Hacker News Reader

Comment by _FKS_ | Hacker News Reader

In case you're interested, this[1] document is of great interest if you wish to understand how these offshore turbines perform empirically. I'll give you a hint: not very good. Any piece of machinery exposed to sea salt doesn't last long. Also maintenance will be a big problem: just think one second the kind of undertaking needed to send a team of technicians to repair only one of these turbines. Let's not talk about replacing any large piece.

[1] http://www.ref.org.uk/attachments/article/280/ref.hughes.19.... (see Figure 1, page 13, "Performance degradation due to age using equal weights")

View on HN

Seems like the foundation that published that study is anti wind and might not be the most reputable source [1].

[1] http://www.ewea.org/blog/2012/12/study-on-turbine-lifespan-j...

This is also from a pro-wind blog ;)

Statoil has done offshore drilling since the 70s, the people who work there probably know more than anyone else in the world about designing and operating very large machinery at sea. You can read more on their web pages or search the web for statoil to find examples of what i mean.

yep, but a wind turbine is churning way less money than an oil rig, you get the chopper only for extreme cases (and it's a pain because of the rotor, sometime they just use the emergency lift to get into the water with a life raft).

So now we are talking high sea docking to a moving structure in the North Sea, not going to happen in the winter. So any incident and you lose your entire season, and now you're in a downward spiral. I'm not saying this won't work, I'm saying it's a very complicated situation.

Out of curiosity, do you genuinely believe the people building and intending to operate these haven't thought of these problems?

I think they have thought about it, it doesn't mean they got it right. Those people deliver brand new wind turbines whose rotor are not balanced. They deliver onshore turbine bolted to deficient foundations. They never reach their goals. (Yes I have worked a bit in the industry)

>They deliver onshore turbine bolted to deficient foundations. They never reach their goals. (Yes I have worked a bit in the industry)

As someone who presumably works a bit more than you in the offshore construction industry, I'd love to see you quantify these statements. Especially since you imply them to be industry-wide, commonplace blights.

Instead of picking a fight (I already know no source or figure would satisfy you), would be constructive and explain how the yaw works on floating systems?

>(I already know no source or figure would satisfy you)

Woah there. I'm not picking a fight with you. You make some pretty bold claims like "they deliver insufficient foundations." Tolerances for verticality, foundation position, etc. are contractually obliged and delivered overwhelmingly with success.

>would be constructive and explain how the yaw works on floating systems?

"Floating systems" is too broadly undefined to give you an answer. Could be that the mooring design resists yaw motion within certain tolerances. Could be that yaw motion of the base is compensated by a rotating nacelle.

> I think they have thought about it, it doesn't mean they got it right.

I think you're being evasive.

Do you think they have not thought about these problems as much or as effectively as you have?

How much have you thought about it, what expertise are you comparing to this company's proposals, and how do your proof of concept deployments compare to theirs in terms of size, scale, and longevity?

It won't be very far off the shore, so it's accesible by boat.

Exactly that. The difference to other offshore is not that it's further away from the coast, just that it can be used for less shallow areas. They should still be reachable within a day by boat and I guess maintenance shouldn't differ much from other offshore wind farms.

Some thoughts:

Yes, the marine environment is harsh. Corrosion is an issue. Maintenance is challenging. But these are not new problems: these are solvable (and solved) engineering challenges. The O&G industry has considerable overlap with offshore wind; foundation design, transportation and installation, etc., all well-understood and in practice for literally decades.

I haven't read the report you cited, but it is already 5 years old (much has changed in the past decade). The wind farm performance degredation they speak of in Denmark and the UK might have a lot to do with outdated technology of these older turbines. The first offshore farm in Denmark was built in 1991. Technologies since even 2010 have greatly improved.

Statoil has been operating an 85 meter rotor pilot since 2009, so they have a lot of understanding about how to deal with such potential problems.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com