Appendix

Country: Belgium

Form filled out by: TEE

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	2	More important for characterisation of wind loads than for resource assessment.
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	1	Sufficiently accurate resource estimates can be based on data from buoys and platforms combined with land-based meteo stations.
1.c Model estimates	2	Models need to be refined for off-shore application.
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	1	Required distance to shore is highly subjective parameter. No strong guidance. Water depth and wave height : a distinction needs to be made between short-term potential (eg. Water depth 5-20 m) and medium or long-term potential (water depth > 20m)
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	1	Marine traffic and military areas. Two off-shore windparks of 100 MW each are planned for 2004
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	3	Not important due to limited off-shore potential estimated at 1000 MWe ( or 3 TWhr) in 2020. To be compared to an estimated 100 TWhr total electricity production in Belgium in 2020.	Ampere Commission Report 12 Dec 2000	Y ( D, F) later available in English

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	No experience available.
2.a Size of wind farm
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	1=low 2=medium 3=high
3.b Availability	3	True availability (determined by technical availability and accessibility) is considered to be most important source of uncertainty. Also, relation between availability and maintenance cost should be analysed.
3.c
3.d
3.e

Country: Denmark

Form filled out by: Rebecca Barthelmie, Ris

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	3=high	Vindeby 1993 onwards Rdsand 1996 onwards Om Stlgrunde 1996 onwards Gedser 1996-2000 Horns Rev 1999 onwards Ls Syd 1999 onwards	(Barthelmie et al., 1995), (Barthelmie, 1999c), (Barthelmie et al.,1999b), (Barthelmie, 1999a)	Reports available inside Denmark
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	1=low	Typically use purpose built masts. Satellite data under investigation in WEMSAR project
1.c Model estimates	3=high	Yes for designated sites. Includes WAsP, Measure-Correlate-Predict and estimation based on Weibull distribution. Comparison with long-term land/coastal sites.	(Mortensen et al., 1994) (Barthelmie et al., 1998; Barthelmie et al., 1999a; Hjstrup et al., 1997)	Reports available inside Denmark
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	3=high	Government approach designates four main areas for offshore wind farms with a capacity of 8,000 MW. The areas were selected based on water depths between 5 and 11 m and avoiding national park areas, shipping routes, microwave links, military areas, etc. The distance from coastal areas varies from 7 to 40 km. This also minimises the visual impact onshore. If water depth limit is increased to 15 m the offshore potential in the main designated areas is of the order 16,000 MW	http://www.windpower.dk http://www.ens.dk/e21/e21uk/index.htm	Yes, energy Plan 21 available on line or for purchase in hardcopy.
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	3=high	Energy 21 Plan (see above). Two existing wind farms Vindeby and Tun Knob. In addition to designated areas: Middelgrunden wind farm operating from December 2000. Another under investigation at Sams. Full site description of planned and active wind farms in eastern Denmark (SEAS utility area) and in western Denmark (ELSAM utility area)		www.middelgrunden.dk : http://www.seas.dk/ https://www.elsam.com/default_ie.htm
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	1=low	If Energy Plan 21 is realised a total of 4000 MW of offshore wind power will be installed before 2030. Together with another 1,500 MW installed onshore Denmark will cover more than 50 per cent of total electricity consumption by wind energy. In comparison, the wind power capacity in 1998 was 1,100 MW.
1.g. National resource estimate	1=low	See above

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Horns Rev (1^st phase)	https://www.elsam.com/default_ie.htm (in Danish), (Neckelmann and Petersen, 2000)	Yes
2.a Size of wind farm		150 MW
2.b Year of construction		2002
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast		18 km
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Tidal range of the order 3-4 m Relatively high waves and deep water in comparison with other Danish sites. Detailed environmental considerations - see web site (mainly Danish with English summary).
2.f. Other		Extensive onsite wind and wave monitoring since 1999

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Ls Syd (1^st phase)	https://www.elsam.com/default_ie.htm (in Danish)	Yes
2.a Size of wind farm		150 MW
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Special site for black duck to the south of the site.
2.f. Other		Extensive meteorological monitoring since 1999

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Vindeby	(Barthelmie et al., 1996a; Barthelmie et al., 1994; Barthelmie et al., 1996b; Barthelmie et al., 1995; Dyre, 1990), (Frandsen S. et al., 1996; Hjstrup et al., 1994; Olsen and Dyre, 1993)	Yes
2.a Size of wind farm		4.7 MW (11 450 kW Bonus turbines)
2.b Year of construction		1991
2.c kWh per year		~12,000 MWh	(Olsen and Rasmussen, 1994),(Dyre, 1992)	yes
2.d Distance to coast		2-3 km	(Barthelmie et al., 1993)
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		Almost double	(Dyre, 1992)
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Low water depth 2-5 m First offshore prototype. Extensive ongoing on-site monitoring since 1993 (includes meteorology and turbines)

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Tun Knob	(Madsen, 1996)	Yes
2.a Size of wind farm		5 MW (10 turbines 0.5 MW)	https://www.elsam.com/default_ie.htm
2.b Year of construction		1995
2.c kWh per year		~14.6 GWh/y	(Barthelmie et al., 1999c)
2.d Distance to coast		3 km to Tun, 6 km to east coast of Jutland	Promotional leaflet from Midkraft
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Om Stlgrunde	www.seas.dk
2.a Size of wind farm		72 2.1 MW turbines. Total 150 W
2.b Year of construction		October 2005
2.c kWh per year		ca. 430 million
2.d Distance to coast		5.6 km to Om 11.1 km to Lolland
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		Investment ca. 16,000 million kr. (2000 prices)
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Environmental considerations given on project web page (in Danish)

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Rdsand	www.seas.dk
2.a Size of wind farm		150 MW (72 2.1 Bonus MW turbines)
2.b Year of construction		October 2002
2.c kWh per year		500 mill.
2.d Distance to coast		9-10 km south of Lolland
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		Investment about 16000 million kr (2000 prices)
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Ongoing intensive monitoring including meteorology, wave and currents. Special site for migratory birds. Environmental considerations given on project web page (in Danish)
2.f. Other

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Gedser	www.seas.dk
2.a Size of wind farm		150 MW
2.b Year of construction		October 2008
2.c kWh per year		500 mill.
2.d Distance to coast		5 km to Falster
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Environmental considerations given on project web page (in Danish)
2.f. Other

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Middelgrunden	www.middelgrunden.dk , www.middelgrunden.com, Larsen & Srensen (2001), Srensen et al. (2000), Srensen et al. (2001), (Barthelmie, 1999c)	Yes (Report available in Denmark)
2.a Size of wind farm		40 MW (20 turbines 2 MW)
2.b Year of construction		2000
2.c kWh per year		89,000,000 kWh
2.d Distance to coast		2 km
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		Comparable. 0.34 DKK/kWh production price.
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Built on an old dumpsite prohibited to shipping. Water depth 2-6 m. In the lee of the city of Copenhagen.

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Sams	http://www.veo.dk	Yes
2.a Size of wind farm		10 turbines 22-30 MW
2.b Year of construction	2002	At tender November 2001.
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast		4 km
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Water depth 14-18 m

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	3=high	Site dependent. Most designated sites have one year or more measurement data plus modelling. Uncertainties are estimated as 4% with 6 or more years of measurement data and 8% with one years measurement data. This analysis carried out using bootstrapping. In comparison with other sites using different models and long-term data sets uncertainties	(Barthelmie et al., 1998)	In Denmark
3.b Availability	3=high	Most analysis focuses on access for maintenance. Studies ongoing.
3.c
3.d
3.e

Country: Ireland

Form filled out by: Brian Gallachir

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	3	Testing commenced at 7 sites following the issuing of 7 licenses in Sept 2000 Arklow Bank (4), Greater Codling Bank, Blackwater Bank and Codling Bank	[1]	n
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	1	Offshore buoys owned and operated by the UK Met Office at Malin Head, Belmullet, Porcupine, Valentia and Rosslare.	[2]
1.c Model estimates	2	Assessment for offshore resource for the island of Ireland - based on windspeeds at 22 onshore locations, model developed for assessment and Weibull distribution with k=2	[3],[4]	y
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	2	Resource assessed at maximum water depths of 20m and 50m, with min distance from coastline 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 10 km (with max distance the 12 nautical mile territorial limit). Offshore stations will not typically be allowed within 5 km of the shore.	[3] [6]	y
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	3	Government targets exist for renewable energy up to 2005 (additional 500 MW). It is the policy of the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources to maximise the use of Irelands offshore resources. No targets yet exist specifically for offshore wind energy but a policy document on regulation has been published and an assessment of impacts on the offshore environment.	[5], [6],[7]	y
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	1	Practical resource with max water depth 20m and min distance from shore 5 km is 11 TWh or 32% of annual predicted electricity consumption in 2005	[3]

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm		Arklow Bank	[1], [8]	Y
2.a Size of wind farm		500 MW	[8]	Y
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast		10km	[8]	Y
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		571m - 635m (IR 450m - IR 500m) estimated	[8]	Y
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other		Foreshore licence to allow wind measurement awarded September 2000	[1]

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm		Kish Bank Wind Farm	[1]	Y
2.a Size of wind farm		200 250 MW	[9]	Y
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast		10 km	[9]	Y
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other		Foreshore licence to allow wind measurement awarded September 2000	[1]	Y

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm		Codling Bank Wind Farm	[1]	Y
2.a Size of wind farm
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other		Foreshore licence to allow wind measurement awarded September 2000	[1]	Y

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm		Blackwater Bank Wind farm	[1]	Y
2.a Size of wind farm
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other		Foreshore licence to allow wind measurement awarded September 2000	[1]	Y

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	3	Model developed to assess Irish offshore wind speeds provides an estimate of the standard error of estimation.	[3]
3.b Availability
3.c
3.d
3.e

References:

1. Department of the Marine and Natural Resources. Investigations to begin on Suitability of Sites for offshore Wind Farms Press Release 4 September 2000. http://www.irlgov.ie/marine/pressRelease/September00/4Sep.htm

2. The web site for the UK Met Office is http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/index.html. A map showing the location of the buoys is available at http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/Maps/England.shtml

3. Department of Public Enterprise and Department of Enterprise Trade and Investment (2000) Assessment of Offshore Wind Energy Resources in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

4. McWilliams B and Sprevak D (1980) Wind Engineering Volume 4 pp 227-238.

5. Department of Public Enterprise (1999) Green Paper on Sustainable Energy. Available at http://www.irlgov.ie/tec/energy/renewinfo.htm

6. Department of the Marine and Natural Resources (2000) Offshore Electricity Generating Stations Note for Intending Developers Impacts of Offshore Wind Energy Structures on the Marine Environment.

7. Marine Institute (2000) Assessment of Impacts of Offshore Wind Energy Structures on the Marine Environment, ISBN 1-902895-09-6.

8. Eirtricity (2000) Article posted 6 November 2000. http://www.eirtricity.ie/eirtricity_ie/newsframeset.html

9. Powergen Renewables (2000) Powergen Renewables Offshore Developments http://www.powergenrenewables.com/harnessingoffshorewindpower.htm

Country: Spain

Form filled out by: CIEMAT

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Availa. A/N	Language
1.a	Onsite Measurements	1	Plans for measurement in Cadiz (waiting for permission). Measuring at Huelva harbour dock.		N
1.b	Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	3	1 - Data from measuring networks of Puertos del Estado (harbour measurements). REMPOR : Coast Meteorology. RAYO: Meteorology, Wave, Currents, Temperatures, Salinity. 2.- Ships: Campaigns of Spanish Institute of Oceanography. 3.- Satellites: Images of the sea surface temperature	www.puertos.es/redes-eng.html contact to: andres@puertos.es ignacio@puertos.es www.ieo.es/ship.htm contact to: carlos.masso@md.ieo.es www.ieo.es/satesant.htm contact to: alicia.lavin@st.ieo.es (Dez, 1996b), (Sethuraman and Raynor, 1980),(Gaudiosi, 1994),(Dez, 1996a),(IDAE, 1999)	A ? A	ES, EN ES ES
1.c	Model estimates	3	Puertos del Estado is a public entity with a lot of information, both measurements and models but not focus on wind energy. Models: GESIMA Atmosphere, wind velocity HAMSOM Ocean Circulation PROPS Wave Propagation WAM Generation Wave Model WAVEWATCH Shallow Water Model Coupled Models WAM-PROPS Wave prediction: Public services of sea meteorological information (Nacional Intitute of Meteorology).	www.puertos.es/Modelos/models-eng.html www.inm.es/wwc/indinfmar.html contact to: maritima@inm.es	A A	SP, UK
1.d	Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore		High water depth and sea bed slope seem to be one of the main drawbacks for the off-shore development in Spain.	-(Dez, 1996b) -" El Relieve de la Pennsula Ibrica y de su Entorno Terrestre y Marino".In Atlas: "El Medio Marino".1989	A A	ES ES
1.d	Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	1	Cartography-marine charts. Three types of information sources: Spanish charts from Instituto Hidrogrfico de La Marina (Army), British charts from British Admiralty and French charts from SHOM, in paper and digital formats Measuring networks of Puertos del Estado REMRO: Scalar Wave. EMOD: Directional Wave. REDMAR: Sea Levels. Navigational waves RADAR:Directional Wave and Currents	www.navegar.com/organismos/ www.bme.es/blmon www.nauticarobinson.com/cgi-bin/w3-msql/portada.html www.puertos.es	A
1.e	Planned activity e.g. government mandate	2	Huelva Harbour: Plans for install 40-50 Mw. Cadiz: Depending on the measurements.
1.f	Comparison with national electricity consumption	3	Not significant

References:

1.-Plan de Fomento de las Energas Renovables en Espaa. 1999. Instituto para la Diversificacin y Ahorro de la Energa, IDAE.

2.- Dez, JM., 1996. Gua Fsica de Espaa. Tomo 6. Las Costas. D. L., Alianza Editorial.

3.-Sethuraman, S., Raynor,G.S, 1980. Comparison of Mean Wind Speeds and Turbulence at a Coastal Site and and Offshore Location. American Meteorological Society,15-21.

4.-Gaudiosi, G.,1994. Offhore Wind Enegy in the Mediterranean and other European Seas. Renowable Energy, 5, pp. 675-691.

Country: Finland

Form filled out by: Jonas Wolff (VTT)

1. Offshore wind resource potential : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	2=medium	but models outdated and for lower heights a.s.l.	None	N
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	3=highest	Met stations in reasonable vicinity	Finnish Wind Atlas	Y
1.c Model estimates	3	Only way so far, wind atlas not yet updated for offshore areas nor heights > 50 m a.s.l.	Finnish Wind Atlas + Wasp
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	3	Not to forget ice coverage in winter	Sea charts and specific reports	Y
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	3	First demonstrations important, information from turbines on peninsulas and islands	National production statistics	Y
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	1=lowest
1.g Overall national potential	3	In detail studied only for a part of the coastline. Rough overall estimate ~ 20 TWh/a	Study	Y

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm		Pori offshore
2.a Size of wind farm		To be decided
2.b Year of construction		Planned
2.c kWh per year	3
2.d Distance to coast	2
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy	2	Limited resource of cheap onshore driving development offshore
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify	3	Ice coverage in wintertime, requirements on foundation, economic impact negligible
2.f. Other

10. 3. Uncertainties in energy yield : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	3	No experience yet
3.b Availability	3	No experience yet
3.c
3.d
3.e

Country: FRANCE

Form filled out by: P.BRUYERRE (EED)

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	1=low 2=medium 3=high
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites		Good intercorrelation (at the site of Dunkerque) between Met UK buoy (Sandettie), our own buoy (5 km offshore) and 2 onshore (seashore) measurements.	Study of the offshore wind farm in Dunkerque (northern France)
1.c Model estimates	2	Need to be precise to take in account large scale effects (ie Channel effect)
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	3	The sum water depth + tide is the major issue. A 30 m depth site in Mediterranean is equivalent to a 20 m site in Normandy (10 m tide). On the basis on EED studies in different french regions of offshore potential, the potential is estimated as 9125 MW or 30.1 TWh. This is a technical potential integrating also major environmental constraints. The analysis has been limited to about 20 km (limit of French territory) max and 3 km min. 30.1 TWh/y It has to be compared with 517 TWh of electrical power produced in France in 2000.
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	2	The main question is the compatibility of offshore wind farms with exiting marine activities. No existing rule at the moment (the seabed belongs to the nation).
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	1	The issue is more related to the possibility to have a sufficient onshore connection to the grid (ie in Brittany). Four r

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	BREEDT ( DUNKERQUE)	Breedt Oddsfore wind farm	Y (partial)
2.a Size of wind farm		7.5 MW
2.b Year of construction		PLANNED IN 2002
2.c kWh per year		0.064 Euro + subsidies (25% of investment costs)
2.d Distance to coast		5 km
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		+ 50%
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Potential scour on sandbank + tidal currents
2.f. Other		Difficulties with local fishermen

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	3	On sites where no offshore data (buoys, light vessels) are available, the uncertainty is quite high.
3.b Availability	3	Depending on the technology. Need for specific design
3.c Technical risk	2	Related to 3b.
3.d
3.e

References :

Identification of potential offshore sites : Nord-Pas de Calais (1998), Brittany (1999-2000), Normandy (2000), Languedoc-Roussillon (2000). Studies realized for regional councils and/or ADEME (french energy agency)

Development of a 7.5 MW offshore wind farm at Breedt (Dunkerque) (1998, on going) with SAEML Eoliennes Nord-Pas de Calais, Shell Renewable, TotalFinaElf and Framatome (Jeumont Industrie)

Development of 3 offshore sites for large wind farms : Normandy, Brittany, Languedoc

Form (Draft)

Country: Greece

Form filled out by: Dr. G. Lemonis, CRES

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Onshore wind data available from CRES. Nearshore wind data available from NTUA, National Technical University of Athens and the National Center for Marine Research	1 2-6
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites		Data available from the National Service for Meteorology, National Observatory, Greek Ministry for Defense, a.o.	www.mod.gr www.noa.gr
1.c Model estimates		Different onshore wind prediction models have been developed or are currently under development at CRES. Direct application for nearshore locations possible. Further development for offshore applications possible.	1
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore		Seabed relief data available from the National Hydrographic Institute
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate		No activities for OWE planned yet
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high
2.a Size of wind farm
2.b Year of construction
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	1=low 2=medium 3=high
3.b Availability
3.c
3.d
3.e

References

P. Chaviaropoulos, D. Douvikas, (1998) Mean-flow-field Simulations over Complex Terrain using a 3-D Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes Solver, ECCOMAS 98, Athens, Greece

Soukissian, T.H., Chronis G.Th. and Nittis, K., 1999, POSEIDON: Operational Marine Monitoring System for Greek Seas, Sea Technology, Vol. 40, Νο. 7.

Soukissian, T.H., Chronis G.Th., POSEIDON: A marine environmental monitoring, forecasting and information system for the Greek Seas, 2000, Μediterranean Μarine Science, Vol. 1, No.1, pp. 71-78.

G.A. Athanassoulis, E.K. Skarsoulis, "Wind and Wave Atlas of the Northeastern Mediterranean Sea", ENEY/KD-11/92, GEN/OK-20/92, 20+191 pp., July 1992

G.A. Athanassoulis, M.T. Pontes, L. Tsoulos, B. Nakos, Ch.N. Stefanakos, A. Skopeliti, R. Frutuoso, "European Wave Energy Atlas: An Interactive PC-based system", Second European Wave Power Conference, 8-10 November, 1995, Lisbon, Portugal

L. Cavaleri, G.A. Athanassoulis, S. Barstow, Eurowaves: a user-friendly approach to the evaluation of near-shore wave conditions, 9^th (1999) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference and Exhibition, ISOPE 99, 30 May 4 June 1999, Brest , France

Country: Italy

Form filled out by: Gaetano Gaudiosi ENEA

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	1=low 2=medium 3=high	La Maddalena Sardinia	OWEMES	Y
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	1	Oil Platforms
1.c Model estimates	1	Local in Sardinia WASP	OWEMES
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	3	Water depth
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	3	Some	ENEA. Ragusa Province Environment Ministry
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	2	Significant resources

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Planned Study Offshore Wind Farm
2.a Size of wind farm		?
2.b Year of construction		?
2.c kWh per year		?
2.d Distance to coast		?
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		?
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		High salinity
2.f. Other

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	1=low 2=medium 3=high	2European wind atlas	Risoe	y
3.b Availability	2
3.c
3.d
3.e

Country: Netherlands

Form filled out by: Toni Subroto / Andrew Henderson (TUDelft)

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance 1=low, 2=medium3=high	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
			Summary in 1 and 2	Yes (Eng)
1.a Onsite Measurements	High	MeetNet Noordzee provides oceanographic and Meteorological data such as windspeed,-direction,waterlevel , waveheight and temperature. Data Voluntary Observing Ships provides wind data with a high resolution, long track record but poor accuracy. The Ness database provides accurate wind data over a long period (about 30 years) for a 30 by 30 km grid.	Rijkswaterstaat Directie Noordzee (RWS).3 KNMI 4 5	from RWS from the KNMI. You have to pay for it.
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	High	Data bases of Rijkswaterstaat Directie Noordzee and MARIS provides sufficient data concerning the Continental Shelf and Southern NorthSea	RWS 3	from RWS
1.c Model estimates	Medium	Preliminary study resulting in a Geographic Info. Syst. (GIS) and estimates on suitable and available space for LSOWE. An estimate for all European countries, including the Netherlands was made in the joint Germanischer Lloyd / Garrad Hassan European-Commission funded project: Study of offshore wind energy in the European Community. A new survey is currently being undertaken in the current European-Commission funded project: Predicting offshore wind energy resources (POWER), currently being undertaken by a consortium led by Rutherford Appleton Laboratories (RAL)	Report 6 CORDIS record ⁷ CORDIS record ⁸	Y
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	High	Data bases of Rijkswaterstaat Directie Noordzee and MARIS provides sufficient data concerning the Continental Shelf and Southern NorthSea	RWS 3	from RWS
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	High	1/3 to 1/2 of planned 2750 MW renewable energy for 2020 must probably be offshore. A demonstration near shore project consisting of a 100MW windfarm is in preparation.	Report ⁹	Y
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	Medium	An installed LOW capacity of 10.000MW will be able to provide 11% of the electr. demand in 2020.	Report ¹⁰

2. Economics: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1=low 2=medium 3=high	^{Near Shore Windpark} Feasibility study	Report ¹¹	Y (Dutch)
2.a Size of wind farm		100MW
2.b Year of construction		2003
2.c kWh per year		Annually 250-300 GWh.
2.d Distance to coast		approx. 8 km but will probably need to be further because of public concerns about visual impact
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		16 - 17 c(NL)/kWh (= 7-8 c/kWh), would need a subsidy of NLG 60m	¹²
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other
2a. Name of wind farm		Offshore Q7-WP (E-connection)
2.a Size of wind farm		60 turbines (~100 MW)
2.b Year of construction		2002 (Depends on obtaining the permissions)
2.c kWh per year
2.d Distance to coast		More than 12 miles
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		The cost price is confidential but they state that it is a commercial project
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify
2.f. Other
2a. Name of wind farm		Lely (Medemblik)	Conference Papers ^13,14 and Final Report ¹⁵	Y (Eng)
2.a Size of wind farm		four 500 kW NedWind turbines = 2 MW
2.b Year of construction		commissioned in summer 1994
2.c kWh per year		30% more energy than a corresponding windfarm in the south of the country due to the higher average windspeeds and the reduced turbulence 3.5 million kWh
2.d Distance to coast		800 m
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Bright coloured sections on the tower, night warning lights and horizontal blade parking further reduce the hazard to shipping fog detection, (park blades and activate hazard lights)
2.f. Other		30 m long, 3.5 m diameter steel monopiles twin-blade 40.8 m diameter rotor turbines in 5-10 m water depth in the IJsselmeer, an inland (hence sweet water) sea thunderstorm detection, (reduce lightning strikes by parking turbine horizontally), additional automation, such as for lubrication, (reduce maintenance costs), a built in hoist, and additional pollution prevention measures (IJsselmeer is a potable water reservoir).

3. Uncertainties in energy yield : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	high	9 m/s, variation : 8-10 m/s. 7-9 m/s (at 10 m height)	Report ¹⁶ Report 2	Y (Lng. NL) Y (Eng)
3.b Availability	high	the availability of the turbines has a very important effect on the overall costs of the generated electricity	Reports ¹⁷^{and ¹⁸}	Y (Eng)
3.c Environmental data		For an accurate determination of the combined wind and wave fatigue of the support structure, correlated long-term data on wind and waves are necessary	5

References:

1. J.P. Coelingh (ed), Wind and wave data compiled for the DOWEC concepts study (report for DOWEC Concepts, working group 5/6), Delft Section Wind Energy IW-00162R, February 2000.

2. J.P. Coelingh (ed), Wind and wave data from the Measuring Network North Sea - a preliminary analysis (report for DOWEC Concepts, working group 5/6), Delft Section Wind Energy IW-00169R, September 2000.

3. http://www.waterland.net/

4. Korevaar, C.G., Climatological data of the Netherlands lightvessels over the period 19491980, WR 87-9, KNMI, De Bilt, 1987

5. Peters, D.J. et all, Modelling the North Sea through the North European Storm Study, Proceedings Offshore Technology Conference (1993), pn 7130

6. Grontmij, Ruim baan voor wind op zee, Doc.nr.ROMT98001879. 1998

7. Study of offshore wind energy in the European Community, CORDIS record number: 2441, www.cordis.lu, 1993

8. Predicting offshore wind energy resources, CORDIS record number: 45062, www.cordis.lu, 1999

9. Plaatsingsplan Windenergie Buitengaats, Novem, 1999.

10. Functionele eisen van offshore windparken, KEMA, 60134-KST/ENR 98-2038, 1998,

11. Haalbaarheidsstudie Demonstr. Project Near Shore Windpark , Novem, 1997.

12. Milieu-effectrapport, Locatiekeuze Demonstratieproject 'Near Shore Windpark', Ministerie van Economische Zaken en Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer, 2000

13. Kouwenhoven, H.J. et al, Windfarm "Lely", the First Off-shore Windfarm in the Netherlands, EWEC Conference, 1994

14. van de Sande A.M.C., Windfarm Lely - first off-shore project in the Netherlands, OWEMES Conference, 1997

15. Kouwenhoven, H.J, Lely Windturbine Project, Final Report for Project WE23/89NL, Energie Noord-West, 1996

16. globale analyse van Invest.kosten,eindrapport. Stork Eng. Consultancy, 1999.

17. Khn, M. (editor), Cockerill, T.T; Harland, Harrison, R.; L.A.; Schntag, C.; van Bussel, G.J.W.; Vugts, J.H. Opti-OWECS Final Report Vol. 2: Methods Assisting the Design of Offshore Wind Energy Conversion Systems. Institute for Wind Energy, Delft University of Technology, 1998.

18. Ferguson, M.C. (editor); Khn, M.; Bierbooms, W.A.A.M.; Cockerill, T.T; Gransson, B.; Harland, L.A.; van Bussel, G.J.W.; Vugts, J.H.; Hes, R. Opti-OWECS Final Report Vol. 4: A Typical Design Solution for an Offshore Wind Energy Conversion System. Institute for Wind Energy, Delft University of Technology, 1998.

Country: POLAND

Form filled out by: Dariusz Mikielewicz (BAPE)

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	1=low
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	2	Only through private communication with relevant authorities
1.c Model estimates	2	Wind Energy Potential 1. 36 PJ (of which 11 offshore) - Economical and legal aspects of utilisation of renewable sources of energy in Poland - EC BREC 2000. 2. 4-5 PJ - World Bank Report, Hauff (1996).
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	2	According to Maritime Bureau, after exclusion of all restricted areas (birds, fishing, offshore exploitation), ca. 2 800 km² for development of offshore wind power is available in Poland, that is 8.5% of the Polish territorial waters: in the Gdansk Bay, the area where implementing wind turbines is possible is ca. 40 km long and on the open sea coast line (from Jastrzebia Gora to Swinoujscie) - it is ca. 200 km long, excluding coastal banks at Wistula and Szczecin Bays.
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	1	Additionally there seems to be a significant investment in the planning stage concerning the first offshore wind farm in Bialogora near Puck. The wind farm consisting of 49 turbines of 2MW power will be located on artificial island in a Puck Bay (North of Gdask bay). A foreseen end of investment is 2003, but first turbines were planned to operate in August 2001. Consents have also been given for 50 2 MW turbines near Karwia and two applications are pending at Slupsk Municipality. Technical potential of offshore wind is estimated at 11PJ and the strategy aims to increase renewable energy from its current 2.4% share to at least 7.5% in the year 2010 but no formal targets have been set.
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption	1	None

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm	1	None
2.a Size of wind farm	1	Non applicable
2.b Year of construction	1	Non applicable
2.c kWh per year	1	Non applicable
2.d Distance to coast	1	Non applicable
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy	1	Non applicable
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify	1	Non applicable
2.f. Other		Non applicable

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	3=high	Experiences only in onshore measurements by meteorological stations (10 m heights)	2	Y(PL)
3.b Availability	1	Non applicable
3.c
3.d
3.e

References:

1. Strategy for the development of RES

2. Proceedings of international seminar on Wind Power onshore and Offshore, Sopot 15-17 December 2000

3. Baltic Energy Conservation Agency ( http://www.bape.com.pl)

4. EC BREC, (http://www.ibmer.waw.pl/ecbrec/)

5. Elektrownie Wiatrowe S.A., (http://www.elektrownie-wiatrowe.org.pl)

Country: Sweden

Form filled out by: Vindkompaniet

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a Onsite Measurements	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Onsite measurements are very important. Investors dont believe in estimations
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites		Vindkompaniet have made onsite measurements on three off-shore sites around the Swedish coasts but only for in-house use. There is a network of off-shore meteorological stations owned by the Swedish State meteorology Service (SMHI) around the Swedish coast collecting wind data. Data is available.	SMHI	Y
1.c Model estimates		The Meteorological Institute of Uppsala University MIUU have worked out a meso-scale model with huge masses of computerised data.	MIUU	Y
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore		We have practical experience in the country from three off-shore plants . Very useful for calculations and estimations of the potential for offshore windpower. A total national survey where all these limitations mentioned to the left are considered and estimated in order to determine the offshore windpower-potential is under construction.
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms		There are about 550 gridconnected windturbines in Sweden with about 230 MW installed effect. The first offshore-based windturbine in the world a 220 kW WindWorld with 27 m rotor was erected outside Nogersund in Blekinge (southeast of Sweden) 1990. It has a steel tripod foundation (very expensive) In September December 1997 Vindkompaniet constructed an offshoreplant 5 X500 WindWorld machines on steel monopile foundations at Bockstigen, Valar. The site is a reef 4 km outside the Nsudden peninsula at the southwest coast of the island Gotland in the middle of the Baltic. Nsudden has one of the biggest european windparks with nearly 85 turbines. The commissioning of Bockstigen was in february 1998. Vindkompaniet then in summer 1997 applied for permission at the site Utgrunden in Kalmarsund that is the sound between the island land and the Swedish mainland. Utgrunden is a reef in the sound, 8 km from the coast of land and 12 km from the coast of the Swedish mainland. In late 1998 Enron Wind bought all the Utgrunden rights. Permission and authorisations was granted in the winter 1999/2000 and Enron erected 7 X1,425 MW in september/november 2000. Ther working with starting up and testing now in december. 5 The third off-shore wind-plant is under construction. It is a 5 X 2 MW project outside the very southeast coast not far from Karlskrona in the Blekinge county. The name of the project (and the site) is Yttre Stengrund. Its a Vindkompaniet/NEG-Micon project. 5 X 2 MW NEG-Micon 2 MW machines will be erected on the site during February and March 2001. The project started 2,5 years ago with making environmental assessments, windmeasuring, preparing all needed applications etc applications
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption		The electricity consumption in Sweden is about 140 TWh/year. Roughly speaking half of that comes from hydro power and the other half from nuclear power. The present windpower-capacity ca 220 MW contributes with only 0,35%. There is no decided political goal for an increasing of windpower-produced electric power but governmental and prime-minister statements the last year points out a fast growth for windpower. According to these statements the focus for the wind power growth in Sweden will be big off-shore located plants.

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	Ref	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm Bockstigen,Valar Utgrunden Yttre Stengrund	1=low 2=medium 3=high	1.Bockstigen/Valar 2.Utgrunden 3. Yttre Stengrund
2.a Size of wind farm 5 x 0,5 MW 7x 1,425 MW 5x2 MW		5 x 0,5 MW 7 x 1,425 MW 5 x 2 MW
2.b Year of construction 1997 2000 2000-2001		1997 2000 2000/2001-01-01
2.c kWh per year 1.		7 500 000 38 000 000 30 000 000
2.d Distance to coast		4 km 8 km 5 km
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		Installation cost 7 MSEK compared to 4 MSEK onshore. Unknown. (Efforts to investigate can be made if wanted.) 143 MSEK compared to about 80 MSEK onshore
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		The foundation which is a steel mono-pile is designed after strong efforts to predict the wave- and iceloads. Data and information concerning the icing in the water and the waveheights have been obtained from SMHI (Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute). The model with the worst year of the last fifty has been used. A special ice-protection is mounted on the monopiles. No special ice-cone. See 2.e,3 See point 1 above.
2.f. Other

3. Uncertainties in energy yield : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance	Main Conclusions	Ref
3.a Mean wind speed	1=low 2=medium 3=high	Very small uncertainties. The Bockstigen plant is built 4 km offshore from the Nsudden peninsula where 75 onshore windturbines are located. 25 of these are the same model WindWorld W3700, as the offshore-turbines. To calculate and predict the energy-production of the Bockstigenturbines there were not so sophisticated methods used, mostly Wind-atlas calculations and comparisons and cross-calculations between the future and the present turbines. Its important to know that above all the present windturbines there is big wind-measuring mast on the Nsudden peninsula with gathered windspeed data since 1979 on seven levels, 10 145 meters. Today data show very good accordance with the predicted. The Utgrunden Windplant is located in the sound between the island of land and the Swedish mainland with a distance to Swd. Cost of approx. 12 km and approx. 8 km to land. There are 33 windturbines located on southern land within max 12 km radius from the Utgrunden site. They were erected between 1990 and 1997 and therefore work good as references to make reliable predictions for the future windenergy production at the Utgrunden site. Furthermore metmast measurements have been made on top of the Utgrunden lighthouse and cross calculations based on long-term winddata from the nearest meteorological stations.
		The uncertainties are much bigger as there is neither windturbines nor metmasts in the close vicinity. To predict the production many calculations and cross calculations have been made using the nearest meteorological stations with long term wind velocity data. Even a close to site met mast has been used.
3.b Availability		The availability is about 90-95 % which is much lower compared to the 99 % availability at the Nsudden peninsula windpark. The problems have been: 1. Sea-cable breakdowns with failure of current. 2. Stopped turbines with need for manual reset in the turbine combined with access-problems(i.e problems to board and climb up to the turbine platforms when the wave heights exceed 1.5 meters) 3. The turbines are equipped with a more sophisticated control system to make possible connection to a weak grid on the coast. Many stopped-turbine-periods are caused by troubles with that control system. A standard on-shore control system Unknown. See 2.e,3 Based on experiences about availability presented above there are many steps taken to increase the availability.
3.c
3.d
3.e

Country: UK

Form filled out by: Colin Morgan, Garrad Hassan

1. Offshore wind resource potential: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning resource assessment
Topic		Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
1.a On-site measurements	3	All future projects will be project-financed requiring therefore a high degree of confidence in energy analysis.	-
1.b Available data e.g. Ships, buoys, platforms, satellites	2	Ships spatial-sparse and time-sparse observations, subjective so inaccurate, only useful for broad site selection Buoys spatial-sparse observations (mainly coastal), low elevation (typically 5m) so inaccurate, only useful for broad site selection Platforms very spatial-sparse observations. Satellites coarse spatial resolution (approx. 25km x 25km), only 14 years of data and (in European latitudes) 6-8 samples per day. Becoming useful for site selection as database builds. Lighthouses / small islands UK Met Office operate small number of met stations on islands or lighthouses which are proving useful for a very limited number of projects. Accuracy possibly insufficient and height of measurement inadequate.	1 2	N Y
1.c Model estimates	3	(Mainly) WAsP initiated from coastal stations, cross-validated with other coastal stations and possibly island or lighthouse stations. Very important in initial stages but inadequate for financing.
1.d Physical limits e.g. water depth, wave height, distance to shore	3	Water depth is a prime factor in site selection most UK sites chosen are 5-15m depth. Distance to shore is less important than distance to grid connection point. Wave height is known to be a capital cost-determinant.	3	Y
1.e Planned activity e.g. government mandate, other nearby off- or on-shore wind farms	3	2600MW offshore by 2010 (one-fifth of renewables total)	4	Y
1.f Comparison with national electricity consumption		2% by 2010	4	Y

2. Economics : Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning economics from current and planned Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance 1=low 2=medium 3=high	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
2a. Name of wind farm		Blyth	www.blyth-offshore.co.uk	Y
2.a Size of wind farm		4MW
2.b Year of construction		2000
2.c kWh per year		Confidential but approx. 12 GWh/year total
2.d Distance to coast		1km
2.e. Cost cf. Onshore wind energy		Blyth 1000 / kW Typical UK onshore 800/kW
2.e Special considerations physical parameters e.g. icing, high waves please specify		Depth (spring low) 5m Depth (spring high) 11m Max wave height 8m No icing 1km offshore existing Blyth Harbour wind farm
2.f. Other

Locations and configuration of all offshore wind farms planned in the UK is still to be determined.

3. Uncertainties in energy yield: Please specify national experiences and/or considerations concerning uncertainties in energy yield from Offshore Wind Farms in relation to the topics listed below:
Topic	Importance 1=low 2=medium 3=high	Main Conclusions	References	Available (Y/N)
3.a Mean wind speed	3	Extrapolated from experience on-shore in UK.
3.b Availability	3	Ditto (mainly turbine, but also electrical system and grid availability)
3.c Power curve	2	Ditto (including blade degradation and failure to maintain power curve up to cut-out wind speed)
3.d Wake losses	2	Ditto
3.e Access disruption	3	Turbine down but lost production not the risk of the O&M contractor so residing with the lender and owner.

References:

I Troen and E L Petersen. Wind and wave conditions at 55 European coastal sea areas determined from weather and wave observations of voluntary commercial ships. Technical report, Germanischer Lloyd, Hamburg, November 1991.

Private correspondence between GH and Centre for Remote Sensing, University of Bristol, 12 October 2000.

H G Matthias, A D Garrad et all. Study of offshore wind energy in the European Community. Garrad Hassan and Partners, latest reprint 1999.

UK DTI. The Renewables Energy Obligation preliminary consultation. October 2000. Additional DTI, Ofgem and ministerial statements October December 2000.

1. Offshore Wind Power Potential
2. Cost-ranking
3. Economics
4. Uncertainty in energy yield
5. Research needs
6. Summary
7. References
8. Additional information sources

Appendix

Country: Belgium

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Denmark

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Ireland

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Spain

Importance

Main Conclusions

Country: Finland

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: FRANCE

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Greece

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Italy

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Netherlands

Importance

1=low, 2=medium3=high

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: POLAND

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: Sweden

Importance

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Country: UK

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

Main Conclusions

1. Offshore Wind Power Potential 2. Cost-ranking 3. Economics 4. Uncertainty in energy yield 5. Research needs 6. Summary 7. References 8. Additional information sources

1. Offshore Wind Power Potential
2. Cost-ranking
3. Economics
4. Uncertainty in energy yield
5. Research needs
6. Summary
7. References
8. Additional information sources