DOCSLIB.ORG

Opportunities and Challenges for a Floating Offshore Wind Market in California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Opportunities and Challenges for a Floating Offshore Wind Market in California Opportunities and challenges for a floating offshore wind market in California PIETER-JAN VANDENBRANDE Master of Science Thesis Stockholm, Sweden 2017 Opportunities and challenges for a floating offshore wind market in California Pieter-Jan Vandenbrande Master of Science Thesis INDEK 2017:71 KTH Industrial Engineering and Management Industrial Management SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Master of Science Thesis INDEK 2017:71 Opportunities and challenges for a floating offshore wind market in California Pieter-Jan Vandenbrande Approved Examiner Supervisor 2017-05-30 Terrence Brown Serdar Temiz Commissioner Contact person n.a. n.a. Abstract The offshore wind energy industry is a rapidly growing industry as solutions are becoming cost-competitive and there is an increasing need to limit greenhouse gas emissions. New floating offshore wind turbine designs now enable the access to previously inaccessible offshore wind resources. In this research, a comprehensive analysis is made of the different factors influencing the macro environment for a potential floating offshore wind energy market in California. The analysis assesses the relevant political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal aspects in California. The outcome of this research shows the opportunities and challenges for a floating wind turbine market in California. It is found that there are many opportunities present due to California's political and economic climate. There is considerable support for offshore wind projects on the state level, demonstrated by the active engagement of the governor and the creation of the California Task Force. The large economy and high electricity prices are promising for future projects. Furthermore, wind resources are vast and the technical infrastructure is present, especially Southern California is well suited. There are technological threats present, but these are common for all renewable energy sources and seem unavoidable with the Renewable Portfolio Standards California has set. The main threats are posed by the complex regulatory environment and the financial uncertainty as a result of the lack of federal support. The Jones Act, for example, can be troublesome as it will likely increase costs and delay projects. Furthermore, the social environment and local willingness for such projects was shown to be very important for their success. The state of California has already been working pro-actively on involving the local members of the public in potential upcoming offshore wind energy projects. The research concludes that California offers many opportunities with surmountable threats. Key-words Floating wind turbines; California; PESTEL analysis; market challenges and opportunities Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank my thesis supervisor Serdar Temiz, who was inter- ested by my topic and gave me academical direction. Secondly, thanks to Hexicon AB for providing me with the great opportunity to learn about the promising fu- ture of floating wind turbines. Special thanks go to Eduard Dyachuk and Maurice Jenkens for their willingness to answer my questions and helped me find this in- teresting research topic. Thanks also to Edmundo Lazo and Oxana Casu for helping me by providing valuable feedback on the research proposal and final thesis. Finally, my eternal gratitude to my girlfriend Mathilde for supporting me at all times. Contents 1 Introduction1 1.1 Background..................................1 1.2 Purpose and Research Question.......................2 1.3 Delimitations.................................3 1.4 Limitations...................................3 1.5 Research Structure..............................3 2 Literature Review4 2.1 Offshore wind energy overview.......................4 2.1.1 History and current situation....................4 2.1.2 Overview of technological, economic and political aspects...6 2.2 Developments in offshore wind....................... 10 2.2.1 Floating wind turbines........................ 10 2.3 Offshore wind in the United States..................... 12 2.4 Energy Market California.......................... 14 3 Theoretical Framework 16 3.1 Introduction.................................. 16 3.2 External Business Environment....................... 16 3.2.1 PESTEL Analysis........................... 16 3.2.2 Porter’s Five Forces.......................... 18 3.3 Internal Business Environment....................... 19 3.3.1 SWOT Analysis............................ 19 4 Methodology 20 4.1 Research Paradigm.............................. 20 4.2 Research Method............................... 20 4.3 Data Collection................................ 21 4.4 Ethical and Sustainability Issues...................... 21 5 Analysis California 23 5.1 Political..................................... 23 5.2 Economic.................................... 26 5.3 Social...................................... 32 5.4 Technological................................. 34 5.5 Environmental................................. 37 5.6 Legal...................................... 41 6 Discussion 44 6.1 Opportunities and Threats.......................... 44 7 Conclusion 47 A PESTEL Analysis Summary 49 B Opportunities and Threats Summary 56 Bibliography 58 List of Figures 2.1 Installed offshore wind capacity per country...............5 2.2 Cumulative and annual installed offshore wind capacity in Europe..5 2.3 Evolution of European wind turbines over time.............7 2.4 Life cycle of offshore wind farms in Europe................8 2.5 Levelised Cost of Electricty (LCOE) of power generation technologies in Europe....................................9 2.6 Technologies for floating offshore wind.................. 11 2.7 Offshore wind projects development in the US as of June 2016..... 12 2.8 Total electricity generation from renewable sources in California.... 15 2.9 Total installed capacity of renewable sources (2016)........... 15 5.1 Impact of PTC on annual installed wind energy capacity in the US... 27 5.2 Visualization of California’s industry.................... 28 5.3 Average electricity prices in the US in 2014................ 30 5.4 California Cap-and-Trade market visualization.............. 30 5.5 Employment rate in California and the US................. 31 5.6 Question to locals in California: Would you support or oppose off- shore wind energy in Santa Barbara County................ 33 5.7 Map of offshore wind farm sites selected by NREL with the ports and transmission lines............................... 35 5.8 Power characteristic for an average 2016 March day in California... 36 5.9 Offshore wind resources at 90m in the United States........... 39 5.10 Water depths in the US............................ 39 5.11 Technological potential of offshore wind in the United States...... 40 List of Abbreviations BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management CAA Clean Air Act CAISO California Independent System Operator CEC California Energy Commission CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CMSP Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning CPP Clean Power Plan CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CWA Clean Water Act CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act DOI Department of the Interior EPA Environmental Protection Agency EU-ETS European Union Emissions Trading System GDP Gross Domestic Product GDP Gross Domestic Product GE General Electric GW Gigawatt IOU Investor Owned Utility ITC Investment Tax Credit kW Kilowatt kWh Kilowatt-hour LCOE Levelised Cost Of Electricity MW Megawatt NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NIMBY Not In My Backyard NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory O&M Operations and Maintenance PCPI Per Capita Personal Income PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric PPA Power Purchase Agreement PTC Production Tax Credit PTC Production Tax Credit R&D Research and Development REC Renewable Energy Credit RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard SCE Southern California Edison SCOE Society’s Cost Of Electricity SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric TW Terrawatt US United States USDOE United States Department Of Energy 1 1 Introduction 1.1 Background The topic of energy is becoming more important than ever, and rapid economic and technological developments cause an ever increasing energy demand. According to a report from the Energy Information Administration, the world energy consump- tion is projected to increase by 48% between 2012 and 2048 (Doman, 2016). However, energy production comes at a cost. Fossil fuels are still one of the primary ways of generating energy. The consequences of this excessive use of fossil fuels are now be- coming more apparent as the climate of our planet is changing. As the environmen- tal state deteriorates, and energy crisis becomes more pressing, people, companies and governments are searching for ways to alleviate this pressure and protect the planet from further harm. The United States is the biggest consumer of energy per capita in the world. The total electricity consumption in 2015 was over 3.9 TWh (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2017). The electricity sources are coal (33%), natural gas (33%), nu- clear (20%) and renewables (13%) (US Energy Information Administration, 2016). Wind power makes up 35% of the renewables and is currently responsible for al- most 5% of the total electricity generation. All wind power is located on-land with Texas, known as the oil state, being a surprising leader, followed by Iowa, Okla- homa and California, and the onshore wind power capacity is still growing rapidly (AWEA, 2016). However, offshore wind parks can have considerable
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewables Investor Event
    Renewables Investor Event 29 September 2020 1 © Subsea 7 - 2020 Subsea 7 Renewables Forward looking statements This announcement may contain ‘forward-looking statements’ (within the meaning of the safe harbour provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). These statements relate to our current expectations, beliefs, intentions, assumptions or strategies regarding the future and are subject to known and unknown risks that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of words such as ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘future’, ‘goal’, ‘intend’, ‘likely’ ‘may’, ‘plan’, ‘project’, ‘seek’, ‘should’, ‘strategy’ ‘will’, and similar expressions. The principal risks which could affect future operations of the Group are described in the ‘Risk Management’ section of the Group’s Annual Report and Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2019. Factors that may cause actual and future results and trends to differ materially from our forward-looking statements include (but are not limited to): (i) our ability to deliver fixed price projects in accordance with client expectations and within the parameters of our bids, and to avoid cost overruns; (ii) our ability to collect receivables, negotiate variation orders and collect the related revenue; (iii) our ability to recover costs on significant projects; (iv) capital expenditure by oil and gas companies,
    [Show full text]
  • Floating Offshore Wind: a Situational Analysis Dr. Roberts Proskovics October 2018 | AP-0017
    Floating Offshore Wind: A Situational Analysis Dr. Roberts Proskovics October 2018 | AP-0017 Introduction Floating offshore wind technology is gaining momentum, with more governments and organisations showing interest in its potential to unlock wind resource from deep water its es. As a relatively nascent technology, floating wind has several barriers to overcome before it can be deemed a fully-commercial technology. This Analysis Paper looks at the key strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) surrounding floating offshore wind and its path to full commercialisation, and is aimed at those who might have technical knowledge of bottom-fixed offshore wind, but little or no previous exposure to floating wind technology. Headlines • A clear frontrunner as to the most viable substructure type (semi-submersible, spar and tension-leg platform (TLP)) and primary material (steel or concrete) is yet to emerge. • Currently, TLPs lag behind the other typologies in terms of technology readiness. • Floating offshore wind turbine substructure design should not be optimised against one parameter only, as this can lead to an overall increase in the cost of the substructure (e.g. a substructure optimised solely for mass could become more complex to manufacture). • While floating offshore wind is exposed to various technological challenges (e.g. technology readiness level progression, development of dynamic export cables), the most significant challenges are commercial. • Floating offshore wind remains a relatively nascent technology and is predominantly deployed in demonstration projects. The next step in its commercialisation will be the development of pre- commercial projects. These require government support, which is available in only a few countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Description of an 8 MW Reference Wind Turbine
    Journal of Physics: Conference Series PAPER • OPEN ACCESS Recent citations Description of an 8 MW reference wind turbine - Cyclic flexural test and loading protocol for steel wind turbine tower columns To cite this article: Cian Desmond et al 2016 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 753 092013 Chung-Che Chou et al - Techno-economic system analysis of an offshore energy hub with an outlook on electrofuel applications Christian Thommessen et al View the article online for updates and enhancements. - Evaluating wind turbine power coefficient—An undergraduate experiment Edward W. K. Chan et al This content was downloaded from IP address 170.106.40.139 on 26/09/2021 at 05:57 The Science of Making Torque from Wind (TORQUE 2016) IOP Publishing Journal of Physics: Conference Series 753 (2016) 092013 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/753/9/092013 Description of an 8 MW reference wind turbine Cian Desmond1, Jimmy Murphy1, Lindert Blonk2 and Wouter Haans2 1 MaREI, University College Cork, Ireland 2 DNV-GL, Turbine Engineering, Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. An 8 MW wind turbine is described in terms of mass distribution, dimensions, power curve, thrust curve, maximum design load and tower configuration. This turbine has been described as part of the EU FP7 project LEANWIND in order to facilitate research into logistics and naval architecture efficiencies for future offshore wind installations. The design of this 8 MW reference wind turbine has been checked and validated by the design consultancy DNV-GL. This turbine description is intended to bridge the gap between the NREL 5 MW and DTU 10 MW reference turbines and thus contribute to the standardisation of research and development activities in the offshore wind energy industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Floating Offshore Wind Turbines: Responses in a Seastate Pareto Optimal Designs and Economic Assessment
    Floating Offshore Wind Turbines: Responses in a Seastate Pareto Optimal Designs and Economic Assessment By Paul Sclavounos, Christopher Tracy and Sungho Lee Department of Mechanical Engineering Massachusetts Institute of Technology October 2007 Abstract Wind is the fastest growing renewable energy source, increasing at an annual rate of 25% with a worldwide installed capacity of 74 GW in 2007. The vast majority of wind power is generated from onshore wind farms. Their growth is however limited by the lack of inexpensive land near major population centers and the visual pollution caused by large wind turbines. Wind energy generated from offshore wind farms is the next frontier. Large sea areas with stronger and steadier winds are available for wind farm development and 5MW wind turbine towers located 20 miles from the coastline are invisible. Current offshore wind turbines are supported by monopoles driven into the seafloor at coastal sites a few miles from shore and in water depths of 10-15m. The primary impediment to their growth is visual pollution and the prohibitive cost of seafloor mounted monopoles in larger water depths. This paper presents a fully coupled dynamic analysis of floating wind turbines that enables a parametric design study of floating wind turbine concepts and mooring systems. Pareto optimal designs are presented that possess a favorable combination of nacelle acceleration, mooring system tension and displacement of the floating structure supporting a five megawatt wind turbine. All concepts are selected so that they float stably while in tow to the offshore wind farm site and prior to their connection to the mooring system.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Risk in Floating Wind Key Risks and How to Mitigate Them
    An Introduction to Risk in Floating Wind Key risks and how to mitigate them Roberts Proskovics | November 2017 | AP-0014 Summary Technological advances in floating offshore wind have opened up opportunities to exploit the abundant wind resource in deep water sites where it is currently not possible to deploy bottom-fixed wind turbines. However, as a relatively nascent technology, there are still many challenges to be overcome before floating offshore wind can be deployed in full-scale commercial arrays. From a wider set of risks identified using a new risk assessment methodology developed specifically for floating wind, this Analysis Paper highlights the key risks facing the developers of novel floating turbine systems, both technical and non-technical, and sets out how to mitigate them. Headlines • Floating wind is closing in on full-scale commercialisation: an increasing number of countries are ready to support the technology and are including it in their future (in France’s case, near future) electricity generation mix. • The key markets for floating wind in the near future are: countries with deep waters close to shore, countries with isolated island communities with high electricity prices, and in the electrification of oil and gas platforms – that is, using floating wind to power these platforms, as opposed to gas. • Some of the reasons for floating wind’s relatively high levelised cost of energy (LCoE) are clear: it is a technology in the pre-commercialisation stage, it is not in serial production, and it uses only a small number of units per site. But there are other key obstacles that need to be overcome: there is a lack of available operational performance data (which makes floating wind a high-risk investment), and limited collaboration between substructure developers and wind turbine OEMs (in part because there are not enough OEMs to partner with each substructure concept developer).
    [Show full text]
  • Forecast from 2016-17 to 2019-20
    Tariff Information Paper Forecast TNUoS tariffs from 2016/17 to 2019/20 This information paper provides a forecast of Transmission Network Use of System (TNUoS) tariffs from 2016/17 to 2019/20. These tariffs apply to generators and suppliers. This annual publication is intended to show how tariffs may evolve over the next five years. The forecast tariffs for 2016/17 will be refined throughout the year. 28 January 2015 Version 1.0 1 Contents 1. Executive Summary....................................................................................4 2. Five Year Tariff Forecast Tables ...............................................................5 2.1 Generation Tariffs ................................................................................. 5 2.2 Onshore Local Circuit Tariffs ..............................................................10 2.3 Onshore Local Substation Tariffs .......................................................12 Any Questions? 2.4 Offshore Local Tariffs .........................................................................12 2.5 Demand Tariffs ...................................................................................13 Contact: 3. Key Drivers for Tariff Changes................................................................14 Mary Owen 3.1 CMP213 (Project TransmiT)...............................................................14 Stuart Boyle 3.2 HVDC Circuits.....................................................................................14 3.3 Contracted Generation .......................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum Submitted by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (WIND 01)
    Energy and Climate Change Committee The Economics of Wind Power written evidence REF: Page WIND 01 Department of Energy and Climate Change 5 WIND 02 Maureen Beaumont 9 WIND 03 D E Simmons CEng; MIMechE; CMIOSH; RMaPS 11 WIND 04 Galloway Landscape And Renewable Energy (GLARE) 12 WIND 05 Dr. Ian Woollen 15 WIND 06 Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) 16 WIND 07 Viscount Monckton of Brenchley 18 WIND 08 ABB 21 WIND 09 Roland Heap 24 WIND 10 David Campbell 29 WIND 11 The Renewable Energy Foundation 31 WIND 12 Brian Skittrall 34 WIND 13 Sir Donald Miller 37 WIND 14 Hengistbury Residents' Association (HENRA) 40 WIND 15 Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy ‐ UK 43 WIND 16 REG Windpower Ltd 46 WIND 17 Adrian J Snook 52 WIND 18 Montgomeryshire Local Council Forum; Welshpool Town Council 55 WIND 19 Ian W Murdoch 57 WIND 20 Mrs Brenda Herrick 60 WIND 21 Mr N W Woolmington 62 WIND 22 Professor Jack W Ponton FREng 63 WIND 23 Mrs Anne Rogers 65 WIND 24 Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) 67 WIND 25 Derek Partington 70 WIND 26 Professor Michael Jefferson 76 WIND 27 Robert Beith CEng FIMechE, FIMarE, FEI and Michael Knowles CEng 78 WIND 28 Barry Smith FCCA 81 WIND 29 The Wildlife Trusts (TWT) 83 WIND 30 Wyck Gerson Lohman 87 WIND 31 Brett Kibble 90 WIND 32 W P Rees BSc. CEng MIET 92 WIND 33 Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management 95 WIND 34 Councillor Ann Cowan 98 WIND 35 Ian M Thompson 99 WIND 36 E.ON UK plc 102 WIND 37 Brian D Crosby 105 WIND 38 Peter Ashcroft 106 WIND 39 Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) 109 WIND 40 Scottish Renewables 110 WIND 41 Greenpeace UK; World Wildlife Fund; Friends of the Earth 114 WIND 42 Wales and Borders Alliance 119 WIND 43 National Opposition to Windfarms 121 WIND 44 David Milborrow 124 WIND 45 SSE 126 WIND 46 Dr Howard Ferguson 129 WIND 47 Grantham Research Institute 132 WIND 48 George F Wood 135 WIND 49 Greenersky.
    [Show full text]
  • North American Offshore Wind Projects Sandy Butterfield Chief Engineer National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado
    North American Offshore Wind Projects Sandy Butterfield Chief Engineer National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado South Carolina Wind Farm Feasibility Study Committee Offshore Wind Projects Horns Rev European Activity Offshore Wind 1,471 MW installed (Jan 2009) 37,442 MW Planned (by 2015) Red = large turbines Blue = under construction Grey = planned EU Offshore Wind Targets 2010 5,000 MW http://www.offshorewindenergy.org/ 2015 15,000 MW http://www.ewea.org/index.php?id=203 2020 20‐40,000 MW 2030 150,000 MW Current Installed Offshore Capacity (Country, MW Installed at the end of 2008) Sweden, 133.3 Netherlands, United 246.8 Kingdom, 590.8 Ireland, 25.2 1,471.25‐MW Germany, 12 Finland, 24 Denmark, 409.15 Belgium, 30 http://www.ewea.org/index.php?id=203 Projects Planned by 2015 Europe and North America Sweden, 3312 United States, 2073 Spain, 1976 United Poland, 533 Kingdom, Norway, 1553 8755.8 Netherlands, 2833.8 Italy, 827.08 40,616‐MW Belgium, 1446 Ireland, 1603.2 Canada, 1100 Denmark, 1276 Finland, 1330 Germany, France, 1070 10927.5 http://www.ewea.org/index.php?id=203 Presentation Scope • “Approximately 30 offshore wind projects have been announced in North America”. • “This presentation will provide brief overviews of the projects announced to date in various regions”. Land-based Shallow Transitional Deepwater Water Depth Floating Offshore Wind Commercially Wind Proven Demonstration Technology Technology Phase Estimated 0m-30m 30m-60m 60m-900m US Resource 430-GW 541-GW 1533-GW No exclusions assumed for resource estimates Commercial
    [Show full text]