They're run along the ocean floor like our fiber-optics cables. High voltage cables are really heavy.

@@kylecramer8489 Thank you, Mr. Cramer, I appreciate your response. Once again the logistics of this process elude me. I am familiar with the cables used to cross the oceans for communications and that they are very expensive. If we are going to put thousands of these windmills in deep water across the oceans we are going to need hundreds of thousands of miles of high voltage cables, since the windmills will be floating the cables will have to be miles long just to reach the floor of the ocean. Unlike communication cables which carry very little weight these high voltage cables will have to carry many tons of weight to support the long distances to the bottom of the ocean. If all the windmills have cables tethered to the ocean floor we will have to have a lot of junction boxes strategically placed to connect the individual windmills to a common cable that goes to land. I see some very difficult problems placing these junction boxes and doing all the connections necessary in water far too deep for divers. I suppose a junction box could be connected to several windmill lines on the deck of a ship and then lowered into place. The ship could then go around to the windmills and attach a cable to each mill. I was sort of hoping that the Bloomberg research people would have references to proposed methods of securing and running the cables that would allow me to read up on the process a bit, but that may be beyond the scope of this program. Thanks again for your quick response.

They will also have a floating substation that will collect power from all the turbines and transmit it onshore through an undersea cable

Why would you float them a few hundred feet down?

@@sayed5004 Having seen the North Atlantic storms I have to admit that I am skeptical of any kind of large floating system with its parts connected by long, expensive electrical cables. I noted that in the video above the admission that they were planning on the windmills moving around quite a bit since they will not be anchored in any way. If the floating substation is not anchored then the whole farm will be able to slosh around tethered only by the ocean floor cable to land. I think that all of these are solvable problems especially after seeing the natural gas line that has been run from Norway to the UK. The downside to this is that it will take a long time to bring to fruition and it will be EXPENSIVE, thus making the electricity expensive. I'm a big fan of technology but I suspect that we have run out of time where climate change is concerned.

You bought a thing humans don't necessarily need,,,

@@SAGAWISIW30 I bought a solar powered light it's useless since it only works in daylight

they lose power in transmission, they will corrode like crazy in no time flat and do you wonder how many thousands of birds will be shattered by their blades, also they're shockingly polluting to produce and they're unrecyclable, it's a joke compared to modular Fluoride Thorium salt nuke reactors, a complete joke.

Do they also develop nuclear power plants since they are the source of reliable energy for the future?

@@Veldtian1 1) All kinds of energy generation plants lose power in transmission , even modular fluoride thorium salt nuke reactors lose energy . It's a basic physics law which you can't do anything about .( And this isn't even a huge issue ) 2) They won't corrode like crazy . Do normal farm wind turbines corrode due to rain ?? No they don't. BRUH . 3) These turbines are all placed in deep ocean with high winds . Birds don't fly in deep ocean . Birds move along the ocean line . BRUH . 4) Wind turbines are being produced in a large quantity since the last 100 years , never have I ever heard about them causing extreme amounts of pollution and you must also be aware that those nuke reactors you mentioned result in the production of compounds which are harmful to humans like beryllium . 5) And the last point , you said they are unrecyclable , well well you must have not done any research . Wind turbines are 90% recyclable . So you are heavily wrong here :)

@@shukrantpatil they are gonna corrode from the salt water bro

@@shukrantpatil they will probably corode like crazy. salt water is no joke.

Serviced by swimming unicorns

Building a larger turbine is better; think of each blade as a lever, the longer the lever: the higher the torque & the great the potential energy.

@@FreeManFreeThought Think of.... - maintenance 120M above the ground w special cranes not required for 80M towers. -parts shipped in which are too large to travel over existing roads without closing them or even modifying them -visibility 20km away above the tree line of 300M above the ground blade tips.

Or purify and electrolyze water into hydrogen.

Like the Hindenburg.

A lot to hope for but I hope at least some of these things things come true

there are companies that can already build tidal turbines. it works, but it needs more r&d to increase the energy output.

Minesto is what you are looking for.

Interesting point. If they're far out then they'll be on the swell, I'd imagine. I've always assumed the wave only breaks steep enough to push things along when it gets to a shallower region.

I may be wrong but I thought that tsunamis didn’t change the elevation of the ocean in deeper areas , they only became problematic when pushing that extra water upon the beaches and intertidal areas. If I am wrong I am sure someone will point this out to me.

When did you last have a tsunami in Southern California?

@@martin3203 lol🤣

Tsunamis are not really higher than normal waves in deep waters. So no problem there

Yep and your life will have to become about 75% more energy efficient too, I'm sure you'll love to only be able to travel as far in your entire life as the full charge on your electric scooter.

@@Veldtian1 You do understand that your point entirely relies on the assumption that nobody will be able to come up with more efficient electronic devices in the future, right? It's not like these things have been around for thousands of years and there's no ideas left to come up with for it. You know what I'm gonna eat next Tuesday too?

@@Veldtian1 You must have a nice horse and buggy. That automobile thing will never take off. You spend more time fixing them than driving after all XD

Many of them are pretty far from shore, and it will probably be a few decades before we actually need to go very far from the shoreline

Your idea isn't bad, but I'd think the number of adaptable drilling rigs and platforms is pretty small. A bigger problem is that adapting them for wind power production would be so expensive that it probably wouldn't make economical sense. As Henrik Stiesdal says on the video, large scale and big series are the key for cheap production. Oil platforms tend to be different from each other, so you would have to do a lot of tailoring, which is expensive. You'd also have to tailor the maintenance, which would add to the cost too.

Have a look at SeaTwirl.

What a time to be alive! Thanks a lot @@Patrick-ws7nz!

tidal works best in shallow-ish waters, floating wind turbines are for deep seas. you can connect the two, but they don't have to be. it's fine working them separately.

You put dragons from Minesto below the surface

Why not SeaTwirl? Vestas maket cap is 1300 times SeaTwirl's but SeaTwirl's floating offshore wind turbine technology is much more cost effective. Imagine the potential if you invest in SeaTwirl instead.

You don't need much storage with offshore wind and intrrconnectors People imagine the wind is like their back yard. The wind resources in the North Sea are some of the best on the planet. More than half the time there is a wind speed in excess of 20mph

Geothermal can’t be used more because suitable close to the surface hot rock is rare, success rate of drilling expensive homes is rare, and geo releases a lot of CO2 from carbon bearing rock, occasionally more than burning coal.

Higher wind speeds the taller they build them was the reason they gave I think. But yeah, I get what your saying. I assume the top can turn so the blades are always facing into the wind, so maybe they can also tilt back and forth a little to counter act the effect and keep the top level and the blades at the right angle of attack to catch the wind efficiently. Not sure though, just a guess 🤷‍♂🙂

You add ballast to the base structure to mitigate

that would increase the total weight of the structure. now we need more buoyancy to float. moving existing mass (generator) downwards would probably be more advantageous compared to adding ballast.

The people in the video are not building wind turbines. They are building the structures for offshore floating turbines. And since it's in the test phase, they use regular wind turbines. It would be very expensive, just to build special wind turbines for this purpose.

vertical axis wind turbines exist, and they have some advantages compared to horizontal axis wind turbines, although I'm not sure anyone has a large scale commercial turbine of this kind. irl, manufacturers like Siemens and Vestas want as few mechanical moving parts as possible because they are the first thing that breaks in wind turbines. so, adding yet another drive train/gears would probably be a big no-no for them. p.s. check direct drive wind turbines.

Because of the salt in the water wears down the moving parts + lack of efficiency and scale from the current tech in that area in general

"Spar"

@@afederdk Thank you so much!!

This has actually been extensively researched and written about in professional spaces and it its actually pretty negligible considering that construction, placement and maintenance are really the only times it creates emissions, and they often go 25 years without needing much maintenance at all, on average they emit between 5 and 25 grams of carbon when coal and natural gas would produce from 100 grams to 870 for the same amount of energy, averaged over the lifetime of the turbines. Everything costs something and when it's a choice between continuing use of fossil fuels (which'll run out eventually and destabilize the climate we rely on for the ability to breathe and eat and whatnot long before that), or we do something to avoid mass suffering in the future when we can before it gets worse, I'd rather take the latter, but maybe that's just me. Also there's this new thing called google, you just type just about any question and easily find lots of people educated on the subject talking about it as well as most scientific papers from the last few centuries to present. It's crazy, I know but you can educate yourself before spreading misinformation and everyone benefits.

I wonder if you'd have to have a caretaker crew that lives out there for periods of time to repair the turbines if something goes wrong in the same way that crews live on oil platforms. If they are so far out to sea and a gyro goes bad, I imagine that's a pretty significant investment to lose because you couldn't get there in time to fix it before it sank

High temperature Superconducting wind turbine generator makes floating wind turbine more efficient , due to higher energy density. Furthermore, predictive Ai enabled IOT system could reduce maintenance cost.

Why store energy offshore, when you can store it onshore. Also changing a damaged battery underwater, is more economically robust than simply leaving the water there. Lol

@@CADPond Pressure tanks& turbines, no batteries:)

It refers to the orientation of the shaft. For example, the traditional three blades turbines are horizontal axis wind turbines.

Seatwirl sells Vertical Axis Wind Turbines (VAWT) for floating offshore wind. Check them out.

Vestas, Siemens Gamesa, Goldwind to mention a few.

ørsted as well

In emerging markets like India, government pushing big on green energy. Solar stock have gone 5 times like Tata Power, I wonder how Suzlon,a wind turbine company trading at 10 rupees 🤣 cost of a cigarette

@@ctcfinacialservices Suzlon was Indian wind pioneer and made a lot money initially. But later entry of international competitors like GE, Vestas and Siemen Gamesa with superior wind turbines made them go out of business. Though Suzlon has undergone debt restructuring, Vestas will remain the market leader followed by Gamesa.

Seatwirl has the most cost effective solution by far for floating offshore wind. Totally designed for sea conditions from the very beginning and with a very low center of gravity. Also easy and hence cheap to service since all parts that might need replacement are near sea level. Traded at Nasdaq First North.

Why would it be a scam? It's all based on wellknown technology and physical principles.

offshore wind turbines already exist and produce electricity, they have a lifetime of about 20-25 years depending on service contracts. at end of life they're disassembled, the metals in them are too expensive to throw them away.

My understanding is they become land fill.

And why does it matter? You can build it for a lot cheaper, so you can build more of them in more areas that make up for it, and you'd have higher total output (during those peaks you fill up hydro storage, be it dams, or everyone talking about new hydrogen tech, or cheap home usage systems, allow people to heat up another 2C during that peak time, or allow people to schedule stuff like washing machines, etc.). Also he was talking about being at max capacity, not not outputting power, looking up danish figures for offshore, their min seems to be about 40% of nameplate capacity for 2018/19, which is one of the worst years in the last decade.

yup, you were right. It must be Power=(1/2) Rho (V^3) (Pi R^2). Where the (Pi R^2) is obviously the area of circle created by swept of the rotor. It is what connect the power to "larger" turbine. I think the editor made a huge mistake when editing since he might not understand that equation.

Maybe but they do work. The first offshore wind farm was built in 1991 and decommissioned 2017 so it lasted 26 years and that was first generation offshore wind turbines The current ones are designed to last 30 years but I'd bet they will still be around in 60 years with a big replacement of blades and generator at year 30 allowing another 30 years of operations

@@kaya051285 of course but still maintaining them is labour and technology intensive.

@aman gautam Not as much as you would imagine. In the North Sea using the new 13-15MW turbines that will come online next year is the cheapest source of eletricity in Europe. Cheaper than gas nuclear and solar

Stepping up... Higher voltages lower losses