OFFSHORE WIND: Placing turbines in deep waters offshore could provide a bonanza of power while keeping turbines out of sight--if technical hurdles can be overcome.
Image: ©Hans Laubel/istockphoto.com
More In This Article
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
The waters of the Jersey Shore may soon become home to the nation's first deepwater wind turbines. New Jersey officials recently announced the state would help fund an initiative by Garden State Offshore Energy to build a 350-megawatt wind farm 16 miles (26 kilometers) offshore. The state wants by 2020 many more of these parks, at least 3,000 megawatts worth, or about 13 percent of the state's total electricity needs.
"This is probably the first of many ambitious goals to be set by states," says Greg Watson, a senior advisor on clean energy technology to the governor of Massachusetts. "Three thousand megawatts is significant. With that you're able to offset or even prevent fossil fuel plants from being built."
The federal government is about to open up to wind energy development vast swaths of deep ocean waters, and states and wind park developers are vying to be the first to seize the new frontier. Wind parks in these waters can generate more energy than nearshore and onshore sites, they don't ruin seascape views, and they don't interfere as much with other ocean activities.
New Jersey's plan was prompted, in part, by new federal rules that will greatly expand the territory in which developers can build offshore wind parks. Until now, such projects were only allowed in shallow state waters—those within 3.5 miles (5.6 kilometers) of shore. The new rules would allow them in federal waters, known as the outer continental shelf, which extend to the edge of U.S. territory about 230 miles (200 nautical miles, or 370 kilometers) out. These are the same waters where the hotly debated oil and gas drilling has been proposed, but the sites are unlikely to overlap, say wind developers.
The U.S. Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service, the federal agency with jurisdiction, plans to finalize the rules by the end of the year. The agency says it will lease plots of the shelf to developers of wind parks and other renewable energy projects, such as ocean current and wave-harvesting technologies. States are chipping in on wind park development projects in the hope that the energy from these complexes will feed into state grids and help meet renewable energy requirements.
Some groups say the rules leave too many barriers for developers to overcome. "Are these waters really open?" asks Sean O'Neill, founder of the Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition. O'Neill says the leases may be prohibitively expensive and the environmental review process too extensive.
Which way the wind blows
But opening up the shelf may be the only way a viable offshore wind industry can develop in this country. Wind projects in state waters are visible from shore and can interfere with shipping routes and recreation. Turbines often have to be smaller and fewer to minimize these impacts, leading to less profitable projects. And prior to the new federal rules, no one knew who was in charge.
These obstacles have delayed, and in some cases nixed, many projects—and so far, not a single offshore wind turbine is operating in the U.S. Organizers of Cape Wind, an offshore wind park to be built more than five miles (eight kilometers) from Cape Cod, Mass., have been battling public opposition and regulatory hurdles for more than seven years.
Leasing the outer continental shelf may solve some of these problems and open a tremendous energy resource. Researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, Colo., estimate that the wind in this territory could generate nearly 1000 gigawatts—a little more than the current U.S. electrical capacity.
See what we're tweeting about
11 Comments
Add CommentThe statement that "Europe has far surpassed the U.S. in offshore wind..." is, of course, true. However, Europe, for example Denmark which has 4 GW of wind power, has also far surpassed the U.S. in electricity prices. Danish electricity costs 29 cents/Kwhr because of the massive amount of wind energy installed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe price of electricity related to these offshore wind turbines is not mentioned in the article. I pay 9 cents/Kwhr in Chicago, IL (Exelon Energy), and would be willing to pay a little more for renewable energy; but will not pay 29 cents/Kwhr.
One final note: Vestas, the largest manufacturer of wind turbines installed a large wind turbine farm (81 two megawatt turbines) in 2002. (Reference IEEE Spectrum, October 2002, "Reap the Wild Wind"); and had to retrofit all 81 of the turbines in 2004 at considerable expense due to the harsh sea conditions. Presently, Vestas calls for greater focus on "onshore" wind generation. I think installing mechanical/electrical equipment in a salt water environment off shore, with astronomical future maintenance costs is a losing proposition.
I live in Auckland, New Zealand and we pay $0.22/kWh. Our electricity supply used to be 100% from hydro in the 70's and has steadily declined to 70% now. Electricity prices has gone from $0.04/kWh to $0.22/kWh.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince our use of renewbale has dropped in NZ but prices has kept increasing, one can only arrive at the conclusion that this price increase is not due to renewables but to the privitisation of electric power supply.
You will find that in many places in the US, the electricty prices is still government controlled (only now starting to change). I am of the opinion that electricity prices are still too cheap in many developed nation and needs to be more expensive to incentivise renewable uptake and energy efficiency.
My solar hot water heater has a payback period of 10years now but if I use electricty prices 4 years ago, it would be 14 years.
Achieving a viable marine renewable energy industry in the U.S. is going to take a great deal of work on the federal, state and local levels. Since there is no solid framework in place to support this industry, we are dedicating the 2008 Marine Law Symposium here at Roger Williams University on Oct. 23 & 24 to address just that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInternational, national, and local experts will be discussing ways to achieve a viable marine renewable energy industry for the United States with a focus on offshore wind; hydrokinetics (wave, current and tidal); and ocean thermal energy conversion. The goal of the Symposium is to identify the challenges facing a viable marine renewable energy industry at the local, state, and federal levels and to describe and evaluate possible solutions to these challenges.
This years topic is timely, given R.I. Governor Donald Carcieris recent announcement of the successful bidder to develop the states first offshore wind farmDeepwater Wind. Deepwater Wind intends to use the jacket design, as is used in the Beatrice Windfarm. The Beatrice Windfarm Director and Coordinator of the DOWNVinD program, Europes largest renewable energy research and development program, will be discussing this project and issues associated with incentives and technological challenges. The CEO of Deepwater Wind, Chris Brown, will also be on hand to discuss the recent developments of the project.
In an effort to distinguish Rhode Island as the first coastal state to have an offshore wind farm, the Sea Grant Legal Program/Marine Affairs Institute will provide legal research and analysis of ocean zoning and other relevant issues to support the development of policies and regulations for an Ocean Special Area Management Planor ocean zoning plan.
With more attention to this important subject, perhaps we will see the progress that is needed to defray our reliance on non-renewable resources.
Megan E. Higgins
Research Counsel, Marine Affairs Institute
Rhode Island Sea Grant Legal Program
Roger Williams University School of Law
http://law.rwu.edu/sites/marineaffairs/symposia/seventhMLS.aspx
In a proposition submitted as part of a two volume resume recognized by my representative, I proposed to melt and mold alumimum wind turbines right there at waste insinarator plants at the municipalities and having them installed by unarmed soldiers on light poles- energizing more than street and highway lamps. A major proposal that eliminates wiring, pole costs, staffing, and grid distribution, etc. Kiumars Lalezarzadeh, Ph.D., Environmental Program, Q's Ministry, Behavioral Health Image Therapies, NIHARD
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is great. Regarding the increased costs, we need coal and nuclear in addition to wind and PV. Let the market decide when to push each option. This will insure that we have the most energy at the best cost.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRegarding 'Not only are offshore winds stronger but landlubbers have fewer objections to turbines almost invisible from the coast'. This unfortunately does not apply to those who have a lot of money and political connections. They would far rather have someone else bear the burden while preaching that we, (ie), everyone else must sacrifice equally. Sorry for the cynicism. I believe energy independence is critical and wind will be a big part of it. It frustrates me when some of those who preach the walk won't walk it themselves.
Wind energy=overstated benefits and understated risks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFaith based green initiatives should be treated as such by business.
Particularly if green is defined as industrial wind.
GE will sell us what we think we need , regardless of its efficacy. We should insist that our generous wind subsidies be tied by index to reduction in harmful emmissions, so that it will wither away and die.
Thomas G. Donlon May 16, 2005, issue of Barrons:
It is shameful that GE, a highly profitable company, has decided to take advantage of faulty federal and state wind energy policies by producing turbines for wind farms . In addition to environmental damage&, wind power has an economic flaw that any GE engineer ought to be able to imagine: Since no human power can turn the wind on and off when its wanted for electricity, every bit of wind power capacity must be backed up by another generating source&Immelt, an engineer, understands this but he provided the executives counter argument : The customers want it, so its GEs job to produce it.
The Paris windfarm protest draws 3,000:
"Saturday Oct 4th, in Paris, 2000 to 3000 people coming from France and various European countries demonstrated peacefully against windfarms. Antoine Waechter was among them. Green candidate in the 1988 French presidential election, Mr Waechter subsequently split from the Greens to found the Independent Ecological Movement. He is shown on the picture reading my placard. To the right of the picture, the mayor of a village in France whose inhabitants ALL decided to sell their houses when a windfarm project was announced in the vicinity. If you wish to know more about the Village for Sale, please advise.
We received over one hundred messages of support coming from all over the world, including Australia, New Zealand, the US, Canada, Puerto Rico, Ecuador, South Africa, Japan and Slovenia. See : http://collectif.4.octobre.free.fr/
The demonstration and conference was backed by 176 associations and federations : http://collectif.4.octobre.free.fr/
Enron stated in the wind industry. It's about tax sheltering, the primary incentive!
"The nation needs an ambitious plan to promote the deployment of wind and other renewable energy technologies -- and the urgent first step it must take is to rapidly extend the expiring renewable energy credits, which are the primary incentive that the nation provides for these technologies today."
-- Randall Swisher, Executive Director, AWEA
Barbara Durkin
The prime directive of the 21st Century will be for our society to embrace a more holistic approach to resource development. This point is particularly salient as we discuss the prospects for offshore wind energy. The first issue that must be addressed is the need for the "platform" for the offshore energy generation to be able to be paid for by the revenue from the generation capacity. The problem with the conventional fragmented approach to resource development is the tendancy for a single minded viewpoint which misses collateral opportunities which could also provide substantive economic value for the project development companies but also for the general public in the form of added resource generation for the use pof those public lands. In the offshore wind debate, before the "Cape Wind" project shifted the original concept was the "Ocean Ranch" project created to develop integrated offshore energy and open ocean ecologically sustainable aquaculture. This was done as a result of envisioning the austere shortsightedness of the offshore wind turbine platform development in Europe, specifically Vindeby in Denmark in 1991. In todays world, and markert reality, the potential revenue from the farm raised fish as an alternative fisheries resource would dwarf the potential value of the energy generation. This is not an easy task, but when we consider that the top two US trade deficit categories as recently as 2006 were imported energy and imported seafood.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur nation needs to take a leadership position in bringing about a sustainable society by mid century. This will need to be done through the development of a new paradigm in the infrastructure which supports our society. Our oceans are in grave trouble, most of our global fisheries have collapsed and the Cod, for which my birthplace was named, is on the verge of economic extinction. That "Sacred Cod" which hangs in the Massachusetts State House should be a symbol of sustainable fisheries brought forth by a visionary citizenry, not a symbol of the bounty that once existed and we destroyed by our non-sustainable ways.
I support family farming, fishing families, but not fish farming. There's merit sufficient in public health, economic and environmental terms to insist that wild fish caught in clean U.S. waters be served and sold.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA wide range of chemicals are used in aquaculture. They include antibiotics, parasiticides, pesticides, hormones, anesthetics, minerals, and vitamins. The use of these antibiotics is a health risk for fish as well as people, since it promotes the spread of antibiotic-resistance in both human and fish pathogens.
Farmers treat fish with potent anti-parasitics known to kill some species of shrimp. Farmed fish contract antibiotic-resistant stains of furunculous, a fatal disease that produces ulcers; wild salmon that migrated past their pens also contract the disease.
Massachusetts Fishermens Partnership represents 18 commercial fishing organizations in Massachusetts.
Their Oct. 3, 2008 MFP comments to NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
RE: Comments from the Massachusetts Fishermens Partnership (MFP) on the Draft Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary.
&we need to know where our fish products are coming from now. It is well established that 80% of all seafood consumed in the U.S. is imported. About a fifth of what is imported comes from China. Less well known is that according to the NYT (12/15/07), less than 1% of these imports are inspected. Even if you try to avoid imports, How can you be sure that farm raised fish arent raised with cheap fishmeal which comes from polluted Asian fish farms
There are now more than 4 million fish farmers in China and many of their water ways are polluted. Many crowded fish farms are maintained with illegal antibiotics and veterinary drugs. There have been hundreds of recalls in the past two years alone including one for mislabeling poisoned puffer fish as monkfish. Last year the U.S. and Europe both temporally banned Chinese fish imports because they didnt pass one of the infrequent inspections.
So how safe are fish imports overall? As reported on the ABC News site (11/6/07), in Alabama where they do comprehensive testing of fish products more than 60% of all fish imports are rejected&
DMP Citation:
Since the onset of fishery management actions in the 1990s, the maximum length of some species, particularly cod and haddock, appears to be increasing
The sooner that we can develop our own wind technologies, which are the cheapest form of solar energy, the more assured will be the future for our children! Amerca has long had the opportunity to transform this industry into a major export market. Why not develop an entire infrastructure that combines food production, currently 95% dependent on petroleum inputs, transportation, and high-tech cities that put everyone close to the land? Impossible? Please see www.greenmillennium.eu for a project that occured to me in 1980 as I was recovering from my heart stopping for 10 minutes following a car accident in Kenya.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe last 2000 years can be reduced to only 20 times the 5 generations that we know in our own families! If the only scientifically provable form of eternal life is that lived by the components of our genes, that were present in a different combination in the first life that appeared here, where will they be 2000 years from now, without petroleum for 95% of the time until then?
How about putting turbines in mountain ravens above tree lines in areas without bird populations.Taking advantage of thermals that move air up and down them through out most of the day,and night.With nothing else living there and painting them the same color as the rocks that surround them,both the visual and actual environmental impact would be minimal.With many west coast locations,this solution could power much of those areas.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDenmark's power is actually quite cheap before taxes. And, the cost isn't attributable to the vagaries of wind energy but their focus on efficiency and their determination to meet the demands of the Kyoto protocol although it's not likely they'll meet the target.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut, North America could learn a lot from Denmark w.r.t. efficiency and attitude. And they and the EU may well be the energy leaders in the West in the 21st century while we fall behind.