Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ATLANTIS RESOURCES CORPORATION SIEMENS MCT
ALSTOM TGL
VOITH HYDRO
SCHOTTEL TIDALSTREAM
TIDAL ENERGY LIMITED
MEYGEN
KAWASAKI HEAVY INDUSTRIES
GDF-SUEZ
MINESTO
BAUER RENEWABLES
AQUANTIS
HYDROQUEST
SABELLA
Mojo Maritime & Tidal Energy Marine Operations – Project History
Offshore Wind – mature technology, cost-reduction focused;
Tidal Energy – maturing technology, focused on commercialisation at array scale
Wave Energy – nascent technology, focused on commercial R&D and pilot array scale
Ocean Current – immature technology, but with opportunity for rapid development leveraging on tidal energy;
• CAPEX (BOP) – Balance of Plant • Foundations • Cables • Sub Stations
• CAPEX (Install) – Installation Costs: • Vessel Charter Rates & Performance • Role Equipment Charter Rates & Performance, e.g.:
• Drills • ROVs
• Project Yield: • Foundation Design • Array Design • Installation Speed
• CAPEX (BOP) – Balance of Plant • Foundations • Cables • Sub Stations
• CAPEX (Install) – Installation Costs: • Vessel Charter Rates & Performance • Role Equipment Charter Rates & Performance, e.g.:
• Drills • ROVs
• Project Yield: • Foundation Design • Array Design • Installation Speed
Marine Operations Theoretical Case Study
• Theoretical Large Scale Array: • 50 turbines
• 75MW Installed Capacity
• Challenging High Energy Site
• Input Variables - Balance of Plant: • Gravity Base v Monopiles
• Sub Stations & Cabling Strategy
• Input Variables - Vessel: • Jack Up Barge
• Conventional OCV
• High Performance OCV
• Input Variables - Equipment: • Drill?
• Conventional ROV
• High Performance ROV
• Outputs Variables: • Time, Cost, Yield
Marine Operations Simulation Software:
Applications
Marine Operations Simulation Software:
Applications
MERMAID
The Simulation Algorithms
first, task-analyse the
marine operation and
MetOcean task limits;
second, simulate the
whole operation against
site-specific MetOcean
hind-cast data;
third, interrogate results to
understand and minimize
project and site specific
operational time, cost &
risk
Marine Operations R&D Using Simulation
• Moored: • Easy O&M Access
• Ideal water column depth
• Low Area Power Extraction Efficiency
• Navigational Interference
• Gravity Base: • Potential Speed of Installation
• High Unit Cost @ 1400 tonnes per iMW
• Bottom Preparation & Verticality
• High Underwater Drag
• Monopile: • Low unit costs @ 120 tonnes per iMW
• Drill time
• Low Underwater Drag
• Simplicity
Variable I – Foundation Choice: Moored v Gravity Base v Monopile
• Moored: • Easy O&M Access
• Ideal water column depth
• Low Area Power Extraction Efficiency
• Navigational Interference
• Gravity Base: • Potential Speed of Installation
• High Unit Cost @ 1400 tonnes per iMW
• Bottom Preparation & Verticality
• High Underwater Drag
• Monopile: • Low unit costs @ 120 tonnes per iMW
• Drill time
• Low Underwater Drag
• Simplicity
Variable I – Foundation Choice: Moored v Gravity Base v Monopile
• Jack Up Barges: • Potential Stability/VIV issues
• Weather & Depth Limited
• Operations in High Energy High Density Site
• Charter = Expensive day rates
• Conventional OCV: • 90m LOA & 900m2 Deck Space
• 2ms-1 DP Performance
• 400 tonne AHC Crane & Deep Water Capability
• Charter = £29K to £125K
• High Performance OCV: • 5ms-1 DP Capability
• 850-900 m2 Deck Space
• 250 tonne AHC Crane & Shallow Water Capability
• Charter = £35K-£55K
Variable II – Vessel Choice: Jack Up v Conventional OCV – High Performance OCV
• Jack Up Barges: • Potential Stability/VIV issues
• Weather & Depth Limited
• Operations in High Energy High Density Site
• Charter = Expensive day rates
• Conventional OCV: • 90m LOA & 900m2 Deck Space
• 2ms-1 DP Performance
• 400 tonne AHC Crane & Deep Water Capability
• Charter = £29K to £125K
• High Performance OCV: • 5ms-1 DP Capability
• 850-900 m2 Deck Space
• 250 tonne AHC Crane & Shallow Water Capability
• Charter = £35K-£55K
Variable II – Vessel Choice: Jack Up v Conventional OCV – High Performance OCV
-5
0
5 TIDAL CURRENT (m/s)
0
1
2
3WAVE HEIGHT (Hs, m)
0
5
10
15
20 WIND SPEED (m/s)
£0
£2
£4
£6
£8
£10CUMULATIVE COST OF n FOUNDATION INSTALLATION (£m)
EXISTING DP OCV
FUTURE VESSEL
• Conventional ROV: • Tested and cost-effective technology
• 1.0 ms-1 UW Performance
• Deep Water Capability
• Charter = £4-5K
• High Performance ROV: • Novel & untested technology
• 2.0+ ms-1 UW Performance
• Cost Unknown
• Charter = £4-8K
Variable III – Equipment Choice: Conventional ROV v High Performance ROV
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Variable III – Equipment Choice: Conventional ROV v High Performance ROV
Mermaid Analysis: Operational Task Flow
Mermaid Analysis: Mermaid Live
Mermaid Results: Max - Initial Runs - 10 Nov 16
Vessel ROV UnweatheredMin P10 P25 Median P75 P90 Max
Siem Daya WR200 – 1.0 m/s 262.33 951.6 1007.25 1036.44 1204.94 1243.03 1271.75 1316.36
HF4 WR200 – 1.0 m/s 262.33 845.82 887.29 911.8 1013.41 1067.4 1088.11 1125.39
HF4 UCV – 2.0 m/s 262.33 477.2 493.56 512.22 537.36 556.98 580.66 611.65
HF4 MM 1a – 2.7 m/s 262.33 469.87 487.09 503.44 531.22 549.91 572.84 611.65
HF4 MM 1b – 3.1 m/s 262.33 469.87 487.09 503.35 531.22 549.91 572.84 611.65
HF4 MM 2 – 4.4 m/s 262.33 469.87 487.09 503.35 531.22 549.91 572.84 611.65
Max - Sensitivity Runs - 14 Nov 16
Vessel ROV Speed (ms-1) Unweathered Min P10 P25 Median P75 P90 Max
Siem Daya - WR200 1.00 262.33 951.6 1007.25 1036.44 1204.94 1243.03 1271.75 1316.36
Siem Daya - UCV 2.00 262.33 788.24 826.12 866.43 1007.01 1042.87 1059.66 1090.24
Siem Daya - MM1a 2.70 262.33 787.97 826.04 864.78 1005.95 1038.63 1059.59 1090.1
Siem Daya - MM1b 3.10 262.33 787.97 826.04 864.78 1005.95 1038.63 1059.59 1090.1
Siem Daya - MM1c 4.40 262.33 787.97 826.04 864.78 1005.95 1038.63 1059.59 1090.1
HF4 - WR200 1.00 262.33 845.82 887.29 911.8 1013.41 1067.4 1088.11 1125.39
HF4 - UCV 2.00 262.33 477.2 493.56 512.22 537.36 556.98 580.66 611.65
HF4 - MM1a 2.70 262.33 469.87 487.09 503.44 531.22 549.91 572.84 611.65
HF4 - MM1b 3.10 262.33 469.87 487.09 503.35 531.22 549.91 572.84 611.65
HF4 - MM1c 4.40 262.33 469.87 487.09 503.35 531.22 549.91 572.84 611.65
• Discussion Points: • Impact of HF-ROV @ 2.0ms-1
• Impact of HF4
• Lack of Improvement above 2.7ms-1
Mermaid Results:
75MW Installation Median Durations in Days Comparisons
Project Phase HF4 + HF-ROV % Project Time Siem Daya + HF-ROV% Time Task Improvement
Foundation Unweathered Foundation Install 141.8 26.7% 262.3 26.1%
Median Weather Impact 125.0 23.5% 433.1 43.1%
Sub Total 266.8 50.2% 695.4 69.1% 61.6%
Sub Stations Unweathered Substation Install 3.4 0.6% 3.4 0.3%
Median Weather Impact 0.6 0.1% 1.5 0.1%
Sub Total 4.0 0.8% 4.9 0.5% 18.5%
Export Cables Unweathered Ex Cable Install 15.2 5.8% 15.2 1.8%
Median Weather Impact 2.6 1.0% 20.9 2.5%
Sub Total 17.7 3.3% 36.0 3.6% 50.8%
Nacelle Unweathered Nacelle Install 106.1 20.0% 106.1 10.5%
Median Weather Impact 136.6 25.7% 163.5 16.3%
Sub Total 242.7 45.7% 269.6 26.8% 10.0%
Total Total 531.2 100.0% 1006.0 100.0%
MetOcean Downtime 264.76 49.8% 619.0 61.5%
• Discussion Points: • Foundation Time
• Nacelle Time
• Weather Downtime
Mermaid Results: ROV Performance Impact
Mermaid Results:
Installation Cost Comparision - OCV v HF4 - ROV Variants
OCV OCV & HF4 - 1.0ms-1 OCV-WR200 v HF4-WR200
OCV Assumed Day Rate 29,000£ 29,000£
ROV Assumed Day Rate 4,000£ 4,000£
Drill Spread Assumed Total Day Rate 26,597£ 26,597£
Total Day Rate 59,597£ 59,597£
Median Project Days 1205 1,205
Total Charter Costs 71,810,207£ 71,813,783£
HF4
HF4 Assumed Day Rate 35,000£ 35,000£
HF-ROV 4,000£ 8,000£
Drill Spread Assumed Total Day Rate 26,597£ 26,597£
Total Day Rate 65,597£ 69,597£
Median Project Days 1013 531£
Total Charter Costs 66,476,149£ 36,955,742£
HF4 - CAPEX Installation Saving 5,334,058£ 34,858,041£
Load Factor Yield Comparison
Yield Factors
Array Size - iMW 75 75
Assumed Load Factor 59.0% 0.59
HF4 Charter Days Saved 192 674
Strike Price - Up to 30 MW 30 305£ 24,815,393£ 30 87,326,136£
Strike Price - Above 30MW 45 100£ 12,204,292£ 45 42,947,280.00£
HF4 - Early Yield Delivered 37,019,685£ 130,273,416£
Net HF4 Financial Benefit
Installation Cost Benefit 5,334,058£ 34,858,041£
Early Yield Benefit 37,019,685£ 130,273,416£
Net Early Years Benefit 42,353,742£ 165,131,457£
£-
£50,000,000
£100,000,000
£150,000,000
£200,000,000
£250,000,000
£300,000,000
InstallationPrice
Early YieldNet HF4Benefit
HF4
OCV
HF4 v OCV yield & net benefits:
• yield – 3.1 years at UK strike prices = £154M gained.
• net benefit = installation savings & early yield = £265M.
Economic Results:
Mermaid Modelling – Levelised Cost of Energy
•
•
•
•
Economic Results:
• Low cost due to vessel capability not low charter rate
Sensitivity Modelling - LCOE
Economic Results:
• CAPEX (BOP) – Balance of Plant • Foundations • Cables • Sub Stations
• CAPEX (Install) – Installation Costs: • Vessel Charter Rates & Performance • Role Equipment Charter Rates & Performance, e.g.:
• Drills • ROVs
• Project Yield: • Foundation Design • Array Design • Installation Speed
MARINE OPERATIONS & TIDAL ENERGY
