FY 2006 DOE Wind and Hydropower Program Peer Review Denver Marriot West, Golden CO, USA May 9-11, 2006 Walt Musial Leader-Offshore Projects National Wind Technology Center National Renewable Energy Laboratory Offshore Technology Development

DOE Offshore Wind Program: A Brief History LWST Phase II RFP modified to include offshore with a program goal of 5 cents/kWh by – (1 system development, 1 component, 3 conceptual) Horns Rev and Nysted wind farms commissioned August 2003, DOE Secretary Abraham requested white paper on feasibility of offshore wind. DOE program begins gathering deepwater information to address longer term US vision. June 2004, offshore projects develop problems; broader program indicated. DOE identifies multiple technology pathways

Current Status of Offshore Industry  Offshore 804-MW of 60,000 MW+ world-wide – less than 2%  11-GW+ offshore is projected for 2010  Offshore has affected current onshore systems  Offshore will continue to influence European markets. Current Future

Studie/Studie_WindEnergy_en.htm?menu=Visitor Predicted Growth of German Wind Energy Markets

Land-based wind sites are not close to coastal load centers Load centers are close to offshore wind sites Two market approach is needed Graphic Credit: Bruce Bailey AWS Truewind Why Offshore Wind in the US? Graphic Credit: GE Energy % area class 3 or above US Population Concentration U.S. Wind Resource

U.S. Offshore Wind Energy Opportunity U.S. Offshore Wind Energy Resource Resource Not Yet Assessed

Wind Energy Cost Trends 1981: 40 cents/kWh Increased Turbine Size R&D Advances Manufacturing Improvements 2006: cents/kWh 2012: 3.6 cents/kWh 2006: 9.5 cents/kWh 2014: 5 cents/kWh Multi-megawatt Turbines High reliability systems Infrastructure Improvements Land-based Class 4 Offshore Class 6

Coastal Energy Prices Are Higher with No Significant Indigenous Sources

DOE/NREL Offshore Wind Energy Program: Approach Offshore Industry European Wind Energy Experience DOE Offshore Wind Energy Program

European Collaborations NREL/RISØ Co-Operating Agents for International Energy Agency Offshore Annex – XXIII. Eight Active Countries

Offshore Code Comparison Collaborative (OC 3 ) Baseline Model Dynamics Comparisons (8 codes)

Horns Rev- Corner Turbine Enhancements? Wind Direction Offshore array modeling and analysis can open new siting options both offshore and onshore

DOE/NREL Offshore Wind Energy Program: Approach Offshore Industry European Wind Energy Experience DOE Offshore Wind Energy Program

Offshore Oil and Gas Industry: The Link to Offshore Wind Energy

Offshore Industry Collaborations are Essential MMS regulatory authority Offshore industry needs to diversify IEC insufficient for MMS/U.S. structural certification (API standards) Infrastructure owned by offshore industry 50 years of offshore experience

Joint Activities with Offshore Industry Minerals Management Service DOE/MMS Memorandum of Understanding Advisory Relationships Established Proposed Rulemaking Comments Scoping Meetings – Upcoming

Joint Activities with Offshore Industry Joint Industry Project –Purpose: Determine requirements for offshore safety and certification. –Participants: US Offshore Wind Developers, Offshore construction, DOE, MMS Offshore Technology Conference (OTC) –Wind Session 150 attended –Invited for 2007 –High level of interest SeaCon Studies

DOE/NREL Offshore Wind Energy Program: Approach Offshore Industry European Wind Energy Experience DOE Offshore Wind Energy Program

Deep Water Wind Turbine Development Offshore Wind Technology Development 90.1 GW>500 GW GW DOE Goal: 30 to 60-m Class 6 winds 5 cents/kWh by 2016 DOE Goal: 0 to 30-m Class 6 winds 5 cents/kWh by 2014 ShallowTransitionalDeep

Offshore Technology Pathway Strategy Laboratory SeaCon (Subcontracts)

Skeleton: Offshore Technology Development Pathway Management and Support Supporting Research and Testing SeaCon Test Bed Development Public/Private Partnerships Field Verification Yr 1 Yrs 8 to 17 Program Goal

Current Offshore Wind Program Activities  Enabling Research – Coupled Codes (Jonkman), wakes, controls, rotors, drivetrains, reliability  Resource Assessment – Offshore mapping, boundary layer, wind/wave correlations  Environmental Support – (Ram, Energetics)  LWST II Subcontracts oGE System Development - $27M/ $8M DOE oGE Ultralong blade- component (canceled) oConcept Marine Associates, MIT, AWS Truewind  Offshore Wind Collaborative (OWC)  Testing Support and Facilities (Simms)  TVP Arklow Banks  SeaCon Studies

Sea-Based Concept Studies (SeaCon) DOE/NREL sponsored studies underway: Objectives: – Use offshore O&G experience - form partnerships – Define requirements for infrastructure and technology – Narrow focus on best technology options – Establish basis for test bed and system development

Offshore Wind Cost Elements Offshore turbine 33% of the life cycle cost vs. 59% onshore derived from NREL cost model and CA-OWEE report 2001

SeaCon Studies Connectivity

Sea-Based Concept (SeaCon) Studies 1.Offshore cost and economic modeling 2.US offshore infrastructure assessment 3.Offshore reliability models 4.Anchoring and mooring studies 5.Turbine design optimization 6.Operation and maintenance 7.Offshore grid system 8.Fixed bottom support structures 9.Floating platforms 10.Environmental assessments 11.External conditions 12.System scaling studies

SeaCon Phases  Phase 1 – Baseline parametric studies-FY06  Phase 2 – Component Scaling FY07  Phase 3 – System Optimization and Scaling FY08 Phase 1 Example: What foundations work best at various depths?

Transitional Depth Foundations 30-m to 60-m Depths Tripod Tube Steel Guyed Tube Spaceframe, Jacket, or Truss Talisman Energy Concept Suction Bucket GW potential

Floating Foundations >60-m Depths Dutch tri- floater Barge SparMono-hull TLP Concept Marine Associates Concrete TLP SWAY >500 GW potential

Strategies for Minimal Life Cycle Cost Reliability versus O&M Understand the relationship between OPEX and CAPEX Close the loop between design and operations –High reliability systems –Design for low cost in-situ repairs –Avoid collateral damage. –Integrated CM and self diagnostics Benefit Offshore and Onshore Designer Operator

Offshore Turbine Availability Increasing Site Severity and Distance from Shore Engineering Challenge

Offshore Component Costs are Low Relative to Total Project  All of the energy Cost of Energy Can we afford more expensive rotors?  Most of the loads  4% of the cost

Offshore Resource Mapping Current 1000-GW 0-5nm excluded 5-20nm 67% exclusion 20-50nm 33% exclusion Alaska and Hawaii excluded SC to Mexico excluded Class 4 excluded No state boundaries Updates in progress  New maps by AWS Truewind  Exclusions not assumed  Class  Resource by 10-m depths  All States (except FL, AL)  State boundaries  Distance from Shore  0-3nm – State waters  3-6nm – MMS/State zone  6-12nm – MMS High Viewshed  12-50nm – Low Viewshed  Wind/Wave mapping for site specific design  Bottom conditions  Exclusion criteria

Substructure Energy per Area Turbine Costs Installation Operation and Maintenance Grid and Electrical Infrastructure 1 SeaCon Phase 2 and 3: Offshore Scaling and System Optimization – How Big? High capacity offshore infrastructure enables larger machines.

Offshore Design Drivers  Enablers for larger turbines  Lightweight structural materials  Load reduction/Increased energy  Reliability and predictive maintenance  Verification and testing  System weight reduction  Onshore benefits

Summary Near term US offshore projects needed Environmental, regulatory, and public perceptions are drivers in US. Significant R&D is necessary to lower costs Offshore O&G industry experience and collaborations are essential Three technology pathways identified Shallow water pathway has begun Wind can potentially supply 20% of electric energy in United States