Ecobalance of the offshore wind park alpha ventus

Transcription

1 Ecobalance of the offshore wind park alpha ventus Hermann-Josef Wagner Institute for Energy Systems and Energy Economy Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany Summer School of Physical Societies, Varenna

2 Reasons for ecobalances Methodological approaches Cumulated energy of a single wind converter Off shore windpark alpha ventus Structure of my presentation

3 World primary energy consumption World primary energy consumption 2010: 17 Mrd. t CE Energy consumption, million t CE Other Nuclear energy Hydro Power Natural gas Oil Coal Contribution of selected countries and country groups to the world primary energy consumption USA 19 % EU % Germany 3 % China 20 % India 4 % Japan 4 % African Countries 3 % Original in Grundlagen der Energiewirtschaft und -technik Source: various statistics, recent years: BP-Statistics The world is hungry on fossil energy

4 Lignite Anthracite Natural Gas Photovoltaic Biomass Hydroelectric Wind Legend Nuclear lower limit Plausibility range upper Limit Solar heat 1) Figures of plausibility not possible CO 2 - emission of electricity generation in consideration of the whole chain Comparison of different studies

5 Reasons for ecobalances Methodological approaches Cumulated energy of a single wind converter Off shore windpark alpha ventus Structure of my presentation

6 Life cycle assessment: Process chain analysis

7 Source: Nordex AG Assembling of a wind converter by Nordex AG

8 Reasons for ecobalances Methodological approaches Cumulated energy of a single wind converter Off shore windpark alpha ventus Structure of my presentation

9 Structure of cumulative energy demand of an onshore-plant (1,5 MW) 3 % each rotor blade Totally about GJ primary energy equivalent 15 % Housing without generator 23 % Generator 30 % Steeltower 11 % Fundament 12 % Monitoring system and network access Source: Enercon Magazin Data : LEE

10 Usage Wasser-IA of water [m3/mwh] [m³/mwh] 150 Land Flächen-IA use [m² a] 60 [m2 a] Employment BE [Tsd./MW] [Thsd./MW] Air Luft-IA use [m³/mwh] 30 [m3/mwh] ,2 2, Energy SGK cost 90 [Ct./kWh] [ct./kwh] CE kea [MJ [MJprim./kWh] 7,5 5,0 0,4 VS 0,6 [-] Energy Security Sustainability evaluation of a 350 MW GCC power station

11 Usage Wasser-IA of water [m3/mwh] [m³/mwh] 150 Land Flächen-IA use [m² a] 60 [m2 a] Employment BE [Tsd./MW] [Thsd./MW] Air Luft-IA use [m³/mwh] 30 [m3/mwh] ,2 2, Energy SGK cost 90 [Ct./kWh] [ct./kwh] CE kea [MJ [MJprim./kWh] 7,5 5,0 0,4 VS Energy Security security 0,6 [-] Sustainability evaluation of a 1,5 MW onshore wind converter without backup power station

12 Reasons for ecobalances Methodological approaches Cumulated energy of a single wind converter Off shore wind park alpha ventus Structure of my presentation

13 Source: BWK Jan./Feb Planned offshore wind parcs and cable lines in German northsea

14 Non-ferrous metal 8.1 % Synthetic material 5.9 % Other 12.7 % Ferrous metal 73.2 % Total 29,000 t Material balance over lifetime alpha ventus

15 Disposal phase 1.2 % Use phase 20.4 % Production phase 78.4 % 2,300 TJ PE-Equivalent Cumulated energy over lifetime alpha ventus

16 1 % 6x Wind Energy Converter Grid Connection 12 % 5 % 6x Foundation (Jacket or Tripod) Multibrid M5000 (Tripod) 12 % 19 % 1 % 6x 30 kv Submarine Cable 110 kv Submarine Cable 1 % REpower 5M (Jacket) 12 % 16 % Offshore Transformer Station 0 % 0% 10 5% % 10% 20 % 15% 30 % 20% 25% 30% 35% Onshore Transformer Station Proportion of the total CED ( = 78.4 %) Production phase of offshore-wec

17 Photo: Große Böckmann alpha ventus : tripod for Multibrid wind converter

18 3 % each Rotor blade 22 % Housing without gearbox 5 % Gearbox Totally about GJ primary energy equivalent 21 % Steeltower 1 % Network access 42 % Fundament Source: Picture: REPOWER Data: LEE Structure of cumulative energy demand of an offshore-plant (5 MW)

19 Scenario Description Technical Lifetime a Full Load Hours b Maintenance Assignment c Number of WEC c A Standard Scenario Foundation and Sub. Cable 20 years 3,900 h/a 10 Helicopter and 15 Shipping Services per year and WEC 12 B Foundation & Sub. Cable 40 years Foundation and Sub. Cable 40 years 3,900 h/a 10 Helicopter and 15 Shipping Services per year and WEC 12 C Full Load Hours 3600 Foundation and Sub. Cable 20 years 3,600 h/a 10 Helicopter and 15 Shipping Services per year and WEC 12 D Full Load Hours 4200 Foundation and Sub. Cable 20 years 4,200 h/a 10 Helicopter and 15 Shipping Services per year and WEC 12 E Half Maintenance Assignment Foundation and Sub. Cable 20 years 3,900 h/a 5 Helicopter and 7.5 Shipping Services per year and WEC 12 F Wind Farm beta ventus d Foundation and Sub. Cable 20 years 3,900 h/a 10 Helicopter and 15 Shipping Services per year and WEC 40 a b c The technical lifetime of the other components of the wind farm is 20 years Including down time and losses during transmission to onshore transformer station Maintenance for each wind energy converter (WEC) over the technical lifetime for every scenario: replacement of 0.5 gearboxes and 1.25 rotor blades d Assumption for the fictitious wind farm beta ventus (40 WEC): same transformer stations and submarine cable like wind farm alpha ventus Overview of the scenarios

20 CED [kwh PE-Eq. / kwh el ] 0, , , , , , , , ,00 A B C D E F Scenarios Cumulated energy demand (CED) over lifetime alpha ventus

21 Effect-Class Energy resource Massflow Energy consumption Effect Indicator (load factor) All forms of energy count back on primary energy equivalent (CED); if possible differentiate between fossil, nuclear & renewable Water- and Air-Pollution Pollutants in effluents and air Waste volume Solid waste Critical Volume (Emission devided by critical value = dilutionsvolume ) Volume, subdivided into default classes e.g. solids dump, domestic waste dump, hazardous waste dump Greenhouse effect Ozone depletion Photooxidants Climate-damaging gases e.g. CO 2, N 2 O, CFC CFC Gases, which add to photochemical ozone production (CO, NO x, NO 2, C x H y ) Conversion by Global-Warming-Potential-Factors (GWP) into CO 2 -Equivalent Conversion by Ozone-Depleting-Potential-Factors (ODP) on R11 Conversion by Effect-factors on kg ethylene (C 2 H 4 )-equivalent (POCP) Possible effect-classes and indicators in Life Cycle Analysis 1

22 Effect-Class Soil acidification Massflow Air emissions, which add to acidification Effect Indicator (load factor) Conversion of emissions (SO 2, NO x, NH 3, O 3 ) by effect-factors into kg-sulfur dioxide (SO 2 )- equivalent (AP). The disposal potential of H + - ionic is used as reference. Eutrophication Fertilizing emissions in water, soil and air Conversion by effect-factors into kg-phosphate (PO 4 )-equivalent (EP) Humantoxicity Emissions with effects on human health Conversion by effect-factors into equivalent number kg-bodyweight (amount pollutant [kg] devided by toxicological limit [mg/kg]) (HTP) The limits are different between the absorption by water, air und foodstuff Problem: resilient numbers for limits Ecotoxicity Emission with effects on the stability of ecosystems Analog humantoxicity with equivalent number kg-soil/water Problem: resilient numbers for limits Possible effect-classes and indicators in Life Cycle Analysis 2

23 CED [kwh PE-Eq./kWh el ] AP [mg SO 2 -Eq./kWh el ] GWP [g CO 2 -Eq./kWh el ] POCP [mg C 2 H 4 -Eq./kWh el ] EP [mg PO 4 -Eq./kWh el ] HTP [g DCB-Eq./kWh el ] German Electricity Mix at the High-Voltage Grid alpha ventus (without backup Backup power Power plant) Plant) Comparison alpha ventus German electricity mix

24 Thank you for your attention

25 Three dimensions -model Russian doll - model Today Economy South North Environment Society Future Today South North Environment Society Economy Future Source: SIA 2000, modified Source: UN 1987 Brundtland Report Sustainability approach and models