Jump to content

Triton Knoll: Difference between revisions

Coordinates: 53°24′N 0°54′E / 53.4°N 0.9°E / 53.4; 0.9
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Xiiophen (talk | contribs)
2,397 edits
up to date
Xiiophen (talk | contribs)
2,397 edits
Line 49: Line 49:
The project was initially developed by [[RWE Npower Renewables]], who was awarded the 'Triton Knoll' development area by the [[Crown Estate]] in 2003.{{sfn|ES Non technical summary|2012|loc = §5.2}} The original {{convert|206.9|km2}} development was refined, extending north outside the original area, with the boundaries of the area defined by the avoidance of main shipping routes.{{sfn|ES Site selection|2012|loc=§3.29-3,31; Fig.3.4}}
The project was initially developed by [[RWE Npower Renewables]], who was awarded the 'Triton Knoll' development area by the [[Crown Estate]] in 2003.{{sfn|ES Non technical summary|2012|loc = §5.2}} The original {{convert|206.9|km2}} development was refined, extending north outside the original area, with the boundaries of the area defined by the avoidance of main shipping routes.{{sfn|ES Site selection|2012|loc=§3.29-3,31; Fig.3.4}}


In 2008 the developer accepted an offer from [[National Grid]] for a onshore grid connection at [[Bicker Fen]], with landfall made at [[Mumby]]. Later the connection offer was withdrawn by National Grid due to a re-assessment of their planning. By 2011 the two parties had agreed on a connection at Bicker Fen.{{sfn||ES Site selection|2012|loc=§3.33-3.42}} However due to uncertainty over the final state of the Bicker Fen substation, in 2011 the developer split the planning applications into separate offshore wind farm and electrical system applications, to mimimise delay.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc=§1.2.1 }} A planning application for the offshore elements was submitted in early 2012.<ref name="consent"/> The formal developer was ''Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Ltd'', a 100% subsidiary of [[RWE Npower Renewables]] -they applied for a wind farm of {{convert|135|km2}} in size off the [[North Norfolk]] and [[Lincolnshire]] coast in the southern [[North Sea]]; the development area was cut in two by a NE/SW running pipeline channel of {{convert|500|m}} width.{{sfn|ES Non technical summary|2012|loc = §1.2; Fig.1, p.2}} The proposed wind farm would be of up to 1200MW capacity, with turbines foundations in water with depth of {{convert|18|to|24|m}}. The planning application included the offshore structures, but excluded the undersea export cable, and onshore electrical infrastrure.{{sfn|ES Non technical summary|2012|loc = §3.1-3.2}}
In 2008 the developer accepted an offer from [[National Grid]] for a onshore grid connection at [[Bicker Fen]], with landfall made at [[Mumby]]. Later the connection offer was withdrawn by National Grid due to a re-assessment of their planning. By 2011 the two parties had agreed on a connection at Bicker Fen.{{sfn||ES Site selection|2012|loc=§3.33-3.42}} However due to uncertainty over the final state of the Bicker Fen substation, in 2011 the developer split the planning applications into separate offshore wind farm and electrical system applications, to minimise delay.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc=§1.2.1 }}
A planning application for the offshore elements was submitted in early 2012.<ref name="consent"/> The formal developer was ''Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Ltd'', a 100% subsidiary of [[RWE Npower Renewables]] -they applied for a wind farm of {{convert|135|km2}} in size off the [[North Norfolk]] and [[Lincolnshire]] coast in the southern [[North Sea]]; the development area was cut in two by a NE/SW running pipeline channel of {{convert|500|m}} width.{{sfn|ES Non technical summary|2012|loc = §1.2; Fig.1, p.2}} The proposed wind farm would be of up to 1200MW capacity, with turbines foundations in water with depth of {{convert|18|to|24|m}}. The planning application included the offshore structures, but excluded the undersea export cable, and onshore electrical infrastructure.{{sfn|ES Non technical summary|2012|loc = §3.1-3.2}}


In July 2013 the government approved the plan for a wind farm of up to 288 turbines with up to 1200MW generating capacity, with associated meteorological masts, offshore substations,{{refn|group="note"|In the original wind farm planning consent, {{harvnb||The Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Order|2013}}, explicit reference is made to the use of HVDC substations without any mention of HVAC technology, whilst in the electrical system planning application, {{harvnb|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc=§2}}, the developers explicitly state that HVAC was the chosen technology }} and connecting cabling, with wind turbines limited to {{convert|220|m}} tip height, {{convert|140|m}} rotor height, and {{convert|180|m}} rotor diameter. Additionally pile driving was not permitted during the [[Herring]] spawning season (Sep to mid Oct), without prior permission.<ref name="bbc1"/><ref name="consent"/>{{sfn|The Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Order|2013|loc = Schedule 1. Parts 1-3, pp.6-8; Scedule 2. Part 2, §16, p.26}}
In July 2013 the government approved the plan for a wind farm of up to 288 turbines with up to 1200MW generating capacity, with associated meteorological masts, offshore substations,{{refn|group="note"|In the original wind farm planning consent, {{harvnb||The Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Order|2013}}, explicit reference is made to the use of HVDC substations without any mention of HVAC technology, whilst in the electrical system planning application, {{harvnb|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc=§2}}, the developers explicitly state that HVAC was the chosen technology }} and connecting cabling, with wind turbines limited to {{convert|220|m}} tip height, {{convert|140|m}} rotor height, and {{convert|180|m}} rotor diameter. Additionally pile driving was not permitted during the [[Herring]] spawning season (Sep to mid Oct), without prior permission.<ref name="bbc1"/><ref name="consent"/>{{sfn|The Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Order|2013|loc = Schedule 1. Parts 1-3, pp.6-8; Scedule 2. Part 2, §16, p.26}}
Line 57: Line 59:
In February 2015 [[Statkraft]] acquired a 50% stake in the project.<ref name="stat1"/> In late 2015 Statkraft announced it would no longer be investing in offshore wind, but would continue with the development at Triton Knoll.<ref>{{citation| url =http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Triton-Knoll-Statkraft-says-offshore-wind/story-28381159-detail/story.html| title = Triton Knoll still on as Statkraft says 'no more' to offshore wind| date =16 Dec 2015| first =David| last = Laister| work = www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk }}</ref>
In February 2015 [[Statkraft]] acquired a 50% stake in the project.<ref name="stat1"/> In late 2015 Statkraft announced it would no longer be investing in offshore wind, but would continue with the development at Triton Knoll.<ref>{{citation| url =http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Triton-Knoll-Statkraft-says-offshore-wind/story-28381159-detail/story.html| title = Triton Knoll still on as Statkraft says 'no more' to offshore wind| date =16 Dec 2015| first =David| last = Laister| work = www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk }}</ref>


In April 2015 the developers submitted their planning application for the electrical power export system.{{sfn|Triton Knoll Electrical (planning)|2015}} [[High-voltage alternating current|HVAC]] was identified as the preferred method of electrical power export; [[HVDC]] and mixed HVDC/HVAC systems were considered but HVDC was rejected primarily on cost grounds, with the export cable length not sufficiently long to justify a HVDC system.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §2.1}} [[Overhead line]]s were rejected on environmental impact grounds.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §2.1.6, 2.3.3}} A landfall at or near [[Anderby Creek]] was indentified as likely,{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §3.1.1-3.1.2}} An intermediate electric compound (IEC) use to regulate the [[reactive power]] of the AC cables, and a preferred site was selected to the west of [[Skegness Stadium]].{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §5}}{{refn|group="note"|The original site of choice was deselected in early 2014 following an objection from East Linsey District Council due to a clash with the local development plan ''Vision for Skegness''.<ref name="vision"/>}} A final substation site at or near ''Double Twelve Groves'' northwest of the Bicker Fen connection, and adjacent east of the ''South Forty Drain'' was shortlisted as the preferred option.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §7}} Offshore and onshore export cables were to be energised at upto 220kV for a connection at Bicker Fen at 400kV.{{sfn|Electrical System. Planning statement|2015|loc = §2; Fig. 3-1, p.9}} The onshore cable route consisted of around {{convert|63|km}} of underground cable - a number of interested parties raised concerns about the cable route and windfarm: farmers and the [[National Farmers' Union of England and Wales|NFU]] raised concerns about its affects on drainage;<ref name="drains"/> and [[Lincoln City Council]] claimed the development would have a negative affect of tourism;<ref name="obj1"/> [[Lincolnshire County Council]] raised concerns about the combined environmental impact of the onshore link together with the [[Viking Link]] electrical connector to Denmark.<ref name="obj12"/>
In April 2015 the developers submitted their planning application for the electrical power export system.{{sfn|Triton Knoll Electrical (planning)|2015}} [[High-voltage alternating current|HVAC]] was identified as the preferred method of electrical power export; [[HVDC]] and mixed HVDC/HVAC systems were considered but HVDC was rejected primarily on cost grounds, with the export cable length not sufficiently long to justify a HVDC system.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §2.1}} [[Overhead line]]s were rejected on environmental impact grounds.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §2.1.6, 2.3.3}} A landfall at or near [[Anderby Creek]] was identified as likely,{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §3.1.1-3.1.2}} An intermediate electric compound (IEC) use to regulate the [[reactive power]] of the AC cables, and a preferred site was selected to the west of [[Skegness Stadium]].{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §5}}{{refn|group="note"|The original site of choice was deselected in early 2014 following an objection from East Linsey District Council due to a clash with the local development plan ''Vision for Skegness''.<ref name="vision"/>}} A final substation site at or near ''Double Twelve Groves'' northwest of the Bicker Fen connection, and adjacent east of the ''South Forty Drain'' was shortlisted as the preferred option.{{sfn|Electrical System. Site selection|2015|loc = §7}} Offshore and onshore export cables were to be energised at upto 220kV for a connection at Bicker Fen at 400kV.{{sfn|Electrical System. Planning statement|2015|loc = §2; Fig. 3-1, p.9}}
The proposed onshore cable route consisted of around {{convert|63|km}} of underground cable - a number of interested parties raised concerns about the cable route and windfarm: farmers and the [[National Farmers' Union of England and Wales|NFU]] raised concerns about its affects on drainage;<ref name="drains"/> and [[Lincoln City Council]] claimed the development would have a negative affect of tourism;<ref name="obj1"/> [[Lincolnshire County Council]] raised concerns about the combined environmental impact of the onshore link together with the [[Viking Link]] electrical connector to Denmark.<ref name="obj12"/>


If constructed the wind farm is estimated (2015) to represent a total investment of £3-4 billion.<ref>{{citation| url =http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-13/statkraft-buys-stake-in-u-k-triton-knoll-wind-farm-development| title = Statkraft Buys Stake in U.K. Triton Knoll Wind Farm Development| first = Jonas| last = Cho Walsgard| date =13 Feb 2015 }}</ref>
If constructed the wind farm is estimated (2015) to represent a total investment of £3-4 billion.<ref>{{citation| url =http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-13/statkraft-buys-stake-in-u-k-triton-knoll-wind-farm-development| title = Statkraft Buys Stake in U.K. Triton Knoll Wind Farm Development| first = Jonas| last = Cho Walsgard| date =13 Feb 2015 }}</ref>

Revision as of 02:10, 18 February 2016

Triton Knoll Wind Farm
Map
CountryEngland, United Kingdom
LocationNorth Sea
Coordinates53°24′N 0°54′E / 53.4°N 0.9°E / 53.4; 0.9
Statusplanning
Commission date
  • 3 January 2022
Owner(s)RWE npower, Statkraft
Wind farm
TypeOffshore
Distance from shore33 km (20.5 mi)
Power generation
Units operational90 × 9.5 MW
Make and modelMHI Vestas V164-9.5MW (90)
Nameplate capacity600–900 MW
External links
Websitewww.tritonknoll.co.uk
[edit on Wikidata]

Triton Knoll Wind Farm is a proposed offshore round 2 offshore wind farm 33 kilometres (21 mi) off the coast of Lincolnshire, in the North Sea, England.

RWE Npower Renewables were awarded the lease to the development area in 2003. The offshore elements of the wind farm of up to 1200MW power gained planning consent in 2013; RWE reduced the scope of the wind farm to 900MW or under in 2014, to reduce cost per MW.

Statcraft became joint owner of the development in early 2015. The onshore and offshore electrical connection assets were subject of a separate planning application, submitted 2015.

History

The project was initially developed by RWE Npower Renewables, who was awarded the 'Triton Knoll' development area by the Crown Estate in 2003.[1] The original 206.9 square kilometres (79.9 sq mi) development was refined, extending north outside the original area, with the boundaries of the area defined by the avoidance of main shipping routes.[2]

In 2008 the developer accepted an offer from National Grid for a onshore grid connection at Bicker Fen, with landfall made at Mumby. Later the connection offer was withdrawn by National Grid due to a re-assessment of their planning. By 2011 the two parties had agreed on a connection at Bicker Fen.[3] However due to uncertainty over the final state of the Bicker Fen substation, in 2011 the developer split the planning applications into separate offshore wind farm and electrical system applications, to minimise delay.[4]

A planning application for the offshore elements was submitted in early 2012.[5] The formal developer was Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Ltd, a 100% subsidiary of RWE Npower Renewables -they applied for a wind farm of 135 square kilometres (52 sq mi) in size off the North Norfolk and Lincolnshire coast in the southern North Sea; the development area was cut in two by a NE/SW running pipeline channel of 500 metres (1,600 ft) width.[6] The proposed wind farm would be of up to 1200MW capacity, with turbines foundations in water with depth of 18 to 24 metres (59 to 79 ft). The planning application included the offshore structures, but excluded the undersea export cable, and onshore electrical infrastructure.[7]

In July 2013 the government approved the plan for a wind farm of up to 288 turbines with up to 1200MW generating capacity, with associated meteorological masts, offshore substations,[note 1] and connecting cabling, with wind turbines limited to 220 metres (720 ft) tip height, 140 metres (460 ft) rotor height, and 180 metres (590 ft) rotor diameter. Additionally pile driving was not permitted during the Herring spawning season (Sep to mid Oct), without prior permission.[8][5][9]

In January 2014 the developer RWE announced that it had chosen to progress with a reduced plan of between 600 and 900 MW power, in order to reduce the cost (per MW) of the development.[10]

In February 2015 Statkraft acquired a 50% stake in the project.[11] In late 2015 Statkraft announced it would no longer be investing in offshore wind, but would continue with the development at Triton Knoll.[12]

In April 2015 the developers submitted their planning application for the electrical power export system.[13] HVAC was identified as the preferred method of electrical power export; HVDC and mixed HVDC/HVAC systems were considered but HVDC was rejected primarily on cost grounds, with the export cable length not sufficiently long to justify a HVDC system.[14] Overhead lines were rejected on environmental impact grounds.[15] A landfall at or near Anderby Creek was identified as likely,[16] An intermediate electric compound (IEC) use to regulate the reactive power of the AC cables, and a preferred site was selected to the west of Skegness Stadium.[17][note 2] A final substation site at or near Double Twelve Groves northwest of the Bicker Fen connection, and adjacent east of the South Forty Drain was shortlisted as the preferred option.[19] Offshore and onshore export cables were to be energised at upto 220kV for a connection at Bicker Fen at 400kV.[20]

The proposed onshore cable route consisted of around 63 kilometres (39 mi) of underground cable - a number of interested parties raised concerns about the cable route and windfarm: farmers and the NFU raised concerns about its affects on drainage;[21] and Lincoln City Council claimed the development would have a negative affect of tourism;[22] Lincolnshire County Council raised concerns about the combined environmental impact of the onshore link together with the Viking Link electrical connector to Denmark.[23]

If constructed the wind farm is estimated (2015) to represent a total investment of £3-4 billion.[24]

Notes

  1. ^ In the original wind farm planning consent, & The Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Order 2013, explicit reference is made to the use of HVDC substations without any mention of HVAC technology, whilst in the electrical system planning application, Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §2, the developers explicitly state that HVAC was the chosen technology
  2. ^ The original site of choice was deselected in early 2014 following an objection from East Linsey District Council due to a clash with the local development plan Vision for Skegness.[18]

References

  1. ^ ES Non technical summary 2012, §5.2.
  2. ^ ES Site selection 2012, §3.29-3,31; Fig.3.4.
  3. ^ & ES Site selection 2012, §3.33-3.42.
  4. ^ Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §1.2.1.
  5. ^ ES Non technical summary 2012, §1.2; Fig.1, p.2.
  6. ^ ES Non technical summary 2012, §3.1-3.2.
  7. ^ "Triton Knoll wind farm gets green light", BBC News, 11 July 2013
  8. ^ The Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Order 2013, Schedule 1. Parts 1-3, pp.6-8; Scedule 2. Part 2, §16, p.26.
  9. ^ "RWE cuts UK offshore wind farm capacity by up to half", www.reuters.com, 6 Jan 2014
  10. ^ Sources:
  11. ^ Laister, David (16 Dec 2015), "Triton Knoll still on as Statkraft says 'no more' to offshore wind", www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk
  12. ^ Triton Knoll Electrical (planning) 2015.
  13. ^ Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §2.1.
  14. ^ Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §2.1.6, 2.3.3.
  15. ^ Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §3.1.1-3.1.2.
  16. ^ Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §5.
  17. ^ "Onshore rethink for Triton Knoll", renews.biz, 29 Jan 2014
  18. ^ Electrical System. Site selection 2015, §7.
  19. ^ Electrical System. Planning statement 2015, §2; Fig. 3-1, p.9.
  20. ^ Sources:
  21. ^ "Lincoln County Council's serious concerns over Triton Knoll", www.itv.com, 6 Nov 2015
  22. ^ "Fight against Triton Knoll onshore development continues", www.lincolnshire.gov.uk, 6 Oct 2015
  23. ^ Cho Walsgard, Jonas (13 Feb 2015), Statkraft Buys Stake in U.K. Triton Knoll Wind Farm Development

Sources

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Triton_Knoll&oldid=705538545"