[Graeme]

US Offshore Wind Energy Potential Is Staggering

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation recently wrote a piece highlighting the potential for offshore wind development in the US, specifically, in the midwest: The simple message? “The potential for offshore wind power generation in the U.S. is staggering.”

And the figures presented in the opening paragraph back this up: The US has a projected 4,223 GW worth of offshore wind generating potential — with 50 GW from the Ohio waters of Lake Erie alone.

The Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation was founded in 2009 to initially build wind turbines in Lake Erie, before desiring to turn its attention towards stimulating “an entire offshore freshwater wind industry.” And they make a strong case: As they write, “offshore wind offers a viable, untapped opportunity for large-scale clean energy projects that produce zero emissions in operation, consume no water, and displace the generation from some of our nation’s dirtiest power plants.”

But as Lake Erie notes, “the U.S. lags woefully behind the rest of the world in offshore wind power generation.”

One need only cast their eyes over the last few months of offshore wind energy news here at CleanTechnica, to see how thoroughly Europe figures in the industry. Danish juggernaut DONG Energy alone claims to have built more offshore wind farms than any other company worldwide, and a quick look at its installations show these clumped heavily in the west of Europe.

Lake Erie claims that Europe has at least 80 offshore projects in operation or under construction, compared to the US, where “offshore wind development is in its infant stages”.

[lpetrich]

DONG Energy - Wikipedia explains the source of that company's name: the acronym of Dansk Olie og Naturgas (Danish Oil and Natural Gas).

Another Legal Victory for America’s First Offshore Wind Project - rather difficult for me to think of a good summary of that latest round of litigation.

Cape Wind Project Status & Timeline | Cape Wind
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Cape Wind is currently in its financing and final commercial contracting stage. Cape Wind will complete its financing soon and construction will begin in 2015.

[ROCKMAN]

And here's the question of the day: why not build onshore wind farms along the shoreline for a fraction of the cost instead? Same wind blowing as out over the water. Could it be for the same reason offshore east coast wind farms have been delayed for many years and why much of the EU wind power is generated offshore: NYMBYism. Texas built the first offshore wind test facility in the country despite the press touting east coast progress...progress that as of yet does not include even one offshore turbine.

And thanks to Texas developing more wind power then the next two states combined and providing the cheapest alternative energy in the country the plans for Texas offshore wind have been put on hold. Turns out that even though we can build such offshore farms cheaper than any other state (thanks to the oil patch infrastructure and virtually no NYMBYism from our coastal residents) they still can't compete with our onshore wind projects.

Thanks to cheaper electricity and NG a number of European manufacturers are relocating to S Texas. Just as a great many other businesses have relocated here.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
Far out to sea, amid the crashing waves of the North Atlantic, there’s a fortune to be made. According to new research, deep water wind farms could produce enough energy to meet all existing and future electricity demand, if properly harnessed. In a study published on October 9 by researchers at the Carnegie Institution for Science and Stanford University, it’s estimated that deep water offshore turbines could produce three to five times as much energy as land-based turbines, due to the higher speeds and consistent force of the wind at sea. One ‘small’ wind farm, covering 70 thousand square kilometers, could provide enough electricity to power the entire United States for ten years, according to the study. A major factor in generating wind power is the movement of energy from higher in the atmosphere to the surface, where the turbines can transform it ...

[cephalotus]

Offshore wind in Germany (not incl. grid connection) is already cost competitive to our (low) energy Prices on the electricity market.

Last call for tender ended with two large bidders offering subsidiues of 0.0ct/kWh

There are already 4.83 Gigawatt of offshore wind power in Germany installed and running and many more Gigawatt are planned. Most of offshore wind in Germany is "deep water", because the shallow water (Wattenmeer) is a protected ecosystem.

List of offshore Windparks worldwide:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der ... -Windparks

Problem in many regions could be major hurricans. Those parks are not decentralised power, so usually all of them will be destroyed at once and it will be neither easy nor quick to repair or rebuild them.

[StarvingLion]

You mean that's all it takes to get rich?

The Middle East is saved! (and everywhere else)

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
Norwegian energy company Statoil said Wednesday its Dudgeon wind farm off the British coast is now feeding the grid from its 67 wind turbines. The Dudgeon wind farm is about 25 miles off the coast of Norfolk. Its turbines, with a combined capacity of 402 megawatts, can meet the energy demands of around 410,000 average households at its peak. The Norwegian company, one of the main energy suppliers to the European market, said Dudgeon is part of its efforts to add more green components to its portfolio. "As part of our strategy to develop from an oil and gas company to a broad energy major, Statoil will grow significantly in profitable renewable energy, with an ambition to invest around $12 billion towards 2030," CEO Eldar Sætre said in a statement. Statoil placed the last of the 67 turbines at the Dudgeon wind farm

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')The largest offshore wind farm on the planet opens

Located in the Irish Sea, the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm has a total capacity of 659 megawatts.

The 87 turbine facility covers an area equal to around 20,000 soccer pitches, and can power nearly 600,000 homes in the U.K.

...

Thirteen new offshore wind farms were completed in 2017, including the planet's first floating offshore wind farm. The U.K. installed 1.7 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind in 2017, while Germany was responsible for 1.3 GW.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')The largest offshore wind farm on the planet opens

Located in the Irish Sea, the Walney Extension Offshore Wind Farm has a total capacity of 659 megawatts.

The 87 turbine facility covers an area equal to around 20,000 soccer pitches, and can power nearly 600,000 homes in the U.K.

...

Thirteen new offshore wind farms were completed in 2017, including the planet's first floating offshore wind farm. The U.K. installed 1.7 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind in 2017, while Germany was responsible for 1.3 GW.

[lpetrich]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'U')ntil green energy proves it can both produce net energy and pay for its own maintenance and replacement costs without the vast subsidy of cheap fossil fuel energy I remain unconvinced.

[jawagord]

Well that was a short experiment. Maybe the Japanese should build power plants and wind turbines inland, where they are accessible and away from tsunami?

Fukushima wind turbine, symbol of Tohoku earthquake recovery, to be removed due to high maintenance costs

The offshore power facility was put in place as the Fukushima Prefectural Government introduced renewable energy after the triple-reactor meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in the days following the massive March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
The price tag to remove the ¥15.2 billion turbine, which has an output capacity of 7,000 kilowatts, is expected to be around 10 percent of the building cost.
The turbine started operating in December 2015 but was riddled with problems.
Its utilization rate over the year through June 2018 was 3.7 percent, well below the 30 percent necessary for commercialization.
The two other turbines, of different sizes, have utilization rates of 32.9 percent and 18.5 percent, respectively.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/ ... 9oRhpNKiUn

[KaiserJeep]

A clear advantage of offshore wind is that it is much more constant than onshore winds, because the water maintains a more constant temperature than on land.

The materials R&D is already done, the technology has matured. Offshore wind farms have roughly the same lifetimes as other power plants, in excess of a half century.

NIMBY is the problem with both onshore and offshore wind farms.

[KaiserJeep]

The first major offshore wind farm (Phase 1 = 800 Mw) will be built offshore of Cape Cod in 2019. The backers are Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners and Avangrid Renewables.

This offshore wind farm is not the first. Nearby Block Island Wind Farm was first, capacity 30Mw. Two slightly larger wind farms are under construction off S California, each in the 100-200Mw range. This wind farm, called the Vineyard Wind Project, will triple existing US offshore wind capacity when Phase 1 goes online.

Even more remarkably, the initial contracted electricity price is $0.074/kwh, which will decline to $0.065/kwh in the second phase of the project. These figures are competitive with the coal-fired electric pricing in the area. By comparison, the existing Block Island Wind Farm produces electricity at $0.244/kwh.

In other news, although it was not widely publicized, the Cape Wind wind farm officially was dead in late 2017. NIMBY killed it. As a result I am determined that any further investments I make in renewable energy will be in equipment I own personally.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/with-vineyard-wind-the-us-finally-goes-big-on-offshore-wind-power

[Newfie]

KJ,

Any idea what those cost estimates include? Specifically I’m asking about removing the infrastructure at end of use?

[KaiserJeep]

Newfie, if the Vineyard Wind Project is managed like most power plants or the extensive large offshore wind farms in Europe, they really will not decommission, ever. Power plants typically have a scheduled capital renewal cycle. Individual turbines will be maintained and replaced as needed on a regular and ongoing basis. Unlike coal plants, these wind farms have very small environmental footprints long term - they do not spew toxics and radioactives into the environment, nor carbon dioxide, for that matter.

Unless you believe that FF energy will get cheaper in the future, we are going to build and use a lot of these wind farms. By contrast, many East Coast coal plants are surrounded by ash heaps and slurry ponds that are square miles in extent. Ask yourself what constitutes "decommisioning" all those coal wastes.

[Tanada]

I will believe those sale price estimates when I see them on consumers bills verified as a subsidy free cost.

[KaiserJeep]

I'll let you know. The Koch brothers coal-fired electricity cost me $0.163/kwh last Winter. There is a underwater power feed from the mainland now, it used to be $0.235/kwh when they ran the big diesel generators on-island.

However, the Vineyard Wind pricing is not an estimate, they contracted to deliver power at that rate.

[Newfie]

KJ,

The foundations wont last forever. I think ginger true price discovery the removal cost of the foundations should be paid off first, put in a secure fund for their removal. Same with the ash pits and removing the physical structure of any power plant regardless of technology.

Otherwise we are just pushing costs into future generations.

[KaiserJeep]

Newfie, think of it as a revenue opportunity, just as there are "power utilities" today who will never produce a single watt of power, because their true business is managing idle nuclear plants, defuelling them, and decommisioning nuclear reactors. These companies buy the nuclear plant and accept payments for meeting all the requirements to decommision.

Coal plants end up with relatively small physical footprints, and huge toxic deathprints. By that I mean ash heaps and slurry ponds that cover tens of square miles, and radioactive and toxic metal contamination for a 20-30 mile radius around the stacks. Stack effluents end up in the food chain for the most part, as they fall on pastures and agricultural lands. Note there is ZERO set-aside funding for decommissioning, and all coal plants will be idled (eventually) by peak coal effects. My guess: the taxpayer ends up funding the removal of these.

Virtually every existing offshore wind farm is of the monopole, shallow water design shown below. There is only one European wind farm that has reached decommisioning status, which was Yttre Stengrund in Sweden, retired in November 2015. All five of these pilot project turbines went into operation in 2001 and were decommissioned by 2015. More modern designs are expected to last 50+ years with maintenance.

There are a few of the lattice foundations and a single deepwater anchored wind farn in Scotland. But I fully expect that virtually all wind farms will be the monopole, drilled foundation design which is used for 99+% of the installed turbines today. They are still studying these to decide if it is lower impact to remove the pylon or let it decay away. Almost all existing foundation pylons are of ferroconcrete construction.

This illustration is obsolete in one respect. The "shallow water" design with the monopole foundation is now used in waters up to 50 meters deep, then the lattice and floating structures take over. Modern designs exist to reuse existing monopole foundations with new turbines, because all the deterioration happens in the 10 meters below the water surface, the rest is pretty untouched. If the foundation is in good shape, it can be capped with a new turbine assembly and weather resistent foundation cap, saving a lot of cash versus an entirely new foundation.