the required depth of quay. An idealised fabrication facility, whether in steel or concrete, is likely to require a site of 20 - 30 ha. and a 10 - 15 m draft unless buoyancy devices are used. These requirements are hard to find in one place, and in their absence multiple facilities are needed to fulfil requirements for single large projects, which in itself brings additional logistical considerations. New facilities will certainly be required, but this is much easier to say than to do. In the UK, a new greenfield port would be considered a nationally significant infrastructure project, and getting it through planning and construction could take up to 10 years. In order to avoid a lack of suitable port infrastructure becoming a bottleneck for the industry, an interim solution is needed. In the shorter-term, there are opportunities to start generating momentum by splitting activities between existing sites. For example, the Philippines has existing oil and gas, as well as existing LNG infrastructure spread across its thousands of islands that could be repurposed. The downside of this approach is that it will increase costs and risks.
Local supply chain opportunities Who, exactly, will be doing all this activity? While technology providers have come up with patented solutions for substructures, and turbines are broadly similar to their fixed counterparts – Vestas, Siemens, GE, and others – it is clear that the real challenge – and opportunity – for the supply chain lies in actually building floating wind at a commercially viable scale. The market’s experience of fixed offshore wind will help, but it can only go so far. For one thing, there are practical differences. Fixed projects have typically geared up for an installation period lasting between 18 months and two years, squeezing it into this tight period because of the expensive equipment required. But floating projects do not require such big, costly installation vessels all the time – meaning the vessel charter profile and cost is different. They require large cranes
Figure 3. Floating offshore wind offers the ability to provide renewable energy in challenging geological conditions.
20
ENERGY GLOBAL SUMMER 2022
to install and a lot more tugs to tow them out and install the moorings. As well as different port facilities, equipment, and services, floating wind is likely to have a different supply chain profile as countries look to develop their domestic industries. For fixed offshore wind projects in the UK, most of the large installation and fabrication contracts to date have been undertaken by overseas companies. While UK companies have been successful in winning operation and maintenance contracts, most of the manufacturing has been done abroad. Establishing blade factories in the UK and assembling components quayside after shipping them from overseas has been the easiest way for these companies to meet local content requirements.
Policy and confidence The situation will be different for floating wind. As local content requirements become more stringent and the UK government pursues its levelling up agenda, floating substructures will have to be manufactured in the UK. And this requires port infrastructure. In October 2020, the UK government made £160 million available through its offshore wind manufacturing investment scheme, with half allocated for upgrading port infrastructure – for which Able Marine Energy Park in South Humber received £75 million and Teesworks, the freeport site in the Tees Valley, received £20 million. With the UK government announcing in last autumn’s white paper that it plans to provide similar backing for floating offshore wind, this is a timely reminder that policy intervention can help create the right conditions for the industry to thrive but that it also takes careful management to maintain momentum. Confidence will also be crucial to maintaining momentum, and the shortlisting of companies for ScotWind was notable in this regard. As soon as that announcement came, companies rushed to confirm supply chain relationships, including Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) for port space. With the environmental impact assessments, design, contracts, and investment decisions still to come, they want to ensure they meet the deadline of being on the ground and building within five years. The confidence generated by the early adopters in ScotWind are attracting investment to Scotland. For example, BW Ideol has signed an agreement with Ardersier Port Authority to manufacture concrete substructures for floating wind projects. Here and elsewhere, companies are partnering to make the most of opportunities. In Wales, energy company RWE is partnering with Associated British Ports and the Port of Milford Haven to scale up port facilities for floating wind in the Celtic Sea. Ultimately, those in the industry know only too well that port infrastructure is the biggest barrier to deploying floating offshore wind rapidly at scale. With limited options for building suitable port infrastructure, the companies who are first out of the blocks may well win the race – not only securing the few available facilities but also building and retaining knowledge that will keep them ahead of their competitors.
