Evaluating capital and operating cost efficiency of offshore wind farms: A DEA approach

被引:80
|
作者
Ederer, Nikolaus [1 ]
机构
[1] Vienna Univ Technol, Fac Elect Engn & Informat Technol, A-1040 Vienna, Austria
来源
关键词
Offshore wind; Data envelopment analyis (DEA); Cost efficiency; Best practice; Economies of scale; Learning-by-doing; DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; 2ND-STAGE DEA; ENERGY; POWER; AVAILABILITY; BENCHMARKING; PERFORMANCE; VARIABLES; MODELS; SCALE;
D O I
10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.071
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
An actual growth rate greater than 30% indicates that offshore wind is a reasonable alternative to other energy sources. The industry today is faced with the challenge of becoming competitive and thus significantly reduce the cost of electricity from offshore wind. This situation implies that the evaluation of costs incurred during development, installation and operation is one of the most pressing issues in this industry at the moment. Unfortunately, actual cost analyses suffer from less resilient input data and the application of simple methodologies. Therefore, the objective of this study was to elevate the discussion, providing stakeholders with a sophisticated methodology and representative benchmark figures. The use of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) allowed for plants to be modelled as entities and costs to be related to the main specifics, such as distance to shore and water depth, ensuring the necessary comparability. Moreover, a particularly reliable database was established using cost data from annual reports. Offshore wind capacity of 3.6 GW was benchmarked regarding capital and operating cost efficiency, best-practice cost frontiers were determined, and the effects of learning-by-doing and economies of scale were investigated, ensuring that this article is of significant interest for the offshore wind industry. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1034 / 1046
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A cross-European efficiency assessment of offshore wind farms: A DEA approach
    Akbari, Negar
    Jones, Dylan
    Treloar, Richard
    [J]. RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2020, 151 : 1186 - 1195
  • [2] Wake model selection in offshore wind energy: balancing efficiency and cost in Indian offshore wind farms
    Anangapal, Hari Bhaskaran
    Victor, Kirubakaran
    [J]. Engineering Research Express, 2024, 6 (04):
  • [3] Efficiency evaluation for offshore wind farms
    Li, Zheng
    Zhao, Menghua
    Chen, Zhe
    [J]. 2006 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON POWER SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY: POWERCON, VOLS 1- 6, 2006, : 2007 - +
  • [4] The Efficiency of Offshore Wind Energy Companies in the European Countries: A DEA Approach
    Maradin, Dario
    Drazenovic, Bojana Olgic
    Cegar, Sasa
    [J]. ENERGIES, 2023, 16 (09)
  • [5] Impact of operating cost components on airline efficiency in India: A DEA approach
    Sakthidharan, Visakh
    Sivaraman, Sunitha
    [J]. ASIA PACIFIC MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2018, 23 (04) : 258 - 267
  • [6] Decommissioning cost modelling for offshore wind farms: A bottom-up approach
    Milne, Callum
    Jalili, Shahin
    Maheri, Alireza
    [J]. SUSTAINABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES AND ASSESSMENTS, 2021, 48
  • [7] ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY OF CENTRAL AND EAST EUROPEAN FARMS BASED ON DEA - COST APPROACH
    Toma, Elena
    Vlad, Ionela Mituko
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC PAPERS-SERIES MANAGEMENT ECONOMIC ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, 2018, 18 (03) : 455 - 460
  • [8] Low cost load monitoring for offshore wind farms
    Braam, H.
    Obdam, T. S.
    Verbruggen, T. W.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON NOISE AND VIBRATION ENGINEERING (ISMA2012) / INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON UNCERTAINTY IN STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS (USD2012), 2012, : 4297 - 4311
  • [9] Improving Logistics Efficiency in Offshore Wind Farms Construction
    Chartron, Sylvain
    Haasis, Hans-Dietrich
    [J]. DYNAMICS IN LOGISTICS, 2018, : 139 - 143
  • [10] A parametric whole life cost model for offshore wind farms
    Mahmood Shafiee
    Feargal Brennan
    Inés Armada Espinosa
    [J]. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2016, 21 : 961 - 975