DOCSLIB.ORG

Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Volume 5 Number 16 the Avoidance Rates of Collision Between Birds and Offshore Turbines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Volume 5 Number 16 the Avoidance Rates of Collision Between Birds and Offshore Turbines Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Volume 5 Number 16 The Avoidance Rates of Collision Between Birds and Offshore Turbines A S C P Cook, E M Humphreys, E A Masden and N H K Burton © Crown copyright 2014 Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Volume 5 Number 16 The Avoidance Rates of Collision Between Birds and Offshore Turbines A S C P Cook, E M Humphreys, E A Masden and N H K Burton Published by Marine Scotland Science ISSN: 2043-7722 Marine Scotland is the directorate of the Scottish Government responsible for the integrated management of Scotland’s seas. Marine Scotland Science (formerly Fisheries Research Services) provides expert scientific and technical advice on marine and fisheries issues. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science is a series of reports that publishes results of research and monitoring carried out by Marine Scotland Science. It also publishes the results of marine and freshwater scientific work that has been carried out for Marine Scotland under external commission. These reports are not subject to formal external peer-review. This report presents the results of marine and freshwater scientific work carried out for Marine Scotland under external commission. Marine Scotland Science Marine Laboratory 375 Victoria Road Aberdeen AB11 9DB Copies of this report are available from the Marine Scotland website at www.scotland.gov.uk/marinescotland BTO Research Report No. 656 The avoidance rates of collision between birds and offshore turbines Authors Aonghais S.C.P. Cook1, Elizabeth M. Humphreys2, Elizabeth A. Masden3 & Niall H.K. Burton1 1 British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU, UK 2 BTO Scotland, School of Biological Sciences, Stirling University, FK9 4LA 3 Centre for Energy and the Environment, Environmental Research Institute, North Highland College – University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI), Ormlie Road, Thurso, Caithness, KW14 7EE Report of work carried out by the British Trust for Ornithology1 in collaboration with the Environmental Research Institute2 on behalf of the Marine Scotland Science British Trust for Ornithology The British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford, Norfolk IP24 2PU Registered Charity No. 216652 CONTENTS Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... .1 RECOMMENDATIONS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................. 5 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 7 2. OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................. 9 2.1 Produce definitions for the types and scales of avoidance rates that will be used throughout the review document .................................................. 9 2.2 Review the current use of avoidance rates ............................................... 10 2.3 Review and critique existing avoidance behaviour studies and any derived rates ................................................................................................ 10 2.4 Provide summary table/s of individual avoidance rates and a final Total Avoidance Rate for each priority species/species group ........................ 12 2.5 Undertake an assessment of the sensitivity of the conclusions reached to inputs and conditions under which they were collected ..................... 13 2.6 Applicability of avoidance rates to different collision risk models ......... 14 3. DEFINITIONS OF AVOIDANCE BEHAVIOUR ............................................. 16 3.1 Introduction.................................................................................................. 16 3.2 Defining appropriate spatial scales of avoidance .................................... 17 3.3 Defining the appropriate 3-D level of avoidance ....................................... 22 3.4 Total avoidance rates .................................................................................. 23 3.5 Recommended definition ............................................................................ 25 4. REVIEW OF AVOIDANCE RATES USED IN COLLISION RISK MODELLING FOR OFFSHORE WINDFARMS ................................................................... 26 5. REVIEW OF PUBLISHED EVIDENCE FOR AVOIDANCE RATES OF MARINE BIRDS ............................................................................................ 37 5.1 Review of Published Evidence for Macro-Response Rates of Marine Birds ............................................................................................................ 37 5.1.1 Causes of barrier, displacement and attraction effects ................ 37 5.1.2 Overall approach to assessing evidence for barrier, displacement and attraction effects .................................................................................. 38 5.1.3 Studies of barrier effects .................................................................. 38 5.1.3.1 Methodologies used to look barrier effects ............................. 38 5.1.3.2 Results of studies on barriers effects ...................................... 40 5.1.4 Studies of displacement/attraction ................................................. 44 5.1.4.1Methodologies (and survey design) used to look at displacement /attraction ............................................................................................ 44 5.1.4.2 Results of studies on displacement/attraction ......................... 45 5.1.5 Evidence for an overall macro response rate ................................ 47 5.2 Review of Published Evidence for Meso-Response Rates of Marine Birds ............................................................................................................ 51 5.2.1 Studies of meso-avoidance ............................................................. 51 5.2.2 Horizontal meso-response conclusion ........................................... 51 5.2.3 Vertical meso-response rates conclusions .................................... 52 5.2.4 Meso-response rates conclusions .................................................. 54 5.3 Review of Published Evidence for Micro-Avoidance Rates of Marine Birds ...................................................................................... 55 5.3.1 Studies of micro-avoidance ............................................................. 55 5.3.2 Micro-avoidance conclusions .......................................................... 55 5.4 Review of Published Evidence for Within-Windfarm Avoidance Rates of Marine Birds ................................................................................................. 56 5.4.1 Background ....................................................................................... 56 5.4.2 Methodology ..................................................................................... 56 5.4.2.1 Deriving within-windfarm avoidance rates ............................... 56 5.4.2.2 Estimating representative avoidance rates ............................. 63 5.4.3 Results ............................................................................................... 66 5.4.3.1 Derived within-windfarm avoidance rates ............................... 66 5.4.3.2 Representative within-windfarm avoidance rates .................... 69 6. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS.............................................................................. 99 6.1 Avoidance rates derived using the basic Band model (option 1 and 2) . 99 6.1.1 Sensitivity to the assumed flux rate at the windfarm .................. 101 6.1.2 Sensitivity to the corpse detection rate at the windfarm ............. 102 6.1.3 Sensitivity to the proportion of birds flying upwind .................... 103 6.1.4 Sensitivity to the mean turbine rotor speed ................................. 104 6.1.5 Sensitivity to the turbine pitch ...................................................... 106 6.1.6 Sensitivity to the bird flight speed ................................................ 107 6.1.7 Basic Band model sensitivity conclusions .................................. 108 6.2 Avoidance rates derived using the extended Band model (option 3) ... 109 6.2.1 Sensitivity to assumed flight height distribution ......................... 110 6.2.2 Sensitivity to the assumed flux rate at the windfarm .................. 111 6.2.3 Sensitivity to the corpse detection rate at the windfarm ............. 112 6.2.4 Sensitivity to the proportion of birds flying upwind .................... 114 6.2.5 Sensitivity to the turbine rotor speed ........................................... 115 6.2.6 Sensitivity to the turbine pitch ...................................................... 116 6.2.7 Sensitivity to the bird flight speed ................................................ 117 6.2.8 Extended Bank model sensitivity conclusions ............................ 118 6.3 Sensitivity analysis conclusions .............................................................. 121 6.4 Sensitivity to other external factors ......................................................... 122 6.4.1 Weather ............................................................................................ 122 6.4.2 Habitat use ...................................................................................... 123 6.4.3 Turbine Size .................................................................................... 124 6.4.4 Seasonality ...................................................................................... 124 6.4.5
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ørsted Annual Report 2018 Ørsted Annual Report 2018 Contents
    Ørsted Annual report 2018 Ørsted Annual report 2018 Contents Our vision Let’s create a world that runs entirely on green energy Ørsted Annual report 2018 Contents Content Management’s review Financial statements Overview 4 Consolidated financial statements 72 Chairman’s statement 5 Income statement 73 CEO’s review 6 Statement of comprehensive income 74 Performance highlights 10 Balance sheet 75 Outlook 2019 12 Statement of changes in equity 76 Financial estimates and policies 14 Statement of cash flows 77 Note summary 78 Our business 15 Notes 79 The green transformation 16 Our strategic playing field 18 Consolidated ESG statements (additional information) 167 Our markets 19 Basis of reporting 168 Our strategy 22 Environment 169 Our business model 25 Social 171 Strategic targets 26 Governance 172 Our geographic footprints 28 Parent company financial statements 175 Results 30 Income statement 176 Results 31 Balance sheet 176 Five-year summary 35 Statement of changes in equity 177 Fourth quarter 36 Notes 178 Quarterly summary, 2017-18 38 Management statement, Business units 39 auditor’s reports and glossary 185 Our business units 40 Statement by the Executive Board Offshore 41 and the Board of Directors 186 Onshore 46 Independent Auditors’ report 187 Bioenergy 49 Limited assurance report of the independent auditor 191 Customer Solutions 52 Glossary 192 Governance 55 Board of Directors 56 Group Executive Management 58 Corporate governance 59 Remuneration report 63 Risk and risk management 66 Shareholder information 70 3 / 193 Ørsted Annual
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 6.1: List of Cumulative Projects
    Appendix 6.1 Long list of cumulative projects considered within the EIA Report GoBe Consultants Ltd. March 2018 List of Cumulative Appendix 6.1 Projects 1 Firth of Forth and Tay Offshore Wind Farms Inch Cape Offshore Wind (as described in the decision notices of Scottish Ministers dated 10th October 2014 and plans referred to therein and as proposed in the Scoping Report submitted to MS-LOT in May 2017) The consented project will consist of up to 110 wind turbines and generating up to 784 MW situated East of the Angus Coast in the outer Forth and Tay. It is being developed by Inch Cape Offshore Windfarm Ltd (ICOL). This project was consented in 2014, but was subject to Judicial Review proceedings (see section 1.4.1.1 of the EIA Report for full details) which resulted in significant delays. Subsequently ICOL requested a Scoping Opinion for a new application comprising of 75 turbines with a generating capacity of 784 MW. Project details can be accessed at: http://www.inchcapewind.com/home Seagreen Alpha and Bravo (as described in the decision notices of Scottish Ministers dated 10th October 2014 and plans referred to therein and as Proposed in the Scoping Report submitted to MS-LOT in May 2017) The consents for this project includes two offshore wind farms, being developed by Seagreen Wind Energy Limited (SWEL), each consisting of up to 75 wind turbines and generating up to 525 MW. This project was consented in 2014, but was subject to Judicial Review proceedings (see section 1.4.1.1 of the EIA Report for full details) which resulted in significant delays.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Annual Load Factors for 2018/19 Tnuos Tariffs
    Final Annual Load Factors for 2018/19 TNUoS Tariffs October 2017 NGET: Final ALFs for 2018/19 TNUoS Tariffs October 2017 1 Final Annual Load Factors for 2018/19 TNUoS Tariffs This information paper contains the Final Annual Load Factors (ALFs) that National Grid will use in the calculation of Generation TNUoS charges from April 2018. October 2017 October 2017 Contents Executive Summary 4 Annual Load Factors For The 2018/19 Charging Year 5 Table 1: Annual Load Factors By Generating Station 5 Table 2: Generic Annual Load Factors For The 2018/19 Charging Year 10 Changes to the Draft ALFs 11 The Onshore Wind Generic ALF has changed 11 Edinbane 11 Pen Y Cymoedd 11 Inactive Generators 12 How Are ALFs Calculated? 13 Five Years Of Data 13 Four Years Of Data 14 Three Years Of Data 14 Fewer Than Three Years Of Data 14 Calculation Of Partial Year ALFs 15 Generic ALFs 15 Next Steps 15 Appendix A: Generation Charging Principles 16 CMP268 16 The TNUoS Wider Tariff 16 Other Charges 17 Contact Us If you have any comments or questions on the contents or format of this report, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with us. Team Email & Phone [email protected] 01926 654633 NGET: Final ALFs for 2018/19 TNUoS Tariffs October 2017 3 Executive Summary This document contains the Final Annual Load Factors (ALFs) to be used in the calculation of generator Transmission Network Use of System (TNUoS) tariffs for 2018/19, effective from 1 April 2018. The ALFs are based on generation data for five years from 2012/13 until 2016/17.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Reef Effects of Offshore Wind Farm Strucurse and Potential for Enhancement and Mitigation
    REVIEW OF REEF EFFECTS OF OFFSHORE WIND FARM STRUCTURES AND POTENTIAL FOR ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION JANUARY 2008 IN ASSOCIATION WITH Review of the reef effects of offshore wind farm structures and potential for enhancement and mitigation Report to the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform PML Applications Ltd in association with Scottish Association of Marine Sciences (SAMS) Contract No : RFCA/005/00029P This report may be cited as follows: Linley E.A.S., Wilding T.A., Black K., Hawkins A.J.S. and Mangi S. (2007). Review of the reef effects of offshore wind farm structures and their potential for enhancement and mitigation. Report from PML Applications Ltd and the Scottish Association for Marine Science to the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR), Contract No: RFCA/005/0029P Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The Review of Reef Effects of Offshore Wind Farm Structures and Potential for Enhancement and Mitigation was prepared by PML Applications Ltd and the Scottish Association for Marine Science. This project was undertaken as part of the UK Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) offshore wind energy research programme, and managed on behalf of BERR by Hartley Anderson Ltd. We are particularly indebted to John Hartley and other members of the Research Advisory Group for their advice and guidance throughout the production of this report, and to Keith Hiscock and Antony Jensen who also provided detailed comment on early drafts. Numerous individuals have also contributed their advice, particularly in identifying data resources to assist with the analysis. We are particularly indebted to Angela Wratten, Chris Jenner, Tim Smyth, Mark Trimmer, Francis Bunker, Gero Vella, Robert Thornhill, Julie Drew, Adrian Maddocks, Robert Lillie, Tony Nott, Ben Barton, David Fletcher, John Leballeur, Laurie Ayling and Stephen Lockwood – who in the course of passing on information also contributed their ideas and thoughts.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Statement
    Environmental Statement INFORMATION SHEET Project name: Beatrice Wind Farm Demonstrator Project DTI Project Reference: D/2875/2005 Type of project: Demonstration of offshore wind farm Undertaker name: Talisman Energy (UK) Limited Address: 163 Holburn Street Aberdeen AB10 6BZ Licensees/Owners: Talisman Energy (UK) Limited Anticipated commencement of works: May 2006 Short description of project: Proposed installation and operation of two stand- alone wind turbine generating units (WTGs) to provide electrical power to the Beatrice platforms. The WTGs will be supported on small steel jackets piled into the seabed, and will be 88m high with blades 63m long. The WTGs will be linked to the Beatrice AP platform by a buried umbilical containing the electrical cable. Date and reference number of any Beatrice Decommissioning Programme earlier Statement related to this RDBF/003/00006C-01 and 02 project: December 2004 Significant environmental impacts Underwater noise from piling identified: Potential interaction with birds at sea Statement prepared by: Talisman Energy (UK) Limited – 1– TALISMAN ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Talisman is grateful for the support, advice and comments received from all organisations and individuals during the consultation programme. Thanks are due to the Moray Firth Partnership for help in organising major stakeholder meetings, and to the University of Aberdeen Lighthouse Field Station for access to unpublished data. This Environmental Statement was prepared with support from BMT Cordah Limited. Design and production by The Big Picture. – 2– CONTENTS CONTENTS 1 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY . .9 1.1 Introduction . .9 1.2 Description of proposed project . .10 1.3 Environmental setting for the proposed WTGs . .11 1.4 Consultation programme .
    [Show full text]
  • Hornsea Project Three Offshore Wind Farm
    Hornsea Project Three Offshore Wind Farm Hornsea Project Three Offshore Wind Farm Funding Statement Annex 2 – Ørsted Annual Report PINS Document Reference: A4.1.2 APFP Regulation 5(2)(h) Date: May 2018 Compulsory Acquisition Funding Statement Annex 2 – Ørsted Annual Report May 2018 Compulsory Acquisition Funding Statement Annex 2 – Ørsted Annual Report Cover Letter to the Planning Inspectorate Report Number: A4.1.2 Version: Final Date: May 2018 This report is also downloadable from the Hornsea Project Three offshore wind farm website at: www.hornseaproject3.co.uk Ørsted 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG © Orsted (UK) Ltd, 2018. All rights reserved Front cover picture: Kite surfer near a UK offshore wind farm © Orsted Hornsea Project Three (UK) Ltd., 2018 i Compulsory Acquisition Funding Statement Annex 2 – Ørsted Annual Report May 2018 Prepared by: Oliver Palasmith Checked by: Richard Grist Accepted by: Sophie Banham Approved by: Stuart Livesey ii Ørsted Annual report 2017 Ørsted Annual report 2017 Contents The Ørsted Way Let’s create a world that runs entirely on green energy Climate change is one of the biggest challenges for life on Earth. Today, the world mainly runs on fossil fuels. We need to transform the way we power the world; from black to green energy. At Ørsted, our vision is a world that runs entirely on green energy. We want to revolutionise the way we power people by developing green, independent and economically viable energy systems. By doing so, we create value for the societies that we are a part of and for all our stakeholders. The way we work is based on five guiding principles: Integrity Results We are open and trustworthy We set the bar high, take ownership and uphold high ethical standards and get the right things done Passion Safety We are passionate about what We never compromise on health and safety we do and proud of what we achieve standards Team Integrity is our root.
    [Show full text]
  • UK Offshore Wind Power Market Update Overview of the UK Offshore Wind Power Market and Points to Note for New Entrants May 2019
    UK Offshore Wind Power Market Update Overview of the UK offshore wind power market and points to note for new entrants May 2019 英国海上风电市场投资指南 | 经济及金融形势概览 02 2018年大型上市银行 | 引言 Contents Executive Summary 1 Chapter 1 UK Power Market Overview 3 1.1 Market structure 3 1.2 Market Status 7 1.3 Power Trading 9 1.4 European Commission power market legislation 11 Chapter 2 UK Offshore Wind Market 12 2.1 Market overview 12 2.2 Statutory stakeholders in UK offshore wind market 17 2.3 The Offshore Wind Sector Deal 19 Chapter 3 Project Development Key Steps 22 3.1 Project lifecycle 22 3.2 Seabed Leasing 23 3.3 Planning Consent and generation licence 29 3.4 Contract for Difference (CfD) auction 31 3.5 Transfer offshore transmission asset 41 Summary 48 Contact Details 50 1 英国海上风电市场投资指南 | 经济及金融形势概览 1 UK Offshore Wind Power Market Update | Executive Summary Executive Summary UK power market is one of the most liberalised power market in the world with sophisticated regulatory schemes to support efficiency and encourage competition. The openness and transparency of the UK power market have made it one of the most attractive destinations for overseas investors including strategic investors such as major utilities as well as infrastructure funds and other financial investors. Similar to many other markets in the world, the UK power market is going through a transition towards a cleaner energy mix. The UK will phase out coal-fired power plant by 2025 and offshore wind power is playing an increasingly important role in delivering the low carbon energy mix.
    [Show full text]
  • Dso Ai Market Tests Public Power Data
    New PowerJUNE 2019 REPORT CONTRACTS FOR DIFFERENCE Offshore wind steps up as thermal projects falter AI PUBLIC What can it do for energy? POWER Labour’s plans go local MARKET DSO Joining the EU’s TESTS new entity New products to manage constraint DATA ‘It is astonishing storage Industry should is not on the government’s learn lessons dashboard in the same way as offshore wind’ Mark Wilson, ILI Energy 15 MINUTES ‘Over 200GW of renewable Will GB lose capacity is likely to be required, its TERRE made up of predominantly wind and solar’ derogation? Kyle Martin, LCP Expert information for all those invested in the UK’s energy future REPORT Labour public ownership plan could create hundreds of local energy groups The Labour Party has put forward a programme for a bigger public role in energy supply that includes both national and regional authorities to set policy and could result in hundreds of local energy agencies. It promises, in ‘Bringing Energy Home’, that the change is not a return to “the distant bureaucracies of the 1970s”. The policy will start with a National Energy Agency, set up on the institutional base of National Grid, which will have duties over both decarbonisation and social objectives. It will own and operate the transmission system and will take over some of Ofgem’s functions. It will also be able to borrow to fund system extensions, including owning and operating storage. Regional energy agencies, based on distribution network operators’ areas, will have similar responsibilities within their areas and will also be able to take action over energy efficiency, regional industrial strategy and new infrastructure such as vehicle charging networks.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Vessel Requirements for the U.S. Offshore Wind Sector
    Assessment of Vessel Requirements for the U.S. Offshore Wind Sector Prepared for the Department of Energy as subtopic 5.2 of the U.S. Offshore Wind: Removing Market Barriers Grant Opportunity 24th September 2013 Disclaimer This Report is being disseminated by the Department of Energy. As such, the document was prepared in compliance with Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554) and information quality guidelines issued by the Department of Energy. Though this Report does not constitute “influential” information, as that term is defined in DOE’s information quality guidelines or the Office of Management and Budget's Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (Bulletin), the study was reviewed both internally and externally prior to publication. For purposes of external review, the study and this final Report benefited from the advice and comments of offshore wind industry stakeholders. A series of project-specific workshops at which study findings were presented for critical review included qualified representatives from private corporations, national laboratories, and universities. Acknowledgements Preparing a report of this scope represented a year-long effort with the assistance of many people from government, the consulting sector, the offshore wind industry and our own consortium members. We would like to thank our friends and colleagues at Navigant and Garrad Hassan for their collaboration and input into our thinking and modeling. We would especially like to thank the team at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) who prepared many of the detailed, technical analyses which underpinned much of our own subsequent modeling.
    [Show full text]
  • First Quarter 2021 Earnings Presentation
    First Quarter 2021 Earnings Presentation 29 April 2021 1 © Subsea 7 - 2021 subsea7.com Forward looking statements • This document 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 2020. 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]
  • Who's the Patsy? Offshore Wind's High-Stakes Poker Game
    WHO’S THE PATSY? Offshore wind’s high-stakes poker game Gordon Hughes The Global Warming Policy Foundation GWPF Note 18 WHO’S THE PATSY? Offshore wind’s high-stakes poker game Gordon Hughes © Copyright 2019 The Global Warming Policy Foundation Contents About the author vi 1 Introduction 1 2 Project revenues 2 3 Operating costs 2 4 Financing costs 3 5 Net earnings 3 6 Comparison with the Beatrice offshore wind farm 4 7 Who is the patsy? 5 8 Conclusion 7 Notes 8 About the author Gordon Hughes is a former adviser to the World Bank and is professor of economics at the University of Edinburgh. If you’ve been in the game for 30 minutes and you don’t know who the patsy is...you’re the patsy. Warren Buffett on poker vi 1 Introduction There is an aphorism, which applies to both business and economic policy, that when a deal is too good (or bad) to be sustained, the only question is when and how it breaks down. This applies to the auctions to supply renewable energy under the UK’s Contract for Difference (CfD) contracts.∗ The headlines following the announcement of the results of the allocation round in 2017 highlighted dramatic reductions in the strike prices for three projects due to come on-stream in 2021 and 2022 relative to the strike prices for the previous round of offshore wind contracts. Shortly after the CfD strike prices were first announced, Capell Aris, John Constable andI wrote a paper Offshore Wind Strike Prices: Behind the headlines 1 questioning the assumption that the capital costs of offshore wind were falling rapidly and suggesting that offshore wind would be unviable at these low strike prices.
    [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]