Ørsted to Deploy Record Size Turbines in Atlantic City Offshore Wind Farm

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Ørsted to Deploy Record Size Turbines in Atlantic City Offshore Wind Farm Ørsted to deploy record size turbines in Atlantic City offshore wind farm MICHELLE BRUNETTI POST Staff Writer ATLANTIC CITY — The 1,100 megawatt Ocean Wind offshore wind farm to be built off the coast here will deploy a new generation 12 megawatt turbine that will be the largest and most powerful in the world, according to the developer of the project. GE Renewable Energy will supply the newly developed turbines to the Atlantic City project, which will be the third largest wind farm in the world and open in 2024, Danish company Ørsted announced Thursday. In March 2018, GE announced it was embarking on producing the world’s first 12 MW turbine, which some in the industry said could not be done. While Ørsted recently announced it will mainly transmit Ocean Wind’s electricity into the grid at the closed Oyster Creek nuclear plant in Lacey Township, it also is still looking at sending some power through other New Jersey locations. “There are a couple of other options we are looking at, including B.L. England,” Thomas Brostrøm, CEO of Ørsted U.S. Offshore Wind, said of the closed electric generating plant in Beesleys Point, Upper Township. Oyster Creek’s facility can only take 800 of the 1,100 MW the wind farm will generate, he said. Ørsted will first use the 12 MW turbiens on Ørsted’s much smaller 120 MW Skipjack wind farm off Maryland, expected to be in operation by 2022. Skipjack and Ocean Wind will be the world’s first commercial deployment of GE’s Haliade-X 12 MW offshore wind turbine, according to Ørsted. “Basically, 8 MW to 9.5 MW or 10 MW turbines have been used recently,” Brostrøm said, compared to the GE machines at 12 MW. “With the introduction of 12 MW, it is going to be the biggest machine ever deployed — the most powerful machines in the world.” Ørsted was the first to deploy an 8 MW turbine in 2016. A 12 MW platform represents a 50% increase in power output per unit, according to the company. The new units are bigger in megawatts generated and capacity and rotor diameter, he said. “It’s how much wind can you capture?” Brostrøm said. “There’s a balance there.” The GE turbine has a rotor diameter of 220 meters (722 feet). Each blade is 107 meters (351 feet) long, sweeping a total area of 38.000 square meters (409,000 square feet), according to Ørsted. To put it in perspective, the company said turbines available in 1991 when Ørsted constructed the world’s first offshore wind farm in Europe only had a capacity to generate 0.45 MW. Back then, a 600 MW offshore wind farm would have required more than 1,300 wind turbines. Using 12 MW turbines, 600 MW can be achieved with only 50 units. Technological improvements have made producing offshore wind much cheaper, Brostrøm said. There is some risk to using a new generation turbine. “We’ve done years of technical due diligence, so we are comfortable and confident in the machine,” Brostrøm said. “And we will set up and deploy them on Skipjack the first 10 turbines.” Ørsted will get calibration and learn from that, and factor it in before deploying in the much larger Ocean Wind project, which will use 90 turbines. The United State’s first wind farm, a 30 MW facility now operated by Ørsted, used 6 MW turbines, said Lauren Burm of Ørsted. It was built in 2016 off Block Island, Rhode Island. GE Offshore Wind CEO John Lavelle said the company saw the offshore wind market growing globally and looked at where GE could use its strengths to create unique products and drive down the costs of producing green energy. “It resulted in a bigger, more powerful and efficient machine,” Lavelle said, using a “regimented, step-by-step process.” By the time GE announced it would produce the world’s first 12 MW turbine, the company already had done about 12 months of technological development,” Lavelle said. “We already had a lot of design concepts under way before GE management would say ‘we approve’ — before GE was comfortable, we knew what we were doing,” he said. The company brought in some of the best minds from across GE, based in the U.S. and several other countries, to help. “Now that we are completing the prototype and have that installed, we start the design validation phase and operate and test for another year,” Lavelle said. In about two years, the company will start to produce the first tubines for Skipjack, he said, then for the Ocean Wind project. Turbines are likely to keep getting bigger, Lavelle said. “I never say never. You always can figure out a way,” Lavelle said, citing ongoing technological developments likely to come out of GE’s Technological Global Reserach Center in the near future. “We may invent something in the labs — come up with something completely different in 10 years,” Lavelle said. Brostrøm said Ørsted is now getting all the necessary permits for the project and will start construction in the early 2020s. That’s when the region will start to see job creation really pick up, he said. “We are super excited to bring a third supplier into the industry in a big way,” Brostrøm said of GE. “It has been Siemans and MHI Vestas forever. A strong company like GE stepping in to the U.S. offshore market is a big thing for us,” making the supply chain more robust and adding competition to the field. In the U.S. alone, seven states on the East Coast have committed to building a total of 20 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2035, according to Ørsted. In the U.S., Ørsted has been awarded the rights to build offshore wind farms to serve the markets of Maryland, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York and Connecticut. They will have a total capacity of about 2.9 gigawatts and will be built by 2024, the company said. .
Recommended publications
  • U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment
    U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment Issue Date | March 2020 Prepared By American Wind Energy Association Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Current Status of U.S. Offshore Wind .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Lessons from Land-based Wind ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Announced Investments in Domestic Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................ 5 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Input Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Modeling Tool ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Monitoring and Mitigation Policies and Practices at Offshore Wind Installations in the United States and Europe
    Ecological Monitoring and Mitigation Policies and Practices at Offshore Wind Installations in the United States and Europe August 2020 Michael C. Allen, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Research Associate, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources, Rutgers University, Matthew Campo, Senior Research Specialist, Environmental Analysis & Communications Group, Rutgers University Prepared for the New Jersey Climate Change Alliance (https://njadapt.rutgers.edu/). Working Group Members: John Cecil, New Jersey Audubon Tim Dillingham, American Littoral Society Patty Doerr, The Nature Conservancy of New Jersey Russell Furnari, PSEG Kevin Hassell, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Anthony MacDonald, Urban Coast Institute at Monmouth University Martha Maxwell-Doyle, Barnegat Bay Partnership David Mizrahi, Ph.D., New Jersey Audubon Technical Reviews and Acknowledgments Joseph Brodie, Ph.D. Jeanne Herb Marjorie Kaplan, Dr.P.H. Josh Kohut, Ph.D. Richard Lathrop, Ph.D. Julie Lockwood, Ph.D. Douglas Zemeckis, Ph.D. https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-wn1p-cz80 1 ABSTRACT Offshore wind energy is poised to expand dramatically along the eastern United States. However, the promise of sustainable energy also brings potential impacts on marine ecosystems from new turbines and transmission infrastructure. This whitepaper informs government officials, scientists, and stakeholders in New Jersey about the current policies and monitoring methods other jurisdictions use to monitor potential ecological impacts from offshore wind installations. We reviewed policy documents in the eastern U.S. and Europe, reviewed the scientific literature, and conducted stakeholder interviews in Spring 2020. We found: 1. Short-term (3-5 year) project-specific efforts dominate coordinated regional and project life duration ecological monitoring efforts at offshore wind farms in North America and Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Deepwater Wind Plans Offshore Wind Farm to Serve Maryland
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MEDIA CONTACT: Meaghan Wims 401.278.4434, [email protected] Deepwater Wind Plans Offshore Wind Farm to Serve Maryland Skipjack Wind Farm Will Deliver Affordable Offshore Wind Energy Far Below State Estimates, Saving Ratepayers Millions of Dollars Ocean City, Md. – November 22, 2016 – America’s leading offshore wind company Deepwater Wind today announced plans for the Skipjack Wind Farm, a new offshore wind farm that will help Maryland meet its clean-energy goals at far lower prices than state law anticipates, saving Maryland ratepayers millions of dollars. The Skipjack Wind Farm will not only be the state’s largest renewable energy project, it would also be the right size for Maryland’s first offshore wind farm. At 120 megawatts, the Skipjack Wind Farm could be built in a single construction season, and developed more cost-effectively, and with considerably less risk, than a larger project. At more than 17 nautical miles northeast of Ocean City’s coastline, the project would be located so far away that it won’t impact views from Maryland’s shore. Deepwater Wind has secured the rights to acquire the site’s federal lease, subject to regulatory approval. “We’re bringing down the cost of American offshore wind energy in a big way,” said Deepwater Wind CEO Jeffrey Grybowski. “Ratepayers in Maryland will benefit from energy that is both clean and affordable. The Skipjack Wind Farm is the right clean energy solution for Maryland, and we’re ready to get to work.” The Skipjack Wind Farm is expected to generate well over $100 million dollars in economic benefits for Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Market Report
    US OFFSHORE WIND MARKET UPDATE & INSIGHTS US OFFSHORE WIND CAPACITY GENERATION The US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM), has auctioned 16 US offshore wind energy areas (WEAs) designated in federal waters for offshore wind development. Each area has been leased to a qualified offshore wind developer. The ar- eas are located along the East Coast from North Carolina to Massachusetts and represent a total potential capacity of 21,000 Megawatts (MWs) of offshore wind power generation. HISTORY OF BOEM AUCTIONS AND LEASES YEAR LEASE # LESSEE STATE ACREAGE BID MW* NEXT 2012 0482 GSOE I DE 70,098 NA NA SAP *Reading volumes, some earlier estimates 2013 0486 Deepwater Wind NE RI/MA 97,498 $3,838,288 3400 TTL COP of capacity likely used 2013 0487 Deepwater Wind NE RI/MA 67,252 $3,838,288 3400 TTL FDR different calculations. 2013 0483 VA Electric & Power Co. VA 112,799 $1,600,000 2000 COP In all cases, capacity 2014 0490 US Wind MD 79,707 $8,701,098 1450 COP calculations should be considered estimates. 2015 0501 Vineyard Wind MA 166,886 $166,886 See Below FDR 2015 0500 Bay State Wind MA 187,523 $281,285 2000 TTL COP 2016 0498 Ocean Wind NJ 160,480 $880,715 See Below COP 2016 0499 EDFR Development NJ 183,353 $1,006,240 3400 TTL SAP 2017 0512 Equinor Wind US NY 79,350 $42,469,725 1000 COP 2017 0508 Avangrid Renewables NC 122,405 $9,066,650 1486 SAP 2018 0519 Skipjack Offshore Energy DE 26,332 Assigned NA SAP 2018 0520 Equinor Wind US MA 128,811 $135,000,000 1300 EXEC 2018 0521 Mayflower Wind Energy MA 127,388 $135,000,000 1300 EXEC 2018 0522 Vineyard Wind MA 132,370 $135,000,000 1500 EXEC EXEC—Lease Execution SAP—Site Assessment Plan COP—Construction & Operations Plan FDR—Facility Design Report @offshorewindus / BUSINESS NETWORK FOR OFFSHORE WIND / offshorewindus.org 1 STATE 2018 2019 MARKET GROWTH The US Offshore Wind market currently stands VIRGINIA 12 12 at 16,970 MWs and is a subset of the total US MARYLAND 366 366 potential generation capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Offshore Wind Summit September 25, 30, and October 7
    Offshore Wind Summit September 25, 30, and October 7, 2020 National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & The Embassy of Denmark 1 Introductory Remarks Jessica Rackley, Energy & Environment Program Director, NGA Center for Best Practices Michael Guldbrandtsen, Counselor, Embassy of Denmark Thank You to our Sponsors States with Clean Energy Goals Source: NGA, 2020 Offshore Wind Technical Potential Source: NREL, 2016 Offshore Wind Energy Resource Assessment for the United States Today’s Virtual Meeting: Zoom Controls The Zoom menu bar appears at the If you don’t see the menu bar, move your bottom of the Zoom window once the meeting begins. mouse slightly and the bar will appear. Chat your questions Introductory Remarks Michael Guldbrandtsen Counselor Embassy of Denmark Welcome Remarks Tim Blute Director NGA Center for Best Practices Introduction to the Day – Offshore Wind Update Thomas Brostrøm CEO Ørsted North America, Offshore Offshore Wind Summit Thomas Brostrøm, CEO Ørsted North America, Offshore Offshore Wind Update September 25, 2020 Ranked most sustainable company in the world 2 Significant transformation of Ørsted over the past decade 1 Note 1: Figures taken from Ørsted’s Annual Report 2019. Excluding Radius (power distribution business which was divested during 2019) Note 2: ROCE target for 2019-2025 3 Note 3: International share calculated based on Group EBITDA excl. divestments and miscellaneous un-allocated costs totalling 16 DKKbn The first major energy company to reach net-zero emissions in its energy generation – We will become carbon neutral by 2025. – This will make Ørsted the first major energy company to reach net-zero emissions in its energy generation – far ahead of science-based decarbonization targets for limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Offshore Wind Market Report & Insights 2020
    RAMPION OFFSHORE WIND FARM — COURTESY OF ATKINS THE BUSINESS NETWORK FOR OFFSHORE WIND U.S. OFFSHORE WIND MARKET REPORT & INSIGHTS 2020 MEMBERS ONLY The Business Network for Offshore Wind’s2020 U.S. Offshore Wind Market and Insights offers an analysis of federal and state government activity to better understand how it may affect your business planning and the industry holistically. The federal government has turned its attention to the burgeoning industry to offer more regulation. Congress and federal agencies beyond the Department of Interior’s Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management and U.S. Department of Energy are now affecting how the offshore wind industry will operate into the future. This report also discusses how some of the challenges facing offshore wind are being addressed. The health and safety of workers – whether onshore or offshore – are a paramount tenet within the industry. Particular- ly at this time, the offshore industry remains proactive in its response to the coronavirus epidemic, having put in place telework directives, eliminating unnecessary travel, and following government guidelines. As a result of these protocols, Europe has reported minimal disruptions to the supply chains and the 15 offshore wind projects in the U.S., remain in the planning and development stages. It is too soon to know exactly how the global COVID-19 epidemic disruption will affect the U.S. offshore wind in- dustry. Our main concern centers around the economic hardship a long-term shutdown and recession would place on secondary and tertiary U.S. suppliers. It is important to point out, however, that there is almost 10GWs of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • WIND ENERGY Renewable Energy and the Environment
    WIND ENERGY Renewable Energy and the Environment © 2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC WIND ENERGY Renewable Energy and the Environment VaughnVaughn NelsonNelson CRC Press Taylor Si Francis Group BocaBoca RatonRaton LondonLondon NewNewYor Yorkk CRCCRC PressPress isis an an imprintimprint ofof thethe TaylorTaylor && FrancisFrancis Group,Group, anan informa informa businessbusiness © 2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group 6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300 Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742 © 2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business No claim to original U.S. Government works Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4200-7568-7 (Hardcover) This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the valid- ity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may rectify in any future reprint. Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or uti- lized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopy- ing, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Off-Shore Wind Update
    Off-Shore Wind Update – Part 2, rev b By John Benson September 2019 1. Introduction Part 1 of this two-part series reviewed the politics in the states that are currently reasonable candidates for offshore wind projects. A link to Part 1 is below. Part 2 of this series focuses on the off-shore projects, the latest off-shore turbine designs from major manufacturers and planned supporting infrastructure for the major offshore projects. https://www.energycentral.com/c/cp/shore-wind-update-%E2%80%93-part-1 2. Major Projects 2.1. New York The State of New York is the customer for Sunrise Wind and Empire Wind below. See Part 1, Section 2.1 for additional details. 2.1.1. Sunrise Wind Sunrise Wind is an offshore lease site 30 miles east of Montauk Point in Long Island. It will be developed by Danish wind power giant Ørsted in partnership with New England energy company Eversource, and it will provide 880 megawatts to the power grid on Long Island. As part of the agreement, Sunrise Wind will build an operations and maintenance hub in Port Jefferson, Long Island, investing in port infrastructure upgrades and establishing offshore wind training programs. The hub will include dockage for a 250 ft. service operation vessel, a warehouse and office facility. Sunrise Wind will be located adjacent to Ørsted’s South Fork Wind Farm and Revolution Wind projects in federal waters off the northeastern coast of the US. The Sunrise wind project will feature SG 8.0-167 DD offshore wind turbines, which will be supplied by Siemens Gamesa under a conditional contract with the project partners.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy: Lake Michigan Offshore... Advisory Council
    Lake Michigan Offshore Wind Energy Report Prepared by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources June 2012 Lake Michigan Offshore Wind Energy Advisory Report 2012 Preface From the Director of the Department of Natural Resources Offshore wind power in Lake Michigan is both Marc Miller a great opportunity and challenge for Illinois. Director Successful development of this industry in the Great Lakes will mean a stronger economy with new high value manufacturing jobs and Investment. It also means a cleaner environment with reduced carbon and mercury emissions. The Great Lakes are a jewel that we are committed to preserving for this and future generations, and across the globe offshore wind power is being developed responsibly and protective of our natural resources. Exciting breakthroughs in technology are occurring that will reduce or eliminate many of the significant cost challenges, and it is our hope that this study will provide valuable guidance to the Governor’s office and the legislature as we explore this new opportunity. From the Mayor of Waukegan The development of offshore wind energy in Robert Sabonjian Illinois will augment existing regional power Mayor of Waukegan sources as part of the state’s renewable-energy portfolio and could provide power for up to 100,000 homes in the region. This project will also serve as a major economic development opportunity that could create hundreds of jobs. Lake Michigan Offshore Wind Energy Advisory Report 2012 Acknowledgments Development of this report is due in large part to the leadership of State Representative Robyn Gabel who introduced and helped pass House Bill 1558, officially creating the Lake Michigan Offshore Wind Energy Advisory Council Act.
    [Show full text]
  • ORDER NO. 89622 Skipjack Offshore Energy, LLC's Qualified Offshore Wind Project's Compliance with Conditions Approved in 20
    ORDER NO. 89622 Skipjack Offshore Energy, LLC’s Qualified * BEFORE THE Offshore Wind Project’s Compliance with * PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Conditions Approved in 2017 * OF MARYLAND * _______________ * * Case No. 9629 * _________________________________ _______________ Issue Date: August 20, 2020 ORDER APPROVING TURBINE SELECTION I. Procedural History 1. On May 11, 2017, pursuant to the provisions of the Maryland Offshore Wind Energy Act of 2013, the Commission issued Order No. 88192, which authoriZed the issuance of offshore wind renewable energy credits (“ORECs”) for two offshore wind projects—the 248 MW U.S. Wind, Inc. project and the 120 MW Skipjack Offshore Energy, LLC (“Skipjack”) project that is the subject of the present proceeding (“the Project”).1 In its November 30, 2016 Application for ORECs, Skipjack stated that it had selected the Siemens 8 MW offshore wind turbine for developing its Project’s design basis.2 However, Skipjack noted that its selection of a wind turbine was subject to 1 Case No. 9431, In the Matter of the Application of U.S. Wind, Inc. and Skipjack Offshore Energy, LLC for a Proposed Offshore Wind Project(s) Pursuant to the Maryland Offshore Wind. Energy Act of 2013, Order No. 88192. On November 18, 2019, the Commission granted Skipjack’s Motion to Bifurcate Case No. 9431 and established separate dockets for the Skipjack and U.S. Wind projects. Those new dockets are Case No. 9628, U.S. Wind, Inc.’s Qualified Offshore Wind Project’s Compliance with Conditions Approved in 2017; and Case No. 9629, Skipjack Offshore Energy, LLC’s Qualified Offshore Wind Project’s Compliance with Conditions Approved in 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Offshore Wind Energy Challenges and Opportunities
    Offshore Wind Energy Challenges and Opportunities Fishery Management Council Coordinating Committee May 18, 2021 Brian Hooker | Office of Renewable Energy Programs Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Energy OCS Lands Act: "… vital national resource … expeditious and orderly development … environmental safeguards" Energy Policy Act of 2005: "… energy from sources other than oil and gas …" Alaska OCS Pacific OCS Gulf of Mexico OCS Atlantic OCS 2 Biden Administration Offshore Wind Energy Goals o March 29, 2021 the White House issued a “whole-of-government approach” to offshore wind energy development including: o Establishing a Target of Employing Tens of Thousands of Workers to Deploy 30 Gigawatts (30,000 megawatts) of Offshore Wind by 2030 (BOEM). o Partnering with Industry on Data- Sharing (NOAA). o Studying Offshore Wind Impacts. (NOAA). 3 Renewable Energy Program by the Numbers Competitive Lease Sales Completed: 8 Active Commercial Offshore Leases: 17 Site Assessment Plans (SAPs) Approved: 11 General Activities & Research Plans Approved: 2 Construction and Operations Plans (COPs): • Under Review 14 • Anticipated within next 12 months 2 Regulatory Guidance: 11 Leasing Under Consideration: 7 Steel in the Water: 2020 4 Atlantic OCS Renewable Energy: “Projects in the Pipeline” Project Company 2020 Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Pilot South Fork Vineyard Wind I Revolution Wind Skipjack Windfarm Empire Wind Bay State Wind U.S. Wind Sunrise Wind Ocean Wind Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Commercial Park City Wind Mayflower Wind Atlantic Shores Kitty Hawk 2030 OCS-A 0522 5 Pacific OCS Renewable Energy State Project Nominations California Humboldt Call Area 10 California Morro Bay Call Area 11 California Diablo Canyon Call Area 11 Hawaii Oahu North Call Area 2 Hawaii Oahu South Call Area 3 6 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Empire Wind Project Version 1.0
    Environmental Mitigation Plan for the Empire Wind project Version 1.0 Prepared Pursuant to Section 12.06 of the Offshore Wind Renewable Energy Certificate Purchase and Sale Agreement by and Between the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and Equinor Wind US LLC Albany, NY Prepared by Equinor Wind US LLC 120 Long Ridge Road Ste 3EO1 Stamford, CT 06902 October 23, 2019 i Table of Contents 1. Environmental Mitigation Plan Summary ..................................................................................... 1 1.1. Overall philosophy and principles ................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Overall approach to incorporating data and stakeholder feedback ............................................. 1 1.3. Existing guidance and best practices that will be followed .......................................................... 1 2. Communications and Collaboration Approach .............................................................................. 3 2.1. Overview and communication plan objectives ............................................................................. 3 2.2. Communication officers/positions, responsibilities, and contact information ............................ 3 2.3. Identification of stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 3 2.4. Participation in stakeholder and technical working groups ......................................................... 4 2.4.1. Communication
    [Show full text]