[I][B]From a helicopter, it looks like just another North Sea oil rig, a grey cube supported by massive yellow pillars, 90 kilometres (56 miles) off western Denmark.[/B][/I]
But the DanTysk facility is the world’s first accommodation platform for offshore wind, which is borrowing techniques and labour from the crisis-hit oil sector as it tries to cut costs and end an addiction to state subsidies.
The wind industry is moving further offshore and into the deeper waters tamed long ago by oil companies to increase scale and capture stronger and more constant winds.
“There’s a lot of new-generation technology in the offshore wind industry, but when I’m out there, I still know the nuts and bolts,” said Anders Noer Christensen, a former superintendent engineer on oil platforms, who now works as a development manager for Vattenfall’s wind projects in the North Sea.
The 100-million-euro ($110 million) DanTysk opened in August as a way to slash operational and transport costs for the remote turbines. Many of its staff used to work in oil or gas until a plunge in crude prices caused a slump in exploration.
Drawing on a classic offshore oil work schedule, up to 50 staff work two weeks on and two weeks off the platform to keep the 80 wind turbines operational. When winds are blowing strong, DanTysk’s maximum 280 megawatts can power up to 400,000 homes…
[I]By Nikolaj Skydsgaard[/I]
“The UK oil and gas industry lost 110,000 jobs between 2013 and 2016, according to industry lobby Oil & Gas UK. The offshore wind industry employs over 13,000 people in Britain and has the potential to provide 44,000 jobs in the next 10 years, said Renewable UK, another industry body.”
The article does not provide details for a basis in its conclusion on the subject of jobs but it brings up an interesting question I have not seen addressed.
When the energy sector tilts in favor of wind, fracking and a sprinkling of coal over offshore drilling, how many man hours spent in boat operations wlll this new model of energy mining produce compared to those logged in support of the oil patch.
Any guesses?
[QUOTE=Lee Shore;192566]“The UK oil and gas industry lost 110,000 jobs between 2013 and 2016, according to industry lobby Oil & Gas UK. The offshore wind industry employs over 13,000 people in Britain and has the potential to provide 44,000 jobs in the next 10 years, said Renewable UK, another industry body.”
The article does not provide details for a basis in its conclusion on the subject of jobs but it brings up an interesting question I have not seen addressed.
When the energy sector tilts in favor of wind, fracking and a sprinkling of coal over offshore drilling, how many man hours spent in boat operations wlll this new model of energy mining produce compared to those logged in support of the oil patch.
Any guesses?[/QUOTE]
Hard to give an answer to your question about vessel requirement for Offshore Wind Farm, especially in the US because nobody know what the Trump Administration will do on this or nearly anything else in the Energy or Maritime sector, except to scrap existing rules and allow more coal in the energy mix. (Or will he??)
Many of the large modern CSVs are able to ambulate between industries as the demand changes, which may also be the case in the US, once the Offshore Wind Industry take off. (Or is killed in it’s infancy??)
Whether any of the Lift Boats from the GOM can be used during the installation phase is doubtful, since the required crane capacity and reach is increasing with the size of the wind mills.
oh weird, she looks like a Ramform. Doesn’t look right carrying those mast sections vertical and off to one side like that. What do you stability-knowlegable people think?
[QUOTE=Emrobu;194978]oh weird, she looks like a Ramform. Doesn’t look right carrying those mast sections vertical and off to one side like that. What do you stability-knowlegable people think?[/QUOTE]
She is certainly not a classic beauty, like the SS United States. Who cares?
Compared with the modern “beauties” like X-Bow ships, pure car and truck carriers, monstrous cruise ships, container ships and all other special-purpose vessels, she cannot be uglier.
Here is another sketch, a bow view, which may help to understand the “thing”, and a more explicit description of the design >>> https://ulstein.com/soul
She is a sort of double-ramform, a square-form!
All is about deck space for the bigger next-generation wind turbines; and about the greater width between the lateral legs, to increase the stability when uplifted.
[QUOTE=Emrobu;194978]oh weird, she looks like a Ramform. Doesn’t look right carrying those mast sections vertical and off to one side like that. What do you stability-knowlegable people think?[/QUOTE]
Stablity can’t be judged very well by eye. The crew should have a procedure to determine if a load is within acceptable limits.
The stablity and trim book, the program and so forth would all be class approved.
If you add a fourth leg and crane in place of the drill floor and derrick on the Cantilever extended over the stern here you can see the contours of the Soul.
The advantage over the “traditional” wind farm support J/U it is indeed the unobstructed deck area and the wide “foot print” of the legs, giving better stability both afloat and in elevated position.
Here is an example; the Seafox 5 leaving from Keppel FELS for loadout on Black Marlin:
There will certainly be all the necessary tools to calculate stability afloat and “weight on legs” in elevated condition available on these units and it will be class approved for each individual unit. (No “eqv. sister” syndrome)
It will be interesting to see how fast they manage to secure a contract for this design and where they will be built and operated. Is US a possibility???
its so ugly. I don’t think I’ve ever encountered such a functional thing that offends me so much. “Form fits function and is the source of all beauty” has been my maxim for so long, I’m having an uncomfortable little philosophical-aesthetic crisis, here. Thanks Ulstein.
[QUOTE=Emrobu;195011]its so ugly. I don’t think I’ve ever encountered such a functional thing that offends me so much. “Form fits function and is the source of all beauty” has been my maxim for so long, I’m having an uncomfortable little philosophical-aesthetic crisis, here. Thanks Ulstein.[/QUOTE]
Your “uncomfortable little philosophical-aesthetic crisis”, is probably not Ulstein’s main concern.
Will it please the people that decides in the marketplace is what counts.
Does it have an advantage over the earlier versions of J/U Windfarm Support vessels? Undoubtedly.
Can it compete on cost efficiency, both for construction and in operation? Left to be seen.
BTW You’ll probably get used to it, just like most have got used to the Ulstein X-Bow.
[QUOTE=Emrobu;195011]its so ugly. I don’t think I’ve ever encountered such a functional thing that offends me so much. “Form fits function and is the source of all beauty” has been my maxim for so long, I’m having an uncomfortable little philosophical-aesthetic crisis, here. Thanks Ulstein.[/QUOTE]
It may take working on board to see the beauty. For example moving heavy loads on deck, as crane operator, if you can’t see what you’re doing that’s ugly. On the other hand having a good view and nice equipment is beautiful.
