Offshore wind decommissioning regulations and workflows in the Outer Continental Shelf United States

Kaiser, Mark J.; Snyder, Brian F.

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2011.04.004

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, the Tehachapi Pass in California contains "bone yards" of abandoned wind turbine hardware that has been lying around without being recycled (Pasqualetti et al, 2002). Even if decommission is usually mandatory in operating permits, the total costs of decommissioning may not be covered due to price inflation, low capacity, unexpected circumstances (e.g., hurricane destruction), or a combination of such events (Kaiser and Snyder, 2012). It is possible that recycling can become uneconomic compared to abandonment under certain conditions, which is important to remember as decommissioning is dependent on a number of highly uncertain parameters that can have significant direct or indirect impacts on cost.…”

Section: Recyclingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of life cycle assessments on wind energy systems

Davidsson

Höök

Wall³

2012

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Several life cycle assessments (LCA) of wind energy published in recent years are reviewed to identify methodological differences and underlying assumptions. MethodsA full comparative analysis of 12 studies were undertaken (10 peer-reviewed papers, 1 conference paper, 1 industry report) regarding six fundamental factors (methods used, energy use accounting, quantification of energy production, energy performance and primary energy, natural resources, and recycling). Each factor is discussed in detail to highlight strengths and shortcomings of various approaches. ResultsSeveral potential issues are found concerning the way LCA methods are used for assessing energy performance and environmental impact of wind energy, as well as dealing with natural resource use and depletion. The potential to evaluate natural resource use and depletion impacts from wind energy appears to be poorly exploited or elaborated on in the reviewed studies. Estimations of energy performance and environmental impacts are critically analyzed and found to differ significantly. Conclusions and recommendationsA continued discussion and development of LCA methodology for wind energy and other energy resources are encouraged. Efforts should be made to standardize methods and calculations. Inconsistent use of terminology and concepts among the analyzed studies are found and should be remedied. Different methods are generally used and the results are presented in diverse ways, making it difficult to compare studies with each other, but also with other renewable energy sources.

show abstract

Section: Recyclingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of life cycle assessments on wind energy systems

Davidsson

Höök

Wall³

2012

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cost of cutting the recyclable components (e.g. steel) also needs to be weighed against the salvage value (Kaiser and Snyder 2012a). On the other hand, the landfill costs will be dependent on regional landfill tax laws (Pickering 2006;Guezuraga et al 2012;Cherrington et al 2012).…”

Section: Overview Of Literature On Decommissioning Cost Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cutting methods include internal or external abrasive water jetting, oxy-flame cutting, diamond wire cutting, explosives, laser cutting and "felling" of the wind turbine structures by using internal or external cutting methods (which reduce or remove the need for a specialised vessel). There are also different lifting and removal options that can be adopted from the wind turbine installation methods such as the bunny ear and tower in one piece and hub and tower in one piece (see Kaiser and Snyder 2012a;Gjødvad and Ibsen 2016;Paterson et al 2018;Castro-Santos et al 2018). The total lifting and removal cost of wind turbines are calculated by the following equation:…”

Section: Lifting and Removal Of Wind Turbines Tower Foundations Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The factors influencing the logistics costs include the following: distance to and from port, port fees, port capacity, port upscale requirement, storage and processing capacity of port, permit durations, mobilisation/demobilisation costs (vessels and personnel), water depth, number of vessels, number of personnel/crew, accommodation and feeding costs, duration of activities, number of vessels required (and different vessel class mixes), selected transportation strategy, weather windows (uptime and downtime), vessel capacity and weight and dimensions of the items to be transported, crane capacity and probability of failure of equipment/vessels and the duration of replacement. (Kaiser and Snyder 2012a;Lange et al 2012;Topham and McMillan 2017;Sarkar and Faiz, 2017;Gjødvad and Ibsen 2016). A flowchart for logistics planning of the decommissioning process in offshore wind farms is shown in Appendix Fig.…”

Section: Logisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…as artificial reefs), refining and hazardous materials handling, mechanical processing, incineration for energy recovery and disposal to landfills. (Kaiser and Snyder 2012a;Gjødvad and Ibsen 2016;Jensen 2019). After unloading at the port, the components have to be separated, sorted, cut, crushed or packaged for transfer for further processing.…”

Section: Waste Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An economic assessment framework for decommissioning of offshore wind farms using a cost breakdown structure

Adedipe

Shafiee

2021

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose As wind power generation increases globally, there will be a substantial number of wind turbines that need to be decommissioned in the coming years. It is crucial for wind farm developers to design safe and cost-effective decommissioning plans and procedures for assets before they reach the end of their useful life. Adequate financial provisions for decommissioning operations are essential, not only for wind farm owners but also for national governments. Economic analysis approaches and cost estimation models therefore need to be accurate and computationally efficient. Thus, this paper aims to develop an economic assessment framework for decommissioning of offshore wind farms using a cost breakdown structure (CBS) approach. Methods In the development of the models, all the cost elements and their key influencing factors are identified from literature and expert interviews. Similar activities within the decommissioning process are aggregated to form four cost groups including: planning and regulatory approval, execution, logistics and waste management, and post-decommissioning. Some mathematical models are proposed to estimate the costs associated with decommissioning activities as well as to identify the most critical cost drivers in each activity group. The proposed models incorporate all cost parameters involved in each decommissioning phase for more robust cost assessment. Results and discussion A case study of a 500 MW baseline offshore wind farm is proposed to illustrate the models’ applicability. The results show that the removal of wind turbines and foundation structures is the most costly and lengthy stage of the decommissioning process due to many requirements involved in carrying out the operations. Although inherent uncertainties are taken into account, cost estimates can be easily updated when new information becomes available. Additionally, further decommissioning cost elements can be captured allowing for sensitivity analysis to be easily performed. Conclusions Using the CBS approach, cost drivers can be clearly identified, revealing critical areas that require attention for each unique offshore wind decommissioning project. The CBS approach promotes adequate management and optimisation of identified key cost drivers, which will enable all stakeholders involved in offshore wind farm decommissioning projects to achieve cost reduction and optimal schedule, especially for safety-critical tasks.

show abstract