Looking Forwards for Offshore Wind: A Focus on Technology

Offshore Wind Structures

Produced in association with:

London, UK14-15th April 2015

Looking Forwards for Offshore Wind: A Focus on Technology

With the offshore wind industry continuing to gather momentum, new projects

accessing the favourable wind conditions of deeper waters will be striking out

into new technological territory, with increased capacity turbines, novel founda-

tion types, and updated installation and servicing techniques.

Independent analysis forecasts 40GW of installed offshore wind capacity across

Europe by 2020 and 150GW by 2030. Surging towards these key dates, innova-

tion is occurring across the industry; turbines and foundations with capacities

and designs that are far beyond what had previously been thought possible are

revolutionising the entire supply chain.

With a view to maximising the potential of technology at this pivotal time in the

offshore wind industry, companies and independent experts are looking to the

benefits of an integrated design process between the conceptors and manufac-

turers of this new technology, to bring the industry together in collaboration to

achieve the ultimate goal of lowering the levelised cost of energy.

In conjunction with the Offshore Wind Structures summit (14-15th April 2015,

London) Wind Energy Update has brought together experts at Statoil and

Senvion, two key players contributing to the momentum in offshore wind

technology development, to instigate the conversation about which offshore

technologies are key for the future.

Amy Allebone-Salt

Project Director | Wind Energy Update

amy@windenergyupdate.com

Join the conversation: linkd.in/Mi6eaN @W_E_Update #OffshoreWindStructures

The Next Generation of Offshore Wind Turbines

Upscaling available turbine technology, in order to allow increased rotor

diameter and megawatt capacity, is one of the primary ways to achieve cost

reductions in offshore wind energy production. Being able to employ fewer

turbines for the same energy output reduces time and money spent on

installation and maintenance.

Marc Seidel, Leading Expert on Offshore Engineering at Senvion, comments:

“From a turbine perspective, we are increasing the energy yield per turbine

constantly, for example by erecting our prototype of the 6.2M152 this month,

where we increase rotor diameter from 126m (of the 6.2M126) to 152m, which

significantly increases annual yield. Generally, the trend is to increase turbine

size to 6MW (or more) for forthcoming projects.”

Eirik Byklum, Technology Manager for floating wind at Statoil, points out that

the maturation of the industry means that installation and maintenance are

both seeing better levels of operational efficiency, again bringing costs down.

“Because the industry is now maturing the installation process itself is getting

better. Specialised installers that are becoming quicker and safer are coming to

the fore,” he says, “and the access vehicles and systems too have become much

more fit-for-purpose, safer, and able to operate in extreme weather conditions.

This all contributes significantly to cost simply because the underlying support

infrastructure can then work to keep the turbines running and producing power.”

2012 2-3MW turbines

<25m water depth<25km from shore

2020 4-7MW turbines

<60m water depth<100km from shore

20308-10MW turbines

120m+ water depth120km+ from shore

An immediate impact of larger turbines – combined with increasing water

depths – is that advancing offshore foundation design and fabrication is a

prescient concern. As the maximum perceived monopile diameter approaches,

the role of technology is to stretch that limit whether through incremental

developments, or step change to different foundation concepts. This expanding

of limits refers not only to the physical sense of the size of the monopole, but

also to the supporting installation and maintenance.

As both turbine and foundation technology develops, the design processes are

becoming more integrated, and tools to optimise structural weights are having

an impact.

Seidel comments: “As monopiles have proven to be very cost effective, we

are pushing the limits in terms of water depths and site conditions, where we

are currently already at 40m water depth in the North Sea with monopiles of

~1200t weight… This improves cost compared to using jackets.”

Jacket technology, too, is being tested and Byklum believes that the seemingly

open discussion prevailing in the industry right now around foundation types

and suitability is a positive one.

“Jackets do not need to be driven as deep into the seabed and this is easier,

quieter and thus a promising development. But testing in various scenarios

needs to be carried out and there is a lot of interest in how this will go,” he says.

Indeed, if the technology for jackets can be matured in the same way as

happened with monopile technology then mass production at reduced cost

would become viable. The same principle can also be applied to the mass

production of up-scaled turbines.

What does this mean for foundations?

How will this mix change in 2014 and beyond?

Market share of installed structures in 2013

Gravity 0.2%

Tripile 1%

Jacket 6%

Tripod 14%

Monopiles 79%

Thus far, up-scaling turbines is one of the most important solutions to the

perennial challenge of bringing down costs. Looking forwards, an important

theme for both foundation and turbine considerations is the need for a margin

to allow incremental improvements, rather than to be constantly operating at

the limits of a given technology solution. In practical terms, this means estab-

lishing solutions now with genuine longevity to allow for further development.

Being able to make incremental changes is a key means of increasing opera-

tional efficiency. This is well demonstrated by wind farm layout and positioning,

where changing the distances between turbines in order to maximise the

amount of wind being captured and reduce loss through uncaptured energy

has reaped real rewards.

Byklum explains: “The layout of the turbines is something that can have a great

deal of impact on productivity. It draws upon various variables, notably the

actual area of the wind farm, the seabed beneath and the direction from which

the wind is coming. The calculations around layout have become more accu-

rate and so getting the right configuration and the distance between turbines

has become easier to get right.”

The seabed itself also has an important role. The soil conditions are crucial for

stiffness conditions, which is one of the most important parameters. Seabed

conditions may also be very important for installation, especially if they feature

weak soils at the top.

Byklum comments: “Developers have learnt the hard way that poor conditions

on the sea bed can have a very negative impact - they are much more aware of

this and its cost implications.”

Turbine Positioning The Seabed

How can the design process improve?

Advancing technology in order to bring costs down and progress the indus-

try relies heavily upon cooperation and communication between its various

components; nowhere does this apply more than in the interplay between the

turbine manufacturer and foundation designer in the design stages.

Seidel comments: “Direct interaction between the lead engineers at the wind

turbine manufacturer and the foundation designer is key to the success of the

project.” He points out that establishing interaction with the foundation design-

ers as early as possible has historically yielded good results. “Communication

has enabled us to successfully complete jacket designs as early as 2005,

whereas other projects (with other turbine manufacturers) experienced delays

due to problems in the design process in recent years. But direct interaction is

not always wanted by owners, as they want to handle the interface between

the two separate contracts. This is a mistake, as this complicates processes and

causes delays,” he says.

In particular, interaction between foundation designer and turbine manufac-

turer would improve the process significantly because the turbine manufacturer

could participate in the design work of the structure, thus mitigating any

incompatability in the interface between loads and structural design.

Seidel thinks that this is “particularly efficient” in the early phases of the project.

“Alternatively, the foundation designer could work with a ‘black box’ turbine

model, which would enable him or her to generate substructure loads inde-

pendently from the turbine manufacturer. Cross-checks are of course needed in

this case, but the process could be much improved,” he says.

And Byklum comments: “Although the interaction is getting better both in

terms of general openness between companies and also project specific

communications, it is still variable and needs to be improved.”

One solution to this could be more structured networking and specific informa-

tion-sharing networks to enshrine the spirit of collaboration into the industry as

a whole.

“It is important to realise that without better cooperation then the end result

will always be sub-optimal,” Byklum says.

A collaborative approach to engineering, procurement and design is

believed to be able to reduce costs by at least 10%

How important is certification for new technologies?

Looking forwards…

But design optimisation is not just about communication and the actual

design itself; it can also be affected by red tape that effectively acts as a bind

to progression, occupying time and energy that would be better spent else-

where, according to Seidel. “The involvement of certification bodies should be

minimised. In my experience, they don’t add much value to the project, but

the process is delaying things. Energy is focused on managing the certification

process with its many assumptions and the risks associated with it, rather than

focusing on optimization of the design. Many people subscribe to this point of

view, but only few dare to say this openly, due to the power that certification

bodies – strangely enough – have acquired.”

Looking to 2020 and beyond, both Seidel and Byklum think that offshore wind

is going to be venturing into the unknown, technology wise. The consequence

of potential step-changes in offshore wind technology is that new innovations

will be based upon theoretical calculations rather than tested and upgraded

versions of existing technology that has a proven track record. However,

although treading the fine line between the reduced risk profile of existing

technologies and bringing costs down through further innovation is always

going to be difficult, these professionals believe it will prove central to the long-

term prosperity of the industry.

Marc Seidel

Leading Expert,

Offshore Wind

Senvion SE

Eirik Byklum

Technology Manager for

Floating Wind,

Statoil.

Representatives from Statoil and Senvion will be continuing the conversa-

tion with EDF, Mainstream, MHI Vestas Offshore, HR Wallingford, BVG

Associates, The Carbon Trust, ETI, and more from across the industry at

Offshore Wind Structures in London, 14-15th April 2015.

The carefully selected agenda and speakers reflect the most important techno-

logical developments as selected by you: the professionals.

Attend Offshore Wind Structures – the only event to consider the whole struc-

ture and so to unite the industry disciplines and across the supply chain – to

add significant value to your project and achieve the goal of reducing the cost

of energy.

Experiences with Wind Energy Update:

“Good especially because it is much more about the problems and less commercial.” Acciona

“This conference was a great opportunity to meet different actors in the offshore wind industry to share knowledge and best practices. It gave me the opportunity for networking with other professionals as well. The conference

as a whole was quite excellent.” Vattenfall

“The WEU events are the only conferences worth attending. The events are detailed, concise and contain the decision makers. It’s always great to be able to attend an event where the speakers stay and spend time networking with

the audience.” GCube Underwriting Ltd

Including Representatives from:

Offshore Wind StructuresLondon, UK | 14-15th April 2015

ORDER NOW

View the forum brochure for more information

Thank you for reading Looking Forwards for Offshore Wind: A Focus on Technology.

If you have any feedback, or ideas for what you would like us to publish next, get in touch.

Contact Amy Allebone-Salt

Project Director | Wind Energy Update

amy@windenergyupdate.com

For more information go to www.windenergyupdate.com

Join the conversation: linkd.in/Mi6eaN @W_E_Update

Looking Forwards for Offshore Wind: A Focus on Technology © 2014 FC Business Intelligence®

The information of this document was prepared by Wind Energy Update (part of FC Business Intelligence) and its partners. Wind Energy Update has no obligation to tell you when information in this

document changes. Wind Energy Update makes every effort to use reliable, comprehensible information, but we make no representation that it is accurate or complete. In no event shall Wind Energy Update

and its partners be liable for any damages, losses, expenses, loss of data or profit caused by the use of the material or contents of this document.

Wind Energy Update

Offshore Wind Structures

Produced in association with:

London, UK14-15th April 2015