SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 10
Download to read offline
PERSPECTIVES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY SECTOR IN BRAZIL
Viterbo, J.C.* ; Saidel. M. A.Ç ; Prado Jr F. A. A.Ç
* jviterbo@usp.br - Naval & Ocean Engineering Dept. (PNV) – Escola Politécnica, Universidade de São Paulo
Çsaidel@pea.usp.br ; faapj@uol.com.br - Electrical Energy and Automation Engineering Dept. (PEA) – idem
ABSTRACT
In global terms, wind power has been the fastest
growing energy source in the last decades and
probably it will be the same for next ones. The
learning curve for this technology shows cost of
energy (COE) falling down by 15% to 20% each
time that global capacity doubles (what happens
each 3 years, approximately). Although only 0.67%
penetration in the world electric generation by
2005, major playing countries in the wind energy
sector have made efforts towards the 2020 target of
12% wind power penetration in world electric
matrix. The contribution of wind power from the
offshore version is important for such goal, due to:
(i) location at a close distance of major load
centers; (ii) mitigation of environmental impacts
from electricity generation, and (iii) providing
efficiency and economy of scale, compared with
the onshore version. This article shows some
aspects of the offshore wind energy (OWE) in
interesting countries, turning focus on Brazil,
recognized as the third largest offshore wind
resource owner in the world, with a high feasibility
index for projects indeed. Conclusion of work
suggests that Brazilian energy actors shall to
strength R&D about technical and economic
feasibility of OWE projects near to shore and at
country’s continental shelf, where massive offshore
oil deployment has already been taken. For the
world leader in clean and renewable energy, value
creation and strategic paths would come as: (i) a
partial relief of energy supply for major load
centers (which are at the coast); (ii) a
rationalization on the use, transport and foreign
dependence of natural gas; and (iii) pushing
dynamics of new markets for the industry and for
Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM).
1. INTRODUCTION
Electricity projects have been established in Brazil
over the last years, but there is still a lack in supply
for the short run. Brazilian Atlas of Wind Power
returns 143 GW onshore wind power as “possible
to be installed” [1, p. 43] and the official program
for alternative sources (PROINFA) is a sensible
start-up for the Brazilian industry, which has a wind
turbines assembler (Wobben – Enercon), a tower
manufacturer (Eólica Industrial), and a 25 m blade
designer and manufacturer (Tecsis) already.
Purpose of this work is to reinforce Brazilian
discussion about the strategic importance of a
deeper penetration of avant-garde energy
technologies in its electricity matrix, emphasizing
about the weight of OWE for such strategy. This
text brings some steps taken by countries in order to
develop wind energy systems, onshore and
offshore. After that, the article discuss about
economical, political, environmental and industrial
aspects related to deploying such systems in Brazil.
2. AN OVERVIEW OF WIND SOURCE IN
THE WORLD ENERGY MATRIX
Concerning to energy as a whole (not electricity
only), the global energy production strongly relies
on fossil fuels. According to the International
Energy Agency (IEA), 80.2 % of the 10,579 Mtoe
of Total Primary Energy Supply (TPES)1
in 2003
came from the fossil sources, 6.5% from nuclear
and 13.3% came from renewable sources. From
these 13.8 points, 10.6 points came from burning
CRW (Combustible Renewables - as wood or
ethanol; and Waste - as CH4 from sanitary landfills
or biodigesters) [2]. So, only 3.2 % of the energy
consumed in the world in 2003 has not added to the
global warming or with nuclear waste inventories
growth, which management virtue will not be
covered by this work. Between 1971 and 2003,
TPES has grown by 2.1% a year. Renewables
(large hydro, CRW and others) have grown by
2.3% a year. Excluding large hydro and CRW from
this data, renewables’ growth becomes 8.2% a year.
These are the sources which do not contribute for
pollution during their production processes, listed
by IEA statistics as geothermal, solar, wind, tidal,
wave, ocean, etc. Not to forget that the major part
of the carbon from the biomass that died under a
large hydroelectric dam goes out to the atmosphere
as CH4 or CO2 later, beyond the fact of excluding
the flora which would catch CO2 and deliver O2 for
a long time. According to IEA data, the largest
growth over the 33 years analysis was relative to
wind energy (48.9 % per year). From 2000 to 2005,
besides with some mature basis already, wind
energy still demonstrated strong growth, at a rate of
27.7% per year [3, p. 10].
Energex 2006 Organising committee
2,1%
2,3%
2,1%
2,5%
8,2%
0,0%
1,5%
3,0%
4,5%
6,0%
7,5%
9,0%
TPES Renewables CRW Hidro Others
Figure 1. Annual average growth of energy sources between 1971 and 2003. Source: IEA, 2006 [2]
In 2005, the world electric production was nearly
18,000 TWh [4, p. 24]. Wind power production got
120 TWh approximately, 0.67% of the world total2
.
The European Wind Energy Association (EWEA)
has made a report (Wind Force 12) which
establishes the goal of 1,250 GW of wind power for
the year 2020 (this means an annual energy yield of
3,000 TWh, or 12% of world’s electric demand at
that time). In 2003, nuclear power contributed with
a 16.0 % share of world electric supply, the same
amount of large hydro [2]. According to the
European Renewable Energy Council (EREC),
wind energy is able to output 4,000 TWh, when it
would surpass the large hydro and it would become
the main renewable electricity source in the world
at 2022 [5]. Such a performance would be only a
play back of the ones showed by nuclear or large
hydro just few decades ago.
Concerning to the adherence features of wind
energy systems for the Brazilian case, one would be
the higher level of integration with the local energy
resources, unburdening the national grid of load
transmission and improving distributed generation,
improving the quality of the energy distributed and
promoting the use of local industries and human
resources. The learning curve of the wind sector
(research plus production scale) shows that the Cost
of Energy (COE) decreases by 20% each doubling
of world generation capacity (what has happened
each three years approximately). In addition to the
use of windy sites, these figures feed the argument
that, if efficiently established, wind is able to
reduce its (COE), becoming cost-competitive with
non-renewable and pollutants energy sources, as
shown in figure 2 [6, p. 73].
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
5,5 6 6,5 7 7,5 8 8,5 9 9,5 10
Figure 2. Lines: COE for onshore wind and for
offshore, according to the mean wind speed.
Bars: Cost range for traditional sources.
Adapted from Wind Power Monthly, V.20, 2004 [6]
Not to forget that the cost for gas-fired conversion,
as above, is that for established plants and transport
infrastructure. But in Brazil, the investment for
pipelines to transport the gas is a problem, mainly
for the supply of the northeastern region, which has
no longer a great choice of hydropower upgrading,
but has a windy-compliance with its pluviometric
profile, one of the main reasons to the pioneering of
the region on wind power. Also, the external cost
was not considered in the values of figure 2 above.
This is the portion of COE that occurs as a result of
energy conversion, but is not put inside energy
tariffs, once such externalities results have widely
spread consequences in time, space and kinds, so
they are difficult to correlate and measure. As a
result, externalities are covered indirectly by the
society, throughout harvests losses, public diseases
7,6%
28,9%
48,9%
0,4%
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
Geothermal Solar Wind Tidal
nuclear
coal
gas
onshore (US$ 1 M / MW)
offshore
(US$ 1,6 M / MW)
US$ / MWh
m/s
and damages to the common wealth (as hurricanes
or river floods do). Figure 3 illustrates COE gap as
a result of considering externalities in some
countries, corroborating the argument of wind
energy cost-effectiveness even when not an optimal
case of cost of capital and wind speed [7].
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Denmark
Spain
Germany
Denmark
Figure 3. COE considering externalities
Source: EWEA, 2004 [7]
3. INTERNATIONAL HIGHLIGHTS OF OWE
According to the Global Wind Energy Council
(GWEC), 2005 has resulted on the installation of
11,769 MW. This is a 43.4% increase in the annual
addition to the global market, up from 8,207 MW in
the previous year. The total value of new generating
equipment installed was over US$14 billions. The
total wind power capacity as ending 2005 stands at
59,084 MW worldwide, an increase of 25%
compared to 2004. The countries with the highest
total installed capacity are Germany (18,428 MW),
Spain (10,027 MW), the USA (9,149 MW), India
(4,430 MW) and Denmark (3,122 MW). Almost
21% of 2005’ new installed capacity was in the
USA (2,431 MW), due to the federal incentive for
wind energy, the production tax credit (PTC),
which was extended for a three year window of
stability by the US congress [3].
OWE shall to be seen as a complement, and not as
a concurrent to the onshore version. Although the
higher costs, OWE brings comparative advantages.
Sea winds are faster, steady and less turbulent [8,
p.4]. The visual impact gets smooth at sea. Onshore
constraints are avoided. Referring to the turbine’s
nominal power, the capacity of trucks, cranes, roads
and bridges are more limited for onshore devices
than for offshore, limiting the size of turbines. On
the wind farms power size, few onshore plants get
more than 50 MW (restricted to the available space,
cost of land, noise and visual impacts), limiting
scale profits of wind farms. OWE’s “power
density” is usually scatter (6 MW/km2
versus 13
MW/km2
onshore), reducing the “wind shadow”
effect throughout the turbines. Cost of connecting
to the grid is higher offshore, but attenuated by
smaller losses during electricity transport. OWE
systems usually are close to load centers, resulting
shorter connections to the grid (in contrast of the
onshore wind farms). Figure 4 exemplifies a cost
breakdown for an offshore wind farm [9, p. 47].
Transport,
Installation
11%
Yearly
O&M
27%
Other
5%
Transm.
System to
Shore
6%
Electric
Collection
System
2%
Wind
Turbine
24%
Tower
9%
Foundation
9%
Decomissio
ning
1%
Retrofit
and
Overhaul
6%
Figure 4. Cost Breakdown for an OWE system.
Dutch Offshore Wind Energy Converter [9]
As shown in figure 4, transport and O&M
summarize almost 40% of an offshore wind farm
cost. In order to attenuate these costs, scale is
critical for OWE cost-effectiveness. Year by year,
assemblers and project developers launch new
world records for the nominal power of turbines
and for the total power of wind farms. At beginning
of 2006, the largest wind turbine was running at 5
MW, 126 m rotor diameter (12.470 m2
). However,
the development of a 10 MW turbine is expected to
2010 and General Electric has announced to be
“physically possible” a turbine of 20 MW and 200
m diameter [10]. Concerning to wind farms, largest
ones are going to be run at the United Kingdom, as
shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Large OWE projects on planning at UK as
April 2006. Sources: www.crownestate.co.uk;
www.beatricewind.co.uk
Project London
Array
Beatrice Triton
Knoll
Main
investors
CORE;
E.ON;
Shell
WindEnergy
Talisman;
Scottish &
Southern;
EDF
Npower
renewables
(RWE
group)
Place 20 km outer
Thames
Estuary
25 km East
coast of
Scotland
25 km
Greater
Wash
Power 1,000 MW 1,000 MW 1,200 MW
Depth 25 m 45 m 20 m
Full Op. 2010 2010 2010
In fact, huge OWE projects are being planned for
the German part of the North Sea, but a final
definition for their evolvement is still to come,
because of grid integration constraints and once
their sizes calls for a more powerful and diversified
collectivity of stakeholders’ interests. Table 2
shows some of the largest on planning [11].
Wind Power
Natural
Gas
€ / MWh
Internal cost External cost
(min.)
External cost
(máx.)
Table 2. GW-scale OWE projects at the German
part of the North Sea. Adapted from [11]
Project Developer Power
MW
Forsetti Prokton Nord 17,500
Jules Verne Plambeck 13,500
TGB North ep4 offshore 10,045
Hochsee
Windpark
Nordsee 54°25’
EOS Offshore 5,355
Weiße Bank
2010
OSB Offshore-
Bürger- Windpark
Butendiek
2,700
Offshore North
Sea Windpower
Enova 2,025
Although some projects on planning in the US and
Canada, at the ending 2005 there was no OWE
plant in Americas. First reason is because countries
moved offshore only after an extensive experience
onshore, with some exception on the British case.
On the mega trend of oil organizations to become
energy organizations, the UK, as major player in
the global oil industry and market, is also the world
seventh wind energy generator (1,353 MW as
2005) [3]. But it still remains some public
resistance against onshore facilities due to cultural
means and visual impact. On the target of turning
into a more peaceful strategy of the security of
energy supply for the middle run, arising
environment-friendly measures at an industrial
basis deployment, UK has made option for OWE as
major tactics for sustainable development, joining
five goals as one: (i) to grow up public acceptance
to the technology; (ii) to create new jobs, (iii) to
promote its well known offshore resources and
industries, (iv) to enable a faster design-to-
operation solution for the energy security supply,
and (v) to evolve towards UK’ commitments to the
Kyoto Protocol . Close and synergic articulation is
between the Crown Estate – as manager of leasing
the public asset (seabed) and on project permitting
– joined to the Dept. of Trade and Industry – in
charge of energy strategy, providing rules for the
industry and defending the customer interest. So
that the first coming Gigawatt scale OWE projects
on planning come from UK. Second reason for no
OWE in Americas is due to the fact there is
relatively fewer shallow waters (<30 m deep) more
than 10 km far from the shore, which is good for a
low visual impact, as found at North Sea and the
Baltic. The shallower the sea is, the less complex
design and cost are. Distance is a combined factor
on the cost of cabling and transport versus the
impacts of plant (visual, tourism, fauna, fishing,
navigation, etc). The second largest OWE plant
running at 2005 is Horns Rev (160 MW). It is 14
km to 20 km far from Danish coast and it is over a
6,5 up to 13,5 m water depth. Such combination is
uncommon at the Atlantic or the Pacific.
Exemplifying about R&D, the National Renewable
Laboratory (NREL - USA) is identifying the
optimal depth of transition from fixed infrastructure
to floating ones, developing equipment and
methodology for erecting floating offshore wind
turbines without using a crane [12]. Furthermore,
NREL shelters the Low Wind Speed Technology
Project, in order to design multimegawatt turbines
with cost-effective output under class 4 winds (5,8
m/s at 10m height). This would increase 20 times
the available area for onshore projects in USA [13,
p. 1], reducing the COE to US$ 30 / MWh onshore
and to US$ 50 MWh offshore up to 2012 [8, p.1].
Plenty of these new areas available will be close to
significant load centers. However, the large cities at
the northeastern cost do not have even the class 4
wind onshore, so that the offshore option to become
the logical choice for an environment-friendly
energy supply. Musial and Butterfield have
produced an interesting essay about OWE in the
USA [8]. Essaying over the available area, they
took the closest 50 nautical miles (nm) width
coastal belt. Then, inside this giant area, they
ignored the first 5 nm (due to visual impact), 2/3 of
the 5 to 20 nm belt and 1/3 of the 20 to 50 nm belt.
The study returned 907 GW of total OWE potential
for the US. Estimation is that 98 GW of that total
amount are at shallow waters (less than 30 m deep).
They have simulated both costs for wind farms
fixed on seabed (30 m) and also for floating wind
farms (600 ft deep). Based on an 5 x 100 MW wind
farm, they have attenuated the profits from learning
curves, concerning to towers and turbines (which
are some matured technologies), but they have
improved learning profits in the case of foundations
or floating systems (as emerging technologies).
Table 3 summarizes the results of simulation.
Table 3: Cost breakdown – 500 MW; class 6 winds:
8 to 8.8 m/s; Cap. Factor 47% – NREL [8]
30 m depth / 15 miles offshore
US$ 000 . 2006 2015 2025
Turbine & tower 338.730 258.746 229.278
Monopile or
tripods 99.200 67.602 59.903
Electric works . 159.300 128.089 113.501
Total . 597.230 454.437 402.682
US$ / kW . 1.194 909 805
US$ / MWh . 54 37 32
600 ft depth
US$ 000 . 2006 2015 2025
Turbine & tower 338.730 245.128 217.211
Floating systems 469.000 289.696 185.406
Electric works . 194.200 156.152 138.368
Total . 1.001.930 690.976 540.985
US$ / kW . 2.004 1.382 1.082
US$ / MWh . 83 51 41
In the US Energy Information Administration’
website, US electric supply is about 1,050 GW (as
2004). NREL forecasts are to start floating OWE
between 2015 and 2020. However, besides the huge
potential, US energy matrix will rely strongly on
coal still by decades (fig. 6), even the investment in
gas-fired thermal power plants (fig. 7) and even the
renewable’s COE to be so close with fossils (fig. 8)
in the future. The following figures are from US
Annual Energy Outlook 2006 [14, pp. 77 - 84].
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
5
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
Petroleum
Renewables
Nuclear
Natural Gas
Coal
2030
2004
Figure 6. Electricity generation in the USA (TWh)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2005-
2010
2011-
2015
2016-
2020
2021-
2025
2026-
2030
Nuclear Renewables
Natural Gas Coal
Figure 7. Electric generation capacity additions by
Fuel, including combined heat , 2005-2030 (GW)
30 28
11 11
41 44 43 41
5
5
1 1
8
8 8 8
15 16
37 40
7
3 3 3
3
7
7
2 3
7
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
Capital O&M Fuel Transmission
Figure 8. Levelized electricity costs for new plants,
2015 and 2030 respectively (US$/MWh)
The Deutsches Windenergie-Institut (DEWI)
indicates Germany as the future largest OWE
developer. DEWI’s scenario is 25,200 MW onshore
and 5,600 MW in the North Sea and Baltic Sea at
2014 (210,000 MW total worldwide). Based on
that, the original aim of the German Government to
install 2,000 to 3,000 MW offshore by 2010 can no
longer to be, because the start of installations will
be delayed to 2008. The reasons are technical and
administrative problems, and due to the booming of
the global market, the wind turbine manufacturers
are already working at full capacity. More than
35,000 MW offshore is expected in the German
part of the North Sea and the Baltic until 2030,
raising wind energy almost to 1/3 national power
source at time [15]. Although delayed by political
problems, Germany has an interesting strategy plan
for exploiting OWE [16]. Good publication is also
that of the UK’s strategy on OWE [17]. According
to IEA, as ending of 2005, the total amount of
OWE wind farms was as 804 MW (Denmark 53%;
UK 38% ; Ireland 3% ; Sweden 3% ; Netherlands
2% and Germany 1%) [18].
Forecast for the global electric demand at 2030 is
31,524 TWh, the double as 2000, but tripling in
developing countries. The world’s total installed
capacity will rise from 3,397 GW in 1999 to 7,157
GW by 2030, according to IEA. Computing on the
replacement of plants going into obsolescence, plus
the new power additions, nearly 5,000 GW is
expected to be built in the global system between
2001 and 2030. [19, pp. 124 - 130]. Including
transmission and distribution, the global investment
in electricity over the period will be US$ 10 trillion.
About one third of this amount shall to be in the
big-five non-OECD economies (Brazil, China,
India, Indonesia and Russia). More than 40% of
world’s new capacity projected is expected to be
gas-fired, which jumps from 677 GW in 1999 to
over 2,500 GW in 2030. But it remains very
uncertain whether these big-five countries will be
able to find the capital required to build the
infrastructure, including upstream facilities,
pipelines and LNG terminals, to support new gas-
fired projects [20, pp. 341 - 356]. The Global Wind
Energy 2005 Report calls the goals for wind energy
by 2020. Table 4 summarizes GWEC goals.
Table 4: GWEC goals for wind energy by 2020 [3]
World’s Total Wind Capacity 1.254 GW
Annual Growth 158.73 GW
12% of global electric demand 3,054 TWh
Annual avoided emissions of CO2 1,832 Mton
Accum. Avoided emissions 10,771 Mton
Annual Investment € 80 billions
Jobs on occupation 2,300,000
Cost of plant 512 € / kW
Cost of energy 24.5 € / MWh
GWEC goals are 2,700 GW for 2030 and 3,200
GW for 2040. The offshore wind sector has a
primordial role in such goals due to the smaller
environmental impact, larger scale and efficiency,
saving the space on land for economical activities
other than energy generation.
Coal Gas comb.
cycle
Wind Nuclear
TWh
GW
US$/MWh
4. ON THE BRAZILIAN FRAMEWORK
83% of the Brazilian electric consumption come
from the hydraulic source 3
. This source is tending
for scarcity in supply for providing in full the
increase of the demand. A great increase of the
natural gas in the electric matrix is expected. But
this would mean: (i) dependence raising with
relation to Bolivia and exposition to its sensible
political risk, (ii) verge evasion and great
expenditures with transport, (iii) lower future
availability of the commodity for other industrial
uses in Brazil and (iv) the rise of the Brazilian
fraction in the global warming. Large hydropower
source is growing slowly in Brazil. Major plants are
public-owned and after the 70’s, few significant
investment was made for the national electricity
infrastructure. Potential demand is available, but
the federal government funds are insufficient, so
that alternative solution was found, throughout a
system of investing by partnership with the private
sector (Parcerias Público Privadas – PPP). But the
maturation of such system is still expected,
throughout higher level of accuracy on rules,
equality over the contracts and steady warranties
that the future representatives on the government
will stand on agreements done by others before.
Actually, the most significant potential for new
large hydro projects in Brazil lies at the Amazon
region. National efficiency average for dams is 6.3
W/m2
. Amazon shows efficiency between 0.1 and
0.3 W/m2
[21]. In addition to the lower efficiency,
the complex and delicate ecology of the region
suggests that it is unlikely to receive foreign
financial resources to be invested in a large energy
project. Even the contrary case, it would take many
years to start production. In order to cover demand
growth in the short run, the Ministry of Energy has
made option in 2000 for gas-fired thermal power
plants (GTPP). Due to the imminence of huge
blackouts, entrepreneurs invested in GTPP,
contracting the gas supply from the unique
provider, the Brazilian oil company Petrobrás. In
2001, the market was forced to reduce
consumption, so that in few months the national
demand was that of three years ago. Although the
slashing-down policy, demand did not started
growing strongly, but as the same rate as usual.
With the short-time problem solved, Petrobrás
didn’t provide the gas for GTPPs, preferring to
cover the financial position of theirs in the
wholesale electricity market rather than making a
heavy investment in gas pipelines. As a financial
gap, the exchange rate jumped from R$1,10/US$ in
oct/22/97 up to R$3,96/US$ in oct/22/02,
sacrificing investors’ long term debt from gas
turbines imports. On the political side, there was
instability in Bolivia (major gas supplier). These
factors, joined to other technical constraints of
transporting, have interrupted Brazilian program for
GTPPs, which would launch 13.6 GW into the
system (47 plants planned, only 4 have started) and
would arise Brazilian CO2 emissions from 80
Mton/year by 2003 to 230 Mton/year [22].
In the other hand, an interesting complement exists
between the wind and the rain profiles near to the
coast of the Northeast Region of Brazil [23]. Upper
wind speed averages are over the dry season (July
to December), the season of highest electricity
prices, as of the highest level of energy deficit risk
too. The Wind Atlas of Ceará state [24] indicates
that coastline blows on dry season between 7m/s
and 13 m/s during 90% of time, good for wind
energy conversion. As in December 2005, the
Brazilian Energy Agency (www.aneel.gov.br)
indicated 5,235 MW of wind energy projects
approved for both states (more than 8,000 MW for
the whole country). On such an appropriate
framework, Carvalho [21] made a simulation study
on the contribution of wind energy by its shoreline
version on the displacement of green house gases
under Kyoto Protocol prerogatives. At the coast
line of the states of Ceará (530 km) and Rio Grande
do Norte (493 km), he considered a 2 km width belt
(onshore). By assumption, the study considered
20% of the area as available for erecting wind
turbines, resulting a 409.2 km2
theoretical wind
park. Under a dispersion of 22 x 600 kW turbines
each km2
, a plant of 9,000 turbines (5,400 MW)
was simulated. It was considered the energy losses
due to wind turbines interaction, also those by dust
impregnation on the blades surfaces and by energy
transporting up to the grid. Losses due non-
availability by electrical, mechanical and weather
issues were also considered. Simulation returned an
amount of 18.5 TWh a year, resulting a capacity
factor of 39% for the system as a whole. 10% of
energy produced was discounted as losses over
transmission and distribution, considering that
fossil conversion, which would be displaced,
usually is not so far away from the load center as
onshore wind plants use to be. Study considered a
base line of 0.502 ton of CO2/MWh for
displacement (as like an efficient combined cycle
gas-fired plant). In a direct calculus, an amount of
8.36 Mton CO2/year would be avoided by the wind
park. Considering US$10 / ton CO2 on the Clean
Development Mechanisms, simulation resulted on
the gross annual revenue of US$ 83 M for the both
states of Ceará and Rio Grande do Norte.
Even the nearly 8,500 km long coast line and the
previous senior competence in oil & gas offshore
operations , Brazil faces previous institutional
challenges other than the technical ones which are
expected for deploying OWE systems. The federal
program for alternative energy (PROINFA) was
seen in 2004 as a start-running force to the onshore
wind industry. It consists on public company
Eletrobrás to buy the total amount of energy to be
converted from 3,300 MW from biomass, small
hydropower and wind. 1,422 MW of wind projects
were selected be contracted by Eletrobrás. Power
purchase agreements are 20 years long, with low
rates for project funding (up to 80% of capital cost,
one year grace period, 12 years for amortization).
Project developers objected to the energy
acquisition price [25], arguing that price would not
raise enough margins to handle the financial rates
of loans plus the payments to suppliers. Prices are
in the range of R$ 204/MWh, or € 78/MWh, for
lower capacity factor plants (34%) and
R$181/MWh, or €69/MWh, for higher capacity
factor plants (41%). Until June 2006, the final price
of energy for residences in São Paulo city was R$
287.20/MWh (before a 25% value-added tax –
ICMS – and other taxes). The companies selected
argue against the difficulty of covering the
requirements for guaranteeing their equity as a loan
contracting counterpart with the funding provider,
the National Bank for Economic and Social
Development (BNDES). Several disputes of
juridical or administrative issues from companies of
non-selected projects have retarded PROINFA’s
progress. Also, there is a rule of nationalization of
expenditures: 60% of the value of components and
services must be expended inside the country. This
rule has brought more difficulties than market
prosperity for the wind sector and so projects were
delayed else more: the deadline for starting the
wind projects generation moved to ending 2008. It
seems that there was not so close articulation
between public promoters for wind in Brazil as it
was the case in UK (not forgetting the helping fact
that companies in UK have the money enough to
invest or guarantee by themselves in accordance to
the price of energy to be bought by utilities).
Helped by the rule of nationalization, the monopoly
in the turbines supply in Brazil has made the prices
arise by 20% compared to the time of business
planning. Outer assemblers are focused on big
markets and some of those markets showed more
than 30% growth in the last years, so that
manufacturers did not invested on factories in
Brazil. By this way, the country does not have still
a strong solution for the security of energy supply
in the middle run (except by GTPP tries again),
making new blackouts as possible in 2008.
Major part of Brazilian power generation is
concentrated in few points and due to this, 30% of
the final consumer tariff refers to energy transport
and 11% of the total energy produced is just lost
during transmission and distribution (according to
the IEA’ statistics tool, this is about 6% in EU 15).
An important advantage from OWE over onshore
systems is the good possibility of finding windy
sites less than 30 km far from the load centers,
reducing the cost of transport and the energy losses.
Also, OWE calls for larger projects, where the
economy of scale is strategically efficient.
Additional opportunity would be to fulfill electric-
intensive companies, as those of aluminum
industry, a strategic product for Brazilian domestic
market also and for exports, once a major part of
the value-added to this product is about energy.
Through the largest corporation of Latin America
and world’s eighth largest oil company, Petrobrás,
Brazil has a mature know-how in offshore projects
for oil and gas production, at deep waters indeed.
Good part of the gas is just burned, as it is not cost-
effective to transport it to continent. On the other
hand, oil platforms must bring diesel generators
into the decks, occupying an important and
valuable space, concurring to layout constraints and
the risk for the crew. On promoting wind energy for
supplying its own projects, Petrobrás contributes
for the creation of an industrial basis aimed at the
offshore oil industry and the onshore wind energy
industry, pushing dynamics for the sector of
assembling, capital goods and special services
providing. By promoting the exploitation,
deployment and production of wind energy fields,
the company also would be feeding its own
capabilities to sell specialized services in this high
potential international market of erecting wind
turbines offshore. Beyond the fixed turbines, if
using floating OWE to supply platforms, the
company would be able to manage the location of
electricity production, following and adapting if
some necessity comes, once they would be modular
and possible to move from a place to another.
Furthermore, as a very well established prestigious
company, Petrobrás would feed the Brazilian
source of Carbon Credits, as assigned by the Clean
Development Mechanisms and the Kyoto Protocol.
An appropriate reference case is Beatrice Wind
Farm. Talisman is a Canadian-based oil and gas
explorer. One of the largest infrastructure operator
at UK’ continental shelf, it became interested in
offshore wind in 2001, by screening a range of
options to identify how to reduce operating costs,
increase production, and extend economic life of
Beatrice oil field. Studies revealed that finding re-
use opportunity for the infrastructure would
contribute to these goals, and indicated that there
was potential for wind energy. The demonstrator
project consists of 2 x 5 MW wind turbines, linked
to the 2 km far Beatrice platform (see table 1).
Project’s cost is about £30 million and will bring
significant benefits to the UK and Scotland, so that
the project has received funding from the Scottish
Executive, UK Dept. of Trade and Industry and the
European Commission. The feasibility study
showed that a successful development would
require combined expertise from the offshore oil
and gas industry with those of utilities. Then,
Talisman UK has partnered with Scottish and
Southern Energy, a major UK utility. After so, the
project has been incorporated into a pan-European
initiative called DOWNVInD (Distant Offshore
Wind farms with No Visual Impact iN Deepwater),
comprising 15 different organizations from 6
European countries. They have established a
synergic catalyst for a R&D cluster in order to: (i)
understand the environmental impact of deep water
windfarms (DWFs), (ii) prove the concept of a
DWF, (iii) explore the cost-effectiveness of
deepwater sites, (iv) share the know-how across
Europe, (v) pioneer the development of DWFs, (vi)
improve and commercialize the technology and
(vii) if approved in pilot phase, the project aims at
growing up to 1000 MW after 2010, providing 20%
of present Scottish demand. But the project has an
immediate impact on Beatrice field too. The energy
will be used to power the platform, reducing the use
of fossil power, following Talisman’s strategy of
reducing emissions and the environmental impact
of its own operations. The demonstrator project
aligns with Talisman’s plan for decommissioning
the Beatrice field, which seeks extending the life of
the field by finding continued and alternative uses
for some of the main facilities and infrastructure.
The Engineering Consultancy Aerodyn GmbH has
identified, in 2003, from a 105 countries initial
data, the most prominent non-EU markets for OWE
deployment [26]. In a total amount of 275,000 km2
of area available for OWE projects, they assumed
that 10% would be less than 20 m deep and 50 km
far from the grid onshore. Interesting that Brazil has
the third largest potential for the OWE yield (609
TWh/year), behind China (1,033 TWh/year) and
USA (612 TWh/year), according to the study. Also,
Brazil is the third in aptitude for developing OWE
projects. Looking only at the feasibility index
created by the consultancy, Brazil is the best index
for developing OWE, if compared with the other
two giants (China and USA). The index created has
considered features like wind speed, economic
framework for wind energy, water depths, distance
to the grid onshore, offshore infrastructure, offshore
interest, and others. If 10% of that Brazilian
potential (609 Twh/year), could be found at good
sites (20 m deep and 50 km far from grid), the 61
TWh/year would supply 17.5% of the Brazilian
total electricity demand by 2004 (350 TWh). If
becoming true, the second phase of PROINFA aims
at contracting power enough (but no longer with
subsidizing prices) to score renewables by 10% of
national electric supply up to 2010.
2006 is an important year for the Brazilian energy
sector. The biggest achievement is reaching self-
sufficiency in oil production at a time of global
scarcity, which has caused high market volatility.
Strategic fact for Brazil is the safety in internal
supply, considering the international market’s
current and future conditions, with indicators of
quick growth in consumption in the emerging
economies and the lack of new and significant
discoveries in the world. The comfortable internal
balance in the oil sector is a privilege of few
countries in the world, most of which are heavily
dependent on oil. Petrobrás is already rated as an
“investment grade” company by Moody’s. The
company is committed to sell, by 2010, 10% of its
total amount of energy offered from renewable
sources (ethanol and biodiesel are major elements
in this mission). Also, 10% of the energy consumed
by the company in its own operations shall to come
from renewables. In this second case, renewable
electric conversion shall to be the way to follow.
The company is already running a pilot project in
the city of Macau, in the coastal state of Rio Grande
do Norte. Project consists on 3 x 600 kW wind
turbines at the beach, few meters distant from the
water (pictures are at the company’s website).
Other interesting opportunity for OWE in Brazil are
illustrated in the Wind potential Atlas of the State
of Rio Grande do Sul (outer south of Brazil). The
state runs the first and also the largest onshore
project selected by PROINFA. The “Osorio Wind
Farm” is a 150 MW system (3 x 50 MW), one of
the largest onshore wind farms in the world. The
state made good survey for its Wind Atlas
completion, considering offshore possibilities over
the Lakes regions indeed. As an example, Lagoa
dos Patos is a wide-area lake (more than 10,000
km2
). The regions of the three lakes in the state
have a total area of 14,550 km2
, with less than 7m
for the average depth. The Atlas returns a total
amount of 19,960 MW (1.36 MW/km2
) for the
Lakes altogether, with a total OWE output of 51.08
TWh (winds at 100 m height, more than 6.0 m/s,
29.2% capacity factor). Maps of proposed “offshore
sites” can be found at the Atlas website [27].
Brazilian engineering and consulting firms are also
preparing to provide special services for regional
OWE development possibilities. Example is
ORICICLON Infrastructure, a start-up technology
company from CIETEC-IPEN institute. Specialized
in offshore structural engineering design, the firm is
planning a small scale pilot project at the southern
seashore of the São Paulo state [28] . It will be
located onshore and, in analogy with that Petrobras’
pilot project at Northeast of Brazil, this will be
exposed to coastal wind profiles. It is planned to be
1.2 MW required by a small and relatively poorer
municipality of Ilha Comprida, situated at an
environmentally-protected reserve. With a weak
grid connection to the primary energy distribution
system, that city has problems with energy supply
during summer (population goes from 10,000 up to
40,000 inhabitants). Quite differently from the
predominantly energy driven Brazilian market, this
region constitute an environmentally-driven market
requiring an integrated energy resources planning
(IRP), what excludes diesel or gas-fired options as
the best choices. Such an environmentally driven
approach fits the wind project development in a
different pathway, as compared to the target
projects of PROINFA program, for example, which
are constituted as energy driven markets.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Although few markets have made option for going
offshore. It is interesting for Brazil to make an
appropriate investment in R&D concerning to
OWE systems. In this sense, Petrobrás should play
a major role, once the company is able to push
dynamics to the industry in the South America.
This would be a strategic contribution to Brazil,
arising the diversification over the national electric
matrix (actually high-dependent on hydropower and
on the rain, by extension). As from onshore as from
offshore facilities, wind energy would help not only
to protect against natural uncertainties (rain), but
also against political and economical uncertainties,
as the natural gas is becoming more and more
important in the national energy matrix, but comes
from foreign and unstable countries, as Bolivia or
Venezuela. Also, the R&D on OWE systems would
contribute with the distributed generation and
losses prevailing along major load centers at the
coastal line, an important path on the energy
planning improvements to come ahead. For
Petrobrás, OWE deployment would be a great
opportunity of diversifying for selling its core
competence realized by clients (now as an energy
company and in the near future as an infrastructure
provider), like major companies started to do in the
North Sea. The worldwide market for OWE
projects is huge for starting on 2010, but few big-
players for a while, on a vertical operation
structure, to handle with.
The promise of 1,422 MW from PROINFA by
2008 (some of them maybe not to come true) made
the Global Wind Energy Report (2004 and 2005
issues) to dedicate good content for the Brazilian
case, as one of the 13 leading-countries that will
perform major role on the world goal of 12% of
global electricity from wind by 2020. Brazil is
covered by the UNEP’s program for funding
developing countries on the assessment of wind and
solar energy potentials (SWERA program). Not for
coincidence, by 2006, the same year of its oil self-
sufficiency, Brazil is the “country in focus”
analyzed by the decision-making publication
“World Energy Outlook” (IEA). In a time of energy
scarcity for the short run, with a 8,500 km long
coastal line (where the major part of Brazilian load
centers are located), it is the better to expect that
Brazil, as the world leader in clean and renewable
energy sources, takes on the way of developing
R&D for OWE at the called “blue amazon”, as so
as other renewable power sources too, but in a so
close as complex articulation by effective measures,
improving the skills that even foreign business or
research organizations assign for the country. Thus,
this present starting work follows on future research
concerning to detailed technical and institutional
prerogatives for the OWE deployment in Brazil
Major points of concern about the OWE conversion
are as follows: (i) impacts over the human and
aquatic local communities, as a result of the
additional O&M, which should fit to pre-existing
behavior; (ii) electromagnetic impact and acoustics
over the sea fauna and the telecommunications. (iii)
technical uncertainties about infrastructure, as
seabed soil, foundations, buoys, cables, etc. (iv)
institutional and juridical aspects for environmental
permitting, for project funding and for fitting OWE
with other economic activities as aviation,
navigation, fishing, mining, tourism, etc.
6. NOTES
1
TPES (total primary energy supply) is the amount
of energy available in a certain place at a time. For
such place and time, it is equal to: (i) the production
from primary sources (the mineral sources, as
petroleum, coal, natural gas and also the electricity
directly converted from its natural sources); (ii)
plus the imports of energetic resources to that place
at that time; (iii) minus the exports of energetic
resources for that place at that time; (iv) plus the
inventories that were taken for consumption; (v)
minus the inventories that were put on reserves.
The common unit for energy resources is the Mtoe
(million of tons of oil equivalent) and it is equal to
11.63 TWh or 41.87 x 1015
joules.
2
The global electric consumption came as an
extension of that figure in the Key World Energy
Statistics 2005 (IEA), p. 24. The wind power
generation data came as a simple ratio calculus
from Global Wind Energy 2005 Report. At the page
16, an amount of 83 TWh is allocated for the
40,504 MW at EU countries, what means a 23.4 %
capacity factor altogether. The remaining 18,580
MW in the world (50% of them inside the US) was
assumed as 22.7 % capacity factor, completing the
120 TWh for the world overall.
3
Calculus was made with data from Brazilian
Ministry of Energy and Mining. The “Balanço
Energético Nacional – BEN 2005” (National
Energy Balance) provides “complete tables” data.
The numbers were added the from table 5.3
(centrais elétricas de serviço público) and table 5.4
(centrais elétricas autoprodutoras). Available at
www.mme.gov.br.
7. REFERENCES
[1] Amarante, O. A. C. (coord.). Atlas do potencial
eólico brasileiro. MME. Brasília, 2001 45p.
Available at www.cresesb.cepel.br
[2] International Energy Agency – IEA.
Renewables in Global Energy Supply – An IEA
Fact Sheet. 2006. 13 p. Available at www.iea.org
[3] Global Wind Energy Concil. Global Wind 2005
Report. 52 p. Available at www.gwec.net
[4] International Energy Agency – IEA. Key World
Energy Statistics 2005. 82 p. Available at
www.iea.org
[5] The European Renewable Energy Council.
Renewable Energy Scenario to 2040. 15 p.
Available at www.erec-renewables.org
[6] The European Wind Energy Association. Wind
Force 12. A Blueprint to achieve 12% of the
world’s electricity from wind power by 2012.
Edition 2004. 104 p. Available at www.ewea.org
[7] The European Wind Energy Association. Wind
Energy – The facts. An Analysis of wind energy in
the EU 25. Vol. 4. – Environment. 2004. 60 p.
Available at www.ewea.org
[8] Musial, W.; Butterfield, S. Future for Offshore
Wind Energy in the United States. To be presented
at Energy Ocean 2004. Palm Beach, FL. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. Available at
www.nrel.gov
[9] Hendriks, H. B. ; Zaaijer, M. Dutch Offshore
Wind Energy Converter. Executive summary of the
public research activities. 2004. 57p. Available at
www.ecn.nl > special projects > dowec.
[10] Lyons, J. P. GE Energy presentation to the
Offshore Wind Energy Collaborative. Feb 10, 2005.
Available at www.mtpc.org/RenewableEnergy/
Owec_pdfs/owec-lyons_21005_v1.pdf
[11] Deutsche WindGuard GmbH. Offshore Wind –
Implementing a new powerhouse for Europe.
Report 2005 for Greenpeace. Available at
www.greenpeace.org > press centre > reports
[12] Musial, W. UC Berkeley Student Project
Proposal. 1) Determination of the Optimum Depth
for Floating Wind Turbines. 2) Methods for
Minimizing Work-at-Sea Requirements of Floating
Offshore Wind Turbines. 2005. 2 p. Available at
www.ce.berkeley.edu/Courses/CE180/
Offshore_projects.pdf
[13] Calvert S., Thresher R., Hock S., Laxson A.,
Smith B. Low Wind Speed Technology
Development in the U.S. Department of Energy
Wind Energy Research Program: Preprint. 2002.
Available at www.nrel.gov
[14] US Department of Energy – Energy
Information Administration. Annual Energy
Outlook 2006. 236p. Available at www.eia.doe.gov
[15] Deutsches Windenergie Institut. WindEnergy
Study 2006 - Market Assessment of the Wind
Energy Industry up to the Year 2014. Available at
www.dewi.de
[16] Germany. Fed. Ministry for the Environment,
Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (lead).
Strategy of the German government on the use of
off-shore wind energy in the context of its national
sustainability strategy. January 2002. 26 p.
Available at www.bmu.de
[17] UK Department of Trade and Industry – DTI.
Future Offshore – A Strategic Framework for the
Offshore Wind Industry. 2002. 87 p. Available at
www.dti.gov.uk
[18] Data available from www.ieawind.org
[19] International Energy Agency – IEA. World
Energy Outlook 2002. Available at www.iea.org
[20] International Energy Agency – IEA. World
Energy Investment Outlook. 2003. Available at
www.iea.org
[21] Carvalho, P.C.M., (2003), Wind energy and
greenhouse emissions trading market: the brazilian
potential, Wind Engineering, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.
135 – 142.
[22] Bermann, C. (2002). Energia no Brasil: Para
quê? Para quem? Crise e alternativas para um país
sustentável. Livraria da Fæsica, São Paulo.
[23] Amarante, O.C., Bittencourt, R. M., Rocha,
N.A., Schultz, D.J., Sugai, M.V.B., (1999),
Estabilização sazonal da energia através da
complementaridade entre os regimes hidrológico e
eólico, XV Seminário Nacional de Produção e
Transmissão de Energia Elétrica, Foz do Iguaçu.
[24] The State of Ceará, Secretaryship for the
Infrastructure. Atlas do Potencial Eolico do Ceará.
Available at www.seinfra.ce.gov.br
[25] Kissel, J. M., Krauter, S. C. W. Adaptions of
renewable energy policies to unstable
macroeconomic situations – Case study: Wind
Power in Brazil. Energy Policy, In Press, Corrected
Proof, Available online 8 September 2005.
[26] S. Siegfriedsen, M. Lehnhoff and A. Prehn:
Primary markets for offshore wind energy outside
the european union – Wind Engineering 27: 5; 419
– 430. 2003.
[27] The State of Rio Grande do Sul, Secretaryship
for Energy, Mining and Communications. Atlas do
Potencial Eolico do Rio Grande do Sul. Available
at www.semc.rs.gov.br. Pictures of the OWE
resources of that state can be found at
www.semc.rs.gov.br/ atlas/INDEX_geral.htm
[28] ORICICLON. Prospect for “Sistema de
Geração Eólica de Energia Elétrica Unidade Piloto
de Ilha Comprida, SP”. 2003. Available at
www.oriciclon.com

More Related Content

What's hot

Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...
Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...
Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...
Gerd Tarand
 
2011 Review in Natural Resources Research
2011 Review in Natural Resources Research2011 Review in Natural Resources Research
2011 Review in Natural Resources Research
Jock McCracken
 
MI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE WhitepaperMI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE Whitepaper
Omar Saif
 
MI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE WhitepaperMI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE Whitepaper
Yousif Abd
 

What's hot (20)

Inyección de CO2
Inyección de CO2Inyección de CO2
Inyección de CO2
 
Role of Enhanced Oil Recovery
Role of Enhanced Oil RecoveryRole of Enhanced Oil Recovery
Role of Enhanced Oil Recovery
 
Tudor Costantinescu, Principal Adviser, European Commission, Directorate-gene...
Tudor Costantinescu, Principal Adviser, European Commission, Directorate-gene...Tudor Costantinescu, Principal Adviser, European Commission, Directorate-gene...
Tudor Costantinescu, Principal Adviser, European Commission, Directorate-gene...
 
World Energy Situation and 21st Century Coal Power
World Energy Situation and 21st Century Coal PowerWorld Energy Situation and 21st Century Coal Power
World Energy Situation and 21st Century Coal Power
 
Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...
Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...
Climate friendly energy for Europe ”We are in the beginning of a Green indust...
 
Challenges Facing Grid Integration of Renewable Energy in the GCC Region
Challenges Facing Grid Integration of Renewable Energy in the GCC RegionChallenges Facing Grid Integration of Renewable Energy in the GCC Region
Challenges Facing Grid Integration of Renewable Energy in the GCC Region
 
05
0505
05
 
Electricity and Climate Change
Electricity and Climate ChangeElectricity and Climate Change
Electricity and Climate Change
 
The Global Energy Challenges on Role Of Nuclear Energy and Climate Change
The Global Energy Challenges on Role Of Nuclear Energy and Climate ChangeThe Global Energy Challenges on Role Of Nuclear Energy and Climate Change
The Global Energy Challenges on Role Of Nuclear Energy and Climate Change
 
Report: Leveraging Natural Gas To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Report: Leveraging Natural Gas To Reduce Greenhouse Gas EmissionsReport: Leveraging Natural Gas To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Report: Leveraging Natural Gas To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 
Main findings Working Group 3: Mitigation of Climate Change
Main findings Working Group 3: Mitigation of Climate ChangeMain findings Working Group 3: Mitigation of Climate Change
Main findings Working Group 3: Mitigation of Climate Change
 
2011 Review in Natural Resources Research
2011 Review in Natural Resources Research2011 Review in Natural Resources Research
2011 Review in Natural Resources Research
 
MI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE WhitepaperMI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE Whitepaper
 
MI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE WhitepaperMI-GE Whitepaper
MI-GE Whitepaper
 
Heritage Resource Bank Apr09
Heritage Resource Bank Apr09Heritage Resource Bank Apr09
Heritage Resource Bank Apr09
 
High Penetration of Renewable Energy
High Penetration of Renewable EnergyHigh Penetration of Renewable Energy
High Penetration of Renewable Energy
 
Decarbonizing the U.S. Energy Sector -- A Study in Optimization and Tradeoffs
Decarbonizing the U.S. Energy Sector -- A Study in Optimization and TradeoffsDecarbonizing the U.S. Energy Sector -- A Study in Optimization and Tradeoffs
Decarbonizing the U.S. Energy Sector -- A Study in Optimization and Tradeoffs
 
The Strategic Energy Technology Plan: at the heart of energy R&I in Europe
The Strategic Energy Technology Plan: at the heart of energy R&I in EuropeThe Strategic Energy Technology Plan: at the heart of energy R&I in Europe
The Strategic Energy Technology Plan: at the heart of energy R&I in Europe
 
A NEW ENERGY ERA - Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in Portugal by Manu...
A NEW ENERGY ERA - Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in Portugal by Manu...A NEW ENERGY ERA - Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in Portugal by Manu...
A NEW ENERGY ERA - Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in Portugal by Manu...
 
Ab climate change outline_v2
Ab climate change outline_v2Ab climate change outline_v2
Ab climate change outline_v2
 

Similar to Viterbo energex norway 2006

The Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copy
The Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copyThe Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copy
The Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copy
Kait Siegel
 
oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012
oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012
oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012
Henry Jeffrey
 
Re technologies cost_analysis-wind_power
Re technologies cost_analysis-wind_powerRe technologies cost_analysis-wind_power
Re technologies cost_analysis-wind_power
Dr Lendy Spires
 
10.1.1.120.7375
10.1.1.120.737510.1.1.120.7375
10.1.1.120.7375
sayed30
 

Similar to Viterbo energex norway 2006 (20)

Mark Jacobson Study in Energy & Environment Science : 145 countries on low co...
Mark Jacobson Study in Energy & Environment Science : 145 countries on low co...Mark Jacobson Study in Energy & Environment Science : 145 countries on low co...
Mark Jacobson Study in Energy & Environment Science : 145 countries on low co...
 
Prof. Mark Jacobson Research Paper: 100% WWS All-Sector Energy Roadmaps and G...
Prof. Mark Jacobson Research Paper: 100% WWS All-Sector Energy Roadmaps and G...Prof. Mark Jacobson Research Paper: 100% WWS All-Sector Energy Roadmaps and G...
Prof. Mark Jacobson Research Paper: 100% WWS All-Sector Energy Roadmaps and G...
 
THE FUTURE OF ENERGY REQUIRED FOR BRAZIL.pdf
THE FUTURE OF ENERGY REQUIRED FOR BRAZIL.pdfTHE FUTURE OF ENERGY REQUIRED FOR BRAZIL.pdf
THE FUTURE OF ENERGY REQUIRED FOR BRAZIL.pdf
 
HOW THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL CAN MAKE THE ENERGY SECTOR SUSTAINABLE.pdf
HOW THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL CAN MAKE THE ENERGY SECTOR SUSTAINABLE.pdfHOW THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL CAN MAKE THE ENERGY SECTOR SUSTAINABLE.pdf
HOW THE GOVERNMENT OF BRAZIL CAN MAKE THE ENERGY SECTOR SUSTAINABLE.pdf
 
A Review on Revolution of Wind Energy Conversion System and Comparisons of Va...
A Review on Revolution of Wind Energy Conversion System and Comparisons of Va...A Review on Revolution of Wind Energy Conversion System and Comparisons of Va...
A Review on Revolution of Wind Energy Conversion System and Comparisons of Va...
 
The Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copy
The Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copyThe Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copy
The Development of Offshore Wind Industry in Asia and the EU copy
 
oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012
oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012
oes_booklet_fa_print_08_10_2012
 
Global electricity network – Feasibility study
Global electricity network – Feasibility studyGlobal electricity network – Feasibility study
Global electricity network – Feasibility study
 
The role of energy in mitigation of climate change (BC3 Summer School _July 2...
The role of energy in mitigation of climate change (BC3 Summer School _July 2...The role of energy in mitigation of climate change (BC3 Summer School _July 2...
The role of energy in mitigation of climate change (BC3 Summer School _July 2...
 
orecca_roadmap
orecca_roadmaporecca_roadmap
orecca_roadmap
 
Re technologies cost_analysis-wind_power
Re technologies cost_analysis-wind_powerRe technologies cost_analysis-wind_power
Re technologies cost_analysis-wind_power
 
Sustainable Computing and Telecom Can Contribute to Limiting Global Climatic ...
Sustainable Computing and Telecom Can Contribute to Limiting Global Climatic ...Sustainable Computing and Telecom Can Contribute to Limiting Global Climatic ...
Sustainable Computing and Telecom Can Contribute to Limiting Global Climatic ...
 
The Global Survey of the Electrical Energy Distribution System: A Review
The Global Survey of the Electrical Energy Distribution System: A ReviewThe Global Survey of the Electrical Energy Distribution System: A Review
The Global Survey of the Electrical Energy Distribution System: A Review
 
Global Power Grid Interconnection for Sustainable Growth: Concept, Project an...
Global Power Grid Interconnection for Sustainable Growth: Concept, Project an...Global Power Grid Interconnection for Sustainable Growth: Concept, Project an...
Global Power Grid Interconnection for Sustainable Growth: Concept, Project an...
 
Design And Analysis of Buoyant Wind Turbine
Design And Analysis of Buoyant Wind TurbineDesign And Analysis of Buoyant Wind Turbine
Design And Analysis of Buoyant Wind Turbine
 
1-s2.0-S0196890420302855-main.pdf
1-s2.0-S0196890420302855-main.pdf1-s2.0-S0196890420302855-main.pdf
1-s2.0-S0196890420302855-main.pdf
 
Thoughts - Renewable Energy
Thoughts - Renewable EnergyThoughts - Renewable Energy
Thoughts - Renewable Energy
 
Variable Renewable Energy in China's Transition
Variable Renewable Energy in China's TransitionVariable Renewable Energy in China's Transition
Variable Renewable Energy in China's Transition
 
Barrow offshore
Barrow offshoreBarrow offshore
Barrow offshore
 
10.1.1.120.7375
10.1.1.120.737510.1.1.120.7375
10.1.1.120.7375
 

More from Jean Carlo Viterbo

More from Jean Carlo Viterbo (16)

descriçao equipe finep do projeto USCS .
descriçao equipe finep do projeto USCS .descriçao equipe finep do projeto USCS .
descriçao equipe finep do projeto USCS .
 
UK PACT Applicant Handbook Aug 2023 v4.pdf
UK PACT Applicant Handbook Aug 2023 v4.pdfUK PACT Applicant Handbook Aug 2023 v4.pdf
UK PACT Applicant Handbook Aug 2023 v4.pdf
 
Who occupational-health-health-in-the-green-econmy
Who   occupational-health-health-in-the-green-econmyWho   occupational-health-health-in-the-green-econmy
Who occupational-health-health-in-the-green-econmy
 
Airborne wind - Brazilian Army
Airborne wind - Brazilian ArmyAirborne wind - Brazilian Army
Airborne wind - Brazilian Army
 
Artigo supply boats
Artigo supply boatsArtigo supply boats
Artigo supply boats
 
Cellulose in Brazil
Cellulose in BrazilCellulose in Brazil
Cellulose in Brazil
 
N2 bio profile as dec 2019
N2 bio   profile as dec 2019N2 bio   profile as dec 2019
N2 bio profile as dec 2019
 
Airborne wind
Airborne windAirborne wind
Airborne wind
 
Biopolymers
BiopolymersBiopolymers
Biopolymers
 
Pulses from brazil
Pulses from brazilPulses from brazil
Pulses from brazil
 
Pellets final
Pellets finalPellets final
Pellets final
 
Supply boats
Supply boatsSupply boats
Supply boats
 
Waterways brazil
Waterways brazilWaterways brazil
Waterways brazil
 
2nd gen biofuels brazil
2nd gen biofuels brazil2nd gen biofuels brazil
2nd gen biofuels brazil
 
Viterbo - revista o setor eletrico
Viterbo  - revista o setor eletricoViterbo  - revista o setor eletrico
Viterbo - revista o setor eletrico
 
Viterbo e Brinati sinergia eolica offshore petroleo e gas
Viterbo e Brinati  sinergia eolica offshore petroleo e gasViterbo e Brinati  sinergia eolica offshore petroleo e gas
Viterbo e Brinati sinergia eolica offshore petroleo e gas
 

Recently uploaded

Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...
Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...
Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...
MohammadAliNayeem
 
Final DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manual
Final DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manualFinal DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manual
Final DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manual
BalamuruganV28
 
Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...
Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...
Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...
Lovely Professional University
 
Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..
Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..
Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..
MaherOthman7
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Operating System chapter 9 (Virtual Memory)
Operating System chapter 9 (Virtual Memory)Operating System chapter 9 (Virtual Memory)
Operating System chapter 9 (Virtual Memory)
 
Quiz application system project report..pdf
Quiz application system project report..pdfQuiz application system project report..pdf
Quiz application system project report..pdf
 
Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...
Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...
Complex plane, Modulus, Argument, Graphical representation of a complex numbe...
 
5G and 6G refer to generations of mobile network technology, each representin...
5G and 6G refer to generations of mobile network technology, each representin...5G and 6G refer to generations of mobile network technology, each representin...
5G and 6G refer to generations of mobile network technology, each representin...
 
Intelligent Agents, A discovery on How A Rational Agent Acts
Intelligent Agents, A discovery on How A Rational Agent ActsIntelligent Agents, A discovery on How A Rational Agent Acts
Intelligent Agents, A discovery on How A Rational Agent Acts
 
ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for project managers.pdf
ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for project managers.pdfChatGPT Prompt Engineering for project managers.pdf
ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for project managers.pdf
 
EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FINAL presentation
EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FINAL presentationEMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FINAL presentation
EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FINAL presentation
 
Final DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manual
Final DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manualFinal DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manual
Final DBMS Manual (2).pdf final lab manual
 
Geometric constructions Engineering Drawing.pdf
Geometric constructions Engineering Drawing.pdfGeometric constructions Engineering Drawing.pdf
Geometric constructions Engineering Drawing.pdf
 
"United Nations Park" Site Visit Report.
"United Nations Park" Site  Visit Report."United Nations Park" Site  Visit Report.
"United Nations Park" Site Visit Report.
 
SLIDESHARE PPT-DECISION MAKING METHODS.pptx
SLIDESHARE PPT-DECISION MAKING METHODS.pptxSLIDESHARE PPT-DECISION MAKING METHODS.pptx
SLIDESHARE PPT-DECISION MAKING METHODS.pptx
 
Instruct Nirmaana 24-Smart and Lean Construction Through Technology.pdf
Instruct Nirmaana 24-Smart and Lean Construction Through Technology.pdfInstruct Nirmaana 24-Smart and Lean Construction Through Technology.pdf
Instruct Nirmaana 24-Smart and Lean Construction Through Technology.pdf
 
Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...
Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...
Activity Planning: Objectives, Project Schedule, Network Planning Model. Time...
 
analog-vs-digital-communication (concept of analog and digital).pptx
analog-vs-digital-communication (concept of analog and digital).pptxanalog-vs-digital-communication (concept of analog and digital).pptx
analog-vs-digital-communication (concept of analog and digital).pptx
 
Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..
Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..
Maher Othman Interior Design Portfolio..
 
Interfacing Analog to Digital Data Converters ee3404.pdf
Interfacing Analog to Digital Data Converters ee3404.pdfInterfacing Analog to Digital Data Converters ee3404.pdf
Interfacing Analog to Digital Data Converters ee3404.pdf
 
Circuit Breaker arc phenomenon.pdf engineering
Circuit Breaker arc phenomenon.pdf engineeringCircuit Breaker arc phenomenon.pdf engineering
Circuit Breaker arc phenomenon.pdf engineering
 
The battle for RAG, explore the pros and cons of using KnowledgeGraphs and Ve...
The battle for RAG, explore the pros and cons of using KnowledgeGraphs and Ve...The battle for RAG, explore the pros and cons of using KnowledgeGraphs and Ve...
The battle for RAG, explore the pros and cons of using KnowledgeGraphs and Ve...
 
Theory for How to calculation capacitor bank
Theory for How to calculation capacitor bankTheory for How to calculation capacitor bank
Theory for How to calculation capacitor bank
 
Linux Systems Programming: Semaphores, Shared Memory, and Message Queues
Linux Systems Programming: Semaphores, Shared Memory, and Message QueuesLinux Systems Programming: Semaphores, Shared Memory, and Message Queues
Linux Systems Programming: Semaphores, Shared Memory, and Message Queues
 

Viterbo energex norway 2006

  • 1. PERSPECTIVES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY SECTOR IN BRAZIL Viterbo, J.C.* ; Saidel. M. A.Ç ; Prado Jr F. A. A.Ç * jviterbo@usp.br - Naval & Ocean Engineering Dept. (PNV) – Escola Politécnica, Universidade de São Paulo Çsaidel@pea.usp.br ; faapj@uol.com.br - Electrical Energy and Automation Engineering Dept. (PEA) – idem ABSTRACT In global terms, wind power has been the fastest growing energy source in the last decades and probably it will be the same for next ones. The learning curve for this technology shows cost of energy (COE) falling down by 15% to 20% each time that global capacity doubles (what happens each 3 years, approximately). Although only 0.67% penetration in the world electric generation by 2005, major playing countries in the wind energy sector have made efforts towards the 2020 target of 12% wind power penetration in world electric matrix. The contribution of wind power from the offshore version is important for such goal, due to: (i) location at a close distance of major load centers; (ii) mitigation of environmental impacts from electricity generation, and (iii) providing efficiency and economy of scale, compared with the onshore version. This article shows some aspects of the offshore wind energy (OWE) in interesting countries, turning focus on Brazil, recognized as the third largest offshore wind resource owner in the world, with a high feasibility index for projects indeed. Conclusion of work suggests that Brazilian energy actors shall to strength R&D about technical and economic feasibility of OWE projects near to shore and at country’s continental shelf, where massive offshore oil deployment has already been taken. For the world leader in clean and renewable energy, value creation and strategic paths would come as: (i) a partial relief of energy supply for major load centers (which are at the coast); (ii) a rationalization on the use, transport and foreign dependence of natural gas; and (iii) pushing dynamics of new markets for the industry and for Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM). 1. INTRODUCTION Electricity projects have been established in Brazil over the last years, but there is still a lack in supply for the short run. Brazilian Atlas of Wind Power returns 143 GW onshore wind power as “possible to be installed” [1, p. 43] and the official program for alternative sources (PROINFA) is a sensible start-up for the Brazilian industry, which has a wind turbines assembler (Wobben – Enercon), a tower manufacturer (Eólica Industrial), and a 25 m blade designer and manufacturer (Tecsis) already. Purpose of this work is to reinforce Brazilian discussion about the strategic importance of a deeper penetration of avant-garde energy technologies in its electricity matrix, emphasizing about the weight of OWE for such strategy. This text brings some steps taken by countries in order to develop wind energy systems, onshore and offshore. After that, the article discuss about economical, political, environmental and industrial aspects related to deploying such systems in Brazil. 2. AN OVERVIEW OF WIND SOURCE IN THE WORLD ENERGY MATRIX Concerning to energy as a whole (not electricity only), the global energy production strongly relies on fossil fuels. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), 80.2 % of the 10,579 Mtoe of Total Primary Energy Supply (TPES)1 in 2003 came from the fossil sources, 6.5% from nuclear and 13.3% came from renewable sources. From these 13.8 points, 10.6 points came from burning CRW (Combustible Renewables - as wood or ethanol; and Waste - as CH4 from sanitary landfills or biodigesters) [2]. So, only 3.2 % of the energy consumed in the world in 2003 has not added to the global warming or with nuclear waste inventories growth, which management virtue will not be covered by this work. Between 1971 and 2003, TPES has grown by 2.1% a year. Renewables (large hydro, CRW and others) have grown by 2.3% a year. Excluding large hydro and CRW from this data, renewables’ growth becomes 8.2% a year. These are the sources which do not contribute for pollution during their production processes, listed by IEA statistics as geothermal, solar, wind, tidal, wave, ocean, etc. Not to forget that the major part of the carbon from the biomass that died under a large hydroelectric dam goes out to the atmosphere as CH4 or CO2 later, beyond the fact of excluding the flora which would catch CO2 and deliver O2 for a long time. According to IEA data, the largest growth over the 33 years analysis was relative to wind energy (48.9 % per year). From 2000 to 2005, besides with some mature basis already, wind energy still demonstrated strong growth, at a rate of 27.7% per year [3, p. 10]. Energex 2006 Organising committee
  • 2. 2,1% 2,3% 2,1% 2,5% 8,2% 0,0% 1,5% 3,0% 4,5% 6,0% 7,5% 9,0% TPES Renewables CRW Hidro Others Figure 1. Annual average growth of energy sources between 1971 and 2003. Source: IEA, 2006 [2] In 2005, the world electric production was nearly 18,000 TWh [4, p. 24]. Wind power production got 120 TWh approximately, 0.67% of the world total2 . The European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) has made a report (Wind Force 12) which establishes the goal of 1,250 GW of wind power for the year 2020 (this means an annual energy yield of 3,000 TWh, or 12% of world’s electric demand at that time). In 2003, nuclear power contributed with a 16.0 % share of world electric supply, the same amount of large hydro [2]. According to the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC), wind energy is able to output 4,000 TWh, when it would surpass the large hydro and it would become the main renewable electricity source in the world at 2022 [5]. Such a performance would be only a play back of the ones showed by nuclear or large hydro just few decades ago. Concerning to the adherence features of wind energy systems for the Brazilian case, one would be the higher level of integration with the local energy resources, unburdening the national grid of load transmission and improving distributed generation, improving the quality of the energy distributed and promoting the use of local industries and human resources. The learning curve of the wind sector (research plus production scale) shows that the Cost of Energy (COE) decreases by 20% each doubling of world generation capacity (what has happened each three years approximately). In addition to the use of windy sites, these figures feed the argument that, if efficiently established, wind is able to reduce its (COE), becoming cost-competitive with non-renewable and pollutants energy sources, as shown in figure 2 [6, p. 73]. 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 5,5 6 6,5 7 7,5 8 8,5 9 9,5 10 Figure 2. Lines: COE for onshore wind and for offshore, according to the mean wind speed. Bars: Cost range for traditional sources. Adapted from Wind Power Monthly, V.20, 2004 [6] Not to forget that the cost for gas-fired conversion, as above, is that for established plants and transport infrastructure. But in Brazil, the investment for pipelines to transport the gas is a problem, mainly for the supply of the northeastern region, which has no longer a great choice of hydropower upgrading, but has a windy-compliance with its pluviometric profile, one of the main reasons to the pioneering of the region on wind power. Also, the external cost was not considered in the values of figure 2 above. This is the portion of COE that occurs as a result of energy conversion, but is not put inside energy tariffs, once such externalities results have widely spread consequences in time, space and kinds, so they are difficult to correlate and measure. As a result, externalities are covered indirectly by the society, throughout harvests losses, public diseases 7,6% 28,9% 48,9% 0,4% 0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% Geothermal Solar Wind Tidal nuclear coal gas onshore (US$ 1 M / MW) offshore (US$ 1,6 M / MW) US$ / MWh m/s
  • 3. and damages to the common wealth (as hurricanes or river floods do). Figure 3 illustrates COE gap as a result of considering externalities in some countries, corroborating the argument of wind energy cost-effectiveness even when not an optimal case of cost of capital and wind speed [7]. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Denmark Spain Germany Denmark Figure 3. COE considering externalities Source: EWEA, 2004 [7] 3. INTERNATIONAL HIGHLIGHTS OF OWE According to the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), 2005 has resulted on the installation of 11,769 MW. This is a 43.4% increase in the annual addition to the global market, up from 8,207 MW in the previous year. The total value of new generating equipment installed was over US$14 billions. The total wind power capacity as ending 2005 stands at 59,084 MW worldwide, an increase of 25% compared to 2004. The countries with the highest total installed capacity are Germany (18,428 MW), Spain (10,027 MW), the USA (9,149 MW), India (4,430 MW) and Denmark (3,122 MW). Almost 21% of 2005’ new installed capacity was in the USA (2,431 MW), due to the federal incentive for wind energy, the production tax credit (PTC), which was extended for a three year window of stability by the US congress [3]. OWE shall to be seen as a complement, and not as a concurrent to the onshore version. Although the higher costs, OWE brings comparative advantages. Sea winds are faster, steady and less turbulent [8, p.4]. The visual impact gets smooth at sea. Onshore constraints are avoided. Referring to the turbine’s nominal power, the capacity of trucks, cranes, roads and bridges are more limited for onshore devices than for offshore, limiting the size of turbines. On the wind farms power size, few onshore plants get more than 50 MW (restricted to the available space, cost of land, noise and visual impacts), limiting scale profits of wind farms. OWE’s “power density” is usually scatter (6 MW/km2 versus 13 MW/km2 onshore), reducing the “wind shadow” effect throughout the turbines. Cost of connecting to the grid is higher offshore, but attenuated by smaller losses during electricity transport. OWE systems usually are close to load centers, resulting shorter connections to the grid (in contrast of the onshore wind farms). Figure 4 exemplifies a cost breakdown for an offshore wind farm [9, p. 47]. Transport, Installation 11% Yearly O&M 27% Other 5% Transm. System to Shore 6% Electric Collection System 2% Wind Turbine 24% Tower 9% Foundation 9% Decomissio ning 1% Retrofit and Overhaul 6% Figure 4. Cost Breakdown for an OWE system. Dutch Offshore Wind Energy Converter [9] As shown in figure 4, transport and O&M summarize almost 40% of an offshore wind farm cost. In order to attenuate these costs, scale is critical for OWE cost-effectiveness. Year by year, assemblers and project developers launch new world records for the nominal power of turbines and for the total power of wind farms. At beginning of 2006, the largest wind turbine was running at 5 MW, 126 m rotor diameter (12.470 m2 ). However, the development of a 10 MW turbine is expected to 2010 and General Electric has announced to be “physically possible” a turbine of 20 MW and 200 m diameter [10]. Concerning to wind farms, largest ones are going to be run at the United Kingdom, as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Large OWE projects on planning at UK as April 2006. Sources: www.crownestate.co.uk; www.beatricewind.co.uk Project London Array Beatrice Triton Knoll Main investors CORE; E.ON; Shell WindEnergy Talisman; Scottish & Southern; EDF Npower renewables (RWE group) Place 20 km outer Thames Estuary 25 km East coast of Scotland 25 km Greater Wash Power 1,000 MW 1,000 MW 1,200 MW Depth 25 m 45 m 20 m Full Op. 2010 2010 2010 In fact, huge OWE projects are being planned for the German part of the North Sea, but a final definition for their evolvement is still to come, because of grid integration constraints and once their sizes calls for a more powerful and diversified collectivity of stakeholders’ interests. Table 2 shows some of the largest on planning [11]. Wind Power Natural Gas € / MWh Internal cost External cost (min.) External cost (máx.)
  • 4. Table 2. GW-scale OWE projects at the German part of the North Sea. Adapted from [11] Project Developer Power MW Forsetti Prokton Nord 17,500 Jules Verne Plambeck 13,500 TGB North ep4 offshore 10,045 Hochsee Windpark Nordsee 54°25’ EOS Offshore 5,355 Weiße Bank 2010 OSB Offshore- Bürger- Windpark Butendiek 2,700 Offshore North Sea Windpower Enova 2,025 Although some projects on planning in the US and Canada, at the ending 2005 there was no OWE plant in Americas. First reason is because countries moved offshore only after an extensive experience onshore, with some exception on the British case. On the mega trend of oil organizations to become energy organizations, the UK, as major player in the global oil industry and market, is also the world seventh wind energy generator (1,353 MW as 2005) [3]. But it still remains some public resistance against onshore facilities due to cultural means and visual impact. On the target of turning into a more peaceful strategy of the security of energy supply for the middle run, arising environment-friendly measures at an industrial basis deployment, UK has made option for OWE as major tactics for sustainable development, joining five goals as one: (i) to grow up public acceptance to the technology; (ii) to create new jobs, (iii) to promote its well known offshore resources and industries, (iv) to enable a faster design-to- operation solution for the energy security supply, and (v) to evolve towards UK’ commitments to the Kyoto Protocol . Close and synergic articulation is between the Crown Estate – as manager of leasing the public asset (seabed) and on project permitting – joined to the Dept. of Trade and Industry – in charge of energy strategy, providing rules for the industry and defending the customer interest. So that the first coming Gigawatt scale OWE projects on planning come from UK. Second reason for no OWE in Americas is due to the fact there is relatively fewer shallow waters (<30 m deep) more than 10 km far from the shore, which is good for a low visual impact, as found at North Sea and the Baltic. The shallower the sea is, the less complex design and cost are. Distance is a combined factor on the cost of cabling and transport versus the impacts of plant (visual, tourism, fauna, fishing, navigation, etc). The second largest OWE plant running at 2005 is Horns Rev (160 MW). It is 14 km to 20 km far from Danish coast and it is over a 6,5 up to 13,5 m water depth. Such combination is uncommon at the Atlantic or the Pacific. Exemplifying about R&D, the National Renewable Laboratory (NREL - USA) is identifying the optimal depth of transition from fixed infrastructure to floating ones, developing equipment and methodology for erecting floating offshore wind turbines without using a crane [12]. Furthermore, NREL shelters the Low Wind Speed Technology Project, in order to design multimegawatt turbines with cost-effective output under class 4 winds (5,8 m/s at 10m height). This would increase 20 times the available area for onshore projects in USA [13, p. 1], reducing the COE to US$ 30 / MWh onshore and to US$ 50 MWh offshore up to 2012 [8, p.1]. Plenty of these new areas available will be close to significant load centers. However, the large cities at the northeastern cost do not have even the class 4 wind onshore, so that the offshore option to become the logical choice for an environment-friendly energy supply. Musial and Butterfield have produced an interesting essay about OWE in the USA [8]. Essaying over the available area, they took the closest 50 nautical miles (nm) width coastal belt. Then, inside this giant area, they ignored the first 5 nm (due to visual impact), 2/3 of the 5 to 20 nm belt and 1/3 of the 20 to 50 nm belt. The study returned 907 GW of total OWE potential for the US. Estimation is that 98 GW of that total amount are at shallow waters (less than 30 m deep). They have simulated both costs for wind farms fixed on seabed (30 m) and also for floating wind farms (600 ft deep). Based on an 5 x 100 MW wind farm, they have attenuated the profits from learning curves, concerning to towers and turbines (which are some matured technologies), but they have improved learning profits in the case of foundations or floating systems (as emerging technologies). Table 3 summarizes the results of simulation. Table 3: Cost breakdown – 500 MW; class 6 winds: 8 to 8.8 m/s; Cap. Factor 47% – NREL [8] 30 m depth / 15 miles offshore US$ 000 . 2006 2015 2025 Turbine & tower 338.730 258.746 229.278 Monopile or tripods 99.200 67.602 59.903 Electric works . 159.300 128.089 113.501 Total . 597.230 454.437 402.682 US$ / kW . 1.194 909 805 US$ / MWh . 54 37 32 600 ft depth US$ 000 . 2006 2015 2025 Turbine & tower 338.730 245.128 217.211 Floating systems 469.000 289.696 185.406 Electric works . 194.200 156.152 138.368 Total . 1.001.930 690.976 540.985 US$ / kW . 2.004 1.382 1.082 US$ / MWh . 83 51 41
  • 5. In the US Energy Information Administration’ website, US electric supply is about 1,050 GW (as 2004). NREL forecasts are to start floating OWE between 2015 and 2020. However, besides the huge potential, US energy matrix will rely strongly on coal still by decades (fig. 6), even the investment in gas-fired thermal power plants (fig. 7) and even the renewable’s COE to be so close with fossils (fig. 8) in the future. The following figures are from US Annual Energy Outlook 2006 [14, pp. 77 - 84]. 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 Petroleum Renewables Nuclear Natural Gas Coal 2030 2004 Figure 6. Electricity generation in the USA (TWh) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2005- 2010 2011- 2015 2016- 2020 2021- 2025 2026- 2030 Nuclear Renewables Natural Gas Coal Figure 7. Electric generation capacity additions by Fuel, including combined heat , 2005-2030 (GW) 30 28 11 11 41 44 43 41 5 5 1 1 8 8 8 8 15 16 37 40 7 3 3 3 3 7 7 2 3 7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Capital O&M Fuel Transmission Figure 8. Levelized electricity costs for new plants, 2015 and 2030 respectively (US$/MWh) The Deutsches Windenergie-Institut (DEWI) indicates Germany as the future largest OWE developer. DEWI’s scenario is 25,200 MW onshore and 5,600 MW in the North Sea and Baltic Sea at 2014 (210,000 MW total worldwide). Based on that, the original aim of the German Government to install 2,000 to 3,000 MW offshore by 2010 can no longer to be, because the start of installations will be delayed to 2008. The reasons are technical and administrative problems, and due to the booming of the global market, the wind turbine manufacturers are already working at full capacity. More than 35,000 MW offshore is expected in the German part of the North Sea and the Baltic until 2030, raising wind energy almost to 1/3 national power source at time [15]. Although delayed by political problems, Germany has an interesting strategy plan for exploiting OWE [16]. Good publication is also that of the UK’s strategy on OWE [17]. According to IEA, as ending of 2005, the total amount of OWE wind farms was as 804 MW (Denmark 53%; UK 38% ; Ireland 3% ; Sweden 3% ; Netherlands 2% and Germany 1%) [18]. Forecast for the global electric demand at 2030 is 31,524 TWh, the double as 2000, but tripling in developing countries. The world’s total installed capacity will rise from 3,397 GW in 1999 to 7,157 GW by 2030, according to IEA. Computing on the replacement of plants going into obsolescence, plus the new power additions, nearly 5,000 GW is expected to be built in the global system between 2001 and 2030. [19, pp. 124 - 130]. Including transmission and distribution, the global investment in electricity over the period will be US$ 10 trillion. About one third of this amount shall to be in the big-five non-OECD economies (Brazil, China, India, Indonesia and Russia). More than 40% of world’s new capacity projected is expected to be gas-fired, which jumps from 677 GW in 1999 to over 2,500 GW in 2030. But it remains very uncertain whether these big-five countries will be able to find the capital required to build the infrastructure, including upstream facilities, pipelines and LNG terminals, to support new gas- fired projects [20, pp. 341 - 356]. The Global Wind Energy 2005 Report calls the goals for wind energy by 2020. Table 4 summarizes GWEC goals. Table 4: GWEC goals for wind energy by 2020 [3] World’s Total Wind Capacity 1.254 GW Annual Growth 158.73 GW 12% of global electric demand 3,054 TWh Annual avoided emissions of CO2 1,832 Mton Accum. Avoided emissions 10,771 Mton Annual Investment € 80 billions Jobs on occupation 2,300,000 Cost of plant 512 € / kW Cost of energy 24.5 € / MWh GWEC goals are 2,700 GW for 2030 and 3,200 GW for 2040. The offshore wind sector has a primordial role in such goals due to the smaller environmental impact, larger scale and efficiency, saving the space on land for economical activities other than energy generation. Coal Gas comb. cycle Wind Nuclear TWh GW US$/MWh
  • 6. 4. ON THE BRAZILIAN FRAMEWORK 83% of the Brazilian electric consumption come from the hydraulic source 3 . This source is tending for scarcity in supply for providing in full the increase of the demand. A great increase of the natural gas in the electric matrix is expected. But this would mean: (i) dependence raising with relation to Bolivia and exposition to its sensible political risk, (ii) verge evasion and great expenditures with transport, (iii) lower future availability of the commodity for other industrial uses in Brazil and (iv) the rise of the Brazilian fraction in the global warming. Large hydropower source is growing slowly in Brazil. Major plants are public-owned and after the 70’s, few significant investment was made for the national electricity infrastructure. Potential demand is available, but the federal government funds are insufficient, so that alternative solution was found, throughout a system of investing by partnership with the private sector (Parcerias Público Privadas – PPP). But the maturation of such system is still expected, throughout higher level of accuracy on rules, equality over the contracts and steady warranties that the future representatives on the government will stand on agreements done by others before. Actually, the most significant potential for new large hydro projects in Brazil lies at the Amazon region. National efficiency average for dams is 6.3 W/m2 . Amazon shows efficiency between 0.1 and 0.3 W/m2 [21]. In addition to the lower efficiency, the complex and delicate ecology of the region suggests that it is unlikely to receive foreign financial resources to be invested in a large energy project. Even the contrary case, it would take many years to start production. In order to cover demand growth in the short run, the Ministry of Energy has made option in 2000 for gas-fired thermal power plants (GTPP). Due to the imminence of huge blackouts, entrepreneurs invested in GTPP, contracting the gas supply from the unique provider, the Brazilian oil company Petrobrás. In 2001, the market was forced to reduce consumption, so that in few months the national demand was that of three years ago. Although the slashing-down policy, demand did not started growing strongly, but as the same rate as usual. With the short-time problem solved, Petrobrás didn’t provide the gas for GTPPs, preferring to cover the financial position of theirs in the wholesale electricity market rather than making a heavy investment in gas pipelines. As a financial gap, the exchange rate jumped from R$1,10/US$ in oct/22/97 up to R$3,96/US$ in oct/22/02, sacrificing investors’ long term debt from gas turbines imports. On the political side, there was instability in Bolivia (major gas supplier). These factors, joined to other technical constraints of transporting, have interrupted Brazilian program for GTPPs, which would launch 13.6 GW into the system (47 plants planned, only 4 have started) and would arise Brazilian CO2 emissions from 80 Mton/year by 2003 to 230 Mton/year [22]. In the other hand, an interesting complement exists between the wind and the rain profiles near to the coast of the Northeast Region of Brazil [23]. Upper wind speed averages are over the dry season (July to December), the season of highest electricity prices, as of the highest level of energy deficit risk too. The Wind Atlas of Ceará state [24] indicates that coastline blows on dry season between 7m/s and 13 m/s during 90% of time, good for wind energy conversion. As in December 2005, the Brazilian Energy Agency (www.aneel.gov.br) indicated 5,235 MW of wind energy projects approved for both states (more than 8,000 MW for the whole country). On such an appropriate framework, Carvalho [21] made a simulation study on the contribution of wind energy by its shoreline version on the displacement of green house gases under Kyoto Protocol prerogatives. At the coast line of the states of Ceará (530 km) and Rio Grande do Norte (493 km), he considered a 2 km width belt (onshore). By assumption, the study considered 20% of the area as available for erecting wind turbines, resulting a 409.2 km2 theoretical wind park. Under a dispersion of 22 x 600 kW turbines each km2 , a plant of 9,000 turbines (5,400 MW) was simulated. It was considered the energy losses due to wind turbines interaction, also those by dust impregnation on the blades surfaces and by energy transporting up to the grid. Losses due non- availability by electrical, mechanical and weather issues were also considered. Simulation returned an amount of 18.5 TWh a year, resulting a capacity factor of 39% for the system as a whole. 10% of energy produced was discounted as losses over transmission and distribution, considering that fossil conversion, which would be displaced, usually is not so far away from the load center as onshore wind plants use to be. Study considered a base line of 0.502 ton of CO2/MWh for displacement (as like an efficient combined cycle gas-fired plant). In a direct calculus, an amount of 8.36 Mton CO2/year would be avoided by the wind park. Considering US$10 / ton CO2 on the Clean Development Mechanisms, simulation resulted on the gross annual revenue of US$ 83 M for the both states of Ceará and Rio Grande do Norte. Even the nearly 8,500 km long coast line and the previous senior competence in oil & gas offshore operations , Brazil faces previous institutional challenges other than the technical ones which are expected for deploying OWE systems. The federal program for alternative energy (PROINFA) was seen in 2004 as a start-running force to the onshore wind industry. It consists on public company Eletrobrás to buy the total amount of energy to be
  • 7. converted from 3,300 MW from biomass, small hydropower and wind. 1,422 MW of wind projects were selected be contracted by Eletrobrás. Power purchase agreements are 20 years long, with low rates for project funding (up to 80% of capital cost, one year grace period, 12 years for amortization). Project developers objected to the energy acquisition price [25], arguing that price would not raise enough margins to handle the financial rates of loans plus the payments to suppliers. Prices are in the range of R$ 204/MWh, or € 78/MWh, for lower capacity factor plants (34%) and R$181/MWh, or €69/MWh, for higher capacity factor plants (41%). Until June 2006, the final price of energy for residences in São Paulo city was R$ 287.20/MWh (before a 25% value-added tax – ICMS – and other taxes). The companies selected argue against the difficulty of covering the requirements for guaranteeing their equity as a loan contracting counterpart with the funding provider, the National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES). Several disputes of juridical or administrative issues from companies of non-selected projects have retarded PROINFA’s progress. Also, there is a rule of nationalization of expenditures: 60% of the value of components and services must be expended inside the country. This rule has brought more difficulties than market prosperity for the wind sector and so projects were delayed else more: the deadline for starting the wind projects generation moved to ending 2008. It seems that there was not so close articulation between public promoters for wind in Brazil as it was the case in UK (not forgetting the helping fact that companies in UK have the money enough to invest or guarantee by themselves in accordance to the price of energy to be bought by utilities). Helped by the rule of nationalization, the monopoly in the turbines supply in Brazil has made the prices arise by 20% compared to the time of business planning. Outer assemblers are focused on big markets and some of those markets showed more than 30% growth in the last years, so that manufacturers did not invested on factories in Brazil. By this way, the country does not have still a strong solution for the security of energy supply in the middle run (except by GTPP tries again), making new blackouts as possible in 2008. Major part of Brazilian power generation is concentrated in few points and due to this, 30% of the final consumer tariff refers to energy transport and 11% of the total energy produced is just lost during transmission and distribution (according to the IEA’ statistics tool, this is about 6% in EU 15). An important advantage from OWE over onshore systems is the good possibility of finding windy sites less than 30 km far from the load centers, reducing the cost of transport and the energy losses. Also, OWE calls for larger projects, where the economy of scale is strategically efficient. Additional opportunity would be to fulfill electric- intensive companies, as those of aluminum industry, a strategic product for Brazilian domestic market also and for exports, once a major part of the value-added to this product is about energy. Through the largest corporation of Latin America and world’s eighth largest oil company, Petrobrás, Brazil has a mature know-how in offshore projects for oil and gas production, at deep waters indeed. Good part of the gas is just burned, as it is not cost- effective to transport it to continent. On the other hand, oil platforms must bring diesel generators into the decks, occupying an important and valuable space, concurring to layout constraints and the risk for the crew. On promoting wind energy for supplying its own projects, Petrobrás contributes for the creation of an industrial basis aimed at the offshore oil industry and the onshore wind energy industry, pushing dynamics for the sector of assembling, capital goods and special services providing. By promoting the exploitation, deployment and production of wind energy fields, the company also would be feeding its own capabilities to sell specialized services in this high potential international market of erecting wind turbines offshore. Beyond the fixed turbines, if using floating OWE to supply platforms, the company would be able to manage the location of electricity production, following and adapting if some necessity comes, once they would be modular and possible to move from a place to another. Furthermore, as a very well established prestigious company, Petrobrás would feed the Brazilian source of Carbon Credits, as assigned by the Clean Development Mechanisms and the Kyoto Protocol. An appropriate reference case is Beatrice Wind Farm. Talisman is a Canadian-based oil and gas explorer. One of the largest infrastructure operator at UK’ continental shelf, it became interested in offshore wind in 2001, by screening a range of options to identify how to reduce operating costs, increase production, and extend economic life of Beatrice oil field. Studies revealed that finding re- use opportunity for the infrastructure would contribute to these goals, and indicated that there was potential for wind energy. The demonstrator project consists of 2 x 5 MW wind turbines, linked to the 2 km far Beatrice platform (see table 1). Project’s cost is about £30 million and will bring significant benefits to the UK and Scotland, so that the project has received funding from the Scottish Executive, UK Dept. of Trade and Industry and the European Commission. The feasibility study
  • 8. showed that a successful development would require combined expertise from the offshore oil and gas industry with those of utilities. Then, Talisman UK has partnered with Scottish and Southern Energy, a major UK utility. After so, the project has been incorporated into a pan-European initiative called DOWNVInD (Distant Offshore Wind farms with No Visual Impact iN Deepwater), comprising 15 different organizations from 6 European countries. They have established a synergic catalyst for a R&D cluster in order to: (i) understand the environmental impact of deep water windfarms (DWFs), (ii) prove the concept of a DWF, (iii) explore the cost-effectiveness of deepwater sites, (iv) share the know-how across Europe, (v) pioneer the development of DWFs, (vi) improve and commercialize the technology and (vii) if approved in pilot phase, the project aims at growing up to 1000 MW after 2010, providing 20% of present Scottish demand. But the project has an immediate impact on Beatrice field too. The energy will be used to power the platform, reducing the use of fossil power, following Talisman’s strategy of reducing emissions and the environmental impact of its own operations. The demonstrator project aligns with Talisman’s plan for decommissioning the Beatrice field, which seeks extending the life of the field by finding continued and alternative uses for some of the main facilities and infrastructure. The Engineering Consultancy Aerodyn GmbH has identified, in 2003, from a 105 countries initial data, the most prominent non-EU markets for OWE deployment [26]. In a total amount of 275,000 km2 of area available for OWE projects, they assumed that 10% would be less than 20 m deep and 50 km far from the grid onshore. Interesting that Brazil has the third largest potential for the OWE yield (609 TWh/year), behind China (1,033 TWh/year) and USA (612 TWh/year), according to the study. Also, Brazil is the third in aptitude for developing OWE projects. Looking only at the feasibility index created by the consultancy, Brazil is the best index for developing OWE, if compared with the other two giants (China and USA). The index created has considered features like wind speed, economic framework for wind energy, water depths, distance to the grid onshore, offshore infrastructure, offshore interest, and others. If 10% of that Brazilian potential (609 Twh/year), could be found at good sites (20 m deep and 50 km far from grid), the 61 TWh/year would supply 17.5% of the Brazilian total electricity demand by 2004 (350 TWh). If becoming true, the second phase of PROINFA aims at contracting power enough (but no longer with subsidizing prices) to score renewables by 10% of national electric supply up to 2010. 2006 is an important year for the Brazilian energy sector. The biggest achievement is reaching self- sufficiency in oil production at a time of global scarcity, which has caused high market volatility. Strategic fact for Brazil is the safety in internal supply, considering the international market’s current and future conditions, with indicators of quick growth in consumption in the emerging economies and the lack of new and significant discoveries in the world. The comfortable internal balance in the oil sector is a privilege of few countries in the world, most of which are heavily dependent on oil. Petrobrás is already rated as an “investment grade” company by Moody’s. The company is committed to sell, by 2010, 10% of its total amount of energy offered from renewable sources (ethanol and biodiesel are major elements in this mission). Also, 10% of the energy consumed by the company in its own operations shall to come from renewables. In this second case, renewable electric conversion shall to be the way to follow. The company is already running a pilot project in the city of Macau, in the coastal state of Rio Grande do Norte. Project consists on 3 x 600 kW wind turbines at the beach, few meters distant from the water (pictures are at the company’s website). Other interesting opportunity for OWE in Brazil are illustrated in the Wind potential Atlas of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (outer south of Brazil). The state runs the first and also the largest onshore project selected by PROINFA. The “Osorio Wind Farm” is a 150 MW system (3 x 50 MW), one of the largest onshore wind farms in the world. The state made good survey for its Wind Atlas completion, considering offshore possibilities over the Lakes regions indeed. As an example, Lagoa dos Patos is a wide-area lake (more than 10,000 km2 ). The regions of the three lakes in the state have a total area of 14,550 km2 , with less than 7m for the average depth. The Atlas returns a total amount of 19,960 MW (1.36 MW/km2 ) for the Lakes altogether, with a total OWE output of 51.08 TWh (winds at 100 m height, more than 6.0 m/s, 29.2% capacity factor). Maps of proposed “offshore sites” can be found at the Atlas website [27]. Brazilian engineering and consulting firms are also preparing to provide special services for regional OWE development possibilities. Example is ORICICLON Infrastructure, a start-up technology company from CIETEC-IPEN institute. Specialized in offshore structural engineering design, the firm is planning a small scale pilot project at the southern seashore of the São Paulo state [28] . It will be located onshore and, in analogy with that Petrobras’ pilot project at Northeast of Brazil, this will be exposed to coastal wind profiles. It is planned to be 1.2 MW required by a small and relatively poorer municipality of Ilha Comprida, situated at an environmentally-protected reserve. With a weak grid connection to the primary energy distribution system, that city has problems with energy supply during summer (population goes from 10,000 up to
  • 9. 40,000 inhabitants). Quite differently from the predominantly energy driven Brazilian market, this region constitute an environmentally-driven market requiring an integrated energy resources planning (IRP), what excludes diesel or gas-fired options as the best choices. Such an environmentally driven approach fits the wind project development in a different pathway, as compared to the target projects of PROINFA program, for example, which are constituted as energy driven markets. 5. CONCLUSIONS Although few markets have made option for going offshore. It is interesting for Brazil to make an appropriate investment in R&D concerning to OWE systems. In this sense, Petrobrás should play a major role, once the company is able to push dynamics to the industry in the South America. This would be a strategic contribution to Brazil, arising the diversification over the national electric matrix (actually high-dependent on hydropower and on the rain, by extension). As from onshore as from offshore facilities, wind energy would help not only to protect against natural uncertainties (rain), but also against political and economical uncertainties, as the natural gas is becoming more and more important in the national energy matrix, but comes from foreign and unstable countries, as Bolivia or Venezuela. Also, the R&D on OWE systems would contribute with the distributed generation and losses prevailing along major load centers at the coastal line, an important path on the energy planning improvements to come ahead. For Petrobrás, OWE deployment would be a great opportunity of diversifying for selling its core competence realized by clients (now as an energy company and in the near future as an infrastructure provider), like major companies started to do in the North Sea. The worldwide market for OWE projects is huge for starting on 2010, but few big- players for a while, on a vertical operation structure, to handle with. The promise of 1,422 MW from PROINFA by 2008 (some of them maybe not to come true) made the Global Wind Energy Report (2004 and 2005 issues) to dedicate good content for the Brazilian case, as one of the 13 leading-countries that will perform major role on the world goal of 12% of global electricity from wind by 2020. Brazil is covered by the UNEP’s program for funding developing countries on the assessment of wind and solar energy potentials (SWERA program). Not for coincidence, by 2006, the same year of its oil self- sufficiency, Brazil is the “country in focus” analyzed by the decision-making publication “World Energy Outlook” (IEA). In a time of energy scarcity for the short run, with a 8,500 km long coastal line (where the major part of Brazilian load centers are located), it is the better to expect that Brazil, as the world leader in clean and renewable energy sources, takes on the way of developing R&D for OWE at the called “blue amazon”, as so as other renewable power sources too, but in a so close as complex articulation by effective measures, improving the skills that even foreign business or research organizations assign for the country. Thus, this present starting work follows on future research concerning to detailed technical and institutional prerogatives for the OWE deployment in Brazil Major points of concern about the OWE conversion are as follows: (i) impacts over the human and aquatic local communities, as a result of the additional O&M, which should fit to pre-existing behavior; (ii) electromagnetic impact and acoustics over the sea fauna and the telecommunications. (iii) technical uncertainties about infrastructure, as seabed soil, foundations, buoys, cables, etc. (iv) institutional and juridical aspects for environmental permitting, for project funding and for fitting OWE with other economic activities as aviation, navigation, fishing, mining, tourism, etc. 6. NOTES 1 TPES (total primary energy supply) is the amount of energy available in a certain place at a time. For such place and time, it is equal to: (i) the production from primary sources (the mineral sources, as petroleum, coal, natural gas and also the electricity directly converted from its natural sources); (ii) plus the imports of energetic resources to that place at that time; (iii) minus the exports of energetic resources for that place at that time; (iv) plus the inventories that were taken for consumption; (v) minus the inventories that were put on reserves. The common unit for energy resources is the Mtoe (million of tons of oil equivalent) and it is equal to 11.63 TWh or 41.87 x 1015 joules. 2 The global electric consumption came as an extension of that figure in the Key World Energy Statistics 2005 (IEA), p. 24. The wind power generation data came as a simple ratio calculus from Global Wind Energy 2005 Report. At the page 16, an amount of 83 TWh is allocated for the 40,504 MW at EU countries, what means a 23.4 % capacity factor altogether. The remaining 18,580 MW in the world (50% of them inside the US) was assumed as 22.7 % capacity factor, completing the 120 TWh for the world overall. 3 Calculus was made with data from Brazilian Ministry of Energy and Mining. The “Balanço Energético Nacional – BEN 2005” (National Energy Balance) provides “complete tables” data. The numbers were added the from table 5.3 (centrais elétricas de serviço público) and table 5.4 (centrais elétricas autoprodutoras). Available at www.mme.gov.br.
  • 10. 7. REFERENCES [1] Amarante, O. A. C. (coord.). Atlas do potencial eólico brasileiro. MME. Brasília, 2001 45p. Available at www.cresesb.cepel.br [2] International Energy Agency – IEA. Renewables in Global Energy Supply – An IEA Fact Sheet. 2006. 13 p. Available at www.iea.org [3] Global Wind Energy Concil. Global Wind 2005 Report. 52 p. Available at www.gwec.net [4] International Energy Agency – IEA. Key World Energy Statistics 2005. 82 p. Available at www.iea.org [5] The European Renewable Energy Council. Renewable Energy Scenario to 2040. 15 p. Available at www.erec-renewables.org [6] The European Wind Energy Association. Wind Force 12. A Blueprint to achieve 12% of the world’s electricity from wind power by 2012. Edition 2004. 104 p. Available at www.ewea.org [7] The European Wind Energy Association. Wind Energy – The facts. An Analysis of wind energy in the EU 25. Vol. 4. – Environment. 2004. 60 p. Available at www.ewea.org [8] Musial, W.; Butterfield, S. Future for Offshore Wind Energy in the United States. To be presented at Energy Ocean 2004. Palm Beach, FL. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Available at www.nrel.gov [9] Hendriks, H. B. ; Zaaijer, M. Dutch Offshore Wind Energy Converter. Executive summary of the public research activities. 2004. 57p. Available at www.ecn.nl > special projects > dowec. [10] Lyons, J. P. GE Energy presentation to the Offshore Wind Energy Collaborative. Feb 10, 2005. Available at www.mtpc.org/RenewableEnergy/ Owec_pdfs/owec-lyons_21005_v1.pdf [11] Deutsche WindGuard GmbH. Offshore Wind – Implementing a new powerhouse for Europe. Report 2005 for Greenpeace. Available at www.greenpeace.org > press centre > reports [12] Musial, W. UC Berkeley Student Project Proposal. 1) Determination of the Optimum Depth for Floating Wind Turbines. 2) Methods for Minimizing Work-at-Sea Requirements of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines. 2005. 2 p. Available at www.ce.berkeley.edu/Courses/CE180/ Offshore_projects.pdf [13] Calvert S., Thresher R., Hock S., Laxson A., Smith B. Low Wind Speed Technology Development in the U.S. Department of Energy Wind Energy Research Program: Preprint. 2002. Available at www.nrel.gov [14] US Department of Energy – Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Outlook 2006. 236p. Available at www.eia.doe.gov [15] Deutsches Windenergie Institut. WindEnergy Study 2006 - Market Assessment of the Wind Energy Industry up to the Year 2014. Available at www.dewi.de [16] Germany. Fed. Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (lead). Strategy of the German government on the use of off-shore wind energy in the context of its national sustainability strategy. January 2002. 26 p. Available at www.bmu.de [17] UK Department of Trade and Industry – DTI. Future Offshore – A Strategic Framework for the Offshore Wind Industry. 2002. 87 p. Available at www.dti.gov.uk [18] Data available from www.ieawind.org [19] International Energy Agency – IEA. World Energy Outlook 2002. Available at www.iea.org [20] International Energy Agency – IEA. World Energy Investment Outlook. 2003. Available at www.iea.org [21] Carvalho, P.C.M., (2003), Wind energy and greenhouse emissions trading market: the brazilian potential, Wind Engineering, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 135 – 142. [22] Bermann, C. (2002). Energia no Brasil: Para quê? Para quem? Crise e alternativas para um país sustentável. Livraria da Fæsica, São Paulo. [23] Amarante, O.C., Bittencourt, R. M., Rocha, N.A., Schultz, D.J., Sugai, M.V.B., (1999), Estabilização sazonal da energia através da complementaridade entre os regimes hidrológico e eólico, XV Seminário Nacional de Produção e Transmissão de Energia Elétrica, Foz do Iguaçu. [24] The State of Ceará, Secretaryship for the Infrastructure. Atlas do Potencial Eolico do Ceará. Available at www.seinfra.ce.gov.br [25] Kissel, J. M., Krauter, S. C. W. Adaptions of renewable energy policies to unstable macroeconomic situations – Case study: Wind Power in Brazil. Energy Policy, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 8 September 2005. [26] S. Siegfriedsen, M. Lehnhoff and A. Prehn: Primary markets for offshore wind energy outside the european union – Wind Engineering 27: 5; 419 – 430. 2003. [27] The State of Rio Grande do Sul, Secretaryship for Energy, Mining and Communications. Atlas do Potencial Eolico do Rio Grande do Sul. Available at www.semc.rs.gov.br. Pictures of the OWE resources of that state can be found at www.semc.rs.gov.br/ atlas/INDEX_geral.htm [28] ORICICLON. Prospect for “Sistema de Geração Eólica de Energia Elétrica Unidade Piloto de Ilha Comprida, SP”. 2003. Available at www.oriciclon.com