• Ingen resultater fundet

4.1 Offshore wind potential and site characteristics

4.1.2 Results

Identified potential capacity in Baltic Sea

Potential offshore wind power sites with a total capacity of 93.5 GW have been identified in the Baltic Sea. The areas identified consist of existing areas identified by governments/developers

5 This covers a Feasibility Study, Environmental Impact Assessment, bathymetry and geophysical surveys, geotechnical surveys, supply and installation of on-site wind

measurements, port preparation and rental costs, port fees, marine operation management office and facilities, certification and marine warranty survey fees, project management fees, engineering fees, legal fees and insurance.

6 This covers costs related to extended installation time for foundations, wind turbines and an offshore substation, costs related to extended time for export- and inter-array cabling and a general contingency fund for the development and construction phase.

and new areas identified as part of this study. The total capacity is the sum of 187 wind farm blocks, each with a capacity of 500 MW.

The total estimated potential net output from all of these sites as measured at the identified points of connection to the existing grid in the BEMIP countries is 325.9 TWh/year. This corresponds to an average capacity factor of 39.8 %. Among the sites identified, the capacity factor varies between 32.0% and 42.8%. The long-term mean wind speed in the identified areas at 100 m ASL varies between 7.9 m/s and 9.6 m/s.

Potential per BEMIP member country

See Table 4-4 for a summary of the potential identified in each country using the site identification methodology described in section 4.1.1. It should be noted that, depending on additional factors beyond the screening criteria used in this study, not all of the sites listed in Table 4-4 may prove economically viable due, for example, to economic and project performance requirements or price and technology cost trajectories. On the other hand, additional sites and larger capacity potentials may be identified in individual BEMIP Member States as part of their national strategies, including in the context of the National Energy and Climate Plans under the recast Renewable Energy Directive7 and the new Governance framework8. The finalisation of the National Energy and Climate Plans will occur after this study; therefore, new developments after the completion of the related tasks of this study could not always be reflected. Where additional information was provided by before the finalisation of this study, this information has been included in the relevant country factsheet.9

The table 4-4 includes the number of 500 MW offshore wind farm blocks, the total identified potential capacity and the total potential net annual energy production. In addition, we provide the name of the site with the highest capacity factor in each country.

7 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, OJ L 328, 21.12.2018.

8 Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action, OJ L 328, 21.12.2018.

9 This is particularly relevant in the case of Estonia, which in elaborating its National Energy and Climate Plan, has considered a more prominent role for wind energy in its 2030 energy mix than initially envisaged in this analysis.

Table 4-4 Summary of identified potential offshore wind capacity in the BEMIP member countries Country Number of

500 MW wind farm blocks

Identified potential capacity [GW]

Potential Total Net Annual Energy

Production [TWh]

Highest capacity factor site

Higher capacity factor


Denmark 39 19.5 70.7 DK54-1 Rønne Banke, 42.5

Estonia 14 7.0 24.0 EE New Saarema-1/2 40.3

Finland 16 8.0 26.0 FI New Aalands Hav-1/2 40.9

Germany 16 8.0 29.1 DE Baltic 2, Baltic 2 area 42.6

Latvia 29 14.5 49.2 LV07-2 Baltic Wind Park

Phase 1 40.5

Lithuania 9 4.5 15.5 LT New #4-1/2 40.3

Poland 24 12.0 43.2 PL Baltyk Pólnocny phase

1/2 42.4

Sweden 40 20.0 68.2 SE New Oelands Soedra

1/2 42.8

Total 187 93.5 325.9

Note: The site with the highest capacity factor is not necessarily the most economic. The modelling undertaken in Task 2 accounts both for differences in site-specific costs and in the value of site output when selecting sites to develop.

Note that to take into account the comments from the BEMIP member countries, some existing wind farms with capacities of less than 500 MW have been included in the list. To do so, the existing offshore wind farms have been combined into 500 MW blocks if located in the same area with similar wind conditions. For cases where a potential new area neighbours one or more existing offshore wind farms of less than 500 MW, the new potential area and the existing wind farm(s) have been combined so that both the potential and existing capacity is represented by one or more 500 MW wind farm blocks. This simplification is not expected to have any material impact on the modelling undertaken in Tasks 2 and 3.

List of offshore wind farms and ranked lists

A table listing the identified offshore wind farm sites has been prepared as part of the deliverables from Task 1. For each offshore wind farm, the following information is given:

Offshore substation coordinates

Onshore pooling station coordinates

Coordinates and name of suggested point of connection

Distance from offshore substation to onshore pooling station

Distance from onshore pooling station to suggested point of connection

Sea depth

Sea ice zone (low risk, medium risk, high risk)

Wind conditions, including mean wind speed and Weibull parameters for 100m ASL

Gross and Net Annual Energy Production from the offshore wind farm

Estimated losses (including availability losses, electrical losses in array cables and offshore substation, electrical losses in export cables and pooling station and electrical losses in transmission cables)

Capacity factor

Total capacity in wind farm area (if multiple 500 MW wind farm blocks located in one identified area)

The full offshore wind farm list is provided in Appendix A.

Ranked lists of the wind farms according to capacity factor are included as Appendix B and Appendix C.

Due to the size of the abovementioned tables, they will also be delivered in spreadsheet format.

Maps of existing and potential wind farm areas

Figure 4-5 to Figure 4-13 below are maps showing the identified existing and potential offshore wind farm sites for each BEMIP country. In each map, two colours are used for the areas – one to denote newly identified sites, and the other to denote existing sites. All newly identified sites include “New” in the assigned label.

Figure 4-5 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Denmark

Figure 4-6 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Estonia10

Figure 4-7 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Finland

10 Additional areas could be added by incorporating areas identified in recent spatial planning.

A sketch of the areas likely to be identified for offshore wind development in the Estonian Maritime Spatial Plan can be found in the relevant country factsheet in Appendix E.

Figure 4-8 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Germany

Figure 4-9 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Latvia

Figure 4-10 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Lithuania

Figure 4-11 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Poland

Figure 4-12 Existing and potential offshore wind farm areas in Sweden (southern part)

Figure 4-13 Existing and potential offshore wind farm sites in Sweden (northern part)

We are aware of the existence of other offshore wind farms in the pipeline with capacities of less than 500 MW (e.g. Kiri in Finland). In cases where existing wind farms or wind farms in the pipeline are located close enough to each other that these can be grouped into cost-effective 500 MW blocks, these have been added. Otherwise, while these projects may be useful precursors to broader development, these smaller sites are not included in the list of sites for the purposes of modelling regional impacts. This is not expected to have any material impact on the results.