The Invisible £20 Billion North Sea Project
I introduced Cerulean Winds in the two posts What Is INTOG? and Cerulean Winds Is A Different Type Of Wind Energy Company.
They have now expanded their page on the North Sea Renewables Grid.
It is well worth a look!
World’s Tallest Wooden Wind Turbine Starts Turning
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
This is the sub-heading.
What is made from the same wood as a Christmas tree, held together by glue and manufactured in a Swedish factory for assembly later?
These three paragraphs outline the design of a revolutionary wind turbine tower.
If that calls to mind flat-pack furniture and meatballs, you’re wrong.
If you answered “a wooden wind turbine”, you could be a visionary.
According to Modvion, the Swedish start-up that has just built the world’s tallest wooden turbine tower, using wood for wind power is the future.
I feel that it is not as revolutionary as some people might think.
Forty years ago, I built an extension on my house that included a swimming pool and a barn. The swimming pool roof was based on laminated wood beams and the barn was constructed using traditional wooden beams, that were bolted together.
But surely the most amazing wooden structure of the last century is the DH 98 Mosquito.
This paragraph introduces the Wikipedia entry for this amazing aeroplane.
The de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito is a British twin-engined, multirole combat aircraft, introduced during the Second World War. Unusual in that its airframe was constructed mostly of wood, it was nicknamed the “Wooden Wonder”, or “Mossie”. Lord Beaverbrook, Minister of Aircraft Production, nicknamed it “Freeman’s Folly”, alluding to Air Chief Marshal Sir Wilfrid Freeman, who defended Geoffrey de Havilland and his design concept against orders to scrap the project. In 1941, it was one of the fastest operational aircraft in the world.
One of my friends from the twentieth century, had been an RAF Mosquito pilot in the 1950s and felt it was an unequalled design of aircraft.
The airframe of the Mosquito was built using similar materials and methods as Modvion’s turbine tower.
I have just found out, that the de Havilland Aircraft Museum, where the prototype Mosquito is displayed, is open at least until the 7th of January.
I shall be going by public transport and if anybody would like to accompany me, use the Contact Page to get in touch.
BP And EnBW To Run Suction Bucket Trials At UK Offshore Wind Farm Sites
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
On 30 December, the vessel North Sea Giant is expected to start suction bucket trials within the array areas of the Mona and Morgan offshore wind farm sites, located off North West England and North Wales.
These are the first three paragraphs.
The trials will run for an estimated 32 days, during which time the vessel will be lifting a suction bucket and setting it down on the seabed, and using subsea pumps to drive the suction bucket into the seabed and back out.
The campaign is expected to consist of around 20 suction bucket trials, subject to weather conditions.
In their environmental impact assessment (EIA) scoping reports, issued last year, BP and EnBW state that a number of foundation types are being considered for the two proposed offshore wind farms and that the type(s) to be used will not be confirmed until the final design, after the projects are granted consent.
It sounds sensible to try out different types of foundations, but what is a suction bucket?
This page on the Ørsted web site is entitled Our Experience With Suction Bucket Jackets, explains how they work and are installed.
This is the first paragraph.
Monopiles (MPs) are currently the most commonly used foundation solution for offshore wind turbines with 81% of offshore wind turbines in European waters founded on MPs at the end of 2019 (Wind Europe, 2020). Where site conditions do not allow for an efficient or practical MP design, a number of alternative foundation solutions are available, including the suction bucket jacket (SBJ), piled jacket, gravity base or even a floating solution.
These two paragraphs, indicate when Ørsted has used SBJs.
Ørsted installed the world’s first SBJ for an offshore WTG at the Borkum Riffgrund 1 offshore windfarm in Germany in 2014.
Since the installation of the Borkum Riffgrund 1 SBJ, Ørsted has been involved in the design and installation of SBJs at the Borkum Riffgrund 2 and the design for Hornsea 1 offshore wind farms. At Hornsea 1, overall project timeline considerations and limitations of serial production capacities precluded the use of SBJs, and therefore the project chose an alternative foundation type.
It will be interesting to see how BP and EnBW’s trial gets on.
Enabling The UK To Become The Saudi Arabia Of Wind?
The title of this post, is the same as that of a paper from Imperial College.
The paper can be downloaded from this page of the Imperial College web site.
This is a paragraph from the Introduction of the paper.
In December 2020, the then Prime Minister outlined the government’s ten-point plan for a green industrial revolution, expressing an ambition “to turn the UK into the Saudi Arabia of wind power generation, enough wind power by 2030 to supply every single one of our homes with electricity”.
The reference to Saudi Arabia, one of the world’s largest oil producers for many decades, hints at the significant role the UK’s energy ambitions hoped to play in the global economy.
Boris Johnson was the UK Prime Minister at the time, so was his statement just his usual bluster or a simple deduction from the facts.
The paper I have indicated is a must-read and I do wonder if one of Boris’s advisors had read the paper before Boris’s speech. But as the paper appears to have been published in September 2023, that is not a valid scenario.
The paper though is full of important information.
The Intermittency Of Wind And Solar Power
The paper says this about the intermittency of wind and solar power.
One of the main issues is the intermittency of solar and wind electricity generation, which means it cannot be relied upon without some form of backup or sufficient storage.
Solar PV production varies strongly along both the day-night and seasonal cycles. While output is higher during the daytime (when demand is
higher than overnight), it is close to zero when it is needed most, during the times of peak electricity demand (winter evenings from 5-6 PM).At present, when wind output is low, the UK can fall back to fossil fuels to make up for the shortfall in electricity supply. Homes stay warm, and cars keep moving.
If all sectors were to run on variable renewables, either the country needs to curb energy usage during shortfalls (unlikely to be popular with consumers), accept continued use of fossil fuels across all sectors (incompatible with climate targets), or develop a large source of flexibility such as energy storage (likely to be prohibitively expensive at present).
The intermittency of wind and solar power means we have a difficult choice to make.
The Demand In Winter
The paper says this about the demand in winter.
There are issues around the high peaks in heating demand during winter, with all-electric heating very expensive to serve (as
the generators built to serve that load are only
needed for a few days a year).Converting all the UK’s vehicles to EVs would increase total electricity demand from 279 TWh to 395 TWh. Switching all homes across the country to heat pumps would increase demand by a further 30% to 506 TWh.
This implies that the full electrification of the heating and transport sectors would increase the annual power needs in the country by 81%.
This will require the expansion of the electricity system (transmission capacity, distribution grids, transformers,
substations, etc.), which would pose serious social, economic and technical challenges.Various paths, policies and technologies for the decarbonisation of heating, transport, and industrial emissions must be considered in order for the UK to meet its zero-emission targets.
It appears that electrification alone will not keep us warm, power our transport and keep our industry operating.
The Role Of Hydrogen
The paper says this about the role of hydrogen.
Electrifying all forms of transport might prove difficult (e.g., long-distance heavy goods) or nigh impossible (e.g., aviation) due to the high energy density requirements, which current batteries cannot meet.
Hydrogen has therefore been widely suggested as a low-carbon energy source for these sectors, benefiting from high energy density (by weight), ease of storage (relative to electricity) and its versatility to be used in many ways.
Hydrogen is also one of the few technologies capable of
providing very long-duration energy storage (e.g., moving energy between seasons), which is critical to supporting the decarbonisation of the whole energy system with high shares of renewables because it allows times of supply and demand mismatch to be managed over both short and long timescales.It is a clean alternative to fossil fuels as its use (e.g., combustion) does not emit any CO2.
Hydrogen appears to be ideal for difficult to decarbonise sectors and for storing energy for long durations.
The Problems With Hydrogen
The paper says this about the problems with hydrogen.
The growth of green hydrogen technology has been held back by the high cost, lack of existing infrastructure, and its lower efficiency
of conversion.Providing services with hydrogen requires two to three times more primary energy than direct use of electricity.
There is a lot of development to be done before hydrogen is as convenient and affordable as electricity and natural gas.
Offshore Wind
The paper says this about offshore wind.
Offshore wind is one of the fastest-growing forms of renewable energy, with the UK taking a strong lead on the global stage.
Deploying wind turbines offshore typically leads to a higher electricity output per turbine, as there are typically higher wind speeds and fewer obstacles to obstruct wind flow (such as trees and buildings).
The productivity of the UK’s offshore wind farms is nearly 50% higher than that of onshore wind farms.
Offshore wind generation also typically has higher social acceptability as it avoids land usage conflicts and has a lower visual impact.
To get the most out of this resource, very large structures (more than twice the height of Big Ben) must be connected to the ocean floor and operate in the harshest conditions for decades.
Offshore wind turbines are taller and have larger rotor diameters than onshore wind turbines, which produces a more consistent and higher output.
Offshore wind would appear to be more efficient and better value than onshore.
The Scale Of Offshore Wind
The paper says this about the scale of offshore wind.
The geographical distribution of offshore wind is heavily skewed towards Europe, which hosts over 80% of the total global offshore wind capacity.
This can be attributed to the good wind conditions and the shallow water depths of the North Sea.
The UK is ideally located to take advantage of offshore wind due to its extensive resource.
The UK could produce over 6000 TWh of electricity if the offshore wind resources in all the feasible area of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is exploited.
Note.
- 6000 TWh of electricity per annum would need 2740 GW of wind farms if the average capacity factor was a typical 25 %.
- At a price of 37.35 £/MWh, 6000 TWh would be worth $224.1 billion.
Typically, most domestic users seem to pay about 30 pence per KWh.
The Cost Of Offshore Wind
The paper says this about the cost of offshore wind.
The cost of UK offshore wind has fallen because of the reductions in capital expenditure (CapEx), operational expenditure (OpEx), and financing costs.
This has been supported by the global roll-out of bigger offshore wind turbines, hence, causing an increase in offshore wind energy capacity.
This increase in installed capacity has been fuelled by several low-carbon support schemes from the UK government.
The effect of these schemes can be seen in the UK 2017 Contracts for Difference (CfD) auctions where offshore wind reached strike prices as low as 57.50 £/MWh and an even lower strike price of 37.35 £/MWh in 2022.
Costs and prices appear to be going the right way.
The UK’s Offshore Wind Targets
The paper says this about the UK’s offshore wind targets.
The offshore wind capacity in the UK has grown over the past decade.
Currently, the UK has a total offshore wind capacity of 13.8GW, which is sufficient to power more than 10 million homes.
This represents a more than fourfold increase compared to the capacity installed in 2012.
The UK government has set ambitious targets for offshore wind development.
In 2019, the target was to install a total of 40 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030, and this was later raised to 50 GW, with up to 5 GW of floating offshore wind.
This will play a pivotal role in decarbonising the UK’s power system by the government’s deadline of 2035.
As I write this, the UK’s total electricity production is 31.8 GW. So 50 GW of wind will go a good way to providing the UK with zero-carbon energy. But it will need a certain amount of reliable alternative power sources for when the wind isn’t blowing.
The UK’s Hydrogen Targets
The paper says this about the UK’s hydrogen targets.
The UK has a target of 10 GW of low-carbon hydrogen production to be deployed by 2030, as set out in the British Energy Security Strategy.
Within this target, there is an ambition for at least half of the 10 GW of production capacity to be met through green hydrogen production technologies (as opposed to hydrogen produced from steam methane reforming using carbon capture).
Modelling conducted by the Committee on Climate Change in its Sixth Carbon Budget estimated that demand for low-carbon hydrogen across the whole country could reach 161–376 TWh annually by 2050, comparable in scale to the total electricity demand.
We’re going to need a lot of electrolyser capacity.
Pairing Hydrogen And Offshore Wind
The paper says this about pairing hydrogen and offshore wind.
Green hydrogen holds strong potential in addressing the intermittent nature of renewable generation sources, particularly wind and solar energy, which naturally fluctuate due to weather conditions.
Offshore wind in particular is viewed as being a complementary technology to pair with green hydrogen production, due to three main factors: a) the high wind energy capacity factors offshore, b) the potential for large-scale deployment and c) hydrogen as a supporting technology for offshore wind energy integration.
It looks like a match made in the waters around the UK.
The Cost Of Green Hydrogen
The paper says this about the cost of green hydrogen.
The cost of green hydrogen is strongly influenced by the price of the electrolyser unit itself.
If the electrolyser is run more intensively over the course of the lifetime of the plant, a larger volume of hydrogen will be produced and so the cost of the electrolyser will be spread out more, decreasing the cost per unit of produced hydrogen.
If the variable renewable electricity source powering the electrolyser has a higher capacity factor, this will contribute towards a
lower cost of hydrogen produced.Offshore wind in the UK typically has a higher capacity factor than onshore wind energy (up to 20%), and is around five times higher than solar, so pairing
offshore wind with green hydrogen production is of interest.
It would appear that any improvements in wind turbine and electrolyser efficiency would be welcomed.
The Size Of Wind Farms
The paper says this about the size of wind farms.
Offshore wind farms can also be larger scale, due to increased availability of space and reduced restrictions on tip heights due to planning permissions.
The average offshore wind turbine in the UK had a capacity of 3.6 MW in 2022, compared to just 2.5-3 MW for onshore turbines.
As there are fewer competing uses for space, offshore wind can not only have larger turbines but the wind farms can comprise many more turbines.
Due to the specialist infrastructure requirements for hydrogen transport and storage, and the need for economies of scale to reduce the costs of
production, pairing large-scale offshore wind electricity generation with green hydrogen
production could hold significant benefits.
I am not surprised that economies of scale give benefits.
The Versatility Of Hydrogen
The paper says this about the versatility of hydrogen.
Hydrogen is a highly adaptable energy carrier with numerous potential applications and has been anticipated by some as playing a key role in the future energy system, especially when produced through electrolysis.
It could support the full decarbonisation of “hard to decarbonise” processes within the UK industrial sector, offering a solution for areas which may be difficult to electrify or are heavily reliant on fossil fuels for high-temperature heat.
When produced through electrolysis, it could be paired effectively as an energy storage technology with offshore wind, with the potential to store energy across seasons with little to no energy degradation and transport low-carbon energy internationally.
The UK – with its significant offshore wind energy resources and targets – could play a potentially leading role in producing green hydrogen to both help its pathway to net zero, and potentially create a valuable export industry.
In RWE Acquires 4.2-Gigawatt UK Offshore Wind Development Portfolio From Vattenfall, I postulated that RWE may have purchased Vattenfall’s 4.2 GW Norfolk Zone of windfarms to create a giant hydrogen production facility on the Norfolk coast. I said this.
Consider.
- Vattenfall’s Norfolk Zone is a 4.2 GW group of wind farms, which have all the requisite permissions and are shovel ready.
- Bacton Gas terminal has gas pipelines to Europe.
- Sizewell’s nuclear power stations will add security of supply.
- Extra wind farms could be added to the Norfolk Zone.
- Europe and especially Germany has a massive need for zero-carbon energy.
The only extra infrastructure needing to be built is the giant electrolyser.
I wouldn’t be surprised if RWE built a large electrolyser to supply Europe with hydrogen.
The big irony of this plan is that the BBL Pipeline between Bacton and the Netherlands was built, so that the UK could import Russian gas.
Could it in future be used to send the UK’s green hydrogen to Europe, so that some of that Russian gas can be replaced with a zero-carbon fuel?
Mathematical Modelling
There is a lot of graphs, maps and reasoning, which is used to detail how the authors obtained their conclusions.
Conclusion
This is the last paragraph of the paper.
Creating a hydrogen production industry is a transition story for UK’s oil and gas sector.
The UK is one of the few countries that could produce more hydrogen than it consumes in hydrocarbons today.
It is located in the centre of a vast resource, which premediates positioning itself at the centre of the European hydrogen supply chains.
Investing now to reduce costs and benefit from the generated value of exported hydrogen would make a reality out of the ambition to become the “Saudi Arabia of Wind”.
Boris may or may not have realised that what he said was possible.
But certainly make sure you read the paper from Imperial College.
RWE Acquires 4.2-Gigawatt UK Offshore Wind Development Portfolio From Vattenfall
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from RWE.
These three bullet points, act as sub-headings.
- Highly attractive portfolio of three projects at a late stage of development, with grid connections and permits secured, as well as advanced procurement of key components
- Delivery of the three Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone projects off the UK’s East Anglia coast will be part of RWE’s Growing Green investment and growth plans
- Agreed purchase price corresponds to an enterprise value of £963 million
These two paragraphs outline the deal.
RWE, one of the world’s leading offshore wind companies, will acquire the UK Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone portfolio from Vattenfall. The portfolio comprises three offshore wind development projects off the east coast of England – Norfolk Vanguard West, Norfolk Vanguard East and Norfolk Boreas.
The three projects, each with a planned capacity of 1.4 gigawatts (GW), are located 50 to 80 kilometres off the coast of Norfolk in East Anglia. This area is one of the world’s largest and most attractive areas for offshore wind. After 13 years of development, the three development projects have already secured seabed rights, grid connections, Development Consent Orders and all other key permits. The Norfolk Vanguard West and Norfolk Vanguard East projects are most advanced, having secured the procurement of most key components. The next milestone in the development of these two projects is to secure a Contract for Difference (CfD) in one of the upcoming auction rounds. RWE will resume the development of the Norfolk Boreas project, which was previously halted. All three Norfolk projects are expected to be commissioned in this decade.
There is also this handy map, which shows the location of the wind farms.
Note that there are a series of assets along the East Anglian coast, that will be useful to RWE’s Norfolk Zone development.
- In Vattenfall Selects Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone O&M Base, I talked about how the Port of Great Yarmouth will be the operational base for the Norfolk Zone wind farms.
- Bacton gas terminal has gas interconnectors to Belgium and the Netherlands lies between Cromer and Great Yarmouth.
- The cable to the Norfolk Zone wind farms is planned to make landfall between Bacton and Great Yarmouth.
- Sizewell is South of Lowestoft and has the 1.25 GW Sizewell B nuclear power station, with the 3.2 GW Sizewell C on its way, for more than adequate backup.
- Dotted around the Norfolk and Suffolk coast are 3.3 GW of earlier generations of wind farms, of which 1.2 GW have connections to RWE.
- The LionLink multipurpose 1.8 GW interconnector will make landfall to the North of Southwold
- There is also the East Anglian Array, which currently looks to be about 3.6 GW, that connects to the shore at Bawdsey to the South of Aldeburgh.
- For recreation, there’s Southwold.
- I can also see more wind farms squeezed in along the coast. For example, according to Wikipedia, the East Anglian Array could be increased in size to 7.2 GW.
It appears that a 15.5 GW hybrid wind/nuclear power station is being created on the North-Eastern coast of East Anglia.
The big problem is that East Anglia doesn’t really have any large use for electricity.
But the other large asset in the area is the sea.
- Undersea interconnectors can be built to other locations, like London or Europe, where there is a much greater need for electricity.
- In addition, the UK Government has backed a consortium, who have the idea of storing energy by using pressurised sea-water in 3D-printed concrete hemispheres under the sea. I wrote about this development in UK Cleantech Consortium Awarded Funding For Energy Storage Technology Integrated With Floating Wind.
A proportion of Russian gas in Europe, will have been replaced by Norfolk wind power and hydrogen, which will be given a high level of reliability from Suffolk nuclear power.
I have some other thoughts.
Would Hydrogen Be Easier To Distribute From Norfolk?
A GW-range electrolyser would be feasible but expensive and it would be a substantial piece of infrastructure.
I also feel, that placed next to Bacton or even offshore, there would not be too many objections from the Norfolk Nimbys.
Hydrogen could be distributed from the site in one of these ways.
- By road transport, as ICI did, when I worked in their hydrogen plant at Runcorn.
- I suspect, a rail link could be arranged, if there was a will.
- By tanker from the Port of Great Yarmouth.
- By existing gas interconnectors to Belgium and the Netherlands.
As a last resort it could be blended into the natural gas pipeline at Bacton.
In Major Boost For Hydrogen As UK Unlocks New Investment And Jobs, I talked about using the gas grid as an offtaker of last resort. Any spare hydrogen would be fed into the gas network, provided safety criteria weren’t breached.
I remember a tale from ICI, who from their refinery got a substantial amount of petrol, which was sold to independent petrol retailers around the North of England.
But sometimes they had a problem, in that the refinery produced a lot more 5-star petrol than 2-star. So sometimes if you bought 2-star, you were getting 5-star.
On occasions, it was rumoured that other legal hydrocarbons were disposed of in the petrol. I was once told that it was discussed that used diluent oil from polypropylene plants could be disposed of in this way. But in the end it wasn’t!
If hydrogen were to be used to distribute all or some of the energy, there would be less need for pylons to march across Norfolk.
Could A Rail Connection Be Built To The Bacton Gas Terminal
This Google Map shows the area between North Walsham and the coast.
Note.
- North Walsham is in the South-Western corner of the map.
- North Walsham station on the Bittern Line is indicated by the red icon.
- The Bacton gas terminal is the trapezoidal-shaped area on the coast, at the top of the map.
ThisOpenRailwayMap shows the current and former rail lines in the same area as the previous Google Map.
Note.
- North Walsham station is in the South-West corner of the map.
- The yellow track going through North Walsham station is the Bittern Line to Cromer and Sheringham.
- The Bacton gas terminal is on the coast in the North-East corner of the map.
I believe it would be possible to build a small rail terminal in the area with a short pipeline connection to Bacton, so that hydrogen could be distributed by train.
There used to be a branch line from North Walsham station to Cromer Beach station, that closed in 1953.
Until 1964 it was possible to get trains to Mundesley-on-Sea station.
So would it be possible to build a rail spur to the Bacton gas terminal along the old branch line?
In the Wikipedia entry for the Bittern Line this is said.
The line is also used by freight trains which are operated by GB Railfreight. Some trains carry gas condensate from a terminal at North Walsham to Harwich International Port.
The rail spur could have four main uses.
- Taking passengers to and from Mundesley-on-Sea and Bacton.
- Collecting gas condensate from the Bacton gas terminal.
- Collecting hydrogen from the Bacton gas terminal.
- Bringing in heavy equipment for the Bacton gas terminal.
It looks like another case of one of Dr. Beeching’s closures coming back to take a large chunk out of rail efficiency.
Claire Coutinho And Robert Habeck’s Tete-a-Tete
I wrote about their meeting in Downing Street in UK And Germany Boost Offshore Renewables Ties.
- Did Habeck run the RWE/Vattenfall deal past Coutinho to see it was acceptable to the UK Government?
- Did Coutinho lobby for SeAH to get the contract for the monopile foundations for the Norfolk Zone wind farms?
- Did Coutinho have a word for other British suppliers like iTMPower.
Note.
- I think we’d have heard and/or the deal wouldn’t have happened, if there had been any objections to it from the UK Government.
- In SeAH To Deliver Monopiles For Vattenfall’s 2.8 GW Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Project, I detailed how SeAH have got the important first contract they needed.
So it appears so far so good.
Rackheath Station And Eco-Town
According to the Wikipedia entry for the Bittern Line, there are also plans for a new station at Rackheath to serve a new eco-town.
This is said.
A new station is proposed as part of the Rackheath eco-town. The building of the town may also mean a short freight spur being built to transport fuel to fire an on-site power station. The plans for the settlement received approval from the government in 2009.
The eco-town has a Wikipedia entry, which has a large map and a lot of useful information.
But the development does seem to have been ensnared in the planning process by the Norfolk Nimbys.
The Wikipedia entry for the Rackheath eco-town says this about the rail arrangements for the new development.
The current rail service does not allow room for an extra station to be added to the line, due to the length of single track along the line and the current signalling network. The current service at Salhouse is only hourly during peak hours and two-hourly during off-peak hours, as not all trains are able to stop due to these problems. Fitting additional trains to this very tight network would not be possible without disrupting the entire network, as the length of the service would increase, missing the connections to the mainline services. This would mean that a new 15-minute shuttle service between Norwich and Rackheath would have to be created; however, this would interrupt the main service and cause additional platforming problems. Finding extra trains to run this service and finding extra space on the platforms at Norwich railway station to house these extra trains poses additional problems, as during peak hours all platforms are currently used.
In addition, the plans to the site show that both the existing and the new rail station, which is being built 300m away from the existing station, will remain open.
. As the trains cannot stop at both stations, changing between the two services would be difficult and confusing, as this would involve changing stations.
I feel that this eco-town is unlikely to go ahead.
Did RWE Buy Vattenfall’s Norfolk Zone To Create Green Hydrogen For Europe?
Consider.
- Vattenfall’s Norfolk Zone is a 4.2 GW group of wind farms, which have all the requisite permissions and are shovel ready.
- Bacton Gas terminal has gas pipelines to Europe.
- Sizewell’s nuclear power stations will add security of supply.
- Extra wind farms could be added to the Norfolk Zone.
- Europe and especially Germany has a massive need for zero-carbon energy.
The only extra infrastructure needing to be built is the giant electrolyser.
I wouldn’t be surprised if RWE built a large electrolyser to supply Europe with hydrogen.
Ørsted Greenlights 2.9 GW Hornsea 3 Offshore Wind Farm
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
Ørsted has taken the final investment decision (FID) on what the company says is the world’s single largest offshore wind farm, the 2.9 GW Hornsea 3, which is expected to be completed around the end of 2027.
These are the two introductory paragraphs.
In July 2022, Ørsted was awarded a contract for difference (CfD) for Hornsea 3 at an inflation-indexed strike price of GBP 37.35 per MWh in 2012 prices.
The CfD framework permits a reduction of the awarded CfD capacity. The company said it will use this flexibility to submit a share of Hornsea 3’s capacity into the UK’s upcoming allocation round 6.
With all the work, that Ørsted have done to protect kittiwakes, which I wrote about in Kittiwake Compensation, the company seems to have been taking the development of this wind farm carefully and this statement from the wonderfully-named Mads Nipper, Group President and CEO of Ørsted indicates that the UK Government has been persuasive in times, that are not totally favourable to wind farm developers.
Offshore wind is an extremely competitive global market, so we also welcome the attractive policy regime in the UK which has helped secure this investment. We look forward to constructing this landmark project, which will deliver massive amounts of green energy to UK households and businesses and will be a significant addition to the world’s largest offshore wind cluster.
But the article also has this paragraph.
According to Ørsted, most of Hornsea 3’s capital expenditure was contracted before recent inflationary pressures, securing competitive prices from the supply chain, adding that the larger wind turbines and the synergies with Hornsea 1 and 2 lead to lower operating costs.
It looks like Ørsted, may have taken advantage of Siemens well-publicised financial woes and got a good price for the over two hundred turbines.
This page on the Hitachi web site, describes their part in Hornsea 3, where this is said.
Hitachi Energy has supported Ørsted with the grid connection of Hornsea One and Hornsea Two, but Hornsea 3 will be the first phase to use HVDC application in the Hornsea cluster.
The overall HVDC system, including the offshore platform, is delivered in partnership with Aibel. Hitachi Energy will supply two HVDC Light® converter systems, while Aibel will deliver two HVDC offshore converter platforms. The platform is based on Hitachi Energy’s modular HVDC system including its advanced control and protection system, MACH™. As the HVDC offshore market grows and becomes more complex, Hitachi Energy will continue to develop solutions with its customers and partners to enable a more flexible offshore grid of the future.
Hitachi Energy is supplying four HVDC converter stations, which convert AC power to DC for transmission in the subsea cables, then reconvert it to AC for integration into the onshore grid. Two of the converter stations will be installed on offshore platforms and two at mainland grid connections.
Note.
- Hitachi are pushing their electrical innovation hard.
- Hitachi and Ørsted have worked together on Hornsea 1 and 2.
- What better place is there for Hitachi to test their new modular HVDC system, than on one of the world’s largest wind farms?
- Hitachi appear to say, they like to develop with customers and partners.
It looks to me, that Ørsted may well have got new improved technology at an advantageous price.
This is the last paragraph of the article.
The Hornsea zone will also include the Hornsea 4 project, which could have a capacity of up to 2.6 GW. The wind farm received its development consent order from the UK government earlier in 2023 and is now eligible for forthcoming CfD allocation rounds.
So will Hornsea 4 be a slightly smaller version of Hornsea 3 using the same suppliers?
- There could be savings in the design and manufacturing of the electrical systems, foundations, sub-stations and turbines.
- Could for instance, Hitachi’s modular HVDC result in savings in converters and sub-stations, if the two wind farms shared infrastructure?
- I’m sure that Siemens, Hitachi and the other suppliers will be happy to just keep rolling.
- It would be an ideal follow-on.
It looks to me, that by using good design and management, and established suppliers, Ørsted have managed to get the costs of Hornsea 3 and Hornsea 4 to a level, where the venture is profitable.
Vestas and Vattenfall Sign 1.4 GW Preferred Supplier Agreement For UK Offshore Wind Project And Exclusivity Agreements For 2.8 GW For Two Other UK Projects
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from Vestas.
These are the first two paragraphs.
Vattenfall, one of Europe’s largest producers and retailers of electricity and heat, and Vestas have signed agreements to elevate the partnership between the two companies and their offshore wind business towards 2030. The agreements are another step in the right direction for offshore wind energy in the UK and follow the UK Government’s recent announcement about the parameters for the next Contracts for Difference Auction round, which sent a very positive signal to renewable energy investors.
The agreements for the three projects include a preferred supplier agreement (PSA) for the 1,380 MW Norfolk Vanguard West project, comprising 92 of Vestas’ V236-15 MW offshore wind turbine. Vattenfall and Vestas have further signed exclusivity agreements for the Norfolk Vanguard East and Norfolk Boreas projects with a total installed capacity of 2,760 MW. The two latter projects will potentially feature up to 184 V236-15 MW turbines. Once installed, the agreements also include that Vestas will service the projects under long-term Operations and Maintenance (O&M) service contracts. The agreements are another step forward for what will be one of the largest offshore wind zones in the world, with a capacity to power over 4 million UK homes.
It looks like Norfolk Boreas is back on Vattenfall’s list of active projects.
Vattenfall’s Norfolk zone now includes the following.
- Norfolk Vanguard West – 92 x V236-15 MW – 1380 MW
- Norfolk Vanguard East – 92 x V236-15 MW – 1380 MW
- Norfolk Boreas – 92 x V236-15 MW – 1380 MW
Note.
- All turbines appear identical.
- The deal includes long-term Operations and Maintenance (O&M) service contracts.
- 276 identical turbines plus service contracts looks like a good deal for Vestas.
Since I wrote Vattenfall Stops Developing Major Wind Farm Offshore UK, Will Review Entire 4.2 GW Zone in July 2023, which has this sub-heading.
Vattenfall has stopped the development of the Norfolk Boreas offshore wind power project in the UK and will review the way forward for the entire 4.2 GW Norfolk Zone, the Swedish energy company revealed in its interim report.
I have written the following posts.
- November 2023 – Aker Solutions Gets Vattenfall Nod To Start Norfolk Vanguard West Offshore Platform
- November 2023 – Norfolk Boreas Windfarm Work Could Resume After Energy Price Rise
- December 2023 – SeAH To Deliver Monopiles For Vattenfall’s 2.8 GW Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Project
- Earlier in March 2023, I wrote Vattenfall Selects Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone O&M Base
It appears that with the deal announced with Vestas, Vattenfall now have everything they need to develop 4.2 GW of offshore wind.
- The O & M base will be Great Yarmouth.
- SeAH will build the monopile foundations on Teesside. Will all monopiles be identical?
- An energy price rise could change the cash flow of the project.
- Aker Solutions will build the offshore substations.Will all sub-stations be identical?
- Vestas will build the wind turbines.Will all turbines be identical?
Nothing has been said since July 2023 about how the power will be brought ashore.
In February 2022, I wrote Norfolk Wind Farms Offer ‘Significant Benefit’ For Local Economy, where I published this map from Vattenfall, which shows the position of the farms and the route of the cable to the shore.
Note.
- The purple line appears to be the UK’s ten mile limit.
- Norfolk Boreas is outlined in blue.
- Norfolk Vanguard West and Norfolk Vanguard East are outlined in orange.
- Cables will be run in the grey areas.
- Cables to deliver 4.1 GW across Norfolk to the National Grid, will bring out the Nimbys in droves.
Landfall of the cables will be just a few miles to the South of the Bacton gas terminal.
In SeAH To Deliver Monopiles For Vattenfall’s 2.8 GW Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Project, I asked if there could be an alternative approach.
Consider.
- If Vattenfall develop all three wind farms; Boreas, Vanguard East and Vanguard West, they will have 4.2 GW of capacity, when the wind co-operates.
- But East Norfolk is not noted for industries that need a large amount of electricity.
- I also feel, that the locals would object to a steelworks or an aluminium smelter, just like they object to electricity cables.
But would they object to a 4 GW electrolyser?
Could this be Vattenfall’s alternative approach?
- A giant electrolyser is built close to the landfall of the cable to the wind farms.
- The hydrogen could be piped to Bacton, where it could be blended with the UK’s natural gas.
- Bacton also has gas interconnectors to Balgzand in the Netherlands and Zeebrugge in Belgium. Could these interconnectors be used to export hydrogen to Europe?
- The hydrogen could be piped to Yarmouth, where it could be exported by tanker to Europe.
There would be only a small amount of onshore development and no overhead transmission lines to connect the wind farms to the National Grid.
There would be even less onshore development, if the electrolyser was offshore.
From their decisions, Vattenfall seem to have a new plan.
Airport Of The Future
I am fairly sure, that in ten years, there will be a lot of zero-carbon aircraft flying short haul routes. I have been particularly impressed by some of the ideas from Airbus, although Boeing seem to be very quiet on the subject. Perhaps it’s the difference between visionaries and engineers, and accountants.
But you rarely read anything about how airports are preparing for even a low-carbon future.
- Some long-stay car-parks could be made electric vehicles only, so they would become massive grid batteries, whilst owners are travelling.
- Airside vehicles can all be made zero-carbon.
- Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) shouldn’t be a problem, as it would be handled like jet fuel.
- Do airports have a large enough grid connection for all the electrification of vehicles and some planes?
- Do airports have a plan for hydrogen?
The last two points, probably mean we should have built Maplin.
- It could have a cable and a hydrogen pipeline from wind farms and co-located hydrogen electrolysers in the Thames Estuary.
- The Elizabeth Line or a new line could easily be extended or built to the airport, to give a 125 mph connection.
But that enemy of the planet; Harold Wilson cancelled it.
GE’s Recently Unveiled 18 MW Wind Turbine To Spin Offshore Japan
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
The three consortia that Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) selected in the country’s second round of offshore wind auctions will use some of the biggest and most powerful wind turbines on/coming to the market – Vestas V236-15 MW and GE’s 18 MW Haliade-X.
Wind farms under construction or in pre-construction in the UK, as I write this post, include.
- Neart Na Gaoithe – 8 MW x 54 – 450 MW
- Sofia Offshore Wind Farm – 14 MW x 100 – 1400 MW
- Dogger Bank A – 13 MW x 95 – 1235 MW
- Moray West – 15 MW x 60 – 882 MW
- Dogger Bank B – 13 MW x 95 – 1235 MW
- Dogger Bank C – 14 MW x 87 – 1218 MW
- East Anglia Three – 14 MW x 95 – 1372 MW
- Hornsea Three – xx MW x 231 – 2852 MW
Note.
- I can’t find the turbine size for Hornsea Three.
- This article on The Telgraph is entitled Ørsted Asks For More Government Cash Amid Doubts Over Flagship Wind Farm Project, says that Ørsted and Claire Coutinho are talking.
- The total power is 10644 MW.
- There are a total of 817 turbines.
- This is an average turbine size of almost exactly 13 MW.
There would appear to be scope to increase the size of these wind farms by using the new larger turbines.
Just uprating the turbines to 15 MW would increase capacity by 15 %.
The frequency of stories like these are increasing.
Crown Estate Mulls Adding 4 GW Of Capacity From Existing Offshore Wind Projects
Vattenfall Boosts Capacity For Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone
Three Steps To Unlocking The Potential Of High-Power Wind Turbines
Ossian Floating Wind Farm Could Have Capacity Of 3.6 GW
Developers are seriously thinking of building or upgrading wind farms with larger turbines and other capacity-increasing technology.
Floating Solar Not Yet Up to Par To Be Brought Into Offshore Wind Tenders, Says BP’s Benelux Head Of Offshore Wind
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
System integration is what is needed for the next leap in offshore wind, however, not all technologies that can integrate with offshore wind farms have the same starting point. Floating solar still has some way to go in becoming more resilient to harsh offshore conditions. On the other hand, hydrogen is a more ready option with plenty of support from the industry, but it needs to be included and clearly defined in offshore wind tenders.
These two paragraphs describe the views of Frank Oomen, Head of Offshore Wind Benelux at BP.
This is according to Frank Oomen, Head of Offshore Wind Benelux at BP, who discussed financial and qualitative criteria in offshore wind auctions during the Offshore Energy Exhibition & Conference 2023 (OEEC 2023).
Speaking about recently joining BP from the renewables industry, Oomen pointed out that, with offshore wind becoming larger scale, it needs to move in the direction of system integration and become an integrated energy business itself.
I had a lot of my engineering education, in ICI’s world of integrated chemical plants and I believe that Frank Oomen’s views are heading in the right direction.
If we take Frank Oomen’s views to their logical conclusion, we will see the following.
- Clusters of wind farms far from land in productive wind power areas.
- A nearby electrolyser will be producing hydrogen.
- The hydrogen will be taken to the shore by pipeline or tanker.
- BP with their oil and gas heritage, have been doing this for decades.
BP might even have some redundant gas infrastructure they can repurpose.
The Anonymous Widower 