{"id":208519,"date":"2017-07-28T19:35:51","date_gmt":"2017-07-28T23:35:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/qa-how-viable-are-floating-offshore-windfarms-carbon-brief-carbon-brief\/"},"modified":"2017-07-28T19:35:51","modified_gmt":"2017-07-28T23:35:51","slug":"qa-how-viable-are-floating-offshore-windfarms-carbon-brief-carbon-brief","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/offshore\/qa-how-viable-are-floating-offshore-windfarms-carbon-brief-carbon-brief\/","title":{"rendered":"Q&#038;A: How viable are floating offshore windfarms? | Carbon Brief &#8211; Carbon Brief"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Earlier this week, it was widely reported that the worlds first floating    windfarm is currently being installed off the coast of    Peterhead in Scotland.  <\/p>\n<p>    Statoil, which is developing the pilot Hywind windfarm, says    the project aims to demonstrate the feasibility of future    commercial, utility-scale floating windfarms.  <\/p>\n<p>    Floating windfarms could have a number of advantages over    conventional offshore windfarms. They can be placed in deeper    waters where the wind is stronger and less variable. The    turbines can be fully assembled close to shore before being    towed out to sea and they could have less impact on wildlife    than other types of wind turbine.  <\/p>\n<p>    But with the technology still in its infancy and the costs    relatively high, the question remains when, or if, they will be    able to compete against fixed offshore wind turbines or other    sources of energy.  <\/p>\n<p>    Carbon Brief takes a look at the status of floating windfarms    and their potential to provide renewable energy in the future.  <\/p>\n<p>    Just as oil and gas started with easier-to-access onshore    developments, before moving to near offshore and, finally, to    deeper locations, floating turbines represent a next phase in    the location of wind turbines.  <\/p>\n<p>    A floating wind turbine mounts a standard offshore model on a    floating structure, rather than the fixed-bottom towers    typically used for conventional offshore schemes. This allows    floating windfarms to be located in depths far greater than the    50m-or-so limit of conventional offshore wind.  <\/p>\n<p>    There are three dominant designs for floating wind structures:    spar, tension leg platform (TLP), and semi-submersible, shown    left to right in the image below.  <\/p>\n<p>      Spar, tension leg platform, and semi-submersible floating      wind turbines. Image courtesy of ORE Catapult.    <\/p>\n<p>    Each of these turbines gain their stability in different ways.  <\/p>\n<p>    Spar-buoys rely on having the centre of gravity lower in the    water than the centre of buoyancy. This is done by adding a    heavy weight to the lower part of the structure.  <\/p>\n<p>    Tension leg platforms  currently, the least advanced design     are anchored to the seabed and stabilised using tensioned    mooring lines.  <\/p>\n<p>    Semi-submersible platforms meanwhile are stabilised by    buoyancy. They have 3-5 cylindrical platforms connected by    tubes and float half submerged on the surface of the ocean    whilst anchored to the seabed with mooring lines.  <\/p>\n<p>    Rhodri James, a manager in Carbon Trusts policy and innovation team, says    these designs have been adapted from oil and gas technologies.    He tells Carbon Brief:  <\/p>\n<p>    The key difference is that, whereas oil and gas consists of a    small number of very large platforms, floating offshore wind    requires a larger number of smaller platforms.  <\/p>\n<p>    (Its worth noting the relative use of the word small here.    The structures used for floating turbines still reach up to    around 3,000 tonnes for steel designs and roughly 12,000 tonnes    for concrete designs.)  <\/p>\n<p>    The wind turbines used for floating windfarms are nearly    identical to fixed-bottom structures.  <\/p>\n<p>    The promise of floating offshore wind turbines lies in their    ability to be tethered in deep waters of 50-1,000 metres. These    are not suitable for conventional fixed-turbine offshore wind    structures, which are constrained to water depths of less than    50 or 60 metres because of the need to embed foundations in the    sea floor.  <\/p>\n<p>    Therefore, they open up areas of sea not previously suitable    for offshore wind power, including areas where the continental    shelf drops off too fast for fixed turbines to be viable, such    as off the US west coast, Japan and, in this case, Aberdeen.  <\/p>\n<p>    According to a 2015 review by the Carbon Trust,    floating turbines could become increasingly important as the    world exhausts the low hanging fruit of shallow near-shore    sites and moves outwards from the coast.  <\/p>\n<p>    The deeper waters where floating wind turbines can be located    also have higher average wind speeds    than closer to shore. This could lead to floating windfarms    producing more electricity per gigawatt (GW) of installed    capacity, increasing revenues. Higher capacity factors could    also benefit onshore transmission networks by reducing    variability.  <\/p>\n<p>    They can also be almost completely put together close to shore    before being towed out to their destination by simple, low-cost    ships. This avoids the need to use expensive, heavy vessels to    construct the wind turbines out at sea on top of permanent    foundations.  <\/p>\n<p>    The five turbines of the Scottish Hywind project, for instance,    have been assembled in Norway and are in the process of being    towed to the Scottish coast off Peterhead. This mobility could    also be an advantage for heavy maintenance operations, where    the turbines could be towed back to port.  <\/p>\n<p>        Watch video!  <\/p>\n<p>    Finally, their location further out to sea could offer a remedy    for some public opposition to windfarms. Visually they would be    even less prominent, while, according to RSPB, they could also be less    harmful to birds than farms placed closer to the coast and,    thus, seabird nesting sites.  <\/p>\n<p>    In addition, they avoid the need to pile-drive a large    foundation into the seabed, as well as lengthy offshore    construction activity, both of which can be temporarily        disruptive to sea life, including whales and birds.  <\/p>\n<p>    Aside from the cost due to being a nascent technology (see    below), there are several technical challenges floating    windfarms are faced with.  <\/p>\n<p>    The floating nature of the turbines themselves could pose some    problems. Bobbing of the turbine about on the water could        reduce its capture of wind energy and risk damaging    windmill components. However, this is not believed to be a    major challenge since tools have been designed to mitigated it    by making alterations to the turbine control system.  <\/p>\n<p>    However, several bespoke elements will need to be developed    before they are used at large scale. These include dynamic    electrical cables, mooring and anchoring systems, and floating    substations.  <\/p>\n<p>    According to James, while these are not necessarily going to be    showstoppers, they will still require further research and    development before large scale deployment can be achieved.  <\/p>\n<p>    As a young technology not yet commercially deployed, the costs    of floating wind currently remain high. Early projects will    need to be subsidised, meaning the rate of progression will    depend to a large extent on political support. (Its worth    noting that the Hywind pilot is currently heavily subsidised by    the Scottish government.)  <\/p>\n<p>    If this support is given, costs are expected by several experts    to fall in line with conventional offshore wind, as designs are    optimised and the technology is deployed at scale.  <\/p>\n<p>    A 2015 Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) report found that    large-scale floating windfarms could deliver a levelised cost    of electricity of around 85 per megawatt hour (MWh) by the mid    2020s.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Carbon Trust study similarly concluded leading floating    wind concepts could reach a levelised cost of electricity of    85-95\/MWh in large-scale commercial projects in the 2020s,    with further innovation potentially seeing costs fall still    further.  <\/p>\n<p>    For comparison, the Hinkley Point strike price was set    at 92.50 MWh in 2012 prices, a figure that is index linked so    will rise with inflation over its 35-year contract.  <\/p>\n<p>    Meanwhile, in the UKs 2015 Contracts for Difference (CfD)        auction, offshore winds status as a less established    technology meant it was granted the higher-than-average strike    price of 117\/MWh in 2012 prices, also index linked.  <\/p>\n<p>    Its worth noting that conventional offshore wind costs are    also rapidly falling, however. A 2017 Dong Energy report found offshore wind    projects in the UK fell to an average of 97\/MWh during    2015-16. The results of the forthcoming auction for additional    UK offshore wind capacity are widely expected to deliver    costs below 85\/MWh, beating a 2026 cost target set by the    government by nine years.  <\/p>\n<p>    James argues floating wind could be competitive with other    energy technologies within the next decade if it is deployed at    scale, particularly in markets with high energy demand in    coastal areas with deep continental shelves.  <\/p>\n<p>    Comparing conventional and floating windfarms, while the cost    of the substructures for floating turbines the spar    buoy, for example  will likely remain higher than for fixed    foundations, this may be negated to some extent by the    advantages of floating windfarms listed above.  <\/p>\n<p>    The IEA has said the cost of    floating turbines today is the same as fixed-bottom ones a    decade ago.  <\/p>\n<p>      Aasta Hansteen substructure upending. Credit: Espen Rnnevik      og Roar Lindefjeld\/Statoil.    <\/p>\n<p>    Any attempts to estimate the costs of future commercial    projects will inevitably contain a great deal of uncertainty,    since the technology is still in its infancy with few    demonstrations actually in the water. Peter Stansby, professor of    hydrodynamics at Manchester University, tells Carbon Brief:  <\/p>\n<p>    These figures are always quoted as improvements. Its very    hard  nobody I dont think predicted that [the cost of] fixed    structure, monopile offshore wind platforms would actually drop    the way they have. So its like putting your finger in the    wind.  <\/p>\n<p>    According to an article published last month by researchers    from Offshore Renewable Energy Catapult in    WindTECH International, once    floating wind technology matures, the cost of substructures is    the only area where cost or risk will lag materially behind    monopiles.  <\/p>\n<p>    Statoil, the developers of the Hywind pilot project currently    being installed off the coast of Peterhead, claims it is the    worlds first commercial floating windfarm.  <\/p>\n<p>    The 30 megawatt (MW) farm will be powered by five giant    turbines made by Siemens Gamesa, distributed    across around four square kilometres. These will be placed in    an area of sea 25 km offshore from Peterhead with a depth of    between 95 and 120 metres.  <\/p>\n<p>    For now, just one of the turbines has been moved to Scotland,    with the rest expected to be in place by the end of August.    Generation is expected to begin later this year.  <\/p>\n<p>    The 253m-tall turbines are of the spar-buoy design (see above),    with 175m above the water and 78m below. According to a    BBC article, Statoil claims the    blades harness breakthrough software  which holds the tower    upright by twisting the blades to dampen motions from wind,    waves and currents.  <\/p>\n<p>      Infographic: How Hywind offshore windfarm compares to other      tall landmarks. Credit: Statoil.    <\/p>\n<p>    The 190m pilot windfarm follows six years of testing by    Statoil of a 2.3MW Hywind prototype installed off the island of    Karmy in Norway in 2009. During this time, Statoils    design optimisation allowed it to tripled the power output of    the turbine.  <\/p>\n<p>    Statoil says the project aims to show cost efficiency and    feasibility of multiple floating wind turbines in a region with    optimal wind conditions, with its end goal being large scale    floating offshore wind parks of 500-1,000MW. James says:  <\/p>\n<p>    Hywind Scotland is a major step forward to the industry as it    will demonstrate the technology in an array layout for the    first time (as opposed to the single prototype demonstrations    to date). This will deliver important learnings in the    construction and installation of multiple units and the    interactions between turbines in a single windfarm.  <\/p>\n<p>    Hywind is subsidised under the UKs Renewable Obligation    Certificate (ROC) scheme, through which it will    receive160\/MWh on top of the wholesale price of    electricity (currently around     40\/MWh). Statoil claims the costs of projects such as    Hywind can be reduced by 40-50% by 2030. This could bring the    cost down to around 100\/MWh, similar to conventional offshore    today. Given conventional offshore wind costs are also expected    to fall, Statoils floating turbines would therefore remain    more costly.  <\/p>\n<p>    Its worth noting that despite their generally favourable    outlook on floating windfarms, the RSPB was opposed to    the Hywind project as it is concerned that too many offshore    turbines in the area have already been approved.  <\/p>\n<p>    Research and development into floating offshore wind turbines    has been going on for around a decade, with a range of studies, prototypes    and pilots tested in the UK and further afield.  <\/p>\n<p>    According to the Carbon Trust, there are over 30 concepts currently    under development, although only five have been demonstrated at    full scale in an offshore environment.  <\/p>\n<p>    US firm Principle Power installed a    prototype of its WindFloat semi-submersible design in Portugal    in 2011 and plans to mount pilots in Portugal in 2019 and    France in 2020\/21. SBM Offshore, meanwhile,    aims to install a pilot farm of its tension-leg platform design    in France in 2020\/21.  <\/p>\n<p>    While a nascent technology, floating offshore windfarms could    open up areas of deeper sea not previously suitable for wind    energy and show promise of some advantages over conventional    offshore wind.  <\/p>\n<p>    In 2013, the EWEA said the energy produced    from turbines in deep waters in the North Sea alone could meet    the EUs electricity consumption four times over. (The variable    output of wind means this would only be true across a full    year, with other sources needed to fill in when the wind    doesnt blow).  <\/p>\n<p>    Meanwhile, Scotlands considerable natural wind resources,    along with its well-developed supply chain and infrastructure    developed for the offshore oil and gas sector, offer potential    as a market for floating wind technology.  <\/p>\n<p>    This could also open up further markets for the UK: another    Carbon Trust paper, published in 2014,    said Europes more developed offshore wind industry could be    leveraged to speed up deployment in Japan, highlighting    floating wind as a key area.  <\/p>\n<p>    According to James, current market signals suggest that the    first large-scale floating windfarms could be installed by    2025. This could pave the way for considerable growth over the    coming decades, he says.  <\/p>\n<p>    The development of floating wind could see wind power expanded    to areas in the northern part of the North Sea, the    Mediterranean and Atlantic coastlines of Western Europe, as    well as locations outside Europe with deep continental shelves,    such as parts of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the US.  <\/p>\n<p>      This story was updated on 28\/7\/2017 to include the cost of      the subsidy Hywind will receive under the ROC.    <\/p>\n<p>      Sharelines from this story    <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Read the rest here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.carbonbrief.org\/qa-how-viable-are-floating-offshore-windfarms\" title=\"Q&A: How viable are floating offshore windfarms? | Carbon Brief - Carbon Brief\">Q&A: How viable are floating offshore windfarms? | Carbon Brief - Carbon Brief<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Earlier this week, it was widely reported that the worlds first floating windfarm is currently being installed off the coast of Peterhead in Scotland. Statoil, which is developing the pilot Hywind windfarm, says the project aims to demonstrate the feasibility of future commercial, utility-scale floating windfarms.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/offshore\/qa-how-viable-are-floating-offshore-windfarms-carbon-brief-carbon-brief\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187814],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-208519","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-offshore"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/208519"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=208519"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/208519\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=208519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=208519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=208519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}