New Menaces to Navigation?

[boatman61]

Viana do Costelo, Portugal.. just the one floater to date but this is what is to come for folk sailing N or S.
Secuite, Secuite, Secuite.. A wind generator has broken loose and is currently drifting S, if sighted please contact the VTS on Channel 11 VHF. giving time and position.

[ItDepends]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The Levelised Cost of Electrify from offshore wind is one of the more cost effective means of generating electricity. So I don’t know where you get your statement

It's interesting your graph does NOT include "OffShore + Battery" or "Offshore plus pumped hydro" which of course would be required to make it a truly grid usable power source, while most of the other power sources in your graph are priced as full grid supply costs. It's not an accurate comparison.

You can not build a wind farm for $X capital dollars and NOT count the $Z of capital cost needed to supply power when the wind is not available in the cost of the power. Even when sitting there idle, the $Z of additional generating capacity is REQUIRED and costs money to build and maintain. A gas fired plant (for example) is a stand alone facility and does not required a 'hot backup" ready to go. There are no hidden costs. As an engineer I do realize that this analysis is a bit simplified, but it is an important point to the OVERALL cost of power coming out of the plug in your home.

It would be like being sold a solar system to generate all the power needed at your off-grid house, and having the batteries needed at night be an optional extra. I think you would count that as dishonest pricing. I am sure you can see the analogy.

The subsidized, variable cost of power is hardly the point...

In the USA where onshore wind power is pretty common, and generally economical (at least after tax breaks and subsidies), some of the highest electricity costs are on Block Island, feed entirely by a highly subsidized offshore wind project...

Another example, on the east cost of Puerto Rico there is a wind farm that was destroyed in a hurricane a few years ago. It has never been repaired because without the subsidies available to the original builder, it is not not economical to do so, and PR power prices are NOT cheap! (OK the turbines are not QUITE offshore but pretty close!)

You might think I am opposed to offshore wind power. I am not. in the right place and close to shore it can make sense in a total energy picture to reduce conventional fuel usage. And I understand that honest cost figures are incredibly difficult to find unless you really know what to look for. Both renewable and conventional power supplies have multiple (frequently hidden) layers of subsidies and imposed costs.

Add to that, both supporters and detractors obfuscate numbers (i.e., lie) to make points they think need to be made. Add to that silly things like "Menace to navigation!" and it becomes really hard to see the truth.

[RaymondR]

One of the reasons for moving them offshore is that people don't like the visual pollution they cause onshore also where they have been installed near human habitation some people appear to be seriously affected by them.

Some of the zones proposed cover whale migration routes. What are the effects upon sea life?

[boatman61]

Headaches...

[Gadagirl]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

One of the reasons for moving them offshore is that people don't like the visual pollution they cause onshore also where they have been installed near human habitation some people appear to be seriously affected by them.

Some of the zones proposed cover whale migration routes. What are the effects upon sea life?

Well I'm sure in the past that erecting oil wells on land and offshore have done worse damage than wind mills. I'm sure people and their surrounding environments are by far less damaged to the environment than oil platforms, oil wells, fracking sites, and coal mining sites. and all of the accompanying refining facilities that spew pollution.

As far as migration of fish stocks? Climate change exasperated by our use of fossil fuels have already altered and jeopardized not only fish and migration of all life on the planet, it's precipitated by the changing of our major ocean and wind currents.

I'm not sorry that some person in Iowa can't sleep quite right because of the noise created by a wind mill. But billions of people are subjected by air pollution, water pollution, and a blight on their horizon (view) by an oil rig or an a refinery.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by ItDepends

It's interesting your graph does NOT include "OffShore + Battery" or "Offshore plus pumped hydro" which of course would be required to make it a truly grid usable power source, while most of the other power sources in your graph are priced as full grid supply costs. It's not an accurate comparison.

You can not build a wind farm for $X capital dollars and NOT count the $Z of capital cost needed to supply power when the wind is not available in the cost of the power. Even when sitting there idle, the $Z of additional generating capacity is REQUIRED and costs money to build and maintain. A gas fired plant (for example) is a stand alone facility and does not required a 'hot backup" ready to go. There are no hidden costs. As an engineer I do realize that this analysis is a bit simplified, but it is an important point to the OVERALL cost of power coming out of the plug in your home.

It would be like being sold a solar system to generate all the power needed at your off-grid house, and having the batteries needed at night be an optional extra. I think you would count that as dishonest pricing. I am sure you can see the analogy.

The subsidized, variable cost of power is hardly the point...

In the USA where onshore wind power is pretty common, and generally economical (at least after tax breaks and subsidies), some of the highest electricity costs are on Block Island, feed entirely by a highly subsidized offshore wind project...

Another example, on the east cost of Puerto Rico there is a wind farm that was destroyed in a hurricane a few years ago. It has never been repaired because without the subsidies available to the original builder, it is not not economical to do so, and PR power prices are NOT cheap! (OK the turbines are not QUITE offshore but pretty close!)

You might think I am opposed to offshore wind power. I am not. in the right place and close to shore it can make sense in a total energy picture to reduce conventional fuel usage. And I understand that honest cost figures are incredibly difficult to find unless you really know what to look for. Both renewable and conventional power supplies have multiple (frequently hidden) layers of subsidies and imposed costs.

Add to that, both supporters and detractors obfuscate numbers (i.e., lie) to make points they think need to be made. Add to that silly things like "Menace to navigation!" and it becomes really hard to see the truth.

The key is a super grid , in Europe this is under development. The winds always blowing somewhere. Equally backstop generation can be shared on the super grid. Ireland for example expects to be a net renewable supplier to the super grid by 2030

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by Gadagirl

But billions of people are subjected by air pollution, water pollution, and a blight on their horizon (view) by an oil rig or an a refinery.

Agreed and don't think we can carry on burning coal and oil. If the price is windmills out at sea along with other sources of greener generation, do be it.

Having seen the damage drag nets do to the seabed, an area at sea were they can't fish with net or drag trawls opens up the possibility of a nature reserve or nursery, enabling species the opportunity to thrive. Having dived the small 10m oil rigs in Brunei and there are hundreds of them every mile or so, what was once a flat empty seabed at a depth of 20-30m has been been transformed. The rigs either single tube or triple leg type and now after some years a haven for a variety of fish.

Now, if you had an electric yacht, could you stop off and plug in for a few hours to top the bank up, have a Costa or Big Mac? gets my vote.


Pete

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

There may still some (probably justifiable) concerns from commercial fishermen.

I believe that I read an article recently about wind farms, but it might have been about oil rigs. The structures in the water grow attached life, muscles and grasses and stuff like that. That develops an ecosystem that extends to a significant area around the structure. Like miles. The end result is that offshore structures take parts of the ocean that are nearly lifeless and infuse life into them.

Of course, the rigs still do produce physical impediments to fishing.

[JPA Cate]

@ Raymond R, and whoever is interested, and relative to the "menace"....

When you originally plot your course either way [going west or east), you normally allow a clearance zone off hazards, and increase it if you're expecting a southerly buster. (Based on the days of celestial navigation, I like 5 n. mi. off. Some people think 1/4 mi is enough, and it is, in daylight, with only good weather forecast, but I will not go that close. Part of seamanship is deciding what is safe enough.) There are west and east setting tidally related currents that affect courses through Mr. Bass' St., as well, but most cruising sailors will be aware of them through experience, or by watching the growing set on their GPS. People without GPS will probably be sensible enough (as Wotname posted, have the nous) to plan a safe trip. The offshore windmills are more hazard to birds, is my guess, than to sailors. Iirc, the orange bellied parrots cross there, and some of the shearwaters. The deaths of the endangered birds are to be regretted; but renewable energy is a very important thing to develop, as well, for many reasons.

I'd suggest that most people will not set out deliberately to get caught in stronger southerly winds than they can handle; and that other winds, they will be able to put the wind on their quarters or abeam, and slow down the boat, and will not have a problem. Most people do not set out to get in trouble because it is tiring and not "fun." They wait for the front to pass and leave on the back of it.


Ann

[RaymondR]

Hi Ann.

I used the proposed Bass Strait wind farm area as an example because there was an image available for that area however numerous others along the east coast are proposed.

I suspect that what will happen once installation of these things commences is that exclusion zones will be proclaimed and I also suspect that since these things have seabed cables connecting them to the shore based grid the exclusion zones will go to the waters edge. I also suspect that they will tend to cluster near to the coast but beyond visual sight of the population centres.

If this occurs one will be forced to go well out to sea before going on course for the next port adding many miles to a voyage and producing over nighters where day sailing is now possible.

[jamhass]

They really ought to require AIS on any such nav hazards, wind turbines, oil rigs, etc etc.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by ItDepends

It's interesting your graph does NOT include "OffShore + Battery" or

You missed the point completely... The idea is you dont need battery with such excess wind power. In this scenario (with 50 times more wind capacity than today) most of the time more than half of the wind turbines are braked not because of too much wind, but because the power is not needed. They wont wear out if they aren't spinning.

Excess power is also used for dynamic loads like hydrogen production that can easily consume the excess. I even produce hydrogen on my boat (cooking fuel) with excess solar.

The issue of energy storage is only because of such limited renewable supply. If I have enough solar panels to produce 5 times the power I need when it is also overcast, I can have a very small battery (40 ah) but I have reliable power all the time.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The key is a super grid , in Europe this is under development. The winds always blowing somewhere. Equally backstop generation can be shared on the super grid. Ireland for example expects to be a net renewable supplier to the super grid by 2030

This is exactly it.. there is an abundance of renewable power, it just is not harnessed.

Already lots of countries far away trade power, for example denmark makes excess wind power, up to 150% at times, (no where near 500% but its a good start) The excess is sold cheaply to norway for pumped hydro who can then sell it back to denmark at a higher price another time.

Originally Posted by RaymondR

ppen once installation of these things commences is that exclusion zones will be proclaimed and I also suspect that since these things have seabed cables connecting them to the shore based grid the exclusion zones will go to the waters edge. I also suspect that they will tend to cluster near to the coast but beyond visual sight of the population centres.

This is a real issue. Most countries allow navigation through the turbines, but not all of them. Some provide designated "channels" through the turbines. It is not unrealistic to think in the future it will be prohibited to sail betwen especially if there are enough incidences.

The other issue besides damage is sailboats blocking wind and thus stealing power from the turbines and for this reason many people who invested in wind power think boats should have to use the motor when passing upwind of the turbines and not be allowed to deploy sails.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by Pete7

possibility of a nature reserve or nursery, enabling species the opportunity to thrive. Having dived the small 10m oil rigs in Brunei and there are hundreds of them every mile or so, what was once a flat empty seabed at a depth of 20-30m has been been transformed.

the wind farms may increase diversity of sea life if anything. The vibrations and how they affect certain creatures is not really well understood.

Now, if you had an electric yacht, could you stop off and plug in for a few hours to top the bank up, have a Costa or Big Mac? gets my vote.

You want to use off-shore wind farms as mooring fields with power hook up? Maybe write to the wind farm installers and ask them if they could put a 50 amp plug on every 3rd or 4th turbine.

[ChrisJHC]

Originally Posted by jamhass

They really ought to require AIS on any such nav hazards, wind turbines, oil rigs, etc etc.

This is a good idea, but I wonder where they would get the electricity to power the AIS?

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

Hi Ann.

I used the proposed Bass Strait wind farm area as an example because there was an image available for that area however numerous others along the east coast are proposed.

I suspect that what will happen once installation of these things commences is that exclusion zones will be proclaimed and I also suspect that since these things have seabed cables connecting them to the shore based grid the exclusion zones will go to the waters edge. I also suspect that they will tend to cluster near to the coast but beyond visual sight of the population centres.

If this occurs one will be forced to go well out to sea before going on course for the next port adding many miles to a voyage and producing over nighters where day sailing is now possible.

There are already plenty of pipelines, fibre optic cables, and power cables - including a power cable between Victoria and Tasmania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basslink - on the seabed both in Bass Strait and around the world.
They simply have 'prohibited anchoring' zones near the shore.

One reason for a windfarm just off the Gippsland coast in that area is that is handy for the existing Victorian power grid based on the Latrobe Valley coal fired power stations.

It is also well inshore and off the beaten track for yachts heading to or from Wilsons Prom towards Gabo/NSW.