How Long Does It Take To Build An Offshore Wind Farm?
These are some timescales and costs for the construction of some wind farms.
East Anglia One
East Anglia One is a 714 MW offshore wind farm, which consists of 102 turbines on fixed foundations, in a maximum water depth of 53 metres.
- Planning consent – June 2014.
- Contracts – April 2016
- Offshore construction – June 2018
- Commissioned – July 2020
It is expected to cost £2.5 billion.
Hornsea One
Hornsea One is a 1200 MW offshore wind farm, which consists of 174 turbines on fixed foundations, in a maximum water depth of 30 metres.
- Planning consent – April 2014.
- Contracts – March/April 2016
- Offshore construction – January 2018
- Commissioned – March 2020
It is expected to cost £4.2 billion.
Hornsea Two
Hornsea Two is a 1400 MW offshore wind farm, which consists of 165 turbines on fixed foundations, in a maximum water depth of 30 metres.
- Planning consent – August 2016.
- Offshore construction – 2020
- Commissioned – August 2022
I can’t find any costs.
Moray East
Moray East is a 950 MW offshore wind farm, which consists of 100 turbines on fixed foundations, in a maximum water depth of 50 metres.
- Planning consent – 2014.
- Financial Close – December 2018
- Offshore construction – July 2020
- Commissioned – July 2022
It is expected to cost £2.6 billion.
Keadby Wind Farm
Keadby Wind Farm is a 68 MW onshore wind farm, which consists of 34 turbines.
SSE says this about its construction timescale.
After receiving planning permission in 2008, construction began in 2012 and the first turbine foundation was complete in February 2013. The final turbine was assembled on 11 December 2013 and the project was completed in summer 2014.
I can’t find any costs.
Can I Deduce Anything?
Two things are similar on the four fixed-foundation offshore wind farms.
Planning Consent To Commissioning Seems To Take About Six To Eight Years
Moray East took eight years and the other three took six.
In addition Keadby onshore wind farm took six years.
This indicates to me, that any improvements to the planning process for wind farms could shorten the planning process for many wind farms and allow offshore construction of these wind farms to start earlier.
The Start Of Offshore Construction To commissioning Seems To Take About Two Years
It surprised me that it takes twice as long to go from planning to the start of offshore construction, than to actually build and commission the offshore components of the project.
In addition Keadby onshore wind farm took two years.
How will these two observations affect floating wind farms, which could be more numerous in the future?
The home page of the Principle Power web site, shows a floating wind turbine being constructed and floated out.
- The turbine and its float are assembled in a deep water dock, using a large crane mounted on the dock.
- This dockside assembly must be less dependent on good weather, than doing assembly onto a fixed foundation forty miles or more out to sea.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find that floating wind farms may have substantial health and safety, and construction advantages, but I doubt they’d save much time on the current two years of offshore construction.
But I suspect, they would be one of these types of project that would only rarely be late.
Assembly And Project Management Issues
As with many types of construction, I suspect good project management will be key to building both fixed-foundation and floating offshore wind farms.
For fixed-foundation wind farms, a steady stream of turbines, foundations, substations and connecting cables would need to be delivered to a tight schedule to the assembly point offshore, where turbines, foundations, substations and connecting cables would be lifted into place by a crane mounted on a barge or ship.
For floating wind farms, a steady stream of turbines, floats and probably some connecting cables would need to be delivered to a tight schedule to the assembly dock in a convenient port, where turbines would be lifted onto floats by a crane mounted on the dock. Once complete, the floating wind turbines would be towed into position, anchored and connected to the offshore sub-station.
- No large offshore crane would be needed.
- The dockside crane could be sized for the largest turbines.
- Floating turbines would be brought back to the dockside for major serving and updating.
- One assembly dock could serve several wind farms during construction and operation.
Given that in the latest ScotWind leasing round, there was 17.4 GW of floating wind farms and 9.7 GW of fixed-foundation wind farms, which is 64/36 % split, I can see that the proportion of floating wind farms will increase.
Good project management, with particular attention to the rate of the production of critical components will be needed for both fixed-foundation and floating offshore wind farms.
Perhaps it would help, if we reduced the numbers of types of each components?
Would it be too far to imagine a British Standard float, that could handle any manufacturer’s turbine with a standard connecting cable? This is Plug-and-Play at the very heavy end.
Conclusion
Consider.
- As the floating wind technology matures, I can see the designs getting more affordable and the proportion of floating wind farms increasing dramatically.
- I also believe that in the future, it will take a shorter time to install, connect up and commission a wind farm.
This leads me to think, that in future, it is reasonable to make the following assumptions.
- It will take six years or less from planning consent to commissioning.
- It will take two years or less from the start of construction to commissioning.
Note.
- I’m assuming that better project management and improved government legislation, will tend to level down the times.
- Floating or fixed foundations doesn’t seem to make much difference.
The UK will become Europe’s zero-carbon power station.
Maximising Space In North Sea Essential To Tackling Energy Security And Net Zero Targets
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the Eastern Daily Press.
These two paragraphs introduce the article.
Reviving wells in the Southern North Sea, powering oil and gas platforms with wind turbines, capturing and storing CO2 and hydrogen systems, starting work on world-class offshore wind farms off the coast and consent for Sizewell C nuclear power station – the East of England is ripe with opportunity for companies ready for the challenge.
The industrialised North Sea is becoming supercharged in the name of UK energy security – so much so that a spatial planning exercise is under way to optimise the seabed for energy security and make everything fit for maximum efficiency.
This is an article, that must be read fully.
These are some topics that are discussed.
- Looking at old wells to see if more oil and gas can be extracted.
- Electrification of oil and gas facilities, where economic and possible.
- Powering oil and gas facilities with offshore wind.
This is also said about the Innovation and Targeted Oil and Gas (INTOG) leasing round.
The Innovation and Targeted Oil and Gas (INTOG) leasing round is open for developers to apply for the rights to build offshore wind farms specifically to provide low-carbon electricity to power oil and gas installations in Scotland. It offers the opportunity to enable small scale (less than 100MW) innovation projects, including alternative outputs such as hydrogen.
It looks like mopping up the oil and gas in the North Sea could be promoted as a possible alternative to fracking.
I shall be interested to see how INTOG progresses.
At worst, it will mean that oil and gas installations will be powered by zero-carbon electricity, but in addition it could recover worthwhile amounts of oil and gas.
UK Cleantech Consortium Awarded Funding For Energy Storage Technology Integrated With Floating Wind
The title of this post, is the same as that of this page on the UK Government’s Catapult Offshore Renewable Energy Web Site.
This is the introductory paragraph.
STORE, a UK-based cleantech consortium led by RCAM Technologies Limited, has been awarded £150,000 of funding to develop an advanced subsea energy storage technology manufactured using 3D printed concrete that could help offshore wind farms produce a steady and predictable energy output to the electricity grid.
This paragraph talks of the concept of Marine Pumped Hydro.
STORE is assessing the feasibility of integrating Marine Pumped Hydro (MPH) technology, which stores energy using hollow concrete spheres fitted with a hydraulic turbine and pump, with floating offshore wind plants in UK waters. In addition, the project advances the design of MPH systems and plans a prototype demonstration in the UK.
Note.
- The hollow concrete spheres are 3D-printed in concrete using the technology of RCAM Technologies.
- Spheres are structurally very strong.
- 3D printing of concrete is now mainstream technology and has been extensively used on the Elizabeth Line as I wrote about in The Story Behind The Concrete Panels On The Elizabeth Line.
- There is a visualisation on the Catapult web page, which shows several floating turbines, a floating sub station and several concrete hemispheres sitting on the seabed.
- The energy storage medium is sea water and air, which must be environmentally-friendly.
The technology is described in detail on this page of the STORE consortium web site.
- The spheres are fifteen metres across.
- The spheres can be installed at depths between 150 and 2000 metres.
- The system has a round-trip efficiency is up to 70%, which is similar to pumped storage hydro.
- The design life is 50 to 80 years.
I think that this system has possibilities.
This last paragraph in the Catapult web page gives a look into the future.
As well as improving the reliability and predictability of energy to the electricity grid, the project will support the cross sector transfer of UK offshore expertise and port infrastructure for use in renewable energy and create high-value UK jobs in engineering, construction, and operations and maintenance. This energy storage solution is ideally suited to coupling with floating wind plants and for powering offshore oil and gas assets from renewable energy. The 3D printed concrete also facilitates localized manufacturing and enables low cost fabrication of new and complex shapes that were previously not practical.
I also feel that if the concrete sphere energy storage can be made to successfully work, then the technology can surely be fitted to any offshore wind farm, by just adding the right number of spheres and connecting them to the offshore sub station.
The STORE Consortium
The STORE consortium has a web site, which has a heading of Innovative Subsea Energy Storage.
It describes the technology in this paragraph.
STORE is advancing a subsea energy storage technology called Marine Pumped Hydro (MPH). MPH uses large hollow concrete spheres on the seafloor to store mechanical energy in the form of pressure. MPH charges when seawater is pumped out of the spheres and releases energy to the grid when high-pressure water flows back into the spheres through a turbine. MPH features a patent-pending multi-sphere pod to increase the amount of energy stored and uses efficient 3D concrete printing to reduce manufacturing costs.
It sounds like an engineer with children, has been playing with them and their plastic toys in a bath and has had an Archimedes moment.
The project and its funding is described in this paragraph.
STORE was awarded £150,000 from the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy Longer Duration Energy Storage Demonstration (LODES) competition. Phase 1 will deliver a Feasibility Study focused on the design and analyses for the UK. Phase 2, if awarded, will design, manufacture, and operate a prototype system at TRL 6.
Note that TRL 6 is Technology Readiness Level 6 and is fully defined on this NASA web page, as having a fully functional prototype or representational model.
There is also an interesting link to the ScotWind N3 wind farm. that I wrote about in ScotWind N3 Offshore Wind Farm.
- This is an unusual floating wind farm with a floating substation.
- Technip and Loch Kishorn port are involved in both the wind farm and STORE.
- Loch Kishorn has a history of building immense concrete structures.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this wind farm would be the location of the prototype system.
Conclusion
This is a brilliant concept.
- It is the ideal energy storage system for offshore wind, as it can turn a wind farm with a variable output into one with a much more constant output.
- It can be retrofitted to existing offshore wind farms.
- It will work with both fixed and floating wind farms.
- The concrete storage spheres can be fully assembled with all their electrical gubbins on shore and towed out, before sinking in the required position.
It also looks like the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy have got involved and helped with the funding. Someone there seems to know a good idea, when they see it!
IberBlue Wind Launches In Spain And Portugal With The Objective Of Promoting Iberian Leadership In Floating Offshore Wind
The title of this post is the same as that of this press release from the Simply Blue Group.
These three paragraphs introduce the project.
Simply Blue Group, Proes Consultores and FF New Energy Ventures have formed a joint venture that brings together expertise in all phases of floating offshore wind farm development.
The joint venture will focus its operations in Spain on Andalusia and Galicia, while in Portugal it will focus on the central and northern parts of the country.
IberBlue Wind aims to develop around 2GW of floating offshore wind farms.
This paragraph describes the plans of the Irish company; Simply Blue Group.
Simply Blue Group is a global developer of floating offshore wind farms with projects in Ireland, UK, US, Poland, and Sweden. Simply Blue Group currently has a pipeline of 10GW of projects under development. As part of its growth strategy, the company is now expanding into the Spanish and Portuguese markets.
It appears to be a very ambitious company.
Every GW of renewable energy helps.
Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions To Expand U.S. Offshore Wind Energy
The title of this post is the same as that of this fact sheet from the White House briefing room.
This is the sub-title.
Departments of Energy, Interior, Commerce, and Transportation Launch Initiatives on Floating Offshore Wind to Deploy 15 GW, Power 5 Million Homes, and Lower Costs 70% by 2035.
Some points from the fact sheet.
- The President set a bold goal of deploying 30 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind by 2030, enough to power 10 million homes with clean energy, support 77,000 jobs, and spur private investment up and down the supply chain.
- Conventional offshore wind turbines can be secured directly to the sea floor in shallow waters near the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico.
- However, deep-water areas that require floating platforms are home to two-thirds of America’s offshore wind energy potential, including along the West Coast and in the Gulf of Maine.
- Globally, only 0.1 GW of floating offshore wind has been deployed to date, compared with over 50 GW of fixed-bottom offshore wind.
- The Floating Offshore Wind Shot will aim to reduce the costs of floating technologies by more than 70% by 2035, to $45 per megawatt-hour.
- The Administration will advance lease areas in deep waters in order to deploy 15 GW of floating offshore wind capacity by 2035.
This all seems to be ambitious!
But!
- In ScotWind Offshore Wind Leasing Delivers Major Boost To Scotland’s Net Zero Aspirations, I looked at Scotland’s latest round of offshore wind leases.
- If the lessors carry out their proposals Scotland will add 9.7 GW of fixed-foundation offshore wind farms and 14.6 GW of floating offshore wind farms, which I estimate will be built by 2035.
- In Three Shetland ScotWind Projects Announced, I looked at three floating wind farms to the East of Shetland, which are a secondary deal after ScotWind, which could generate 2.8 GW by 2035.
- In Is This The World’s Most Ambitious Green Energy Solution?, I describe an ambitious plan called Northern Horizons, proposed by Norwegian company; Aker to build a 10 GW floating wind farm, which will be 120 km to the North-East of the Shetlands.
It could be possible that little Scotland installs more floating wind farms before 2035, than the United States.
And what about England, Wales and Northern Ireland?
- England hasn’t announced any floating wind farm projects, but has around 17 GW of fixed-foundation offshore wind farms under development in the shallower waters along the East and South coasts.
- In Two Celtic Sea Floating Wind Projects Could Be Delivered By 2028, I looked at prospects for the Celtic Sea between Wales, Ireland and Devon/Cornwall. It is possible that a GW of floating wind could be developed by 2028, out of an ultimate potential of around 50 GW.
- Northern Ireland is a few years behind England and Scotland and might eventually make a substantial contribution.
But Biden’s aims of a strong supply chain could be helped by Scotland, as several of the floating wind farms in Scotland are proposing to use WindFloat technology from Principle Power, who are a US company. The Principle Power website has an explanatory video on the home page.
North Seas Countries Commit To 260 GW Of Offshore Wind By 2050
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Renewables Now.
This is the first two paragraphs.
The nine member countries of the North Seas Energy Cooperation (NSEC) on Monday committed to at least 260 GW of offshore wind energy by 2050.
The NSEC aims to advance offshore renewables in the North Seas, including the Irish and Celtic Seas, and groups Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the European Commission.
Note.
Intermediate targets are 76 GW by 2030 and 193 GW by 2040.
The UK has a target of 50 GW by 2030, of which 5 GW will be floating offshore wind.
The UK is not mentioned, but has joint projects with the Danes, Germans, Irish, Norwegians, Spanish and Swedes.
There is nothing about energy storage or hydrogen!
On the figures given, I think we’re holding our own. But then we’ve got more sea than anybody else.
Stromar, Broadshore And Bellrock
The ScotWind wind farms, that I described in ScotWind Offshore Wind Leasing Delivers Major Boost To Scotland’s Net Zero Aspirations, are starting to be more than numbers in documents.
This map shows the various ScotWind leases.
Note, that the numbers are Scotwind’s lease number in their documents.
- 3 is now Bellrock and 1,200 MW
- 8 is now Broadshore and 900 MW
- 10 is now Stromar and 1,000 MW
Falck Renewables, who have now been renamed Renantis, and BlueFloat Energy are involved in all three projects, with Ørsted also involved in Stromar.
This article on Renewable Energy Magazine is entitled Companies Partner on Floating Offshore Wind In Scotland, where this is said.
Together the three areas could accommodate a total of approximately 3.0 GW of offshore wind capacity, with the projects scheduled to be operational by the end of the decade, subject to securing consent, commercial arrangements and grid connections.
Dates for ScotWind seem to be emerging and 2030 seems to cover several.
Three Shetland ScotWind Projects Announced
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release on Crown Estate Scotland.
These three paragraphs outline how the leases were allocated.
Three projects will be offered seabed agreements for offshore wind projects following Crown Estate Scotland’s ScotWind clearing process.
The announcement comes as an offshore wind supply chain summit is held in Aberdeen today (22 August) with Sir Ian Wood, chaired by Michael Matheson MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Energy, and including a keynote address by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon MSP.
Clearing saw the ‘NE1’ area east of Shetland made available for ScotWind applicants who met the required standards but who did not secure their chosen location earlier in the leasing process.
I think it was good idea to offer these leases to those bidders that failed to get a lease, the first time around, despite meeting the standards.
- Would it encourage bidders, if they knew that after the expense of setting up a bid, that if they failed, they could have another chance?
- It must also save the Scottish Government time and money checking out bidders.
- How many times have you interviewed several applicants for a job and then found jobs for some of those, that you didn’t choose for the original job?
Let’s hope the philosophy has generated some good extra contracts.
This map from Cross Estate Scotland shows all the contracts.
Note the three new leases numbered 18, 19 and 20 to the East of Shetland, in the North-East corner of the map.
Their details are as follows.
- 18 – Ocean Winds – 500 MW
- 19 – Mainstream Renewable Power – 1800 MW
- 20 – ESB Asset Development – 500 MW
Note.
All are floating wind farms.
- Ocean Winds is a Spanish renewable energy company that is developing the Moray West and Moray East wind farms.
- Mainstream Renewable Power appear to be a well-financed and ambitious company, 75 % owned by Aker.
- ESB Energy appear to be an experienced energy company owned by the Irish state, who operate several wind farms and Carrington gas-fired power station in the UK.
2.8 GW would appear to be a generous second helping.
Ocean Winds and Mainstream Renewable Power
This web page on the Ocean Winds web site, is entitled Ocean Winds Designated Preferred Bidder For Seabed Leases For 2.3 GW Of Floating Projects East Of Shetland, Scotland, contains several snippets of useful information.
- Crown Estate Scotland announced the result of ScotWind Leasing round clearing process, awarding Ocean Winds with two seabed leases for floating offshore wind projects: a 1.8 GW capacity site with partner Mainstream Renewable Power, and another 500 MW capacity site, east of the Shetland Islands.
- Ocean Winds’ international portfolio of projects now reaches 14.5 GW of gross capacity, including 6.1 GW in Scotland.
- Floating wind turbines for the two adjacent sites are confirmed, because of the water depth.
- The partners are committed to developing floating offshore wind on an industrial scale in Scotland, generating local jobs and opportunities in Scotland and the Shetland Islands.
- From the picture on the web page, it looks like WindFloat technology will be used.
- Ocean Winds developed the WindFloat Atlantic project.
Ocean Winds appear to want to go places.
The Shetland HVDC Connection
The Shetland HVDC Connection will connect Shetland to Scotland.
- It will be 160 miles long.
- It will have a capacity of 600 MW.
- It is estimated that it will cost more than £600 million.
- It will allow the 66MW Lerwick power station to close.
- It will be completed in 2024.
I have a feeling that all these numbers don’t add up to a sensible answer.
Consider.
- The three offshore wind farms can generate up to 2800 MW of green electricity.
- With a capacity factor of 50 %, an average of 1400 MW of electricity will be generated.
- The Viking onshore wind farm on Shetland could generate up to 450 MW.
- More wind farms are likely in and around Shetland.
- Lerwick power station can probably power most of the Shetland’s needs.
- Lerwick power station is likely to be closed soon.
- Sullum Voe Terminal has its own 100 MW gas-turbine power station.
- Load is balanced on Shetland by 3MWh of advanced lead-acid batteries.
- Lerwick has a district heating scheme.
If we assume that Shetland’s energy needs are of the order of a few hundred MW, it looks like at times the wind farms will be generating more electricity, than Shetland and the Shetland HVDC Connection can handle.
Various plans have suggested building electrolysers on Shetland to create hydrogen.
Conversion of excess electricity to hydrogen, would have the following advantages.
- The hydrogen could be used for local heavy transport and to replace diesel.
- Hydrogen could be used to fuel a gas turbine back-up power station, when needed.
- Hydrogen could be used for rocket fuel, if use of Shetland as a Spaceport for launching satellites takes off.
Any excess hydrogen could be exported to the rest of the UK or Europe.
Bombora Wraps Tank Trials Of Its Floating Hybrid Energy Platform
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Bombora Wave Power has completed tank testing of its floating foundation system suitable for the InSPIRE solution, which combines the mWave wave energy technology with a wind turbine onto a single floating offshore platform.
This second paragraph gives details of the power output of the hybrid energy platform.
The tank testing program at FloWave follows the pre-FEED phase of the InSPIRE project completed earlier in 2022, based on the integration of a 4MW mWave solution with a 10MW wind turbine on a single semi-submersible floating foundation system.
4 MW seems a worthwhile increase in power, that can probably be handled by the existing cables and substations.
Equinor Is Counting On Tax Breaks With Plans For North Sea Oilfield
The title of this post, is the same as that, of this article in The Times.
These paragraphs outline the project.
Norway’s state-owned oil company is pushing ahead with plans to develop Britain’s biggest untapped oilfield after confirming that it stands to benefit from “helpful” tax breaks introduced alongside the windfall levy.
Equinor could lower its windfall tax bill by as much as £800 million in the years to come thanks to investment relief if it develops the Rosebank field, according to Uplift, a campaign group.
Rosebank, to the west of Shetland, could cost £4.1 billion to develop and may account for about 8 per cent of British oil output in the second half of this decade, producing 300 million barrels of oil by 2050.
Equinor said yesterday that it hoped to take a final investment decision on the field by next year and to start production by 2026. It has applied for environmental approval from the government.
Needless to say Greenpeace are not amused.
We Have Both Long Term And Short Term Energy Problems
In the UK, energy is generally used as electricity or gas and to power industry and transport.
Electricity
In the long term, we need to decarbonise our electricity production, so that all our electricity is produced from zero-carbon sources like nuclear, solar, tidal, wave and wind.
- As I write this, our electricity production is around 26.8 GW of which 62 % is coming from renewable sources.
- Surprisingly around 45 % of the renewables is coming from solar. Who’d have ever thought that in an predominantly-grey UK?
- As we have committed to around 50 GW of wind power by 2030 and the 3.26 GW Hinckley Point C will be on stream by the end of the decade, the long term future of electricity production looks to be fairly secure.
- It would be even more secure, if we added around 600 GWh of storage, as proposed in Highview Power’s Plan To Add Energy Storage To The UK Power Network, which would be used as backup when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow.
It looks to me, that our long term electricity problem is capable of being solved.
For the next few years, we will need to rely on our existing gas-fired power stations until the renewables come on stream.
Gas
Gas could be more of a problem.
- I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot of resistance to the replacement of natural gas for heating, cooking and industrial processes.
- Natural gas is becoming increasingly difficult to source.
- As I said in the previous section, we will still need some gas for electricity generation, until the massive wind farms are completed.
On the other hand, there is HyDeploy.
I like the HyDeploy concept, where up to 20 % of hydrogen is blended with natural gas.
- Using a blend of hydrogen and natural gas doesn’t require any changes to boilers, appliances or industrial processes.
- The hydrogen blend would make the most of our existing world class gas network.
- Customers do not require disruptive and expensive changes in their homes.
- Enormous environmental benefits can be realised through blending low carbon hydrogen with fossil gas.
- The hydrogen blending could happen, where the natural gas enters the network at terminals which receive gas from the UK continental shelf or where liquified natural gas is imported.
- Alternatively, it may be possible to surround a gas production platform with an offshore wind farm. This could enable hydrogen production and blending to be performed offshore.
The amount of gas we need would drop by twenty percent.
In The Mathematics Of Blending Twenty Percent Of Hydrogen Into The UK Gas Grid, I calculated that 148.2 tonnes per hour of hydrogen would be needed, to blend twenty per cent of hydrogen into UK natural gas supplies.
I also said this about the electricity needed.
To create 148.2 tonnes per hour of hydrogen would need 8,180.64 MW of electricity or just under 8.2 GW.
I also calculated the effect of the hydrogen on carbon dioxide emissions.
As twenty percent will be replaced by hydrogen, carbon dioxide emission savings will be 24,120,569.99 tonnes.
I believe that generating the 8.2 GW of electricity and delivering the 148.2 tonnes per hour of hydrogen is feasible.
I also believe that HyDeploy could be a valuable way to reduce our demand for natural gas by twenty per cent.
Transport
Not every vehicle, ship, aircraft and train can be powered by electricity, although batteries will help.
Hydrogen will help, but we must also develop our capability for sustainable fuels made from rubbish diverted from landfill and biologically-derived ingredients like used cooking oil.
Summing Up Our Long Term And Short Term Energy Problems
We obviously have got the problem of creating enough renewable energy for the future, but there is also the problem of how we keep everything going in the interim.
We will need gas, diesel, petrol and other fossil fuel derived products for the next few years.
Is Rosebank Our Short Term Solution?
This page on the Equinor web site is entitled Rosebank Oil And Gas Field.
This introductory paragraph described the field.
Rosebank is an oil and gas field 130 kilometres off the coast of the Shetland Islands. Equinor acquired the operatorship in 2019 and has since then been working to optimise and mature a development solution for the field together with our partners.
Could the field with its resources of oil and gas, be just the sort of field to tide us over in the next few difficult years.
But given the position, it will surely not be an easy field to develop.
These two paragraphs set out Equinor’s strategy in developing the field.
Equinor believes the field can be developed as part of the UK Government North Sea Transition deal, bringing much needed energy security and investment in the UK while supporting the UKs net zero target. According to a socioeconomic study (see link below) based on data and analysis by Wood Mackenzie and Voar Energy, if sanctioned Rosebank is estimated to create GBP 8.1 billion of direct investment, of which GBP 6.3 billion is likely to be invested in UK-based businesses. Over the lifetime of the project, Rosebank will generate a total of GBP 24.1 billion of gross value add (GVA), comprised of direct, indirect and induced economic impacts.
Equinor together with our partners are working with the supply chain to ensure that a substantial part of investment comes to Scotland and the UK. A supplier day was held in Aberdeen in partnership with EIC in order to increase the number of local suppliers to tender.
Note.
- The sums that could accrue to the UK economy are worthwhile.
- The Government North Sea Transition Deal is worth a read.
- A lot of the deal is about converting oil and gas skills to those of a renewable energy economy.
Planned properly, we should get all the oil and gas we need to get through difficult years.
I particularly like these two paragraphs, which are towards the end of the Government North Sea Transition Deal.
Through the Deal, the UK’s oil and gas sector and the government will work together to deliver
the skills, innovation and new infrastructure required to decarbonise North Sea oil and gas
production as well as other carbon intensive industries. Not only will it transform the sector in
preparation for a net zero future, but it will also catalyse growth throughout the UK economy.
Delivering large-scale decarbonisation solutions will strengthen the position of the existing UK
energy sector supply chain in a net zero world, securing new high-value jobs in the UK,
supporting the development of regional economies and competing in clean energy export
markets.
By creating the North Sea Transition Deal, the government and the UK’s oil and gas sector are
ambitiously seeking to tackle the challenges of reaching net zero, while repositioning the UK’s
capabilities to serve the global energy industry. The Deal will take the UKCS through to
maturity and help the sector pivot towards new opportunities to keep the UK at the forefront of
the changing 21st century energy landscape.
I believe that developing Rosebank could enable the following.
- The oil and gas we need in the next few years would be obtained.
- The economic situation of the UK would be improved.
- The skills and techniques we need to decarbonise the UK would be delivered.
- Net-zero would be reached in the required time.
- Jobs will be created.
- The export of surplus oil and gas.
I strongly believe that developing the Rosebank field would be worthwhile to the UK.
I have some other thoughts.
Electrification Of Platforms
This page on the Equinor web site is entitled Electrification Of Platforms.
This paragraph explains what that means.
Electrification means replacing a fossil-based power supply with renewable energy, enabling a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Equinor is fully committed to reducing emissions from our offshore oil & gas production.
Note.
- Typically, platforms use gas turbine engines running on natural gas to provide the electricity needed on the platform.
- Platforms in the future will get their electricity from renewable sources like wind and will have an electricity cable to the shore.
- Rosebank will be powered in this way.
This document on the Equinor web site is entitled Rosebank: Investing In Energy Security And Powering A Just Transition, which has a section called How Is Rosebank Different?, where this is said.
The key difference of Rosebank compared to other oil fields is that it
aims to draw on new technology applications to help reduce carbon
emissions from its production, through FPSO electrification.Building offshore installations that can be powered by electricity reduces
reliance on gas powered generators which are the biggest source
of production emissions. The electrification of UKCS assets is vital to
meeting the North Sea Transition Deal’s target of reducing production
emissions by 50% by 2030, with a view to being net zero by 2050.Electrification of Rosebank is a long-term investment that will drastically
cut the carbon emissions caused by using the FPSO’s gas turbines for
power. Using electricity as a power source on Rosebank results in a
reduction in emissions equivalent to taking over 650,000 cars off the
road for a year compared with importing 300 million barrels of oil from
international sources.
Note.
- An FPSO is a Floating Production Storage And Offloading Unit, which is the method of production, that Equinor have chosen for the Rosebank field.
- If we are going to extract fossil fuels then we must extract them in a manner, that doesn’t add to the problem by emitting extra carbon dioxide.
- We will probably extract fossil fuels for some years yet, as they are the easiest route to some important chemicals.
- I also believe that we will increasingly find uses for any carbon dioxide captured in combustion and chemical processes.
I already know of a farmer, who heats greenhouses using a gas-powered combined heat and power unit, who pipes the carbon dioxide to the tomatoes in the greenhouses.
Despite what Greenpeace and others say, carbon dioxide is not all bad.
Energy Security
The last page of this document on the Equinor web site is entitled Rosebank: Investing In Energy Security And Powering A Just Transition, is entitled Energy Security.
Look at the numbers.
- £8.1 billion – Total field investment with 78% of this being spent in the UK
- 1600 – Estimated peak number of direct FTE jobs
- £24.1 billion – Estimated gross value add
- 8 % – Of UK oil production from Rosebank to 2030
- 39 million cubic feet per day – Average daily gas production over the first 10 years of field life, equivalent to almost twice Aberdeen’s daily gas consumption
- 250kt CO2 – Carbon avoided by reusing existing FPSO
And if you have time read it fully.
Could The Rosebank FPSO Be Powered By Floating Offshore Wind?
Floating wind turbines are now being installed around the world.
- They can use the largest turbines.
- Some designs perform in the roughest of seas.
- They have a high capacity factor.
- They are generally brought into a suitable port for servicing and updating.
- Floating wind farms can be connected to floating substations
There is at least 20 GW of floating wind turbines planned for UK waters.
So could an appropriately-sized floating wind farm be placed near the Rosebank FPSO to provide it with electricity?
I don’t see why not, if there were some energy storage in the system, for when the wind wasn’t blowing.
Floating Offshore Wind Close To The Rosebank FPSO Would Be Challenging
Rosebank is an oil and gas field 130 kilometres off the West coast of the Shetland Islands.
That would be a challenging location for floating wind turbines.
But solving the installation problems would set precedents for floating wind farms all over the world.
Could The Rosebank FPSO Handle Hydrogen From Floating Offshore Wind?
It would surely be possible to put an electrolyser in the system somewhere, so that hydrogen was also stored in the tanks of the FPSO.
I also don’t think it unfeasible, that twenty percent of hydrogen could be blended into the natural gas to create the low-carbon natural gas, that has been proposed by the HyDeploy project.
The Anonymous Widower 