Advertisement

A Framework to Improve the Coexistence of Maritime Activities & Offshore Wind Farms

  • Raza Ali Mehdi
  • Jens-Uwe Schröder-Hinrichs
  • Aykut I. Ölçer
  • Michael Baldauf
Chapter
Part of the WMU Studies in Maritime Affairs book series (WMUSTUD, volume 6)

Abstract

The increasing number and size of offshore wind farms (OWFs), combined with the ambitious plans for future developments in the sector, portray a bleak outlook for ‘traditional’ maritime and marine players. The sustained growth of OWFs can cause conflict with other marine users, and thus certain risk control options (RCOs) may need to be adapted in order to maintain navigational safety and reduce the environmental impact of such installations; introducing such measures, however, may be counter-productive in terms of energy efficiency or financial sustainability. This leads to questions such as ‘is there a point when implementing certain RCOs actually makes an OWF project unfeasible’?

In this discussion paper, we describe a holistic and integrated framework that allows decision makers to evaluate the safety, energy efficiency, environmental impacts and financial sustainability aspects of OWFs. We consider a selection of vital factors and parameters in the current framework, and discuss how the different data sets can be integrated into a single framework. We also describe a novel evaluation tool that can allow users to ‘plot’ the output of the proposed framework in a spider diagram form. We conclude by discussing how the proposed work can be employed to optimize the use of limited sea-space.

Keywords

Offshore renewables Spatial planning Maritime safety Energy efficiency Energy economics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a Marie Curie Initial Training Network Grant within the 7th European Community Framework Programme. The authors of this work gratefully acknowledge support for this research under the project No. 309395 MARE-WINT provided by the EU.

References

  1. Andersson, M. H. (2011) Offshore wind farms – Ecological effects of noise and habitat alteration on fish. Dissertation, Stockholm UniversityGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey, H., Brookes, K. L., & Thompson, P. M. (2014). Assessing environmental impacts of offshore wind farms: Lessons learned and recommendations for the future. Aquatic Biosystems.  https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-9063-10-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beiersdorf, A., & Radecke, A. (Eds.). (2014). Ecological research at the offshore Windfarm alpha ventus: Challenges, results and perspectives. Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Blanco, M. I. (2009). The economics of wind energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 1372–1382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boquist, P. (2015). Offshore wind power investment model using a reference class forecasting approach to estimate the required cost contingency budget. Dissertation, Uppsala University.Google Scholar
  6. Boukani, L. N. (2016). Ship energy management and development of software for vessels’ optimum economic speed. Dissertation, World Maritime University.Google Scholar
  7. BSH. (2015). Minimum requirements concerning the constructive design of offshore structures within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). In BSH Books. Available via BSH. http://www.bsh.de/de/Produkte/Buecher/Standard/index.jsp. Accessed 18 August 2017.
  8. Chen, J.-L., Liu, H.-H., Chuang, C.-T., & Lu, H.-J. (2015). The factors affecting stakeholders’ acceptance of offshore wind farms along the western coast of Taiwan: Evidence from stakeholders’ perceptions. Ocean Coast Manage, 109, 40–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chircop, A., & L’Esperance, P. (2016). Functional interactions and maritime regulation: The mutual accommodation of offshore wind farms and international navigation and shipping. Ocean Yearbook, 30, 439–487.Google Scholar
  10. Dalgic, Y., Lazakis, I., Dinwoodie, I., McMillan, D., & Revie, M. (2015). Advanced logistics planning for offshore wind farm operation and maintenance activities. Ocean Engineering, 101, 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deeb, H., Mehdi, R. A., & Hahn, A. (2017). A review of damage assessment models in the maritime domain. Ships Offshore Structures, 12(1), 31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Degraer, S., & Brabant, R. (Eds.). (2009). Offshore wind farms in the Belgian part of the North Sea: State of the art after two years of environmental monitoring. Brussels: Royal Belgian Institute for Natural Sciences.Google Scholar
  13. Desholm, M., & Kahlert, J. (2005). Avian collision risk at an offshore wind farm. Biology Letters, 1(3), 296–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Devine-Wright, P. (2005). Beyond NIMBYism: Towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy, 8, 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dierschke, V., Garthe, S., & Mendel, B. (2006). Possible conflicts between offshore wind farms and seabirds in the German sectors of North Sea and Baltic Sea. In J. Köller, J. Köppel, & W. Peters (Eds.), Offshore wind energy: Research on environmental impacts (pp. 121–143). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ehlers, C., & Douvere, F. (2009). Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-step approach toward ecosystem-based management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Programme (IOC Manual and Guides No. 53, ICAM Dossier No. 6). UNESCO Publications. Available via UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001865/186559e.pdf. Accessed 17 May 2017.
  17. EU. (2014). DIRECTIVE 2014/89/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning. Official Journal of the European Union. Available via EU. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32014L0089&from=EN. Accessed 17 May 2017.
  18. EU. (2016). Political declaration on energy cooperation between the North Seas Countries. European Union Documents. Available via EU. http://europa.eu/rapid/attachment/IP-16-2029/en/Political%20Declaration%20on%20Energy%20Cooperation%20between%20the%20North%20Seas%20Countries%20FINAL.pdf. Accessed 17 May 2017.
  19. EWEA. (2016). The European offshore wind industry - key trends and statistics 2015. https://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/library/publications/statistics/EWEA-European-Offshore-Statistics-2015.pdf. Accessed 1 March 2017.
  20. Giebel, G., & Hasager, C. B. (2016). An overview of offshore wind farm design. In W. Ostachowicz, M. McGugan, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, & M. Luczak (Eds.), MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in offshore wind turbine technology (pp. 337–346). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gjødvad, J. F., & Ibsen, M. D. (2016). ODIN-WIND: An overview of the decommissioning process for offshore wind turbines. In W. Ostachowicz, M. McGugan, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, & M. Luczak (Eds.), MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in off-shore wind turbine technology (pp. 403–419). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. GWEC. (2016). Global Wind Report 2015 – Annual market update. http://www.gwec.net/publications/global-wind-report-2/global-wind-report-2015-annual-market-update/. Accessed 1 March 2017.
  23. Hüppop, O., Dierschke, J., Exo, K.-M., Fredrich, E., & Hill, R. (2006). Bird migration and off-shore wind turbines. In J. Köller, J. Köppel, & W. Peters (Eds.), Offshore wind energy: Research on environmental impacts (pp. 91–116). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. IMO. (2015a). Routeing measures and mandatory ship reporting systems. Report on the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) related to proposals for new and amended routeing measures off the Netherlands- Belgian Coast between West Hinder, North Hinder and Maas West traffic separation schemes Submitted by Belgium and the Netherlands. NSCR 3/INF.3 In: IMO Docs. Available via IMO. https://docs.imo.org/. Accessed 18 August 2017.
  25. IMO. (2015b). Routeing measures and mandatory ship reporting systems. New traffic separation scheme and amendments to existing traffic separation schemes “In the Approaches to Hook of Holland and at North Hinder” Submitted by Belgium and the Netherlands. NSCR 3/3/2 In: IMO Docs. Available via IMO. https://docs.imo.org/. Accessed 18 August 2017.
  26. IMO. (2017). Formal Safety Assessment. http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/SafetyTopics/Pages/FormalSafetyAssessment.aspx. Accessed 10 June 2017.
  27. Köller, J., Köppel, J., & Peters, W. (Eds.). (2006). Offshore wind energy: Research on environmental impacts. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Lacroix, D., & Pioch, S. (2011). The multi-use in wind farm projects: More conflicts or a win-win opportunity? Aquatic Living Resources, 24, 129–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ladenburg, J. (2011). Attitude and acceptance of offshore wind farms – The influence of travel time and wind farm attributes. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15, 4223–4235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maegaard, P., Krenz, A., & Palz, W. (Eds.). (2013a). Wind power for the world: The rise of modern wind energy: Pan Stanford series on renewable energy (Vol. 2). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  31. Maegaard, P., Krenz, A., & Palz, W. (Eds.). (2013b). Wind power for the world: International reviews and developments: Pan Stanford series on renewable energy (Vol. 3). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  32. Martínez García, I. E., Sánchez Sánchez, A., & Barbati, S. (2016). Reliability and preventive maintenance. In W. Ostachowicz, M. McGugan, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, & M. Luczak (Eds.), MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in offshore wind turbine technology (pp. 235–272). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mehdi, R. A., Ostachowicz, W., & Luczak, M. (2016). Introduction. In W. Ostachowicz, M. McGugan, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, & M. Luczak (Eds.), MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in offshore wind turbine technology (pp. 1–9). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Mehdi, R. A., & Schröder-Hinrichs, J.-U. (2016). A theoretical risk management frame-work for vessels operating near offshore wind farms. In W. Ostachowicz, M. McGugan, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, & M. Luczak (Eds.), MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in offshore wind turbine technology (pp. 359–400). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mehdi, R. A., Schröder-Hinrichs, J.-U., van Overloop, J., Nilsson, H., & Pålsson, J. (2017). A critique of navigational risk assessment processes for offshore wind farms. Submitted to Energy Research & Social Science.Google Scholar
  36. Mehta, D. (2016). Large Eddy simulation of wind farm aerodynamics with energy-conserving schemes. In W. Ostachowicz, M. McGugan, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, & M. Luczak (Eds.), MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in offshore wind turbine technology (pp. 347–358). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. New, L., Bjerre, E., Millsap, B., Otto, M. C., & Runge, M. C. (2015). A collision risk model to predict Avian fatalities at wind facilities: An example using golden eagles, Aquila chrysaetos. PLoS ONE.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ostachowicz, W., McGugan, M., Schröder-Hinrichs, J.-U., & Luczak, M. (Eds.). (2016). MARE-WINT: New materials and reliability in offshore wind turbine technology. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Samoteskul, K., Firestone, J., Corbett, J., & Callahan, J. (2014). Changing vessel routes could significantly reduce the cost of future offshore wind projects. Journal of Environmental Management, 141, 146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sarker, B. R., & Ibn Faiz, T. (2017). Minimizing transportation and installation costs for turbines in offshore wind farms. Renewable Energy, 101, 667–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Siemens, A. G. (2014). A macro-economic viewpoint: what is the real cost of offshore wind? Available via Siemens AG. http://www.energy.siemens.com/hq/pool/hq/power-generation/renewables/wind-power/SCOE/Infoblatt-what-is-the-real-cost-of-offshore.pdf. Accessed 1 March 2017.
  42. Snyder, B., & Kaiser, M. (2009). Ecological and economic cost-benefit analysis of offshore wind energy. Renewable Energy, 34, 1567–1578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Verfuss, U. K., Sparling, C. E., Arnot, C., Judd, A., & Coyle, M. (2016). Review of offshore wind farm impact monitoring and mitigation with regard to marine mammals. In A. N. Popper & A. Haw-kins (Eds.), The effects of noise on aquatic life II. Advances in experimental medicine and biology (Vol. 875, pp. 1175–1182). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  44. Wang, Y., & Sun, T. (2012). Life cycle assessment of CO2 emissions from wind power plants: Methodology and case studies. Renewable Energy, 43, 30–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Weinzettel, J., Reenaas, M., Solli, C., & Hertwich, E. G. (2009). Life cycle assessment of a floating off-shore wind turbine. Renewable Energy, 34, 742–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Gibson, E., & Howsam, P. (2010). The legal framework for offshore wind farms: A critical analysis of the consents process. Energy Policy, 38, 4692–4702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Wright, G., Mehdi, R. A., & Baldauf, M. (2016). 3-dimensional forward looking sonar: Off-shore wind farm applications. In: Proceedings of the 24th European Navigation Con-ference (ENC 2016), European Group of Institutes of Navigation, Helsinki 30 May – 2 June 2016.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raza Ali Mehdi
    • 1
  • Jens-Uwe Schröder-Hinrichs
    • 2
  • Aykut I. Ölçer
    • 3
  • Michael Baldauf
    • 2
  1. 1.Maritime Risk & System Safety (MaRiSa) Research Group, World Maritime UniversityMalmöSweden
  2. 2.MaRiSa Research GroupMaritime Safety and Environmental Administration (MSEA), WMUMalmöSweden
  3. 3.World Maritime UniversityMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations