What the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Obama and Massachusetts Deval Patrick Administrations, along with complicit media, are not telling you threatens to harm all of us.
The focus of this essay is on the Cape Wind proposed offshore wind energy project. While this evidence begs the question, "Is offshore wind energy technically viable and reasonably considered as a "reliable" source of energy in the U.S.?"
CAPE WIND FEATURES 130 wind turbines that were "discontinued" during this project NEPA permit review process. Cape Wind has most recently specified Siemens 3.6 MW wind turbines widely reported to be "sinking", "shifting", and "corroding" offshore United Kingdom.
The Cape Wind project was (130) 3.6 MW wind turbines made by General Electric that GE "discontinued". This GE model failed to perform offshore Arklow as (7) land-based wind turbines modified for offshore use. Although Cape Wind featured "discontinued" wind turbines, these were the entire focus of the Cape Wind 4,000 page project Draft Environmental Impact Statement involving approximately (17) state and federal reviewing agencies. These agencies of government that include US Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Coast Guard, the Federal Aviation Administration conducted publicly-funded, highly technical, and hardware-specific studies to determine the cost v benefits and impacts of (130) "discontinued" wind turbines over a period of several years. Incredibly, (130) "discontinued" Cape Wind turbines were deemed "reliable" to be consistent with Mass General Law and federal mandates. The evidentiary paper trail of public comments to agencies and reviewing parties that Cape Wind proposed wind turbines were "discontinued" could blanket the 46 square mile ocean area lease. Ignoring this evidence, the state and federal governments, in concert with Cape Wind permit reviewing entities, deemed a "discontinued" wind turbine could deliver to us reliable energy. This determination clearly exists beyond the boundaries of truth. Cape Wind specified wind turbines were never "rolled out" in production having failed in the General Electric test-pilot offshore Ireland. This technology for offshore wind proved too challenging in the marine environment for General Electric and other wind industry giants.
Cape Wind project opponents identified the fact that Cape Wind was a phantom energy project to the lead federal agency. And, the finger-pointing began with Cape Wind Project Manager Rodney Cluck of Minerals Management Service, (see Cape Cod Times 9/28/08 below).
On December 15, 2009, D.P.U. was involved in contract negotiations between National Grid and Cape Wind with "discontinued wind turbines. On this date, as an individual intervenor involved in this process, I introduced into evidence to the Mass Department of Public Utilities that Cape Wind featured "discontinued" wind turbines, thus Cape Wind was Neither "reliable" as mandated by Mass General Law and, Nor could D.P.U. by National Grid solve for Cape Wind energy cost without actual wind turbine specifications and warranty information.
Cape Wind subsequently, during D.P.U. contract negotions with National Grid, announced that their project would feature Siemens (130) 3.6 MW wind turbines.
The lead federal permit application reviewing agency for Cape Wind was MMS that changed its name to BOERME after the Gulf Oil Spill under their purview. MMS and BOERME, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, the Mass State Department of Public Utilities, the Massachusetts Attorney General, and Massachusetts Office of Inspector General have all been provided evidence that GE 3.6 MW wind turbines were, "discontinued", and that Siemens 3.6 MW wind turbines are now "sinking", "shifting" and "corroding" offshore U.K. These facts demonstrates that Cape Wind cannot meet the standard of a "reliable' energy source as required under state and federal mandates. Citizens are entitled to a reliable source of energy under the laws being ignored by the state and federal government in the context of Cape Wind. But, this is about politics and public subsidies--not public or environmental interests, so the feds and the state remain mute on this harsh reality.
As it stands, Cape Wind is not a reliable source of energy, yet its energy cost is triple the cost of conventional energy and twice the price of available land-based energy through (2) "no bid" deals gifted by the federal and state governments. Should Cape Wind advance to construction, the public will pay a "green tax" premium to make our energy source less reliable by introduction of (130) "sinking" "shifting" and "corroding" Siemens 3.6 MW wind turbines. Cape Wind must be anticipated to fail by reasonable and responsible public servants who are encumbered to serve public interest met by reliable and commercially viable sources of energy.
Editor's note:
Please forward this Newsvine link to your representatives to put them on Notice. Cape Wind pre-construction is failing, yet this developer still intends to collect public subsidies to make your energy source less reliable and three times more costly. That's just not acceptable!
The evidence in the hands of the Cape Wind involved regulators reveals what appears to be collusion between the state and federal government. They are prepared to sell you exactly what you do not need--cost-prohibitive and unreliable offshore wind energy.
Respectfully,
Barbara Durkin
The evidence:
Cape Cod Times, September 25, 2008: 'GE may change Cape Wind direction'
http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080925/BIZ/809250310/-1/NEWS
This article states:
"General Electric — identified earlier as the prospective supplier of wind turbines — appears to have dropped the 3.6-megawatt model Cape Wind had hoped to use, said Rodney Cluck, Cape Wind project manager for U.S. Minerals Management Service."
"In documents filed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Massachusetts environmental officials before 2005, Cape Wind officials listed the GE model as the turbine they had planned to use for the project, Cluck said."
The MMS Cape Wind Project Manager, however; must know that while under his MMS watch in 2008; Cape Wind officials listed the "discontinued" GE 3.6 MW wind turbine in the draft EIS as the focus of the DEIS, "Description of Proposed Action":
Cape Wind Energy Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
January 2008
Bookmark 2.0 "Description of Proposed Action"
(see top of page 69-70 where Cape Wind identifies GE 3.6 MW wind turbines will be used) http://www.mms.gov/offshore/renewableenergy/DEIS/Volume%20I%20-%20Cape%20Wind%20DEIS/Cape%20Wind%20DEIS.pdf
Cape Cod Times September 25, 2009 continues:
"Although no manufacturer has been chosen by Cape Wind, a 3.6-megawatt turbine made by Germany-based Siemens or a 3.0-megawatt turbine made by Denmark's Vestas are being considered, Rodgers said."
"GE Wind Energy Europe Managing Director Rainer Broring states the 3.6 MW GE 3.6l has been shelved for the moment, "GE's initial plan to install a prototype this year will therefore not materialise yet..."
"GE Wind, the subsidiary of the American energy giant General Electric, has left the risky business at sea altogether. Although seven 3.6-MW turbines have operated since 2003 ten kilometres off the Irish port of Arklow, the more secure business is on shore, says a spokesman of the company."
http://www.newenergy.info/index.php?id=1592
GE 3.6 MW wind turbine is "discontinued": page 4:
http://www.solentcomposites.com/images%5Cnews%5CWind%20innovation%20slows.%20REW%200807.pdf
GE 3.6 MW wind turbines "discontinued" status page 15 under "Offshore Wind Turbine Suppliers":
http://tlc.usm.maine.edu/2_Musial_Offshore%20renewables-UMaine-V2.pdf
GE 3.6 MW offshore wind turbine status:
"General Electric 3.6sl (discontinued). Capacity 3.6 MW, rotor diameter 111 m. Hub height 75 m (from Cape Wind design specs). Seven 3.6s units producing power offshore at Arklow Bank since June 2004. See product brochure for GE 3.6sl. Based on experience at Arklow, GE had a set of engineering modifications to make for serial production of an offshore machine, but the company has to date decided not to compete in this market."
http://www.ocean.udel.edu/windpower/hardware.html
Gunfleet Sands original plan called for GE 3.6 MW/ This project will use Siemens 3.6 MW, (not available in the U.S. market, or apparently for their project), instead:
http://www.solentcomposites.com/images%5Cnews%5CWind%20innovation%20slows.%20REW%200807.pdf
Offshore wind drivetrains account for windturbines out of commission 39%:
http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/07/25/wind-turbine-drivetrains-reliability-and-serviceability/
Windturbine Drivetrains – Reliability and Serviceability
July 25th, 2011
by CleanTechies Guest Author
Offshore wind power is undergoing intense growth in order to meet the European energy targets laid out for 2020. Research and development is being carried out into all aspects of the industry as it attempts to emerge as the main source of renewable energy throughout Europe.
An integral component of a wind turbine, the drivetrain is continually evolving as new concepts and designs are explored. As larger turbines are developed, and more wind farms are installed in deeper water, the service and maintenance of each component must also be considered.
The design of drivetrains is moving towards direct drive technology, and new initiatives are also being developed in hydraulic and hydrodynamic technology. All of the new concepts and designs have reliability as a central aim in development, as drivetrain failure is a big contributor to the time a wind turbine spends out of commission.
Operation and Development
Planned maintenance at sea is a much more complicated routine than on land, and unexpected service visits are highly unwelcome. A wind turbine drivetrain may have a yearly maintenance routine consisting of generator brush inspections, gearbox oil and filter changes, LSS bearing grease refill and container removal. The extra overheads of a boat, a crew, and sea trained technicians can easily amount to several thousand pounds; and the weather can delay schedule and increase the costs.
According to data gathered from existing offshore wind farms, drivetrain, generator, and gearbox failures account for around 14% of all down time for offshore turbines.
Due to the complexity of repairs, however, they account for 39% of the time a turbine is out of commission per year. Typical failures include HSS generator and bearing damage, coupling degradation and internal gearbox component failures.
There are several causes associated with drivetrain failure, some specific to the offshore environment. Wind speed can increase considerably even when only a short distance from the shore; while this improves the potential for energy production, it significantly increases the stress and pressure placed on components and can cause fatigue damage far quicker than in onshore applications. Turbulence is also greatly increased at sea, and although designers plan the layout of wind farms to avoid it, turbines can still be subject to downstream turbulence from other turbines in the grid.
Continue reading this article: http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/07/25/wind-turbine-drivetrains-reliability-and-serviceability/
Cape Wind IS as described in the project Construction Operation Plan COP as (130) Siemen’s 3.6 MW wind turbines. Cape Wind was previously described (Project Action) in the Cape Wind DEIS as GE 3.6 MW wind turbines. Thusly, Cape Wind represents an unreliable energy source “discontinued”, “sinking”, “shifting” and “corroding” wind turbines manufactured by GE AND Siemens.
General Electric GE:
"GE Wind Energy Europe Managing Director Rainer Broring states the 3.6 MW GE 3.6l has been shelved for the moment, "GE's initial plan to install a prototype this year will therefore not materialise yet..."
"GE Wind, the subsidiary of the American energy giant General Electric, has left the risky business at sea altogether. Although seven 3.6-MW turbines have operated since 2003 ten kilometres off the Irish port of Arklow, the more secure business is on shore, says a spokesman of the company."
< >http://www.newenergy.info/index.php?id=1592http://www.newenergy.info/index.php?id=1592
GE 3.6 MW wind turbine is "discontinued": (page 4):
http://www.solentcomposites.com/images%5Cnews%5CWind%20innovation%20slows.%20REW%200807.pdf
GE 3.6 MW wind turbines "discontinued" status page 15 under "Offshore Wind Turbine Suppliers":
http://tlc.usm.maine.edu/2_Musial_Offshore%20renewables-UMaine-V2.pdf
GE 3.6 MW offshore wind turbine status:
"General Electric 3.6sl (discontinued). Capacity 3.6 MW, rotor diameter 111 m. Hub height 75 m (from Cape Wind design specs). Seven 3.6s units producing power offshore at Arklow Bank since June 2004. See product brochure for GE 3.6sl. Based on experience at Arklow, GE had a set of engineering modifications to make for serial production of an offshore machine, but the company has to date decided not to compete in this market."
http://www.ocean.udel.edu/windpower/hardware.html
Cape Wind spec'd turbines, newly installed, are sinking, shifting and corroding. Yet, citizens are entitled to "reliable" energy under M.G.L. and the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
- Recharge: 8/13/10 Siemens hires vessel to tackle turbine corrosion
Wind
The 3.6MW turbines being assembled in Siemens' factory at Brande, Denmark, before being shipped to Burbo Bank
Siemens Wind Power has discovered significant problems with the corrosion protection of pitch bearings in its 3.6MW offshore turbines, and has contracted the MPI Resolution jack-up vessel to carry out a major maintenance campaign, Recharge has learned.
Related Stories
- Siemens buys 49% A2SEA stake to deepen offshore ties
- Siemens receives offshore turbine order for EnBW Baltic 2
- Siemens launches new 3MW direct-drive model
The company is carrying out preventative maintenance on all its 3.6MW turbines with similar pitch bearings of the same type and age group.
The repairs will involve the temporary removal of blades from all the turbines installed at the 90MW Burbo Bank offshore wind farm, off the northwestern coast of England, with the work done by the jack-up vessel.
Blade removal will not be required for other offshore turbines with slightly different design features.
Siemens says the corrosion protection of the pitch bearings for new turbines has been addressed from the start of this year.
The German manufacturer has contracted the Resolution for several months, according to MPI. Until now, the vessel has been used almost entirely for installing offshore wind farms rather than for maintenance operations.
Siemens says the vessel will be carrying out works at the UK’s Lynn and Inner Dowsing, Gunfleet Sands, Burbo Banks and Rhyl Flats wind farms. The campaign includes scheduled maintenance, some upgrades and the replacement of components.
The ship is likely to cost about £100,000 ($155,000) per day plus fuel to charter.
The company stresses that there have been no incidents or damage relating to the problem at Burbo.
“The turbines have operated reliably and safely. They will continue to do so, and the only downtime experienced at this wind farm has been caused by preparation and execution of preventive maintenance,” a Siemens spokesman says.
He says the affair demonstrates the company’s “pro-active response to any deviation from specification”.
The spokesman points out that the Resolution “is capable of dynamic positioning, which has important advantages, like highly flexible manoeuvring and quick set-up.”
The vessel “can quickly transfer between the east and west coast of the UK and will enable us to proceed with minimum weather downtime”.
The incident is the latest in a number of technical teething problems for the nascent offshore wind industry. Earlier this year, Recharge revealed foundation faults affecting hundreds of offshore turbines.
Repairs to correct a weakness in the transition piece structure that connects the tower to its monopile foundation are likely to be carried out at all wind farms with monopile turbines.
Transition piece structures were found not to be solid enough to withstand the stresses of harsh offshore conditions, and had moved a few centimetres.
Ben Backwell
Published: Friday, August 13 2010
"Everybody in the industry has this problem so all of us are interested in solving it," a spokesman for Dong Energy said. "This shows this is a young industry and there are experiences to learn from."
Context of this first important article regarding "Hundred of offshore wind farms are being checked after a construction fault was discovered in one of Europe-wide industry standards." Towers are shifting several centimeters under the impact of harsh offshore conditions.
The United States "first" "America's largest" 130 WTG offshore Cape Wind, in its 9th year of permit review, has announced it will install Siemens 3.6 MW wind turbines.
Cape Wind spec'd Siemens 3.6 MW monopile (also called monopole) (foundations) are installed at the newly commissioned UK offshore Gunfleet Sands AND ARE EFFECTED according to this news report.
http://www.4coffshore.com/windfarms/greater-gabbard-united-kingdom-uk05.html#stakeholders
"Dong Energy has discovered the fault on three of its wind farms: at Dogger Bank off the coast of Liverpool, at the newly-commissioned Gunfleet Sands, and at the massive Horns Rev 2 facility off Denmark. A total of 164 turbines are affected, the company reports."
The Independent
Fresh blow for wind farms as possible flaw is scrutinised
Industry investigates design error as offshore turbines hit by 'conditions'
By Sarah Arnott
Monday, 12 April 2010
Hundreds of offshore wind farms are being checked for a construction fault after a flaw was discovered in one of the Europe-wide industry standards.
The problem that has emerged is over the turbines' "monopile" foundations. The issue is centred on the grouting in the transition piece linking the turbine to its foundation, and the towers that are affected have shifted several centimetres under the impact of harsh offshore conditions.
The fault is not associated with a particular turbine model or manufacturer. Rather, it is an error in the generic design schematics signed off by the DNV, the Norwegian accreditation body, so the problem could show up in any turbine with a monopile foundation structure.
The industry is keen to play down the significance of the problem, stressing that the fault can be fixed and that there are no safety or performance implications. Even if every one of Britain's 336 offshore turbines were affected, the total cost of fixing the glitches would be "just" £50m, a fraction of the total cost of the installations, according to Charles Anglin, a director at RenewableUK, an industry group. But until all the checks have been completed, it is not possible to reliably estimate the impact.
"The problem is it will take a while to quantify the scale of the issue, "Mr Anglin said. "It is a concern and the industry is acting on it, but this is not something which is going to put anyone at risk or reduce output," he added.
The grout troubles first showed up last October at a wind farm at Egmond aan Zee in the Netherlands owned by Shell and Vattenfall.
Since then a task force of the big players in the offshore wind industry – including Centrica, E.ON and Dong Energy – has been working on the most effective solution to correct the monopile issue.
"Everybody in the industry has this problem so all of us are interested in solving it," a spokesman for Dong Energy said. "This shows this is a young industry and there are experiences to learn from."
continue reading this article:
http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5587102/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5jby51ay9pbmNvbWluZy9mcmVzaC1ibG93LWZvci13aW5kLWZhcm1zLWFzLXBvc3NpYmxlLWZsYXctaXMtc2NydXRpbmlzZWQtMTk0MjI3Ni5odG1s
Sinking turbines blow ill wind across offshore energy sector - Times Online
From Times Online
April 14, 2010
Sinking turbines blow ill wind across offshore energy sector
Angela Jameson
Hundreds of offshore wind turbines could be suffering from a design flaw that makes them sink into the sea.
Energy company engineers are urgently investigating the extent to which their offshore wind farms are affected, after flaws were discovered on a Dutch wind farm last autumn.
The problem could cost £50 million, said Renewables UK, the industry body that represents wind farm developers. It says that almost all of the 336 offshore turbines that have been erected could be affected as these were built to European standards now in question.
The problem arises in the concrete used to fix the turbine to its steel foundation. Shell found that some of the turbines at Egmond aan Zee, its Dutch wind farm, had moved a few centimetres. Centrica, owner of British Gas, and Dong Energy, the Danish wind group, admitted potential problems with some of their UK farms, but added that there was no safety or operational issue.
Related Links
Peter Madigan, head of offshore renewables for Renewables UK, said: “A fault has been identified and has been shared with the industry, which has moved to see if there is a larger problem.” If repairs are necessary, energy companies will do them one turbine at a time to keep energy losses down.
Dong Energy said that three of its offshore wind farms were affected, including Gunfleet Sands, which has 30 turbines off the Essex coast, and Burbo Bank, which has 25 turbines in Liverpool Bay. Centrica said that it was investigating its Lynn and Inner Dowsing wind farm in the North Sea but that its Barrow offshore farm was not affected. However, the industry must revise its design standards before the next round of wind farm construction.
Installation of 175 turbines on the giant London Array offshore wind farm off the Essex coast, in which Dong Energy and E.ON are partners, was due to take place this year. When completed, it is hoped that London Array will provide half the Government’s target of providing 15 per cent of UK electricity from renewable sources by 2015.
A spokesman for Dong Energy said that an appropriate solution would be found for London Array and that Dong was talking to its lawyers about who should pay for the problem.
The offshore wind industry has been at the heart of the UK economy’s shift to low carbon by Labour, but the cost of developing it, although it is heavily subsidised, is high and planning consents have proved difficult to obtain.
Experts say that although the UK coast is one of the windiest in the world, wind farms do not provide the sort of flexible power that Britain will need when its coal-fired and nuclear generators begin to close over the next decade.
http://www.windpowermonthly.com/go/europe/news/1022734/Siemens-forced-repair-coroding-bearings-36MW-offshore-turbines/
Siemens forced to repair coroding bearings on 3.6MW offshore turbines
James Quilter, Windpower Monthly, 17 August 2010, 2:22pm
OFFSHORE: Siemens is carrying out essential maintenance work on four offshore wind farms, including the recently opened Gunfleet Sands, after it was discovered the turbines' bearings were corroding.
Siemens 3.6MW offshore turbine
The four wind farms all use Siemens’ 3.6MW turbines. In addition to Dong Energy’s Gunfleet Sands, the affected developments are: Burbo Bank (Dong), Rhyl Flats (RWE) and Lynn and Inner Dowsing (Centrica). Gunfleet Sands was only brought online last month.
There are 181 turbines across all four wind farms.
A Siemens spokeswoman said that during routine maintenance it had discovered the"protection" had failed for the hub bearings.
Work to remedy the problem will take place over the coming weeks. In the meantime, Siemens said, all of the wind farms will continue to operate as normal.
Siemens was unable to confirm whether it would be seeking damages from the respective suppliers. The work will be funded by Siemens, despite the company needing to hire a 7000-ton vessel to carry it out.
The Siemens 3.6MW wind turbine has been described by some wind developers as the ‘workhorse’ of offshore. Recently it was picked as the turbine of choice for Cape Wind’s 420MW development in Nantucket Bay. [end]
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Complaint EL-119
Californians for Renewable Energy, Inc. (CARE), and Barbara Durkin
National Grid, Cape Wind, and the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities
(excerpt):
"The Minerals Management Service Cape Wind DEIS represents Cape Wind as requiring the use of GE 3.6 MW wind turbines in “Description of Proposed Action” Cape Wind Energy Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement January 2008 Bookmark 2.0 “Description of Proposed Action”.[1] Even according General Electric (“GE”) "GE Wind Energy Europe Managing Director Rainer Broring states the 3.6 MW GE 3.6l has been shelved for the moment, "GE's initial plan to install a prototype this year will therefore not materialise yet...GE Wind, the subsidiary of the American energy giant General Electric, has left the risky business at sea altogether. Although seven 3.6-MW turbines have operated since 2003 ten kilometres off the Irish port of Arklow, the more secure business is on shore, says a spokesman of the company"[2], “GE 3.6 MW wind turbine is "discontinued"”[3], “GE 3.6 MW wind turbines "discontinued" status”[4], “GE 3.6 MW offshore wind turbine status: "General Electric 3.6sl (discontinued). Capacity 3.6 MW, rotor diameter 111 m. Hub height 75 m (from Cape Wind design specs). Seven 3.6s units producing power offshore at Arklow Bank since June 2004. See product brochure for GE 3.6sl. Based on experience at Arklow, GE had a set of engineering modifications to make for serial production of an offshore machine, but the company has to date decided not to compete in this market." [5]
[1] See page 69-70 where Cape Wind identifies GE 3.6 MW wind turbines will be used
http://www.mms.gov/offshore/renewableenergy/DEIS/Volume%20I%20-%20Cape%20Wind%20DEIS/Cape%20Wind%20DEIS.pdf
[2] See http://www.newenergy.info/index.php?id=1592
[3] See http://www.solentcomposites.com/images%5Cnews%5CWind%20innovation%20slows.%20REW%200807.pdf at page 4
[4] See page 15 under "Offshore Wind Turbine Suppliers" http://tlc.usm.maine.edu/2_Musial_Offshore%20renewables-UMaine-
V2.pdf
