Date post: | 20-Mar-2017 |
Category: |
Engineering |
Upload: | alex-byrne |
View: | 12 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Trends, Technical Risks, and Opportunities in Partial Repowering Alex Byrne
March 1, 2017 AWEA OMS Conference
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 2017
Traditional wind turbine lifecycle
2
Repower
Extended life
DecommissionEnd of design lifeStart of operation
Inject gearboxes, blades, labor, cranes, effort to keep turbines running
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 2017
Benefit of repowering is to use of newer technology – why wait until turbines are facing obsolescence?
3
Full repowering: remove entire turbine and replace with new technology
Partial repowering: keep some portion of turbine and replace some portion with new technology
Studies have shown full repowering generally not attractive until after year 20 unless there are incentives– May 2016, IRS clarified criteria for project upgrades
to qualify for PTC– Investments must be 4x retained value– Calculations made per turbine pad– Business case highly project and turbine specific
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 20174
Aging fleet: 12% of US turbines are more than 10 years old
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 20175
What does partial repowering mean?
No formal definition of ‘partial’ Some options include:– Full nacelle and rotor replacement– Replacement of rotor, various drivetrain, ancillary
components and controls Tower and foundation likely to remain Tower replacement conceivable but may not result in
economically viable approach Large increases in rotor size (>20% increase) could result
in loads exceeding capacity in tower and foundations 20% rotor size increase ~ 10 to 20% energy boost
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 20176
Risks and benefits relative to new construction
Structural and foundation risks Energy risk Environmental and permitting concerns Contractual risks Electrical balance of plant impacts
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 20177
Site conditions and structural reliability risk
Stru
ctur
al lo
ad
Design load capacity (IEC)
20 yrs original turbine
site loading
20 yrs repower turbine
site loading
Innov
ation
!
10 yrs original
site load
20 yrs repower site load
10 yrs original site load
20 yrs repower site load
With partial repowering, some components will operate beyond their design life
Careful analysis of site conditions and fatigue loading is critical
Benign vs aggressive siting influences risk
Certification status of repowered turbines: still a question
Controls and material innovations in recent years reduce loads
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 20178
Towers and foundations
Foundations– New foundation loads must be assessed– Foundations older than 10 years may not have been
designed for fatigue– Assess current site and soil conditions– Review operating history of turbine for extreme events– Refurbishment might be possible, but costly
Towers– Non-destructive testing at key load points and welds– Evaluate fatigue, harmonics and tip clearance– New/old interface compatibility & adapters– Risk-based inspections
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 20179
Structural reliability risk challenges and mitigates
Analytical estimation of consumed life is uncertain– Without certification of repowered turbine, structural
risk likely higher than with new construction Inspection and repair plans / reserves help mitigate
this elevated risk Risk based inspections (RBI)– Inspect at an optimized interval to: – Maintain risk of failure below a target– Catch cracks before they are critical– Mitigate risk of continued operation of used
components in spite of uncertainty
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 201710
RBI conceptually
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 201711
Energy assessment: often lower uncertainty
DNV GL has seen 2-3% reduction in uncertainty in long term AEP
Why? Historic operating data provides better knowledge of:– Environmental and BOP loss factors – Grid curtailment and other interconnection
issues – Wake effects– Long term wind resource– Wind speed variation across site
Possible reduction in inter-turbine spacing– Impact on loads?– Sector management impact on energy?
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 201712
Contractual, environmental and permitting
Environmental: – Larger rotor: – Avian and wildlife review – Sound, shadow, and other setbacks
– Increased tip height: Changes to FAA approvals Local or state permitting and review processes –triggering new review
process? Contractual: – New turbine supply & installation agreement– New warranties– Interconnection Agreement –limitations or necessary changes?– Offtake agreements – min/max limits, term, rates, etc.– O&M agreements – Changes due to new turbines, parts, responsibilities
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 201713
Electrical Balance of Plant
Risks: – Turbine and plant capacity may change– Additional years of operation
Mitigation: – Evaluate equipment capacity and remaining
life of existing equipment– Pad transformers and cables– Medium voltage cables and overhead
conductors– Turbine grounding– Transmission– Interconnection
– Substation:– Main power transformers– Feeder circuit breakers– Main breakers– Reactive power compensation– Surge arresters
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 201714
Conclusions
We’ve seen a lot of interest in partial repowering including safe harbor activities in 2016 NextEra and BP have been public about their plans to repower Potential benefits can be compelling, but are site specific: – Increased energy – Increased reliability– Requalification for PTC
Risks must be assessed/mitigated:– Reliability of used components especially tower and foundation– Undersiting and improved controls can be leveraged– Risk based inspections to limit exposure to failure
– Environmental, permitting, contracts re-opened– Electrical BoP capacity and life
DNV GL white paper on partial repowering available at www.dnvgl.com/publications
DNV GL © 2017 01 March 201715
SAFER, SMARTER, GREENER
www.dnvgl.com
Thank you!
Alex [email protected]