hse challenges related to offshore renewable energy...presentation for the deep sea offshore wind...

Technology for a better society

Presentation for the deep sea offshore wind power R&D seminar 2011-01-21

Camilla K Tveiten

Eirik Albrechtsen

Jørn Heggset

Matthias Hofmann

Per Kristian Norddal

Erik Jersin

- A study of HSE issues related to current and future offshore wind power concepts

1

HSE challenges related to offshore renewable energy


HSE challenges related to offshore renewable energy

2

• Object for the study: to identify the HSE factors related to offshore renewable energy production (with focus on offshore wind energy).

• Our report:– Lists different offshore wind developing concepts that exist today as well

developments that may result in future concepts. • Technical solutions and operation philosophy (both fixed and floating concepts)

• A brief summary of actors and plans for development in Norway

• Regulations and standards for offshore renewable energy are briefly listed

– A qualitative analysis of the hazards that exist for different stages for offshore wind turbine farms.

• Several possible accident scenarios– possible consequences for humans, environment and material issues.

• A qualitative prioritization of the scenarios.

• Issues related to risk mitigation and regulations


Potential areas of development

3

• Offshore wind farms are planned along the whole coast of Norway

– bottom fixed or floating wind turbines.

– distances from shore vary mainly from 1 to 60 km

– the Southern North Sea has a distance of around 150 km to the shore.

– many offshore wind farms are in the concept stadium

Source: NVE (2010): Havvind – Forslag til utredningsområder.


Installation

4

Bottom fixed substructures has to be transported to the offshore wind farm with transport vessels before fixed to the seabed:

Floating structures and the turbine are preassembled close to the construction port and then towed out to their final position as a complete unit:

Transport and erection of a fully onshore constructed wind turbine at Beatrice (Source: www.scaldis-smc.com)Lowering of the jacket or tripod onto the pin piles (source www.alpha-ventus.de)

Installation of Hywind (Source: www.statoil.com)

http://www.scaldis-smc.com/�

http://www.alpha-ventus.de/�

http://www.statoil.com/�


Access methods

5

• Access not always possible because of weather conditions

• Three main alternatives for access:– Direct landing by use of vessel

– Use of equipment to compensate for motion

– Helicopter

• Possible to have living quarters near the offshore wind farm to shorten travel time– Access to turbine still involves the same challenges

Source: RepowerSource: www.ampelmann.nlSource: www.southboatssp.co.uk


Overview of access types and (dis-) advantages

6

TypeSignicant wave height in metres

Average wind speed in m/s (1hr at 10 m height)

Example of application Advantages Disadvantages

Direct boat landing0.5 - 1.5 (rubber boats)2.5 (SWATH) 10

Nysted (rubber boats)Bard 1 (SWATH) Simple

Sensitive to marine growth and icing

Boat landing with motion compensating

2 - 2.5 (OAS)2 - 3 (Ampelmann)

11.5 (OAS)14 (Ampelmann) Tested

Not sensitive to marine growth

Installation of additonal equipment on the vessel required

Hoisting by crane 2.5 ? NoneNot sensitive to marine growth

Remote control of craneMaintenance offshore required

Helicopter - 15 - 20Horns Rev, alpha ventus

Not sensitive to wavesFast transport Expensive


HSE – more frequent incidents and accidents?

7

• Damage to construction (rotor blades fall loose, the construction collapses)

• Fire

• Crane- and lift related incidents (Loss of -/damage to equipment)

• Diving accidents

• Occupational accidents (crush/squeeze injuries, fractures, head injuries, drowning etc.)

– ”Just bare luck that more serious accidents do not happen”

• Corrosion

• Cable rupture/cable displacement

Source : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Source: http://wind-energy.gemzies.com/

Source: outside-blog.away.com


Reported incidents.

8

Pape

r by

Nits

chke

et a

l. (2

006)

Japa

nese

repo

rt

ww

w.w

indm

onito

r.de,

la

st u

pdat

ed 2

006

Lightning 24% 31% 4%Storm 20% 5%Icing - 8% 3%Design/material/ defect of parts 27% - 37%Failure elec.sys./short circuit 8% 13% -Failure control system - 21% 23%Fire 7% - -Failure-drive system - 13% -Software - 11% -Loosing of parts - 3%Grid failure - - 7%Others 14% - 11%Unknown causes - - 7%

Component damages Tower 18%

Blades 17%

Gearbox 16%

Generator 13%

Transformer 10%

Nacelle 8%

Control eq. 5%

Others 13%

(Sharples and Sharples, 2010)

(Nitschke et al., 2006)


Hazards we identified for the installation phase

9

Hazards

Mechanical Falling structure/ load/ object (lifting operations)Potential energy (work in height, lifting operations)Kinetic energy (vessels, helicopters, moving parts)Marine operations (ship collisions, man over board)Helicopter operations

Vibration (During testing)Electrical Short circuit

OverchargeElectrostatic phenomena (chock, spark/ignition)

Thermal/smoke/fire Fire and/ or explosion - turbine, vessel Radiation NANoise From machinery and tools/ equipmentInsufficient ergonomics (construction and design) Physiological effects due to heavy lift and repeating movements, unfortunate working positions etc. (manual work carried out during installation)

Work in heightSlippery surfacesPsychological effects due to insufficient working – and living conditions

Environmental effects (internal) Base/ ground failure

Dangerous liquids, gases or materials FlammablePoisonousHarmfulOxidizing/corrosive(Battery acid?)

Environmental effects, external WindWaves and currentsLighteningEarthquake (?)

Organizational Time pressureInsufficient/lacking safety equipmentWrong use of machinery and tools/equipmentLack of correct competence, due to new types of offshore operationsSeveral different actors/companies involved in same operation

Terrorism/sabotage SabotageTerrorism


Hazards we identified for operation and maintenance

10

Hazards

Mechanical Falling structure/ load/ object (blade failure, structural failure) Potential energy (work in height, lifting operations)Kinetic energy (vessels, helicopters, moving parts, rotating parts, turbine overspeed)

Vibration From machinery and tools/ equipmentIn turbine

Electrical Short circuitOverchargeElectrostatic phenomena (chock, spark/ignition)

Thermal/smoke/fire Fire and explosionRadiation NANoise From machinery and tools/ equipmentInsufficient ergonomics (construction and design)

Human errorPhysiological effects (unfortunate working positions etc.) Psychosocial effects (mental overload, mental underload, stress etc.) Absent possibility to see deviations in system operation (Human Machine Interface)

Environmental effects (internal) Damp environmentCorrosive environmentSlippery surfacesBase/ ground failure

Dangerous liquids, gases or materials

NA

Environmental effects, external WindWaves and currentsLighteningEarthquake (?)Bird strikeChanges in seabed conditions

Organizational Time pressureLack of relevant competence Unclear roles and responsibilityInsufficient procedures (if remotely controlled) Lack of communication from onshore control rooms to offshore installation


Operation Maintenance Hazards

Mechanical Falling structure/ load/ object (Work in height, lifting operations, blade failure, structural failure, falling tools/ parts, crane failure)Potential energy (work in height, lifting operations)Kinetic energy (vessels, helicopters, moving parts, rotating parts, turbine overspeed)Sharp edgesTensed energy (springs etc)

Vibration From machinery and tools/ equipmentIn turbine

Electrical Short circuitOverchargeElectrostatic phenomena (chock, spark/ignition)

Thermal/smoke/fire Fire and explosion Too hot or too cold surfaces

Radiation From instruments?Noise Vibration and noise from equipmentInsufficient ergonomics (construction and design)

Human error Physiological effects due to heavy lift and repeating movements, unfortunate working positions etc. Work in heightSlippery surfacesWorking alone?Psycho social effects (mental overload, mental under load, stress, etc.)

Environmental effects (internal) High or low temperatureDamp environments inside towerSlippery surfacesHuman access and egress

Dangerous liquids, gases or materials

OxidisingFlammablePoisonous(oil, paint)Harmful (asbestos, cyanides?)CorrosiveCarcinogenicHarmful too genes

Environmental effects, external WindWaves and currentsLighteningEarthquake Bird strike

Organizational Time pressureLack of correct competence Unclear roles and responsibilityInsufficient proceduresInsufficient safety equipmentWrong use of machinery and equipmentInsufficient planning (e.g. use of spare parts)Unfortunate work hoursLack of communication from onshore control rooms to offshore installation



Identified accident scenarios for offshore wind energy production (alphabetically, not prioritized in terms of frequency or impact)

11

• Air collision

• Anchoring failure, (dynamic) positioning failure

• Bird strike

• Blade failure (falls off)

• Capsizing of vessel

• Diving incident

• Environmental impact

• Extreme weather conditions

• Falling object

• Fire

• Helicopter crash

• Human over board

• Ice throw

• Lightning

• Loss of remote control

• Mooring failure

• Occupational accident

• Pollution to sea

• Structural failure

• Vessel or drifting installation on collision course


Emergency handling challenges:

12

• Accidents may not be discovered in time to prevent further damage

• Access to turbine and tower (e.g. to help sick or injured people) is limited

• Fire-fighting crews will have difficulties in getting access to the fire

• Generally, helicopter transport is risky. This will challenge rescues actions (e.g. rescuing persons from sea or evacuating from nacelle.)

• Evacuating injured person from nacelle is very challenging. Climbing ladders require use of both hands

• Impaired weather conditions may become challenging as few vessels are designed for use in significant waves over 2,5 meters.

• Floating objects in sea may be difficult to pick up because of the infra structure in the wind farm

• Unclear which rules will apply for rescue – will they be the same as for e.g. the petroleum industry?

• Many actors are involved in operations with offshore wind farms.

– unclear whether the same regulations will apply to all and who is responsible for emergency management in which situations.


Suggested actions

13

• There is need for regulations that ensure the Norwegian interests and traditions within HSE when working on the Norwegian Continental Shelf and internationally.

• The responsibility for regulations, inspections and audits within HSE should be clear and coordinated

• Appropriate inspections and audits should be conducted • The phases in offshore wind energy production farms should be regulated to ensure

that HSE is attended to at an early stage. • There is a need for HSE requirements in the design phase to ensure sufficient

attention to ergonomic considerations in work areas. – This may require an international standard or guideline as most concepts are “off the shelf”

from international industry.• Cooperation between the relevant authorities in different countries is necessary.• It is suggested to establish a pilot offshore wind park for research, testing and learning• All experience (within operation, maintenance, reliability and HSE) from an early stage

of the development should be collected.– Databases should be established. Contribution to and use of data from such databases

should be open to all actors and the authorities.• Emergency preparedness plans and training sessions should be established


Thank you for your attention-

14

• We wish to thank the Petroleum Safety Authority in Norway this assignment.

hse challenges related to offshore renewable energy...presentation for the deep sea offshore wind...

Documents