2.12.7 Impact: The actions described above address all of the criteria relating to competition, as outlined in Annex 1. Generic impacts are discussed in Section 2.9. Key package-specific impacts at a project level are: [C1,C2,C3,C4,C5] {ii}


 New investment in one ormore UKmanufacturing facilities, by the turbinemanufacturer or 3rd party supplier. This is dependent on suppliers chosen and also decisions taken on other projects.


 Provision of a further offshore turbine, foundation and other component or operation test site.  Turbines not yet installed in commercial projects being used, independent of which supplier chosen.  Further localisation of supply.


2.12.8 All of the above impacts have knock-on impacts at a wider level, including projects beyond the EA1 Project and in sectors beyond offshore wind, as discussed further in Annex 6. {iii}


Turbine installation


2.12.9 Installation wrapped following lessons learned: As part of the scope of works eachWTG supplier was requested to provide a transport and installation offer. This request was influenced by the recent decision to combine these packages on SPR’sWikinger project with the developer advantages including a reduction in interfaces tomanage and the allocation of this scope lying with the party best placed tomanage the installation risk. This part of theWTG suppliers’ scope is fully integratedwith theWTG supply negotiations outlined above. [C3] {ii}


2.12.10 Open market of installation suppliers considered: The shortlistedWTG suppliers have included as part of their tender responses installation proposals including 13 vessels andmultiple port choices. EA1 will work with the preferredWTG supplier to engage the pool of suitable vessel owners and port locations for the delivery of the project. [C1,C2,C4,C5] {ii}


2.12.11 Collaboration to share knowledge & facilities: EA1 will discuss turbine installation specific lessons learned frompast offshore wind projects with the chosen supplier to ensure that the optimal execution plan for the EA1 Project is defined. EA1 is already having these discussions as part of the turbine package optimisation workstream(3.3.2). Further comments on shared port facilities are noted in 2.19. [C1,C2,C3,C4,I3] {ii, iii}


2.12.12 Impact: The collective impact of the above activities on the wind turbine installation sector will be to drive: [C1,C2,C3,C4,C5] {ii, iii}


 Competition in installation of very large turbines far fromshore and in relatively deep water  Good practice with regard to lessons learned and vertical communication  Localisation of supply, where there are shared benefits to do so


2.13 Foundation Design


2.13.1 Previous jacket experience informing approach: Steel jacket foundations are the optimal solution for the project's water depth and soil conditions. This decisionwas influenced by Vattenfall’s experience of jacket installation on the Ormonde OffshoreWindfarmand SPR’s recent experience contracting this foundation solution for itsWikinger project. In both such occasions new suppliers were introduced to this area of the market (as described in 2.2).[C1, C2, C3, C5] {ii, iii}


2.13.2 EA1 owns the designwhich gives greater supplier options: EA1’s approach has been to ensure that it has ownership of the design specification produced. This strategy allows EA1 to promote the fabrication opportunity to a wider number of potential suppliers than had an existing concept design tailored to the facilities of a smaller number of fabricators option been selected. [C1,C2,C4] {ii, iii}


2.13.3 Open and competitive tender process: Thirty seven suppliers were initially contacted duringmarket engagement themajority of which were new or less established suppliers in the offshore windmarket. EA1 is close to awarding a contract to the preferred foundation design supplier. [C1,C4,C5] {ii}


2.13.4 EA1 will challenge the contracted supplier to optimise the jacket solution to be deployed on the EA1 Project ensuring that particular consideration is given towards the prospect of standardising and simplifying aspects of the design for fabrication. EA1 will also examine the concept of further integration of theWTG tower and foundation as this is considered to be an area which could generate future cost savings. [C3,I2,I5] {ii, iii}


Page 12 of 30


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  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87