Fowind Study Report - 29 06 2016 - Pages - JWG Update - v2

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 124

SUPPLY CHAIN,

PORT INFRASTRUCTURE
AND LOGISTICS STUDY

for offshore wind farm development


in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu

June 2016
SUPPLYTABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAIN,
PORT INFRASTRUCTURE AND
LOGISTICS STUDY

for offshore wind farm development


in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu
June 2016

This report is co-funded by the European Union


TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of acronyms and abbreviations ........................................................................


6

Foreword ..............................................................................................................7

About FOWIND .....................................................................................................


8

Executive summary ...............................................................................................9

1. INTRODUCTION TO THE FOWIND INFRASTRUCTURE STUDY .....................


11

2. SUPPLY CHAIN ASSESSMENT ........................................................................ 12


2.1 Development ........................................................................................... 15
2.1.1 Site surveys ...................................................................................... 15
2.1.2 Consent and planning ...................................................................... 18
2.1.3 Design and engineering .................................................................... 19
2.1.4 Commercial and legal work .............................................................. 19
2.2 Wind turbines .......................................................................................... 20
2.2.1 Turbine assembly .............................................................................. 20
2.2.2 Blades .............................................................................................. 21
2.2.3 Casting and forgings ........................................................................ 21
2.2.4 Gearbox and generators ................................................................... 22
2.2.5 Towers ............................................................................................. 22
2.3 Support structure/foundations .............................................................. 22
2.3.1 Monopiles ........................................................................................ 24
2.3.2 Jacket foundations ........................................................................... 25
2.3.3 Gravity base concrete foundations .................................................... 25
2.4 Electrical ...................................................................................................
25
2.4.1 HVAC cables .................................................................................... 26
2.4.2 Offshore substation .......................................................................... 26
2.4.3 Onshore substation .......................................................................... 27
2.5 Installations vessels and infrastructure ................................................. 28
2.5.1 Turbine installation vessels ................................................................ 28
2.5.2 Foundation installation vessels .......................................................... 29
2.5.3 Cable installation vessels .................................................................. 29
2.5.4 Offshore substation installation vessels ............................................. 29
2.5.5 Ports ................................................................................................29
2.6 Operations and maintenance ................................................................. 30
2.6.1 Crew transfer vessels ........................................................................ 30
2.6.2 Ports ................................................................................................30
2.6.3 Technicians ....................................................................................... 30
2.7 Supply chain conclusions ........................................................................ 31

3. PORT INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOGISTICS ..................................................... 34


3.1 Study objective .......................................................................................
34
3.2 Offshore wind ports ............................................................................... 34
3.2.1 Introduction .....................................................................................
34
3.2.2 Wind turbine manufacturing port ..................................................... 35
3.2.3 Wind turbine foundation manufacturing port ................................... 36
3.2.4 Offshore substation manufacturing port ........................................... 36
3.2.5 Operations & maintenance port ....................................................... 36
3.2.6 Marshalling (or staging) port ............................................................ 37
3.3 Port infrastructure assessment methodology ..................................................38
3.4 Project specification ...........................................................................................39
3.4.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................39
3.4.2 Project specifications - PFR summaries ........................................................40
3.5 Component specification ...................................................................................41
3.5.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................41
3.5.2 Wind turbine generator components .........................................................41
3.5.3 Foundations - monopiles and transition pieces ...........................................48
3.5.4 Foundations - jackets .................................................................................50
3.5.5 Foundations - gravity base structures .........................................................52
3.5.6 Substation .................................................................................................54
3.5.7 Wind farm electrical plant ..........................................................................56
3.6 Vessels .................................................................................................................58
3.6.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................58
3.6.2 Dumb barge ..............................................................................................60
3.6.3 Self-propelled and towed jack-up craft .......................................................60
3.6.4 Sheerleg heavy lift vessel ............................................................................63
3.6.5 DP2 heavy lift cargo vessels ........................................................................64
3.6.6 Leg-stabilised crane vessel .......................................................................... 65
3.6.7 DP2 Offshore supply vessel ......................................................................... 66
3.6.8 Semi-submersible heavy lift vessel ..............................................................66
3.6.9 Suitability of vessels for various OWF installation activities ..........................67
3.6.10 Construction vessel screening in India ........................................................ 67
3.6.11 Vessel port access requirements .................................................................69
3.7 Installation strategy ...........................................................................................70
3.7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 70
3.7.2 Vessel port access requirement ................................................................... 70
3.7.3 Monopiles and transition piece installation strategy ....................................70
3.7.4 Jackets structures installation strategy ........................................................73
3.7.5 Floating and lifted gravity based structures (GBS) installation strategy .........75
3.7.6 Wind turbine generators installation ..........................................................76
3.7.7 Offshore substation foundations and topside installation ............................77
3.7.8 Subsea export and inter array cables installation .........................................78
3.8 Port infrastructure ..............................................................................................80
3.8.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................80
3.8.2 Categories of port infrastructure ................................................................80
3.8.3 International port compliance ....................................................................84
3.9 Offshore wind port study ..................................................................................84
3.9.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................84
3.9.2 Construction port screening .......................................................................85
3.9.3 Port readiness assessment - Gujarat ...........................................................88
3.9.4 Port readiness assessment - Tamil Nadu ...................................................... 99
3.9.5 O&M port assessment ................................................................................ 106
3.9.6 Summary ................................................................................................... 109

4. DECOMMISSIONING .................................................................................................
111

5. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ONGOING WORK ...................................................... 112

6. APPENDIX A - PORT MAPS .......................................................................................


114
6 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Air gap Distance between water level and top of vessel and safe clearance
AMSL Above mean sea level
Beam The maximum width of a vessel or other floating body
Bollard Pull The force which a tug can exert upon its load when towing
CGS Concrete gravity structure
CSI Container security initiative
CTV Crew transfer vessel
Draft Depth of the keel of a vessel
GBF Gravity based foundation
GBS Gravity based structure
GRP Glass reinforced polypropylene
H&S Health and safety
HLV Heavy lift vessel
HLCV Heavy lift cargo vessel, often called a geared vessel as it has its own lift gear
HSE Health, safety and environment
IAC Inter-array cables
ISPS IMO International ship and port facility security code
LAT Lowest astronomical tide
LOA Length overall, of a vessel
MPs Monopiles
MSL Mean sea level
NM Nautical miles
O&M Operation and maintenance
OWA The offshore wind accelerator project, hosted by The Carbon Trust
OWF/OWP Offshore wind farm (called offshore wind parks in Germany)
OSS/OSP Offshore substation or offshore substation platform
PPE Personal protection equipment
ROV Remotely operated vehicles
Scour Erosion of material adjacent to the structure due to water movement
SHLV Sheerleg heavy lift vessel
SPMT Self-propelled modular transportation
Spring tide The highest tides of the lunar tidal cycle
Storm surge Increase in mean sea level due to atmospheric pressure variations
T&I Transport and installation
TEU Twenty-foot equivalent units, a measure of container vessel size
TIB Transport and installation Barge
WFSV Wind farm support vessel
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 7

FOREWORD

On behalf of the project consortium, we are pleased to present the Supply chain, Port infrastructure and Logistics
Study for the states of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, which is an important outcome of the Facilitating Offshore Wind in
India project’s second year. The four-year project aims to put together a roadmap for developing a sustainable and
commercially viable offshore wind industry in India.

This report first provides an overview of the key supply chain elements required for offshore wind and undertakes
an initial review of the potential for Indian companies to enter the market. Following on from the supply chain
assessment a port infrastructure and logistics assessment is provided, identifying key component specifications,
vessel requirements, installation strategies and port infrastructure required from manufacturing to installation and
through to the operation and maintenance of an offshore wind farm. The report culminates with an offshore wind
port readiness assessment for Gujarat and Tamil Nadu and provides an insight into project decommissioning.

India, already a key global player in the field of installed onshore wind capacity, is under increasing pressure to meet
its energy deficit – a growing concern due to a booming population – using indigenous and low carbon sources.
While costs of offshore wind projects are still high, there are clear indications that they can be brought down
substantially through experience and economies of scale. The rewards in India have the potential to be great: a strong,
steady resource that can play a major role in supplying clean energy to the major load centres in coastal cities and
industrial areas within Gujarat and Tamil Nadu.

With the recent approval of India’s Offshore Wind Policy by the Union Cabinet in October 2015, the impetus and
added incentive for offshore wind development remains very positive. This is indeed an exciting time to explore the
future of offshore wind in India and we hope you find this Supply chain, Port infrastructure and Logistics assessment
for Offshore Wind Farm Development in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu a useful resource.

Steve Sawyer Mathias Steck G.M. Pillai Dr. Anshu Bharadwaj


Secretary General Senior Vice-President & Director General Executive Director
GWEC Regional Manager, WISE CSTEP
Asia Pacific Energy &
Renewables Advisory
DNV GL
8 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

ABOUT FOWIND

The consortium led by the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) is implementing the Facilitating Offshore Wind in India
(FOWIND) project. Other consortium partners include the Centre for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP),
DNV GL, the Gujarat Power Corporation Limited (GPCL), and the World Institute of Sustainable Energy (WISE).
The National Institute of Wind Energy (NIWE), an autonomous R&D institution under the Indian Ministry of New and
Renewable Energy, is a knowledge partner to the project since June 2015.

The project seeks to establish structural collaboration and knowledge sharing between the EU and India on offshore
wind technology, policy and regulation and serve as a platform for promoting offshore wind research and development
activities. The project focuses on the states of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu for identification of potential zones for
development through preliminary resource and feasibility assessments for future offshore wind developments, as well
as through techno-commercial analysis and preliminary resource assessment. The project consists of a total of seven
work packages.

This Supply chain, Port infrastructure and Logistics study has been developed as part of Work Package 3. A separate
study covering the grid infrastructure for Gujarat and Tamil Nadu is also being completed as part of Work Package 3.
The aim of the Grid Infrastructure study is to evaluate the amount of grid integrated renewable energy sources that can
be reliably incorporated into the grid in regional transmission and distributions networks, and consider the associated
costs.

There are a number of


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Supply Chain, Port Infrastructure and Logistics Study has been developed as part of FOWIND’s Work Package 3.
The overarching objective is to develop further understanding of typical ports, vessels, infrastructure and supply chain
requirements for offshore wind project development. Specifically the report delivers:

n an overview of key supply chain elements required for offshore wind;


n a high-level appraisal regarding the feasibility of local supply for key components in the medium and long term;
n an overview of key infrastructure and logistical requirements for an offshore wind project during development,
fabrication, transportation, installation, operations and maintenance and decommissioning;
n an appraisal of suitability and readiness of India’s existing port infrastructure for offshore wind development.

The supply chain assessment identifies the extensive procurement list that would be required to develop a typical
offshore wind farm. The specific supply chain requirements and considerations for major offshore wind project
phases/packages (e.g. development, turbines, support structures, electrical elements, construction and O&M) are
further defined. The remainder of the assessment focuses on identifying key global players and providing a
commentary on current and potential Indian suppliers that might have capability to enter the local market.
Given the relative immaturity of the Indian market and the supply chain the local assessment is conducted at
high-level and would need to be re-visited when specific projects are identified.

The port infrastructure and logistics assessment commences with an initial preparation phase where; estimated Indian
project specifications (from the FOWIND Pre-feasibility reports), component specifications, vessel requirements and
possible installation strategies are defined. Following this initial preparation phase the port screening phase is executed,
which provides a desk-based study, considering the suitability of offshore wind ports in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu to
supply the potential offshore wind project demand for construction and O&M operations. The final stage provides a
more detailed port readiness assessment which includes reports from site visits conducted at the most promising ports.

Key findings formulated during the course of this Supply Chain, Port Infrastructure and Logistics Study can be
summarised as follows:

Supply chain assessment

There are a number of Due to the complexities of If a large project pipeline,


areas where there is good developing offshore wind combined with attractive
potential for Indian and lessons from other incentives, develops in India
companies to move into emerging markets it is then the local supply chain
the offshore wind sector, anticipated local companies will almost certainly grow in
in particular, aspects of the will require some parallel and indeed attract
development process, the collaboration and capacity both local and overseas
fabrication of support building with experienced OEMs to develop their
structures and offshore organisations, particularly business within the region.
substation topsides. during the local market’s
embryonic development
years.
10 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Port infrastructure and logistics

The report provides extensive details and commentary regarding typical offshore wind
component specifications, the range and suitability of construction vessels, different installation
strategies and explanations for the suitability of common port infrastructure for offshore wind.

Following the port readiness assessments it can be concluded that no single port estate in India
is currently suitable to facilitate all offshore wind construction activities without some level of
adaptation or with the strategic use of multiple port estates.

Early consultations should be made, during the development process, with port authorities to
establish any current and future conflicts of interest with regards to spatial planning and their
appetite to facilitate offshore wind.

Gujarat – the most promising port estates appear to be Hazira (marshalling, manufacturing
and O&M) and Pipavav (marshalling, OSS manufacturing and O&M ).

Tamil Nadu – the most promising port estate in close proximity to the proposed development
zones appears to be Tuticorin (marshalling and O&M). Kattupalli could have some potential
for substructure and offshore substationto manufacture, but has significant access restrictions
to the most favoured development zones.
Zones A to G4 are effectively land-locked by the very shallow Palk Strait, and should
Kattupalli or Chennai ports be mobilised, it would require any components to be
circumnavigated large distances around the island of Sri Lanka.
In both Gujarat and Tamil Nadu it is also likely a number of smaller ports would be suitable
for O&M support and could play a strategic role during the operation of specific projects.

4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 11

1 INTRODUCTION TO THE FOWIND INFRASTRUCTURE STUDY

In February 2015, the Indian government announced its This report aims to support key offshore wind
plans to almost quadruple its renewable power capacity stakeholders in India, including local developers,
to 175 GW by 2022 as part of the plan to supply operators, government bodies, R&D institutions,
electricity to every household in the country1. This fabricators, vessels owners, port operators and wind
includes 60 GW from wind energy. India already has a turbine OEMs. The overarching objective is to develop
strong track record in onshore wind, with an installed further understanding of typical ports, vessels,
capacity of 26743.61 MW or 26.74 GW according to infrastructure and supply chain requirements for offshore
the MNRE (world’s fifth largest wind energy producer) wind projects. Specifically the core objectives of this
at the end of March 20162.The sector has faced several report can be summarised as follows, to provide:
challenges including national policy instability and
state-specific issues linked to land acquisition and grid n an overview of key supply chain elements required for
integration. However, both onshore and offshore wind offshore wind;
energy are anticipated to play a vital future role in n an appraisal regarding the feasibility of the local

moving the country into a low carbon economy. supply for key components in the medium and long
term;
During 2013, the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy n an overview of key infrastructure and logistical
(MNRE) in India launched consultations on its policy for requirements for an offshore wind project during
Offshore Wind under the previous government3. development, fabrication, transportation, installation,
It is heartening to see that the new government in Delhi operations and maintenance and decommissioning;
is even more committed to vastly increasing the n an appraisal of suitability and readiness of India’s
exploitation of India’s not inconsiderable renewable
existing port infrastructure for offshore wind
energy sources, and building a strong and increasingly
development.
equitable economy on the basis of clean, indigenous and
increasingly competitive renewable energy sources.
This study will form an important input into future
The offshore policy and various guidelines on resource offshore wind feasibility investigations. The study is based
assessment, clearances, for setting up of offshore wind on a comprehensive review of existing literature
projects was approved by the Union Cabinet in available in the public domain, and on applied experience
October 2015. The objective of the policy is to promote and knowledge gained in over 10 years of commercial
development of offshore wind farms. The nodal ministry European offshore wind projects.
for overall monitoring of offshore wind development in
the country will be the Ministry of New and Renewable Section 2 - The Supply Chain Assessment provides an
Energy. overview of the key supply chain elements required for
offshore wind farms and undertakes an initial review of
The FOWIND project consortium is working closely with the potential for Indian companies to enter the market.
the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, the National
Institute of Wind Energy, key centres and state based Section 3 - The Port Infrastructure and Logistics
agencies to develop a roadmap for offshore wind Assessment details the port infrastructure and logistics
development in India, with a focus on the states of required from manufacturing (i.e. wind turbine and
Gujarat and Tamil Nadu. The on-going discussions on
foundation, etc) to installation and the subsequent
developing offshore wind in India are encouraging
operation and maintenance (O&M) phase of an offshore
and the FOWIND project is providing technical support
through its preliminary assessments and feasibility wind farm. A port screening and port readiness study is
analysis while increasing stakeholder awareness and conducted for Gujarat and Tamil Nadu.
involvement.
Section 4 - Decommissioning provides a high-level
The FOWIND consortium’s Supply Chain, Port introduction to the processes and operations likely to be
Infrastructure and Logistics Study for both Gujarat and implemented when decommissioning an offshore wind
Tamil Nadu, is a key deliverable from the project’s second farm at the end of its 20 to 25 year design life.
year and follows on from the FOWIND Pre-feasibility
Study Reports issued in mid 20154. 1
http://www.makeinindia.com/sector/renewable-energy
2
NMRE - http://mnre.gov.in/mission-and-vision-2/achievements/
3
http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/
National-Offshore-Wind-Energy-Policy.pdf
4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
12 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

2 SUPPLY CHAIN ASSESSMENT

The development of an offshore wind farm from design A skilled workforce will be required for design
to fabrication to installation and through to operation development, project management, fabrication,
is a complex puzzle with an extensive supply chain transportation, installation, commissioning, operations
containing multiple interfaces (see Figure 1). & maintenance and decommissioning.

Interfaces can range from large primary interfaces In Europe, offshore wind projects have a Europe wide
such as the wind turbine to foundation connection, to and indeed global supply chain. The procurement
interfaces as small as a fire detection device fitted within process is driven by various factors, but primarily cost
an offshore substation; requiring consideration of (commercial factors) and quality (technical factors).
mounting points, connection into the station’s low Quality and hence risk reduction is particularly important
voltage system and HSE requirements. with regards to the selection of suppliers with a solid
and proven track record in offshore wind. This is seen
In order to better illustrate the diversity and magnitude across the European markets and now also in emerging
of a typical project’s supply chain an offshore wind markets such as China, where for example in a number
procurement list has been formulated to document of projects we are seeing developers reducing project
some of the important ingredients required to realise risk profiles by selecting offshore wind turbines from the
an offshore wind farm from fabrication through to limited number of suppliers with proven track records
operation (see Table 1 and Table 2). This list is illustrative rather than selecting less-proven local WTG OEMs.
rather than comprehensive and aims to give the reader Local content is of course important in many markets
a background level understanding. The procurement but this can often be driven by political incentives and/or
list focuses on the physical materials and component directives rather than a pure cost versus quality decision.
requirements rather than specific specialist consultants,
contractors or man-power that is required during all the It is anticipated that the supply chain in India would
key project development stages. Each item on this list develop in a similar fashion to other emerging Asia-
comes with a whole host of complex interfacing, risk, Pacific markets (e.g. China, Taiwan, Japan and South
health & safety and environmental considerations. Their Korea). During the early stages of development it is
implications and interactions must be carefully evaluated probable that skill and equipment gaps will exist within
during project development. the supply chain and global procurement strategies will
be required. As the local supply chain develops, gaps
The importance of procuring specialist contractors with will gradually be closed by the emerging local suppliers.
their experience should not be underestimated However, due to the diversity, complexity and
(e.g. design-houses, fabrication contractors, specialisation in the offshore wind supply chain, in the
transportation and installation contractors etc). medium and long term a global supply chain will likely
still play a significant role for offshore wind in India.

Figure 1 - Primary offshore wind interfaces


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 13

Offshore wind procurement list


Key materials, equipment and components*

WTG Supply Foundations Offshore substation Offshore electrical


(WTG/OSS) topside network
(electrical/structural/others) (export/array cables
& others)

n Generator n Steel of suitable grade (or concrete n Transformers (if AC) n Array cables
n Gearbox & reinforcement if GBS) n Converters (if HVDC) n Export cables
n Main shaft n Interface flanges n Reactors n Cables hangers

n Control system n Castings n Switchgear n Cable protection systems


n Generator
n Blade n Standard tubulars (jacket) n Crane - J-tube seals
n Gearbox
n Nacelle cover n Bolts n Backup generator - Bend restrictors (e.g. Techmar)
n Main shaft
n Spinner n Coatings n Plate girders - Stiffeners
n Control system
n Personnel access n Grout n Universal beams - Cable mats
n Blade
n Drive train components n Grout seals n Cable laydown deck Pullingcover
n nNacelle engines
n Tower n Grout lines n Fire walls Conductor
n nSpinner
n Davit cranes n Fall arrest yo-yo n Cooling system n nPersonnel
Insulatoraccess
n SCADA system n Navigation lights n Oil sump n nDrive train components
Mechanical and chemical
n Flanges n Fog horn n Bunds
Tower
n protection
n Davit cranes
n Coatings n Lighting n Helipad n Etc.
n SCADA system
n Nacelle bedplate n Signage n Platform access
n Flanges
n Main bearing n Transition piece n Hatches
n Coatings
n Power take-off n Vessel docking interface n Stairways n Nacelle bedplate
n Yaw system n Platforms (incl. GRP grating) n Water tanks n Main bearing
n Yaw bearing n Handrails n Accommodation n Power take-off
n Nacelle auxiliary systems n Davit or similar light crane n Control room n Yaw system

n Small engineering n Crew access system (ladders) n Cable supports n Yaw bearing
n Nacelle auxiliary systems
components n J-tube n Earthing materials
n Small engineering
n Fasteners n Scour protection n Panels, cable trays, tracks, clamps
components
n Conditioning monitoring n Sacrificial anode and supports
n Fasteners
system n Temporary covers n Fire and blast protection systems
n Conditioning monitoring
n Structural composite n Earthing system n Low voltage supplies system
materials n Condition monitoring system n Navigation aids n Structural composite
n Lighting protection n Shims (for levelling) n Fuel tanks materials
n Pitch system n Scour protection material n Safety system n Lighting protection

n Hydraulic system n Etc. n Life raft

n Earthing system n Etc.

n Etc.

* This list is illustrative rather than comprehensive and aims to provide background level understanding.
The procurement list focuses on the physical materials, equipment and component requirements rather
than specific specialist companies, contractor or manpower.

Table 1 - Offshore wind procurement list (part 1)


14 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Offshore wind procurement list


Key materials, equipment and components*

Onshore electrical Fabrication Transport and Operations and


and civil works equipment installation maintenance
equipment equipment

n Similarelectrical systems to n Welding equipment (manual & n WTIVs

offshore substation automated) n Barges


n Buildings and other facilities are n Welding consumables n Jack-ups vessels
simplified compared with offshore n Welding enclosures n Heavy lift vessels
n Metering equipment n Plate rolling (bending) machine n Cable laying vessels
n Crew transfer vessels
n Etc. n Cutting equipment n Seabed cable plough
n Helicopters (if considered)
n Milling machines n Cable jetting tool
n Jack-up vessel (major repairs)
n Drilling machines n Rock cutting/trenching tool
n Onshore control room
n Grinding equipment n Pile hammers n Generator
n SCADA system
n Forging equipment (e.g. furnace/ n Pile guides and followers n Gearbox
n Condition monitoring system
hammer) n Pile lifting frames (hydraulic) n Main shaft
n Spare parts (key spares stored
n Casting equipment n Seabed piling template (tripods/ n Control system
at O&M base\0
n Blade
n Coating equipment jackets)
Inspection
n nNacelle coverequipment
n Blasting equipment n Grout mixing systems
n n ROV (inspections)
Spinner
n Mechanical handling systems n Grouting lines/connections
n nPersonnel access removal
Marine growth
n Gantry cranes n Grout testing equipment
Drive train components
n equipment
n SPMTs n Sea lashings/temp supports Tower
n n Cable repair equipment
n Ringer cranes n Pile plugs (buoyant MPs) n Davit cranes
n Access equipment
n Temporary supports n Lifting slings and spreader bars n SCADA system
n HSE equipment e.g. PPE)
n Non-destructive testing (NDT) n Specialist handling toolds (e.g. n Flanges
n Other equipment used during
equipment WTG blades) n Coatings
installation may be required
n Nacelle bedplate
n Surveying equipment (as built n Access systems
n Mainfor specific
bearing unscheduled major
records) n Drilling rings
n Power
O&Mtake-off
activities e.g. WTG serial
n Scaffolding n Pile cleaners
n Yaw system
defect replacements, scour
n HSE equipment (e.g. PPE) n Cable lifting frames
n Yaw bearing
material replenishment
n Etc. n ROV (inspections) n nNacelle
Etc. auxiliary systems
n Surveying equipment n Small engineering
n HSE equipment (e.g. PPE) components
n Etc. n Fasteners
n Conditioning monitoring

system
n Structural composite
materials
n Lighting protection

* This list is illustrative rather than comprehensive and aims to provide background level understanding.
The procurement list focuses on the physical materials, equipment and component requirements rather
than specific specialist companies, contractor or manpower.

Table 2 - Offshore wind procurement list (part 2)

The remainder of section 2 provides an overview of the The section is structured to follow the main work
various aspects of the supply chain that are required to packages involved with offshore wind, namely:
construct and operate an offshore wind farm. Given the n development
relative lack of maturity of the Indian offshore wind n wind turbines
market and the supply chain, most of the focus is on n support structure/foundations
global suppliers, but commentary on current and n electrical elements
potential Indian suppliers is provided where appropriate. n installation and commissioning

n operations and maintenance


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 15

2.1 Development Leading marine surveyors include: Fugro, Intertek and


Gardline (many of whom are already active in India).
Once a site has been allocated and the developer has a
lease, the developer will undertake all the early stage Those organisations currently undertaking marine surveys
activities needed to see the project successfully in India or have vessels that could be converted should
developed to construction and operation. be well placed to obtain work in the sector. There is an
emerging body of guidance for vessels in the UK and
There are a large number of tasks which are required EU markets that could be reviewed to better understand
(see figure 3) but broadly they can be summarised into specific requirements.
four main areas:
2.1.1.1 Wind resource assessment
1. Understanding the site through site surveys and desk Wind is the fuel for wind farms and so a crucial element
based research (including wind resource, wave and of the development and design process is undertaking a
current assessments; and birds, marine mammals, fish, robust assessment of the wind resource. This is typically
benthos, coastal, geotechnical & geophysical surveys achieved through the erection of a meteorological mast
2. Consenting and planning work (including undertaking (met mast) at the site, but other remote sensing
the Environmental Impact Assessment, engaging with techniques (such as LiDAR) can also be used. These
stakeholders and applying for planning permission) devices seek to measure wind at proposed turbine hub
3. Design and engineering work (including initial heights (for example 100 m above sea level) and can
feasibility studies, concept and detailed design) therefore be quite large structures comprising a
4. Commercial and legal work (developing the business foundation, platform, steel lattice met mast, access
case, obtaining land agreements, obtaining financing, facilities as well as the measuring sensors. Meteorological
grid connection agreements, etc.) sensors track wind speed (with instruments at a
number of heights or via LiDAR, measuring over a range
Each of these elements is discussed further. of heights with one sensor), wind direction, temperature,
The developer will typically manage this process, pressure, humidity, solar radiation and visibility. A full met
contracting a large number of external consultants. mast EPCI contract in European deeper water typically
Supply chain capacity in this element is mainly focused costs around 11 to 14 million EUROS.
around people, with a wide range of skill sets required.

2.1.1 Site surveys


Site surveys are required to help the developer
understand and characterise the site, in turn allowing
the optimum wind farm design. Surveys will need to be
completed across the entirety of the offshore site, cable
route and onshore site. Both onshore and offshore
contractors are therefore used.

Personnel, in the form of trained surveyors, engineers,


ornithologists, geophysicists, etc. are crucial at this stage.

Capital equipment is also required, mainly in vessels


undertaking the various surveys. Different surveys have
different requirements. Some light aircraft have even
been used in the UK, utilising high definition cameras to
rapidly scan large areas of seabed for marine mammals
or birds.

Publically funded institutions could offer some support


in the early scoping phase e.g. the National Institute of
Oceanography (NIO), National Institute of Ocean
Source: SEACORE
Technology (NIOT) and labs of the Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research. Figure 2 - Offshore met mast installation, UK
Feasibility Development Procurement
Development
Development project
LVA Marine Offshore Socio- Commitment
(offshore) Ornithology mammals Fish Benthic archeology economic register
management management
Consents Environment
EIA (main Planning Habitat Marine Coastal Underwater Cumulative
(subsidiary, management
offshore) advice regulations ecology processes noise study assessments
offshore) plan
Consenting
EIA LVA Birds Ecology & Hydrology & Archaeology Cultural Land use Condition
(onshore) (onshore) (onshore) habitats geology (onshore) heritage (onshore) compliance
(onshore) (onshore) (onshore) & discharge
Wind farm Technical Shipping Vessels Ports Radar & SCADA
selection/ Metocean CDMC
layout advisor assessment assessments aviation software
audit
Conceptual - Met mast Met mast Wind Anchor Turbine
turbine topsides foundations energy Geophysical Geotechnical UXO penetration evaluation
selection (offshore) (offshore) analysis trial
Engineering
stream
Conceptual Substation Cable Outline Electrical Virtual Contract
GIS
design - concept routing GI (onshore) design - system construction preparation
mapping
foundations (onshore) (offshore) foundations design modelling - tech specs.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Substation Substation Offshore Cable route Construction Substation Substation Virtual Contract
concept noise cable route (onshore) & traffic basic design basic design operations negotiations
(offshore) (onshore) & inst. options (onshore) (offshore) (onshore) modelling (technical)
Land agent Access Contract
Financial Grid Legal - Legal - Legal -
Commercial model application & options agreements Risk mapping landowner planning contracting
negotiations
(onshore) (commercial)
PR/ Fisheries Stakeholder Community Policy Industry Vessel Fabrication
stakeholder/ liaison liaison engagement lobbying
PR/media
engagement definition plant WTG design
supplier (for providers) design
Figure 3 - Development activities
16
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 17

Some of the key players in the EU include:


n Foundation and Platform: BiFab, Bladt, MT HØjgaard
and SIF-Smulder
n Masts: Carl C and Francis & Lewis
n Meteorological sensors: FT Technologies, NRG
Systems, Thies and Vector Instruments
n Metocean sensors: Nortek, Planet Ocean

Key existing onshore met mast suppliers in India may Figure 4 - ADCP (left) and wave buoy (right)
be positioned to enter offshore sector, based on a
preliminary market assessment, some of these include:
The duration of survey campaign depends on the
Shah Infra Tower, Aditya Enterprises and RK
n accuracy of data desired. Minimum measurement period
Windmast of one month is recommended for currents/water levels
in order to cover a complete lunar cycle and its effect.
Fabrication of the met mast support structure could be
a useful way for Indian fabricators to gain an early For waves a minimum of 6-12 months onsite
foothold in the market. Existing Indian suppliers of measurement would be required. ADCPs can be
deployed at a specific location by lowering it from a
meteorological sensors for the onshore wind industry will
survey vessel and then anchoring using heavy weights.
also be well positioned to move into the offshore sector.
In many cases sea divers are used to accurately place the
ADCP on position. The fleet of engineers/technicians
In Europe, some early projects directly deployed onshore includes but is not limited to oceanographer,
met masts offshore, but with limited consideration of skipper/crew and sea divers.
the additional dynamic loading from waves which then
resulted in additional fatigue loading causing early failure Some of the key players in India based on a preliminary
or structural concerns for some of these masts (especially market assessment include:
when masts are deployed on slender and flexible National Institute of Oceanography (NIO), Geological
monopile foundations). Survey of India (GSI), Ocean Science & Surveying
(formally known as Egs Survey), Fugro Survey (India),
2.1.1.2 Oceanographic surveys Indomer, CGG, and Petroleum Geo-Services.
A detailed oceanographic model of the wind farm site
will be required to inform various design, construction 2.1.1.3 Geophysical and geotechnical surveys
and operational aspects of the project. These validated Geophysical surveys for offshore wind farm
models are used to predict for example wave and current development will typically include but not limited to
parameters across the site. Models are validated against bathymetry surveys in order to capture the water depth
existing data points and also data gathered from on-site variations within a specified area, side-scan sonar survey
oceanographic surveys. to map the seabed profile, sub-bottom profile survey
(see Figure 5, top) in order to understand stratigraphy of
Oceanographic surveys shall typically include soil below seabed up to a limited depth, magnetometer
measurement of the intensity of current, tidal variations, survey to locate any existing buried metallic substances.
wave pattern and heights of waves. Normally it can be Also, grab sampling is recommended to have a better
carried out by ADCP (Acoustic Current Doppler Profiler) geological understanding of seabed soil. Grab samples
which can be seabed mounted (see Figure 4, left) or ship can be subjected to visual geological inspection, soil
bottom mounted. Seabed mounted systems are always particle and classification analysis.
preferred over the ship bottom mounted; however there
is a risk of theft or sand wave movement. Periodic Normally specialist survey vessels are available or other
acquisition of data shall reduce the risk. Wave buoys vessel types can be converted for this operation by
(see figure 4, right) are also used and measure sea carefully retro-fitting surveying equipment. The selection
surface displacements from inferred motions of the buoy. of vessels based on the anticipated sea condition is the
Various fixed instruments can also be attached to prime factor in order to have vessel stability within the
offshore platforms (e.g. vertically oriented radar and desired range. Survey equipment must capture the data
laser altimeters). with minimal disturbances.
18 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

The fleet of engineers/technicians shall include but not Geophysical surveys help to define the extent and
limited to oceanographer, marine geologist, electronics location of geotechnical investigation. The depth of
& communication engineer, hydrographic surveyor, and borehole may vary from 30 to 80 m depending on
geophysicist. High-end equipment like a multi-beam foundation design requirements. A range of laboratory
echo sounder for bathymetry, dual frequency side scan tests are then performed on collected soil samples to
solar, sub bottom profilers (such as boomer/sparker) are establish the engineering properties of the soil/rock.
available in prevailing markets. The capacity and accuracy
of survey equipment shall be carefully selected based on Jack-up vessels are available which can be mounted with
the extent of data required. drilling rigs and other in-situ test equipment in order to
perform the desired investigation program. Jack-ups can
Some of the key players based on a preliminary market be towed to location via tugboats and fixed on defined
assessment in India include: Ocean Science & Surveying co-ordinates using their in-built hydraulic legs.
(formally known as Egs Survey), Fugro Survey (India), The minimum length of legs and spud-can bearing
Indomer and Petroleum Geo-Services. capability in the seabed shall be carefully studied in order
to have safe and efficient operations. Towing of jack-ups
Geotechnical investigation ideally shall follow the in a rough sea condition is not recommended. Many
geophysical survey. It includes drilling of boreholes at companies have also successfully operated drilling ships
pre-defined coordinates, collecting in-situ disturbed and mounted with high efficiency dampers for geotechnical
undisturbed soil samples, in-situ tests like cone drilling. The fleet of engineers/technicians shall include
penetrometer test (CPT), standard penetration test (SPT), but not limited to geotechnical engineer, geologist,
dynamic cone penetration test (DCPT), seismic resonance Jack-up operator, towing expert and skipper/crew.
and etc. For more representative in-situ test data CPTs are
favoured over others such as SPT and DCPT (see Figure 5, Some of the key players based on a preliminary market
bottom). assessment in India could include: Fugro Geotech (India),
DBM Geotechnics & Construction, Comacoe, and
Oceanking Survey Services.

2.1.2 Consent and planning


A crucial element in the development stage is obtaining
planning consent or approval for the project.
Each country will have their own unique planning
process, although all require an environmental impact
assessment. This will cover both human and natural
receptors, and therefore requires engagement with a
huge range of stakeholders.

Relatively little capital equipment is required for this stage


compared with the construction phase (over and above
the requirements for site surveys). Instead, specific
expertise in undertaking environmental assessments,
engaging and reaching agreement with stakeholders
and understanding the planning process will be required.
Offshore wind experience is important, particularly for
assessing environmental impacts, as the risk profile is
different from an oil and gas platform (except oil in
offshore substation transformers and a limited amount
of gearbox oil) and greater focus is required on elements
such as bird flight paths and aviation radar. Large
multinationals with offshore wind experience in the EU
will be well positioned. Other environmental and
planning consultancies could also enter the market,
Figure 5 - Sub-bottom profiler (top) and CPT data (bottom)
particularly those already active in large infrastructure
projects (particularly in the marine environment).
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 19

Some of the leading environmental consultancies in In general the purpose of an external consultant would
the EU include: ERM, Natural Power, NIRAS and Royal be to:
Haskoning.
n Provide experienced advice to the owner/developer
Some of the key players based on a preliminary market n Help reduce the project risk profile
assessment in India could include: AECOM, Chilworth n Help optimise the project for cost of energy
Technology, ERM, Engineers India Limited and Royal
Haskoning. General Consultants or Owner’s Engineer can assist with
the following:
2.1.3 Design and engineering
In addition to the environmental elements, there is a n Delivery of Engineering, Environmental and
huge amount of engineering and design work that is Commercial tasks
required to install such large structures in the hostile n Supporting the Project Management Office
marine environment. Offshore wind experience here is n 3rd party independent reviews
vital, although could at a stretch be transferred over
time from onshore wind or offshore oil and gas. 2.1.3.2 Third party review and certification
The blue sections in Figure 3 show the various In some markets (such as Germany) project certification is
engineering elements that need to be completed. mandatory, while other developers may choose to obtain
project certification to help minimise risk. This is where
Some of the leading engineering consultancies in the an independent third party reviews the approach taken
EU include: Atkins, COWI, DNV GL, LIC Energy, OWEC, by the developer against a predefined standard.
Ramboll, and Sgurr . It should also be noted that a This then gives comfort to the regulatory authorities
number of these have local offices in India. and/or investors that the project is fit for purpose. It is
not yet clear whether the Indian market will mandate
Some of the key players in India include companies project certification.
with existing wind and large infrastructure engineering
experience such as; Aker Solution, Arup, Engineers India In addition, turbine manufacturers typically need to
Limited, L&T Construction and Saipem India Projects. obtain type certification. This is to reduce the technology
Lessons learnt from other emerging markets such as risk of the project and give confidence to developers and
China have shown that there is steep and challenging investors.
learning curve at the beginning of the offshore wind
industry. A number of leading local engineering 2.1.4 Commercial and legal work
consultancies have subsequently teamed-up or formed There is a significant amount of legal and commercial
joint ventures with leading and experienced European work required to reach investment decisions involving
engineering consultancies. millions and potentially billions of Indian rupees. Typically
the developer would manage the business case in house
2.1.3.1 General Consultant and Owner’s Engineer but may employ external advisors to support. Legal firms
It is unlikely that owners/developers will have sufficient support all elements of the process.
internal human resources to conduct all of the vast
number of the project management and technical/
commercial development tasks (see Figure 3). In this
situation it is common for a developer to contract an
experienced General Consultant and/or Owner’s
Engineer.

In Europe only developers with a large project portfolio


(e.g. Dong Energy) have developed extensive internal
project development teams – smaller developers and
those in emerging markets will tend to augment project
teams with external consultants.
Source: SEACORE
20 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

2.2 Wind turbines

Historically, offshore wind turbines have been versions of


onshore turbines adapted for the marine environment,
yet over the past ten years offshore specific designs have
emerged. The principle difference is that they are much
larger, but also have a greater focus on reliability and
durability in a hostile environment (given the challenges
of getting to site in case of downtime).

There are a much smaller number of Wind Turbine


Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) in offshore
wind compared with onshore wind. There are five major
EU OEMs; the leading player is Siemens, followed by
MHI Vestas, Senvion (formerly of Suzlon), ALSTOM and
Areva Gamesa. In addition there are a number of
Chinese players (including Goldwind, Ming Yang, XEMC,
Sinovel and others) and Japanese manufacturers
(Hitachi). In India, Suzlon has rights to license and build Figure 6 - Fundamental WTG components
the Senvion 6.XM series machine5.

Table 3 shows the latest offering to the market for a 2.2.1 Turbine assembly
selection of leading manufacturers. Beyond this, plans Before transport to site for installation, the major
are developing for 10 MW turbines by the end of the components of the wind turbine generators (WTG) must
decade. be finished and assembled into the final product at
specialist coastal facilities by the OEM.
Wind turbine OEMs design the wind turbine but are then These are hugely important sites, both in terms of
effectively ‘assemblers’ bringing together parts from a investment (~1000 Crores Indian Rupees) but also
range of sub-suppliers. through the development of supply chain hubs in the
nearby area. Investment on this scale is primarily driven
The main elements of the supply chain are: by market size and a strong order book and would
therefore be linked to the expected market demand in
n Turbine assembly
India.
n Blades

n Castings and forgings

n Drive train (gearboxes and generators)

n Towers

Each element has further sub-components not covered in 5


http://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1331506/
this report. analysis-divorce-suzion-senvion

Manufacturer Current offering to market (end of 2015)

Siemens 6 MW (commercially installed), 7 MW commercial contract signed

MHI Vestas 8 MW (commercial contract signed)

ALSTOM (GE) 6 MW (demo site under construction)

Senvion 6.16 MW (commercial installation underway)


Adwen 5 MW (commercial deployment)

Ming Yang 6.5 MW 2-bladed downwind (one prototype contracted in EU)

Hitachi 5 MW downwind - prototype installed


Table 3 - Offshore wind turbine models currently in the market
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 21

Entry into the offshore market is extremely challenging, Major OEMs with in-house capability include Siemens,
requiring huge financial and technical resources. A track MHI Vestas and Senvion. ALSTOM has a partnership with
record is vital, yet very expensive and time consuming to LM Blades while Euros and SSP have also supplied blades
obtain. Major players including Samsung and GE have to the sector.
all initially entered but then exited the market due to
these challenges. Any existing Indian OEMs supplying the Suzlon began its first blade manufacturing facility at
onshore market must be aware of these challenges, and Daman (UT), India in 2002. They have since added four
will need to be supported almost entirely by the domestic more blade manufacturing facilities in Pondicherry (UT),
Indian market. The hurdle of offshore track record (risk) Dhule (Maharashtra), Bhuj (Gujarat) and Padubidri Udupi
is an important factor but could be partially mitigated by (Karnataka). It is understood that should the offshore
local content requirements, cost advantages and O&M wind market develop with a sufficient pipeline Suzlon
advantages from local OEM suppliers. Similar to the could consider development of a purpose built offshore
Chinese market, it is likely that many of the early projects wind turbine manufacturing facility within a suitable port
will use both European and local OEMs. estate.

2.2.2 Blades LM Wind Power (established in 1940 in Denmark) has


The function of the blade is to convert the energy in the rotor blade facilities located in Taluka-Halol, Vadodra
airstream into rotational torque on the main shaft, which (Gujarat) and Dabaspet (Karnataka).
drives the generator. 2 to 5 MW class turbines have
blades around 50 to 60 m in length while new 6 MW+ Other Indian OEMs also have in-house rotor blade
turbine models demand blades in the 70 m+ range. The manufacturing facilities, e.g. Suzlon and Inox.
largest blade deployed to date is 83.5 m for the Samsung
7 MW turbine. The sheer scale of these blades means
very high technical design and manufacturing capability
is required. Increasing blade length results in increased
loads on the WTG, bearings, tower and foundations. This
demands advances in materials technology to keep blade
mass down together with a robust WTG and foundation
design to allow for family turbines, which share key
components, but are focused on different IEC class
sites. This reduces design costs somewhat and reduces
the certification effort, increasing speed to market and
competiveness. Due to the high cost of transportation
and factory costs modular blade design (in both chord
and length wise) may emerge, which allows them to be Source: Business green
shipped in containers and assembled on site.
Figure 7 - 8 MW Offshore WTG blade

Most rotor blades are made from glass fibre reinforced


plastics (FRP), i.e. glass fibre reinforced polyester or 2.2.3 Casting and forgings
epoxy. However carbon fibres have recently began Offshore wind turbine manufacture requires heavy duty
augmenting the glass fibres for their comparatively light metal work for several components. Castings are needed
weight, higher rigidity and superior strength properties. for items such as the rotor hub, nacelle bedplate,
Apart from being expensive, carbon fibres are difficult bearing housing and gearbox housing and steel forgings
to work with and they conduct electricity, which makes are needed for bearings, shafts, gear wheels and flanges.
blades potentially more vulnerable to lightning strikes. The size of the steel castings needed by very large
A number of manufacturers use carbon fibres for the offshore wind turbines (in excess of 20 tonnes) limits the
supporting laminates of their offshore blades (large size) number of foundries in the EU and the demands of very
to keep the mass within a limit. Using extruded carbon large offshore wind turbines (large items and reasonably
in blades is quicker and has a higher degree of control high volume) sets it apart from other sources of business.
in the manufacturing process than infusion. Epoxy resins
Source: SEACORE
have higher material performance properties than the Castings and forgings have been supplied to offshore
polyester resins, but epoxy resins are comparatively wind by suppliers such as Brück, Euskal, Felguera Melt,
expensive. LM Wind Power uses polyester resins in Fonderia Vigevanese, Metso, Siempelkamp, Torgelow
almost all its blades to keep the costs down whereas and VTC.
Vestas and Suzlon prefer epoxy over polyester for better
material quality.
22 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Based on a preliminary market assessment in India forges


such as Bharat Forge, L&T Special Steel, Kalyani Forge,
SE Forge and Heavy Forgings may be able to move into
the sector.

Source: NREL

Figure 9 - WTG modular drivetrain configuration

2.3 Support structure/foundations

The wind turbine is supported by a foundation that is


typically fixed to the seabed, although some floating
Figure 8 - Forging a WTG ring flange designs are starting to emerge.

Monopile foundations have dominated the market to


2.2.4 Gearbox and generators date, but a range of other concepts exists. These include
The major components in the drive train of offshore jackets, tripods, gravity based concrete solutions (GBS)
wind turbines are the generator unit and (for non-direct and suction bucket foundations. A wide range of site-
drive models) the gearbox. Larger turbines and the specific factors including depth of water, ground
demands of maintenance at sea mean that there is a conditions, turbine size and wave loading dictates
general diversification from the 3-speed gearbox drive the choice of foundation. The capability of the local
trains that have dominated the wind industry (on- and fabrication and installation supply chain will also impact
offshore) to date and a range of increasingly product- foundation choice and the design process. In addition
specific solutions such as mid-speed, direct drive or even to the primary structure, the foundation design includes
hydraulic power transmission emerge. secondary and tertiary elements such as; crew access
Some of the key suppliers of gearboxes are Bosch systems, cable protection systems (e.g. I or J-tubes), davit
Rexroth, ZF Wind, and Winergy. Leading manufacturers cranes, grouted connection systems (e.g. high-strength
of converters include ABB. grout, grout lines, grout seals) and corrosion protection
systems (coatings and cathodic protection). I or J-tubes
2.2.5 Towers are steel tubes that allow the installation of cables by
Towers are rolled, tapered steel tubes, which are flanged providing a conduit through which the cables can be
and bolted together in sections. Towers are the same pulled. Scour protection is often required at the
for on- and offshore wind – albeit on a larger scale foundation/seabed interface, particularly in areas of high
offshore. As turbines get bigger, the tower will also current flows.
need to increase in size and number of sections.
Most technical development is likely to occur in the area Broadly speaking monopiles are the simplest (and to date
of structural load optimisation through an integrated cheapest) technology, yet begin to struggle with water
Manufacturer
design approach for turbine, tower and foundation. depth above 40 m, particularly for the largest wind
A good example of such a project is a recent offshore turbines (6 to 8 MW). Ground conditions can also
wind integrated design study focused on cost reduction, preclude the use of monopiles (e.g. where rock head
called FORCE6. exists at depth or large boulders are present in the soil
Major EU tower suppliers include Ambau, Welcon and profile). Jackets are used for deeper sites with larger
CS Wind. Existing manufacturers of towers in the Indian turbines, given their versatility and inherent strength.
sector may be able to scale up to deliver into the offshore GBSs have been used in the Baltic where ground
market (including Windar and DN Wind). conditions make piling difficult but have struggled to
break into the North Sea market. Suction bucket jackets
potentially offer a quicker, quieter means of installation
(than piling) but are only suitable in certain ground
conditions and have yet to be used on a commercial
scale project.
6
FORCE - https://www.dnvgl.com/energy/feature-articles/
project-force.html
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 23

Figure 10 - WTG Tower fabrication

Regarding the key supply chain risks for steel foundations Offshore paint coatings are highly specialised and
the following should be carefully considered: are typically Epoxy based (sometimes glass-flake
reinforced to extend the lifetime). Suitable coating
n Steel grade systems are only available from a limited number of
Offshore wind structures are subjected to high levels suppliers with extensive track record, e.g. Jotun,
of dynamic loading and subsequent fatigue damage. International and Hempel.
Wall thicknesses can be large (e.g. >100mm in large
monopiles) and design temperatures are low. To resist n Flange supply
this fatigue loading and prevent brittle fracture special Similar to the wind turbine the foundation to
high-grade tough offshore steels are required. These WTG interface flange is a specialist item that must
are only available from a limited number of suppliers be manufactured to precise tolerances. See Section
(e.g. Dillinger, Tata, JFE and Nippon). Furthermore the 2.2.1.
thickness of the material for jacket nodes must be
tested and typically even higher grades are required n Cast nodes
for similar thicknesses in other structural parts Jacket structures that are heavily loaded may push the
(e.g. legs and brace members). design limits of fabricated nodes (X and K joints). Cast
joints enable a superior fatigue detail classification due
n Welding qualifications and automation to the smoother construction and subsequent reduced
All welds within an offshore wind structure must be stress concentrations. If cast nodes are required this
completed to specific Welding Procedure will add significant cost and specialist suppliers would
Specifications (WPS) and these procedures must be need to be identified. See Section 2.2.1.
qualified with suitable Procedure Qualification Records
(PQRs). Fabricators have a significant advantage if they n Anode supply
already hold suitable weld PQRs. The ability for a Anodes or cathodic protection is an effective
fabricator to produce double sided full penetration method of protecting steel in the zones where it is
welds would also be advantageous due to the permanently submerged. It is widely used in the
significant fatigue benefits. All welders must be maritime and oil and gas industries. Hence multiple
suitably qualified. suppliers exist.

n Coating supply n Grout material


The marine environment contains all the components Grouted connections are commonly used in both
required to corrode carbon steel (water, oxygen and monopiles and jackets to connect structures
dissolved Chlorides). The severe corrosion takes place underwater (e.g. monopile/transition piece and jacket/
Source: SEACORE
in the splash zone where the structure is constantly pin pile). For monopiles specialist high-strength grouts
exposed to air and water. Corrosion is mitigated are used. For jackets different projects have used
through a combination of: 1. Sacrificial thickness, both high-strength and lower strength Ordinary
2. Cathodic protection (anodes), 3. Coating systems. Portland Cement (OPC) grouts. High-strength grouts
24 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

typically result in a shorter connection and are often


required for heavily loaded connections. The specialist
nature of high-strength grouts limits suitable suppliers
e.g. Found Ocean and Densit.

n Grout seals
These contain the grout at the base connection and
their integrity is a high risk during installation. As seen
on a number of early projects, failure of gout seals
can severely cost projects financially, due to vastly
expensive vessels waiting on-site while remedial
repairs are completed. There are two main types:
1. Passive seals – thick rubber wiper seals held in place
by the pressure head of grout, 2. Active seals –
inflatable bags that once activated underwater fill the
annulus. Due to the high risk nature, grout seal design
and supply is typically left to a hand-full of specialist
companies e.g. Crux and Trelleborg.

n Fabrication tolerances and dimensional


limitations
Offshore wind foundations need to be fabricated
to tight tolerances (especially large diameter
monopiles) and the foundations designed must be
within the handling capability of fabricators (e.g.
crane under hook heights, load-out quays, storage Figure 11 - Jacket fabrication (top) and monopile fabrication
etc). This of course limits the number of fabricators (bottom)
with capabilities to deliver offshore structures.
Promoting competitive tendering by not excluding too 2.3.1 Monopiles
many fabricators is also a key consideration during Steel tubular structures, between 40 m and 80 m in
design. The majority of fabricators with offshore wind length, embedded in the ground using large hammers
track records are located in Europe but capability and if necessary drills. Tubular sections are rolled from
does exist within India and surrounding regions such steel plate then welded together. A transition piece,
as in China and the Middle East, albeit with very consisting of more complex welded steel sections, usually
limited offshore wind track records. acts as the interface between the monopile and the
turbine, although designs have emerged without the
n Installation limitations transition piece. To date 7.5 m has been the maximum
Vessel availability and handling capabilities will have a diameter with a wall thickness of ~100 mm but Sif
significant impact during foundation design. Smulders recently committed to a factory with capability
See Section 2.5. In addition specialist installation of rolling 11 m diameter tubes.
equipment availability can impact foundation choice
and design, for example hammer driving limits can
Manufacturer The leading suppliers in Europe include Bladt, Bilfinger,
impact monopile design and feasible pile diameters. EEW, Steelwind, SIF and Smulders.

In Gujarat the mean depth varies from 15 m to 43 m and Smaller monopiles are relatively easy to manufacture and
in Tamil Nadu to depth varies between 11 m and 53 m existing Indian suppliers of rolled tubes should be able
within the identified development zones in each State. to enter the market. Larger fabricators in India, such as
This suggests that a range of foundation concepts could Larsen and Toubro (L&T) and Essar Projects, may already
be used, subject to further consideration of site specific have capability to roll the larger diameter/thickness
factors. Reference can be made to Table 1 and Table 2 tubulars required for XL monopiles. However, the largest
to further understand the procurement complexities that monopiles currently being designed in the EU may
India may face with regards to the foundation supply exceed the capability that many existing fabricators in the
chain. Indian market have at present. As a result to boost local
content more conservative designs (using smaller turbines
in shallower water) may be preferred for earlier sites.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 25

2.3.2 Jacket foundations GBSs can be broadly categorised into:


Jackets most commonly have three or four legs, and are n ‘lifted’ concepts - where the structure is installed,
affixed to the seabed using piles of around 1.5 to 3 m often with the turbine pre-installed, using a specialist
diameter. These can be pre-piled, and the jacket lowered installation vessel, and
on subsequently, or post-piled, through the sleeves at the n ‘floating’ concepts - where the GBS is floated out and
base of the positioned jacket. They are similar in design
then installed by sinking the structure to the seafloor
to the jackets used in the offshore oil and gas industry,
Strabag - Boskalis and GBF are leading developers of
although the manufacturing requirements are very
lifted concepts, while BAM – Van Oord and Gravitas are
different (many units at low cost) to that taken to oil and
gas projects (one or two units, at much higher budget). progressing floated concepts.
As a result, the main R&D focus in offshore wind is
through standardisation and process optimisation. GBS concepts have already been used in offshore wind
The fabricator Bilfinger have developed an automated in the Baltic, most recently at the 48 MW Karehamn site
jacket facility in Poland that uses robotic welding of in Sweden, yet the technology has largely failed to break
nodes and utilisation of standard off-the-shelf tubular into the North Sea market. For the more novel concepts,
members – it is suggested automation cuts welding this lack of progress is likely to reflect the risk
time by more than 70% compared with traditional O&G associated with delivering an efficient end to end process
point-to-point jacket fabrication using manual welding. of manufacture and installation for a large number of
This optimisation is stated as having potential to reduce units (alongside all the other tasks) that are required for a
costs by 30%. commercial scale wind farm. It is not clear whether GBSs
are likely to be a widely attractive concept in the Indian
Jackets have been used on various projects around market, but in areas where there is high rock-head, like
Europe, including Ormonde, Thornton Bank, Baltic 2, Tamil Nadu, they are likely to be amongst the favoured
Wikinger and Nordsee Ost, with further installation options to be evaluated at Front End Engineering
expected at East Anglia 1, Beatrice and Neart Na Design stage (FEED). This is particularly true if the port
Gaoithe. Like monopiles, jackets are considered proven. infrastructure necessary to facilitate manufacture and
launch of these very large reinforced concrete structures
Typical size of a jacket for a 6 MW turbine is around is already locally available (e.g. Kattupalli).
600 - 800 tonne.
2.4 Electrical
Leading manufactures include Bladt, EEW, Smulders,
Bifab and Navantia. In India large-scale fabricators and The typical electrical layout is a High Voltage Alternative
shipyards active in the oil and gas industry are well Current (HVAC) system, with strings of 6 to 8 turbines
placed to transfer across. For example Larsen and connected by an inter-array cable (IAC), ~up to 50 km, to
Toubro (L&T)’s Head of Business Development in Europe the offshore substation. The offshore substation steps up
has previously stated that: ‘they can make jackets for the the power and then transmits to shore along an export
offshore wind market’7. Other potential Indian players cable.
might include; Essar Projects, Bharati Shipyard, Cochin An onshore substation cleans and steps up the power
Shipyard and EEW. There also exist fabricators with and connects it to the transmission network. This is
offshore capability in China (e.g. ZPMC and Blue Island
Offshore) and in the Middle East (e.g. Lamprell in U.A.E.).

2.3.3 Gravity base concrete foundations


Gravity base foundations (GBS) are large structures made
from reinforced concrete that use sheer weight, including
ballast, to provide stability to the turbines.
These structures can be over 3,000 tonne and have a
footprint of 30 m or more.

Source: SEACORE

Source: ABB

Figure 12 - High voltage AC electrical layout


7
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/channels/policy-and-business/
in-depth/indian-oil-and-gas-giant-eyes-uk-renewables-move/
1016637.article
26 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

However, the electrical layout for the wind farm will vary
primarily on the size of the wind farm and the distance
to shore. For smaller projects, closer to shore (~ <10 km)
it may be possible to remove the offshore substation,
using an array cable(s) to transmit the power directly
to an onshore substation. For projects further offshore
(~ > 50-100 km) and hub arrangements (where multiple
wind farms connect into one offshore connection), Source: Nexans
High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) systems are used.
These have higher capacities and reduce losses over Figure 13 - Offshore wind export and array cable types
distance but are more expensive to install. Only Germany
has to date installed HVDC systems offshore. 2.4.2 Offshore substation
The following sections focus on HVAC as this is the The offshore substation steps the voltage up from the
technology that will be expected to be used in Indian array cable operating voltage to the export system
offshore wind for the foreseeable future. operating voltage, provides switching devices to connect
or disconnect equipment and protection equipment to
2.4.1 HVAC cables respond to faults. This plant includes transformers,
Electrical cables are typically made up of three copper reactors, switchgear, control, fire protection systems
cores set into an XLPE (cross linked polyethylene) base, and low voltage auxiliary systems. All this equipment is
surrounded by steel wire armouring. Fibre optic cables contained in a large fabricated topside structure which
provide a communication channel for the wind farm. usually includes two or more stories and is installed upon
a support structure (usually a jacket). Topsides are
For array cables, 33 kV array cables have been used to around 30 m x 30 m x 15 m (LxWxH) and can weigh
date, although there is significant R&D, qualification over 1,000 tonnes. Depending on the size of the project,
work and future projects using larger capacity WTGs there may be more than one offshore substation.
that will utilise 66 kV cables.
Technology risk is considered relatively low. The supply
Export cables typically operate at 132 kV but increasingly for AC plant globally is not solely related to the demand
220 kV is being used. Typical requirements for a 132 kV in the offshore wind market. This has the advantage of
(AC) three core 800 mm² cable include: providing a deep pool of design and manufacturing
resource but also puts offshore wind in competition for
n Capacity: approximately 175 MVA supply at times of high demand from other sectors.
n Diameter: 214 mm Instead the size and mass of the topside (see Figure 14)
n Weight: 87 kg/m is a major manufacturing, logistical and installation
challenge. To date almost all substations have been
Technological improvements being considered include bespoke designs. Designers must carefully consider the
higher ratings, more dynamic ratings and greater durability of electrical equipment installed offshore.
condition and vibration monitoring. To mitigate damage and risks from the harsh offshore
environment, equipment is typically housed inside
The HVAC cable market has traditionally been tight multiple containers or the topside is fabricated as a single
(particularly for higher voltages) and is dominated by fully sealed unit. Offshore substations contain more
a few very well established players such as Nexans, interfaces and equipment than any other part of the
Manufacturer
Prysmian, JDR cable, Van Oord, ABB and NKT. High offshore wind farm, hence careful management of the
barriers to entry exist including significant technical and complex and typically global supply chain is required.
manufacturing capability and high investment costs.
Yet existing Indian manufacturers of cable (including
Polycabs and Universal Cables) are likely to be able to
enter the market.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 27

The support structure is fabricated by large yards 2.4.3 Onshore substation


including Heerema, Bladt, Bilfinger, Harlan and Wolff The onshore substation receives power from the export
and Semco Maritime. cable(s), steps the power up to the transmission voltage
and connects the wind farm to the onshore transmission
Yards manufacturing topsides for oil and gas in India and (high voltage) network. Switching devices allow
the Middle East may be well placed to manufacture connection or disconnection of equipment and
topsides for offshore wind. Larsen and Toubro (L&T), protection equipment helps respond to faults.
Essar Projects, Dolphin Offshore Enterprises and possibly Reactive power and other grid code issues are dealt with.
other fabrication yards/shipyards in India may be able to Onshore substations for offshore wind farms are almost
enter this segment. For jacket substructure fabrication identical to substations for other power generating
see Section 2.3.2. technologies and so existing suppliers in India should
be able to move into the market.
A recent concept design from Siemens is the
development of a ‘distributed transformer concept’8.
This would remove the need for an offshore
substation through attaching an offshore transformer
module directly to the foundation of a wind turbine.
Some of the main suppliers of electrical equipment are
Siemens, ABB, ALSTOM and CG Power (also active in
India).

Source: HFG

Source: SEACORE
Figure 14 - Greater Gabbard substation topside, 480 MW

8
http://www.siemens.com/press/en/pressrelease/?press=/en/pressrelease/
2015/energymanagement/pr2015030151emenhtm&content[]=EM
28 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Towed ‘dumb’ barge with crane Shearleg crane-barge

Semi-submersible/heavy-lift vessel DP2 Heavy-lift cargo vessel

Leg-stabilised crane vessel Self-propelled jack-up

Figure 15 - Installation vessels


Manufacturer

2.5 Installations vessels and infrastructure 2.5.1 Turbine installation vessels


Turbine installation requires a large number of heavy
There are four distinct major installation processes nacelles (120 to 400 tonne) and blades to be lifted to
required for an offshore wind farm: turbines, a significant height (typically ~100 m), with great
foundations, cables, and the offshore substation. precision and in challenging weather conditions.
Each has unique technical challenges, therefore Typically the installation vessel also collects the turbine
requiring specialised vessels. Installation activity is parts from shore and transports them to site. This fairly
coordinated from an installation port. unique set of challenges means that specialist Wind
Turbine Installation Vessels (WTIVs) are used.
Each of these elements is now discussed in turn. For
more information on the specific process see Section 3.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 29

Historically installation vessels have been a major 2.5.3 Cable installation vessels
bottleneck for the sector with few purpose built vessels Installation of power cables for offshore wind is similar
and demand from a buoyant oil and gas market driving to installation of telecoms cables and umbilical’s in oil
up prices and reducing capacity for offshore wind and gas. Yet despite this cable installation has and
developers. However, over the past few years around continues to remain a significant issue for the sector with
20 purpose built vessels have been ordered, most of an often-cited statistic that 80 % of insurance claims to
which are now coming on stream. Examples include: date have been from cable faults.
A2Sea’s Sea Challenger and Sea Installer, Van Oord’s
Aeolus, Seajacks’s Scylla and Swire Blue Ocean’s Pacific A range of vessels has been used in the market including
Orca. vessels and barges. Recently commissioned vessels
include SIEM Offshore (Installer) and Aimery and the
It is worth noting that for smaller turbines there is a CLV Ndurance.
surplus of suitable jack-ups and installation vessels, due
to the move in Europe towards larger turbines. In India, cable installation vessel operators currently
active in the telecoms or oil and gas sectors would be
As a result over-supply in the market is likely, at least for well placed to move into the offshore wind market.
the next couple of years, although Asian demand could
potentially reduce this. This can be seen by the recent 2.5.4 Offshore substation installation vessels
announcement that Seafox 5, a state of the art The sheer size and mass of the offshore topside requires
installation vessel, will move to the oil and gas market that specialist heavy lift crane vessels are used (unless a
for a year or so. Looking longer term, specifications may float-over method or self-installing topside design can
need boosting for more challenging sites in deeper water be utilised). There is widespread experience of installing
and next generation wind turbines. oil and gas topsides in India, and substation topsides are
very similar in dimensions and weights to smaller oil rigs.
2.5.2 Foundation installation vessels The vessels used in the Indian marketplace to fulfil this
Three different types of vessel have been used to install role should be suitable to be used for offshore wind as
foundations. These include: well.

n Wind turbine installation vessels (see above) 2.5.5 Ports


n Floating heavy lift vessels with advanced position It is not essential for offshore wind development to have
holding capability (e.g. Seaway Heavy Lifting’s Oleg numerous ports to work from, and provided there is at
Strashnov and Stanislav Yudin, Van Oord and there least one large facility, which meets the specific technical
are several others with potential like Saipem 3000, criteria to support the anticipated development strategies
and OSA’s Samson & Goliath) in its region, and then this will be adequate.
n Sheer leg crane vessels (e.g. Taklift 7)
The two areas identified as being promising for early
There appears to be sufficient supply of capacity for offshore wind development in India are the Gulf of
standard monopile installation while the supply of the Khambhat in Gujarat, and the Gulf of Mannar off Tamil
lifting capability needed to install monopiles with Nadu. This is discussed in far greater depth in Section 3.
diameters greater than 7.5 metres will need to be
invested in to meet projected demand if semi-buoyant
installation methods are not adopted.
Jacket installation vessels with adequate deck capacity
to carry more than three foundations are very limited in
supply and will constrain deployment at deep water sites
without investment in more vessels.

India has an established Oil and Gas industry, and there


are several similarities between the vessel specifications
necessary for lifting offshore wind turbine foundations,
and the installation of O&G jacket foundations and Source: SEACORE
topsides. Suitable vessels may also be available more
widely in Asia (e.g. China/South Korea) and the Middle
East.
30 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

2.6 Operations and maintenance crew transfer vessels are used to ferry technicians to
A large range of activities is required in the O&M phase the site every day. These are typically catamarans in the
of a wind farm (see Figure 16). These include onshore range of 15 to 24 m length, classed to transport up to
and offshore logistics, day-to-day maintenance of the 12 technicians and associated parts and equipment, with
offshore assets (turbines, foundations, electrical cruising speeds in the order of 20 knots. Crew vessels are
elements) and operation and back office administration primarily limited by sea state, often preventing access to
in keeping with the running of a large (wind) power offshore assets in rough weather. At more exposed sites
plant. helicopters are sometimes used to support crew transfer
vessels for works requiring rapid response and relatively
The majority of the work is focused on addressing the small parts or equipment during periods of more
scheduled and unscheduled maintenance requirements onerous weather. For large wind farms further offshore
of the wind turbines. Meanwhile foundations (typically more than about 40 nm from the O&M port),
generally require infrequent inspections and remedial offshore-based concepts are starting to emerge with
works, virtually all of which can be undertaken in a accommodation provided near the wind farm and
scheduled fashion, since foundation failures of sufficient technicians working for extended periods offshore
severity to cause turbine stoppages are very rare. (akin to the oil and gas sector). The rest of the section
The majority of foundation maintenance is typically assumes the first strategy is used.
focused around periodic statutory inspections, marine
growth and guano removal, paint coatings and cathodic 2.6.1 Crew transfer vessels
protection inspections and small remedial tasks such as The sector has seen rapid development in vessel
painting and repairs of secondary steelwork and auxiliary design. First generation vessels were 18 to 24 m fishing
devices (e.g. davit cranes, ID signs etc.). Occasionally or guard vessels, which had the minimum of
more substantial works are required on the foundations, modifications. Second generation vessels were those that
such as scour pit inspections or remediation, but again were specially designed workboats conforming to MCA
these can typically be scheduled without incurring category 2 of MGN 280, and ISO 12217 for offshore
significant production losses. wind. More radical third generation designs have been
proposed through the Offshore Wind Accelerator
Unlike foundations, failures in sub-sea cables can lead competition including SWATHs (small-waterplane-area
to substantial periods of lost production, and therefore, twin hull) and, SES (surface effect ships) and these are
albeit rare, unscheduled outages of cables are treated slowly starting to enter the market.
with considerable urgency. Periodic seabed surveys will
usually be undertaken every few years to monitor the There is a thriving and competitive industry in the
burial status of the cables and assess the risks due to manufacture of personnel transfer vessels. Leading EU
external aggravation, such as anchor strikes or trawling suppliers include Alnmaritec, Alicat, CWind and Damen.
activities etc. In India, existing yards and manufacturers should be
able to transition to build offshore wind transfer boats,
The primary supply chain activities are around crew although it may be sensible to utilise the existing vessel
transfer vessels, portside infrastructure and offshore design experience from the EU in the short term.
technicians. Spares are often required but usually
provided by the original OEM, with a limited market to 2.6.2 Ports
date for third party providers, and which is therefore not O&M ports are much smaller than those required for
discussed further. Much of the turbine-related work is construction and are situated as close to the site as
monopolised by the turbine OEM’s who have the turbine- reasonably possible to minimise day to day transit time.
specific skills and expertise to undertake the work and Shore-side services are vital to support offshore logistics
an existing supply chain set up to provide the parts and and all offshore wind farm O&M activity needs access to
other services as required. However, works associated port facilities such as load-out and work boat mooring.
with balance of plant items, such as foundations and See Section 3 for more details.
cables, are sufficiently diverse that specialist contractors
are often used for these works, opening up opportunities 2.6.3 Technicians
for local business. Suitably qualified and experienced personnel are
crucial to undertaking effective O&M. Technicians
The key logistical challenge is getting technicians to site, typically travel out to site every day by boat, transfer
with the distance to shore driving different strategies (see across to the turbine, climb the turbine, undertake the
Figure 16). Close to the O&M port (less than ~40 Nm) maintenance work and then repeat as appropriate.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 31

Source: The Crown Estate

Figure 16 - Overview of key offshore wind O&M activities

It is quite physical work in a hostile environment and from other emerging markets it is anticipated local
there are various certificates and accreditations that companies will require some collaboration and capacity
are required. A large number of training providers have building with experienced organisations, particularly
opened up to meet the demand and now include courses during the local market’s embryonic development years.
provided by manufacturers (such as Siemens), higher
education courses and commercial training providers. To some degree the size of the local project pipeline will
Roughly, the sector needs between 0.5 and 1.5 full time dictate the level of localisation. If a large project pipeline,
equivalent jobs per operational turbine. combined with attractive incentives, develops in India
then the local supply chain will almost certainly grow in
Turbines typically come with a five year warranty from parallel and indeed attract both local and overseas OEMs
the manufacturer and during this period, the OEM will to develop their business within the region.
typically employ the majority of technicians on site.
After the warranty period is over, the owner operator In Europe the offshore wind supply chain is now
can opt to extend the OEM warranty agreement or takes becoming large and highly specialised. This has involved
over responsibility for the plant and directly employ the moving beyond what can be manufactured in existing
technicians. Some more ‘hands-on’ owners are taking facilities and led to the development of purpose built
responsibility earlier and/or having jointly employed ports and optimised manufacturing facilities. The need
technicians working on the wind farm during the for cost reduction has for example seen the recent
warranty period. development of serial production facilities for jacket
foundations, XL monopiles (6 to 10 m diameter) and
2.7 Supply chain conclusions purpose built installation vessels. Doing so requires a
There are a number of areas where there is good huge amount of investment and therefore confidence
potential for Indian companies to move into the in the market, but these new developments present an
Source: SEACORE
offshore wind sector, in particular, aspects of the excellent opportunity for India to accelerate learning-
development process, the fabrication of support curves as their local offshore wind market develops.
structures and offshore substation topsides. Due to the Table 4 on the next page summarises the findings from
complexities of developing offshore wind and lessons this supply chain study.
32 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Element Some of the leading Some of the potential companies who could
companies in EU enter market in India based on preliminary
market assessment

Site surveys Fugro, Gardline and Intertek (many of The National Institute of Oceanography (NIO), National Institute of Ocean
whom are already active in India) Technology (NIOT) and labs of the Council of Scientific and Industrial
Research. Publically funded institutions could initially offer some support.

CGG, DBM Geotechnicians, EGS Survey, Fugro Survey (India), Indomer and
Petroleum Geo-Services.

Wind resource BiFab, Bladt, MT Højgaard and Essar and L&T. Other fabricators/shipyards e.g. Bharati Shipyard and
assessment - Met mast SIF-Smulder Cochin Shipyard will likely have capability for these structures.
foundation & platform

Wind resource Carl C and Francis & Lewis Current onshore suppliers with possible potential to enter offshore wind
assessment - Met masts market: Aditya Enterprises, RK Windmast, and Shah Infra Tower.

Wind resource FT Technologies, NRG Systems, Riso, Current onshore suppliers:


assessment - Thies and Vector Instruments SGS Weather and Environmental Systems, NRG Systems.
Meteorological sensors

Oceanographic Nortek and Planet Ocean Nortek are active in Asia. Other suppliers exist offering equipment on lease
assessment - sensors terms or purchasing terms.

Consenting and ERM, Natural Power and NIRAS and AECOM, Chilworth Technology, ERM, Engineers India Limited and Royal
planning Royal Haskoning Haskoning.

Design and Arup, Atkins, COWI, DNV GL, Aker Solution, Arup, Saipem India Projects, Engineers India, L&T
engineering LIC energy, Mott MacDonald, OWEC, Construction.
Ramboll and Sgurr

Wind turbines As of late 2015, the leading player If a sufficient market develops leading OEM suppliers might consider
is Siemens, followed by MHI Vestas, investing in a local offshore wind base in India.
Senvion (formerly of Suzlon), ALSTOM
and Areva Gamesa. Most of the major OEM’s operating in India have multi-megawatt offshore
turbine platforms operating globally. Areva Gamesa, MHI Vestas and GE
In addition there are a number of Energy India through its acquisition of ALSTOM Power in 2015.
Chinese players (including Goldwind,
Ming Yang, Sinovel and others) and Suzlon Energy has rights to license and build the Senvion 6.XM series
Japanese manufacturers (Hitachi). machine.

Blades for offshore LM Blades, Euros and SSP Suzlon, INOX rotor blade, LM Wind Power and Vestas.
wind turbines

Casting & forgings Brück, Euskal Felguera Melt, Fonderia Bharat Forge, Heavy Forgings, L&T Special Steel, Kalyani forge, SE Forge,
Vigevanese, Metso, Siempelkamp, and Synergy Green Industries may be able to move into the sector.
Torgelow and VTC

Gearbox and Key suppliers of gearboxes are: Bosch ZF Coimbatore, Winergy are prominent gearbox suppliers in India.
generators Rexroth, ZF Wind, and Winergy. ABB-India is the leading supplier of generators in India.
Leading manufacturers of generators
include ABB.

Towers Ambau, Welcon and CS Wind Typically in India local OEMs manufacture towers. Windar, Anand, Batliboi,
and DN Wind Systems, L&T, GWPL may be able to scale up to cater for the
offshore market.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 33

Element Some of the leading Some


Someof of
thethe
potential companies
potential who
companies whocould
could
companies in EU enter market
enter in India
market based
in India on on
based preliminary
preliminary
market assessment
market assessment

Monopiles Bladt, EEW, Steelwind, Bilfinger, SIF, Smaller monopiles are relatively easy to manufacture and existing Indian
and Smulders suppliers of rolled tubes should be able to enter the market.
Larsen and Toubro (L&T) and Essar Projects may be well positioned to
enter this segment with some knowledge transfer. Other local fabricators/
shipyards may have capability for at least smaller diameter MPs.

Jacket foundations Bladt, EEW, Smulders, Bifab, and In India large-scale fabricators/shipyards active in the oil and gas industry
Navantia are well placed to transfer across.
Larsen and Toubro (L&T), Essar Projects, Bharati Shipyard, Cochin Shipyard,
and EEW may be able to enter this segment.

Gravity base concrete\ GBS Concepts: High barriers to entry exist including high investment costs in
foundations Strabag - Boskalis and GBF are leading manufacturing facilities.
developers of lifted concepts, while
BAM – Van Oord and Gravitas Offshore L&T have a long history in construction of reinforced concrete structures
are progressing floated concepts and a facility in Kattupalli which is suitable for their manufacture and
GBS Fabricators: launching.
MBG, Monberg & Thorsen – (Now MT
Højgaard), Skanska, Ballast Nedam,
Bilfinger Berger, Aarsleff, Pihl –
Foundations and Jan De Nul.

HVAC cables Nexans, Prysmian, JDR cable, Van Oord, High barriers to entry exist including significant technical and
ABB and NKT manufacturing capability and high investment costs. Yet existing Indian
manufacturers of cable, including Polycabs and Universal Cables, are likely
to be able to enter the market.

Amongst the Indian suppliers, Polycab has exposure towards onshore


inter-array cables for export markets.

Offshore substation Main suppliers of electrical equipment High barriers to entry exist including significant technical and
are Siemens, ABB, Alstom and CG manufacturing capability and high investment costs. Yards manufacturing
Power. topsides for oil and gas in India and the Middle East may be well placed
The support structure is fabricated by to manufacture topsides for offshore wind. Larsen and Toubro (L&T), Essar
large yards including Heerema, Bladt, Projects, Dolphin Offshore Enterprises and other fabrication yards/
Bilfinger, Harlan and Wolff and Semco shipyards in India may be able to enter this segment.
Maritime.
ABB, Siemens, Alstom are reasonably active in electrical components,
systems and services including the wind power industry and established
sectors such as Oil & Gas, Marine and Power generation.

Onshore substation Onshore substations for offshore wind farms are almost identical to
substations for other power generating technologies and so any existing
suppliers in India should be able to move into the market.

Table 4 - Supply chain conclusions

Specific recommendations with respect to the readiness of local companies in the offshore supply chain can
be undertaken in future studies. In European experience these detailed reports are confidential in nature and
respond to specific commercial and technical queries from the contracting party or company.
34 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3 PORT INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOGISTICS

3.1 Study objective 3.2 Offshore wind ports

Ports are strategic hubs in the offshore wind farm 3.2.1 Introduction
supply chain, since all components, plant and transport This study considers the primary operations for which
operations must transit through these facilities. port facilities are required when constructing and
Therefore, they must provide suitable infrastructure in operating an offshore wind project, namely:
order to meet the specific requirements of the offshore manufacturing, marshalling (or staging), and O&M.
wind industry. This section aims to provide definitions for the five main
types of offshore wind port, specifically ports for:
The characteristics of available ports and vessels are
critical for defining and optimising Offshore Wind n wind turbine (WTG) manufacturing (see Section 3.2.2)
Installation Strategies and Logistical Operations. n WTG foundation manufacturing (see Section 3.2.3)
This Port Infrastructure and Logistics study details n offshore substation manufacturing (see Section 3.2.4)
the port infrastructure and logistics required from n operations and maintenance (see Section 3.2.5)
manufacturing (i.e. wind turbine and foundation, etc) n marshalling (or staging) (see Section 3.2.6)
to installation and the subsequent operation and
maintenance (O&M) phase of an offshore wind farm. It should be noted that an individual port estate may
have the capability to handle more than one or even
The study expands upon the previous FOWIND all of the above port operations. Nevertheless different
Pre-feasibility study reports for Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, operations and components have different handling
and focuses on defining and investigating and storage requirements and as such ports must be
the following key areas: considered on a case by case basis. For example different
stages of the manufacturing and installation process are
n offshore wind port types (Section 3.2) likely to require different crane specifications, quayside
n anticipated offshore wind project specifications for loadings and quayside water depths. Hence when
India (Section 3.4) selecting offshore wind ports it is critical to work
n anticipated offshore wind component specifications backwards from the anticipated envelope of offshore
(Section 3.5 wind components to be handled during each stage of
n definition of available vessel types for offshore wind the offshore wind project(s).
(Section 3.6
Clearly the location of the port facilities with respect to
n possible installation strategies (Section 3.7)
the offshore wind farm site(s) has a big impact when
n typical port infrastructure descriptions (Section 3.8)
selecting suitable port estates. Therefore before
n port screening and port readiness in Gujarat and Tamil
assessing the ability of port infrastructure for handling
Nadu (Section 3.9) offshore wind farm components, it is necessary to have
a thorough appreciation of the most common logistical
The primary objective of this study is to develop an methods by which wind farm components are handled.
understanding of the existing port infrastructure
capabilities available to support offshore wind energy Large wind farm components are generally manufactured
projects in the Indian states of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu. in proximity to port facilities, given the difficulties of
The port infrastructure and logistics assessment handling such large components and the need to reduce
methodology is described in Section 3.3. the large transit distances to the offshore project site.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 35

There are a number of methods for the delivery of wind


OWF - Offshore windfarm
farm components from the original equipment FND - Foundation manufacturer
manufacturers’ (OEM) premises to the offshore wind WTG - Wind turbine manufacturer
farm site. The generally applicable options include: OWF

1. Loading and off-loading of components onto


quayside storage areas in ports, at the manufacturer’s
and marshalling (or staging) site respectively; WTG FND
2. Loading of components onto a transport vessel or
barge at the manufacturer’s premises and off-loading
onto a floating barge in a sheltered harbour near the Figure 17 - Spatial distribution of 3 key port facilities for
offshore wind farm site, to be stored, awaiting offshore wind farm construction
transfer to the installation vessel;
3. Loading of the components onto a transport vessel As a result in regions with a high offshore wind
or barge at the manufacturer’s premises, and off- development density (e.g. >5 GW within 100 NM &
loading onto the installation vessel at the offshore within 10 years), the large WTG OEMs have established
wind farm site – known as feeder vessel duties; or purpose built wind turbine manufacturing port
4. Loading of the components directly onto the facilities. Figure 18 shows Siemens Wind Power’s
installation vessel at the manufacturer’s premises, proposed new fabrication facility in Hull, UK.
and installation at the offshore wind farm site Key features of a wind turbine manufacturing port
(see Figure 17). facility would include:
n Workshops – large inside facilities for blade, tower
In this ideal scenario (option 4), all manufacturing and nacelle fabrication/assembly
facilities are located on the coast, in the nearest port to n Storage areas – with sufficient bearing capacities and
the offshore wind farm. In this configuration the area to meet supply chain
foundation or turbine installation vessel would cycle
n Quayside – with suitable access and depth for vessels
directly between the manufacturer’s port and the
n Road/rail links – to facilitate land based supply of
offshore wind farm, and all necessary storage, to
smaller materials/components
accommodate fluctuations in installation rate, would be
n Cranage – sufficient for fabrication and load-out of
accommodated within the manufacturers’ premises.
components
For the purposes of assessing port facilities, the n Workforce – a large number of specialist employees

assumption is that option 1 is the preferred option for are required, e.g. skilled welders, coating specialists
transportation of wind turbine (WTG) components from and machinery operators
a manufacturer’s facility to a developer’s marshalling n Location – close proximity to supply chain preferable

(or staging) harbour. to reduce transits

Options 2 to 4 become relevant when considering


staging of foundation and array cable installation and
mobilisation from the developer’s marshalling (or staging)
harbour.

3.2.2 Wind turbine manufacturing port


Given the large size of offshore wind turbines (currently
3.0 to 8.0 MW) compared with their smaller onshore
relatives, wind turbine manufacturers need to locate their
fabrication facilities within a port estate with a suitable
quay side for both receipt of the raw manufacturing
materials/components and load-out of the fully Source: Siemens
fabricated WTG components ready for project supply
Figure 18 - Port of Hull (UK), Siemens wind power WTG
fabrication facility (under development)
36 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.2.3 Wind turbine foundation manufacturing port


In Europe there are now a significant number of
well-established and experienced foundation fabricators.
Again given the large size and mass of offshore wind
foundations manufacturers need to locate their
fabrication facilities within a port estate with a suitable
quay side for both receipt of the raw materials and
load-out of the fully fabricated foundations ready for
project supply. Unlike WTG OEMs, whose facilities tend
to be more offshore wind market centric, foundation
fabricator’s primary historical business tends to be oil and
gas platform or maritime vessel fabrication. As a result
a number of existing foundation manufacturing port
facilities exist but are not always in very close proximity Figure 19 - Port of Bremerhaven (Germany) - WTG foundation
to the offshore wind market. As a result it is common to fabrication
implement an installation strategy involving an
intermediate marshalling port, see Section 3.2.6.
Figure 19 shows a wind turbine fabrication quayside at 3.2.4 Offshore substation manufacturing port
the Port of Bremerhaven in Germany. Key features of a Like offshore wind turbine foundations, offshore
foundation manufacturing port facility would include: substation manufacturing facilities’ historic business tends
to be oil and gas platforms. Depending on the capability
n Fabrication shops – very large internal workshops of different fabricators and also the project’s contractual
for fabricating foundation components, providing arrangements it is not uncommon for the substructure
controlled environments for cutting, rolling and and the topside to be fabricated at different locations.
welding In terms of offshore substation manufacturing port
n Coating shops – large internal environments for facility requirements these will be very similar to
blasting and painting offshore structures foundation manufacturing ports, but with larger bearing
n Storage areas – with sufficient bearing capacities and capacity and load-out requirements given the significant
area to meet supply chain mass of these structures.
n Quayside – with suitable bearing capacities, access Figure 20 shows an OSS topside under construction at
and depth for vessels Heerema’s fabrication facility, located in the Port of
n Cranage – sufficient for fabrication and load-out of Zwijndrecht in the Netherlands.
foundations (load-out typically done using over-head
gantry crane or large crawler cranes or possibly SPMTs
n Road/rail links – to facilitate land based supply of

smaller materials/components
n Raw material supply chain – in the case of steel

structures, a suitable supply chain for high grade


offshore steels is critical
n Workforce – a large number of specialist employees

are required, e.g. skilled welders, coating specialists


and machinery operators
n Location – close proximity to supply chain preferable

but not critical if combined with a marshalling port

Source: Heerema Fabrication Group

Figure 20 - Port of Zwijndrecht (the Netherlands) - Heerema OSS


fabrication
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 37

3.2.5 Operations & maintenance port


Offshore wind projects require a designated port facility
including an onshore office and storage warehouse to act
as the hub for all the operational and maintenance
activities required during the wind farm’s 20 to 25 year
operational life. These are termed operations and
maintenance (O&M) ports and it is possible for one port
to operate and maintain multiple wind farms. Figure 21
shows the Port of Ramsgate which is the O&M port for
the following UK projects; Thanet (300 MW), Kentish Flats
(90 MW), Kentish Flats Extension (49.5 MW) and London
Array (630 MW). The Port of Ramsgate was also used
as a marshalling port during construction for the Thanet
project’s transition pieces (barge storage was used due to Figure 21 - Port of Ramsgate (UK) - Thanet, Kentish Flats and
limited quayside bearing capacities). London Array O&M base

The O&M port and vessels should be based as close as


possible to the project site so as to reduce transportation 3.2.6 Marshalling (or staging) port
time for service technicians. The port is used as a base A marshalling or staging port is an intermediate port
for scheduled maintenance and minor intervention needs facility located in close proximity to the offshore project(s)
to be able to accommodate small service vessels. These which it serves. This concept becomes increasingly
are typically catamarans with 750-1,500 kW propulsion valuable when manufacturers/fabricators are located long
power, capable of cruising at 20-25 knots or more distances from the wind farm installation site.
(15 to 25 m LOA, 2 m draft, and 10 m beam maximum). Figure 22 shows a WTG component marshalling port in
It is important that the O&M port can be accessed close Eemshaven which serves offshore projects in Germany.
to 100% of the time under all weather conditions and is
not significantly restricted by tidal constraints or lock gate It is vital to address the fundamental question of what
limitations. benefit a marshalling (staging) port may be to offshore
wind farm development, during both the construction
Vessels of this size require minimal water depths and and O&M phases, considering the four general methods
quayside equipment and in general can operate from any for delivery as discussed in Section 3.2.1.
waterway suitable for small fishing vessels. Hence any port
with capability to accommodate even the smallest cargo In reality, with most offshore wind farms which have
vessels will likely have the capability to accommodate been built to date in Northern Europe, the manufacturing
wind farm support vessels. premises and the offshore wind farms have been located
at considerable distances from each other, and indeed
Furthermore, if a helicopter is to be employed within the in most cases these facilities have been located in other
access strategy, the infrastructure to support this may be countries.
best positioned adjacent to the port-base where
possible, although helicopter ports further inland may
also be considered.

The port required for major intervention operations,


typically involving a jack-up rig, does not need to be so
close to the site. As an example in Europe, a gearbox can
be loaded onto a jack-up barge in a Danish harbour and
then installed in a turbine located in the UK.

After the exchange, the faulty gearbox could stay on the


jack-up barge until it is back in Denmark or Germany and
then sent for repair. A similar approach could be applied
locally in India. Port facilities used for major intervention Figure 22 - Port of Eemshaven, WTG component marshalling
must be able to accommodate the jack-up barges used in
the industry (130 m LOA, 12 m draft).
38 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

In general, the specialised offshore wind farm installation Cost benefit analysis will reveal which of the two
vessels have charter rates of several times those of cargo scenarios (option 1 or option 4) is preferable.
vessels, so to minimise overall installation and O&M costs, This involves a comparison between:
it is vital that voyage durations for the main installation
vessels are kept to a minimum. n the installation vessel’s charter (and fuel) costs directly
between (1) foundation (FND) and (2) wind turbine
Offshore windfarm installation vessels have been (WTG) manufacturers and offshore windfarm (OWF) as
optimised primarily to install components, whereas illustrated in Figure 23
n the cost of cargo vessels from foundation and wind
modern cargo vessel designs are ideally suited for
transporting large and heavy components over long turbine to a marshalling port (MAR) and additionally
distances. By using a combination of (1) cargo vessels incurring the double-handling costs, and port fees
for the long distance logistics from manufacturers to etc. associated with using the marshalling port (MAR),
marshalling ports, and (2) wind turbine installation vessels as well as the costs of the wind turbine installation
(WTIVs) for shorter installation cycles, an optimal solution vessels (WTIVs) between marshalling port (MAR) and
for offshore windfarm logistics and transport and offshore windfarm (OWF) as illustrated in Figure 23
installation (T&I) and potentially O&M has evolved, see
Figure 23. It is also worth considering the possible risk of damage
during re-handling and storage, and the potential
programme disruptions any delays associated with
remedial works might incur. The cost benefit analysis
OWF - Offshore windfarm should incorporate modelling of any additional items
FND - Foundation manufacturer
from the risk register associated with the various
WTG - Wind turbine manufacturer
MAR - Marshalling or construction port strategies.
WTIV - Wind turbine installation vessel
3.3 Port infrastructure assessment
methodology
OWF

A desktop screening methodology for conducting port


infrastructure and logistics assessments has been
developed by DNV GL. Figure 24 shows a flow chart
WTIV illustrating this methodology which includes an initial
“preparation phase” where the project, component
specifications, vessel requirements and possible
installation strategies are defined. Following this initial
MAR preparation phase the “port screening phase”can
commence, which is a desk-based study, considering the
Cargo vessel Cargo vessel suitability of offshore wind ports in Gujarat and Tamil
Nadu to supply the potential offshore wind project
demand for construction operations. The final stage is the
WTG FND
more detailed “port readiness assessment” which includes
site visits to promising construction ports.

Figure 23 - Marshalling ports: reduce installation vessel Section 3.9.5 provides a high-level screening of possible
voyage durations
O&M ports, based on those identified in the FOWIND
Pre-feasibility reports. O&M activities can generally be
facilitated from minor ports with minimal infrastructure
development compared with the demands of a
construction port; hence only a high-level screening
was conducted which should be re-visited when specific
projects are identified.

DNV GL proprietary in-house software tools support the


process. Results are summarised in Section 3.9.6.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 39

FOWIND
FOWIND Pr
Port infrastructure assessment

1. PREPARATION PHASE - Project specification (Section 3.4)

2. PREPARATION PHASE - Component specifications, vessel requirements, installation strategy (Sections 3.5 - 3.7)

3. PORT SCREENING PHASE - Desk-based study (Section 3.9)

4. PORT READINESS ASSESSMENT - Inc. port visits (Section 3.9)

Figure 24 - Port infrastructure assessment - DNV GL summary methodology

3.4 Project specification At this stage of the ports assessment study precise
dimensions and masses of foundations are not required,
3.4.1 Introduction but upper-bound values of each variable are
In order to assess the suitability of port infrastructure established to an appropriate level of detail (see Sections
for offshore wind activities in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu it 3.5.3 and 3.5.5. If the development is at an early stage,
is important to first define the envelope of project estimates must be used, based on past experience and
specifications that are anticipated within the regions engineering judgement. For the purposes of this study the
(termed the demand). Key project parameters to be WTG foundation mass and other pertinent information is
defined include: established, like the megawatt capacity, and build-rate,
including any multi-seasonal phased development options.
n wind turbine MW capacities
n project MW capacities It should be noted, based on the assessment conducted
n minimum distance to existing substation by the FOWIND consortium and presented in the Gujarat
n water depth and Tamil Nadu Pre-feasibility study reports4, eight
n foundation types considered and estimated masses preliminary zones have been identified in each state for
n requirement for an offshore substation the development of commercial scale offshore wind
farms. As a result of the high level of uncertainty
The basis for defining the range of anticipated offshore associated with the preliminary constraints data
wind project parameters has been established from (in particular seabed conditions and oceanographic
the recent Pre-feasibility Reports for Gujarat and Tamil parameters) and the lack of on-site wind measurements
Nadu4. A summary of the anticipated envelope of project to validate the modelling process (note a LiDAR device
parameters are provided in Section 3.4.2. is expected to be deployed in 2016 to conduct wind
measurements), it must be stated that the results and
conclusions presented in this Supply Chain, Port
Infrastructure and Logistics study could be subject to
change as the FOWIND project develops and updated
input data becomes available.

4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
40 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.4.2 Project specifications - PFR summaries

3.4.2.1 WTG and project capacity assumptions 3.4.2.3 Tamil Nadu project specifications
Two indicative project capacities of 150 MW and 504 MW Table 6 summarises the envelope of assumed offshore
have been considered during the Pre-feasibility studies, wind project parameters presented in the Tamil Nadu PFR.
since these are broadly representative of typical European These form the basis for inputs into the Port Infrastructure
commercial offshore wind developments. Similarly, two and Logistics assessment.
generic wind turbine generator sizes of 4 MW and 6 MW
have been considered in the FOWIND Gujarat and
Tamil Nadu PFRs. These capacities are representative of
established (4 MW) and current (6 MW) offshore wind
turbine designs.

3.4.2.2 Gujarat project specifications


Table 5 summarises the envelope of assumed offshore
wind project parameters presented in the Gujarat PFR.
These form the basis for inputs into the Port
Infrastructure and Logistics assessment.

Parameter Range or assumption

Wind turbine capacities 4 MW and 6 MW

Project capacities 150 MW and 504 MW


Minimum distance to existing substation 9 to 45 km

Water depth -15 to -43 m LAT


Foundation types considered Monopile and jacket

Required for an offshore substation OSS likely to be required (assumed required for projects >20 km
from shore and/or >100 MW capacity

Table 5 - Gujarat project specifications

Parameter Range or assumption

Wind turbine capacities 4 MW and 6 MW

Project capacities 150 MW and 504 MW


Minimum distance to existing substation 12 to 46

Water depth -10 to -53 m LAT


Foundation types considered Monopile, jacket and gravity base

Required for an offshore substation OSS likely to be required (assumed required for projects >20 km
from shore and/or >100 MW capacity

Table 6 - Tamil Nadu project specifications


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 41

3.5 Component specification It is most common for turbines to be installed in six lifts:
n lower tower section n blade 1

n upper tower section n blade 2


3.5.1 Introduction
n nacelle & hub n blade 3
The component specifications are defined by the range of
component sizes which may be handled. The key drivers
are (1) turbine type and (2) foundation type. As described Some larger turbines are installed using the four lift star
in Section 3.4, Project Specification. Generic 4 MW and assembly method.
6 MW wind turbines were chosen to be likely turbine
types, hence these MW classes have been considered n lower tower section
when estimating component sizes. Likewise the n upper tower section
n nacelle
foundation types considered included monopile, jacket
n ‘rotor star’ of hub, blade 1, blade 2 & blade 3
and gravity based structures, as described in Section 3.4.

This allows the formation of a database for the range of The largest wind turbine installation vessels (WTIVs) will
different sizes and weights of: have capacity for around 10 complete sets of components
‘Siemens SWT 3.6 - 120’ or five complete sets of
n wind turbine generator (WTG) components components ‘Senvion 6M’s’, including tower sections,
n foundation components nacelles, hubs and blades. The port requirements have
been assessed on the basis of a large wind turbine
Consideration must also be given to component sizes and installation vessel (WTIV).
weights of:
The following sections contain component dimensions
n offshore substation (OSS) for generic wind turbines of particular 4 MW and 6 MW
n cables (export and inter-array IAC) nameplate capacities. These are not specific models on
the market, and the analysis will need to be repeated
The following Sections to 3.5.7 define the general when specific turbine models are decided upon to confirm
handling methods, port requirements and estimated that the conclusions drawn remain valid.
component sizes and weights for consideration in the
Port Infrastructure and Logistics study. 3.5.2.2 Blades
The lightest components used are the blades but their
3.5.2 Wind turbine generator components long lengths make them one of the most challenging to
handle, particularly onshore.
3.5.2.1 Introduction The following tabulated information (Table 7) contains
Wind turbine generators can be installed in a number of blade dimensions for generic wind turbines of particular
different ways as shown in Figure 25. 4 MW and 6 MW nameplate capacities.

Generic wind
turbine size
3-4 Lifts
2 Lifts Single lift
Parameter [MW]
Current practice
‘Star Assy’ proposed proposed
4 6

Rotor diameter [m] 120 150


Hub diameter [m] 3 4
Blade length [m] 59 73
Blade mass [t] 19 28
Chord length [m] 4 5
Quayside for storage [m2] 363 527
Bearing area (2 contact blocks under frame [m2] 16 20
6 Lifts 5 Lifts 3-4 Lifts Bearing pressure under blocks (3 blades stacked) [t/m2] 3.6 4.2
Current practice Current practice Previous practice
‘Bunny-ears’ Fabrication workshop length [m] 69 83
Reinforced area for mobile crane load-outs (crane capacity) [t] 76 112
Haul route strength between quayside and storage [t/axle] 7.8 9.6
Figure 25 - Various assembly strategies for WTGs during Haul route strength between quayside and storage [t/m2] 10 10
installation
Table 7 - Blade specifications and port requirements
42 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Figure 26 - Blade handling trailers for road haulage and handling in port estates

3.5.2.2.1 Onshore transportation and storage 3.5.2.2.2 Load-out


Transportation and storage of wind turbine components Load-out of wind turbine blades will be undertaken by
at the manufacturing facility shall be required prior to vessel-based cranage or, in the case of non-self-propelled
load-out and transport to the pre-staging harbour. transport barges, port-based cranage. The transport
Blades are manufactured under the cover of a fabrication vessel shall be required to moor against the quayside to
facility which has suitable gantry cranes to lift and allow for the efficient transfer of the blades from the
transfer the blades to bespoke trolleys, which are quayside to the vessel.
themselves used to ship the blades to a long/medium-
term storage area. Figure 26 presents a wind turbine Where the blades are being loaded using a single crane,
blade transport vehicle. specialist spreader beams will be required to provide
two points of contact on the blade, while retaining a
Long/medium-term storage of blades requires a large manageable under-hook height, as presented in
lay-down area, with single or multiple blades held within Figure 29.
two frames, one located at the hub and one located
along the blade span, as presented in Figure 27.

Where space is limited, multiple blades can be stored in


larger frames as presented in Figure 28. The size of the
storage frames will be determined by the capabilities of
the vessel or quayside crane capacity used to load-out
the wind turbine blades from the manufacturing and/or
marshalling port.

Source: DuluthShippingnews

Figure 29 - Port cranage blade load out

Source: Windpower Monthly


Blades may also be transported as they are stored, in
Figure 27 - Wind turbine blade storage (single frame)
large bespoke transportation frames which can
accommodate three wind turbine blades, as presented
in Figure 30.

Source: Fotolibra

Figure 28 - Wind turbine blade storage (multiple frames)


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 43

n Quayside
There is only a light-weight requirement for haulage,
but since for manoeuvring it is likely that a 2-bogey
unit will be used, which concentrates load and
therefore increases the requirement for deck strength.
The maximum individual length of a blade will dictate
the quayside length, and multiple blade storage
alongside the vessel to be loaded will be required.

n Depth
Blades are generally carried long distances as deck
cargo on heavy-lift cargo vessels. These large
transportation vessels will have a significant draft
requirement within the port facility.

n Mobile cranage
Wind turbine blades today weigh in the order of tens
of metric tonne, however, these weights are likely to
increase as technology trends push towards larger
offshore machines. It is likely that transport vessels will
load-out significant numbers of blades however blade
Source: Wireropeexchange
weights are well within the capacity of suitable mobile
Figure 30 - Three blade load out cranage.

3.5.2.2.4 Specific port requirements - whole rotor


3.5.2.2.3 Summary of port requirements for blades assembly
The following key parameters need to be investigated A number of turbines, particularly the larger machines,
when assessing port facilities for wind turbine blade have been designed to have the whole rotor
manufacture, storage and transportation: pre-assembled before installation. This operation can
either be conducted by transporting the hub and blades
n Fabrication facility separately, and assembling the rotor on the deck just
Blade length is a major driver for the fabrication prior to installation, or by loading the pre-assembled
facility. A number of blades may be fabricated in rotor, as presented in Figure 31. Pre-assembly of rotors
parallel, requiring facilities that are wider than the onshore requires large port assembly/storage areas.
sum of the fabrication moulds used to pre-lay the
fiber-reinforced plastic that constitutes the blade
structure. Since turbine blades are made of
lightweight composites, light internal cranage
(overhead gantry) will suffice for the transfer of the
blades to their transport trolleys.

n Load-out
Large heavy-lift cargo vessels are best used for
transporting blades from the manufacturer to the
marshalling port. They are increasingly fitted with
container-twist-locked frames and loaded in groups
of three at a time, which requires significant cranage
lift-weight capacity and outreach only found on larger
heavy-lift crane vessels. The installation vessel then
typically carries out transportation from the
marshalling port to the wind farm.
Source: Renewableenergyworld

Figure 31 - Full rotor assembly in port


44 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

A rotor is a very bulky object and it is extremely difficult Wind


to load installation vessels with more than one rotor per turbine size
Parameter [MW]
cycle, however to date some operations have transported
up to 4 complete 5 MW rotor assemblies. Feeder 4 6
vessels have been adopted in some cases to transport Tower length [m] 66 81
these unwieldy items to the site. Tower mass [t] 185 250
Tower diameter [m] 5.0 6.0
The rotor has always been transported to the site with Number of sections 2 2
its axis vertical (as per Figure 31), and requires Section length [m] 33 41
specialist hub lifting equipment (as it needs a 90° twist Section mass [t] 93 125
during lift). While this is a complex lifting procedure, Storage area per section [m2] 245 340
it has been carried out successfully by all of the major Bearing area [m2] 16 16
5 MW turbine manufacturers offshore, and it appears Bearing pressure [t/m2] 6 8
that this rotor lift will remain the preferred assembly
option for large turbines. Table 8 - Tower specifications and port requirements

3.5.2.3 Tower sections


Tower sections are long and heavy. Just like blades
onshore they are typically handled using specialist
haulage units (see Figure 32).

Source: Earthandindustry

Figure 33 - Tower section transportation

Figure 32 - Goldhofer RA3 tower haulage unit

The tabulated information in Table 8 contains tower


dimensions for generic wind turbines of particular 4 MW
and 6 MW nameplate capacities.

3.5.2.3.1 Onshore transportation and storage


Wind turbine towers are manufactured under the cover
of a fabrication facility with a production line set-up
where steel plates are rolled into tower cans, which are
in turn welded together into tower sections. Bespoke
trolleys can be used to lift the tower sections and
transport these around the port facility, as presented in
Figure 33.
Source: Mlm

Storage of the towers involves laying them on their sides Figure 34 - Tower section storage
with bespoke frames providing support at either end and
in the middle of the tower section (depending on tower In port estates it may be more appropriate to handle
section length), as presented in Figure 34. tower sections using Self Propelled Modular Transport
units (SPMTs), see Figure 35.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 45

Figure 35 - Self-propelled modular transport units

SPMTs generally come in 4 or 6 axle units, with individual As the tower is vertical when fitted, rather than engage
axle capacities of between 15 and 40 tonne. They can be in offshore up-ending during the final installation, it is
built into long configurations, and with a few transport best if the tower is transferred to the offshore site in
cradles, can be used to transport tower units. Great care an upright position. However, as depicted in Figure 36,
is needed to ensure that corrosion protection coatings during transportation of tower components from the
applied to the tower sections are not damaged, so soft manufacturer’s facility to the staging harbour, it is usual
faces are provided on these cradles. In general SPMTs can to transport the tower sections horizontally.
operate on ground with 10 tonne/m² bearing capacity,
but by increasing the number of axles used, lower ground The upper flange of each tower section has bolted
bearing capacities can be accommodated, but at a cost connections which are designed to take the considerable
premium. thrust loads of the turbines, so these form ideal points
for locating lifting attachments. These are usually fitted
3.5.2.3.2 Load-out to the tower sections before being loaded onto the deck
Load-out of wind turbine towers is undertaken by of the installation barge and left in place; they are only
vessel-based cranage or, in the case of non-self-propelled removed (and stored until arrival of the next towers) once
transport barges, port-based cranage. Towers are usually the tower has been installed in position.
fitted with lift frames at either end of the tower sections
which provide lift points for the lifting frames. The frames Offshore the towers are heavy and long, and, with the
also allow for towers sections to be stacked on board the rolling movements of a vessel, are capable of exerting
heavy lift transport vessel, as presented in Figure 36. significant loads on the transport vessel’s deck. As stated
above, the towers are often transported in a vertical
position. Ideally, if the whole tower were to be fitted
together, this would require only one offshore lift.
However, the very long and heavy structure may be too
heavy for the crane to lift when in one piece; therefore,
transportation in smaller sections is necessary.

Other considerations include whether or not it is


economical to design a deck frame substantial enough
to react to the considerable loads which sea transits
could inflict on the deck, and the difficulty of finding
local deck areas with sufficient capacity to accommodate
frameworks to withstand these loads from the lower
tower flange bolts to bulkheads below decks.

Source: Wikimedia

Figure 36 - Tower section vessel cranage load-out


46 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.5.2.3.3 Summary of port requirements for towers n Haulage


The following key parameters need to be investigated Tower sections are relatively cheap and may be
when assessing port facilities for wind turbine tower ordered well in advance of the installation phase, as
manufacture, storage, and transportation: there is little cost and it reduces the risk of late delivery
if production delays occur on a tight timetable. They
n Workshop will then require storage in large numbers and, if laid
Workshops with adequate headroom under the down, will require individual access for lifting and thus
cranage will be necessary to ensure the tower bases even larger areas. They are not typically stacked when
can be lifted from rolling equipment. Towers require stored horizontally. If space is at a premium they can
conical rolling, and rolling is more onerous than for be stored upright, at the cost of additional cranage, so
cylindrical piles, and tower walls are far thinner so the this must not be taken as a hard limit.
equipment required is much smaller.
3.5.2.4 Nacelle
n Rail Nacelles are amongst the heaviest pieces which require
The welding of cans (e.g. a can is a plate rolled into a transportation, but their relatively compact size makes
cylinder with the longitudinal seam welded) will them easier to handle. They are highly complex pieces of
benefit from rails to align cans. Rail-mounted rollers machinery, and have precision finished steel flanges and
will only require lightweight capacities, as tower walls internally have high-value mechanical and electrical and
are much thinner than piles. electronic components, so should not be stored in areas
where there is an environment of either dust or iron ore.
n Length Port areas where there is bulk loading or offloading of
Transportation will probably be via barges, but may coal are generally avoided, but sites where iron ore
use HLCVs so the length of the latter has been used is handled are also unsuitable for nacelles, as the
as the limit, but this may be reduced if barges to be magnetised iron can attach to machined steel
used are <100 m. components and can cause accelerated corrosion or
mechanical damage.
n Quayside
Towers are long components and require a long length The following tabulated information (Table 9) contains
heavy duty SPMTs which achieve a lightweight ground nacelle dimensions for generic wind turbines of particular
bearing pressure. 4 MW and 6 MW nameplate capacities.

n Depth
Transportation will probably be via barges, but may Wind
turbine size
use HLCVs so the draft of the latter has been used as Parameter [MW]
the limit, this may be reduced if barges are used. 4 6

n Mobile cranage Nacelle mass [t] 162 330


It is becoming increasingly common to install complete Storage, lift and sea lashing frame mass [t] 16 33
towers offshore to reduce offshore operations, so a Nacelle and frame total mass [t] 178 363
large crane capacity may be required. Nacelle width [m] 5.2 7.4
Nacelle length [m] 13 18
n RoRo Nacelle storage area [m2] 111 185
If rolling load-outs can be used, these may well reduce Number of rows of SPMT’s 1 1
costs, though this is a desirable feature of the port, Number of lengths of baulk timber 2 2
rather than a hard limit. The diameters of towers Nacelle bearing area [m2] 27 35
are larger than the height of lorry-trailers (16’ 6” Bearing pressure (baulk timber under columns) [t/m2] 7 10
in the UK), so RoRo quays designed for haulage with MIn. number of SPMT axles for nacelle 8 15
restricted headroom are unsuitable – hence the
requirement for unrestricted headroom. Table 9 - Nacelle specifications and port requirements

n Haulage
Tower sections may well be transported by SPMT or
heavy haulage trailer, a minimum number of axles
will likely be used to save costs, which may lead to
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 47

3.5.2.4.2 Load-out
Load-out of wind turbine nacelles will be undertaken by
vessel-based cranage or, in the case of non-self-propelled
transport barges, port-based cranage, as presented in
Figure 39. The transport vessel shall be required to moor
against the quayside.

The frame mounted on the tower-top flange may be


used to ensure that the connection between the nacelle
and the deck is of adequate structural strength to
tolerate the accelerations, which the cargo will endure
during transit. The weight of this frame therefore needs
to be considered in any load-out lift.
Source: ALE

Figure 37 - Siemens SWT 3.6 on SPMT trailer It can have a further function, which is to speed
connection to rolling and floating transport. There will
be some form of bolted or welded connection on the
3.5.2.4.1 Onshore transportation and storage underside, which is designed to marry with a pre-installed
Wind turbine nacelles are manufactured under the cover mating part, fitted to a structurally sound area of the
of a fabrication facility which has suitable gantry cranes deck. This ensures rapid assembly and offshore removal
to lift and transfer components that constitute the of sea lashings, and helps to precisely align the cargo
nacelle (gearboxes, generators, etc.). Upon leaving the with the under deck stiffening of the vessel’s structure.
fabrication facility, nacelles are usually transported around
the port facility using SPMTs, as shown in Figure 37. The sea-lashing frame may also form a lifting cradle,
to which lifting tackle on a custom spreader beam
Bespoke frames are mounted on the tower-top flange arrangement attach, for swift lifting during loading
which provides support for the lay-down of the nacelles. and unloading. This optional functionality may add
The nacelle is pre-assembled before offshore considerable weight to the frame, and it may be
transportation. It will be watertight and effectively preferable simply to attach lifting tackle to the upper
complete when leaving the manufacturer’s facility. structure of the nacelle.

For offshore wind turbines, though the components


themselves may have been sourced from specialist
manufacturers worldwide, the final assembly of turbine
nacelles occurs adjacent to the water.

Source: Renewableenergyfocus

Figure 39 - Crawler crane nacelle load-out

Source: Vattenfall

Figure 38 - Port cranage nacelle load-out


48 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.5.2.4.3 Summary of port requirements for nacelles n Mobile cranage


The following key parameters need to be investigated The largest offshore nacelles today weigh in excess
when assessing port facilities for wind turbine nacelle of 300 tonne; however, these weights are likely to
manufacture, storage, and transportation: increase as technology trends push towards larger
offshore machines. It is likely that transport vessels will
n Fabrication facility load-out significant numbers of nacelles. Multiple 350
Fabrication facilities for the final assembly of nacelles tonne mobile cranes would provide adequate capacity
will require cranes individually capable of handling for load out.
the largest components. Electric Over-Head Travelling
(EOHT) crane capacity of up to 75 tonnes may be n RoRo
required for the movement of components within the Rolling load out is cheaper than lifting in some
facility. The nacelles will likely be built with the circumstances, so this capacity is desirable.
capability for SPMTs to manoeuvre underneath the
nacelle’s tower-top flange crane, jack-up and transit 3.5.3 Foundations - monopiles and transition pieces
out of the facility. Given the relative size of monopiles and transitions
pieces, compared with other foundation solutions, it is
n Haulage possible to manufacture and transport these to staging
A maximum ground bearing pressure resulting from harbours using heavy-lift transport vessels. Once
the use of SPMTs of 10 tonne/m2 has been assumed mobilised at the staging port, suitable installation vessels
and this will be a requirement of all haul routes from are used to transport the foundations to the wind farm
storage areas to load-outs. site for installation.

n Storage Monopiles are generally transported and stored


Nacelles are principally stored on frames, with the horizontally, but because of the more delicate secondary
frame bolted to the nacelle at the tower/nacelle steelwork, transition pieces are generally transported and
transition. stored vertically (see Figure 40).

n Load-out The tabulated information in Table 10 contains monopile


It is vital in this case that any quayside can and transition piece dimensions for generic wind turbines
accommodate heavy-lift cargo vessels, as components of particular 4 MW and 6 MW nameplate capacities.
will be sourced worldwide, so both material input and The dimensions and masses have been derived from
delivery of manufactured items may well involve large DNV GL’s in-house foundation database.
cargo vessels.

n Quayside
Nacelles are usually transported by SPMT so it will be
possible to vary the number of units used to ensure
that ground bearing pressure is within acceptable
limits.

n Depth
Nacelles are generally carried long distances as deck
cargo on heavy-lift cargo vessels, possibly the same
vessels used to transport blades. These large
transportation vessels will have a significant draft
requirement within the port facility.

n Seabed
Large offshore wind farm installation vessels may
well collect turbines from manufacturer’s premises
so jack-up capacity will be required of the quayside.
Figure 40 - Monopiles and transition pieces in port storage area
Measurements of the soil strength adjacent to the
quayside will be needed to ensure that layering of
sub strata does not include thin hard layers of soils
overlaying weaker soils to avoid jack-up leg
punch-through.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 49

Wind n Headroom
Design turbine size The headroom requirement for the installation port
depth Parameter [MW]
[m] was based upon the assumption that there is a strong
4 6 possibility that a jack-up vessel or feeder barge will be
TP (Transition Piece) mass [t] 280 550
used to carry the monopile from the port, and carry
TP min number of SPMT axles 12 22
out the installation. During marine transit the legs are
_
TP Storage area [m2] 82 101
above the water, so they are unlikely to be able to pass
TP Bearing area [m2] 11 13
under many bridge decks and power lines. For this
TP Bearing pressure [t/m2] 25 42
reason it is important that the vessel options are well
understood when considering available staging ports
Monopile mass [t] 500 1,076 for a project. Overhead clearance of at least 40 m or
Monopile min number of SPMT axles 20 44 more is typically required. There is no such
Monopile base diameter [m] 5.5 6.5 requirement for the manufacturing base.
20
Length [m] 56 66
Storage area [m2] 435 578 n LOA
Total bearing area (10 block supports) [m2] 40 40 There is a range of overall lengths for heavy lift cargo
Bearing pressure under blocks [t/m2] 13 27 vessels approaching 170 m, so to ensure future-
proofing it is suggested that a figure of 170 m LOA
Monopile mass [t] 675 1,464
port access be used, as this will be adequate for all but
Monopile min number of SPMT axles 27 59
a small minority of these vessels.
Monopile base diameter [m] 6 7
30
Length [m] 69 79
n Quayside
Storage area [m2] 568 729
The usual method of transport of monopiles is SPMT
Total bearing area (10 column supports) [t/m2] 40 40
units (see Figure 41) imposing ground-bearing
Bearing pressure under blocks [t/m2] 17 37
pressures of approximately 20 tonne/m². As has been
Table 10 - Monopile specifications and port requirements previously stated, this is not an absolute limit but is
a reasonable capacity, which will be able to
accommodate most types of units.
The following information details the port requirements
for manufacturing facilities as well as staging ports:

n Width
The access channel width requirement should be
qualified by stating that port access widths are
customarily quoted as being the widest beam of
two equally sized vessels which can pass through the
narrowest part of the port approaches, whether this is
the port’s dredged access channel, harbour entrance
or other restriction.
Figure 41 - Monopile onshore transport using SPMTs
n Heavy-lift cargo vessel drafts
It will be necessary for heavy transport to transit the
monopiles between the manufacturer and the n Mobile cranage
staging port if the monopiles are fabricated overseas. If the cranage is placed so that the outriggers are
The transportation of monopiles using heavy lift cargo adjacent to the quay wall, the sheet piling in an
vessels will ideally require approximately 8 m to Chart unsupported quay wall would experience loadings
Datum of water. which may be enough to collapse the quay. It is
customary for monopiles to be lifted by two cranes in
n Installation vessel drafts a lift configuration referred to as being “top-and-
It will also be necessary for either an installation tailed”. The individual lift-weights are reduced by half,
(jack- up) vessel to transit the monopiles between the so figures of 1,000 tonne have been included to cover
staging port and the wind farm site or for bunged various anticipated lift configurations. The lift-weight
monopiles to be towed by a tug. The transportation of transition pieces is significantly less than that of
of monopiles using a jack-up vessel will ideally require their associated monopiles. There is therefore a
approximately 6 m to Chart Datum of water. reduced cranage requirement of 400 tonne.
50 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

n Seabed
The seabed adjacent to the quayside will have a finite 3.5.4 Foundations - jackets
capacity to support loads, and may or may not be Jacket structures for offshore wind turbine purposes are
suitable to support a jack-up vessel, if it wanted to usually manufactured and delivered directly to the wind
self-load from the quayside using the on-board crane. farm site using deck barges. Once mobilised at the wind
farm site, a suitable installation vessel is used to install
n Haul routes the structure. The present section details the port
The exact transit routes by which heavy loads are to requirements for the manufacture, storage, and load-out
transit from any storage areas to the quayside need to of the jacket structures.
be defined, and the deck strength of any paved areas
assessed to ensure that they are sufficient to support In the European market to date, all projects that utilise
SPMTs and their payload. jacket foundations have involved turbines of greater
than 4 MW. However, jackets are planned to be used in
n Storage PR China and Taiwan for smaller turbines where ground
Areas that are used for long-term storage of conditions or vessel lift capacities are not conducive to
monopiles will be required to have sufficient deck the installation of monopiles.
strengths to accommodate the feet loads of storage
frames. SPMT loading and unloading methodology is In addition, it is unlikely that jackets would prove an
to pass under the load to be lifted and then jack optimal solution for a turbine in water depths of less than
up their upper load-bed, to raise-up and lift the 30 or even 40 m, given the trend towards XL monopiles
payload. After transit to the destination, the jacks are in recent years. However given the embryonic nature of
lowered and the load is then again supported on the the offshore wind industry in India and the possibility
ground by the frame, and the SPMT is free to move of fabrication restrictions for XL monopiles in the early
out from under the load. Transition pieces are usually development years, dimensions for jackets supporting
stored vertically, which avoids damage to paintwork. 6 MW turbines in water depths of both 30 and 40 m
This means that the plan area required is about below LAT have been considered. As with China
10 m x 10 m to allow access around the structure. Mainland and Taiwan, this is not to say that 4 MW WTGs
deployed on jacket foundations could not be utilised if a
suitable combination of environmental and supply chain
conditions are found to exist in India.

The tabulated information in Table 11 contains jacket and


pin pile dimensions for generic wind turbines of 6 MW
nameplate capacities. The dimensions and masses have
been derived from DNV GL’s in-house foundation
database.

The following information details the port requirements


for manufacturing facilities as well as staging ports:
Source: Utility Weekly
n Width
Figure 42 - Jacket transportation on the quay
The access channel width requirement should be
qualified by stating that port access widths are
customarily quoted as being the widest beam of two
equally sized vessels which can pass through the
narrowest part of the port approaches, be this the
port’s dredged access channel, harbour entrance, or
other restriction.

n Feeder barge drafts


It will be necessary for feeder barges to transit the
jacket structures between the manufacturing port and
the wind farm site. The transportation of jackets using
barges will require a maximum of approximately 5.0 m
Source: Bifab
of water below the Chart Datum (LAT).
Figure 43 - Jacket storage on the quay
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 51

Wind
turbine
n Storage
Design
depth Parameter size The likely means of transport will still be SPMTs, but
[m] [MW] the ground bearing pressure required by SPMT units is
6
likely to be lower than for monopiles, or can be
Jacket mass [t] 613 arranged to be such, as the jacket is much larger in
Pin piles (4) mass [t] 328 size and of reduced weight. This means SPMT
Number of SPMT axles 25 arrangements can be set up which imposes ground
Jacket leg separation [m] 17 bearing pressures of approximately 10 tonne/m2.
30 Height (leg base to TP) [m] 48 This figure is not an absolute limit but a reasonable
Storage area (laid down) [m2] 1.302 capacity, which will be able to accommodate most
Storage area (standing) [m2] 441 types of unit.
Bearing area (4 block supports to distribute load) [m2] 48
Bearing pressure under blocks [t/m2] 13 n Mobile cranage
If the cranage is placed so that the outriggers are
Jacket mass [t] 684
adjacent to the quay-wall, the sheet piling in an
Pin piles (4) mass [t] 328
unsupported quay-wall would experience loadings
Number of SPMT axles 28
which may be enough to collapse the quay. It is
Jacket leg separation [m] 23
unlikely that the jacket structure will be lifted by a
40 Height (leg base to TP) [m] 58
single crane, and two cranes and spreader beams are
Storage area (laid down) [m2] 1.674
envisaged. The maximum dead mass will be in the
Storage area (standing) [m2] 729
order of 700 tonne, so with half-load per crane a
Bearing area (4 block supports to distribute load) [m2] 48
figure of 350 tonne has been taken.
Bearing pressure under blocks [t/m2] 14

Table 11 - Jacket specifications and port requirements n Haul routes


The exact routes by which heavy loads are to transit
from any storage areas to the quayside need to be
n Headroom defined, and the deck strength of any paved areas
The headroom requirement has been based upon assessed to ensure that they are sufficient to support
the assumption that the jacket will be stood upright SPMTs and their payload. The transport of jacket
upon the barge used to carry it out to the wind farm structures will require considerable width and turning
site. The likelihood is that this transit will be aboard a circles.
deck barge which will have low freeboard, so the
figure of 75 m has been chosen to accommodate a
65 m high jacket aboard a barge with 5 m freeboard
and to have a 5 m clearance. It is possible that the
jacket could be loaded aboard a heavy-duty cargo
vessel, but since there are always two cranes available
and offshore upending is a practicable option, it has
been assumed that the jacket would transit
horizontally under these circumstances. It still remains
a recommendation that only ports with unrestricted
headroom be used as jacket installation ports, where
possible.

n LOA
Barges are likely to transport up to three jacket Source: Recharge news

structures at any one time (see Figure 44), thereby


Figure 44 - Jacket load-out onto deck barges
requiring an overall length of the order of 90 m LOA
port access.
52 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.5.5 Foundations - gravity base structures It however seems possible that GBSs may be feasible in
Gravity Base Structures (GBS) transmit wind turbine loads Tamil Nadu, given the known presence of coral-rock
to the sea bed using the mass of the structure to provide below ground and the problems which piling related
lateral stability. This simple concept makes GBSs suitable noise-pollution could cause, given the environmental
for a range of water depths. However, due to their size, sensitivity of the area.
they are difficult to handle and are therefore transported
directly to the wind farm project site from the chosen It is clear from these specifications that the biggest
manufacturing facility. requirement that GBS foundations impose upon ports is
their sheer size, particularly their weight. To date, three
Table 12 displays generic specifications for GBSs at methodologies have been developed for GBS
an assumed design depth of 40 m below LAT and construction. Each of these methods has its advantages
supporting a 6 MW turbine. These are example and disadvantages and their appropriateness varies
specifications of generic foundations and are intended with GBS design and port capabilities. The methods are
only to inform port requirements. Much of the experience described in Sections 3.5.5.1 to 3.5.5.3 with the port
of gravity bases at offshore wind farms are at relatively requirements for each concept.
shallow depths of < 25 m, but the range at which GBS
designs are now considered feasible extends to deeper 3.5.5.1 GBS Construction on quayside
waters. Construction on the quayside will often require
reinforcement of the quay as both the total mass and
GBSs can be considered for shallow waters in India under the bearing pressure applied are significant. An example
the right seabed conditions where hard scoured and of a project where reinforcement was required is
fractured rock sea-beds are suitable. Whilst it seems Thornton Bank, located in Belgian waters (see Figure 45).
unlikely that GBS’s will prove a favoured solution in
Gujarat, since the ground conditions are not known to be
suitable across the identified development zones A to H,
it should be noted that further seabed data is required to
substantiate this conclusion in future FOWIND studies.

Wind
Parameter turbine
type Parameter size Source: SECO
[MW]
6 Figure 45 - Construction of GBS on the quay
(Thornton Bank)
Total mass without ballast [t] 5,970
General Diameter [m] 39
Area of base [m2] 1,260
Construction of GBSs adjacent to the quayside allows the
Clearance around base during construction [m] 10 structure to be lifted directly for installation using a heavy
Construction area (per GBS) [m2] 3,481 lift vessel such as the Rambiz or Svanen. The wall of the
Quayside Bearing area (quayside construction and storage) [m2] 504 quayside may need to be reinforced due to the forces
construction Bearing pressure (quayside construction and imposed on it during this load-out. If it is not possible to
storage) [t/m2] 12 site the substantial construction area required adjacent to
Number of SPMT axles required to transport GBS 239 the quayside then SPMTs can be used to haul the GBS for
load-out.
Un-ballasted bearing pressure distributed [t/m2] 5
Dry dock Clearance around base during dry dock Average bearing pressure for the port is the mass of
construction construction [m] 3 the un-ballasted structure divided by the area – typically
Minimum width of dry dock [m] 45 approximately 60 kPa or 6 tonne/m2. In addition, if
Clearance around base during barge construction [m] 2 transport by SPMTs is necessary, the mass of the GBS
Minimum barge width [m] 27 or 32 will be distributed through the wheels of the SPMT with
Barge
Barge length [m] 97 or 121 an axle load of up to 30 tonne per axle. Whether this is
construction
Harbour area (per barge) [m2] 4,300 acceptable for individual ports is dependent on quayside
Barge draft [m] 5 but load spreading can help meet this requirement.

Table 12 - GBS specifications and port requirements


for 40 m design depth
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 53

The following criteria need to be investigated when


constructing GBSs on the quayside:
Parameter
n Width
The largest of the heavy-lift vessels used to install GBS
structures is Svanen at 74.6 m beam, so a limit of
75 m has been selected to give minimum clearance.
If a heavy lift vessel of reduced beam was selected, this
criterion could be reduced.

n Headroom
The headroom requirement has been based upon
the assumption that a large sheerleg vessel will be
used to carry out the installation. Svanen requires Source: LORC

clearance of over 100 m, so it cannot realistically pass Figure 46 - GBS lift off construction barge using Eide 5
under any marine structures. Therefore, unlimited heavy-lift barge
headroom is specified.

n Depth The following criteria need to be investigated when


The largest of the heavy-lift vessels used to install constructing GBSs on barges:
GBS structures is Svanen, with a lift capacity of
8,700 tonne and a 6 m fully laden draft. n Width
Port access channel of suitable width for construction
n GBS fabrication area barges (30 m standard barge width, increasing with
The installation port is usually the point of GBS size).
manufacture of the GBS. A large area is required for
GBS fabrication, as these structures tend to have plan n Headroom
areas of at least 30 m square. An area of 45 m x 45 m As above unlimited headroom is specified.
or ~2,000 m2 per base gives a 15 m clearance
around the base. n Depth
Water depth suitable for construction barge
3.5.5.2 GBS Construction on barges (> 5 mLAT).
Barges are an attractive option for the construction of
GBS structures, as they can be used in almost any port n Port berthing area
due to their minimal draft requirements. Significant port space available for long-term rent
This construction method is viable for GBSs as long as (several barges at > 30 m x 100 m).
a barge large enough for the foundation can be found.
Bearing in mind that the example base diameters given 3.5.5.3 GBS Construction in dry dock
previously are representative of gravity bases on fairly Construction of GBSs within dry dock facilities with a
strong soils (350 kPa allowable bearing pressure), the float-out of the structure reduces the requirement for
area can increase to the point where extremely large large installation vessels capable of lifting the whole GBS,
barges are required to accommodate construction. thereby reducing vessel costs (see Figure 47). Dry dock
space is more expensive then general port space, but
Where barges are used, installation can be performed extremely large GBS designs can be constructed in dry
from a variety of vessels including existing heavy-lift docks as the float-out allows some or all of the mass to
vessels such as the Eide 5 barge used on Nysted or be taken by the buoyancy of the GBS, thereby reducing
Rambiz used on Thornton Bank. As the construction required crane size.
occurs on barges, the GBS units can be towed on the
construction barge to the wind farm site for installation, The challenge with dry dock construction is producing at
which removes the requirement for the installation vessel a sufficient rate for commercial installation considering
to interact with the port facility. the limited availability of suitable dry docks. Installation
vessels for this construction method depend on the
buoyancy of the design.
54 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.5.6 Substation
The offshore substation consists of a topside
(see Figure 48, right) containing the electrical equipment
and a foundation (see Figure 48, left) which supports the
topside.

3.5.6.1 Topside port requirements


Substation topsides represent the heaviest item in an
offshore wind project, typically weighing 2000 to 4000
tonne. This extremely heavy mass and large size means
substation topsides tend to require similar port
requirements to GBS foundations.

As discussed in section 3.5.3, the topside will often be


Figure 47 - GBS construction in a dry-dock facility
(or graving yard)
lifted directly off the quayside for installation by a
heavy-lift installation vessel such as Rambiz or Svanen.
The installation port must be able to accommodate such
The following criteria need to be investigated when large vessels. If a separate port is used for manufacture
constructing GBSs in dry dock facilities: and assembly, but not installation, then the
manufacturing port must also be able to handle heavy-lift
n Width vessels, or have a large enough crane in port to load-out
For a lifted design a port access channel of suitable onto a transport vessel. Due to the difficulty of handling
width for the installation vessels would be required. large substations, they will typically be installed directly
If a buoyant design the minimum width would be a from the manufacturing port.
safe clearance on the foundation width (assumed the
structure is towed to site by tug vessels). As with GBS foundations, the typical transport
methodology for substation topsides within the port is via
n Headroom SPMTs due to the large weights of the substation topside
Port access channel with unlimited headroom. (typical load per axle of an SPMT is 30 tonne/m2). Smaller
substation topsides may also be carried within the port
n Depth by crawler crane, but this becomes problematic as larger
For lifted design, water depth suitable for installation sizes are reached.
vessels (> 6 mLAT). If a buoyant design the draft of
the gravity base structure would need to meet the Some large projects and those far from shore utilise
constraints of the launch site and transit channel. multiple offshore substations, and this approach can
hence reduce the substation topside sizes and handling
n Dry dock area requirements. For example the 630 MW London array
Large dry dock of width greater than the GBS. has two HVAC offshore substations, this not only reduces

Source: Harland Source: HFG

Figure 48 - Offshore substation jacket foundation and topside


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 55

the topside mass compared with having one platform but compared with the wind turbine foundations. If possible
it also provides redundancy for the electrical distribution these synergies may result in less costly manufacturing
Parameter
system. A further example is in Germany where many and installation.
projects are >100 km offshore and HVDC transmission
is utilised. In this case offshore substations are required In deeper waters or in cases of very large substation
to both step-up AC voltages from the array but also to weights where the project’s turbine foundation concept
convert AC to DC electricity for transmission to shore. cannot be viably used for the substation, jacket
For example the Borwin 1 substation, weighing 3200 foundations are often selected. While this report provides
tonne, is only performing the AC to DC conversion, the figures for foundation port requirements, substation
voltage already having been stepped up by the Bard 1 foundations will typically be larger and heavier. Also, they
offshore substation. are less tapered, due to the large area of the substation.

The following criteria need to be investigated when The following criteria need to be investigated when
constructing the topside of an electrical substation constructing the foundation of an electrical substation
onshore: onshore:

n Width n Width
Port access channel of suitable width for installation Port access channel of suitable width for installation
vessels (> 75 m). vessels (> 75 m)

n Headroom n Headroom
Port access channel with unlimited headroom (based Port access channel with unlimited headroom (based
on Svanen). on Svanen)

n Depth n Depth
Water depth suitable for installation vessels (> 6 m Water depth suitable for installation vessels (> 6 mLAT)
LAT).
n Quayside
n Quayside Quayside reinforced for assembly and storage of the
Quayside reinforced for assembly and storage of jacket (> 1,000 tonne at 20 tonne/m2)
topside (> 2,500 tonne at 20 tonne/m2).
n Load-out
n Load-out (1) RoRo load out would require a heavily reinforced
(1) RoRo load out would require a heavily reinforced quayside similar to those required for an O&G jacket,
quayside similar to those required for an O&G topside, e.g. 20 tonne/m2 (2) Lifted load-out typically requires
e.g. 20 tonne/m2 (2) Lifted load-out typically requires heavy lift crawler cranes (3) Lift and carry load-out
two heavy lift crawler cranes working in tandem uses the installation vessel to directly lift jacket from
(3) Lift and carry load-out uses the installation vessel to the quay.
directly lift topside from the quay.
3.5.6.3 Self-installing substation port requirements
3.5.6.2 Substation foundation port requirements Notable deviations from the above requirements are
Offshore substation foundations are typically jacket self-installing and floating substation designs (see next
structures weighing 700 to 1000 tonne. However page, Figure 49, left). Self-installing designs come with
monopiles or GBS foundations are also possible and have an incorporated jacking foundation, where the legs can
been deployed. For the purpose of this study jackets are simply jack up at site to secure the substation in place.
considered henceforth. Floating designs can be attached to a pre-laid base-frame
upon installation (see next page, Figure 49, right). Both
The first approach in selecting a substation foundation designs require only transport to site, which can be done
is to verify whether the wind turbine foundation type by tug, after they are placed in the water at the port.
selection can be extended to the substation (possibly As such, port requirements are reduced to either the
scaled up or slightly modified), which will reduce costs. crane capacity to place the substations in the water, a
The lower the substation’s weight, the smaller the change sufficient slipway, or a dry dock within which to construct
in design required for the substation foundation the substation.
56 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Source: BARD Offshore 1 Source: Overdick

Figure 49 - Self-installing and floating substation designs

3.5.7 Wind farm electrical plant Where pre-wound cable drums are used, each will be
Electrical cabling for an offshore wind farm includes loaded with enough cable to connect at least a string of
both the inter-array cables connecting strings of wind wind turbines. The total load out of array cable may be
turbines to the substation and the export cables split across a number of drums.
connecting the offshore substation to the onshore
substation. Both cables can be produced by a single Manufacturing port requirements are the same as for
manufacturing port facility. Where a staging port is used, export cables, as similar cabling vessels will be used, and
the cable vessels and cable handling impose similar similar infrastructure is required to handle the cabling.
requirements as encountered at the manufacturing port. One additional requirement of the port, if the capacity to
lift cable drums is desired, is for a heavy crane.
3.5.7.1 Array cables
Array cables are lighter than export cables, weighing The following criteria need to be investigated for
approximately 20 to 40 kg/m depending on the location Manufacturing Port requirements for Array Cables:
within the array and the material (copper is heavier than
aluminium). n Width
Port access channel width for cable installation vessels
It is more common for array cables to be stored at a (> 28 m).
staging port as they are lighter, can be transported in
shorter lengths, and are more flexible and therefore less n Depth
onerous to handle. In addition to being wound onto an Water depth suitable for cable installation vessels
on-board carousel, turntable, or cable tank, array cables (> 5 mLAT).
can also be lifted pre-wound from the port to the vessel
deck. By lifting the cables on drums, using the staging n Quayside
port becomes more practical. Quayside length adequate for installation vessels
(LOA > 100 m).
For array cabling, the advantage of using a staging port is
that it allows the cabling to be transported using a HLCV n Workshop
rather than a specially equipped cable vessel. Such a Long fabrication workshop (>100 m x 10 m) and the
vessel can travel faster, with lower fuel burn. facility should be located adjacent to quayside.

To load a pre-wound cable drum onto a vessel requires n Cranage


a heavy crane lift, so the port must be able to Heavy lift crane adjacent to quayside (if lifting of
accommodate a heavy crane to achieve this. drums is desired).
Alternatively, a heavy lift cargo vessel may be able to pick
up the array cables pre-wound using its on-board crane.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 57

As staging ports may be used to store cable, a crane or


a carousel to load and unload cables may be required.
Parameter
The crane would need to be adjacent to the quayside
and sufficient space for cable storage would be needed.
In the case of a carousel, storage is covered by the
carousel itself.

The following criteria need to be investigated for Staging


Port requirements for Array Cables:

n Width
Port access channel width for cable installation vessels
(> 28 m).
Source: ABB

n Depth Figure 51 - ABB’s high-voltage manufacturing facility in Sweden


Water depth suitable for cable installation vessels
(> 5 mLAT).

n Quayside
installation to occur directly from the manufacturing port
Quayside space for crane and cable storage or
(see Figure 51).
carousel.
As discussed above, the majority of export cable
installations will be performed by transiting to the site
directly from the manufacturer. The demands export
cable manufacturers place on ports are driven by the
availability of premises for fabrication near the quayside
for direct load-out of cables, and for large areas for the
manufacturing of cables. In addition, the ground must
have reasonable strength to withstand the mass of the
cables (these are closely coiled, with an AC export cable
weighing approximately 70 to 100 kg/m).

For a cabling manufacturing site, a surface area of


approximately 70,000 m2 is recommended, though this
Source: Windpower offshore will vary significantly depending on estimated rates of
Figure 50 - Offshore wind cables stored onshore
production. Storage of cables will usually utilise
turntables measuring approximately 30 m in diameter
with a bearing pressure of 10 tonne/m2 at capacity.
3.5.7.2 Export cable As such, the storage area may need to be reinforced, but
Export cables impose certain specific requirements to a this can be a distance away from the quayside loading
construction program due to their extreme length and area as long as there is a direct path for feeding the cable
weight. Taking into account the difficulties in joining to the vessel.
cables offshore, it is usually desirable to fabricate and
load the entire export cable onto a vessel in one Cable laying vessels used on offshore wind farms have
continuous length. A typical load-out speed is lengths of up to 130 m, so a minimum length of port
approximately 6 m/min or almost 9,000 m per day. quayside of 150 m is recommended for safety, though
This means that an export cable load out for an offshore most cable vessels are less than 100 m. Due to the long
wind farm will typically take a period of several days, load-out time, the cabling port must have sufficient draft
excluding initial setup of the load-out. In order to avoid for the fully laden vessel at low tide.
the inconvenience and risk to cables of off-loading
and reloading cable at a staging port, and due to the
specialized equipment required (extremely large cable
carousels) for cable transport and storage, it is usual for
58 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

The following criteria need to be investigated for 3.6 Vessels


Manufacturing Port Requirements for Export Cables:
3.6.1 Introduction
n Width This section specifics different types of vessels used in
Port access channel width for cable installation vessels offshore wind farm construction, including their
(> 28 m). limitations, specific construction roles and port access
requirements.
n Depth
Water depth suitable for cable installation vessels Figure 52 shows the 300 MW Thanet offshore wind farm
(> 5 mLAT). under construction in 2010, this represents a common
marine operations scene for large scale offshore wind.
n Quayside It is easy to see that there are a number of vessels
Quayside length adequate for installation vessels simultaneously operating, a situation abbreviated as
(LOA > 100 m). SIMOPS. In the foreground Normand Mermaid is engaged
in laying array cables. A workboat is passing through
n Workshop the scene possibly transporting a turbine commissioning
Long fabrication workshop (> 100 m x 10 m) and the team. The Stanislav Yudin, a 2,500 tonne crane vessel is
facility should be located adjacent to quayside. engaged in placement of the substation topside. In the far
distance the jack-up MPI Resolution is engaged in turbine
It should be noted that cabling manufacturers will often installation.
serve the telecoms markets as well, so manufacturing
port requirements are often also intended to match the In these situations operations must be meticulously
needs of submarine communications installation. managed and close attention must be given to good
practice guidance regarding the governance of such
circumstances in order to ensure the safety of all crew,
vessels and equipment. The IMCA guidance on SIMOPS
is well regarded in this respect9.

A number of vessel types have been developed, adapted


or have been proven directly suitable for OWF
installation in Northern Europe (see examples in
Figure 53 and descriptions in later sections).
It has been assumed a similar range of vessels may
become available for the construction of OWFs in India.
Their key dimensions have been used within this study to
establish the approximate physical size of port facilities
required in India.

Figure 52 - Busy scene during construction of Thanet OWF It should be noted that the actual vessel overall
dimensions have been used to establish whether a port
passes or fails the initial screening. In reality, a safe
clearance would be required on both the vessel beam and
its draft etc, but since there is a range of vessels in each
class considered, it is reasonable to suppose that at least
some specific vessels within each class would be suitable.
Hence the vessel selection criteria within the port study
(Section 3.9) is simply based on the key vessel
characteristics.

9
IMCA IMCA M 203 - Guidance on simultaneous operations (SIMOPS) - www.imca-int.com
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 59

Parameter

Towed ‘dumb’ barge with crane Shearleg crane-barge

Semi-submersible/heavy-lift vessel DP2 Heavy-lift cargo vessel

Leg-stabilised crane vessel Self-propelled jack-up

1. Stemat 79 2. Taklift 7 3. Thialf


Manufacturer 4. Jumbo Javelin 5. Sea Energy 6. MPI Resolution

Figure 53 - A selection of vessel types used during OWF installation

The remaining Sections 3.6.2 to 3.6.8 describe the key Section 3.6.10 presents a high-level preliminary
characteristics for different offshore wind vessel classes. screening for vessels known to be available in India.
Section 3.6.9 describes the suitability of different Section 3.6.11 summarizes typical vessel port access
vessel classes for different construction activities. requirements in terms of draft (depth) and beam (width).
60 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.6.2 Dumb barge 3.6.2.2 Possible offshore wind roles


The limited stability of this configuration of craft means
3.6.2.1 Vessel characteristics that it is unsuitable to act in the role of the principal
The cheapest floating lift-craft is formed by placing a installation vessel. However, crafts of this type will often
land-based crane on to a dumb barge. This is the most be used for a multitude of small roles on any offshore
common type of vessel used to support river, coastal and construction site, and may fulfil the role of a feeder
estuarine marine construction projects, see Figure 54. vessel – but offshore unloading will most likely be carried
out by the main installation vessel in all but the most
The 360° rotational capability of the crane, coupled with benign sea conditions.
a reasonable lift capacity, potentially greater than 100 Table 13 illustrates the key features and dimensions of a
tonne, means that it is a versatile vessel. This type of typical dumb barge.
vessel is often used for piling and maintenance of ports
and harbours. Grabs, grapples or dragline buckets can
Dimension Value [m]
be fitted to the crane for rock-armour handling,
dredging, or material handling duties, and man-cradles Length 91
allow inspection of marine structures. Beam 27
Draft - laden 5.0
The barge can be fitted with retractable legs, called
Air draft (with jackets on-board) 80
spud-legs. When the crane is towed into position, by a
tug, the legs are lowered to the seabed, and this both
locates the craft in position, and if the legs are clamped Table 13 - Key dimensions of a typical dumb barge
provides some additional stability when lifting – but
should in no way be considered as an equivalent to the This type of vessel has not found widespread use in
stability provided by the legs of a jack-up. Northern European offshore wind farms sites, but is quite
capable of carrying out operations like pre-piling duties
Dumb barges are the most basic of craft, and any for jackets in benign weather windows.
additional equipment to enhance their capability must Other foundation placement roles could conceivably be
be added to the deck of the barge. This often includes carried out in shallower sites. In a number of UK sites,
items from the following list: cable-runs pass through very shallow or drying areas, and
crane barges of this type have found roles trenching
n Accommodation, storage, containerised diving-support using airlifts, or other digging equipment, and are then
units and office units available to support main-line installation should
n Generators, compressors, fuel bowsers, scour conditions be suitable.
protection, and grouting equipment and materials
n Mooring winches, anchors, mooring cable, or array It has totally inadequate stability to carry out the turbine
cable etc. installation function.

3.6.3 Self-propelled and towed jack-up craft


These two distinct types of vessel have been placed
under a single class heading for simplicity because, aside
from their means of propulsion, they fulfil similar roles in
offshore wind construction.

3.6.3.1 Vessel characteristics


Early smaller wind farms (less than 100 MW) used one
individual jack-up vessel for virtually every conceivable
operation on a piled foundation windfarm, because it
was most economic to use one versatile vessel for all
Source: CRG tasks. This is a contrast to today’s multi 100 MW wind
Figure 54 - Dumb barge with spud-legs, and crawler crane
farms where a number of customised vessels are
mobilised to carry out specific roles.

The type of jack-up vessel shown in Figure 55 (towed


self-elevating platform) has been in use within the
marine construction and offshore oil-rig maintenance
and conversion markets for many years.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 61

Figure 56 - Wind turbine installation vessel


MPI Resolution at Thanet OWF

The leg structures themselves can be:


n tubular

n rectangular
Figure 55 - Fugro Seacrore’s Excalibur towed jack-up installing
a monopile n lattice type

The towed jack-up or self-elevating platform (SEP) is The stable-base provided by a jack-up barge (JUB) is
effectively a dumb barge with a heavily stiffened hull equivalent to working onshore, and if an onshore crane
retro-fitted with jack-legs. Early usage of these vessels is retro-fitted, onshore lift-specifications can be used
was primarily focused on inshore marine construction (except when lifting from floating plant or another
where a flexible deck layout was required to meet site dynamic lift). Dynamic lifting offshore is not
specific needs. However today jack-ups used in the wind recommended practice for onshore cranes. This stability
industry have permanent fitted cranes. makes JUBs ideal for installing the nacelles and blades
of turbines, which are the most precise lifts required
As offshore wind projects have grown is number, MW anywhere on a project due to strict bolt alignment
capacity and complexity (e.g. larger capacity farms, tolerances and insensitivity to the wave state. Hence
larger/heavier WTGs with higher hub heights and bigger jack-up barges (JUBs) effectively dominate this area of
foundations) a new class of jack-up vessel has evolved to work.
meet these specific industry demands and have become
known as the Wind Turbine Installation Vessel (WTIV), Historically there were fears regarding offshore wind
see Figure 56. vessel shortages, and if installation rates do indeed
increase to previously planned levels, jack-up vessels
Jack-up vessels are often referred to as jack-up barges will likely be restricted to turbine installation work, and
or JUBs and may be fitted with a number of propulsion attract a premium, while floating solutions will be used
types: for the majority of other activities.
n diesel or diesel/electric propellers, with or without

azimuthing thrusters The ever increasing water-depths and foundation and


n dynamically positioned vessels with diesel/electric turbine weights have rendered obsolete the vessels which
azimuthing thrusters, and bow thrusters carried out the first installations in water depths of less
n no propulsion at all i.e. towed jack-up barges than 25 m. Upgrading of leg lengths can be undertaken
up to particular engineering limits, but this is always a
The leg-jacking mechanisms are generally hydraulic jacks, compromise. Increasing operational water depth may
but the means of connection between the jacks and the well decrease the operational metocean limits because
legs can be: it is rarely feasible to couple leg extensions with the
n hydraulic pin-jacked increased hull and jacking house loadings.
n pneumatically gripped

n rack and pinion drive


62 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

There are a few JUBs with longer legs, and a number of but it is unlikely to prove suitable for 6 MW classes due
new-builds are joining the marketplace with capacities to crane capacity and deck area limitations. Small vessels of
carry out the larger 6 MW+ class turbine installation work this type with longer legs are likely to find favour for the
in water depths from 30 to 45 m. It is noteworthy that pre-piling of jacket foundations in deeper waters.
lattice legged jack-ups are the vessel of choice for the oil
and gas industry for water depths over 50 m. This is due Larger vessels like the NG 9000C (examples including
to a reduced mass to stiffness ratio and reduced wave Brave Tern and Bold Tern, see Figure 59) are capable of
loading on the legs, and vessels designed with both installing both 6 MW class turbines and most piled
marketplaces (O&G and wind industry) in mind are foundations. There have been several studies on
generally of the lattice legged type. installing substations in sections utilising the main WTIV
vessel, but to date in Northern Europe, where there are
An example of a jack up vessel design with a good several heavy lift vessels suitable for lifting oil and gas
combination of leg length to overall size for pre-pilling topsides, modular substation installation has not been
and small wind turbine installation is the Gusto MSC adopted. Similarly there exist quite a large number of
NG2500x (see Figure 57). This is a relatively small barge, offshore oil and gas installations off the Indian coast so
but with 60 m depth working capacity in benign waters the single-lift installation may again be preferred.
and 48 m in harsh conditions. But it will at least be prudent to revisit whether the local
installation cost drivers may make modular substation
installation a preferred option in India.

Figure 58 and Table 14 illustrate the key features and


dimensions of a typical Small WTIV.

Figure 58 - A small DP2 WTIV


Seajack’s Kraken

Dimension Value [m]


Figure 57 - Gusto MSC NG2500x installing Siemens SWT 3.6 107
at Walney 1 offshore windfarm Length 61
Beam 36
There are several vessels of this type available to the Draft - laden 3.7
offshore wind industry spot-charter market, and indeed Air draft (with jackets on-board) 100
some are owned by Gulf Marine Services, a vessel Lift capacity (tonne) 300
operator in the Middle East, which is only around
1,000 nautical miles from Gujarat. Table 14 - Key dimensions of Kraken

3.6.3.2 Possible offshore wind roles Many smaller jack-up vessels are not capable of either
Dynamic Positioning (DP) jack-ups are capable of most providing the under-hook height to install larger turbines
roles on wind farm sites, but their stability means that (which occasionally require lifts in excess of 100 m above
they dominate the turbine installation role. MSL) or their on-board cranes have insufficient lift
capacity.
Most jack-up barges in use in the wind industry have
been designed by Gusto MSC, and their model codes are A large number of new-build WTIVs with cranes in the
used henceforth for simplicity. The NG 2500x model has lift capacity range of 800 to 1,500 tonne, and capable
been used for 4 MW class WTG machines (Figure 57), of working in +40 m of water have entered the offshore
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 63

Dimension Value [m]

Length 132
Beam 39
Draft - laden 6
Air draft (with jackets on-board) 100
Lift capacity (tonne) 800

Table 15 - Key dimensions of Bold Tern

narrow lock-gates, and in fact lead to their selection as


part of the installation methodology adopted for one
recent UK site.
Figure 59 - Large DP2 WTIV - Fred Olsen Windcarrier’s Bold/Brave
Tern pre-piling jackets 3.6.4.2 Possible offshore wind roles
Given that piling hammers are far lighter than the piles
wind fleet in recent years. These vessels are capable of that they drive, a role is emerging for sheerleg crane
installing both the larger +6 MW class turbines, and all vessels to deliver monopiles, jackets or tripods to jack-up
but the largest foundations. piling vessels (see Figure 60). In this case the jack-ups
are pre-stationed at the foundation site and the sheerleg
Figure 59 and Table 15 illustrate the key features and lowers the foundation onto the seabed, or if a monopile,
dimensions of a typical Large WTIV. into the pile-guides at slack water. The jack-up vessel is
then used to drive the piles.
3.6.4 Sheerleg heavy lift vessel

3.6.4.1 Vessel characteristics


The Sheerleg is fundamentally a very heavy-lift
configuration of a dumb barge. The lifting frame fitted
to the deck is permanent, and many are self-propelled,
but they are not generally equipped with dynamic
positioning.

The lift-frame can be derricked (i.e. raised or lowered)


and can often be fitted with a fly-jib, which is a boom
extension affording greater outreach, or under-hook
lifting height, at the expense of lift-capacity.
Source: Alpha Ventus

This type of vessel is mainly designed for heavy-lifting in Figure 60 - Sheerleg crane-vessel working in tandem with a
jack-up piling vessel
sheltered waters like harbours, rivers and estuaries, but
the larger vessels (over 500 tonne) usually have some
limited capability to operate offshore, in varying levels of Recent experience on one site led to weather related
sea-state. programme delays due to the sheerleg’s metocean limits
for foundation placement on the seabed. It is unlikely
Vessels of this type are available in Northern European that Sheerlegs will be used widely in this role far offshore
waters up to 3,300 tonne capacity and widely in anything but summer weather windows and or due
available across the Asia region. They can transit in seas to a lack of available and suitable vessels. Sheerlegs are
with significant wave heights of well over 1 m, but are however often used during the installation of offshore
generally limited to carrying out lifting operations in substation topsides due to the one-off nature of this lift
seas of between 0.5 and 1 m significant wave heights, as presented in Figure 61.
depending on craft size.
Table 16 illustrates the key features and dimensions of a
Since lifting is always over the end of the barge, sheerleg typical Sheerleg.
cranes require less beam than ship-type crane vessels of
an equivalent lift capacity which can carry out 360°
fully-rotating lifts. This is a major advantage in ports with
64 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Dimension Value [m]

Length 70
Beam 32
Draft - laden 6
Air draft 85
Lift capacity (tonne) 1,800

Table 16 - Key dimensions of Matador 3, Sheerleg Heavy Lift


Vessel, SHLV

Source: Mercator Media 3.6.5.2 Possible offshore wind roles


With their high transit speeds, heavy-lift capacity, and
Figure 61 - Rambiz 3, 300 t SHLV installing a substation topside
lower day-rates than other equivalent lift-capacity vessels,
it is likely that this type of vessel will see a greater role in
3.6.5 DP2 Heavy lift cargo vessels future wind farms.

3.6.5.1 Vessel characteristics They have been used successful by the oil and gas
Cargo vessels deliver loads rapidly and cost effectively industry for a wide variety of offshore installation
around the world, and by fitting heavy cranes to the duties. Figure 63 shows a screenshot from an animation
vessel, they can collect and deliver cargo from ports of a jacket installation, during which the vessel carries
which do not have adequate crane capacity to handle not only the jacket structure but also the pin piles, piling
the shipment. Often these are individual large units spread and grouting spread. Likewise tripods would
for chemical plants or transformers for power station appear to be another potential application.
projects – and are described as project cargo. The two-crane tandem lift configuration largely avoids
problems with the limited under-hook height with which
Some of these vessels have been fitted with dynamic many single-crane vessels struggle with when installing
positioning (DP) meaning they have the capacity both to deeper water structures.
deliver components rapidly to offshore sites, at speeds of
15-20 knots, and also lift and position them accurately.
Essentially DP is a computer-controlled system which
compares Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite
location data with the desired position of the vessel,
as set by the helmsman. DP takes control of all vessel
propulsion to pilot the vessel to the desired location,
or onto the desired course at the set speed etc.

Being ships, their hull-form is far sleeker than the


majority of crane vessels. This may prove advantageous
in development of wind farms in areas where port access
widths are limited. However, their increased draft would
require careful considerations.

Figure 63 - Heavy lift cargo vessel - jacket installation

Table 17 illustrates the key features and dimensions of a


typicel DP2 heavy lift cargo vessel.

A large number of companies operate heavy-lift cargo


vessels, with the largest project cargo vessels fitted with
twin 1,000 tonne cranes capable of 2,000 tonne tandem
Source: Jumbo Shipping lifts, but two vessels are currently being built for Jumbo
Figure 62 - Heavy lift cargo vessel - Jumbo Javelin Shipping which have a 3,000 tonne tandem lift capacity.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 65

Dimension Value [m] The stabilisation legs are a hybrid between the passive
spud-legs, which are clamped in position, and jack-legs,
Length Parameter which actively jack the vessel out of the water. There is
144.1
Beam 26.7 some level of downward pressure exerted by the legs,
Draft - laden 8.1 which helps to react the overturning moments associated
Air draft (with jackets on-board) 100 with the lifted loads.
Lift capacity offshore (tonne) 1,000
The origins of these vessels mean that they have good
Lift capacity in port (tonne) 1,800
hydrodynamic hull forms and transit rapidly and
economically. This has allowed some projects to collect
Table 17 - Key dimensions DP2 Heavy Lift Cargo Vessel,
Jumbo Javelin turbines from the manufacturer’s load-out facility and
deliver them straight to site in reasonable cycle-times,
with the additional saving of the costs of a
A number of these vessels are also equipped with construction mobilisation and storage port. It has also
dynamic positioning, including: won them feeder vessel duties on at least one recent
project.
n two of Jumbo Shipping’s J-1800 class
n both of Jumbo Shipping’s K-3000 class new builds
n both of SAL Shipping’s type 183 vessels

Jumbo Javelin, a J-1800 class has been successfully used


during offshore wind farm installation for the placement
of transition pieces in significant wave heights of up to
1.5 m. The SAL vessels have also carried out pre-piling
of jackets at Wikinger OWF in the Baltic Sea.

Heave-compensation systems have been retro-fitted to


these vessels, and offshore vessel-to-vessel transfers have
been achieved. This suggests they could find favour as
feeder-vessels as wind farms move further offshore.
These vessels however lack the stability necessary to Figure 64 - A2Sea Sea Energy / Sea Power - Leg-stabilised
install wind turbines, so jack-ups will continue to crane vessels
dominate in this role.

3.6.6 Leg-stabilised crane vessel 3.6.6.2 Possible offshore wind roles


The 24 m maximum working water depth means that
3.6.6.1 Vessel characteristics their suitability is limited in the installation marketplace.
So far only two vessels of this class have entered the They may well be used for turbine, or possibly transition
wind farm installation fleet and both were owned by piece installation in shallow areas, but they are more
A2Sea – Sea Energy and Sea Power. However Sea Energy likely to find ongoing work in the O&M vessel fleet for
was recently sold to the Oil and Gas company OIS and the existing wind farms which they helped to install, and
is currently working in the Gulf of Guinea. They were where they have the leg-length to operate.
standard cargo ships before being retro-fitted with legs
and pedestal mounted Terex Demag cc 2600 crawler Table 18 illustrates the key features and dimensions of a
crane upper-works (in 400 tonne lift-configuration). typical leg-stabilised vessel.
More recently, Sea Power’s crane was upgraded to a
pedestal mounted, Terex Demag cc2800, which has a Dimension Value [m]
600 tonne capacity when in crawler configuration but
Parameter
experiences down-rating to 230 tonne at 15 m radius Length 92
when the boom is extended to allow for a 100 m Beam 21.6
under-hook height above deck. Draft - laden 4.25
Air draft 50
This adaption has proved a versatile low-budget Lift capacity (tonne) 230
installation craft, which was ideal to install wind turbines
in the shallower sites of the early European wind farms.
Table 18 - Key dimensions, leg-stabilised vessel, A2Sea Power
66 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.6.7 DP2 Offshore supply vessel

3.6.7.1 Vessel characteristics


The offshore supply vessel (OSV) is the work-horse of
the offshore oil and gas industry and they are universally
available, often at extremely competitive charter rates.
There are several names used for supply vessels utilised by
the offshore industry but many are similar in appearance
and would be equally capable of fulfilling the functions
required on an offshore wind farm site. There are three
main categories of OSVs, namely Anchor Handling
Tug Supply (AHTS), Platform Supply Vessel (PSV), and
Construction Support Vessel (CSV). Construction support
Figure 65 - DP2 offshore construction support vessel installs
vessels tend to be better equipped with equipment like array cables - Normand Mermaid
knuckle boom heave compensated cranes, ROV hangers
and tend to be slightly larger.
Dimension Value [m]
3.6.7.2 Possible offshore wind roles Parameter
Dynamic positioned OSVs have become a favoured Length 90.1
option for array cable laying. They have high power Beam 21
propulsion, and often have rated “bollard pulls” for Draft - laden 7
towing, which means that they can pull cable ploughs Air draft 40
and jetting equipment for cable burial. Several have at Lift capacity (tonne) 100
least one ROV hangar, and work class ROVs (WROVs)
can be used for specialist installation operations like
Table 19 - Key dimensions of Normand Mermaid, DP2 OSV
cable or pipeline crossings, and removal of obstructions
like old cables, anchor-chains, fishing nets and etc.
3.6.8 Semi-submersible heavy lift vessel
Tracked cable-layers with “follow-sub” capability could
be integrated with the DP controls of the vessel. As the 3.6.8.1 Vessel characteristics
cable is laid by the ROV, the vessel can be set to “follow” This type of huge vessel has been developed by the
the “sub”-merged cable laying equipment, while also oil and gas industry to carry out placement of oil rig
maintaining the cable tension on deck by also coupling modules in harsh offshore conditions. The hull can be
the DP system with the cable engine. However only the flooded, greatly increasing the deadweight of the craft,
best equipped cable installation contractors will have and it is designed so that this ballasting operation
equipment with the sophistication to deliver this level of dramatically increases the craft’s period of roll. This
capability. change in vessel dynamics effectively tunes-out the
wave effects on the craft and therefore the avoidance
Many vessels in this class are equipped with of the problem of inopportune wave-periods leading
heave-compensated knuckle-boom cranes which can to resonance. It sits effectively motionless in the water,
be used to load cable-reels etc, as well as deployment unaffected by all but the harshest wave states. Clearly
and recovery of ploughing and jetting sleds. They can the huge structure presents a large surface to the wind,
also be used for the pull-ins of the array cables up the but again, the overall stability is such that even delicate
J-tubes, as can be seen in Figure 65. lifting operations can be carried out in deep water during
relatively strong wind conditions.
Furthermore, since this class of vessel is generally
used in close proximity to fixed offshore oil and gas 3.6.8.2 Possible offshore wind roles
installations they are often equipped with laser or radar The use of Thialf at Alpha Ventus (Figure 66) was
ranging devices. This allows the GPS location to be primarily due to particular circumstances on that project.
supplemented by additional positioning information, It is unlikely that this vessel type will be used on offshore
to ensure the highest level of accuracy when carrying wind farms for turbine or foundation installation in the
out precise marine operations like cable pull-ins in close future. Day rates for this extremely expensive class of
proximity to WTG foundations. vessel are prohibitive to the offshore wind installation
market in general.
Table 19 illustrates the key features and dimensions of a
typical offshore supply vessel.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 67

Substation jackets are not included as they can be


handled by the wind turbine generator (WTG) jacket
vessel, or by the HLV installing the topsides.
Note, several options which are technically possible
would be uneconomic, unless there was a vessel available
at greatly below the market rate (for example the
semi-submersible heavy lift vessel).

3.6.10 Construction vessel screening in India


A high-level local vessel screening for India was
conducted as part of the FOWIND Pre-feasibility reports4
and is reproduced in this section.
India has a total of over 700 offshore vessels with a total
Figure 66 - Jacket installation at Alpha Ventus, by Thialf
gross tonnage of over 800,000. Most of these vessels
are used for the offshore oil and gas industry. To date no
It is possible that such vessels may be used as a vessel of newly designed, offshore wind installation vessel exists in
opportunity again, if a particular vessel is in the area and India. Table 23 provides an overview of offshore related
has no commercial charter, but this is unlikely. vessels available in India and their potential scope for
offshore wind installation.
Occasionally there could be a role for these craft in
large substation installation in onerous sea conditions, Based on the results of this vessel availability desk top
particularly if there is a HVDC topside, which are survey, the following three opportunities for offshore
generally larger than their HVAC counterparts. wind deployments in the Gujarat and Tamil Nadu region
should be considered:
Since the availability of this class of vessel is unclear in
India, the vessel type has only been included for n Modifications of the existing oil and gas, fishing or civil
completeness but no example vessel has been used in engineering vessels specific to the requirements for
the ports assessment. Such craft are unlikely to enter a both construction and operation and maintenance
port due to their large size. phases of offshore wind projects. This option should
be considered at least for offshore support vessels and
Table 20 illustrates the key features and dimensions of a work boats;
typical Semi-submersible heavy lift vessel. n Design of specialised vessels for offshore wind project

installation. The development of specialised vessels is


Dimension Value [m] largely dependent on the scale of deployment of
offshore wind in India;
Parameter
Length 201.6 n Using the services of the existing European or Asian

Beam 88.4 offshore wind vessels may be a favourable short term


Draft - laden 11.8 - 31.6 solution. This option should be considered for wind
Air draft (approximately) 75 turbine, foundation and substation installation vessels.
Lift capacity (tonne) 14,200
One issue that has been raised in the Indian market is the
availability of vessels. It is noted that Gujarat is relatively
Table 20 - Key dimensions of a typical semi-submersible vessel close to the Middle East. Gulf Marine Services10 located
in Abu Dhabi own several jack-up vessels which are
3.6.9 Suitability of vessels for various OWF commonly in use in the northern European offshore wind
installation activities industry and are approximately 1100 NM from Gujarat.
This section aims to categorise the key construction Chartering Middle Eastern jack-up vessels may well
activities for offshore wind sites with monopile, jacket potentially be a viable means of support for early
and tripod foundations in various water depths, and then developments in the offshore wind industry in Gujarat.
identify the suitability of each class of vessel as described
in Sections 3.6.2 to 3.6.8. This is presented in the form
of a vessel class suitability matrix in Table 22.
Key symbols used to define this high-level suitability are
given in Table 21.
4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
68 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Vessel suitable √
Parameter
Vessel may be suitable under certain circumstances e.g.
modification or special marine operations required ~

Vessel unsuitable
X

Table 21 - Key to vessel class suitability

towed jack-up craft*


Self-propelled and
Semi-submersible
barge with crane

Heavy lift cargo


heavy lift vessel
Sheerleg crane

vessels (no DP)


Floating dumb

DP2 Heavy lift

Leg-stabilised
cargo vessels

crane vessel
Parameter Water

barge
Activity depth
[m]

< 10 ~ ~ √ ~ ~ √ √
10 — ~ ~ √ ~ ~ ~ √
Monopile driving
20 — X ~ √ ~ ~ ~ √
> 30 X ~ √ ~ ~ X √

30 — ~ ~ √ √ ~ √ √
Jacket/tripod pre-piling 40 — ~ ~ √ √ ~ √ √
50 — ~ ~ √ √ ~ √ √

30 — ~ √ √ √ ~ X √
Jacket installation 40 — X √ √ √ ~ X √
50 — X √ √ √ ~ X √

10 — ~ ~ √ √ √ X ~
20 — ~ ~ √ √ √ X ~
Tripod installation 30 — X ~ √ ~ ~ X ~
40 — X ~ √ ~ ~ X ~
50 — X ~ √ X X X ~

10 — ~ √ √ √ √ √ √
20 — ~ √ √ √ √ ~ √
Transition piece installation 30 — X √ √ √ √ X √
40 — X √ √ √ √ X √
50 — X √ √ √ √ X √

10 — X X X X X √ √
20 — X X X X X ~ √
Turbine installation 4MW 30 — X X X X X X √
40 — X X X X X X √
50 — X X X X X X √

Turbine installation 6MW X X X X X X √

Substation topside X √ √ √ ~ X X

* depending on water depth limits and lift capacity


Table 22 - Technical suitability of vessel types for offshore wind farm installation activities
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 69

Vessel type Potential scope No. of vessels

Offshore supply vessels Construction support and supply vessels 113


Anchor handling tower support vessel (AHTS) Construction support and supply vessels 4
Multi-purpose support vessel (MPSV) Construction support and supply vessels 1
Motor stand-by vessel (MSV) Work boats 1
Barges Turbine and foundation transportation 39
Floating cranes Turbine and foundation transportation and installation vessel 1
Dredgers Construction support and supply vessels 36
Tug vessel Construction support and supply vessels; work boats 322
Passenger service vessels Crew transfer vessel 57
Port trusts and maritime board vessels Requires investigation 95

Specialised vessels for offshore services Requires investigation 38


TOTAL 707

Table 23 - Offshore related vessels available in India

3.6.11 Vessel port access requirements


DNV GL used their in-house Vessel Port Access
Requirement charts as a means of making the initial
screening of the ports in both Gujarat and Tamil Nadu
(see Section 3.9). An explanation of this process is
provided within this section.

Table 24 summarises the dimensions of the key vessels


identified to represent those commonly used as OWF
installation vessels. Plotting the vessel beam (fully laden)
and vessel draft on a Vessel Port Access Requirement
chart (see Figure 67), the beam and draft requirements
for each vessel can be clearly represented graphically.

Figure 67 - Vessel port access requirement charge for


Description LOA Draft Beam Air-gap
example vessels

Small JUB/WITV Parameter


61 3.7 36 100
Large WTIV 132 6 39 100
HLCV/MPV 144 8 26.7 47.3 The high and low water depths available and any marine
Feeder barge 91 5 27 15 access width restrictions at suitable berths in ports within
Offshore supply vessel 93 6.3 21 40 the selected areas, can be plotted on the same axes.
Heavy lift vessel (2,500 t) 183 9 36 50 This approach allows for a comparison between the
Sheerleg HLV (1,500 t) 70 6 32 85 vessel’s basic requirements for water depth and width,
versus those available at the various port locations.
Table 24 - Summary table of dimensions of example
OWF installation vessels
70 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.7 Installation strategy 3.7.3 Monopiles and transition piece installation


strategy
3.7.1 Introduction
When developing project specific Installation and 3.7.3.1 Driven monopiles
Logistics methods it is necessary to capture a The majority of foundations installed to date have been
representative range of options in terms of installation steel monopiles. The advantages of this foundation type
strategies for the specific offshore wind project. are that it is relatively cheap to manufacture, requires little
The installation strategy must include corresponding or no sea bed preparation, and can be installed with
marine operations and related transport and installation one simple piling operation in a wide range of soil
(T&I) vessels and plant. conditions. In harder ground conditions alternative
methods include “drive-drill-drive”(see Section 3.7.3.2)
The installation strategy will to a large extent define the and “rock-socketing” (see Section 3.7.3.3).
vessel requirements and in turn the port characteristics
required to facilitate operation of these vessels. Clearly The foundation installation strategy discussed within this
this is a multi-dimensional puzzle in order to arrive at an section follows the standard approach by the majority of
all-encompassing Installation Logistics solution because the early Northern European OWFs. Foundation
vessel availability and port availability within the local components (monopiles and transition pieces) are
supply chain are also critical factors in defining the transported from the manufacturing port, either direct to
strategy. the offshore wind farm, or to a marshalling port, generally
by dumb barges, or cargo vessels.
This section defines a limited number of typical installation
strategies that have now become best-practice within The monopile (MP) and transition pieces (TP) are typically
the European market (there are numerous others and connected by placement of high-strength structural grout
variants but this section only covers the key strategies within a narrow annulus between MP and TP. In order to
at high-level). See Section 3.7.2 for further examples. prevent downward sliding of the TP it is now considered
best practice (offshore standard DNV-OS-J101) to
The following strategies are outlined within this section in provide monopile grouted connections with either a
high-level detail: straight sided annulus with friction enhancing shear keys
or alternatively a tapered cone connection between MP
n Three different foundation construction strategies and TP. In early cases before revision of the design
are illustrated in Sections 3.7.3 to 3.7.5 which are standards where downward sliding of transition pieces
amongst the 30 or 40 which have been defined for occurred in a number of projects remedial elastomeric
transport and installation (T&I) of the foundation bearings were post-installed, but this is now only
components considered for remedial repairs.
n One strategy is illustrated for transport and installation

of turbines, see Section 3.7.6


n T&I strategies and plant for offshore substation

foundation and topsides are also discussed in Section


3.7.7
n T&I strategies and plant are discussed for inter-array

cables, see Section 3.7.8

3.7.2 Vessel port access requirement


A wide range of alternative installation strategies are
possible for the various components and the vessels
required to carry out these offshore wind operations.
In order to provide further detail to the port selection
study these various strategies and anticipated vessel
dimensions required to facilitate them have been
estimated. A selection of these are summarised in
Table 25.
Figure 68 - Transportation of monopiles FND to MAR, using a
dumb barge
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 71

MAXIMUM
Strategy description
Beam Draft

4 MW Turbine installation - small WTIV 36 3.65


6 MW Turbine installation - large WTIV 39 6

Pre-pilling 4 MW Jacket - small jack-up barge (JUB) 36 5


Pre-pilling 6 MW Jacket - small jack-up barge (JUB) 36 5
Pre-pilling 4 MW Jacket - floating option 27 8.1
Pre-pilling 6 MW Jacket - floating option 27 8.1
Installation of 4 MW Monopile - heavy lift vessel (HLV) 26.6 8.1
Installation of 4 MW Monopile - sheerleg & small JUB 36 6
Installation of 4 MW Monopile - large WTIV 39 6
Installation of 6 MW Monopile - heavy lift vessel (HLV) 26.6 8.1
Installation of 6 MW Monopile - sheerleg & small JUB 36 6
Installation of 6 MW Monopile - large WTIV 39 6
Installation of 4 MW Jacket - heavy lift vessel (HLV) 26.6 8.1
Installation of 4 MW Jacket - sheerleg 32 6
Installation of 4 MW Jacket - large WTIV 39 6
Installation of 6 MW Jacket - heavy lift vessel (HLV) 26.6 8.1
Installation of 6 MW Jacket - sheerleg 32 6
Installation of 6 MW Jacket - large WTIV 39 6

Grouting of 4 MW Jacket/transition piece - offshore support vessel (OSV) 21 6.3


Grouting of 6 MW Jacket/transition piece - offshore support vessel (OSV) 21 6.3

Array cable laying - offshore support vessel (OSV) 21 6.3


Export cable laying - offshore support vessel (OSV) 21 6.3

Substation installation - heavy lift vessel (HLV) 27 8.1


Sub-substation installation - sheerleg 32 6

Table 25 - Alternative OWF installation strategies for various components

Alternative bolted monopiles have also been seen in Transition pieces are generally up-ended and transported
some projects in Europe and China. In shallow sites these vertically; this is primarily to protect and prevent damage
can involve monopiles directly bolted to the turbine to the attached secondary steel components (platforms,
tower with secondary steel attached using cages that are boat fenders, ladders and anodes).
friction fitted over the monopile (for example, Kentish
Flats Extension, UK). Alternatively in deeper sites a bolted Monopiles can be installed using the following vessels:
monopile to transition piece can be used (for example, n Towed deck barges, with or without spud-legs – this

Humber Gateway, UK). requires dynamic offshore lifts (cheap spud-legs offer
some stability for offshore lifts - multiple vessel
The remainder for this section focuses on installation options)
strategies for grouted MP to TP connections. n Jack-up barges (static offshore lifts, more expensive

than deck barges)


Monopiles can be transported in a number of ways n Floating crane vessels, with or without heave-

including: compensated cranage (costly)


n Plugging the pile and floating it to site, using its own n Cargo vessels with or without cranes fitted (fast, but

buoyancy (provided the monopile is of sufficiently large dynamic lifts)


diameter)
n Loading one or more piles onto the deck of the

installation barge/jack-up
n Using a feeder vessel to transport the piles out to the

site
72 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Source: CRG

Figure 69 - Jack-up upending a monopile in preparation Figure 70 - Piling frame on Excalibur awaiting a floating monopile
for piling

The most common monopile installation methodology is 3. Up-end pile using vessel crane or up-ending tool
to use a jack-up vessel as a piling guide, and to use the (typically using JUB or WTIV or sheerleg vessel);
on-board crane to both lift the pile into a guide-frame 4. Drive monopile to design depth using suitable piling
(also called the piling gate), and place the hammer on hammer (typically using JUB or WTIV);
top for pile-driving, as shown in Figure 69. 5. Place scour protection material if required;
6. Clean pile of marine growth (using manual equipment
Lifting the pile vertical usually requires cranage with a lift or specialist pile cleaners);
capacity in excess of the mass of the pile. Two exceptions 7. Transport (vertically) TPs to installation site (various
to this vessel crane lift-capacity limitation exist: vessels suitable);
8. Lift transition piece onto pre-installed monopile
n A technique called semi-buoyant lifting, in which (various vessels suitable) and level using hydraulic
the pile is plugged and the lift-weight seen by the jacking system;
installation crane is reduced. This technique 9. Attach grouting lines and fill grouted annulus (either
potentially allows installation vessels with relatively TP installation vessel equipped with grouting spread or
small lift capacities to install heavy foundations. It does separate grouting vessel).
however require complicated marine operations
planning and supervision, and is not a preferred Monopile diameters installed to date have varied from
technique for most installation sites. 4 m upwards and diameters of 8.0 m or larger are being
n A specialist piling frame, for example as seen fitted to discussed for installation in wind farms in the future, with
jack-up Excalibur in Figure 70, which has a jack-up forged piling hammer anvil diameters being the limiting
pile-guide which lifts and rotates the pile into the factor. At present there is a piling anvil effective limit of
vertical, independently of the crane. approximately 7 m diameter.

If the installation vessel does not have cranage in excess A key design factor is the fatigue life of the monopile
of the mass of the pile, it is possible to use a different circumferential and transition piece attachment welds.
vessel which does have the required cranage in Great care must be taken regarding the planned driving
conjunction with the installation vessel as a piling barge sequence during monopile design, as driving the pile
(see Sheerleg crane in Section 3.6.4, Figure 60). too hard could reduce the fatigue life of the monopile
below which is needed for the 20 to 25 year wind
In summary the typical installation sequence for driven turbine operational design life.
monopile and transition pieces is as follows:
1. If scour protection is required place filter layer on
seabed before monopile driving;
2. Transport monopile to installation site (typically dumb
barge or WTIV or bunged monopiles);
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 73

3.7.3.2 Drive-drill-drive technique This significant advantage must be offset against the
The ground conditions of some sites include layers of likelihood that there will be environmental constraints
harder material which cannot be driven through without placed on the discharge of the drill uprisings. During
damaging the pile. The installation technique in these drive-drill-drive operations at early wind farms off North
circumstances is “drive-drill-drive”. This technique Wales, foundation contractors were allowed to discharge
consists of driving the pile down to the harder layer, the cuttings straight over the side of the barge, to form
before using a large-diameter reverse circulation drill, an added layer of scour protection around the bottom
to remove the upper layers, and then drilling through the of the pile. This allowed large plumes of turbid water to
hard layer, generally at a slightly smaller diameter than form, and with the strong currents at the site, the impact
the pile to ensure subsequent good contact between the would have been felt well downstream from these sites.
pile and the soil. The drill is then removed and the pile is It has been shown that this had little measurable material
driven down to its target depth. environmental impact in this case and it is understood
that it may be accepted in future developments, and may
This technique is clearly far more time-consuming than form a test-case for other sites, although there may be
simply driving the pile, and given the fact that jacket-leg stricter constraints placed on works by other jurisdictions.
piles can be made far more robustly, and driven through
harder sub-strata, it would appear logical to revert 3.7.4 Jackets structures installation strategy
to jacket foundations if monopiles cannot be driven. Jacket foundations may be installed with pre-installed
However, given the large cost differential between the or post-installed piles (see Figure 71). Post-installed piles
monopile and steel tubular jacket-structures, and the sea have the advantage that one vessel could be used for the
bed preparation which they sometimes require, it is often entire operation but the foundations will likely be heavier
economical to carry out drilling operations rather than as a result of the attached pile sleeves. Pre-installed
to install jackets. Jackets may also not be best suited piles enable two vessels to be operating simultaneously
due to structural dynamic effects; their inherent high (shorter installation time) and lighter jacket structures as
structural stiffness can make it challenging to meet the sleeves are not required to resist pile driving forces.
wind turbines natural frequency window when jackets
are deployed in shallow waters.

This same reverse circulation drilling equipment is often


required as a contingency if site investigations show great
local variations in ground conditions, or in areas where
there are known to be glacial till deposits (as glacial
scouring often entrains large boulders). Hence in these
cases drilling may be required to allow the pile to achieve
target depth.

3.7.3.3 Rock-socketed monopiles


It is possible to install steel monopiles in rock. A similar
drill to that described for drive-drill-drive installation is
used to drill a hole slightly larger in diameter than the Figure 71 - Wind turbine substructure concept - jacket
(pre-piled & post-piled)
monopile. The monopile is then lowered into the socket,
and is grouted in place. Two early offshore wind farms
have installed monopiles in this way to date – Blythe in In both options the pile to jacket connection is typically
the UK, and Yttre Stengrund in Sweden. achieved using a grouted annulus connection.
One alternative to grout is swaging, although not widely
This technique is considerably slower than impact used, (except for the two pilot jackets in the Beatrice
piling. However, it shares the advantage that there is no project, Scotland) where a metal to metal connection
requirement for sea bed preparation at most sites. It has between pile and jacket sleeve is made using a
a further advantage that no piling noise is generated, so specialist hydraulic tool. The swaging tool is inserted into
there are some sites where this technique may afford the the pile and applies high/localised internal pressure to
opportunity to install foundations during periods which make a controlled structural deformation between
the project environmental assessment has concluded that pile/sleeve which directly interlocks the two tubulars
piling noise would be unacceptable. together. The two most common jacket installation
methods, pre-installed and post-installed piles, are
described in Sections 3.7.4.1 and 3.7.4.2.
74 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3. Jacket installation
The template is then removed and the jacket is lowered
into the piles. Stab-ins on each of the jacket legs fit
internally into the pre-driven piles, as shown in Figure 73.

Jackets are not normally off-loaded from the barge after


load-out and are usually installed offshore straight from
the feeder barge (see Figure 74). So the marshalling port
rarely sees a requirement for onshore logistics, and the
storage requirement is to ensure that there is adequate
quayside to moor alongside, and adequate moorings laid
in sheltered waters for the maximum number of delivery
barges envisaged.

Figure 72 - Small pile-driving jack-up, with yellow under-slung The jackets typically arrive on site by the means of a
pre-piling template capable feeder barge, a suitable jack-up barge (JUB)
such as a wind turbine installation vessel (WTIV) will be
3.7.4.1 Pre-installed piles pre-stationed and jacked up at the installation location,
Pre-installed pile types are becoming favoured for larger the feeder barge will then go alongside for the WTIV to
jacket projects in Europe for the following key reasons: lift off a jacket and install it.

n Optimisation of the jacket installation sequence by 4. Grouting


enabling simultaneous operation of two vessels Grouting of the foundations will follow. This can either
(pin-pile installation vessel and jacket placement be done by the WTIV if it has a grout spread aboard,
vessel), thereby removing any conflict between the but this may be an expensive method given the very
two operations and giving potential for more unit high day-rate of such craft. For this reason, grouting is
installations per weather season. often carried out by means of a dedicated grouting vessel
n Reduced jacket mass compared with post-piled which is usually a standard dynamic position offshore
(approximately 10% reduction) by replacement of supply vessel (DP OSV) fitted with cement tanks below
multiple heavy pile sleeves with one universal seabed deck and a grout mixing spread on deck (see Figure 75).
template across the project.
If a separate vessel is used for grouting, its dimensions
The sequence of offshore operations in this scenario can will have to be incorporated within the ports assessment,
be described as follows: as it is likely to have a higher draft than the jack-up barge
and may be a limiting factor. However, if marshalling
1. Pin-pile load-out involves delivery by Heavy Lift Cargo Vessels (HLCV),
The pin-piles are loaded out onto a small jack-up vessel these are likely to be of greater beam and draft that the
using a crawler crane. It is generally assumed that the OSV.
barge can accommodate up to four pin-piles (one
foundation set). Further to these, a pin-pile template is
loaded out. All items are sea-lashed to the deck as part
of the vessel’s seaworthiness preparations.

2. Pin-pile installation
A degree of sea bed levelling may be required prior to
the arrival of the jacket and this would be undertaken
using dredging equipment with high-resolution sonar.
The requirement for sea bed dredging will be wholly
driven by the results of any geological campaign at
individual turbine locations.
Next, a piling template is lowered onto the sea bed.
The template is assumed to be part of the jack-up spread
and is re-usable for each turbine location (see Figure 74).
Piles are individually lowered into the pile-guides and a
suitable hydraulic hammer is used to drive them to their Figure 73 - Jacket leg stab-ins at point of insertion into
design depth. pre-piled foundation
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 75

3.7.5 Floating and lifted gravity base structures


(GBS) installation strategy
Concrete Gravity Base Structures (CGS/GBS) have been
used very effectively in the Baltic, but have not tended
to be the foundation of choice in the North or Irish Sea
wind farms. GBS’s are often favoured in hard or rocky
ground conditions as is found in the northern coast of the
Baltic Sea, as the ground cannot be piled, and there is no
requirement to drill.

The installation method for GBS foundations depends on


their design and construction. The difficulty with offshore
GBS installation lies in the mass of the structure. To handle
this large weight, several methodologies are available,
namely:
Figure 74 - Transportation of jackets FND to MAR/OWF,
using a dumb barge
n Quayside construction
If the GBS is constructed on the quayside (or
transported to the quayside once constructed), a
sufficiently powerful heavy lift crane vessel is required
to lift the GBS directly from the port and transport it to
the site for installation. Alternatively, multiple GBSs can
be loaded onto a barge using the heavy lift vessel, then
transported to the site, where the heavy lift vessel is
used again to lower them onto the sea bed.

n Barge construction
If the GBS is constructed on a barge, the barge needs
to be taken to the site, where a sufficiently powerful
heavy lift crane vessel is required to lift it from the barge
and onto the sea bed.

n Dry dock construction


If the GBS was constructed in a dry dock; there are two
Figure 75 - Grouting spread on the aft of an offshore
options for transportation to the site and installation.
supply vessel - Borkum West II
The GBS can be made semi-buoyant and towed to site,
using a barge with a frame/support structure, or a crane
3.7.4.2 Post-installed piles vessel supporting the mass of the GBS. Alternatively, the
The sequence of offshore operations in this scenario is as GBS can be made fully buoyant and towed to site using
follows, ensuring that the seabed is level (or micro-siting an appropriate barge or vessel. Once at the site, the
the turbine to find a level area within the vicinity of its GBS can then be lowered and ballasted.
proposed location):

1. Lower the jacket to the seabed (temporary support


on jacket’s mud-mats)
2. Locate a pile into the sleeve on each leg of the jacket
3. Drive the piles and grout

The pile-guides need to be substantial structures to


survive the piling operations, and this adds approximately
10% to the overall mass of the structure. Not only does
this increase material and fabrication costs, but also
Source: Talisman
requires a larger installation vessel (as the jacket lift is
the largest lift, and is the driver for vessel selection). Figure 76 - Rambiz up-ending the leg-sheered jacket at Beatrice
76 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Often, the ground at the site needs to be prepared would be unsuitable to operate in onerous far-offshore
before the GBS can be placed on the sea bed. In order waters. Some semi-submersible installation barges have
to improve the soil bearing capacity, dredging is often also been proposed as solutions.
performed to remove the layer of quaternary deposits.
This can be carried out using a fall-pipe vessel or even a 3.7.5.2 Floated GBS´s
grab-crane, the GBS is then lifted onto the prepared area There has been much research and development work
of seabed. done on the potential for buoyant gravity base
structures. A number of designers have been tendering
The prevailing ground conditions in Gujarat are believed for work, and amongst these, the BAM and Gravitas
to be pile-able cohesive soils of reasonable strength, the (see Figure 78) designs are two of the front-runners.
prevailing seabed ground conditions off Tamil Nadu are However to date, apart from a few met masts which
known to include areas of rock with over laying sands, have been deployed in this way, no large scale
albeit in some areas a layer of coral rock, which may be deployment of this foundation type has been seen on
soft enough to pile through. an offshore wind farm.

In these latter areas it is anticipated that gravity based The significant advantage that floating designs have
structures may be considered as viable alternatives to over lifted designs is clearly that during the transport
more conventional piled steel foundations. This is also and installation phase there is no requirement for
due to the close proximity of numerous environmentally anything other than tugs to tow the device, thus saving
sensitive sea areas, with populations of a variety of significantly against the costs associated with expensive
protected marine mammals. installation vessels.

Sections 3.7.5.1 and 3.7.5.2 describe the two most


widely utilised strategies for installing gravity based
foundations.

Figure 78 - Towing a floating Gravitas GBS foundation

3.7.6 Wind turbine generators installation


Figure 77 - The bespoke heavy lift vessel Eide 5 lifting GBS
The assembly of the turbine on whatever foundation type
foundations at Rødsand has been selected, involves a number of operations, some
of which require great precision and stability.

3.7.5.1 Lifted GBS’s Heavy lift cargo vessels (HLCV) are generally used to
This method involves installation using very large heavy transport wind turbine generator (WTG) components
lift vessels (HLVs). The installation can be carried out with from the manufacturer’s port(s) to the marshalling port.
the vessel directly cycling between port and the wind As described in Section 3.5 wind turbine generators can
farm site or by the method shown in Figure 77 where be installed in a number of different ways.
multiple foundations are pre-loaded onto a barge and
transported to the installation site. Ideally a buffer stock of two complete cycles of the
installation vessel is stored, and preassembly of rotors can
If the water depth is larger than 10 to 15 m, the mass be carried out, if required. This level of storage is probably
of the GBS increases rapidly, and it is then necessary to the optimal quantity, and only experienced contractors,
have a very large HLV. A modification to the Eide 5 dumb who are very competent at construction programme
barge (see Figure 77), involving the addition of a bespoke planning, are capable of achieving such a low level of
lift-frame, allows installation of GBS’s of up to 1,800 storage. For the purposes of the ports assessment, it will
tonne in the relatively benign waters of the Baltic sea, be assumed that approximately half of the project’s WTG
but like other craft based upon dumb barges, this vessel units may be stored at any one time.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 77

3.7.7 Offshore substation foundations and


topside installation
Due to their size, a large number of offshore substations
have been installed on jacket foundations but as stated
in Section 3.5.6.2 offshore substations have also been
installed on both monopiles (e.g. the two OSSs at the
630 MW London Array project, UK) and also gravity bases
(for example the OSS at the 400 MW Anholt project,
Denmark).

Figure 79 - Heavy lift cargo vessel, used for wtg transportation


Figure 81 - Barge for transport and SHLV for installation of
Once sufficient WTG sets are ready at the marshalling OSS foundation and topside
port, these are loaded onto a wind turbine installation
vessel (WTIV) that will carry out the complete installation
cycle. Alternatively, the WTIV can load corresponding As discussed in the FOWIND Pre-feasibility reports4,
WTG components at the WTG manufacturer’s port of there exist a number of strategies for transport and
delivery and transit straight to the project site for installation of OSSs depending on the substructure and
installation, and will probably do so, if a cost benefit topside concept:
analysis shows that this is cheaper than incurring local
marshalling port costs. n Lifted substructure and topside
Lifted Substructure and Topside – this is the most
common installation method for HVAC offshore
substation (OSS) to date where both the
substructure and the topside of the OSS will be
transported from the manufacturing base to the
marshalling port, or straight to site, aboard a towed
offshore barge (in some cases both may be transported
on the same barge, particularly if manufactured at the
same site, Figure 81). When a suitable weather
window is available, the OSS substructure will be
delivered to site aboard the barge, where it will be lifted
off and installed by a heavy lift crane vessel (HLCV).
Once the substructure is completed, the OSS topside
will be transported to site and installed, often done
using the same HLCV as for the foundation. The topside
installation will typically be the heaviest lift in an
offshore wind project, with topside weights in the
region of 2000 to 4000 tonnes (foundation could be
700 to 1000 tonnes). In topside design the installation
lift will often be the driving load case, hence requires
careful consideration and handling during lifting
operations.

4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
Figure 80 - Wind turbine installation vessels
78 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

n Self-installing substructure and topside The cable would be stored in either a static cable tank or
A novel method (used in BARD Offshore 1, Germany) a powered cable carousel. The cable installation vessel
to avoid the use of HLCVs. Both the substructure and would also be equipped with cable handling equipment
buoyant topside are designed to float and are then to control the tension during the cable lay and to provide
towed to site; where the substructure is then lowered holdback to control the rate of cable pay-out.
to the seabed and following this the topside is raised
clear of the water using an in-built jacking system. Dedicated cable laying vessels are generally based upon
vessels rather than barges. Export cables are loaded at
n Subsea base frame and floating jack-up topside the manufacturer’s premises in a single length of possibly
In this method a lattice base frame (substructure) is tens of kilometres, and taken direct to the offshore wind
pre-installed on the seabed and the buoyant/enclosed farm site. There is a strong likelihood that the export cable
topside is floated over and using in-built jack-up legs laying vessel may never actually visit any port in the area
is installed and raised clear of the water (used for the of the OWF site, unless they are using the port as a safe
BorWin Beta HVDC converter station, Germany). haven. They are therefore unlikely to represent the most
onerous vessel when assessing the port.
n Topside float-over installation
This approach has strong synergies with the O&G The following procedure is to install the export cables
industry in the Gulf of Mexico and the Middle East. from the shore landing point to the offshore wind farm:
A jacket substructure is pre-installed with two
up-stands. The heavy topside is then floated out by n The cable installation vessel arrives at a location close
barge. During high water the barge is located between to the shore landing point approaching the shore at
the two jacket up-stands, de-ballasted and the topside high water;
lowered and located into position. Following this the n The cable end is passed from the cable installation

topside is jacked-up clear of the water (used for SylWin vessel and connected to a tow wire from an onshore
Alpha HVDC convertor station, Germany). winch. The cable end is then floated off from the
vessel and towed towards the shore. When the cable
end reaches the beach it is pulled up to the cable
onshore jointing chamber;
n The cable end is then secured at the joint transition pit;

n The subsea cable plough is then deployed to the

seabed. The cable installation vessel slowly moves away


from the shore;
n The subsea cable plough is then launched from the

cable installation vessel and the simultaneous lay and


burial of the cable commences with the vessel moving
away from the shore;

Figure 82 - Dedicated cable laying vessel for export cable


installation

3.7.8 Subsea export and inter-array cables


installation

3.7.8.1 Subsea export cable installation


There are two potential methods by which the export
cables can be installed:

n Installing the cables from the wind farm to shore or


n Installing the cables from shore to the wind farm

Due to the lengths of cable involved, it is envisaged that


the cables would be installed using a subsea cable plough, Figure 83 - Subsea cable plough burying cable at the shore
which would bury the cables simultaneously with the
laying of the cable from the main cable installation vessel.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 79

n Figure 83 shows a cable plough burying cables at the


shore and being pulled towards the host barge, which
has been deliberately grounded on the beach before
re-floating at high tide and moving away to the wind
farm. The plough is simultaneously laying and burying
the subsea cable;
n The plough cuts a narrow trench in the seabed and
buries the cable to a target depth, typically around
1-2 m;
n With the cable installation vessel at its closest
acceptable position to the turbine or OSS where the
export cable is connected, the cable installation vessel Figure 85 - Cable transportation and installation
recovers the subsea cable plough onto the deck of the
cable installation vessel;
3.7.8.2 Inter-array cable installation
n With the plough recovered on deck, the cable is then
Inter-array cables (IACs) are often pre-cut and stored
released from the cable pathway in the plough and the
on individual cable drums, and then transported by a
cable end is then floated off from the vessel towards
standard cargo vessel to the marshalling port at such a
the foundation structure. A roller quadrant is often
delivery rate as to ensure that sufficient buffer stock is
suspended from the crane on the cable installation
continually maintained.
vessel during this cable handling operation to facilitate
safe and careful handling, as presented in Figure 84.
Alternatively, inter-array cables (IACs) can be delivered
straight onto the cable-laying vessel (which may be a
dumb barge) at the cable manufacturer’s delivery port
using a carousel.

Cable laying is either carried out by a dumb barge


fitted with a carousel (see Figure 85), or alternatively
by a standard DP offshore service vessel (OSV) fitted
with corresponding cable-laying gear (see Figure 86).
In this case cable laying gear includes a means of
handling individual IAC cable reels or a carousel
equipped with a cable pulling engine. The vessel is often
equipped with an A frame to deploy the cable plough or
jetting equipment.

Figure 84 - Cable installation adjacent to a wind turbine

n At the substation, the cable is connected to the end


of the messenger line exiting the J-tube’s bell-mouth.
The messenger line allows the cable to be pulled up the
J-tube;
n The cable is then pulled up the J-tube in a controlled

manner;
n When the cable reaches the cable termination point,

the pulling operation ceases and the cable is clamped in


Figure 86 - Inter-array cable laying using an offshore supply
place using a cable hang-off fitting; vessel
n This installation procedure would leave a section of

cable unburied from the point of subsea plough


recovery to the J-tube bell-mouth. This section of cable
is then buried at a later date.
80 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

the following procedure can be used to install the 3.8 Port infrastructure
inter-array cables:
3.8.1 Introduction
n A cable barge or a specialist cable installation vessel Sea ports exist across the world and to some degree
would be mobilised to the project site. The cables their facilities have become standardised. As an example,
will be supplied either on cable reels or as a continuous containers are standardised items and therefore container
length; ports for receiving and distributing this cargo will have
n The vessel transits to site and takes up station adjacent similarities across the globe. This section of the report
to a wind turbine structure. A cable end is then floated describes standard types of port infrastructure that can
off from the cable reel on the vessel towards the wind be found in ports surrounding India and describes their
turbine structure and connected to a pre-installed suitability and adaptability for offshore wind operations
messenger line in the J-tube; (see Sub-section 3.8.2). The section also introduces the
n The cable is then pulled up the J–tube in a controlled requirements for international port compliance
manner. When the cable reaches the cable termination (see Sub-section 3.8.3).
point, the pulling operation ceases and the cable joint is
then made; When specific facilities were assessed as part of the port
n The cable is laid away from the first J-tube towards the study (see Section 3.9) only the characteristics of the most
J-tube on the second wind turbine structure; capable berths were considered, but when projects reach
n If the cable is being buried simultaneously with the lay the detailed planning phase, each possible berth will need
of the cable, this would be achieved with the use of a to be included.
subsea cable plough. Alternatively, the cable would be
laid into a trench in the seabed and buried later using The physical requirements for offshore wind ports are
a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) which is purpose often more onerous than for more traditional cargo.
built for cable burial. Figure 87 presents the Global Wind turbine components are large structures, which
Marine ‘Eureka’ ROV, an example of this type of vehicle; impose significant bearing pressures on the ground
n When the cable installation vessel nears the J-tube surface and also require significant storage space at the
on the second wind turbine structure, the cable end port. The most common example of this is the ground
is taken from the reel, ready for pulling up the second bearing capacity in the storage area and at the quayside;
J tube; some of the down selected ports in Gujarat and Tamil
n The cable end is attached to the messenger line from Nadu will require soil strength improvements before they
the bell-mouth of the second J-tube. The pulling can fully support offshore wind project construction.
operation is repeated in the same manner as was
employed at the first J-tube; In areas where self-propelled modular transporters
n It is probable that a ‘lay loop’ of cable would be laid on (SPMTs) are to be used, a minimum bearing capacity of
the seabed close to the second J-tube to accommodate 10 tonne/m2 is recommended to allow storage and
the slack, or over-length allowance (as the final cable transportation of wind farm components. Also, to
end is released from the cable drum). support the lifting and/or movement of onshore cranes,
either in the storage area or at the quayside, additional
ground strength is likely required and will be determined
by the size of the load and specifications of the crane.

3.8.2 Categories of port infrastructure


There are several types of port facility which have evolved
to service and facilitate the various types of cargos and
operations required to be handled by different port
estates across the world. These different port
infrastructures can be categorised using an adopted
terminology which is presented in the IHS Fairplay
Figure 87 - Subsea remotely operated vehicle (ROV)
(formerly Lloyds) Port and Terminals Guide11.

In Sections 3.8.2.1 to 3.8.2.9 nine terms which IHS use to
describe berths and other key capabilities are presented
with brief explanations.

11
IHS Fairplay Port and Terminals Guide
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 81

3.8.2.1 Break bulk facilities components of the same size as project cargos, but there
Break bulk cargo or general cargo are goods that must are tens or hundreds of these components. Onshore and
be loaded individually, but they are not containerised offshore wind have therefore become major players in
or in loose bulk (like coal or iron ore). It usually takes the global project cargo logistics market.
the form of some type of cargo in protective packaging Project cargos tend to be transported onshore using
which may be a crate, a drum, a bag, or it may be on self-propelled modular transport units (SPMTs), which
a pallet. Facilities to handle this sort of cargo generally have individual axle loads which generally vary between
have rail-mounted or wheeled harbour cranes, which 15 and 40 tonne, and require 10 tonne/m2 bearing
vary in capacity from as little as 10 tonne to a the larger capacity. A general cargo berth with in excess of
capacities of the Gottwald Model 812 or Liebherr LHM600 10 tonne/m2 bearing capacity would be suitable for load
which have around 200 tonne capacity. Earlier this year out of offshore wind components. Additional SPMT units
Liebherr launched the LHM 800 which has a capacity of will spread the load and lessen individual axle loads, and
308 tonne, but harbour cranes are generally towards the likewise reduce the bearing capacity requirement, but
lower end of the lift capacity range quoted. at a cost premium. Although it is possible that this will
make a particular berth usable which would otherwise
appear to be of insufficient strength.

3.8.2.2 Container facilities


With the global markets greatly contracted from past
levels and still stagnating, there is significant over-
capacity in the container vessel marketplace.
For efficiencies of scale, there is an ever increasing
trend for larger and larger vessels to cut unit costs on
major cargo routes. The latest generation of super-sized
container vessels can accommodate around 20,000
twenty-foot container equivalent units (20,000 TEU).
They have a requirement for deep draft and so take the
premium berths in most port facilities, with berths in the
12 to16 m draft range being the norm.
The characteristic container unloading cranes tend to
run on heavily supported rails running along the edge
of the quay. This strength provided by this reinforced rail
area would be ideal for offshore wind, to allow SPMTs
Figure 88 - Harbour crane LIEBHERR LHM 80013 to operate close to the quayside edge, but potentially
also to allow crawler cranes to load and unload
components. But in both cases, civil structural evaluation
The quayside decks, and haul routes to and from work is required to ensure adequate capacity.
general cargo berths tend to be light-duty, and suitable
for conventional road haulage vehicles. Such vehicles Container berths also tend to have extended areas of
tend to have individual axle loads of 8.5 tonne for “high and heavy” paved storage just inboard of the
driving axles and 10-12 tonne for other axles, varying quayside. This would certainly be a great advantage
little worldwide. This type of berth therefore will almost as offshore wind can have high demand for lay-down
certainly be perfectly adequate for handling blades, but areas in the order of 10,000 to 100,000 m2, which is an
may well be unsuitable for the heavier loads which are unusual requirement for most other activities carried out
the norm for offshore wind farm components. in port estates.

There is a category “project cargos” described within Since the whole loading and unloading arrangement is
shipping and logistics which refers to the extra-large run as a highly efficient computer-controlled operation,
components. These are generally major items in there is no appetite to share the facility with other types
particular construction projects, hence the name. of cargo, so container berths are not likely to be used by
Typically, there are only one or two unique items of this the offshore wind industry where other suitable facilities
type per project. Offshore wind however tends to have are available.

12
Gottwald Model 8 - http://www.terex.com/port-solutions/en/
products/harbour-cranes/mobile-harbour-cranes/model-8/index.htm
13
Liebherr LHM 800 - http://www.liebherr.com/MCP/en-GB/
products_mcp.wfw/id-11603-0/measure-metric
82 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

It is unclear what the recent extended period of reduced


trade in this sector will do for port utilisation, but where
under utilised container facilities exists, there may be an
opportunity to use these facilities, but conditions will vary
on a case by case basis.

Source: Wikipedia

Figure 89 - Container port

3.8.2.3 Dry bulk facilities


Cargos like fertilisers and minerals tend to be loaded and Source: LD Ports & Logistics
unloaded by specialist equipment. This is generally based Figure 90 - Dry bulk facilities
on conveyor systems, pneumatic systems or the historic
grab-cranes. But they tend to carry out long-distance
transport with conveyor systems, taking the cargo
directly to and from warehousing. Foodstuffs like grain
are handled in a similar manner, but are stored in silos.

Coal and iron ore are very common in major Indian ports
(see Figure 90). They are stored in open bulk mounds
and because of the sheer areas which are often required;
these may be several hundred metres inshore from the
berth. Transport of this material is typically facilitated
using long conveyor belt systems which by their nature
give rise to low headroom clearances around the port
estate. Both coal and iron ore are dirty cargos and whilst
coal can be cleaned-off by a simple jet-wash, iron ore
tends to be magnetic, and adheres to the metal Source: Hindustan Shipyard
components of wind turbines. If precision machined
Figure 91 - Dry dock facilities
parts become impregnated with iron dust there is great
potential for damage. For this reason turbines are unlikely
to be unloaded or stored in areas where bulk coal or iron key facilities identified in the port selection study.
ore are handled. It is recommended to investigate the potential use of
floating dry docks which can be mobilised at harbour
The major issue with bulk cargo facilities is that the facilities that have the capacity to accommodate GBS
conveyors effectively act as a barrier to the transit of production.
“high and heavy” cargos (and most wind turbine
components are in this category). Ports tend to put the 3.8.2.5 Liquid facilities
conveyor systems to one side of their port estate to Liquid cargos are offloaded and transported by pipelines
minimise the impact of the headroom restriction. for several hundreds of metres and stored in large
clusters of storage tanks often referred to as tank farms.
3.8.2.4 Dry-dock facilities
In most cases the presence of dry dock facilities for In the same way as the conveyor systems for bulk cargo
repairing ships is largely irrelevant for offshore wind handling, these pipe line systems tend to form an
farms. However, there is an opportunity to cast gravity effective barrier to wind farm components. Again ports
based structures (GBS) in a dry-dock and then flood the tend to put their liquid cargo berth at one extremity of
dock to launch the structures. The launch can either their site or another, and ports handling both types of
involve a float-away method if they are buoyant or to cargo therefore become bounded by liquid facilities on
allow access to a heavy lift vessel if they are not. In Tamil one side and bulk on the other.
Nadu the rock seabed may make the consideration of
GBSs more attractive, so dry docks may be worthy of
consideration, however no dry docks existed within the
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 83

3.8.2.6 LPG facilities


It is of no great significance to offshore wind whether
LPG facilities exist, but in the same way as liquid facilities
these imply restricted access due to pipework.
It is noteworthy that some pipework may be mounted
above ground and some buried, but in either case can be
an obstruction (see Figure 92). Pipes above ground have
limited headroom passage beneath them. Buried pipes
may well limit the axle loads which can pass over them.

Figure 93 - 180 tonne RoRo linkspan

The 180 tonne RoRo ramp at Larne in Northern Ireland


(see Figure 93) has allowed the port estate to be used as
a marshalling port for turbine blades manufactured at
a facility in Scotland. The ferry shown in Figure 93 was
used to transport the blades. As stated some facilities
may have concrete ramps which can be used to allow
the delivery and load-out of large components, see
Source: TheHindu Figure 94.
Figure 92 - LPG facilities

3.8.2.7 RoRo facilities


“Roll-on and Roll-off” (RoRo) has significant implications
with regard to vessel, port infrastructure, and mechanical
plant selection. RoRo is most commonly associated with
passenger car ferries, where both commercial vehicles
and private cars are loaded and unloaded onto the vessel
by driving on and off ramps using a customised port
access device called a link-span.

Many onshore wind farm components can be


transported using RoRo vessels, however, large offshore
components are unlikely to be transported using ferries,
as their components are generally larger than even
Figure 94 - Concrete ramp, used for RoRo load-outs
the largest freight transport for which the ferries and
link-spans are designed; they are also too large to be
road-hauled via infrastructure designed for similarly-sized 3.8.2.8 Passenger facilities
vehicles. However, this methodology is applicable to Passenger facilities are of relevance for several reasons,
loading and unloading components which may be firstly, the services are generally run on a scheduled
transported by barge, and some cargo vessels have decks timetable and port authorities will generally prioritise the
which can be used for RoRo cargos. departure and arrival of these services above commercial
construction traffic. It is unlikely that this will be of great
While some ports may not have permanent RoRo berths, impact but on occasions delays may be experienced
it is possible to accommodate this facility by using a waiting for a ferry and this could lead to an operation
mobile RoRo ramp. This is a highly specialised piece of missing a tide for example.
equipment, as it enables extension of a port’s capability
beyond that of its fixed infrastructure. The fact that large numbers of passengers need to travel
through the port means that the road and rail access to
There are some general cargo vessels and heavy-lift cargo the port is likely to be good. This may be of relevance
vessels which have aft and/or bow ramps designed for to the operation and maintenance aspects of the work
RoRo cargos. Some vessels are designed with reinforced as a large number of technicians need to travel to and
decks, and will only accommodate the RoRo cargos as from the O&M facility daily and good transport links can
deck loads, while others have more elaborate facilitate this, particularly if the O&M facility is located
arrangements for accommodating the cargo below deck. adjacent to the passenger terminal.
84 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.8.2.9 Multipurpose facilities n possible installation strategies (in turn defining likely
By their very nature multipurpose berths are more n vessel specifications (used to define minimum port
complex to assess, and if they are considered, would requirements to facilitate operations)
n standard port infrastructure specifications and
require individual assessment. Some berths have both
liquid and general cargo facilities, and some are used suitability for offshore wind
for handling bulk and project cargos as well.
This desk-based screening study has utilised the above
Multipurpose vessel is another name given to vessels like preparation phase information to consider the suitability
heavy lift cargo vessels. They are generally more suited of ports in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu to supply the
to project cargo handling than the lighter duty general potential Indian offshore wind project demands for
cargos and break bulk cargos. There is an expectation construction operations. This screening process (see
that “high and heavy” cargos will use these berths, Section 3.9.2) was developed further during the more
and haul routes will be specified to allow for the axle detailed port readiness assessment (see Sections 3.9.3
loadings associated with SPMTs rather than conventional and 3.9.4) which included site visits to promising ports.
road haulage.
In terms of maritime limitations, some technical
3.8.3 International port compliance requirements stem from the physical dimensions of the
vessels used for either the construction phase or for
3.8.3.1 ISPS Compliant transportation (as logistical elements of the supply chain,
The IMO International Ship and Port Facility Security code described in Section 2); in these contexts the following
ensures that cargos can be transported internationally items need to be considered:
n vessel beam
and since at the present time there is no Indian offshore
n laden and un-laden draft (water depth required by
turbine manufacturer there is a strong possibility that
there will be a requirement for importation, which will the vessel should also include an additional amount for
require an ISPS compliant port. safety, and changes in level, and silting up)
n their overall length (to a lesser extent)

n overhead clearance (sometime referred to as air-draft)


3.8.3.2 CSI Compliant
Based on the same logic as ISPS Compliance, since
turbine wear components and spares are likely to be Other hard technical limits result from the dimensions
transported by containers, it would be advantageous if and mass of wind farm components, at the various
the port where O&M facilities are located has Container stages of assembly at which they are transported
Security Initiative (CSI) compliance. This will allow delivery between manufacturing and construction facilities
of spares from the WTG manufacturer directly to the (pre-staging ports), where the following factors need to
O&M facility port. be considered:
n physical size range of components, for each project to

be supported from each port


n length, breadth, and height required – not only of the
3.9 Offshore wind port study
component itself, but of the area surrounding it in any
storage areas to allow access for the lifting and other
3.9.1 Introduction
mechanical handling plant required to move it; and
This section presents the final stage of the Port
n numbers of components that will likely require storage
Infrastructure and Logistics assessment, namely the port
during conventional project programs
screening phase. The methodology presented in
Section 3.3 has been followed, with Sections 3.4 to 3.8
For the construction pre-screening, a comparison is
presenting the research findings from the preparation
therefore made between the port requirements and its
phase. These sections provide the baseline inputs for this
published capabilities, to establish whether it is suitable
port study and DNV GL’s proprietary in-house software
to accommodate each combination of wind turbine,
tools have supported the process.
foundation and construction strategy.
The preparation phase has defined and/or investigated
Information is readily available from international
the following:
references for these desk based studies, for example the
n the envelope of project specifications for Gujarat and
IHS Fairplay Maritime Ports and Terminals Guide14.
Tamil Nadu (e.g. turbine power rating and project MW)
The 2015/6 edition was used during the early screening
n the range of components that are likely to be handled
of suitable ports.
and stored (physical dimensions and mass – used to
define minimum storage requirements in the port)
14
IHS Fairplay Maritime Ports and Terminals Guide
https://www.ihs.com/products/maritime-ports-terminals-cd.html
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 85

Once ports have been pre-screened (see Section 3.9.2,


port screening), visits were arranged to confirm that
there are no other previously unforeseen circumstances
which may mean that the port is, or is not suitable
(see Section 3.9.3, port readiness assessment).
A key consideration is the port development plans; as
offshore wind farms are long-lead time projects and ports
rarely stay exactly the same for long periods.
The opportunities and challenges associated with
Source: Mlm
proposed modifications must therefore be factored into
any suitability assessment. Figure 95 - Nacelle storage at port

Section 3.9.5 provides a high-level screening of possible timbers are 30 cm by 30 cm and can distribute load
O&M ports, based on those identified in the FOWIND nearly uniformly over their area.
Pre-feasibility reports.
It is also assumed that blades are stored in stacks of three
3.9.2 Construction port screening and the frames are supported by 4 m long blocks at
The Ports Screening Process involves the comparison of both ends. In deck strength requirement calculations, for
two sets of data, (1) the requirements which the project nacelles, it is assumed that similar transport frames with
components, vessels and installation strategies place four columns would support the structure and would rest
upon the port; and (2) the physical dimensions and on timbers the length of half of the nacelle.
characteristics of the port to meet the demand. This is
assessed in a quantified and systematic approach in order The transition pieces are assumed to rest on a frame,
to assess the supply and demand of port infrastructure. which rests on four columns, the mass distributed over
This involves establishing: two pieces of baulk timber as long as the diameter of the
n the port infrastructure characteristics required by each transition piece. The monopile foundations are assumed
combination of turbine model/foundation type/ to be stored on ten columns at five points along the
construction strategy foundation, each column resting on a 4 m long piece of
n the port infrastructure capacity of the most capable baulk timber. It has often been found to be cheaper to
berth within each of the various ports within support monopiles on multiple parallel bunds (see Figure
reasonable geographic proximity of the development 96), but this approach may not be suitable for all ports.
Source: www.mlm.uk.com
zone SPMTs can then drive between the bunds and lift the
monopiles as required.
Lastly a comparison of the two is made to establish
which ports are suitable to facilitate which types of
installation strategies, without any requirement for port
redevelopment. Further studies could then establish a
cost gap-analysis to evaluate how much it would cost to
bring any given port’s facilities up to the requirements
of any particular approach to transport and installation
(T&I), and this would allow a project level cost-benefit
analysis to be based upon the value of the identified
capital expenditure.
Figure 96 - Monopile storage on bunds, of the same height
3.9.2.1 Key assumptions as an SPMT
It is assumed that components will be raised off the
ground during storage, as shown in Figure 95. This Lastly, the jacket foundations are assumed to be stored
enables self-propelled modular transport (SPMTs) to upright or on their sides, at the manufacturer’s premises,
manoeuvre underneath, jack-up to take the mass of the and each of the four contact points resting on 12 m2
component, and transit to the quayside for load-out. load spreading mats. It should be noted, however, that
A sufficient gap must therefore be left for the SPMT it is not recommended for the jackets to be stored at
beneath the component. The typical method to achieve the staging port, but loaded immediately onto a barge
this is to use transport frames with metal columns to from the manufacturing port and kept there until ready
raise the component off the ground and baulk timbers for installation. Jacket foundations are particularly fragile
to distribute the load to the ground. In deck strength and this method avoids multiple handling and potential
requirement calculations, it has been assumed that baulk damage.
86 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.9.2.2 Screening ports in Gujarat The five selected facilities of interest are as follows:
The State of Gujarat has over 1,600 km of coastline
(the longest in India) and a significant number of n The Adani port facility has potential to be used as
developed and protected harbours. In the FOWIND wind turbine marshalling facility during construction
Gujarat Pre-feasibility study report a total of 38 ports n Larsen and Toubro’s fabrication facility in Hazira
have been identified in the Gujarat region (see Figure 97). would be a possible fabrication site for several types
of offshore wind foundations and possibly substation
topsides
n The Port of Pipavav has facilities to accommodate

foundations and potentially turbines if suitable coal


dust insulation is used
n Bhavangar has a narrow lock-gate on the approach

channel so is unsuitable for installation vessels. There


is however a well-developed limestone handling facility,
could be utilised as a base of scour protection
marshalling during construction and O&M phases
n Port Okha, the nearest port to development zones

G and H, however would require substantial


infrastructure development before being suitable to
support offshore wind developments

Figure 97 - Ports in Gujarat It should be noted that in Gujarat in particular there is a


Please see Appendix A for a larger map.
tendency to have ports with offshore deep-water
anchorages, and to bring cargos ashore using barges or
Out of the total 38 in the Gujarat region, a selection lighters. This sort of technique is usually used in shipping
of ports have been initially screened and considered for break bulk and general cargos and for small volume
potentially suitable for construction activities. The ports bulk transport, but in general it is not considered
of Bhogat, Chhara, Mahuva and Vansi Borsi are proposed appropriate for project cargos.
under development and, hence have not been selected
at this stage for further analysis. In addition, the ports In the present study, whilst it is acknowledged that it
at Diu and Alang have not been selected since they are may be technically possible to handle offshore wind
small ports mainly involved in fishing activities and would components by offloading them from a heavy lift cargo
incur significant capital investment costs. vessel onto feeder barges for example, it was not
considered that this was an optimal construction strategy,
Out of the remaining ports, five have been identified and so the ports assessment is based upon the larger
(see Figure 98) with some potential and taken forward vessels being able to come alongside a berth in the port
for further investigation in the ports readiness assessment facility. If the assessment were based on a “mother and
in section 3.9.3. daughter lightering” arrangement, and feeder vessels,
some of the ports with low water depths but deep water
offshore anchorages might be considered suitable.
This approach would have to be revisited when specific
offshore wind farm sites are under development.

The development zones identified during the


Pre-feasibility study are mostly concentrated around the
Gulf of Khambhat that is within the eastern part of
Gujarat. The Gulf of Khambhat is known to have very
strong currents, with up to six knots having been noted.
High currents can lead to large-scale scouring, additional
hydrodynamic loading and significant installation and
O&M challenges. Existing fixed facilities in the Gulf of
Source: Google Earth
Khambhat can be seen to have very extensive scour
Figure 98 - Offshore potential ports in Gujarat protection features around their bases (see Figure 99).
Please see Appendix A for a larger map.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 87

3.9.2.3 Screening ports in Tamil Nadu


In Tamil Nadu, three major and 22 minor ports have been
identified during the Pre-feasibility study (see Figure 101).
The potential and suitability of the three major ports for
construction is discussed in the following sections.

The development zones identified during the


Pre-feasibility study are mostly concentrated around the
Gulf of Mannar.

There are three facilities which are of interest in the


present construction port study:
Figure 99 - Structure in the river showing heavy scour protection
n Kattapalli - the deep water port of Ennore is provided
with a dedicated terminal for handling coal, general
It is also significantly more difficult to conduct offshore and liquid cargo and a vast hinterland. Closest
installation operations in these conditions. Recently, in development zone is H, which is approximately
northern Europe projects, significant work has been 310 km.
conducted to demonstrate the operational capabilities n Chennai - the deep water port of Chennai is provided

of various jack-up and dynamically positioned vessels in with a dedicated terminal for oil, iron ore and general
such conditions. This work has been largely driven by the cargo and 24 hour 7 day operations, and a passenger
embryonic tidal energy industry in the UK and its terminal. Closest development zone is H, which is
requirement to install tidal stream generators in these approximately 290 km.
harsh tidal conditions. GeoSea recently conducted an n Tuticorin - the port of Tuticorin is provided with an

extreme current trial in Raz Blanchard, France where the oil & coal handling jetty and 24 hour 7 day operations,
jack-up Goliath was successfully stationed in 10 knot general, break-bulk, container and bulk cargo handling
(5 m/s) in 56 m of water, see Figure 100. This expertise facilities, dry and liquid cargo storage facilities and
and the lessons learnt could well be leveraged to great a passenger terminal. Closest development zone is A,
advantage during marine operations planning for which is approximately 20 km.
installations in the Gulf of Khambhat.

Source: Maritimejournal

Figure 100 - Jack-up ‘Goliath’ in strong current in the


Raz Blanchard

Figure 101 - Ports in Tamil Nadu


Please see Appendix A for a larger map.
88 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Source: Google Earth


Pipavav
No beam limit
Figure 102 - Offshore potential ports in Tamil Nadu
Please see Appendix A for a larger map.

Figure 103 - Vessel port access requirement chart for vessels


3.9.3 Port readiness assessment - Gujarat accessing ports in Gujarat
This section develops the screening process further into a
more detailed construction port readiness assessment for
Gujarat. The assessment includes: If the vessel is ABOVE the lower limit of the line but
n considerations of vessel access requirements BELOW the upper limit, the vessel can only operate at
(Section 3.9.3.1) that port partially laden or tidally restricted.
n an appraisal of the suitability of specific ports for

offshore wind (Sections 3.9.3.2 to 3.9.3.6) It can be seen that Bhavnagar is unsuitable for any
n reports key findings from the port estate visits vessel to pass through its narrow access channel, but
in Gujarat (Sections 3.9.3.2 to 3.9.3.6) that all vessels can operate at Hazira and Pipavav, and
most vessels can operate at Port Okha fully laden at most
3.9.3.1 Installation vessel port access requirement states of the tide, but HLCVs and OSV can only operate
chart - Gujarat partially laden or tidally restricted. A further restriction
The vessel port access requirements which represent the at Port Okha is that the quayside deck strength is
most common ones used in offshore wind installation currently unsuitable for heavy project cargo traffic, and
were described in Section 3.6.11. port infrastructure development would be needed before
the facility could be used. Alternatively construction
The minimum width of vessel which can access each port work could be carried out using floating storage vessels
and the depth at high and low tides are plotted versus moored alongside existing quays but this flexibility would
the four ports (note L&T shipyard Hazira considered come at a cost premium.
mainly for manufacturing purposes only) with the most
potential for offshore wind construction in Gujarat, see 3.9.3.2 Adani container port at Hazira
Figure 103. Adani Hazira port is a privately owned container port
located on the west side of the Hazira peninsula. An
If the vessel is to the LEFT and BELOW the entire line entrance channel connects the port with the deep water
associated with a particular port then it is both: of the Sutherland Channel. Allowing for the arrival and
n narrow enough to fit into the port’s tightest marine departure of ships up to a draft of 13 m. Development
access requirement, and zones D and F are approximately 13 km away from the
n it’s fully laden draft is less than the water depth at any port. The layout and aerial view of the port can be seen
state of the tide, meaning that the vessel can operate in Figure 104 and Figure 105 respectively.
at that port at any state of the tide, and whether it is
un-laden or fully loaded The straight approach channel has a clear width of
700 m at the seaward side tapering off to a width of
If the port is to the LEFT of the vessel, the port is not 470 m between the breakwaters at the harbour
wide enough to allow the vessel access. entrance, to allow unobstructed and easy passage of
ships.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 89

Adani container port


(key parameters)
Parameter
Draft 13 m

Harbour entrance width 470 m

Turning radius 300 m

Berth 1 - MP1, overall length (LOA)/beam 300 m/36 m


Berth 2 - MP2, overall length (LOA/beam) 300 m/36 m
Berth 3 - MP3, overall length (LOA/beam) 300 m/64 m
Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide
Berth 4 - CB1, overall length (LOA/beam) 300 m/64 m
Figure 104 - Hazira - Adani container port terminal Berth 5 - CB2, overall length (LOA/beam) 300 m/64 m

- steel yard
- liquid terminal
Infrastructure - covered storage
- open storage
- containers

Table 26 - Adani container port key parameters

Available facilities

Parameter
Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities x

Container facilities √ Passenger facilities x

Dry bulk facilities √ Multipurpose facilities √

Dry-dock facilities x ISPS compliant √


Source: Google Earth
Liquid facilities √ CSI compliant √
Figure 105 - Adani container port terminal

LPG facilities x LNG facilities √


There are proposals to deepen the channel and turning
circle to accommodate capesize vessels in due course. Table 27 - Port facilities available at Adani Container Port Hazira
The breakwaters provide protection for the berth from
the SW monsoon waves and swells and for the currents
parallel to the coastline. The port contains a turning basin 3.9.3.2.1 Specific berths of interest in Adani
with a radius of 300 m for manoeuvring tug-assisted container port terminal
ships during berthing and realignment before setting out Existing port facilities consist of two piled quaysides with
to sea. rail-mounted container cranes along both quaysides
(see Figure 106). The northern quay is over 600 m in
Ongoing development plans include establishing a length and according to the IHS guide is designed for a
rail-connection to join the main rail system around Surat. permissible draft of 13 m, with a turning circle of 600 m
Development plans are currently flexible enough to diameter.
include the capability to handle general and project
cargos along reinforced haul routes within the decking It has a concrete decked area of approximately 250 m
on the northerly container berths. The southerly quay width along the entire length which is mainly used for
provides good shelter to the harbour. container storage. However some parts are narrower as a
result of the location of the office complex, meaning that
a theoretical 150,000 m2 “high and heavy” storage area
capacity would be reduced to approximately 100,000 m2.
90 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Source: Adani Ports

Figure 106 - Adani container port mobile harbour cruise

A heavily piled central area under the northern quay With suitable offshore wind development density in
means that the port can be considered suitable for Gujarat and given the size of the port it is also possible,
handling heavy project cargos using self-propelled subject to availability, that manufacturers might give
modular transporters (SPMTs). The quay has a high consideration to locating their operations here to serve
freeboard, so all loading and unloading would have to the wider Gujarat offshore wind zones. However the lack
be by crane, and RoRo options would require substantial of available development land at the site could be a
ingenuity. factor in any such decision.

The southern quay is of approximately 950 m in length During the construction phase, the port is suitable as a
and is adequately wide to accommodate the container wind turbine marshalling facility, and could also
cranes and transport tractors and trailers, but little else. accommodate foundation marshalling of monopiles and
There is no storage adjacent to the quay. transition pieces as well as jackets and pin-piles.

A major issue regarding access is the tidal streams, which The water depths at this port are deep enough for
have a north – south direction but can be five to six knots conventional or heavy-lift cargo vessels to bring in
according to the IHS guide. The port of Magdalla slightly offshore wind turbines for marshalling. If cabling were
upstream on the river to Surat and Hazira port entrance supplied pre-cut and transported upon individual cable
has a tidal range of 6.5 m15. reels, the port could easily cater for the cargo vessels
which would most likely transport these, and their
There is the Hazira bird sanctuary limiting the northern loading, off-loading and storage, as well as any offshore
development of the port estate, although some potential supply vessels which might be used to install them.
for reclamation appears to exist to the east.
Close proximity to a coal-fired thermal power station These berths would be suitable to receive monopiles,
would potentially make offshore areas suitable for grid transition pieces or jacket pin-piles for marshalling,
connection. delivered by similar vessels, but great care would be
needed in planning the haul route to any monopile and
3.9.3.2.2 Suitability of Adani terminal to support transition piece storage areas, as only a central corridor
offshore wind development in Gujarat of the northern quayside is heavily reinforced for project
As identified in the FOWIND Gujarat Pre-feasibility study cargo transportation using SPMTs. Bringing barges
report444, Adani’s geographic location means that it is alongside with any of the above components aboard
well positioned to support the offshore wind would require careful consideration of fendering and
development zones D and F on the northern and eastern where necessary, loading & unloading arrangements,
areas of the Gulf of Kumbat. And will also be worthy of as the freeboard of the quay is far higher than the
consideration as an O&M base for these two zones. deck-level of even large barges.

15
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port of Magdalla#Tidal information
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 91

Its geographic location means that the project offices,


marine operations management and PPE & general
storage facilities could be accommodated within the
security fenced facility.

The quayside deck strength is unsuitable to allow the


unloading of substation topsides, but the sheltered
waters within the breakwater would provide safe haven
for substation components on barges waiting on
weather, and indeed any other vessels involved in the
construction of wind farms during times of inclement
weather.

The Port of Hazira is most suited as a marshalling port;


however it would not be impossible to establish a blade
manufacturing facility here. Though this would require
usage of a considerable proportion of the currently Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide

available storage space within the port estate.


Figure 108 - Larsen & Toubro fabrication facility - Hazira

Source: Adani Ports Source: Google Earth

Figure 107 - Adani container berths with cranes Figure 109 - Larsen & Toubro port and fabrication facility Hazira

3.9.3.3 Port at Hazira The site consists of a modular fabrication facility (MFF),
When considering ports for offshore wind farms it is heavy engineering & shipbuilding and power equipment
always necessary to consider the location of potential manufacturing facilities. The factory buildings cover over
fabrication facilities, especially when located at sites 34,500 m2 and the site has a heavy-duty load-out quay
which may negate the need for a marshalling facility. on the banks of the river Tapi, approximately 16 km from
Surat, Gujarat. High and heavy haul routes to suitable
Larsen & Toubro’s (L&T) are an extremely large privately storage areas are available for any foundation
owned construction group in India and they have a components, should they be fabricated here.
fabrication facility at Hazira. The facilities consist of a Overall their site extends to over two million square
boiler and pressure-vessel manufacturer, with high-quality metres. The layout and aerial view of the port can be
fabrication facilities for oil and gas, power and the seen in Figure 108 and Figure 109 respectively.
nuclear industries. Development zones D and F are
approximately 20 km away from the port.
92 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

L&T Port at Hazira16


n heat treatment furnaces (for jobs up to 50 m long)
(key parameters) and quenching facilities, advanced welding equipment,
Parameter positioners and power sources
Draft 4m n hydro test beds with capacity of 60 Mt/m , testing
2
Side launch facility 160 m facilities
Water depth 5.5 m minimum n ISO 17025:2005 NABL approved testing Lab
Vessel deadweight (DWT) 20,000 tonnes n heavy thick radiography, PAUT (Phased Array Ultrasonic

Testing), TOFD (Time-of-Flight Diffraction) capabilities


Shipyard located within a large
scale heavy manufacturing facility. In addition, the facility has one of the world’s largest
Shipyard equipped: forging facilities, large scale material handling
Infrastructure - plate stockyard capabilities, a roll-on-roll-off slipway, and a shipbuilding
- automatic blasting and priming line facility for modern vessels. It has all of the facilities and
- plasma cutting machines the capability to fabricate monopiles and transition
- marine coating shops pieces.
- pipe shops

Table 28 - L&T port at Hazira key parameters


The port has previous experience of manufacturing oil
and gas topsides up to 2,000 tonne, which are directly
analogous to offshore wind farm substation topsides,
Available facilities and this capability with heavy tubular offshore structures
Parameter
would allow production of jackets.
RoRo facilities (heavy
Break bulk facilities √ √
project cargos) The facility has a heavy-duty load-out facility, but is
heavily restricted by tides, with the IHS Guide quoting the
Container facilities x Passenger facilities x channel depth as 3 m with some drying areas in the river
at low water. With a tidal range approaching 7 m, large
Dry bulk facilities x Multipurpose facilities √ vessels can be berthed alongside, if they are suitable
for bottoming, as can be seen in Figure 110, with the
Dry-dock facilities x ISPS compliant x Roll Dock heavy lift cargo vessel alongside (which was
fabricated at the site). However only low-draft vessels
Liquid facilities x CSI compliant x can approach all areas, even at high tide.

LPG facilities x LNG facilities x

Table 29 - Port facilities available at L&T Hazira

3.9.3.3.1 Specific berths of interest at L&H


Hazira site
The Larsen and Toubro (L&T) fabrication facility caters Source: L&T
for critical and large sized equipment for process plant,
Figure 110 - L&T Hazira site
nuclear and defence sectors. It is equipped with:

n heavy thick rolling machines of 3,050 Mt capacity A major issue regarding access is the tidal streams, which
(maximum plate dimensions for hot rolling 4,500 mm have a north–south direction but can be 5 to 6 knots
width X 225 mm thick, which are much thicker than according to the IHS guide. However, this high tidal
even the heaviest-walled monopiles) range allows larger vessels to be brought in at high tide
n CNC flame/plasma cutting machines (up to 450 mm and bottomed out on the soft-silty riverbed alongside
thick alloy steel plates) the heavy duty ‘V’ shaped load-out quay. There is also
n floor mounted horizontal boring machines (12.5 m RoRo capacity to allow the transport of several thousand
horizontal and 5 m vertical traverse horizontal/vertical tonne modules using self-propelled modular transporters
deep hole drilling machine with maximum drill depth (SPMTs). This may not prove overly restrictive if
up to 1,200 mm) transportation of bunged-monopiles is considered, as
these do not require a high draft, and could be loaded
16
L&T Hazira out and towed for a high proportion of most tidal cycles.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 93

Source: L&T

Figure 111 - L&T Hazira manufacturing complex

Being boiler and pressure vessel manufacturers they have given consideration as a base for O&M activities.
the capacity to roll tubular heavy walled structures from Likewise even if manufacturing of components were to
steel plate. This ability to roll thick plates is similar to take place at the site, whilst it may be appropriate to
the requirements for the fabrication of offshore wind locate the construction offices at the site, any Marine
monopiles. In the past the facility has fabricated tubulars Coordination and crew transfer and storage facilities
of up to 1,000 tonne and 100 m in length. would most likely be located at a port facility directly on
The facility has capacity to deliver extremely high quality the coast of the Gulf of Khumbat.
tubular structures.
3.9.3.4 Bhavnagar
Whilst current order books cannot be taken as an Bhavnagar port is situated in Saurashtra region of
indication of future activity, it is noteworthy that the Gujarat. Bhavnagar is managed by the Gujarat maritime
facility is engaged in the fabrication of naval vessels, board. It is an all-weather direct berthing port for smaller
therefore there is very low utilisation of their heavy rolling vessels. It is located in the Gulf of Khumbat.
and welding capacity. The facility clearly has a policy to Development zone F as identified in the FOWIND
accommodate fluctuating order books by having a Pre-feasibility study report4 is approximately 35 km away
diverse portfolio of capabilities, which bodes well for from the port. The layout and aerial view of the port can
their capacity and interest in accommodating the be seen in Figure 112 and Figure 113 respectively.
requirements of new industries like offshore wind energy.
Bhavnagar Port
3.9.3.3.2 Suitability of L&T terminal to support (key parameters)
offshore wind development in Gujarat Draft
Parameter
4 m (lock gate)
L&T’s facility has great potential as a monopile or jacket Mean high water springs (MHWS) 12 m
foundation and offshore substation topside fabrication, Mean low water springs (MLWS) 8.3 m
and storage facility. The closest development zones to Mean sea level (MSL) 3m
the site is zone D and F as identified in the FOWIND Concrete jetty Length 270 m, width 12.8 m
Pre-feasibility report, but the savings associated with the Vessel restrictions Length 144 m, width 20 m
possibility of avoiding the need for a marshalling port
may well mean that it is competitive for a wide range of - rock phosphate
the proposed Gujarat development zones. - coal
Commodities handled - fertiliser
It is unsuitable for marshalling turbines, as the water - iron scrap
depths are too low for conventional heavy lift cargo - sulphur
vessels and in general, all cargo handling must best be - wood and timber
accommodated by barges.
Table 30 - Bhavnagar port key parameters
The port is further upstream than Hazira, and with the Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide and GMB ports
strong currents in this area, it is therefore unlikely to be
4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
94 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.9.3.4.1 Specific facilities of interest at Bhavnagar


Available facilities The port has a narrow lock gate on the approach
Parameter channel of 19.8 m width, which also has a low air draft
Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities x as can be seen from Figure 112 and Figure 114.

Container facilities x Passenger facilities x Bhavnagar’s current major cargo is crushed limestone for
use in the salt-producing areas in the hinterland of the
Dry bulk facilities √ Multipurpose facilities x port.

Dry-dock facilities √ ISPS compliant x The port has a dry dock for repair of tugs, launches and
barges. The port has two workshops. The general
Liquid facilities x CSI compliant x workshop is used to carry out repairs on flotilla units and
mechanical instruments. The running workshop is used
LPG facilities x LNG facilities x for the day-to-day repairs and maintenance
requirements. Recently, the port has been connected
Table 31 - Port facilities available at Bhavnagar with a broad gauge railway line.
Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide

Source: Beckett rankine marine consulting engineers

Figure 114 - Bhavangar Port - lifting gate lowered into


position at high tide

Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide

Figure 112 - The port of Bhavnagar and approach channel

Source: GMB ports website

Figure 115 - Bhavangar Port - lifting gate

3.9.3.4.2 Suitability of Bhavnagar to support


offshore wind development in Gujarat
Due to its location and facilities it is unlikely that
Bhavnagar will be able to perform any significant role in
offshore wind development

However, due to its existing infrastructure associated with


Source: Google Earth limestone handling. It could perhaps be utilised as a base
for scour protection marshalling during the construction
Figure 113 - The port of Bhavnagar and approach channel and O&M phases. The handling of bulk rock armour is
quite damaging to quaysides, and many ports will be
reluctant to use their facilities in this role, and this may
well make utilising these existing facilities more attractive.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 95

3.9.3.5 Pipavav
Pipavav Port
Pipavav is privately owned by APM terminals and is the (key parameters)
largest port on the west side of the Gulf of Khumbat. Parameter
The port is an all-weather port. The port’s location in Draft 14.5 m
the state of Gujarat provides immediate access to key Mean high water springs (MHWS) 3.92 m
markets in northwest India. With a total land area of Low low water springs (LLWS) -0.01 m
631 hectares, there is plenty of land available for Mean sea level (MSL) 1.76 m
expansion of port-related services and businesses. Currents Between 2.5-3 knots (peak tidal)
Development zones A, B and C as identified in the Quay length 735 m
FOWIND Gujarat Pre-feasibility report are approximately
23 km, 27 km and 13 km respectively from the port. - container facilities (850k TUEs)
- storage facilities (container
The port is along the major trade routes and is close to freight station 7600 m2)
the major Indian port of Nhava Sheva (300 km away). Cargo facilities - bulk cargo (quay length 690 m,
It has been dredged to 14.5 m draft. There are eight 3 berth)
quay cranes for containers and two mobile harbour - storage facilities (coal yard
cranes for handling bulk cargo. The layout and aerial 100k m2)
view of the port can be seen in Figure 116 and Figure - liquid cargo (2 million Mt)
117 respectively. Table 32 - Pipavav port key parameters

Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide 2015 & APM terminals

Available facilities

Parameter
Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities x

Container facilities √ Passenger facilities x

Dry bulk facilities √ Multipurpose facilities √

Dry-dock facilities √ ISPS compliant √


Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide 2015

Figure 116 - Port facilities at Pipavav Liquid facilities √ CSI compliant x

LPG facilities √ LNG facilities x

Table 33 - Port facilities available at Pipavav

Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide 2015

3.9.3.5.1 Specific berths of interest in Pipavav


The south-western flank of the main quayside area is
engaged in bulk coal handling, with a conveyor and
coal storage areas. This effectively forms a barrier to any
offshore wind activities beyond the conveyor system.
Source: Google Earth
Foundation storage and handling is generally
Figure 117 - Port facilities at Pipavav compatible with dirty bulk handling and storage
facilities of this type, but turbine marshalling will not be
ideal anywhere in close proximity to this area. Cleaner
facilities would be required away from the bulk handling
areas.
96 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Also the deck strength may not currently have the full
capacity to allow SPMT transportation of project cargos.
So an investigation would be required to cost whether
the usage of additional axles, to reduce the ground
bearing strength requirement, or additional deck
strengthening work would be the most economic
remedial method.
Source: Google Earth

Figure 118 - Pipavav port facilities The port handles deep water bulk carriers, and has
adequate water depth at all of its main quays for all
types of vessels currently in use within the offshore wind
In the north eastern areas of the port estate there is a industry. To the south-west of the main port facility is an
tank-farm for bulk liquid storage. Along the north oil and gas industry repair and fabrication yard (Pipavav
eastern edge of the facility there are pipes which are defence and Offshore engineering company limited).
used to transport liquid cargos from the northern quay Several oil rigs were seen undergoing modification and
to the tank farm. This effectively forms a barrier along repairs.
the other edge of the port facility to offshore wind farm
activities, in the same way as the coal conveyor system
forms a barrier along the other side of the port estate.

There is no heavy cranage available in the port and it


would be necessary to bring in equipment by sea, but
this is generally the case with general purpose and
container facilities. The majority of vessels used in the
offshore wind industry for handling project cargos are Source: APM Terminals
equipped with their own cranage. Figure 119 - Pipavav port - APM terminals

The facility is engaged in drawing-up development


plans and this would involve additional general purpose
quaysides near the liquid cargo quayside and extending
the piled-quays past where the existing liquid terminal is
located. This would require the relocation of the liquid
cargo quay to the most northerly quay which is planned
after redevelopment. There is no concrete timeline for
these developments, but if early engagements are made
Source: APM Terminals
with the Port Management, facilities ideally suited to
offshore wind farm development could easily be Figure 120 - Vessel berthed in Pipavav
incorporated into these development designs.
These might include quaysides suitable for project cargo Using Google Earth to look at images of the port facility,
haulage to the quay-edge, with bearing capacity in a heavy-lift crane barge can be seen in the facility with a
excess of 10 tonne/m2 and good turning circles for long heavy crane and a helideck (see Figure 121).
structures like towers, and “high and heavy” haulage This vessel would appear to have some potential utility
routes to large areas of storage. There is also adequate in the role of floating monopile installation. Enquiries are
space within the port estate to accommodate ongoing to establish if this craft was in transit or is
manufacturing facilities, and consideration could also be available in the area.
given to ensuring that their requirements could be met
by redevelopment plans. At present there are limited opportunities for loading
and offloading of project cargos at this facility. The piled
The suitability of the ground adjacent to these quaysides container offloading jetties do not represent an ideal
to facilitate wind turbine installation vessels to jack-up facility (see Figure 119). The dog-legged area in the
and therefore allow them to use their on-board cranage centre of the container jetties appears to show some
to its full capacity has yet to be established. However, utility. The port is in an industrialised area with no
should the existing ground strength be inadequate, residential areas within close proximity, and as such
additional load-spreading work could be carried out to allows 24 hour operation, without fear of disturbance
make localised areas suitable. to local residents.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 97

The oil and gas repair and fabrication yard to the


south-west of the port may have some fabrication
capabilities suitable for offshore wind17, but its close
proximity to coal handling facilities should be noted.
At this stage, subject to further investigation, it might
be assumed some capability exists for OSS structure
fabrication and perhaps WTG fabrication (particularly
jackets).

3.9.3.6 Port Okha


There are a limited number of substantial ports near the
month of the Gulf of Kutch from which to support the
construction phase of potential offshore wind. Okha port
Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide 2015 is an all-weather port with direct berthing facilities.
Figure 121 - Facilities at port Okha The monsoon period is known to occur between May
and September. The port is managed by the Gujarat
maritime board. It is situated on the north-west coast of
Saurashtra Peninsula, at the mouth of the Gulf of Kutch
3.9.3.5.2 Suitability of Pipavav to support offshore on the west coast of India. Development zone G, as
wind development in Gujarat identified in the FOWIND Gujarat Pre-feasibility report is
Pipavav is geographically well placed to serve the approximately 40 km away from the port.
development zones A, B and C in the Gulf of Khumbat
as identified in the FOWIND Gujarat Pre-feasibility report. Anchorage is available 2.4 km offshore and vessels up
to 7.5 m draught can be berthed at this port. Pilotage is
It has ample facilities to accommodate monopile & compulsory.
transition piece, and jacket pin-pile foundations and
potentially turbine marshalling (although for turbines, Okha Port
appropriate coal dust protection measures may be (key parameters)
required). Parameter
Draft 4 m (dry cargo berth), 8 m (Sayaji pier)

The water depths are deep enough for conventional or Length 180 m
heavy-lift cargo vessels to bring in WTGs for marshalling. Width 20.5 m
If cabling were supplied pre-cut and transported upon Sayaji pier Approach 114 m
individual cable reels, the port could easily cater for the 2 vessels at a time
cargo vessels which would most likely transport these, Draft 8 m
and their loading, off-loading and storage, as well as any
offshore supply vessels which might be used to install Length 146 m
them. Width 13.7 m
Dry cargo berth Approach 216 m
The berths are all open to the Gulf of Khumbat, and 2 vessels at a time
there is no sheltered water to act as safe haven in Draft 4 m
inclement weather, but there are large areas protected
by a breakwater at the adjacent oil & gas facility which it MHWS 3.5 m
may be possible to use. MLWN 0.4 m
MHWN 3m
Its geographic location means that the project offices, MSL 2m
marine operations management and PPE & general MLWS 1.2 m
storage facilities could be accommodated within the Commodities handled Coke, coal, wheat, sulphur and fertiliser
security fenced facility. It will also be worthy of
consideration that this port could later be used as a base Table 34 - Okha port key parameters
for O&M activities for development zones A, B and C.
Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide 2015 & GMB ports

17
http://pipavadoc.com/index.php/oil-gas
98 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Available facilities

Parameter
Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities x

Container facilities x Passenger facilities √

Dry bulk facilities √ Multipurpose facilities x

Dry-dock facilities x ISPS compliant x

Liquid facilities x CSI compliant x

LPG facilities x LNG facilities x

Table 35 - Facilities at port Okha

Source: IHS Fairplay Ports and Terminals Guide

Source: Google Earth


The Port has two jetties which can be equipped with Figure 122 - Port Okha facilities
modern mechanical handling systems to enhance the
rate of loading/unloading. Capital dredging near the
berth is being considered in the turning circle and
entrance channel to increase the available draught. supply vessels, survey, and even some heavy-lift cargo
An exclusive repair facility in the form of a modern dry vessels, but the current mooring arrangements are not
dock is also under consideration. The layout and aerial suitable for substantial vessels.
view of the port can be seen in Figure 122 and
Figure 123 respectively. In-board of these quays there is extensive road and rail
infrastructure which makes haulage of project cargos
3.9.3.6.1 Specific berths of interest in Port Okha very difficult and substantial ingenuity would have to be
Both Sayaji Pier and Second Pier are concrete piled applied to accommodate this activity. There is also limited
structures with solid decks (see Figure 123), but these space to facilitate storage in the port estate.
are relatively light duty structures which are narrow and
generally unsuitable for handling heavy project cargos. Precisely how far the fencing extends is an issue in some
They have up to 8 m of water alongside so can places and maintaining a large security-controlled area
accommodate substantial vessels including offshore could be problematic.

Source: GPM Ports

Figure 123 - Okha port berth


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 99

3.9.3.6.2 Suitability of Port Okha to support If the port is to the LEFT of the vessel, the port is not
offshore wind development in Gujarat wide enough to allow the vessel access.
In general, this port does not have the capability to
operate as an ideal or conventional offshore wind If the vessel is ABOVE the lower limit of the line but
marshalling facility. BELOW the upper limit, the vessel can only operate at
that port partially laden or tidally restricted.
Whether a mother & daughter barge lightering system
would be suitable in these relatively sheltered waters is It can be seen that there are no vessel type restrictions
worthy of consideration, as is the possibility of simply identified for offshore wind operations at Chennai,
mooring a barge alongside the piers and operating the Kattupalli and Tuticorn.
whole operation from floating storage. This system was
successfully used for the construction of Gunfleet Sands 3.9.4.2 Kattupalli
offshore wind farm, where little more than a small river Kattupalli is 4 km north of Ennore in Tamil Nadu. The
mouth was used with lesser facilities than exist at Okha. port was privately owned by L&T but it is understood that
the facility in the northern part of the site has recently
The waters around Port Okha would be useful as a safe been purchased by Adani Ports Group. The port
haven for vessels constructing within zones G and H, as comprises of a 1.5 km northern breakwater, and a 3 km
they form a well sheltered natural harbour. southern breakwater, forming a sheltered harbour area.
Development zone H, as identified in the FOWIND Tamil
Due to its location at some distance from the proposed Nadu Pre-feasibility study report4 is approximately 310 km
development zones, it is unlikely to be considered as a away from the port.
location for an O&M base, and locations around other
facilities like Porbandar may well prove to be preferable Container berths exist along the in-board side of the
locations for these activities. northern breakwater, but due to its geographic location
at very significant distance from any of the development
3.9.4 Port readiness assessment - Tamil Nadu zones, these are of little interest and will not be
This section develops the screening process further into a considered further in this study. The layout and aerial
more detailed construction port readiness assessment for view of the port can be seen in Figure 125.
Tamil Nadu. The assessment includes:
There could however be possibilities to fabricate
n considerations of vessel access requirements foundations at Kattupalli and in particular GBSs. There is
(Section 3.9.4.1) known to be a coral–rock layer at the surface of the
n an appraisal of the suitability of specific ports for seabed along some of the Tamil Nadu coastline.
offshore wind (Sections 3.9.4.2 to 3.9.4.4) Following discussions with local authorities, it might
n reports key findings from the port estate visits in Tamil be suggested that the region lends itself to GBS type
Nadu (Sections 3.9.4.2 to 3.9.4.4) foundations in some areas. Where coral rock is present,
it may well prove unsuitable for pile driving, without the
3.9.4.1 Installation vessel port access requirement significant additional complexity of either rock-socketing
chart - Tamil Nadu or “drive-drill-drive” installation methodologies.
The vessel port access requirements which represent the
most common ones used in offshore wind installation On the site there are two other facilities that are still
were described in Section 3.6.11. owned and operated by Larsen & Toubro Limited (L&T).
One of these is a heavy-duty ship lift and further to
The minimum width of vessel which can access each port the south of the site there is L&T’s O&G fabrication
and the depth at high and low tides are plotted versus facility with an area 1,200 m long by 400 m wide with
the three major ports in Tamil Nadu, see Figure 124. 30 tonne/m2 ground bearing strength.

If the vessel is to the LEFT and BELOW the entire line L&T’s heavy duty ship lift is 200 m long and 46 m
associated with a particular port then it is both: breadth, and has capacity to launch and recover
n narrow enough to fit into the port’s tightest marine 18,000 tonne ships, and is ideally suited for the
access requirement, and launching of GBSs.
n its fully laden draft is less than the water depth at any

state of the tide, meaning that the vessel can operate


at that port at any state of the tide, and whether it is 4
http://www.fowind.in/publications/report
un-laden or fully loaded

100 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Source: Google Earth

No beam limit

Figure 124 - Vessel port access requirement chart for vessels accessing ports in Tamil Nadu

There is 16.5 m of water alongside at the launch-end of Whilst it is generally possible to manufacture floating
the ship-lift which is deep enough for the vast majority foundations, and tow them to site, a distance of this
of vessels to be floated on and off the ship-lift. Further, magnitude in deep sea conditions is not viable in the
inshore of the ship-lift it is equipped with a heavy-duty circumstances. If however foundations were either
rail system, which allows ships to be rolled to a series of rolled directly from the ship lift onto the aft of a heavy
six repair stations. Clearly this facility has a primary role transport vessel, or barge, such a craft could undertake
in ship repair, however it would require little, or no the voyage.
adaptation, to allow for several GBSs to be cast in the
repair stations, rolled to the ship-lift and either launched Conceivably, an ideal solution could be to manufacture
there or rolled onto a vessel for transportation to the buoyant GBS structures, launch then via the ship lift, and
offshore windfarm. then arrange them on the back of a semisubmersible
heavy transport vessel. In this way they could be
The waters between Sri Lanka and Tamil Nadu are transported around the island of Sri Lanka, and discharge
extremely shallow. This does not allow the passage of from the vessel by simply submerging the craft, and
any but the shallowest draft vessels. Therefore in order to towing the GBS structures to site for storage or
transport any foundations manufactured at Kattupalli, it installation.
will be necessary to circumnavigate Sri Lanka, a journey
of circa 900 NM.
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 101

Available facilities

Parameter
Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities x

Container facilities √ Passenger facilities x

Dry bulk facilities x Multipurpose facilities x

Dry-dock facilities x ISPS compliant x

Liquid facilities x LNG facilities x

Source: Google Earth LPG facilities x


Figure 125 - Kattupalli port
Table 37 - Port facilities available at Kattupalli

Fabrication of other foundations or substation structures Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide

could also be possible at Kattupalli. L&T’s large 1,200 m


by 400 m oil and gas fabrication facility to the south of
3.9.4.2.1 Specific berths of interest in Kattupalli
the site with its 30 tonne/m² ground bearing capacity
The ship-lift and its associated rail infrastructure are of
could facilitate this. This site is used by L&T to fabricate
interest as a potential fabrication and load-out facility for
large oil and gas jackets and there is a heavy duty
the construction of GBS structures.
quayside to the eastern edge which has 16.5 m water
depth alongside, which is used to load-out the
The heavy duty load-out capacity associated with the
fabricated structures.
large fabrication area in the south of the site would be
a potential fabrication and load-out site for a substation
L&T are familiar with the construction of both tubular
topside. It may also be a jacket load-out site if steel
steel structures like jackets for foundations and topsides
foundations prove to be considered as a viable option.
for oil rigs. It is therefore possible that, if the ground off
Tamil Nadu proved suitable for drilling and grouting, and
conceivably piling, that piled foundations like jackets
may be a suitable type. L&T would then be one of the
nearest fabrication facilities to the proposed
development zones in Tamil Nadu.

Whether GBSs or steel WTG foundations are selected


L&T would certainly be one of the oil and gas
fabricators which might be interested in providing
fabrication services for the substation topsides and
jackets.

Kattupalli port
(key parameters) Source: Kattupalli

Parameter
Draft 14 m Figure 126 - Port facilities available at Kattupalli
Berth 1 - CB1 Length: 350 m
Berth 1 - CB2 Length: 360 m
Tidal range Approximately 1 m
Outer channel length 2 km
Inner channel length 1.2 km
Channel width 165 m
Turning basin diameter 570 m

Table 36 - Kattupalli port key parameters

Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide & L&T Kattupalli
102 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.9.4.2.2 Suitability of Kattupalli to support Chennai Port


offshore wind development in Tamil Nadu (key parameters)
Kattupalli is highly suitable as a manufacturing site for Parameter
a number of different offshore wind farm components. Length of channel Approximately 7 km
Most notably; GBS structures, jacket foundations and Inner channel (depth) 18.6 m
offshore substation topsides. Outer channel (depth 19.2 m
Width of channel 244 m to 410 m
Load out facilities exist to allow loading of these Swell allowance 3m
fabrications aboard suitable vessels to transport them to Dr. Ambedkar dock Ringed by berths
windfarm development areas in the Gulf of Mannar.
2 x liquid facilities (BD 1 and BD 3)
Its geographic location at a great distance from even Bharathi dock 1 x bulk ore
the northerly wind farm development zones mean that (BD 2, draft 16.5 m)
it will be very unlikely to be considered as a the local
construction base, or indeed as an operational base for 2 x liquid facilities (JD2 and JD6)
O&M when the wind farms are completed. Jawahar dock 1 x general cargo
(JD4, draft 11 m)
3.9.4.3 Chennai
The port of Chennai is situated on the Coromandel Container terminal 4 x container berths (CCT1 to 4)
coast in Tamil Nadu. It has a main harbour enclosed
by a breakwater with an entrance protected by an International container 3 x deep water container berths,
off-lying groyne. On the North side of the main harbour terminal draft 15 m
lies Bharathi Dock, sheltered from the North and East and
Table 38 - Chennai port key parameters
Jawahar Dock lies on the South side of the main harbour.
Ambedkar Dock is situated in between Bharathi and Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide
Jawahar and has 8 berths for handling cleaner cargoes.

Available facilities

Parameter
Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities √

Container facilities √ Passenger facilities √

Dry bulk facilities √ Multipurpose facilities √

Dry-dock facilities x ISPS compliant √

Liquid facilities √ CSI compliant x


Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide
Figure 127 - Chennai port LPG facilities x LNG facilities x

Table 39 - Port facilities available at Chennai


Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide

The harbour is completely artificial and has facilities for


most cargoes. The layout and aerial view of the port can
be seen in Figure 127 and Figure 128 respectively.

Chennai’s location about 290 km north of the upper end


of development zone H means that it is unattractive as a
construction or operation and maintenance base even for
the two northernmost development zones. The shallow
Source: Google Earth
water between the northern tip of Sri Lanka and Tamil
Figure 128 - Chennai port estate
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 103

Nadu effectively block the passage of ships through West Quay 1 & 2 are designated for vehicles. Centre
this region and mean that access to the southern Berth has a draft of 12 m and is for general cargo
development regions from Chennai would require and West Quays 1 & 2 are 12 m and 11 m draft
circumnavigating Sri Lanka which renders the site highly respectively, but warehousing immediately inboard
unattractive. of the berths will mean that it would be necessary to
transport components to a storage area.
In some respects it is the very fact that Chennai is such a
well-appointed and therefore busy port which is its least 3. Jawahar Dock has three main dedicated berths;
attractive feature. It has 60 Mt of cargo passing through JD 2 & JD 6 are for bulk liquids and are unsuitable
it per year, on over 2,000 vessels. due to the physical requirements for offshore wind
components as the liquid facilities impose restricted
Offshore wind operations regularly involve towing access due to the pipework (limited headroom
barges, with long bridle arrangements, and loading and passage if pipes above ground or limited axle load if
offloading heavy project cargos to quaysides is an buried beneath ground) see Section 3.8.2.5.
operation which can be sensitive to disturbances from JD 4 is a general cargo berth with 11 m draft which
the wash of any large vessel passing the berth. Ideally, could be usable. Just inboard of this berth is an
ports which are to be selected as a major marshalling area described as the “Coal Yard”, and there appears
facility are less heavily trafficked, but clearly if a port is to be warehouse buildings covering the rest of the
well used because it is so capable, these capabilities may potential storage areas, so it would be necessary to
outweigh the congestion. transport components to a storage area.

4. Chennai Container Terminal consists of container


berths CCT1-4 and is considered unsuitable for
offshore wind as the terminal will operate solely
with containers only in a very highly efficient
loading and unloading operation, see Section 3.8.2.2.

5. Chennai International Container Terminal consists


of three deep water container berths of 15 m draft.
These are also unsuitable for offshore wind as the
terminals are dedicated for handling standardised
containers only, see Section 3.8.2.2.
Source: Chennai port

Figure 129 - Chennai port estate 3.9.4.3.2 Suitability of Chennai to support offshore
wind development in Tamil Nadu
The major areas which appear most suitable for initial
3.9.4.3.1 Specific berths of interest in Chennai offshore wind development in Tamil Nadu are at such a
The port areas are divided into 5 terminals: vast distance from Chennai that it is unlikely that the port
will find a role. It is however well appointed and would
1. Dr Ambedkar Dock is ringed by berths, which are be technically suitable were local areas to be identified
described above as the cleaner berths. closer to the port.

2. Bharathi Dock consists of two liquid facilities, BD 1 & The major areas which appear most suitable for initial
BD 3 and a bulk ore berth BD 2. The liquid berths are offshore wind development in Tamil Nadu are at such a
unsuitable for offshore wind use. vast distance from Chennai that it is unlikely that the port
will find a role. It is however well appointed and would
The bulk ore berth BD2 has a draft alongside of be technically suitable were local areas to be identified
16.5 m at high water (which is the value quoted in closer to the port.
the IHS Directory), but it is necessary to remember
that the tidal range is 1.3 m.

North quay has a draft of 8.5 m, and access to some


storage areas inboard, and would have utility. There
are general and RoRo berths along the western edge.
104 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.9.4.4 Tuticorin Tuticorin Port


The port of Tuticorin is an all-weather port and is (key parameters)
designated as a major port in India. It is ideally located Parameter
centrally to development zones A, B, C and D. V.O.C. Berth no. 1 Draft 9.3 m/quay length 168 m
Approximately 10 km, 63 km, 25 km and 51 km away V.O.C. Berth no. 2 Draft 9.3 m/quay length 168 m
from these zones respectively. The layout and aerial view V.O.C. Berth no. 3 Draft 10.7 m/quay length 192 m
of the port can be seen in Figure 130 and Figure 131 V.O.C. Berth no. 4 Draft 10.8 m/quay length 192 m
respectively. V.O.C. Berth no. 5 (AB.1) Draft 8.6 m/quay length 168 m
V.O.C. Berth no. 6 (AB.2) Draft 9.3 m/quay length 168 m
The fact that the waters just north of zone C are V.O.C. Berth no. 7 (container terminal) Draft 10.9 m/quay length 370 m
shallow mean that there will be no major shipping lanes V.O.C. Berth no. 8 Draft 10.9 m/quay length 345 m
in this area, and could make zone C attractive as an early Shallow water berth 1 Draft 5.85 m/quay length 140 m
development zone. Shallow water berth 2 Draft 5.85 m/quay length 110 m
Oil jetty Draft 10.7 m
Tuticorin also has a coal fired thermal power station Coal jetty Draft 10.9 m
located immediately adjacent to the port estate, which Coal jetty II Draft 10.9 m
means that connection to an existing substation feeding
Table 40 - Tuticorin port key parameters
into the grid could be feasible.
Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide & Tamil Nadu ports

Extensive port redevelopment plans are understood to be in


an advanced stage. However these developments may not
be constructed shortly and as such this study has only
considered data relating to existing facilities, or those under
construction or having passed their final investment decision
(FID). It is worth nothing that should these development plans
proceed there would be significantly larger facilities available
at this location in the future.

The scale of these planned port developments are significant


(see Figure 132). The southern breakwater (enclosing the
purple, blue, orange and green areas in Figure 132) would
Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide 2015 be 5.4 km in length. If this area were to be fully developed,
Figure 130 - Tuticorin port estate it would engender a requirement for a total review of the
comments made within this port study.

Source: Google Earth Source: VOC port

Figure 131 - Tuticorin port Figure 132 - Tuticorin port development plans
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 105

3.9.4.4.1 Specific berth of interest in Tuticorin


The berths along the north breakwater are for bulk coal Available facilities
handling. Berths NCB I & II in the North Cargo Berth are Parameter
14.1 m draft and a third berth is to be constructed there. Break bulk facilities √ RoRo facilities √
Coal Jetty 1 & 2 have a 12.8 m draft.
Container facilities √ Passenger facilities √
The areas along the south breakwater have several berths
which are attractive for offshore wind. Dry bulk facilities √ Multipurpose facilities √

Berths 5 & 6 (apparently also designated AB 1 & 2, Dry-dock facilities x ISPS compliant √
according to IHS), in Figure 130 are designated as
multi-purpose berths, although 5 is also described as for Liquid facilities √ CSI compliant x
passengers. Berth 5 has a draft of 8.6 m and Berth 6 has
a draft of 9.3 m, and they have lengths for LOA 183 m LPG facilities x LNG facilities x
and LOA 245 m respectively. They are immediately
adjacent to the Container Terminal areas. Within these Table 41 - Port facilities available at Tuticorin
areas, inside the security fence, there is 553,000 m2 of Source: IHS Fairplay Ports & Terminals Guide
open “high and heavy” storage.
3.9.4.4.2 Suitability of Tuticorin to support offshore
wind development in Tamil Nadu
The port of Tuticorin is ideally situated to facilitate the
construction of several windfarm development zones
identified in Tamil Nadu.

There are several berths identified with adequately


deep water to accommodate vessels engaged in the
marshalling of wind turbines or foundations.

There is substantial “high and heavy” storage areas


available within secure fenced areas, with good heavy
haul routes between these areas and berths, suitable for
load-out of components during the construction phase
of an offshore wind farm. Their location is adequately
Figure 133 - Corner on haul route from VOC 1-4 to separated from the existing bulk coal handling and
container terminal
storage facilities and it is believed that this would have
little impact, but should be verified. If the extensive
Whilst berth 7 is specifically designated for containers, redevelopment plans are put in motion others sites may
berths 8 & 9 are for containers and general cargo and become available with improved facilities above and
multipurpose/passengers respectively, and both have beyond those existing, and early engagement with the
12.8 m depth alongside. It would appear that the berths port management is advised to facilitate incorporation
5, 6, 8 & 9 and adjacent storage areas are highly suitable of appropriate features into proposed developments.
to act as a marshalling facility for turbines, monopiles,
transition pieces, and any array cables stored on reels, The facility would lend itself to having the construction
and other general activities carried out during offshore offices, marine operations coordination and storage
wind farm construction. facilities located in a well-placed compound, adjacent to
construction activities. Furthermore, such a facility could
The four berths at the south eastern extremity designated later be used as the base for operations and maintenance
VOC I, II, II & IV are for general or dry bulk cargos. activities, since the port is located in close proximity to
VOC’s I & II have 9.3 m draft and VOC II has 10.7 m the development areas.
VOC IV has 10.8 m. Whilst there are warehouses
immediately inboard of these berths, there is a heavy If required Tuticorin could potentially host a blade
haul route along the quayside with gently radius bends manufacturing facility. Subject to agreement with the
allowing easy access to the container terminals. port authority this development might be integrated
within their future port extension plans.
106 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.9.5 O&M port assessment


CRITERIA
In this section the results from a desk based screening of
possible O&M ports for zones identified in Gujarat and Parameter
Considered suitable < 25 NM
Tamil Nadu are presented. The analysis is conducted at
high-level and based on ports identified within the
Somewhat suitable < 25 NM & tidal restriction
FOWIND Pre-feasibility reports.
Somewhat suitable 25 to 75 NM
Beyond the suitable construction and marshalling ports,
identified in Section 3.9.2, in both Gujarat and Tamil
Not considered suitable > 75 NM
Nadu it is also likely a number of smaller ports would be
suitable for O&M support and could play a strategic role Table 42 - O&M Port screening criteria
during the operation of specific projects.

As discussed in Section 3.2.5, the requirements for O&M This should be investigated in future studies, where the
ports are much less stringent than those for construction, feasibility and cost vs benefit of port development works
hence most ports with the capability to accommodate are identified.
even the smallest cargo vessels will likely have the
capability to accommodate wind farm support vessels. The full screening matrices and conclusions for both
In general it is important that the O&M port can be Gujarat and Tamil Nadu O&M ports are provided in the
accessed close to 100% of the time under all weather following Sections 3.9.5.1 and 3.9.5.2.
conditions and is not significantly restricted by tidal
constraints or lock gate limitations. O&M support vessels
typically have a maximum draft of 2 m and a 10 m Gujarat summary
maximum beam; hence these values have been
considered when assessing O&M port constraints.
n The selection of O&M ports will pose no
The criteria for assessing O&M ports are given in significant barriers for offshore wind farm
Table 42. Essentially a port which has adequate water development in Gujarat
depth, is less than 25 NM from the identified n One or more ports for each identified

development zones and with 24 hour accessibility is development zone meet the criteria for good
potentially suitable for an O&M base. While some ports O&M bases
in close proximity to the zones have been de-rated to n The extremely high currents which are known

“somewhat suitable” due to noted tidal restrictions18, to exist in the Gulf of Khumbhat will either
these should not be strictly excluded on the basis of this increase or decrease the transit times of
high-level assessment. In some cases it may be possible windfarm vessels
to develop these currently restricted ports with minimal n When planning O&M strategies, it will be

marine/civil works, for example dredging and the necessary to appropriately model the site
addition of strategically placed pontoons. conditions

18
http://www.navionics.com/en, www.worldportsource.com/,
https://www.nga.mil/Pages/Defaut.aspx

ZONE
GUJARAT
A B C D E F G H
Parameter
Pipavav Pipavav Navabandar Vansi Borsi Nargol Hazira Dwarka Porbandar

Top 3 ports Jafrabad Mahuba Pipavav Hazira Jafrabad Dahej Bhogat Mangrol

Navabandar Jafrabad Diu Magdalia Pipavav Mihivirdji Porbandar Bhogat

13 13 5 5 22 4 5 8
Distance to
zones (NM) 14 13 5 7 38 6 9 17

16 18 5 11 38 6 12 26

Table 44 - Gujarat top 3 O&M ports


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 107

3.9.5.1 Gujarat

GUJARAT ZONE Tidal


Port name restriction
A B C D E F G H
Parameter
Alang 57 18 52 35 60 60 168 142 Y
Bedi 148 150 129 182 172 172 68 71 Y
Beyt 175 188 151 225 205 205 20 57 Y
Bhavnagar 77 42 71 54 84 84 171 149 Y
Bhogat 147 165 123 203 190 190 9 26 N
Chhara 28 57 6 91 62 62 98 61 N
Dahej 85 43 80 44 81 81 188 165 Y
Dholera 82 46 76 58 88 88 172 151 Y
Dholera (proposed port) 82 46 76 58 88 88 172 151 Y
Diu 18 41 5 75 47 47 112 76 N
Dwarka 171 188 147 226 203 203 5 46 N
Hazira 68 23 65 7 49 49 197 168 N
Jafrabad 14 18 6 56 38 38 128 95 N
Jakhau 233 243 210 277 262 262 69 114 N
Kandia major port 169 168 156 193 193 193 96 103 Y
Khambhat 119 81 113 84 121 121 198 182 Y
Magdalia 75 31 73 11 56 56 203 175 Y
Mahuva 26 13 20 43 47 47 146 116 N
Mandvi (proposed port) 185 191 162 225 211 211 49 78 Y
Mangrol 71 96 47 132 106 106 54 17 N
Mithivirdi 62 23 57 37 65 65 171 146 Y
Mul-Dwarka 31 60 8 94 66 66 94 57 N
Mumbai port 111 105 141 87 74 74 269 231 N
Mundra 170 173 148 205 194 194 60 75 N
Nargol 71 36 80 18 72 72 220 186 N
Navabandar 16 35 5 69 43 43 116 81 N
Navlakhi 158 156 149 180 183 183 105 107 Y
Okha 177 189 153 227 207 207 20 58 Y
Old Dahej 85 44 80 46 83 83 188 165 Y
Pipavav 13 13 5 51 38 38 135 102 N
Porbandar 116 136 92 174 149 149 12 8 N
Positra 169 182 145 219 199 199 21 52 Y
Salaya 150 158 126 195 177 177 39 46 Y
Sikka 148 153 127 187 173 173 54 58 Y
Sutrapada 42 71 19 106 78 78 82 45 N
Vandinar 154 160 131 195 190 190 48 55 N
Vansi Borsi 72 25 71 5 48 48 206 176 N
Veraval 50 78 26 113 85 85 75 38 N

Table 43 - O&M port screening, Gujarat


108 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

3.9.5.2 Tamil Nadu

TAMIL NADU ZONE Tidal


Port name* restriction
A B C D E F G H
Parameter
Chennai 321 360 262 340 370 201 396 1553 N

Colachel 58 25 88 50 30 705 11 695 N

Cuddalore 243 282 184 262 292 131 318 71 N

Ennore Minor 330 369 271 349 379 210 405 162 N

Kanyakumari 43 6 70 32 16 615 6 600 N

Karaikal 187 226 128 206 236 67 262 19 N

Kattupalli Minor 333 372 274 352 382 213 408 165 N

Kaveri 205 244 146 224 254 85 280 37 N

Koodankulam 32 7 58 22 20 585 15 595 N

Krishnapatnam 391 430 332 410 440 271 466 223 N

Manappad 8 9 35 6 32 572 40 582 N

Mugaiyur 289 328 230 308 338 177 364 117 N

Muttom 57 20 78 45 24 635 7 622 N

Nagappattinam 181 226 128 206 236 60 262 13 N

Pamban 55 96 15 80 109 6 129 41 N

Parangipettai 233 272 174 252 282 121 308 61 N

Punnakayal 8 24 22 19 48 111 56 141 N

Rameswaram 84 121 26 103 132 11 155 43 N

Silambimangalum shipyard 235 272 174 252 282 121 308 61 N

Thiruchopuram 237 276 178 256 286 123 312 63 N

Thirukkadaiyur 201 240 142 220 250 81 276 33 N

Thirukkuvalai 170 215 117 195 225 49 251 5 N

Tuticorin 10 31 13 26 58 100 64 134 N

Valinokkam 28 68 12 58 91 77 110 108 N

Vanagiri 204 243 145 223 253 84 279 36 N

Table 45 - O&M port screening, Tamil Nadu

* Note: assumes vessel can passage through the Palk Strait

ZONE
TAMIL
NADU A B C D E F G H
Parameter
Manappad Kanyakumari Valinokkam Manappad Kanyakumari Pamban Kanyakumari Thirukkuvalai

Top 3 ports Punnakayal Koodankulam Tuticorin Punnakayal Koodankulam Rameswaram Muttom Nagappattinam

Tuticorin* Manappad Pamban Koodankulam Muttom Thirukkuvalai Colachel Karaikal

8 6 12 6 16 6 6 5
Distance to
8 7 13 19 20 11 7 13
zones (NM)
10 8 15 22 24 49 11 19

Table 46 - Tamil Nadu top 3 O&M ports


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 109

During the early development of offshore wind in India


Tamil Nadu summary it might be anticipated that ports specifically associated
with the supply of wind turbines, will mainly be required
for temporary marshalling of overseas components.
n The selection of O&M ports will pose no However as the market and local supply chain matures;
significant barriers for offshore wind farm purpose built fabrication and marshalling ports in the
development in Tamil Nadu form of offshore wind hubs may be developed, such as
n No identified port is tidally restricted those now seen and under development in Germany and
n Two or more ports for each identified the UK.
development zone meet the criteria for good
O&M bases The construction port readiness assessment for Gujarat
n In calculating the distance from the potential investigated five ports with the most potential:
O&M port to the development zone, there is an
assumption that vessels are passable through the n Adani container port facility in Hazira – Existing port
Palk Strait. None of the identified three most facilities consist of two piled quaysides with rail-
suitable O&M ports, for any of the development mounted container cranes. The closest development
zones, require passage through the Palk Strait. zones D and F are approximately 13 km away.
n When planning O&M strategies, it will be The w ater depths at this port are suitable for
necessary to appropriately model the site conventional or heavy-lift cargo vessels and has
conditions potential to be used as a wind turbine marshalling
facility during construction (see Sub-Section 3.9.3.2)
n Larsen and Toubro’s fabrication facility in Hazira –

The shipyard is located within a large scale heavy


3.9.6 Summary manufacturing facility and has a heavy-duty load-out
Following the port readiness assessments it can be quay on the banks of the river Tapi. It would be a
concluded that no single port estate in Gujarat and Tamil possible fabrication site for several types of offshore
Nadu is currently suitable to facilitate all offshore wind wind foundations and possibly substation topsides
construction activities without some level of adaptation (see Sub-Section 3.9.3.3)
or with the strategic use of multiple port estates. n Bhavangar port – It has a narrow lock-gate on the
For example ports may need development of quayside approach channel so is unsuitable for installation
bearing capacities and handling/lifting equipment to vessels. There is however a well-developed limestone
facilitate large substructures and OSS components or handling facility, which could be utilised as a base
expansion of storage areas for multiple foundations or for scour protection marshalling during construction
insulation of port areas from damaging coal/iron ore and O&M phases, (see Sub-Section 3.9.3.4)
dust. n Port of Pipavav (APM terminals) – The all-weather port

is the largest on the west side of the Gulf of Khumbat.


During this study it has been assumed that ports The port has facilities to handle containers, bulk, break
appropriate for construction are also suitable for O&M bulk and liquid cargo. The port has potential to
activities due to the less stringent access and accommodate foundation and wind turbine
infrastructure requirements. In both Gujarat and Tamil marshalling facilities during construction and possibly
Nadu it is also likely a number of smaller ports would be offshore substation fabrication. Suitable coal dust
suitable for O&M support and could play a strategic role insulation may be required, (see Sub-Section 3.9.3.5)
during the operation of specific projects. This is n Port Okha – The port has two piers which are light duty
highlighted by the high-level O&M port assessment structures which are narrow and generally unsuitable
presented in Section 3.9.5. for handling heavy project cargoes. It is the nearest
port to development zones G and H. The port would
Currently a number of the identified ports are highly require substantial infrastructure development before
active with large volumes of marine and quayside traffic. being suitable to support offshore wind developments
They are for example engaged with; handling containers (see Sub-Section 3.9.3.6)
and bulk handling of dirty cargos (e.g. coal and iron ore).
Early consultations should be made, during the
development process, with port authorities to establish
any current and future conflicts of interest with regards
to spatial planning and their appetite to facilitate
offshore wind.
110 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

In Tamil Nadu three facilities were investigated: n Tuticorin - The port of Tuticorin is provided with an
oil & coal handling jetty and 24 hour 7 day operations,
n Kattupalli - This deep water port is provided with a general, break-bulk, container and bulk cargo handling
dedicated terminal for handling coal, general and liquid facilities, dry and liquid cargo storage facilities and
cargo and a vast hinterland. Closest development zone a passenger terminal. Closest development zone is A,
is H, which is approximately 310 km. It has potential which is approximately 20 km. The port is ideally
as a manufacturing site, most notably for GBS situated and has potential to be used as a wind turbine
structures, jacket foundations and offshore substation and foundation marshalling facility during construction
topsides (see Sub-Section 3.9.4.2). (see Sub-Section 3.9.4.4).
n Chennai - The deep water port of Chennai is

provided with a dedicated terminal for oil, iron ore


and general cargo and 24 hour 7 day operations,
and a passenger terminal. Closest development zone
is H, which is approximately 290 km. Given this vast
distance it is unlikely the port will play a significant
role unless a cost effective solution is found
(see Sub-Section 3.9.4.3).

Vessel access Possible OW port type


Port name Distance to zones
restrictions (ref. Section 3.2)
Parameter
Adani Container n O&M (zones D & F)
√ Zone D & F - 13 km
Port (Hazira) n Marshalling (WTGs and WTG foundations)

L&T Port n WTG foundation manufacturing


√ Zone D & F - 20 km
(Hazira) n Offshore substation manufacturing

Bhavnagar x Zone F - 35 km n Scour protection marshalling during the construction and O&M phases

n O&M (zones A, B & C)


Zone A, B & C -
Pipavav √ n Marshalling (WTGs and WTG foundations)
23 km, 27 km & 13 km
n Offshore substation manufacturing

Port Okha x Zone G - 40 km n Limited - unless floating marshalling (zones G & H)

Table 47 - Gujarat major port summary

Vessel access Possible OW port type


Port name Distance to zones
restrictions (ref. Section 3.2)
Parameter
n WTG foundation manufacturing (GBS/steel)
Kattupalli √ Zone H - 310 km n Offshore substation manufacturing
n Limited further application - vast distance to zones

Chennai √ Zone H - 290 km n Limited application - vast distance to zones

Zones A, B, C & D - 10 km, n O&M


Tuticorin √
63 km, 25 km & 51 km n Marshalling (WTGs and WTG foundations)

Table 48 - Tamil Nadu major port summary


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 111

Table 47 and Table 48 summarise the capability of the An alternative would be to develop regional offshore
ports considered most suitable to generally facilitate wind construction hubs where the scope and range of
offshore wind construction in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu. possible projects are well defined at a national level
This was based on physical site visits and review of their and port facilities are upgraded to meet these needs.
state of readiness during late 2015. This would only be logical if there is perceived to be
a firm enough commitment to the development of
As regards to the level of specific adaptation that may multiple offshore wind projects in the region and that
be required, and what form this might take, it would be such a port infrastructure investment will make a
un-economic to upgrade specific ports to allow them to tangible return in the near future. This approach would
accommodate each and every vessel, foundation, and have the advantage that it would reduce the level of
turbine type currently available to the market. development risks for owners and developers and
For example, this would have a significant influence decrease the perceived risk in their Financial Investment
on the requirements for high and heavy storage areas. Decision.
It would be recommended that site-specific assessments
should be made on a project-by-project basis, at the
earliest, when the Front End Engineering Design (FEED)
studies have narrowed the range of turbine and
foundation types under consideration, and most
importantly when a clear view on the specific
development areas and overall capacity of the offshore
wind farms are known. At this stage, without these
details, it is considered too early to provide reliable
guidance on the specific port infrastructure upgrades
that may be required.
112 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

4 DECOMMISSIONING

This section provides a high-level introduction to the considered for re-use/re-sale depending on their
processes and operations likely to be implemented when operational condition. All lifting operations will need to
decommissioning an offshore wind farm at the end of its be engineered and the relevant structural integrity checks
20 to 25 year design life. Given the embryonic nature of carried out.
the offshore wind industry limited decommissioning has
taken place to date other than a handful of metrological It is likely that the site work in India might need to be
masts, see Figure 134. carried out over a period of two seasons, with vessels
moving off site over the intervening monsoon months.
The base case assumption is that the wind farm will be In the year prior to the first season on site, there will be
decommissioned using similar procedures to those used significant engineering and project management
in construction, only in reverse order. This will involve the including: site surveying, EIA updates and stakeholder
use of: consultations, development of bespoke water jet cutting
rigs, tooling, lifting and handling equipment and sea
n two large WTIVs, one to dismantle the turbines and fastenings, and also setting up the operational site and
towers, and the other to cut and remove the the scrapping site.
foundation (for example TP and Monopile or Jacket)
n a DP cable vessel to remove the array cables If the site had an OSS it would be assumed that it would
be available to continue to supply power to the turbines
In addition, a DP Construction Support Vessel (CSV) as needed throughout decommissioning of the turbines
will be used to prepare the foundations for cutting, for and foundations. If there was no OSS or no available
example cutting the array cables, removing internal power source, then it would be necessary to fit a large
seabed material in the pile down to at least the required number of turbines with temporary power supplies for
cutting level, and removal of any secondary steelwork things such as navigational aids, control and yaw
and electrical equipment within the TPs that would systems, braking, periodic rotor jacking and rotation,
obstruct the installation of the main tracked water jet nacelle temperature & humidity control, lighting, lifting
cutting tool. gear and power tools for the early preparation stages of
turbine decommissioning.
Some of the lift sequences may be different from those
during construction, because decommissioning In summary decommissioning an offshore windfarm is no
tolerances and sensitivity are generally less critical in small task and might cost anything between 60 and 80%
terms of damage to components; care will be needed of the installation CapEx. In Europe almost all offshore
however to ensure safe operations at all times, and also projects require a detailed decommissioning study during
to protect any equipment such as turbines which may be the early project development.

Source: DBB Jak-up Source: DBB Jak-up

Figure 134 - DBB Jack-up decommissioning operations, removal of offshore masts (left) and associated monopiles (right)
on Horns Rev 1 and Horns Rev 2 in Denmark
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 113

5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ONGOING WORK

The Consortium would recommend the following activities to support the feasibility and development of offshore
wind in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu. It is highlighted were these recommendations will in part be undertaken through
the ongoing FOWIND project work scope:

n On-site wind measurement campaign – later stages of the FOWIND project an offshore LiDAR wind
measurement campaign is scheduled to help mitigate this risk; limited area coverage.

n Full Feasibility Study – Pilot Project Site Selection, Preliminary Engineering and cost modelling; to be included
within the FOWIND full-feasibility study.

n Extreme wind speed studies considering typhoon risk – to be conducted to some extent in the FOWIND
full-feasibility study.

Gathering further constraint data, metocean data and ground related data (Geophysical and
n

Geotechnical) – to be conducted to some extent in the FOWIND full-feasibility study.

n Logistics and Infrastructure Study – an updated and more detailed investigation should be completed after
the area for the pilot project site has been selected.

n Grid Connection and Transmission Study – to be included within the FOWIND Grid Connection Study.

n Preliminary Environmental and Social Impact


Study (ESIA) – an updated and more detailed investigation
should be completed after the area for the pilot project
site has been selected.

n Stakeholder Engagement Workshops – to be conducted


to some extent as part of FOWIND’s stakeholder activities.

n Development of a supportive National and Local Policy


environment and guidelines to promote development in
Gujarat and Tamil Nadu – in view of India’s existing policy
framework for offshore wind a long-term outlook for the sector
will be developed.
114 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

6 APPENDIX A - PORT MAPS


Figure 97 (from page 86) - Ports in Gujarat
Figure 97a (supporting information) - Water depth in Gujarat
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study
115
116 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Source: Google Earth


Figure 98 (from page 86) - Offshore potential ports in Gujarat

Source: Google Earth


Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 117

Figure 101a (supporting information) - Water depth in Tamil Nadu


118 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

Figure 101 (from page 87) - Ports in Tamil Nadu


Figure 102 (from page 88) - Offshore potential ports in Tamil Nadu
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study
119
120 Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study

PROJECT PARTNERS

Global Wind Energy Council (Brussels, Belgium) is the international trade


association for the wind power industry. The members of GWEC represent
over 1,500 companies, organisations and institutions in more than 70 countries.
www. gwec.net

Center for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (Bangalore, India) is one of
the largest think tanks in South Asia; its vision is to enrich the nation with
technology-enabled policy options for equitable growth.
www.cstep.in

DNV GL (Arnhem, the Netherlands) is the world’s largest provider of independent


renewable energy advice. The recognised authority in onshore wind energy, DNV GL
is also at the forefront of the offshore wind, wave, tidal and solar sectors.
www.dnvgl.com

Gujarat Power Corporation Limited (Gandhinagar, India) has been playing the
role of developer and catalyser in the energy sector in the state of Gujarat.
GPCL is increasing its involvement in power projects in the renewables sector,
as the State of Gujarat is concerned about the issues of pollution and global
warming.
www.gpclindia.com

World Institute of Sustainable Energy (Pune, India) is a not-for-profit institute


committed to the cause of promoting sustainable energy and sustainable
development , with specific emphasis on issues related to renewable energy,
energy security, and climate change.
www.wisein.org

KNOWLEDGE PARTNER

National Institute of Wind Energy (NIWE) will support FOWIND efforts towards
preliminary feasibility assessments for potential offshore wind project development
in the states of Gujarat & Tamil Nadu - with a special focus on wind resource
validation. NIWE is an autonomous R&D institution under the Ministry of New and
Renewable Energy, Government of India, established to serve as a technical focal
point for orderly development of Wind Power deployment in India.
www.niwe.res.in
Supply chain, port infrastructure and logistics study 121

The European Union (EU) is a unique economic and political partnership between 28 European countries.
In 1957, the signature of the Treaties of Rome marked the will of the six funding countries to create a common
economic space. Since then, first the Community and then the European Union has continued to enlarge and
welcome new countries as members. The Union has developed into a huge single market with the euro as its
common currency.

What began as a purely economic union has evolved into an organisation spanning all areas, from development
aid to environmental policy. Thanks to the abolition of border controls between EU countries, it is now possible
for people to travel freely within most of the EU. It has also become much easier to live and work in another EU
country.

The five main institutions of the European Union are the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers, the
European Commission, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors. The European Union is a major player in
international cooperation and development aid. It is also the world’s largest humanitarian aid donor. The primary
aim of the EU’s own development policy, agreed in November 2000, is the eradication of poverty.

http://europa.eu/
DISCLAIMER
This report is provided for illustrative purposes only without any representations, warranties or undertakings from GWEC, DNV GL, WISE, CSTEP or
the European Union as to the content or any part of this report and the data contained therein, including without limitation in respect of quality,
accuracy, completeness, or reliability. The information contained in the report does not represent endorsement by GWEC, DNV GL, WISE, CSTEP or
the European Union of any particular project, product or service provider.
By accessing the report either in a hard copy or electronically, users accept that neither GWEC, DNV GL, WISE, CSTEP nor the Authors are responsible
for any kind of loss or damage resulting from the use of the information contained in the report or for any reliance placed thereon and the users
further acknowledge that the content of the report and data therein are subject to change.

Copyright ©FOWIND 2016


Unless otherwise indicated, material in this publication may be used freely, shared or reprinted, but full acknowledgement is
requested. This publication should be cited as FOWIND (2016), Supply Chain, Port infrastructure and Logistics Study.

Front cover photo: ©Stiftung OFFSHORE-WINDENERGIE/Jan Oelker 2008

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DNV GL co-authors listed alphabetically: Chris Garrett, Jack Giles, Pranab Kumar, Ruben Menezes, Birjukumar Mistri
Reviewed by: Steve Sawyer (GWEC), Shruti Shukla (GWEC), Alok Kumar (DNV GL), Anand Wagh (WISE), Ashish Nigam (CSTEP)
Graphic design: Chris Vleeming (DNV GL)

CONTACT
For further information, please contact FOWIND Secretariat at [email protected]
This report is available for download from www.fowind.in and the websites of the FOWIND project partners.

You might also like