WINDSPEED. Resultat og erfaringer med MSP. 26. september 2013 Hans Chr. Sørensen, SPOK ApS. Contract number: EIE/07/759/S

Transcription

1 WINDSPEED Resultat og erfaringer med MSP 26. september 2013 Hans Chr. Sørensen, SPOK ApS Contract number: EIE/07/759/S

2 Background H C Sørensen Business and university background PhD, 40 years with business development Project management large projects Ocean wave energy (Wave Dragon), Tidal current (Tideng) Offshore wind (Middelgrunden 40 MW, Samsø 23 MW, Hvidovre 7.2 MW) Committees Danish Wind Turbine Owners Association, board European Ocean Energy Association, vice president to 2011 consult@spok.dk

3 Objectives WINDSPEED To establish an offshore wind road map for based on a transnational approach for the North Sea region Results: 135 GW possible - more than 33% of the electricity consumption in the region Installed capacity by 2020 is expected to be 32 GW following the 2020 plans

4 Bottom-up site specific cost model developed for the entire study area for use in the DSS Cost inputs Bathymetry Geological Conditions Storm Surge Spring Tidal Amplitude Mean Wave Height Extreme Wave Height Staging Ports Grid Connection Points Ave. Wind Speed at 90m shading indicates levelised production cost

5 Decision Support System: Processing (Overview)

6 DSS Processing Distance To Coast Parameters (2 * 6) Mininum distance Maximum distance

7 DSS Processing Water Depth Parameters (1 * 6) Maximum depth

8 Parameters (2 * 6) Limit type LPC CapEx OpEx Cost limit for LPC CapEx OpEx DSS Processing Cost Limit

9 DSS Processing General Suitable Areas + = +

10 Sea mammals: Distribution of two species. Harbour porpoise Wageningen- IMARES Minke whale

11 Fishing effort Sweden and Denmark Wageningen- IMARES

12 Decommisioning of offshore oil and gas platforms. ( Year out of production >2021 Unknown Wageningen- IMARES

13 Example: spatial inputs Cables & Pipelines Military Sand Extraction Shipping Density Shipping Routes Oil & Gas Platforms Fisheries Nature Conservations Zones Fish species richness Benthic value Bird Sensitivity Existing and Planned OWP shipping Marine wildlife vulnerability Military zones Spatial usage patterns and nature values were collected for the entire study area and harmonised for use in the DSS along with exclusion rules that dictate how each sea use function interacts with OWE

14 Economic potentials Map of economic potential in the WINDSPEED area for each scenario: Little Will Little Wind [bottom left], Going Solo [top left], In the Deep [bottom right] and Grand Design [top right

15 Spatial capacity (GW) Spatial results The maps show the large impact that technology related exclusions, such as permissible water depths and distances to shore, have on the available areas for new OWE. They also show the relatively high level of spatial congestion close to the coast of most of the WINDSPEED countries when additional space for OWE is not prioritised, as well as how this can change when some level of synergy and/or compromise is sought with non-wind sea use functions. The overall spatial potential for OWE in the WINDSPEED study area was determined by combining the results of the DSS, which looks for new areas for deployment, with knowledge of existing and proposed offshore wind parks Grand Design In the Deep Going Solo Little Will Little Wind BE DE DK NL NO UK Total potential spatial capacity in the WINDSPEED area for each of the countries in each of the 4 scenarios

16 Capacity [GW] Economic potentials LWLW Going Solo In the Deep Grand Design Spatial Spatial > 70 m 1st economic 2nd economic (-) 2nd economic (+) Overview of total 2030 estimated capacities Overview of the different potentials for the six WINDSPEED countries in The minimum of the economic potential is indicated by (-), the maximum by (+) in the WINDSPEED study area for each of the 4 scenarios

17 Average levelised production cost ( /MWh) Key spatial drivers sand extraction fisheries oil and gas extraction military areas shipping exclusions nature conservation areas cable or pipelines 170 marine wildlife preservation % 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percentage overlap with other sea use functions Labelled bubble size represents the total excluded area in TWh

18 WINDSPEED approach WP3: Inventory of current and future sea uses WP2: Cost inventory of offshore wind energy WP4: Develop Decision Support System (DSS) WP6: Scenario analysis of spatial priorities WP6: Roadmap and policy recommendations Stakeholder consultation

19 Decision Support System A GIS based Decision Support System (DSS) was developed. The DSS maps the available spatial information regarding the existing and forecast sea use functions in the North Sea as influenced by the user-driven cost model and spatial strategies to determine available space and costs for offshore wind farms. This process negotiates available space on the basis of user-defined criteria, i.e. the user of the software can change the spatial prioritization/ extent of each sea use with regards to OWE. User interface Example output plots Example output map

20 Grid connections The scenarios fall into two broad categories in regards to the connection philosophy assumed for future OWE. The first is for radial connections only, whereby countries continue to connect individual parks back to shore with HVAC or HVDC technology as seen today. The second is a mix of radial connections (for near shore resource), along with an offshore meshed grid where further from shore OWE clusters are directly interconnected using HVDC technology (see below). Illustration of the key components of an offshore grid: In the Deep [left] and Grand Design [right]

21 Cumulative potential generation (TWh) OWE costs The cost model in the DSS provides information on the cost and potential of incremental areas for OWE. The plot below shows the supply curve for new OWE (outside identified existing or planned wind parks) for the entire WINDSPEED area Little will Little wind Going Solo In the Deep In the Deep - 70m depth constraint Grand design Grand design - 70m depth constraint Levelised Production Cost ( /MWh)

22 A set of four scenarios were developed within a two dimensional framework. The two dimensions reflect, firstly, various spatial allocation priorities and interaction regimes for OWE and, secondly, differing viewpoints on technology development and costs. These two dimensions reflect two of the key uncertainties that impact the future deployment of offshore wind energy. Scenario design

23 Key messages - spatial There is limited potential for incremental OWE capacity across most of the southern portion of the North Sea by focussing on relatively near-to-shore and radially connected wind parks without prioritisation of space for OWE. Changes in the level of prioritisation that is given to new OWE in terms of looking for co-use with some existing sea uses or assuming some level of compromise on the extent of other certain uses were found to make a large difference to the potential for incremental OWE; particularly for generation at low to moderate delivered electricity costs. Tied closely to the ability to find new space for OWE is the need to integrate planning of certain existing sea use functions with wind parks. Relaxing the constraints on the permissible maximum distance to the coast in anticipation of connecting these far from shore areas via an offshore grid significantly increases the spatial potential. The In the Deep incremental spatial potential is roughly five times that of the Little Will Little Wind scenario (in effect matched scenarios, as both do not spatially prioritise for OWE) and the Grand Design scenario identifies more than three times the incremental spatial potential as the Going Solo scenario. There are potential co-use opportunities for OWE and certain sea use functions, due to the low average installed density of wind turbines that is assumed. The corridors between neighbouring parks can be utilised by other sea use functions such as shipping and fishing. Relatively low densities of OWE (at a macro scale) are thus not only necessary to preserve the level of wind resource, but also allow integration or co-use of some other sea uses. Realising floating technologies effectively doubles the total spatial OWE potential in both the In the Deep and Grand Design scenarios. The utilisation of this would be contingent on cost effective floating solutions becoming available. Moreover, the additional capacity is concentrated almost exclusively in the UK and Norway, which suggests that the drive for such technology will likely have to originate in these countries.

24 Project Partners Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) Wageningen IMARES GL Garrad Hassan SINTEF Energy Research Deutsches Zentrum für Luftund Raumfahrt e.v. (DLR) Stiftung Offshore Windenergie SPOK ApS Coventry University Enterprise