Massive offshore wind-power backbone inspired by marine scientist's model

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Renewable energy made big national headlines October 12 as a group of investors, including search engine giant Google, announced plans to build a 560-kilometer offshore wind power transmission "backbone" off the U.S. eastern seaboard. The developers of the plan say it will make wind power more economical and enhance the reliability of the existing grid.

The proposed high-voltage direct current (HVDC) cable, dubbed the Atlantic Wind Connection (AWC), would run from southern Virginia to northern New Jersey, occupying shallow trenches on the seabed of federal waters some 15-20 miles off the shore. The line would connect with the mainland at four points—southern Virginia, Delaware, and southern and northern New Jersey. And if all goes according to plan, it would have a whopping 6,000-megawatt (MW) capacity—roughly equal to that of five large nuclear reactors and capable of powering some 1.9 million homes.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

Trans-Elect, the Maryland-based transmission line company heading up the plan, expects the project to cost $5 billion in total, not including financing and permit fees. It hopes to begin construction in 2013, and estimates the first phase—a $1.8 billion, 240-kilometer stretch—could be completed by 2016. The entire project will not be complete until 2021 at the earliest. Google's initial stake is 37.5 percent of the equity portion of the project.

Certain details of the plan were at least in part inspired by research led by Willett Kempton, a professor of marine science policy at the University of Delaware. In a paper published April 5 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Kempton's group described offshore wind data collected over a five-year period along a 2,500-kilometer stretch of the U.S. eastern seaboard. The researchers used a mathematical model to show that, thanks to ocean wind patterns, a system of turbines placed strategically and wired together could be counted on to produce a steady supply of power—unlike land-based systems which can be hindered by intermittent winds. In an email, Kempton told Scientific American that the AWC developers contacted him several times for information related to the PNAS paper, and also asked him to speak with investors as they analyzed the plan.

Several undersea HVDC cables already exist off the Atlantic Coast for long-distance transport of electricity generated on land. But these lines simply carry electrons from one point to another, with no power-generating inputs in between. In the case of the AWC, generating stations along the line would add electricity to the system, a process that will require newer, more cutting-edge technology, says Kempton.

Practically, the biggest obstacles to the plan's implementation are more administrative than technological, several experts, including Kempton, told The New York Times. For one thing, it will face a complicated permitting process—the same one that took almost a decade for a proposed wind farm in near-shore waters off Cape Cod, Mass, which was finally approved by the Department of Interior in April.

Symbolically, though, the AWC plan is a big step. "This shows that there is confidence that the offshore wind industry is going to take off in the U.S. as it is already in Northern Europe," Kempton says.

See also the linksat series"Beyond Fossil Fuels," part of a survey conducted by Scientific American of executives at companies engaged in developing and implementing non–fossil fuel energy technologies.

Image credit: Flickr/ PEBondestad

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe