11 ms·
First large-scale deep-sea floating offshore wind farm
- skybrian 9y agoIt seems like the big worry would be getting undercut by cheaper alternatives, as happened with some kinds of solar when the prices dropped. On the other hand, if you compare the risk of getting stranded to a big nuclear plant, it probably looks a lot better in comparison.
- usrusr 9y agoThe wind sector has decades (well, roughly two decades I would say) of experience in being permanently undercut by cheaper wind. Moderate shifts in the playing field won't take them by surprise.
- cr1895 9y agoNearly three decades, even. Vindeby offshore wind farm was around in 1991.
- pjc50 9y agoIn both cases the operator will try to negotiate a strike price rather than selling every watthour on the spot market. UK wind strike prices are now below the strike price negotiated for Hinckley Point C.
- dmix 9y agoI just wanted to say that I found this website does an excellent job of communicating exactly what they are offering, what they previously accomplished, and what they are planning to do next. I wish more startups, or any large project in general, had this type of site.
- rajeshp1986 9y agoThis was my first thought after looking at their site. Amazing job by the UX guys.
- subpixel 9y agoOne quibble: the YouTube embed removes the control bar, so the user can start/stop but not go back and forth. No bueno.
- temp123123123 9y agoFun fact: When the video is paused, you can use arrow keys to move forward/back. This also works on some kinds of youtube ads.
- kwhitefoot 9y agoAnd it works without enabling JavaScript!
- Nition 9y agoA lot of startups are trying to cover for the fact that they don't have anything ready to offer and haven't previously accomplished anything.
- Cthulhu_ 9y agoNope, they want to look good to raise funds and/or be acquihired by one of the big ones.
- TeMPOraL 9y agoActually, both, because they are "trying to cover for the fact that they don't have anything ready to offer and haven't previously accomplished anything" precisely "to look good to raise funds and/or be acquihired by one of the big ones".
- aw3c2 9y agoSo this is basically a landing page to lure investors. Can someone comment on the feasibility and technical novelty?
- anotherbrownguy 9y agoNo, it is a project by Statoil, one of the biggest oil companies in the world.
- _FKS_ 9y agoThat doesn't mean it's a reasonable projet ;)
- giarc 9y agoPerhaps the commentor is referring to the fact they don't need investors?? Not sure though.
- anotherbrownguy 9y agoYes that is what I was referring to.
- kwhitefoot 9y agoBut it does mean that the infrastructure side of it is well understood by the company as it has vast experience of building large installations in the North Sea, both fixed and floating. So the question is rather is it economically viable?
- anotherbrownguy 9y agoI have said it in another comment which has been downvoted but just to answer your question, I'll say it again. They are not doing this because of economic viability. If it was economically viable, it wouldn't take Statoil to do it; numerous startups would find investments to do it. They are doing it as an "investment in renewables" to keep the eco-terrorists happy.
- anotherbrownguy 9y agoThe kind of things oil companies have to do to please the eco-terrorists. People who have to pay for oil and everything it helps us create/transport (basically everything) are forced to pay for this, thanks to eco-terrorists, while tried and tested nuclear power will last us thousands of years. Unlike nuclear and coal, this will harm the aquatic life and birds more... but those things only matter when you are speaking against their narrative.
- eutropia 9y agoHow does a large, slowly-spinning turbine materially harm aquatic/bird life after the construction?
- pbh101 9y ago(Not OP, and) Not sure about aquatic life, but if those turbines are anything like the ones on land, then the rotors are definitely NOT spinning slowly! And they look even bigger, which would imply a faster speed at the rotor tip for the same rotational velocity. And as a result there have been issues with them killing lots of birds, esp 1) IIRC large predatory birds which are looking down at the ground for prey and can't change course as easily as a small bird, and 2) being in migration paths. But I think both of those problems are pretty well understood by now and I'm guessing this project takes both into account.
- djrogers 9y ago> if those turbines are anything like the ones on land, then the rotors are definitely NOT spinning slowly! You apparently haven’t seen modern (ie installed in the last 5 years, this stuff moves quickly) wind turbines. They are huge and slow turning, also much quieter than the smaller, shorter, faster spinning ones.
- usrusr 9y agoThe rotors turn slow in terms of rpm but fast in terms of wingtip speed, due to the very large radius. But many things kill birds, I do not believe that wind turbines could ever make much of a difference.
- zengid 9y agoNow combine this with mircosofts off-shore under-water data-centers: https://news.microsoft.com/features/microsoft-research-project-puts-cloud-in-ocean-for-the-first-time/ https://news.microsoft.com/features/microsoft-research-proje...
- devrandomguy 9y agoAnd use all of the masts as an ELF antenna array. That will give those racks something to think about: subsurface phased-array radar for submarine spotting, earthquake and atmospheric study, etc.
- mark_element 9y agoIt is important to note that Statoil is majority owned by the Norwegian government so it's priorities are maybe a bit more complicated than more independent multinational oil and gas companies. Although all the big energy companies have major alternatives portfolios and innovations strategies too.
- wonton2 9y agoIt is also important to mention that this project happened because of the falling oil price, and Statoil needing to find alternative stuff to do. Not diversify their sources of income, but literally give their enployees something to do. A lot of highly educated people lost their jobs in Norway during the last few years, and a windpower project would be one way to get public funding and avoid firing too many employees (this is of political interest, Statoil don't need half of their eployees). I am not saying the project would never have happened, but it probably happened now and not in ten years because of this. Bottom line: this is busywork imposed on a huge, slow, old fashioned oil company which will never be able to compete comercially.
- eisa01 9y agoI'm not sure I would be that cynic: - Statoil took over Hywind in 2008 when they acquired the O&G division of Hydro, and set up the first test turbine in 2009 - Shell is also active in offshore wind, so this is not limited to majority state owned companies Offshore wind could be competitive in the early 2020's without subsidies, depending on your assumption of fossil fuel and CO2 prices Bottom line: Floating offshore wind could be very promising in areas with deep water, such as Japan, so I would not call this busy work
- wonton2 9y agoI agree with your bottom line. I was going to say they have talked about wind farms at sea since 2008, but that fits well with what you say. I see I seem too cynical, but i still think they are very late to the game. Especially considering how far denmark have come, given this project probably is inspired by the danish focus on wind power, and the competency of Statoil on offshore constructions.
- danans 9y agoAt first glance I didn't understand how these things wouldn't tip over under load, but then the video made clear that the ballast extends 78m below the surface. The torque exerted on the turbine/generator itself is probably small compared to the stabilizing resistance provided by the ocean's mass, and the fact that it is secured to the sea floor in 3 directions. Of the two, ocean or sea-floor moorings, I wonder which provides most of the actual resistance to toppling under load.
- _rpd 9y agoIt requires interesting control systems to keep stable and performing optimally. You can read about some of the challenges here (has some great figures) ... http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167610515000690 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167610515...
- oh_sigh 9y agoIt appears the tethers are for positional stability, and the keel or whatever you want to call the underwater portion of the structure provides rotational stability, but I'm sure there is much more to it than that.
- cr1895 9y agoThe moorings would provide lateral and yaw stability, while the deep spar resists roll, pitch, and heave.
- nraynaud 9y agoI have absolutely no clue as to how they yaw the thing. A 1° yaw error with the wind is like 2-3% efficiency penalty, and a penalty on durability.
- dx034 9y agoI guess as with most turbines. Most will remain fixed, only the upper part with generator will rotate. This shouldn't work different to conventional turbines.
- _FKS_ 9y agoIn case you're interested, this[1] document is of great interest if you wish to understand how these offshore turbines perform empirically. I'll give you a hint: not very good. Any piece of machinery exposed to sea salt doesn't last long. Also maintenance will be a big problem: just think one second the kind of undertaking needed to send a team of technicians to repair only one of these turbines. Let's not talk about replacing any large piece. [1] http://www.ref.org.uk/attachments/article/280/ref.hughes.19.12.12.pdf http://www.ref.org.uk/attachments/article/280/ref.hughes.19.... (see Figure 1, page 13, "Performance degradation due to age using equal weights")
- obastani 9y agoSeems like the foundation that published that study is anti wind and might not be the most reputable source [1]. [1] http://www.ewea.org/blog/2012/12/study-on-turbine-lifespan-just-more-anti-wind-propaganda/ http://www.ewea.org/blog/2012/12/study-on-turbine-lifespan-j...
- _FKS_ 9y agoThis is also from a pro-wind blog ;)
- wonton2 9y agoStatoil has done offshore drilling since the 70s, the people who work there probably know more than anyone else in the world about designing and operating very large machinery at sea. You can read more on their web pages or search the web for statoil to find examples of what i mean.
- nraynaud 9y agoyep, but a wind turbine is churning way less money than an oil rig, you get the chopper only for extreme cases (and it's a pain because of the rotor, sometime they just use the emergency lift to get into the water with a life raft). So now we are talking high sea docking to a moving structure in the North Sea, not going to happen in the winter. So any incident and you lose your entire season, and now you're in a downward spiral. I'm not saying this won't work, I'm saying it's a very complicated situation.
- mrfusion 9y agoWhy not floating solar panels, I've always wondered? Free space, free supports, clear direct sunlight.
- the8472 9y agohttps://www.google.com/maps/@32.6135118,116.875538,1429m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.com/maps/@32.6135118,116.875538,1429m/dat...
- dx034 9y agoThat's fascinating. Is there any information (in English) about that project?
- jpm_sd 9y agoSure. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/china-launches-largest-floating-solar-farm-180963587/ http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/china-launches-larg... Bio-fouling and corrosion are still huge problems though.
- netfire 9y agoI know deterioration of the solar panels is a concern for land-based installations. I imagine that could be accelerated by sea salt, waves, and storms. I'm also curious how cloudy/foggy ocean sites are compared to ideal desert-based land sites like Nevada. That also might be a factor.
- rb808 9y agoThe sun isn't so good around Norway.
- xyproto 9y agoThe sun is in space, luckily. And there is quality sunlight in Norway too. But there is not much sunlight during winter. And winter is coming.
- 9y ago
- ChuckMcM 9y agoI'm curious if they generate enough energy that they could do autonomous station keeping with thrusters in the base. What is hard to appreciate is the scale of these things, they are like 50% larger than the largest land based wind turbine. That is pretty amazingly huge. And I'm not sure how you do maintenance on one but they do look pretty amazing.
- protomyth 9y ago> I'm curious if they generate enough energy that they could do autonomous station keeping with thrusters in the base. I cannot help but think during conditions where station keeping is really needed that the wind power would be at its highest, so it should be enough given the design of what is where.
- specialist 9y agore maintenance: Knowing nothing about anything, my first thought was the RP FLIP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP_FLIP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP_FLIP
- cr1895 9y ago>autonomous station keeping with thrusters in the base. This adds far more complexity and risk than you might expect. Redundancy, reliability, etc. all are vitally important. If one of several thrusters fails, and the environmental conditions are too great for the remaining thrusters to match, what happens? How do you maintain the thrusters? You could have station-keeping with tugs during maintenance, but often maintenance of azimuthing thrusters requires a drydock. Hypothetically speaking, if all the turbines were somewhat easily mobile, their position could be optimized for the given wind conditions. That could be pretty interesting! Today however that's science fiction. Furthermore, there's always going to be a subsea tether for power. That's unavoidable. In any case, moorings of various types are dumb, well-understood, and very effective.
- perbu 9y agoWrt to reliability of thrusters - this is pretty well covered. They have been drilling for oil with unmoored platforms for decades. Here, the requirements for keeping the rig in a fixed position are quite loose compared to a drilling rig. The power tether would be quite minimal. Also, there is the possibility of creating untethered rigs that store hydrogen locally. Probably not feasible atm.
- Jedd 9y agoLove the layout, and the video production, in terms of clearly presenting salient information. Even where they show diameter with lots of pointer lines towards radius-of-one-blade (and a bit of another). Nit-picking -- exclusive use of upper case overlays may look hip, but reduces clarity. M/S means either miles or mega-somethings per something. Whereas m/s means metres (only Americans spell them meters for reasons that aren't clear) per second.
- ztjio 9y agoKinda disappointed they aren't combined with an OTEC setup.
- aedron 9y agoA seastead with a couple of these could be interesting.