Euromech 583 VAWT 2016

Blackbird: Storage Base Anchored Uniaxial Hybrid VAWT-WEC TL Buoy
Euromech VAWT Colloquium - 8th September 2016 - TU Delft
Dr. C. R. Golightly GO-ELS Ltd. – BLACKBIRD: Euromech VAWT 2016 – TU Delft - 9th September 2016
Dr. Chris Golightly GO-ELS Ltd.
Geotechnical & Engineering Geology Consultant
Source: Univ. Mass. 1974
Source: WINDFLOAT Website Source: Statoil GOW 2014

IPCC AR5 Synthesis Report
AR5 SYR SPM

LCOE Renewables Ranges and Averages [IRENA, 2015]

LCOE Ranges [Bloomberg NEF, 2013] USD/MWhr

European Offshore Wind Costs [Carbon Trust, 2015]

Offshore Wind Cost Trends –
Need for Reductions
• Cost increases since 2005 due to
commodity price rises (mainly
steel) and marine installation costs
• Monopile costs per kW flat-lining
from 1991 to 2008
• Deeper waters, further out to sea:
- heavier and longer over-designed
monopiles & jacket towers
- more extensive and expensive
equipment and vessel spreads
- higher downtime and weather
standby costs
• Insistence on “known technology”
leading to lack of innovation,
conservatism, risk aversion on the
part of developers and lenders.
• Lack of experience in developer
organisations; skills shortage.
Source: van der Zwaan et al, 2011
Source: The Offshore Valuation, 2010

Building the European Offshore Transnational European Grid
• More predictable energy
output needed
• Connections to more
than one country
• Power trading between
countries
• Viable alternative to
onshore grid construction
• Connection to other
energy sources
• Economical grid
utilisation via shared use
• Greater energy security
• Interconnection capacity
means “firmer“ power
• Single European
electricity market

Offshore Floating Wind – Huge Potential Resource UK Example
Source: The Offshore Valuation, 2010.

Floating Wind – Huge Potential Offshore Wind Resource
Majority of OW developments have been in the Southern North Sea, a relatively flat shallow water
continental shelf, mainly dense sand, stiff glacial clayey soils & soft sediment filled paleo-valleys.
Not globally representative. Most coastal areas are steep, rocky, with thin (< 5 to 10 m) soil cover.
Piling is costly for fixed or floating structures. Soils insufficient for drag or suction caisson anchoring.
Source: Statoil Global Offshore Wind 2014

Global Wave Energy Potential – Fugro OMAE 2010

European Wind-Wave Combined Potential – ORECCA 2011

Comparison Oil Drilling Semi-Sub Vs Offshore Wind Floater

The Future: Offshore Floating Wind Leaders
HYWIND Statoil [NO] statoil.com/en/TechnologyInnovation
PELASTAR Glosten [US] pelastar.com
WINDFLOAT Principle Power [PO/US] www.principlepowerinc.com/products/windfloat.html
IDEOL IDEOL Partners [FR] ideol-offshore.com/en
WINFLO DCNS-Alstom [FR] fr.dcnsgroup.com/produit/eoliennes-flottantes/
INFLOW EDF-IFP-Nenuphar [FR] inflow-fp7.eu/floating-vertical-axis-wind-turbine/
GICON GICON-Fraunhofer [DE] gicon-sof.de/en/sof1.html
FUKUSHIMA Mitsubishi-Hitachi [JA] fukushima-forward.jp/english/
DEEPCWIND 30 diverse members [US] composites.umaine.edu/our-research/offshore-wind/deepcwind-consortium/
SANDIA Sandia Labs [US] energy.sandia.gov/energy/renewable-energy/wind-power/offshore-wind
Source: Myhr et al, 2014.

Floating Wind Platforms – Semi-Sub - Spar - TLP - Taut Buoy

Vertical Axis Wind Turbines [VAWT]– Pros and Cons
ADVANTAGES
o Omni-directional
- accepts wind from any direction
o Components mounted at sea level
- ease of service & maintenance
- lighter weight composite structures
o Can theoretically use less materials to
capture the same amount of wind
DISADVANTAGES
o Rotors lower at reduced wind speeds
o Centrifugal force over-stresses blades
o Poor self-starting capabilities
o Often requires support at turbine
rotor top
o Rotor needs removing for bearings
replacement
o To date, poorer performance &
reliability than HAWTs

BLACKBIRD: Storage Base Anchored Uniaxial Hybrid VAWT-WEC TL Buoy
 BLACKBIRD: Hybrid Floating Offshore Wind Turbine [FOWT] Wave
Energy Convertor [WEC]. Grouping of existing designs & concepts:
 Twin bladed Vertical Axis Wind Turbine [VAWT]
 VAWT &WEC generators with anti-yaw horizontal rotating bearing
 High buoyancy Uniaxial Submerged Tension Leg Buoy [USTLB]
 Tubular Linear Magnetic-Geared Interior Permanent Magnet
Generator [LMGIPMG] WEC
 Power Take Off [PTO] units integrated into float unit.
 Single vertical high capacity damped tether/tendon.
 Subsea ball & taper “plug-in” seabed connector
 Subsea FRP “green” concrete storage, pumping & electrolysis unit.
 Seabed rock Anchored Foundation Template [SAFT]
 Export HVDC power line above gas supply pipeline.

WEC - Linear PM Generator [LMGIPM]
 Linear generation offers possibility of direct
conversion of mechanical into electrical energy.
 Direct drive PTO simpler than hydraulic systems,
with no intermediate steps between primary
interface & electrical machine.
 “The basic concept of a linear generator consists
of a translator with magnets of alternating
polarity directly coupled to a heaving buoy”
 Stator contains windings mounted in a relatively
stationary structure connected to a drag plate, a
large inertia, or the sea bed. As the heaving
buoy oscillates, current is induced in the stator”.
 Conventional linear permanent magnet
generators (CLPMG) for direct-drive WEC have
experienced drawbacks including low power
density and large system volume.

Seabed Anchored Foundation Template [SAFT]
 Buoyant float-out hybrid structure concept
 Foundation base or mooring point template.
 GRP /reinforced concrete base configured to support
tripods, jackets or GBS or:
 Pre-installed templates for inclined or vertical
(TLP)taut or slack catenary mooring lines
 Steel /concrete edge skirts and suction caissons [SC]
, or helical screws for differing soil types/thicknesses
 Tension resistance via pressure grouted rock anchors
installed below upper support casing.
 Installed from an ROV operated marinised drilling
unit via vessel launched LARS.
 External GRP, concrete or steel mudmats and/or
integral plastic anti-scour frond mats/mattresses.
 Configuration has considerable lateral seabed
resistance and tension uplift capacity.
 Design preceded by high quality shallow geophysical
investigation of seabed surface and upper layering
 Confirmatory “pilot hole soil/rock coring by same
ROV drilling unit used to install the anchors.
 Proof-loading of 5-10% to twice working load.
www.bladeoffshore.com/our-company/blade-offshore-remote-drilling#gallery[as]/2/

Closing Thoughts – Future of Offshore Wind Energy
Aim: Most Efficient Abstraction of Kinetic Energy From Moving
Turbulent Air [OFFSHORE WIND]
 How Would That Be Done in 2016 From A Standing Start? Fixed
Structure Top Heavy 3 Bladed Onshore HAWT on Fixed Steel Towers?
>> No!! Too Expensive and Subsidy Dependent
 What Will The Global Mix Be Between Fixed Vs Floating?
>> Deeper Waters/Sloping Seabeds >> FLOATING VAWT
 Will There be a Real Offshore Wind “Gamechanger” - or not? Yes
there must be soon.
>> [$$$ ECONOMICS $$$]

References & Links
References
 Borg, M., Collu, M. and Brennan, F.: Use of a Wave Energy Converter as a Motion Suppress Device for Floating Wind
Turbines, Energy Procedia 35 (2013) 223 – 233, DeepWind 2013, 24-25 January, Trondheim, Norway, 2013.
 Carbon Trust: Innovation in Offshore Wind: International Collaboration and Coordination”, All Energy 2015,
Glasgow, UK, p. 32, 2015.
 DNV-KEMA: The Crown Estate – UK Market Potential and Technology Assessment for Floating Offshore Wind Power;
An Assessment of the Commercialisation Potential of the Floating Offshore Wind Industry, Rev. 01, 21st December
2012, Ref. 2012-1808, p.24, 2012.
 Golightly, C.R.: Efficient Anchored Template Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines [OWT], EWEA 2013
 Myhr, A. and Nygard, T.A.: Experimental Results for Tension-Leg-Buoy Offshore Wind Turbine Platforms, Journal of
Ocean and Wind Energy, ISOPE, 1, 4, November 2014, pp. 217–224, 2014.
 Paulsen, U.S., Borg, M., Madsen, H. A., T.F. Pedersen, Hattel, J., Ritchie, E., Ferreira C.S., Svendsen H., Berthelsen P.
A., Smadja, C.: Outcomes of the DeepWind Conceptual Design”, Energy Procedia 80, pp. 329 – 341, 2015.
 SI Ocean: Wave and Tidal Energy Strategic Technology Agenda, February 2014, p. 44, 2014
 Slocum, A. H., Fennell, G.E. and Dundar, G.: Ocean Renewable Energy Storage (ORES) System: Analysis of an
Undersea Energy Storage Concept, Proc. IEEE, 101(4): pp. 906–924, 2011.
 White, C.N., Erb, P.R. and Botros, F.R.: The Single-Leg Tension-Leg Platform: A Cost-Effective Evolution of the TLP
Concept”, Proc. 20th Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 2nd -5th May 1988, Vol. 1, p.8, 1988.
Links
 Global Wind Energy Council Country & Global Reports [www.gwec.net/publications/country-reports
 ORECCA: European Offshore Renewable Energy Roadmap, p. 101, 2011.
 IRENA Costs Database [irena.org/costs]
 USA Offshore Wind Database [offshorewind.net]
 4C Offshore Wind Database [4coffshore.com]

Contact Details
Dr. C.R. Golightly, BSc, MSc, PhD, MICE, FGS.
Geotechnical and Engineering Geology Consultant
Rue Marc Brison 10G, 1300 Limal, Belgium
Tel. +32 10 41 95 25
Mobile: +44 755 4612888
Email: chris.golightly@hotmail.com
skype: chrisgolightly;
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/pub/5/4b5/469
“You Pay for a Site Investigation -
Whether You do One or Not”– Cole
et al, 1991.
“Ignore The Geology at Your Peril” –
Prof. John Burland, Imperial College.

Euromech 583 VAWT 2016

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (16)

Ähnlich wie Euromech 583 VAWT 2016

Ähnlich wie Euromech 583 VAWT 2016 (20)

Euromech 583 VAWT 2016