Carbon Footprint Offshore Wind Foundationsnationalestaalbouwdag.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/005... · Carbon Footprint Offshore Wind Foundations ... Steel Monopile which is recovered

9-10-2014 1

Carbon Footprint Offshore Wind Foundations

Bauke Hoekstra Bonnema

Tata Steel Construction Centre NL

Together we make the difference

9-10-2014 2

Offshore wind market

Life Cycle Analysis

Tata Steel capabilities

Summary & Conclusions

1

2

3

4

5

Offshore wind foundations

2

Tata Steel Slide 3Tata Steel Offshore Presentation

Climate targets

EU 2050 Roadmap:

� 80% Greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction (ref 1990)

EU : 2014: EU Climate & Energy Package , 2030 targets:

� 40% reduction GHG

� 27% share renewable energy

� 40% increase energy efficiency in build environment

NL: SER akkoord

� Increase share renewable energy 4% -> 14% in 2020 (16% 2023)

� Offshore wind 3,450 MW (2020) -> 4450 MW in 2023.

� Present capacity approx 800 MW.

Source : cobouw 13 jan 2014 + feb 6



Total Wind Energy EU:

� 117 GW (on-shore + offshore) , growth 2013 : 28%

Offshore wind EU:

� 90% share world capacity offshore wind (China: 9%, Japan 1%)

� EU present installed capacity 1660 turbines @ 3-4MW = approx 6400 MW

Source : EWEA 2013



Offshore wind market growth :

� 2013: 1400 MW (growth)

� 2020: 40 GW (cumulative)

� 2030: 150 GW (cumulative)

Steel intensity :

� approx 1000 ton steel / 5MW

� 60% foundation

� 40% superstructure

Source : EWEA 2013

28% / year


Developments by country

Netherlands

� Present capacity NL: 730 MW

� Permits issued for 2,500 MW , 1500 MW to be issued

� Projects under development: Luchterduinen (43 turbines ,128MW ).

� North of the Netherlands ( total 600MW ) + test/demo site 300MW : Leeghwater

UK:

� 6000 MW operational /under construction

� Furthermore 8000 MW planned (a.o. Race Bank + Dungeon)

Denmark:

� Target 2020: 50 % electricity energy generating by wind .

� under development 2000 MW (Anholt, Kriegers Flak , Horns Rev III, etc)

Germany:

� 2000MW under construction / operational,

� 3500 MW for approval and financing.

Total steel opportuninty 3000+8000+1500+6000 / 5MW= 3,5 mio ton (excl. auxilary

equipment)

Source : EWEA 2013, various studies


Content Summary


Life Cycle Analysis



1

2

3

4

5


7


Offshore Foundation types

Total: 74% (2012 :73%)

Total 5% (2012: 13%)

Total: 5% (2012:11%)

Total: 16% (2012: 3%)


Content Summary


Life Cycle Analysis



1

2

3

4

5


9


� How do concrete designs (Gravity bases) compare with steel designs (monopiles/jackets)

� What is impact of installation

� What are impact options around recovery and end-of-life recycling?

10

“What is the carbon footprint associated with the

manufacture, installation, use and end-of-life of different

designs of off-shore wind turbine tower foundations?”

Research question:

Tata Steel Slide 11Tata Steel Offshore Presentation 11

� LCA phases:

� Manufacture of foundation structure (excluding fabrication e.g. concrete pumping, welding and transport to site¹)

� Extraction/processing of ballast and scour protection materials

� Installation of foundation

� End of Life Recovery and benefits from recycling

¹ considered relative small impacts

LCA info

Re-use

Tata Steel Slide 12Tata Steel Offshore Presentation 12

EoL Scenarios:

� Steel Monopile which is recovered at end-of-life (EoL) for recycling

� Steel Jacket which is recovered at EoL for recycling

� Concrete Gravity Base which is either recovered for recycling or remains in place at EoL

LCA info


Analyses a.o. based on the Study by Danish Energy Agency for the Kriegers Flak

Windfarm.

13

1550

1750

2000

2250

3500

625

675

800

1075

1475

400

400

450

600

800

0 2000 4000

3.0 MW

3.6 MW

4.0 MW

8.0 MW

10.0 MW

tonnes of material

Steel jacket base

Steel monopile

base

Concrete gravity

base

Source Danish Energy Agency: study Kriegers Flak Windfarm

Average Water Depth ~23m

Materials


� Models built in GaBi6 LCA software

� Built using guidance from EN15804 & ISO14040/44

14

LCA Modelling


� Steel data (Global Average)

Obtained from The World Steel Association – 100% recycling rate

� Reinforced concrete data was modelled in GaBi and was compared with other data sources for consistency (BCSA, NL national database)

� CEMII RC50 concrete with 4.7% rebar (50% GGBS and 50% Portland Cement)

� Concrete modelled as a lower strength grade to account for carbon benefits of reduced Portland Cement content

� Rock/aggregate for scour protection – data from GaBi6 0.01tCO2e/t

15

Plate 0.90 tCO2e/t

Rebar 0.82 tCO2e/t

Not recycled at EOL 0.50 tCO2e/t

Recycled at EOL 0.22 tCO2e/t

Material data


� Use of rock and aggregates for ground preparation, ballasting of a concrete gravity base and scour protection

A Jacket has lowest CO2 footprint even when the gravity base is recovered for

recycling

16

170157

98 92

219203

11598

0

50

100

150

200

250

including ballast/scour protection excluding ballast/scour protection

tCO

2e

qu

iv.

/MW

Monopile - Recycled EOL

Jacket - Recycled EOL

Gravity Base - Not Recycled EOL

Gravity Base - Recycled EOL

+ 8 - 12%

Impact ballast/scour protection


� SMART Wind published information on the usage of vessels and fuel consumption for the installation

� Project One in the Hornsea Zone (water depth 25-40m)

17

¹ Emission factor for heavy fuel oil (direct and indirect) = 3.85tCO2e/t

Vessel Fuel consumption Time (days per installation) Total Fuel use (t per instal lation) Total Emission (tCO2 e)

ton/day Gravity Monopile Jacket Gravity Monopile Jacket Gravity Monopile Jacket

Tug 15 6 2 2 90 30 30 346 115 115

R ock dumping vessel 15 2 1 1 30 15 15 115 58 58

P ile installation vessel 15 1 0 0 15 0 0 58

D redging vessel 30 3 90 0 0 346 0 0

Grout support vessel 15 1 1 0 15 15 0 58 58

D iver support vessel 5 1,5 2 1 7,5 10 5 29 38 19

W ork boat 5 1 0 5 0 0 19 0

Safety boat 1,5 3 1 1 4,5 1,5 1,5 17 6 6

J ack -up installation vessel 30 2 2 2 60 60 60 231 231 231

Total 282 137 142 1084 525 544

Total per MW 93,6 MW W T)

3,85 CO2 e /ton 3,84 301 146 151

Impact Installation

The CO2e emissions associated with Heavy Fuel Oil usage were found to be considerable due to the size and number of vessels involved

¹


� Installation has a considerable impact on LCA values for all foundations

18

170

98

219

115

146

151

302

302

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Monopile - Recycled

EOL

Jacket - Recycled EOL Gravity Base - Not

Recycled EOL

Gravity Base -

Recycled EOL

tCO

2e

qu

iv.

/MW

Installation

Material impacts

Material + Installation impacts

Jacket has a 27% advantage over a Monopile foundation and 110% advantage

over Gravity Base.


� Decommissioning /Dis-assembly: assumed to be similar to installation impacts as a worst case scenario.

19

17098

219

115

146

151

302

302

146

151

302

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Monopile - Recycled

EOL

Jacket - Recycled EOL Gravity Base - Not

Recycled EOL

Gravity Base -

Recycled EOL

tCO

2e

qu

iv.

/MW

Recovery

Installation

Material impacts

Material + Installation + End of Life impacts

Even if the Gravity Base is not recovered a recovered Jacket still has a 30%

advantage.

The carbon footprint of a recovered Gravity Base is higher than a Gravity Base that

is not recovered.

Tata Steel Slide

� A concept developed by ARUP/ Gravitas was also included in the analysis:

� ARUP/Gravitas concept Brochure

� 4584t Concrete vs. 2250t Concrete for Kriegers Flak gravity base (8MW)

� Significant quantities of Rebar required –380kg/m3

� water depth – 35m

20

Materials Gravitas structure

Tata Steel Slide

� No data available on installation but assumed to be the same as a conventional gravity base in this study.

� Significant increase in materials 35m vs. 23m

21

Gravitas Concept Comparison

17098

375

189

146

151

302

302146

151

302

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Monopile - Recycled

EOL

Jacket - Recycled EOL GRAVITAS - Not

Recycled EOL

GRAVITAS - Recycled

EOL

tCO

2e

qu

iv.

/MW

Recovery

Installation

Material impacts


� Variation between studies arises for a number of reasons and makes direct comparisons difficult

� Use of different data sets for steel manufacture (EAF vs. BF/BOF)

� Water depth and turbine size (MW)

� Installation was found to be significant in those studies where it was included but there was variation in the estimates.

22

Gravity base – not recycled

Monopile

Jacket

UK Concrete centre studies

TSE study


Content Summary

Offshore Wind market

Life Cycle Analysis



1

2

3

4

5


23


Steel for all energy and power applications

24


We have a dedicated team serving all aspects of the Energy & Power sector

25


Ex-stock service to our customers enables flexible supply

Stock locations in Rotterdam, Singapore, Dubai and Houston

26


Offshore (Wind) structures

27


Offshore structures

28

Semi-processing of components so you can increase

productivity in your own businesses and shorten

leadtimes for your customers

Product kits of parts so you do not have to use valuable

fabrication areas for stock holding

Single sourcing contracts by working with approved

sub-suppliers to deliver the widest size and product

ranges

Dedicated contract managers to ensure that projects

are delivered in accordance with your project

requirements

Complete traceability of all materials to ensure

compliance with your customers’ quality

specifications


Content Summary

Offshore Wind market

Life Cycle Analysis



1

2

3

4

5


29


Summary

� Growth renewable energy at the heart of EU policies

� Offshore wind rapid growth market, with goodopportinities for steel

� Life Cycle Analysis offshore wind foundation: production, installation, recycling/end of life/disassembly and recycling phases to consider

� Ballast/Scour protection increase footprint byapprox 8-12%

� Installation /decommissioning has considerable impact (factor 1,5 - 5 x materialimpact) on CO2 footprint

� Jacket foundation results lowest CO2 footprint

� Tata Steel provides wide productrange / services for Offshore (Wind) and Energy market

SlideTata Steel 31Sustainable Metal Innovations

Together we make the difference

31

Tata Steel Construction Centre

“www.tatasteelbouw.nl”

02514-94500

Thanks for your attention , Questions??

Documents

Carbon Footprint Offshore Wind Foundationsnationalestaalbouwdag.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/005... · Carbon Footprint Offshore Wind Foundations ... Steel Monopile which is recovered