reskit.wind.economic.offshore_cost_model

reskit.wind.economic.offshore_cost_model#

Functions#

offshore_turbine_capex(capacity, hub_height, ...[, ...])

A cost and scaling model (CSM) to calculate the total cost of a 3-bladed, direct drive offshore wind turbine according to the cost model proposed by Fingersh et al. [1] and Maples et al. [2].

offshore_bos(cp, rd, hh, depth, distance_to_shore, ...)

A function to determine the balance of the system cost (BOS) of an offshore turbine based on the capacity, hub height and rotor diameter values according to Fingersh et al. [1].

Module Contents#

reskit.wind.economic.offshore_cost_model.offshore_turbine_capex(capacity, hub_height, rotor_diam, depth, distance_to_shore, distance_to_bus=None, foundation=None, mooring_count=None, anchor=None, turbine_count=None, turbine_spacing=None, turbine_row_spacing=None)#

A cost and scaling model (CSM) to calculate the total cost of a 3-bladed, direct drive offshore wind turbine according to the cost model proposed by Fingersh et al. [1] and Maples et al. [2]. The CSM distinguishes between seaflor-fixed foundation types; “monopile” and “jacket” and floating foundation types; “semisubmersible” and “spar”. The total turbine cost includes the contributions of the turbine capital cost (TCC), amounting 32.9% for fixed or 23.9% for floating structures, the balance of system costs (BOS) contribution, amounting 46.2% and 60.8% respectively, as well as the finantial costs as the complementary percentage contribution (15.9% and 20.9%) in the same manner [3]. A CSM normalization is done such that a chosen baseline offshore turbine taken by Caglayan et al. [4] (see notes for details) corresponds to an expected specific cost of 2300 €/kW in a 2050 European context as suggested by the 2016 cost of wind energy review by Stehly [3].

Parameters:

  • capacity (numeric or array-like) – Turbine’s nominal capacity in kW.

  • hub_height (numeric or array-like) – Turbine’s hub height in m.

  • rotor_diam (numeric or array-like) – Turbine’s rotor diameter in m.

  • depth (numeric or array-like) – Water depth in m (absolute value) at the turbine’s location.

  • distance_to_shore (numeric or array-like) – Distance from the turbine’s location to the nearest shore in km.

  • distance_to_bus (numeric or array-like, optional) – Distance from the wind farm’s bus in km from the turbine’s location.

  • foundation (str or array-like of strings, optional) – Turbine’s foundation type. Accepted types are: “monopile”, “jacket”, “semisubmersible” or “spar”, by default “monopile”

  • mooring_count (numeric, optional) – Refers to the number of mooring lines are there attaching a turbine only applicable for floating foundation types. By default 3 assuming a triangular attachment to the seafloor.

  • anchor (str, optional) – Turbine’s anchor type only applicable for floating foundation types, by default as recommended by [1]. Arguments accepted are “dea” (drag embedment anchor) or “spa” (suction pile anchor).

  • turbine_count (numeric, optional) – Number of turbines in the offshore windpark. CSM valid for the range [3-200], by default 80

  • turbine_spacing (numeric, optional) – Spacing distance in a row of turbines (turbines that share the electrical connection) to the bus. The value must be a multiplier of rotor diameter. CSM valid for the range [4-9], by default 5

  • turbine_row_spacing (numeric, optional) – Spacing distance between rows of turbines. The value must be a multiplier of rotor diameter. CSM valid for the range [4-10], by default 9

Returns:

Offshore turbine total cost

Return type:

numeric or array-like

Notes

The baseline offshore turbine correspongs to the optimal design for Europe according to Caglayan et al. [4]: capacity = 9400 kW, hub height = 135 m, rotor diameter = 210 m, “monopile” foundation, reference water depth = 40 m, and reference distance to shore = 60 km.

Sources#

[1] Fingersh, L., Hand, M., & Laxson, A. (2006). Wind Turbine Design Cost and Scaling Model. Nrel. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/40566.pdf [2] Maples, B., Hand, M., & Musial, W. (2010). Comparative Assessment of Direct Drive High Temperature Superconducting Generators in Multi-Megawatt Class Wind Turbines. Energy. https://doi.org/10.2172/991560 [3] Stehly, T., Heimiller, D., & Scott, G. (2016). Cost of Wind Energy Review. Technical Report. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy18osti/70363.pdf [4] Caglayan, D. G., Ryberg, D. S., Heinrichs, H., Linssen, J., Stolten, D., & Robinius, M. (2019). The techno-economic potential of offshore wind energy with optimized future turbine designs in Europe. Applied Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113794 [5] Maness, M., Maples, B., & Smith, A. (2017). NREL Offshore Balance-of- System Model NREL Offshore Balance-of- System Model. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/66874.pdf [6] Myhr, A., Bjerkseter, C., Ågotnes, A., & Nygaard, T. A. (2014). Levelised cost of energy for offshore floating wind turbines in a life cycle perspective. Renewable Energy, 66, 714–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.01.017 [7] Bjerkseter, C., & Ågotnes, A. (2013). Levelised Costs Of Energy For Offshore Floating Wind Turbine Concepts [Norwegian University of Life Sciences]. https://nmbu.brage.unit.no/nmbu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/189073/Bjerkseter%2C C. %26 Ågotnes%2C A. %282013%29 - Levelised Costs of Energy for Offshore Floating Wind Turbine Concepts.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [8] Smart, G., Smith, A., Warner, E., Sperstad, I. B., Prinsen, B., & Lacal-Arantegui, R. (2016). IEA Wind Task 26: Offshore Wind Farm Baseline Documentation. https://doi.org/10.2172/1259255 [9] RPG CABLES, & KEC International limited. (n.d.). EXTRA HIGH VOLTAGE cables. RPG CABLES. www.rpgcables.com/images/product/EHV-catalogue.pdf

reskit.wind.economic.offshore_cost_model.offshore_bos(cp, rd, hh, depth, distance_to_shore, distance_to_bus, foundation, mooring_count, anchor, turbine_count, turbine_spacing, turbine_row_spacing)#

A function to determine the balance of the system cost (BOS) of an offshore turbine based on the capacity, hub height and rotor diameter values according to Fingersh et al. [1].

Parameters:

  • cp (numeric or array-like) – Turbine’s nominal capacity in kW

  • rd (numeric or array-like) – Turbine’s rotor diameter in m

  • hh (numeric or array-like) – Turbine’s hub height in m

  • depth (numeric or array-like) – Water depth in m (absolute value) at the turbine’s location.

  • distance_to_shore (numeric or array-like) – Distance from the turbine’s location to the nearest shore in km.

  • distance_to_bus (numeric or array-like, optional) – Distance from the wind farm’s bus in km from the turbine’s location.

  • foundation (str or array-like of strings, optional) – Turbine’s foundation type. Accepted types are: “monopile”, “jacket”, “semisubmersible” or “spar”, by default “monopile”

  • mooring_count (numeric, optional) – Refers to the number of mooring lines are there attaching a turbine only applicable for floating foundation types. By default 3 assuming a triangular attachment to the seafloor.

  • anchor (str, optional) – Turbine’s anchor type only applicable for floating foundation types, by default as recommended by [1]. Arguments accepted are “dea” (drag embedment anchor) or “spa” (suction pile anchor).

  • turbine_count (numeric, optional) – Number of turbines in the offshore windpark. CSM valid for the range [3-200], by default 80

  • turbine_spacing (numeric, optional) – Spacing distance in a row of turbines (turbines that share the electrical connection) to the bus. The value must be a multiplier of rotor diameter. CSM valid for the range [4-9], by default 5

  • turbine_row_spacing (numeric, optional) – Spacing distance between rows of turbines. The value must be a multiplier of rotor diameter. CSM valid for the range [4-10], by default 9

Returns:

Offshore turbine’s balance of the system cost (BOS) in monetary units.

Return type:

numeric

Notes

Assembly and installation costs could not be implemented due to the excessive number of unspecified constants considered by Smart et al. [8]. Therefore empirical equations were derived which fit the sensitivities to the baseline plants shown in [8]. These ended up being linear equations in turbine capacity and sea depth (only for floating turbines).

Sources#

[1] Fingersh, L., Hand, M., & Laxson, A. (2006). Wind Turbine Design Cost and Scaling Model. Nrel. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/40566.pdf [2] Maples, B., Hand, M., & Musial, W. (2010). Comparative Assessment of Direct Drive High Temperature Superconducting Generators in Multi-Megawatt Class Wind Turbines. Energy. https://doi.org/10.2172/991560 [3] Stehly, T., Heimiller, D., & Scott, G. (2016). Cost of Wind Energy Review. Technical Report. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy18osti/70363.pdf [4] Caglayan, D. G., Ryberg, D. S., Heinrichs, H., Linssen, J., Stolten, D., & Robinius, M. (2019). The techno-economic potential of offshore wind energy with optimized future turbine designs in Europe. Applied Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113794 [5] Maness, M., Maples, B., & Smith, A. (2017). NREL Offshore Balance-of- System Model NREL Offshore Balance-of- System Model. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/66874.pdf [6] Myhr, A., Bjerkseter, C., Ågotnes, A., & Nygaard, T. A. (2014). Levelised cost of energy for offshore floating wind turbines in a life cycle perspective. Renewable Energy, 66, 714–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.01.017 [7] Bjerkseter, C., & Ågotnes, A. (2013). Levelised Costs Of Energy For Offshore Floating Wind Turbine Concepts [Norwegian University of Life Sciences] [8] Smart, G., Smith, A., Warner, E., Sperstad, I. B., Prinsen, B., & Lacal-Arantegui, R. (2016). IEA Wind Task 26: Offshore Wind Farm Baseline Documentation. https://doi.org/10.2172/1259255 [9] RPG CABLES, & KEC International limited. (n.d.). EXTRA HIGH VOLTAGE cables. RPG CABLES. www.rpgcables.com/images/product/EHV-catalogue.pdf