Reply #4: There's a good reason for that actually...

[skids]

Wind offshore is faster and more importantly, less intermittent.

The turbines can also be bigger when there's less potential for danger to surrounding areas by ice throw/etc.

Also the NIMBY problems diminish when you get a certain distance off. Cape Wind is actually an exception, generally NIMBY problems are less for offshore developments.

A floating system might be extremely expensive at least for the first several. But it's also a technology that could be made mobile, other than the delivery uplink. And heck if they managed to store the power instead of directly transmit it (for once, H2 might be a good solution and not just a diversion from better technology) they could potentially move around seasonally or even by forecast to chase the wind and shuttle fuel to shore.

But the primary reason is you get more electricity out of an offshore turbine than the same turbine on land. Just you have to make up the cost of the float.

The only "turkey" thing I find about the wind technologists is neglecting the VAWT, and in the micro-wind area failing to formulate mass production engineering solutions/supply lines to drive the price down.