Daily Archives: July 27, 2021

The UK is planning to install 40 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030 enough to provide electricity to every home in the country. This would require 5,000 wind turbines double the number installed offshore worldwide at the end of 2020. Current projections indicate 234 gigawatts of offshore wind energy will be installed globally by 2030, which could mean around 30,000 turbines.

Green energy developers hope to exploit the faster winds that blow offshore and allow larger turbines to generate more electricity than their onshore equivalents. Supplying the equivalent of a UK homes worth of electricity for nine billion people by 2050 would require something like half a million offshore wind turbines. Besides the more than two million fishing vessels, industrial activity in the ocean on this scale is unprecedented. Over the last 70 years, only around 5,000 offshore oil and gas rigs have been installed at sea, and many of these have since been removed.

Developing oil and gas offshore has helped engineers learn how to design ocean structures that remain fixed in one place, far from land, for decades. As the world transitions from low numbers of oil and gas installations to large numbers of renewable energy devices, how engineers design in the ocean must evolve too. Just as fossil fuel extraction must end, so should the design philosophy which sustained this industry. That is, meeting narrowly defined human need and a high return on investment.

To make wind turbines work offshore, great technological advances have been made. Using remote sensors, engineers can precisely control the angle of 80 metre-long blades to maximise how much energy they generate, or prevent damage in bad weather. Steel tubes ten metres wide can be hammered vertically into the seabed to support wind turbines installed over vast areas.

Engineers are working to design yet bigger turbines, operating more efficiently and for longer, which can be installed further from shore, like floating turbines for waters deeper than 50 metres. All this innovation has been driven with one job in mind: making electricity. In common with the oil and gas industry (and most others), the prevailing design philosophy of offshore wind is to build something that achieves this purpose while meeting environmental and safety obligations for the lowest price.

This story is part of Oceans 21Our series on the global ocean opened with five in-depth profiles. Look out for new articles on the state of our oceans in the lead up to the UNs next climate conference, COP26. The series is brought to you by The Conversations international network.

However, the price of offshore wind turbines, along with the price of most produced goods, overlooks a range of costs involved in the life cycle of the product. Turbines are up to 70% steel, which is made from recycled or newly extracted iron, which is processed from ores. These ores are removed from rocks by blasting causing disruption to the natural environment, and often from sites with cultural significance to indigenous people. The mined ores are then transported by large trucks, crushed, refined, processed and shipped.

Whether its emissions from machines processing and transporting the ores or air and water contaminants released during extraction, mining creates pollution. Converting the iron into steel also contributes to climate change. Globally, the iron and steel industry is responsible for 11% of CO emissions.

Steel plates are shipped and then rolled into curved sections, people and machines weld these to form long tubes, which are loaded onto vessels, transported to sea and assembled, processes which are largely powered by fossil fuels.

The world needs more wind turbines, and fast. But clearly, the environmental and social consequences of making and installing them reduces their positive potential. Currently, the most ambitious designs seek to minimise these negative impacts.

Can we think deeper? Everything we engineer, whether its clothes, mobile phones or offshore wind turbines needs resources from Earths biological and physical systems, which are taken, made into these things we use everyday and then discarded as waste. A landmark report recently showed that this way of exploiting nature is outstripping its ability to recover.

What if, as well as building useful infrastructure for society, engineers sought to tie their work into ecological processes? We would need to shift our thinking from simply limiting damage to the natural world, to including its needs, so that we reciprocate and support the natural world as it supports us, and help regenerate these natural systems.

Design principles which aim to meet human needs alongside the needs of the planet have recently been applied successfully to city planning in Amsterdam. Applying similar principles to planning in the ocean might start with a single question: what would it mean for both a windfarm and the habitat it is in to thrive?

In Sweden, a study found that redesigning the foundations of wave energy installations benefited brown crab populations. Simply adding holes in the structure provided shelter for the crustaceans. These foundations can also be designed to cause seawater upwelling, moving nutrients and food up from the deep sea for fish to feed on. Offshore structures could even suck carbon from the air. These examples are just a glimpse of how the windfarms of the future could be designed to support life, both human and non-human.

Technology could help create new relationships between people and offshore windfarms. Apps and smart meters could show energy users how weather patterns and the environment influence the windfarms powering their homes. This could help them understand when it is good to use power and when it is less so, and to use just what is needed.

But what would it mean for the windfarm to support the wellbeing of people touched by each link in its supply chain? This provokes even more questions about how and where steel is sourced from and shipped, or how financial returns from the windfarm support workers to leave the fossil fuel industry as part of a just transition.

Ocean engineers must think ecologically to help species live and evolve through the difficult decades ahead. We will need to challenge the status quo, be open to collaboration and reimagine how we can work with the ocean.

See the original post here:

Offshore wind turbines could number 30,000 by 2030 new ideas in ocean engineering are needed to install them - The Conversation UK

RWE, Shell, Gasunie and Equinor have confirmed their joint collaboration which aspires with the AquaSector project to take the next step towards a massive offshore hydrogen park off the coast of Germany. The project is part of the AquaVentus initiative, a partnership of dozens of companies, governments and research institutes. They have set a goal of achieving electrolysis capacity of 10 gigawatts in the German North Sea by 2035.

This entails generating electricity from wind farms. The hydrogen is then transported via the island of Helgoland to the mainland. This will be done by means of a system of pipelines hat have been dubbed AquaDuctus.

The first few years are primarily intended as a study. This will be concentrating on a 300 megawatts of electrolysis capacity by 2028. This is good for 20,000 metric tons of green hydrogen per year which will be collected on Helgoland and mainly used there as well.

Your weekly innovation overviewEvery sunday the best articles of the week in your inbox.

he project aims to demonstrate that in Germany offshore-based hydrogen production enables an efficient, cost-effective and sustainable way to produce green hydrogen. RWE said in their press release.

The major advantage of offshore hydrogen production, according to the German energy group, is that it requires fewer high-voltage direct current cables. One hydrogen pipeline can replace five of these (very expensive) high-voltage cables. That is according to RWE, consequently it not only makes it financially attractive, but also more ecologically responsible. This is because the most likely route from Helgoland to the mainland will pass through the German Bight and the vulnerable Wadden Sea.

The AquaVentus initiative is a kind of 5-stage rocket made up of AquaPrimus, AquaCampus, AquaPortus, AquaSector and AquaDuctus.

AcuaPrimus is the very first pilot plant with 14 megawatts of electrolysis capacity that should be in operation by 2023. However, that plant will still run on solar energy and be located on the mainland. To be precise, in the town of Sassnitz on the Rgen peninsula.

AquaCampus is home to an R&D center 45 kilometers from Helgoland. This is where all technologies are tested and further developed by scientists. Initially, hydrogen will be produced here with the electricity from 2 wind turbines. The plan is that this will then increase more and more with the aid of the AquaProcess. It is not yet entirely clear how many electrolysis stations there will be nor how big they will be. Most likely they will end up being large stations the size of drilling rigs.

AquaPortus will run from 2024 to 2029. It is mainly concerned with the expansion of harbor capacities on Helgoland and making the island CO2-free. The first volumes of hydrogen will be used on the island itself. Thereafter, it will be used as fuel for ships and/or further transported to the coastal region.

AquaDuctus is charged with installing hydrogen pipelines between electrolysis platforms at sea, AquaCampus, Helgoland and the mainland.

Also read the article: Energy islands in the North Sea: good news for the climate and an opportunity for Dutch entrepreneurs

More here:

On the way to 10 gigawatts of offshore electrolysis capacity with project AquaSector - Innovation Origins

Remove homeless from Penn Station

I appreciate Newsdays editorial drawing attention to the "Problems at Penn" [July 18]. However, it is a lukewarm, tiptoeing commentary that does not represent the sad and dramatic reality that is Penn Station today.

People seem to have forgotten that it is a commuter rail station. It is not a drug den, homeless shelter or a halfway house. Penn Station is a place where some advocates of the homeless huddle safely in groups hiding out in a drug store while the homeless people are begging, defecating, screaming, doing drugs and harassing pedestrians waiting for trains.

Until we actually change the perverse narrative that since Penn Station is a public place we cant move people out because we are infringing on their rights if they do not wish to leave, the situation will never improve.

These people are not commuters. Many are sick people who suffer from mental illness and/or substance abuse and do not understand that they need help.

Therefore, the only humane thing for us to do as reasonable, civilized people would be to remove them and provide social services and housing for them and tell them they cannot live in Penn Station, period.

Susan LoGiudice, Bayport

I believe the Long Island Power Authority was transparent in its investigation of PSEG Long Islands failures following Tropical Storm Isaias ["No lights: Who get the blame?," Editorial, July 15]. LIPAs investigations revealed that virtually all delays and poor communication resulted from ineffective PSEG Long Island management.

Go inside New York politics.

By clicking Sign up, you agree to our privacy policy.

LIPA worked to resolve these issues by publishing a 30- and 90-day report that listed 85 recommendations to address management, emergency management and information technology shortfalls. The board also adopted another 79 recommendations concerning non-storm areas of management and demanded the public receive quarterly updates.

With these shortcomings in mind, the board reviewed the best alternatives for customers. The board held public hearings and issued an analysis of the options based on fact. We discussed areas of concern in the current PSEG Long Island contract and the non-negotiable changes needed to ensure more accountability.

Last month, LIPAs management delivered the strongest contract in our 22-year history. In my opinion, this agreement met all eight of the boards criteria for a reformed contract with PSEG LI, including placing significantly more of their compensation at risk and restructuring management to place greater control on Long Island.

The option for LIPA to become fully municipal, subject to policy makers consent, is still a possibility. But for now, I feel we have a stronger contract to drive long-term results for customers.

Laureen Harris, Plandome

The writer is a LIPA board member.

I found Michael Dobies column "When solutions are problems" eye-opening [Opinion, July 18]. With no clear path to avoiding an avalanche of life-altering, storage-battery-materials mining waste, we may be jumping from the frying pan into the fire of toxic choices. I suppose we can always pretend its cleaner, to assuage the current zeitgeist. Waste that is out of sight, tends to become out of mind.

David Rogers, Northport

Kyle Strobers essay "Unfair cost to LI for offshore wind" [Opinion, July 14] unfortunately focuses solely on the cost of necessary transmission upgrades on Long Island, which the state Public Service Commission is considering be borne by 75% of Long Island ratepayers and 25% by statewide ratepayers.

He completely ignores the fact that all the costs of offshore wind projects, many of which will directly benefit Long Island, will be paid for by ratepayers across the state. Further, the PSC is reevaluating the 75/25 split and may adjust its proposed cost-sharing arrangement. The transmission upgrades are necessary, will strengthen the downstate grid, will make it more resilient and help avoid the type of power outages that recently wreaked havoc in Texas.

Its true that Long Island and downstate ratepayers are currently subsidizing nuclear power plants in upstate New York, but the converse is also true when it comes to offshore wind, which all New York ratepayers will share in the cost of building.

Long Island will enjoy enormous benefits when it comes to offshore wind, which will inject billions of dollars into the economy, create thousands of good-paying jobs, and help revitalize ports and other infrastructure.

Joe Martens, Albany

The writer is director of the New York Offshore Wind Alliance.

Originally posted here:

Penn Station's homeless, utility issues, battery waste and offshore wind - Newsday

Former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt defended the Trump administrations lengthy review of Americas first offshore wind farm in an interview yesterday, saying the additional environmental analysis he ordered was intended to strengthen the project against legal challenges rather than kill it.

The Trump administration had initially planned to complete a review of Vineyard Wind in the summer of 2019. But Bernhardt surprised the projects developers, who proposed a $2.8 billion wind farm near Marthas Vineyard, Mass., by expanding a government study of the project to consider other wind farms proposed along the East Coast.

The announcement cast a pall over the wind industry. It slowed planning work on other projects and raised questions about the viability of offshore wind in the United States. Many industry supporters suspected the move was a reflection of former President Trumps disdain for wind power, which he regularly lambasted as an eyesore and a danger to birds. Trump erroneously claimed wind turbines could cause cancer.

But in a phone interview yesterday while vacationing at a North Carolina beach, Bernhardt said it was "fundamentally false" that the administration was playing politics with Vineyard Wind. Instead, he said his call for more analysis was driven by the growing number of wind projects proposed along the East Coast and by divisions among federal agencies over Vineyard Winds potential impact on commercial fishing and marine navigation.

You cant proceed with federal agencies warring with each other, he said. I was like, Look, we dont have our ducks in a row.

He added, The last thing we wanted to do is put out a finalized program that wasnt legally sustainable."

Bernhardts comments came hours after the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management released more than 500 pages of documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by E&E News. The documents were related to the permitting process of Vineyard Wind.

They show that BOEM officials were nearing completion of the projects environmental impact statement in the summer of 2019. It was the final step before approval.

Then Bernhardt got involved.

BOEM briefed the DOI Executive review team on the Vineyard Wind Final EIS on Friday, June 28th (this briefing is required prior to publication of a Final EIS for all DOI agencies), Brian Krevor, an environmental protection specialist at BOEM, wrote to other federal officials involved in the permit review on July 1, 2019.

The Secretary of the Interior is now personally reviewing the Final EIS and associated materials," he added. "As a result, the Final EIS was not filed with the EPA on the 28th and will not be published on July 5th. I currently do not have a date for when the document will be published.

Bernhardt said he had promised Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican who has championed offshore wind, that he would personally read Vineyard Winds EIS. He said he was extremely troubled by what he read.

A growing number of states along the East Coast had signed contracts to buy electricity from offshore wind projects by the time Interior officials were finalizing the Vineyard Wind study. But the cumulative impact of those projects on other ocean users like the fishing industry was not considered in the study, Bernhardt said yesterday.

He was also concerned about issues raised by other agencies. NOAA Fisheries, a division of the Commerce Department that oversees federal fisheries, had informed BOEM it did not agree with the bureaus impact analysis of Vineyard Wind. The U.S. Coast Guard had raised separate issues about the safety of marine vessels transiting the projects towers.

It was very important to me that we not have conflict between the agencies when you go out for the first project, Bernhardt said. People have to have faith the government is doing the job it is required to do and managing the varying interests we had. We couldnt be shooting at each other.

Trump critics saw the delay as an attempt to kill the project, but Bernhardt said he has a long-standing interest in offshore wind. In 2005, he helped draft the Energy Policy Act as Interiors congressional liaison. The law gave Interior oversight of offshore wind permitting.

I think where I depart from perhaps some is that because I was actually involved in the development of the legislation, it is my view that a high bar was set in the standards that the secretary must meet to move forward both in preventing waste but also in protecting other uses, Bernhardt said.

I think the legislation that was created was intended to be cautionary. It is important to make these projects work in areas and places where they dont do harm to others," he said. "That was what Congress was trying to do, because it was developed in context of the Cape Wind situation.

Cape Wind was a 130-turbine project proposed in Nantucket Sound. The federal government lacked regulations for permitting offshore wind projects when it was initially proposed. It was ultimately abandoned in 2017 after years of lawsuits from residents who worried about the sight of turbines and their impact on environmental and cultural resources.

Fearing a similar outcome, Vineyard Wind went back to the drawing board after Bernhardts unexpected announcement in 2019.

It revamped the layout of its project, agreeing to space its turbines 1 nautical mile apart in a grid. The move was intended to address concerns from fishermen and the Coast Guard about transiting between the turbines. Other offshore wind developers said they would follow the same pattern.

Vineyard Wind also increased the size of its turbines, from 9.5 megawatts to 12 megawatts, enabling it to reduce the number of towers from 84 to 62. The companys initial plan called for 104 turbines. The project has a capacity of 800 MW, enough to power 400,000 homes.

When BOEM released a draft review of the cumulative impact of all proposed offshore wind projects in the summer of 2020, it found the industry would have an adverse effect on fishermen. But it also concluded that fishermen would be affected by climate change and that the burden of the turbine would be concentrated on different parts of the fishing fleet. Squid boats, it found, would be most impacted by Vineyard Wind. It also determined that the wind industry stood to create thousands of jobs.

BOEM subsequently missed a November deadline to finish its review. Instead, it would announce its final decision on Jan. 15, five days before Trump was scheduled to leave office. In response, Vineyard Wind announced in December that it was withdrawing its permit application, saying it needed to consider the impact of using larger turbines as part of the project.

It quickly refiled its application after Biden took office, concluding the larger turbines did not alter the projects impact. BOEM approved a final EIS in March and stamped Vineyard Winds permit in May. The final decision said it expected the project would have a negligible to moderate impact on fishermen but that the impact could become major as a result of future offshore projects. A 2020 study by the Coast Guard concluded that the updated grid layout addressed many of the navigation concerns.

But the permitting snafu may yet plague the project.

A lawsuit filed this week challenging the projects permit said BOEM erred when it decided to re-accept the application without considering the impact of the larger turbines.

Bernhardt, for his part, said Interior was committed to finishing its review under his watch, saying a tremendous amount of work was done to ensure that when this program went forward it would be defensible and stand the test of time.

A tremendous amount of work on this project was happening up to the moment they chose to terminate, he added.

Asked if the final EIS released by the Biden administration differed from the one being prepared by the Trump administration, Bernhardt said it was difficult to evaluate because his team never finished its review.

But, he added, I would be very skeptical that it looks dramatically different.

More here:

Bernhardt: Trump tried to boost offshore wind, not kill it - E&E News

There has been a lot of buzz lately aroundthe Port ofNew Bedford. From theOffshore Wind Institutetothe power plant redevelopmentand the landmark project labor agreement with Vineyard Wind, New Bedford is on the precipice of making its port a national leader not just in fishing, but in clean energy as well.

Recently, I was joined on-air by Mayor Jon Mitchell to talk about the recent big announcementsatthe waterfront. Mayor Mitchell has repeatedly calledoffshore wind an opportunity for New Bedford to capitalize on what it does best,which is fostering a thriving port economy and leveragingour shoreline assets to createmarketable economic development opportunities.

While there may be tensions between ourgreat fishing industry and offshore wind, it is important to stress that this will be a mutually beneficial relationship.

Offshore wind isn'tjust an economic opportunity for New Bedford and the region, but a necessary measure in mitigating the disastrousresults of our seemingly intractable climate crisis, which is already having a noticeable impact on our marine ecosystem and fishing.

Mitchell and I discussed these topics, as well as the recent survey his office released asking New Bedford residents how they would like to see the city's nearly $65 million relieffrom theAmerican Rescue Plan Act spent, which he described as a "once in a generation opportunity."

You can listen to the full conversation here:

Marcus Ferro is the host of The Marcus Ferro Show airing Saturdays on 1420 WBSM from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Contact him at marcusferrolaw@gmail.com. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

See more here:

Mayor Mitchell on Offshore Wind, How to Spend New Bedford's COVID Relief [OPINION] - wbsm.com

EDP Renewables and Engies Ocean Winds is working with renewables developer Disa Group to build offshore wind farms off the Canary Islands.

The projects would mainly focus on floating offshore wind projects due to the depths of the waters off the Canary Islands, they explained.

Ocean Winds and Disa claim their projects would help reduce the cost of electricity generation on the islands.

The developers would not confirm how much capacity they are planning to develop. They currently do not have a preferred floating platform for the projects.

Construction could start as soon as 2022, but a final project timeline including a commissioning date would be dependent on Spain approving its new. framework for offshore wind development, an Ocean Winds spokesman told Windpower Monthly.

They claim their projects could create up to 3,700 direct and indirect jobs in shipyards, auxiliary workshops, ports and other service industries.

The partners also stated that their projects would help Spain meet its renewable energy targets, which will be especially difficult in the Canary Islands.

Spain aims to double the share of renewable energy in its final energy consumption to 42% by 2030. In 2019, renewables accounted for 4% of electricity consumed in the Canary Islands.

Iberdrola and EnerOcean are also developing separate floating offshore wind farms off the Canary Islands.

Ocean Winds has experience in floating offshore wind, having developed the25MW WindFloat Atlantic WindFloat Atlantic (25MW) Offshoreoff Viana do Castelo, Portugal, Europe Click to see full details project off neighbouring Portugal.

Go here to read the rest:

Ocean Winds plans Canary Islands floating offshore wind - Windpower Monthly

SINGAPORE - To keep the marine and offshore engineering sector in Singapore buoyant, a plan to boost its competitiveness is being updated by government agencies to account for disruptors such as Covid-19 and climate change.

Dr Tan See Leng, Second Minister for Trade and Industry, told Parliament on Tuesday (July 27) that the refreshed industry transformation map for the sector - which includes shipbuilding and repair, rig building and marine equipment - is slated to be launched in 2022.

"We expect offshore renewables and offshore carrier transport of hydrogen to be among the areas of opportunity in the refreshed map," he said in response to questions raised by Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong GRC).

The latter had asked the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) for an update on transformation plans for the carbon-intensive marine and offshore engineering sector. It was affected by negative oil prices due to Covid-19 lockdowns last year, and is expected to be impacted by a global push to tackle climate change, which entails shifting away from fossil fuels.

The marine and offshore engineering industry contributed $3.6 billion, or 1 per cent, of Singapore's gross domestic product, and employed more than 23,000 workers in 2016.

Dr Tan Wu Meng also asked for MTI's assessment of whether the country could be a hub for emerging technologies that can help companies slash their carbon footprint.

These include hydrogen - a fuel that produces no planet-warming carbon dioxide when burnt - and carbon capture, utilisation and storage.

Dr Tan See Leng said Singapore plans to use these technologies to help it meet the goal of reaching net-zero emissions. However, using hydrogen as a fuel comes with disadvantages, he added, including high storage and transportation costs.

As hydrogen is a gas with a boiling point far lower than that of natural gas, it is considered flammable and requires a "significant engineering challenge" to transport and store it in a commercially viable manner.

Singapore is looking into a few strategies to overcome this, Dr Tan See Leng said. These include transporting hydrogen as ammonia (which is a compound of hydrogen and nitrogen and comparatively easier to handle), liquefied hydrogen, or through liquid organic hydride carriers.

However, all come with challenges. For instance, liquid organic hydride carriers are less hydrogen-dense. "This means a relatively higher cargo footprint would be needed to import the same amount of hydrogen. The process required to release hydrogen from (these carriers) can also be landand energy-intensive," he added.

He said Singapore is keen to realise the decarbonisation potential of hydrogen and develop into a regional hydrogen hub.

"Government agencies will continue to monitor the technological and market developments to ensure that Singapore maintains its competitiveness," he added.

On carbon capture, Dr Tan See Leng said the country lacks known geological formations that are suitable for the permanent storage of carbon dioxide underground.

"We are therefore exploring partnerships with companies and other countries with suitable geological formations to enable carbon dioxide storage opportunities," he said.

As for carbon capture and utilisation, he added that the Republic is looking into converting carbon dioxide into waste-based feedstock or natural minerals that can be used to produce aggregates for reclamation or building materials.

Read more:

S'pore updating plan to lift competitiveness of marine and offshore engineering sector amid Covid-19 and climate change - The Straits Times

Australia has the potential to develop a substantial offshore wind energy industry from scratch, with abundant resources available near existing electricity substations across the continent, according to a new report.

The Blue Economy Cooperative Research Centre said Australia was yet to capitalise on significant offshore wind capacity despite the International Energy Agency nominating it as one of the big three likely sources of renewable energy globally alongside solar and onshore wind.

It found more than 2,000GW of offshore wind turbines far more than Australias existing generation capacity could be installed in areas within 100km of substations. Environmentally restricted and low-wind areas were excluded from the assessment.

Sites that have traditionally been electricity generation hubs, such as the Hunter and Latrobe valleys and Gladstone, were found to be particularly suitable as they were close to transmission grids and had strong offshore winds at times when solar and onshore wind output was limited.

Dr Chris Briggs, research director at the University of Technology Sydneys Institute for Sustainable Futures and a contributor to the report, said there had been a view in the energy industry that offshore wind energy would not play as significant a role in Australia as some other countries due to the availability of much cheaper solar and onshore wind energy.

He said that was starting to change as people recognised the scale of the clean energy transition required and what offshore wind could deliver. The combination of the scale, falling cost and the development of floating wind turbines means it has come into focus, he said.

Briggs said offshore wind could be built on a much larger scale than solar or onshore wind up to 2GW for a project and could generate more electricity per megawatt of capacity. This could be very valuable in the late 2020s and 2030s as we see coal plants retiring, he said.

The projects leader, Dr Mark Hemer of the CSIRO, said offshore wind could be particularly important under energy superpower scenarios that involved mass electrification of industry and transport and hydrogen production for domestic use and export.

The report said there were 10 offshore wind projects with a combined capacity of 25GW in development in Australia, all at an early stage. The most advanced is the $10bn Star of the South a 2.2GW windfarm planned for between 7km and 25km offshore in South Gippsland.

The federal government is yet to finalise the regulatory framework necessary for an offshore wind industry to develop. The report said it could help develop an industry by supporting the technology through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, incorporating it into planning for the national hydrogen strategy, and considering allocation of marine space in commonwealth waters.

The work was partly funded by the maritime, electrical and manufacturing unions. They called on federal and state governments to take immediate steps to support the development of an industry, saying it had the potential to create jobs for workers in fossil fuel industries.

Paddy Crumlin, the national secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia, said the development of an offshore wind industry would give seafarers and offshore oil and gas workers an opportunity to transition into the important work of delivering Australias clean energy future.

Offshore wind is more advanced in countries with limited capacity to develop renewable energy on land. The report said 2030 targets for offshore wind energy totalled about 200GW, including 60GW in the European Union, 40GW in Britain and 12 GW in South Korea. Japan plans to reach 45GW by 2040.

Solar and onshore wind have grown substantially in recent years, leading to renewable energy providing nearly 30% of generation in the national electricity market. But the Morrison government also continues to support fossil fuels.

A report by BloombergNEF and Bloomberg Philanthropies this week found Australia increased support for fossil fuel by 48% between 2015 and 2019, the largest rise in the G20.

It said most of the support had been delivered in the form of tax breaks to oil and gas projects. They included tax capex deductions for mining and petroleum operations, fuel-tax credits and reductions in fuel-excise rates and offset schemes. Australia lost out on nearly US$6bn in foregone taxes over the five years, it said.

The Bloomberg report did not include the Morrison governments support for a gas-fired recovery from the pandemic. The government dedicated hundreds of millions of dollars to gas projects in the May budget, including up to $600m for a new power plant in the Hunter Valley that experts say is not needed.

Read the original:

Australia has huge potential to develop offshore windfarms near existing substations, report says - The Guardian