cost reduction
Forcing the issue – report homes in on four technologies
Looking at the ‘big picture,’ modifying the way industry organises itself, could speed up the introduction of new technology that could help drive down the cost of energy produced from offshore wind
IN June, classification society DNV GL published an in-depth report that concluded that companies in the offshore wind industry could achieve energy cost savings of at least 10 per cent through the integration of four market-ready technologies. So, what are the key findings of the report? And what are the main implications for companies operating in the offshore wind industry? As Joe Phillips, communications manager and head of strategy and policy services, renewables advisory at DNV GL Energy explained, three main findings emerge from the FORCE (For Reduced Cost of Energy) report. Firstly, by taking a more integrated approach to the design of wind turbines and their supporting structure via the adoption of four near-market technologies, cost of energy savings “of at least 10 per cent are achievable”. Secondly, the only barriers preventing exploitation of technology in question relate to the way the industry goes about developing and procuring offshore wind projects. Finally, he explained, these commercial barriers are best addressed via a joint industry project (JIP), which would promote collaborative, integrated engineering practices. “If industry successfully addresses these barriers, an even
greater level of cost reduction is possible,” Mr Phillips told OWJ. In arriving at these conclusions, DNV GL carried out what it describes as “integrated application of advanced design analysis, load modelling and control philosophies” to a representative northern European project and applied the results to baseline technology representing current practice. The entire process was then repeated to examine how the application of the four key technologies would affect the outcome, before a comprehensive cost of energy model for the entire windfarm system was used to evaluate the performance of the ‘advanced’ design versus the baseline. According to Mr Phillips, the first of the four key technologies assessed by DNV GL is integrated design, which, put simply, means designing for an optimal outcome of the entire system rather than just individual elements of it. “This sometimes means trade-offs,” he explained. “Design
decisions might make one area of the system more expensive and another cheaper, but as long as there is a net gain for the system overall, then we can say we are taking an integrated approach. This is built on a fundamental understanding that, in any system, changes in one area affect another.”
30 I Offshore Wind Journal I 3rd Quarter 2014
Relaxing frequency constraints could allow the introduction of significantly lighter structures
To illustrate this fact, Mr Phillips pointed out that, even though the design of wind turbines and design of their supporting foundations are both driven by environmental loads – mainly related to wind and wave loading – most offshore wind projects currently design foundations using separate load-modelling and design tools to those used for the turbine, with only a rudimentary interface to model the two parts of the system. “Here, integrated design means using just one model to
capture the dynamic response of the complete system – wind turbine and foundation,” he told OWJ. “This approach results in a much leaner design. It also allows the application of the remaining three technologies with confidence,” he added. The first of the remaining technologies is the relaxation of
frequency constraints. As Mr Phillips explained, every structure has a ‘resonant’ or natural frequency, which designers avoid, since resonant effects in operation will dramatically reduce the lifetime of the structure. However, by taking an integrated approach to design and load modelling, he explained, the Project FORCE team were
www.owjonline.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70