page 1 herb sutherland wind energy technology dept. sandia national laboratories wind energy...

Herb Sutherland

Wind Energy Technology Dept.

Sandia National Laboratories

www.sandia.gov/wind

Wind Energy Technology

Current Wind Industry MarketCurrent Wind Industry Market

• Size– 1.5-5.0 MW

– Towers: 65-100 m

– Blades: 34-50m

– Weight: 150-500t

• Costs– System < $3/lb

– Blades < $5/lb

– ~ $0.75/Watt

– $0.03-0.05/kWh

Wind Cost of Energy is Falling

Increased Turbine Size - R&D Advances - Manufacturing Improvements

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

U.S

. C

umul

ativ

e C

apac

ity (

MW

)

Cos

t of

Ene

rgy

(cen

ts/k

Wh*

)

*Year 2000 dollars

Some Machines Currently on the Market

Some Machines Currently on the Market

Gamesa (Spain)

GE (US)

Enercon (Germany)

Vestas – NEG Micon(Denmark)

No. 5Bonus/Siemens(Denmark/Germany)

These four suppliers account for 75% of the

world market

Size of the Global MarketSize of the Global Market

The Global Wind Power Market in US$Expected development 2004-2008

0

3,000

6,000

9,000

12,000

15,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

mill

. US

$

0

12,000

24,000

36,000

48,000

60,000

Cu

mu

lati

ve m

ill. U

S$

Forecast offshore Offshore 2003 Onshore 2003

Forecast onshore Cumulative marketSource: BTM Consult ApS - March 2004

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07

Growth of Wind Energy Capacity Worldwide


Rest of World

Actual Projected

Rest of World

North America North America

Europe Europe

Jan 2004 Cumulative MW*Rest of World = 3.897

North America = 6,691

Europe = 28,706

MW

In

s ta l

led

Sources: BTM Consult Aps, March 2003

AWEA/EWEA Press Release 3/3/03

EWEA press release 10/3/04

*

* Updated March 2004

Installed capacity in DenmarkNo. of MW (1981-2003)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002

MW

0

250

500

750

1,000

1,250

1,500

1,750

2,000

2,250

2,500

2,750

3,000

3,250

Cu

mu

lati

ve M

W

Installed MW Forecast Cumulative Cumul. forecast

Source: BTM Consult ApS - March 2004

Installed capacity in GermanyNo. of MW (1987-2003)

0

450

900

1,350

1,800

2,250

2,700

3,150

3,600

1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002

MW

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

Cu

mu

lati

ve M

W



Installed capacity in SpainNo. of MW (1990-2003)

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

MW

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

Cu

mu

lati

ve M

W



Installed capacity in the USANo. of MW (1981-2003)

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

MW

0

800

1,600

2,400

3,200

4,000

4,800

5,600

6,400

7,200

Cu

mu

lati

ve M

W



RESOURCERESOURCE

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

TWh

N Dakota

Texas

Kansas

S Dakota

Montana

Nebraska

Wyoming

Oklahoma

Minnesota

Iowa

Colorado

New Mexico

Idaho

Rest of U.S.

Ref.: Elliott, et al, “An Assessment of the Available Windy Land Area and Wind EnergyPotential in the Contiguous United States,” August 1991, PNL-7789

New Mexico

NM Wind FarmsNM Wind Farms

• 204 MW PNM Wind Energy Center – House, NM

– PNM

• 80 MW Caprock Wind Ranch– Quay county, NM

– Cielo Wind Power/Xcel

• 120 MW San Juan Mesa – Elida, NM

– Padoma Wind Power/Xcel

DOE Wind Energy Program2002 Plan

DOE Wind Energy Program2002 Plan

Goal ABy 2012, COE from large systems in Class 4 winds 3 cents/kWh onshore or5 cents/kWh offshore

(Program Strategic Performance Goal)

Goal C By 2012, complete

program activities for grid access, operating rules, ancillary service tariffs,

and transmission expansion plans that

support industry’s 2020 capacity goal.

Goal D By 2010, 100 MW installed in at least

16 states.

ProgramGoals

Technology ApplicationTechnology Viability

Low Wind SpeedTechnology

SystemsIntegration

Primary Program Activities:• Public/private partnerships

Distributed WindTechnology

Primary Program Activities:• Public/private partnerships

Primary Program Activities:• Models• Ancillary costs• Utility rules• Grid capability

TechnologyAcceptance

Primary Program Activities:• State outreach • Federal loads• Rural wind development• Native Americans• Power partnerships

Goal B By 2007, COE from

distributed wind systems10-15 cents/kWh in Class 3

Supporting Researchand Testing

Primary Program Activities:• Enabling research• Design Review and Analysis• Testing Support

Supporting Engineeringand Analysis

Primary Program Activities:• Standards and certification• Field verification test support• Technical issues analysis and communications• Innovative technology development

Class 6 (High Energy) Sites

Class 4 (Good) Sites

Load Centers

Impact of Cost GoalsImpact of Cost Goals

Baseline (15 GW in 2020)• No technology breakthrough• Class 6 Plateau

Program Goal: 3 cents/kWh Class 4 COE in 2012

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2010 2015 2020

GW Competitive Class 4 Technology*

*Growth trajectory from NEMS using AEO 2001 assumptions with 3 cent/Class4/2007 technology

EIA/AEO 2001 Renewables Cases

Opportunity

2001

Reference

High Renewables

Expands resource base 20-fold Reduces average distance to load 5-fold 35 GW additional opportunity by 2020

Current Class 4 cost:4.3 cents/kWh

Class 4 goal (2012):3.0 cents/kWh

Offshore WindOffshore Wind

US DOE Program Goal: 5 cents/kWh, Shallow Water Offshore in the year

2012

• European Goal – 10 GW offshore

• British Islands– Enormous resource

– 1.4 GW in the planning stages

• US has limited shallow resource

• US Early Interest:– Cape Cod (Cape Wind)

– Long Island (LIPA)

• Deep Water Research – Base and foundation costs

– Floating structures

How Do We Get to Low-Cost,Low-Wind-Speed Technology?

(Thresher: 5/02)Technology Improvements Estimated COE Improvement

• Larger-scale 2 - 5MW - (rotors up to 120m) 0% 5%

• Advanced rotors and controls – (flexible, low-solidity, higher speed, hybrid carbon-glass -15% 7%and advanced and innovative designs)

• Advanced drive train concepts - (Hybrid drive trains with low-speed PM generators and -10% 7%other innovative designs including reduced cost PE)

• New tower concepts - (taller, modular, field assembled, load feedback control) -2% 5%

• Improved availability and reduced losses - (better controls, -5% 3%siting and improved availability)

• Manufacturing improvements - (new manufacturing methods, -7% 3%volume production and learning effects)

• Region and site tailored designs (tailoring of larger 100MW -5% 2%wind farm turbine designs to unique sites)

-44% 32%

Wind Turbine SystemsWind Turbine Systems

Hub

BladeTower

Gear Box

Generator

Pitch System

Yaw System

Conventional Drive Train

Direct Drive System

How Do We Get to Low-Cost,Low-Wind-Speed Technology?

(Thresher: 5/02)Technology Improvements Estimated COE Improvement

• Larger-scale 2 - 5MW - (rotors up to 120m) 0% 5%

• Advanced rotors and controls – (flexible, low-solidity, higher speed, hybrid carbon-glass -15% 7%and advanced and innovative designs)

• Advanced drive train concepts - (Hybrid drive trains with low-speed PM generators and -10% 7%other innovative designs including reduced cost PE)

• New tower concepts - (taller, modular, field assembled, load feedback control) -2% 5%

• Improved availability and reduced losses - (better controls, -5% 3%siting and improved availability)

• Manufacturing improvements - (new manufacturing methods, -7% 3%volume production and learning effects)

• Region and site tailored designs (tailoring of larger 100MW -5% 2%wind farm turbine designs to unique sites)

-44% 32%

Sandia Wind Energy ResearchPrimary Responsibility – Blades

Sandia Wind Energy ResearchPrimary Responsibility – Blades

Sandia Research Elements

•Advanced Blade Control – both active and passive (adaptive blade)

•Materials

•Manufacturing

•Analysis Tools

•Validation Testing & NDI

•Field Testing and Instrumentation

•Reliability

Blades are the only uniquely wind-turbine component Blades produce all the energy Blades produce all the system loads

Blades Are Getting BiggerBlades Are Getting Bigger

50.5 Meter Blade(GE 3.6 MW turbine)

Blade Size over Time

Comparison of Weight Trends WindStats Data & Preliminary Designs

Comparison of Weight Trends WindStats Data & Preliminary Designs

SAND2004-0074, Innovative Design Approaches for Large Wind Turbine Blades; Final Report, TPI

New Materials: New IssuesNew Materials: New Issues

• Carbon fiber forms– Cost vs. Performance

– Tow Size

– Pre-preg vs. fabrics

• Processing and fiber straightness

• Carbon/Glass hybrids

• Carbon-to-Glass Transitions

• Resin systems

7.5 mmAdditionalfiberglass

3.0 mmCarbonlayers

Design Tools:Validation and Testing

Design Tools:Validation and Testing

Design, analyze, fabricate, and test composite material structures to develop new approaches to design and analysis of blades

Sandia Partners in Blade Manufacturing

Sandia Partners in Blade Manufacturing

• TPI Composites

• TPI and Mitsubishi have a joint venture – Vienteck in Juarez, Mexico

• Manufacturing blades for 1-2 MW Mitsubishi machines

• 40m long blade now being tested

• TPI patented SCRIMP® technology

Eolidyn Rotor SystemsPlanform A / 50 meter blade

Blade Length (m) (ft) 50.0 164.0 Rotor Speed (rpm) 11.9Hub Radius (m) (ft) 1.5 4.9 Wind Speed (m/s) 10.0Rotor Radius (m) (ft) 51.5 169.0

Baseline Thickest Structurally Optimized ReynoldsStation Radius Radius Station Chord Twist Chord Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness NumberNumber Ratio (m) (m) Ratio (deg) (m) Ratio (mm) Ratio (mm) Ratio (mm) (Re)

1 5% 2.575 1.075 0.0517 29.5 2.664 100.00% 2664 100.00% 2664 100.00% 2664 1.92E+062 15% 7.725 6.225 0.0775 19.5 3.992 42.00% 1676 62.00% 2475 66.00% 2634 3.79E+063 25% 12.875 11.375 0.0860 13.0 4.429 28.00% 1240 48.00% 2126 54.00% 2392 5.73E+064 35% 18.025 16.525 0.0758 8.8 3.901 24.00% 936 40.00% 1561 47.00% 1834 6.57E+065 45% 23.175 21.675 0.0664 6.2 3.418 23.00% 786 33.00% 1128 35.00% 1196 7.15E+066 55% 28.325 26.825 0.0574 4.4 2.957 22.00% 651 26.00% 769 27.00% 798 7.43E+067 65% 33.475 31.975 0.0487 3.1 2.509 21.00% 527 21.00% 527 21.00% 527 7.37E+068 75% 38.625 37.125 0.0402 1.9 2.072 20.00% 414 20.00% 414 20.00% 414 6.97E+069 85% 43.775 42.275 0.0319 0.8 1.643 19.00% 312 19.00% 312 19.00% 312 6.24E+06

10 95% 48.925 47.425 0.0237 0.0 1.221 18.00% 220 18.00% 220 18.00% 220 5.16E+06

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50

Blade Station (m)

BladeThickness

(mm)

Traditional Design Thicker AirfoilsR

oot Tip

Bla

de

Th

ick

nes

s

Blade Station

Design Studies identify the inner-span for thicker airfoilsDesign Studies identify the inner-span for thicker airfoils

• A thicker airfoil opens up new manufacturing opportunities– Constant thickness spar cap

– Pre-manufactured spars (e.g., Pultrusion)

• Weights are reduced substantially without other (material) changes

Examples of Flatback AirfoilsExamples of Flatback Airfoils

Previous extent of flat trailing edges on blades

New concepts in flatback airfoils

Adaptive BladesAdaptive Blades

ActiveMicro-tab Assembly & Motion

s l i d e r

b a s e

e x t e n d e r

Passive

Bend-Twist Coupling

ATLAS System Layout

Field Testing Site Monitoring and Turbine Loads Research

Field Testing Site Monitoring and Turbine Loads Research

Wind Energy: QuestionsWind Energy: Questions

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07



Rest of World

Actual Projected

Rest of World

North America North America

Europe Europe

Jan 2004 Cumulative MW*Rest of World = 3.897

North America = 6,691

Europe = 28,706

MW

In

s ta l

led

Sources: BTM Consult Aps, March 2003

AWEA/EWEA Press Release 3/3/03

EWEA press release 10/3/04

*

* Updated March 2004

Blade Size over TimeBlade Size over Time

50+ meter

34 meter

23 meter

20 meter

12 meter

9 meter

7.5 meter

5 meter

1978 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Offshore Wind DevelopmentOffshore Wind Development

• Germany and Denmark have limited land area and extensive, shallow, windy, offshore area

• The UK has onshore NIMBY and is hoping to go immediately offshore

• The US East Coast is the largest electrical load – the best wind resources are offshore

• Great Lakes offer a similar opportunity

• Much of the US opportunity is in deeper water (>50m)

Annual Global Wind Power DevelopmentActual 1990-2003 Forecast 2004-2008 Prediction 2009-2013

0

7,000

14,000

21,000

28,000

1990 2003 2008 2013

MW

Prediction Offshore (Forecast) Forecast Existing capacitySource: BTM Consult ApS - March 2004

Offshore Projection

Wind Power BasicsWind Power Basics

59.0

3.0

max

max

32

1

LiftP

DragP

P

C

C

VACWindPower Wind Power output is proportional to wind speed cubed.

Effectively, the maximum drag-driven power coefficient is 0.15 because only the down-wind motion of the blade produces power

Lift-driven machines are only limited by the Betz Limit (the maximum energy extraction coefficient)

Power Curve

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Windspeed (m/s)

Po

wer

(kW

)

Turbine power Betz Power

Turbine Power BasicsTurbine Power Basics

Power vs. Wind Speed

Energy vs. Wind Speed

15 mph (6.8 m/s) average wind speed

Wind, Energy

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Windspeed (m/s)

Rayleigh Probability Weibull Probability Weibull Betz

Turbine Energy Weibull Cp

Wind Turbine ManufacturersWind Turbine Manufacturers

Top-10 Suppliers in 200396.8% of the total market

VESTAS (DK) 21.7%

ENERCON (GE) 14.6%

Others 3.2%

SUZLON (Ind) 2.1%

MITSUBISHI (JP) 2.6%

NORDEX (GE) 2.9%

REPOWER (GE) 3.5%

BONUS (DK) 6.6%

NEG MICON (DK) 10.2%

GAMESA (ES) 11.5%

GE WIND (US) 18.0%


Horn’s Reef, Denmark

Why Move Offshore?Why Move Offshore?

• Higher-quality wind resources• Reduced turbulence• Increased wind speed

• Economies of scale • Avoid logistical constraints on turbine

size

• Proximity to loads• Many demand centers are near the

coast

• Increased transmission options• Access to less heavily loaded lines

• Potential for reducing land use and aesthetic concerns

Wind turbine type Vestas V80 - 2 MW

Total wind farm output 160 MW (80 turbines)

Expected annual production 600,000,000 kWh

Rotor diameter 80 m

Hub height 70 m

Mean wind speed (62 m) 9.7 m/s

Water depth 6-14 m

Distance from land 14-20 km

Wind farm area 20 km2

Total project costs DKK 2 billion(EUR 270 million)

Horns Rev Offshore Wind FarmNorth Sea: Off Danish Coast

Horns Rev Offshore Wind FarmNorth Sea: Off Danish Coast

Northeastern U.S. Offshore Potential

Northeastern U.S. Offshore Potential

Wind ResourceWest Coast of the US

Wind ResourceWest Coast of the US

Reverse Evolution…

GE Wind Energy 3.6 MW Turbines

page 1 herb sutherland wind energy technology dept. sandia national laboratories wind energy...

Documents