WindEnergyUpdate talks to Advanced Offshore Solutions CEO, Kurt Thomsen, about innovations in offshore turbine installation and avoiding the pitfalls of false economies.

By Rikki Stancich

WindEnergyUpdate: Can you outline some of the challenges for the transportation of offshore components?

Kurt Thomsen: With offshore transport there are an array of challenges. For offshore turbines, up to 3.6 MW turbines are generally manufactured onshore and transported to port, but the 5 MW - 9MW turbines will be so big that they’ll need to be manufactured at the port.

REPower and Multibrid have production systems in port areas.  The trend is for people to start manufacturing in the port facilities – the companies doing this are way ahead of everyone else.

People say that the way they are doing things today works – in other words, using a jack-up vessel to tow out the turbine for offshore installation. But if you want to install a whole farm offshore, this approach is not viable.

There are really three ways you can install offshore turbines. The first is to transport the turbine in 3-4 pieces for offshore assembly. This is currently the favoured method.

The second way is to transport the turbine in one piece and then put it on its foundation. 

The third is to install the turbine and foundation in one piece – but I struggle to see the advantage of that. You design the foundation for a once-in-a-lifetime feature – great, but you have the added cost to make it floatable. You have a huge cost, but only one added value.

The cheapest option is to build the equipment and then transport and install the turbine offshore, as we are doing.

WindEnergyUpdate: AdvancedOffshoreSolutions has designed a vessel capable of doing this. Can you expand on the project, in terms of what stage it is at?

Kurt Thomsen: I have designed a ship that can take 18 turbines and load them within 24 hours. We have come up with this vessel in response to a growing demand for new methods and specialized equipment. If you are looking at using cheap equipment, you are looking in the wrong direction.

We are already through the design phase and the project has been tendered to ship builders. The vessel will include automotive systems for loading the turbines – we have come up with some promising designs and methods of loading. 

The vessel will also have systems that operate independently of each other – that can take more than one component at a time.

The challenge is to make a solution that works; is economically viable; and that looks good (if it looks good, it normally works well).

WindEnergyUpdate: Among its services, Advanced Offshore Solutions provides risk assessment. What high cost risks are offshore wind developers facing and what strategies are being put in place to mitigate these risks?

Kurt Thomsen: Risk is generally divided into two sections: Health and safety, and financial.

Health and safety risk is borne out of what contractors promise on the basis of what the clients want. We make it clear to clients what the rules and regulations are, let them know what they need to do, advise on equipment and on what is practically feasible.

Slight risks can quickly turn into very dangerous situations, particularly when operating offshore. We advise never to push equipment to its limit of capacity when operating offshore.

In terms of financial risk, it all comes down to what people can afford, what the cost is and whether they have identified the most cost-effective solution.

We know exactly what the costs are, what they should be and whether something has been overpriced or is underperforming. We know all the prices out there and who the contractors are.

The latest prices I’ve been hearing, with regards to the Sheringham Shoal project are totally outlandish - there is a team of developers out there who are definitely not getting a good deal. The cost of installation is 4-5 times higher than it should be.

WindEnergyUpdate: Can you expand on Advanced Energy Solution’s model called EVAM? What is its purpose?

Kurt Thomsen: The scenario is that with our vessel, there is a high day rate. Clients perceive it as high, but they forget that they are only seeing one part of the picture.

So we developed a statistical model, with the help of the University of Arhaus in Denmark and several independent consultants, which includes all pertinent parameters of an operation.

We developed a statistical model and a set of advanced spreadsheets so that we could see the cost per day of a vessel transporting 18 turbines per trip, compared with using relatively cheaper jack-up barges. 

With the model, we could demonstrate that the two options are price comparative but that the logistical challenge of using the jack-up barge is greater. 

We also figured out, using the model that with a higher intake on the ship, we could stay out there longer. In this we can avoid the added cost of port duties, given that the number of trips in and out of port are reduced. This makes the overall project costs a lot lower.

We could prove that with a large intake and good weather the wind farm could be installed faster and cheaper.

Ultimately the EVAM model can demonstrate the overall cost effectiveness of AdvanceOffshoreSolution’s offering.

We also give the spreadsheet to our clients to use. It’s a useful too for obtaining an accurate cost comparison.  But as with any statistical model, it’s ‘garbage in = garbage out’ – if you don’t put realistic figures in, you won’t get a realistic result.

WindEnergyUpdate: Are you working on any other innovative products for the offshore wind turbine industry?

Kurt Thomsen: Yes, as a matter of fact, we have. But I am not willing to talk about those just yet!