Offshore technology

Profound progress

Daniel Hautmann, 26 Apr 14
Large offshore turbines are mostly installed on complex structures. Cylindrical monopiles can only support small turbines, as they cannot be driven deeply enough into the seabed. But thanks to new drilling technology, a solution is now on the way.

The idea is certainly appealing. Instead of installing offshore wind turbines on huge, complex and expensive tripods, simple steel cylinders could be used in the future. These foundations are called monopiles – and they are far cheaper than jacket or tripod foundations. But why have turbine manufacturers only just come up with this apparently obvious idea? The answer lies in drilling technology. So far, it has only been possible to drive monopiles to a depth that allows them to support turbines with a power of two or three megawatts (MW) at most.

Save the nature, save money, subscribe to our epaper - click here for the trial version!Print is 70 Euros/6 issues, epaper is 59 Euros/6 issues. For more information please send an email to epaper@neueenergie.net 

Sheet steel is bent and soldered to make the large cylinders, which are then held by a claw from a ship or hoisting platform and driven into the seabed with great force using hydraulic or diesel piling hammers. The latter are heavy steel constructions that hang from a crane and lift heavy weights by igniting a compound of diesel and air. When the weight falls down again, it hits the monopile, thus driving it a little further into the seabed each time. However, diesel piling hammers can only cope with foundations that have a diameter of up to six metres. Too much power is needed for anything bigger than this. But larger turbines need foundations with a larger diameter. Another problem is the volume of sound produced when metal hits metal. As noise carries a long distance underwater, marine fauna may suffer permanent damage. As a result, the authorities have set a noise limit of 160 decibels at a distance of 750 metres from the building site. But even this limit can prove tricky when the monopiles are rammed into the seabed.

There is also another issue: monopiles cannot be hammered into complex geographical structures, such as a stony substratum. Christoph Budach from Essenbased building concern Hochtief Solutions describes these problems as “the three big disadvantages of ramming”. His solution for the three-part problem has three letters: OFD, which stands for offshore foundation drilling. Instead of using enormous force to hammer the foundations into the seabed, holes are drilled for them. Hochtief, which is one of the largest construction companies in the world, and Herrenknecht, the global market leader in tunnelling equipment, joined forces on OFD and set up a research consortium. “Herrenknecht was looking for new markets at the same time that we at Hochtief realised we would need to use a drilling technology offshore in order to install large foundations. That was two-and-a-half years ago,” Budach recalls. The two companies have been developing the drilling equipment and the necessary logistics for offshore projects together since then.

This is an abridged version of the article – the complete text is available in issue 5/2013 of new energy.

Comments (1)

Add new comment»
  • 15 Oct 2014 - 4:07am, Alifia

    I voted for Obama; I'm a lifelong Dem, I sortupped him since the primaries, and I agree with him about 99% of his policies; the only one I have a problem with is his lukewarm support of nuclear energy...which is the only real option to tackle the global meltdown of global warming in our lifetimes, as well as to get rid of dependency on foreign oil.I do hope that Forbes is right about Obama's position on nuclear issues. I am also cautiously optimistic in that area. Obama's got a first class brain, and if he's given enough information to judge an issue like nuclear power on the merits, he will--hopefully. He isn't a Boomer who grew up during the years of atomic testing and missile crises and hopelessly conflates nuclear weapons with nuclear power, a major factor that made some of the Boomers rather anti-nuclear. So I think he's reachable for the purpose of turning his skeptical support into warm support for nuclear...if you give him the evidence and the facts to make such a choice. On another note, my generation, we'll be on Obama's staff...you should reach out to us...because you'll find that though we're progressive and liberal, we're also willing to try new things, including those things rejected by our parents...like nuclear power, provided somebody makes a case to us. For example, engaging progressive bloggers and younger opinion leaders on nuclear issues might pay quite good dividends--especially about using nuclear power as an answer to climate change, and the like.

Add new comment

Current issue

Issue 05 / 2018

Climate action vs. wildlife conservation - An unnecessary conflict

Previous issues »