iea wind 2013 roadmap

8/11/2019 IEA Wind 2013 Roadmap

1/63


2/63


3/63

1Foreword

Current trends in energy supply and use areunsustainable economically, environmentally andsocially. Without decisive action, energy-relatedgreenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions could more thandouble by 2050, and increased oil demand willheighten concerns over the security of supplies.

We can and must change the path we are now on;sustainable and low-carbon energy technologieswill play a crucial role in the energy revolutionrequired to make this change happen.

There is a growing awareness of the urgent need toturn political statements and analytical work intoconcrete action. To address these challenges, theInternational Energy Agency (IEA), at the request

of the Group of Eight (G8), has identified the mostimportant technologies needed to achieve a globalenergy-related CO2target in 2050 of 50% belowcurrent levels. It has thus been developing a seriesof technology roadmaps, based on the EnergyTechnology Perspectives modelling, which allowsassessing the deployment path of each technology,taking into account the whole energy supply anddemand context.

Wind is the most advanced of the new renewableenergy technologies and was the subject of one ofthe first roadmaps produced by the IEA, in 2009.

Since then, the development and deployment ofwind power has been a rare good news story in thedeployment of low-carbon technology deployment.A much greater number of countries in all regionsof the world now have significant wind generatingcapacity. In a few countries, wind power alreadyprovides 15% to 30% of total electricity. Thetechnology keeps rapidly improving, and costsof generation from land-based wind installationshave continued to fall. Wind power is now beingdeployed in countries with good resources withoutspecial financial incentives.

Because of these improvements and other changesin the energy landscape, this updated roadmaptargets an increased share (15% to 18%) of globalelectricity to be provided by wind power in 2050,compared to 12% in the original roadmap of 2009.

But more remains to be done to ensure that theseobjectives are met. There is a continuing need forimproved technology. Increasing levels of low-costwind still require predictable, supportive regulatoryenvironments, and appropriate market designs. Thechallenges of integrating higher levels of variablewind power into the grid must be tackled. Andfor offshore wind still at the early stages of thedeployment journey much remains to be done

to develop appropriate large-scale systems and toreduce costs.

This updated roadmap recognises the verysignificant progress made since the last versionwas published. It provides an updated analysis ofthe barriers which remain to accelerated progressalong with proposals to address them coveringtechnology, legislative and regulatory issues. Wehope that the analysis and recommendations willplay a part in ensuring the continued success ofwind energy.

This publication is produced under my authority asExecutive Director of the IEA.

Maria van der HoevenExecutive Director

International Energy Agency

Foreword

This publication reflects the views of the International Energy Agency (IEA) Secretariat but does not necessarily reflectthose of individual IEA member countries. The IEA makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, in respectto the publications contents (including its completeness or accuracy) and shall not be responsible for any use of, orreliance on, the publication.


4/63

2 Technology Roadmap Wind energy

Foreword 1

Acknowledgements 4

Key findings and actions 5

Key actions in the next ten years 5

Introduction 7

Rationale for wind power in the overall energy context 7

Purpose of the roadmap update 7

Roadmap process, content and structure 8

Wind energy progress since 2008 9

Recent developments in wind markets 9

Technology improvements 12

Advancing towards competitiveness 14

Barriers encountered, overcome or outstanding 17

Medium-term outlook 18

Vision for deployment and CO2abatement 19

CO2reduction targets from the ETP 2012Scenarios 19

Wind targets revised upward compared to 2009 roadmap 20

Potential for cost reductions 22

Global investment to 2050 23

Wind technology development: actions and time frames 25

Wind power technology 25

Special considerations for offshore development 28

Wind characterist ic assessment 32

Supply chains, manufacturing and installation 34

System integration: actions and time frames 36

Transmission planning and development 36

Reliable system operation with large shares of wind energy 41

Policy, finance, public acceptance and International collaboration: actions and time frames 45

Incentivising investment 45

Public engagement and the environment 47

Planning and permitt ing 48

Increased funding for RD&D 49

International collaboration: actions and time frame 50

Roadmap action plan and next steps 52

Near-term actions for stakeholders 52

Implementation 53

Abbreviations and acronyms 54References 56

Table of contents


5/63


6/63


through discussions and early comments, but aretoo numerous to be named individually. Reviewcomments were received from: Global WindEnergy Council (GWEC, Steve Sawyer); European

Wind Energy Associat ion (EWEA, Jacopo Mocciaand Vilma Radvilaite); American Wind EnergyAssociation (AWEA, Michael Goggin and others);US Department of Energy (DOE, Jim Ahlgr imm,Benjamin Chicoski and Richard Tusing); NationalRenewable Energy Laboratory (NREL, MaureenHand, Paul Veers, Patrick Moriarty, Aaron Smith,Brian Smith and Robert Thresher); LawrenceBerkeley National Laboratory (LBNL, Ryan Wiser);GLGarrad Hassan (Paul Gardner); Iberdrola (AngelesSantamaria Martin); Acciona (Carmen Becerril

Martinez); General Electric (GE, Bart Stoffer andIzabela Kielichowa); HIS CERA (Susanne Hounsell);Energinet.dk (Antje Orths); Laboratrio Nacionalde Energia e Geologia (LNEG, Ana Estanqueiro);Strathclyde Uni (David Infield); Utility Variable-Generation Integration Group (UVIG, J. CharlesSmith); WindLogics (Mark Ahlstrom), MargueriteFund (Michael Dedieu); Green Giraffe (JeromeGuillet); Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau (KfW,Andrew Eckhardt); HgCapital (Tom Murley); andABB (Hannu Vaananen).

For more information on this document, contact :Technology RoadmapsInternational Energy Agency9, rue de la Fdration75739 Paris Cedex 15FranceEmail: [email protected]

This publication was prepared by the RenewableEnergy Division (RED) of the International EnergyAgency (IEA). Cdric Philibert and HanneleHolttinen were the co-ordinators and main authorsof this update, based on the or iginal work of HugoChandler. Paolo Frankl, Head of RED, providedinvaluable guidance and input, as did KeisukeSadamori, Director of Energy Markets and Securityat the IEA. Cecilia Tam, in her role as TechnologyRoadmap Co-ordinator, made importantcontributions through the drafting process.Severalother IEA colleagues also provided importantcontributions, in part icular Heymi Bahar, DanielMoeller, Simon Mueller, Alvaro Portellano, UweRemme and Michael Waldron.

The IEA Implementing Agreement on WindEnergy Systems provided valuable comments andsuggestions. Edgar DeMeo of Renewable EnergyConsulting Services, Inc. provided valuable input.

The authors would also like to thank MarilynSmith for editing the manuscript as well as the IEAPublication Unit, in particular Muriel Custodio,Astrid Dumond, Angela Gossmann, Cheryl Hainesand Bertrand Sadin for their assistance on layoutand editing.

Finally, this roadmap would not be effective withoutall of the comments and support received fromthe industry, government and non-governmentexperts who attended the workshop, reviewedand commented on the drafts, and providedoverall guidance and support. The authors wish tothank all of those, such as workshop participants(Vienna, 4 February 2013), who gave inputs

Acknowledgements


7/63

5Key findings and actions

z Since 2008, wind power deployment has morethan doubled, approaching 300 gigawatts(GW) of cumulative installed capacities, led byChina (75 GW), the United States (60 GW) andGermany (31 GW). Wind power now provides2.5% of global electricity demand and up to30% in Denmark, 20% in Portugal and 18% inSpain. Policy support has been instrumental instimulating this tremendous growth.

z Progress over the past five years has boostedenergy yields (especially in low-wind-resourcesites) and reduced operation and maintenance(O&M) costs. Land-based wind power generationcosts range from USD 60 per megawatt hour

(USD/MWh) to USD 130/MWh at most sites. It canalready be competitive where wind resources arestrong and financing conditions are favourable,but still requires support in most countries.Offshore wind technology costs levelled off aftera decade-long increase, but are still higher thanland-based costs.

z This roadmap targets 15% to 18% share of globalelectricity from wind power by 2050, a notableincrease from the 12% aimed for in 2009. Thenew target of 2 300 GW to 2 800 GW of installedwind capacity will avoid emissions of up to

4.8 gigatonnes (Gt) of carbon dioxide (CO2)per year.

z Achieving these targets requires rapid scalingup of the current annual installed wind powercapacity (including repowering), from 45 GW in2012 to 65 GW by 2020, to 90 GW by 2030 and to104 GW by 2050. The annual investment neededwould be USD 146 billion to USD 170 billion.

z The geographical pattern of deployment israpidly changing. While countries belongingto the Organisation for Economic Co-operation

and Development (OECD) led early winddevelopment, from 2010 non-OECD countriesinstalled more wind turbines. After 2030, non-OECD countries will have more than 50% ofglobal installed capacity.

z While there are no fundamental barr iers toachieving or exceeding these goals, severalobstacles could delay progress including costs,grid integration issues and permitting difficulties.

z This roadmap assumes the cost of energy fromwind will decrease by as much as 25% for land-

based and 45% for offshore by 2050 on theback of strong research and development (R&D)

to improve design, materials, manufacturingtechnology and reliability, to optimiseperformance and to reduce uncertainties for plantoutput. To date, wind power has received only 2%of public energy R&D funding: greater investmentis needed to achieve winds full potential.

z As long as markets do not reflect climatechange and other environmental externalities,accompanying the cost of wind energy tocompetitive levels will need transitional policysupport mechanisms.

z To achieve high penetrations of variable windpower without diminishing system reliability,improvements are needed in grid infrastructureand in the flexibility of power systems as well asin the design of electricity markets.

z To engage public support for wind, improvedtechniques are required to assess, minimise andmitigate social and environmental impacts andrisks. Also, more vigorous communication isneeded on the value of wind energy and the roleof transmission in meeting climate targets and inprotecting water, air and soil quality.

Key actions in thenext ten years

z Set long-term targets, supported by predictablemechanisms to drive investment and to applyappropriate carbon pricing.

z Address non-economic barriers. Advanceplanning of new plants by including wind powerin long-term land and maritime spatial planning;develop streamlined procedures for permitting;address issues of land-use and sea-use constraintsposed by various authorities (environment,building, traffic, defence and navigation).

z Strengthen research, development anddemonstration (RD&D) ef forts and financing.Increase current public funding by two- to five-fold to drive cost reductions of turbines andsupport structures, to increase performance andreliability (especially in offshore and other newmarket areas) and to scale up turbine technologyfor offshore.

z Adapt wind power plant design to specific localconditions (e.g.cold climates and low-wind sites),penetration rates, grid connection costs and theeffects of variability on the entire system.

Key findings and actions


8/63


9/63

7Introduction

Introduction

There is a pressing need to accelerate thedevelopment of advanced energy technologiesin order to address the global challenges ofclean energy, climate change and sustainabledevelopment. To achieve emission reductionsenvisioned, the IEA has undertaken an effort todevelop a series of global technology roadmaps,under international guidance and in closeconsultation with industry. These technologies areevenly divided among demand-side and supply-sidetechnologies and include several renewable energyroadmaps (www.iea.org/roadmaps/).

The overall aim is to advance global developmentand uptake of key technologies to limit global mean

temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius (C) in thelong term. The roadmaps will enable governmentsand industry and financial partners to identify stepsneeded and implement measures to acceleraterequired technology development and uptake.

The roadmaps take a long-term view, but highlightin particular the key actions that need to be takenby different stakeholders in the next five to ten yearsto reach their goals. This is because the actionsundertaken within the next decade will be criticalto achieve long-term emission reductions. Existingconventional plants together with those under

construction lead to a lock-in of CO2emissions asthey will be operating for decades. According to theIEA Energy Technology Perspectives 2012 (ETP 2012),early retirement of 850 GW of existing coal capacitywould be required to reach the goal of limitingclimate change to 2C. Therefore, it is crucial tobuild up low-carbon energy supply today.

Rationale for wind power inthe overall energy context

ETP2012projects that in the absence of newpolicies CO2emissions from the energy sectorwill increase by 84% over 2009 levels by 2050 (IEA,2012a). The ETP 2012model examines competitionamong a range of technology solutions that cancontribute to preventing this increase: greaterenergy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclearpower and the near-decarbonisation of fossil fuel-based power generation. Rather than projectingthe maximum possible deployment of any givensolution, the ETP 2012model calculates the least-cost mix to achieve the CO2emission reduction goal

needed to limit climate change to 2C (the ETP 20122C Scenario [2DS]; Figure 1 and Box 1).

ETP 2012shows wind providing 15% to 18% of thenecessary CO2 reductions in the electricity sectorin 2050, up from the 12% projected in EnergyTechnology Perspectives2008 (IEA, 2008). Thisincrease in wind compensates for slower progress inthe intervening years in the area of carbon captureand storage (CCS) and higher costs for nuclearpower. Yet, it also reflects faster cost reductions forsome renewables, including wind.

Wind energy, like other power technologies based onrenewable resources, is widely available throughoutthe world and can contribute to reduced energyimport dependence. As it entails no fuel price risk orconstraints, it also improves security of supply. Wind

power enhances energy diversity and hedges againstprice volatility of fossil fuels, thus stabilising costs ofelectricity generation in the long term.

Wind power entails no direct greenhouse gas (GHG)emissions and does not emit other pollutants (suchas oxides of sulphur and nitrogen); additionally,it consumes no water. As local air pollution andextensive use of fresh water for cooling of thermalpower plants are becoming serious concerns inhot or dry regions, these benefits of wind becomeincreasingly important.

Purpose of the

roadmap update

The wind roadmap was one of the initial roadmapsdeveloped by the IEA in 2008/09. This documentis an update of that earlier document, outliningprogress made in the last four years, as well aspresenting updated goals and actions. This updatedroadmap presents a new vision that takes intoaccount this progress of wind technologies as wellchanging trends in the overall energy mix.

It presents a detailed assessment of the technologymilestones that wind energy will need to reachthe ambitious targets presented in the vision. Thekey objective is to seek measures to improve windtechnology performance and reduce its costs inorder to achieve the competitiveness needed for thelarge investments foreseen.

The roadmap also provides an extensive list ofnon-economic barriers that hamper deploymentand identifies policy actions to overcome them.For instance, addressing issues such as permitting

processes and public acceptance, transmission andsystem integration is critically important.


10/63


This roadmap thus identifies actions and timeframes to achieve the higher wind deploymentneeded for targeted global emission reductions.In some markets, certain actions will already havebeen taken, or will be underway. Many countries,particularly in emerging regions, are only justbeginning to develop wind energy. Accordingly,milestone dates should be considered as indicativeof urgency, rather than as absolutes. Individualcountries will have to choose what to prioritise inthe rather comprehensive action lists, based on theirmix of energy and industrial policies.

This roadmap is addressed to a variety of audiences,including policy-makers, industry, utilities,

researchers and other stakeholders. It provides aconsistent overall picture of wind power at globaland continental levels. It further aims at triggeringand informing the elaboration of action plans,target sett ing or updating, as well as roadmaps ofwind power deployment at national level.

Roadmap process, content

and structure

This roadmap was developed with inputs from

diverse stakeholders representing the windindustry, the power sector, R&D institutions, thefinance community, and government institutions.Following a workshop to identify technologicaland deployment issues, a draft was circulatedto participants and a wide range of additionalreviewers. It is consistent with the Long Term R&DNeeds Report of the Implementing Agreementfor Co-operation in the Research, Developmentand Deployment of Wind Energy Systems (WindImplementing Agreement [IA], 2013).

This roadmap is organised into seven majorsections. First, the current state of the wind industryand progress since 2008 is discussed, followedby a section that describes the targets for windenergy deployment between 2010 and 2050 basedon ETP 2012. This discussion includes informationon the regional distribution of wind generationprojects and the associated investment needs, aswell as the potential for cost reductions.

The next three sections describe approachesand specific tasks required to address the majorchallenges facing large-scale wind deploymentin three major areas, namely wind technologydevelopment; transmission and grid integration;

policy framework development, public engagementand international collaboration.

The final section sets out next steps and categorisesthe actions from the previous sections bystakeholders (policy makers, industry and powersystem actors) to help guide their efforts tosuccessfully implement the roadmap activities andachieve the global wind deployment targets.


11/63

9Wind energy progress since 2008

Wind energy is developing towards a mainstream,competitive and reliable power technology.Globally, progress continues to be strong, withmore active countries and players, and increasingannual installed capacity and investments.Technology improvements have continuouslyreduced energy costs, especially on land. Theindustry has overcome supply bottlenecks andexpanded supply chains.

Recent developmentsin wind markets

Since 2000, cumulative installed capacity has grownat an average rate of 24%per year (%/yr) (Figure 1).In 2012, about 45 GW of new wind power capacitywere installed in more than 50 countries, bringingglobal onshore and offshore capacity to a total of282 GW (GWEC, 2013; IEA, 2013). New investment

in wind energy in 2012 wasUSD 76.56 billion(Liebreich, 2013). Among the largest clean energyprojects financed in 2012 were four offshore windsites (216 megawatts [MW] to 400 MW) in theGerman, United Kingdom and Belgian waters of theNorth Sea, with investments of EUR 0.8 billion toEUR 1.6 billion (USD 1.1 billion to USD 2.1 billion).

Thriving markets exist where deploymentconditions are right. Progress made since 2008shows a positive trend: in 2012, wind powergenerated about 2.6% of global electricity (Table 1)while capacity and production information for windresources around the globe show steady expansion(Figure 2).

Wind energy progress since 2008

Figure 1: Global cumulative growth of wind power capacity

Source: unless otherwise indicated, all material in figures and tables derive from IEA data and analysis.

KEY POINT: cumulative wind power capacity grew at almost 25%/yr on average.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GW

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Rest of the world

IndiaChinaUnited StatesUnited KingdomSpainPortugalItalyGermanyFranceDenmark

Annual growth (%)


12/63


13/63


Figure 2: Global wind map, installed capacity and production for lead countries

Note: wind speeds at 80 m height are shown with 15 km resolution.

Source: resource data from Wiser et al., 2011; production and capacit y data from IE A, 2013.

KEY POINT: good wind resources are found in many regions, notably in the United States, Europeand China, which lead the global market.

5 km wind map at 80m

Wind speed (m/s)

3 6 9

Cumulative installed capacity (GW) in 2012 Additional capacity (GW) in 2012 TWh from wind energy in 2012 Share of windpower in electricity generation in 2012

China

75.7 13 100 2%

DenmarkFrance

United Kingdom

Ireland

Germany

4.6 0.4 10 33.7%

31.3 2.2 46 7.7%

12.5

8.4

1.7

0.9

1.9

0.1

14.9

19.4

4

2.7%

6%

14.5%

Spain22.8 1.3 49.2 17.8%

Italy8 1.1 13.2 4%

Portugal

4.5 0.3 10.3 20%

United States

58.8 13.1 140.9 3.5%

India

18.4 2.3 29.1 2.7%

This map i s without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

Denmark, the pioneering country, had about halfof global markets in 2005, but Danish companiesrepresented only 20% of operating turbines in 2012

still a huge amount for a country that has slightlymore than 1% of global installed wind capacity(Navigant, 2013a). In addition to Denmark, strongmanufacturers in Spain and Germany make Europea large exporter of wind technology; in 2010, netexports were EUR 5.7 billion (EWEA, 2012). TheUnited States and India are also among the largemanufacturing countries. The US market nowcomprises 559 wind-related manufacturing facilitiesand domestic content is 67% (up from less than25% before 2005) while import s are down to 33%from 75% (Wiser and Bolinger, 2012). Countries

with emerging manufacturers include France andKorea, while Brazil has an increasing number ofmanufacturing facilities.

The wind industry has contributed substantially tothe socio-economic development of several regions.A clear example is significant job creation in Spain

during the first decade of the century, where asound support scheme attracted several foreignindustrial companies across the value chain for windprojects, together with a strong local industry. TheUnited Kingdom is currently attracting industrybecause of its thriving offshore wind market (CrownEstate, 2012a): between 2007 and 2010, jobs inthe sector grew by nearly 30% (EWEA, 2012). Jobsin the wind industry (both direct and indirect)reached approximately 265 000 in both China andthe European Union (of which 118 000 in Germany),81 000 in the United States, 48 000 in India and

29 000 in Brazil (REN21, 2013). Employment figuresare not easy to compare across technologies, butwind generally provides more jobs per investment


14/63


than generation from coal and natural gas. Anestimate for the United States finds that windprovides 0.10 job-years/GWh to 0.26 job years/GWh,while the rate is 0.11 job-years/GWh for both coaland natural gas (Wei et al., 2010). An est imate forSpain shows that per EUR 1 million invested, thewind industry creates 15 jobs/yr while combinedcycle gas turbines (CCGT) create six jobs/yr (Ernst &

Young, 2012).

Technology improvements

The general trend in turbine design has been toincrease the height of the tower, the length of

the blades and the power capacity. On average,however, turbines have grown in height and rotordiameter more rapidly than have their powercapacities. This decrease in the specific power, or

ratio of capacity over swept area, has pushed upcapacity factors considerably for the same windspeeds (Figure 3). Reducing the energy cost hasbeen the primary driver of this evolution, whichmight also have positive implications at system level(see System integration: actions and time frame).

This trend has also led to the emergence of rotorsdesigned for lower wind speeds, having evensmaller specific power, with high masts and longblades in relation to generator size and evenhigher capacity factors. This allows installing windturbines in lower-wind-speed areas, which are oftencloser to consumption centres than the best windyspots. As this avoids installation in areas that are

sensitive for environment and landscape integration(seashores, mountain ridges, etc.), this practicelowers the potential for opposition and conflicts(Chabot, 2013).

Advances in blade design, often with bettermaterials and also advanced control strategies,have contributed to increased yields from theturbines relative to their installed capacity. Since

2008, the share of gearless or direct-drive turbineshas increased from 12% to 20%. Other designvariations being pursued include rotors downwind

of the tower and two-bladed rotors. Offshore windturbines are evolving from the earlier marinisedversions of land-based models towards dedicatedoffshore turbines of increased size, exploring

different sub-structures such as jackets and tripods.Further improvements involving the design areanticipated.

Figure 3: Capacity factors of selected turbine types

Source: Wiser et al., 2012.

KEY POINT: turbine design advancement in ten years allows for signicant increase in capacity factors.

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5

Wind speed at 50 m height

Capac

ity

fac

tors

2012-2013 low windspeed (100 m tower)2012-2013 low windspeed (80 m tower)

2012-2013 standard equipment2009-10 standard equipment2002-03 standard equipment


15/63


Wind power output varies as the wind rises and falls.At low penetration levels, wind variability adds onlyincrementally to the existing variability in electricitysupply and demand, but variability and uncertainty

become significant as wind penetrations increase.Recent years have seen more countries and regionsreach high penetration levels of close to 20% of

yearly electricity consumption from wind power.The experience gained in wind integration shows

that few physical changes to power systems areneeded until penetration exceeds 20%. Considerableprogress has been made since 2008 in forecastingthe output of wind power plants. In Spain, for

example, day-ahead errors have been reduced byone-third (Figure 4). Moreover, a vast majority ofwind turbines now installed have fault ride-throughcapabilities and offer active and reactive powercontrol, thanks to power electronics developments.

Figure 4: Evolution of forecasting errors since 2008

Source: Red Elect rica, 2013.

KEY POINT: day-ahead errors in Spain have been reduced by one-third since 2008,a result of dramatically improved forecasting technologies.

While several technical designsare in use today, most grid-connected largeturbines have three blades in a horizontal axisrotor that can be pitched to control the poweroutput. The size of the wind turbines continuesto increase; the average rated capacity ofnew grid-connected turbines in 2012 wasabout 1.8MW compared to 1.6 MW in 2008(Navigant, 2013a). For offshore, the averageinstalled turbine size has grown from 3 MW in2008 to 4 MW in 2012. As of 2012, the largestcommercial wind turbine available is 7.5MW,with a rotor diameter of 127m, and severallarger diameter turbines are available (up to164 m). Turbines with a rated capacity rangingfrom 1.5MWto 2.5 MW still comprise thelargest market segment.

Wind turbines generate electricity from windspeeds ranging from 3 metres per second(m/s) or 4 m/s to 25m/s (even 34 m/s withstorm control). The availabilityof a windturbine is the proportion of time that it istechnically ready for use, a useful indication ofO&M requirements, and the reliability of thetechnology in general. Onshore availabilitiesare usually more than 95%. Availability ofoffshore wind power plants in Denmark andSweden have been mostly between 92% and98%, but some years of lower availabilit ies haveoccurred. In the Netherlands and the UnitedKingdom, offshore power plants availabilitieshave been less than 90% in the first years ofoperation, but in most cases have recoveredtowards 95% (GL Garrad Hassan, 2013a).

Box 1: Modern wind turbine technology: major achievements over last five years


16/63


Advancing towards

competitivenessWhere the resource is good, and conventionalgeneration costs are high, onshore wind energymay be competitive with newly built conventionalpower plants today. This is the case in Brazil,where recent power auctions saw wind bids as lowas USD 42/MWh. Australia, Chile, Mexico, NewZealand, Turkey and South Africa also see land-based wind power competing or close to competingwith new coal- or gas-fired plants. Competitiveness,however, is not yet the norm and reducing thelevellised cost of energy (LCOE)1from wind remains

a primary objective for the wind industry.2

PricingCO2emissions from fossil-fuel combustion to reflectclimate change externalities would help windachieve competitiveness more rapidly.

1. The LCOE represents the present value of the total cost(overnight capital cost, fuel cost, fixed and variable O&M costs,and financing costs) of building and operating a generating plantover an assumed financial life and duty cycle, converted to equalannual payments, given an assumed utilisation, and expressed interms of real money to remove inflation.

2. The Wind IA Task 26: Cost of Wind Energy group has publisheda standard methodology to assess wind energy costs. (Schwabeet al., 2011).

Investment costs

In the previous version of the IEAWind Roadmap

(IEA, 2009), the investment costs for onshorewind energy including turbine, grid connection,foundations, infrastructure and installation rangedfrom USD 1.45 per watt (USD/W) to USD 2.60/W.The range today is even larger, spanning from thelow USD 1.10/W in China to the high USD 2.60/Win Japan (IEA, 2013); mid-range pr ices are found inthe United States (USD 1.60/W) and Western Europe(USD 1.70/W).

Following a period of steady decline, investmentcosts rose considerably in 2004-09, doubling in

the United States for example. This increase wasdue mostly to supply constraints on turbines andcomponents (including gear boxes, blades andbearings), as well as higher commodity prices,particularly for steel and copper (the increase incommodity prices also affected conventional powerproduction). Since 2009, investment costs havefallen along with commodity costs and the reversalof supply constraint trends as well as increasedcompetition among manufacturers. All factorsconsidered, investment price declined by 33% ormore since late 2008 (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Cost trend of land-based wind turbine prices, by contract date

Note: data exclude Asian turbines.

Source: Tabbush, 2013a.

KEY POINT: investment costs for onshore wind power have declined steadily since 2007.

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

1.3

H2

2006

H1

2007

H2

2007

H1

2008

H2

2008

H1

2009

H2

2009

H1

2010

H2

2010

H1

2011

H2

2011

H1

2012

H2

2012

H1

2013

EUR

/W

Cost of turbines


17/63


Investment costs for offshore wind can betwo to three times higher than onshore winddevelopments, but limited data on offshore costsmake it difficult to calculate accurate estimates.It is known that in offshore projects, the turbineaccounts for less than half of the investment cost,compared to three-quarters for land-based projects.Offshore projects incur additional expenses forfoundation, electric infrastructure and installationcosts, which vary with distance from shore andwater depth. In 2008, offshore investment costsranged from USD 3.10/W to USD 4.70/W. Costshave increased in the 2010-13 period, spanningfrom USD 3.60/W to USD 5.60/W (Wind IA, 2012;JRC, 2012). It should be noted that the low number

is from Denmark, and does not include gridconnection to the shore (Wind IA, 2012).

The investment costs of offshore wind in the UnitedKingdom have significantly increased since the firstcommercial-scale wind power plants were deployedin the early 2000s. This results from underlying costincreases, reliability concerns and deeper watersites: while earlier plants were in relatively shallowwaters, most new plants since 2010 are locatedin water depth exceeding 20 m (Crown Estate,2012a). Recently announced wind power plants forsimilar sites show that capital costs have levelledoff at GPB 2.60/W to GBP 2.90/W (USD 4.00/W toUSD 4.40/W) including transmission capital costs(Figure 6). This reflects several factors including abetter understanding of the key risks in offshorewind construction and larger projects leading to

greater economies of scale.

Figure 6: Capital costs of European offshore wind farms, by year (EUR/W)

Note: the bubble diameter is proportionate to wind farm capacity; EUR/W = EUR per watt.

Source: GL Garr ad Hassan, 2013b.

KEY POINT: while technical advances since 2008 make it possible to install in deeper water,they also drive up investment costs for offshore wind power.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.04.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Off

shore

wind

farmcap

ita

l

cost

(201

1EUR

/W

)

Year operational

Operational Under construction Contracted

O&M

The O&M costs of wind turbines represent animportant component 15% to 25% in thecost of wind power. O&M activities t ypicallyinclude scheduled and unscheduled maintenance,spare parts, insurance, administration, site rent,

consumables and power from the grid. Lowavailability of data makes it difficult to extrapolategeneral cost figures, as does the rapid evolution

of technology: O&M requirements dif fer greatly,according to the sophistication and age of theturbine. Problems with electrical and electronicsystems are the most common causes of windturbine outages, although most of these faults canbe recti fied quite quickly. Generator and gearboxfailures are less common, but take longer to fix andare more costly.


18/63

16 Technology Roadmap Wind energy16

Based onrecent contracts, O&M shows a 44%decrease in average prices (as EUR per MW per

year [EUR/MW/yr]) from 2009 to 2013 (Figure 7).With a capacity factor of 25%, the 2013 costs forland-based would thus be EUR 7.90 per MWh (EUR/MWh) (USD 10.25/MWh). The span, however, canbe large ranging from USD 5 per kilowatt hour

(USD/kWh) to USD/kWh (Wiser and Bolinger, 2013).For offshore projects, O&M cost range exhibits alow of USD 20/MWh (stable since 2007), while theupper end has increased from USD 48/MWh in 2007to USD 70/MWh (NREL, 2012).

Figure 7: Recent trends in average price for full-serviceO&M contracts (EUR/MW/yr)

Source: Tabbush, 2013b.

KEY POINT: O&M costs of land-based wind power have decreased by almost half since 2007.

30 990

21 74520 120

19 15217 312

0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

35 000

July 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Prices in EUR/MW/year

LCOE

The LCOE of wind energy can vary signif icantlyaccording to the quality of the wind resource, theinvestment cost, O&M requirements, the cost ofcapital, and also the technology improvementsleading to higher capacity factors.

Turbines recently made available with higher hubheights and larger rotor diameters offer increasedenergy capture. This counterbalances the decade-long increase in investment costs, as the LCOE ofrecent turbines is similar to that of projects installedin 2002/03. For some sites, LCOEs of less thanUSD 50/MWh have been announced; this is true ofthe recent Brazil auctions and some private-publicagreements signed in the United States. Technology

options available today for low-wind speed tall,long-bladed turbines with greater swept areaper MW reduce the range of LCOE across wind

speeds (Figure 8). More favourable terms for turbinepurchasers, such as faster delivery, less need forlarge frame agreement orders, longer init ial O&Mcontract durations, improved warranty terms and

more stringent per formance guarantees, have alsohelped reduce costs (Wiser and Bolinger, 2013).

Higher wind speeds off shore mean that plants canproduce up to 50% more energy than land-basedones, partly offsetting the higher investment costs.However, being in the range of USD 136/MWh toUSD 218/MWh, the LCOE seen in offshore project sconstructed in 2010-12 is sti ll high compared toland-based (JRC, 2012; Crown Estate, 2012b). Thisreflects the trend of siting plants farther from theshore and in deeper waters, which increases thefoundation, grid connection and installation costs.

Costs of financing have also been higher for largerdeals at new sites, as investors perceive higher risk.


19/63


Figure 8: Estimated change in the LCOE between low- and high-wind-speed sites


KEY POINT: cost of land-based wind power has fallen more rapidly at low-wind sitesthanks to the use of larger rotors.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2002-03standard technology

Current, 2012-13technology choice

Lev

eli

sed

cost

of

energy

(USD

/MW

h)

inclu

des

fed

era

lP

TCan

dM

ACRS

6 m/s

8 m/s

7 m/s

39% cost reduction

24% cost reduction

Barriers encountered,overcome or outstanding

Since the first IEA Technology Roadmap on windpower was published in 2009, stakeholders haveencountered and gained experience in addressing several barriers that delay the deployment of windenergy and the achievement of targets set in energypolicy. Permit/authorisation delays and high costsfor administrative and grid connection proceduresare issues in many countries. Other barriers relate

to the lengthy approval of environmental impactassessments (EIAs), compliance with spatialplanning, the number of parties involved, anabsence of information on the grid connectioncapacity, a lack of planning for grid extension andreinforcements, insufficient grid capacity and landownership. For example, the German offshore windprojects faced delays in 2011 due to financial andtechnical issues. Delays in grid reinforcements alsoled to curtailments of wind energy in China.

The permitt ing process for wind power plants canbe complicated, long and expensive. Finding ways

to simplify the process and co-ordinate amongauthorities can speed up considerably the buildingof wind power. As public acceptance is needed

to avoid lengthy appeal processes, authoritiesneed to assess safety margins to buildings, radars,roads, airports, etc., and address concerns aboutthe presence of bats and birds (such as raptors).Still, the size of areas in which building windpower plants is forbidden has been shrinking overtime, as knowledge of actual impacts improves.Some management measures such as stoppingthe turbines when bird migration occurs canalso reduce negative environmental impacts andfacilitate obtaining permissions to build.

Financing of wind power remains a substantialchallenge, as it is relatively new territor y for bothcompanies and financial institutions. Politicaland regulatory stability are needed to counteractperceived high risk, particularly in times ofeconomic crisis, when banks reduced long-termlending and have increased borrowing costs. Muchdiscussion has explored alternative providers ofdebt (private placements, debt funds, institutional,etc.) but so far the gap has not been closed.Efforts to make public financing available can helpavoid higher cost of capital, yet is it also clear thatpolitical and regulatory instability can severelyimpact project viability and financing. There isevidence of market fears of government making


20/63


retroactive changes to support schemes (as in Spain)or ex-post creation on taxes on existing plants, andof higher financing costs in some countries (as inIndia) (CPI, 2012).

Project financing is particularly challengingin the offshore wind sector, which still faceshigh technological and construction risks. Theincreasing scale and complexity of the innovativeprojects create a perception of higher risk, themain constraint to raising investments, but alsothere is a lack of capital to fulf il the growing sectorneeds. Funding support grants for technologydevelopment and loans for deployment istherefore of crucial importance. Specific measures

may be needed to finance the offshore sector andavoid specific delays in:

z starting the projects and achieving financing:permitting for offshore areas may need newprocedures and the establishment of publicfinancing options; and

z grid connection: the regulator and systemoperators need to address future offshore plansin good time to establish planning and financingneeded.

Medium-term outlook

Despite uncertainties and complications associatedwith the ongoing financial and economic crisis, theprospects for both land-based and offshore windpower development in the next five years remainpositive (IEA, 2013).

From a global perspective, land-based wind isprojected to reach an installed capacity exceeding500 GW by 2018, despite a slow-down in 2013.China will likely have the largest cumulativecapacity with a total of 185 GW, followed by theUnited States (92 GW), Germany (44 GW) and India(34.4 GW). Global production of land-based wind

power should reach 1 144 TWh in 2018, with non-OECD countries producing over 44%, a substantialincrease from less than 30% in 2012.

With strong support in some countr ies, offshorewind progresses significantly to 2018, but itsviability over the medium term ultimately dependson tackling technical and financial challenges. By2018, it should reach 28 GW, an impressive scalingup from 5.4 GW in 2012. Europe, led by the United-Kingdom, then Germany and Denmark, is drivingmuch of the growth, representing almost two-thirdsof total cumulative capacity by 2018. China (28%),

the United States, Japan and Korea account for therest. By 2018, offshore wind should deliver 76 TWhof electricity globally a third of which from theUnited Kingdom, followed by China.


21/63

19Vision for deployment and CO2abatement

Vision for deployment and CO2abatement

Theoretically, wind supply could meet globalenergy needs several times over (Wiser et al.,2011) while producing virtually no CO

2emissions.

However, the amount of wind resources that canbe harvested in a cost-effectivemanner is currentlymuch smaller. Although the best sites deliver themost power in relation to the level of investment,and should be developed first, the economicpotential for other sites will increase over time asthe technology matures, and as ways are found toincrease the ability of power systems to incorporategreater wind energy production (e.g.throughexpanded transmission networks and flexibility).

CO2reduction targets fromthe ETP 2012Scenarios

Wind power plant s installed by end 2012 areestimated to generate 580 TWh/yr of cleanelectricity and thus avoid the emission ofabout 455 MtCO2/yr. In theETP 20122DS andhiRen Scenarios (IEA, 2012a) (see Box 2), whichthis roadmap takes as its point of departure,deployment of wind power contributes 14% to 17%of the power sector CO2emissions reductions in

2050. In the scenarios, global electricity productionin 2050 is almost entirely based on zero-carbonemitting energy technologies, including renewables(57% to 70%); the higher the renewable share,the lower the corresponding shares of fossil fuelswith CCS (14% to 7%) and nuclear (17% to 11%).Over the complete lifecycle of wind power plants,emissions of CO2are negligible.

At the system level, the variable nature of windpower may require additional flexible reserves(e.g.combustion turbines) to respond to increasedvariability and uncertainty in the power system.Concerns have been expressed that this may raisethe CO2 emissions of the power sector, either as a

result of cycling losses or, in the longer term andin some countries, as a result of a displacement ofcarbon-free but inflexible capacities (e.g.nuclearpower in France or Germany) with flexible fossil-fuelled plants. In reality, such cycling losses areanticipated to be very small i.e.less than 0.5%(GE Energy, 2012). Emission increases can beseen in some countries, but will be limited byinterconnections among countries. IEA modellingscenarios indicate that related CO2emissions will bemuch less than the emission reductions achieved bywind power expansion.

Box 2: ETPScenarios: 6DS, 2DS, hiRen

This roadmap has as a starting point the visionfrom the IEA ETP 2012analysis, which describesdiverse future scenarios for the global energysystem in 2050.

A Base Case Scenario, which is largely anextension of current trends, projects thatenergy demand will almost double during theintervening years (compared to 2009) andassociated CO2emissions will rise even morerapidly, pushing the global mean temperatureup by 6C (the 6C Scenario [6DS]). Analternative scenario sees energy systemsradically transformed to achieve the goal oflimiting global mean temperature increaseto 2C (the 2CScenario [2DS]). A thirdoption, the High Renewables Scenario (hiRenScenario), achieves the target with a largershare of renewables, which requires fasterand stronger deployment of wind power tocompensate for the assumed slower progress

in the development of CCS and deployment

of nuclear than in 2DS. This hiRen Scenariois more challenging for renewables in theelectricity sector.

The ETP 2012analysis is based on a bottom-up TIMES*model that uses cost optimisationto identify least-cost mixes of energytechnologies and fuels to meet energydemand, given constraints such as theavailability of natural resources. Covering28 world regions, the model permits theanalysis of fuel and technology choicesthroughout the energy system, representingabout 1 000individual technologies. Ithas been developed over several years andused in many analyses of the global energysector. Recently, the ETP 2012 model wassupplemented with detailed demand-sidemodels for all major end-uses in the industry,buildings and transport sectors.

* TIMES = The Integrated MARKAL(Marketing and AllocationModel)-EFOM (energy flow optimisation model) System.


22/63


Wind targets revisedupward compared to

2009 roadmap

To achieve the targets set out in the 2DS and hiRenScenarios, it is necessary in this update to increaseconsiderably the wind capacity deployment thatwas envisioned in 2009. Against the initial windroadmap, the 2DS now sees a deployment of1 400 GW in 2030 (compared to 1 000 GW) and2 300 GW in 2050 (compared to 2 000 GW). Interms of electricity generation, the 2DS foresees6 150 TWh in 2050 (almost a 20% increase), so thatwind achieves a 15% share in the global electricitymix (against 12%).

Wind capacity in the hiRen Scenario reaches1 600 GW in 2030 and 2 700 GW in 2050, andgenerates 7 250 TWh, almost a one-fifth increasecompared to the 2DS. In this scenario, the share ofwind power in electricity generation increases to

18% in 2050. The higher penetration of wind in thehiRen is driven by a lower deployment of both CCSand nuclear power.

Figure 9: Global electricity mix by 2050 in the 2DS and hiRen scenario

Source: IEA, 2 012a.

KEY POINT: renewables could provide 57% to 71% of worlds electricity by 2050,of which 22% to 32% would be variable.

0

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

35 000

40 000

45 000

2009 20502DS

20502DS hi-REN

TWh

Offshore wind OceanLand-based windSolar PVSolar CSPGeothermalHydropower

Biomass w. CCSBiomass and wasteNuclearOilNat. gas w. CCSNatural gasCoal w. CCSCoal

Renewables

57%

71%

32%

Variables

22%

As offshore wind power remains more expensive,deployment is expected to take place mainly onland. Offshore will, however, provide a growingshare and will increase to one-third of windgeneration by 2050.

China will overtake OECD Europe as the leadingproducer of wind power, by 2020 in the 2DS andby 2025 in hiRen; in both cases, the United Stateswill be the third-largest market. India and other

developing countries in Asia emerge by 2020 asan important market. By 2050, China leads with1 600 TWh to 2 300 TWh, followed by OECDEurope (1 300 TWh to 1 400 TWh) and the UnitedStates (1 000 TWh to 1 200 TWh), and then by otherdeveloping countries in Asia and the Middle East(Figure 10).

As wind penetration increases, CO2abatement in2050 from wind energy under the 2DS reaches atotal of 3 Gt/yr over the 6DS (see Box 2), or 4 Gt/yrif wind power was frozen at it s current level (anda mix of fossil fuels being used to generate the

difference in electricity). China makes the largest


23/63


Figure 10: Regional production of wind electricity in the 2DS and hiRen


Figure 11: Additional CO2emissions reduction in 2050 by regionin the 2DS and hiRen (over the 6DS)


KEY POINT: principal wind markets up to 2050 are China, OECD Europe and the United States.

KEY POINT: China accounts for 35% to 44% of additional CO2reductions attributed to wind power in 2050.

OECD Europe260 Mt (9%)

OECD Asia Oceanic

99 Mt (3%)United States472 Mt (16%)

Other OECDNorth America

67 Mt (2%)

Africa108 Mt (4%)

Other developing Asia342 Mt (11%)

Middle East143 Mt (5%)

India110 Mt (4%)

China1 064 Mt

(35%)

Eastern Europe andFSU293 Mt (10%)

Latin America73 Mt (2%)

OECD Europe290 Mt (8%)

OECD Asia Oceanic135 Mt (4%)

United Sates501 Mt (13%)

Other OECDNorth America

58 Mt (2%)

Africa108 Mt (3%)

Other developing Asia354 Mt (9%)

Middle East158 Mt (4%)India

131Mt (3%)

China1 681 Mt

(44%)

Eastern Europe andFSU352 Mt (9%)

Latin America60 Mt (2%)

hiRen2DS

contribution with 1 GtCO2/yr avoided, followed bythe United States at 472 Mt, and other developingAsia and Eastern Europe with 342 Mt (Figure 11).

Under the hiRen additional reductions over the 6DSreach 4 Gt CO2/yr or 4.8 Gt CO2/yr if wind powerwas frozen at its current level.


24/63


The wind industry suggests that production couldincrease even more, with deployment reaching upto 6 678 TWh from 2 500 GW capacities in 2030,and up to 12 651 TWh from 4 814 GW in 2050

(Figure 12) (GWEC, 2012). This correspondingadvanced scenario would require an average annualinstallation rate of 250 GW, five times the presentinstallation rate.

Figure 12: Wind electricity production in the hiRen versus industry scenarios

Sources: IEA , 2012a; GWEC, 2012.

KEY POINT: industry foresees wind electricity by 2050 as being 75% higher than in hiRen.

0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

14 000

2009 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

TW

h

Wind offshoreLand-based wind GWEC, 2012 (advanced)GWEC, 2012 (moderate)

Potential for

cost reductions

The main metric for improvements of technologyis the cost for produced energy, for a certain siteholding constant the quality of wind resource.This will take into account both the improvements

in extraction of energy as well as in the designfor producing the equipment with cost efficientmaterial use.

The European Wind Initiative (EWI) targetscompetitive land-based wind by 2020 and offshoreby 2030, as well as reducing the average cost ofwind energy by 20% by 2020 (in comparison to2009 levels). The cost competitiveness will dependon costs of other technologies as well, and assumesthat externalities of fossil fuels are incorporated.

A compilation of trends from various publications is

summarised in Wind IA Task 26 (2012) where mostLCOE estimates anticipate 20% to 30% reductionby 2030.

Technology innovation, which will continueto improve energy capture, reduce the cost ofcomponents, lower O&M needs and extend turbinelifespan, remains a crucial dr iver for reducing LCOE(see Windpowertechnology). Larger markets willimprove economies of scale, and manufacturingautomation with stronger supply chains can yieldfurther cost reductions.

Given its earlier state of development, offshorewind energy is likely to see faster reductions in cost.Foundations and grid connection comprise a largershare of total investment cost, with foundationshaving substantial cost-reduction potential. Greaterreliability, availability and reduced O&M cost areparticularly important for offshore development asaccess can be difficult and expensive.

The 2DS assumes a learning rate3for wind energy of7% on land and 9% off shore up to 2050, leading toan overall cost reduction of 25% by 2050. Offshore

3. Learning or experience curves reflec t the reduction in capitalcosts achieved with each doubling of installed capacity.


25/63


Figure 13: 2DS projections for investment costs of wind turbines


KEY POINT: investment costs for wind power would decrease by 25% on land and 45% off shore by 2050.

0

5 00

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

4 000

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

USD

/kW

Offshore Land-based

investment costs are assumed to fall by 37% by2030, and by 45% in 2050 (Figure 15). The analysesassume a 20% reduction of onshore O&M costs by2030, rising to 23% by 2050. Larger reductions areanticipated for offshore O&M costs, of 35% in 2030and 43% in 2050.

The cost of generating energy is expected todecrease by 26% on land and 52% off shore by 2050,assuming capacity factor increases from 26% to31% on land and 36% to 42% off shore. All figuresanticipate that improved wind turbine technologyand better resource knowledge will more than offsetthe possible saturation of excellent sites.

Global investment to 2050

Approximately USD 5.5 trillion to USD 6.4 tr illionof investment will be required to reach the 2DStargets of 15% to 18% global electricity produced

from wind energy in 2050. Cumulative investmentsin wind in the 2DS account for 15% of the totalinvestments (USD 36 trillion) in the power sector.Close to 70% will be spent in China, OECD Europeand OECD Americas together (Table 2).

Table 2: Cumulative investment in the 2DS (USD billion)

2010-20 2020-30 2030-50

OECD Europe 256 337 831

OECD Americas 209 455 628

OECD Asia Oceania 32 69 120

Africa and Middle East 42 173 194

China 305 385 839

India 36 38 158

Latin America 25 12 74

Other developing Asia 53 105 279Other non-OECD 22 61 185TOTAL 980 1 635 3 308


26/63


Current investment in wind power deployment isalready considerable, with more and more countriesgetting involved: USD 76.560 billion of newinvestment was reported in 2012 (Liebreich, 2013).The 2DS scenarios project the sector to grow from282 GW of installed capacity at the end of 2012 tobetween 2 346 GW and 2 777 GW in 2050. This

would require the annual new capacity installed togrow from 45 GW in 2012 to 56 GW/yr to 65 GW/yron average for the next 38 years, or up to 93 GW/yrtaking into account repowering. On average,annual investments should double to betweenUSD 150 billion and USD 170 billion.


27/63

25Wind technology development: actions and time frames

Wind technology development:actions and time frames

Increased efforts in wind technology R&D areessential to realising the vision of this roadmap,with a main focus on reducing the investment costsand increasing performance and reliability to reacha lower LCOE. Good resource and performanceassessments are also important to reducefinancing costs.

Wind energy technology is already proven andmaking progress. No single element of onshoreturbine design is likely to reduce dramatically thecost of energy in the years ahead. Design andreliability can be improved in many areas, however;when taken together, these factors will reduceboth cost of energy and the uncertainties that stifle

investment decisions. Greater potential for costreductions, or even technology breakthrough, existsin the offshore sector.

Actions related to technology development fall intothree main categories:

z wind power technology: turbine technologyand design with corresponding development ofsystem design and tools, advanced components,O&M, reliability and testing;

z wind characteristics: assessment of wind energy

resource with resource estimates for siting,wind and external conditions for the turbinetechnology, and short-term forecasting methods;

z supply chains, manufacturing and installation

issues.

In light of continually evolving technology,continued efforts in standards and certificationprocedures will be crucial to ensure the highreliability and successful deployment of new windpower technologies. Mitigating environmentalimpacts is also important to pursue.

This roadmap draws from the Wind IA Long-termR&D Needsreport, which examines most technologydevelopment areas in more detail (Wind IA,forthcoming).

Wind power technologyCost reduction is the main driver for technologydevelopment but others include grid compatibilit y,acoustic emissions, visual appearance and suitabilityfor site conditions (EWI, 2013). Reducing thecost of components, as well as achieving betterperformance and reliability (thereby optimisingO&M), all result in reducing the cost of energy.

System design Time frames

1. Wind turbines for diverse operating conditions: specific designs for coldand icy climates, tropical cyclones and low-wind conditions.

Ongoing. Commercial-scaleprototypes by 2015.

2. Systems engineering: to provide an integrated approach to optimisingthe design of wind plants from both performance and cost optimisationperspectives.

Ongoing. Complete by 2020.

3. Wind turbine and component design: improve models and toolsto include more details and improve accuracy.


4. Wind turbine scaling: 10 MW to 20 MW range turbine design to pushfor improved component design and references for offshore conditions.

Ongoing. Complete by 2020-25.

5. Floating offshore wind plants: numerical design tools and novel designsfor deep offshore.


Advanced components Time frames

6. Advanced rotors: smart materials and stronger, lighter materials to enablelarger rotors; improved aerodynamic models, novel rotor architecturesand active blade elements.


7. Drive-train and power electronics: advanced generator designs; alternativematerials for rare earth magnets and power electronics; improved gridsupport through power electronics; reliability improvements of gearboxes.


8. Support structures: new tower materials, new foundations for deep waters

and floating structures.Ongoing. Complete by 2025.

9. Wind turbine and wind farm controls: to reduce loads and aerodynamiclosses.



28/63


O&M reliability and testing Time frames

10. Operational data management: develop standardised and automated

wind plant data management processes; build shared database ofoffshore operating experiences. Ongoing. Complete by 2015.

11. Diagnostic methods and preventive maintenance: develop conditionmonitoring, predictive maintenance tools and maintenance practices,especially off shore.


12. Testing facilities and methods: develop advanced testing methods andbuild facilities to test large components.


13. Increase technical availability: target for offshore turbines to current best-in-class of 95%; minimum O&M requirement for remote locations.


System design

Moving towards specific wind turbines fordiverse operating conditionsrequires deeperunderstanding of the conditions in which a windpower plant will operate over its lifetime. The aim isto develop more cost-effective turbine designs withthe ability to extract more energy from the wind,over a longer lifetime and in specific operatingenvironments. Wind turbine manufacturersplanning to offer so-called cold climate packageswill need to use special materials and components,including specialised measurement systems, heatersor pre-heaters for components and subsystems, and

even nacelle heating to allow comfortable turbinemaintenance. Anti- or de-icing systems for bladesmost often use electro-thermal heating elements.Special foundations may be needed in permafrost.

System design needs tool development to minimiseloads across the components to optimise for specificconditions including offshore, cold and icy climates,tropical cyclone climates and low-wind speeds.Improving model tools requires measurementcampaigns both in the f ield and in controlledtest facilities.

Optimising power-to-swept area ratiosisimportant to achieve lowest LCOEs, especiallyat low-wind-speed sites (Molly, 2012). If thisoptimisation includes connecting costs it may leadto different results,4as the reduction in connectioncosts might be important, especially for offshorewind farms far from shore. Also, the reducedvariability offered by the weaker turbines is likely tofacilitate the handling of large shares of wind powerin the electricity mix.

4. Consider, for example, a strong turbine of specific power(relative to the swept area) of 530 W/m2, assuming on a given sitea capacity factor of 32.4%. On the same site, a weak turbine of

only 294 W/m2will have a capacity factor of 48.9%. For same sweptareas, the weak turbine will generate only 83.7% of the electricity ofa strong turbine, but will require a connecting line of only 55.5% ofthe capacity of that needed for the strong turbine (Molly, 2011).

R&D targets for up-scaling to 10 MW to 20 MWturbineswill push the technology towards newsolutions, which may help reduce costs for the2 MW to 5 MW turbine size (seen as suf ficient formost applications). Optimum size for both land-based and offshore applications is still to be solved(EWI, 2013). Further enlargement of land-basedturbines is limited by logistics constraints as well assound and visibility regulations. Offshore up-scalingwill bring more direct benefits. A comprehensiveevaluation by the UpWind Project (funded by theEuropean Union) found a 20 MW turbine technicallyfeasible, with need for significant advances inmaterials, design architectures, controls capabilities

and other factors (UpWind, 2011). Achieving thevastly larger turbines expected in future generationswill require new R&D and innovations to offset ormitigate the mass increases that would be assumedfrom classical scaling-up theory (Figure 14).

Advanced components

Advanced rotors, with larger swept area and higherreach, provide greater energy capture and havealready reduced the cost of wind energy. As rotorsbecome larger with longer, more flexible blades,a fuller understanding of their behaviour duringoperation is required to inform new designs. Noisereduction technologies are important to increasethe amount of land available for wind projects.Other promising technologies can be developedto improve blade pitch control and advanceblade bearing and pitch systems and hub design,materials and manufacture.

Drive-traincomponent improvements can berealised through a comprehensive optimisationof the whole turbine. Increased controls, throughpower electronics, can reduce loads and material

intensity. Hydraulic drive-train designs, in which a


29/63


Figure 14: Growth in size of wind turbines since 1980 and prospects

Source: adapted from EWEA, 2009.

KEY POINT: scaling up turbines to lower costs has been effective so far,but it is not clear the trend can continue forever.

320300

280

260

Hu

bh

eight

(m)

240

220

200

180

Rotor diametre (m)Rating (kW)

Futurewind turbines

FutureFuture

1980

-90

1990

-95

1995

-200

0

2000

-05

2005

-10

2010

-2015

2015

-202

0

160

140

120

100

80

6040

20

0

250 m20 000 kW

150 m10 000 kW

125 m5 000 kW

100 m3 000 kW

80 m1 800 kW70 m

1 500 kW50 m

750 kW30 m

300 kW17 m

75 kW

hydraulic system replaces the mechanical gearbox,are also a possibility. Continued development oflarger and greater turbine capacities will necessitatehigher capacity power electronics and enhanced

grid support capabilities from wind power plants.Lower cost power conversion is expected fromdeployment of higher voltage power electronics(UpWind, 2011).

Box 3: Abundance of rare earths

Rare earth oxides (REOs) are used in manymodern devices such as catalytic converters,LCD screens, rechargeable batteries, and windturbine generators (about 20% of them, whethergeared or direct drive) that use permanentmagnets. These generators are more compact,more efficient, and require less maintenance,which is especially important off shore.

Fears have been expressed that scarcity ofREOs may impede large-scale deployment ofwind power. However, known reserves areestimated to represent 1000 years of supplyat current consumption levels (USGS, 2013). In

fact, prices for the neodymium oxide used toproduce magnets dropped from USD 195/kg toUSD 80/kg during 2012 a trend which doesnot suggest imminent scarcity. Extrapolationsshow that the wind power industry willcontinue to represent less than 1% of the globaldemand. The real issue is that 95% of currentREO production occurs in China, which restrictsexports but has only 30% of the worlds knownreserves. Mining projects are currently beingconsidered in more than 20 countries, andresearch is underway for alternative materials inmany applications.


30/63


Support structurescould benefit from advances inmaterial research that might further reduce costs.Materials with higher strength-to-mass ratios (e.g.carbon fibre and t itanium) could enable larger arearotors, lighter generators and other drive-traincomponents, thereby reducing tower head mass.New materials could also provide solutions for tallertowers and reduce the dependence of permanentmagnet generators on rare earths. As turbinesapproach 10 MW, direct-drive superconductinggenerators may offer potential to lower mass andsize, while also providing the reliability benefits ofdirect-drive platforms (Abrahamsen et al.,2010).

Wind turbine and wind farm (i.e.plant-wide)

controlsare an important area for cost reductionin wind power. Industry is currently undergoing a

transformation to optimise at the plant level, withindividual turbines viewed as components that canbe designed and operated for specific locationswithin the plant as a whole. Turbine-mountedLidar (Light and radar) will be used to informturbines of changes in wind speed, direction andturbulence, making it possible to optimally positionturbines (and pitch blades) as changes occur in theapproaching wind. Such capabilities offer the dualbenefit of enhanced performance and reducedfatigue loads (UpWind, 2011).

All these improvements could drive about 20% costreduction of the lcoe of land-based wind power by2020 (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Target for cost reductions of land-based wind powerin the United States

Source: US DOE, 2013.

KEY POINT: incremental progress on many fronts can reduce land-based wind power costs.

Leve

lise

dco

sto

fe

nergy

(USD

/MW

h)

Bladearchitecture,

controls,aero-acoustics,aero-dynamics,controlsystemsreduce bladeloads

Drivetrainarchitecture,

powerelectronics,controlsystemsreducegeneratorloads

Towerarchitecture,innovativematerial,controlsystemsreducetower loads

Optimised

electricalinfra-structure

Optimised

resourceassessment,forecasting,optimisedmicro-siting,controlstrategies

Testing,

standards,transparentinformationsharing

Reducedcomponentdefects andfailures,conditionmonitoring,optimisedO and Mstrategies

2009

LCOE

benc

hmark

2010

LCOE

Roto

r

Rotor

Drive

train

Drivetrain

Towe

r

Tower

Bala

nce

ofplan

t

Balance of plant

Plan

tperfo

rman

ce

optim

isatio

n

Plant performance optimisation

Syste

mvalid

atio

n

System validation

Oper

atin

gcosts

Operating costs

2020

LCOE

2009 LCOE benchmark

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Special considerations

for offshore development

Offshore challenges:the design of offshoreturbines for distant offshore installations willcontinue to deviate from that of land-basedturbines, with less focus on issues such as flicker,

sound and aesthetics. Continued turbine scalingwill remain critical for offshore technology, as ithas already resulted in lower balance of plant andoperations costs while simultaneously increasingenergy capture.


31/63


The interaction of the marine atmosphere and seawaves, which places different loads on var iousparts of the wind turbine and its foundation,requires continued attention. As long as the realrequirements of wind technology in offshoreconditions remain insufficiently understood,conservative design practices adopted from otheroffshore industries are likely to be used for turbinedesign (Wiser and Bolinger, 2012).5

Offshore turbines could adopt a design other thanthe mainstream three-blade concept, e.g.twoblades rotating downwind of the tower. Improvedalternative-current (AC) power take-off systemsor the introduction of direct-current (DC) power

systems are also promising technologies for internalwind power plant grid offshore and connection to

5. Assessment of a number of shallow, transitional, and deep-wateroffshore concepts is ongoing in the IEA Wind Task 30 OffshoreOC4 group.

shore.Changes in design architecture and an abilityto withstand a wider array of design considerationsincluding hurricanes, surface icing, and rolling andpitching moments, are also likely to be needed.

In total, the US DOE expects a 40% reduction inthe cost of electricity generated by offshore windby 2030; the UK Crown Estate foresees similarreductions for wind projects to be decided as earlyas 2020 (2013b; Crown Estate, 2012b). The CrownEstate expects cost reductions from areas suchas competition and installation, with the largestsavings (17%) from turbine changes (Figure 16 andBox 4). Of this, increase in rated power accounts fornine percentage points, as it reduces capital costs

by as much as 4% to 5%, operating costs by 10%to 15%, and increases annual energy production byup to 5%.

Box 4: UK projections for offshore cost reductions

In the United Kingdom, the government-ownedCrown Estate manages all offshore sites. The

Renewables Roadmap target is to cut the cost ofwind power to GBP 100/MWh (USD 150/MWh)and install 18 GW capacity off the UK coasts by2020.

All parts of the supply chain will need toplay their roles in building the industry andbolstering innovation to drive down the cost ofenergy in line with the seven areas identified bythe roadmap:

z introduction of larger turbines with higherreliability and energy capture and lower

operating costs;z greater competition in key supply markets

(e.g.turbines, foundations and installation)from within the United Kingdom, Europe andEast Asia;

z greater activity at the front end of projects,including early involvement of suppliers andimproved wind farm design;

z economies of scale and standardisation;

z optimisation of installation methods;

z

mass-produced, standardised deep waterfoundations;

z lower costs of capital through de-riskingconstruction, and O&M.

As cost reductions require a larger market,predictability and permanence of the market isneeded to achieve maximum results. Wind farmdevelopers and suppliers must work togetherto deliver continuous, end-to-end cost and riskreduction. Managing a pipeline of projects,rather than working project by project, willhelp to drive down cost.

The cost of capital is a key driver of LCOE foroffshore wind plants. A drop of one percentagepoint in the weighted average cost of capital

(WACC) reduces LCOE by about 6%. As theoffshore industry gains experience, key risks(e.g.installation costs and timings, turbineavailability, and O&M costs) will be bettermanaged, and the overall risk profile ofoffshore projects will decline, thereby loweringthe returns sought by capital providers. Movingto products specifically designed for offshorewind and industrialising the supply chainprovides multiple opportunities to reducecapital and operating costs and increase powergeneration (Crown Estate, 2012b).


32/63


33/63


Figure 17: Fixed-bottom foundation and floating offshore concepts


KEY POINT: diverse concepts are being tested for offshore turbines.

Ballast stabilised spar-buoywith catenary mooring drag

embedded anchors

Mooring line stabilisedtension leg platform

with suction pile anchors

Buoyancy stabilisedbarge with catenary

mooring linesMonopile Tri-pod Jacket Suction

caissonGravity

base

Floatingwindturbine concepts

O&M reliability and testing

Operational data managementcan facilitate fasterand less costly O&M. High access costs to of fshoreturbines, often coupled with narrow weatherwindows, make reliability a high priority. Minimalon-site O&M can be achieved by equipping turbineswith system redundancy while applying remote,advanced condition monitoring and self-diagnosticsystems can reduce the duration and frequency ofonsite repairs. Offshore turbine designs that create

new access opportunities, potentially allowingrepairs under more diverse weather and seaconditions, are also important.

Reliability and other operational improvementswould be accelerated through greater sharingof operating experience among industry actors,including experiences related to other marinetechnologies such as wave and ocean currenttechnologies. A database of operating experiences,currently being developed in Germany, hasstimulated wider, international research co-operation..A way should be sought to make

operational data available through a shareddatabase, while taking into account commercialsensitivities. Development of public databases

may need push from R&D funding organisationsand government; e.g.granting of subsidies couldbe linked to required reporting of operationalexperience.

Diagnostic methods and preventative

maintenanceoffer the possibility to use correctivemaintenance with more regular and effectivemeasures that can help to minimise unplannedmaintenance a critical factor in driv ing downoperations expenditures. Technological advances

in condition monitoring and more experienceidentifying failure indicators are expected toincrease efficiency in diagnosing and findingappropriate mitigation in advance of failures.Advanced condition monitoring techniques mightinclude self-diagnosing systems, real-time loadresponse, and the ability to manipulate and controlindividual turbines from an onshore monitoringfacility. Co-ordinating preventative maintenanceefforts with improved wind and weather forecastingshould allow operators to minimise turbineproduction losses (US DOE, 2012).


34/63


Long-term options

To date, concepts to replace the current two-to-

three-bladed horizontal axis turbine have fallenshort in terms of cost-effectiveness and technicalreliability.

Future research is likely to explore airborne options.Kites might transmit mechanical energy to land-based generators, or fully fledged flying machinessuch as tethered autogyres with rotors run by thewind that provide both lift and power generation.Google recently bought Makani Power, a start-upthat specialises in developing such devices. High-altitude winds are known to be very good and

constant resources, routinely used by pilots to savetime and fuel on eastbound circumpolar flights.Their potential has been said to be considerable(Archer and Caldeira, 2009), but other scientists seea greater potential for environmental perturbationthan for electricity generation (see e.g.Miller, Gansand Kleidon, 2011).

While technologies to get electric ity from of fshorewinds have been developing, use of winds inmaritime transportation disappeared after havingserved mankind for centuries (except for leisureand some small fishing activ ities). An array of new

or modernised technologies (e.g.automated sailsand kites) can save fuel and emissions in maritimetransportation, either through direct mechanicalenergy or through electricity generation or both(see e.g.Fagiano et al., 2012). A full description ofthese st ill immature options is beyond the scope ofthis roadmap.

In the future, innovative combinations of renewableenergies and storage options could prove to becost-effective. There is strong interest in the energyisland proposed in the Nether lands, which willcombine wind power, pump-storage and potentially

tidal power (IEA, 2012b). Other options would tieindividual submarine pumped storage systems withoffshore turbines (see, e.g.,Slocum et al., 2013).

Wind characteristic

assessment

Accurate assessment of wind characteristics isneeded for choosing the right turbines for givensites and selecting the specific locations for turbineswithin a wind farm (micro-siting). More precise

measurements and modelling of external conditions(e.g.climate) can significantly enhance the turbine

design process. Ultimately, efforts in both areascontribute to more precise power productionforecasts, whether five days or five minutes ahead.

One risk factor that influences investments in windpower relates to the anticipated output from agiven plant with turbines located over many squarekilometres. Better understanding of the numerousuncertainties in current wind resource assessmentprocesses could result in lower financing costs. Bothmodels and measurements are needed to estimatethe long-term average wind resource and theturbine output: measurements offer precision andallow benchmarking models, which offer depth inboth time and space.

Resource assessment

and siting

Regional wind atlas and databases, based onmodels that try to capture the wind resource for acertain grid cell, offer a starting point. Such atlasesare already used for potential analyses when sett ingtargets for deployment and regional planning.They can also help wind developers to find the bestsites for projects, but more detailed modelling andmeasurements are needed for actual investments.

A shared database of information on the availabilityof wind resources in all countries with significantdeployment potential would greatly facilitate thedevelopment of new projects. Many countrieshave already published wind atlas maps anddetailed data, including measurements, would alsobe valuable to share, but commercial sensitivityconcerns need to be addressed. Resource data areparticularly sparse in developing countries andfor wind at heights above 80 m and of f shore. Thedatabase should include details of wind variability,average speeds, wind shear, turbulence and

extreme speeds. Ideally, it would also link to otherdatabases of the solar resource, site topography, airtemperature, lightning strikes and seismic activity,as well as off shore relevant external conditions. TheInternational Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA),in collaboration with the Clean Energy Ministerial(CEM) Multilateral Wind and Solar Working Group,recently posted an online compilation of resourcedata for wind.6

As turbines become taller, it becomes more costly toacquire measurements using standard anemometrymasts particularly off shore. Remote sensing

using sonic detect ion and ranging (Sodar) or light

6. www.irena.org/globalatlas.


35/63


and radar (Lidar) technologies, and computationalfluid dynamics (CFD) techniques to model airflow, have recently been developed but still needvalidation especially for complex terrains.7Remotesensing is also a future option in turbine nacelles toimprove the control of turbines.

Siting optimisation of wind turbines in a plantcould help address the wake effect (i.e. theinfluence of one turbine on the airflow incidenton another turbine), one of the more poorlyunderstood phenomena in wind power. Wakeeffect is particularly significant off shore, wherewind power plants comprise hundreds of turbines,and can reduce energy capture by as much as 10%while often increasing structural loading and O&Mcosts.8Future research is critical to improve micro-siting and increase the lifespan of the turbines, as is

7. The Wind IA Task 11 has recently published recommendedpractices using SODAR and LIDAR to assess the wind resource.

8. Work for a new IEC st andard on wind plant siting IEC 61400-15has started in 2013.

validation of wake models. Reducing array losses andoptimising plant layout by modelling the wake effectcan improve total wind power plant efficiency.

Efforts are underway to standardise methodsfor measurement campaigns and computermodelling of the resource, on-site measurementand data gathering. Uncertainty remains highest fornew types of sites, such as off shore, complex andforested terrains, and those with icy conditions.9Additional work is needed to develop measurementand modelling techniques, and to standardise bestpractices. Improving the models further requiresmeasurement campaigns in diverse terrains; toachieve multi-scale models for complex flow, it willbe necessary to combine regional and micro-siting models.

9. The Wind IA Task 19 Wind Energy in Cold Climates has publishedRecommended Practices and State-of-the-art reports includingalso measurements http://arcticwind.vtt.fi/.

Resource assessment and siting Time frames

1. International wind atlases: develop publicly accessible databases of land-

based and offshore wind resources and conditions.Ongoing. Complete by 2015.

2. Remote sensing techniques: high spatial resolution sensing technologyand techniques for use in high-fidelity experiments and siting wind powerplants.


3. Siting optimisation of turbines in a wind power plant: develop toolsbased on state-of-the-art models and standardised micro-siting methods;refine and set standards for modelling techniques for wind resource andmicro-siting.


4. Measurement campaigns and model improvement for multi-scalecomplex flow: improve understanding of complex terrain, offshoreconditions and icy climates; develop integrated models linking large-scaleclimatology, meso-scale meteorological processes, micro-scale terrain and

wind farm array effects.

Complete by 2025.

Assess conditions to improve turbine design Time frames

5. Measurement campaigns and model improvement for turbine rotorinflow: experimentation to couple blade loading conditions to rotorinflow, including computational fluid dynamics and wake effects.

Complete by 2020.

6. Marine environment design conditions: design case development forcomplex interactions among wind, waves, turbulence and current,in

iea wind 2013 roadmap

Documents