TY - JOUR
T1 - The offshore renewables industry may be better served by new bespoke design guidelines than by automatic adoption of recommended practices developed for oil and gas infrastructure
T2 - A recommendation illustrated by subsea cable design
AU - Griffiths, Terry
AU - Draper, Scott
AU - Cheng, Liang
AU - An, Hongwei
AU - Schläppy, Marie Lise
AU - Fogliani, Antonino
AU - White, David
AU - Noble, Stuart
AU - Coles, Daniel
AU - Johnson, Fraser
AU - Thurstan, Bryan
AU - Teng, Yunfei
N1 - Funding Information:
DC acknowledges the financial support of the Tidal Stream Industry Energiser project (TIGER), which is co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through the Interreg France (Channel) England Programme. TG acknowledges the financial support of an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship, UWA Safety-net Top-up, STABLEpipe scholarship and Small Diameter Pipeline scholarships, as well as support from a University Club of Western Australia Research Travel Scholarship. SD acknowledges the financial support of The Lloyd’s Register Foundation. Lloyd’s Register Foundation supports the advancement of engineering related education, and funds research and development that enhances safety of life at sea, on land and in the air. DW acknowledges the support of the UK EPSRC Offshore Renewable Energy Supergen Hub, grant ref. EP/S000747/1. YT acknowledges support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51479025). The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Australian Research Council (ARC) and Woodside Energy Ltd. for elements of the work reported in this paper through ARC Linkage Project LP150100249 Hydrodynamic forces on small diameter pipelines laid on natural seabed, with participation by The University of Western Australia and University of Western Sydney. http://purl.org/auresearch/grants/arc/LP150100249. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the STABLEpipe JIP Sponsors, Woodside and Chevron who have enabled the STABLEpipe research work to be undertaken and published, and therefore made available for uptake by industry as well as scrutiny and improvement by researchers and practitioners. Elements of this work were funded by the Australian Research Council via grants LP0989936, FT0991816, CE110 001009 and DP130104535). The authors acknowledge the generous financial and technical support of other industry partners who have also contributed to this research, including: CRP Marine, JDR Cables, Simec Atlantis, Tasmanian Gas Pipeline, Technip and Woodside (in alphabetical order), as well as the UK EPSRC Offshore Renewable Energy Supergen Hub (EP/S000747/1).
Funding Information:
DC acknowledges the financial support of the Tidal Stream Industry Energiser project (TIGER), which is co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund through the Interreg France (Channel) England Programme. TG acknowledges the financial support of an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship, UWA Safety-net Top-up, STABLEpipe scholarship and Small Diameter Pipeline scholarships, as well as support from a University Club of Western Australia Research Travel Scholarship. SD acknowledges the financial support of The Lloyd’s Register Foundation. Lloyd’s Register Foundation supports the advancement of engineering related education, and funds research and development that enhances safety of life at sea, on land and in the air. DW acknowledges the support of the UK EPSRC Offshore Renewable Energy Supergen Hub, grant ref. EP/S000747/1. YT acknowledges support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51479025). The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Australian Research Council (ARC) and Woodside Energy Ltd. for elements of the work reported in this paper through ARC Linkage Project LP150100249 Hydrodynamic forces on small diameter pipelines laid on natural seabed, with participation by The University of Western Australia and University of Western Sydney. http://purl.org/auresearch/grants/arc/LP150100249 . The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the STABLEpipe JIP Sponsors, Woodside and Chevron who have enabled the STABLEpipe research work to be undertaken and published, and therefore made available for uptake by industry as well as scrutiny and improvement by researchers and practitioners. Elements of this work were funded by the Australian Research Council via grants LP0989936, FT0991816, CE110 001009 and DP130104535). The authors acknowledge the generous financial and technical support of other industry partners who have also contributed to this research, including: CRP Marine, JDR Cables, Simec Atlantis, Tasmanian Gas Pipeline, Technip and Woodside (in alphabetical order), as well as the UK EPSRC Offshore Renewable Energy Supergen Hub (EP/S000747/1). Acknowledgments
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2023 Griffiths, Draper, Cheng, An, Schläppy, Fogliani, White, Noble, Coles, Johnson, Thurstan and Teng.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Introduction: There is an emerging need for the offshore renewable industry to have their own bespoke design guidelines because the associated projects and offshore facilities differ in fundamental ways to oil and gas facilities. Offshore renewable energy (ORE) facilities have already surpassed the numbers of installed facilities in the oil and gas industry by an order of magnitude and demand is forecast to continue growing exponentially. In addition ORE facilities often have different response characteristics and limit states or failure modes as well as profoundly different risk and consequence profiles given they are generally uncrewed and do not contain explosive hydrocarbon fluids which might be released into the environment. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to advocate for licensing bodies and regulators (such as the various national PEL 114 committees) to challenge the process of automatic adoption of oil and gas design processes, while pushing for offshore renewables to be treated differently, when appropriate, with more relevant and applicable guidance. Methods: To support this argument we present new bespoke design guidance developed for subsea cables based on specific modes of cable behaviour, which often differ from pipelines. We also show worked examples from recent project experience. The results from on-bottom stability analyses of a set of cables are compared between conventional oil and gas guidance following DNV-RP-F109 versus the stability using cable-optimised approaches. Results: The outcomes from the ‘conventional’ oil and gas results are not simply biased compared to cable-optimised design methods, with a trend of being either conservative or unconservative. Instead, the results of the two methods are very poorly correlated. This shows that the oil and gas approach isn't simply biased when applied to cables, but is instead unreliable because it doesn't capture the underlying failure conditions. These analytical comparisons are supported by field observation - the ocean doesn't lie, and makes short work of any anthropogenic structures which are designed with inadequate appreciation of the real world conditions. Discussion: To support the rapid growth of ORE, we should therefore actively pursue opportunities to rewrite the design rules and standards, so that they better support the specific requirements of ORE infrastructure, rather than legacy oil and gas structures. With more appropriate design practices, we can accelerate the roll out of ORE to meet net zero, and mitigate the climate crisis.
AB - Introduction: There is an emerging need for the offshore renewable industry to have their own bespoke design guidelines because the associated projects and offshore facilities differ in fundamental ways to oil and gas facilities. Offshore renewable energy (ORE) facilities have already surpassed the numbers of installed facilities in the oil and gas industry by an order of magnitude and demand is forecast to continue growing exponentially. In addition ORE facilities often have different response characteristics and limit states or failure modes as well as profoundly different risk and consequence profiles given they are generally uncrewed and do not contain explosive hydrocarbon fluids which might be released into the environment. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to advocate for licensing bodies and regulators (such as the various national PEL 114 committees) to challenge the process of automatic adoption of oil and gas design processes, while pushing for offshore renewables to be treated differently, when appropriate, with more relevant and applicable guidance. Methods: To support this argument we present new bespoke design guidance developed for subsea cables based on specific modes of cable behaviour, which often differ from pipelines. We also show worked examples from recent project experience. The results from on-bottom stability analyses of a set of cables are compared between conventional oil and gas guidance following DNV-RP-F109 versus the stability using cable-optimised approaches. Results: The outcomes from the ‘conventional’ oil and gas results are not simply biased compared to cable-optimised design methods, with a trend of being either conservative or unconservative. Instead, the results of the two methods are very poorly correlated. This shows that the oil and gas approach isn't simply biased when applied to cables, but is instead unreliable because it doesn't capture the underlying failure conditions. These analytical comparisons are supported by field observation - the ocean doesn't lie, and makes short work of any anthropogenic structures which are designed with inadequate appreciation of the real world conditions. Discussion: To support the rapid growth of ORE, we should therefore actively pursue opportunities to rewrite the design rules and standards, so that they better support the specific requirements of ORE infrastructure, rather than legacy oil and gas structures. With more appropriate design practices, we can accelerate the roll out of ORE to meet net zero, and mitigate the climate crisis.
KW - design guideline
KW - offshore renewable energy
KW - on bottom stability
KW - recommended practice
KW - subsea cables
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85160061269&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fmars.2023.1030665
DO - 10.3389/fmars.2023.1030665
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85160061269
SN - 2296-7745
VL - 10
JO - Frontiers in Marine Science
JF - Frontiers in Marine Science
M1 - 1030665
ER -