By David Wojick

My regular readers know that I have been fussing about the threat of hurricanes destroying proposed Atlantic coast offshore wind arrays. The issue arises because the offshore wind industry is based in Europe, which does not get hurricanes. My focus has been Dominion’s massive project off Virginia, but the whole East Coast is hurricane alley.

Now I have found some research that actually quantifies the threat and it is very real. It looks like wind generators will have to be redesigned specifically to withstand hurricanes. In fact, that work is underway. In the meantime we should not be building conventional offshore wind towers.

The 2017 press release is succinctly titled, “Offshore wind turbines vulnerable to Category 5 hurricane gusts.” The PR says this: “The study, which was conducted in collaboration with the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, highlights the limitations of current turbine design and could provide guidance for manufacturers and engineers looking to build more hurricane-resilient turbines in the future.”

We certainly want hurricane-resilient turbines! Actually, they also mean towers and blades, not just the turbines. It is the towers and blades that are most likely to collapse in extreme wind, although the turbines can be damaged as well.

The research report itself has a more specific but equally scary title: “Gusts and shear within hurricane eyewalls can exceed offshore wind turbine design standards.” Mind you, what they did is computer modeling. But what they found confirms prior observations that people were having trouble believing.

Simply put, they found that hurricane wind gusts can hit an incredible 200 miles per hour, while wind towers are only designed to withstand 160 mph. If those extreme gusts hit an offshore wind farm, catastrophe is pretty much guaranteed.

In addition to extremely damaging gusts, the press release says this: “Furthermore, current standards do not account for veer, a measure of the change in wind direction across a vertical span. In the simulation, wind direction changed by as much as 55 degrees between the tip of the rotor and its hub, creating a potentially dangerous strain on the blade.”

Here is how they make the fundamental point:

The findings could be used to help wind farm developers improve design standards as well as to help stakeholders make informed decisions about the costs, benefits and risks of placing turbines in hurricane-prone areas.

I have yet to see any sort of hurricane risk assessment from any of the proposed East Coast wind projects, most of which involve many billions of dollars. In the Virginia case the primary stakeholders are the ratepayers who are on the hook for an estimated ten billion dollars. In their case hurricanes have not even been mentioned by Dominion.

A more recent article comes to similar conclusions — “Hurricane eyewall winds and structural response of wind turbines.” The article is technical but here is their plain language summary:

Offshore wind energy is a burgeoning area of renewable energy that is at an early stage of development in the United States. Exposure of offshore wind turbines to hurricanes must be assessed and mitigated to ensure the security of the renewable energy supply. This research assesses the impact of hurricane wind fields on the structural response of wind turbines. Such wind fields have characteristics that may pose heretofore unforeseen structural challenges to offshore wind turbines.

I have not done a literature search but there may well be a large literature on this huge problem. If so, then the wind developers are carefully ignoring it.

Before we build tens or hundreds of billions of dollars worth of massive offshore wind facilities off the East Coast we need to be sure that they will withstand strong hurricanes. (It may well be that even Category 4 hurricanes will exceed today’s design standards.) Otherwise both the ratepayers and the grid will be at great risk.

This hurricane design case may be something that NERC should Issue a Reliability Standard on. Such a Reliability Standard would lay out the kind of hurricane risk assessment that must be done as part of the facility design process. These risk assessments need to then be made part of the public decision process.

Offshore wind should not fly blindly into the teeth of the storm. Too much is at risk.

David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. He has been on the faculty of Carnegie Mellon University and the staffs of the U.S. Office of Naval Research and the Naval Research Lab.  This article was originally published at cfact.org. 


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

46 responses to “Hurricanes: Dominion’s Big Bet With Our Money”

  1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Seems like a Cat 5 hurricane is something you can insure against. This is a design issue and one would hope that it is being addressed in a manner in which they design nuclear reactors to withstand earthquakes…. which they do Fukushima notwithstanding…

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      The point (not really stressed by this author) is the risk is 100% on the ratepayers. On company management and shareholders? Zero risk. Not the case with any other similar project in the freaking world, the world!! (Well, some might be government owned…) But in the U.S., only in Virginia is our legislature that stupid.

      Mention “climate change!!” and a huge portion of the public just checks their brains at the door. I’m sure they will line up to comment.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      On the other hand, if the turbines get wiped out, we can rest assured no one will be holding a hurricane party on one of them.

    3. I doubt insurance is available as there is no way to price it. Insurance typically covers expected events where the unknown is to whom they will happen. House fires, car wrecks, stuff like that. Actuaries price it.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        You want to suggest that hurricanes are not expected events in ‘hurricane alley”? Nonetheless, what you claim is simply not correct. I purchase trip insurance every time I go to the outer banks of NC which covers impact from hurricane evacuation among other things. Adjusters are usually the first people to enter a hurricane impact area post storm as they have significant claim liability to address. Insurance is clearly available – the problem is that usually big corporations self insure – in this case, maybe they should not. But really you want to suggest that hurricanes are not expected events in ‘hurricane alley”?

    4. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      The point (not really stressed by this author) is the risk is 100% on the ratepayers. On company management and shareholders? Zero risk. Not the case with any other similar project in the freaking world, the world!! (Well, some might be government owned…) But in the U.S., only in Virginia is our legislature that stupid.

      Mention “climate change!!” and a huge portion of the public just checks their brains at the door. I’m sure they will line up to comment.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        I would presume, but I could be incorrect in the assumption that Dominion is a self-insured entity. Therefore, regardless of the outcome the ratepayers would be on the hook.

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        Not if they insure against it, Haner. Do you think hurricanes only strike windmills…??

        1. That insurance will help when the lights go out along the coast. How will Norfolk Naval Base, Oceania Air Station, Langley, and NNS&DDCo operate when the windmills are in the water?

          1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Almost every one of those facilities have emergency back up power as the grid is normally knocked out during major storm events for quite some time. Grid resilience will need to take such events into account to be sure – as they do now. This piece is about the potential capital losses from storm events.

        2. WayneS Avatar

          Do you think hurricanes only strike windmills…??

          Maybe they seek them out – the way tornados look for trailer parks…

          🙂

    5. Ruckweiler Avatar
      Ruckweiler

      To prepare an offshore windmill for the scenario you mentioned would greatly increase the cost per unit and the project expense. There is really no way to structurally harden the enormous blades from destructive flutter against such a wind.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        I have no comment one way or the other here. I am not a windmill engineer.

  2. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    These are important points. I assume that the SCC is not authorized or staffed to review design standards and actual construction of energy facilities. Its function is primarily in the financial realm.

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has the responsibility of regulating the construction of nuclear power plants. Is there any agency that has similar responsibility for other types of energy plants? It would seem that since Dominion is a regulated quasi-monopoly and all the risk is on ratepayers, the state government should have some agency overseeing the design and construction of these facilities.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Well, how many dams are in the same condition as our bridges? If the dam produces power is it held to different standards than the reported large number in danger of collapse?

      https://e360.yale.edu/features/water-warning-the-looming-threat-of-the-worlds-aging-dams

      1. Most states have dam safety programs. How effective they are is a different matter. I once did an insurance investigation for a dam break that killed about 40 people in Pennsylvania, which had one of the supposedly strongest dam safety programs going. They ignored the obvious threat.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          PA doesn’t have the best luck with dam’s. One would think after two disasters at Johnstown they would take it more seriously.

      2. WayneS Avatar

        Well, how many dams are in the same condition as our bridges?

        Trust me, you do not really want to know the answer to that question…

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Hilltop property is always preferable.

        2. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          I don’t think most people want to know the actual condition of our bridges.

          1. WayneS Avatar

            True. But if everyone knew it might cut down on traffic…

            😉

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            The sad part about that being, my up close and personal experience with them was 10+ years ago now. So while dated, I haven’t seen much “upkeep” or “maintenance” since that time.

            Takoma Narrows Bridge, say what.

          3. WayneS Avatar

            Takoma Narrows was caused by a design flaw.

          4. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I know, it was just an illustration of a bridge accident that was on the tip of my tongue.

            I suppose the Pittsburgh Frick Bridge collapse would’ve been related.

          5. WayneS Avatar

            There you go!

        3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          Absolutely true!!!

    2. Great point, Dick. It has been assumed that the utilities would build reliable plants but times have changed. I have been calling for NERC to issue technical reliability standards for wind and solar penetration. Maybe we need something at the State level as well, since the states oversee generation.

  3. The eco-wacos only blames/warns against climate change weather disasters when it supports their ideological drive to put us into the dark ages [literally because power consumption will outpace energy creation from wind & solar].

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Will? Already does.

    2. WayneS Avatar

      Well, now, technically, power consumption cannot exceed power production – power demand can exceed that which is being generated, but you can’t use what you haven’t produced.

      And yes, I know that is what you meant -I guess I’m just in a pedantic mood today…

      😉

  4. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    Stanford University claims that a large wind turbine farm can reduce damaging hurricane winds and storm surges. The article is dated from 2014.
    https://www.chron.com/news/houston-weather/hurricanes/article/Study-Huge-wind-turbine-farm-could-cut-hurricane-5269675.php

    The power companies on the North Sea are planning a massive wind turbine farm complete with an artificial island that serves as a power station.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/84f14875388abc1d7fe9114b4ffb3b4bd741f29c62e97f1ac5ffe5cd17a39416.jpg

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      https://windeurope.org/about-wind/daily-wind/

      Another good excuse to share that cool link. Low capacity factors yesterday.

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead

        Putin must be grinning ear to ear. Hard to believe it is that low.

  5. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Of course, with a Cat5, what isn’t at risk? The wind turbine field compares to Charleston and Hugo as loss in the same ratio as a flat tire to an engine fire.

    Of course, 50 years ago, the probability of a Cat5 coming anywhere near the Virginia Capes was virtually nonexistent. Gee, what’s changed? And, whatever could have caused that change?

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      No, but ironically it is the Climate Catastrophe Crowd now claiming 1) hurricanes will get worse and 2) so build OSW. Dumb. (But the 1935 storm that hit VA would be a Cat 5 by today’s standards, so not unprecedented.)

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Well then, naught to worry. All of the Above.

  6. WayneS Avatar

    The issue arises because the offshore wind industry is based in Europe, which does not get hurricanes.

    To be fair, they may not get actual hurricanes, but they get winter storms in the North Atlantic with hurricane-force winds and very large waves.

    My father can tell you how harsh the North Atlantic can be. He served on the USS Rhodes, a DER (destroyer escort, radar) on picket patrol duty as part of the Atlantic Barrier Patrol during the late 1950s. From what he has told me, it was not a pleasant experience.

    PS – The Atlantic Barrier Patrol was an Atlantic Ocean extension of the DEW Line. The ABP worked picket patrols from southern Argentina, north to Newfoundland, and from there to Iceland and then to the the Azores by way of northern Scotland. The Rhodes worked the northern portion of the patrol area, from Newport Rhode Island to the Azores. They’d head to a shipyard in Scotland when they needed to have storm damage repaired.

    1. vicnicholls Avatar
      vicnicholls

      It is not. 80 foot waves … its pretty bad.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      I crossed the North Atlantic on the SS United States in October. Dad said it was the smoothest crossing he’d ever had. The rest of the passengers crawling on their hands and knees just threw up.

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        We arrived in New York in 1955 heading for France and my Dad’s orders said, use “earliest available transport.” Dad looked at what we were getting and responded, but the SS United States leaves the next day, and the factotum said, sorry, earliest available….guess what ship was already docked in Bremerhaven when the smaller SS Geiger limped in? I was not yet two and I remember that crossing! Not smooth…(Loved the Lockheed Tri-Star coming home three years later.)

        And my opinion of government genius was already forming…

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          707 on return.

          Govt travel. Had a GS-15 as a COTR once. He used to take a nonstop Norfolk to LA about once a month. Travel office told him “no more”. A two-hour layover at O’Hare was $15 cheaper.

  7. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    geeze, how often do Cat5s hit the Bay? When is the last time?

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/87b9ef5df45bf36f96fdb4d6d4154888ea17c0302998e80df55be9506badcbe1.jpg

    oh never mind… boogeyman FUD is much more fun….

    and they don’t have hurricanes in the North Sea where more than a few large turbines have been built?

    and funny, the “deniers” are now using “models” to prove their point? too funny!

  8. Brian Glass Avatar
    Brian Glass

    That’s why the windmill blades need to be able to “feather.” That’s supposed to prevent damage to the blades during high winds.

  9. Brian Glass Avatar
    Brian Glass

    The offshore windmill blades are being designed so that they can “feather,” or collapse during high winds. That’s supposed to protect the blades. I’m confident that that will add additional costs to the project, whose budget has already increased dramatically.

  10. Instead of just making ridiculous statements like “The issue arises because the offshore wind industry is based in Europe, which does not get hurricanes” — which is akin to saying they can’t make cars in Germany for the UK because they drive on the other side of the road — why not actually do the literature search that you say you didn’t do. You can start here: https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/studies/standardsregulations.

  11. Ruckweiler Avatar
    Ruckweiler

    Been speaking about this windmill proposal for a long time. More silly environmentalist nonsense with this project even being considered. Damage/destruction will be paid by the users while the power generated will be offline for who knows how long. Anyone want to guess where the power will then derive?

Leave a Reply