SubTel Forum Magazine #120 - Offshore Energy by Submarine Telelecoms Forum

SUBMARINE TELECOMS

FORUM ISSUE 120 | SEPTEMBER 2021

OFFSHORE ENERGY

EXORDIUM FROM THE PUBLISHER WELCOME TO ISSUE 120, OUR OFFSHORE ENERGY EDITION

recently attended my first in person conference in over a year. A longtime industry friend who moved away from the fiber world and into the offshore wind space a number of years ago suggested I check out the Business Network for Offshore Wind who put together an excellent conference, called IPF ’21, which was held in Richmond, Virginia last month. Besides the usual papers and exhibition (as well as some 1,000+ masked and pre-examined, pre-vaccinated attendees), BNOW held a complimentary 5 hour teach-in on everything offshore wind – the technology, the business, the politics, the players, etc. Two weeks later they conducted on four consecutive Fridays an in-depth training for interested virtual worldwide attendees who received more information than they could ever digest plus a very slick and thick textbook as a back-up reference. The sheer amount of good information about how to do business in their industry was astounding, and our industry could learn quite a lot from these guys. Looking ahead, offshore energy continues to be a feast and famine industry, but a number of projects are currently underway, and more are in the offing. Since last year’s edition, Tampnet closed on its acquisition of the BP GoM submarine cable system, and they are providing herein some insight as to their plans in store. In addition, the offshore wind industry here in the US is taking off and joining the rest of the world. Next month we will be releasing the 10th edition of the Submarine Telecoms Industry Report and we are honored that so many industry veterans will again sup-

Offshore energy continues to be a feast and famine industry, but a number of projects are currently underway, and more are in the offing.

2 SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

port it with their ideas and insights. There have been a number of interesting developments in our industry over the last year, which we will be discussing there in greater detail. As always, the report will also feature some truly excellent expertise and opining from across our industry, as well as loads of details on where we have been and where we are headed. We are also accomplishing our annual industry survey, which is embedded in this issue, the results of which will be highlighted in our upcoming Industry Report in Octo-

A Publication of Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com ISSN No. 1948-3031 PRESIDENT & PUBLISHER: Wayne Nielsen | wnielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-2527 VICE PRESIDENT: Kristian Nielsen | knielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845 SALES: Teri Jones | tjones@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 471-4902 PROJECT MANAGER: Rebecca Spence | rspence@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 268-9285

ber. Please do participate in the survey!

TAKE THE SURVEY NOW!

EDITOR: Stephen Nielsen | snielsen@subtelforum.com DESIGN & PRODUCTION: Weswen Design | wendy@weswendesign.com

Work has also already begun on our printed Submarine Cable Map, which will be distributed at PTC ’22 in January then mailed globally thereafter. SubTel Forum’s Submarine Cable Map is literally coming to a wall near you. As always, we have some really excellent articles in this issue, dissecting and discussing the theme, Offshore Energy, from a myriad of perspectives, covering Oil & Gas, offshore wind, and a bunch of other related topics. We also have exceptional articles considering the linkage between offshore Oil & Gas, wind and yes, submarine telecom systems. Thanks to these system owner, supplier, and contractor authors for their significant inputs. Thanks especially for their support to this issue’s sponsors: Business Development Agency Bermuda and Pacific Telecommunications Council. Lastly, we highlight the updates to the online cable map with both recent cable announcements; and of course, our ever popular “where in the world are all those pesky cableships” is included as well. STF

DEPARTMENT WRITERS: Michael Thornton, Philip Pilgrim, Rebecca Spence, Terri Jones, and Wayne Nielsen

Good reading and stay well,

Contributions are welcomed and should be forwarded to: pressroom@subtelforum.com. Submarine Telecoms Forum magazine is published bimonthly by Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc., and is an independent commercial publication, serving as a freely accessible forum for professionals in industries connected with submarine optical fiber technologies and techniques. Submarine Telecoms Forum may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publishers. Liability: While every care is taken in preparation of this publication, the publishers cannot be held

Wayne Nielsen, Publisher

SUBMARINE TELECOMS

FORUM

FEATURE WRITERS: Bill Burns, Bill Wall, Chris Benjamin, Derek Cassidy, Don Klikna, Greg Otto, Hermann Kugeler, Joanna El Khoury, Kate Panayotou, Kristian Nielsen, Paul Abfalter, René d’Avezac de Moran, Robert van de Poll, Sandeep Narayan Kundu, Shashank Krishna, Stewart Ash, Tim Pugh, Trygve Hagevik, Venkata Jasti, and Vince Nacewski

ISSUE 121 | NOVEMB

NEXT ISSUE: NOVEMBER 2021 Data Centers & New Technology AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INDEX: www.subtelforum.com/onlineindex

DATA CENTERS

AND NEW TECHNOLOGY

Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com/corporate-information BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Margaret Nielsen, Wayne Nielsen and Kristian Nielsen SubTel Forum Continuing Education, Division of Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc. www.subtelforum.com/education CONTINUING EDUCATION DIRECTOR: Kristian Nielsen | knielsen@subtelforum.com | [+1] (703) 444-0845

VOI CE

OF T HE

responsible for the accuracy of the information herein, or any errors which may occur in advertising or editorial content, or any consequence arising from any errors or omissions, and the editor reserves the right to edit any advertising or editorial material submitted for publication. New Subscriptions, Enquiries and Changes of Address: 21495 Ridgetop Circle, Suite 201, Sterling, Virginia 20166, USA, or call [+1] (703) 444-0845, fax [+1] (703) 349-5562, or visit www.subtelforum.com. Copyright © 2021 Submarine Telecoms Forum, Inc.

I NDUSTRY

IN THIS FORUM ISSUE

SUBMARINE TELECOMS

ISSUE 120 | SEPTEMBER 2021

features

6 QUESTIONS WITH GREG BERLOCHER:

EXPANDING OFFSHORE NETWORKS By Greg Otto and Kristian Nielsen

By Trygve Hagevik

By Don Klikna, Vince Nacewski, Chris Benjamin, Dr. Kate Panayotou, and Joanna El Khoury

TAMPNET CONTINUES TO GROW ITS PRESENCE IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

THE 2021 US OFFSHORE WIND MARKET UPDATE By Bill Wall

4 SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

PROTECTING A PROJECT FROM TROUBLED WATERS

OPERATION PLUTO By Bill Burns & Stewart Ash

IRELAND, AN OVERVIEW OF ENERGY CONNECTIVITY By Derek Cassidy

INNOVATIONS FOR SUBMARINE CABLE PLANNING By Robert van de Poll, Sandeep Narayan Kundu and René d’Avezac de Moran

By Paul Abfalter

By Tim Pugh

THE TIME FOR A FUTUREFORWARD ASIAN NETWORK IS NOW

AUTOMATIC ROUTE GENERATION AND CABLE NETWORK OPTIMIZATION FOR OFFSHORE WINDFARMS

THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL, BUT HAVE THEY READ IT?

WHAT NEXT FOR OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY? By Shashank Krishna

By Dr. Venkata Jasti and Hermann Kugeler

departments EXORDIUM..................................................................................................2 SUBTELFORUM.COM....................................................................................6 STF ANALYTICS............................................................................................8 CABLE MAP UPDATE.................................................................................. 12 WHERE IN THE WORLD.............................................................................. 14 BACK REFLECTION.....................................................................................82 ON THE MOVE............................................................................................90 SUBMARINE CABLE NEWS NOW................................................................. 91 ADVERTISER CORNER................................................................................92

SubTelForum.com

VisitSubTelForum.com SubTelForum.com to to find find links resources Visit linkstotothe thefollowing following resources

FREERESOURCES RESOURCESFOR FORALL ALLOUR OUR SUBTELFORUM.COM SUBTELFORUM.COM READERS FREE READERS The most popular articles, Q&As of 2020. TOP OFyou 2019 FindSTORIES out what missed! The most popular articles, Q&As of 2019. Find out what you NEWSmissed! NOW RSS FEED Keep on top of our world of coverage with our free News NEWSdaily NOW industry RSS FEEDupdate. News Now is a daily RSS feed Now Keep on top of our world of coverage with our freehighNews of news applicable to the submarine cable industry, Now daily industry update. News Now is a daily RSS&feed lighting Cable Faults & Maintenance, Conferences As-of news applicable to the submarine industry, highlighting sociations, Current Systems, Datacable Centers, Future Systems, Cable Faults & Maintenance, Associations, Offshore Energy, State of the Conferences Industry and&Technology & Current Systems, Data Centers, Future Systems, Offshore Upgrades. Energy, State of the Industry and Technology & Upgrades.

PUBLICATIONS PUBLICATIONS Submarine Cable Almanac is a free quarterly publica-

Submarine Cablethrough Almanacdiligent is a freedata quarterly publication made available gathering and tion madeefforts available through diligent data gathering and mapping by the analysts at SubTel Forum Analytics,

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

a division of Submarine Telecoms Forum. This reference mapping analysts at SubTel Forum Analytics, tool givesefforts detailsby onthe cable systems including a system map, a division of Submarine Telecoms Forum. This reference landing points, system capacity, length, RFS year and other tool givesdata. details on cable systems including a system map, valuable landing points,Telecoms system capacity, and free other Submarine Industrylength, ReportRFS is anyear annual valuable data. publication with analysis of data collected by the analysts of Submarine Report is an annualanalyfree SubTel ForumTelecoms Analytics,Industry including system capacity publication of data collected by the of analysts of sis, as well aswith the analysis actual productivity and outlook current SubTel Forum Analytics, including system capacity and planned systems and the companies that serviceanalythem. sis, as well as the actual productivity and outlook of current and planned CABLE MAP systems and the companies that service them. The online SubTel Cable Map is built with the industry CABLE MAP standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel The online SubTel Cable Map is built withthe theprogress industryof Forum Submarine Cable Database. It tracks standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel some 300+ current and planned cable systems, more than Forum Submarine Database. tracks46 thecable progress 800 landing points,Cable over 1,700 data It centers, shipsof

as well as mobile subscriptions and internet accessibility data for 254 countries. Systems are also linked to SubTel Forum's News Now Feed, allowing viewing of current and archived news details. The printed Cable Map is an annual publication showcasing the world's submarine fiber systems beautifully drawn on a large format map and mailed to SubTel Forum Readership and/or distributed during Pacific Telecommunications Conference in January each year.

VIDEO STREAMING AND TUTORIALS

SubTel Forum tutorials teach how to use the ever growing SubTel Cable Map, including various map layers for data centers, cable ships, etc.

CONTINUING EDUCATION

SubTel Forum designs educational courses and master classes that can then appear at industry conferences around the world. Classes are presented on a variety of topics dealing with key industry technical, business, or commercial issues. See what classes SubTel Forum is accrediting in support of the next generation of leaders in our industry.

AUTHORS INDEX

The Authors Index is a reference source to help readers locate magazine articles and authors on various subjects.

EXCLUSIVE INFORMATION FOR SUBSCRIBERS OF MARKET SECTOR REPORTS SUBTEL FORUM ANALYTICS MARKET SECTOR REPORTS

SubTel Forum Subscribers have exclusive access to SubTel Forum online MSRs updated quarterly: DATA CENTER & OTT PROVIDERS: Details the increasingly shrinking divide between the cable landing station and the backhaul to interconnection services in order to maximize network efficiency throughout, bringing once disparate infrastructure into a single facility. If you're interested in the world of Data Centers and its impact on Submarine Cables, this MSR is for you. GLOBAL CAPACITY PRICING: historic and current capacity pricing for regional routes (Transatlantic, Transpacific, Americas, Intra-Asia and EMEA), delivering a comprehensive look at the global capacity pricing status of the submarine fiber industry. Capacity pricing trends and forecasting simplified. GLOBAL OUTLOOK: dive into the health and wellness of the global submarine telecoms market, with regional analysis and forecasting. This MSR gives an overview of planned systems, CIF and project completion rates, state of supplier activity and potential disruptive factors facing the market.

OFFSHORE ENERGY: provides a detailed overview o the offshore oil & gas sector of the submarine fiber industry and covers system owners, system suppliers and various market trends. This MSR details how the industry is focusing on trends and new technologies to increase efficiency and automation as a key strategy to reduce cost and maintain margins, and its impact on the demand for new offshore fiber systems. REGIONAL SYSTEMS: drill down into the Regional Systems market, including focused analysis on the Transatlantic, Transpacific, EMEA, AustralAsia, Indian Ocean Pan-East Asian and Arctic regions. This MSR details the impact of increasing capacity demands on regional routes and contrasts potential overbuild concerns with the rapid pace of system development and the factors driving development demand. SUBMARINE CABLE DATASET: details 400+ fiber optic cable systems. Including physical aspects, cost, owners, suppliers, landings, financiers, component manufacturers, marine contractors, etc. STF

ANALYTICS

BY MICHAEL THORNTON

his year has been challenging for many industries around the world due to the continued COVID-19 pandemic. As important as offshore energy is to the global economy, the energy industry has not been immune its impact. Compared to previous years, demand for hydrocarbons has been reduced, while production capability has been met with difficulties imposed by quarantines and social distancing requirements. As a result, submarine fiber activity in this market has been brought almost to a standstill. However, while the immediate impacts are disheartening, the long-term effects of the global pandemic could result in a boon for the submarine fiber industry. COVID-19 has forced many industries to expand their remote work and automation capabilities – all of which need the capacity and reliability that only fiber can provide. As the demand for more capacity to offshore facilities grows, so will the demand for submarine fiber systems as the more traditional satellite and O3b telecoms solutions are simply unable to meet the data demands.

BY THE NUMBERS

Before 2019, there were several new systems added around the world, as various offshore energy companies began to realize the benefits of fiber systems for their offshore facilities. However, a dip in oil prices in late 2018 through early 2019 and an overall global economic downturn slowed, or flat out halted, progress on systems

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

for 2019. As prices and the economy began to pick back up through the latter half of the year, several systems were announced for 2020 and beyond – making it seem like things were back on track. Of course, COVID-19 hit the world towards the end of Q1 2020 and brought the entire world to a standstill, with quarantine procedures effectively keeping people at home. With less commuting and travel, demand for oil and gas was brought down significantly in 2020. Due to these circumstances, 4 systems that had been planned for 2020 did not enter service on time. However, as the industry focuses on utilizing new technologies to increase efficiency and automation

as a key strategy to reduce cost and maintain margins – especially considering the new reality brought on by pandemic quarantine and social distancing procedures – demand for new offshore fiber systems should increase through 2024. Granted, due to the ongoing global impact of COVID-19, it has become apparent that our initial estimates for length of cable added in 2023 has drastically changed. Substantial delays and cancellations have greatly altered the landscape of our data. The growth we were expecting to see in 2023 has shifted to the following year in 2024, however the amount of growth is much lower. As a result, 2023 is now expected to see very little length added.

The same can be said about the number of systems that will be active in the coming years. With the previous expectation of 15 systems planned for 2023, that number has been brought to its knees as only 1 system is currently planned. We don’t expect to see too many more systems coming online the following year, in 2024, due to ongoing delays due to COVID-19.

THE OIL BENCHMARK

Looking at the average quarterly price of a barrel of oil over the last five years via the West Texas Intermediate benchmark, oil prices reached their peak in October of 2018. Prices reached just shy of $70 per barrel during this time. After that, prices began to decline to an average of just over $55 per barrel and remained relatively steady at this range throughout 2019. Eventually, however, as initial COVID-19 lockdowns were put in place around the world, a sharp drop in prices was witnessed and quickly the prices bottomed out at just over $25 per barrel in Q2 2020. This gradual-to-steep price decline is the primary reason the market saw such a sharp decline in new systems implemented in 2019 and no new systems in 2020. Many systems either died outright or were pushed back to 2021 and beyond. While 2021-2024 are currently predicted to have a respectable increase in system activity, it is unclear whether oil prices and energy demand have recovered enough to support such an optimistic outlook. However, with the need for additional automation and remote capabilities brought on by the global pandemic, this may bal-

Figure 1: Systems by Year, 2017-2024

Figure 2: KMs Added by Year, 2017-2014

ance out demand for additional telecommunications capacity with a reduction in oil and gas demand.

DEDICATED VS. MANAGED

Dedicated systems are those built primarily by one or more Oil & Gas companies to serve their specific

offshore facility’s needs. Managed systems are those operated by a third-party telecoms service provider to one or more Oil & Gas companies’ offshore facilities. As companies push further out and explore new areas for drilling, they can rely less and less on existing systems JULY 2021 | ISSUE 119

ANALYTICS managed by telecom providers. With most of the heavy growth in offshore energy happening in previously untapped areas, expect the prevalence of dedicated systems to continue. In addition, offshore energy companies have generally preferred to outright own their telecoms infrastructure in the past. This can potentially provide better flexibility and direct control of overhead costs. As of now, 56 percent of all planned systems through to 2024 will be Dedicated, and 44 percent will be Managed systems. However, with Tampnet’s landmark acquisition of the BP GoM offshore cable system in August of 2020 (Tampnet Press Release, 2020), a new trend is possibly emerging where commercial telecoms companies own and operate multiple systems specifically for offshore oil & gas clients. Historically, systems like BP GoM had been owned by one or more oil companies that then have to manage the network for any additional third parties that connect to the system. This has the potential to create some conflict as companies essentially must trust their data in the hands of a competitor. Tampnet has already established itself as an independent operator in the North Sea, and as they are looking to replicate that model in the Gulf of Mexico, this opens the doors for other telecoms companies to do the same. The next step would be for a third-party telecoms company like Tampnet to build a brand-new system to service offshore facilities instead of acquiring existing assets – as has been done up to this point.

10 SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

BY MICHAEL THORNTON

Figure 3: West Texas Intermediate Quarterly Price History, 2016-2021

If this model catches on, companies will have to decide for themselves which is the better option for their purposes, but more options are almost always a net positive.

A PROMISING OUTLOOK

This time last year told a very different story. There was a lot of uncertainty in which direction the price of oil would go. From the second half of 2020 and the first half of 2021, we witnessed an incredible rebound in oil prices. As of the beginning of Q2 2021, the price of oil is back up to just over $65 per barrel; only $3 per barrel less than the peak we saw in 2018. While the price of oil appears to be in an upward trend, the submarine cable industry remains to have an uncertain future due to the ongoing global impact of COVID-19. We remain hopeful that the current vaccination efforts will eventually yield a much-needed surge in system imple-

mentation in the coming years as we get caught up from the time lost due to worldwide lockdowns. Ultimately, however, outlook for this aspect of the submarine fiber industry is entirely up in the air. STF MICHAEL THORNTON joined Submarine Telecoms Forum in 2020 as Database Administrator, including the management of the Submarine Cable Database. Michael holds an Advanced Diploma in Computer Programming from St. Lawrence College in Ontario, Canada. From a young age, he focused his ambition on training as an IT Technician and computer programmer. Having been commonly sought out for PC repair and utilizing his programming abilities, he become a World of Warcraft developer, developing a successful addon. He has supported numerous database and analytics efforts for Submarine Telecoms Forum. STF WORKS CITED Tampnet Press Release. (2020, August 24). Tampnet Agrees to Acquire a 1,200km Offshore Fibre Cable System in the Gulf of Mexico. Retrieved from SubTel Forum: https:// subtelforum.com/tampnet-agrees-to-acquire-bpgomcable-system/

PM 2.0 BY YOUR PROJECT ANALYTICS ANYTIME, ANYWHERE

PROVEN PROCESSES AND METHODOLOGIES • • • • • • •

Defined Processes Template Driven PMP Based Project Management Approach Rigorous Documentation Controls Quality Assurance Focused Secure Records Storage Accessible and User Friendly

INTRODUCING THEVIRTUAL REP • In-Field Analysis Without In-Field Risk • Remote real-time analysis and reporting without the added cost of today’s in-field representation liabilities.

REQUEST A QUOTE

FEATURE SubTel Cable Map Updates

he SubTel Cable Map is built with the industry standard Esri ArcGIS platform and linked to the SubTel Forum Submarine Cable Database. It tracks the progress of over 400 current and planned cable systems, 45+ cable ships and over 950 landing points. Systems are also linked to SubTel Forum’s News Now Feed, allowing viewing of current and archived news details. This interactive map is a continual work and progress and regularly updated with pertinent data captured by analysts at SubTel Forum and feedback from our users. Our goal is to make easily available not only data from the Submarine Cable Almanac, but also more and more new layers of system information. The SubTel Cable Map makes use of the ArcGIS Dashboards platform. This allows users to see an array of key data points without having to dig through complicated menus and settings to drill down into the data that is important to you. For this update, the map has received a significant visual and organizational overhaul. The quick reference information and graphs have been moved into a separate dashboard below the map itself in order to keep the focus on what is important – the submarine cable systems themselves. The item lists have been streamlined, removing visual and organizational clutter while the search feature in the top

This interactive map is a continual work and progress and regularly updated with pertinent data captured by analysts at SubTel Forum and feedback from our users. right corner of the map allows users to directly search for cable systems and landings by name. Additionally, be sure to check out the slide over panel on the left-hand side of the map to filter data based on Region, System Supplier, System Installer, System Owner or whether or not a system is Unrepeatered. For those who still want Since the last issue of the Magazine, we the analytical data provided have continued working hard rolling out our in the previous version of the map, this can be found just brand-new database. This overhauled system below the map on the same now allows us to provide automated weekly page. Want to know how much capacity is available updates moving forward and ensure the data along Transpacific routes or is more accurate than ever. We are excited how many kilometers of cable to keep expanding these capabilities – stay a supplier has produced over the last five years? Now all it tuned for additional updates takes is couple simple clicks and improvements! to see your data! Finally, we have created an initial version of the Subma-

SUBTELFORUM.COM/CABLEMAP 12

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

rine Cable Industry Timeline Map. This brand-new map shows users the timeline of systems added to the global network from the year 2000 all the way to those planned through 2023. See just how far this industry has come and get an idea of where it is going with a single click of a button. Check out the brandnew Industry Timeline Map here: https://subtelforum. com/industrytimeline We hope you continue to make use of the SubTel Cable Map in order to learn more about the industry yourself and educate others on the importance of submarine cable systems. Please feel free to reach out to our Project Manager, Rebecca Spence, should you have any comments, questions, or updates at rspence@subtelforum.com. STF

THE FULL LIST OF ADDED/UPDATED SYSTEMS AS OF SEPTEMBER 2021 IS AS FOLLOWS: Systems Added 2Africa Apricot Darwin-Jakarta-Singapore Cable H2HE IRIS PEACE Polar Express SPSC/Mistral

JULY 2021 | ISSUE 119

WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE THOSE PESKY CABLESHIPS? BY REBECCA SPENCE

alk about a busy season! With only a few short weeks left before the northern parts of the world are covered in ice, cable laying vessels are working hard around the world to meet their deadlines. In the last several weeks, the Responder and her crew completed the Grace Hopper Landing in Sopelana, Spain and CS Bold Maverick landed PEACE cable in Egypt and many more. When the data was collected for this month’s article the numbers reflected the high volume of work currently being fielded by cable ships internationally. 24 percent of the vessels we track were in motion towards their destinations; as seen in Figure 1. This is a slight increase from July which saw 23 percent of the fleet actively moving and 71 percent had reached their reported destination. There were far less ships that did not move. Only 5 percent reported the same location the last two recorded months. This is down from 11 percent in July.

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

The 23 percent of vessels that were in motion can be broken down as seen in Figure 2. Figure 2 shows a nice spread of vessels that will be arriving at their announced destinations over the next several weeks. As previously mentioned, cable crews around the world

are working hard to meet their project goals. The IT Intrepid for instance left the Halifax in August to head to the Hexatronic Manufacturing Plant in Hudiksvall, Sweden where it will begin loading the cable for the CrossChannel Fibre System. Another was the C/S Teliri which landed Google’s Equiano Cable on the Island of Saint Helena. As these vessels reach project milestones they reroute and head to the next location. As was the case with the Ile de Sein which is working on the Southern Cross Next Cable system in the Pacific. In the recent months the regions of activity have seen quite a shift from the last issue in July. The biggest difference can be seen in the top four regions. Previously East Asia, the China Coast, South East Asia, and North East Atlantic Ocean were the most active. Now for the first time in almost a year, the activity has shifted to the Americas, and Atlantic. With large projects like Equiano, PEACE, and Southern Cross Next, that shift will likely continue to be seen over the coming months. The current cableship distribution chart has not shifted, with Orange Marine and SubCom still in the lead followed closely by ASN and Global Marine. Though in the coming months, ASN should see a bump with the addition of their two newly outfitted vessels the Ile d’Yeu and Il de Molene. Until next time, keep sharing your vessels on social media and don’t forget to tag @SubTelForum if you want to be mentioned in the next issue. And you can always check the current location any vessel in the fleet at https://subtelforum.com/submarine-cable-map. Chao! STF

REBECCA SPENCE is a Research Analyst from Submarine Telecoms Forum. Rebecca possessed more than 10 years’ experience as an analyst and database manager including for the small business division of a prominent government contractor, General Dynamics. She is a regular contributor to SubTel Forum Magazine and is based out of Hillsborough, North Carlina USA. to design, construction, operation and maintenance of optical networks, terrestrial and submarine.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

6 QUESTIONS WITH GREG BERLOCHER: Talking Technology Trends with New Star Energy Services’ CEO

WHAT IS NEW STAR ENERGY SERVICES’ MISSION?

New Star Energy Services is a telecommunication engineering firm that supports energy-related customers that need to communicate in remote locations and in harsh environments. Our mission is to design, build, install, and maintain high availability network solutions for offshore platforms and vessels, pipelines, midstream companies, fracking companies, and oilfield service companies. In addition to the Oil & Gas Market, we provide engineering, telecommunication services, and field support to the IoT Market.

HOW DOES NEW STAR ENERGY SERVICES PARTICIPATE IN THE SUBMARINE CABLE MARKET?

As an engineering company, we focus on delivering the best solution for a particular customer’s specific needs. We work with a wide range of telecommunication technologies, including: radio, microwave, Private LTE, satellite, and fiber. Subsea fiber is often the best solution for delivering gigabits of data, reliably and cost effectively, to offshore facilities. New Star can provide FEED studies for energy companies considering subsea fiber projects.

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

We also work with partners to provide construction oversight and documentation.

I S NEW STAR ENERGY SERVICES CURRENTLY INVOLVED WITH ANY NEW SUBMARINE CABLE INITIATIVES?

Yes, we were recently approached by an international investment fund that specializes in telecommunication projects and we are actively engaged in a feasibility study for an international subsea project approximately 700 KM in length. New Star is also engaged in terrestrial fiber projects in West Texas and New Mexico. Our customers require fiber connectivity in several areas in the Delaware Basin that are not served by fiber optic cables today.

WHAT MAKES NEW STAR ENERGY SERVICES UNIQUE IN THE SUBMARINE SYSTEM MARKET?

WHERE DO YOU SEE NEW STAR ENERGY SERVICES IN 5 TO 10 YEARS?

New Star will celebrate our 9th anniversary in a few months and, as the years have passed, our customer base and the size of the projects we now work on have both increased. We are blessed to work with an outstanding customer base and best of breed partners who can provide world class solutions. As the company’s founder and CEO, it is exciting to receive calls from telecommunication giants that have sought us out to team with on specific projects. Over the next 5 years, New Star will continue to grow our engineering base but will see significant growth in the Engineering, Procurement & Construction (EPC) side of our business. STF

Over the next 5 years, New Star will continue to grow our engineering base but will see significant growth in the Engineering, Procurement & Construction (EPC) side of our business.

We believe that New Star is unique in the submarine system market because we have empathy for our customer’s customer. We have a 40+ year track record of success support customers in the Oil & Gas Market and are sensitive to their financial and operational needs. There are a lot of good engineering firms around the world but few have the extensive experience dealing with energy companies that New Star does.

1,000 site IoT application and the cost per drop was only $31 per month. The interest in the CBRS spectrum and private LTE networks is off the page. What goes unmentioned is that fiber optic connectivity if often the underpinning for private LTE networks. We have a number of these projects underway now and expect these projects to keep us quite busy for the next few years.

WHAT IS NEXT FOR NEW STAR ENERGY SERVICES?

Over the last 30 years, many energy companies have put a laser-like focus on one type of telecommunication service or another, like fiber or private RF networks, but that is changing. We are seeing a huge sea change in the interest in building hybrid networks. New Star has been actively involved in architecting hybrid network solutions that provide ultra-high network availability, while at the same time are extremely cost effective. We recently designed a hybrid cellular/satellite network for a

Greg Berlocher is a forty-year veteran of the Telecommunication Industry, holding a number of executive roles. Over his career, he was worked for a number of high growth companies, including three INC 500 companies in the United States and one Branham 300 company in Canada. Mr. Berlocher has a track record of success introducing new telecommunication technologies to the market. He was part of the team that helped launch the first Ku-band shared hub satellite service at the Houston International Teleport in 1986, and during the 1990s, he launched a vertical market at AT&T Tridom, selling 3,000 VSATs to the Pipeline Industry. Mr. Berlocher is a subject matter expert in SCADA and IoT. MQTT, the foundational protocol of the IoT Industry, was originally developed for one of Mr. Berlocher’s pipeline customers. Mr. Berlocher is the founder and CEO of New Star Energy Services (New Star), which is based in Sugar Land, Texas. New Star provides telecommunication engineering services to energy-related customers that need to communicate in remote locations and in harsh environments. New Star designs, builds, installs, and maintains high availability network solutions for pipelines, midstream companies, fracking companies, and service companies. Mr. Berlocher has a BS in Industrial Distribution from the College of Engineering, Texas A&M University.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

L E BT

R FO

S M O C E L E T E N

I R A M B U S

Y R T S U D

0 1 UM

T R O P E R

PUBLICATI

OCTOBE 2021

The SubTel Forum Industry Report is in full production, and we are: •

Revitalizing/updating our Format

•

Adding Full Page Ads for Sponsors

•

Offering 30-60 second embedded Sponsor Videos

Updated annually and downloadable, the SubTel Forum Industry Report provides the most accurate and comprehensive data on the submarine fiber market and related industries, presented free of charge. The analysis of data collected by SubTel Forum analysts and industry experts includes system capacity analysis, as well as, actual productivity and outlook of current and planned systems, and the companies that service them.

USE THIS LINK TO RESERVE YOUR SPACE TODAY Or contact our Sales Manager, Terri Jones, at tjones@subtelforum.com.

The SubTel Forum Industry Report will reach current and future clients, vendors, and peers; and keep them updated and linked to our Sponsors!

SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS: • • • • • •

Full-Page Ad (optional 30-60 second embedded video) Logo/Link throughout your designated section Complimentary tile web banner on subtelforum.com news feed Social Media acknowledgment (LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter) Acknowledgment in Press Release and Mailer 500,000+ downloads per issue.

ONE FULL YEAR OF BENEFIT – ONLY $3,750

ION:

L A U N N

FEATURE

TAMPNET CONTINUES TO GROW ITS PRESENCE IN THE GULF OF MEXICO BY TRYGVE HAGEVIK

ver 95% of international voice and data communication takes place via submarine fiber networks, connecting people, systems, and devices around the globe. Despite this, the common misconception is that this communication takes place via satellite. Since the first transatlantic submarine cable was deployed in 1866, many technological advancements have changed the way we communicate. After the first transatlantic fiber-optic cable was laid in 1988, linking the US to the UK and France, their usage had quickly amplified. As devices grow more sophisticated, the demand for high-speed, low-latency communications has arisen, especially in offshore regions that have traditionally relied on satellite using Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) networks. VSAT networks utilized offshore represented low bandwidth and high latency communications capabilities that require a better alternative to improve performance. With the inefficiencies in satellite communications, offshore facilities realized the need for 4G/LTE connectivity. With its Americas headquarters in Houston, Texas, Tampnet Inc. has been working on extending 4G/LTE coverage throughout the Gulf of Mexico (GoM) and the North Sea for the past four years. Since the initiative began, Tampnet’s cov-

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

erage in the GoM has expanded to about 80,000 square miles, providing essential, reliable, and high-speed data through a network of submarine fiber optic cables and microwave links. The combination of these two technologies is unique to Tampnet, allowing the company to deliver connectivity to a variety of devices, including personal devices and smartphones. The company’s expansion into the GoM is a continuation of its commitment to deliver high-speed, low-latency connectivity to customers in the Gulf. Connectivity is a necessary ingredient for companies to implement digitization strategies and improve technologies and communication with onshore facilities.

BUILDING A NETWORK

As Tampnet continues to extend the network infrastructure in the GoM, the network is becoming equal to that of the one they operate in the North Sea, which follows the same service model. In 2020, Tampnet purchased 1,200 KM of subsea fiber from BP, replicating the North Sea presence with the services they’ve developed for the GoM. With this acquisition, Tampnet was able to take complete ownership over the fiber cable network to de-risk the business by securing long-term access to the only fiber network

in the GoM. In addition, it ensures that Tampnet has the infrastructure necessary to match its customer’s needs and fits with the goal of international expansion. As the only existing fiber network in the GoM, it catapults Tampnet ahead as a market leader. Since this purchase, the company has signed a series of agreements that have expanded its service area by approximately 25% to deliver 4G/ LTE services to more customers. These agreements have been made with two deep water field developers, both highly experienced with VSAT, 4G/ LTE, and fiber communications. These are not the only agreements of this type that will come to fruition. Tampnet has another eight similar deals in the pipeline for the remainder of 2021 and 2022, which will significantly continue Tampnet’s expansion in the GoM. These strategic purchases and partnerships have allowed Tampnet to grow to be the largest deep water network operator in the GoM and support the company’s continual growth. Following the success of the North Sea network expansion, and the current efforts to grow in the GoM, Tampnet has plans to introduce reliable network infrastructure for offshore LTE coverage in Trinidad and Tobago and off the coast of Newfoundland, Canada.

MEETING THE NEEDS OF OFFSHORE INDUSTRY

Throughout the GoM, there are a large number of clients in the deep water region that rely on reliable connectivity. From oil rigs, fishing boats, ships, and yachts, devices,

equipment, and employees need high-speed 4G/LTE. This is especially true as offshore service providers prioritize digitalization. With the fiber connectivity Tampnet is providing to clients in the GoM, the goal is to lower the cost threshold for oil and gas companies and field developers to connect to the Tampnet infrastructure. This need is best exemplified by Tampnet’s recent contract awarded by a major oil and gas company to provide 4G/LTE coverage to their oil and gas operations in the GoM. Taking definitive steps to leverage new technology to improve weak processes, the contract followed a series of successful initiatives on two production platforms. The company’s drillships also require high-speed, low-latency connectivity and intra-facility and on-deck LTE is highly desirable for device connectivity. This long-term agreement will follow with a swift rollout to aggressively leverage the state-of-the-art network for drilling and marine operations.

EASE OF ACCESS

For companies looking to leverage Tampnet’s 4G/LTE network offshore, it can be easily done through a user’s onshore mobile subscriptions. For users of the major carriers, smartphone and tablet devices will automatically connect to the offshore network for data and talk services through roaming capabilities. The user just has to ensure that roaming is turned on, with 4G and VoLTE turned on, with no alternative SIM card required. Some carriers even offer unlimited data and text within Tampnet’s coverage area.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE This ability makes it easier for users to access the network offshore whenever they need it. In addition, users outside the major carriers with devices that have eSIM compatibility can benefit from Tampnet’s partnership with GigSky. The partnership allows users to enable an eSIM on their device to access the 4G/LTE network on their devices on their terms. Both of these options allow users to seamlessly connect to the high-speed network in the GoM.

BEYOND CONNECTIVITY

Tampnet recognizes the possibility of applications of its infrastructure beyond the scope of 4G/LTE connectivity. Traditionally, seafloor geophysical equipment used to monitor earthquakes and seismic activity are expensive to deploy and challenging to maintain. Despite the challenges, it is essential for research and the identification of seismic events that could affect offshore structures, their personnel, and onshore inhabitants. Researchers at the California Institute of Technology have recently tested the possibility of detecting seismic waves through submarine fiber networks. In the researcher’s study, regular optical telecommunication signals’ state of polarization was monitored to detect earthquakes and water swells. The study focuses on the Curie cable that travels from Los Angeles to Chile, which was found to have less noise than terrestrial cables, enabling the researchers to identify seismic activity. The conclusion was that since this method of monitoring does not require dedicated fiber or specialized equipment, it is scalable to other submarine cable networks. With nearly three-quarters of a million miles of undersea cables spanning the globe, seismic monitoring presents a vast and compelling opportunity to learn more about the Earth itself. In the GoM, hidden underwater landslides have been triggered by earthquakes that threaten deep water oil and gas infrastructure like rigs and pipelines. With nearly 2,000 offshore platforms and tens of thousands of miles of pipeline, submarine landslides pose a significant threat to the environment. For example, a landslide that demolished an oil production platform off the coast of Louisiana 17 years ago has caused crude oil to spill into the surrounding ocean. Many of these landslides have no detectable trigger, caused by earthquakes hundreds of miles away. Using polarization monitoring through the subsea cables, even microseisms, earthquakes smaller than 2 on the Richter scale can be identified. Since underwater landslides can be caused by these minute earthquakes, it will be interesting to see how this technology continues to develop. Since the GoM is filled with loose sediment deposited by rivers, the seafloor is especially vulner-

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

able to collapse. Using submarine fiber cables to detect these seismic events can help further study this phenomenon to better understand their impact on oil drilling in the region. While this application still requires much research, it is an exciting potential application of the Tampnet network in the GoM and beyond. When this ability is realized, Tampnet envisions a collaboration with a global content provider to upload and analyze earthquake and tsunami data. This revolutionary application aligns closely with Tampnet’s commitment to sustainability. With high-speed, low-latency communication possible between onshore and offshore facilities, fewer employees are required to travel back and forth offshore, reducing carbon footprints. Additionally, safety is always a focus for Tampnet, so being able to use this data in the future could have potential implications in improving the safety of offshore operations.

THE FUTURE OF TAMPNET

Tampnet is heavily invested in the future of telecommunications and submarine cable networks to deliver reliable connectivity to customers around the globe. Beginning in the North Sea and current efforts heavily focused on the Gulf of Mexico, the company is committed to expanding its network. Tampnet has begun operations in other geographic locations, like Trinidad and Tobago and Newfoundland, increasing Tampnet’s ability to reach more customers and meet the demand for high-speed 4G/LTE networks. These efforts will enable customers to improve the health, safety, quality, and efficiency of their offshore operations. 4G/LTE capabilities will continue to revolutionize offshore operations so that decisions can be made faster, information can be shared in real-time, and collaboration can be efficient. STF TRYGVE HAGEVIK has held the position of Chief Commercial Officer (CCO) of Tampnet for well over 12 years. During the time he has had the overall responsibility for sales and business development, the company has grown from being a small telecom operator serving 34 fields in the North Sea to the largest low-latency offshore telecommunications carrier in the world, serving in excess of 400 fixed and mobile offshore assets with high capacity and low-latency communication. With the acquisition of BP’s Gulf of Mexico subsea fiber system, Tampnet now owns and operates a network based on 4100 km of subsea fibre optic cables, approximately 140 offshore microwave line of sight links and around 100 offshore 4G/5G LTE base stations, providing 200,000 square miles of offshore LTE coverage between the North Sea, Gulf of Mexico and east coast of Canada. Tampnet is also a turnkey supplier for implementing subsea fiber optic cables and complete telecommunication solutions to both greenfield and brownfield offshore fields. Trygve has led the sales and business development efforts of the company throughout a period where the company’s revenue has grown tenfold, both organically and through several M&A processes. He holds an honours degree in Economics and International Business from the University of Strathclyde in the UK and has recently returned to Stavanger, Norway with his family, after six years in Houston, Texas.

REACH YOUR TARGET SUBMARINE CABLE INDUSTRY AUDIENCE

Advertise in SubTel Forum publications used by decisionmakers across the entire industry: • SubTel Forum Magazine • Submarine Cable Almanac • Submarine Telecoms Industry Report • Submarine Cables of the World Wall Map • Submarine Cables of the World Online Map

SUBTELFORUM.COM/ADVERTISING

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

Figure 1: CVOW Pilot, America’s Second Offshore Wind Farm

THE 2021 US OFFSHORE WIND MARKET UPDATE Submarine Power Cable, a Hot Commodity That May Now Need Storage BY BILL WALL INTRODUCTION

Since my last Offshore Energy article for STF (Issue # 108 Pre-Pandemic September 2019) the number of Offshore Wind Farms in the US has doubled! Wow you say that is great, but in reality there are now two offshore wind farms. The addition of the 2-Turbine, 12MW Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind Pilot (CVOW Pilot) 27 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach, see Figure 1 above, boosted the operating energy output of the US offshore wind industry to a new high of 42MW (Block Island 30MW + CVOW Pilot 12MW ). This contrasts with a European operating total of over 25,000MW (25GW ). The CVOW pilot was the first offshore wind farm to be built in US federal waters controlled by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) the regulatory agency managing the lease and use of federal lands off the coast of the US. OK enough on current statistics, congratulations to Dominion Energy the developer of the CVOW pilot and further congratulations to Dominion on the progress on their utility scale 2.6GW CVOW Commercial project to be built off the coast of Virginia Beach. The CVOW Commercial Project is due to come on-line in 2026 and at peak output will serve the electrical needs of over a million households.

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

2021 US EAST COAST OFFSHORE WIND UPDATE

The big news in 2021 is that the pipeline of Offshore Wind projects ready to deploy has increased dramatically. Also there has been an influx of big-name energy companies vying for BOEM leases in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lands especially off the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic Coasts. Companies like Shell, BP, Total, etc. usually dominant in the offshore Oil & Gas markets are now active participants in the US Offshore Wind development market. The US East Coast area has exploded with projects that are either close to construction starting or are in the permitting phase prior to getting the go-ahead to start construction. Figure 2 shows the status on the US East Coast of current projects and tentative Wind Energy Areas (WEA) and Call Areas designated as such by BOEM. The US Federal Regulator BOEM (https://www.boem. gov/) is an agency of the US Department of the Interior and regulates the leasing of offshore sites for offshore wind energy development and for Offshore Oil & Gas exploration and production under the auspices of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (August 7th, 1953). BOEM, after receiving input from adjoining states, designates “Call Areas” as possible sites for offshore wind develop-

ment; those sites are then scrutinized for environmental & energy production suitability during a detailed Public Review process. If deemed viable the areas are then designated as “Wind Energy Areas” (WEA) and eventually offered to pre-qualified offshore wind developers under a competitive leasing auction. It is exciting to note that most of the named projects shown in Figure 2 that have contracts to supply offshore wind energy to various states along the East Coast are utility scale projects. Ocean Wind 1 (Orsted) has a contract to supply 1100MW to New Jersey, also in New Jersey Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind (EDF/Shell) is supplying 1500MW. In Massachusetts Vineyard Wind 1 (CIP/Avangrid) is under contract to deliver 800MW+, Mayflower Wind (Shell/Ocean Winds) is also slated to generate 804MW in Massachusetts. With projects like these lined up to come on-line in the late 2020’s it will not be long before the US is able to gain some ground on the European lead in the production of energy from Offshore Wind.

SUBMARINE POWER CABLE; A HOT COMMODITY IN THE OFFSHORE WIND SUPPLY CHAIN

Submarine power cable is an integral part of the offshore wind equipment configuration. In any offshore wind farm, there are two main types of submarine power cable; Inter Array Cables (IAC) are submarine power cables, currently operating at 66KV, that interconnect offshore turbines in a “Daisy-Chain” configuration. The Inter Array Cables usually interconnect a line or “String” of say 8 to 10 turbines, spaced approximately between 1KM to 2KM apart, then from the last turbine in the string they carry the cumulative power from the string to the offshore substation platform for transformation to the export High Voltage system carrying the wind farm’s output to shore. Figure 3 shows a European offshore wind farm layout with strings of 10 turbines and two offshore substations. This particular wind farm has a nameplate power output of 630MW.

Figure 2: US East Coast OSW Development – Courtesy of US DOE Market Report

With the introduction of larger offshore wind turbines in the 10MW to 15MW output range the Inter Array Cables will need to carry more power and eventually will be designed at a voltage level of 115KV versus the current 66KV. The second type of submarine cable in use on offshore wind farms are the export cables. As their name suggests these cables export the windfarm’s power output from the offshore substation to the shore grid interconnection point. Due to the longer distances involved these cables operate at higher transmission voltages of 230KV, 275KV and now possibly up to 345KV. The utility scale projects planned for the US East Coast will require export cables in the 60KM to 90KM length range. Both the Inter Array Cable and the export cable are three-core design with interstitial fibers for Scada and turbine control functions and a single layer of steel armor wires, this basic, typical configuration is shown in Figure 4. To protect against external aggression (trawling, clam dredging, scallop fishing etc.) and to satisfy regulatory requirements all cables are buried 4 to 6 feet into the sea bed. JULY 2021 | ISSUE 119

FEATURE Figure 3: Layout of a 650MW European Windfarm

SUPPLY CHAIN CRUNCH

Now with most utility scale offshore wind projects needing about 200KM to 250KM of inter array submarine cable and then at least two if not three export cables in the 60KM + range we see single projects requiring upwards of 450KM to 500KM of submarine cable. In fact, one of the current planned projects on the east coast is requiring 650KM of submarine cable split between inter array and export cables to build out to full capacity over a 2-year construction period. Prior to the advent of offshore wind farms major submarine cable projects in the US utility market were few & far between, maybe two or three projects a year for bay crossings, large river/harbor crossings and an interconnector or two across an inland waterway, consequently the standard cable-factory supply chain lead time and the limited contractor driven installation assets were enough to satisfy this somewhat constrained market. In the early 2000’s As the offshore wind industry ramps up in Europe and the Far East submarine cable factories around the world start to see orders in the 60KM, 70KM and up to 80KM length range, consequently production lines get full and lead times increase. Currently in 2021 typical lead times for say a two-to-three-hundred-kilometer cable order are in the region of two to two and a half years. Now add to that the fact that the developers on the US east deposit to a cable factory to secure a manufacturing slot needed coast are all targeting a similar Commercial two years hence before the finance package for the project is in Operation Date (COD) for their projects in the 2026 to 2028 place. All in all the current market situation makes Submarine timeframe and we have a supply chain choke point whereby three developers could be chasing the same manufacturing slot. Power cable a Hot Commodity! A further complication for the developer is that utility scale offshore wind farms have a Capex budget measured in the CAN YOU STORE MY SUBMARINE CABLE? PLEASE? Billions, the arranging of this type For as long as I can rememof financing is a complex process ber the US submarine power with banks, investors, insurance cable market has been a “Just In companies etc. all looking for Time” industry. The owner (US a guaranteed project outcome East Coast utility company) which often time delays the finanorders a submarine power cable cial closing or “Final Investment system on a “Supply & Install” Decision” (FID) until it’s too late basis from a cable manufacturer to book a manufacturing slot at a whose factory is either in Eucable factory. This situation causes rope or in the Far East region. added concern to the developer as (Up until about two years ago Figure 4: Typical Three Core Cable Design he or she must pay some form of there were no submarine cable

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

factories in the US with waterfront facilities capable of manufacturing long, continuous lengths of submarine cable, there is now one factory in the US with this capability based in South Carolina) The manufacturer would then fabricate the cable system in their factory, transfer the cable to a quayside storage tank or turntable, charter a freighter ready at the quayside when the cable is set, load the freighter, the freighter then transits to US East Coast where a pre-arranged installation contractor meets the freighter, unloads the cable onto an installation vessel (usually a barge) and sails straight off to the site to install the cable. A relatively straight forward logistics exercise that requires constant attention, but the cable goes from factory to operating site in one controlled operation. Add to this the fact that the cable for previous utility projects was a relatively simple configuration and was of a “Coilable” design and therefore could be stored and transported in a simple “Static Tank” which a contractor could fabricate from steel pipe stanchions and install readily onto a barge of opportunity for loading, transit & installation. A typical static tank design on a US DP Lay Barge with a high gantry for this type of operation is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Static Tank on Lay Barge – Courtesy of Caldwell Marine Figure 6: Hydraulic Turntable on Lay Barge – Courtesy of Durocher Marine

TECH CENTRAL 99 per cent of the world’s communications is carried on submarine cable networks, increasingly critical infrastructure because of the exponential growth of data. Bermuda’s centrality makes it the ideal landfall and interconnection point for cables between the Americas, Europe and Africa. The island’s government and regulators are working with global tech companies to establish an Atlantic digital hub here, ensuring speed and security for the data upon which we all depend.

THE MIDDLE OF EVERYWHERE . BERMUDA . 1-877-697-6228 / info@bda.bm / bda.bm

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE Along comes the offshore wind market and cables are larger, heavier and no longer coilable. Some export cables are now 230mm+ (9”) in diameter and weighing in at 100Kg/M (71lbs/ft) and are no longer of a coilable design but must be stored, transported and installed using a hydraulic turn-table or Carousel. Figure 6 shows a hydraulic turntable being loaded on a US installation DP barge. In offshore wind operations various factors such as time-of-year permit restrictions, balance of plant availability and other factors may lead the developer to request storage for say six months prior to installation. Factories do not want to tie up their quayside storage carousel with a cable system for six months as this will preclude the next cable in their order backlog from leaving the production line for delivery. This may drive the developer to require the supplier to store the cable at the delivery port in the US. Quayside turntables or carousels are basically non-existent at any ports along the US East coast. Also due to the size, weight & length of export cables storage turntables may have to be capable of handling up to 10,000MT of cable. This is a logistics problem that will have to be overcome should cable storage become necessary.

SUMMARY

The nascent US Offshore Wind industry is finally about to take off on the east coast and the submarine power cable industry will be an important part of the total supply chain. The US Department of Energy has recently issued its 2021 Offshore Wind Market Report. This report can be accessed at the following link: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-08/ Offshore%20Wind%20Market%20Report%202021%20Edition_Final.pdf

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

The current US administration views offshore wind as an important part of its overall clean energy policy and has called for the US to install 30GW by 2030. This ambitious goal will mean many more utility scale projects being built and many more submarine power cable manufacturing slots to be secured. STF Having joined his first Cable ship (CS Edward Wilshaw) in January 1974 at age 21 Bill Wall has over 47 years of worldwide offshore marine construction & development experience specializing in submarine cables and more recently the US offshore wind market. He has held positions ranging from sales, marketing, project management, contract negotiation, project development & project implementation in the marine industry for various companies including his previous positions at offshore wind developer Deepwater Wind, offshore transmission developer The Atlantic Wind Connection and US Wind Inc. in Maryland. He is currently the Project Director at LS Cable Systems America (LSCSA) in Fort Lee NJ. LSCSA is a leading supplier of submarine power cable systems to the Offshore Wind Industry. Footnote: Still having a great time in this ever-changing business, the submarine cable industry has been very good to me & my family over the years, and I must say thank you to my Wife Bernadette & my son Liam for putting up with all the travel & time away from home. Sorry guys, no retirement on the horizon yet! FOOTNOTES: 1. Although the East Coast is the current focus for the US offshore wind industry, the West Coast is also making its presence felt. Developers are busy planning floating offshore wind farms with Dynamic Submarine Cable connections in the deep-water sites offshore California. As can be seen below in the figures from the latest DOE market report BOEM has designated Call Areas offshore California and the Hawaiian Islands. 2. The Business Network for Offshore Wind (BNOW) a US based offshore wind industry advocacy group just held its first “in-person” conference since 2019 in Richmond VA. The IPF meeting over 4 days was well attended and had a very up-beat crowd looking forward to the busy year ahead.

ADVERTISE WITH US!

THE VOICE OF THE SUBMARINE CABLE INDUSTRY

FOR MEDIA & SPONSORSHIP INFORMATION VISIT: SUBTELFORUM.COM/ADVERTISING SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

EXPANDING OFFSHORE NETWORKS BY GREG OTTO AND KRISTIAN NIELSEN

ffshore energy fields are dynamic and evolve over the years - new production platforms come on station, old platforms are decommissioned, new turbines are installed, and older ones are decommissioned. In addition, facilities have ongoing projects and minor expansion. As energy companies look to become more efficient and address climate change, new digital technologies and applications are introduced, and new communication solutions become available, most notably wireless technologies such as 5G. Together, these factors drive the need to routinely expand and contract offshore energy networks, as well as modify them to address long term issues such as where “mid span” facilities are decommission causing a platform to platform network to fail.. When most of the early offshore oil and gas submarine cable networks were built, the business case was measured in terms of production gain (e.g., boe/day) that could be attributed to improved connectivity and new applications. Focus on fewer offshore personnel did not drive value as those beds would inevitably be replaced with other workers, such as maintenance and project personnel who would work to improve production efficiency (boe/day). Due to the high capital cost of fiber networks, the payback time exceeded ten years and required a base production of at least 40 or 50 thousand barrels per day per fiber attached facility. As such, the typical offshore facility identified for fiber connections would have at least a 100,000 boe/day production profile and at least a fifteen year expected life before serious decline in production. Today, these criteria are changing as companies learn more about how technologies such as automation, robotics, artificial intelligence and collaboration are critical to safe and reliable production while optimizing and maximizing efficiency. This

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

is further compounded as the cost to do offshore work in the energy industry increases with higher level standards and scrutiny towards safety and engineering. For example increased frequency and diligence for inspections and protective measures to manage corrosion and have driven higher costs and workloads which in return are driving use of robotics. Therefore, where older facilities would not have previously qualified for high capital fiber investments in the past, the growing workload has driven an expanding need for improved connectivity and has re-invigorated the desires to expand existing fiber optic systems. Companies like Tampnet in the UK and US have business models directly related to this where they look to expand fiber backbones using fiber and wireless technologies to serve the expanded customer market. Expansion of a submarine fiber network can take multiple forms and the method chosen is dependent upon several different factors including the original system design, the needs of demanding facilities, local considerations and obviously cost constraints. These considerations will be briefly explored in this paper.

EXISTING SYSTEM

Submarine fiber systems for offshore energy have several different decisions captured in their basis of designs including the choices below: 1. Trunk and Branch versus Platform to Platform ring; 2. Interplatform dependency and criteria for it’s use; 3. One or two cable landing stations; 4. Powered (repeatered) versus Passive (repeaterless); and 5. Fiber only versus a hybrid using fiber, microwave, 4G/5G. In addition, based on consideration of immediate and future potential needs, there are several additional specific

design decisions with respect to: 1. System routing and backbone modification allowances; 2. Fiber count and assignments; 3. Optical wavelength capacity and multiplexing; 4. Branching unit counts including futures and spares; 5. Power Feed sizing for powered systems; and 6. Requirements for fault tolerance to support “in service” modifications. The decisions identified above have a material impact on the capability to expand a submarine fiber system to additional facilities. Based on distance limitations, capacity, spare fibers, tolerance to outages and many other factors, the ability to expand a system can be heavily limited by engineering. And of course, the cost to expand is always a critical factor. In a trunk and branch system that is powered, branch lines are often limited between 75 and 100 km. With quality engineering, a branch leg might reach 150 km without having to implement costly branch leg repeaters and on facility power feed equipment. Similarly, a passive, unpowered system may only allow connections up to 400 km between the two ends of the optical pair which can cause issues for longer and farther-reaching offshore energy networks. Prior to starting any expansion design, a study of the existing system is critical to understand the options and limits available and how this may impact existing operations. This review will help determine the range of capital cost exposure, scope of work and the risks to the integrity of the existing system. Extending a system too far, thereby exceeding initial engineering limits, or creating an inter-facility dependency, may create an unacceptable risk to the existing customer base. Furthermore, the system design will determine if modifications can take place while maintaining some level of service for users or subject them to several days of outage.

INITIAL EVALUATION

Once it has been decided to look at ways to expand the system and an understanding of the current system has been completed, a set of conceptual ideas would be generated. This step should be accomplished in a few days or weeks and would not address, but may capture, any technical or other issues to be explored further. From this, a set of options should be developed based criteria including: 1. Facilities to be connected including location and priority or criticality; 2. Existing work in the basin which can be leveraged (reduce mobilization costs); 3. Service level requirements (availability, bandwidth, tol-

erance to outage factors); 4. Expected duration of connection (< 5 years, 5-10 years, 10 or more years); 5. Capital availability; 6. Desired “go-live” date; 7. Subsea design and conflict potential; and 8. Impact to existing system design and tolerances. The conceptual options developed during this initial phase can take on many different structures with some of the more common options being shown in Table 1 with target scenarios or conditions: Table 1 shows several different options which can be used to expand a submarine cable system for offshore energy. The table lacks specific quantitative numbers as these will be specific to each cable system and each expansion plan such that “definitive” rules are not possible. Instead, a full analysis has to be completed to determine what is viable. It would be common and expected that an expansion plan supporting multiple facilities might include some combination of the above options. For example, expanding a direct fiber connection to a new platform and then using 5G to reach several nearby facilities might be a valid option. Likewise, a multi-step process might be used such as using wireless until a fiber connection can be constructed. The set of options taken forward will give a range of capability, performance, time and cost. Options which clearly don’t meet the business conditions and needs should be removed from further analysis.

DETAILED ANALYSIS

The detailed analysis phase is about removing as much risk as possible from the next steps so that a final decision on how to expand the system can be completed with a high degree of confidence. The removal of risk comes from: 1. Removing unknowns through research; 2. Completing critical engineering to ensure technical limits are maintained; 3. Validating assumptions and technical understanding and addressing issues; 4. Collecting existing documentation on system, infrastructure, and facilities; 5. Component by component assessment as being fit for purpose and limits; 6. Assessing topside infrastructure on faculties including fiber, HVAC, power and space; 7. Physical testing of existing infrastructure (e.g., riser fiber); 8. Documenting collateral work and impacts such as building 4G/5G nodes; SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE 9. Determining if there are equipment availability or interoperability issues; 10. Documenting engineering and project process and responsibilities for facilities; 11. Validating & scheduling timelines with critical suppliers, facility operations teams; 12. Determine the need or value in completing any other system upgrades and refresh; and 13. Determining the backup connectivity solution. A thorough review of the above will identify several potential gaps and allow for correction and adjustment as to help drive a successful project outcome. The following examples highlight some of the challenges an expansion project might incur in the offshore energy sector: 1. In adequate optical budget due to length or loss attributable to specific components; 2. Mis understanding of system design and technical de-

tails such as branch leg design 3. Need for costly upgrades to HVAC and electrical systems on facilities to meet extra load; 4. Competing activities on facilities cause deferral of work and mis-aligned schedules; 5. Internal operations and engineering team processes integration and alignment; 6. Unique vessel requirements which are not properly captured and result in project changes; and 7. Non operable existing infrastructure such as failure to complete build or damage. Unlike a normal telecommunications cable, an offshore energy telecommunications system is being built into a facility whose core function is to produce energy. This production is generating tens to hundreds of million dollars of revenue a year. As such, the engineering and buildout of connectivity while important is not the first

Table 1 – Common Expansion Options Option

Supporting Conditions (many of which are inter-related)

Wireless Solutions

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Immediate connectivity needs Shorter term needs Older assets Lower service levels required Multiple assets Reduced capital availability Tough subsea environment

Direct Fiber Connection (trunk and branch)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Smaller number of new facility connections Newer and large-scale assets Existing fiber risers/umbilicals in place Potential to serve as a future connectivity hub Useable branching unit is existing Wavelengths or fiber capacity available

Modify a branch line

1. 2. 3.

One facility connection is required System is capable of multiple facilities on single branch Impacted facilities can accept integrity and reliability risks

Modify or reroute fiber ring (Platform to Platform ring)

1. 2. 3.

Need to remove existing facility from ring (due to age or other) Existing system is passive Limited fiber counts available

Subtend (extend fiber network on backside)

1. 2. 3. 4.

Facilities are within repeaterless reach of “Host” facility Facility can accept & tolerate dependency on “Host” Facility Host facility has excess capacity which can be shared Multiple facilities in area can be supported by a Host Facility.

Modify and extend Trunk close to new facilities with direct fiber connection

1. 2. 3.

New facilities need direct fiber connection (as noted above) Direct fiber connection is needed to trunk and cannot be made under existing design. Existing system has design allowance to add 100+ km of trunk length including power and optical budget.

New System

1. 2. 3. 4.

Existing system cannot meet totality of needs for new facilities Large expansion plans required Existing system is older and won’t have lifecycle Security issues dictate something different

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

priority and the projects have an obligation to align into the engineering and operations of these facilities with the least amount of disruption. Close coordination with the facility teams is an imperative to capture unique requirements early and address them including documenting them in supply contracts. Once the options have gone through this second level of vetting, a project concept can be selected and move forward. As part of this, a high level scope of work will be produced including the different workstream to be engineered and completed during the subsequent phases. This work could potentially be broken be broken into the following workstreams: 1. Submarine cable (e.g., main line, trunk modifications, branching unit install, branch leg); 2. Riser and umbilical (e.g., new riser or umbilical hook up); 3. Topsides construction and modifications (e.g., fiber, HVAC, electrical, 4G/5G, racks); 4. Dry Plant System modifications (e.g., SLTE , PFE, CLS); 5. Backup solution design; and 6. Commissioning and data migration. During this phase, a commercial approach should be selected with an option for the customer to purchase a fiber service, instead of with self-building. This is often a common approach where there are companies with this specific corporate objective that can help mitigate and manage the project and reduce long term responsibilities and there is “shared” infrastructure already in place.

ENGINEERING ANd CONSTRUCTION PHASE

By the time the project is in this final phase, engineering should be able to handle most issues. There will be multiple iterations during detailed planning and engineering however, most of these should be normal work activities. When working in field near the facilities, close planning with the subsea and facility teams will be required to define points of interface and expectations clearly. Each point of interface between different party ownership (e.g., umbilical termination assembly and submarine cable ends) will have to be fully documented at a physical and logical level including how connections are to be made. Early on, a schedule will need to be developed that includes addressing the timing and impacts to other systems users. For example, will the full system need to be taken offline or can a full outage be prevented by performing power isolation on the trunk when cutting in a new branching unit so that each terminal point is single end fed during the installation. Getting this work scheduled will take significant effort and multiple months of advance notification is required

to ensure overall project plans are met. Scheduling will need to be completed several months in advance with notifications and with preliminary timelines starting more than a year in advance. Existing customers may push for shifts in schedule to accommodate critical work they have planned and this will have to be managed. Actual construction will require the engineering and installation plans be pre-approved by all parties and that procedures are properly documented. Once working near facilities, their simultaneous operations and field entry along with other procedures will have to be adhered to and often taken an extra half day to complete. Also, vessels may have to be pre-approved to work in the defined areas.

CONCLUSION

Expanding a submarine cable system to meet growing and changing needs in the offshore energy market is necessary and possible. Evaluating the options takes a good understanding of the expectations for the connectivity as well as the capabilities of the existing system to find a viable solution which is within financial boundaries. The solution itself may comprise of multiple technology solutions based on the requirements. Mitigating risk including technical, financial, scheduling and procedural from the project happens during all phases as these projects are not the primary focus of the offshore energy industry and any major gaps will not be taken lightly. Project interruptions may result in material time and cost impacts up to and including stopping the project entirely. Properly working as a team with the relevant facility teams throughout the project is critical to finding a viable solution. STF GREG OTTO is the Technical Director for WFN Strategies and holds a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering. He has worked with multiple Oil & Gas companies during his career. Besides working for Shell Oil and BP, Greg was a co-founder of a consulting company and is currently working as an independent consultant. Greg was the program leader on technical and commercial matters on BP’s fiber in Gulf of Mexico Fiber and has supported similar projects in multiple countries. In addition, Otto is the President/CEO and firefighter/medic for a nonprofit company where he furthers the use his entrepreneurial skills and capabilities to help others. KRISTIAN NIELSEN is the Quality & Fulfilment Director at WFN Strategies. He is a Project Management Professional (PMP™) and ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 27001:2013 auditor and possesses more than 13 years’ experience and knowledge in submarine cable systems, including Polar and offshore Oil & Gas submarine fiber systems. As Quality & Fulfilment Director, he reviews subcontracts and monitors the clients and vendors, and is the final check on all delivered WFN products. He is responsible for contract administration, as well as supports financial monitoring and in-field logistics. He has worked in-field, at-desk and everywhere in between.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

PROTECTING A PROJECT FROM How Project Controls Can Prevent a Project From Turning Into a Shipwreck BY DON KLIKNA, VINCE NACEWSKI, CHRIS BENJAMIN, DR. KATE PANAYOTOU, AND JOANNA EL KHOURY

BY ANDERS LJUNG AND REBECCA SPENCE

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

BASICS OF A PROJECT

Projects are best described as having a defined start and end, to produce a specific product or service. Think of the Great Pyramids, The Roman Colosseum, The Eiffel Tower, or more recently an Olympic Swimming Pool. Each of these had to be designed and built to specific standards and serve a defined function. As Project Managers, we have been taught that the Triangle of Constraints consists of Scope, Schedule, and Budget. As we continue to develop Project Management methodologies, we’ve become more aware of the impacts Quality and Risk have on a project’s success. These have been added into The Triangle of Constraints, changing the triangle to something more akin to a star, pentagon, or pyramid (depending on the artist). There are several articles that argue for defining additional constraints such as Benefits, Safety and Resources. These should be considered critical to a successful project, but in most cases are incorporated in the previously listed categories and/or Project Execution Plan. For this discussion, we will focus on Scope, Schedule, Budget, Quality and Risk. Plus, the artwork to display the constraints can become rather creative. So, now what? You’ve identified an idea (Scope), you’ve set your timeframe to bring the idea to fruition (Schedule), and what you expect it to cost (Budget). Sprinkle in a little Quality Assurance and Risk identification and off you go. How do you know the project is on track? Projects do not have an Autopilot. They must be monitored regularly and guided along a set course, making adjustments as needed. As a Project Manager and part of a Project Team, what is your guide on the course to completing the project? How do you determine what course corrections need to be made and when?

of The Quebec Bridge failures of 1906 and 1916 or The Banqiao Dam failure in 1975 (Smith, 2017). However, project failure does occur. An improperly managed project will usually result in missing major milestones/deadlines, incomplete deliverables, cost overruns, quality issues, compromised safety, etc. Projects do not fail as a result of one mistake but are comprised of a series of smaller mistakes and defects that go uncorrected. Even successful projects can have missteps, which if addressed early, will have minimal to no impact on the overall project.

CONTROL METHODOLOGIES

Chances are, most projects will not have the historic failures of the likes SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE Lessons learned through project successes and failures have led to developing methods and strategies to monitor and keep projects on track. These tools not only track Scope, Schedule, and Budget, but should also include Quality, Change and Risk. These are Project Controls. Project controls are defined as: Comparing actual performance with planned performance, analyzing variances, assessing trends to effect process improvements, evaluating possible alternatives, and recommending appropriate corrective action as needed (Project Management Institute, Inc., 2013). There are endless configurations of tools, software systems, and strategies that can be implemented to help manage a project to a successful conclusion. The mix of tools and methods would depend on the product or service, the complexity of scope, available team of resources, duration, etc. Setting up project controls is an important step in building a successful project, however they need to be established at the outset of the project and scaled appropriately. As a project grows in complexity, the more robust the project controls should be. In typical engineering projects, a Project Execution Plan (PEP) would be developed, which outlines the tools and methods to be employed and validates the Scope, Schedule and Budget of the project. A baseline is then established for each of these constraints and control methods are defined to track against the baseline. Quality Metrics should be specified and measurable (for example: ASME or API specification for piping). A Risk Matrix should be created to determine various risks to the project and their potential impact. A Communications Matrix should be established to identify the key team members and stakeholders for the project and determine the channels of communication. A Procurement Strategy is also outlined for the project as well as a Management of Change (MOC) process that should be clearly developed and observed. Each of these tools needs to be updated on a regular basis, as defined in the PEP. A project’s schedule and budget baseline should not shift, without going through a proper Change Control process. The importance of maintaining the baseline is to ensure accurate tracking of actual performance against the forecasted performance. Any deviations from plan should draw the

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

team’s focus to verify if it is in line with anticipated performance or if it is an indication of an emerging issue.

EFFECTIVE USE OF PROJECT CONTROLS IN LARGE, COMPLEX PROJECTS

As a leader for permitting submarine cable projects in Australia and internationally, GHD has delivered ongoing support with impact assessments, permits and /approvals for undertaking marine route survey and cable installation. Globally, our team has contributed to the installation of approximately 60,000 km (37,000 miles) of submarine cables via permitting and approvals of the cables’ landing locations. In a recent project, GHD assisted with permitting of a subsea fiber optic cable from The Sultanate of Oman to Western Australia. Traversing the ocean with multiple landings, there were several national, regional, and environmental jurisdictions involved in the permitting process of the approximately 9,800km (6,100mi) long route. One of our first steps in defining the scope of work was to build a Permit Matrix. As we built the Permit Matrix, we also utilized a scheduling program to define the tasks, dependencies, and durations for each permit. We identified the responsible agencies and stakeholders for each of the tasks. By putting the Permit Matrix into a schedule format, we were able

to clearly define the Critical Path for each permit and the Critical Path for the overall project permitting effort. This provided us and the Installation Team a graphical representation of how each permit fit into the larger picture and how any shift in schedule (positive or negative) would impact the overall installation schedule. The Permit Matrix and permit schedule would be updated as tasks were completed and on a regular basis. We reviewed the schedule at these intervals, to verify the project was on track and if there was any shift to the Critical Path. Any shifts in the schedule were identified and addressed as a team, to understand the impact and if any actions are required as a result. The updated schedule was then integrated into the cable installation master schedule, which was again evaluated for any impact to the overall project. By providing project updates through the methods used, we helped to reduce Project Risk, reduced Commercial Impact, and improved Project Team Communication. In addition, we were able to redirect and focus on more complex landings, which if not identified and acted upon in a timely manner, could have had a cascading effect throughout the entire project impacting the construction schedule, budget and landing schedule.

CONCLUSION

Project Controls are more than a slide rule or plumb bob. There are countless combinations of tools and methodology that can be employed to make sure a project is on track. It is important to establish a baseline at the beginning of the project, otherwise you will not have the ability to measure the health of the project accurately. Ensuring the tools are “right sized” for managing and controlling the project, the more complex a project is, the more robust the tools should be. Remember, projects do not run on autopilot. They need someone at the helm, with the right set of tools in hand, guiding them through the waves and currents that can affect any project. STF With nearly 30 years of experience in telecom construction and Project Management, DON KLIKNA started his career by serving in the US Army as a Cable Systems Installer. He was formally trained as a telecommunications lineman, in addition to the installation, maintenance and recovery of a wide variety of telecommunication systems. After completing his military service, he continued working in the telecommunications industry for eight years as a Journeyman Lineman and Journeyman Splicer, before returning to school to earn his bachelor’s degree and MBA in Project Management. He then transitioned into managing offshore pipeline construction projects, process control systems, and Fire and Life Safety systems. Since joining GHD, Don continues to serve as a Project Manager, utilizing his experience to manage various Engineering Design projects. In addition to his degrees, Don is a certified Project

VINCE NACEWSKI is Technical Director / NA Mid-Con Environ-Contaminated Site Assess & Remediation for GHD, and has over 25 years of environmental, due diligence, permitting, and emergency response experience in the oil, gas, and chemicals industries. He has a solid working relationship with a variety of regulatory agencies across the US Southwest and brings strong expertise and connections with potential industrial customers of green hydrogen produced by EDFR. Vince is a leading Principal in GHD's Future Energy Initiative, supporting the decarbonization of traditional energy systems. Vince is adept with identifying and developing regulatory strategies to meet clients' needs across a broad range of regulatory bodies from local to national agencies. He has extensive experience in regulatory negotiations and is known for his experience in developing ideas to meet clients objectives, goals, and timing. CHRIS BENJAMIN is Environmental Engineer / Water Market Leader – Mid Con/ IAP Service Line Leader for GHD, and is an environmental engineer and Principal in our Houston office. Chris has successfully delivered and project managed a diverse range of environmental projects including Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), marine ecological surveys and integrated Environmental Management Systems (EMS) in the both public and private sectors. Chris has worked on multiple national scale marine infrastructure Projects with large socio-economic components and recently completed delivery of the Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Qatar National Master Plan, which covered all major infrastructure including the new Port. He has participated in management of environmental and social risk (including compliance with WBG and IFC requirements). He is experienced in development of environmental and socio-economic risk assessment frameworks, associated analysis and projections, development of monitoring plans and mitigation measures. His experience covers in depth ecological and natural resources studies, providing a strong base from which to assess natural resources socio economics. He has undertaken a decade of marine infrastructure EIA work in KSA. DR. KATE PANAYOTOU is Technical Director of GHD, located in our Sydney office, is a principal environmental scientist and is GHD’s lead for subsea cables. She manages multi-disciplined projects in various sectors including coastal and waterways, maritime and ports, transport, digital cables and oil and gas. She is a technical lead and has managed numerous projects including environmental and social impact assessments (ESIA) and permitting associated with subsea fibre optic cables, climate change adaptation and resiliency plans, environmental site investigations and stakeholder engagement. Kate sits on the UN Joint Task Force charged with coordinating the implementation of Smart Cables and is also Climate Champion for the PIANC Environmental Commission. Kate is an energic leader, mentor and advisor, she is passionate and dedicated to making a difference. She has worked in academia, government and consulting, with near 20 years’ experience working across the globe. JOANNA EL KHOURY is Senior Environmental Scientist of GHD and located in our Brisbane office, has more than 15 years’ experience in the environmental field and has been involved in numerous marine projects within Australia and the Middle East. These include environmental impact assessments, marine environmental baseline assessments, marine monitoring projects and options assessment projects. Joanna has worked with clients from various sectors including submarine telecommunications suppliers, port authorities, oil and gas, mining industry, heavy industries and government departments. Her submarine cable experience has further expanded her understanding of the environmental legislation and permitting process for cable installation. She has a breadth of understanding in the potential impacts from planned and unplanned activities associated with submarine cable installation, maintenance, and decommissioning.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

Artist’s Impression of the Original Siemens Brothers Site in 1863, by E Neale c 1927

OPERATION PLUTO (PIPELINE UNDER THE OCEAN): PART 1 - THE H.A.I.S. CABLE

n September 1941, the United Kingdom stood virtually alone against the advances of the Third Reich. They had survived the humiliation of Dunkirk, which Winston Churchill (1874-1965) described as ‘a colossal military disaster’. However, 338,226 Belgium and British troops had been rescued from the beaches between 26 May and 4 June 1940. This led to Churchill’s famous ‘We will fight them on the beaches…’ speech. Immediately afterwards, the conflict for control of the skies over Europe known as the ‘Battle of Britain’ ensued. It lasted from 7 June 1940 until 11 May 1941, when the RAF secured victory and the Luftwaffe reverted to night bombing raids on British cities. At this time, public opinion in the USA was strongly against joining the war in Europe, and it wasn’t until the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Sunday 7 December 1941 that this changed. The USA formally entered the war

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

BY BILL BURNS & STEWART ASH in Europe on 11 December 1941. Almost immediately, military strategists switched their thoughts from defence and began thinking about the liberation of Europe. To this end a British submarine cable manufacturing company with German roots would play a crucial role in these plans, and at the same time it would arguably take the first steps towards a subsea oil industry. That company was Siemens Brothers Ltd. The Siemens Brothers factory was established in 1863 by Charles William Siemens (1823-83), on land leased from the Bowater Estate, and the site is still situated on the south bank of the River Thames, at the border of Charlton and Woolwich in southeast London. It is bounded on the other three sides by Eastmoor Street, Warspite Road, and the Woolwich Road. Charles was born Carl Wilhelm Siemens on 4 April 1823 in Berlin, and he came to En-

gland in March 1848 to set up a branch of Siemens & Halske. This company had been founded in Berlin by his elder brother, Ernst Werner Siemens (181692), and Johann Georg Halske (181490). By 1858, Carl Wilhelm had registered the Siemens & Halske Agency in London, providing engineering consultancy to the emerging telegraph market. Its clients included the British Government, for both the terrestrial electrical telegraph and the pioneering submarine telegraph cables markets. At the same time, another brother, Karl Heinrich Von Siemens (1829-1906), set up a Siemens & Halske factory in St Petersburg to sell telegraph equipment and cables to the Russians. On 19 March 1859, Carl Wilhelm became a naturalized British subject under a warrant granted by Queen Victoria, changing his name to Charles William Siemens. This was in preparation for his marriage to Anne Gordon (18211901) on 23 July that year. She was the sister of Lewis Brodie Gordon (1815-76), Professor of Civil Engineering and Mechanics at Glasgow University. In 1865, a rift developed between William Siemens and Johann Halske over the submarine telegraph cable market, which Halske considered too risky, so they went their separate ways. Halske retained a large equity stake in the London company, but it was re-registered as Siemens Brothers. In 1869, Karl Hendrich came to join William in London, and he too would later become a naturalised British citizen. Siemens Brothers prospered and the site expanded to 35 acres (14 Hectares), employing around 10,000 people at its peak, second only to the Royal Arsenal in this part of London in the size of the site and its number of employees. Despite its strong German links, which would result in confiscation of share capital, internment and/or deportation of many German national employees during both World Wars, Siemens Brothers was responsible for several major technical developments that assisted the allies in both WWI and WWII. In the First World War, these included

field telephone systems, and trench cable, but perhaps the most significant development was ruggedised light bulbs for the Aldis and OL signalling lamps, used by the Royal Navy and the Army respectively in both wars. In the Second World War, the demand for telecommunication cable was again high because of bomb damage caused by German air-raids, but significant military projects included the ‘Clyde Loop’, that protected and kept the mouth of the River Clyde free of mines, and the High-Speed Motor Uniselector used in what was known then as ‘Chain Home’, a key element in the revolutionary Radio Direction Finding (RDF) system. RDF would later become RADAR (RAdio DeWWI Field Telephone and tection And Ranging). Siemens also the Aldis Lamp Bulb produced the extremely robust light bulbs for the Churchill tank, without which it would have been inoperable, due to the massive vibrations produced by its engine and drive system. However, perhaps the most audacious and ingenious of these products was the rapid development and manufacture, in complete secrecy, of the H.A.I.S. Cable for Operation PLUTO (Pipe Line Under The Ocean). The story of PLUTO begins in early April 1942, when Lord Louis Mountbatten (1900-79), the current Queen’s second cousin, and at that time Chief of Combined Operations, put a proposition to Geoffrey Lloyd (1902-84), the Conservative MP for Birmingham Ladywood, at that time Secretary for Petroleum and head of the Petroleum Warfare Department of the Ministry of Fuel and Power. Mountbatten’s proposal was that if a military campaign into Europe against the Nazis was to be successful, then there would need to be a pipeline across the English Channel to provide petrol, oil and lubricants in bulk to support the armed forces. Lloyd put this concept to the experts in his department and their consultants who had, prior to the outbreak of war, been working on pipelines across the Bristol Channel, the River Mersey, and the Thames. Their advice was that tidal and weather conditions in the English Channel, together with the risk of enemy action, would make it impossible to implement the proposal using any currently known land or sea construction method, which required pipes of 6” (inches) or more in diameter. However, the problem reached the ears of Arthur Clifford Hartley (1889-1960), SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE Chief Engineer of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Co Ltd. A few years earlier, his company had solved the problem of transportation of oil over a very hilly route by the development of a 3” pipe working at 1,500 pounds per square inch (psi) [103.4 bar]. Hartley recognised that such a pipe could deliver 100,000 gallons of fuel per day, the equivalent of 25,000 ‘Jerrycans’, the method used to refuel vehicles in the field. So, on 15 April 1942, Hartley made a suggestion to his Chairman, Sir William Fraser (1888-1970), who was also Honorary Petroleum Advisor to the War Office, that such a line could make a significant contribution to this problem and that if multiple lines were built it would have the major added advantage of not having all their eggs in one basket. One obvious problem was that the pipeline would need to be laid quickly to overcome the tides and currents, and ideally it should be laid in one operation without joints at sea. This would also have the advantage of limiting the risk of enemy action disrupting the operation. Hartley thought it might be possible to use submarine cable technology to contrive a cable without a core that could be deployed by a cableship. Fraser encouraged Hartley to develop his idea further and promised him his full support, so the next day Hartley called on the Managing Director of Siemens Brothers, Dr Henry Robert Wright (1879-1951). Wright thought that the concept was viable and immediately arranged for his Woolwich factory to design and make a 200-yard (183m) test length which could withstand an internal pressure of 500lb psi (34.47bar). It was manufactured from materials that were already available in stock and consisted of a 2” bore tube of hardened lead, reinforced with two layers of 10mm steel tapes, and over-armoured with galvanised steel wires. Production was completed within a week and a rigorous static testing regimen then commenced, which included strain and pressure tests to failure. The results were promising and demonstrated that a much higher working pressure of up to 750psi (51.7bar) could be achieved. The design of the cable was based on Siemens Brothers’ experience of developing gas-filled power cables, combined with their vast experience in making and laying submarine cables. The design concept was intended to deliver 30,000 gallons a day over the 20 nautical mile

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

The High Speed Motor Uniselector & The Churchill Tank

(nm) span from Dover to Calais. Just fifteen days after the initial contact with Dr Wright, Geoffrey Lloyd and the Services Chiefs involved in Operation PLUTO visited the factory to see the test cable coiled on board the Post Office cableship HMTS Alert (2) anchored off the Woolwich Works in the River Thames. The party included Lieutenant-General Bernard Law Montgomery (1887-1976). So pleased were they with the progress that Lloyd requested a short sample of the test cable that he could take to show the Prime Minister, Winston Churchill (1874-1965). Shortly after this visit instructions came from 10 Downing Street to proceed with the project with all speed. The Post Office, the Admiralty, Combined Operations, the War Office and Anglo-Iranian were called together at the Petroleum Division HQ to arrange the manufacture of further lengths and prepare a complete test programme. Anglo-Iranian undertook, as agents of the Petroleum Division, to develop, order, progress and supervise the whole of the pipe, pipe joints, pumping installations, etc. that would be required, and Siemens Brothers, without waiting for official orders or priorities, quickly produced more cable. Secrecy from the enemy was paramount and the cable was given the codename ‘H.A.I.S.’ an acronym derived from Hartley, Anglo-Iranian & Siemens. One of the most important features of this project was the necessity for all discussions, development and manufacture to be carried out in absolute secrecy, as if information were to have leaked concerning the nature of what was being planned, the enemy would have taken

Geoffrey Lloyd and the Service Chiefs, Including General Montgomery on the far left

any risk to prevent the cable being completed, or to destroy it when it was being laid in the English Channel. Elaborate precautions were put in place; one section of the Siemens Works was isolated and special passes were issued to every person, whether senior management or factory worker, who was required to enter the area. In addition, the staff engaged in the work were called into the factory library, where the Works Manager informed them not of the purpose to which the new cable was to be put, but of the fact that they were to be engaged in a job vital to the war effort. Therefore, it was of the utmost importance for them not to talk to anyone, either inside the Works or outside, concerning the work on which they were engaged. Everyone whom it became necessary to allow to enter the secure area was compelled to sign a statement signifying their complete understanding of the requirements of the Official Secrets Act. It appears that Government security officers were brought in to test the strength of the systems in place, and they made repeated but unsuccessful attempts to enter the restricted areas of the Works. After the war, Siemens was formally congratulated upon the efficiency of the precautions and safeguards that it had put in place and operated throughout the project.

The handling trial that had taken place on 1 May 1942 showed that the test sample could be coiled into a tank, loaded onto a cableship, and discharged back into the factory without impairing its performance. The next step was to manufacture a much longer length, deploy it, and test it in situ. The next section of test cable to be manufactured was 1,100 yards (1,006m) in length. On 10 May 1942, it was laid by CS Alert (2) in a loop off Chatham, in the River Medway. The ends were brought ashore to pumps that had been borrowed from the Manchester Ship Canal Co, and pumping tests at 600psi (41.37bar) were commenced. However, after two days faults occurred in the cable structure, so the cable was recovered, and the defective sections examined by the Post Office, Siemens Brothers and W T Henley & Co. Under normal circumstances, Henley’s would have been a major competitor of Siemens Brothers, but it was at Siemens’ suggestion that Henley’s was invited to join the project to provide additional manufacturing capability, as its factory at Gravesend was adjacent to the River Thames, which would facilitate transfer of the cable to cableships. This collaboration between commercial competitors would continue throughout Operation PLUTO. The cable failure mechanism was quickly identified as SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE the extrusion of the lead through gaps in the helical steel strengthening tapes, due to the two layers of tape being directly one above the other in certain places along the cable. To resolve the problem the combined resources of the Siemens and Henley’s Research and Design departments, together with the Post Office and the National Physical Laboratory, both of which had been brought in to assist, were mobilised. The result was that a new specification was drawn up within two days of the failure mechanism being identified. Lengths of this design were then ordered from both cable making companies. The new design comprised a central lead-tin-antimony pipe, with 2” internal diameter, wrapped with two layers of paper tape, one of cotton, four layers of steel tape (right hand lay), jute, helically lapped longitudinal steel wires (left hand lay) and further layers of jute covered with whitewash. The opposite lays of the tapes and the armour wires were designed to balance each other, making the cable torsionally neutral, so that it would not twist under handling or the influence of internal pressure. This design was calculated to allow for an internal pressure of 1,250 psi (86 bar). In June 1942, test lengths of both firms’ manufacture were laid by the Post Office ship HMTS Iris (2) in water of similar depth to the English Channel in the Clyde estuary. Siemens’ cable was the first to be deployed; it was laid over the bow with the ship steaming ahead and with the central tube containing air at atmospheric pressure. After the cable was recovered from a depth of about 33 fathoms (61m), it was pressurised to 90psi (6.2 bar), and it appeared that the cable was leaking, as after the cable had been filled with water, the applied test pressure would

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

not remain steady. In addition, on later examination, water appeared on the outside of the cable, seeping through the outer jute serving at several places along the cable length. These locations were stripped down to the lead tube, where it was found to have been pressed in on itself into a kidney shape. The reason for this was that the tensile load applied to the cable, both Cross Section of on the forward drum Deformed Trials engine and when passing Cable over the bow sheave, had deformed the circular lead tube into an oval, and the external hydrostatic pressure of the sea had then further crushed the deformed tube Because of this, some sea water was found to have been trapped in the space formed between the lead pipe and its steel tape protection. Under application of the test pressure, the lead pipe had begun to return to its circular form, and this pushed the trapped water through the outer armouring and serving, giving the impression of leaks. Due to the increasing urgency of the project, it was decided to go ahead with the lay of the Henley’s cable in parallel with this investigation into the assumed failure of the Siemens cable. It was again laid from the bow of the Iris (2), but this time with the ship going astern to simulate the less demanding over-the-stern laying conditions. In addition, the Henley’s cable was laid while filled with water pressurised to 100 psi (6.89 bar) to balance the external hydrostatic pressure. The complete success of this test lay, combined with the confirmation that the Siemens cable had not failed, was encouraging. The Siemens cable had undergone more severe conditions during its lay than the Henley’s cable, and in so doing had proved that the design was capable of withstanding much rougher handling. This gave the PLUTO team the confidence to make the decision to

Telescoped Section of the Final 2” H.A.I.S. Cable

manufacture six operational lengths of 26 nautical miles (48.23km), plus an additional length for a full-scale trial in the Bristol Channel, where conditions of tide and depth of water could be found that were more severe than those that would be encountered in the English Channel. When going into full production, it was necessary to evaluate the differences in the method of manufacture of lead tubes used by the cable making companies. Siemens believed that its technique, using a HMS Holdfast vertical press involving a longitudinal seam, while entirely satisfactory for extruding lead sheath over ordinary cables, might need some development to make it satisfactory for making the central tube for the H.A.I.S. Cable. Rather than run the slight risk of delay, it was agreed to use lead tube made in presses that avoided a longitudinal seam. Pirelli’s lead sheath, made in a continuous extrusion machine, was tested and proved satisfactory but before it could be adopted Pirelli’s works were taken out of operation by enemy action. As Henley’s lead tube, made in its ‘Judge’ straightthough presses, had been proved suitable, this type of press provided all the lead pipe used until the manufacturing capacity of further cable companies had to be brought in to produce the large quantities of cable eventually required. Lead tubes made by Pirelli’s continuous presses and by vertical presses (including those with longitudinal seams) both in the UK and the USA, were later used with complete success. Full scale production on this 2” cable commenced at the Woolwich Works on 14 August 1942, and the first completed 26nm (48.25km) length for the Bristol Channel trial, which had an overall diameter of 3” and weighed approximately 1,050 tons (1,067 tonnes), was ready for loading by 30 October. It had been quickly identified that no existing cableship could handle and deploy this extremely heavy cable, and that a vessel large enough to carry it would have too great a draft to get close enough inshore to land the cable ends. Therefore, the Admiralty and the Ministry of War Transport made available the SS London, a coaster of 1,500 tons. She was fitted out to lay

the H.A.I.S. Cable under the direction of the Director of Naval Construction and renamed HMS Holdfast. She was equipped with Johnson & Phillips cable gear, lent by the Post Office, and fitted with large cable tanks and specialist bow and stern sheaves. Siemens suggested to the authorities that Commander Henry Treby-Heale (18791966) should be made available for the laying operations and perhaps given command. He had, until recently, been in command of the company’s cableship Faraday (2), but she had been destroyed by enemy action off Milford Haven on 26 March 1941. Treby-Heale survived the attack and had then been seconded to the Royal Naval Reserve (RNR). He was an ideal choice, as he had great experience in the laying of heavy submarine cables, and so Siemens’ suggestion was readily accepted. This just left the problem of landing the shore ends. It was concluded that these needed to be landed by smaller vessels and a quick-coupling or joint was required to join the main cable to the shore end cable.

SHORE ENDS & CABLE COUPLINGS

Two satisfactory types of armoured joint were developed. The first consisted of a conventional submarine cable laidin ‘splice’, and the second comprised a mechanical coupling assembly. The splicing method was used for making up shore-end lengths and for repair work on long sections in storage tanks or on cableships, when in dock. Altogether, some forty splices were made by Siemens’ jointers, but the job proved to be too time consuming and demanded too greater a skill-set to be practicable when laying under fire, or for emergency repair operations; therefore, a mechanical coupling was essential. The design of such a coupling was a complex issue, and initial designs were prepared by the National Physical Laboratory, the Admiralty, the Petroleum Warfare Department and Siemens. After due consideration the Siemens design was adopted, and the company became the sole supplier of all couplings used in connection with Operation PLUTO. Each coupling was a complete pressure termination for a single cable end and could be fitted in about two hours by SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

The H.A.I.S. Cable Coupling

a skilled technician. Two couplings could then be brought together for a straight-through connection and assembly could be completed in about 30 minutes. Couplings were fitted to each cable end on the ship, on shore ends, and on spare sections for replacement or repairs. Meeting the requirement to quickly connect the H.A.I.S. Cable was greatly improved by using the couplings instead of the conventional in-line splice. The coupling design included bursting discs of thin copper, which were incorporated in the joint to hold the water pressure of up to 200psi (13.8 bar) that was used when laying the cable. Once the full length was assembled these discs could then be burst by increasing the internal water pressure, allowing flow through the completed pipeline. Static tests were continued on the 2” cables at the makers’ factories, and pressures in excess of 3,000psi (207 bar) were maintained for several months. Throughout the autumn of 1942, the Chiefs of Combined Operations conducted tests

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

with cable on drums at the experimental establishment at Westward Ho! in an endeavour to find ways of handling the shore ends with craft which could be operated at the beaches. The most promising method devised was to mount two cable drums with 1,000 yds. (915m) of cable on horizontal axles in a landing craft (type LCT 326) designed for landing armoured vehicles, with a view to paying the cable out over the bow ramp, which was lowered with the craft going astern. This method was used as part of the full-scale trial in December 1942.

THE BRISTOL CHANNEL TRIAL

With all the necessary building blocks in place, a fullscale rehearsal of Operation PLUTO took place on 29 December 1942, when a 30nm length of the H.A.I.S. Cable was laid across the Bristol Channel, and the shoreend cables were to be landed from LCTs at Ilfracombe and Swansea. Although the main cable was laid successfully at

5 knots by HMS Holdfast under the command of Henry Treby-Heale RNR, great difficulty was experienced in laying the shore ends, owing to the lack of manoeuvrability of the LCTs when going astern with heavy cable over the bow. Further development work would be required before the trail cable could be completed. As a result of a conference convened in January 1943 at Combined Operations Headquarters to evaluate the rehearsal, it was agreed to adopt an alternative method of landing the shore ends. This would employ the technique used by submarine cable suppliers of coiling sufficient cable horizontally in the hold of a self-propelled barge, specially fitted for paying out cable over the stern through hand-controlled compressor gear. Although this involved allotting precious Thames barges and their crews solely to this task, they were made available, and the shore ends for the trial system were completed by the end of March 1943. The National Oil Refineries at Swansea, the Royal Engineers (RE), and the Royal Army Service Corps (RASC) specially trained Bulk Petroleum Companies had meanwhile erected a pumping station on the sea wall at Queens Dock in Swansea and connected it to their petrol tanks. The RE, working with Combined Operations and the RASC, had, with the help of the Petroleum Board, erected a receiving terminal with tanks, pumps and loading racks in Watermouth Bay near Ilfracombe. After satisfactorily testing with water, the first petrol ever to be pumped through such a long sea line reached Watermouth on 4 April 1943. Geoffrey Lloyd was there to witness the first petrol arrive and a few days later he took a sample to the Prime Minister. It had always been the intention that the vulnerability of the cable to bombing or depth charges, and the possibilities of needing repairs should it be dragged by a ship’s anchor, would be evaluated. However, a German air raid on Swansea proved that the cable was not damaged by a bomb that exploded within 100 ft (30.5m) of it. Also, during a gale, a ship at the Mumbles anchorage dragged the cable with her anchor. HMS Holdfast was deployed and had no difficulty in locating the cable, cutting out the damaged portion and completing the repair with a new length of H.A.I.S. Cable. In order to prove the reliability of the cable and pumps, and to train the RE and RASC personnel who would be responsible for the operation, pumping continued day and night. Initially the system was operated at the design pressure of 750psi (51.7 bar) but later this was increased to 1,500 psi (103.5 bar). At this pressure, 56,000 gallons were pumped from Swansea to Watermouth each day and distributed by the Petroleum Board around Devon and Cornwall.

Without a shadow of a doubt the H.A.I.S Cable design had proved itself, therefore the detailed plans for Operation PLUTO could go forward at full speed, and we will tell you what happened next in November’s Issue. STF BILL BURNS is an English electronics engineer who worked for the BBC in London after graduation before moving to New York in 1971. There he spent a number of years in the high-end audio industry, during which time he wrote many audio, video, and computer equipment reviews, along with magazine articles on subjects as diverse as electronic music instruments and the history of computing. His research for these articles led to a general interest in early technology, and in the 1980s he began collecting instruments and artifacts from the fields of electricity and communications. In 1994 a chance find of a section of the 1857 Atlantic cable inspired a special interest in undersea cable history, and soon after he set up the first version of the Atlantic Cable website <https:// atlantic-cable. com>, which now has over a thousand pages on all aspect of undersea communications from 1850 until the present. Bill’s interest in cable history has taken him to all of the surviving telegraph cable stations around the world, and to archives and museums in North America and Europe. He has presented papers on subsea cable history at a number of conferences, and in 2008 he instigated and helped organize the 150th Anniversary Celebration for the 1858 Atlantic cable at the New-York Historical Society. Most recently, in 2016 he was involved with the celebrations in London, Ireland and Newfoundland to mark the 150th anniversary of the 1866 Atlantic cable. Since graduating in 1970, STEWART ASH has spent his entire career in the submarine cable industry. He joined STC Submarine Systems as a development engineer, working on coaxial transmission equipment and submarine repeater design. He then transferred onto field engineering, installing coaxial submarine cable systems around the world, attaining the role of Shipboard Installation Manager. In 1986, he set up a new installation division to install fibre optic submarine systems. In 1993, he joined Cable & Wireless Marine, as a business development manager and then move to an account director role responsible for, among others the parent company, C&W. When Cable & Wireless Marine became Global Marine Systems Ltd in 1999, he became General Manager of the engineering division, responsible for system testing, jointing technology and ROV operation. As part of this role, he was chairman of the UJ Consortium. He left Global Marine in 2005 to become an independent consultant, assisting system purchasers and owners in all aspects of system procurement, operations, maintenance and repair. Stewart’s interest in the history of submarine cables began in 2000, when he project managed a celebration of the 150th anniversary of the submarine cable industry. As part of this project, he co-authored and edited From Elektron to ‘e’ Commerce. Since then, he has written and lectured extensively on the history of the submarine cable industry. From March 2009 to November 2015, he wrote Back Reflection articles for SubTel Forum. In 2013 he was invited to contribute the opening chapter to Submarine Cables: The Handbook of Law and Policy, which covered the early development of the submarine cable industry. To support the campaign to save Enderby House—a Grade II listed building—from demolition, in 2015 he wrote two books about the history of the Telcon site at Enderby Wharf on the Greenwich Peninsula in London. The first was The Story of Subsea Telecommunications and its Association with Enderby House, and the second was The Eponymous Enderby’s of Greenwich. His biography of Sir John Pender GCMG The Cable King was published by Amazon in April 2018.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

IRELAND, AN OVERVIEW OF ENERGY CONNECTIVITY BY DEREK CASSIDY

reland, an island of the northwest coast of Europe has been the centre of literature culture and its capitol, Dublin is a UNESCO City of Literature since 2010. Its deep-rooted history in the art of storytelling and writing is world renowned. In the Middle Ages it was called the land of saints and scholars and it had the title of the saviour of Europe in the dark ages due to the prolific writing and manuscript production that occurred at this time. Two perfect examples are the books of Durrow and Kells, both national artifacts and often called national monuments., But being an island also has its issues with regards to energy supply. In the Middle Ages and all the way up to the 20th century the burning of turf or peat in the form of rectangular sods was a main source of material for fires and energy production and steam generation. Ireland was plentiful in its supply of peat due to the vast boglands that straddled the country from east to west in the great central plain. Another source of energy was water. The introduction of the water wheel into Ireland in the 1600s helped start a revolution in water wheel design. The use of water wheels to supply energy to the many local and cottage industries flourished and at one stage, Ireland had more water wheels than the whole British Isles combined. These water wheels or water mills existed all the way up to the

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

1940s when electrification soon took over. This saw a quick decline in their use and the many paper mills and other industries that relied on water for their energy production quickly saw a rapid decline due to the change in working practices and energy production that came with electrification. Ireland also had coal, and some said plenty of it, but unlike the UK and Europe, the coal seams in Ireland were shallow and were barely a metre thick in places, which made any coal mine unworkable and unprofitable. It was the latter that made the idea of coal mining in Ireland a near impossible task. However, that is not to say that Ireland had no mines, there were some pockets that did produce some coal and anthracite, but these were for industrial purposes and not for general use or vast industrial production that the coal mines in England and Wales produced for. In Ireland it was generally accepted that mining for coal was totally uneconomical, so today the vast majority of coal seams still lie where they are, untouched by human industrial endeavour. If we look at the supply of energy in Ireland, in the middle and soon to be industrial ages, we can always start at the use of peat and wood, as Ireland had plenty of both. Water, for the turning of water wheels for all types of industrial productions from milling wheat and paper making was first used in the late

19th century fir the production of energy for lighting systems on private estates. These hydro systems were rudimentary in design and in private ownership and few in number. However, with the establishment of the Electricity Supply Board (ESB) in 1927 and the building of the first hydro-electric dam and electric generation station on the River Shannon, at Ard Na Crusha, in 1929 specifically for domestic and industrial use, saw the start of the era of electrification of Ireland on a socio-economic direction. This city and rural electrification project, designed to bring Ireland into the 20th century, begun in 1929 but it took nearly 40 years to finally electrify the country and connect all urban and rural dwellings and industrial premises. This was well behind other countries, but the building of the Shannon Hydro-Electric System designed by both German and Irish Engineers was seen as a model for future hydro-electric systems around the world. Ireland did have a basic gas supply system in the major centres of population like Dublin, Cork, Belfast, and Limerick which was produced from coal and the remnants of these gas works can still be seen in the skeletal gasometers across the cities of the British Isles. Some of these structures have formed the basic skeletal structure that office space or student accommodation has been built around, just like in Dublin which is used for student accommodation for the local University. However, it must be noted that any industry in Ireland that generated energy and required coal as the source material, including the production of gas, was done with coal imported from the Britain. As Irish coal seams were not capable of extraction, so the importation of coal was the norm. The production of energy in Ireland, carried out by the state authority, the ESB, is generated with the following fuels or methods of electrical energy creation, in order of highest use, Peat, Hydro, Oil, Gas and Coal. The use of oil, gas and coal meant that these materials had to be imported from abroad, other than peat or water, Ireland had no natural energy sources it could rely on. However, that was to change in 1973. In 1973 during research carried out for oil, gas was found in an area 50 miles of the south coast of Cork. This was the first find of gas in Irish territory, either land or sea and it led to the development of a new Irish Statutory body called Bord Gáis Éireann or the Gas Board. This gas find helped to fulfil the gas supply needs of Ireland from 1975 to 2020 when the gas reservoir was depleted. The Kinsale Gas Field was the first home grown find of any natural fossil fuel, other than peat or coal. The idea that

Ireland could now use its own reserves of gas to supply the nation, other than peat, was the next step in the revolutionary progression in energy creation since 1929 and the Ard Na Crusha Hydro-Electric Scheme on the River Shannon. As time went on the idea that Ireland had to secure its energy sources and establish a system where energy creation was put on a secure footing was tested during the 1970s with 1973 oil crisis and the 1979 energy crisis. As most of the ESBs generating stations used Water (Hydro) or Peat to help generate electricity, other generating stations, that used oil and gas were put under pressure due the 1970s and the need to find other supplies of oil and gas from non-volatile areas was needed. The idea that Kinsale could not fulfil indefinitely was known and news back-up reserves or supplies were needed. In early 1992 an agreement with the UK government was reached in which Ireland could connect to the North Sea Gas Fields directly through the UK. This was the first gas interconnector between Ireland (ROI) and Scotland, and it helped to supplement the gas field supplies that were being fed from Kinsale. It was completed in 1993 and in 2004 a second gas interconnector was established between Ireland and Scotland. This time the pipeline landed in North County Dublin as opposed to the first one which laned in South County Dublin. These two gas interconnectors help to supply Irelands need of gas for energy and electrical production. In 2013 the Irish state under the auspices of Eirgrid, a subsidiary of the ESB, agreed a new contract with the authorities in Britain where a new high voltage direct current (HVDC) electrical connection between Deeside in Wales and Rogerstown in North Dublin would soon be delivered. The East West Interconnector Cable (EWIC) was a system made up of two HVDC cables along with a 48-fibre optical submarine cable package. The optical fibre would be used as monitoring for the HVDC cable as well as being managed by a Telecommunications Company for the sole purpose of offering dark fibre or managed services across the communication networks. Technically this cable offered both an electrical energy connection and also a submarine cable for communications purposes. Apart from the gas interconnectors built in 1993 and 2004, this was the first HVDC electrical interconnector built between Ireland (ROI) and Britain. However, in 2001 the Moyle electrical Interconnector was built between Scotland and Northern Ireland. This interconnector consists of two (36.8Km) separate HVDC cables, even though it traverses the Irish Sea it still connects countries within the United Kingdom (UK) and not

The Kinsale Gas Field was the first home grown find of any natural fossil fuel, other than peat or coal.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE until the 2010, the Moyle interconnector only supplied electricity into the Northern Ireland Market. However, after 2010 when the ESB purchased Northern Ireland Electricity the Moyle interconnector was connected inti an all-Ireland electricity supply market. In the early 2000s there was a push to interconnect the power systems of both Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland. Firmus Energy established in 2006 and ESB NIE established in 2010. Bord Gáis Éireann and the ESB had both established companies in Northern Ireland helping to create an all-Ireland energy system where security of supply was the main reason behind these two interconnection projects.Ireland could now be viewed as an all-Ireland energy supplier and a single electrical generation footprint. In 2018 a third gas pipeline was established between Scotland and Northern Ireland. It was seen as a diverse and protected link offering a twinning to the two already existing submarine gas pipelines connecting Ireland to Scotland. This new gas pipeline would help to offer resilience to the existing gas supplies and assist in gas delivery if either or both of the other gas pipelines ruptured. In 1996 a natural gas field or gas reserve was discovered 83km or 52 miles off the coast of County Mayo. It was designated the Corrib Gas Field and production of the gas head and extraction systems was started in 2004. The gas terminal station County Mayo will control the extraction of gas and scrub it for use within the energy supply system in Ireland. The design is based upon existing systems in Norway and Scotland where there is no need for a gas platform to carry out the extraction and scrubbing of gas making it a useable source of energy. The Corrib gas field is high in methane and ethane gas and low in dopants and impurities such as carbon dioxide hydrogen sulphide, making is a relatively clean gas. However, the gas still needs to go through a process to make it a viable and clean source or energy. In 2015 the first gas was produced for commercial production and pumped into the gas system for use with the national grid and other uses to produce energy, heating, and transport. Technically the Corrib Gas field is Irelands fourth gas pipeline and second only natural gas find since Kinsale. Ireland of 2020 had come along way from a country that imported most of its energy requirements through the gas interconnections with Scotland and the electrical interconnect with Wales. Its existing gas supplies in Kinsale has been used up and this gas field was in the motion of being decommissioned. Its reliance on coal importation had been reduced due to government action and making coal burning in cities such

as Dublin, Cork, and Limerick illegal. The smokey coal ban came into effect in the 1990s and other forms of fuel were required for heating and energy requirements of the state. Wind was another source of energy production and over the last 20 years Ireland had established well over 300 windfarms on the island. However, in 2004 a new windfarm was commissioned of the coast of Arklow on the Arklow Bank which was a natural sand bank that runs the length of Ireland from Dublin down to Wexford and slightly into the Celtic Sea. These sand banks, running a total of 102 miles in length create a natural barrier between the Irish Coast and the Irish Sea. The depths on either side pf the banks can be as deep as 100Metres but the banks themselves can be a shallow as 2 meters and deep as 20 meters. They became the ideal platform for a new offshore windfarm built off the coast of Ireland and commissioned and it is Irelands only off-shore windfarm in operation today, nearly 17 years later. The use of submarine electrical power cables is not new in Ireland as all the islands off the coast all have their own submarine electrical connections and the ESB have their own specialist department that look after all of these connections and look at future connectivity projects. But it does not stop here, as Ireland moves inti the third decade of the 21st century that are projects that are under progress. There is a new electrical interconnector between designed route analysis and seabed surveys have already been carried out. The Greenlink project will connect the Great Island generation station in County Wexford with the Pembroke generating station in South Wales. This project is similar to the EWIC design and will connect the two National Grids in Ireland and the UK providing a two-way transmission system capable of supplying each other’s national grid with electrical energy. This project, although underway will see the interconnector come into full production in 2023. Another electrical interconnector is also in progress. This new HVDC interconnector will be from Cork to Brittany in Northern France and is Irelands first European interconnector. It is called the Celtic Interconnector and is due to be commissioned in 2026. This new international European HVDVC interconnector will supply approximately 700MW of energy inti each national grid and will help to stabilise the energy requirements and supplies of both countries. The use of solar and wind energy will enable the two national grids to reduce their carbon footprint by utilising each other’s natural ability to create energy though these natural resources, wind in Ireland and solar energy in France.

Wind was another source of energy production and over the last 20 years Ireland had established well over 300 windfarms on the island.

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

As Arklow Bank is Irelands only operating off-shore wind farm, the ESB looked at other wind off-shore generating projects. The Moneypoint generating station in County Clare is Irelands only coal burning generating station. It is undergoing a refurbishment project at the moment and during this stage a new off-shore wind energy project will be established where new off-shore wind farms will be built off the coast of Clare and connected directly into the Moneypoint infrastructure for forward onward transmission into the national grid. This new project was established in 2020 and got Government approval for funding in 2021. The project will consist of a set of wind farms that will be interconnected into a new off-shore energy producing wind farm and its electrical energy production will be directly fed into the Moneypoint generating station. As the country moved towards a green energy supply there are other wind farms on the horizon. A new windfarm is being developed off the Dublin coast on the codling bank, part of the great sand banks that stretch from Dublin into the Celtic Sea. This project has already carried out seabed surveys for the submarine power cable connectivity and is selecting the location of the windfarm turbines. Just like Arklow Bank and the future Moneypoint windfarms, the Codling Bank windfarm will generate pure green energy and through its interconnection with Eirgrid will supply electrical energy, all green, into the Irish national grid. Valentia Island, famous for its link with the first successful trans-Atlantic cable of 1866 and also the world’s oldest, still functional submarine cable station is also looking to the future with regards to being self-sufficient with its energy supplies. As the island is working towards achieving the World Heritage Status for the technological advancements in telegraph communication and developing the cable station into a science and technology hub for the advancement of innovation and technology design and future educational purposes. Valentia Island is working to become a centre of science and technology within the community and in conjunction with the new submarine cable it is working to help bring a new high speed ethernet link to the island, reconnecting Valentia Island to the communication world. But it’s also the natural resources of wind and wave energy that are abundant around the island and within its off-shore environment. Valentia is working on anew venture with a consortium to develop these natural resources and build a new joint windfarm and wave generation network that will be capable of supplying the islands full energy needs and also supplying the

vast majority of the generated energy into the national grid. The project is at an advance stage and is nearly ready to go into design and installation stage with all permits received and permissions granted. When in full production the wind farm/ wave generating project will be Irelands first joint venture with the local community developing the local natural resources to produce pure green energy for national and local level and use. However, the use of wind, wave, and tidal movements to help create energy and the use of submarine cable technology to understand these movements and develop research into new proposals is already under way. Off the coast of Galway there is a large research facility that is totally marine based. The area is managed by a consortium of educational institutions from Galway and is operated by the Marine Institute. The Smart Bay project allows users to research the possibilities of wave and tidal energy creation, sea floor and seismic movements, marine environment and its possible uses for future research and hydrogen extraction etc. The ability of the Smart Bay project to offer this solution is invaluable as it is located in Galway Bay, in the area of research; the Marine Environment where actual research working with real time measurements and environmental changes can help deliver results that other institutions can only achieve under certain conditions. The future development of the natural marine resources is constantly being reviewed with regards to technology and science. Ireland is moving to a new era of green energy creation with its existing on-shore wind farms, helping to create 38% of Irelands energy needs and moving towards new off-shore wind farms and community driven projects to help deliver newer forms of green energy. The era of energy isolation is well, and truly over as new interconnects come online which will help deliver a more sustainable and secure energy solution for the island of Ireland. STF

Ireland is moving to a new era of green energy creation with its existing on-shore wind farms, helping to create 38% of Irelands energy needs

DEREK CASSIDY is doing a PhD in the field of Optical Engineering; Waveguide creation and Wavelength manipulation with UCD, Dublin. He is a Chartered Engineer with the IET and Past-Chair of IET Ireland. He is Chairman of the Irish Communications Research Group. He is also currently researching the Communication History of Ireland. He is a member of SPIE, OSA, IEEE and Engineers Ireland. He has patents in the area of Mechanical Engineering and author of over 30 papers on Optical Engineering. He has been working in the telecommunications industry for over 27 years. Derek holds the following Degrees; BSc (Physics/Optical Engineering), BSc (Engineering Design), BEng (Structural/Mechanical Engineering), MEng (Structural, Mechanical, and Forensic Engineering) and MSc (Optical Engineering).

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE FEATURE

THE TIME FOR A FUTURE-FORWARD ASIAN NETWORK IS NOW BY PAUL ABFALTER

he global events of the past year have provided a long list of factors impacting the world’s cable infrastructure. Shifts in policy and regulation in Asia-Pacific have resulted in a range of trans-Pacific subsea cable reconfigurations in the telecommunications market. The Pacific Light Cable Network (PLCN), Bay to Bay Express (BtoBE), and Hong Kong Americas (HKA) systems are all in the process of reconfiguring their routes. And, more than that, the environmental constraints in the Asia Pacific, shallow water fishing, and the risks of natural disasters increasingly reshape the landscape that telecommunications organisations are designing their plans within.

THE REACTION TO THE PANDEMIC

These changes have occurred before we even consider the COVID pandemic. 18 months ago, at a network operator level, we saw the pandemic’s impact initially through skyrocketing demand for data as people around the world began working remotely. The impact was enormous. International capacity use increased far greater than forecasted, driven by upticks in use of video for work, play and education, and large-scale SaaS adoption. Upstreaming capacity demands continue to hit the network hard, due to an increase in video calling, video-conferencing and gaming. Our core subsea network usage rose the most in March 2020, seeing a 16-percentage point increase in over a single

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

month. Similarly, IPVPN growth increased by 28 per cent in the same month. But, interestingly, IPVPN has continued to increase over time to hit new heights – equal to a 37 per cent increase from 2020. And yet, under this enormous pressure, our infrastructure stood up well to enable people around the globe to connect with one another to live, work, and play.

AMID CONSTANT CHANGE, DEMAND REMAINS CONSISTENT

Connectivity into and within Asia is no longer just focused on the traditional hubs but is diversifying. While markets like Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore have traditionally seen the most connectivity ingress, alternative cities are experiencing increased demand for connectivity. Yet, not everything is changing. Demand for data, digital experiences, and diversity continue to increase every year. And telecommunications organisations must create longterm, proactive plans for subsea, terrestrial, and satellite networks to meet and exceed those requirements. At Telstra, we believe there are three key focus areas telecommunications providers need to consider for the future of Asian infrastructure: • The evolution of infrastructure in the world’s biggest connectivity hubs • The expansion of connectivity to new markets • The enhancement of existing infrastructure to optimise connectivity

Proactive connectivity strategies are increasingly looking to emerging markets to realise new growth, access new revenues, and reach new eyeballs. Across the industry, we’re seeing increased investment in capacity and infrastructure in key markets including Taiwan, Philippines, Australia, and South Korea.

BUILDING ON SUCCESS IN THE PHILIPPINES

EVOLUTION

While the hubs of Asian infrastructure are expanding, the traditional priority markets of Hong Kong, Japan, and Singapore remain critical to the future of global connectivity. They became the centres of Asian connectivity for good reason, and will continue to underpin Asian connectivity strategies. That’s why we must not rest on our laurels in these locations and continue to invest in these connectivity hubs, reinforcing global demand and providing more options and more access for customers looking to connect into, and within, Asia.

INVESTMENTS IN HONG KONG

Hong Kong remains a central part of intra-Asian connectivity, as well as trans-Pacific routes. Currently, the Asia-America Gateway (AAG) cable is the primary direct route between Hong Kong and the US, where Telstra is the largest investor and holds more than 20 per cent of the cable.

MAINTAINING STRENGTH IN INTRA-ASIAN CONNECTIVITY

We are focusing investments in intra-Asian assets and have more than 100Tbs design capacity across the East Asia Crossing (EAC) and City-to-City (C2C) cables, while boosting backhaul and diversity options across Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

EXPANSION

New centres of Asian connectivity are emerging beyond the traditional hubs of Singapore, Japan, and Hong Kong.

Telstra is the largest foreign international connectivity telecommunications provider in the Philippines. That accolade was bolstered by record capacity growth into the Philippines in 2020, driven by our customers’ recognition of the opportunities available in the country. That’s why we are reaffirming our commitment to connectivity into and within the Philippines with a range of investments. We have refreshed C2C segment 5 and 6 connecting Singapore to the Philippines and the Philippines to Japan to extend cable life, including the installation of 14 new repeaters in the past year. We’ve also expanded our foundations in the country through creating a second primary point of presence as well as two new routes to boost diversity options between the C2C and EAC landing stations as well as our city PoPs. Following our new joint venture with Converge ICT, the up-and-coming third-largest fixed line provider in the Philippines, Telstra can also offer flexible terrestrial and cable routings in and out of the country.

THE INCREASING IMPORTANCE OF TAIWAN

Taiwan is increasingly becoming critical to many Asian and intra-Asian connectivity plans, mirroring its economic growth. The island’s economy grew at its fastest pace in more than a decade in the first three months of 2021 based on strong demand for its hi-tech exports. And we can attest to the scale of that growth. We saw record capacity growth in the country over the second half of 2020, ultimately commissioning more than 15 terabytes of lit and design capacity to meet surging demand. By the end of the year, that investment made Telstra responsible for approximately 40 per cent of ingress capacity into Taiwan. We don’t expect there to be any slowdown either. Not only is Telstra the landing party into Taiwan for the Hong Kong and America (HKA) cable, we will also be the only carrier with capacity into Taiwan. We own a ½ fibre pair on the route and will also deploy state-of-the-art spectrum sharing technology, which will sate some of the booming demand for trans-Pacific connectivity as well as providing a direct route between Taiwan and the US. We’re also investing in new on-net fibre overland routes SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE through the East Coast of Taiwan to boost latency and diversity options, boosting resilience and choice for carrier partners and customers.

BOOSTING GLOBAL CONNECTIVITY DOWN UNDER

Telstra’s strength in Australia has traditionally been domestic, terrestrial infrastructure. But more and more, Australia is being used as a new route to Asian markets as enterprises and OTTs look to realise the benefits of the country’s increased stability, diversity, and performance. At the heart of this is the development of the Southern Cross Cable Network (SCCN) - of which Telstra is now a 25 per cent owner - and Southern Cross Next (SCX) routes, with SCX due to be ready for service in early 2022. Similarly, new developments continue to progress. Telstra is committed to connectivity across Australia’s frontier – connecting Darwin into Singapore, Indonesia and the US – with more announcements coming soon.

EXPANDING SOUTH KOREA’S CONNECTIVITY

South Korea is a mature market when it comes to technology and innovation but is still emerging as a connectivity hub. Yet, its growth has been exponential; Telstra has seen capacity growth in South Korea of 377 per cent over the past four years alone. Telstra is responsible for more than a third of all connectivity to and from South Korea across Asia and is continuing to invest in infrastructure. We currently operate three cable landing stations for EAC, C2C, and the Reach North Asia Loop (RNAL) cables, supported by six points of presence in Seoul and one in Busan.

ENHANCEMENT

But it’s not only new investments and cable developments that will form the basis of connectivity plans for the future. That’s why Telstra continues to optimise and improve existing infrastructure with new innovation to future proof the global network and ensure the performance and efficiencies customers expect.

BOOSTING CAPACITY OF EXISTING ASSETS

First and foremost, that means getting the most out of what we already have. Take our Technology Uplift Program, which enables us to upgrade up to 115Tbps of capacity using existing chassis. We’re doing that through innovative solutions to optimise what our networks are capable of.

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

UPGRADING OUR SUBSEA ASSETS

We’re also committed to investing in upgrades across our subsea assets. Over the course of the past financial year, a key program of work has seen an improvement of 70Tbps at a total global network level, comprised of 34Tbps increase in subsea capacity and 36Tbps of terrestrial capacity.

BOOSTING BUILD TIMES

Finally, we are investing in creating new routes and improving performance across the most popular routes and nodes in our Asian network. We are building new high-speed connections through South Korea and Japan based on a minimum of 1.2 terabyte optical highways, equipped with 100G port interfaces. The idea is to provide a fast and wide transport network where businesses need it most, boosting latency and access to bandwidth for customers and reducing costs for carriers.

THE TIME FOR A FUTURE-FORWARD ASIAN NETWORK IS NOW

There is an understandable desire to stand and reflect on all the change and disruption we have faced in recent years. But it’s clear that, while much of the world remains at a standstill in some respects, the demand for data is undiminished and new, proactive strategies for the future of global networks are required. Telstra’s strategies cater for three core focal points for our future networks: the evolution of infrastructure in the world’s biggest connectivity hubs, the expansion of connectivity to new markets, and the enhancement of existing infrastructure to optimise connectivity. Telstra has a long history providing just that. We have more than 70 years’ history of connecting Asian countries and businesses. We were a leader in Asia in the first days of international voice, in the first days of international data, and now in the first days of cloud computing and we are committed to invest in the future of Asia’s networks to future proof connectivity for many more years to come. STF PAUL ABFALTER has been based in Hong Kong for more than a decade. He leads a sales and business development team accountable for Telstra’s largest international territory, and its wholesale business globally. This includes supporting the world’s largest cloud & content customers. Paul has played a key leadership role in reigniting and executing Telstra’s global growth strategy through projects including leading the restructure of the Reach joint venture, re-entering India and South East Asia, the transformation and sale of HK mobile carrier CSL, and listing PRC portal Autohome Inc on the NYSE. He was also one of the key leaders on the Pacnet acquisition and fully responsible for integrating Pacnet into Telstra: Pacnet was Telstra’s largest acquisition since 2002. Paul holds Bachelor degrees in Economics and Law from the University of Adelaide, and is a graduate of the Advanced Management Program at Wharton.

STAY CURRENT

play for offshore wind. Climate Change

While the telecom industry has been operating for quite some time and has made significant advances in our knowledge of benthic marine environments, climate change is one issue that we will have to face in conjunction with all offshore maritime industries and the wider world. The push for projects concerning environmental monitoring and communications is spreading throughout the industry, with a current focus on issues relating to marine megafauna and fisheries targets. Initiatives such as SMART cables and similar monitoring systems in offshore wind will go a long way towards narrowing existing knowledge gaps and ensuring that we have lengthy and reliable data records as our seas undergo this period of immense change. As mentioned previously, interdisciplinary initiatives such as ROSA will be integral in encouraging data sharing and data tracking as some common fisheries and conservation target species exhibit spatial and temporal distribution shifts. By working together, industry and local stakeholders can broaden our collective knowledge of how the oceans around us will be impacted by climate change related phenomena. As such, we can hope to mitigate issues to the best of our abilities and focus on nurturing sustainable growth of both telecom and offshore wind industries, keeping the world connected and providing reliable sources of clean, renewable wind energy. Similarly, collective knowledge on natural system faults, both for subsea cables and offshore wind infrastructure, will contribute to our understanding of how best to shift future engineering and operation innovations to cope with an increase in strength and frequency of inclement weather events and other climatic factors. Summary

those of public perceptions, will help to pave the way for community buy-in and long term success of these installations. In the past century and a half, humans have come to understand a significant amount about our oceans and how they function. Through the course of hundreds of subsea cable installations, the telecom industry has been at the forefront of uncovering benthic knowledge. Our understanding of seafloor hydrology, shifting sediments, ecological interactions, and even earthquakes and tsunamis has greatly increased. By taking what we have learned and applying it to the burgeoning offshore wind industry, we can best position ourselves to reap the rewards of an extensive renewables network while mitigating social, environmental, and ecological impacts. We have extensive local fisheries and communities networks, professional guard vessels and crews, broad knowledge of the marine environmental and applicable requirements and legislation, and, above all, we have a vision for long-term, sustainable success in harnessing our renewable natural resources for clean energy. To our partners in the offshore wind industry— we are ready and willing to help you reach your goals. Emma Martin is the Marine Systems Associate at Seagard. She has her BA in Biology from Boston University, USA and her MSc in Marine Systems and Policies from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. She has performed marine field work around the world and looks forward to continuing to support maritime infrastructure developments.

Throughout both industries, a common theme is the importance of early and continued stakeholder engagement. “We stand by the idea that stakeholder engagement and outreach with other maritime users and operators is incredibly important,” Ryan Wopschall, ICPC GM states, “Raising awareness of subsea cables within the offshore renewable energy sector and encouraging developers and stakeholders to contact us in regard to new and ongoing projects will further facilitate safe and efficient use of marine resources and long-term protection of seabed infrastructure.” All marine users must be considered throughout project development, and these considerations, alongside

SUBTEL-FORUM

@SUBTELFORUM

SUBTELFORUM SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

COMING TO NEAR

Reserve y today fo

O A WALL YOU!

your spot or 2022.

FEATURE

AUTOMATIC ROUTE GENERATION AND CABLE NETWORK OPTIMIZATION FOR OFFSHORE WINDFARMS BY DR. VENKATA JASTI AND HERMANN KUGELER

s global warming and climate change continue to impact the planet in many ways, there is an increased demand for renewable energy sources. While landbased renewable energy technologies have been largely commercialized throughout the world, there has become a need to move power production offshore to harvest the large energy resource available, and reduce the need for land use that is often costly in coastal locations. Wind speeds offshore are also generally higher than on-shore, and have less turbulence, which means power can be more efficiently harvested. For these reasons, many Asian and European countries have begun implementing offshore wind to increase their renewable energy generation, but the United States is just now beginning to develop its offshore wind infrastructure. The global offshore wind capacity rose above 30 GW in 2020, and is expected to experience continued rapid growth in the years and decades to come. President Biden has set an ambitious goal to install 30 GW of offshore wind in the U.S. by 2030. This is 1000x the U.S.’s installed offshore wind capacity as of 2019. While the U.S. is somewhat late to the game in terms of offshore wind adoption, it provides the opportunity to leverage existing technologies and tools that have been used commercially elsewhere. It also pro-

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

vides the opportunity to look at the European and Asian markets and figure out ways of improving designs, reducing costs, and streamlining the project development process.

OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT IN CABLE DESIGN PRACTICES WITHIN WINDFARM PLANNING

There are several project planning tools on the market that have been used around the world to plan and develop layouts and designs for offshore windfarms. These tools help developers optimize the design and layout of a windfarm based on the location’s wind resource, estimated performance based on wind capture modeling, and development costs. While these tools are helpful in optimizing the above-surface infrastructure, they skip over a critical piece of offshore windfarm infrastructure: the subsea power cables. Many of these software tools were initially developed for land-based windfarms, where the cabling wasn’t a significant cost factor in terms of the overall project cost, and construction practices are much more accommodating, but for offshore windfarms the cable costs become a much more significant portion of the overall project cost. Much of the west coast United States has deeper waters that make fixed offshore wind infeasible, and require floating offshore

wind. The cable costs get magnified as floating windfarms move further offshore, and into deeper waters, where the costs and challenges of laying cables increase. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has estimated that the cabling cost for a floating offshore windfarm off the coast of California equates to approximately 16% of the total capital expense for the project, and this percentage is expected to rise as the cost of wind turbines and the floating platforms become cheaper. Current methods require a cable route engineer to manually design and select the power cable network, and associated hardware after the above surface windfarm design and layout has been completed. This approach could result in a costly or impractical power cable design, that the developer either has to accept or iteratively re-design the above surface infrastructure to accommodate. In either case, the project developer and owner see an increased cost; either from the cable installation, or re-design services, and time delays if re-design is required. An opportunity exists to use automatic route generation and cable network optimization tools that can integrate earlier into the windfarm optimization process allowing for significant cost savings.

CURRENT ROUTE PLANNING CAPABILITIES

route engineer when one of the rules they set is violated as they edit the cable route. The Rule Checker includes a broad category of rules that are made available to the user, and the user can setup custom rules using their data and constraints. Examples of rules that the Automatic Rule Checker can monitor are checking for proximity to existing cables or restricted areas, checking for crossing angles with existing cables, checking for severe terrain slopes, checking for side slopes near body landing locations, etc. The Costing Tool continuously updates the total cost of a submarine cable system by combining user-defined cost elements with real-time state information of the route as it is being edited. The Cost Estimation tool uses the cable’s Single Line Diagram (SLD) and Route Position List (RPL) in combination with a database of operator-customized materials, equipment and labor unit rates to estimate the total cost of installing a system, from the planning phase through installation and post-lay inspection. Some of the categories of costs included are System Procurement Costs, Survey Costs, Installation Support Costs, Ship Transit and Cable Loading Costs, etc. As part of the cost estimation process, the module also develops duration estimates for the entire cable planning and installation lifecycle.

Makai has developed a software tool built on top of and AUTOMATIC ROUTE GENERATION leveraging the world’s #1 software for planning submarine A new element of the proposed automation method is the cables, MakaiPlan. MakaiPlan has an established geograph- Automatic Route Generator which automatically generic information system (GIS) framework that is well suited ates an optimal cable route between two points. In order to to process and visualize terrain and related data. Since facilitate this automatic cable route selection process, Makai MakaiPlan’s inception in the 1990s, Makai has constantly added support for gridded bathymetry. In addition to effiimproved this software and added substantial functionality related to submarine cables, including the physical properties of cables, installation costs, and installation methods. A couple of recent additions to MakaiPlan that directly supported the current automation effort are the Automatic Rule Checker and the Costing Tool. The Automatic Rule Figure 1. Route Generation Algorithms implemented within MakaiPlan. The blue cells are the grid cells explored by the algorithm and the red Checker continuously cells are automatically identified from the shoreline data and marked as no-go zones. The calculated route is the shortest distance route with checks and alerts the minimum number of alter-courses that meet the constrains imposed.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

Figure 2. Automatically generated network between desired set of input nodes (left), and additional optimization by allowing the algorithm to place extra branching nodes (right).

ciently representing depth, underlying grid representation can be extended to other parameters like soil type, hardness, restricted zones etc. The Automatic Route Generator can use any of the user defined layers during route calculations. The Automatic Route Generation tool takes the user defined start and end points, and follows the user defined rules, constraints and parameter weightings, to automatically generate an optimized cable design. The underlying algorithm is based on the well-known and robust A* (A-Star) algorithm with modifications made for line of sight, geodetic distance calculation, etc. It is an efficient graph traversing approach that uses cost and heuristic functions to make the route choices. The cost function includes all of the system constraints. The heuristic function provides feedback on how close the algorithm is to solving the problem. This framework works well for coding in all the competing constraints of route planning. Some of the same rules used in Makai’s Automatic Rule Checker and costs defined in the Costing Tool are passed on to the Automatic Route Generator as constraints, costs, and heuristics.

AUTOMATED NETWORK OPTIMIZATION

The Network Optimization tool is in the early stages of development. It works on top of the suggested automatically generated routes to calculate an optimized subsea cable network that connects multiple nodes of interest. This is a well-known class of problem called Minimum Spanning Tree and can be solved with or without adding additional branching nodes as

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

seen in the picture below. The edge weights that are minimized were replaced with route generation costs from the above tool and modification were made to add point costs to the nodes themselves to minimize the number of branching nodes.

COMBINING EVERYTHING

While this approach of layering Network Optimization on top of Automatic Route Generation can be used for a number of terrain-based optimization problems, the initial purpose of its development was for automatic subsea cable route engineering. This tool is ideally suited for offshore windfarms planning due to their complex inter array cable and export cable networks. Below is an example of notional Windfarm layout generated by the combined tool. The turbine, substation and shore landing locations were inputted and the software automatically calculated the laydown of the whole network. In calculating the export cable route; burial requirements, terrain slopes, cable costs, etc. were all taken into account. Within the inter-array cable network however, uniform cable type was chosen and the terrain was relatively flat. Because of this, the optimization mostly reflected the shortest distance between the nodes in most cases except a few connections that were avoided because of slope constraints. Integrating into existing Windfarm Planning process Makai’s cable optimization software is modular, allowing it or its modules to act as a standalone tool, or work in conjunction with other windfarm planning tools to optimize

Figure 3. Notional Windfarm cable network developed by the automated tool. The turbine locations along with the proposed substation location and shore landing location were inputted and the routing for the export cable as well as all the inter array cables was automatically calculated. Each route within the network is calculated by the Automatic Route Generation tool that was set to find the lowest cost route (Top). The profile view of the export cable (Bottom).

the entire windfarm design with cable network consideration. The project engineer can use this tool on its own to perform cable route design and selection, based on a pre-determined windfarm design to develop the cable network and cost estimates. This tool will eliminate the need for an expert cable route engineer to spend weeks developing a cable route and cost estimates in the early stages of the project. While a project engineer could use this tool on its own, and still see some cost and time savings in the development stage of the project, Makai anticipates more overall project savings if integrated into the greater windfarm planning tool. By integrating this software into a windfarm planning tool, the below surface cable network design and costs can be considered at the same time as the above surface infrastructure design. This will allow for total project optimization. Consider the case where the topside infrastructure design results in an extremely expensive cable cost, for any number of reasons like, the topside infrastructure is placed further offshore to capture wind from a higher producing location, resulting in a high export cable cost, or the windfarm is placed above obstacle laden seabed, resulting in a costly inter array cable design. In both of these cases, the windfarm and cable designs can likely

be adjusted in order to reach a middle ground where the wind capture is optimized based on total project cost, including the cable costs. The integration of Makai’s software into a planning tool would allow these issues to be addressed at the start of the design and planning process, and be considered through the entire process, resulting in overall project cost reduction through planning, and optimized design. STF DR. VENKATA JASTI, joined Makai’s submarine cable systems group in 2009, after earning his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Carnegie Mellon University. Currently, he is the technical leader for commercial submarine cable activity at Makai. This includes maintaining our proprietary submarine cable model, sales, and training of our worldwide clients in the use of our ﬂagship MakaiLay and MakaiPlan software. In recent work, he has focused on applying the extensive knowledge Makai has gained from telecom cable installations to benefit the subsea power cable and seismic exploration markets. HERMANN KUGELER, joined Makai in 2018 as the Business Development Manager. In this role, he leads the team’s efforts in the early stage of projects, including client interaction and proposal preparation for projects, both within the U.S., and internationally. Hermann is involved in both commercial and federal projects spanning Makai’s areas of expertise and services. He was born and raised on Maui, Hawaii, and received his B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering, from the University of Denver.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

Celebrating 20 years of expert client representation and consulting

WFN Strategies is an industry-leading consultancy specializing in the planning, procurement, and implementation of submarine cable systems

We possess an ISO 9001: 2015 accredited management system and ISO 27001:2013 InfoSec program for the implementation of submarine fiber cable systems for commercial, governmental and offshore energy companies throughout the world. We have served the industry for 20 years and received the ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 27001:2013 certified designer and for Exports. President’s “E” Award implementer of submarine fiber cable systems for commercial, governmental and oil & gas companies.

FEATURE

INNOVATIONS FOR SUBMARINE CABLE PLANNING: An Optical Survey Toolbox

BY ROBERT VAN DE POLL, SANDEEP NARAYAN KUNDU AND RENÉ D’AVEZAC DE MORAN

s pressure mounts to reduce our carbon footprint, the impetus is on harvesting renewable energy. Offshore wind farms (OWFs) and floating solar farms (FSFs) are therefore the new resources to feed our hunger for energy. The frequency and density of these developments are exponential and techniques for surveying and characterising the seabed need to evolve and keep pace. During this era of pandemic-related restrictions, projects are taking longer. At Fugro, we have found out innovative ways to characterise the seabed using optical observations from high and very high-resolution satellite imagery. This technology has greatly enhanced planning for submarine cables and executing bathymetric and topographic surveys arrays for many recent projects. Adopting satellite technology has not only kept projects on schedule but also has other benefits: it poses few health and safety risks and is environmentally friendly too. Below is a visual summary of optical survey methods organised from left to right, from the fastest and least precise to the slowest and most precise end of the spectrum. In order to detail the optical surveys, we shall touch upon how satellite images are sourced, how they are processed and most importantly how they are interpreted to transform the signals into relevant information which we then use to decipher the nature of the seabed on the area we are planning to lay a submarine cable. It is also important to understand how we can glean information from these images to mitigate risks to the cable. Efficiency, accuracy, detail, and capability are the fundamental factors that need to be evaluated when selecting an

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

appropriate remote sensing technology for shallow water surveys. Complex coastal environments typically require more than one technology to achieve the optimum mapping solution. Fugro’s integrated approach to shallow water surveying, utilising satellite-derived bathymetry (SDB) and airborne LiDAR bathymetry (ALB) enable us to deliver quality Geo-data within shorter project windows.

FUGRO SATRECON

Fugro SatRecon produces 4DSSM imagery, which is a visualisation tool that takes advantage of the human brain’s ability to rapidly sort through information to determine similarity, difference, and relative changes in optical reflectivity. Images are rendered in CARIS LOTS (Law of the Sea) software to make the information visually intuitive to a human observer. Fugro SatRecon (4DSSM imagery) may contain general bathymetric information, but it is not a bathymetric product. The visualisation complements a bathymetric chart in understanding the seabed. Bathymetric (or nautical) charts are not generally updated fast but satellite imageries do have a repeat image over the same area on a weekly or fortnightly temporal basis. Hence SatRecon helps in fast visualisation of the recent changes that a bathymetric chart is unable to provide which makes it an indispensable tool to monitor recent changes and plan cable routes and inshore surveys without having to visit anywhere. SatRecon deliverables have already been used to complement some twenty different specific offshore nearshore-foreshore shallow water mapping applications globally in the marine industry. In this article, we focus on the submarine cable industry.

From SatRecon (4DSSM imagery) analysis to LiDAR: increasing image precision with time

The imageries for SatRecon are initially sourced from Landsat-8 and Sentinel-2, which both have a native spatial resolution of 15 m and 10 m respectively. Their horizontal accuracy varies depending on the positional accuracies of the source satellite (~20 m for Landsat-8 and 7 m to 8 m for Sentinel-2). When there is a requirement for higher resolution and positional accuracy, commercial satellite imagery with extreme high resolution (submetre) has been used to develop the SatRecon product. Fresh imagery can also be tasked through our vendors on top of the rich archive of imageries that date back to 10 years. The depth of penetration of optical imagery is dependent on localised conditions such as atmospheric aerosols and water turbidity. Typical depths to which seabed morphological features (i.e. hazards) can be mapped in about 20.0 m, although this technology has successfully mapped features to 34 m in some parts of the world (e.g. the Red Sea). SatRecon can be applied to an area of interest where one wishes to assess whether sand waves or shoals are shifting and whether the trend poses a threat to existing or planned seabed installation. SatRecon is a first and efficient step before tasking a localised satellite-derived bathymetry (SatAnalytics) or multibeam or LiDAR survey to check on such hazards. If seabed changes appear to be a potential problem, SatRecon provides the necessary information to ask the right questions before commissioning an in-situ survey where necessary.

Another example of application is where we wish to examine a time series of historical imageries around the preliminary site to eliminate obviously unsuitable locations at a very early design process for a submarine cable project. A time series SatRecon helps in identifying an unstable (large moving shoals or persistent rough water) seabed based on which cable laying and landing choice can be eliminated. This helps avoid surprises during the survey where precious time is lost during field operations to survey an alternate route or a landing. Fugro SatRecon services and deliverables can also include information about what is happening in the water column, which may provide important contextual information to the items of interest in the image scene. Turbidity of water is detrimental to optical penetration, but it can be an advantage as it can convey important information about relative current speed and direction, scouring potential, and variability over the field. The deliverables (4DSSM imagery) are based on passive satellite remote sensing using optical-band imagery and therefore there is a latency which is dependent on the revisit rate of that satellite. Landsat-8 revisits every 15 days. This typically delivers 2-3 scenes of Landsat-8 Source Imagery per month (as there is 35 % overlap in satellite paths) dating back to February 2013. Therefore, for any given site (generally), we have (as of July 2021), usable data source archive of 200-300 scenes for the area of interest (AOI). The Sentinel-2A & 2B satellites each have a 10-day revisit rate and are in alternate SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE orbits (dating back to June 2015), meaning a total revisit rate of 5 days for a given site. This typically delivers 5-6 scenes of Sentinel-2A & 2B 8 Source Imagery per month (as there is 35 % overlap in satellite paths) dating back to June 2015. Therefore, for any given site, we have (as of July 2021), giving a usable data source archive of 300-360 scenes for the area of interest. Commercial satellite revisit rates vary, and image acquisition may have to be bespoke and tasked for an additional cost. Seabed morphology scenes derived from optical imagery may contain “false positives” – ephemeral conditions that look like, but are not, Uncharted reef pinnacles in SatRecon (4DSSM) visualisation (right) missing in nautical chart (left) true seabed morphology – that do not impact the overall usefulness of a scene, but the user needs to be aware of and refrain from making erroneous conclusions. The major constraints to clear deliverables are cloud cover and water turbidity, both of which impact the depth to which the seabed can be observed. Hence the only way to overcome these constraints is to task a fresh imagery on a clear day and when the water is not turbid (especially during and after a spell of rain). The frequent revisit rate for satellites provides us with the flexibility to choose a historical image containing few clouds during quiet weather conditions. The 4DSSM imagery deliverables are supplied as single geocoded and colour-coded 3D sun-illuminated GeoTIFF file type that allows integrated (overlaid) visualisation with A wedge-shaped sand bank and submarine dunes and sand waves as visualised using SatRecon (4DSSM imagery) other geospatial layers in commonly used geographical information systems. It is an easy-to-use visualisation tool, where there is no attempt to metric product. The process is more involved than SatRecon correct water levels, aerosols, or variable marine conditions. and produces a well-calibrated bathymetric product able These additional services are covered by satellite-derived to supplement inshore surveys for submarine cable routes. bathymetry (Fugro SatAnalytics) services. SatAnalytics produce a satellite-derived bathymetry (SDB) The true value of 4DSSM imagery lies in its capabiliproduct and related seabed classification which are a quick ty to leverage the power of the human mind to examine and cost-effective method of retrieving bathymetric and and evaluate information. It augments Geo-data analysis, sediment information and benthic habitats from broad areas. triggering the right questions, in a qualitative assessment of SDB has been developed to provide comparatively low a submarine project in its early stage and helps reduce and cost, low risk solutions for bathymetry of coastal and shalrealign the next steps, reducing the overall project time and low waters using multispectral imagery. The survey method cost. The product is easy to use and therefore equally appeals is founded on the modelling of light penetration through to both technocrats and managers involved in the project. the water column in visible bands of multispectral remotely sensed images. Fugro offers SDB services utilising the most suitable satellite imagery and processing methodologies proFUGRO SATANALYTICS viding the highest accuracy results. The products are aimed Unlike SatRecon, Fugro SatAnalytics is a quantitative endeavour requiring rigorous calibration to produce a bathy- at defining operational risk in nautical charting, offshore

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

ALB for a nearshore region (left) and for dredge monitoring (right)

seismic in shallow waters, and for cable and pipeline projects. It provides great inputs for environmental impact assessment, coastal engineering, monitoring dredging operations, baseline mapping of reefs and rapid environmental assessment. The benefits of SDB are many. It can supplement an inshore survey where applicable, reducing the cost and time involved to crew, instrument and mobilise a vessel for the physical survey. It provides faster turnaround for reliable bathymetric data, having a low error of 10 % to 15 % in water depths of up to 20m. The product also enjoys the flexibility of choosing a satellite sensor with a weekly or fortnightly repeat cycle from historical imagery or newly tasked imagery. Fugro’s deep knowledge of multispectral and hyperspectral imagery has helped develop a solid methodology for SDB and related products from optical image sources. It uses state-of-the-art technologies for atmospheric correction, image segmentation, image classification and masking and signal attenuation. SDB products go through a strict set of quality control which includes analysis of water depths. SDB and derived products include seabed reflectivity, seabed classification and sedimentation analysis. SDB has the capability to accommodate other sources such as airborne LiDAR bathymetry (ALB) and hyperspectral image (HSI) Geo-data. ALB is an active sensor that uses lasers in the near-infrared band of the electromagnetic spectrum. The systems work by transmitting pulses of energy from a laser source. Infrared energy is quickly absorbed, thereby detecting the water surface, while energy in the green spectral band penetrates the water to map the surface of the seafloor. The delta of the water surface and seafloor measurements provides the water depth. ALB technology is rapidly evolving: the latest Rapid Airborne Multibeam Mapping System (RAMMS) uses next-generation ALB

technology and consistently captures bathymetric and topographic areas which have challenging conditions, such as slightly deeper water, high seabed slope, poor reflectivity, extreme shallow water, and highly turbid areas, all the while with a reduced CO2 production of over 80 % compared to previous ALB technologies. Depending on water clarity, seabed characteristics, and energy output, airborne LiDAR bathymetry is effective in water depths up to 70 m. HSI is an advanced imaging technique that measures visible, near infrared and short-wave infrared light reflecting off the earth’s surface. Using advanced hyperspectral sensor suite, over 400 discrete bands of information are available from 400 nm to 2500 nm wavelengths at very high spatial resolution, enabling expert analysis to be performed. Hyperspectral cubes have application in both marine and land environments e.g. agricultural crop health and value, mineral exploration, forest mapping, benthic mapping, risk assessment for insurance, urban modelling, and soil moisture studies.

SATELLITE-DERIVED TOPOGRAPHY

At each cable landing a topographic survey is required. This is traditionally done by surveying instruments like total stations which is both labour intensive and time consuming. Use of drone mounted LiDARs is now prevalent as they offer lower cost proposition and higher accuracy, but they come with associated risks. For example, during the pandemic, mobilising personnel for such surveys has been a challenge. Satellite-derived topography is a tested alternative which Fugro has used in recent projects. Optical satellite imagery such as those from SPOT, LANDSAT and other high-resolution satellites with repeat visit cycles are used in generating topographic elevation models using the photogrammetric technique. SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

3D rendering of satellite-derived topography (left) and the orthoimage draped on the DEM (right)

The topography generation technology from high-resolution satellite imagery enables us to generate a wide range of high-resolution topographic Geo-data rapidly, greatly improving the efficiency of acquisition. This method is more efficient than airborne LiDAR as a set of stereopair imagery covers larger area without any field deployment. The product is a digital elevation model (DEM) which can be referenced to mean sea level (MSL) or lowest astronomical tide (LAT) as required. The associated orthoimage is a by-product of the processing exercise and contributes to meaningful visualisation of land features. Fugro has provisions to access historical stereo imagery from multi-sensor and multi-resolution satellite platforms. As and when required, newer imagery is specifically tasked for the purpose. The spatial resolution and vertical accuracy remain satellite platform dependent with Superviw-1 providing a horizontal resolution of 0.5 m with accuracy varying from 2 m to 5 m. Constraints of satellite-derived topography lie in weather and cloud conditions during new tasking exercises. The processing algorithm extracts topographic information from the overlapping regions of a stereo image pair. As the tasking exercise involves couple of images to be acquired during subsequent passes of the satellite, it is imperative that the weather conditions remain unchanged else the tasking must be extended for the next pass. It is therefore recommended that for projects where satellite-derived topography is needed, a decision needs to be taken early so that the project can be completed in time. The cost propositions are much less than traditional methods or even by airborne surveys using drones or LiDAR.

CONCLUSION

All these Fugro satellite techniques have been used and perfected over the last 5 years. Initially used exclusively internally, they have now evolved to be an essential tool for “preliminary shallow water nearshore-foreshore site investi-

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

gation” before putting “physical boots on the ground”. To date, over 2000 Fugro projects have used these image techniques globally, as preliminary site support in over 120 countries. Such Fugro deliverables do not aim to entirely replace any real onsite field surveys, but they can dramatically improve the overall project, allowing for more efficient planning and thorough site preparation and, in turn, deliver cost savings for the project. STF ROBERT VAN DE POLL, B.SC., M.SC. ENG., is Global Director Law of the Sea at Fugro. He is Global expert on Law of the Sea, advising Governments and Industry, with over 1800 projects completed in 146 of the 162 Countries he globally manages, advising all nearshore-foreshore mapping applications. He created the CARIS LOTS software used by the United Nations and International Courts. Robert holds “Honorary Lecturer”positions at (i) Dundee University, UK, (ii) University of Wollongong, Australia (iii) University of Malta, Malta. One mapping technique he created and perfected used in all Global Mapping is the Fugro SatRecon (4DSSM Imagery) Analysis. DR SANDEEP N KUNDU is a Geoscientist and Spatial Data Science Expert with over 20 years of experience the field of exploration and surveying industry. He currently oversees Cable route Desktop Studies and Hydrographic Surveys at Fugro where he explores innovations to overcome challenges in the business. He had previously worked for Reliance Industries and BHP Billiton as a Geoscientist and had research and teaching associations with National University of Singapore, University of Jen and University of Muenster, Germany. He is a British Chevening Awardee and is highly skilled in using Satellite Remote Sensing and Geographical Information Systems. RENÉ D’AVEZAC DE MORAN is Global Key Account Manager for Fugro and oversees the global business development of desktop studies and route surveys that Fugro provides to the subsea cable industry. René is also regionally responsible for cable route surveys in Asia-Pacific. René began his offshore career in 1998 in Singapore with CGG, supporting nearshore seismic acquisition projects, and headed Fugro’s offshore positioning service line in Asia-Pacific from 2002 to 2009. He revived the cable route surveys service line in Asia in 2004 and has been instrumental in the creation of a global cable expertise service offering within Fugro.

POWERFUL AND

INSIGHTFUL

ANALYTICS • Almanac Data Sets • Capacity Pricing • Data Center and Cable Market Studies • Market Sector Reports • Customized Reporting

SUBTELFORUM.COM/ANALYTICS

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL, BUT HAVE THEY READ IT? BY TIM PUGH

he writing is on the wall, but have they read it? This is a question I have been asking myself for at least the last twelve months or so whenever I hear about another oil company stating that they are going to ride the green wave of renewables. “We have been working offshore for decades, we know what we are doing and if we get a problem, we can just throw money at it!”. When you hear this, and I have heard it stated a great deal at presentations of late, one must ask is this arrogance or ignorance? Having worked in both the Oil & Gas and Renewable sectors for several decades I would say it’s a bit of both but more of one than the other. I am not an economist, strategist, or an accountant, just a humble geoscientist who has worked on a great many offshore projects and witnessed the differences in attitude between the industry sectors towards the success of the emplacement of offshore structures. I therefore wish to take you on a journey that will, I hope, highlight some of the reasons why I ask the question, The writing is on the wall, but have they read it? What has triggered the oil companies to now wake up (if not a little late) and start giving the renewable sector attention rather than just lip service? Unless you have been living under a rock since the beginning of 2020 then you will

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

know that Covid 19 was first detected in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and has set off a global pandemic. This has been the first extreme widespread disease since the Spanish flu a century ago. It has infected over 132 million people and killed over 2.8 million as of April 8, 2021 (1). The result has been huge money-based and employment losses around the world and confining ~58% of the world’s population (2). In January 2020, many governments began restricting travel and closing businesses to stop the coronavirus widespread disease. As a result, demand for oil began falling and oil prices collapsed in the middle of the money-based slowdown. In the first quarter of 2020, gas and oil use averaged 94.4 million barrels per day, a drop of 5.6 million barrels per day from the previous year (3). Brent oil prices fell to a 17-year low of below $26/bl on 18 March 2020, following the effects of Covid-19 on worldwide demand and oil price arguments between Russia and Saudi Arabia. The recent crash saw prices record the biggest daily loss since the end of the Gulf war in 1991. In 2020, Brent oil prices had fallen more than 60% since peaking at $69.75/bl in January when they hit a 17-year low of $26.33/bl. Gas and power contracts have so far followed the same trend, falling 32.7% and 21.1% respectively (4) During this period, we have witnessed a greater uptake

tors’ preferred choice for new power plants. For nearly two in the use of renewable energy. This increase in renewable power during the pandemic is not purely circumstantial. But decades, renewable energy capacity has grown steadily. There is more commentary on Investment further in the article. Covid-19 may also have hastened the end of fuel derived During the Covid-19 pandemic, governments introduced from prehistoric organisms in the power sector. It would appear that Covid-19 has brought the era of energy from fossil full-lockdown measures that depressed electricity demand at historical levels (15%-30%) (6) in many countries and generfuels to breaking point. As the lockdown measures were ated an oversupply of available power capacity. As the crisis introduced, global energy demand dramatically dropped to levels not seen in 70 years. The International Energy Agency hit, grid operators sought the cheapest and cleanest supply source to balance the lower demand. Therefore, weaker (IEA) has estimated that overall energy demand contracted electricity demand increased the share of renewables in the by 6% and energy-related emissions decreased by 8% for system while sending the more polluting and costly carbon 2020. Oil demand is expected to drop 9% and coal 8% for fuels to the back of the queue. This effect happened even at this year, while crude oil is at record-low prices. a time of historically low fossil fuel prices, making hydrocarPrevious energy crises provide a window into which we bons and carbons the biggest losers in see what happens when the oil price the pandemic. crashes and how the use of fossil fuels Not only has COVID had a huge has subsequently rebounded. However, Although the pandemic is impact on electricity but also on the present crisis is different, as it is circumstantial and unexpected, transportation. Traditionally 44% of demand-led. The scale of the fall in the current outcome for crude oil extracted is used to propel demand, the speed of change, and how the power sector is not. The our cars from A to B, but as the green widespread it has been has resulted ongoing increase in renewable wave gains height we are seeing a in what can only be described as a rapid increase in electrification. As the radical shift in the power sector and its energy into the grid results Covid-19 pandemic unfolded in early demand for fossil fuels. With the fall from a mixture of past policies, 2020 and lockdowns were implemented in demand, renewable sources , mainly regulations, incentives, and in countries around the world, global wind and solar, saw a substantially innovations embedded in the car sales experienced an unprecedented increase to record levels in many countries share of electricity. In less than 10 power sectors of many forward- drop. Despite gradual recovery over the course of the year, early market data weeks, the USA increased its renewthinking countries. suggests that global car sales contracted able energy consumption by nearly in 2020 by an estimated 14%, mirroring 40% and India by 45%. Italy, Germany, closely the IEA estimate of 15%. The and Spain set new records for variable drop in global car sales in 2020 was significantly larger than renewable energy integration to the grid. (5) the one observed during the global financial crisis of 2007Although the pandemic is circumstantial and unexpect2009. As the pandemic began to surge in early 2020, there ed, the current outcome for the power sector is not. The was a general expectation that electric car markets would ongoing increase in renewable energy into the grid results likely be more resilient than the general automotive sector from a mixture of past policies, regulations, incentives, and although a drop in electric car sales was generally expected. innovations embedded in the power sectors of many forHowever, electric car sales in 2020 exceeded these expectaward-thinking countries. tions. Backed by existing policy support and additional stimThere are three key factors behind the increase in reulus measures, the IEA preliminary estimate is that electric newable energy during this crisis. The first is the fact that car sales worldwide climbed to over 3 million and reached a renewables have been supported by favorable policies. In market share of over 4%, making 2020 a record-breaking year many countries, renewables receive priority through market regulation, favouring cheaper and cleaner sources. Secondly, for EVs (. electric vehicles). This is equivalent to a growth renewable energy has become the cheapest source of energy. of over 40% in global sales from the 2.1 million electric cars sold in 2019. Somewhat surprisingly, electric vehicles (EV) International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA)recently sales are back on track. A total of 2,65 million new EVs have reported that the cost of solar had fallen by 82% over the been sold during the first half of 2021, an increase of +168 % last 10 years, while BloombergNEF states that renewable compared to 2020. As a result, there are today more than 10 energy is now the cheapest energy source in two-thirds of million electric cars on the road globally. While impressive, the world. And lastly, renewable energy has become invesSEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

the share of electric vehicles in total car sales is still only onetenth that of conventional SUV sales. (7) Now that I have painted a bit of a convoluted outline of the effects of the oil crash and effects of Covid 19 I must bring you back to the title of this discussion and why do I think that the oil companies are making a fundamental error. It all comes down to the value of the product and how companies make a profit. Let’s start with oil and gas pricing 101. Who sets the oil prices? Many will answer “OPEC” (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), a permanent intergovernmental oil organisation, created in 1960 by Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. However, this is incorrect. Although OPEC did set crude oil prices from the early 1970s to the mid-1980s, this is no longer the case. In today’s complex global markets where the price of crude oil is set by movements on the three major international petroleum exchanges. These being the New York Mercantile Exchange, the International Petroleum Exchange in London, and the Singapore International Monetary Exchange. This does not mean that OPEC does not have an influence on the oil market. OPEC produce approximately 45 per cent of the world’s crude oil and 18 per cent of its natural gas. OPEC’s oil exports represent about 55 per cent of the crude oil traded internationally (8). Therefore, OPEC can have a strong influence on the oil market, especially if it decides to reduce or increase its level of production. Each index rises and falls depending on how many people want to buy oil on that day. Many who invest in oil at these exchanges never actually intend to take delivery. These people just want to buy a contract at a low price and then sell it on at a higher price. When speculation enters

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

a market then many new factors enter the pricing structure. Political uncertainty in some part of the world could disrupt supply and so the price goes up. Trade figures of a major manufacturing nation, like China, might show that country is slipping into recession. That would reduce demand for oil, thus the price would fall on all the indices in the world. Economic theory suggests that oil prices should be a function of supply and demand. When supply and demand increase, prices should drop and vice versa. But the dynamics of the oil economy are complex, and the oil price determination process goes beyond the simple market rules of demand and supply. Oil prices are heavily influenced by traders who bid on oil futures in the commodities market based on their perceptions of the future supply and demand for oil. Futures contracts and oil derivatives are traded daily, which acts to influence the price of oil. This causes the price of oil to change daily because it all depends on how trading went that day. As oil prices rise oil companies pump out more oil to capture higher profits, this also limits OPEC’s ability to influence its price. Historically, OPEC’s production cuts had devastating effects on global economies, although this is no longer always the case. The U.S. is one of the world’s top consumers of oil, and as production at home increases, there will be less demand for OPEC oil in the U.S. The other key factor in determining oil prices is sentiment. The mere belief that oils demand will increase dramatically at some point in the future can result in a dramatic increase in oil prices in the present, as speculators and hedgers alike snap up oil futures contracts. Of course, the opposite is also true. In summary, whoever owns the oil fields controls the price of oil through supply and demand. There are obvious other factors that affect the oil price such

the retailer putting together the power, transmission, distrias shareholder sentiment, political instability, natural disasbution, meter reading and billing, while taking the counterters and not forgetting the commodity traders party risk. About 7% relates to government fees, including Let us now look at how electricity prices are established. fees to run the regulator, VAT, excise taxes, renewable energy The first thing that needs to be considered is the golden and capacity levies, environmental taxes and the like. Taxes mantra of electricity production. That being the Levelized play a significant role in electricity end user prices in many Cost of Electricity, (LCOE). This is an economic measure advanced countries. used to compare the lifetime costs of generating electricity In the UK, some of the big household suppliers produce across various generation technologies. The lifetime costs for generation can be categorized into the following groups: or generate a proportion of their own energy. But they buy most of it either direct from the producers who generated 1) Capital costs, or the up-front costs to construct a power the power, and the rest is bought from the traded wholesale plant. Building a power plant requires a lot of investment. markets. Suppliers will likely have spread out their purchasThe power company recovers this investment over several es of energy for delivery today over a long period of time, to years. As It has to pay back the loans taken from the banks mitigate risk caused by volatility in the and investors. 2) Operation and mainwholesale market. From the suppliers’ tenance costs. Those costs incurred to perspective, when they set residential run a power plant. Such as personnel In the UK, some of the big energy tariffs, they have one thing in salaries, security costs, insurance, and household suppliers produce mind - profit. Tariffs need to be low most importantly, fuel costs for power enough to beat the competition, but generation. In addition, there is transor generate a proportion of high enough to keep their shareholdmission and distribution losses. This their own energy. But they ers happy. The price of the fuels used loss occurs because some amount of buy most of it either direct to produce electricity influences the electricity is lost during the transmisfrom the producers who price of the electricity. For instance, sion phase. 3) Disposition costs: These are costs typically incurred at the end generated the power, and the if the power plant relies on natural of the useful life. The disposition costs rest is bought from the traded gas for fuel, the cost of that resource will affect the cost of the electricity it for certain generation technologies, wholesale markets. produces. Likewise, if wind speeds are such as nuclear power plants, can be high and turbines are producing a lot huge. In most instances, the disposition of power for the grid, prices may drop. costs for the solar and generation projDepending on where you live, regulations may set electricects are assumed to be zero because the scrap value of the ity prices, with a utility commission determining what you equipment generally should cover the cost of removal. For pay for power. In many countries with the highest houseany new project the LCOE must be low enough to make it economically viable working within the confines of set elec- hold electricity prices including Germany, Denmark and tricity prices. The company must recover all these costs from Italy relatively high excise taxes are collected. In Germany, for example, the EEG surcharge for renewables is borne its customers; however, government regulations affect the by residential customers while large industrial consumers price that the utility company charges for electricity. Furare exempt, which partly explains the high household cost thermore, pricing is determined by a formula that depends primarily on the cost of debt and equity and the value of the of electricity. Mexico has the lowest electricity prices for households by far (close to half the value of Korea’s as the asset base. The formula is impartial with respect to ownersecond-lowest price). This is due to consumption being ship. Distribution in South Australia is owned by a Hong subsidised in part by the federal government and in part Kong-based billionaire. In Brisbane and Perth, it is owned by the state-owned electric utility (10). It is hoped that by the state government. They all get the same deal. Actual cost per kilowatt (kW) can be divided up into the following. this provides an insight to the differences between the two energy sectors and how they charge for their resources and Approximately 33% is the cost of wholesale power. This is why I question the attitudes of oil companies. Simply put, dependent upon fuel type. In 2019 oil fired plants could produce 1kW for $1000 whereas onshore and offshore wind the oil companies have control of their prices whereas electricity generation is controlled through regulation and what cost $1600 and $6500 per kW respectively and solar $1060 that country considers a fair price for its citizens to pay per kW. (9). Around 10% of the cost comes from the retailer. kilowatt. Retail has historically been regulated by government, with SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE But before you draw your own conclusions let’s dust off our crystal balls and try and glimpse into the future, starting with hydrocarbons. The chart below compares the three oil crashes in the first 100-day period from when prices started to decline from their peak. While the 2014-2016 price crash occurred over a long period of time and much slower than the current one, the rate at which oil prices initially fell since the start of the year was comparable to the rate at which they fell in 2008. Where the two rates begin to diverge is when prices crashed due to conflict over output cuts between Russia and Saudi Arabia; meaning that prices fell to half their initial value about 30 days quicker than in 2008. (11) The recent sharp rally to near $70/bbl. has spurred talk of a new super-cycle and a looming supply shortfall. Analysis suggests otherwise. For a start, oil inventories still look ample compared with historical levels despite a steady decline from that stockpiled up during 2020. By the end of January, OECD industry stocks, at 3 023 mb, were still 110 mb higher than a year ago at the onset of the Covid 19 crisis. (12) This would indicate that the world dose not have as big a demand on oil as it once had and some of the oil companies may be living in a fool’s paradise. In general, when we think of oil, we think of the everyday things in our live such as fuel for our cars, heating oil and electricity. However, there are many uses for crude oil with the main seven uses being: Gasoline (Used to fuel cars).........................................44% Heating Oil (Used to heat buildings), and Diesel Fuel............................................................19% Other Products............................................................15% Jet Fuel...........................................................................8% Propane..........................................................................6% Residual Fuel Oil (powering factories, fueling large ships, and making electricity).................... 5% Asphalt..........................................................................3% And if we look deeper in the other uses it can be seen that crude oil is an important source for a variety of products including: • Plastic – from food wrap to computers • Clothing - in the production of rayon, nylon, polyester • Furniture – cushions, polyurethane foam, molded seats • Insulation – domestic roof insulation • Domestic Items- Refrigerators, cookers • Vehicles- Body panels, wiring, engine parts, fluids • Food – Fertilizer, packaging

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

So even if the green revolution enables us to drive in electric vehicles, heat and power our homes, and power trains and ships, and enable us to grow our crops there will still be a demand for crude oil, even if greatly reduced. From this one would think that oil has a future in the new world. One may even ask if it can overcome a pandemic then it should be bullet proof. However, there are greater threats to the hydrocarbon industry. In March 2019 the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) said it was moving away from investing in oil and gas exploration, signaling the end to a historical enthusiasm for the sector. The fund is the world’s largest, valued at $1 4trillion, so the move away from exploration has sent a worrying message to the industry. A spokesman for the fund said there are oil companies in its portfolio that “absolutely” aren’t doing enough to cut emissions. The warning comes as Norway reassess the mandate it’s handed the world’s biggest wealth fund. A government-commissioned paper that proposed having climate risk underpin investment decisions across the fund, amid increasingly alarming evidence that the planet is heating up much faster than previously feared, with fossil-fuel companies behind much of that development. The expert group, appointed by Norway’s Finance Ministry, recommended that Norway “change the mandate” under which the fund operates to “better handle climate risk.” Changes would include giving the fund greater scope to put pressure on greenhouse gas emitters in its portfolio, with scope to divest those that are too slow to cut their carbon footprint. The result was felt this year, when Norway’s wealth fund started voting against corporate boards, as a tool to bring about change. As investor revolts become a more frequent occurrence, resulting in some spectacular upsets at several the world’s biggest oil companies. Most notable among these was Exxon’s failure in May to repel an uprising that handed board seats to an activist investor group insisting the company do more to reduce its carbon footprint. Norway’s wealth fund used the votes to demand that Exxon be transparent around political contributions, in an effort to stop the kind of corporate lobbying that leads to dubious climate policies. The fund also withheld support for Exxon Chief Executive Officer Darren Woods to continue as chairman, based on its view that those jobs shouldn’t be held by one person. Another example of shareholders forcing through change was Chevron. Norway’s wealth fund was among investors backing a successful proposal insisting that Chevron’s emissions targets include Scope 3, which includes the carbon footprint of the oil giants’ customers. The vote, which came the same day as the Exxon shareholder victor and coincided with a court decision in the Netherlands

forcing Royal Dutch Shell Plc to slash emissions, sent shock drive growth of bioenergy, thanks to incentives. Increases in electricity generation from all renewable sources should waves through an oil industry used to pushing through its push the share of renewables in the electricity generation own agenda and having its own way. mix to an all-time high of 30% in 2021. Combined with In comparison renewable energy use increased 3% in nuclear, low-carbon sources of generation well and truly 2020 as demand for all other fuels declined. The primary exceed output from the world’s coal plants in 2021.(15) driver was an almost 7% growth in electricity generation The expansion and growth of renewable global resources from renewable sources. Long-term contracts, priority access to the grid, and continuous installation of new plants must be one that the oil companies are enviable of. But are the big oil companies listening or even taking any notice underpinned renewables growth despite lower electricity demand, supply chain challenges, and construction delays in that the winds of change are blowing through the oil derricks? What are the big oil companies doing when it comes many parts of the world. Accordingly, the share of renewto renewables? ables in global electricity generation jumped to 29% in BP was one of the first oil majors to commit significant 2020, up from 27% in 2019. Bioenergy use in industry grew capital to renewable projects. From 1980 to 2001 it was 3% but was largely offset by a decline in biofuels as lower looking at wind and solar as other energy sources beyond oil demand also reduced the use of blended biofuels. (13) Renewable electricity generation in 2021 is set to expand oil. However, following the 2010 Deep Water Horizon oil spill incident in the Gulf of Mexico, BP closed most of its by more than 8% to reach 300 TWh, the fastest year-onprevious green energy investments to year growth since the 1970s. Solar PV try and free up about $10bn of capital and wind are set to contribute twoto cover the costs of the disaster. In thirds of renewables growth. China BP was one of the first oil alone should account for almost half majors to commit significant 2018, the firm made three investments to prepare for a low-carbon future. The of the global increase in renewable capital to renewable projects. first of which was a $20m investment electricity in 2021, followed by the From 1980 to 2001 it was in StoreDot, an Israeli developer of United States, the European Union and India. (14) Wind is set for the looking at wind and solar as rapid-charging batteries. The second was a $5m investment in US company largest increase in renewable generaother energy sources FreeWire, which makes fast-charging tion, growing by 275 TWh, or almost beyond oil. infrastructure for electric vehicles. 17%, which is significantly greater than And finally, $160m was spent on 2020 levels. Policy deadlines in China acquiring Chargemaster, the UK’s and the United States drove developers leading network of charging points. This allowed the oil to complete a record amount of capacity late in the fourth firm an opportunity to combine Chargemaster’s 6,50proquarter of 2020, leading to notable increases in generation vide charging points at its 1,200 petrol stations. Although already from the first two months of 2021. Over the course this contributes to lower carbon emissions, it again seems of 2021, China is expected to generate 600 TWh and the like lip service. (16) United States 400 TWh, together representing more than Shell’s investment target for green energy projects was half of global wind output. While China will remain the set between $4bn and $6bn for the period from 2016 largest PV market, expansion will continue in the United until the end of 2020, but it has been reported by The States with ongoing policy support at the federal and state Guardian that the sum is “well below” those figures. The level. Having experienced a significant decline in new solar Anglo-Dutch firm’s 2016 New Energies strategy covers PV capacity additions in 2020 as a result of Covid-related several areas including electricity, wind and solar, electric delays, India’s PV market is expected to recover rapidly in vehicle charging, and initiatives to encourage the adoption 2021, while increases in generation in Brazil and Vietnam of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles. It spent a reported are driven by strong policy supports for distributed solar PV applications. Globally, solar PV electricity generation is $2bn on setting up a low-carbon energy and electricity expected to increase by 145 TWh, almost 18%, to approach generation business in 2016. The following year, it acquired 1 000 TWh in 2021. Hydropower generation is expected to UK-based electricity and gas provider First Utility, as increase further in 2021 through a combination of econom- well as Europe’s largest electric vehicle charging company NewMotion. In 2018, Shell bought a 44% stake in US solar ic recovery and new capacity additions from large projects in China. Energy from waste electricity projects in Asia will power firm Silicon Ranch for $200m and made a $20m eqSEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE gas business. In 2018, Chevron launched a Future Energy uity investment in India-based renewable power company Fund, with an initial commitment of $100m set aside to Husk Power Systems. Prior to this Shell has been involved invest in breakthrough technologies that will reduce carbon in offshore wind since 2000 and has more than 6 gigawatts emissions and provide cleaner energy. In comparison, in the of wind projects in development. In recent months, Royal Dutch Shell Plc agreed to buy a 51% stake in an Irish proj- same year Chevron committed $1.1billion to global exploration of hydrocarbons. (21) ect to develop a floating wind farm in the Celtic Sea (17). Like its US counterpart, Exxon has shown very little inOn top of this Shell has announced an 80% stake in the JV, which is called MunmuBaram, with the remaining 20% terest in investing in renewable energy technologies, with no held by CoensHexicon.in a 1.4 gigawatt wind farm situated budget or timescale planned for future projects. The company’s strategy revolves around reducing greenhouse gas emisbetween 65 and 80 kilometers off Ulsan, South Korea. (18) sions, advancing biofuels, and carbon capture and storage Total’s plan for renewables is to invest $500m a year in (CCS). Exxon holds interests in about a third of the world’s clean energy technologies. That figure is about 3% of the CCS capacity and captured 6.9 million metric tonnes of French oil major’s total capital expenditure, with plans in carbon dioxide for sequestration the process of separating place to ramp that up to 20% over the next 20 years. Total is the gas from the atmosphere in 2015. In 2019, it announced aiming to become a global integrated leader in solar power. plans to develop carbon capture fuel Over the past 10 years, it has made cell technology, which produces power a number of strategic investments, and captures and concentrates CO2 which included $1.4bn being spent on for storage resulting in potential cost acquiring a 60% stake in US solar firm In the US, Chevron’s reductions. (22) SunPower in 2011. Total is aiming to investments in renewables The above does not paint a good become a global integrated leader in sohave been relatively scarce, picture when it comes to oil comlar power and has 1.6 gigawatts (GW) with no target in place for a panies’ commitment to change and worth of capacity, and plans to increase move to cleaner technology. acceptance of renewables. That is until that to 5GW over the next five years. In we take a look at Scandinavia, spe2016, it purchased French battery mancifically Norway and Denmark. The ufacturer Saft for $1.1bn and bought Norwegian oil company, Statoil, now Belgian green power utility Lampiris for $224m. Total acquired a 74% stake in the French electric- Equinor since 2018, has bowed to government pressure and has started to concentrate on renewables, especially offshore ity retailer Direct Energie for $1.7bn in 2018, propelling the wind. Using its expertise from the oil industry it has develcompany forward into being one of the top utility providers oped floating turbines and built the first productive floating in France. (19) turbine farm the 30-MW Hywind Scotland floating wind Although Eni is not quite up to speed with its rival oil farm 29 kilometers off Peterhead, Scotland. In addition, it majors, the Italian company has plans in place to invest operates as the major share holder several wind farms in the further in renewable technologies. In 2014, it launched the North Sea, USA, Taiwan and South Korea (23) world’s first conversion of a traditional refinery to a bioreOne cannot ignore the Danes and how they have finery that produces jet fuel, green diesel, green naphtha embraced renewables. The highest accolade must go to and liquid petroleum gas. With an eye on growing its onDONG (Danish Oil and Natural Gas). At about the time shore and offshore wind capacity, Eni formed partnerships of the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference with France-based GE Renewable Energy and Norwegian in Copenhagen, DONG Energy announced that it was to energy company Equinor. Clean energy sources play a key adopted a strategy, called “85/15 vision”, of changing from role in the firm’s corporate strategy, and it is targeting to a company with 85% of activities fossil fuel based to a comdeliver 1GW of installed renewable power capacity bepany 85% based on green energy activities.(24) By 2017, tween 2018 and 2021 by investing €1.2bn ($1.3bn), with a the company decided to phase-out the use of coal for power long-term goal of reaching 5GW by 2025. (20) generation, and it sold off its oil and gas business. After In the US, Chevron’s investments in renewables have selling its oil and gas business the company announced its been relatively scarce, with no target in place for a move transition to renewable energy was fulfilled and changed to cleaner technology. The US firm has invested in solar, its name to Orsted. Now it is the world’s leading offshore wind and geothermal projects over the past 20 years but, following low returns, the focus has remained on its oil and wind developer and ranked the most sustainable energy

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

Government agencies

He has worked on a number of landmark projects including South Africa’s company in the world. Ørsted is the largest offshore wind first deep water oil discovery, Muela Dam, Lesotho, Channel Tunnel, UK High farm company in the world with a market share of 16%. Speed Rail Link, and over 1 million kms of submarine Telcom cables. He also has extensive experience in the renewable energy sector. having provided project Ørsted surpassed 1,000 offshore wind turbines in 2016 management, design, acquisition and interpretation site investigation services .It operates offshore wind farms In the United Kingdom to projects in the UK, Ireland, Europe, Canada. Taiwan and Australia. North America Canada. Netherlands, Taiwan and now As a Chartered Geologist (C.Geol, FGS) he has been co contributor to a number of industry standards including UKOOA, SUT and ICPC and prelooking at South Korea and Vietnam (25) sented and published a number of industry papers. Finally. We come to the end of our journey. I will leave He has been a member of the Society of Under Water Technology (SUT) it to you to make up your minds about the future of oil committee. In addition, he was one of the two founders of the Perth’s SUTs Offshore Site Investigation Group (OSIG) and sat as chairman. and renewables. But you may like the observations made by Thomas Sanzillo, the Director of Finance for the REFERENCES Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis 1) World Health Organization COVID 19 Dashboard, https://covid19.who.int/ believes renewables are where the future of today’s oil and 2) C. Bates et al. Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY, Epub gas producers lies: “They are more knowledgeable about Nature Vil 584, July 2020, offshore structures than anyone else in the world,” Sanzillo 3) U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) - April 2020,” Page 2. Accessed Aug. says. “They should be devoting more to 11, 2021. that and trying to bring products into 4) J. Brabben, The 2020 oil price crash: How does it compare commercial operation… some will fail, previous events? March 2020. https://www.cornwall“They are more knowledgeable toinsight.com/energy-market-watch-on-covid-19-the-2020but they should try.” It’s imperative for the industry’s future success, he argues, about offshore structures than oil-price-crash/ as although oil and gas companies will 5) 6) Nelson Mojarro, COVID-19 is a game-changer for renewable anyone else in the world,” energy. Here’s why., World Economic Forum, June 2020, tell you things will turn around next Sanzillo says. “They should www.weforum.org year, even next quarter, it won’t. “Albe devoting more to that and 7) Marine Gorner, Leonardo Paoli, How global electric car though there’s a market there for some defied Covid-19 in 2020, 28 January 2021IEA, trying to bring products into sales decades, it’s an industry in decline. https://www.iea.org/ It would seem that Tom has seen the commercial operation… some 8) Energy & Capital, The Future of Oil in 2021 and Companies That Control It... Sept 2021m writing on the wall, and he says the will fail, but they should try.” the https://secure.energyandcapital.com/ entire sector needs to start thinking 9) “International Energy Outlook 2020 about its future. Falling oil prices over https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/ an extended period of time and a rise 10)IEA Electricity Market Report Dec 2020 in the demand for renewable sources https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-market-report-december-2020 will shape the industry of tomorrow. 11) Electricity Market Report - December 2020 - Analysis - IEA https://www.iea.org/reports/ “We aren’t about to end our use of fossil fuels for the electricity-market-report-december-2020 likes of airplanes and ships. So, there is some market there 12) Oil Market Report March 2021 International Energy Agency https://iea.blob.core.windows. but what you’re seeing is an overall smaller market, with net/assets/3ae30257-333a-4e91-b479-e4ee81819e9e/March_2021_OMR.pdf smaller profits and higher costs, and so you’ll have a very 13, 14, 15) Renewables bucked the trend in 2020 Global Energy Review 2021 International Energy Agency different fossil fuel sector in the future.” STF Tim Pugh is an independent consultant with over 35 years of global experience in the offshore industry. He has worked within Mining, oil & gas, contracting, consulting and project management companies including, SOEKOR, Goldfields, Geoseis, J Arthur and Associates, Hydrosearch, RPS and Carnegie. Holding positions as Technical Director and Director, involved in a wide variety of projects worldwide predominantly to the offshore industries. Since 2016 he has had his own consultancy, Earth Search Consulting and presently supports THREE60 Energy in the role of General Manager of their Marine Geoscience Division. He has been consulting in the geosciences since 1992, specializing in geological, geophysical, geotechnical, environmental project requirements together with stakeholder and community engagement. and data integration. This has included the provision of services to Engineering groups, Cable Companies, Oil Companies, Offshore Renewable Energy developers, Offshore mining, and

https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2021/renewables 16) Laura Hurst 17 19 20 https://ieefa.org/ jan 28 2021 17)Evelyn Blackwell World News Era 4 sept 2021 18, 19, 20 22) By James Murray 16 Jan 2020 NS Energy

21) https://www.chevron.com/stories/chevron-announces-18-3-billion-capital-andexploratory-budget-for-2018 23) McCulloch, Scott (2 November 2015)”Statoil to pilot floating wind farm scheme offshore Peterhead”. Dailyrecord.co.uk. Retrieved 19 July 2018. “DONG Energy completes the divestment of its upstream oil and gas business to INEOS” (Press release). DONG Energy. 29 September 2017. Clowes, Ed (20 October 2020).”Ørsted: The oil giant that went from dirty fuel to clean energy in a decade”.The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 25 October 2020.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE

WHAT NEXT FOR OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY?

BY SHASHANK KRISHNA

INTRODUCTION

The energy sector is responsible for nearly 75% of the global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It is a critical focus area for climate change mitigation. The International Energy Agency (IEA) and the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) estimate that the world requires 2,000GW of offshore wind by 2050 to ensure that the global temperature does not rise above 1.5C of pre-industrial levels as contemplated by the Paris Agreement and meet the various net zero and other climate targets. The offshore wind industry has a critical role if the world has any chance of averting catastrophic climate change. The offshore wind juggernaut continues its impressive run in response, becoming a significant source for hitting the clean energy and climate goals. Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) estimates that the global offshore wind installed capacity will reach approx. 206GW by 2030

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

– growing at an impressive rate from the current level of approx. 35GW. Such an astronomical growth will significantly benefit the global marine industry and the wider industry supply chain. In particular, the submarine cable making and laying business is expected to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of the offshore wind boom as demand for undersea high voltage cables grow. Prysmian estimates that in a typical offshore wind project, approx. 25% of the cost is spent on cables. Credit Suisse estimates that the offshore wind cable market in Europe and the US will expand from €1.5bn in 2019 to about €5.9bn in 2035. As is well known, the cable projects typically with the highest margins involve offshore wind cables and undersea interconnectors. Offshore wind projects are becoming more complex. They are increasingly moving to the deeper waters – further stimulating demand for products and services in the submarine cable and the wider marine industry.

Here are five key trends to watch out for offshore wind in this decade.

1. SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN THE LEVELISED COST OF OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY

Offshore wind is more expensive to build and operate than onshore wind. Shipping, logistics, higher upfront equipment costs all add to the costs. However, as the turbines are getting bigger and more efficient, the levelised cost of offshore wind on a per-MW basis has fallen significantly. Bigger turbines mean fewer turbines (and associated reduction in Capex and Opex costs) for an offshore wind project of the same capacity. The scale, efficiency and technology gains are further leading to the cost reductions. In addition, interest rates are at historic lows. This reduces the overall cost of capital for offshore wind, where upfront Capex costs are high and require leverage for the overall economics to work.

Source: BNEF. (Other: Spain, Portugal, Italy, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Lithuania, Greece).

2. GROWING GEOGRAPHIC SPREAD AND TARGETS

The World Bank estimates suggest that 71,000GW of offshore wind resource potential is available across nearly 100 countries. The Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) estimates that by 2050 Asia will lead the world in offshore wind with nearly 40% of the world’s offshore wind installed capacity, followed by Europe (32%), North America (18%), Latin America (6%), the Pacific region (4%) and Africa and the Middle East (2%). Not a month goes by without governments announcing new offshore wind targets, which helps guide the industry. The USA has set a target of 30GW of offshore wind by

2030. South Korea has announced a target of 12GW of offshore wind by 2030. The EU Offshore Renewable Energy Strategy targets 300 GW of offshore wind by 2050 and 60 GW by 2030. The UK continues to remain a success story setting targets of 40GW of offshore wind by 2030. Germany, Denmark, France, Poland, Norway, Ireland, Sweden, the Baltics, China, Taiwan, Japan, and Vietnam remain key offshore wind markets. SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

FEATURE 3. FLOATING OFFSHORE WIND

80% of the world’s offshore wind resource potential lies in waters deeper than 60m where wind speeds are higher but where bottom-fixed offshore wind turbines are difficult to install as the bottom-fixed offshore wind turbines are rooted to the seabed. On the other hand, the floating offshore wind turbines are deployed on top of floating structures secured to the seabed with mooring lines and anchors. Therefore, floating turbines can be installed in deeper waters further away from the shores. The deeper waters benefit from more consistent wind resources. The energy yield from the projects increases while reducing the levelised cost of the energy. The GWEC estimates that the floating wind installations will reach 1GW annually in 2026, moving on from technology demonstrator projects. The GWEC further estimates that the full commercialization of floating offshore wind with multi-GW projects will occur by 2030. WindEurope, an industry body, predicts one-third of all offshore wind turbines installed in Europe by 2050 could be floating. There are significant floating offshore wind tenders underway or planned for 2021 and beyond. For example, Norway is launching a tender process for floating offshore wind later in 2021. Norway has designated a dedicated area for new floating offshore wind – Utsira Nord, offering the opportunity

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

Source: BNEF

to build up to 1.5GW of capacity. Floating offshore wind also represents an opportunity for oil & gas companies to bring deep water exploration and drilling expertise to renewable energy. Shell, for example, recently launched the world’s largest hydrogen electrolyzer at one of its German refineries, which will be powered by offshore wind to provide a cleaner source of fuel.

4. OFFSHORE MARINE ENERGY PARKS

A consortium of 16 European energy companies and research groups has kicked off a €45m ($53m) project to deliver ‘world-first bankable hybrid offshore marine energy parks that combine offshore wind power with solar and wave energy. The European Scalable Offshore Renewable Energy Sources (EU-SCORES) will build two demonstration plants: a (i) 3MW offshore solar system by floating solar outfit off the Belgian coast co-located with a bottom-fixed wind farm; and (ii) a 1.2MW wave energy array in Portugal co-located with a floating wind farm. The projects intend to demonstrate the benefits of a continuous, more resilient and stable power system by leveraging the three complementary power sources. This is expected to lead to higher capacity factors and a lower total cost per MW hour. Denmark is also progressing with its plan for a $34 billion man-made energy island in the North Sea. The island is expected to support infrastructure for Denmark’s offshore wind parks. Once completed, the island is expected to supply 3GW of electricity by 2033. Denmark has agreed on strategic partnerships with other countries, including Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg.

5. OFFSHORE WIND-TO-HYDROGEN

There is a growing requirement to reduce GHG emissions in the transport and industrials sector. This is has led to renewed interest in renewable hydrogen. Offshore wind could be the critical piece to produce renewable hydrogen at scale. The projects pipeline is increasing with over 17GW of announced electrolyzer capacity. What is needed for offshore wind-to-hydrogen to take off is a combination of (i) wind resources, (ii) extensive subsea and onshore gas pipeline network, (iii) offshore wind supply chain, and (iv) supportive legal and regulatory architecture and demand for hydrogen. Most of these drivers already exist in the North Sea and other mature offshore oil & gas areas. The hydrogen production cost is falling rapidly. BNEF estimates the mid-range levelised cost of hydrogen to be $4.6/

kg in 2030 for an offshore wind project with an onshore electrolyzer. BNEF further forecasts that the mid-range levelised cost of hydrogen will fall to around $1.0/kg by 2050 as offshore wind projects and electrolyzers get cheaper. The government mandates to use hydrogen (similar to renewables) will further drive up demand for green hydrogen and reduce costs as the industry matures and scales. Another option for offshore wind to hydrogen market to consider is to skip the electricity network entirely. This involves developing floating offshore wind-powered hydrogen plants in the deepwater regions constructed in waters too deep for bottom-fixed turbines. This could avoid the need for complex, time-consuming and expensive permitting issues and do away with the need for electricity interconnectors and dependence on the local (and regulated) electricity markets. A floating offshore wind project with a co-located hydrogen production plant could produce and store hydrogen on platforms. The hydrogen is then shipped via tankers to target the global hydrogen or green shipping market. The objective is to sell molecules in a bigger global market rather than electrons in a locally regulated market. Of course, the costs need to be reduced for the economics to work, but the idea is moving forward through technology demonstrator plants. The changing legal and policy architecture, including stringent GHG targets, hydrogen mandates and carbon pricing norms, is further helpful in driving demand for this potential market.

CONCLUSION

It is impressive how far the offshore wind industry has come in the last decade. While the challenges remain, they are not insurmountable. The industry is set for consolidation and further building on its growth story in the next decade and onwards. The submarine and the wider marine industry has a real opportunity to align with the growth story in offshore wind. STF SHASHANK KRISHNA advises clients in the international energy and infrastructure sectors, focusing on the emerging markets of the Middle East and Africa. He has experience in various industries such as power and renewables, oil & gas, LNG, refining and petrochemicals, social and economic infrastructure and metals, mining and commodities. His practice is focused on M&A, joint ventures and project development and financing involving complex and high-value energy and infrastructure projects across the value chain. Shashank has practised law in large international firms in London, Singapore and New Delhi and has worked on transactions involving nearly 50 jurisdictions with approx. $100 billion in deal and asset value. Shashank has been involved in some prestigious pro bono projects, including pro bono legal advice to the Governments of Sierra Leone and Nepal.

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

REGISTER BY 1 NOVEMBER FOR BEST RATES Advertise, sponsor, exhibit, host a meeting, or participate in the PTC Awards 2022.

LEARN MORE AT PTC.ORG/PTC22

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

DID YOU KNOW? Pacific Telecommunications Council (PTC) is a global non-profit membership organization PTC’s mission is to advance the ethical development and use of information and communication technologies (ICT) With your support of PTC’22: Reunite. Rethink. Renew. as well as membership dues, PTC is able to give back through various community outreach initiatives:

PTC ACADEMY

PTC PROJECTS

PTC YOUNG SCHOLAR PROGRAM

PTC RESEARCH AWARDS

Join PTC PTC Membership–open to any person or entity worldwide with professional interests in the Pacific region pertaining to telecommunications, information technology, or related fields–is the most powerful way to reach and connect with leading companies, executives, prospects, partners, and thought leaders in ICT.

LEARN MORE AT PTC.ORG/JOIN

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

BACK REFLECTION

THE “ALMOST” SECOND SUBMARINE CABLE IN NORTH AMERICA: 1855 NEWFOUNDLAND – NOVA SCOTIA BY PHILIP PILGRIM

f you have read the last two Back Reflection articles on the early cables in Eastern Canada, you may be wondering why we are now jumping ahead to 1855. You may also be wondering what had happened since we last left off in January 1853 with Gisborne heading to St. John’s, Newfoundland to continue building the North American telegraph network closer to London. Well that will be the subject of a future article that focuses on a terrestrial route across Newfoundland and the passing of the baton from Frederic Newton Gisborne to Cyrus Field. This article focuses on the first efforts of Field and the continuance of Gisborne’s plan: to connect Newfoundland with New York by telegraph and reduce Telegraph Route from NYC and the location of the 1855 Cable

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

the time for communications between London and New York. In March 1854, Cyrus Field is now heading the project with his new company, the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company (N.Y.N.L.T.C). They hold a 50-year exclusivity agreement for landing cables in Newfoundland (inherited from Gisborne’s dissolved company). The new goal is to connect New York City to London by electric telegraph. The project is commonly known as the Atlantic Cable and it builds upon the earlier efforts and ideas of Gisborne and John Watkins Brett. The term “Atlantic Cable” is a slight misnomer as five cables were actually required. There are three significant bodies of water, and a two less signif-

icant bodies of water between New York and London. These all needed to be traversed by submarine cables. The three significant cables required were: 1. Irish Sea - 65 miles 2. Atlantic Ocean - 2,000 miles 3. Gulf of Saint Lawrence - 75 miles via N.S. (or 150 miles via P.E.I.) Let’s now look at the project from the company’s business perspective in 1854 to see what influenced their decision making. Crossing the Irish Sea in 1854 was not a priority, nor profitable, as there were already two cables operating between Ireland and Scotland (along with three other freshly failed cables in the same sea). As to crossing the Atlantic Ocean, the New York, Newfoundland, and London

Telegraph Co. nor the current technology was ready at that time. So, the obvious first project was to cross the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. This would also extend N.Y.C.’s telegraphic reach another 600 miles closer to London and reduce the “latency” by three days. This was Gisborne’s original plan that started the wheels in motion back in 1850. Fortunately for Field, with the Atlantic Cable suddenly becoming a reality, the Nova Scotia Electric Telegraph Company (N.S.E.T.C.), who had previously blocked Gisborne’s efforts in 1851 to transit their network, now realized they could lose all transatlantic telegraph transit traffic to their northern neighbouring province of Prince Edward Island (P.E.I.). With Field’s “mega-project” looming, they re-evaluated their position and negotiated new and reasonable terms with the New York, Newfoundland, and London Telegraph Company. Thus, the Nova Scotia bypass route was not needed, and a shorter cable could be laid across the Gulf to save costs and reduce risk to Field. This was a blow to the province of P.E.I. whose only cable also failed in August of 1854. So, the stage is set for this article to move forth and describe the wonderful lay of the 1855 Gulf Cable; well that is not the case. In 1854, Field’s company was in the same predicament as Gisborne’s earlier company; they needed significant financing and much improved technology to realize their Atlantic Cable’s

cable station, the lay of the cable, and details of 1855 life in Newfoundland (rural Port Aux Basques & metropolitan St. John’s) as well as in Nova Scotia (the town of Sidney, its nearby Micmac [sic] settlement, and its coal mines). Most notable is that the accounts and tone used in the subsequent newspaper articles, magazine articles and books vary dramatically; especially with typeset typos. Furthermore, these illustrators and writers also helped land the cable and construct the cable station in Cape Ray. For additional promotion List of Passengers Aboard the Lay Vessel, James Adger. and as a demonstration of confidence, Field also invited N.Y.C. heads of society, success. The early cables were not business, and finance to travel to robust, laying techniques were not mature, and ships and their apparatus Newfoundland and enjoy a sea cruise to witness the event. As mentioned in for laying cables were not developed. an earlier article, the Atlantic Cable For Field to fund a cable across the project’s magnitude was equivalent Atlantic, he needed many investors, to the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo some of which joined his company, Moon Mission so it was a significant but he also needed market funding, historic event gaining the attention of promotion, and publicity. These last three items are what makes this 1855 the world. Field’s family, and dream team of cable lay most interesting. company directors included Samuel For this author to try and cover Morse (Morse Code). They also particthe details of the lay, it would be a ipated in the cruise. Passenger lists redisservice as Field hired professional cord that Gisborne was also on board writers, illustrators, and pressmen to for the lay but accounts of his activities participate in the expedition and to in the lay are yet to be discovered. His document the lay. This was done to role in the new company had been promote the beginning of the Atlandissolved after selling his company’s tic Cable project, to drum up public interest, and to entice investors. These exclusive landing rights and debt to Field in March,1854. wonderful written accounts cover the Here is a brief chronology of the lay: transiting journey from N.Y.C. to Newfoundland, the building of the SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

BACK REFLECTION

PRE-LAY TRANSIT

DIGRESSIONS:

• Jul. 29 The bark Sarah L. Bryant 1. The various newspapers, magadeparts Liverpool, England for Port zines, and books describing the lay Aux Basques, Newfoundland with all expound upon the wonderful the 85-mile cable payload in the hull Newfoundland dogs of St. John’s. and lay machinery on deck. (Note: The passengers, while enjoying 85 miles = 75 nautical miles) themselves in St. John’s, seemed • Aug. 7 The steamer James Adger so enamoured that reports of 20 to departs NYC with a contingent of 40 dogs (including puppies) being sixty-two guests as passengers. purchased by the passengers and • Aug. 9 The Adger arrives in Halifax taken aboard the Adger make one for a nine hour stop. Perhaps Giswonder what it was like on that borne boarded here as he lived in Halifax at the time? • Aug.12 The Adger arrives at the rendezvous point of Port aux Basques, Newfoundland. The cable transport ship from England had not arrived so the Adger sails to St. John’s to visit with government officials. • Aug. 14 The Adger arrives in St. John’s. • Aug. 15 A banquet is held in St. John’s for the passengers of the Adger. • Aug. 15 The bark Sarah L. Bryant arrives at the rendezvous point of Port aux A portion of Passenger Bayard Taylor’s Account of the Lay for the Basques (having transported N.Y. Tribune the cable from England for the past 18 days) • Aug. 16 The Adger and its passenvessel. Perhaps it is time to remind gers continue to enjoy St. John’s. the reader that a “Poop Deck” is de• Aug. 17 A ball is held in St. John’s fined by Webster as “a partial deck for the passengers of the Adger. above a ship’s main afterdeck”. • Aug. 18 The Adger departs St. John’s 2. It is fitting that the first cable ship in for Port aux Basques. North America, the Ellen Gisborne, • Aug. 20 The Adger arrives in Port aux attended the same ball on August Basques to meet with the bark Sarah 17, 1855. It transported the GoverL. Bryant. The bark has waited for five nor of Nfld. To the event. (SubTel days. The N.Y.N.L.T.C.’s steamer, VicForum Magazine Issue 118). toria, is also anchored with the Bryant. The Victoria will support the lay.

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

• Survey Aug. 20 The Adger sails to Nova Scotia, surveys the route and landing, then returns on the 21st.

LAY

• Aug. 22 The Victoria steams the 10 miles north to Cape Ray from Port aux Basques to build the cable station and land the test instruments and batteries. All accounts state that some of the timbers for the station went astray in the strong waves near the shore, but the Intrepid Newfoundland dogs swam out to Intercept the wayward lumber with Integrity (IT Telecom plug for my fellow Canucks!) and retrieved the wayward wood. • Aug. 23 The cable end is brought ashore at Cape Ray. • Aug. 24 Fog. • Aug. 25 The Adger is connected to the Sarah L. Bryant to begin the lay (The Bryant would be towed by the Steam ship Adger). Difficulties in departing caused the two ships to flounder. The Bryant lost an anchor and drifted. The two ships hit each other then the Victoria leaped into action and steamed to assist the Bryant by towing it away from the rocks. The cable was cut to prevent further complications and all ships regained control. • Aug. 27 An attempt was made to land a fresh end of the cable at Cape Ray, but it was postponed due to high winds. (The winds in the area and notorious. They descend from a high plateau and have even blown trains off the tracks). • Aug. 28 The cable is successfully landed at Cape Ray and the lay

commences towards Cape North, Nova Scotia. During the first day, the cable kinks three times when leaving the hold of the Bryant and has to be repair-spliced each time. The weather deteriorates as the lay progresses. • Aug. 29 The lay continues until around 4 AM when the winds reach gale-force. 40 miles of cable has been laid and 45 miles remain on board. The ships are now floundering again in the heavy seas tied to each other with two hawsers (tow ropes). Those on board the Adger were worried the Bryant would sink with its heavy cargo and pull the Adger down with it. The lead engineer, Samuel Canning, refuses to give the order to cut the cable while the two ships toss about. Waiting for Canning to do the right thing lasts for two hours until Captain Edward Pousland, of the Sarah L. Bryant, notifies Canning that he would cut it. Canning does not oppose.

Note: Had the ship sunk and all hands lost including the family of Samuel Morse and three of the Field brothers, it would have been a terrible loss and set submarine telegraph in North America back ten to fifteen years. The alternate path to connect London to NYC via Russia and “Russian Alaska” in 1865 may have become the first to connect these cities. • Aug. 30 The steamer James Adger, with the Bark Sarah L. Bryant in tow, reaches Sydney, Nova Scotia. The remaining cable (45 miles) was unloaded in Sydney.

INSURANCE

Field had insured the cable, and the cable lay project, for $75,000 with Lloyds of London on June 15th, 1855. Reports show that by February 18th, 1856, Lloyds have

not settled with Fields and he is threatening court actions in the U.K. An article on July 9th, 1856, states that Lloyd’s finally settled with Field on or about June 15th, 1856. The settlement was for $69,000 and Field was allocated ownership to the unlaid cable remaining in Sydney and to the cable remains on the ocean floor.

EARLY CABLE RECOVERY

The Brigantine Ellen recovered the laid portion of the 1855 cable between June 29 and July 21, 1856. The pick-up started at the Cape Ray end as it did not require grapnel runs. Approximately 23 miles was recovered before a storm ended the operation. This

Excerpt of a Cyrus Field’s Letter Printed in The London Times, Feb. 18, 1856

1855 Cable Route, As Laid, and Recovered

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

BACK REFLECTION perhaps may be the first recorded example of cable recovery from the ocean floor.

EARLY CABLE RECYCLING

There was a resourcefulness to Field as it seems he had arrangements to reuse the recovered and unused 1855 cable across any river, or to any nearby island in North America. This includes the Canso Gut in Nova Scotia, which is one of the “two less significant bodies of water” between NYC and London that was mentioned in this article’s third paragraph. In researching the first cables laid in the world, one can find many tables of cables. Some of these include very short cables. By inspection, any unique 3 conductor cables on or about 1855 laid in North America are most certainly the recycled 1855 Gulf of St. Lawrence cable. Also, there must still be countless undocumented smaller cables that are cut from the 1855 cable remains. Here in Nova Scotia, there are three that are documented: 1. Canso Gut (#9 in the list: Plaister Cove to Port Mulgrave) 2. Lennox Passage (#2 in the list) 3. Pugwash Harbour (#43 in the list with typo “Arichat”)

CONTROVERSY, LESSONS LEARNED, AND MISCELLANEOUS

Here are some interesting items discovered while researching this cable lay. • The U.S.A. vs. U.K. methods for executing projects was debated in the press. Critiques of the American fanfare and failure were put forth, but they were countered by, “We’ll be back at it next year and lay the cable.”. The writers aboard the Adger reported the barking and howling Newfoundland dogs spooked some of the superstitious crew. They thought it was an omen for a voyage leading to disaster. They were partially correct, but it was the Adger that had the largest bark (in tow) …groan.

Another 3-conductor cable in Nova Scotia, documented elsewhere, is across Pictou Harbour. You can also note the many cables in the NYC area that are from the 1855 cable. Gisborne’s Ship’s Telegraph Invention 1863

SUBMARINE TELECOMS MAGAZINE

List of Short Submarine Telegraph Cables in North America 1854 to 1861 (Most are pieces of the 1855 Cable)

• The method of towing a large vessel laden with a cable created extra challenges for cable laying. The development of dedicated cable ships soon ended this technique, but it is still a tried-and-true method used even today. Where waters are too shallow for a cable ship, a flat bottom barge is the transport of choice. • Gisborne, the inventor, must have noted the constant starting, stopping, and slowing command messages between the two ships and between the engine room and bridge. In 1863 he patented the Ship’s Engine Order Telegraph (Annunciator). This device provides instant communication between the bridge and engine room of a ship. We commonly see this device in nearly every movie with a ship or submarine. • Field and his team seemed to enjoy last minute cable station builds. They only purchased the land for a cable station in Cape North on September 9th, 1855. One of the agents signing for the N.Y.N.L.T.C. was also on the passenger list of the James Adger (Stephen Jason Sluyter). Again in 1858, we find Cyrus Field arriving with the cable at the unfinished Atlantic Cable station in Bay Bulls, Newfoundland. He had attempted to land the cable there a year earlier in 1857. During the lay, when the weather worsened and the ships drifted off track, a blame game started that carried on for years accusing the James Adger captain of going off course and wasting cable as well as causing the two vessels to collide. Some reports state that he become difficult only after being offended by

not being offered a seat at the head of the table early in the lay.

THE CABLE TODAY:

Here is an image of the 1855 three-conductor cable. It was manufactured by Messrs. W. Kupert & Co. at Morden Wharf, East Greenwich, London. It was ~ 1 inch in diameter. It would be difficult to find samples of this illusive cable on the beaches of Cape Ray as the cable was recovered from that location in 1856 however, the list of river crossings would provide the best locations for cable hunting. In 2016, Janet and I searched for

this cable in the Gut of Canso crossing between Plaister Cove and Port Mulgrave. We did not find the 3-conductor cable 1855 cable, but we did find a monstrous 20-conductor cable! So, if you consider the current trend to build Spatial Division Multiplexing (SDM) cables with high fiber counts, it is not really new. Another doggy digression: While on our second hunt for cables (2014 in P.E.I.), we were in a precarious location as the tide was coming in and we were on a shrinking shoreline with a 10m high edge however, watching over us from above was a Newfoundland dog!=In 2019, Janet and I visited Port

1855 Cable Cross Sections

A 20 Conductor Submarine Telegraph Cable

SEPTEMBER 2021 | ISSUE 120

BACK REFLECTION

aux Basques and Cape Ray. One of the goals was to find the 1853 terrestrial telegraph line (which Janet immediately found of course), and to try and geolocate this 1855 illustration showing the terrestrial telegraph between Port aux Basques and Cape Ray. The poles and line are shown faintly in the background.

A Newfoundland Dog High Above Watching Our Cable Hunting in PEI

ACCURACY OF THE ACCOUNTS:

With respect to the accounts, and with hindsight being 20/20, Cyrus Field and a fellow N.Y.N.L.T.C. director, Peter Cooper, both accounted they had waited for days in Port aux Basques at the rendezvous point, but the pressmen on board reported they did not wait at the rendezvous point and went instead to St. John’s for several days. The Illustrated London News of Oct. 20, 1855, reported that the each of three cable conductors eventually failed one after the other as the lay continued, but it was not until the final conductor failed that they cut the cable. Other accounts state there was a 2-hour standoff in a storm where the chief engineer, Samuel Canning, would not give the order to cut the cable but the captain of the bark holding the cable gave the order to save the lives of those on board. Perhaps this artistic interpretation of the Adger and elite passengers tells a story…. and is that Gisborne on the high wire? Illustration of the James Adger in Rough Seas in John Mullaly’s 1855 Book A Trip to Newfoundland

SubTel Forum Magazine #120 - Offshore Energy

Articles inside

TAMPNET CONTINUES TO GROW ITS PRESENCE IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

EXPANDING OFFSHORE NETWORKS

THE 2021 US OFFSHORE WIND MARKET UPDATE

6 QUESTIONS WITH GREG BERLOCHER: