Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Power

World's First Floating Offshore Wind Farm To Be Taken Offline For Up To 4 Months (electrek.co) 142

Posted by BeauHD from the heavy-maintenance-required dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Electrek: The world's first floating offshore wind farm, Hywind Scotland, is coming offline for three to four months for "heavy maintenance." Hywind Scotland's operator, Norwegian power giant Equinor, says that operational data has indicated that its wind turbines need work. The pilot project has been in operation since 2017. The five Siemens Gamesa turbines will be towed to Norway this summer. An Equinor spokesperson said, "This is the first such operation for a floating farm, and the safest method to do this is to tow the turbines to shore and execute the operations in sheltered conditions."

Norwegian contractor Wergeland Group will undertake the work. The spokesperson added, "Wergeland is the closest port with offshore wind experience and sufficient water depth that can service these turbines." As the world's first floating offshore wind farm, Hywind Scotland has trailblazed for much larger floating wind farms now in the pipeline. Its five floating wind turbines have a total capacity of 30 megawatts (MW). It generates enough electricity to power the equivalent of 34,000 households in the UK. Each turbine's maximum height, base to turbine, is 253 meters (830 feet). [...] Equinor said in December 2022, when Hywind Scotland turned five, that it was the world's best-performing offshore wind farm, achieving a capacity factor of 54% over its five years of operations.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's First Floating Offshore Wind Farm To Be Taken Offline For Up To 4 Months More

World's First Floating Offshore Wind Farm To Be Taken Offline For Up To 4 Months

Comments Filter:

  • Why do they have to take them all offline at once? Can't they do sections at a time?

    • Re:Modularity and redundancy (Score:4, Informative)

      by AleRunner ( 4556245 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @02:59AM (#64162543)

      Why do they have to take them all offline at once? Can't they do sections at a time?

      It's a demonstration / experimental wind farm. It will have the minimum size to test the equipment. If this was a real one it would be made up of hundreds of similar units and then they would be able to take parts offline at a time.

      • At which point you'd likely insource most of the maintenance. Let's say it's 4 months of maintenance every 5 years, and the efficient number of turbines is 5 for hauling in at a time.

        5*5*3 = 75 turbines, well, you'd likely actually have 80. 75 out in the field, 5 being maintained. If you install 5/month for those 5 years, well, let's just say that you have quite a number of full-time workers just maintaining the turbines.

        If you have hundreds, well, 25*12 = 300. You have 300 turbines in the field, a crew

        • I am sure that periodic maintenance was done. This work sounds like a major overhaul which required them to disassemble the turbines and ship them to land.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dryeo ( 100693 )

            Actually ship them to land and then disassemble, do maintenance, reassemble and ship back. More efficient

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      It is a small prototype installation with only 5 turbines. For a large farm you would do maintenance in rotation on smaller units.

    • There are 5 turbines so there are not many sections.

  • cost (Score:3)

    by cstacy ( 534252 ) on Monday January 15, 2024 @11:35PM (#64162251)

    Presumably this was budgeted for in the pricing of the electricity. (But I have no idea how the consumer pricing and corporate profits and government investment and everything was done here.) Maybe they never knew exactly how long they could run these things in these conditions. One thing is for sure: turbines need maintenance and they ain't gonna fix themselves, and everyone knew that up front. Therefore I don't see this as a failure of wind power. That will ultimately be decided by the profit margin that the power company sees, now and in their future wind endeavors. So, kind of a non-story.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dohzer ( 867770 )

      But I have no idea how the consumer pricing and corporate profits and government investment and everything was done here.

      It's done the same as everywhere. You generate electricity onto the grid and they give you virtually nothing in return. You consume electricity from the grid and they fleece you for everything you've got.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Why would anybody in their right mind see any kind of failure here? This is just business as usual.

      • It's a bit like my brother complaining that his work van needs an oil change every couple of months, and that takes an hour or so...

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Only that it has been 7 years under adverse conditions. I bet they expected to have to do larger maintenance much earlier and this thing would still have been very profitable.

          • I think you missed my agreeing with you. Oil changes are absolutely routine maintenance. Or maybe it'd be like rebuilding my clutch at 100k miles. Maybe not routine, but I've gotten a hell of a lot of use out of it.

            And yes, I figure that they left "worst case" maintenance territory quite a while ago, and are into "longer than we expected".

      • That's the first time they have to take the whole thing down for at least 4 months so I don't see how it's "business as usual".

        Whether or not it's any kind of failure I think would depend on what they find out.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          You do not see planned maintenance as "business as usual"? What bizarre world do you live in?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by XXongo ( 3986865 )

          That's the first time they have to take the whole thing down for at least 4 months so I don't see how it's "business as usual".

          The fact that a facility sometimes needs maintenance is business as usual.

          This particular maintenance is a first time occurrence.

          Since it was stated at the beginning that this is the first installation of this type of wind farm, this is basically still shaking out the operational procedures.

        • Wind turbines that have operated for 6 years in the North Sea need a major overhaul. I am surprised they lasted that long under those conditions without major maintenance sooner.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      FTFY:

      Very obviously this was budgeted for in the pricing of the electricity.

  • salt water is the killer (Score:2, Insightful)

    by v1 ( 525388 )

    for anything you want to do with offshore wind or wave power. The power looks very attractive until you see all the damage the salt water can do in a short period of time.

    • Re:salt water is the killer (Score:5, Funny)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @12:32AM (#64162371)
      That's why most intercontinental shipping is carried over the Bering Strait by elephants.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      This is the first large maintenance after 7 years. That is not "a short period of time". That is pretty much as expected or better.

      There really is nothing to see here. The whole thing is only a story because this is the first time anybody is doing routine maintenance on their floating wind farm.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Boats need regular maintenance. A typical cargo ship is hauled into dry dock every 1-3 years for maintenance, including cleaning and re-painting the underwater parts of the hull.

      So a 5 year maintenance cycle for floating turbines is actually pretty good, compared to commercial shipping.

  • Just let me know when the oldest established permanent floating crap game in New York is shut down. In da meantime, I would advise you to keep one eye on those windy farmers. Whether they make sense is not quite obvious. And the conclusion, I will tell you in a moment...

  • ROI? (Score:2)

    by Gabest ( 852807 )

    What is the time to make the investment and the repair cost back? Is this within the lifespan of the windfarm?

    • The wind farm was set up 2017.
      Today is 2024.

      It is all paid off already.

    • It's the world's first offshore wind farm, so I would expect it to be at least somewhat more expensive than its successors.

      • If it's the very first, I expect that writing down some of the expense as research costs to be reasonable.

        • If it's the very first, I expect that writing down some of the expense as research costs to be reasonable.

          Mmm, should we apply that doctrine to nuclear plants too? Hinkley Plant C, Flamanville were the first plants of those kinds (same as those wind turbines were the first ones installed offshore), should we be writing down some of the expense as research costs to be reasonable?

          Asking for a friend.

          • I would. Given the delays in building any nuclear plants in the USA, I'd also consider building a new one to be a training exercise effectively, and more expensive because of that.

            Basically, you're building a prototype with inexperienced people. Any surprise it's more expensive? Get to the point that I'd like, where we'd be building ~10 nuclear reactors per year, and we'd expect to have experienced crews that could do it faster, better, and cheaper.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dryeo ( 100693 )

        First floating offshore wind farm.

        • Yeah, that.

          You'd think the most wear-prone item in a wind turbine would be the generator, which would be about the same whether floating or not, but what do I know...

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dryeo ( 100693 )

            Possibly, still wave action as well as corrosion would likely have an impact. As others up the page mentioned, ocean going ships need regular maintenance every few years that usually involves a dry dock, painting mostly it seems. Wonder how much maintenance an off shore oil rig needs? Seems to be ongoing as they're crewed. One site says the workers should always have a grease gun with them. Most of the sites I looked at were pay walled or required registration so didn't look hard.
            I also don't actually know

  • Cool that they can tow them (Score:3)

    by ZipNada ( 10152669 ) on Monday January 15, 2024 @11:55PM (#64162321)

    The first floating wind farm, not surprising that there are problems. But it is impressive that they can untether the turbines and tow them in for repair.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      What "problems" do you see here? Larger maintenance after 7 years of operations is not a "problem". It is expected.

      • The 'problems' I see are whatever required them to take all the turbines offline and tow them in for 3-4 months of unspecified heavy maintenance. This implies a common structural or mechanical fault.

        And as I clearly said, 'The first floating wind farm, not surprising that there are problems.'

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          It's called operating in salt water, and the unexpected is not having to do this sooner. Ships are routinely, as in every several years, put into dry dock for maintenance, painting and such. Salt water is harsh on machinery.

          • The ocean is a harsh environment but the wind turbines had better last more than 7 years without an extensive overhaul if they want to be competitive. The Dogger Bank turbines are expected to last 35 years.

            https://www.equinor.com/news/2... [equinor.com]

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dryeo ( 100693 )

              Yea, I don't actually know what maintenance this rig is under going, just took it for granted it was the floating part and not interested enough to pursue it.

  • Math correction. (Score:3)

    by Mspangler ( 770054 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @12:12AM (#64162337)

    54% of 34,000 is 18,360 houses actually supplied on average. That's actually pretty good. Capacity around here was more like 17% of nameplate in December.

    So they would need only twice as many windmills to supply the claimed load, we would need six times as many.

    https://transmission.bpa.gov/b... [bpa.gov]

    Interestingly, when the cold snap hit on the 12 th about half the wind capacity went away although the wind was blowing a constant 24 mph here at ground level. The companies that bought them obviously didn't pay extra for cold proofing, the same mistake the Texans made.

    Then on the 14th the wind stopped as the high pressure settled in.

    Between the wind and the temperatures around zero F the heat pump couldn't keep up and I had to power up the resistors. That is pretty unusual, the Mitsubishi can usually hack it, but not this year. I wonder if it's time to check the refrigerant charge.

  • Taking out energy from atmosphere circulation (Score:3)

    by Max_W ( 812974 ) on Tuesday January 16, 2024 @04:27AM (#64162645)
    For millions of years the air circulated freely around the Earth. Now we started taking out the energy from this circulation with the wind turbines.

    Could not it lead to slowing down the speed of the winds? Perhaps, this is the reason that it is becoming so hot in summer?

    I remember that when I was young there was almost always a pleasant breeze even on very hot days. But nowadays the heat can be so oppressive.

    I do not know if my theory is true, probably, it needs further research.

    • It is even worth, mate.
      You know the turbines work like propellers, just opposite right?
      They slow down the earth rotation so badly, we have to add a leap second every few years. As if a leap day Avery other odd year is not enough ...
      As everyone knows leap seconds lead to computer crashes and such ...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      I think you do not know how wind works. Ever thought that, maybe, _mountains_ would be a problem if there were any truth to your claim?

Slashdot Top Deals

The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.

Close