Daily Archives: April 17, 2017

An offshore wind farm at the center of a LIPA plan to address spiking electric demand on the South Fork will produce excess energy when its needed least, and fall short of a sharply expanding summer peak load, a recent analysis found.

In a response to questions from Newsday, James Manwell, director of the Wind Energy Center at the University of Massachusetts, found that while effective in helping offset a portion of soaring peak demand when conventional energy is most expensive the planned wind farm will be least productive during the peak summer months, when visitors flood the South Fork and additional power is needed most.

In general, for sure in the Northeast, the winds tend to be higher in winter than in summer, Manwell said, while the loads go way up in summer. Thats a bit of a mismatch for sure.

The projects 15 turbines will be able to produce a maximum of 90 megawatts of energy, but because the wind doesnt blow all the time, Manwell estimated that the average actual capacity will be just under half that amount. A megawatt of offshore wind energy powers about 360 homes. Developer Deepwater Wind says the array will provide energy for up to 50,000 homes.

The state comptrollers office recently reported that Long Island customers will pay $1.62 billion over 20 years to buy all the emission-free energy the array produces. The cost for energy from the project would average about 22 cents a kilowatt hour over 20 years, around three times that of conventional energy.

Manwell called the notion of using offshore wind to address peak power needs an interesting idea.

One normally wouldnt think of it as such, because you just cant turn on the wind turbine as you would a gas-powered plant. Note that most of the load is in the summer, Manwell wrote in a summary of his findings. Wind speeds are lower in the summer than other months, but still high enough to result in significant generation.

In general, Manwell found, 90 percent of the power generated by the wind farm would be used to reduce the annual electrical demand on the South Fork. He noted the turbines would have some additional benefit of addressing the summer peak by varying amounts. The increasing summer peak is the reason PSEG Long Island sought bids for new power sources on the East End.

Most days, the South Fork uses about 88.5 megawatts of energy. But in the summer, it more than doubles to 190, according to the report. When that happens, the wind farm will be able to reduce the peak by just about half.

Manwell used a computer model that matched wind speeds in the area off Rhode Island, between Block Island and Marthas Vineyard, where the wind farm will be constructed. His program looked at each hour of the year, calculated the wind turbine generation and compared it with the electrical demand.

PSEG in response to Newsday questions acknowledged it used similar techniques to Manwells but different tools during its development of the South Fork solution.

The two analyses measured different sets of parameters, some of which overlap, PSEG said. Where there is measurement of similar parameters, the results produced in the [Manwell] report are generally consistent with the results of our analysis.

PSEG noted, however, that Manwells report did not include the impact of energy storage, steps to reduce consumption and transmission enhancements. One would expect the integration of these technologies into the solution to increase the percentage utilization of energy on the South Fork.

For its part, project developer Deepwater Wind said that while it agreed with Manwells overall findings that appear to show the wind farms output generally aligns with [electric demand] on the South Fork, it took exception with some conclusions.

Deepwater noted that Manwells study used slightly less powerful turbines, but more of them, to reach the 90-megawatt total, and noted the total annual output he projected was about 10,000 megawatt hours less than its own projections.

Deepwater agreed with Manwells finding that the array is expected to produce a significant portion of the South Forks energy needs, including during peak demand period.

As for the cost, Deepwater said, The appropriate comparable cost is that of building a new fossil-fired generator on the South Fork, where its very difficult and expensive to build anything, or a solar renewable energy facility elsewhere on Long Island. . . . Our cost is competitive with that of each of those.

PSEG and Deepwater noted that other technologies, including large batteries to store excess energy from the array and remote-controlled thermostats to help lower summer electrical demand at Hamptons customers homes, will be also be used on the South Fork to moderate the peaks, and store the power for later peak periods.

Moreover, PSEG will simultaneously solve the South Fork peak demand problem with a $513 million series of power cables and upgrades that will cost all LIPA ratepayers about $2.48 a month. LIPA projects the wind farm and other technologies will cost about $1.19 a month when completed in 2022.

Robert Amundsen, an energy-management expert at the New York Institute of Technology in Old Westbury, said LIPAs plan to use wind energy to address a growing peak need raises questions.

From an operation standpoint it doesnt really make sense to consider a wind farm as a peaking resource because the idea of peak is to have the power when you need it, and turn it off when you dont, he said. The wind farm is not like that. Thats not to say its not a great idea. But it doesnt by itself solve your peak power problems. You need to have either enough power in the area or to import it from somewhere else.

Original post:

Offshore wind farm may not meet peak summer demand on South Fork - Newsday

In order to resolve concerns about the visual impacts of its proposed wind farm off the coast of Maryland, developer US Wind has offered to move the first line of turbines farther offshore, as far as five miles to the east.

According to Paul Rich, US Winds project development director, this proposal is the start of a dialogue with Ocean City officials and is intended to demonstrate the companys willingness to modify the project layout.

Recently, the Maryland Public Service Commission (PUC) held two public meetings to review applications for the Offshore Renewable Energy Credit (OREC), made available thanks to the Maryland Offshore Wind Energy Act of 2013.

At the first meeting, held on March 25, US Wind pitched its proposed project, a 750 MW installation approximately 12 miles offshore in the Maryland wind energy area. The company expects that the wind farm will create approximately 5,000 manufacturing jobs and produce $16 billion in economic output.

According to US Wind, 67 people at the meeting spoke in support of the project plans, in addition to written testimony from Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh praising US Winds application.

Although no one in attendance openly opposed the project, Ocean City Mayor Rick Meehan expressed concerns about the impact on the ocean view.

Attempting to address the issue head-on, Rich says he quickly approached the mayor and requested a meeting with the city council to present the wind farm and its many potential benefits.

On April 3, at the second public meeting, Rich was invited to give his presentation, which included visual renderings of the proposed project.

After seeing how near to shore thewind farm would appear once built, the Ocean City Council unanimously voted to send a letter to the PUC, the governor and other local authorities opposing the visual pollution for its potentially negative impacts on tourism and property values.

Wasting no time, Rich sent a letter in response to the mayor and council within the week, acknowledging their concerns and proposing to push the wind farm five miles farther offshore. According to US Wind, this move would dramatically reduce the viewshed impacts for Ocean City at least 35%, if not more.

In an interview with North American Windpower, Rich explains, In an effort to be responsive, I wanted to express to them, soon after the meeting, that were open to discussing whether or not it makes sense for us to move the wind farm further east and minimize the viewshed impacts a little bit more.

Emphasizing the developers willing attitude, he says, We just want to be responsive and good corporate citizens to react quickly to what we heard from Ocean City and the mayor, and were hoping theyll have the same approach.

Rich adds that he hopes theyll look to the success of offshore wind in Europe and even to the newly developed Block Island Wind Farm in Rhode Island for reassurance.

Built by Deepwater Wind the other developer being considered for the OREC by the Maryland PUC the Block Island Wind Farm is the only other offshore wind farm currently operating in the U.S. The 30 MW, five-turbine project began operations in December 2016.

In the spirit of full cooperation, US Wind has already begun redesigning the project in an attempt to address Ocean Citys concerns.

Moving the turbines back beyond the 12-mile range would inevitably add to the project cost approximately $5 million, considering export cables run approximately $1 million per mile but US Wind is ready and willing to take it on.

Concerning equipment, Rich says relocating the turbines would not require a change in turbine model or type or height of the towers. As of now, the developer has the option of using Siemens 4 MW turbines or GE 6 MW turbines.

In my letter that I sent to them, I said were doing the engineering to understand what it looks like to move them as much as five miles further east, and my request was that we have a meeting as soon as they have time to talk through this.

There shouldnt be a wall but, rather, a membrane for transparent conversation around these issues that can lead to the best project possible, he explains.

If given the green light, the first phase of the project would be in service in 2020, with subsequent phases each year until the full build-out by 2023.

Read more:

US Wind Tackles Viewshed Concerns For Maryland Offshore Wind Project - North American Windpower

Photo: Heerema Offshore Marine

Netherlands-based Heerema Marine Contractors (HMC) says it has received notice from ConocoPhillips about itsintention to enter into a contract for a major offshore decommissioning project in the North Sea.

Under the contract Heerema Marine Contractors and its partner AF Gruppen will remove and dispose of platforms connected to the Ekofisk field in the North Sea. The contract includes Engineering, Preparation, Removal & Disposal (EPRD) of four platforms with a total tonnage of approx. 36,000 tonnes.

HMC says the platforms are to be removed and disposed from 2017 to 2022.

HMC did not specify which vessels it would use for the project. The company currently owns three of the worlds largest crane vessels: the semi-submersible crane vessel (SSCV) Thialf, the crane-equipped deepwater construction vessel (DCV) Balder, and SSCV Hermod. HMC also currently developing a the new-generation semi-submersible crane vessel, the Sleipnir, which is scheduled for delivery in 2018. The Sleipnir equipped with two cranes of 10,000 metric tonnes lifting capacity each and a reinforced deck area of 220 meters in length and 102 meters in width, which will make it the largest crane vessel in the world.

gCaptain is the top-visited maritime and offshore industry news site in the world. Since 2007, gCaptain has proven to be a highly effective platform for information sharing and a source for up-to-date and relevant news for industry professionals worldwide.

Read this article:

Heerema Wins Major Offshore Decommissioning Project in North Sea - GCaptain

The SkyTeam alliance launched SkyTeam Marine and Offshore to meet the travel needs of the marine and offshore industry.

The new product will offer tailored travel solutions for seafarers and offshore workers.

SkyTeam Marine and Offshore initially will include travel on six SkyTeam members: Aeroflot, Air France, Delta, KLM, Kenya Airways and Saudia.

More airlines are set to participate in the coming months.

The carriers will offer one-way and roundtrip special fares to more than 1,000 global destinations with special conditions for baggage allowance and ticket flexibility to meet the travel needs of ship crews and offshore workers.

It is managed by IAS Global(International Airline Services), a company created in 1994 by KLM to meet the demands of increasing globalization of the marine and offshore crew travel markets.

IAS specializes in the provision of air travel for the shipping, oil and gas and alternative energy industries.

Although it initially offered its pricing and ticketing services exclusively to marine travel agents in the UK on behalf of KLM, it expanded rapidly to other European territories within a year.

It established a US presence as well, opening IASE Americas in Houston in 1995, and took over KLMs offshore oil and gas industry travel business in the same year.

It now operates three subsidiaries: IAS Europe, IAS Americas and IAS Asia. It also has a partnership with Dnatain the Middle East.

SkyTeam said working with IAS Global will ensure its product is widely available to M&O specialist travel agencies worldwide through one convenient point of contact.

The marine and offshore travel market is complex and requires highly specialized skills and a different type of service engagement than most other forms of managed travel.

The cost of downtime for a ship or an oil rig is huge, so the crews that service this machinery need to be arranged with speed and precision.

View original post here:

SkyTeam enters marine and offshore services market - Tnooz

[HONG KONG] Days after plans for a new economic hub south of Beijing ignited a frenzy among mainland investors, a Chinese property company with links to the zone has unveiled plans to sell overseas bonds.

China Fortune Land Development stands to benefit from the central government's Xiongan New Area project, announced on April 1. The company said on April 6 it planned to raise US$1 billion through its first offshore bond offering.

The local government has given Fortune Land, which is based in Hebei province where the special economic zone will be built, the task of developing some 500 square kilometres of the new area, or about a quarter of the total planned size.

The bond deal may take some time to get off the ground, like the planned metropolis itself, but it has already caught the attention of potential underwriters and investors.

Fortune Land's bond offering "is probably the only chance available to gain access to Xiongan-related assets", said a Hong Kong-based credit trader at a major Chinese bank. He noted that property sales had been frozen in the area and that related stocks might already have overshot due to the frenzied investor response.

Some DCM bankers were keen to get in on the action. "We have already sent people to Hebei to approach the issuer. We definitely want to get on the deal," said a banker at a middle-sized Chinese bank.

Expectations that Xiongan will mirror the success of the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone and Shanghai Pudong New Area have fired up domestic investors, sending the shares of regional companies sharply higher. Fortune Land's Shanghai-listed shares rose more than 62 per cent, to 44.39 yuan, from April 1 to April 12. Last Thursday, the company, along with 13 others, requested a trading halt to evaluate the impact of the project on its business.

The new economic zone, situated around 100km south-west of Beijing, will take over some administrative functions of the capital and is expected to grow into an international hub.

Another DCM banker with a foreign bank said he would be sure to join in pitching for the mandate, but cautioned that marketing the credit to foreign investors could be challenging. "How will you tell the story to investors? It is not a conventional Chinese property developer and there is no comparable peer in the US dollar bond market," he said.

Fortune Land develops industrial new towns for local governments through public-private partnerships, whereas property companies that have tapped the offshore bond market in the past are mostly developers of commercial or residential buildings. "You can market the credit skewing towards Chinese local government vehicles, but then it is a privately owned company, not an SOE like all LGFVs," said the banker with a foreign bank.

Eye-catching equity gains and reports of property speculators flocking to the area with suitcases full of cash, are not expected to skew the pricing of the new bonds. "The issuer's credit fundamentally won't change immediately. It (Xiongan New Area) may be a market topic, but it won't affect the yield it needs to pay investors," said a Hong Kong-based DCM banker at a Chinese investment bank.

Another banker, who approached Fortune Land years ago to explore US dollar bond issues, pointed to the uncertainties surrounding the Xiongan project.

Fortune Land itself warned in a filing that the contracts it had secured with the local government were subject to policy uncertainties. "The company has not obtained any residential land in the area and thus no project development has been started," it said.

The issuer must also secure the approval of the National Development and Reform Commission, a main regulator of Chinese offshore debt, bankers said. "Every issuer desires to print offshore deals as early as possible in an environment of rising US interest rates, but the pace of issuance ultimately lies in the hands of NDRC," the banker said.

A Fortune Land investor relations officer told IFR that the offshore bond plan had not been registered with NDRC yet, which means months might pass before an actual offshore deal could be launched.

Fortune Land, rated AA+ (Dagong Global), last month privately placed 706 million yuan (S$143.2 million) securities backed against PPP projects in the domestic exchange market.

This was one of the first batch of PPP securitisations designed to attract private investment to government-led projects. A one-year senior tranche was priced at par to yield 3.90 per cent.

REUTERS

Originally posted here:

Chinese developer to bring Xiongan frenzy to offshore investors - THE BUSINESS TIMES