Renewables Investor Event
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Gravity-Based Foundations in the Offshore Wind Sector
Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Review Gravity-Based Foundations in the Offshore Wind Sector M. Dolores Esteban *, José-Santos López-Gutiérrez and Vicente Negro Research Group on Marine, Coastal and Port Environment and other Sensitive Areas, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, E28040 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] (J.-S.L.-G.); [email protected] (V.N.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 27 December 2018; Accepted: 24 January 2019; Published: 12 March 2019 Abstract: In recent years, the offshore wind industry has seen an important boost that is expected to continue in the coming years. In order for the offshore wind industry to achieve adequate development, it is essential to solve some existing uncertainties, some of which relate to foundations. These foundations are important for this type of project. As foundations represent approximately 35% of the total cost of an offshore wind project, it is essential that they receive special attention. There are different types of foundations that are used in the offshore wind industry. The most common types are steel monopiles, gravity-based structures (GBS), tripods, and jackets. However, there are some other types, such as suction caissons, tripiles, etc. For high water depths, the alternative to the previously mentioned foundations is the use of floating supports. Some offshore wind installations currently in operation have GBS-type foundations (also known as GBF: Gravity-based foundation). Although this typology has not been widely used until now, there is research that has highlighted its advantages over other types of foundation for both small and large water depth sites. There are no doubts over the importance of GBS. -
Suction Caisson Track Record 2019
Suction Caisson Track Record 2019 Expertise, Seabed and Below. cathiegroup.com Pushing Boundaries, Delivering Solutions cathie-associates.com Client Project Name Description Date Region Sector Genesis Oil and Gas Detailed design and seismic assessment of suction caissons for a manifold Consultants Ltd Design experience & fishing protection structure. 2019 Middle East Oil & Gas Third party driveability analysis for CP and assessment of suction-assisted Northern Total E&P Third-party review penetration of CAN-ductor (composite CP and suction can). 2018-2019 Europe Oil & Gas FPSO mooring anchor concept selection (driven or suction pile), FEED- stage sizing and installation analysis of selected concept (suction caisson), including inverse catenary assessment and effect of seismic loading/ SBM Offshore Design experience liquefaction. 2018-2019 Oceania Oil & Gas R&D and development of Development of philosophy and design standard doucments for design methods/ geotechnical anchor systems, which will be part of SBM Corporate Northern SBM Offshore guidelines Specifications, Geotechnical discipline. 2018-2019 Europe Oil & Gas R&D and development of design methods/guide- Update seismic design guidelines to address specific Technip queries Northern Technip U.K. lines (including design of caisson foundations). 2018-2019 Europe Oil & Gas Mc Dermott Inc Foundation design review Design review of skirted mudmat and bucket foundations . 2018 Mediterranean Oil & Gas Holding capacity analysis accounting f.or chain trenching for different ExxonMobil Third-party review configurations. 2018 Africa Oil & Gas Suction Caisson Track Record 2019 Client Project Name Description Date Region Sector Geotechnical design review of 2 Universal Foundation monobucket designs for Deutsche Bucht site in Germany. The review covers document review Northern Offshore Van Oord Third-party review and independent installation and in-service design calculations. -
WELL POSITIONED for the FUTURE Who We Are
Subsea 7 S.A. Annual Report 2012 WELL POSITIONED FOR THE FUTURE WHO WE ARE Subsea 7 is a seabed-to-surface engineering, construction and services contractor to the offshore energy industry worldwide. Our vision is to be acknowledged by our clients, our people and our shareholders as the leading strategic partner in our market. We provide integrated services and have a proven track record of safely and reliably executing offshore projects of all sizes and complexity in all water depths. Our operating principles define the way we conduct our operations and shape our approach to business: Safety is at the heart of our operations – we are committed to an incident-free workplace, every day, everywhere. Projects are core to our business – our people are motivated to ensure that our projects deliver exceptional performance. Engineering is at the heart of our projects – we create technical solutions and sustainable value for our stakeholders. People are central to our success – we build our business around a valued and motivated workforce. We make long-term investments in our people, assets and know-how – we build strong relationships with clients and suppliers, based on mutual trust and respect. We operate in a consistent manner on a worldwide basis – we are locally sensitive and globally aware. Subsea 7 S.A. Annual Report and Consolidated Financial Statements 2012 2012 Financial Highlights Overview Overview 1 2 Chairman’s Statement Revenue Revenue by Territory 4 What We Do AFGOM $2,182m 6 Where We Operate 8 Chief Executive Offi cer’s Review $6,297m -
Delivering Sustainable Value Across the Energy Lifecycle
DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE VALUE ACROSS THE ENERGY LIFECYCLE SUBSEA 7 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2020 OUR PROGRESS INSIDE THIS REPORT CEO’s letter 2 In 2020 we made good progress Materiality assessment 3 on our sustainability journey Sustainability priorities Health, safety and wellbeing 4 REINFORCED OUR CORPORATE Energy transition 6 GOVERNANCE AROUND SUSTAINABILITY Labour practices and human rights 8 Business ethics 10 Operational eco-efficiency 12 Ecological impacts 14 ESTABLISHED WORK GROUPS OF SENIOR Additional sustainability topics 16 MANAGEMENT TO FOCUS ON OUR Covid-19 19 SUSTAINABILITY PRIORITIES Data summary 20 Report abbreviations 24 EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive 24 CONTINUED TO DEVELOP METRICS AND TARGETS KEY METRICS WE MADE SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS WITH EACH OF OUR SUSTAINABILITY PRIORITIES: Employee health, Energy transition DEVELOPED A CARBON ESTIMATING TOOL TO safety and wellbeing CALCULATE THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF OUR WORK INCREASED THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES COMPLETING 0.07 6.0 GW COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS E-LEARNING Lost-time incident Cumulative power capacity frequency rate per of renewables projects 200,000 hours worked supported to end of 2020 FOCUSED ON THE WELLBEING OF OUR EMPLOYEES WITH DEDICATED RESOURCES TO SUPPORT THEM STARTED ELIMINATION OF SINGLE-USE PLASTICS Labour practices Business ethics EMBEDDED THE PRINCIPLES OF BUILDING and human rights RESPONSIBLY AND THE UN GLOBAL COMPACT COMMITTED TO PROACTIVE PARTICIPATION 6,660 5,153 IN ENERGY TRANSITION Number of suppliers Number of employees with a contract that who have completed -
Stochastic Dynamic Response Analysis of a 10 MW Tension Leg Platform Floating Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine
energies Article Stochastic Dynamic Response Analysis of a 10 MW Tension Leg Platform Floating Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Tao Luo 1,*, De Tian 1, Ruoyu Wang 1 and Caicai Liao 2 1 State Key Laboratory for Alternate Electrical Power System with Renewable Energy Sources, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China; [email protected] (D.T.); [email protected] (R.W.) 2 CAS Key Laboratory of Wind Energy Utilization, Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +10-6177-2682 Received: 2 October 2018; Accepted: 23 November 2018; Published: 30 November 2018 Abstract: The dynamic response of floating horizontal axis wind turbines (FHWATs) are affected by the viscous and inertia effects. In free decay motion, viscous drag reduces the amplitude of pitch and roll fluctuation, the quasi-static mooring system overestimates the resonant amplitude values of pitch and roll. In this paper, the quasi-static mooring system is modified by introducing linear damping and quadratic damping. The dynamic response characteristics of the FHAWT modified model of the DTU 10 MW tension leg platform (TLP) were studied. Dynamic response of the blade was mainly caused by wind load, while the wave increased the blade short-term damage equivalent load. The tower base bending moment was affected by inclination of the tower and the misaligned angle bwave between wind and wave. Except the yaw motion, other degrees of freedom motions of the TLP were substantially affected by bwave. Ultimate tension of the mooring system was related to the displacement caused by pitch and roll motions, and standard deviation of the tension was significantly affected by the wave frequency response. -
Annual Report 2020
SUBSEA 7 S.A. ANNUAL REPORT 2020 DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE VALUE ACROSS THE ENERGY LIFECYCLE SUBSEA 7 S.A. ANNUAL REPORT 2020 Strategic report Chairman’s Statement 2 2020 FINANCIAL Chief Executive Officer’s Review 4 Our Business Model 8 PERFORMANCE Our Markets 10 Our Activities 12 Strategy 14 Business Review 18 REVENUE ADJUSTED EBITDA Sustainability 22 Risk Management 26 Governance $3,466M $337M Governance Overview 37 (2019: $3,657m) (2019: $631m) Board of Directors 38 Executive Management Team 40 Corporate Governance Report 42 Consolidated Financial Statements Financial Review 52 CASH AND CASH DIVIDENDS AND SHARE Consolidated Financial Statements 59 EQUIVALENTS REPURCHASES Subsea 7 S.A. Financial Statements Subsea 7 S.A. Financial Statements 137 $512M $10M Glossary 149 (2019: $398m) (2019: $304m) Additional Information 155 NET INCOME/(LOSS) DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE $(1.1)BN $(3.67) (2019: $(82)m) (2019: $(0.27)) BACKLOG ORDER INTAKE $6.2BN $4.4BN (2019: $5.2bn) (2019: $3.9bn) Get the latest investor information online www. subsea7.com VISION To lead the way in the delivery of offshore projects and services for the energy industry STRATEGIC REPORT Discover online how we are fulfilling our vision. Visit www.subsea7.com STRATEGY In an evolving energy sector, we create sustainable value by being the industry’s partner and employer of choice in delivering the efficient offshore solutions the world needs Information on our strategic priorities and progress is set out on pages 14 to 17 GOVERNANCE SUBSEA FIELD ENERGY TRANSITION OF THE FUTURE – -
Suction Caissons: Model Tests PI’S: R.E
1 Comprehensive Status Report: November 18, 2004 OTRC Project Title: Suction Caissons & Vertically Loaded Anchors MMS Project 362 TO 16169 Project Subtitle: Suction Caissons: Model Tests PI’s: R.E. Olson, Alan Rauch, & Robert B. Gilbert MMS COTR: A. Konczvald This report provides a comprehensive summary the research completed in all prior Phases of this project (September 1999 – August 2004), and describes research being done in the present Phase (September 2004 – August 2005) to complete this project. Note that this report addresses one of four related research areas on this project. The other three areas are reported separately under the subtitles – Suction Caissons: Seafloor Characterization for Deepwater Foundations, Suction Caissons: Finite Element Modeling, and Suction Caissons & Vertically Loaded Anchors: Design Analysis Methods. Suction Caissons: Model Tests Roy E. Olson and Robert B. Gilbert BRIEF HISTORY OF OFFSHORE STRUCTURES The intent of this introductory section is to provide a brief history of evolution that led to use of suction caissons. It is not intended to deal with offshore structures in general, nor with structures not part of the evolution of suction caissons. Further, views here are those of the authors and may not represent the convoluted manner in which developments typically occur. The early offshore oil production structures were steel frames (Fig. 1), called jackets, which were fixed to the seafloor using open-end steel pipe piles that were driven through the jacket legs and then welded to the jacket. When oil was discovered in the North Sea, the subsoil was generally stiff enough that shallow foundations could be used. This allowed the design to change to gravity platforms (Fig. -
Finite Element Analysis of Suction Bucket Foundations in Sand Subjected to Cyclic Loading
Finite Element Analysis of Suction Bucket Foundations in Sand Subjected to Cyclic Loading Ingerid Elisabeth Rolstad Jahren Civil and Environmental Engineering Submission date: June 2018 Supervisor: Hans Petter Jostad, IBM Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering i Preface This is a master thesis written in the spring of 2018 as the final part of my M.Sc. degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) in Trondheim. The thesis is a part of the master’s programme in Geotechnical Engi- neering at the department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. The thesis has been carried out in a cooperation with the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI), which also proposed the thesis. Trondheim, 2018-06-10 Ingerid Rolstad Jahren iii Acknowledgement I would like to express my gratitude to my academic supervisor Adjunct Prof. Hans Petter Jostad, NGI, who provided great insight and expertise throughout the thesis work. His interest and enthusiasm for the topic in addition to great knowledge is truly inspiring. I also thank members of the staff at the Geotechnical Division at NTNU for kindly sharing their wisdom during my years as a student at NTNU. Finally, thank you to all my fellow students for valuable discussions and support. I.R.J. v Abstract A suction bucket or suction caisson is a foundation concept for supporting offshore installa- tions. The practical experience related to this concept is mainly based on applications in the oil and gas industry. Observations show significant difference in response for wind turbines compared to more traditional installations offshore. -
Engineering Challenges for Floating Offshore Wind Turbines
A national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Engineering Challenges for Conference Paper NREL/CP-500-38776 Floating Offshore Wind Turbines September 2007 S. Butterfield, W. Musial, and J. Jonkman National Renewable Energy Laboratory P. Sclavounos Massachusetts Institute of Technology Presented at the 2005 Copenhagen Offshore Wind Conference Copenhagen, Denmark October 26–28, 2005 NREL is operated by Midwest Research Institute ● Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 NOTICE The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Midwest Research Institute (MRI), a contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-99GO10337. Accordingly, the US Government and MRI retain a nonexclusive royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of this contribution, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. -
Floating Offshore Wind 101 Webinar Q & A
Floating Offshore Wind 101 Webinar Q & A This Q&A document is based on the webinar, Floating Offshore Wind Overview. Cost and Economics Questions Answers Can you comment on the recent report that characterizes offshore wind in the We are unaware of the report being referenced, but we can say recent cost declines in Europe have been United States as too expensive? Is the industry positioned to counter that verified by NREL’s analysis of the revenue generated from negotiated power purchase agreements for assertion? the first few U.S. offshore wind projects suggest offshore wind: 1. Is no more expensive in the United States than in Europe 2. May soon be competitive in many electric markets, especially in the Northeast 3. May be able to provide additional benefits to the utility system, especially in constrained energy markets. What are the most likely financing schemes for U.S. utility-scale projects For early commercial-scale floating wind projects (e.g., those in the mid-2020s), we expect project starting construction in the mid-2020s or later without the benefit of federal tax financing arrangements that are similar to today’s financing of fixed-bottom wind projects in the United credits? Is a single-owner power purchase agreement the most likely financing States. The benefits of the fading tax credits will have to be compensated through other means to make mechanism, absent the past tax benefits for flip structures? projects bankable. These other means include lower costs or technology-specific, state-mandated power purchase agreements or offshore wind renewable energy certificates, which are known as ORECs, and they may need to be used in combination with public financing. -
IEA Wind Technology Collaboration Programme
IEA Wind Technology Collaboration Programme 2017 Annual Report A MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR Wind energy continued its strong forward momentum during the past term, with many countries setting records in cost reduction, deployment, and grid integration. In 2017, new records were set for hourly, daily, and annual wind–generated electricity, as well as share of energy from wind. For example, Portugal covered 110% of national consumption with wind-generated electricity during three hours while China’s wind energy production increased 26% to 305.7 TWh. In Denmark, wind achieved a 43% share of the energy mix—the largest share of any IEA Wind TCP member countries. From 2010-2017, land-based wind energy auction prices dropped an average of 25%, and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) fell by 21%. In fact, the average, globally-weighted LCOE for land-based wind was 60 USD/ MWh in 2017, second only to hydropower among renewable generation sources. As a result, new countries are adopting wind energy. Offshore wind energy costs have also significantly decreased during the last few years. In Germany and the Netherlands, offshore bids were awarded at a zero premium, while a Contract for Differences auction round in the United Kingdom included two offshore wind farms with record strike prices as low as 76 USD/MWh. On top of the previous achievements, repowering and life extension of wind farms are creating new opportunities in mature markets. However, other challenges still need to be addressed. Wind energy continues to suffer from long permitting procedures, which may hinder deployment in many countries. The rate of wind energy deployment is also uncertain after 2020 due to lack of policies; for example, only eight out of the 28 EU member states have wind power policies in place beyond 2020. -
17 March 2020 Dear Shareholders, on Tuesday 7 April
Subsea 7 S.A. 412F, Route d'Esch L-2086 Luxembourg www.subsea7.com 17 March 2020 Dear Shareholders, On Tuesday 7 April 2020, the Annual General Meeting (the “AGM”) of the Shareholders of Subsea 7 S.A., (the “Company”), RCS Luxembourg N° B43172, will be held at the registered office of the Company, 412F, route d’Esch, L-2086 Luxembourg, at 15:00 hours (local time). Due to the fact that the Company is incorporated in Luxembourg as a Société Anonyme, the Company’s affairs are governed by the provisions of Luxembourg Company Law. Under these provisions and the provisions of the Company’s Articles of Incorporation, the AGM will be restricted to the matters set out in the enclosed Notice. Matters to be considered at the AGM At the AGM, shareholders will be asked to approve the Group’s Annual Report and consolidated financial statements, the Company’s annual accounts, discharge the Directors from their duties for the financial year and approve the statutory auditor’s appointment. In addition, this year’s AGM agenda includes three items with respect to the election to the Board of Directors of three directors standing for re-election, Mr Jean Cahuzac, Mr Niels Kirk and Mr David Mullen. The biographies of the relevant directors are attached to this letter in an Appendix. Quorum and Majority At the AGM, since under Luxembourg law there is no minimum quorum requirement, decisions taken shall be valid regardless of the number of shares represented, provided there is approval by the majority of the votes of the shareholders validly cast.