Scotland: First Floating Wind Farm

[The Glitch]

I live in Scotland, and yesterday was the first time I had even heard of this project, Hywind. I love wind farms, and feel they are definitely going to be a huge part of our future producing power.

I thought the whole -floating- thing was quite interesting. Do you think we will see more of these floating farms? What are your thoughts on it?

The world’s first floating offshore wind farm began delivering electricity to the Scottish grid today.
The 30MW installation, situated 25km (15.5mi) from Peterhead in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, will demonstrate that offshore wind energy can be harvested in deep waters, miles away from land, where installing giant turbines was once impractical or impossible. At peak capacity, the wind farm will produce enough electricity to power 20,000 Scottish homes.

The installation, called Hywind Scotland, is also interesting because it was built by Statoil, a Norwegian mega-corporation known for offshore oil drilling. Statoil has pursued offshore wind projects in recent years, using the company’s experience building and managing infrastructure in difficult open sea conditions to its advantage.

Hywind Scotland began producing power in September, and today it starts delivering electricity to the Scottish grid. Now, all that's left is for Statoil and its partner company Masdar to install a 1MWh lithium-ion battery, charmingly called “Batwind,” on shore. Batwind will help the offshore system regulate power delivery and optimize output.

After a number of small demonstration projects, the five 6MW turbines are the first commercial turbines to lack a firm attachment to the seafloor. They're held in place using three giant suction anchors, which are commonly used in offshore oil drilling. Essentially, an enormous, empty, upside-down “bucket” is placed on the seafloor, and air is sucked out of the bucket, which forces the bucket downward, further into the seafloor sediment. The 2013 video below helpfully shows exactly how that works.
The towers, which extend 176m (577ft) above the water and 78m (256ft) below it, are then moored to the three anchors. The towers have a rotor diameter of 154m (505ft). A cable running from each delivers electricity to a power station onshore.

The turbines are quite high-tech as well. According to Statoil, each tower is capable of pitching its blades to reduce unwanted motion and optimize power output depending on the wind direction and strength.

The project cost about 200 million pounds ($263 million) to construct, according to Bloomberg. But the UK government will help Statoil recover that cost. It has pledged to deliver 3.5 Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) to Statoil for the power produced by Hywind Scotland, which translates to about 140 pounds ($185) per megawatt-hour on top of the current wholesale power price in the UK, which is about 49 pounds ($65) per megawatt-hour.
That's not cheap, but Statoil is confident that it can now build these floating wind farms faster and cheaper. Irene Rummelhoff, the executive vice president of Statoil's New Energy Solutions business, said in a press release, “Statoil has an ambition to reduce the costs of energy from the Hywind floating wind farm to € 40-60 €/MWh by 2030."

But why build floating offshore wind farms in the first place? The farther out you can place offshore turbines, the steadier and faster the wind is. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding any community arguments over clean ocean views, not to mention the fact that unimaginably large rotor components can be delivered by sea rather than by land, where roads have weight limits and turns can get tricky. In addition, Statoil claims that 80 percent of offshore wind resources are in deep water, where fixed installation would be prohibitively expensive.

So floating offshore wind offers a way to bring more wind power online in a theoretically cheaper fashion. Wind is already seeing the benefits of a significant learning curve. In January, The Crown Estate, which manages the UK seabed (and has leased the necessary acreage to Statoil for Hywind Scotland) released a report saying that the cost of offshore wind had come down 34 percent in the last four years. Another report published in Nature Energy in November 2016 estimated that advances in turbine technology would reduce the cost of wind by 24 to 30 percent by 2030. Hywind Scotland is a step in that direction.

Link to source: https://arstechnica.com/science/2017...s-electricity/

[Daedius]

Current wind farm take up a lot of open space... so I'd be in favour of these off-shores ones... if they can overcome a number of hurdles.

[Deleted]

These seems easier to manage though:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_wind_turbine
And I bet there is even more space in the air.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Very cool way to go Scotland.

[Deleted]

I would be a tad skeptical with the price tag that is being put on them currently, but it could very well be a future design that could benefit coastal nations.

[ItsRainingMetal]

Dont get too excited, im sure a bunch of poles will pull up and tow them away soon enough.

[cubby]

I live in Scotland, and yesterday was the first time I had even heard of this project, Hywind. I love wind farms, and feel they are definitely going to be a huge part of our future producing power.

I thought the whole -floating- thing was quite interesting. Do you think we will see more of these floating farms? What are your thoughts on it?





Link to source: https://arstechnica.com/science/2017...s-electricity/

That's fantastic. It seems like the project hit all the right buttons in all the right places. Good output. Far enough offshore that no one can see (i.e. not an "eyesore" - whatever that means in this case, but grats nonetheless).

I wonder what the math would be like to line the shores with these farms. What percentage of electrical needs could be met of an coastal faring country.

Also - I noticed that they call this a floating wind farm, but it doesn't float . . . it's anchored to the ground.

- - - Updated - - -

Current wind farm take up a lot of open space... so I'd be in favour of these off-shores ones... if they can overcome a number of hurdles.

What hurdles?

- - - Updated - - -

Very cool way to go Scotland.

Agreed. I want to do some back-of-the-envelope math to see how this would work for the world. Although it seems places like Australia might fare better with land-based wind farms, just because they are probably easier to maintain, and Australia has all that open (and mostly useless) space.

- - - Updated - - -

I would be a tad skeptical with the price tag that is being put on them currently, but it could very well be a future design that could benefit coastal nations.

I can't see the costs going up now that they have proof of concept actually generating. I could see it going down dramatically - and the article intimates that the cost will drop significantly.

[The Glitch]

Also - I noticed that they call this a floating wind farm, but it doesn't float . . . it's anchored to the ground.

Not sure what the qualifications for calling it floating are, I plead ignorance on that kinda stuff lol.

[Fonduset]

Good for Scotland. The more wind farms the better

[Pyro1990]

I've always liked the idea of these that harvest energy from the oceans waves but these seem good as well

[cubby]

Not sure what the qualifications for calling it floating are, I plead ignorance on that kinda stuff lol.

Same here - and frankly, I don't really care overall, just for detail's sake - if that makes sense.

- - - Updated - - -

I've always liked the idea of these that harvest energy from the oceans waves but these seem good as well

The wave energy generators are also very interesting. From what little I know of them, they need to be relatively close to shore - which I think perks up the "eyesore" argument. Not saying I agree/disagree, though, just pointing it out.

[Pyro1990]

That's fantastic. It seems like the project hit all the right buttons in all the right places. Good output. Far enough offshore that no one can see (i.e. not an "eyesore" - whatever that means in this case, but grats nonetheless).

I wonder what the math would be like to line the shores with these farms. What percentage of electrical needs could be met of an coastal faring country.

Also - I noticed that they call this a floating wind farm, but it doesn't float . . . it's anchored to the ground.

The way I understood it is the turbines are floating and they are tethered to the anchors so they dont float away. Could be wrong tho.

[Post]

I figured putting them in the ocean would make them a lot harder to manage/maintain but if they can handle it then I see nothing wrong with it.

[cubby]

The way I understood it is the turbines are floating and they are tethered to the anchors so they dont float away. Could be wrong tho.

When I first read the story, that's how I thought it would be rigged. And the story itself intimates that's how it works - even a quote from one of the founders says . But the renderings seem to indicate that the turbines are fixed. Maybe other ones will be floating/anchored?

- - - Updated - - -

I figured putting them in the ocean would make them a lot harder to manage/maintain but if they can handle it then I see nothing wrong with it.

I wondered about that, too. The ocean is notoriously corrosive - they must have figured out a good production model to prevent long term corrosion. If I'm the first to think of it we're all fucked.

[Deleted]

I can't see the costs going up now that they have proof of concept actually generating. I could see it going down dramatically - and the article intimates that the cost will drop significantly.

I am simply being skeptical, and await it. My own nation spurred on how ocean wave energy was this great thing that would happen, yet it is not come to fruition yet, since it has been stuck with a high price and low output comparatively.

I am however optimistic that this will help further our future with minimal fossil fuels.

[cubby]

I am simply being skeptical, and await it. My own nation spurred on how ocean wave energy was this great thing that would happen, yet it is not come to fruition yet, since it has been stuck with a high price and low output comparatively.

I am however optimistic that this will help further our future with minimal fossil fuels.

I think cautious optimism is the way to go regarding renewable energy on a daily developmental basis - take each stride with some skepticism (as well as hope!). I like that this is built and producing and isn't some proof-of-concept model or lab design yet to see daylight. The fact that they have such hard numbers to work with is inspiring - and the "eyesore" solution really works in their favor.

Most designs usually drop in cost as efficiency's are found (or even the simplicity of "buying in bulk") so there is a good indicator, at least, that cost more than likely will drop. If so - 20,000 homes per wind farm. Very tasty.

[Afrospinach]

Also - I Agreed. I want to do some back-of-the-envelope math to see how this would work for the world. Although it seems places like Australia might fare better with land-based wind farms, just because they are probably easier to maintain, and Australia has all that open (and mostly useless) space.

Australia? Why are you even talking about wind.

[cubby]

Australia? Why are you even talking about wind.

Lol, good point. Geo-thermal would probably be better! /kidding

I guess solar would be the way to go out there, eh?

[Shadowmelded]

I've always liked the idea of these that harvest energy from the oceans waves but these seem good as well

Apparently we trialed those a while ago. Dunno what became of it. We've got some tidal power generation already though.

[Pyro1990]

Apparently we trialed those a while ago. Dunno what became of it. We've got some tidal power generation already though.

Idealy I would like all of these technologies that harvest energy in various forms from the ocean to grow and become more widespread. The ocean has a vast amount of untapped energy and any way we can distance ourselves from oil dependency the better.