier increases.

As part of the CPA agreement, the city will additionally see $125,000 per year — a minimum of $50,000 per year from port revenues and another $75,000 to cover impact fees for the city.

Passero, in a recent interview, referred to the funds as “crumbs off the table.”

The CPA has said the property is not subject to PILOT funding, though David Kooris, chairman of the CPA board, said it was unclear to him whether the state would immediately stop its payments to the city.

“On the one hand it’s technically true the property is no longer subject to PILOT funds. That being said, I don’t see the legislature targeting New London and reducing the set PILOT amount because of the transfer of property" to the CPA, Kooris said.

A spokesman with the state Office of Policy and Management was not immediately available to comment on the status of PILOT funding.

Kooris said the CPA has supported Passero’s bid to have a seat on the CPA board and also has been involved in ongoing discussions with various state agencies to support New London's position.

Max Reiss, a director of communication for Gov. Ned Lamont, said “the Office of the Governor, Office of Policy and Management, and the Department of Economic and Community Development have remained actively engaged in negotiations to ensure the City of New London is compensated for (its) vital role in ensuring this historic, once in a generation economic development opportunity for the region, is successful."

"This project will bring a significant number of direct and indirect jobs to the region, which will benefit New London and the surrounding communities, and the Lamont Administration agrees, that the City of New London is entitled to adequate support from the state, and beyond," Reiss said.

Kooris said the city’s recent opposition to the redevelopment of the pier is disappointing, given that the partnership will benefit the region for generations.

“New London is in a position to capitalize on the impacts,” he said. “I don’t understand what the alternative is. If we don’t invest in the facility there continues to be a meager amount of cargo coming through and, without the heavier load bearing capacity, there are only certain things that can move through that facility.”

Displacement of current State Pier tenants — longshoremen, a road salt distributor and commercial fishermen, among others — is another issue that continues to be debated. There remains opposition to giving exclusive use of the pier to the wind industry and excluding regular cargo.

Tenants at State Pier have to be moved to accommodate the massive construction project, which includes filling in between the two existing piers. But the CPA has argued that the end result is a facility better able to accommodate more activity in the future.

“We have been able to attract a marquee entity to be a customer at the facility,” Kooris said. “More jobs will flow through the port. I would love to see everyone spend their time and energy trying to figure out what aspect of the supply chain we can be attracting to New London. I’d like to think that what we’re doing for the port is making it one step in making things better for the city.”

Passero said the city remains in a difficult situation. “We’ve heard nothing from (Ørsted/Eversource) since March 13. The state seems to have empowered them to just not have to meet their obligations. Which means they don’t feel like they owe any obligations to the city. The project’s going forward to their benefit and with no consideration to the city.”

“Every dollar they are exempt is a dollar we’ve subsidized their profits,” he said of the lack of property tax obligations. “As far as I’m concerned the state is doing the bidding of these two private corporations. They’re supposed to be sticking up for the city of New London.”

How Pete Buttigieg could save mass transit

Matthew Yglesias, Bloomberg  When President-elect Joe Biden's cabinet takes office later this month, all eyes will be on the public-health officials coping with covid-19. But one of the most difficult and important post-pandemic tasks - restoring America's deteriorating mass-transit systems - will rest with the secretary of Transportation.

The question is not so much whether Pete Buttigieg is ambitious enough to try to do something big with what's traditionally been a small job. (He is.) It's whether he's willing to take on the Democratic Party interests necessary to bring about true reform.