Ya, I'm afraid I agree with Charles' general answer: the things that will make it viable for developing nations are the same things that ever make it work anywhere. This ultimately gets us back to the same place we begin (and end up) in any discussion around building industrial capacity and fostering technology transfer for the developing world.
That said, if we want to consider angles that might give some LCOE advantage (which is really the bottom line everywhere) I think it's important to break out the various Capex and installation categories individually:
1) Manufacture - The more that's local, the better. But if it's not at scale, it'll be an expensive vanity project that won't make it through the valley of death. One country supplying a region (or continent) could work. Workforce development will be needed.
2) Installation - It takes a lot of expensive maritime infrastructure to install an offshore project. If you can't spread that cost over many projects, it takes your initial cost to the moon. So how can this need synergize with those of other industries to create an infrastructure cluster that can support several sectors? There's also the question of workforce development here too.
3) Ops/Maintenance - Similar to #2, if a lower scale. Many installers will become operations workers. This requires a minimum amount of permanent maritime infrastructure, so you can't just rent the installation fleet and watch it sail away without having something else in place.
4) Transmission - I'd separate transmission into its own category for analysis, since this potentially solves other grid problems and thus might be funded from other pots of money at least partially on that basis alone. Especially if built in a way that helps strengthen the grid across international borders, creating pathways for all manner of renewable energy market opportunities. (For example, just because you built a big transmission line offshore doesn't mean it can't be used to move around electrons from terrestrial projects as well. Think: Africa's offshore fiber rings for telecom).
5) Regulatory - Burying a project in bureaucracy is equally bad everywhere. Enough said.
6) Sector Corruption - Think corruption doesn't hold back projects in the US? Think again. If you're coming up against existing companies/players who don't like wind, it'll end up looking every bit as ugly as Cape Wind did.
In sum, I'd say that the key problems for the developing world revolve around the question of existing (or lack of) necessary infrastructure base (sound familiar?). That's probably the most important leverage point to work on to equalize the opportunity here. Sure, you could ship everything there from China or India, and rent someone's big fleet to install it (which is actually an opportunity: capitalize and rent out such a fleet, but base it in the developing world!), but you could still get hung up on Maintenance infrastructure and Transmission as additional Capex hits. Everywhere that Offshore Wind expands, this is an issue. The developing world is no exception.
Sign in to Participate