1 Objective

The objective of the study is to find out optimum Quantity of WTG, PCS and Battery so that
maximum possible energy requirements of FPSO is supplied by renewable energy resources.
The scope consists of following

• Modelling of WTG based on its Power curve (Ref: IEA Wind TCP Task 37 Definition of the
IEA Wind 15-Megawatt Offshore Reference Wind Turbine Technical Report
• Modelling of Wind resource (Ref: Metocean Reference Document for Gato do Mato) and
identifying the energy generation of WTG
• Integrating the WTG with GTG and FPSO Loads to check how much percentage of energy
consumed could be met by WTG
• Validate the feasibility of shutting down one GTG with 3 WTG
• Validate the feasibility of shutting down one GTG from year 13
• Identifying the optimal quantity of WTG
• Optimising BESS rating (PCS & Battery capacity)
• Optimising the WTG and BESS in Base case and Optimised case

2 Definition and Terms

Renewable Fraction
The renewable fraction is the fraction of the energy delivered to the load that originated from
renewable power sources. i.e This indicates how much percentage of energy consumed is met
by renewable resources. Higher renewable fraction indicates less carbon emission.
Renewable Penetration
Maximum value of power generated by renewable divided by total load at any instant. Higher
renewable penetration indicates system close to unstable condition. In order make the system
stable with high penetration, higher spinning reserve is required.
Capacity Factor
Capacity factor any power source is defined as Average Generation divided by rated capacity.
Step Load of GTG
Maximum instantaneous increase in power demand the GTG can handle without violating
Frequency and Voltage.
Excess Energy
The energy produced by power source which could not be utilised because of non-availability
load / Energy Storage
Round Trip Efficiency
Round-trip efficiency is the percentage of electricity put into storage that is later retrieved. The
higher the round-trip efficiency, the less energy is lost in the storage process

3 Software
The study is performed by using the engineering software tool HOMERPro 3.14. HOMER – Hybrid
Optimisation of Multiple Energy Resources – is used to identify the optimal mix of multiple energy
resources. The HOMERPro microgrid software by HOMER Energy is the global standard for
optimizing microgrid design in all sectors. This software application is used to design and evaluate
 technically and financially the options for off-grid and on-grid power systems for remote, stand-
alone and distributed generation applications.

4 System description
Project is powered by three No’s of GTG plus one standby GTG. Expected average Power demand
is about 70.5 MW from first year to ninth year. The Power demand reduces to 66 MW in tenth year
and further reduces to 52 MW in thirteenth year. The Rest of the Field life the Power is almost
Constant.
The power generation will consist of four 28MW GTGs with a N+1 configuration. All 28MW GTG
are connected to 13.8kV MV 80-EH-3070 Switchboard with bus coupler closed during Normal
Operation. The 13.8kV Motor loads are fed directly from the switchboard 80-EH-3070.
Power supply for the 6.6kV MV switchboard 80-EH-3080 loads are fed from two no’s of 22MVA,
13.8/6.9kV transformers, namely 80-ET-3080A and 80-ET-3080B. Bus tie at the 80-EH-3080
Switchboard is normally open.
6.6kV MV 80-EH-1080 switchboard connected loads are fed from two no’s of 21MVA, 13.8/6.9kV
transformers, namely 80-ET-1080A and 80-ET-1080B. Bus tie at the 82-EN-1080 Switchboard is
normally open.
0.69kV essential switchboard 82-EN-1070 loads are fed from two no’s of 6.8MVA, 6.6/0.72kV
transformers, namely 82-ET-1070A and 82-ET-1070B. Bus tie at the 82-EN-1070 switchboard is
normally open.
0.44kV Normal LV switchboard 82-EN-3070 Section loads are fed from two no’s of 4MVA,
13.8/0.46kV transformers, namely 80-ET-3070A and 80-ET-3070B. Bus tie at the 82-EN-3070
Switchboard is normally open.
In order to minimise the environmental impact and increase the renewable energy generation,
connecting WTGs to the FPSO are explored. In order to balance the generation and demand during
Wind fluctuation, battery energy storage system is proposed and connected to WTG 13.8 kV MV
Switchboard 80-EH-4501.
Renewable fraction and excess electrify are the two key evaluation parameters for optimising the
WTG and battery energy storage system. Energy loss and auxiliary power consumption of BESS
is another key factor which is to be accounted.

5 General Assumptions
The following data is considered as assumption used in the studies,
• Wind resource data from HOMER software is altered to meet the monthly wind data
provided in Metocean Reference Document for Gato do Mato. This is conservative
assumption. Actual wind speed will help to further improve the renewable generation.
• Power curve of the WTGs is considered from Definition of the IEA Wind 15-Megawatt
Offshore Reference Wind Turbine Technical Report.
• WTG is modelled neglecting all losses & maintenance schedule.
• Study is performed with 60 minute resolution. Wind velocity with One-minute resolution
may provide more accurate results during detailed engineering phase.
• In absence of real time data available on maximum variability of wind, 90% instantaneous
spinning reserve is considered for wind power generation. This is on conservative side.
Upon actual data, BESS size can be optimized during detailed engineering phase.
• Minimum load of GTG Data is considered based on Heat & Power Balance requirements
provided by company in optimized case and Base Case.
• Minimum up time of GTG assumed as twenty days to minimize the simulated Shutdown
by the software.
• 25% of capacity is considered as maximum Step load for GTG.
 • ABB PowerStore PCS100 & ABB-P3 Battery standard model available in HOMERPO
used for PCS & battery modelling
• Minimum State of Charge of the battery is assumed as 10%
• Round trip efficiency of BESS is assumed to be 81%.

6 Input data for Network Modelling

The electrical network is modelled as per the inputs available. Modelling of various equipment’s
are explained in detailed below.
6.1 Load Data
Load is modelled with below parameters
Table 1: Load Data

Topside Power Demand in Number of

kW offloading Topside Power
Year days in year Demand Average
normal in kW
Offloading
operation
1 70031 75418 36.1 70564.313
2 70031 75418 34.3 70537.378
3 70031 75418 31.0 70488.895
4 70031 75418 28.1 70445.799
5 70031 75418 26.3 70418.864
6 70031 75418 24.1 70386.542
7 70031 75418 21.9 70354.22
8 70031 75418 20.1 70327.285
9 70031 75418 18.6 70305.737
10 65985 71372 16.8 66232.802
11 65985 71372 15.0 66205.867
12 65985 71372 13.9 66189.706
13 51802 57189 10.2 51952.836
14 51802 57189 9.1 51936.675
15 51802 57189 8.4 51925.901
16 51802 57189 7.7 51915.127
17 51802 57189 6.9 51904.353
18 51802 57189 6.2 51893.579
19 51802 57189 5.8 51888.192
20 51802 57189 5.5 51882.805

6.2 GTG Data

GTG is modelled with below parameters
 Table 2: GTG Data

S.No Parameters Unit GTG

/1/ Power Rating MW 28
/2/ Step load % 25
Minimum load ratio of GTG depends on the heat requirements and that varies from year on
year. Minimum load ratio of GTG for is calculated based on minimum required GTG power
divided by GTG rating and the same is listed in the below table
Base Case 18 MW – WHRU
Table 3: Base Case - Minimum Load Ratio

Minimum GTG
Minimum Load ratio of
Year Power required in
GTG (3 GTGs Running)
kW
/1/ 67,318 80.14
/2/ 64,751 77.08
/3/ 60,131 71.58
/4/ 56,024 66.70
/5/ 53,458 63.64
/6/ 50,378 59.97
/7/ 47,298 56.31
/8/ 44,731 53.25
/9/ 42,678 50.81
/10/ 40,111 47.75
/11/ 37,544 44.70
/12/ 35,940 42.79
/13/ 31,347 37.32
/14/ 31,327 37.29
/15/ 31,317 37.28
/16/ 31,307 37.27
/17/ 31,296 37.26
/18/ 31,290 37.25
/19/ 31,280 37.24
/20/ 31,269 37.23

Optimized Case – 28MW - WHRU

Table 4: Optimized Case - Minimum Load Ratio

Minimum GTG
Minimum Load ratio of
Year Power required in
GTG (3 GTGs Running)
kW
/1/ 45,182 53.79
/2/ 43,459 51.74
/3/ 40,359 48.05
 Minimum GTG
Minimum Load ratio of
Year Power required in
GTG (3 GTGs Running)
kW
/4/ 37,602 44.76
/5/ 35,880 42.71
/6/ 33,812 40.25
/7/ 31,745 37.79
/8/ 30,023 35.74
/9/ 28,644 34.1
/10/ 26,922 32.05
/11/ 25,199 30
/12/ 24,122 28.72
/13/ 21,040 25.05
/14/ 21,026 25.03
/15/ 21,019 25.02
/16/ 21,012 25.01
/17/ 21,006 25.01
/18/ 21,001 25
/19/ 20,994 24.99
/20/ 20,987 24.98

6.3 WTG Data

15MW WTG data are considered from Definition of the IEA Wind 15-Megawatt Offshore
Reference Wind Turbine Technical Report.
Table 5: WTG Data

S.No Parameters Unit WTG

/1/ Power Rating MW 15
/2/ Cut in Speed m/s 3
/3/ Rated Wind Speed m/s 10.59
/4/ Cut Out Speed m/s 25
/5/ Hub Height m 150

Power curve of WTG is used from Definition of the IEA Wind 15-Megawatt Offshore
Reference Wind Turbine Technical Report and shown below.
 Figure 1: Power and Thrust Curve

For better clarity, Power Output vs Wind Speed is tabulated in the below table and modelling.
Table 6: Wind Speed-Power Output

Wind Speed Power Output

S. No
(m/s) (kW)

/1/ 3 0

/2/ 4 706

/3/ 5 1514

/4/ 6 2727

/5/ 7 4449

/6/ 8 6677

/7/ 9 9414

/8/ 10 12760

/9/ 10.59 15000

/10/ 11 15000

/11/ 12 15000

/12/ 13 15000

/13/ 14 15000

/14/ 15 15000

/15/ 25 15000

/16/ 26 0

/17/ 27 0

Modelling of WTG in in HOMER Software is presented in below image.

 Figure 2: Modelling of WTG

6.4 Wind Data

Wind data is considered from Metocean Reference Document for Gato do Mato and the same
is presented in the below.
Table 7: Monthly Average Wind Speed Data

Average
S. No Month Wind Speed
(m/s)
/1/ January 7.055

/2/ February 7.354

/3/ March 6.715

/4/ April 6.790

/5/ May 7.011

/6/ June 7.056

/7/ July 7.560

/8/ August 7.812

/9/ September 8.295

/10/ October 7.808

/11/ November 7.350

/12/ December 7.000

 Figure 3: Basic Statistics of Wind Speed

Monthly percentage exceedance of wind speed (1-hour, 10 m) at is presented in the below

table
Table 8: Monthly percentage exceedance of wind speed Data

Wind resource in HOMER software is adjusted to meet the reference provided in the
Modelling of Wind data in HOMER is presented below.
 Figure 4: Monthly Average Wind Speed Data in Homerpro

Figure 5: Wind Speed Data in Homerpro

6.5 Battery Energy Storage System Modelling

• Standard PCS100 available in HOMERPRO is considered as Bidirectional converter for
studies. Data Sheet of PCS 100 is provided Appendix A
• Standard ABB PS-BatP3 available in HOMERPRO is considered as battery for studies.
Data Sheet of Battery is provided Appendix B

7 Energy Assessment Studies and Optimisation

Energy assessment studies are considered for the following case

1. Evaluating the Wind energy generation and Capacity factor for single WTG
2. Evaluating the Renewable penetration and Renewable fraction with 3 GTG, 1 WTGs
along with BESS for 1st year Base Case. Evaluating the year at which excess energy
becomes zero
3. Evaluating the Renewable penetration and Renewable fraction with 1/2/3 WTGs along
with BESS for 1st year Optimized Case (3 GTGs)
4. Evaluating the Renewable penetration and Renewable fraction with 1/2/3 WTGs along
with BESS for 6th year Optimized Case (3 GTGs)
5. Evaluating the Renewable penetration and Renewable fraction with 1/2/3 WTGs along
with BESS for 13th year Optimized Case (3 GTGs)
 6. Evaluating the Renewable penetration and Renewable fraction with 1/2/3 WTGs along
with BESS for 13th year Optimized Case (2 GTGs)
7. Evaluating the year at which excess energy becomes zero for 2 WTGS in optimised
Case

Table 9: Study Cases

Number Number of
Case Year WHRU
of GTG WTG

Case-1 - - 1 -

Case-2. a 1 3 1 Base

Case-2. b 2,3,4,5,13 3 1 Base

Case-3. a 1 3 1 Optimized

Case-3. b 1 3 2 Optimized

Case-3. c 1 3 3 Optimized

Case-4. a 6 3 1 Optimized

Case-4. b 6 3 2 Optimized

Case-4. c 6 3 3 Optimized

Case-5. a 13 3 1 Optimized

Case-5. b 13 3 2 Optimized

Case-5.c 13 3 3 Optimized

Case-6. a 13 2 1 Optimized

Case-6. b 13 2 2 Optimized

Case-6. c 13 2 3 Optimized

Case-7 1,2,3 3 2 Optimized

7.1 Wind Energy Generation & Capacity factor

Case 1:
This case is considered to identify the wind generation and capacity factor of WTG. This also provides the
idea of wind variation over the year in one hour blocks. HOMERPRO model to evaluate this case is shown
below.

Figure 6: Wind Assesment

Simulation results shows the wide variation of wind from zero to 45 MW. Results shows 15 MW WTG on
an average generates about 6.3 MW which is 42.1% capacity factor. Energy generated by single WTG is
55,309,425 kWh for an year. HOMER Pro results are tabulated below.
 Table 10: Wind Assessment Data

Value Units

Total Rated Capacity 15,000 kW

Mean Output 6,314 kW

Capacity Factor 42.1 %

Total Production 55,309,425 kWh/yr

Hours of Operation 8,263 hrs/yr

Results also shows that WTG is not generating any power about 497 hours in an year (i.e wind velocity is
less than the cut in wind speed).

Figure 7: WTG Power Output

Above image is the output from HOMERPRO shows the wind variation over an year. Above results are on
the conservative side. With actual wind data and Power curve of the WTG, 3 to 4% improvement on the
capacity factor is expected.

7.2 Base Case - Single WTG along three GTGs

Case 2.a
This case is considered to identify the renewable fraction and renewable penetration with 1 No of 15MW
WTG to meet the FPSO loads under Base case. GTG Minimum Load Ratio is 80.14 % based on heat
requirements.

Simulation results concludes that about 3.8% of total energy requirement are met by WTG and remaining
96.2% of energy requirement is met by GTG. Simulation also indicates that maximum renewable
penetration (maximum {Renewable generation / Demand}) is 21.4%. Since the system running at Normal
renewable penetration, outage of WTG can be handled by GTG step load (7 MW per each GTG). However
sudden ramp down of WTG may reduce the life of GTGs in absence of BESS. 6 MW PCS with 3 MWh Battery
will reduce the stress on the GTG and enhance the life of GTG.
However, minimum power requirement of GTG based on heat requirements is 67.3 MW. This mean wind
power more than 2.7 MW should be curtailed (power demand in normal operating condition is 70.03 MW).
From the simulation results Curtailment of Wind Power is 56.72% and hence it is not favourable to add
WTG in first year.

Case-2.b
Study is carried out to identify in which year excess energy (Wind Curtailment) become zero. Simulation
results shows on 5th year excess energy become zero. Simulation also shows the excess electricity reduces
drastically from 1st year until it becomes zero in year 5.

Since the system running at Normal renewable penetration, outage of WTG can be handled by GTG step
load (7 MW per each GTG). However sudden ramp down of WTG may reduce the life of GTGs in absence of
BESS. 6 MW PCS with 3 MWh Battery will reduce the stress on the GTG and enhance the life of GTG.

Below table provides excess electricity from 1 st year to 5th year. Simulation is carried out for 13th year also
to validate if there is any excess energy. Simulation results shows there is no excess energy from 5 th year.

Table 11: Base Case - 1 WTG Excess Energy Result

Power
Minimum Renewable
demand Excess Excess
GTG Energy
Year in normal electricity electricity
Power Generation
operation kWh %
Required kWh
in kW

1 70,031 67,318 5,53,08,076 3,13,68,396 56.72

2 70,031 64,751 5,53,08,076 1,88,21,614 34.03

3 70,031 60,131 5,53,08,076 54,81,311 9.91

4 70,031 56,024 5,53,08,076 1,24,950 0.23

5 70,031 53,458 5,53,08,076 0 0

13 51802 21,040 5,53,08,076 0 0

7.3 Optimized Case - Three GTGs with WTG for 1st year
GTG Minimum Load Ratio is 53.79% is considered for simulation based on heat requirements in optimised
case.

Case 3.a
This case is considered to identify the renewable fraction and renewable penetration when 1 No of 15MW
WTG is added to meet the FPSO loads.

Simulation results concludes that about 8.9% of total energy requirement are met by WTG and remaining
91.1% of energy requirement is met by GTG. Simulation also indicates that maximum renewable
penetration (maximum {Renewable generation / Demand}) is 21.4%. Since the system running at Normal
renewable penetration, outage of WTG can be handled by GTG step load. However sudden ramp down of
WTG may reduce the life of GTGs in absence of BESS. 6 MW PCS with 3 MWh Battery will reduce the stress
on the GTG and enhance the life of GTG.

Case 3.b
This case is considered to identify the renewable fraction and renewable penetration when 2 Nos of 15MW
WTG is added to meet the FPSO loads.

Simulation results concludes that about 17.2% of total energy requirement are met by WTG and remaining
82.8% of energy requirement is met by GTG. Simulation also indicates that maximum renewable
penetration (maximum {Renewable generation / Demand}) is 42.8%. Sudden loss of 30 MW WTG cannot
be met by GTG step load capacity (3 * 7 MW = 21MW) alone. Hence 12 MW PCS recommended to meet the
spinning reserve requirements. Sudden outage of WTG can be met by combination of Step load capability
of GTG and BESS. In order to meet 12 MW from BESS minimum 6 MWh battery with 2C discharge is
recommended. With installing 12 MW PCS and 6 MWh battery, Curtailment of wind power is 3.60%. This
mean 7.2% of energy generated by second WTG is curtailed.

Study has been extended for next few years to identify when the excess energy becomes zero with two
WTGs. Simulation shows the excess energy will be zero in 4th year and the same is presented in Case 7.

Case 3.c
This case is considered to identify the renewable fraction and renewable penetration when 3 Nos of 15MW
WTG is added to meet the FPSO loads.

Simulation results concludes that about 21.5% of total energy requirement are met by WTG and remaining
78.5% of energy requirement is met by GTG. Simulation also indicates that maximum renewable
penetration (maximum {Renewable generation / Demand}) is 64.3%.

Sudden loss of 45 MW WTG cannot be met by GTG step load capacity (3 * 7 MW = 21MW) alone. Hence 30
MW PCS recommended to meet the spinning reserve requirements. Sudden outage of WTG can be met by
combination of Step load capability of GTG and BESS. In order to meet 30 MW from BESS minimum 15 MWh
battery with 2C discharge is recommended. Such a large size PCS and Battery will result in larger foot print
and higher capital investment. Simulation results shows, Curtailment of wind power is 19.5%. This mean
51% of energy generated by third WTG needs to be curtailed.

Inference for Case 3:

Considering all possible cases (With 1, 2 & 3 WTG), it is favourable to go with One / Two WTG considering
the economics and excess electricity. Overall summary of HOMER results are presented below.

Figure 8: HOMERPRO Results for first Year