IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i21p5618-d435473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Drivers for and Barriers to the Take up of Floating Offshore Wind Technology: A Comparison of Scotland and South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Kubiat Umoh

    (School of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Faculty of Computing, Engineering and Media, De Montfort University, Gateway House, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK)

  • Mark Lemon

    (School of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Faculty of Computing, Engineering and Media, De Montfort University, Gateway House, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK)

Abstract

Offshore wind could both play a significant role in decarbonising the global energy system and supporting the energy needs of cities. Recent trends in offshore wind have seen the installation of turbines in deeper and more remote waters due to the presence of stronger and more consistent wind resources. This has led to the development of floating foundations for turbine mounting in water depths above 40 m, where conventional bottom-fixed foundations are not considered economically feasible. However, due to its emerging nature, floating wind must attain market maturity to be considered cost competitive. It is a widely accepted belief that market expansion yields technological maturity. Therefore, this paper adopts a systems approach to investigate the viability of floating offshore wind power generation in Scotland and South Africa. It does this through a content analysis of relevant secondary documentation, including policy documents, industry reports, press releases, online publications, and databases to determine the drivers and barriers of floating wind in the case contexts. The key findings are that substantial technical potential is required to attract floating wind investments, political support is necessary in order to scale up, a strong offshore wind supply chain could cushion the high-cost effects of floating wind projects, and more innovative business models such as corporate Power Purchasing Agreements could serve as social drivers for such projects. The main contextual conclusions drawn from this paper are that Scotland’s inaugural floating wind projects benefitted from the Scottish government’s Renewable Obligation scheme, however its discontinuation threatens the prospects of future projects. Alternatively, South Africa’s technical potential, coupled with its government’s healthy appetite for renewable energy development, could see the take up of this technology in the near future, with corresponding benefits for more sustainable energy in densely populated areas, compliant with SDG 7.

Suggested Citation

  • Kubiat Umoh & Mark Lemon, 2020. "Drivers for and Barriers to the Take up of Floating Offshore Wind Technology: A Comparison of Scotland and South Africa," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5618-:d:435473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5618/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/21/5618/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julien Lefevre & Aurélie Méjean & Céline Guivarch & Meriem Hamdi-Cherif, 2018. "The transition in energy demand sectors to limit global warming to 1.5◦C," Post-Print hal-03128551, HAL.
    2. Elsner, Paul, 2019. "Continental-scale assessment of the African offshore wind energy potential: Spatial analysis of an under-appreciated renewable energy resource," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 394-407.
    3. Kruger, Wikus & Stritzke, Susann & Trotter, Philipp A., 2019. "De-risking solar auctions in sub-Saharan Africa – A comparison of site selection strategies in South Africa and Zambia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 429-438.
    4. T. Gasser & C. Guivarch & K. Tachiiri & C. D. Jones & P. Ciais, 2015. "Negative emissions physically needed to keep global warming below 2 °C," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-7, November.
    5. Liddle, Brantley & Sadorsky, Perry, 2017. "How much does increasing non-fossil fuels in electricity generation reduce carbon dioxide emissions?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 212-221.
    6. Kaldellis, J.K. & Kapsali, M., 2013. "Shifting towards offshore wind energy—Recent activity and future development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 136-148.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rohit Agrawal & Abhijit Majumdar & Kirty Majumdar & Rakesh D. Raut & Balkrishna E. Narkhede, 2022. "Attaining sustainable development goals (SDGs) through supply chain practices and business strategies: A systematic review with bibliometric and network analyses," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3669-3687, November.
    2. Charalampos Baniotopoulos, 2022. "Advances in Floating Wind Energy Converters," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-3, August.
    3. Xusheng Shen & Tao Xie & Tianzhen Wang, 2020. "A Fuzzy Adaptative Backstepping Control Strategy for Marine Current Turbine under Disturbances and Uncertainties," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Iurii Prokazov & Vladimir Gorbanyov & Vadim Samusenkov & Irina Razinkina & Monika Chłąd, 2021. "Assessing the Flexibility of Renewable Energy Multinational Corporations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Rinaldi, Giovanni & Garcia-Teruel, Anna & Jeffrey, Henry & Thies, Philipp R. & Johanning, Lars, 2021. "Incorporating stochastic operation and maintenance models into the techno-economic analysis of floating offshore wind farms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    6. Iben Ringvej Dahl & Bård Wathne Tveiten & Emily Cowan, 2022. "The Case for Policy in Developing Offshore Wind: Lessons from Norway," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Izquierdo, J. & Márquez, A. Crespo & Uribetxebarria, J. & Erguido, A., 2020. "On the importance of assessing the operational context impact on maintenance management for life cycle cost of wind energy projects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1100-1110.
    2. Ayman Al-Quraan & Bashar Al-Mhairat, 2022. "Intelligent Optimized Wind Turbine Cost Analysis for Different Wind Sites in Jordan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, March.
    3. Ragab El-Sehiemy & Mohamed A. Hamida & Ehab Elattar & Abdullah Shaheen & Ahmed Ginidi, 2022. "Nonlinear Dynamic Model for Parameter Estimation of Li-Ion Batteries Using Supply–Demand Algorithm," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Castro-Santos, Laura & Martins, Elson & Guedes Soares, C., 2017. "Economic comparison of technological alternatives to harness offshore wind and wave energies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 1121-1130.
    5. Li, Wei & Lu, Can & Zhang, Yan-Wu, 2019. "Prospective exploration of future renewable portfolio standard schemes in China via a multi-sector CGE model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 45-56.
    6. Yang, J.J. & He, E.M., 2020. "Coupled modeling and structural vibration control for floating offshore wind turbine," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 678-694.
    7. Dhunny, A.Z. & Timmons, D.S. & Allam, Z. & Lollchund, M.R. & Cunden, T.S.M., 2020. "An economic assessment of near-shore wind farm development using a weather research forecast-based genetic algorithm model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    8. Holly Jean Buck, 2016. "Rapid scale-up of negative emissions technologies: social barriers and social implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 155-167, November.
    9. Jacobsson, Staffan & Karltorp, Kersti, 2013. "Mechanisms blocking the dynamics of the European offshore wind energy innovation system – Challenges for policy intervention," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1182-1195.
    10. Jiang, Hongdian & Dong, Xiucheng & Jiang, Qingzhe & Dong, Kangyin, 2020. "What drives China's natural gas consumption? Analysis of national and regional estimates," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    11. Yonghua Li & Song Yao & Hezhou Jiang & Huarong Wang & Qinchuan Ran & Xinyun Gao & Xinyi Ding & Dandong Ge, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Evolution and Prediction of Carbon Storage: An Integrated Framework Based on the MOP–PLUS–InVEST Model and an Applied Case Study in Hangzhou, East China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Emily Ho & David V. Budescu & Valentina Bosetti & Detlef P. Vuuren & Klaus Keller, 2019. "Not all carbon dioxide emission scenarios are equally likely: a subjective expert assessment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 545-561, August.
    13. Shijie Yang & Yunjia Wang & Rongqing Han & Yong Chang & Xihua Sun, 2021. "Spatial Heterogeneity of Factors Influencing CO 2 Emissions in China’s High-Energy-Intensive Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-24, July.
    14. Frederick Ploeg, 2018. "The safe carbon budget," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 47-59, March.
    15. Tiphaine Chevallier & Maud Loireau & Romain Courault & lydie chapuis-lardy & Thierry Desjardins & Cécile Gomez & Alexandre Grondin & Frédéric Guérin & Didier Orange & Raphaël Pélissier & Georges Serpa, 2020. "Paris climate agreement: Promoting interdisciplinary science and stakeholders' approaches for multi-scale implementation of continental carbon sequestration," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/312984, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    16. Tosatto, Andrea & Beseler, Xavier Martínez & Østergaard, Jacob & Pinson, Pierre & Chatzivasileiadis, Spyros, 2022. "North Sea Energy Islands: Impact on national markets and grids," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    17. Kamila Pronińska & Krzysztof Księżopolski, 2021. "Baltic Offshore Wind Energy Development—Poland’s Public Policy Tools Analysis and the Geostrategic Implications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.
    18. Li, Chen & Mogollón, José M. & Tukker, Arnold & Dong, Jianning & von Terzi, Dominic & Zhang, Chunbo & Steubing, Bernhard, 2022. "Future material requirements for global sustainable offshore wind energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    19. Yang, F. & Meerman, J.C. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2021. "Carbon capture and biomass in industry: A techno-economic analysis and comparison of negative emission options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    20. Parisa, Zack & Marland, Eric & Sohngen, Brent & Marland, Gregg & Jenkins, Jennifer, 2022. "The time value of carbon storage," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:21:p:5618-:d:435473. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.