A National Offshore
Wind Strategy:
Creating an
Offshore Wind
Energy Industry in
the United States.
February 2011

‐Page intentionally left blank‐

A National Offshore Wind Strategy

Creating an Offshore Wind Energy Industry
in the United States
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Wind
& Water Power Program
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation,
and Enforcement
February 7, 2011i

Alphabetical List of Contributing Authors:
Jacques Beaudry‐Losique, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
Ted Boling, U.S. Department of Interior (DOI)
Jocelyn Brown‐Saracino, Knauss Sea Grant Fellow
Patrick Gilman, DOE
Michael Hahn, DOE
Chris Hart, PhD, DOE
Jesse Johnson, Sentech / SRA International
Megan McCluer, DOE
Laura Morton, DOE
Brian Naughton, PhD, New West Technologies, LLC
Gary Norton, Sentech / SRA International
Bonnie Ram, Energetics Incorporated
Tim Redding, DOI
Wendy Wallace, Energetics Incorporatedii

Executive Summary
A National Offshore Wind Strategy: Creating an Offshore Wind Energy Industry in the United States was
prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy(EERE) Wind and Water Power Program to outline the actions it will pursue to support the development ofa world‐class offshore wind industry in the United States. This National Offshore Wind Strategy will guide
DOE as it expands its ongoing efforts through the Offshore Wind Innovation and Demonstration (OSWInD)
initiative to promote and accelerate responsible commercial offshore wind development in the U.S. in bothfederal and state waters.
As the agency with primary jurisdiction over reviewing and approving offshore wind projects in federalwaters, the Department of the Interior (DOI) is a crucial partner in implementing this National Offshore
Wind Strategy and ensuring the creation of a robust and environmentally responsible offshore wind energy
industry in the U.S. Over the past two years, DOI has developed a regulatory framework to review
proposed offshore wind projects in federal waters and recently launched the Smart from the Start initiative
to facilitate siting, leasing, and construction of new projects. This National Offshore Wind Strategy
incorporates elements of that initiative and illustrates the commitment of DOE and DOI to work together tospur the rapid and responsible development of offshore wind energy.

Key Points
•

•

•

•

•
•

Offshore wind energy can help the nation reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, diversify its energy
supply, provide cost‐competitive electricity to key coastal regions, and stimulate revitalization of
key sectors of the economy by investing in infrastructure and creating skilled jobs.
Key challenges to the development and deployment of offshore wind technology include therelatively high cost of energy, technical challenges surrounding installation and gridinterconnection, and permitting challenges related to the lack of site data and lack of experience
with permitting processes for projects in both federal and state waters.
Since no wind turbines are installed in U.S. waters, there is a shortage of critical data on theenvironmental and siting effects of turbines and on the installation, operations, and maintenanceof these turbines. This lack of data drives up the costs of financing offshore wind projects to thepoint where financing charges account for roughly half of the cost of offshore wind energy.
This National Offshore Wind Strategy details the OSWInD initiative, which will guide the national
effort to achieve a scenario of 54 gigawatts (GW) of deployed offshore wind generating capacity by
2030, at a cost of energy of $0.07 per kilowatt‐hour (kWh), with an interim scenario of 10 GW ofcapacity deployed by 2020, at a cost of energy of $0.10 / kWh.
To achieve this scenario, the OSWInD initiative must accomplish two critical objectives: reduce thecost of offshore wind energy and reduce the timeline for deploying offshore wind energy.
The OSWInD initiative will address these critical objectives through a suite of three focus areas –Technology Development, Market Barrier Removal, and Advanced Technology Demonstration –encompassing seven major activities: innovative turbines, marine systems engineering,
computational tools and test data, resource planning, siting and permitting, complementary
infrastructure, and advanced technology demonstration projects.

iii

•

•

•

iv

The OSWInD initiative will help reduce the cost of offshore wind energy through technology
development to reduce capital costs; applied research to decrease installation, operations, andmaintenance costs; turbine innovation to increase energy capture; and codes and standards
development to reduce technical risks and financing costs.
Working in partnership through the OSWInD initiative and the Smart from the Start initiative, DOE
and DOI will help reduce the offshore wind deployment timeline in federal waters through resource
planning, siting and permitting engagement, and complementary infrastructure support. The
OSWInD initiative will include similar efforts in state waters, including the Great Lakes, with close
collaborations between DOE and federal and state agencies with jurisdictional responsibility overthose areas. Through implementation of a well coordinated siting strategy, offshore wind energy
facilities and associated infrastructure can be deployed in a manner that reduces conflict with otherocean and Great Lakes uses and the management of protected resources and areas. This strategy
will be implemented in a manner consistent with the polices and principles of the National Policy
for the Stewardship of the Oceans, Our Coasts and Great Lakes (Executive Order # 13547) and its
Framework for Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning.
The OSWInD initiative will ultimately facilitate gigawatt‐scale offshore wind power deployment andwill augment the more than $90M in funding allocated to offshore wind research and test facilities
through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA) and Department of Energy
appropriated funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 and FY 2010.

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................................iii
Table of Contents ...............................................................................................................................................v
List of Figures....................................................................................................................................................vii
List of Tables .....................................................................................................................................................vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations........................................................................................................................... viii
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2
2. Rationale for a National Offshore Wind Program ........................................................................................ 5
2.1 Resource Size ...........................................................................................................................................5
2.2 Benefits of Offshore Wind Deployment ..................................................................................................6
3. Key Challenges Facing Offshore Wind Deployment ..................................................................................... 8
3.1 High Capital Costs and Cost of Energy .....................................................................................................8
3.2 Technical and Infrastructure Challenges ...............................................................................................10
3.3 Permitting Challenges............................................................................................................................10
4. OSWInD Strategy ........................................................................................................................................ 14
4.1 Reducing Cost of Offshore Wind Energy ...............................................................................................14
4.2 Reducing Deployment Timelines ...........................................................................................................16
4.3 Program Performance Metrics & Analysis.............................................................................................19
5. OSWInD Implementation............................................................................................................................ 20
5.1 Technology Development......................................................................................................................20
Activity 1.1: Computational Tools and Test Data .....................................................................................21
Activity 1.2: Innovative Turbines ..............................................................................................................24
Activity 1.3: Marine Systems Engineering ................................................................................................25
5.2 Market Barrier Removal ........................................................................................................................27
Activity 2.1: Siting and Permitting ...........................................................................................................27
Activity 2.2: Complementary Infrastructure.............................................................................................32v

Activity 2.3: Energy Resource Planning ...................................................................................................35
5.3 Advanced Technology Demonstration .................................................................................................37
5.4 Current DOE Offshore Wind Activities...................................................................................................39
5.5 Current DOI Offshore Wind Activities ....................................................................................................40
Works Cited ..................................................................................................................................................... 42vi

List of Figures
Figure 1. OSWInD initiative deployment scenario and critical objectives..........................................................2
Figure 2. U.S. offshore wind speed estimates at 90‐m height ...........................................................................6
Figure 3. Coastal versus inland state retail electric rates...................................................................................7
Figure 4. Estimated life‐cycle cost breakdown for a typical offshore wind project. ..........................................8
Figure 5. Structure of OSWInD focus areas and activities................................................................................20List of Tables
Table 1. Offshore wind potential for areas up to 50 nautical miles from shore ................................................5
Table 2. Key statutes and agencies involved in offshore wind permitting.......................................................11
Table 3. Potential Path to Reduce Cost of Offshore Wind Energy in Class 6 Wind ..........................................15
Table 4. Technology Development Activity 1.1: Computational Tools and Test Data ....................................23
Table 5. Technology Development Activity 1.2: Innovative Turbines ..............................................................25
Table 6. Technology Development Activity 1.3: Marine Systems Engineering ................................................26
Table 7. Market Barrier Removal Activity 2.1: Siting and Permitting...............................................................31
Table 8. Market Barrier Removal Activity 2.2: Complementary Infrastructure ...............................................34
Table 9. Market Barrier Removal Activity 2.3: Resource Planning...................................................................37vii

Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACOE
AOWEC
ARRA
AWEA
BOEMRE
CMSP
CO2
CO2e
COE
DHS
DOC
DoD
DOE
DOI
EERE
EPA
EU
EWEA
FAA
FERC
FWS
FY
GW
IO&M
kW
kWh
m
MOU
m/s
MW
MWh
NEPA
NMFS
NOAA
NPS
NREL
OCRM
OCS
OE
OSWInD
O&M
RFI
USCG
viii

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Consortium
American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009
American Wind Energy Association
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement
Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning
Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide equivalent
Cost of energy
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Commerce
U.S. Department of Defense
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Department of the Interior
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Environmental Protection Agency
European Union
European Wind Energy Association
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Fish and Wildlife Service
Fiscal Year
Gigawatt
Installation, operations, and maintenance
Kilowatt
Kilowatt‐hour
Meter
Memorandum of Understanding
Meters per second
Megawatt
Megawatt‐hourNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Park Service
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
Outer Continental Shelf
Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability
Offshore Wind Innovation and Demonstration Initiative
Operations and maintenance
Request for Information
U.S. Coast Guard

1. Introduction
Offshore wind energy can help the nation reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, diversify its energy
supply, provide cost‐competitive electricity to key coastal regions, and stimulate revitalization of key
sectors of the economy. However, if the nation is to realize these benefits, key challenges to thedevelopment and deployment of offshore wind technology must be overcome, including the relatively
high cost of energy, technical challenges surrounding installation and grid interconnection, and thepermitting challenges governing deployment in both federal and state waters.
In Fiscal Year (FY) 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy instituted the Offshore Wind Innovation and
Demonstration (OSWInD) initiative to consolidate and expand its efforts to promote and accelerate
responsible commercial offshore wind development in the U.S. A National Offshore Wind Strategy:
Creating an Offshore Wind Energy Industry in the United States is an action document that amplifies anddraws conclusions from a companion report, Large‐Scale Offshore Wind Energy for the United States (W.
Musial 2010). The National Offshore Wind Strategy will guide DOE’s OSWInD initiative to support thedevelopment of a world‐class offshore wind industry in the United States able to achieve 54 GW of
offshore wind deployment at a cost of energy of $0.07 / kWh by the year 2030, with an interim scenario
of 10 GW at $0.10 / kWh by 2020.
To realize these scenarios, the OSWInD initiative has developed a strategy to achieve two criticalobjectives: reduce the cost of offshore wind energy and reduce the timeline for deploying offshore windenergy (see Figure 1 below).

Scenarios

CriticalObjectives

Initiative

54 GW at 7¢/kWh by 2030
(10 GW at 10¢/kWh by 2020)

Reduce Costof Energy

ReduceDeployment
Timeline

OSWInD Strategy

Figure 1. OSWInD initiative deployment scenario and critical objectives

2|PageClose collaboration and partnerships among all federal and state agencies with jurisdictional
responsibility over federal and state waters will be crucial to the success of the OSWInD initiative.
Federal waters in particular – those along the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)1 – hold tremendous promise
for substantial offshore wind development in the coming years.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 provided the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEMRE) with the authority to issue leases for renewableenergy on the OCS. In 2009, BOEMRE released a new regulatory framework to govern the review andapproval of proposed offshore wind projects. Building off of this effort, DOI announced in 2010 the
Smart from the Start initiative to facilitate environmentally responsible offshore wind development
along the Atlantic OCS in the shortest period possible by streamlining the approval process for individual
proposed projects, implementing a comprehensive expedited leasing framework that includes
identifying wind energy areas along the Atlantic OCS, and moving aggressively on a separate parallel
track to process offshore transmission applications.
DOI’s offshore wind efforts mirror its innovative strategy for facilitating onshore renewable energy
development, which has resulted in the approval of 12 commercial‐scale renewable energy projects(solar, wind, and geothermal) on federal lands. Once built, these projects will produce almost 4,000
megawatts (MW) of energy, enough to power over 1.2 million homes and create thousands ofconstruction and operational jobs. Going forward, DOI is using landscape‐level planning to identify
federal lands that may be particularly suitable for renewable development. The Smart from the Start
initiative for offshore wind will use approaches similar to DOI’s onshore renewable energy development
efforts. The Smart from the Start initiative and DOE’s OSWInD initiative are complementary efforts thatwill help reduce the offshore wind deployment timeline in the nation’s waters.
The efforts to facilitate gigawatt‐scale offshore wind deployment described in this National Offshore
Wind Strategy will augment the more than $90M that DOE has allocated to offshore wind research andtest facilities through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA) and FY 2009 and FY2010 appropriated funds. In FY 2010, DOE’s offshore wind energy activities included the development oflarge‐scale wind turbine component test facilities, supported by approximately $70M in ARRA funds;
innovative floating turbine platform research, supported by approximately $8M in ARRA funds;
publication of the report Large–Scale Offshore Wind Power in the United States, Assessment ofOpportunities and Barriers (W. Musial 2010); and several ongoing projects to characterize offshore windresources, assess the possible environmental impacts of offshore wind, and develop offshore windenergy curricula to train the future workforce. These projects are discussed in more depth in Section 5.4of this document.
In FY 2011, the OSWInD initiative will expand its ongoing efforts into a suite of seven major activities,
administered through three focus areas, targeted at the critical objectives of reducing the cost ofoffshore wind energy and reducing the timeline for deploying offshore wind systems. The three focus
areas are Technology Development, Market Barrier Removal, and Advanced Technology Demonstration.
1 The OCS consists of submerged lands, subsoil, and seabed starting 3‐9 nautical miles from shore (dependingon the state) and extending approximately 200 nautical miles outward.

3|Page

The seven major activities are innovative turbines, marine systems engineering, computational tools andtest data, resource planning, siting and permitting, complementary infrastructure, and advanced
technology demonstration projects.
Section 2 of this document discusses the rationale for a national offshore wind initiative. Section 3summarizes the key technical and market barriers to the creation of a world‐class U.S. offshore windindustry and lays out the assumptions and conclusions that influenced DOE’s decision‐making for the
National Offshore Wind Strategy. Section 4 introduces the proposed strategy of the OSWInD initiativeand Section 5 lays out the proposed structure of the OSWInD initiative in more detail.

4|Page2. Rationale for a National Offshore Wind Program
Increasing the use of renewable energy for electricity generation is crucial to mitigate the risks ofclimate change and to shift the nation to a long‐term, low‐carbon economy. In his 2011 State of theUnion Address, President Barack Obama called for 80% of the nation’s electricity to be generated fromclean energy sources, including wind, by the year 2035 (White House 2011). In the North American
Leaders’ Declaration of Climate Change and Clean Energy, the Obama Administration supported theglobal goal of reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 50% by 2030 and 80% by 2050 (White House
2009). Because offshore wind power generates electricity without emitting CO2, gigawatt‐scale offshore
wind deployment could contribute significantly to a national climate change mitigation strategy.
Previously, a scenario analyzed in the EERE report 20% Wind Energy by 2030 found that the UnitedStates could generate 20% of its electricity from wind energy by 2030, with offshore wind providing 54
GW of capacity (Department of Energy 2008). This analysis clearly shows the potential for wind energy,
and offshore wind in particular, to address the daunting challenge of reducing CO2 emissions in a rapid
and cost‐effective manner.

2.1 Resource Size
The energy‐generating potential of offshore wind is immense due to the lengthy U.S. coastline and thequality of the resource found there (offshore winds blow stronger and more uniformly than on land,
resulting in greater potential generation). Offshore wind resource data for the Great Lakes, U.S. coastal
waters, and the OCS indicate that for annual average wind speeds above 7 meters per second (m/s), thetotal gross resource of the United States is 4,150 GW, or approximately four times the generating
capacity of the current U.S. electric power system (M. Schwartz 2010). Of this capacity, 1,070 GW are inwater less than 30 meters (m) deep, 630 GW are in water between 30 m and 60 m deep, and 2,450 GW
are in water deeper than 60 m (see Figure 2). More than 66% of the nation’s offshore wind resource is inwind class 6 or higher. The scale of this theoretical capacity implies that under reasonable economic
scenarios, offshore wind can contribute to the nation’s energy mix at significant levels.
Table 1. Offshore wind potential for areas up to 50 nautical miles from shore with average wind speeds 7 m/s or greater at
90‐m elevation (W. Musial 2010)

Region
New England
Mid‐Atlantic
South Atlantic Bight
California
Pacific Northwest
Great Lakes
Gulf of Mexico
HawaiiTotal

0–30 m depth
100.2
298.1
134.1
4.4
15.1
176.7
340.3
2.3
1,071.2 GW

30–60 m depth
136.2
179.1
48.8
10.5
21.3
106.4
120.1
5.5
628.0 GW

>60 m depth
250.4
92.5
7.7
573
305.3
459.4
133.3
629.6
2,451.1 GW

Total
486.8
569.7
190.7
587.8
341.7
742.5
593.7
637.4
4,150.3 GW

Currently, the majority of offshore wind projects are in the European Union (EU), where utility‐scaleplanning for offshore wind has at least a 10‐year history. Shallow water technology is proven in Europe,with 39 projects constructed and more than 2,000 MW of capacity installed, although this market is
5|Pageheavily subsidized. The EU and European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) have established aggressive
targets to install 40 GW of offshore wind by 2020 and 150 GW by 2030. In the United States, roughly 5
GW of offshore wind capacity have been proposed in federal and state waters (W. Musial 2010).

Figure 2. U.S. offshore wind speed estimates at 90‐m height

2.2 Benefits of Offshore Wind Deployment
On average, one gigawatt of installed offshore wind power capacity can generate 3.4 million megawatt‐
hours (MWh) of electricity annually. Generating the same amount of electricity with fossil fuels would
consume 1.7 million tons of coal or 27.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas and would emit 2.7 million tonsof carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) annually (S. Dolan 2010). Because offshore winds generally blow
more strongly and consistently than onshore winds, offshore wind turbines operate at higher capacity
factors2 than wind turbines installed on land. In addition, daily offshore wind speed profiles tend tocorrespond well to periods of high electricity demand by coastal cities, such that the strongest winds(and thus highest potential energy generation) correspond to the periods of greatest electricity demand(W. Musial 2010).
High electricity costs in coastal regions, more energetic wind regimes offshore, and close proximity ofoffshore wind resources to major electricity demand centers could allow offshore wind to compete
relatively quickly with fossil fuel‐based electricity generation in many coastal areas. The 28 coastal andGreat Lakes states in the continental United States use 78% of the nation’s electricity (Department of2

A measure of the productivity of a power plant, calculated as actual energy produced by a plant over a given
period divided by the amount of energy that the plant would produce when generating at maximum capacity
during that period.

6|PageEnergy 2008) while facing higher retail electricity rates than their inland neighbors (Figure 3). Mid‐
Atlantic and Northeastern coastal states in particular face a dual problem: high electricity costs anddependence on high‐carbon, price‐volatile supplies of fossil fuel for generation. In states without
substantial land‐based renewable resources, offshore wind deployment will be critical to meet theirrenewable energy standards or goals. In states with high electricity rates, offshore wind energy may
quickly become cost‐competitive. Finally, the proximity of offshore wind resources to major electricalload centers minimizes the need to build new transmission capacity to serve those centers.
$0.30

Retail Electricity Prices and Population by State40

Coastal state population$0.25

Inland state population
30

$0.20

$0.15

20
Population (M)Retail Electricity Prices ($/kWh)Retail Electricity Price

$0.10

10

$0.00

Hawaii
New York
Connecticut
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
New Jersey
AlaskaNew…
Maine
California
Maryland
Delaware
Texas
FloridaLouisiana
Michigan
Illinois
Wisconsin
Georgia
Mississippi
Ohio
Alabama
North Carolina
Minnesota
South Carolina
Virginia
OregonIndiana
Washington
Vermont
NevadaPennsylvania
Arizona
Colorado
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Arkansas
KansasTennessee
MontanaSouth Dakota
Iowa
MissouriNorth Dakota
Utah
Nebraska
KentuckyWyoming
Idaho
West Virginia

$0.05

0

Figure 3. Coastal versus inland state retail electric rates. Source: DOE‐EIA

Deployment of wind energy along U.S. coasts would also trigger direct and indirect economic benefits.
According to NREL analysis and extrapolation of European studies, offshore wind would create
approximately 20.7 direct jobs per annual megawatt installed in U.S. waters (W. Musial 2010). Installing
54 GW of offshore wind capacity in U.S. waters would create more than 43,000 permanent operations
and maintenance (O&M) jobs and would require more than 1.1 million job‐years to manufacture andinstall the turbines (W. Musial 2010). Many of these jobs would be located in economically depressed
ports and shipyards, which could be revitalized as fabrication and staging areas for the manufacture,
installation, and maintenance of offshore wind turbines.

7|Page3. Key Challenges Facing Offshore Wind Deployment
The major challenges facing deployment of offshore wind power in U.S. waters include the high costs ofoffshore wind facilities; the technical challenges and lack of current infrastructure to support the
fabrication, installation, interconnection, operations and maintenance of these systems; and thepermitting challenges related to the lack of site data and lack of experience with new or developing
permitting processes for projects in federal and state waters.

3.1 High Capital Costs and Cost of Energy
Offshore wind installations have higher capital costs than land‐based installations per unit of generating
capacity, largely because of turbine upgrades required for operation at sea and increased costs related
to turbine foundations, balance‐of‐system infrastructure, interconnection, and installation. In addition,
one‐time costs are incurred with the development of the infrastructure to support the offshore industry,
such as vessels for turbine installation, port and harbor upgrades, manufacturing facilities, andworkforce training programs. NREL estimates a current baseline of installed capital costs for offshore
wind at $4,250 per kilowatt (kW) based on energy market surveys (W. Musial 2010). The estimated life‐
cycle costs for a typical offshore wind project are shown in Figure 4 below. Several important offshore
technology issues require research and development to achieve competitive market pricing in the longterm. These issues include reducing installed capital costs, improving reliability, and increasing energy
capture. In the longer term, innovative, comparatively inexpensive foundation designs will be required
to harness the massive wind resource located in water more than 60 m in depth.
Other Variable
Costs, 11.1%
Turbine, 28.3%
Operations &Maintenance,
20.5%

Other Capital
Costs, 1.2%
Project
Development andPermits, 4.4%
Logistics andInstallation, 10.4%

Electrical
Infrastructure,
10.9%
Support Structure,
13.3%

Figure 4. Estimated life‐cycle cost breakdown for a typical offshore wind project (W. Musial 2010).

8|PageIn addition to elevated capital costs, offshore windenergy currently has a higher cost of energy3 thancomparable technologies. As discussed throughout
this National Offshore Wind Strategy, a criticalobjective of the OSWInD initiative is to lower thecost of offshore wind energy. This cost of energy canbe broadly calculated as the sum of all up‐front
annualized capital equipment costs and operations
and maintenance costs over the life of the project,divided by the total energy output of the project.
Cost of energy is thus calculated as a unit of currency
per unit of energy (typically $/MWh or ¢/kWh). The
cost of energy can be lowered by reducing thecapital costs, financing costs, or operations andmaintenance costs of a project, or by increasing theamount of energy generated by the project over its
operational life. Increased energy generation will
result from larger, more efficient, more reliableturbines with access to the best wind resource
possible. A substantial reduction in costs andincrease in energy capture will have a dramaticeffect on lowering the cost of energy. Finally,
projects in U.S. waters that demonstrate andvalidate offshore wind technologies can help reducethe cost of financing future projects by reducing theperceived risk of offshore wind systems on the partof investors.

Offshore Wind Cost of Energy
Calculations
The general formula for calculating the costof offshore wind energy can be representedas:
COE = (DRF x ICC) + O&M + LRC + Fees
AEP
COE = cost of energy
DRF = discount rate factor
ICC = installed capital costs
O&M = operations & maintenance costs
LRC = levelized replacement costs
AEP = annual energy production
Fees = annual insurance, warrantees, etc.
DRF =dx (1 ‐ T x PVDEP)
N
1‐T
1 ‐ 1/(1+d)

d = discount rate
N = analysis period
T = marginal income tax rate
PVDEP = present value of depreciation

Current cost of energy projections must be cut by more than 50% to enable the offshore wind
deployment scenario envisioned in this National Offshore Wind Strategy. DOE will work with allnecessary parties to improve all components of offshore wind project development, capital
expenditures, and operational processes, to reduce capital costs, reduce operations and maintenancecosts, and improve energy production.
••

Turbine Capital Cost: reducing capital and installation costs of all turbine components;
Balance of System Capital Cost: reducing capital and installation costs of foundation
structures, cabling, substations and other non‐turbine components;

This cost of energy calculation represents the bus‐bar cost of offshore wind energy delivered to theterrestrial transmission system and does not include possible additional interconnection costs related toimbalance/integration charges, firming charges, or transmission upgrades needed for interconnection.

3

9|Page

•

•
•
•
•

Operations, Maintenance and Replacement Cost: reducing scheduled maintenance,
improving reliability, and reducing replacement costs for components such as gearboxes,
generators and blades;
Capacity Factor: improving overall system performance through improved siting, energy
capture, reliability, and availability;
Transmission & Grid Integration Cost: incorporating low‐cost transmission configurations
and wind integration into power management systems;
Start‐up and Permitting Cost: reducing delays caused by permit approval times; andCost of Capital: reducing financial risks and lowering insurance and warranty premiums as aresult of stable and predictable energy output and life‐cycle operational time through theuse of demonstrated, validated technologies.

3.2 Technical and Infrastructure Challenges
Significant challenges to offshore wind power deployment related to resource characterization, gridinterconnection and operation, and infrastructure will need to be overcome. The offshore windresource is not well characterized. This significantly increases uncertainty related to potential project
power production and turbine and array design considerations, which in turn increase financing costs.
The implications for adding large amounts of offshore wind generation to the power system need to bebetter understood to ensure reliable integration and to evaluate the need for additional grid
infrastructure such as an offshore transmission backbone. Finally, with current technology, cost‐effective installation of offshore wind turbines requires specialized vessels, purpose‐built portside
infrastructure, robust undersea electricity transmission lines, and grid interconnections. These vessels
and this infrastructure do not currently exist in the U.S. Although foreign‐flagged turbine installation andmaintenance vessels exist, legislation such as the Jones Act limits the ability of these vessels to operatein U.S. waters.

3.3 Permitting Challenges
As a nascent industry in the United States, offshore wind projects face new and untested permitting
processes, which contribute to the uncertainty and risk faced by potential project developers andfinanciers, in turn potentially impacting investment in both offshore wind power projects anddevelopment of the supply chain and other supporting infrastructure. Estimates for project approvals
on the OCS vary based on the amount and quality of data collected for the project, environmental
studies, site characterization, and diligence of the developer. For the Great Lakes, where eight states
and the Canadian province of Ontario claim jurisdiction, numerous competing activities and the lack ofan overarching regulatory framework create a unique set of permitting challenges.
Numerous state and federal entities have authority over siting, permitting, and installation of offshore
wind facilities. Table 2 below, adapted from Appendix A of Large‐Scale Offshore Wind Power in the
United States (W. Musial 2010), lists the key statutes and responsible agencies involved in thepermitting of offshore wind power projects. DOI, through the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE), serves as the lead agency in permitting offshore wind energy on
the OCS. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), which is responsible for permitting any potential
10 | P a g e

obstruction or alteration of U.S. navigable waters, currently serves as the lead federal agency inpermitting offshore wind in state waters, including the Great Lakes. Several federal entities also havemandates to review and/or approve certain aspects of offshore wind projects, such as theEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS),
Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), NOAA’s National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Defense (DoD),
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Numerous state, local,
and tribal government entities, as well as other stakeholders, must also be consulted in the permitting
process. The mandates of these various entities include managing protected species, managing
commercial and recreational fisheries, protecting marine and coastal habitats, and designation andprotection of marine areas with special significance due to their conservation, recreational, ecological,
historical, scientific, cultural, archeological, educational, or aesthetic qualities.
Agencies must consider a range of environmental and cultural resources, protected areas, andcompeting uses when permitting the installation of offshore wind power projects. Some of the key
environmental resources of concern are bird and bat species, marine mammals, pelagic and benthic
species and habitats, and water quality. Historic preservation sites, such as notable shipwrecks orcoastal structures, and tribal resources, such as burial grounds or other ocean areas with cultural or
religious significance, must also be considered in the siting process. Certain ocean areas are protected or
restricted from development, including NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuaries, coastal National Parks andNational Wildlife Refuges, DoD limited access areas, or designated ship navigation lanes. Finally, windproject siting must consider competing uses of the ocean space, including ship navigation, commercial
fishing, DoD training and operations, and other activities.
Coordinated and concurrent project review processes can lead to efficiency gains in the permitting ofoffshore wind projects. In some cases, these opportunities for increased efficiency are alreadyrecognized and can be quickly adopted. In other cases, collaboration is needed to identify the potential
efficiencies to be gained through coordinated and concurrent project review. Adoption of such process
efficiencies, including implementation of the National Ocean Policy and coastal and marine spatialplanning, can help protect natural resources, protected areas, and competing uses when permitting
offshore wind energy facilities in the nation’s ocean and Great Lakes waters. Additionally, thedevelopment and use of best management practices can provide valuable tools for mitigating theimpacts of offshore wind projects on wildlife and ecosystems.
Table 2. Key statutes and agencies involved in offshore wind permitting4

StatuteKey Agencies

Description

National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)All federal agencies

Requires federal agencies to consider the potential environmental
impacts of proposed federal actions. For any major federal action thatis likely to result in significant environmental impacts, agencies must
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

States often have similar statutes and regulatory requirements as those listed here, such as state
environmental policy acts and state endangered species acts, as well as rules governing power generation.
4

11 | P a g e

Endangered Species Act
of 1973

FWS; NOAA NMFS

Requires federal agencies to consult with the FWS and NOAA NMFS toensure that proposed Federal actions are not likely to jeopardize thecontinued existence of any species listed at the federal level as
endangered or threatened, or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.

Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972

FWS; NOAA NMFS

Prohibits, with certain exceptions, the take of marine mammals in U.S.
waters by U.S. citizens on the high seas, and importation of marine
mammals and marine mammal products into the U.S.

Magnuson‐Stevens
Fishery Conservationand Management Act

NOAA NMFS

Marine Protection,
Research, andSanctuaries Act of 1972

EPA; USACE; NOAA

Requires federal agencies to consult with the NMFS on proposed
federal actions that may adversely affect essential fish habitats
necessary for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity offederally managed fisheries.
Prohibits the dumping of certain materials without a permit from the
EPA. For ocean dumping of dredged material, the USACE is given
permitting authority.

National Marine
Sanctuaries Act

NOAAProhibits the destruction, loss of, or injury to any sanctuary resource
managed under the law or permit.

Coastal Zone
Management Act of1972

NOAA Office of Ocean
and Coastal Resource
Management (OCRM)

Specifies that coastal states may protect coastal resources and manage
coastal development.

National HistoricPreservation Act of
1966

NPS; Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation;
State or Tribal HistoricPreservation Officer
FAA

Requires each federal agency to consult with the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation and the State or Tribal Historic Preservation
Officer before allowing a federally licensed activity to proceed in anarea where cultural or historic resources might be located.
Requires that, when construction, alteration, establishment, or
expansion of a structure is proposed, adequate public notice be given
to the FAA as necessary to promote safety in air commerce and theefficient use and preservation of the navigable airspace.
Establishes BOEMRE as the lead authority to regulate offshore wind infederal waters. (Note that under the Federal Power Act, per an MOU
between DOI and FERC, FERC has the lead role in regulating offshore
kinetic energy, such as wave energy devices.)

Federal Aviation Act of1958

Federal Power Act

FERC; BOEMRE

Ports and Waterways
Safety Act

USCG

Authorizes the USCG to implement measures for controlling or
supervising vessel traffic or for protecting navigation and the marine
environment.

Rivers and Harbors Act
of 1899

USACE

Delegates to the USACE the authority to review and regulate certain
structures and work that are located in or that affect navigable watersof the United States, including submarine cable systems.

Outer Continental Lands
Act of 1953

DOI

Clean Water Act

EPA, USCG

Clean Air Act

EPA, BOEMRE

Granted the Department of the Interior with the authority to lease
submerged lands on the Outer Continental Shelf. The Energy Policy
Act of 2005 amended this act to give DOI the authority to leaserenewable energy, including offshore wind, on the OCS.
Prohibits the discharge of oil or hazardous substances into waters or
adjoining shorelines which may affect natural resources belonging to
the United States.
Prohibits federal agencies from providing financial assistance or issuing
approval for activities that do not conform to approved plans forachieving National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Requires the EPA (orauthorized state agencies) to issue a permit before the construction of,or major modification to, any major stationary source of air pollution.

12 | P a g e

DOE’s OSWInD initiative will operate in the context of developing offshore energy collaborations and achanging ocean policy and energy regulatory landscape that presents unique opportunities to work withfederal and state partners. With respect to federal waters, DOE and DOI will continue to work closely to
implement their respective complementary offshore wind initiatives: OSWInD and Smart from the Start.
DOI’s Smart from the Start initiative is a strategy to facilitate offshore wind development along theAtlantic OCS. Elements of the initiative include:
1. Streamlining the approval process for individual proposed projects and eliminating unnecessary
regulatory requirements.
2. Implementing a comprehensive, expedited leasing framework for offshore wind development byidentifying wind energy areas along the Atlantic OCS that appear most suitable for offshore windenergy development because of fewer user conflicts and resource issues, organizing aninteragency process to gather information from key agencies regarding the environmental andgeophysical attributes and other uses of these wind energy areas, and assembling that data in a
publicly available format to help assess the feasibility and risks associated with any potential
development in the identified areas.
3. Moving aggressively on a separate but parallel track to process any applications to build
offshore transmission lines, such as potential regional ‘backbone’ lines that would serve multiple
future offshore wind projects along the Atlantic OCS.
The Smart from the Start initiative builds off of DOI’s efforts of the past two years to develop an efficientand responsible permitting process. Following the issuance in 2009 of the new regulatory framework
governing offshore wind development, BOEMRE actively engaged state‐based task forces, comprisingfederal, state, and tribal governments, to collect data and share knowledge about potential
development areas along the Atlantic OCS. DOI also signed an MOU with 11 coastal states to establish
the Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Consortium (AOWEC), which pledged to identify ways to facilitate thedevelopment of offshore wind energy. AOWEC action plans are being incorporated into the Smart fromthe Start initiative and, with the OSWInD initiative, represent a robust collective strategy to support thisimportant renewable energy resource.
These collective efforts are taking place within the broader context of the new National Ocean Policy for
the United States, which emphasizes the importance of coastal and marine spatial planning and earlyand frequent collaboration among stakeholders. In July 2010, President Obama created a new National
Ocean Council chartered to implement the National Ocean Policy and the recommendations of theInteragency Ocean Policy Task Force, including the development of coastal and marine spatial plans at
the regional level. DOE and DOI are active participants in the new National Ocean Council, and the
OSWInD and Smart from the Start initiatives will coordinate closely with this effort.

13 | P a g e

4. OSWInD Strategy
As discussed in Section 2, a common set of challenges confront the initial U.S. deployment of offshore
wind energy and its long‐term growth into a major industry and significant contributor to the nation’senergy and economic needs. DOE, as a non‐regulatory agency, is in a unique position to provide
national leadership through collaborative partnerships with other federal agencies, the states,
academia, and industry. This section of the National Offshore Wind Strategy details a plan to accelerate
offshore wind deployment in the United States through targeted technical research and development,
partnerships to remove market barriers, and implementation of pioneering demonstration projects.
Through such an initiative, DOE can capitalize on its unique position to help eliminate uncertainty,
mitigate risks, and facilitate the use of the first installed offshore turbines as testbeds for research anddevelopment.
The OSWInD strategy considers two critical objectives in overcoming the challenges to offshore windenergy deployment: reducing the cost of energy through technology development to ensurecompetitiveness with other electrical generation sources, and reducing deployment timelines anduncertainties limiting U.S. offshore wind project development. To meet these objectives, the OSWInD
initiative will undertake a set of seven major activities: Computational Tools and Test Data, Innovative
Turbines, Marine Systems Engineering, Siting and Permitting, Complementary Infrastructure, Resource
Planning, and Demonstration Projects. These activities, which are further specified into research areas,
details, and stages, are administered through three focus areas: Technology Development, Market
Barrier Removal, and Advanced Technology Demonstration. Section 5 of this report contains an in‐depth
discussion of the initiative by activity and research area.

Offshore Wind Critical Objectives••

Reduce the cost of energy through technology development to ensure competitiveness withother electrical generation sources.
Reduce deployment timelines and uncertainties limiting U.S. offshore wind project
development.

4.1 Reducing Cost of Offshore Wind Energy
A world‐class research and development effort is needed to integrate the resources and expertise of thecountry in a coordinated investment and information exchange to propel the United States to theleading edge of offshore wind technology. In the short‐term, the Technology Development focus area
will concentrate primarily on risk reduction to facilitate the initial deployment of offshore wind projects
in U.S. waters. Over the long term, the Technology Development focus area will have a primary goal ofdeveloping new technologies that lower the cost of energy, sustain the growth of the industry, andmake offshore wind cost‐competitive without subsidies.
Facilitating deployment of the initial projects in the United States is a top priority in the short term
because these installations will provide experience, generate performance data, and highlight
unforeseen issues, all of which will help inform and prioritize the OSWInD initiative’s longer‐term
14 | P a g etechnology research and development effort. Design codes, standards development, and performancemodels are some of the specific technology development activities that will both lay the foundation of along‐term research and development program and reduce risk for developers, regulators, designers, andfinanciers involved in the first offshore wind installations. Special consideration of technicalimprovements needed to adapt primarily European technologies to the U.S. offshore environment will
also be a priority.
OSWInD’s long‐term research and development strategy will focus primarily on hardware development
to reduce the life‐cycle costs of offshore wind energy systems and to expand access to the mostpromising wind resource areas. More than half of the estimated life‐cycle cost of an offshore windturbine farm is determined by the foundation, electrical infrastructure, installation and logistics, andoperations and maintenance costs.
Table 3. Potential Path to Reduce Cost of Offshore Wind Energy in Class 6 Wind ($2009 USD) (NREL 2010)5

Component

2010

2020

2030

2010 ‐ Land$ 4,259$ 2,900$ 2,600$ 2,120

Discount Rate Factor (DRF)

20%

14%

8%

12%

Turbine Rating (MW)

3.6

8.0

10.0

1.5

Rotor Diameter (m)

107

156

175

77

Annual Energy Production / Turbine (MWh)12,27631,04039,381

4684

Capacity Factor

39%

44%

45%

36%

Array Losses

10%

7%

7%

15%

Availability

95%

97%

97%

98%

Rotor Coefficient of Power

0.45

0.49

0.49

.47

Drivetrain Efficiency

0.9

0.95

0.95

0.9

Rated Windspeed (m/s)

12.03

12.03

12.03

10.97

Average Wind Speed at Hub Heights (m/s)

8.8

9.09

9.17

7.75

Wind Shear

0.1

0.1

0.1

.143

Hub Height (m)

80

110

120

80

Cost of Energy ($/kWh)

0.27

0.10

0.07

0.09

Cost of Energy ($/kWh) at constant 7% DR

0.12

0.08

0.07

0.08

Installed Capital Cost ($/kW)
6

DOE has outlined a potential path for reducing the cost of offshore wind energy at the scale envisioned
in this report. Under this scenario, detailed in Table 3 above and based on a cost of energy analysis
approach developed by NREL (J. Cohen 2008), the cost of offshore wind energy can be reduced from
$0.27 per kWh in 2010 to $0.07 per kWh in 2030 by addressing three critical factors. First, cost of energy
5 All values are preliminary and subject to change. Values are expressed in constant 2009 dollars.

6 The Discount Rate Factor calculation is based on a significant financial risk premium for U.S. offshore windtechnology in 2010; this financial risk premium is assumed to decrease over time.

15 | P a g e

can be reduced by increasing system efficiency and decreasing capital costs through the development oflarger systems, innovative components and fully integrated system designs. Under this scenario,
installed capital cost will decline by 39% from $4,259/kW to $2,600/kW, average turbine rating will
increase from 3.6 MW to 10.0 MW, and turbine capacity factor will improve from 39% to 45%. Second,
overall costs can be reduced by decreasing operational and replacement costs. Operating costs foroffshore turbines must be continually reduced to compete with land‐based systems, and fully loaded
replacement cost, including the cost of marine transport and component replacement costs, will need tobe reduced through higher reliability and innovative, low‐maintenance designs. Finally, the financing
components of the cost of offshore wind energy, roughly half of the modeled cost of offshore windenergy in U.S. markets, can be reduced by reducing project risk. Under this scenario, the discount rate
factor will decline from a current estimate of 20% to a target level of 8% by reducing perceived risks toinvestors. DOE will help reduce these perceived risks by developing validated turbine performancemodels that accurately predict project output, by participating in the development of design codes andstandards that help ensure turbine reliability and survivability, and by partnering in demonstrations ofoffshore wind technologies in U.S. waters to reduce perceptions of technology risk. Predictable andtimely regulatory and permitting approvals will also help reduce financing costs, as will stable andpredictable installation and construction costs, system performance, and maintenance and replacement
requirements.
Successful implementation of this ambitious national research and development initiative will require
collaboration with federal and state agencies, universities, international organizations, non‐governmental organizations, the European offshore wind industry, and the U.S. offshore oil and gas
industry. Identifying shared research priorities will be critical to maximizing investment with minimal
overlap. Access to shared resources, especially test facilities, will be integral to developing the next
generation of large offshore wind turbines. As a final step, field testing could be conducted near‐shore,
and then offshore, to provide platforms for testing pre‐commercial turbines before full deployment andfor collecting performance data to benefit the entire industry and lead to improved reliability.

4.2 Reducing Deployment Timelines
Currently, offshore wind development in the United States is in its infancy. Projects are proceeding
through regulatory permit processes for the first time. Much of the critical environmental baseline datafrom which to build environmental impact assessments has not been collected. The balance of risks andbenefits of offshore wind energy development with respect to critical environmental and cultural
resources, protected areas, and competing uses is not well understood; offshore wind resources in someareas are poorly characterized; and essential transmission, supply chain, installation and maintenanceinfrastructure do not yet exist. Without collaboration among key agencies and stakeholders to develop
and implement high‐quality and efficient permitting processes that proactively avoid and mitigate
conflicts with other ocean uses, project development risks will continue to be unmanageable and cost ofenergy will increase.
The OSWInD initiative will address these challenges through three primary activities:

16 | P a g e•••Energy Resource Planning, which will address wind resource characterization and facility design
conditions.
Siting and Permitting, which will address policy and economic analysis, regulatory processes,
environmental risks, public acceptance, conflicting uses, potential interference with radar andother electronic equipment used in marine operations, and risk management.
Complementary Infrastructure, which will address domestic manufacturing and supply chain
development, transmission and interconnection planning, and specialized vessels and otherinstallation, operations and maintenance technology.

As discussed above, DOI’s complementary Smart from the Start initiative will directly address the siting
and permitting aspects of offshore wind development in federal waters. The initiative is aimed ataddressing concerns raised about the potential timelines facing individual offshore wind projects
through upfront planning to identify wind energy areas that appear best for development because of
fewer user and resource conflicts, gathering available data on resources and uses of those wind energy
areas, and then making that data available to the public to facilitate effective evaluation of individual
projects within identified wind energy areas.
Importantly, the Smart from the Start initiative will include proposed environmental reviews under
NEPA that substantially shorten the initial projected timelines for individual offshore wind projects.
Specifically, the impacts of leasing and performing site assessment activities within identified windenergy areas will be subject to an environmental assessment under NEPA. The proposed construction
and operation plans for individual projects would then be subject to an environmental impact
statement. Each review will be conducted under aggressive schedules with dedicated staff and high‐level engagement. Earlier estimates of a 7‐ to 10‐year permitting timeline for each project were basedon the assumption that multiple, typically lengthy environmental impact statements would be required.
Instead, this strategy will ensure robust environmental review at the appropriate points in the process
and not subject each proposed project to multiple and duplicative environmental reviews. Coupled withother efficiencies in the review process, including enhanced interagency coordination, the Smart fromthe Start initiative has the potential to shorten initial timeline estimates by more than half.
For the OSWInD and Smart from the Start initiatives to be successful, close collaboration among key
federal and state agencies, as well as other stakeholders, will be crucial. Each proposed offshore windproject is subject to a myriad of federal, state, and other requirements. DOE and DOI are working
closely to identify and overcome some of the permitting challenges that are likely to arise because of
those multiple requirements while maintaining the integrity of the review processes and the values theyprotect. Additionally, the DOE and DOI initiatives, as well as related agreements with NOAA, share thegoal of improving the amount of available data on external conditions (e.g., ocean uses and resources aswell as meteorological and geophysical conditions) that influence design requirements, energy
production, and economic viability. One of the key components of the Smart from the Start initiative isthe creation of a senior‐level interagency working group tasked with gathering available resource anduser data on wind energy areas along the Atlantic OCS, making that data publicly available, andidentifying crucial data gaps that should be filled through collaborative research efforts. The OSWInD
initiative will similarly facilitate collaboration between key agencies and research organizations to
17 | P a g e

establish a national data network for characterizing the wind resource and other factors such as wave
action and seabed mechanics. These factors are not well documented but must be better understoodfor accurate marine spatial planning, establishing prioritized offshore wind areas, and financial due
diligence.
DOE is uniquely positioned to play a catalytic role in addressing market barriers by bringing depth ofknowledge of the technology and the industry, technical and financial resources, and a positive historyof working across agencies and stakeholders, which will help in identifying administrative efficiencies toovercome regulatory barriers. Similarly, as the primary agency with jurisdiction over proposed offshore
wind projects in federal waters, DOI can convene agencies and stakeholders to share information,
identify challenges, and find solutions. The OSWInD and Smart from the Start initiatives will engage
federal and state regulators, resource management agencies, and outside stakeholders to drive
collective action toward creating an offshore wind industry. This engagement will include theestablishment of additional formal working arrangements such as memoranda of understanding withkey agencies, as well as interagency working groups. For example, DOE and DOI entered into an MOU
on the future development of commercial offshore renewable energy projects on the OCS (see DOE/DOI
MOU and Action Plan text box), which formalizes the close working relationship between the two
agencies and their shared goal of supporting commercial offshore renewable energy projects. DOE is
also working with ACOE to develop
permitting processes for offshore
DOE/DOI MOU and Action Plan
wind energy in the Great Lakes under
the auspices of the White HouseOn June 29, 2010, the Department of the Interior and theDepartment of Energy signed a new Memorandum ofCouncil on Environmental Quality.
Understanding that will strengthen the working relationship
DOI has entered into an MOU with 11
between the two agencies on the future development ofcoastal states to establish thecommercial offshore renewable energy projects on the OCS.
Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy
Under the Action Plan developed as part of the MOU, the DOE
Consortium (AOWEC), which will
Wind Program and DOI’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
identify ways to facilitate theand Regulatory Enforcement (BOEMRE) committed to improved
development of Atlantic offshore
exchange of data on offshore wind resources and technologies,
wind energy. AOWEC action plansengaging stakeholders on critical barriers, and collaborating on
are being incorporated into theresearch projects to achieve objectives in five areas, including:
Smart from the Start initiative and• Developing attainable deployment goals for offshore
will identify means to reducewind on the OCS
deployment timelines and support• Reducing siting and permitting timelines for project
the development of the offshoredevelopers• Improving resource assessment capabilities
wind industry.
•

Safety, domestic economic benefits,cost‐effective
installation
andoperations, and practical grid
integration processes depend on
development of large‐scale local,•

Developing technical standards for the U.S. offshore
wind industry
Reducing public acceptance risk through informationexchange and public engagement

Successful implementation of the MOU and the Action Plan willbe critical to reducing the deployment barriers identified in thisNational Offshore Wind Strategy.

18 | P a g e

regional and national infrastructure components dedicated to meeting the requirements of the offshore
industry. The OSWInD initiative plans research activities with states, federal agencies, and industry todevelop optimized, integrated strategies for meeting these needs and funding technical development.

4.3 Program Performance Metrics & Analysis
DOE will conduct cost‐benefit analyses to help define ongoing program activities and metrics and toprovide a context for decision‐making. Analysis‐based metrics for cost of energy and other factors are
critical for reporting progress toward technical objectives and judging the feasibility of newtechnologies. Analysis activities include a coherent system of metrics to track program impact, analysisof the costs of deployment barriers that will help characterize program performance, and support forthe development of analysis tools to assist DOE in prioritizing major program research and deployment
elements. DOE will develop and track these metrics to inform decision‐making regarding support fortechnology development and to assess the long‐range impact of its investment.
Cost of energy modeling examines microeconomic cost and supply (e.g., operations and maintenance,
installation, turbine subcomponents) as well as macroeconomic effects (e.g., commodity prices,
exchange rates, public policy). These activities require substantive knowledge and evaluation tools,
some of which remain to be developed. The analysis areas include national energy penetration models
such as ReEDs, NEMS, and Markal. These efforts support national‐scale initiatives to quantify carbon
reductions and enhance high‐penetration renewable energy scenario modeling. They also integrate
offshore wind projections with ongoing job models, such as NREL’s Jobs and Economic Development
Impact (JEDI) model, that are already underway and include market and policy analysis on offshore windprojects, both in the U.S. and Europe, as appropriate.

19 | P a g e

5. OSWInD Implementation
This section details how each of the focus areas, activities, and research areas will be implemented as
the OSWInD initiative matures.

ProgramOSWInD Initiative

Technology
Development

Market Barrier Removal

Computational Tools
and Test Data

Siting and Permitting

Innovative Turbines

Complementary
Infrastructure

Marine Systems
Engineering

Resource Planning

Advanced Technology
Demonstration

Focus

Demonstration
Projects

Activity

Figure 5. Structure of OSWInD focus areas and activities

5.1 Technology Development
The research efforts in Focus Area 1: Technology Development will help overcome technological barriers
to the deployment scenario of 54 GW of offshore wind by 2030. Specific activities will focus on
improvements to models, design tools, components, turbines, and balance‐of‐system components thatwill lead to a lower cost of energy, reduction in technological risk, and increased access to windresources. Activities are highly integrated such that results in one area will be used as inputs to anotherarea, and may ultimately be guided by a system‐level optimization methodology. The Technology
Development focus area is broadly categorized into three main activities: (1.1) Computational Tools andTest Data, (1.2) Innovative Turbines, and (1.3) Marine Systems Engineering.

20 | P a g e

Activity 1.1: Computational Tools and Test Data
Current offshore wind turbine technology is largely derived from land‐based designs that have beenconservatively modified for offshore use. A new generation of modeling and design tools is requiredthat specifically addresses unique wind turbine technology requirements, including installation andoperations in an extremely harsh ocean environment. Developing and assessing innovative technology
begins with the computational design tools, standards, and testing methods that lay the foundation forsafer, more reliable, cost‐effective, and higher‐performing offshore wind turbines. Computational design
tools provide a baseline analysis and development capability for industry, help create and develop new
intellectual property in offshore wind, and help provide educational tools for training the next
generation of engineers and scientists in offshore wind technology.
Computational design tools require continuous updates and modification to reflect the best analysis
methods and scientific models available. This information must be obtained from parallel research anddevelopment activities that improve our fundamental understanding of the underlying physics andphenomenology involved. High‐performance computing efforts will lead to a better understanding ofthese fundamental processes, addressing performance barriers with innovations derived from an
improved understanding of the atmospheric processes affecting wind farm performance,
characterization of the dynamic interactions between turbines operating in large multiple arrays andcomplex terrains, and advanced optimization methodologies producing the lowest cost of energy
options through modeling of integrated system designs.
Design tools and codes must be validated to ensure acceptance by designers and manufacturers, and tohelp in attracting capital investment. Field testing capabilities and facilities will provide the validated
data to support the continued improvement of both design tools and standards, leading to reduced
financial and regulatory risks and increased confidence in the long‐term viability of offshore wind plants.
Research Area 1.1.1: Performance Modeling and Validation
Fundamental challenges affecting the wind industry include array under‐performance, higher‐than‐
expected dynamic loads, premature hardware failures, the need to optimize wind plant performance,
and the need to assess potential adverse environmental effects produced through interactions between
wind turbines and the atmospheric boundary layer. Validated design tools and codes are essential indeveloping innovative technology, planning projects, and minimizing the perceived risk of offshore windenergy development. When assessing the economic feasibility of a project, designers, developers andfinanciers rely on models that predict the amount of energy a wind project will produce over its lifetime
to establish financial viability and develop operations strategies.
The deployment of offshore (and land‐based) multi‐megawatt turbines in multiple‐array wind farms
requires a new generation of modeling capability to assess individual turbine performance within thearray as well as the overall wind plant performance. One immediate goal of OSWInD will be toincorporate offshore capabilities and requirements to design tools developed for land‐based turbine
systems, and to make these tools freely available to industry and academia. In addition to improving thecapability of desktop computer performance modeling tools, high‐performance computing andatmospheric science research and development are critically needed to advance our understanding of
21 | P a g ethe in situ operating environments of large multiple‐array wind farms and to help assess any potential
impacts of large wind farms on micro‐ and macro‐climatic conditions. Special formulations ofcomputational fluid dynamics and finite element analysis tools that couple atmospheric inflow, multi‐
turbine rotor aerodynamics, the air/sea interface, and turbine dynamic response are required to provide
high‐fidelity data and simulations that can be used in assessing existing technology and guiding future
innovation of technology optimized for offshore deployment.
Research Area 1.1.2: Design Tools and Standards
The development of new, accurate computer models is necessary to aid in the development of
optimized offshore wind turbine designs. DOE will support development of computational tools neededto address structural design, control systems, aerodynamics, energy production, certification andverification issues, multiple turbine array effects, multiple array impacts on a regional basis, resource
characterization, and meteorological and oceanographic phenomena. These tools will address theunique extreme environments in the United States, including hurricanes and ice conditions, to allow
deployment of offshore wind in all regions of the country.
Advanced design tools must reliably predict the behavior of complex ocean environment conditions andpermit the rigorous assessment and development of innovative turbine concepts, components, andfoundations. In addition, new enhancements and capabilities are required to evaluate the fixed andfloating platform designs necessary to deploy in transitional and deep water sites to access high‐value
offshore wind resources critically important to reaching national renewable energy goals.
A robust set of technical design, performance, and safety standards must be developed for the benefitof designers, developers, regulatory agencies and the industry at large to reduce risk and increase
reliability. Partnerships with international and national standards‐writing entities will result in access toexisting guidelines and standards, which can serve as a baseline for national efforts. Standards
development is an ongoing iterative process under which testing and operating experiences highlight
new issues requiring further research and standards development. Development of such standards willlead to increased reliability, lowered risk, and lower cost of capital. DOE will work with BOEMRE andother agencies to provide technical consultation and coordinated research to address knowledge gaps inthe current framework for technical approval of offshore wind power facilities.
Research Area 1.1.3: Field Testing
The most effective way to establish offshore wind turbine design requirements and confirm
performance is through measurements made on actual wind turbines and components, both on land
and in the water. It will be necessary to instrument and measure multiple turbines to capture regional
and technology design differences. DOE and its national laboratories will partner with university
research centers and industry in planning a long‐term national operational data‐gathering program.
Field‐test data from multiple diverse test sites is essential for computer model validation and to support
innovation. This field‐test data should include grid interconnection and research instrumentation.
Additionally, it is important to collaborate with industry to establish a national or international databaseof shared operating experience, which can lead to industry‐wide understanding of the shortcomings of

22 | P a g e

existing designs in order to direct and inform future research and development toward activities
resulting in the highest possible positive impact on reliability and costs.
Table 4. Technology Development Activity 1.1: Computational Tools and Test Data

Research Area

DetailDeliverable

Impact1

Develop wind turbine &array performance models

2

Validate performancemodels with field test data

Computational models that
reliably predict individual
turbine and array
performance in large
offshore farms
Validation of above modelwith field test data

3

Develop methodologies andcomputational tools to
optimize next‐generation
offshore wind turbines,
arrays, and O&M strategies
at a system level
Partner with European labs
to access existing databases

Reliable power production
predictions reduce project
performance risk, lower costof capital, and increaseenergy capture
Reliable power production
predictions reduce project
performance risk, lower costof capital and increaseenergy capture
Enables optimized designs
which ultimately lead tolowest cost of energy

1.1.1
Performance
Modeling andValidation

1

2

3
1.1.2
Design Tools
and Standards
4

5

1

1.1.3
Field Testing

23 | P a g e

2Develop U.S. standards foroffshore wind. Harmonize
with international standards
Coupled dynamic
computational model
development

Develop and validate loading
models for extreme
environments (hurricanes,
ice, etc.)
Advanced design tools forcomplex subsurface
structures
Implement data gathering
campaign and gather test
data from multiple field testsites (fixed, floating,regional)
Provide grid interconnection
and research
instrumentation for field test
sites

Concepts, methods andcomputational tools toassess impacts of proposed
subsystem improvements

Existing research andoperational data from
European offshore wind
installations
Robust suite of design andoperation standards for U.S.
offshore wind industry
Validated model to evaluate
dynamic response on the
coupled wind turbine andsupport structure to wind
and wave loading
Validated model that
accurately predicts windturbine loads under extreme
environmental conditions
Computational model that
reliably predicts behavior ofcomplex subsurface
structures
Field test data from diverse
sites

Test data from European
installations provides
baseline for design tool
development
Standards lead to increased
reliability, lowered cost, andlower cost of capital
Allows development offloating platforms andoptimization of full turbine
systems

Field test equipment
operational at sites
identified in above task

Field testing is essential formodel validation and tosupport innovation andtechnological risk reduction

Essential capability to enabledeployment in Southeast
and Great Lakes and informstandards development
New capability permits
rigorous assessment ofinnovative structures
Field testing is essential formodel validation and tosupport innovation andtechnological risk reduction

Activity 1.2: Innovative Turbines
To lower overall project cost of energy, innovative integrated turbine configurations, encompassing
rotor, drivetrain, tower, controls, and foundations, are needed to reduce system weight relative to rated
capacity, simplify installation processes, dramatically reduce maintenance requirements, improvereliability, increase energy capture, and derive benefits from economies of scale in general. DOE will
form partnerships with research consortia, including industry, to identify, model, and eventuallydemonstrate candidate system configurations with high potential to impact cost of energy.
Research Area 1.2.1: New Turbine Concepts
It is generally recognized that, in order to generate cost‐competitive electricity, larger turbines areneeded to overcome the added cost of foundations and other non‐turbine capital costs associated with
offshore wind turbines. A concept study of a large, efficient, and cost‐effective turbine system will
highlight the research and development areas that will be required to realize a system of that size. This
will help direct research and development of advanced components, especially rotors, which will be
required to achieve the turbine design requirements. Concepts that achieve major weight reduction will
also help enable future floating foundation designs.
Research Area 1.2.2: Advanced Drive Concepts
Innovative turbine drivetrains that have the potential for lower cost of energy, improved reliability,
reduced weight, and increased energy capture must be developed to enable cost‐effective, next‐
generation turbines. DOE will support pre‐prototype studies modeling the integration ofsuperconducting generators, transverse flux topologies, and other enabling technologies into advanced
turbine drivetrains. DOE‐supported drivetrain test facilities and, eventually, an offshore test bed will
lower the risk for industry to develop these next‐generation drive concepts.
Research Area 1.2.3: Controls and Power Electronics
Due to their increased size and cost, offshore turbines offer new possibilities in controls and powerelectronics sophistication not economically feasible in smaller systems. Research and development
leading to advances in condition monitoring systems, control algorithms, blade control strategies, andpower conditioning can increase turbine energy production, capacity factor, and component lifetime.
A condition‐based monitoring system, consisting of a comprehensive suite of sensors and robustalgorithms that detect impending problems before they occur, would improve availability and reliability,
lower operating costs, and improve energy capture. These benefits are especially valuable for relatively
remote and inaccessible offshore turbines. This comprehensive suite of sensors and algorithms can also
be combined into control systems that increase hurricane survivability, reduce operational loads, andprovide sufficient damping for floating platforms.

24 | P a g e

Table 5. Technology Development Activity 1.2: Innovative Turbines

Research Area

1.2.1
New Turbine
Concepts

1.2.2
Advanced
Drive
Concepts

1.2.3
Controls andPowerElectronics

DetailDeliverable

Impact1

Large, cost ‐effective
turbine concept studies

Larger machines are needed tolower balance of station costs
that dominate offshore project
economics

2

Advanced rotor
development

1

Evaluate and develop
innovative turbine
drivetrains with potential
for lower cost of energy

2

Develop reliability
framework and O&M
Priorities

Turbine concepts with fullcost analysis, demonstrated
engineering feasibility, andtradeoffs for hardware
development.
New materials,
manufacturing methods anddesign concepts to enablenext‐generation rotor
development
Innovative turbine
drivetrains demonstrated to
improve reliability, lower
cost, reduce weight, andincrease energy capture
Ongoing reliability
characterization andanalysis reporting

1

Evaluate and develop
condition‐based
monitoring systems foroffshore systems

2

Evaluate and develop
advanced control systems
for offshore wind turbines

A comprehensive suite ofsensors and robustalgorithms that detect
impending problems before
they occur
Control systems that
increase hurricane
survivability, reduce
operational loads, andprovide sufficient damping
for floating platforms

Innovations in materials,
manufacturing and design leadto load and weight reduction
enabling higher energy capture
and larger machines
Innovations in the market that
increase reliability, lower costs,
and increase energy capture

Database that gathers/provides
information targeted at
improving reliability and asset
management
Improved availability andreliability with lower operating
costs and improved energy
captureIncrease survivability, increaseenergy capture and enablesuccessful operation of floating
platforms

Activity 1.3: Marine Systems Engineering
A DOE‐sponsored design effort for U.S.‐engineered support structures, anchors, and moorings will leadto identification of significant cost‐saving opportunities for wind power plants utilizing either fixed‐
bottom or floating substructures in shallow‐ or deep‐water installations. Engineering trade‐off analyses
will be followed by detailed design studies and prototype testing. The development of grid architectureand hardware will be integrated with innovative foundations and turbine concepts into a system‐level
optimization methodology to produce an optimized next‐generation offshore wind turbine technology
platform adaptable to regional differences. Such efforts would draw upon the knowledge and expertiseof the nation’s marine engineering industry.
Research Area 1.3.1: Support Structures
DOE will support development of innovative shallow, transitional‐depth, and deepwater substructure
designs that lower capital and installation costs and expand access to available wind resources.
Advanced computational design tools for rigorously analyzing and reliably predicting the behavior of
25 | P a g ethese complex subsurface structures will enable focused and cost‐effective technology development
through design trade‐off studies, dramatically decreasing the technology adoption timeline. Innovativeanchors and mooring approaches for these advanced substructure designs will further reduce cost andrisk. Advanced control systems will help reduce loads on foundations and enable the development offloating systems, which will require stability control and load minimization. Foundation designs, intandem with installation strategies, will optimize the time, cost, and complexity of the construction
process, which is susceptible to weather, availability of specialized equipment, and variability of seabed
conditions.
Research Area 1.3.2: Balance of System
The design of the wind turbine array grid, including inter‐turbine connection schemes, substation
designs, and longer connections to the main electrical grid, will need to be optimized to make offshore
wind projects economically viable. DOE will support design studies for high‐voltage direct current
transmission, superconducting transmission, and other advanced transmission technologies. Concepts
and hardware that allow for load balancing, short‐term forecasting of wind farm production, and otherpower grid services will also help make offshore wind more economical and improve offshore windenergy integration with the existing electrical grid infrastructure. Reliability of offshore substations is
also of vital importance, especially as projects grow in size and are installed further from shore.
Table 6. Technology Development Activity 1.3: Marine Systems Engineering

Research Area1

1.3.1
Support
Structures

2

1
1.3.2
Balance ofSystem2

DetailDeliverable

ImpactEvaluate and develop low costoffshore support structures
for a variety of water depths
and offshore conditions
including floating platforms.
Evaluate and develop
innovative anchors andmoorings for floating offshore
systems in coordination withwater program to reduce costand risk
Offshore grid hardware andintegration studies

Innovative shallow,
transitional and deepwatersupport structure designs
that lower capital andinstallation costs
Innovative anchor andmooring designs forfloating offshore systems
that lower cost and risk

Demonstrated and validated
innovative support
structures that lower costand expand access toresources
Lower cost of energy,
increased reliability, andimproved investor
confidence

Grid architecture andhardware design concepts

Evaluate and develop grid
hardware

New hardware solutions
developed based on above
designs

Improved array efficiency,
feed in to system level
optimization
Enables larger and more
efficient and reliable
electrical grids leading tolower COE and O&M costs

26 | P a g e

5.2 Market Barrier Removal
The research efforts in Focus Area 2: Market Barrier Removal will aid in increasing the efficiency of thecurrent deployment timeline. The Market Barrier Removal focus area is categorized into three main
activities: (2.1) Siting and Permitting, (2.2) Complementary Infrastructure, and (2.3) Energy Resource
Planning.
Activity 2.1: Siting and Permitting
To meet the OSWInD initiative’s goals for offshore wind deployment, permitting and siting timelines andcosts need to be minimized; key market, socioeconomic, and environmental risks need to be better
understood and mitigated; and strategies to build public acceptance of the technology need to be
applied to regions with near‐term deployment goals. Concerted federal investment and engagement—
coordinated within and across agencies and in close partnership with states, non‐governmentalorganizations, tribes and other stakeholders—will be required to enable both the short‐ and long‐term
success of a vibrant offshore wind industry in the United States.
Although DOE has no legal authority in the siting or regulation of offshore wind installations, the
OSWInD initiative can make a significant impact in planning, siting, and permitting processes bypartnering with federal, state, and local agencies that regulate and manage offshore wind projects instate and federal waters. DOE will help jumpstart the nascent offshore wind industry by supporting
research and analysis to better understand regulatory uncertainties and to identify, reduce, and mitigate
key environmental and social science risks. DOE will also produce and disseminate critically needed
objective information to enable informed decision making by stakeholders. In addition,
DOE will collaborate with environmental stakeholders to help identify high‐priority areas for protection,
existing data gaps, and the best manner by which to efficiently incorporate natural resource
considerations into the permitting and siting process.
DOI’s Smart from the Start initiative is similarly aimed at decreasing regulatory uncertainty by clarifying
how the DOI’s offshore renewable energy regulatory framework will be implemented and by convening
key agencies to share data on areas identified for potential development and to collaborate on
individual projects as they are proposed. The interagency data‐gathering and data‐sharing provisions, inparticular, will help ensure that stakeholders are able to make informed judgments and decisions about
potential projects rather than relying on uncertain projections and estimates.
The efforts of the OSWInD and Smart from the Start initiatives in this area will be targeted at
overcoming common barriers currently facing offshore investment and deployment, such as lack ofavailable ocean resource and use data and complicated and untested permitting processes. DOE willprioritize efforts that leverage its investment with initiatives funded by other federal agencies, state andlocal governments, and the private sector, including utilities. The activities supporting implementationof the DOE/DOI MOU Action Plan referenced above will be critical in these initiatives, as will ongoingcollaborative efforts in the Great Lakes with the Council on Environmental Quality and ACOE and thework of the National Ocean Council as it implements the National Ocean Policy and coastal and marine
spatial planning.
27 | P a g e

Research Area 2.1.1: Market Analysis and Public Acceptance
Development of a utility‐scale offshore wind project requires capital investment of hundreds of millions,even billions, of dollars. As experience from land‐based wind and European offshore wind development
has shown, policy options and financial mechanisms can have major impacts on the viability of projects.
Credible, objective analysis to inform stakeholders and compare options has often been lacking. In theabsence of sophisticated and broadly accepted methods of analyzing the costs and benefits associatedwith developing offshore wind projects in the U.S., there is likely to be a wide variety of contradictorydata and interpretations of the public value and financial viability of offshore wind.
Under the Market Analysis and Public Acceptance research area, DOE will support the development ofstandardized methods, models and guidelines for the development of credible information on and tools
for the evaluation of the costs and benefits of offshore wind, including relevant externalities compared
to conventional electric generation sources competing with offshore wind energy. DOE will support thequantification of relevant positive and negative externalities, such as environmental and socioeconomic
impacts, in cost of energy calculations, and will support objective analysis of policy and regulatory
options related to offshore wind to enable informed decision‐making on relevant questions related to
specific projects, the offshore wind industry, and national energy policy.
Public acceptance of offshore wind will also be crucial to both the deployment of specific projects andthe long‐term success of the industry. The development of offshore wind could pose risks to competinguses of the ocean space, such as fishing, navigation, tourism, and military operations. Affected
communities, tribes, and organizations will also have concerns that will need to be addressed. Many ofthese issues will be site‐specific, but many will have common themes that can be addressed collectively.
DOE and DOI will work together, along with other federal and state partners and key stakeholders, toidentify and better understand the potential socioeconomic impacts of offshore wind energy and theconcerns of key stakeholders and communities. Identification of gaps in understanding will be followedby targeted research to develop risk mitigation measures and communication strategies to build public
acceptance of offshore wind. Increased public acceptance of offshore wind will also be driven byinclusive siting and permitting processes that consider community equities and produce outcomes thatshow incorporation of public sentiment.
Research Area 2.1.2: Regulatory Processes
Planning an offshore project requires consideration of hundreds of important environmental andconflicting‐use factors, as well as compliance with a multitude of regulations enforced by agencies withvarying levels of jurisdictional authority. This complexity, compounded by the general lack of robust
data on ocean resources, can result in lengthy permitting processes, particularly in the absence ofeffective interagency collaboration to identify and resolve issues that arise with any given project.
Moreover, the regulatory processes are currently relatively untested, increasing uncertainty and risk forinvestors.
DOE will work closely with other federal agencies to identify means of enhancing efficiency in permitting
processes through concurrent and coordinated review for projects in both federal and state waters. DOE
will also support efficiency in permitting through the support and development of mechanisms such as
28 | P a g e

standardized protocols for baseline planning surveys and monitoring programs and the development ofadaptive management strategies.
DOI’s complementary Smart from the Start initiative will directly address the siting and permitting
aspects of offshore wind development in federal waters. The Smart from the Start initiative includes theearly identification of wind energy areas that appear particularly well‐suited for potential development
because of fewer user and resource conflicts, followed by the implementation of a review process for
proposed projects in those wind energy areas that is streamlined and efficient while promoting
thorough public review and analysis of potential impacts. AOWEC action plans discussed above include:(1) implementing state‐based pilot projects to harmonize state and federal permitting processes tofacilitate data‐sharing and ensure coordination; (2) continuing to review the new regulatory framework
for OCS renewable energy projects, particularly as individual projects are proposed and then reviewed
under the new regulations, to identify any potential regulatory reforms or statutory amendments thatwould reduce permitting timelines while still allowing robust environmental review; (3) developing best
management practices for siting offshore renewable energy facilities and for developing projects thatminimize potential impacts; and (4) ensuring frequent communication and collaboration between
federal agencies and the states, particularly with respect to research, data acquisition, and planning.
The development of offshore wind facilities can be based on a siting process that proactively avoids andmitigates conflicts with other ocean uses and resources. Rather than taking a first‐come, first‐served
approach to siting offshore wind projects, which can miss efficiencies in required baseline datacollection, environmental review, and other permitting requirements, a properly designed and proactive
approach to siting and permitting may have the potential to significantly accelerate responsible
installation of projects while mitigating impacts on critical ocean resources, areas, and competing uses.
Both the OSWInD initiative and the Smart from the Start initiative are aimed at ensuring this proactive
approach.
Research Area 2.1.3: Environmental Risks
Hundreds of environmental studies have been conducted in Europe in conjunction with offshore winddevelopment. Although the United States can leverage lessons learned from these studies, few studies
have been done in U.S. waters. Consequently, major data gaps exist that can delay and add significant
risk to the installation of offshore facilities for both project developers and regulators. Filling these gaps
requires upfront investments in long‐term, expensive research that—while of substantial benefit to theentire industry—falls largely to the first generation of individual project developers.
DOE, along with other federal agencies, will institute a nationally coordinated effort to gather, analyze,
and make public environmental data in order to better inform stakeholders and decision‐makers on theextent of potential environmental impacts of offshore development. This effort will avoid compellingindividual developers to shoulder the high costs of more broadly applicable research and will build thecommon knowledge base. The work will include collaborations such as the offshore interagency working
group organized by the Department of the Interior under the Smart from the Start initiative tocoordinate identification of gaps and priority risks, analysis of European studies to identify data andconclusions applicable to the U.S., aggregation and dissemination of existing environmental data
29 | P a g e

through publicly available databases, collection of baseline data to fill key gaps, site‐specific efforts suchas before‐after control‐impact studies of relevant marine ecology in key geographic areas, developmentof tools and technologies for cost‐effective pre‐ and post‐construction environmental monitoring andmitigation, assessment of the environmental impacts of new foundation and balance‐of‐planttechnologies, and development of broadly acceptable integrated environmental risk assessment anddecision‐making strategies.
Over time, these investments will reduce perception of environmental and statutory risks to theregulatory and resource management agencies, reduce requirements for baseline environmental data
gathering, monitoring, and mitigation requirements to be borne by individual project developers, andincrease community acceptance.
Research Area 2.1.4: Impact on Marine Operations
It is possible that under certain conditions, offshore wind turbine arrays may cause electromagnetic or
acoustic interference with specific electronic navigation, detection, or communication equipment. Thispotential for interference presents a serious concern for many stakeholders, including operators ofcommercial, recreational, and fishing vessels, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department ofHomeland Security (DHS).
While many potential electromagnetic interference issues will be similar to those associated with land‐
based wind systems, there are also circumstances unique to offshore facilities that may potentiallyaffect equipment such as land‐based radar, airborne radar, Automatic Identification Systems (AIS),
Global Positioning Systems (GPS), shipboard radios, Sound Navigation & Ranging (SONAR) and Coastal
Ocean Dynamics Applications Radar (CODAR). Therefore, additional research is needed to effectively
assess any potential operational impacts, characterize the technical challenges and develop mitigation
options.
Assessments of potential electromagnetic or acoustic challenges presented by offshore wind energy
facilities to sea surface, subsurface and airborne electronic systems must include engagement with key
stakeholders to proactively identify the full range of concerns, characterize potential impacts tooperations, identify known requirements and options for mitigation, and establish research and policy
needs.
Both DOE and DOI are members of the sub‐interagency policy committee on radar. This committee ischaired by the National Security Council and involves representatives from the DoD, DHS, FAA, NOAA,
and the Director of National Intelligence. The committee focuses on identifying and resolving conflicting
priorities regarding interaction between wind turbines and radar systems. Interaction with these key
partners will effectively characterize the technical challenges of radar/turbine interaction and develop
mitigation options.
Activities of the OSWInD initiative will complement, and will be defined by, the collaborative framework
established for investigation of potential impacts on electronic equipment and marine operations. This
framework includes:

30 | P a g e•Joint assessment studies to inform research needs.

•

Roadmaps that prioritize research and development activities of individual agencies and identify
opportunities for joint research projects between agencies.

•

Funds for research and development of wind turbine mitigation technologies that can be
implemented by the wind industry.

•

Validation of new technologies that can allow development of the nation’s wind resources
without jeopardizing national security missions.

A goal of this approach is to dramatically reduce the need for project‐by‐project technical assistancethrough broadly accepted technology mitigation measures. These efforts will be informed by theexperience and investigations carried out in conjunction with the European offshore wind industry, suchas tests integrating supplemental radar systems and modifications to radar processing software.
Table 7. Market Barrier Removal Activity 2.1: Siting and Permitting

Research Area

2.1.1
MarketAnalysis &PolicySub‐task

Deliverable

Impact1 Ongoing policy
and market
analysisAnnual market data report andanalysis of emergent policy andeconomic questions

Reduced information barriers toinvestment, better decisions bypolicy makers and otherstakeholders

2 Offshore costs& benefits
analysisStandard methodologies for project
costs and benefits evaluation,
including quantification of
externalities and COE analysis ofnon‐technology barriers and costs
Studies to improve understandingof and mitigation options for key
socioeconomic and public
acceptance risks. Targeted
engagement of key stakeholders
through publications, electronic
media, workshops, etc

Allow apples‐to‐apples comparisonof offshore wind with competing
generation technologies to enable
informed decision making

Recommendations to increase
efficiency of federal and state
project authorization processes andshorten timelines, standardized
protocols for environmental
monitoring and mitigation, adaptive
management strategies
Using coastal and marine spatialplanning principles to identify windenergy areas in federal waters fornear‐term, GW‐scale deployment,
and supporting similar advanced
siting efforts in state waters.
Improved broad‐scale
environmental and ocean use data.
Plan for potential research leases

Decreased timeline and risks
associated with siting and permitting
to both developers and regulators

3 Economic andpublicacceptancerisk reduction

1 Efficientregulatory
processes

2.1.2
Regulatory
Processes

31 | P a g e

2 Proactiveplanning andsitingReduced study costs to developers,
improve quality and availability ofenvironmental and socioeconomic
data required for effective
permitting, reduced risks to investors
and regulators, improved public
acceptance of offshore wind

Accelerated deployment in priority
regions, reduced environmental
study costs to developers, improved
quality and availability ofenvironmental and socioeconomic
data required for effective
permitting, reduced long‐term risks
to investors and regulators

1 Dataaggregationanddissemination

2.1.3
Environmental
Risks

2.1.4
Impact on
MarineOperations

2 Environmental
study
technologies
and methods

Instituting interagency working
groups and other formal working
relationships to share anddisseminate available ocean
resource and user data and to
identify data gaps. Develop
offshore wind environmental
knowledge management system
Assessments, technology
development, and validation ofnovel environmental study
technologies and methods

3 Site‐specificenvironmental
studies

Studies to address key
environmental issues facing specificprojects in development

Overcome regulatory hurdles facedby specific projects. Reduce
regulatory burden for projects facing
similar questions

4 Broad‐scale
environmental
studies

Studies to address priority broad‐scale environmental data gaps,
offshore wind risk evaluation
framework

1 Assessment ofpotential
interferencewith electronicequipment

Baseline study of the potential
impact of offshore wind facilities onnavigation, detection orcommunication equipment used inmarine operations

Reduced regulatory andenvironmental uncertainty fordevelopers, regulators and otherstakeholders; improve quality andavailability of environmental andsocioeconomic data required for
effective permitting; risk framework
will help prioritize areas forinvestment and separate perceived
from real risks.
Determination of research needs,
operational procedures, mitigation
techniques and policy requirements
to protect mission equities of key
stakeholders

Maximize leverage of European
experience; enable objective, data‐
based review and decision‐making

Reduced environmental study costs
and risks to developers andregulators

Activity 2.2: Complementary Infrastructure
Research efforts will address infrastructure challenges that, if not adequately resolved on a national
level, pose significant restrictions to offshore wind market growth and deployment. Priority will be given
to efforts leveraging DOE investment with initiatives funded by other federal agencies, state and local
governments, and the private sector, including utilities.
Research Area 2.2.1: Manufacturing and Supply Chain Development
The supply chain is defined as the system of manufacture and/or procurement of components,
subcomponents and materials that compose the assembled turbine and completed offshore facility.
Domestic infrastructure is critical to the practicality and financial viability of individual offshore projects.
Domestic manufacturing and the growth of U.S.‐based suppliers is also key to asserting global technicalleadership and realizing the full economic benefit of the offshore wind industry. Domestic manufactureof offshore turbines, tower structures, and balance‐of‐plant components offers advantages intransportation and transactional costs during installation and operational periods.

32 | P a g e

In addition to offering financial incentives such as loan guarantees, DOE will provide technical support tocompanies seeking to supply offshore turbines and components and to economic development agencies
seeking to establish manufacturing facilities in their regions. The goal for this effort is to coordinate,facilitate, and leverage research activities at national laboratories, universities, and other agencies, suchas the Department of Commerce (DOC), to facilitate U.S.‐based manufacture, assembly, transport,
operation, and maintenance of offshore wind turbine systems and components. Such support includes
studies on optimized integrated manufacturing and installation strategies, research and development on
manufacturing processes for components such as blades, and analyses of critical material supply anddemand factors that will face the offshore wind industry as it grows.
Research Area 2.2.2: Transmission Planning and Interconnect Strategy
Offshore projects are being planned in close proximity to major urban load centers, requiring
interconnection with some of the country’s major electricity service providers. Grid interconnection
studies are required to ensure that the impacts of large concentrations of offshore wind generation
facilities on these transmission networks are properly understood and can be effectively integrated into
the day‐to‐day power management strategies of the utilities, and to identify system upgrades needed
for reliable interconnection. Studies will also assess the value to utilities of offshore wind energy versus
energy from other sources or regions, and the potential value to the East Coast distribution grid of an
extended offshore electric delivery network.
The OSWInD initiative will collaborate with DOE’s Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE)to develop a long‐range DOE approach that characterizes and addresses the needs for transmission
planning and interconnection strategies specific to offshore wind energy. These strategies will leverage
the experience of existing offshore electric transmission projects. Near‐term research will support OE‐
led, interconnect‐wide transmission planning and address related long‐range industry needs and utility
challenges. Potential near‐term research topics include technology and industry characterization, initialintegration analyses, collaborative utility assessment studies, and advanced technology evaluation(including of a potential offshore transmission ‘backbone’).
Research Area 2.2.3: Optimized Infrastructure and Operations
Offshore wind provides an opportunity for revitalization of U.S. ports and heavy industry facilities. Dueto the large scale of offshore wind turbine components, towers and foundation structures, it is generally
advantageous to limit or eliminate overland transport from assembly and installation scenarios in orderto maximize process efficiency and minimize logistics time and costs. In addition, European experiencehas clearly indicated that it will be necessary to create a purpose‐built installation, operations, andmaintenance (IO&M) infrastructure for offshore wind, including specialized vessels and port facilities. To
assist industry and regional port facilities in making informed decisions regarding design requirements
for IO&M infrastructure, DOE will participate in collaborative studies of infrastructure needs andcapabilities for the benefit of all national regions.
A significant portion of the cost differential between land‐based and offshore wind energy systems liesin transport and installation requirements. European experience indicates that specialized wind systeminstallation vessels, rather than adapted oil and gas vessels, will be required for cost‐effective, high‐33 | P a g e

volume installation. DOE will support development of integrated manufacturing, transport, installation,and maintenance strategies leading to specialized vessels, safety systems, and tooling.
Operations and maintenance analysis and planning at the onset of the design and development ofoffshore wind projects can contribute significantly to reductions in the cost of energy by optimizing
system reliability and availability. Through maintainability analysis that considers projected component
reliability and periods of access limitations, this effort can support accurate energy production estimates
as well as provide targeted reliability goals at a component and vessel fleet level. These efforts will
include establishment of operations databases and development of advanced O&M strategies based ondata analysis targeted at improving asset management.
Table 8. Market Barrier Removal Activity 2.2: Complementary Infrastructure

Research Area

Sub‐task
1

2.2.1
Domestic
Manufacturing
and Supply
Chain
Development

2.2.2
Transmission
Planning &Interconnect
Strategies

2.2.3
Optimized
Infrastructure
and Operations

2

National
manufacturing
infrastructureassessment anddevelopment strategy
Manufacturing
improvement
techniques

1

National offshore gridinterconnection study

2

Collaborative utility
integration studies

3

Advanced technology
assessments

1

Optimized IO&M
strategies

Deliverable

ImpactQuantify existing and long term
manufacturing needs and supplier
opportunities as well as critical
path to effective growth

Enhanced likelihood of
efficient buildup of national
scale infrastructure to meetindustry needs.

Quantify existing and potential
component needs and supplier
opportunities. Identify technicalpathway for market entry of large
offshore components
Baseline assessment of projectedscale of offshore wind industry,
deployment scenarios, technology
and power characteristics, andintegration strategies

Manufacturing strategy
targeted at the build‐out ofa robust supply chain

Case studies and joint analysis
carried out with utilities having
large‐scale offshore winddevelopment proposed in theirservice areas
Identify potential advanced
marine grid and interface
hardware designs such as HVDC
offshore “backbone”, marinized
substations, advanced undersea
cable concepts, and optimized
inter‐array grids
Analysis and models to identify
the most practical means of
reducing cost of energy throughIO&M techniques and supporting
infrastructure while ensuringsafetyWill enable utilities andinterconnect‐wide planningcollaboratives to make more
informed decisions
regarding offshore windintegratjon and operations
Activities will address
integration concerns andtechnical challenges
identified by partnerorganizations
Technical analysis will resultin advancements that lower
costs, increase reliability,
reduce risks and/or facilitate
acceptance.

Required for effective
decision making by industry

34 | P a g e

2

Optimized vessels,
facilities & technology
for IO&M

Identify needs, solutions, costs
and timeframes for development.
Provide technical and financial
supportEnhance efficient buildup ofnational scale infrastructure
to meet industry needs.

3

Develop reliability
framework and O&M
priorities

Ongoing reliability
characterization and analysis
reporting.

Database thatgathers/provides
information targeted at
improving reliability andasset management

Activity 2.3: Energy Resource Planning
Accurate field data, mapping, and databases
DOE‐NOAA Collaboration on Windare essential for assessing potential offshore
Resource Characterization
wind project sites and establishing zones ofprioritized activity. Although many agencies,
DOE and NOAA are working collaboratively touniversities and other organizations have
improve the understanding of meteorologicalprograms nominally addressing offshore windphenomena that affect wind resources and otherresource data needs, there has been no
renewable energy technologies. Better information
on meteorological processes and improved
national‐scale coordination to integrate thesemodeling of the variability of the wind, sun, water,
efforts in order to meet an agreed‐upon set ofand other resources will ultimately increase thedata needs for the offshore industry. Throughcountry’s ability to predictably and reliably integrate
this OSWInD initiative activity, DOE will
renewable energy into the electrical grid. The
facilitate a nationally coordinated effort tocollaborative effort has yielded a jointly‐led windcollect and disseminate data for use in planning
forecasting initiative to help better predict theindividual projects and carrying out criticalshort‐term changes in wind that cause challenging
marine spatial planning activities in support oframps in power production from wind plants.
responsible offshore wind development. For
Building upon their already successful collaboration,federal waters in particular, the OSWInD
DOE and NOAA signed an MOU on January 24, 2011,
toformalize this partnership and expand theirinitiative and the Smart from the Start initiative
efforts in the terrestrial and offshore renewable
will work in tandem to gather and share crucial
energytechnologies arena.
data to support responsible siting of proposed
offshore wind projects. Both of these initiatives
will in turn inform larger efforts, such as the National Ocean Council’s coastal and marine spatialplanning work, to plan responsibly for a myriad of ocean and Great Lakes uses.
Most meteorological, wave, and seabed data used in assessing potential offshore wind sites are basedon extrapolations of data from on‐shore sites, buoys, or limited surveys. Such projections have not beenvalidated for accuracy. Few wind data have been gathered at actual offshore sites due to the cost andlack of practical instrumentation. Similarly, few data exist on seabed conditions, which are required todesign foundations and plan trenching for transmission cables. These data are critical in assessing thecosts, energy production, design requirements and overall economic viability of projects.

35 | P a g e

DOE will collaborate with DOI, NOAA, ACOE, USG, DoD and other key agencies to establish common
databases, ensure that available data are utilized, support new measurement initiatives and funddevelopment of advanced instrumentation technology.
Research Area 2.3.1: Energy Resource Characterization
DOE’s efforts with DOI and NOAA establish a collaborative framework for defining the highest priority
research areas related to the characterization of wind resources. This collaborative framework consistsof the following key resource characterization planning activities:•

Engage industry experts and formation of an interagency working group to ensure that a
broad range of stakeholders and potential program assets are engaged.

•

Prepare a data requirements document identifying exactly what data, collected and compiled
to specified protocols, is needed by the offshore wind industry;•

Complete a gap analysis to determine the relevance of existing data, the best sources of datain the future, required modeling and extrapolation software and recommendations foradvanced technology development.

•

Initiate a long‐range implementation plan that acts as a roadmap for the OSWInD initiativeand its national partners to coordinate and support specific resource characterization
activities.

These planning activities will inform research efforts such as resource characterization for the Outer
Continental Shelf and Great Lakes, mesoscale atmospheric modeling to predict long‐range weather
trends; analysis of extreme events such as hurricanes, assessment and refinement of advanced
instrumentation and methodologies, and joint efforts to establish of GIS databases and methods.
Research Area 2.3.2: Facility Design Conditions
To support reliable and safe offshore wind plant design and to provide data for emerging marine spatialplanning activities, a long‐term, concerted effort to collect and disseminate critical field information
beyond wind characteristics is needed. This data provides the basis for technical requirements governing
structural design and establish operating parameters for turbines, towers, balance‐of‐plant structures,and transmission cables. Applying these requirements to facility design will affect determinations ofpracticality, reliability and economic viability. For instance, information on water depth, currents,
seabed migration, and wave action will be used to study mechanical and structural loading on potential
turbine configurations and to assess impacts of external site‐specific conditions, in terms of both survival
during extreme loading and long‐term fatigue damage and degradation. Other quantifiable factors ofthe design environment include growth of marine organisms, tidal forces, salinity, and icing, as well as
the geotechnical characteristics of the sea or lake bottom.
To make this design and planning information available, DOE will lead a gap analysis that identifies
critical non‐wind data and assesses the best means of collection. DOE will also facilitate the planningneeded to establish a national network that provides data and support for the required research and
36 | P a g e

development. These activities will leverage the existing knowledge base of ocean engineering
established by the offshore oil and gas industry.
Table 9. Market Barrier Removal Activity 2.3: Resource PlanningResearch Area

2.3.1
Resource
Characterization(Wind)

Sub‐task

Deliverable

1

Data gaps analysis

2

National resource
database plan

3

Refined mesoscalemodeling &mappingReliable OCS and Great lakes
mesoscale models and user tools

4

Advanced
meteorologicalinstrumentation,
tools and
Methodologies
Data gaps analysis

Evaluation and validation ofadvanced and applicabletechnologies (i.e. SODAR, LIDAR,etc.) and related modeling tools

1

2.3.2
Facility Design
Conditions
2

National offshore
planning database

Planning report assessing
national status and future needs
with respect to meeting pre‐determined industry andstakeholder data requirements
Plan to establish network of
instrumentation, databases andprotocols to meet pre‐determined data requirements

Report identifying critical non‐wind data for turbine, foundation
and balance of plant design suchas water depth, currents, seabedmechanics, wave action, and ice
loading, recommend means tocollect data for national andregional use
Interagency and multi‐organization plan to establish
national network to collect andmake critical data available

ImpactEnables effective long‐range
interagency planning andcoordination

Enables effective ongoing
characterization of offshore
resource and design
conditions, including local
and regional variations
Models that provide theinformation necessary tosupport technology, siting,and economic decisions
Identification of cost‐effective siting tools
validated to the satisfactionof structural designers andfinancial institutions
Required to develop anational database of local
and regional design
conditions

Information feeds intodevelopment of priority
offshore wind areas andreduction of deployment
timelines

5.3 Advanced Technology Demonstration
The OSWInD initiative will undertake Advanced Technology Demonstration projects to impact the speed
and scale of offshore wind development. The primary goal of this activity will be to support the
installation of offshore wind turbines in U.S. waters in the most rapid and responsible manner possible.
Successful deployment of advanced technology demonstration projects will help make offshore windcost‐competitive with other generation through reduction of uncertainties and refinement oftechnology. By providing funding, technical assistance and government coordination to accelerate
deployment of these demonstration projects, DOE can help mitigate risks and facilitate the developmentof the domestic offshore wind industry.
37 | P a g e

Specific objectives of the program include establishing a network of installations providing performance
validation data; familiarizing the public with offshore wind installations; and testing and refining
infrastructure for offshore wind plant construction, operations, and maintenance.
To carry out the demonstration program, DOE will form cost‐sharing partnerships with broad consortia,
chosen through a competitive process, to support the development of individual offshore wind power
projects. Such consortia are likely to include offshore wind power project developers, research
institutions, electric utilities, equipment manufacturers, marine engineering and construction specialists,and state and local governments. Through these partnerships, DOE will fund technical research,engineering, and planning activities that enhance timely project deployment and result in documented
and publically disseminated technical experience and data.
Examples of potential demonstration projects include, but are not limited to:•••

Several offshore wind systems that make up the initial phase of a larger commercial project.
A large grid‐connected demonstration project (~100 MW) that has the capacity to install andtest multiple systems from multiple manufacturers.
A smaller grid‐connected demonstration project or research center that will address specifictechnical challenges and/or regional conditions.

Use of DOE funds will include, but is not limited to:•••Innovative engineering activities, such as for foundations and electrical systems, facility
infrastructure, and installation systems and methods.
Facilitating field testing through the use of instrumented towers, turbines, and foundation
structures within a project to gather performance or research and development data.
Addressing research gaps related to the marine environment and stakeholder factors including
resource assessment, environmental and socio‐economic research, and efficiency in permitting,planning and siting processes.

DOE will seek to partner in demonstration projects that are diversified by geographical region, water
depths, and innovative technologies. Consideration will be given to regions or states in which either
wind research or commercial leases already have been proposed or have commenced, those in whichfederal or state agencies have issued public Requests for Information, and/or those where initialenvironmental studies have been commenced or completed. Other key criteria that DOE will consider
when evaluating potential partnerships will include cost share; strength of collaborative partnerships;
demonstrated technical expertise; progress to date toward project deployment, particularly in siting andpermitting; justification for how DOE funds would accelerate realization of project goals; explanation of
how the project success would advance the national knowledge base on offshore wind; ability of the
project to support innovative research; support from state and local communities; and feasibility of
proposed deployment timeline.

38 | P a g e

5.4 Current DOE Offshore Wind Activities
DOE is currently engaged in several ongoing offshore wind activities and has invested a total of $93.4
million through the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), FY09
appropriations, and FY10 appropriations into offshore‐related activities within the Wind Program.
Current offshore wind activities support all three focus areas of the OSWInD initiative: technology
development, market barrier removal, and advanced technology demonstration projects.
Major activities in support of the technology development focus include the large drivetrain testing
facility at Clemson University; the large blade test facility at Massachusetts Clean Energy Center; andresearch conducted at the University of Maine, the University of Delaware, and the University of Toledo.
The large drivetrain and large blade test centers provide national infrastructure for full‐scale tests of key
turbine components. The facilities will enable testing of drivetrains with capacities as large as 15 MW,
and blades up to 90m in length. These facilities are important national investments, as there are
currently no facilities in the United States capable of testing the large drivetrains and blades predicted
for offshore wind technology deployments. Research conducted by the universities will result in thevalidation of coupled aeroelastic/hydrodynamic models for floating wind turbine platform deployments;
modeling work on two‐bladed, downwind floating turbine concepts; feedback to technology developers
on corrosion protection and gearbox reliability; and materials innovation using composites for tower
and blade structures.
Ongoing market barrier removal activities include the DOE/NOAA partnership on effective deployment,
operation and maintenance of weather‐dependent and oceanic renewable energy technologies;
environmental research at the University of Maine and Michigan State University; projects addressing
marketplace acceptance at the University of Delaware, Sustainable Energy Advantage LLC, the Great
Lakes Commission, Princeton Energy Resources International, LLC, and the South Carolina Energy Office;and workforce development work at the University of Massachusetts, University of Maine, University ofToledo, and University of Delaware. DOE also supports the development of Rhode Island’s Special Area
Management Plan, which will create a use plan for various activities in the state’s offshore waters,
including renewable energy development. The environmental research is investigating avian, bat, andmarine animal interactions for both the great lakes and the Atlantic seaboard. The market acceptanceresearch is investigating solutions to current barriers for offshore wind deployment. The workforce
development activities will result in new curricula specific to offshore wind energy at the community
college, university undergraduate, and university graduate levels. Finally, in collaboration with BOEMRE
and NOAA, DOE funds numerous projects to evaluate and mitigate the environmental effects of offshore
renewable energy, and to develop protocols for environmental baseline data collection.
Through the Recovery Act, DOE is funding the University of Maine to carry out proof‐of‐concept testing
on a 100 kW wind turbine mounted on a floating deep water platform in the Gulf of Maine. The
University will select the turbine and foundation configuration from eleven initial design concepts thatwill be evaluated through scale model testing in a wave tank facility. The proof‐of‐concept turbine will
be instrumented to gather empirical data for validation of current aero‐elastic/hydrodynamic models
that will be applied in developing much larger floating platforms for multi‐megawatt scale turbines

39 | P a g e

In addition to supporting the activities mentioned above, DOE maintains a core competency of technicalexperts by supporting specific research activities within the DOE national laboratory complex. Theseexperts support key activities in multiple disciplines essential to furthering the national wind energy
development agenda. Finally, DOE is actively engaged in interagency collaborations through activities
associated with the DOI‐DOE MOU, the Center on Environmental Quality, and the National Ocean
Council, along with other collaborations attempting to address the myriad of regulatory and permitting
issues facing offshore wind deployment.

5.5 Current DOI Offshore Wind Activities
For the past two years, the Department of the Interior has been actively engaged in facilitating thecommercial‐scale development of offshore wind, particularly along the Atlantic OCS. In April 2009,
President Barack Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced the final regulatory framework
for renewable energy development on the OCS. These new regulations establish the process BOEMRE
will use for granting leases, easements, and rights‐of‐way for offshore renewable energy development
activities, such as the siting and construction of wind generation facilities on the OCS.
The new regulations encourage collaboration among stakeholders, particularly federal, state, and tribal
governments, by allowing BOEMRE to use intergovernmental, state‐based task forces in carrying out its
responsibilities for authorizing OCS renewable energy activities. These task forces facilitatecommunication between BOEMRE and state, local, tribal, and federal stakeholders concerning
commercial renewable energy leasing and development on the OCS and have served as a forum tocollect data about existing resources and uses present along the Atlantic OCS.
Task forces have been established (or are in the process of being established) in Delaware, Florida,
Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina,
and Virginia. These task forces include a broad range of state and tribal officials as well as
representatives from across the federal government, including BOEMRE, FWS, NPS, Bureau of IndianAffairs, DOE, NOAA, DOT, ACOE, FAA, EPA, USCG, DHS, and DoD.
BOEMRE has used the information collected through the task force processes to issue notices (Requests
for Information, or RFIs) inviting all interested and affected parties to comment and provide information
on areas preliminarily identified as particularly feasible for potential offshore wind development. RFIs
are regulatory notices that allow BOEMRE to request feedback on an OCS area and its suitability forpotential development and to determine whether competitive interest exists for a particular OCS area(the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act requires that BOEMRE issue leases for offshore winddevelopment competitively, unless BOEMRE determines that no competitive interest exists). To date,
RFIs have been issued for certain areas off Delaware, Maryland, and Massachusetts, and are being
developed for other areas off additional states along the Atlantic coast.
DOI’s Smart from the Start initiative and the effort to identify wind energy areas that appear mostfeasible for development will build on the task force‐based effort by using the data collected so far on
potential resource and user conflicts, collecting any additional available data to inform the evaluation of

40 | P a g e

potential lease issuance and site assessment activities, and identifying any data gaps that should be
filled through collaborative research efforts.
In addition to these efforts, in 2009 BOEMRE issued “Interim Policy leases” that allow for site
assessment activities to be performed off the coasts of New Jersey and Delaware. These leases were
issued pursuant to an Interim Policy in place prior to the finalization of the new regulations governing
renewable energy leasing on the OCS. Under these leases, several companies are authorized toconstruct meteorological towers and/or buoys that will collect wind resource and other related data to
support future proposed projects.
On April 28, 2010, Secretary Salazar signed a Record of Decision authorizing the issuance of a lease toCape Wind Associates, LLC, paving the way for BOEMRE to issue a commercial lease to the company in
October 2010. Should BOEMRE approve Cape Wind Associates’ proposed construction and operation
plan, the Cape Wind energy project would be the first wind farm on the OCS, and its approximately 130
planned wind turbines could generate enough power to meet 75 percent of the electricity demand forCape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket Island combined.
Finally, BOEMRE’s Office of Offshore Renewable Energy Programs (OREP) is actively engaged in
conducting research to assess the potential environmental impacts of renewable energy development
on OCS resources. These efforts include determining and evaluating the potential effects OCS activities
may have on natural, historical, and human resources and the appropriate monitoring and mitigating of
those potential effects. OREP’s Environmental Studies Program conducts research across the spectrumof physical, biological and socioeconomic environments.

41 | P a g e

Works Cited
Department of Energy. 20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S.
Electricity Supply. Golden, CO: Department of Energy, 2008.
J. Cohen, T. Schweizer, A. Laxson, S. Butterfield, S. Schreck, L. Fingersh, P. Veers, T. Ashwill. Technology
Improvement Opportunities for Low Wind Speed Turbines and Implications for Cost of Energy Reduction:
July 9, 2005 ‐ July 8, 2006. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), 2008.
K. George, T. Schweizer. Primer: The DOE Wind Energy Program's Approach to Calculating Cost of
Energy: July 9, 2005 ‐ July 8, 2006. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), 2008.
M. Schwartz, D. Heimiller, S. Haymes, W. Musial. Assessment of Offshore Wind Energy Resources for theUnited States. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), 2010.
NREL. "Unpublished analysis of offshore wind cost of energy reduction pathways." Golden, CO: National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, April 2010.
S. Dolan, G. Heath. "Unpublished analysis of offshore wind emissions savings." Golden, CO: National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, November 23, 2010.
W. Musial, R. Thresher, B. Ram. Large‐Scale Offshore Wind Energy for the United States: Assessment ofOpportunities and Barriers. CO, Golden: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2010.
White House Office of the Press Secretary. North American Leaders’ Declaration on Climate Change andClean Energy. August 10, 2009. www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/North‐American‐Leaders‐
Declaration‐on‐Climate‐Change‐and‐Clean‐Energy/ (accessed November 29, 2010).
White House Office of the Press Secretary. Remarks by the President in 2011 State of Union Address.
January 25, 2011. www.whitehouse.gov/the‐press‐office/2011/01/25/remarks‐president‐state‐union‐
address/ (accessed February 7, 2011).

42 | P a g e

EERE Information Center
1-877-EERE-INF (1-877-337-3463)
www.eere.energy.gov/informationcenter
DOE/EE-0798 • February 2011
Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post consumer waste.