Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

Wind, Natural Gas Hybrid Project Moves Ahead

August 3, 2005 | 12 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

Cumbria, The United Kingdom [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] A UK-based company has formally submitted an application for environmental assessments of what could eventually be the world's first offshore gas / wind hybrid energy generation project.

"Successful deployment of the hybrid concept in this high growth sector will represent a global 'first'"

Known as the Ormonde project, the project would see the installation of 108 MW of offshore wind power capacity coupled with 98 MW of natural gas generation in an unprecedented effort to provide near constant power delivery from an offshore wind farm.

Proposed by Eclipse Energy Company, the plan would generate electricity from the wind turbines during medium to strong winds, but during calm weather conditions or periods of wind turbine shutdown, electricity can still be generated from the gas reserves through an offshore generator platform. This unique coupling is designed so as to provide flexible output of electricity to meet the needs of National Grid while mitigating the intermittency of wind power resources.

"Successful deployment of the hybrid concept in this high growth sector will represent a global 'first', demonstrating the commercial viability of utilizing hydrocarbon reserves as a catalyst to develop cost- efficient, low carbon, distributed power generation in the offshore environment," said the company.

The application process which included the submission of the Environmental Statement, Field Development Programme and Production Operator Application is expected to take between six and nine months, at which point Eclipse should then be given full approval to develop the Ormonde Project.

The Ormonde Project would be located 10km west of Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria. Eclipse Energy operates the undeveloped Ormonde North and South gas fields located in the region. When constructed Ormonde is expected to have the ability to provide up to 200 MW of electricity from both gas turbines and the wind turbines. The project anticipates first energy in 2007.

"Eclipse has combined UK North Sea oil and gas experience and business models to provide a commercial catalyst for offshore wind energy development," said Ian Hatton, Managing Director of Eclipse. "We expect Ormonde to be the first of a series of similar developments where offshore wind energy is commercialised in this way. Our concept has the potential to make a significant contribution to the future energy production mix of the UK which is in transition from a period of self- sufficiency courtesy of North Sea oil and gas to one where future needs will be met largely by imported energy."

Other, Wind Power

12 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 12

tripp-bishop-28613

August 3, 2005

I would assume that offshore wind would be a bit cheaper that NG because of it's higher production factor (I think that's the correct term). Onshore wind is already cheaper than NG, and I would think that offshore would be even better over the long run.

Comment
2 of 12

Rucio

August 3, 2005

Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper and more efficient to build just the natural gas plant?

Comment
3 of 12

ben-gatti-37189

August 3, 2005

Such systems will represent the lowest cost method to meeting the graduated emission reduction of the Kyoto and similar protocals.
The amortization of the undersea power cable over increased MW of generation is key to financing the renewable aspect of the project.
I proposed the same scheme for use with my WaveBlanket system. It may be noted that pumping oil produces natural gas, which if not consumed is simply wasted by direct burning (flaring). It is also noted that an offshore natural gas turbine can be used as an LPG port with the energy being sent via the cable. This is safer than storing massive concentrations of toxic gas near population centers on shore. And if the NG exhaust is pumped into the substrata, it can increase oil production while decreasing emissions of CO2.
There is a great potential to combine renewable production with LNG and NG (the cleanest fossil fuels) as a means of reducing emissions economically. - Congratulations to Eclipse.

Comment
4 of 12

charles-butterfield-36244

August 4, 2005

Better than natural gas would be to store electrical energy that is produced during periods when it is not needed, such as, at night.

The electrical energy can be stored by electrolytically separating hydrogen from water, storing the hydrogen as compressed gas, or liquid and then using it to generate electricity when there is peak demand for electricity.

Thank you,
Charles Butterfield

Comment
5 of 12

mike-s-37396

August 4, 2005

I guess the part that doesn't make sense here is why build the NG plant off shore? What's the difference, from a grid reliability standpoint, if the intermittancy of wind is mitigated by a 100 MW offshore NG or a 2000 MW onshore plant?
Gas is being drilled and piped ashore anyway, so is there really much to save by not piping gas? Do those savings offset the increased costs of siting multiple offshore NG plants, where construction costs are higher?

Even if this is just a pilot that is meant to show that wind and gas together can provide more constant output, it just doesn't seem that co-siting wind and gas - and building gas plants that are custom-fit to a particular wind plant - will ever make more financial sense than using power from large onshore NG plants to mitigate intermittancy of scattered offshore wind plants. The engineering required to achieve grid stability is not impossible.

Comment
6 of 12

tripp-bishop-28613

August 4, 2005

Was this NG going to just get flared off anyway or can it be piped to the mainland?

Comment
7 of 12

colin-murchie-9745

August 4, 2005

Yes, because the capital cost of a natural gas plant is very low compared to its variable O&M and fuel costs (even before you factor in price hedging for volatility correction on the gas, and even if you assume that the current peak in nat gas prices is transient.)

Essentially, the gas turbine is cheap to buy, expensive to run, and the wind turbines are expensive to buy, cheap to run. (with a per-kWh cost probably considerably below the gas.)

So hybridizing a high capital cost intermittent resource with low O&M and zero fuel (wind) with a low capital cost, high O&M, high fuel cost high dispatchability generator makes a great deal of financial sense - it's just a technical challenge.

Comment
8 of 12

Rucio

August 4, 2005

Except that the turbines need the NG backup. So is it really cheaper to build two plants when the same reliable power could be attained from one NG?

Comment
9 of 12

ben-gatti-37189

August 5, 2005

To Answer some questions.

Once the cable is run, the cost of adding a generator is low, the real estate is cheap and unencumbered with noise restrictions. Most of the plant can be written off as a renewable energy expense, with the NG part paying only the marginal costs. The plant is immediatly resellable world-wide because it meets the Kyoto requirements. Think of Kyoto like a Cafe standard - new plants must derive 50% of their energy from renewable sources.
Yes storing off peak power as hydrogen would yield fewer emissions, but could also take more money away from lower hanging fruit - so in the grand scheme - it would result in more emissions.

Since Germany places a very high value on renewable energy, the value of this design in that market is higher than in other places.

Comment
10 of 12

cyril-meynier-12679

August 10, 2005

some other comments :

- To the hydrogen objection : converting electricity into hydrogen and back into electricity means 50% losses.

- The gas fields are to small to pipe their gas economically to the network, so an "on-site" utilisation of gas is fine.

- Of course the wind farm and the gaz plants could be located in separate regions and still complement their production via the grid. colocalisation allow the two plants to share the connection to the shore, so it's slightly cheaper than two separate projects.

- This "world first" is unlikely to have numerous followers. The project is posible because a small gas, barely economic, gasfield is olocated is a windy, shallow offshore area. Similar sites must not be plentifull.

- If the place is favorable, perharps wave energy could become a third component of the system ?

Comment
11 of 12

cyril-meynier-12679

August 10, 2005

"Was this NG going to just get flared off anyway or can it be piped to the mainland? "

No reason to flare it : uneconomic natural gas (small production far away from pipelines) is flared when it's a unwanted byproduct byproduct of oil wells.
But when it's from a field with gas only, no reason to flare it - it's juste left in the ground.

Comment
12 of 12

nate-bourell-38095

September 29, 2005

-- Cyril Meynier:
That is a really good idea about incorperating wave energy along with ofshore wind. Waves are created by wind, so places with bouth wind and wave resources are probably plentifull, and using bouth in the same place would save a lot of offshore space. The only problem is the fact that it would take a company that does bouth windpower and wave energy.
PS, did you hear about that new wavepower station that could be capable of making electricity for about $.035 per kWh?? That is cheaper than coal ($.05 per kWh) by 30%!! That might even be enough for energy companies to actually use it.

Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!