wind forum 2016

Wind Power Plant Frequency Control to Support the Penetration of High Levels of Renewable Sources

[17 March 2016, Antonio Martinez, Kouroush Nayebi, Manoj Gupta, Yi Zhou, Vestas Wind Systems A/S]

Wind Industry Forum, 17 March 2016

PUBLIC

Agenda

Wind Power Plant Frequency Control to Support the Penetration of High Levels of Renewable Sources 2

Overview of Frequency Control and Regulation

Frequency Control Challenges with High Levels of Renewables

Frequency Control Support from Wind Power Plants

Inertia Emulation Control (FUTURE)

Active Power Control

Frequency Control

Fast Power De-rating

Conclusions and Recommendations

Overview of Frequency Control and Regulation


Frequency Response

• Balancing supply and demand

Fre

qu

en

cy

(Hz)

Time (Seconds)

Primary Frequency Control

Inertial Response

Secondary Frequency Control

Recover frequency to 50 Hz:

· WPP fre

quency control

· WPP active power control

· 5 m

inute contingency FCAS

· Automatic Generation Control (A

GC)

· Manual dispatch commands

50 Hz

0 secs

Typically5-10 secs

Typically20-60 secs

Typically5-10 mins

Stabilize fre

quency:

· WPP fa

st power control

· WPP fa

st frequency control

· 60 second contingency FCAS

· Governor re

sponse

Stabilize df/d

t and df:

· WPP Inertia Emulation Control (F

UTURE)


· Generator in

ertial response

fnadia

Frequency Regulation

Control

Frequency Regulation to 50 Hz:


· Regulation FCAS

Frequency Control Challenges with High Levels of Renewables

Displacement of synchronous generators

Reduced system inertia

Rapid changes in frequency (larger df/dt)

Synchronous generator

tripping on df/dt

Larger frequency deviations (larger df)

Increased risk of UFLS

Power forecasting for Wind and PV

generation

Supply and demand

balancing


Frequency Control Support from Wind Power Plants

Inertia Emulation Control (FUTURE) Potential Benefits

Increased system inertia for raise

services

Slower changes in frequency (reduces

df/dt)

Reduced Synchronous

generator tripping on df/dt

Smaller frequency deviations (smaller

df)

reduced risk of UFLS

Allows time for governors to

respond

ROCOF and Frequency Withstand

Capability Benefits (typ. 1-4 Hz/sec)

WPP ROCOF withstand-reduced

tripping (1-4 Hz/sec)

WPP frequency withstand-reduced tripping (47-53Hz

continuous)

No added contribution from

WPP to frequency deviation

Fast Frequency Control and Fast Power De-rating

Benefits

Raise and lower contingency FCAS services (6s, 60s)

Slower changes in frequency (reduces

df/dt)

Reduced Synchronous

generator tripping on df/dt

Smaller frequency deviations (smaller

df)

reduced risk of OFGS, UFLS

Allows time for governors to

respond

Fault Ride Through Capability Benefits

No WPP tripping-no added contribution

to frequency deviation

Fast post-fault active power

recovery-contribute to stabilising

frequency

Frequency Control Benefits

Raise and lower contingency FCAS

services (60s, 5mins)

Active Power Control Benefits

Raise and lower Regulation FCAS


Benefits

Fre

qu

en

cy

(Hz)

Time (Seconds)

Primary Frequency Control

Inertial Response

Secondary Frequency Control

Recover frequency to 50 Hz:

· WPP fre

quency control


· 5 m

inute contingency FCAS

· Automatic Generation Control (A

GC)

· Manual dispatch commands

50 Hz

0 secs

Typically5-10 secs

Typically20-60 secs

Typically5-10 mins

Stabilize fre

quency:

· WPP fa

st power control

· WPP fa

st frequency control


· Governor re

sponse

Stabilize df/d

t and df:

· WPP Inertia Emulation Control (F

UTURE)


· Generator in

ertial response

fnadia

Frequency Regulation

Control

Frequency Regulation to 50 Hz:


· Regulation FCAS

6


• Kinetic energy is extracted from all the WTG rotating masses (blades, rotor, gearbox, etc) to produce

active power

• Controlled active power production is possible beyond the available power from the wind

• Trigger: ROCOF threshold, ferror threshold or both

• ∆Pinertia: Requested power change in % of Prated for a predefined duration in seconds.

Concept Description


• Allows time for the governors to respond to stabilise

frequency

• Further research into the benefits of emulated inertia

control from WPP is required

Frequency Monitoring

&Conditioning

Rate of change of frequency

(ROCOF)Estimator

Delta Powercalculator

Inertial responce trigger

ferrorROCOF

ferrorfmeas

Trigger

+DPinertia

P actual

Power output

7


Tdelay: Adjustable initial delay.

Trise: The time it takes to reach the needed boost level. The rate of power change is adjustable.

Tsustain: Adjustable maximum boosting time.

Conceptual Response


8

Active Power and Frequency Control Power Plant Controller® (PPC) Architecture


Frequency

Controller

Option 1

-

Set-Point Frequency

Measured Frequency

Frequency Controller (I)

Active

Power

Dispatcher

Active Power

Reference

WTGs

& or

Pause / Stop

Dispatcher

Power

Controller

Power Control

Curtailed Power

WTGs power

production

Frequency

Controller

Option 2

Available Power

FRT Mode

FRT Mode

Inner Control Loop

Outer Control Loop

Signal

Conditioning

Power Setpoint

Power limit

Power limit

FRT Mode

Power limit

-

Fast Run-back

High Frequency limit

Fast run-back

FRB set by TSO

Power set point for FRB by TSO

Trip commands to

Feeder CBs

Options or Modes

Frequency Controller (II)

Power reference

Active Power loop

Operation Mode

Measured/Calculated Power




Set-Point Frequency

Measured Frequency

Curtailed Power

Measured Frequency

Available Power

Active Power Controller

The active power controller controls the active power output of the wind power plant (WPP).

The active power reference can be provided by different sources.

• Fixed external/internal level

• Frequency Controllers

• Fast Runback Controller

The controller determines active power set-points for the individual turbines in its dispatcher.

The controller includes the following functions:

• Curtailment by a fix value below available

• Curtailment by % of available below available

• Curtailment Ramp rate limiter

• Power Increase Power Ramp rate limiter

• Pausing and releasing WTGs

• Tripping Feeders for fast power reduction


Primary, Secondary Frequency Control and Frequency Regulation

55

57

59

61

63

65

67

69

71

73

75

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Time [s]

Po

wer

[MW

]

Pref

Pmeas

Ppossible

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Time [s]

Po

wer

red

ucti

on

[M

W b

elo

w P

po

ssib

le]

45

47

49

51

53

55

57

59

61

63

65

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Time [s]

Po

wer

[MW

]

Pref

Pmeas

Ppossible

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Time [s]

Po

wer

Pro

du

cti

on

[%

of

Pp

ossib

le]

Onsite Active Power Control Performance


De-rated operation for raise and lower frequency control services

• Power Reference is set to 92% of possible power

• Power Reference is set to 4 MW below possible power

Over Frequency Support

Under Frequency Support

Frequency Control Option 1

• Support to stabilize frequency and to recover frequency to 50 Hz.

• Droop control focuses on changing (Raise or Lower) the active power (dP) proportional to the grid frequency deviation (df).

• The frequency deviation (df) is the difference between the grid and reference frequency.


Primary and Secondary Frequency Control

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Time [s]

Po

wer

[MW

]

Pref

Pmeas

1,002

1,003

1,004

1,005

1,006

1,007

1,008

1,009

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Time [s]

Fre

qu

en

cy

[p

.u.]

Fmeas

68

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

0 10 20 30 40 50

Time [s]

Po

we

r [M

W]

Pref

Pmeas

0,998

1

1,002

1,004

1,006

1,008

1,01

1,012

0 10 20 30 40 50

Time [s]

Fre

qu

en

cy

[p

.u.]

Fmeas

Onsite Frequency Control Option 1 Performance


• Simulated Open-loop frequency offset by 0.01 pu

• Tested with curtailed WPP at 80 MW in FSM mode

• Simulated open-loop frequency step from 1.0083 pu to 1.003 pu

• Tested with curtailed WPP at 80 MW in FSM mode

Frequency Control Option 2

• This type of frequency control follows available power in the wind at all times by an offset in MW of in % of available to allow for raise services.

• Controller uses the available power at time of frequency error observation to lower or raise the power during frequency contingency.



Under

Frequency

Support

Over

Frequency

Support

Onsite Frequency Control Option 2 Performance

• Simulated Open-loop frequency

• Comparing the measured power and the measured control settings



Fast Power De-rating


Primary Over Frequency Control

• Fast Power reduction to a predefined level by TSO.

• Fast Power reduction by monitoring

frequency

P Dispatcher

FRB power commandFRB flag

Measured Active Power

FRB Reference Calculation

Pref_FRB FRB_Flag

Pref

Psetpoint_WTG

TRIP Selector

TRIP_Feeder

Fast Runback Controller

WTG power

Feeder WTG list

Psetpoint_PPC

DP

P DispatcherMeasured Frequency

Measured Active Power

Psetpoint_WTG

TRIP Selector

TRIP_Feeder

Fast Frequency Controller

WTG power

Feeder WTG list

Psetpoint_PPC

DP

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

46 48 50 52 54

Po

we

r [%

o

f n

om

inal]

Frequency [Hz]

frequency/Power Curve

Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions:

• WPP can provide important contingency and regulation FCAS services to manage the system frequency.

• Today WPPs can provide primary frequency control, secondary frequency control and frequency regulation, in a similar way (or better) to synchronous generators.

• In the future WPPs may have emulated inertia control capability, however, the benefits are yet to be understood for various types of grids and operational issues

Recommendations for the future:

• Consider market side solutions to manage the system frequency with high levels of renewables. For example:

• Introduce incentives for WPP to enter the FCAS markets

• Network upgrades (e.g. new lines or interconnectors)

• Review of the system frequency operating standards

• Procuring more FCAS during low inertia operation or other high risk operational scenario (high risk of large supply and

demand imbalance)

• Improve the power forecasting and the dispatching of WPP

• Reduce/eliminate non-scheduled generation

• Further research into the benefits of emulated inertia control from WPP is required


© Vestas Wind Systems A/S. All rights reserved.

This document was created by Vestas Wind Systems A/S on behalf of the Vestas Group and contains copyrighted material, trademarks and other proprietary information. This document or parts thereof may not be reproduced, altered or

copied in any form or by any means - such as graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems without the prior written permission of Vestas Wind Systems A/S. All

specifications are for information only and are subject to change without notice. The use of this document by you, or anyone else authorized by you, is prohibited unless specifically permitted by Vestas Wind Systems A/S. You may not alter

or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from the documents. The document is provided “as is” and Vestas Wind Systems A/S shall not have any responsibility or liability whatsoever for the results of use of the document by you.

Vestas Wind Systems A/S does not make any representations or extend any warranties, expressed or implied, as to the adequacy or accuracy of this information. Certain technical options, services and wind turbine models may not be

available in all locations/countries.

Thank you for your attention

PUBLIC

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF NOISE COMPLIANCE MONITORING

Chris Turnbull

Sonus Pty Ltd

•Wind farm noise often less than ambient noise

•Makes compliance monitoring difficult

•No single definitive objective method of monitoring

•Has recently become controversial

•Most common method is:

– Long term logging

– Line of best fit

– Use of LA90

Context

Typical Correlation

Compliance test plan can:

•Simplify conditions of approval

•Define data requirements

•Allow frequency spectrum analysis

•Allow consideration of upwind v downwind

•Allow measurement at intermediate location

•Define tonality

•Define on/off test (last resort)

To improve accuracy

Importance of lots of data

Removal of High Frequency Noise

Upwind v Downwind

Intermediate Location

•Provides higher “signal to noise” ratio

•Some validation of noise model and emission

•Disadvantage - no measurement at residence

Tonality

On/Off Testing

• Compliance monitoring is difficult

• Significant risk of false conclusions

• Consideration should begin at application stage to minimise unworkable conditions

• Methodologies are available to minimise risks

Summary

Planning conditions and wind turbine noise specifications

1

Christophe Delaire [email protected]

Content of typical planning conditions

Applicable noise standard

Noise limits at receptor locations

Relevant receptor locations

Potential penalties for SACs at receptor locations

2

Purpose of noise specification

Compliance with the planning conditions

Quantify allowable noise and character from the supplied turbine

Methodology and location for quantifying noise and character

3

Contractual terms commensurate with the risk associated with noise for a given project

4

Risk assessment

Risk of non-compliance with planning conditions

• Operator credibility

• Community impact

• Operator vs. supplier liability

Risk of lost energy yield

5

Factors influencing risk

Wind farm size

Distance to dwellings

Topography

Background noise environment

Turbine sound power data

Prediction software and methodology implementation

6


Turbine sound power data

• Estimated values

• Test report values with or without uncertainties (IEC 61400-11)

• Guaranteed values

• Declared values (IEC 61400-14)

Octave band spectral content

7


Prediction method

• ISO 9613-2:1996 (International Standard)

• CONCAWE (1980s UK research study)

• Nord2000

Method implementation

• Acoustic prediction software (SoundPlan, CadnaA, etc.)

• Wind farm design software (windPRO, WindFarm, etc.)

8

Assessment options

Sound power level

+ High signal/noise ratio

+ Well defined methodology (high repeatability)

+ Early evaluation

+ Within the wind farm site

- Not representative of receptor location

- Only representative of the tested turbine(s)

9

Assessment options

Receptor location

+ Community involvement

+ Readily comparable with noise limits

- Generally low signal/noise ratio

- Background noise influence

- Potential access issues

10

Assessment options

Intermediate location

+ High signal/noise ratio

+ Accounts for influence of multiple turbines

+ Can be within the wind farm site

+ Established method for general environmental noise

- Requires extrapolation to receptor location

11

Quantification of A-weighted noise levels

Avoid procedural ambiguities

• Compliance with regulation vs. compliance with defined values

Define measurement methodology

Consideration of uncertainty

• Measured level + uncertainty vs. guaranteed level

• IEC 61400-11 vs. IEC 61400-14

Specification of octave band value

12

Quantification of noise character

Definition of relevant characteristics

Avoid procedural ambiguities

• Subjective vs. objective (NZS 6808:1998)

• Presence vs. prominence

Define the relevant assessment methodologies

• Absence of reliable methods for certain characteristics

• C-weighted noise levels (NSW / QLD)

13

Thank you

14

Date

Wind Industry Forum 2016

Oscillating Constraints

Scheduling Error

17 March 2016

• Outline of the error

• Outline of AWEFS and UIGF calculation

• Determining Constraint Status of the Wind

Farm

• Market Impact – Example of Lake Bonney

• Market Impact – NEM Wide

• Proposed Solutions

2

Presenters:

Claudia Williams OCC Team Lead

ABOUT INFIGEN

Infigen Energy (Infigen) is a developer, owner and

operator of renewable energy generation in Australia.

We own six wind farms and a solar farm with a

combined installed capacity of 557 megawatts

operating in New South Wales, South Australia and

Western Australia.

Infigen’s operating assets generate enough power to

meet the needs of over 250,000 homes saving over a

million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions each year.

Infigen’s development pipeline comprises

approximately 1,100 megawatts of large-scale wind and

solar projects spread across five states in Australia.

For further information please visit our website:

www.infigenenergy.com

3

AWEFS and the UIGF

Wind farm

NEMDE AWEFS

Wind farm SCADA

Data

Price data

Network

Constraint Data

UIGF

Dispatch

targets

Dependent on passing the following through checks:

1. Is the wind farm control system setpoint < registered capacity of the wind farm?

2. Is the Wind farm control system setpoint < active power + 5% of registered capacity?

3. Is the wind farm control system setpoint < potential power?

Definitions:

Control System Setpoint (MW): The lowest current set point active on the wind farm at

the time AEMO takes its readings.

Active Power (MW): The current output of the wind farm when AEMO takes its readings.

Potential Power (MW): Possible production of the wind farm AEMO takes its readings.

Determining Constraint Status of Wind Farm

4

3 Validation Checks

5

Market Impact

Lake Bonney 2 Example

6

Market Impact

Lake Bonney 2 Example

Market Impacts

4

Table from AEMO’s scheduling error report, February 2016.

NEM Wide

Market Impacts

4

From AEMO’s scheduling error report, February 2016.

• Assessment Period: 14 March 2012 and 21 November 2015

• 35,589 affected intervals during the assessment period across

at least 19 wind farms

• 54,076 MWh lower due to this scheduling error

NEM Wide

9

Proposed Solutions

• Increase buffer from 5% to higher value

• Buffer value adjusted based on

historical analysis of the wind farm

• Implemented on 3rd February 2016

• Expected to reduce but not eliminate

oscillating constraints

Interim Resolution Permanent Resolution

• Proposed solution to be fully implemented by

June 2016, with changes made by April .

• Introduce link between AEMO Market

Systems and AWEFS on the dispatch time

frame to directly communicate the SDF status

of wind farm to AWEFS

• Introduce semi-dispatch flag into AWEFS to

determine if the wind farm is constrained

• If the park is unconstrained, take the max of

the active power generation and the wind

speed forecast method to produce UIGF

10

QUESTIONS

Disclaimer This publication is issued by Infigen Energy Limited (“IEL”), Infigen Energy (Bermuda) Limited (“IEBL”) and Infigen Energy Trust (“IET”), with Infigen

Energy RE Limited (“IERL”) as responsible entity of IET (collectively “Infigen”). Infigen and its related entities, directors, officers and employees

(collectively “Infigen Entities”) do not accept, and expressly disclaim, any liability whatsoever (including for negligence) for any loss howsoever arising from

any use of this publication or its contents. This publication is not intended to constitute legal, tax or accounting advice or opinion. No representation or

warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the accuracy, completeness or thoroughness of the content of the information. The recipient should consult

with its own legal, tax or accounting advisers as to the accuracy and application of the information contained herein and should conduct its own due

diligence and other enquiries in relation to such information.

The information in this presentation has not been independently verified by the Infigen Entities. The Infigen Entities disclaim any responsibility for any

errors or omissions in such information, including the financial calculations, projections and forecasts. No representation or warranty is made by or on

behalf of the Infigen Entities that any projection, forecast, calculation, forward-looking statement, assumption or estimate contained in this presentation

should or will be achieved. None of the Infigen Entities guarantee the performance of Infigen, the repayment of capital or a particular rate of return on

Infigen Stapled Securities.

IEL and IEBL are not licensed to provide financial product advice. This publication is for general information only and does not constitute financial product

advice, including personal financial product advice, or an offer, invitation or recommendation in respect of securities, by IEL, IEBL or any other Infigen

Entities. Please note that, in providing this presentation, the Infigen Entities have not considered the objectives, financial position or needs of the recipient.

The recipient should obtain and rely on its own professional advice from its tax, legal, accounting and other professional advisers in respect of the

recipient’s objectives, financial position or needs.

This presentation does not carry any right of publication. Neither this presentation nor any of its contents may be reproduced or used for any other

purpose without the prior written consent of the Infigen Entities.

IMPORTANT NOTICE

Nothing in this presentation should be construed as either an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy Infigen securities in the United States or any

other jurisdiction.

Securities may not be offered or sold in the United States or to, or for the account or benefit of, US persons (as such term is defined in Regulation S under

the US Securities Act of 1933) unless they are registered under the Securities Act or exempt from registration.

DNV GL © 2016 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER DNV GL © 2016

Operational issues affecting wind farm energy capture – Case studies

1

Heather Hurree, Engineer, Renewables Advisory

March 2016

DNV GL © 2016

DNV GL - 150 years of legacy

DNV GL © 2016

Policy Production Transmission

& Distribution

Use

Global service portfolio

Power testing, inspections and

certification

Renewables advisory services

Renewables certification

Electricity transmission and distribution

Smart grids and smart cities

Energy market and policy design

Energy management and operations

services

Energy efficiency services

Software

Policy Production Transmission & distribution Use

DNV GL © 2016

Asset Operation and Management Services (AO&M)

Wind farm analysis team comprises of over 40 professionals worldwide

Services provided include:

1. Long-term energy forecasts

2. Wind farm extension analyses

3. End of Warranty inspection analyses

4. O&M advice

5. Reliability profiling and benchmarking

6. Full wind farm management, via the control room

Over 2.5 GW of wind farms assessed in Australia,

64 % of the installed capacity

More than 50 GW assessed globally

DNV GL © 2016

Wind farm availability vs Operating Efficiency

Turbine stopped for 3 % of the time

How efficient are the turbines for the rest of the time?

Partially-available data Output curtailment Poor performance

DNV GL © 2016

Wind Farm Operational data

SCADA – Supervisory Control and Data

Acquisition system

Huge amount of data recorded by operating

wind turbines at a site

Many uses of the operational records,

including:

1. Turbine power curve performance

2. Changes in operation

3. Availability reviews

4. Monitoring of operating health of turbine

main components

Energy loss

DNV GL © 2016

Case Study 1: Incorrect turbine settings

Located in North America

Generating capacity over 100 MW

79 turbines installed

18 months of SCADA data available

Extensive periods of output curtailment

85 % of rated power

Energy loss estimated at 2-4 % per turbine

Over 2000 MWh of lost production

DNV GL © 2016

Also observed at an Australian Wind Farm

Detailed review of operational data recorded

at a wind farm in Australia

Turbine output curtailment strategies

implemented in the early years

2 turbines still curtailed after the strategies

were no longer needed

1 turbine experienced an additional loss of

3.4 % due to the output curtailment

DNV GL © 2016

Case Study 2: Incorrect Revenue meter settings

Wind Farm located in Europe

15 MW of generating capacity

Based on 2.4 years of operational data

Detailed review of wind farm performance Electrical Efficiency of 89.5 %

Further investigation revealed an

error in the set-up of the wind farm

revenue meter

Similar occurrence at an Australian

wind farm!

Intermittent error in the revenue meter.

DNV GL © 2016

Case Study 3: Gearbox failure

Wind Farm in Australia

Assessment of operating health of turbine main components using temperature

signals recorded by the SCADA system

Ability to plan change-out of failing component.

Decrease lost energy

Start of deviation from model

Gearbox failure with 18 months of advance

notice

DNV GL © 2016

Case Study 4: Change in operation settings

Observed at some Australian Wind Farms

Generating Capacity over 50 MW each

Multiple channel change-point analyses

Observed shift in the power curve and pitch to

power relationship

Corresponding to a change in control settings at

the site

New power curve can be 3 % less energetic

DNV GL © 2016

Case Study 5: Availability Review

Assessment of turbine availability and allocation of downtime

Operational data recorded by the wind farm SCADA system

Downtime attributed to the Operator

Downtime attributed to the Owner

Periods of missing SCADA data

Periods of downtime during

component failures attributed to the

Owner

Turb

ine

num

ber

10 minute records

DNV GL © 2016

Concluding remarks

A wealth of information at your disposal – the operational SCADA data

Use it to optimise the performance of your wind farm

Things can and do go wrong… Regular monitoring enables you to rectify the issues

as soon as they occur.

Erroneous curtailment

Revenue meter errors

Advanced detection of component failure

Changes to controller settings

Yaw misalignment

Be an engaged owner – Keep an eye on your wind farm to make sure it

performs as well as it should be.

DNV GL © 2016

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

www.dnvgl.com

Thank you

Heather Hurree,

Engineer, Renewables Advisory, Pacific

[email protected]

Tel +61 3 9600 1993

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016 SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER DNV GL © 2016

17 March 2016 Jessica McMahon

ENERGY

Remote sensing: the potential value of remote sensing devices in the development and financing of wind farm projects

1

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

Global reach – local competence

2

400 offices

100 countries

16,000 employees

150 years

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

Industry consolidation

3

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

1. Introduction - What is the scope of our discussion

2. Remote Sensing device basics – How does RS work?

3. RS for resource assessment – How can RS add value?

4. DNV GL classification of RS devices

5. Summary

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

1. Introduction – What is the scope of our discussion

• Focus of the presentation: Vertical profiling Remote Sensing (RS) devices

– Ground based, fixed scan geometry, vertically-profiling wind remote sensing

for on-shore wind resource assessment.

– Nacelle-mounted

– Forward-looking LIDAR

– Offshore remote sensing on fixed or floating platforms

– LIDAR that use variable scan geometries to probe volumes not directly above

the device

– Scanning LIDAR

5

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

2. RS device basics – How does RS work?

6

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

2 – What is remote sensing?

A remote sensing device takes measurements at points that are not at the sensor

location (typically at a distance of 20-200 m for ground-based SODAR/LIDAR).

Doppler effect

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

= SOund Detection And Ranging

Advantages

– Low power requirements;

– Inexpensive;

– Portable and easy to dispatch without permits.

Disadvantages

– Potential for echo interactions with trees/structures;

– Possible insect or background noise interference;

– Cannot obtain accurate measurements when precipitation

is present;

– Limitations associated with volume versus point averaging;

– Turbulence and gust wind speed measurements;

– Cannot site SODAR directly next to a met mast.

= LIght Detection And Ranging

Advantages

– Measures valid data in light to moderate precipitation

events;

– High data recovery, even at upper heights;

– Portable and easy to dispatch without permits.

Disadvantages

– Systems contain delicate components;

– Relatively high initial cost (currently);

– May require a special power system for remote

applications;

– Limitations associated with volume versus point averaging;

– Turbulence and gust wind speed measurements.

8

SODAR – Acoustic based remote sensor LIDAR – Laser based remote sensor

2 - Introduction to RS devices

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

3. RS for resource assessment – How can RS add value?

9

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

3 – RS for wind resource assessment

Siting RS Devices RS devices are subject to similar siting considerations as for met masts:

Wind Direction

• Avoid installing adjacent to steep banks or cliffs

• Do not install on the bottom or top of a hill

• Install reasonable distance from any obstacle such as buildings

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

In addition, for SODARs:

• Trees are a both an obstacle and source of noise. Install at least 3x tree height

away from the tree line. However, this set-back depends on tree density and

type. For example, a small group of deciduous trees may require a further set-

back due the noise from the foliage.

• Avoid any source of echoes including met masts.

• Minimum distance of 1.5x to a maximum of 2.0x the tower height (unless

otherwise specified by the manufacturer).


Siting RS Devices

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

• Installation report (as complete as possible) – much like a mast

• Log of visits, maintenance and updates to software or firmware

(very important for consistency)

• Raw data with all available parameters

• Data processing software

• Validation paper for device (if available)

What information is important for a RS device?


DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

• Remote sensing devices should be validated against a nearby met mast

(typically 100-200 m away).

• Mast and RS device should share common measurement heights and

concurrent measurements over several months.

• If possible, base elevation and exposure should be similar at the two

locations.

• After successful validation, the RS device should be deployed to locations

which resemble the validated location – in terms of terrain type and

exposure.

RS verification/validation


DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

• Undergo initial filtering of RS data using quality signals

– e.g. Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) for SODAR devices

• Clean the data against itself (i.e. to avoid skewing validation results)



DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

• Aiming for agreement between mean wind speed measured by mast and RS device to within

the anemometer uncertainty (IEC First Class MEASNET calibrated – 2%)

• Other things to check:

– Accuracy and precision

– Sector wise scatter

– Data recovery rate

– Shape of:

– Frequency distribution

– Wind rose

– Shear profile



DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016


Example 1

16

Mast 1, 60 m,

4 years of valid data Project 1

Hub height 100 m

High vertical

extrapolation

uncertainty !

Co-located remote sensing device

(stage 3 and validated)

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016


Example 2

17

Mast 1, 60 m,

4 years of valid data Project 1

Remote sensing device

(stage 3 and validated)

Site reconstitution (synthesis)

Concurrent period with Mast 1

Project 2

4 km from Project 1

(similar terrain/exposure)

High horizontal

extrapolation

uncertainty !

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

4. DNV GL classification of RS devices

18

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

4. Classification of RS devices

DNV GL has a Position Statement regarding some of the different LIDAR or SODAR devices on the

market (not scanning or nacelle-based LIDAR yet).

Position Statement indicates the amount of validation required in order to be able to rely on data from

the given device in an energy assessment.

Set tests of measurement performance and associated benchmarks for each milestone.

Each device has an allocated ‘DNV GL expert’.

Work is currently underway to validate additional RS devices such as SpiDAR and scanning LIDAR at the

DNV GL test site in Germany, in order to provide position statements on these devices.

19

DNV GL Position Statements

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016 20

Milestone 1

Successfully tested at suitable test locations

Similar accuracy achieved to conventional data

Results published

Milestone 2 Extensive use at range of sites

High data capture levels

Numerous validations demonstrate close agreement with

conventional data

Quantification of precision and accuracy

Can be used qualitatively but not quantitatively

Can be used quantitatively to support

conventional measurements, if subject to

appropriate site specific validation

Can be used quantitatively with

reduced validation requirements

and improved uncertainty

Stage 1

•Commercially available

•Can routinely provide measurements of wind speed and direction with height

•Limited validation with conventional data sources or higher error bars than conventional data sources.

Stage 2

•Increasingly used on range of sites

•More operational experience gained

•Confidence in data increases, conditions where data not reliable are well-understood

Stage 3

•Device considered proven for use


DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

Device Type Benign conditions

Non-benign conditions

AQ500 Sodar Stage 2

Triton Sodar Stage 2

Fulcrum 3D Sodar Stage 2

WindCube V1 Lidar Stage 3 Stage 2

WindCube V2 Lidar Stage 3 Stage 2

WindCube V2 with FCR Lidar Stage 3 Stage 2

ZephIR 300 Lidar Stage 3 Stage 2

ZephIR 150/175 Firmware 2.8 or later & software V4 or later

Lidar Stage 3 Stage 2

ZephIR 150/175 prior to Firmware 2.8 or software V4 Lidar Stage 3 Stage 2

21


DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

1. Summary

• DNV GL has included RS data in wind, energy and uncertainty assessments.

• How RS data is used depends on the type of device and how it is deployed and

validated.

• RS may reduce resource assessment uncertainty by verifying met mast

measurements and providing additional information about new locations.

• DNV GL has developed a classification scheme to assess the accuracy and

applicability of common RS devices.

DNV GL © 2016 17/03/2016

SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER

www.dnvgl.com

Thank you

23

Jessica McMahon

[email protected]

Co-locating wind and solar: Combining powers Joep Vaessen Principal Engineer, Renewable Energy

©

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCJXzv8OGr8gCFUSPlAodZQ0Kfw&url=http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-assistance/energy-fuels/ARENA/Pages/default.aspx&bvm=bv.104615367,d.dGo&psig=AFQjCNFuZfycQUX3tOb05tSVGSKc6KrLrw&ust=1444262307638471

Overview

Wind and solar co-location

1. The idea

2. Benefits and challenges

3. Complementary nature wind and solar resource

4. System sizing and curtailment

5. Heat map and wind farm ranking

6. Summary

1. The idea Co-location of solar PV at existing wind farms

2. Benefits and challenges Benefits

Benefits

Development cost

Land

Grid connection

PPA

Construction time

O&M facilities

Administration

Additional savings can be

obtained when developing

wind and solar power

plants at the same time as

a greenfield development.

2. Benefits and challenges Challenges

Challenges

Land use

Sizing & Curtailment

Agreements (GCA, PPA, LPA, O&M)

O&M activities

Community

Selected 10 wind farms for analysis

State Wind Farm Capacity

(MW) Yrs of data available

1 NSW Capital 140 4

2 NSW Gunning 47 3

3 SA Waterloo 111 4

4 SA Snowtown 99 4

5 SA Hallett 1 95 4

6 VIC Waubra 192 4

7 VIC Oaklands Hill 67 3

8 WA Collgar 206 3

9 WA Alinta 89 4

10 WA Emu Downs 80 4

3. Complementary nature of solar and wind Time of day analysis

Alinta, WA Snowtown, SA

Average annual profile of two wind farms (2011 – 2014)

Conclusions from the

10 wind farms

analysed:

• 6 showed reasonable

anti-correlation

• Strongest anti-

correlation results in

WA

• Large differences

between and also

within states


Waubra, VIC Collgar, WA

Average seasonal profile of two wind farms (2011 – 2014)


10 wind farms

analysed :

• 6 generated more in

Spring


Summer but showed

dips during daylight

hours


Winter (both in WA)

4. System sizing and curtailment Curtailment analysis

Solar PV curtailment versus additional solar capacity on each analysed wind farm (2011 – 2014)

100%

25 – 50%

27% curtailment at Snowtown

Conclusions from the 10 wind

farms analysed :

- Snowtown and Hallett wind

farm show high curtailment

mainly due to its high

generation during the day time

- Suitable penetration with 25%-

50% of solar @5% curtailment

- Curtailment did not exceed

30% when adding 100% of

solar PV.

4. System sizing and curtailment Overview

(2) Capacity factors are analysed over the years and

are not altered for maintenance or downtime

+11%

5. Heat map and wind farm ranking Solar and Wind capacity factor map

Filters:

- Wind capacity factor

>35%

- Solar capacity factor

>16%

- Solar farm at 35% of

the capacity of the

wind farm

5. Heat map and wind farm ranking Ranking of existing wind farms

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25 1.35 1.45 1.55

Co

st In

dex

Revenue Index

New South Wales South Australia Tasmania Victoria Western Australia

Conclusions:

- Western Australia

provides significant

opportunities

- Victoria and New

South Wales appear

to provide cost

advantages

Availability of wind and solar resource

Complementary profile of wind and

solar generation

Cost savings

Revenue opportunities

Agreements and regulations

6. Summary Success factors and conclusion

• Our study demonstrates that co-location is

worth the consideration of developers and

existing wind farm owners/operators.

• We encourage developers to consider

both wind and solar for their respective

sites (operational or in development)

• The report is made available on:

http://arena.gov.au/resources/wind-solar-co-

location-study/

http://arena.gov.au/resources/wind-solar-co-location-study/










Thank You Joep Vaessen 03 9653 8565 0400 401 362 [email protected]

©

Co-locating wind and solar: Combining powers Joep Vaessen Principal Engineer, Renewable Energy

©

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCJXzv8OGr8gCFUSPlAodZQ0Kfw&url=http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-assistance/energy-fuels/ARENA/Pages/default.aspx&bvm=bv.104615367,d.dGo&psig=AFQjCNFuZfycQUX3tOb05tSVGSKc6KrLrw&ust=1444262307638471

Overview

Wind and solar co-location

1. The idea

2. Benefits and challenges

3. Complementary nature wind and solar resource

4. System sizing and curtailment

5. Heat map and wind farm ranking

6. Summary

1. The idea Co-location of solar PV at existing wind farms

2. Benefits and challenges Benefits

Benefits

Development cost

Land

Grid connection

PPA

Construction time

O&M facilities

Administration

Additional savings can be

obtained when developing

wind and solar power

plants at the same time as

a greenfield development.

2. Benefits and challenges Challenges

Challenges

Land use

Sizing & Curtailment

Agreements (GCA, PPA, LPA, O&M)

O&M activities

Community

Selected 10 wind farms for analysis

State Wind Farm Capacity

(MW) Yrs of data available

1 NSW Capital 140 4

2 NSW Gunning 47 3

3 SA Waterloo 111 4

4 SA Snowtown 99 4

5 SA Hallett 1 95 4

6 VIC Waubra 192 4

7 VIC Oaklands Hill 67 3

8 WA Collgar 206 3

9 WA Alinta 89 4

10 WA Emu Downs 80 4


Alinta, WA Snowtown, SA

Average annual profile of two wind farms (2011 – 2014)


10 wind farms

analysed:

• 6 showed reasonable

anti-correlation

• Strongest anti-

correlation results in

WA

• Large differences

between and also

within states


Waubra, VIC Collgar, WA

Average seasonal profile of two wind farms (2011 – 2014)


10 wind farms

analysed :


Spring


Summer but showed

dips during daylight

hours


Winter (both in WA)

4. System sizing and curtailment Curtailment analysis

Solar PV curtailment versus additional solar capacity on each analysed wind farm (2011 – 2014)

100%

25 – 50%

27% curtailment at Snowtown

Conclusions from the 10 wind

farms analysed :

- Snowtown and Hallett wind

farm show high curtailment

mainly due to its high

generation during the day time

- Suitable penetration with 25%-

50% of solar @5% curtailment

- Curtailment did not exceed

30% when adding 100% of

solar PV.

4. System sizing and curtailment Overview

(2) Capacity factors are analysed over the years and

are not altered for maintenance or downtime

+11%

5. Heat map and wind farm ranking Solar and Wind capacity factor map

Filters:

- Wind capacity factor

>35%

- Solar capacity factor

>16%

- Solar farm at 35% of

the capacity of the

wind farm

5. Heat map and wind farm ranking Ranking of existing wind farms

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

0.75 0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25 1.35 1.45 1.55

Co

st In

dex

Revenue Index

New South Wales South Australia Tasmania Victoria Western Australia

Conclusions:

- Western Australia

provides significant

opportunities

- Victoria and New

South Wales appear

to provide cost

advantages

Availability of wind and solar resource

Complementary profile of wind and

solar generation

Cost savings

Revenue opportunities

Agreements and regulations

6. Summary Success factors and conclusion

• Our study demonstrates that co-location is

worth the consideration of developers and

existing wind farm owners/operators.

• We encourage developers to consider

both wind and solar for their respective

sites (operational or in development)

• The report is made available on:

http://arena.gov.au/resources/wind-solar-co-

location-study/











Thank You Joep Vaessen 03 9653 8565 0400 401 362 [email protected]

©

Nacelle mounted LiDAR Optimization of the wind farms performance

Melbourne – 17/03/2016 – Wind Industry Forum 2016 Julien Léon DEWI / UL

Technical Due Diligence – Team Leader France

Introduction of UL/DEWI A Global Service Provider serving the Wind Energy Industry

Global Wind Energy Services

Combining technical expertise with many

years of in-depth industry experience, the

DEWI Group (a UL company) offers global,

one-stop wind energy services to turbine manufacturers, component manufacturers,

All-in-One Service Provider project developers, utilities and other

companies within the sector. The UL/DEWI

Group currently operates two wind test sites

in Wilhelmshaven, Germany and at the West Texas AM University, USA.


DEWI and

DEWI-OCC belong

to the UL family

of companies.

The DEWI Group

comprises:

DEWI:

One of the leading international

performance, measurement,

efficiency, research and

education providers in the field

of wind energy for about 25

years.

UL (Underwriters

Laboratories):

A premier global independent

safety and performance

science company, with more

than 120 years of history.

DEWI-OCC:

Recognised worldwide as

a leading independent

certification body of on-

/offshore wind turbines and

their components.


25 years experience

1,500 clients in 53 countries

636 clients from abroad

180 employees world-wide

ULHeadquarter/Branches (extract)

DEWI Headquarter/Branches

DEWI helps stakeholders – developers, investors and operators – to identify the critical

aspects related to wind farm projects through comprehensive one-stop services,

individually tailored and flexibly delivered.

Services Portfolio Over Windfarm Life

5

Wind Farm Performance


• Wind farms performance: a key challenge for wind farm operators

• During Operation of the wind farm:

Follow-up and check production and performance of the wind turbines.

• Main aspects to monitor:

• Power performance

• Turbine settings (Yaw alignment, blade angle adjustment, rotor imbalance, etc.)

• Availability and main down times

Reach performance as planned before construction

Wind Farm Performance Analysis

Standard approach

Data analysis

On site measurements

SCADA

data

Error logs

Yaw

alignment

Rotor

Imbalance

Power

curve

Optimized WF performance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Sep

.11

Oct

.11

No

v.1

1

De

c.1

1

Jan

.12

Feb

.12

Mar

.12

Ap

r.1

2

May

.12

Jun

.12

Jul.1

2

Au

g.1

2

Sep

.12

Oct

.12

No

v.1

2

De

c.1

2

Jan

.13

Feb

.13

Mar

.13

Ap

r.1

3

May

.13

Jun

.13

Jul.1

3

Au

g.1

3

Sep

.13

Oct

.13

No

v.1

3

De

c.1

3

Jan

.14

Feb

.14

Mar

.14

Ap

r.1

4

May

.14

Tech

nic

al A

vail

abil

ity

Energetic Availability

E01

E02

E03

E04

E05

E06

E07

E08

E09

E10

E11

E12

E13

E14

E15

E16

E17

E18

Wind Farm Performance Analysis

Data analysis • Standard data source = 10-min SCADA data and error logs:

Main Drawback: Low accuracy of nacelle sensors


Standard Analysis Major drawback is low accuracy of nacelle sensors

Solutions (among others):

Need of more accurate measurement

Met mast Spinner

anemometer

Nacelle

Mounted LiDAR Ground

Based LiDAR

Nacelle Mounted LiDAR A solution for Wind Farm Performance Analysis

Nacelle Mounted LiDAR

Measurement

Principle Technologies Objectives Data analysis

Measurement principle

• Measures remotely the free flowing wind before it passes through the rotor

Installation

• Installation on the nacelle roof

• Alignment with rotor axis and setting of tilt and roll

• Remote connection and synchronization with SCADA

Measurement Campaign

• Need of sufficient data set depending on final goal

• Usuall requested measurement duration

• Yaw alignment: 10-15 days

• Nacelle transfer function: 3 to 6 weeks

• Operational power curve: 3 to 6 weeks

Disturbed

flow

Free flow


Measurement


Various Manufacturers and technologies

• Leosphère: Wind Iris (2 beams LiDAR)

• ZephIR: ZephIR DM (scanning LiDAR)

• Windar Photonics: WindEye

• Other manufacturers

Applications

• Accuracy and potential applications depends on the technology of the device.

• For example ZephIR DM and Wind Iris LiDARs allow the applications mentioned hereafter.

Terrain complexity

• Standard use: for simple terrain

• Complex terrain: so far no industrial solution in the market


Measurement


Yaw alignment

• Measure the difference between the wind direction and the turbine rotor axis

• Correct Yaw misalignment (if identified)

• Avoid important production losses and undesired loads

Nacelle transfer function

• Measure the nacelle transfer function

• Application to the nacelle anemometer for further data analysis and performance analysis

Operational Power Curve

• Check the Operational Power Curve during the campaign

• Identify where gain of energy production is possible

The operational power curve and nacelle transfer function

verifications according to IEC 61400-12-1 and IEC 61400-

12-2 requirements do not consider LiDAR measurement

α


Measurement


Main input data for analysis

•LiDAR measured data (10 minutes average): • Wind-speed in front of the rotor (m/s)

• Relative wind direction (°)

•10 minutes SCADA data: • Ambient temperature (°C)

• Nacelle Position (°)

• Wind-speed nacelle (m/s)

• Power output (kW)

Data filtering

• Filtering according to nacelle position (unperturbed sectors)

• Filtering of some transitory events

Specific analysis

• Each application is related to specific analysis and data filtering (see next slides)

Outcomes of Measurement


Yaw alignment

Aim

• Measurement of the difference between the wind direction and its measurement axis, aligned with the turbine rotor axis

Data analysis

• Filtering of transitory events and extreme values

• Flow homogeneity and data availability

• Measurement until convergence of misalignment value

Corrective measures

• Adjustment of the yaw angle setting

Outcome

• Reduction of undesired loads

• Optimize the extraction of energy from the wind flow


Nacelle transfer function

Aim

• Measure the nacelle transfer function to be applied to the nacelle wind speed to calculate the theoretical free wind speed.

Data analysis

• Selection of sector (out of wake from neighboring turbines and obstacles)

Outcome

• Nacelle transfer function

• Application to the nacelle anemometer wind speed for further data analysis and performance analysis

The operational power curve and nacelle transfer

function verifications according to IEC 61400-12-1

and IEC 61400-12-2 requirements do not consider

LiDAR measurement


Operational Power Curve

Aim

• Measurement of the wind-speed in front of the rotor in order to check the Operational Power Curve

Data analysis

• Selection of sector (out of wake from neighbouring turbines and obstacles)

• Air density correction

• Comparison with power curve from SCADA data

Corrective measures

• In case of underperformance identified: investigation of root cause and actions

Outcome

• Identify range of wind speed where gain of energy production is possible.

The operational power curve and nacelle transfer

function verifications according to IEC 61400-12-1

and IEC 61400-12-2 requirements do not consider

LiDAR measurement

Conclusion

Conclusion

• Nacelle mounted LiDAR allows to gather more accurate data to perform more reliable

analysis of wind turbines performance.

• The 3 mains goals of a nacelle mounted LiDAR measurement campaign are checking of:

• Yaw alignment,

• Nacelle transfer function,

• Operational power curve.

• If underperformance or unacurate settings are identified, correction can be applied in order to :

• Improve performance and production,

• Avoid undesired loads.

• Other applications of Nacelle mounted LiDAR

• Offshore Power Curve Verification

Thank you.

Grid Integration, FCAS and Market Systems.

Kate Summers

Manager, Electrical Engineering Pacific Hydro

WIF

March 2016

Focus • Challenges in the NEM - Frequency Control

• Unpick the stories

• Fact check on the performance of wind farms

• Future aims

K Summers - WIF 2016 2

South Australia – RE Integration • Lots of Integration Reports:

• 2011, 2013, 10/2014, 10/2015, 2/2016

• Withdrawal of NPS / Playford, concern over rate of change of frequency.

• Wind Farms make up ~28% of SA generation1 (without retirements)

• Wind Farms are allocated ~ 65% of CPF generator costs

• Frequency control and the excessive cost of frequency control

• Market Systems must integrate with the power system – not redirect it.

• Provision of Ancillary Services requires scrutiny

• Do we get what we are paying for?


Wind Function Information Flow

Wind Farm

SCADA

EMS AWEFS

NEMDE Dispatch Targets

Dispatch Assessment

CPF Assessment

CPF Allocation

There is no doubt about it – its complex!!

ADE

Regulation

Requirements

Using Public Data only …


• Oakland Hill Wind

Farm across 9th/10th

May 2015

• Oakland oscillating

• Oscillated

completely off for

the entire weekend

Conclusion A lot of work is required to return to basic power system control – the fundamentals are being lost

– FCAS specification of Contingency services needs correcting

– Re-establish control hierarchy – Frequency services must control frequency.

– The push for inertia markets and more interconnector constraints needs to back off until we

correct the errors in the dispatch of FCAS services.

– The FCAS markets needs to be reviewed and barriers to RE participation removed

Renewable Energy

– Forecasts must be accurate

– The wind industry has to improve SCADA data feeds to AEMO

– AEMO need to improve forecast logic and NEMDE integration of forecasts

– Wind turbines can easily provide L6, and L60 services and should look into doing that.


References:

AER: FCAS prices above $5000 MW - 1 November 2015 (SA)

AEMO: Load shedding in South Australia on Sunday 1 November 2015

AWEFS UIGF Scheduling error_2012 to 2016_FINAL


Keith Ayotte Chief Scientist

Windlab Limited

Understanding and Predicting

Topographic Wake Turbulence

Emma Howard Wind Engineer

Windlab Limited

The next fourteen minutes/slides:

A few words about atmospheric boundary layer turbulence

The IEC and turbulence in wind turbine design

A description of topographic wake turbulence

Show that topographic wake turbulence can be described by a simple production-transport-

dissipation model

Describe two ways of modelling topographic wake turbulence.

Show two ways of modelling topographic wake turbulence

An introduction to some open source CFD tools

Show some progress in how we model topographic wake turbulence

IEC Turbine Design Curves

Mean wind speed and turbulence probability distributions in wind turbine design.

TI u

2v

2w

2

U

Turbulent Intensity

TI u

U

Sometimes used

Site measurements from a promising site Site measurements from a problematic site

l ~ m’s – 100’s m l ~ mm

In the lee of topography In the free atmosphere

High pressure Low pressure High pressure

Pressure gradient Pressure gradient

How can we model topographic wake turbulence?

Hills are in many ways like a ( stalled ) aircraft wing.

Two Types of CFD Modelling

RANS

Reynolds Average Navier Stokes (RANS)

- can be done commercially

- many assumptions about length scales

- simple boundary conditions

- treats turbulence cascade in a very simple way

that does not account for all of the length scales

associated with geometry of the hill

LES

Large Eddy Simulation (LES)

- prohibitively expensive computationally

- makes far fewer assumptions about length scales

- idealised flows and boundary conditions

- quite naturally reproduces all of the length scales

associated with generation, transport and dissipation

Can we learn some things about the length scales in the flow that allow us to modify our RANS model in a

physically sensible way, to include externally imposed length scales?

We think so. Here’s how.

Two Types of CFD Modelling

Start with turbulence kinetic energy and dissipation equations

k

tU j

k

x j

x l

t

k

k

x l

P

tU j

x j

x l

t

x l

C1

P

kC 2

2

k

dk

t P

d

t c1

P

kC 2

2

k

Apply in homogeneous turbulence to get two

ordinary differential equations

k(t) k0

t

t0

n

(t) 0

t

t0

(n1)

t0 nk

0

C 2 n 1

n

k

tU j

k

x j

x l

t

k

k

x l

P(1 ckp

p

xn

)

tU j

x j

x l

t

x l

C1

P

kC 2(1 cp

p

xn

) 2

k

Pope, S.B., 2000, Turbulent Flows, Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge

cpp

xn

ckp

p

xn

Turbulence generated in lee of the hill is directly

dependent upon the strength of the adverse

pressure gradient and the shear at the top of the

hill.

Turbulence is generated in much larger quantities

at larger length scales.

This allows the turbulence to be transported

downwind in the mean flow for much greater

distances before it is dissipated.

What really happens

0.6S

0.4R

0.4S

0.3R

0.3S

0.2R

0.2S

Prediction of wind tunnel wake turbulence

Open source Field Operation And Manipulation

Pressure at 10m ( 240 deg )

An example of turbulence prediction

across a coastal area.

240 deg 270 deg 300 deg

Thanks for your

attention.

CEC Wind Industry Forum 2016

Innovation in Turbine Tower Design Concrete Towers

Kieren Lewis – Senior Manager, Construction

2

Concrete Towers - is there are place for them in the Australian Market?

Latest wind turbine technology is around bigger rotors and tall towers. Taller towers

present challenges and opportunities. There is demonstrable evidence internationally

that concrete towers can play a significant part of meeting local content requirements,

assist in achieving a social licence to operate, and be economically superior for both

project proponents and the local community. Whilst high costs in Australia (by global

standards) means that further assessment is required, initial modelling undertaken by

Acciona in Australia suggests that, for the right project and market conditions, concrete

towers may have a positive project impact. Certainly there is a case for maintaining

flexibility during project permitting to allow the option for concrete towers.

3

Safety Moment

What – 12kV UG circuit trip

How – a fencing contractor engaged by a landowner drilled through a live cable with a tractor mounted auger

Consequences – moderate (actual) and catastrophic (potential – near miss)

Why – did not DIAL BEFORE YOU DIG, misinterpreted warning signs, no JSEA

Outcomes – landowner engagement, site risk assessment, contractor procedures, replace/additional signs

4

Overview

ACCIONA – leaders in the wind value chain

Trends – constraints, bigger rotors, taller towers, permits catching up

Why concrete towers?

ACCIONA’s concrete tower solution

Project Comparison – Mt Gellibrand Wind Farm

Conclusions – leave the option open

5

ACCIONA

Leaders in the renewable energy

8,500MW

Present in whole wind value chain

6

Trends

Aviation

Policy – RET / State (VIC)

DA’s with ~150m

Tip Height

120m 137.5m

116/125/132m Rotors

125/132m Rotors

87.5m Tower

125m Rotor

7

Why Concrete?

Concrete Towers

Technical challenges at 100m+

Well known,

historically proven

Local content, social licence

Project economics,

price stability

1,000MW+ installed by ACCIONA

Key markets include Brazil & Mexico

Project schedule as per steel

Local/project constraints

Proven economic and social benefit

BUT…Australia is different

How does concrete compare locally? http://www.acciona-windpower.com/pressroom/video-gallery

8

ACCIONA’s Concrete Tower

Patented design

with 20m pre-cast

“keystones”

Keystones are

joined vertically into

sections

Entire tower is post-

tensioned with 6

cable bunches into

the foundation

Small steel adapter

connection on top

section

9

ACCIONA’s Concrete Tower

10

Australian Analysis

Steel Concrete

Footing

Assembly

Manufacturing

Transport

Economics driven by 4

key inputs

Analysis focused on on-

site (or near site) casting

Off-site casting at

existing facilities has the

potential to significantly

improve concrete

Site track network can

reduce transport

V

11

Australian Analysis

Below 100m, steel is more economical unless other project factors prevail

Concrete tower costs converge with steel as quantity increases, more rapidly at higher tower heights

Other factors may come into play

• Government schemes / Local Content (ACT / VIC Auctions)

• Site characteristics

• Manufacturing capacity

• Community support

12

Project Comparison

Mt Gellibrand Wind Farm

Maximum tip height of 150m in DA

Original configuration of 115 x AW1500/82

3 x modifications to 44 x AW3000/125 (87.5m tower)

10% more energy from the same number of WTGs

Positive NPV impact for both 120/140m tower

Tower MW GWh CF Tower Cost

NPV

87.5m 132 435 38% - -

120m 132 460 40% 23% 16%

140m 132 477 41% 39% 28%

13

What does it mean?

The market is moving beyond 150m tip heights

Concrete towers show economic and social project benefits internationally

Local analysis confirms improved project economics at 120/140m+

Specific project characteristics (location, size etc.) and/or proximity to established casting facility impacts steel v concrete equation

Concrete provides direct local content and community benefit supporting bid requirements and contributing to a social licence to operate

There is a case for maintaining flexibility in DAs to allow concrete towers

TransGrid’s Renewable Energy Hub

Mal Coble, Group Manager, Business Diversification

17 March 2016

More than a network

#WIF2016

TransGrid's Renewable Energy Hub

About us Operator and manager of the NSW transmission network, we connect generators, distributors and major end users

64,200 GWh moved in 2014/15

12,900 km transmission lines

99 substations

2,300 km optical fibre

We’re more than a network

2 / Grid innovation: the role of transmission in the evolving energy ecosystem TransGrid’s Renewable Energy Hub 2 /

Legend

Sydney


New England region

NSW

Renewable Energy Hub

A Renewable Energy Hub could bring more than 700MW in additional connections

3 /


Title goes here

Stage 1: Feasibility study & knowledge sharing report

Proof of Concept – New England

Identify & implement potential future

renewable hubs

First customer

connection request

Stage 2:

Construction of

Renewable Energy

Hub

4 /


Investigation streams

Technical Commercial Community Regulatory

5 /


Network configuration – without a hub

330kV Transmission line

Connection point

Proposed transmission line

Proposed substation

Glen Innes substation

132 kV

Transmission

line

6 /


Network configuration – with a hub

330kV Transmission line

Connection point

Proposed transmission line

Proposed substation

Glen Innes substation

132 kV

Transmission

line

7 /


Commercial considerations

Standalone

connection costs

Hub connection

costs

Overall

cost

saving

Overall

connection

cost for hub

arrangement

Commercial considerations

Cost savings

Risk sharing

Investment returns

Replication

The New England Renewable Hub brings economic benefits

8 /


Regulatory considerations

There are potential hurdles to

commercial development/funding

of a SENE or a hub concept study

that need to be addressed.

Incentives for a commercial party

to fund for such a study need to

be considered.

Is it a SENE?

9 /


Community engagement

There is overwhelming broad

community support for these types

of development in the region.

Benefits

New England community:

“We are different”

10 /


Next steps

> Balranald

> Buronga

> Broken Hill

> Darlington Point

> Griffith

> Parkes

> Tamworth

> Wellington

Visit our stand to find out more

Other possible hub locations

11 /

Connection hubs may prove to be an important

ingredient in addressing challenges associated with

increasingly decentralised electricity supply from

renewable sources

Title Sub-heading

21/03/2016

Updates on Victorian Planning from the inside and

guidance for applicants

Michael Juttner - DELWP

Overview

2

DECISION MAKER – MINISTER FOR PLANNING

The Minister for Planning is the responsible authority (decision maker) for all new wind farm applications in Victoria. This includes planning permits for transmission infrastructure

DELWP - PLANNING

• administers all applications and briefs the Minister for him to determine applications.

• Planning will consult with and work with the local council regarding all applications

Changes to planning controls

3

VC124 – 2 April 2015

Recent change to the planning controls in 2015-16 are:

VC107 – 26 November 2015

• Minister for Planning to decide transmission infrastructure planning permit applications (including vegetation removal) .

• -Reduced the 2km rule to 1km. • Minister for Planning to decide all new wind farm planning permit applications.

• allows amendments to existing ‘called in’ planning permits to be considered without the need for a panel hearing.

VC126 – 28 January 2016

What does it mean? Do I need to know this?

No, the planning scheme provisions are most relevant to your application

What should be in my application?

4

Your application for a new wind farm must include:

• An application form and the prescribed fee • Copies of title for all land • Written consent of all house owners within 1 kilometre of a

turbine • A planning report that considers the proposal against the

requirements of the planning scheme and the Wind Energy Facility Guidelines

• Plus – anything else relevant to assessing the impact of your proposal

• Include peer reviews of key reports: noise, avifauna, visual impact

Your planning consultant can do this for you

What should be in the planning report?

5

Your planning report must demonstrate how your proposal meets the planning scheme requirements, including:

• State and Local Planning Policy • Zones and Overlays affecting the land • Permit triggers for use and development • Particular provisions in particular

• Clause 52.32 wind energy facilities • Clause 52.17 native vegetation removal

• Decision guidelines for each permit trigger • General provisions including:

• Referral authorities


The application process

Lodge application

• If further information is required it will be requested

Referral and Notice

• Referrals to authorities identified in planning scheme and CASA

• Views of DELWP environment is sought on avifauna impacts

• The department will work closely with council to ensure council’s input, particularly on local issues.

• Application is advertised by mail, signs, notice in paper

Decision

•Submissions considered

•DELWP Staff make recommendation to the Minister who then determines the application

•Decision can be reviewed at VCAT by objectors

6

What about ‘called in’ applications?

7

Some applicants may request that the Minister ‘call in’ an application under Section 97 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 Victoria’s Regional Statement identifies that applications of state or regional significance may be called in to fast track decision making Submissions received following advertising are referred to a panel hearing After the panel hearing and receipt of the panel report the Minister determines the planning permit application Decisions made on called in applications are exempt from 3rd party review (VCAT)

How to amend an existing permit?

8

First check if the permit was issued by council or the Minister and if it was called in

If issued by council: apply to council to amend the permit (S72)

If issued by Minister following a call in: apply to the Minister to amend the permit (S97)

Note: if the number of turbines is not increased, and no turbine is moved closer to a house then: a) You do not require the written consent of house owners within 1km b) There are no third party appeal rights (VCAT) c) The amendment to a called in permit is exempt from being considered at a panel hearing

What should be in my application to amend a permit?

9

Your application to amend a permit should include:

• An application form and fee • Copies of title for all land • Written consent of all house owners within 1

kilometre of a turbine (if required) • Detailed reports that assess the impact of the

changes. Concentrate on the change, don’t reinvestigate the whole thing.

• Include peer reviews of key reports such as noise, flora and fauna impacts, visual impact.

• Plus – anything else relevant to assessing the impact of your proposal

Before you lodge, consult with: referral authorities CASA DELWP environment

(avifauna and veg removal)

Council and the local community

Tips for applicants?

10

• Consult before you lodge • Identify referral authorities and engage with them early (before you lodge).

Also engage with CASA, DELWP environment (avifauna impacts) • Engage with council and community (no surprises) • Have an on-site quarry to limit traffic impacts • Go to every effort to limit vegetation removal • Consider the Brolga Guidelines and design accordingly • Deal with issues before you lodge, don’t just ask for them to be permit

conditions • Make sure all your consultant reports include an executive summary that

clearly spells out the findings, and is focussed for planning consumption

Use a planning consultant

More tips When submitting documents for endorsement under permit conditions:

• Always use the permit as a checklist

• The planners will be assessing your plans / documents against the permit conditions

• Check that you have met each part of each condition before you lodge them

• Include a covering letter or report that spells out how you meet the requirements of each condition, and where to locate that specific item in the plan / document

• It saves time if you do these things

11


What else?

12

The current state government has repeatedly expressed its commitment to renewable energy and the wind industry.

Read Victoria’s Renewable Energy Action Plan August 2015 and follow developments leading from it.

The target is for 20% of Victoria’s energy to come from renewables by 2020.

There is political support, but you must still prepare a solid, thorough and justified application to obtain a permit.

And…. Use a planning consultant.

Questions?

GRID INTEGRATION

March 2016

PRESENTED BY NICOLA FALCON

GROUP MANAGER, PLANNING

The changing role of transmission in Australia’s energy future

AGENDA SLIDE

1. About AEMO

2. Network Development

3. Risk of Local Congestion

4. AEMO’s Planning Process

5. Investment Triggers and Risks

6. 2016 Victorian Annual Planning Report (VAPR)

7. Integrating Renewables in the VAPR

8. Questions

ABOUT AEMO

• Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO).

• Our vision “Energy security for all Australians.”

• AEMO is fuel and technology neutral.

o Generation expansion plan will consider how Australia may cut carbon emissions by at least 26 per cent of 2005 levels by 2030.

• Guided by the National Electricity / Gas Objectives:

o To promote efficient investment in, and efficient operation and use of, electricity services for the long term interests of consumers

http://www.aemo.com.au/

Changing

technologies

Facilitating

competition

Regulatory and

policy factors

e.g. Climate

commitments

NETWORK DEVELOPMENT

IMPORTANCE OF GENERATION LOCATION

Biomass Large-scale PV Wind Open Cycle Gas Turbine

Additional generation location by 2024-25 – Gradual Evolution scenario (left) and sensitivity

• Widespread wind and solar resources could enable new generation to

connect where there is spare network capacity

• But concentration of generation can lead to local network limitations

RISK OF LOCAL CONGESTION

North-west Victoria (case study)

• Wind farm developers interested in

connecting to the Ballarat-Waubra-

Horsham 220 kV transmission line (BATS-

WBTS-HOTS). • this line currently connects Waubra Wind

Farm (190MW) and Ararat wind farm

(240MW) will be commissioned in 2017.

• additional wind farms connecting will

increase the risk of exceeding the thermal

limit of the line between BATS and WBTS.

• increasing non-synchronous generation will

increase the potential of instability in the

region.

CHALLENGES CAUSED BY LOCAL

CONGESTION

Load = 200MWGeneration cost = $0/MWh

200MW capacity

150MW dispatched

Generation cost = $10/MWh

200MW capacity

50MW dispatched

100% loaded

Short Circuit Ratio

RISK OF GETTING CONSTRAINED

• The generator that will be constrained depends on:

o Variable operational conditions

o Economic considerations

o The location of each wind farm relative to the

constraint

• Will network capacity be augmented?

o Augmentation is only justified if net market benefits

are sufficient

• Generators are not entitled to reserved network capacity

PLANNING PROCESS

Phase 1 – Exploratory (covered in 2016 VAPR)

• Screening studies to identify potential limitations and their timing (based on

MW connected).

• Scenario studies on future triggers that will worsen limitation.

• Market modelling to identify potential market impact and potential benefits for

alleviating these limitations.

Phase 2 – Scoping (limited coverage in 2016 VAPR)

• High-level studies to assess each solution’s technical effectiveness, cost

estimate, and potential benefits across a range of scenarios.

Phase 1 - Exploratory

Phase 2 - Scoping

Phase 3 – Pre-

feasibility

Phase 4 – Feasibility

INVESTMENT TRIGGERS AND RISKS Average fuel costs in the NEM from 2016-2025

Changing generation mix – Rapid Transformation (2015 NTNDP)

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

2015-16 2020-21 2025-26 2030-31 2034-35

Inst

alle

d C

apac

ity

(MW

)

Black Coal Brown Coal Hydro Liquid Fuel Natural Gas

Large Scale PV Wind Biomass Rooftop PV

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Brown Coal Black Coal Coal SeamMethane

Natural GasPipeline

Diesel

$/G

J

2016 VICTORIAN ANNUAL PLANNING

REPORT

• The Victorian Annual Planning Report will be published

in June 2016

• Will explore wind + potential augmentation options as

part of a case study in North-West Victoria

• Interactive map that illustrates the hotspot area of future

renewable generation and other information (limits,

possible connection capacity)

APPROXIMATING GRID ACCESS

*MOCK RESULTS *

QUESTIONS

Thank you!

Email: [email protected]

Phone: 03 9609 8000

mailto:[email protected]

WIND TURBINE NOISE

– THE PERENNIAL QUESTION

by

Dr Norm Broner

SO WHERE ARE WE AT ??

So are Wind Turbines a Health Problem or not?

There have been at 24 reviews that have shown that there is no

evidence of direct health effects

The NHMRC investigated this question and concluded:

After careful consideration and deliberation of the body of

evidence, NHMRC concludes that there is currently no consistent

evidence that wind farms cause adverse health effects in humans.

BUT

Given the poor quality of current direct evidence and the concern

expressed by some members of the community, high quality

research into possible health effects of wind farms, particularly

within 1,500 m is warranted.

.

HEALTH CANADA STUDY The objectives of the study were to:

Investigate the prevalence of health effects or health indicators among a

sample of Canadians exposed to WTN using both self-reported and objectively

measured health outcomes;

Investigate the contribution of LFN and infrasound from wind turbines as a

potential contributing factor towards adverse community reaction.

The following were not found to be associated with WTN exposure:

self-reported sleep (e.g., general disturbance, use of sleep medication,

diagnosed sleep disorders);

self-reported illnesses (e.g., dizziness, tinnitus, prevalence of frequent

migraines and headaches) and chronic health conditions (e.g., heart disease,

high blood pressure and diabetes); and

self-reported perceived stress and quality of life.

ENERGY AND POLICY INSTITUTE REVIEW OF

COURT CASES

Since 1998, 49 hearings have been held under rules of legal evidence

in at least five English-speaking countries and four types of courts

regarding wind energy, noise, and health.

Forty-eight assessed the evidence and found no potential for harm to

human health.

There was one outlier –Falmouth!

Courts in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands have also found no

connection between wind turbines and health issues per reports, but

the records are not in English.

REVIEW OF COURT CASES

Court cases jumped dramatically after Dr. Nina Pierpont’s self-

published a book alleging health risks from wind turbines based on

phone interviews with a self-selected and very small number of

people who blamed them for commonly experienced symptoms.

Canada is the centre of wind farm health-related court challenges,

with 17 separate hearings

Mainly in Ontario, with 14 Environmental Review Tribunals (ERT)

testing the evidence and the relative experts, as well as two higher

court cases.

All Canadian courts found that wind farms would not and do not

cause health impacts with proper setbacks in place

CASES IN AUSTRALIA

Australia with 10 cases.

Victoria with seven civil suits.

South Australia and New South Wales saw three cases in

their environment and resource courts.

All Australian cases found that wind farms would not

cause health impacts with proper setbacks in place.

CASES IN THE USA

The United States saw eight court.

Seven cases found no harm from wind energy with the proper setbacks

currently in place

The USA has the only case where a wind farm was considered to have

caused harm.

This case was brought by a single family near a pair of wind farms

erected on the municipal wastewater treatment plant by the town of

Falmouth, Massachusetts. The judgment includes the statement that

dental harm occurred, along with other types of medical ailments.

This single small wind farm is referenced worldwide by anti-wind

advocacy groups as if it is representative of wind health court cases

instead of a unique outlier

CASES IN NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand had five environmental and civil hearings over wind

energy, noise and health

Only one case in New Zealand went against a wind farm, the Te Rere

Hau wind project, and that was only because noise was greater than

anticipated, not because the wind noise was above standards or

harmful to human health.

This case is widely misrepresented and selectively quoted by anti-

wind campaigning organizations such as the Waubra Foundation and

National Wind Watch

European Platform Against Windfarms

961 Member organizations from 30 European countries

AUSTRALIA 1

MEXICO 3

EU 3

NORWAY 4

CANADA 10

USA 13

SWITZERLAND 16

DENMARK 18

IRELAND 27

BELGIUM 29

UK 120

GERMANY 173

FRANCE 381

BUT eg Belgium 29 listed, only 8 were working and of those, 3

were inactive, making 5 still active (Simon Chapman 2016)

AUSTRALIA’S WIND FARM COMMISSIONER

The Wind Farm Commissioner is an independent role reporting

directly to the Minister for the Environment.

There are no formal powers and the WFC does not displace the

responsibilities of state jurisdictions.

The WFC is meant to operate “based on the effectiveness of my

relationships with a wide and diverse range of stakeholders from all

levels of government, industry and the community”.

Currently, the WFC has a chief of staff, an administrative assistant on

loan from the department. He intends to hire a complaint-handling

manager and a research officer.

So far, 42 complaints about 12 WF’s. 5 Operational, 7 in development.

For the wind farms that have been constructed, typically issues are

again around noise, health effects, turbine configurations, turbine

height and economic loss.

ENGAGEMENT and COMPLAINT HANDLING

In his recent evidence, Mr Dyer stated:

One of the improvement opportunities that I have seen from

anecdotal discussions is to help those agencies and stakeholders

you have just described to improve their complaint handling

processes. It is not just a matter of capturing a complaint; you

need to do something with it.

I think many of the players in the industry and supporting the

industry could further improve their complaint handling

processes, which would then take a load off us

.

LFN & IS Hearing Thresholds Watanabe & Moller (1990)

IS & LFN COMPARISON URBAN SA EPA/Resonate (2013)

SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON WIND TURBINES

Broner in evidence

“So to summarize, I believe that IS is not the source of

any complaints due to wind turbine noise.

I believe that LF audible noise may be a possible source

and that the current recent research shows that wind

turbine noise does not cause health impacts when A

weighted criteria are met.

I believe that A-weighted noise level criteria are therefore

adequate to describe wind turbine noise. And I note that

both the Canadian and Japanese work found that the use

of A weighting was validated”.

.

ANNOYANCE RESPONSE

Activities Disturbed

Eg Reading,

TV viewing

Situational

Eg Season, time of day

Acoustical

Eg Intensity, frequency

Demographic,

biographic

and sociological

Eg Age, sex,

income

Other

Eg Expectation,

previous experience

Psychological

Eg Personality, sensitivity

How Important is the Acoustic Stimulus Alone?

For a community, % Variance in response explained

20 – 30% .

For an individual, % Variance in response explained

10 – 15%

ATTITUDE

ONTARIO TO GET ANOTHER STUDY!

More Ontario wind-health investigation: "The Huron County Health

Unit (HCHU) will be conducting an investigation into the reported

health effects from wind turbines. This investigation is in response to

feedback from numerous Huron County residents reporting negative

health impacts resulting from living in close proximity to the massive

apparatuses designed to capture energy from wind.

The study will consist of two phases:

The first phase will include a launch of an online survey in May to

collect information in regard to the number of complaints and/or

concerns of residents.

The second phase of the investigation, according to Ryan, may involve

acoustic testing both outside and inside affected homes."

.

Thank you

www.ehpartners.com.au www.ehpartners.com.au

Wind Industry Forum 2016 Richard Sharp Senior Consultant Environment & Infrastructure

What is best practice environmental management during wind farm construction?

www.ehpartners.com.au

Wind Farm Implementation Guidelines

• Construction Environmental Management Plan

– Identify the risks

– List the actions to be taken

– Capture conditions of approval / commitments

– Appoint a person responsible for implementation

2


Wind Farm Development Guidelines


– Must be prepared

– Must be endorsed by the relevant authority

– Must identify person to whom incidents, non-conformances and complaints should be made

3


Wind Farm Development Guidelines


– Should be ‘signed off’

– Should include monitoring

– Should include a compliance regime

– Should identify a person from the company who is responsible for implementation

4


Guidelines for Wind Farm


– State how any adverse impacts will be managed

– Expert advice

– Best practice techniques

– Project staging and phasing

5


Wind Farm State Code


– Construction Erosion and Sediment Control Plan

• Certified by a RPEQ

– Construction Traffic Management Plan

• Certified by a RPEQ

6


Wind Farm Approval Conditions

• Environmental Representative

– Suitably qualified and experienced person

– Independent of design, construction & operations

– Oversee the implementation of the CEMP

– Report on any non-compliances against the CEMP

7


What is Best Practice?

• Satisfactory CEMP

– Start of the project

• CEMP revision

– During the project

• CEMP implementation

– Independent compliance monitoring and auditing

8


Achieving Best Practice

Have the CEMP prepared by a Registered Professional / Certified Practitioner.

Have the CEMP reviewed by a Registered Professional / Certified Practitioner. Have the implementation of the CEMP monitored by a Registered Professional / Certified Practitioner who is not an employee of the design, construction or operational entities.

9


Registered Environmental Professional

• Completed a degree, higher degree or graduate diploma and have at least two years’ experience in an area of environmental practice.

• At least five years’ experience in an area of environmental practice.

10


Certified Environmental Practitioner

• An environment-related degree.

• Five years of full time equivalent experience in the functional areas of environmental practice during the last ten years.

• Ongoing commitment to training and professional improvement.

• Respected, competent, ethical and an active member of the profession.

11


Final Words

“Try to evolve to become better as improvements are discovered and don’t let your wind farm

project cage you in.”

12

Low-Wind

Turbine Technology

Steve Crowe Head of Sales Australian, N.Z., Indonesia

Wind Industry Forum 2016

Introduction

Who is Gamesa?

Low wind site analysis

5 Challenges for low wind success

I. Maintain low power density

II. Cost efficient low-wind rotors

III. Cost efficient tall towers

IV. Cost efficient manufacturing platforms

V. Efficient BOP and Logistics

What to remember

1994 commenced making turbines

Home base in Pamplona, Spain

Total installed worldwide 35 GW

Turbines under O & M 21 GW

Projects developed 7.5 GW

Development pipeline 12.5 GW

Installed turbines in 53 countries

Top 5 in worldwide sales in 2015

Top 5 total installed in world

Commenced G80 2MW in 2002

Over 22 GW of 2MW platform installed

G114 rated best turbine 2015 (2-3MW class: Wind Power Monthly)

Low wind sites expected to be close to 50% worldwide from 2016 to 2020

The shift into auction schemes will make tougher for these sites to compete Vs. other renewable technologies

New technological approach needed to reduce this site’s Cost of Energy

Hub height relevant in high shear sites

Clear trend towards low power density

Best energy gain from rotor diameter

MW relevant in high speed sites

Rotor Dia. Swept Area Area Increase

90m 6,362m2

110m 7,854m2 49%

130m 13,273m2 109%

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

Increasing power while maintaining power density should lead to an increase cost of energy, but…

New technology developments and control strategies are leading to loads control shifting this trend

Rotor Dia. Output Power Density

90m 2MW 314 W/m2

114m 2MW 196 W/m2

126m 2.5MW 200 W/m2

132m 3.3MW 241 W/m2

106m

114m

126m

At 8m/s around 500kW, or 40%, extra power is produced from 10m more blade length

Rotor dia. (m)

Power density (W/m2)

Rotor size

decrease

Power density

decrease

126 200 0% 0%

114 245 -10% -22%

106 283 -16% -41%

114m 80m

97m

-120%

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

11

4

11

1

10

8

10

5

10

2

99

96

93

90

87

84

81

Rotor size

Power Density

Rotor dia. (m)

Power density (W/m2)

Rotor size

decrease

Power density

decrease

114 196 0% 0%

97 271 -15% -38%

80 398 -30% -103%

Infusion technology: fiberglass reinforced with epoxy resin

Low noise airfoils and adjusted gearbox ratio to get reduced sound emission level

High absolute thickness at root sections to achieve the minimum mass/cost blade

Mid-sections chord alleviation to reduce maximum loads

Maximum airfoil glide ratio at mid/outer sections

Shear Webs Caps

Over 120 m site-to-site solutions

Standard steel towers

Sectional Tubular Steel

Hybrid #1: Pre-cast concrete + steel

Hybrid #2: Pedestal + steel

Hybrid #3: Cast-in-place concrete + steel

Up to 120 m: Tubular steel towers are usually cost efficient worldwide… currently

High commonalities between Class II, Class III & Class IV:

Common main components

Optimized load path adapted to each site

Blade

Pitch system

Main shaft

Gearbox

Yawing system

Tower

Foundation

New foundation concepts optimized site by site for low wind

New efficient on-site pedestals optimizing production in low wind sites

New logistics for long blades to reduce roads and platforms

Innovative crane solutions

Continuous improvement through experience

Low power density is required to maximise cost effective energy production from low wind sites

Optimisation of all components, including BOP, is necessary to ensure the cost of energy is low

Seek planning permits with no rotor restrictions to allow for maximum benefit from overall tip height

16

Muchas gracias

Wind turbine sound power testing

Wind Industry Forum, 17 March 2016

Tom Evans Associate Director

Outline

What is sound power testing?

Why do we do it?

How do we do it?

What to be aware of

Receptor guarantees vs sound power guarantees

17 March 2016 Slide 2

Sound power testing

• Measurements to determine the sound power level

of an individual turbine

• Sound power level is distance/site independent

measure of sound output of a turbine

• Measure downwind at approx. 130 m from turbine

across suitable range of wind speeds

• Analyse measured levels (controlling for known

factors) to determine sound power level

• May also include tonality, amplitude modulation and

impulsivity tests


Sound power vs sound pressure

• Sound power level is a measure of the sound emitted by a source that is

independent of distance. Units: dB re 10 -12 W.

• Sound pressure level is the actual sound level at a particular distance/position

from a source. Units: dB re 20 𝜇Pa.

• Sound pressure level is dependent on sound power (and other factors).

• From a sound power level for turbines at a site, the sound pressure level can be

predicted considering other relevant factors such as site layout, distance and

topography.

• Therefore, sound power can be determined from sound pressure measurements

near to the source if we can control other factors – sound power testing.


Why do sound power testing?

• Provides a non site dependent (and therefore transferable) measure of the noise

produced by a particular turbine model.

• Assess compliance with contractual guarantees provided by OEM.

• Assessing site compliance based on sound power – not currently done in Australia

but is in parts of Europe.

• Investigate Special Audible Characteristics – normally tonality.


How do we do it?

• Relevant standard is IEC 61400-11 Wind turbines – Acoustic noise measurement

techniques. Current version is Edition 3 (2012) although many Australian

contracts will still refer to Edition 2.1 (2006).

• Measure downwind of turbine at hub height + ½ diameter using a microphone laid

flat on an acoustically reflective board:

• The ground board is used to provide a consistent reflection from the ground

between sites.


What does the Standard require?

• Wind speeds of 0.8-1.3x the speed at 85% rated power (2012).

• Measurements in 10-second intervals with at least 10 data points

required for each half-integer wind speed.

• Noise with turbine ON to be at least 3 dB higher than with it OFF

across frequency range – normally have to switch off nearest

turbine.

• Same amount of data points required with turbine OFF as with

turbine ON.

• Downwind ±15º only. Optional crosswind and upwind positions

provided but rarely used.

• Allowable measurement angle to turbine hub of 25 to 40º.


UPWIND

DOWNWIND

What does the Standard require?

Measured sound pressure levels are binned for each half -integer wind speed with the

turbine ON and turbine OFF.

The turbine ON measurements (corrected for turbine OFF) are used to calculate

sound power levels for the wind turbine at each half -integer speed considering:

• the measured sound pressure levels

• the measurement distance and angle

• frequency content of the sound.

Uncertainty for the sound power level reported at each wind speed to address

variation in noise levels and possible equipment/measurement errors.

The tonal audibility of potential tones is determined at each half -integer wind speed

and reported if audibility exceeds -3.0 dB.


What changed in IEC 61400-2012 version?

In terms of end result not a lot actually changed between 2006 and 2012…

Which is good – you should still get the same sound power level at the end of the day.


Item IEC 61400-11:2006 IEC 61400-11:2012 Comment

Wind speed

height Standardised 10 m Hub height

No significant difference as 2006 used standardised 10

m related to hub height by a fixed amount.

Wind speed bins Results reported for

integer wind speeds

Results reported for

half-integer speeds

Provides additional information but overall sound power

unlikely to change significantly with half-integer steps.

Measurement

period Minimum 1-minute 10-second

More data points required in 2012 but lower overall

measurement duration required.

Determining

average

Polynomial trendline

fitted across speeds

preferred

Binned at each half-

integer speed

2012 provides a better result. Bin method was already

employed in many cases as a deviation to 2006.

Tonality Two periods nearest to

each integer speed

Average over all data

in each bin

Likely to get a more representative result with 2012 but

still limited to same wind conditions

What to be aware of with IEC 61400-11

Wind conditions

Testing can be labour-intensive, so selecting appropriate wind conditions to eliminate

return visits is important. Desire winds from a steady direction over a wide range of

speeds.

Background data

Data with the turbine OFF is almost more important than that with it ON. Need good

background data for all speeds to produce accurate results.

Secondary windshields

Standard allows for optional secondary windshields. Unlikely to be necessary for the A-

weighted sound power level but could provide more accuracy of lower frequency sound

power levels.


What to be aware of with IEC 61400-11

Variability

IEC sound power tests are typically highly repeatable. Sound power levels over repeated

tests are unlikely to differ by more than 1 dB at any wind speed.

However, some factors can influence the calculated sound power level:

• Measurement distance – distance correction methodology in Standard is not perfect

• Measurement angle – very important that the angle of incidence is above 25º

• Groundboard – poor contact between the groundboard and ground increases measured

noise levels

• Tonality – while downwind is worst case for overall sound, this is unlikely to be the case

for tonality


Receptor vs sound power guarantees

Until recently, OEMs were required to provide sound power guarantees for their turbines

which applied at the turbine only.

Nowadays, almost all contracts include a request for a receptor guarantee where the OEM

guarantees compliance with State/National guidelines at receptors.

With respect to sound power testing:

• Receptor guarantees mean that there is unlikely to be a requirement for it on Australian

sites in the future.

• Even if this is the case, however, an understanding of the process is still important to

enable interpretation of data provided for turbines during the planning stage of a site.


Receptor vs sound power guarantees

A brief survey of OEMs raised the following concerns about receptor guarantees:

• While OEMs can control turbine sound power, they typically have little or no control over

other factors that influence compliance at receptors (e.g. distance, layout, wind

conditions, landowner agreements etc). Therefore increased risk for the OEMs.

• May have a price premium, and potentially capacity reduction, as a result of the above.

• Where a receptor guarantee is provided, it is unlikely that any guarantee would be

provided regarding sound power.

• Australia is almost unique in requiring receptor guarantees, although requests have

started to arise in the UK.

And finally an interesting comment:

• A sound power test at a turbine provides a very clear pass or fail.

• However it can be very difficult to establish compliance or non-compliance clearly at a

receptor due to the influence of background noise.

• Even if non-compliance is established, it may not be a result of turbines being louder

than stated.


Conclusion

• Sound power testing is important to assess the sound

output independent of other factors that influence noise at

receptors.

• Accurate sound power data is critical for accurate noise

modelling of a site.

• The IEC 61400-11 Standard is applied globally for this

purpose and provides repeatable test results for turbines.

• However, there are items to be aware of that can introduce

variability to the results.

• With the emergence of receptor guarantees, does sound

power testing have a future in Australia?


Thank you

[email protected]
