“This agreement among federal agencies and Great Lakes states is a smart, practical way to encourage the development of homegrown energy that will create jobs, power homes and reduce pollution in American communities,” said Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New York and Pennsylvania have signed onto the plan, according to the report.

Maryland Offshore Wind Bill Set To Pass House of Delegates

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s offshore wind legislation is on track for final passage in the state House of Delegates today, the Baltimore Sun reported.

Democrats in the House of Delegates rejected several Republican attempts to weaken the bill, including an amendment that would limit the offshore wind development to one prototype turbine.

The bill still faces a daunting challenge in the Senate, according to the Sun report.

Maryland state legislators are expected to reconsider Gov. Martin O’Malley’s ambitious plan to require utilities to buy offshore wind electricity.

“We’re tired of seeing us lose jobs to China,” said panel member Jim Strong, of the United Steelworkers of Maryland. “We’re supporting this legislation because we think it will put people back to work.”

County Commission Attacks Offshore Wind

Months after the issue was apparently settled, the Oceana (Mich.) County Planning Commission released a report this week denouncing a defunct offshore wind proposal for Lake Michigan, the Muskegon Chronicle reported.

Planning Commission Chairwoman Anne Soles released a press release declaring Scandia Wind’s proposal — abandoned last year — had “major flaws” and was “not feasible.”

Soles is reportedly concerned that Scandia might appeal directly to state regulators.

“We need to put a punctuation point on this issue … not in Lake Michigan,” Soles told the Chronicle.

BALTIMORE — The Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation (LEEDCo) is planning to begin construction on its pilot offshore wind farm in 2014, according to CEO Lorry Wagner.

In an interview yesterday with Offshore Wind Wire, Wagner said that the project near Cleveland is on track and LEEDCo officials are currently negotiating power purchase agreements with local utilities. Wagner said the project has already reached a deal to sell 25 percent of the project’s electricity to Cleveland Public Power, a municipal utility. He dismissed the idea that price of offshore wind electricity was too high.

“Some people say that offshore wind power will be too expensive, but solar is expensive [and successful]. I think its premature to say that offshore wind energy will be prohibitively expensive.” Wagner said.

The first step in LEEDCo’s plan is to install a 20 megawatt (MW) offshore pilot wind project in Lake Erie. Wagner hopes that this deployment will stimulate the installation of 1000 MW of wind capacity in the Ohio waters of Lake Erie by 2020.

A key component to this project, according to Wagner, was getting the local communities on board with the plan in its beginning stages.

“We’ve participated in 65 county-led meetings and 180 forums since 2004,” said Wagner. He contrasted the experience with Ontario, where some lake front property owners opposed offshore wind development and the government appeased them by suspending all projects.   “In Ontario people woke up and read about a project in the paper and they were upset. That won’t happen here.”

Wagner said that the great majority of people he has spoken with are enthusiastic about the project, and he has encountered little opposition from people concerned about the visual impacts.

“The turbines will be 7 miles out, so they’ll be only about as big as a dime on the horizon.” said Wagner. “The question we get most frequently is “what happens when the lake freezes?”

Wagner said that the project would use ice-breaking tugs during the winter. Playing off that concern, LEEDCo has begun to promote the pilot project as the ‘Icebreaker’.”

Ice is not the only factor that makes an offshore wind project in the Great Lakes unique. Offshore wind on the Lakes is not regulated by the Department of the Interior, so LEEDCo won’t have the benefit of the Smart from the Start streamlined federal permitting process.

“I look on the bright side.” said Wagner. “One less layer of bureaucracy could be beneficial.”

Ultimately, Wagner sees the pilot project and the farms that may follow as a potential economic boon to the area.

“Ohio already manufactures wind components that are used in places like Denmark and Germany,” Wagner said. “Combined with the skilled construction, operation and maintenance positions that the project will require, there is no question that it this project will be very beneficial to Ohio.”

The New York Power Authority Board of Trustees voted today to end an effort to develop an offshore wind project on the Great Lakes.

The NYPA announced that it would end its competitive solicitation process for the proposed wind farm without choosing a developer. The Trustees cited the higher than average cost of offshore wind electricity and the current economic climate as justification for the decision.

The project, however, was cast in doubt in May when NYPA board chairman Michael Townsend said that he doesn’t “think that project is very viable at this time, politically or economically.”

NYPA officials said that the organization is still interested in developing offshore wind projects.

“While deciding not to proceed with [the Great Lakes Offshore Wind project], the Power Authority will continue its commitment to developing and implementing wind and other clean alternative energy sources to produce emissions-free power for the benefit of New Yorkers today and for future generations,” said Gil Quiniones, the acting president and chief executive officer, NYPA. “The Power Authority’s participation in the evaluation of the LI-NYC Offshore Wind Project and in the regional efforts of such organizations as the Great Lakes Commission and the Great Lakes Wind Collaborative shows NYPA’s dedication to affordable and environmentally-sound development of future offshore wind projects in New York State waters.”

NYPA staff reportedly reviewed five proposals and determined the project is technically feasible but prohibitively expensive.

Offshore Wind Wire: Nautica recently received a grant from the Department of Energy. Please tell us what plans Nautica has in place for the funding?

Larry Viterna: The U.S. Department of Energy provided this funding to support technical innovations that will lower the cost of energy produced from offshore wind turbines. Our effort will develop the conceptual design of a deep water, full turbine and infrastructure system. Nautica Windpower’s Advanced Floating Turbine (AFT) will be a core innovation for this funded design effort. The AFT is presently at an early stage of development but our scale model tests and preliminary analysis indicates that it offers a number of characteristics that will reduce costs of not only the turbine but also the infrastructure system over its operating life.  Using the DOE funding, Nautica Windpower will significantly enhance the design of the AFT and infrastructure for a to-be-selected site and further confirm the predicted performance and cost of energy benefits. As output of the effort, we expect to have fairly detailed digital prototypes, meaning three dimensional engineering models, of key components of the system. In the process, we will also be conducting trades studies of a variety of system and subsystem design options, possibly leveraging other DOE funded and industry innovations.

OWW: Nautica recently claimed that it will generate offshore electricity at 7 cents per kilowatt hour. How does Nautica intend to accomplish this, and when?

Viterna: Cost of Energy (COE) is a critical design driver for our AFT system. Analysis conducted to date by our engineers indicates that 7 cents per kilowatt is achievable in a 250 MW offshore power plant at sites available in the Great Lakes and along the Atlantic and Pacific coastlines of the U.S. The AFT’s deepwater capability enables access to sites further from shore where average wind speeds at the turbine height can approach 9 meters/second. The AFT’s attractive COE also comes via a novel structural design and systems approach, which together increase energy capture, reduce component cost, and ease deployment and maintenance.  Specifically, our rotor and foundation system is wholly different from any commercial technology on the market resulting in a significant reduction in system weight. As weight is a surrogate for major cost elements, this innovation cascades through the system, lowering costs for material, manufacture, maintenance, and deployment per component. In addition, our installation method requires no special vessels, deep ports, or tall cranes, further reducing cost of energy, market entry time and infrastructure limitations to deployment.

Regarding timing and schedule, the DOE funded design effort is over the next three years.  In parallel, we will also conduct a one-third scale prototype test in open water, planned for 2013, to further characterize the performance of the AFT.  Finally, considering time for design and testing of a full scale commercial prototype, we believe it is possible to enter the market with limited production in 2017. This will likely involve partnerships with other wind turbine system manufacturers and component suppliers.

OWW: How does the Advanced Floating Turbine being developed by Nautica compare to a standard offshore turbine? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this technology, and will the AFT be able to withstand natural disasters?

Viterna: Two major differences between standard offshore turbines and the AFT are the way they are connected to sea floor and their water depth capabilities. Standard turbines are rigidly connected to the sea floor by driving large structural components into the floor or placing them on large gravity foundations that can resist the overturning bending from winds, waves and ice. The AFT requires a single connection cable to an anchor point on the sea floor that does not experience the high bending loads of standard foundations. These characteristics of the AFT contribute to the cost reductions during installation mentioned earlier.  Natural disasters such as hurricanes are critical design drivers for all offshore wind turbines. Surprisingly, allowing motion of the AFT can actually reduce damaging forces compared to the rigid structure of standard turbines. This is similar to how flexible palm trees can sustain hurricane winds that destroy less flexible trees.

Standard offshore turbines today are most cost effective for water depths up to about 30 meters.  There will certainly be a good market for these standard turbines in shallow waters as the offshore industry grows. Full-scale, multi-megawatt AFTs will not be capable of operating in these shallow water depths.  Instead, water depths exceeding 60 meters will be necessary and most cost effective. This deepwater capability of the AFT opens up vast new resources of wind energy.  The U.S. DOE analyses show that over two thirds of the available wind energy is located in deepwater of the Great Lakes as well as in deepwater within 50 miles of the ocean shores. DOE has also estimated that the available offshore wind energy in deep water is comparable to the entire U.S. electrical energy demand today.  We believe that for some communities, the AFT’s deepwater capability will be an additional advantage by placing the wind power plant farther from shore, even to the point of being out of sight of shoreline residences.

OWW: Is the Great Lakes offshore wind supply chain positioned to be effective in aiding Nautica’s production goals?

Viterna: The manufacturing supply chain in the Great Lakes region is a significant contributor to the wind industry today and will certainly be a great asset for Nautica Windpower and others in the offshore wind market in the future.  Basic structural materials, mechanical components, instrumentation and electronics are examples of key products of the region that will all be needed. Our Advanced Floating Turbine will be able to use many of the same subsystems and components of used in today’s standard onshore and offshore turbines. As an added asset, the Great Lakes region offers outstanding transportation capabilities by water, land and air.

OWW: How does Nautica’s AFT differ from other deepwater floating turbines currently in development?

Viterna: There are several deepwater floating turbines being designed and even tested around the world – most by very credible and capable companies. Our key differentiator is our patented floating tower technology and we believe this will provide us a significant and sustainable competitive advantage in the future marketplace.

Essentially all of our competitors utilize floating structures that are based on the three types of oil-platforms – spar buoys, tension leg platforms and semi-submersible/barges.  While these types of floating structures work well for the vertical-dominant loads in lifting oil, they are not optimum for the horizontal-dominant loading of a wind turbine. The AFT system uses much less material because of the way it balances the asymmetric forces on the system. The AFT is expected to weigh only 25 percent of the competing deepwater floating turbines, and as stated earlier, weight is a surrogate for cost of manufacturing, assembly and deployment. This patented design also allows for the single anchor line compared to the cost of securing multiple lines to the seafloor as is needed by our competitor’s designs. We also are able to eliminate the active yaw subsystem because the AFT passively follows the wind. This rotation and alignment of the tower structure further allows us to optimize the structure for the direction of the dominant forces. Finally, we can use variable buoyancy of the structure to lower the turbine in the event of major repair – something not possible with the heavy weight and ballast of the oil-platform designs.

We are very excited about this innovation and its potential contribution to a cost competitive and high growth offshore wind industry.

The company is considering laying off about 40 Norway-based offshore wind employees and has suspended plans to build a manufacturing plant in the UK, according to the report.

Forbes reported that the company is focusing on deep-water offshore wind development, with a potential 10-15 MW turbine.

LEEDCo Considers “Gravity-Based” Foundations

An official from Lake Erie Energy Development Corp — the organization that is pushing for a pilot offshore wind project near Cleveland — said the project might use gravity-based foundations that would be built on land and floated out to the site, the Ashtabula (Ohio) Star-Beacon reported last week.

The foundations would reportedly be 10 to 12 stories high and built on land, according to LEEDCo President Lorry Wagner.

“The Ashtabula port is ideally suited,” he said.

Senior Deepwater Official Leaves Company

Deepwater Wind Chief Development Officer Paul Rich has left the company, the Providence Journal reported on Saturday.

The report said that he was leaving to pursue other interests in the offshore wind industry. Jeffrey Grybowski, the company’s chief administrative officer, said that Rich would not be replaced.

“From our view, it’s a natural progression for a project, from an early-development stage to a late-development stage, where we’re getting ready to execute permits and go into preconstruction,” he said, while complimenting Rich’s work on the company’s Block Island project. “He’s been a big part of the project’s success to date.”

“The city of Cleveland fully supports the creation of this offshore wind farm. We have signed a memorandum of understanding to help move the project forward, and Cleveland Public Power is geared up to purchase 20 percent of the energy created by the wind farm,” Jackson wrote.

The Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation (LEEDCo) is developing a pilot project near the city.

“For this vision to become a reality, our entire community needs to rally behind LEEDCo and the offshore wind farm,” according to Jackson. “This will require that both the private sector and the public sector set aside their own, short-term self-interests and focus on the long-term benefits to our economy, our work force and our community.”

MA Court Will Hear Cape Wind Appeal

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court will hear an appeal of the approved Cape Wind power purchase agreement, the Worcester Business Journal reported yesterday.

The Associated Industries of Massachusetts has appealed the agreement because of the projected additional costs of electricity from Cape Wind. The power purchase agreement was approved late last year. The group expects a ruling from the court in late 2011 or early 2012, according to the report.

As players in the US offshore wind industry race to complete the nation’s first commercial offshore wind project, a look at European development suggests one possible path for American offshore wind.  Some observers point to the European programs as a model for US development, while others express concerns about the costs of such an ambitious program. Either way, the European experience illustrates the technical, if not financial, feasibility of gigawatt-scale offshore wind.

A recent report by the European Wind Energy Association documents the growth of offshore wind in European waters in the first half of 2011.  The European report presents a snapshot of the state of European offshore wind as of June 30, 2011:

3,429 MW total installed capacity in operation: 1,247 offshore wind turbines are fully grid connected with a total capacity of 3,294 MW.  This capacity is sited in 49 wind farms spread over 9 countries.

2,844 MW total installed capacity under construction: 11 wind farms are currently under construction in European waters.  Of these, the United Kingdom is responsible for the most growth in the first half of 2011.  7 projects are currently under development in UK waters; when all are complete, they will add 2,238 MW of new offshore wind capacity.  Germany is second in terms of the size of projects under construction, with 448.3 MW of new offshore wind capacity being built.

101 turbines installed and grid-connected in the last 6 months: In the first half of 2011, 101 turbines came online, amounting to 348.1 MW of new capacity.  This represents a 4.5% increase in new offshore wind capacity coming online over the same period of 2010.  On average, each turbine added 3.4 MW of capacity, suggesting larger turbines are becoming more popular, as the average capacity per new turbine in the first half of 2010 was 2.9 MW.

Example of a recent project: One recently-completed project is Vattenfall’s 150 MW Ormonde project off England’s northwest coast.  The Ormonde project ncludes 30 Repower 5 MW turbines.  Offshore construction began last year, with the 30 Scotland-built steel lattice foundations installed by last summer.  Between March 23 and August 8, 2011, Vattenfall installed all 30 turbines and a substation.  The project is now complete, and Vattenfall expects to begin producing power laster this summer.

Floating platform tests in Norway: Commercializing deepwater offshore wind resources may require floating platform turbine installations.  The first half of 2011 brought a milestone in that effort, with the installation of a SWAY 0.015 MW floating turbine in Bergen, Norway.  While a 15 kW turbine may not be cost-effective on a commercial basis, the developer sees this pilot project as a key stage in the ultimate development of a 10 MW floating wind turbine.

Compared to this scale of development, offshore wind is still in its infancy on this side of the Atlantic.  While a number of projects have been proposed, none is in operation, and most have a long permitting and development path ahead of them.

Meanwhile, states continue to examine the opportunities offered by offshore wind.  For example, Illinois has passed a law creating a council to study offshore wind potential in Illinois’ Lake Michigan waters.  Illinois House Bill 1558, sponsored by state Rep. Robyn Gabel, passed both houses of that state’s legislature in May 2011, and has now been signed by Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn.  As Rep. Gabel told the Offshore Wind Wire in April 2011, the bill creates a new body called the Lake Michigan Offshore Wind Energy Advisory Council to examine topics including:

• Criteria for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to apply in reviewing applications for offshore wind development of Lake Michigan lakebed leases;
• Criteria for identifying areas that are favorable, acceptable, and unacceptable for offshore wind development
• A process for ensuring public engagement in the lakebed leasing process
• Options for how the State shall be compensated for Lake Michigan lakebed leasing.
• Lessons learned from other domestic and international offshore wind development experiences such as European programs
• Identification of local, State, and federal authorities with permitting, siting, or other approval authority for wind power development in Lake Michigan.
• Recommendations for needed State legislation and regulations governing offshore wind farm development.

Will state efforts like the one just launched by Illinois lead to gigawatt-scale offshore wind development as we have seen in Europe?

Todd J. Griset practices energy law with Preti Flaherty Beliveau & Pachios in Maine. He also writes a blog on offshore wind, renewable energy and policy issues.

The bill to form the Lake Michigan Offshore Wind Energy Advisory Council was sponsored by two state lawmakers from Evanston, State Rep. Robyn Gabel and Sen. Jeff Schoenberg.

The new council will be led by the state Department of Natural Resources director and has been tasked with finding appropriate sites for offshore wind development. The group will issue a report to Gov. Quinn and the state legislature by June 30, 2012.

Boston Globe Calls On NStar To Buy Cape Wind Electricity

In an editorial published yesterday, the Boston Globe called on state regulators to require the utility NStar to buy electricity from Cape Wind as part of a merger with Northeast Utilities.

National Grid has agreed to buy the first half of the offshore wind farm’s electricity, but Cape Wind is still looking for a buyer for the remainder of its output. NStar has been lobbying for approval of a massive merger with Northeast Utilities.

“The state should not be shy about insisting that the companies provide a full explanation for how they plan to meet the state’s mandatory clean-energy targets – and should make buying power from Cape Wind a condition of approval if the companies can’t come up with any other credible plan,” the Globe editorial read.

Winds are shifting over the Great Lakes, with offshore wind development in Ohio’s lake waters moving forward while projects in New York languish.

The United States Department of Energy has identified 742.5 gigawatts of potential developable capacity in the lakes. However, differences in state and local regulatory environments and in development structures may lead to uneven development of this potential.

In positive news for Great Lakes offshore wind, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland has signed a lease option giving the Lake Erie Energy Development Co. development rights to part of Ohio’s lakebed holdings. Founded in 2009, LEEDCo is a private nonprofit economic development corporation which grew out of a local and state-level task force. LEEDCo’s current goals include building a 20 MW pilot project, then using the pilot project to develop a permitting process designed to scale up to 1000 MW of offshore wind by 2020. LEEDCO distinguishes its project through both extensive engagement with the local communities – whose manufacturing base has been hit hard by the economic downturn – and by a relatively modest initial project size of 5 to 7 turbines.

At the same time, things are not going as smoothly for offshore wind development in New York’s Lake Ontario waters. A shakeup at the New York Power Authority may spell trouble for the NYPA’s Great Lakes Offshore Wind (GLOW) program. This Tuesday, NYPA president and CEO Richard Kessel gave the Authority’s board notice of his resignation.

Within NYPA, Kessel championed the prospects of developing New York’s Great Lakes offshore wind resource. Unveiled on Earth Day 2009, NYPA’s GLOW Project featured a competitive process to award power purchase agreements to prospective developers of offshore wind projects in New York’s lake waters. Things looked rosy at first: five developers responded to NYPA’s request for proposals by the summer of 2010; NYPA appeared to be reviewing the proposals, with a winner to be announced no later than January 2011.

This year brought a shift in the winds for the NYPA GLOW project. First the developer selection date slipped to late March, then it slipped to “second quarter”. In May, the chairman of NYPA’s board publicly questioned the viability of the GLOW program. NYPA has been relatively secretive about the status of GLOW over the past year – drawing public criticism and scrutiny as recently as this week – so it is hard for outsiders to gauge the full import of Kessel’s resignation on NYPA’s offshore wind program. Nevertheless, it is clear that Kessel’s departure comes as another blow to the GLOW program. This reading is consistent with suspicions that the NYPA board will announce that none of the proposals under review meet economic criteria in terms of the return on NYPA’s investment of publicly controlled dollars.

Meanwhile, proposed federal legislation would give a boost to all U.S. offshore wind projects, whether in Great Lakes waters or our oceans. S. 1397, the Incentivizing Offshore Wind Power Act, would extend an existing federal tax incentive for developing new renewable projects. The U.S. tax code allows developers to offset their federal income tax liabilities through an investment tax credit (ITC) equal to 30% of the eligible costs of developing a renewable energy project. This tax credit, like other federal energy tax incentives, tends to receive Congressional authorization for several years, only to be renewed in the face of impending expiration.

Current law requires developers of wind projects to place their projects in service by the end of 2012 in order to qualify for the ITC. Between the novel nature of offshore wind technology, the challenges of the regulatory and permitting processes, and the multi-year nature of any project’s construction effort, it is not clear that any projects could meet the deadline to qualify for the ITC. S. 1397 would amend that incentive to allow offshore wind developers give years after receiving the ITC to complete project development. This would not only help conform the ITC to the needs of real offshore wind projects, but would offer developers greater certainty about the future availability of this incentive.

Todd J. Griset practices energy law with Preti Flaherty Beliveau & Pachios in Maine. He also writes a blog on offshore wind, renewable energy and policy issues.