The Future Off-shore Wind and “New” Renewables Steven J. Smith Andrew Mizrahi

Joe Karas Mayda Nathan

GTSP Technical Workshop College Park, MD

May 24, 2011

PNNL-SA-80112

JGCRI

Wind and CSP are often the largest two potential renewable contributors (aside from biomass) in our future scenarios. The role of “new renewables” such as off-shore wind and thermal CSP depends largely on:

± Capital cost decreases

± Resource quality and location

± Long-distance transmission

± Climate policy?

Conclusions

Regional US and global analysis will be used to examine the potential role of these “new” renewables.

Sponsors: EERE GTSP

JGCRI

Land-Based Wind is No Longer “New”

➡  After substantial cost declines through the 1980s, wind capital costs have increased in recent years.

➡  Much of this increase is shared by other technologies. ➡  Improvements in manufacturing and operation efficiencies are still likely to

occur, but may be at rates similar to other mature technologies.

!

"##$!%&'(!)*+,'-.-/&*0!1234*5!6*7-35! 89!

!"#$%%&'()*+,-)./01)2,-0*3456#)78.)/9+,):*-,)-,;,<.=>)0<;-,91,3?4@))A:*<B)./,)19:2=,)*C)2-*D,;.1)780=.)0<)"%%E#)C*-),F9:2=,#)./,);929;0.>GH,0B/.,3)9+,-9B,)0<1.9==,3);*1.)H91)!"#I"%&'(?))J/01)9+,-9B,)0<;-,91,3)7>)!I$%&'()KEL6)C-*:)./,)H,0B/.,3G9+,-9B,);*1.)*C)!I#E5%&'()C*-)2-*D,;.1)0<1.9==,3)0<)"%%M#)9<3)0<;-,91,3)7>)!M"%&'()K@NL6)C-*:)./,)9+,-9B,);*1.)*C)2-*D,;.1)0<1.9==,3)C-*:)"%%I)./-*8B/)"%%4?))O-*D,;.);*1.1)/9+,);=,9-=>)-01,<#)*<)9+,-9B,#)*+,-)./,)=91.)C0+,)>,9-1?4$

)

))

P*:,)*C)./,);*1.)2-,118-,1)C9;0<B)./,)0<381.->)0<)-,;,<.)>,9-1)K,?B?#)-010<B):9.,-09=1);*1.1#)./,)H,9')3*==9-#)9<3).8-70<,)9<3);*:2*<,<.)1/*-.9B,16)/9+,),91,3)10<;,)=9.,)"%%M?))A1)9)-,18=.#)H/0=,);*1.1):9>)Q)*<)9+,-9B,)Q)-,:90<)/0B/)C*-)9)2,-0*3)*C).0:,)91)3,+,=*2,-1);*<.0<8,).*)H*-')./,0-)H9>)./-*8B/)./,)3H0<3=0<B)79;'=*B)*C).8-70<,1)28-;/91,3)0<),9-=>)"%%M)9.)2,9')2-0;,1)8<3,-)=*<BG.,-:)C-9:,)9B-,,:,<.1#4M

)

)./,-,)9-,),F2,;.9.0*<1)./9.)9+,-9B,)0<1.9==,3);*1.1)H0==)3,;=0<,)*+,-).0:,)K1,,)<,F.)1,;.0*<#)*<)H0<3).8-70<,)2-0;,).-,<316?))

!"#$%&'(()&$*&+&,(-./(01"2&(3.4.(5"6741(1#55$&11&3(4"(5$"4&%4(%"7863&746.+64,9(

!"#$%&'()*''+,-./00&1'2",1'345&%'3%46&7.'84-.-'9:&%';"<&'

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))45)R0:0.,3)19:2=,)10S,),9-=>)*<)Q)29-.0;8=9-=>)0<)./,)IEM%1)Q):9',1)0.)30CC0;8=.).*)20<)3*H<)./01)<8:7,-)H0./)9)/0B/)3,B-,,)*C);*<C03,<;,?)4@)R,9-<0<B);8-+,1)/9+,)7,,<)81,3),F.,<10+,=>).*)8<3,-1.9<3)291.);*1.).-,<31)9<3).*)C*-,;91.)C8.8-,);*1.)-,38;.0*<1)C*-)9)+9-0,.>)*C),<,-B>).,;/<*=*B0,1#)0<;=830<B)H0<3),<,-B>?))R,9-<0<B);8-+,1)1.9-.)H0./)./,)2-,:01,)./9.)0<;-,91,1)0<)./,);8:8=9.0+,)2-*38;.0*<)*-)0<1.9==9.0*<)*C)9)B0+,<).,;/<*=*B>)=,931).*)9)-,38;.0*<)0<)0.1);*1.1?))J/,)2-0<;029=)29-9:,.,-);9=;8=9.,3)7>)=,9-<0<B);8-+,)1.830,1)01)./,)=,9-<0<B)-9.,T))C*-),+,->)3*87=0<B)*C);8:8=9.0+,)2-*38;.0*<&0<1.9==9.0*<#)./,)=,9-<0<B)-9.,)12,;0C0,1)./,)911*;09.,3)2,-;,<.9B,)-,38;.0*<)0<);*1.1?))U91,3)*<)./,)0<1.9==,3);*1.)39.9)2-,1,<.,3)0<)V0B8-,)"$)9<3)B=*79=);8:8=9.0+,)H0<3)2*H,-)0<1.9==9.0*<1#)=,9-<0<B)-9.,1);9<)7,);9=;8=9.,3)91)C*==*H1T))E?4L)K810<B)39.9)C-*:)IEM")./-*8B/)"%%E6)*-)I4?4L)K810<B)39.9)*<=>)38-0<B)./,)2,-0*3)*C);*1.)-,38;.0*<#)IEM"G"%%46?)4$)W.)01)0:2*-.9<.).*)-,;*B<0S,)./9.)H0<3)2*H,-)2-*D,;.1)H,-,)<*.)9=*<,)0<)1,,0<B)82H9-3)2-,118-,)*<)2-*D,;.);*1.1)Q)*./,-).>2,1)*C)2*H,-)2=9<.1),F2,-0,<;,3)10:0=9-)0<;-,91,1)0<);920.9=);*1.1?))V*-),F9:2=,#)./,)WXP)YZ[A)O*H,-)Y920.9=)Y*1.)W<3,F)*C);*9=#)B91#)9<3)H0<3)2*H,-)2=9<.1)1/*H1)9)$4L);920.9=);*1.)0<;-,91,)C-*:)"%%%).*)./,),<3)*C)"%%E)KWXP)YZ[A)"%%E6?)4M)V*-),F9:2=,#)39.9);*:20=,3)7>)U,-',=,>)R97)1/*H)9<),1.0:9.,3)H,0B/.,3G9+,-9B,);*1.)C*-)9)19:2=,)*C):*-,)./9<)4#N%%)\()*C)2-*D,;.1)=0',=>).*)7,)780=.)0<)"%I%)*C)!"#"N%&'(#)*-)!II%&'()/0B/,-)./9<)C*-)./,)19:2=,)*C)2-*D,;.1);*:2=,.,3)0<)"%%E?)

!

"!!

#$!!!

#$"!!

%$!!!

%$"!!

&$!!!

&$"!!

'$!!!

'$"!!

"$!!!

#()%

#()&

#()'

#()"

#()*

#()+

#())

#()(

#((!

#((#

#((%

#((&

#(('

#(("

#((*

#((+

#(()

#(((

%!!!

%!!#

%!!%

%!!&

%!!'

%!!"

%!!*

%!!+

%!!)

%!!(

,-./011234567829/4:7./4;%!!(4<=>?@

4,-3ABA3C014567829/4:7./4;'!"47-1A-24D67829/.4/7/01A-E4%)$"%%4F?@

4:0D09A/GH?2AEI/234JB260E24567829/4:7./

4571G-7KA014L62-34MA-2

JGCRI

Off-shore Wind is More Expensive Than On-shore

➡  Offshore wind will always have a higher capital cost than on-shore. ➡  Intra-farm cabling and connection to shore are significant expenses. ➡  Costs increase with depth and with distance to shore.

Cost decreases in these offshore-specific components are key to a large role for offshore wind.

Shallow-water installation Class 7 wind

backup-capital!

backup-electricity!

connect-to-shore!

foundation!

collect cable & BOS!

turbine!

JGCRI

Offshore Wind Resource ±  On a sub-regional to regional scale, water depth can be a key

resource limitation (more limited resource off the coast of California, for example).

JGCRI

Offshore Wind Resource A first cut look at offshore wind resources.

Wind speed + water depth define the off-shore resource.

Results screened to depths < 200m

Wind speed from UNEP SWERA data (NREL)

JGCRI

Zhang, Y., SJ Smith, GP Kyle, and PW Stackhouse Jr. (2010) Modeling the Potential for Thermal Concentrating Solar Power Technologies Energy Policy 38 pp. 7884–7897. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.09.008.

Thermal CSP Resource Key characteristic for Thermal CSP (e.g., trough, power tower) is clear skies

JGCRI

Global Offshore Wind & CSP Resources

➡  US has very large offshore wind and CSP resources (also Australia & NZ). ➡  Off-shore wind resources have little correlation with CSP ➡  Both can be important: nationally and globally

Substantial portions of both offshore areas and CSP areas excluded.

Aust_NZ, Africa, & Middle East are “off the chart” for CSP.

Vary widely by region.

0!

20!

40!

USA!

Can

ada!

Wes

tern

Eur

ope!

Japa

n!

Aus

tralia

_NZ!

Form

er S

ovie

t Uni

on!

Chi

na!

Mid

dle Eas

t!

Afric

a!

Latin

Am

eric

a!

South

east A

sia!

Easte

rn E

urop

e!

Kor

ea!

Indi

a!

Per

-Cap

ita P

ote

nti

al!

MW

-hr/

capit

a/y

ear!

Per-Capita Renewable Resources!Per-Capita Potential Generation for 2050 population!

Offshore Wind!

CSP Solar!

USA Per-capita

Electricity

Consumption!

JGCRI

How does this play out? Examine results from a sub-regional US analysis using GCAM.

Full electricity generation sector in each sub-region. Only regional renewable generation calibrated in each sub-region.

Have used US average non-renewable generation profile as a 2005 starting point for these runs.

JGCRI

0!

2!

4!

6!

8!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

USA Electric Generation!

Renewable Regionalization

4.5 W/m2 Climate Policy, Advanced Renewable Technology, Regional Renewable Only - 2095

Will examine regional results from a 4.5 W/m2 climate policy scenario. In this scenario

± Solar, wind, and geothermal generation must be used within each sub-region

± All technologies are assumed available, including new nuclear and CCS

± “Advanced” scenario for renewable technology costs

± Solar, wind, and geothermal are 33% of total generation by 2095.

JGCRI

0!

2!

4!

6!

8!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

USA Electric Generation!

Renewable Regionalization

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

2.00!

2.50!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

4.5 W/m2 Climate Policy, Advanced Renewable Technology, Regional Renewable Only - 2095

USA Total: 33% CSP, Wind, PV, Geothermal plus 14% biomass

33%

46%

51%

54%

48%

42%

23%

41%

30%

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

23% 0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

19%

0.00!

0.50!

1.00!

1.50!

Foss

il!

Nucl

ear!

Oth

er!

Bio

mas

s!

CSP!

Onsh

ore

Win

d!

Offsh

ore

Win

d!

Geo

ther

mal!

PV!

29%

JGCRI

What Matters For Renewables?

Renewable shares are smallest if technological change for renewables is low & all technology options available in all sub-regions.

Renewable shares are largest with implementation of a climate policy, and limited options (no new nuclear and no CCS).

0!

2!

4!

6!

8!

10!

Fossil!

Nuclear!

Other!

Biomass!

CSP!

Onshore

Wind!

Offsho

re Wind

!

Geother

mal! PV!

2095 USA Electric Generation!No Policy Ref Renew Tech!

0!

2!

4!

6!

8!

10!

Fossil!

Nuclear!

Other!

Biomass!

CSP!

Onshore

Wind!

Offsho

re Wind

!

Geother

mal! PV!

2095 USA Electric Generation!4.5 Policy Adv Renew Tech!

JGCRI

What Matters For Renewables?

With all technological options available, the key determinant of renewable share is capital costs.

If options are limited (e.g., no new Nuclear or CCS), then climate

policy has the largest impact on the role of renewables.

0!

2!

4!

6!

8!

10!

Fossil!

Nuclear!

Other!

Biomass!

CSP!

Onshore

Wind!

Offsho

re Wind

!

Geother

mal! PV!

2095 USA Electric Generation!No Policy Ref Renew Tech!

0!

2!

4!

6!

8!

10!

Fossil!

Nuclear!

Other!

Biomass!

CSP!

Onshore

Wind!

Offsho

re Wind

!

Geother

mal! PV!

2095 USA Electric Generation!4.5 Policy Adv Renew Tech!

ref-renew adv-renew ref-renew adv-renewAll Techs 18% 30% 21% 34%

No New Nuc or CCS 19% 31% 59% 68%

no-policy 4.5 PolicyShare of wind+solar+geothermal in 2095

JGCRI

Impact of Transmission

➡  CSP and on-shore wind generation increase. ➡  A national renewable grid lower the climate policy cost. ➡  If new nuclear and CCS are not available, impact of grid is twice as large.

Consider scenario where any US sub-region can, in addition to its regional generation, use renewable supply from elsewhere by paying about 1¢/kW-hr + 5% loss.

-1.0!

0.0!

1.0!

2.0!

Fossil!

Nuclear!

Other!

Biomass!

CSP!

Onshore

Wind!

Offsho

re Wind

!

Geother

mal! PV!Gen

erat

ion

Shift

(EJ)!

Impact of a National Renew Grid!Adv Renew Tech - all tech's available!

JGCRI

SUMMARY Renewable technologies comprise a significant portion of future US electricity generation in all scenarios.

➡  Renewable generation in GCAM-RE, including biomass and hydro, comprise 30-50% depending on renewable technology assumptions, even with CCS and new nuclear in the scenario.

CSP and wind are major contributors. ➡  CSP in the southwest ➡  Off-shore wind in the East ➡  Off-shore wind becomes large under advanced scenario where foundation and

underwater transmission costs are assumed to drop faster.

Transmission options change distribution mix. ➡  Under national grid case, with a carbon policy, on-shore wind and CSP

increase, fossil, nuclear, and off-shore wind decrease. ➡  Note that a substantial increase in sub-regional use of renewables is likely to

require transmission upgrades (as found by multiple studies).

The importance of off-shore wind and CSP vary globally by region ➡  A few regions have large amounts of both, more common to have one or

another.