Offshore Wind Technologies and Risk Analysis
Offshore Wind Technologies and Risk Analysis
Bonnie Ram
Energetics Incorporated
Lansing, MichiganMarch 25, 2009
Bonnie Ram
Energetics Incorporated
Lansing, MichiganMarch 25, 2009
2
Energetics supports complex science
and technology
RD&D programs
Energetics supports complex science
and technology
RD&D programs
Overview
• Products and Services:– Strategic planning and analysis – Partnership building and
implementation– Visions and technology roadmaps– Technology assessments and
performance metrics– RD&D program management – Environmental analysis and compliance– Renewable energy technology assessment– Conference management and facilitation services
3
Overview
• Clients: Federal Government, State Governments, Industry Associations, National Laboratories, Universities, Private Companies
• Staff: 120 professionals• Offices:
– Columbia, MD (HQ)– Washington, DC– Morgantown, WV– Arlington, VA
• Ownership: Established in 1979. Since 1995, wholly owned subsidiary of VSE Corporation.
4
Bonnie Ram
• Consultant to DOE and the National Wind Technology Center of NREL since 2001– “20% Wind Energy by 2030”– International Energy Agency: Co-author of first Offshore
Wind Annex – Wave & Current Technology Deployment Strategies– First Deep Water Workshops with oil & gas experts– Facilitator and Founder of Bats and Wind Energy
Cooperative
• Environmental Analyst - NEPA compliance and strategic advice for a dozen years
• Other experience– Transboundary and nuclear waste management– Naval ship dismantlement and recycling– Energy analysis in Southern Africa
5
Presentation Overview
• Why renewables?• Lessons learned from
Europe• Potential risks to
environmental and human systems
• Offshore wind challenges in the Great Lakes
• The need for integrated risk analysis
• What is risk assessment and uncertainty analysis?
• RecommendationsPhotos: Courtesy GE Wind
6
Renewables are a Bridge to Low Carbon Portfolio
• Near-term reductions of carbon & air emissions– Public health
• Climate change mitigation
• Energy security• Diversifying local
energy supplies • Reduction in water use• Regional economic development
and green jobs - Tapping local talent
Offshore Wind in Europe Seas
8
Germany Great BritainDenmark
Belgium Netherlands
Europeans: Planning on a National Scale
Slide Adapted from Jos Beurskens, ECN, Netherlands
9
Danish Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) Studies
• Sea mammals – harbor porpoises and seals
• Fish• Birds• Hydrography• Coastal effects• Artificial reef• Socioeconomics• Community acceptance• Noise emissions• Temperature gradients around
the cables• Electromagnetic fields• Benthic fauna• Viewshed
Photo credits: Wageningen IMARES
Over 350 Studies: No Signs of “Unacceptable” Risks
Danish Offshore Monitoring Program for Nysted & Horns Rev Projects
U.K. Strategic Zones and Competitive Rounds of Projects
Beatrice Wind Farm Demonstration, Scotland
German Research Platforms in the North & Baltic Sea
Netherlands – We@Sea
IEA Annex XXIIIImage accessed from website http://www.fino-offshore.com
11
Lessons Learned from Europe
• Regional zone planning– Strategic Environmental Assessment
(similar to our Programmatic EIS)– Marine spatial planning
• Policy and regulatory certainties• Need early and sustained public
involvement• Committed state leadership• Financial support for baseline
studies– Variety of sites and ecosystems– Replication of methodologies
• Need integrated risk framework
Deploying Offshore Wind in the Great Lakes: Challenges
Deploying Offshore Wind in the Great Lakes: Challenges
Galveston, TX Met Tower
179 feet installed at Horseshoe Shoal
13
Environmental Risks (physical/biological)
• Seabed sediments• Scour pits• Riparian and coastal
processes• Seabed contamination • Water and air quality• Protected sites and
species• Benthic ecology• Fish and shellfish/
Fisheries• Birds
• Marine mammals and bats
• Cables and pipelines• Military activities• Disposal areas• Electronic and
magnetic fields• Onshore grid
connection• Noise and vibrations• Cumulative risks• Climate change• Decommissioning
14
Human Risks
• Worker health and safety• Integrity of shoreline communities• Tourism and recreation• Aesthetics• Cultural/historic views• Property values• Conflicting uses/accidents• Shipping and navigation• Noise• Radar/radio disturbances
(military/commercial uses)• Transmission lines• Electromagnetic fields• Marine archaeology• Cumulative risks (e.g., air quality)
15
It’s Not One Type of Risk (Impacts) and It’s Many Sites
Land-based examples• Raptors in CA• Bats in the East• Military radar across sitesOffshore• East Coast – recreation and beach tourism• Eastern shore – migratory birds• Southeast region – right whales
Why the Need for Integrated Risk Framework?
• Risks determined by regulations, expert opinions, and politics
• Sector-by-sector risk analysis leads to “lopsided”decisionmaking, e.g., wildlife risks
• Call for more data does not lead to better decisions, judgment about significant risks or priority research gaps
• Need to understand who will tolerate which risks
• Allows decisionmakers to move forward with uncertainties
17
What Does the Decisionmaker Get with Risk Analysis?
• Specifics on probability and consequence
• Allows comparison of impacts, including ecological and human
• Includes analysis of uncertainty
• Building blocks for decisionmaking
18
A Simple Model of Risk
Risk = f {xi,pi,ci}
Where,
xi = Adverse effect i (What can happen?)
pi = Probability of xi (How likely is it?)
ci = Consequences of xi (So what?)
Source: Kaplan and Garrick, 1981
19
Two Risk ModelsModel 1 – Command and Control
Source: Morgan, et.al. 2007
Identify the
problem
Identify the
problem
Solve the problem
Solve the problem
Do researchDo research
Gain full understanding of all relevant issues
Gain full understanding of all relevant issues
Identify policy optionsIdentify policy options
Choose the optimal policyChoose the optimal policy
20
Model 2 – Adaptive Management
Source: Morgan, et.al.
Refine problem identification as
needed
Refine problem identification as
needed
Assess what you can and what you can’t know (at least now)
Assess what you can and what you can’t know (at least now)
Identify adaptive policies and choose one that
currently looks best and present options
Identify adaptive policies and choose one that
currently looks best and present options
Implement decision and observe how it works
Implement decision and observe how it works
Reassess risks in light of new understanding
Reassess risks in light of new understanding
Assess the riskAssess the risk
Continue risk
research
Continue risk
research
Identify the problem
Identify the problem
Risk Characterization
23
Determining Risk Tolerability (continued)
24
Management Options (continued)
25
Why is Uncertainty Analysis Essential?
• Assists in prioritizing research: – How reducible are different uncertainty types?– What issues will give greatest traction on
understanding overall risk?– What methods are likely to be most successful?– When should the ‘precautionary principle’ prevail?
• Provides guidance on the selection of a management and mitigation strategy
Recommendationsfor Multi-layered Steps
• Validate wind resource assessments– LiDAR vs. Met Towers
• Continue technology R&D– Fresh water and ice loads
• Designate renewable energy zones with defined regional demand– Map where are the good sites
• Power purchase agreements• One-stop shop for permitting/lease fees • Commitment to adaptive management• Tap into local university/NGO talents
Recommendations for Multi-layered Steps
• Initiate integrated risk analysis• Establish a knowledge base for
comparative risks and benefits of energy options
• Compile baseline studies from existing resources
• Identify the most significant risks = research priorities
• Sustain public perception studies and dialogues
28
Bonnie [email protected]
Thank you for supporting this research:
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Wind and Hydropower Technologies Program and National Wind Technology Center of the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
Note: The views and opinions expressed in this presentation do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. DOE, NREL, or any agency
or entities thereof.
29
National Research CouncilRisk Decision Process
Source: National Academy of Sciences 1996
30
Selected References;North American Projects
• Great Lakes Wind Collaborative– http://www.glc.org/energy/wind
• Michigan Great Lakes Offshore Wind Permitting: Dry Run. Final Report (Michael Klepinger). May 2008
– Overview of evolving regulatory requirements• “Michigan’s Offshore Wind Potential,” Michigan State University. Land
Policy Institute. October 2008.– Wind resource assessment and potential
• MMS Alternate Energy Site – Environmental Studies
• http://www.mms.gov/offshore/AlternativeEnergy/Studies.htm– Cape Wind Project
• http://www.mms.gov/offshore/AlternativeEnergy/index.htm• American Wind Energy Association
• http://www.awea.org/faq/wwt_offshore.html• Naikun Offshore Wind (British Columbia)
• http://www.naikun.ca/the_project/index.php
31
Selected References: Risk Analysis
• NRC.1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process. Washington: National Academy Press. (red book)
• NRC. 1996. Stern, Paul and Harvey V. Fineberg, eds. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (orange book).
• Gregory, Robin. 2003. Incorporating Value Tradeoffs into Community-Based Environmental Risk Decisions. Environmental Values 11: 461-488.
• NRC. November 2008. Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
• U.S. EPA. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. 1998. U.S. EPA, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC, EPA/630/R095/002F.
• Pidgeon, N., R. Kasperson, and P. Slovic. (eds) 2005. The Social Amplification of Risk. London: Cambridge University Press.
• Morgan, M. Granger et al. 2007. Best Practice Approaches for Characterizing, Communicating, and Incorporating Scientific Uncertainty in, Climate Decision Making, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
32
Selected European References
• European Commission. 2003. “External Costs: Research results on socio- environmental damages due to electricity and transport.” Directorate General for Research. Brussels. http://externe.jrc.es
• European offshore resources with word searches– http://www.offshorewindenergy.org/
• European Wind Energy Association. Offshore Wind Statistics, 2009
– http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/statistics/Offshore_Wind_Farms_2008.pdf
• Council of Europe – Summary of bird studies– http://www.coe.int/t/e/Cultural_Co-operation/
Environment/Nature_and_biological_diversity/ Nature_protection/sc23_inf12e.pdf?L=E
33
Selected European Programs and Studies
Danish Offshore Monitoring Program for Nysted & Horns Rev Projects
http://uk.nystedhavmoellepark.dk/frames.asp
http://www.hornsrev.dk/Engelsk/default_ie.htm
U.K. Offshore Program
Strategic Environmental Assessments
Collaborative Offshore Wind Research Into The Environment (COWRIE)
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/newscontent/offshore_wind_energy
http://www.offshore-sea.org.uk/site/scripts/sea_archive.php
http://www.offshorewindfarms.co.uk/Pages/COWRIE
Beatrice Wind Farm Demonstration, Scotland
http://beatricewind.co.uk/downloads/default.asp
German Research Platforms and Environmental Studies in the North & Baltic Sea
http://www.fino-offshore.comhttp://www.minos-info.org
Netherlands – We@Sea http://www.we-at-sea.org/index.php