Next Article in Journal
The Role of Underground Salt Caverns in Renewable Energy Peaking: A Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Sustainable Design in Agriculture—Energy Optimization of Solar Greenhouses with Renewable Energy Technologies
Previous Article in Journal
Thermodynamic Analysis of the Second Fluid Brayton Cycle for Scramjet Engine
Previous Article in Special Issue
Research on the Blades and Performance of Semi-Submersible Wind Turbines with Different Capacities
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 17
Issue 23
10.3390/en17236004
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Logistic Decisions in the Installation of Offshore Wind Farms: A Conceptual Framework

by
Mario O. A. González
1,*,
Gabriela Nascimento
1,
Dylan Jones
2,
Negar Akbari
2,
Andressa Santiso
1,
David Melo
1,
Rafael Vasconcelos
1,
Monalisa Godeiro
1,
Luana Nogueira
1,
Mariana Almeida
1 and
Pedro Oprime
3
1
CREATION Research Group in Renewable Energies and Power-to-X, Graduate Program in Production Engineering (PEP), Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Lagoa Nova University Campus, P.O. Box 1524, Natal 59078-900, RN, Brazil
2
Centre for Operational Research and Logistics, University of Portsmouth, Portland Building, Portland Street, Portsmouth PO1 3AH, UK
3
GEPEQ, Graduate Program in Production Engineering, Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCAR), University City, São Carlos 13565-905, SP, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2024, 17(23), 6004; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17236004
Submission received: 1 November 2024 / Revised: 19 November 2024 / Accepted: 25 November 2024 / Published: 28 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modern Technologies for Renewable Energy Development and Utilization: 4th Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Offshore wind energy has achieved significant reductions in its levelized cost of energy (LCoE) in the past decade, but still needs efficiency improvements. Approximately 18% of the LCoE is related to logistical costs, underscoring the need for optimization in this area. Despite its importance, logistical decisions during offshore wind farm installations remain underexplored in the literature. This article aims to identify and structure the relationships of logistic decisions to optimize total installation costs. A conceptual framework is proposed, detailing logistical decisions and their influencing factors. The results are based on a literature review and survey research for validation with specialists in logistics and offshore wind farms. The findings include the key decisions: port installation selection; vessel fleet selection; installation strategy selection; turbine pre-assembly method selection; aggregate planning approach; installation schedule coverage; storage strategy of components; and the degree of sharing information. The framework reveals the importance of coordinating the value chain in the installation process, mainly due to the influence of weather factors; the logistic decisions, when considered in a systemic view, can contribute to a global efficiency gain in the installation process.

1. Introduction

Offshore wind energy is considered a promising source in the ongoing global energy transition, as it is renewable and clean, and there are multiple, diverse countries with significant wind potential off their shores to be explored [1,2]. Global offshore wind potential is 71,000 GW [2], and it is estimated that this number will grow to 487 GW by 2033 and 1150 GW by 2050 [3].
Compared to onshore wind energy, offshore wind has a higher wind speed and constancy and, consequently, greater electricity generation capacity [4,5]. However, the costs associated with the installation and operation and maintenance (O&M) of offshore wind farms (OWFs) are still relatively high.
Offshore wind farms’ levelized cost of energy (LCoE) is mainly influenced by site conditions (including wind speed, water depth, distance to shore, seabed type and weather conditions), permitting and licensing processes, local content requirements, turbine size and efficiency, technology innovations, manufacturing processes, supply chain logistics, O&M activities, capital investment and investment rates, subsidies and incentives, risk management, among others [6,7,8,9,10].
Studies show that logistical costs correspond to approximately 18% LCoE [11]. This proportion is justified by the nature of the installation of an OWF, which requires the movement of large components, by means of vessels with high cost and low availability, and the use of specialized equipment with high lifting capacity [1,12].
According to Poulsen [11], logistics in the offshore wind sector can be defined as the storage and movement of parts, components, people, and equipment, safely and under varying weather conditions, by land, air or water, within a supply network, encompassing different chains, but with the same focus, enabling the generation of offshore wind energy.
Logistics is also present in the manufacture of the main components, such as turbines and foundations [13,14], during the movement and storage of components in the port [15], in pre-assembly of components [16], in the installation of components and other parts necessary for the OWF operation [1], in the O&M of the OWF [17], and in managing the fleet of vessels [18,19].
In addition, accelerated technological development is observed in the offshore wind sector with the increase in the turbine rated power [12,20,21]. Consequently, these technological developments influence the OWF’s logistical operations, especially during their installation, because the increase in rated power implies an increase in the components’ dimensions [22]. For example, a turbine with a rated power of 3.6 MW has a rotor diameter of 120 m and a hub height of 81.6 m, whereas a 12 MW turbine has a rotor diameter of 220 m and a hub height of 150 m [23,24].
Judge et al. [25] found that approximately 16% of the total investment costs (CAPEX) are related to logistical costs, including transport, port, and vessel costs, and this percentage increases due to the increase in complexity in the sector.
Therefore, enhanced logistics is a cost-saving opportunity in the offshore wind sector [19]. Poulsen and Lema [22] analyzed the OWF’s supply chain for a global renewable energy matrix, emphasizing the logistics area. Lacal-Arántegui, Yusta and Domínguez-Navarro [12] studied the influence of turbine rated power increase on installation costs, highlighting the contribution of daily vessel costs.
Ahn et al. [18] studied the costs of installing a wind farm in Southeast Korea, analyzing the ideal vessel according to its characteristics. Paterson et al. [26] investigated two OWFs’ installation process in the United Kingdom through simulation, in which they evaluated the vessel performance at each stage of the installation, considering the variation in weather conditions.
Kaiser and Synder [27] developed a cost analysis model for OWF installation projects in the US. Sarker and Faiz [16] analyzed the transport and installation of turbines and the influence on cost, considering the method of turbine pre-assembly. Vis and Ursavas [28] analyzed logistical strategies for OWF installation considering the influence of weather conditions.
Scholz-Reiter et al. [13] analyzed the logistical activities through mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) in the OWF’s installation planning and control. Irawan, Jones and Ouelhadj [29] studied the ideal installation schedule considering weather conditions and vessel availability utilizing the compromise programming method. Barlow et al. [30] developed a simulation tool to analyze the logistical installation processes and identify the vessels and operations most sensitive to weather conditions. Jiang [31] presented the state of the art of technical aspects for installing offshore wind turbines, considering different types of foundations for offshore wind turbines, installation vessels, standards, and regulations and numerical tools. Guo [14] provides a review of integrated installation technologies for offshore wind foundations.
The above studies make worthy contributions to problems related to optimizing the logistics of aspects specific to an OWF’s installation phase. However, a gap was identified in the literature due to a lack of studies that focus on the complete set of logistical decisions during the installation, such as a global analysis of all necessary decisions, and that consider all the four main components of the OWF: turbine, foundation, substation, and cables. Thus, this paper poses the question “What are the logistical decisions in the process of installing offshore wind farms and how are they related?”. The objective of the article is to identify and structure the relationships of logistic decisions for the installation of offshore wind farms and to optimize total installation costs. To achieve this goal, a conceptual framework will be designed and analyzed using a systematic literature research (SLR) and survey validation with specialists in the sector.
The structure of this paper is as follows: Section 2 addresses the research method. Section 3, presents the literature review, focusing on the logistics in the installation of offshore wind farms. Section 4 describes the conceptual model of logistical installation decisions. Lastly, Section 5 shows the discussions and presents the conclusions and recommendations for future studies.

2. Materials and Methods

The research was developed through a literature review along with a validation with experts regarding the installation of an offshore wind farm and logistics, based on the analysis of articles from journals and congresses, theses, dissertations, and technical reports. The article was outlined by systematic and transparent methods, aiming to identify, gather, synthesize, and evaluate scientific studies on a given topic, considering all existing evidence on the topic studied and minimizing the bias and errors associated with single or non-systematic studies [32,33,34,35].
Thus, this research aims to answer: What are the logistical decisions in the process of installing offshore wind farms and how are they related? The research was developed in 6 stages, as shown in Figure 1.
Stage 1. In research planning, the search strategy for the articles was defined, including the choice of search bases, the research scope and the identification of keywords. Three databases were used—Scopus, Google Scholar and Capes Periodical Portal—which bring together different databases such as ACM, ACS, AIP, Blackwell, Cambridge University Press, Emerald, Gale, HighWire Press, IEEE, Nature, OECD, OVID, Oxford University Press, ProQuest, Sage, SciELO, Science Direct Online and Wilson.
The scope focus was defined in articles from journals and conferences, theses, sections of books, and technical reports that address the installation of wind farms or logistics during the installation. And the 5 combinations of keywords used for the search are presented in Table 1.
Stage 2. The bibliographical search consisted of a survey and selection of documents, in which 245 articles were found. These articles had their titles, abstracts, introduction, and research method read, and repetitive articles and those considered out of scope were excluded. The scope considered articles addressing logistical operations in offshore wind farm installation and O&M. There was also a survey of theses, dissertations, and technical reports. For the systematic search of theses, dissertations, and monographs, from Google Scholar, Emerald, and repositories of universities that research on the topic of offshore wind energy, such as the Delft Technology University, Technical University of Denmark, Strathclyde University, Portsmouth University, Cranfield University, Liège University, among other universities, 11 dissertations and theses were found that were within the scope of the research. In addition, 7 technical reports that provided relevant information on logistics and installation were analyzed.
Stage 3. In the bibliographical reading stage, the selected documents were read in full, and the contents were organized using spreadsheets. For descriptive analysis, titles, authors, year of publication, type of scientific work, country of authors, institutions of authors and published conference or journal were systematized. The content, the theme of the article, its objective, its research approach, the mathematical method used, the studied installation object, the consideration of weather variables, and the relevant factors for logistical optimization were analyzed. Also, at this stage, the references in the articles were analyzed for inclusion of new works considered relevant. The total number of documents analyzed was 122. Table 2 presents the classification according to the type of scientific work and the quantities.
Stage 4. Data systematization was carried out. With the information gathered from the 122 documents, the prepared spreadsheets were analyzed. Publications selected addressed 20 different countries’ points of view. Among them, 62 articles and theses were evidenced that used mathematical methods to optimize logistical costs in the installation of OWF. The information contained was systematized into 9 items: objective, optimization approach, weather variables, weather forecasting method, studied component, study site, used vessel, transport method, and factors relevant to logistics during the installation. This information served as the basis for delimiting the main logistical decisions present during the planning of the installation, understanding logistics as activities of movement and storage of resources.
Stage 5. The validation process was focused on logistic decisions in the installation process of offshore wind farms with specialists using a questionnaire (Supplementary File S1) sent via email. The specialists considered for this phase included authors with the most publications in the field, authors of the analyzed technical reports, speakers at international ports-related events, port managers from the major ports supporting the offshore wind sector, and experts in offshore wind studies. A total of 118 specialists were identified, and the questionnaire link was distributed in three rounds. The survey was conducted in 10 days, based on the number of responses in each round. The questionnaire received a total of 29 responses, with experts from 14 different countries. This represents a 25% response rate from the target population.
Stage 6. Framework modelling and structuring. With the main decisions highlighted, the factors that influence them and factors that are influenced were analyzed and, from this, influence diagrams were created for each decision. From the analysis of the relationship between the factors, a diagram was made of the relationship between the main logistical decisions for the installation, presented in Section 4.

3. Literature Review

3.1. Offshore Wind Installation Logistics

Logistics is the part of supply chain management that efficiently and effectively plans, implements, and controls the transport and storage operations of goods, services, and information from the origin to the final consumer. Logistics management integrates, coordinates and optimizes logistic activities, examples of which are transport, fleet, inventory, service providers and storage management, material handling, order fulfilment, network design logistics, and demand planning [132].
An OWF’s installation supply chain (Figure 2) starts with the manufacturing, and following the established plan, the manufacturers start the production of the components according to the specifications and the established quantities [105].
As components are manufactured, they are transported to the base port by land or waterways. The mode of transport depends on the dimensions of the components and the conditions of the roads and transport vehicles in each region. Components can leave the factories and go to a base port or can be delivered directly to the OWF construction site [13].
The port is an element that plays an important role in the supply chain, as it is the onshore location to support offshore activities, as well as the place where components are stored and prepared for ship loading [76]. Furthermore, there may be cases where the port covers multiple stages onshore, as some factories are located in ports to facilitate the transport of components [113]. Thus, ports are considered as strategic infrastructure in the offshore wind energy supply chain [76].
Then, depending on the appropriate weather conditions, components are transported by vessels with cranes to the indicated position and installed [113]. The costs associated with vessels are significant during the installation, being relevant resources in the planning of this phase and vary with the choice of vessel for certain activities [26].
An OWF’s component installation activities are complex as they depend on weather conditions, introducing uncertainties in planning [75]. This affects the entire supply chain, as the other links need to react to uncertainties to adapt to the delays that have occurred. By delaying the installation of turbines, components are not taken from stock for assembly, reducing the availability of storage space [13]. Thus, the transport of components from the factories to the port must wait, and factories must reduce production so that they do not need to store components in their space [106].
As offshore transport and installation are significant costly activities and are affected by weather and sea conditions, other links need to be coordinated so there are no onshore delays that would cause a subsequent offshore delay and a consequent rise in logistics costs. Therefore, the supply chain needs to be organized flexibly, with synchronized delivery times, avoiding delays, including those due to lack of material [106].

3.1.1. Transport Strategies to OWF Installation

The literature presents two systems for transporting turbine components to the installation site: by means of feeder vessels or with installation vessels (conventional) [28]. The conventional or pendulum system uses only installation vessels or barges, and these are responsible for loading the turbine components at the base port, transporting them to the OWF construction site and installing them. After installing, they return to the port to transport more components [131].
An alternative is using feeder vessels to transport the components from the base port to the installation site, where there is another vessel with cranes and specialized equipment to install the component. In this way, the specialized vessel for installation does not need to travel to the land base to pick up more components, as the feeder vessel is responsible for feeding the components to the process [4,28].

3.1.2. Installation of Offshore Wind Farm Components

OWF construction comprises the installation of foundations, turbines, cables, and substations. This operation planning process is a complex activity, due to a heavy dependence on weather conditions and the size of the components [28]. The installation operations of these components and support for these structures can be performed in parallel, depending on the planning [74].
Foundation installation depends on the type of foundation chosen for the OWF. There are foundations fixed to the seabed—monopile, gravity-based structure (GBS), tripods, tri-piles and jacket—and floating structures: spar, TLP (tensioned-leg platform), and floating jacket [133].
For the substation, there are three ways to install substations [134]: a conventional substation, with substation elevation and placement above the appropriate foundation; a modular substation, with modular structures individually raised for construction of the substation; and, a floating substation, in which the substation foundation is floating, being transported through the foundations, eliminating the lifting operation.
Regarding the turbine, it is possible to partially or fully assemble the components—tower, nacelle, hub and blades—while on land [16]. Habakurama and Naluku [23] and Muhabie et al. [104] present six types of pre-assembly variations used in the construction of offshore wind farms, shown in Figure 3. These methods vary according to the level of onshore pre-assembly, between the four main components: the two tower sections, the three blades, the nacelle, and the hub.
Method 1 is configured with the transport of assembled nacelle and hub and remaining components disassembled; method 2 presents two tower sections, nacelle and hub assembled and blades disassembled; method 3, called “rotor-star”, is configured with three blades and hub connected, and the tower and nacelle sections disassembled; method 4, called “bunny ears”, is presented with nacelle, hub and two blades assembled, with the two sections of the tower and the third blade to be assembled at sea; method 5 differs from the fourth, only by transporting the two sections of the tower already assembled; and method 6 transports the fully assembled turbine [14,128]. The greater the number of parts of the turbine mounted on land, the lower the number of lifts at sea, reducing offshore work time [28].

4. Logistical Decisions in the Process of Installing OWF: Conceptual Framework

Offshore wind farms installation requires logistical planning, as these decisions directly impact the project’s overall logistical costs. In this study, logistical costs are defined as those associated with the transportation and storage of OWF components. These decisions must be made prior to and during the installation process.
Several factors influence the entire process, and decisions depend on such factors. However, logistical decisions will result in performance goals represented by total installation time and total installation cost. Based on the systematic literature review and the validation through survey research, Figure 4 represents the proposed conceptual model.
Optimization of logistical decisions can be considered as the choice of logistical alternatives that minimize installation times, thereby directly reducing overall project costs. Logistic strategies are the decisions identified that must be taken in an optimal manner and hence provide a reduction in logistic costs.

4.1. Influencing Factors

The factors highlighted were identified in the mathematical methods for logistical optimization of installation, detailed in Table 3. Their relevance during the installation is shown by the high percentage of these articles that consider it as a factor. Also, the experts’ opinions were considered to define the main factors.
The weather and environment conditions have a high influence in the logistic decisions to install offshore wind farms. These projects are inherently dependent on favorable weather [135], as offshore activities are often restricted by safety reasons, such as wave height and wind speed limits. For instance, operations typically halt if wave heights exceed thresholds or if wind speeds surpass safe working conditions [28].
The project characteristics—including OWF location, project size, number of turbines, turbine rated power turbines, substation type, foundation type, cable types, and the installation methodology—play a central role in shaping logistics. These factors determine transportation needs, operational timelines, and the selection of equipment required to efficiently construct and commission the facility. Larger projects or those situated in more remote locations may demand specialized vessels, extended transit times, and greater logistical complexity.
The turbine—size, weight, rated power, manufacturer and model—dictated the processes that must occur. Each turbine specification dictates the appropriate handling, transportation, and installation procedures. Ensuring alignment between turbine specifications and logistical planning is essential to streamline operations, mitigate risks, and reduce costs [77].
The vessels are the main equipment to move all components, and they are responsible for all operations in the sea. So, they will impact speed, dimension, performance, deck space, capacity, crane capacity, operating limits of the installation. Also, availability present in the offshore wind sector is scarce, so there is a bottleneck.
The existing infrastructure such as the port—available areas, cargo capacity, proximity to suppliers, equipment for handling and handling components—influences logistical decisions, given that the port is the point in the land of the OWF where all components are, and it needs to be a place suitable to hold the operation.
Finally, the presence of other economic activities influences the installation activities of the OWF, making it necessary to align navigation routes and expectations with the interested parties, to avoid conflicts in the installation process present close to the farm’s location, such as the fishing sector, tourism, marine transport, the local community, among others. Additional cost components (such as harbor costs, crew costs, and management costs) might also influence the logistics optimization [78].
The execution of operating activities in the offshore wind sector is characterized by the dependence on these factors, which need to be analyzed to reduce technical risks and promote operational safety.

4.2. Logistics Decision

D1—Installation port. Port selection is a primary decision that influences all subsequent logistical and operational aspects of offshore wind farm (OWF) projects. The chosen port serves as the foundation for operations and is often a limiting factor in the overall project efficiency. Notably, there is frequently a scarcity of adequately equipped ports located sufficiently close to OWF sites, which heightens the importance of this decision.
Thus, the choice of port is made through the analysis of the OWF characteristics and its suitability, since the installation of projects have support needs for loading, storage, and handling of large and heavy components. A potential installation port needs specific characteristics to be suitable to support the installation of OWF, and these are presented in Table 4, according to the analysis of the articles.
Once the port is chosen, the distance from the OWF to the port, port configurations, available operational area, and facilities are factors that influence the choice of vessels, strategy of transportation, pre-assembly method, installation planning and schedule, and available storage area.
D2—Vessel fleet. The vessel fleet selection is typically characterized by the limited availability of suitable vessels, which need to have specialized characteristics that support the handling and transport of components. Key characteristics to consider when choosing a vessel to support the installation of OWF are outlined in Table 5, along with references to the corresponding articles.
The selection of vessels is made before the other decisions, except for port selection, as the availability of adequate ports to support OWF installations is even more limited than the availability of installation vessels.
When configuring the vessel fleet and the main installation vessel, factors such as deck dimensions, operating limits, vessel speed, stability, crane, and vessel capacity are defined. These factors serve as input for choosing the transportation strategy, pre-assembly method, aggregate planning, and installation schedule.
D3—Installation strategy. The selection of an installation strategy primarily depends on an analysis of the weather conditions, project characteristics, and the specifications of the vessel used (Table 6). Offshore operations are influenced by the chosen installation strategy. For instance, if the feeder vessel is selected, transferring components between vessels will be necessary. However, in areas with severe environmental conditions, this type of procedure may become unfeasible.
A similar occurrence happens with the characteristics of the project. Selecting a turbine with high-rated power often results in larger dimensions, making it impractical to adopt strategies that involve complex handling at sea. Vessel availability further constrains the choice of installation strategies, as vessel capacity and limitations directly affect the feasibility of operations and transportation methods.
The choice of installation strategy influences the use of the vessel and its costs. However, depending on this choice, it will also limit the choice of assembly method, as the strategy may not be compatible with the complexity of operations needed for such a degree of assembly.
D4—Pre-assembly method. Pre-assembly of an OWF involves preparing and assembling components onshore or nearshore before transporting them to the offshore installation site. The choice of pre-assembly method is influenced by the characteristics of the project and especially the turbine used in the OWF. Transport and handling at sea with a certain degree of pre-assembly are analyzed depending on its dimensions and the feasibility expressed by the manufacturers. Also, the characteristics of the port and the vessels must be considered to ascertain the capacity to support the chosen pre-assembly method [135]. The main factors are presented in Table 7.
Thus, with this definition, it is possible to predict the times and resources necessary for the installation, because the higher the degree of pre-assembly, the less need there is for offshore lifts, so the offshore operation time decreases, and the crane’s capacity increases. Hence, more predictable and accurate medium- and short-term planning is achievable.
D5—Component storage strategy. The component storage takes place at the port to be close to the vessel loading location. Thus, the component storage level will depend on the port characteristics, project information, and weather conditions in the region.
The limiting factors for the level of stock are the available area and the facilities present in the port, together with the dimension of the components. The stock level must also be adequate for the coordination of the supply chain, proximity, and relationship with manufacturers, and they will be influenced by the weather in the region, as it is considered the main factor that limits offshore operations. Thus, there must be components available whenever the weather conditions are suitable for operation.
The supply of components and the demand needed by the installation operation must be coordinated with the level of stock sufficient to avoid delays. According to Scholz-Reiter et al. [13], the weather variations entail the need for the components to be ready at the port to exploit the periods of good weather with intensive installation.
D6—Sharing information. The decision to share information depends on the degree of sharing and the level of information that will be provided between the links of the supply chain.
Main information shared (given in Table 8) includes the level of stock at the port, weather forecast, and vessel availability. The level of stock allocation can coordinate the production and supply of components. As for the weather forecast, the relevant links should be aware of its behaviour so that they are ready to start onshore and offshore operations at the appropriate time, as weather conditions are the main limiting factor for the offshore operation. Also, the availability of vessels plays a limiting role in the transport of components during the installation.
D7—Aggregate planning. Aggregate planning refers to a strategic approach to organizing and scheduling activities across an OWF project, considering a holistic view of resources, constraints, and objectives. The planning decision involves organizing the sequencing and timing of activities together with the coordination of stakeholders, in order to minimize total costs [140].
Variables (Table 9) and parameters (Table 10) related to aggregate planning are vessels, characteristics of the OWF and turbines, logistical strategies, and weather conditions. Among these main influencing factors, the availability of resources stands out, as the sector has complex operations and components with large dimensions.
Weather conditions also are limiting factors for offshore transportation and handling. Adverse weather can disrupt offshore transportation and handling activities, introducing significant uncertainty into operational forecasts. This unpredictability necessitates a high level of readiness across the entire supply chain to respond dynamically to changing conditions and mitigate potential delays.
D8—Installation schedule. The decision on the installation schedule takes place on a short-term basis, in which the accuracy of the weather forecast has a higher degree of probability, and thus, it is possible to schedule the activities according to the weather windows and operating limits, defining the start dates and minimizing total times and costs. In schedule optimization analyses, different variables (Table 11) and parameters (Table 12) can be used.
In this decision, it is important to adjust the weather window—defined as the time when the weather is favourable for the operation—and the operational limits—defined by the vessel used and the operation to be carried out—so that the installation is carried out in a safe and efficient manner.

4.3. Performance Goals

The goal of logistical decisions during the installation is to minimize the total cost of logistics during the installation. As the costing of this task is based on operating daily rates, installation time is considered a factor with a great impact on installation costs; for example, time determines the labour costs, the number of daily trips required for the vessels, the time of use of the port, proximity to the factory of large wind turbine components, among others [142].
Thus, the categorized logistical strategies impact installation times and installation costs (Table 13), and considering their interdepesndencies, it is important to analyze the strategies together to optimize the results globally.
The optimization of just one logistical decision in isolation can negatively affect another decision and decrease installation times or costs, instead of increasing them. Thus, the main contribution of this conceptual model is to propose a framework to enable holistic logistical optimization analyzing all the decisions observed in an interconnected way.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Over the last years, installed OWF capacity has significantly increased in European countries and China, while new markets such as the United States, Taiwan, and Brazil are emerging with new project developments. One of the key drivers of this expansion is the reduction in the levelized cost of energy (LCoE), which has made this energy source more competitive. However, further studies are needed to continue reducing LCoE and ensure offshore wind remains competitive with other energy sources, especially in new markets. One opportunity is the reduction in logistics costs, which comprise approximately 18% of LCoE and 15 to 20% of CAPEX.
Looking at the literature review of logistics in the process of installation of OWFs, it was identified that there are studies that use quantitative methods to optimize the installation centered on an installation sub-process. There are few studies that consider the installation of all OWF components (turbines, foundations, cables, and substations), with most considering the installation of only the turbine or the turbine and the foundation. This leads to optimization in a restricted way, focusing only on the costs incurred in the installation of one or two components and not optimizing the overall logistical costs of the installation. Thus, a gap has been identified in the literature due to a lack of studies that focus on the complete set of logistical decisions during the installation, where most articles focus on the installation of one or two components, without a global vision in the installation process, thus making it difficult to optimize the entire installation process.
This paper addresses this gap as it achieves its objective defined as “to identify and structure the relationships of logistic decisions for the installation of offshore wind farms, to optimization of installation total cost” with the development of the conceptual framework. Eight logistical decisions have been identified: the selection of the installation port; the selection of the vessel fleet; the choice of installation strategy; the choice of turbine pre-assembly method; the approach to aggregate planning; the coverage of the installation schedule; the storage strategy of components; and the degree of sharing information.
These logistical decisions are influenced by factors such as weather and environment conditions, project characteristics, turbine specifications, vessel capabilities, port infrastructure and coordination between stakeholders. At the same time, logistical decisions influence the performance objective of the OWF installation process, represented by the key indicators: total installation time and total installation cost.
The proposed conceptual framework contributes by highlighting the importance of decision-making with a global view, as a solitary decision can harm and increase the costs of the next decision. For this, it is necessary to understand how a decision influences other decisions and take this into account for making choices, assertively and together, to provide optimization in terms of installation costs and times.
The importance of weather conditions during the installation was also identified. The marine environment introduces instability in the operation of transport, handling, and installation of components. To maintain security and assertiveness, the weather must be adequate. Thus, operations are dictated by the weather, and as it has a stochastic behaviour, it is difficult to predict, so it is necessary to have sufficient readiness and agility in the entire chain to cope with weather variations. Hence, the coordination between the value chain and the relationship between stakeholders becomes relevant, as the installation typically requires efforts from many supply chain actors.
Furthermore, an important factor is shown to be that the installation studies must be analyzed according to the location of the turbine to be installed, as the locations have different weather, geographic, geological, and structural characteristics. Practical recommendations for optimizing the installation process include adopting a holistic decision-making approach, conducting location-specific planning, prioritizing weather sensitivity in planning, implementing agile logistics management, integrating advanced decision-support tools, increasing pre-assembly and modularization, and establishing flexible installation strategies.
For future studies, the following questions are raised: how should an expert system that supports all the decisions presented in the conceptual framework be configured? How can the impact of decision interdependencies on trade-offs be measured? Which variables presented are the most influential on performance objectives? How can the effectiveness of logistical decision-making be analyzed in relation to reducing the overall installation cost of an offshore wind farm?

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/en17236004/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.O.A.G. and G.N.; methodology, M.O.A.G., D.J., N.A., M.A. and P.O.; validation, M.O.A.G., G.N., D.J., N.A., A.S. and M.G.; formal analysis, M.O.A.G., N.A., M.A., P.O. and D.J.; research, M.O.A.G., L.N., D.M., R.V. and G.N.; data curation, G.N., M.O.A.G., D.M., R.V. and L.N.; writing—preparation of the original draft, M.O.A.G. and G.N.; writing—review and editing, D.J., N.A., A.S. and M.G.; supervision, D.J.; project administration, M.O.A.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by Petrobras and the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), through ANEEL’s R&D—Electric Sector (PD-00553-0045/2016); the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel of Brazil (CAPES) — finance code 001; the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MCTI)/ Secretariat for Technological Development and Innovation (SETEC)—TED nº 11355260/2023; the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)—Process nº 315918/2021-7 and 406746/2022-2—of Brazil; and the government of the state of Rio Grande do Norte, through SIN and SEDEC—agreement nº 002/2023.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chartron, S. Improving logistics scheduling and operations to support offshore wind construction phase. Logist. Res. 2019, 12, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. World Bank. Going Global-Expanding Offshore Wind to Emerging Markets; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  3. GWEC. Global Offshore Wind Report 2024; Global Wind Energy Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2024; pp. 86–88. [Google Scholar]
  4. Chartron, S. Evaluating and Improving Logistics Costs During Offshore Wind Turbine Construction. Int. J. Transp. Eng. Technol. 2018, 4, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. González, M.O.A.; Santiso, A.M.; de Melo, D.C.; de Vasconcelos, R.M. Regulation for offshore wind power development in Brazil. Energy Policy 2020, 145, 111756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Borràs Mora, E.; Spelling, J.; van der Weijde, A.H. Global sensitivity analysis for offshore wind cost modelling. Wind Energy 2021, 24, 974–990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Melo, D.C. Framework De Um Sistema Especialista De Análise Econômica Para Empreendimentos De Usinas Eólicas Offshore. Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Norte Centro: Natal, Brazil, 2020; 152p. [Google Scholar]
  8. Santhakumar, S.; Heuberger-Austin, C.; Meerman, H.; Faaij, A. Technological learning potential of offshore wind technology and underlying cost drivers. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2023, 60, 103545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Torres, E.S.; Thies, P.R.; Lawless, M. Offshore Logistics: Scenario Planning and Installation Modeling of Floating Offshore Wind Projects. ASME Open J. Eng. 2023, 2, 021013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lerche, J.; Lindhard, S.; Enevoldsen, P.; Neve, H.H.; Møller, D.E.; Jacobsen, E.L.; Teizer, J.; Wandahl, S. Causes of delay in offshore wind turbine construction projects. Prod. Plan. Control 2023, 34, 1513–1526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Poulsen, T.; Hasager, C.B. How expensive is expensive enough? Opportunities for cost reductions in offshoreWind energy logistics. Energies 2016, 9, 437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lacal-Arántegui, R.; Yusta, J.M.; Domínguez-Navarro, J.A. Offshore wind installation: Analysing the evidence behind improvements in installation time. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 92, 133–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Scholz-Reiter, B.; Heger, J.; Lütjen, M.; Schweizer, A. A MILP for installation scheduling of offshore wind farms. Int. J. Math. Model. Methods Appl. Sci. 2011, 5, 371–378. [Google Scholar]
  14. Guo, Y.; Wang, H.; Lian, J. Review of integrated installation technologies for offshore wind turbines: Current progress and future development trends. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022, 255, 115319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Beinke, T.; Quandt, M.; Ait-Alla, A.; Freitag, M. The impact of information sharing on installation processes of offshore wind farms—Process modelling and simulation-based analysis. Int. J. Shipp. Transp. Logist. 2020, 12, 92–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sarker, B.R.; Faiz, T.I. Minimizing transportation and installation costs for turbines in offshore wind farms. Renew. Energy 2017, 101, 667–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shafiee, M. Maintenance logistics organization for offshore wind energy: Current progress and future perspectives. Renew. Energy 2015, 77, 182–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ahn, D.; Shin, S.C.; Kim, S.Y.; Kharoufi, H.; Kim, H.C. Comparative evaluation of different offshore wind turbine installation vessels for Korean west–south wind farm. Int. J. Nav. Archit. Ocean Eng. 2016, 9, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Poulsen, T. Logistics in Offshore Wind; Aalborg University: Aalborg, Denmark, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  20. Tekle Muhabie, Y.; Rigo, P.; Cepeda, M.; de Almeida D’Agosto, M.; Caprace, J.-D. A discrete-event simulation approach to evaluate the effect of stochastic parameters on offshore wind farms assembly strategies. Ocean Eng. 2018, 149, 279–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. de Falani, S.Y.A.; González, M.O.A.; Barreto, F.M.; de Toledo, J.C.; Torkomian, A.L.V. Trends in the technological development of wind energy generation. Int. J. Technol. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 19, 43–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Poulsen, T.; Lema, R. Is the supply chain ready for the green transformation? The case of offshore wind logistics. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 73, 758–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Habakurama, I.I.; Baluku, J. The Challenges in Installation of Offshore Wind Farms a Case of Lillgrund and Anholt Wind Farms; Chalmers University of Technology: Gothenburg, Sweden, 2016; 70p. [Google Scholar]
  24. The Wind Power. Haliade-X 12 MW; The Wind Power—Wind Energy Market Intelligence: Tournefeuille, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  25. Judge, F.; McAuliffe, F.D.; Sperstad, I.B.; Chester, R.; Flannery, B.; Lynch, K.; Murphy, J. A lifecycle financial analysis model for offshore wind farms. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 103, 370–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Paterson, J.; D’Amico, F.; Thies, P.R.; Harrison, G. Offshore wind installation vessels—A comparative assessment for UK offshore rounds 1 and 2. Ocean Eng. 2017, 15, 637–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kaiser, M.J.; Snyder, B.F. Modeling offshore wind installation vessel day-rates in the United States. Marit. Econ. Logist. 2012, 14, 220–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Vis, I.F.A.; Ursavas, E. Assessment approaches to logistics for offshore wind energy installation. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2016, 14, 80–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Irawan, C.A.; Jones, D.; Ouelhadj, D. Bi-objective optimisation model for installation scheduling in offshore wind farms. Comput. Oper. Res. 2017, 78, 393–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Barlow, E.; Tezcaner Öztürk, D.; Revie, M.; Boulougouris, E.; Day, A.H.; Akartunali, K. Exploring the impact of innovative developments to the installation process for an offshore wind farm. Ocean Eng. 2015, 109, 623–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Jiang, Z. Installation of offshore wind turbines: A technical review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 139, 110576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jesson, J.; Matheson, L.; Lacey, F.M. Doing Your Systematic Review—Traditional and Systematic Techniques, 1st ed.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2011; 192p, ISBN 978-1-84860-154-3. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kitchenham, B.A.; Dybå, T.; Jørgensen, M. Evidence-based Software Engineering. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, Edinburgh, UK, 28 May 2004; p. 9. [Google Scholar]
  34. Kitchenham, B.; Pearl Brereton, O.; Budgen, D.; Turner, M.; Bailey, J.; Linkman, S. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—A systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2009, 51, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. González, M.O.A.; de Toledo, J.C. Customer integration in the product development process: A systematic bibliographic review and themes for research. Producao 2012, 22, 14–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gollub, P.; Jensen, J.F.; Giese, D.; Güres, S. Flanged foundation connection of the offshore wind farm Amrumbank West—Concept, approval, design, tests and installation. Stahlbau 2014, 83, 522–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ku, N.; Roh, M. Il Dynamic response simulation of an offshore wind turbine suspended by a floating crane. Ships Offshore Struct. 2015, 10, 621–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hongyan, D.; Jijian, L.; Aidong, L.; Puyang, Z. One-Step-Installation of Offshore Wind Turbine on Large-Scale Bucket-Top-Bearing Bucket Foundation. Trans. Tianjin Univ. 2009, 15, 70–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Cheng, M.Y.; Wu, Y.F.; Wu, Y.W.; Ndure, S. Fuzzy Bayesian schedule risk network for offshore wind turbine installation. Ocean Eng. 2019, 188, 106238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kerkhove, L.P.; Vanhoucke, M. Optimised scheduling for weather sensitive offshore construction projects. Omega 2017, 66, 58–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ait-Alla, A.; Quandt, M.; Lütjen, M. Simulation-based aggregate Installation Planning of Offshore Wind Farms. Int. J. Energy 2013, 72, 23–30. [Google Scholar]
  42. Sovacool, B.K.; Enevoldsen, P.; Koch, C.; Barthelmie, R.J. Cost performance and risk in the construction of offshore and onshore wind farms. Wind Energy 2017, 20, 891–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wang, W.; Bai, Y. Investigation on installation of offshore wind turbines. J. Mar. Sci. Appl. 2010, 9, 175–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Rippel, D.; Jathe, N.; Lütjen, M.; Freitag, M. Evaluation of loading bay restrictions for the installation of offshore wind farms using a combination of mixed-integer linear programming and model predictive control. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 5030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Irawan, C.A.; Akbari, N.; Jones, D.F.; Menachof, D. A combined supply chain optimisation model for the installation phase of offshore wind projects. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 1189–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Li, L.; Acero, W.G.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. Assessment of allowable sea states during installation of offshore wind turbine monopiles with shallow penetration in the seabed. J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 2016, 138, 041902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Leontaris, G.; Morales-Nápoles, O.; Wolfert, A.R.M. Probabilistic scheduling of offshore operations using copula based environmental time series—An application for cable installation management for offshore wind farms. Ocean Eng. 2016, 125, 328–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Gintautas, T.; Sørensen, J.D.; Vatne, S.R. Towards a Risk-based Decision Support for Offshore Wind Turbine Installation and Operation & Maintenance. Energy Procedia 2016, 94, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Bingol, F. Feasibility of large scale wind turbines for offshore gas platform installation. AIMS Energy 2018, 6, 967–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Verma, A.S.; Vedvik, N.P.; Gao, Z. A comprehensive numerical investigation of the impact behaviour of an offshore wind turbine blade due to impact loads during installation. Ocean Eng. 2019, 172, 127–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ren, Z.; Jiang, Z.; Skjetne, R.; Gao, Z. Development and application of a simulator for offshore wind turbine blades installation. Ocean Eng. 2018, 166, 380–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Leontaris, G.; Morales-Nápoles, O.; Wolfert, A.R.M. Planning cable installation activities for offshore wind farms including risk of supply delays. In Risk, Reliability and Safety: Innovating Theory and Practice, Proceedings of the 26th European Safety and Reliability Conference, ESREL 2016 Glasgow, Scotland, 25–29 September 2016; CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017; p. 104. [Google Scholar]
  53. Lian, J.; Wang, P.; Le, C.; Dong, X.; Yang, X.; Jiang, Q.; Yang, Y.; Jiang, J. Reliability analysis on one-step overall transportation of composite bucket foundation for offshore wind turbine. Energies 2019, 13, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ding, H.; Feng, Z.; Zhang, P.; Le, C.; Guo, Y. Floating performance of a composite bucket foundation with an offshore wind tower during transportation. Energies 2020, 13, 882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zhang, P.; Han, Y.; Ding, H.; Zhang, S. Field experiments on wet tows of an integrated transportation and installation vessel with two bucket foundations for offshore wind turbines. Ocean Eng. 2015, 108, 769–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zhao, Y.; Cheng, Z.; Sandvik, P.C.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T.; Van Buren, E. Numerical modeling and analysis of the dynamic motion response of an offshore wind turbine blade during installation by a jack-up crane vessel. Ocean Eng. 2018, 165, 353–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Guachamin Acero, W.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. Numerical study of a novel procedure for installing the tower and Rotor Nacelle Assembly of offshore wind turbines based on the inverted pendulum principle. J. Mar. Sci. Appl. 2016, 16, 243–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ait-Alla, A.; Quandt, M.; Lütjen, M. Aggregate Installation Planning of Offshore Wind Farms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Communications and Information Technology, Beirut, Lebanon, 19–21 June 2013; Volume 7, pp. 23–30. [Google Scholar]
  59. Ursavas, E. A benders decomposition approach for solving the offshore wind farm installation planning at the North Sea. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 258, 703–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Castro-Santos, L.; Filgueira-Vizoso, A.; Lamas-Galdo, I.; Carral-Couce, L. Methodology to calculate the installation costs of offshore wind farms located in deep waters. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 170, 1124–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Beinke, T.; Ait-Alla, A.; Freitag, M. Resource Sharing in the Logistics of the Offshore Wind Farm Installation Process based on a Simulation Study. Int. J. e-Navig. Marit. Econ. 2017, 7, 42–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zhang, P.; Ding, H.; Le, C.; Huang, X. Motion analysis on integrated transportation technique for offshore wind turbines. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2013, 5, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Lian, J.; Jiang, J.; Dong, X.; Wang, H.; Zhou, H.; Wang, P. Coupled motion characteristics of offshore wind turbines during the integrated transportation process. Energies 2019, 12, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Antoniou, M.; Gelagoti, F.M.; Anastasopoulos, I. A compliant guyed system for deep-sea installations of offshore wind turbines: Concept, design insights and dynamic performance. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2019, 119, 235–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zhang, P.; Guo, Y.; Liu, Y.; Ding, H. Experimental study on installation of hybrid bucket foundations for offshore wind turbines in silty clay. Ocean Eng. 2016, 114, 87–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Esteban, M.D.; Couñago, B.; López-Gutiérrez, J.S.; Negro, V.; Vellisco, F. Gravity based support structures for offshore wind turbine generators: Review of the installation process. Ocean Eng. 2015, 110, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Acero, W.G.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. Methodology for assessment of the allowable sea states during installation of an offshore Wind turbine transition piece structure onto a monopile foundation. J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 2017, 139, 061901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Scharff, R.; Siems, M. Monopile foundations for offshore wind turbines—Solutions for greater water depths. Steel Constr. 2013, 6, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Scharff, R.; Siems, M. Pushing the limits—Mega monopile foundations for offshore wind turbines. Steel Constr. 2013, 6, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Nielsen, M.B.; Jensen, J.F.; Harper, C.; Knudsen, L.S.; Pedersen, R.R. State-of-the-art framework for design of offshore wind jacket foundations. Steel Constr. 2019, 12, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Collu, M.; Maggi, A.; Gualeni, P.; Rizzo, C.M.; Brennan, F. Stability requirements for floating offshore wind turbine (FOWT) during assembly and temporary phases: Overview and application. Ocean Eng. 2014, 84, 164–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zhang, P.; Liang, D.; Ding, H.; Le, C.; Zhao, X. Floating state of a one-step integrated transportation vessel with two composite bucket foundations and offshore wind turbines. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Acero, W.G.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. Assessment of the Dynamic Responses and Allowable Sea States for a Novel Offshore Wind Turbine Installation Concept Based on the Inverted Pendulum Principle. Energy Procedia 2016, 94, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Barlow, E.; Tezcaner Öztürk, D.; Revie, M.; Akartunalı, K.; Day, A.H.; Boulougouris, E. A mixed-method optimisation and simulation framework for supporting logistical decisions during offshore wind farm installations. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2018, 264, 894–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Quandt, M.; Beinke, T.; Ait-Alla, A.; Freitag, M. Simulation Based Investigation of the Impact of Information Sharing on the Offshore Wind Farm Installation Process. J. Renew. Energy 2017, 2017, 8301316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Akbari, N.; Irawan, C.A.; Jones, D.F.; Menachof, D. A multi-criteria port suitability assessment for developments in the offshore wind industry. Renew. Energy 2017, 102, 118–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Hong, S.; McMorland, J.; Zhang, H.; Collu, M.; Halse, K.H. Floating offshore wind farm installation, challenges and opportunities: A comprehensive survey. Ocean Eng. 2024, 304, 117793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Amorosi, L.; Fischetti, M.; Paradiso, R.; Roberti, R. Optimization models for the installation planning of offshore wind farms. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2024, 315, 1182–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Kikuchi, Y.; Ishihara, T. Assessment of weather downtime for the construction of offshore wind farm by using wind and wave simulations. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2016, 753, 092016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Lütjen, M.; Karimi, H.R. Approach of a port inventory control system for the offshore installation of wind turbines. In Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Rhodes, Greece, 17–23 June 2012; pp. 502–508. [Google Scholar]
  81. Fan, H.; Lin, J.; Shi, Q. Installation vessel and method for offshore wind turbine in ultra-shallow water. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Shanghai, China, 6–11 June 2010; Volume 3, pp. 357–363. [Google Scholar]
  82. Li, L.; Ren, J. Offshore wind turbines and their installation. In Proceedings of the CICC-ITOE 2010—2010 International Conference on Innovative Computing and Communication, 2010 Asia-Pacific Conference on Information Technology and Ocean Engineering, Macao, China, 30–31 January 2010; pp. 248–251. [Google Scholar]
  83. Barlow, E.; Tezcaner Öztürk, D.; Day, A.H.; Boulougouris, E.; Revie, M.; Akartunalı, K. A support tool for assessing the risks of heavy lift vessel logistics in the installation of offshore wind farms. In Proceedings of the Marine Heavy Transport & Lift IV, London, UK, 29–30 October 2014; pp. 11–20. [Google Scholar]
  84. Barlow, E.; Tezcaner Öztürk, D.; Day, S.; Boulougouris, E.; Revie, M.; Akartunali, K. An Assessment of Vessel Characteristics for the Installation of Offshore Wind Farms. In Proceedings of the ICMT, Strathclyde, UK, 7–9 July 2014; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  85. Wu, G.; Tohbai, Y.; Takahashi, T. Construction and operational properties of offshore wind farm power generation system with self-commuted HVDC transmission. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Power System Technology, Zhejiang, Hangzhou, China, 24–28 October 2010; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  86. Lerche, J.; Neve, H.; Pedersen, K.B.; Wandahl, S.; Gross, A. Why would location-based scheduling be applicable for offshore oil and gas construction? In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Dublin, Ireland, 1–7 June 2019; pp. 1295–1306. [Google Scholar]
  87. Beinke, T.; Ait-Alla, A.; Freitag, M. Resource and information sharing for the installation process of the offshore wind energy. In Proceedings of the IFIP International Conference on Advances in Production Management Systems (APMS), Hamburg, Germany, 3–7 September 2017; Volume 514, pp. 268–275. [Google Scholar]
  88. Cairney, J. Offshore wind farm case study—How to achieve cost reduction at offshore wind farm construction projects. In Proceedings of the Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, USA, 4–7 May 2015; Volume 6, pp. 4398–4405. [Google Scholar]
  89. Leontaris, G.; Morales-Nápoles, O.; Wolfert, A.R.M.R. Probabilistic decision support for offshore wind operations: A Bayesian Network approach to include the dependence of the installation activities. In Proceedings of the Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management PSAM 14, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 16–21 September 2018. [Google Scholar]
  90. Ait-Alla, A.; Oelker, S.; Lewandowski, M.; Freitag, M.; Thoben, K.D. A study of new installation concepts of offshore wind farms by means of simulation model. In Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA, 25−30 June 2017; pp. 607–612. [Google Scholar]
  91. Gao, Z.; Verma, A.; Zhao, Y.; Jiang, Z.; Ren, Z. A summary of the recent work at ntnu on marine operations related to installation of offshore wind turbines. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Madrid, Spain, 17–22 June 2018; Volume 11A, pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  92. Stempinski, F.; Wenzel, S.; Lüking, J.; Martens, L.; Hortamani, M. Modelling installation and construction of offshore wind farms. In Proceedings of the ASME 2014 33rd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, San Francisco, CA, USA, 8–13 June 2014; Volume 9B, pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  93. Gintautas, T.; Sørensen, J.D. Evaluating a novel approach to reliability decision support for offshore wind turbine installation. In Progress in Renewable Energies Offshore, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Renewable Energies Offshore, RENEW 2016, Lisbon, Portugal, 24–26 October 2016; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2016; pp. 733–740. [Google Scholar]
  94. O’Sullivan, J.; Arjona, J.F.; Aghili, M. Comparison of installation scenarios for offshore wind farms using operations simulator with Markov wind & wave weather model. Proc. Offshore Technol. Conf. 2011, 4, 3265–3269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Cholley, J.M.; Cahay, M. Offshore wind turbine and substructure modelling for float over installation design. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Honolulu, HI, USA, 31 May–5 June 2009; Volume 4, pp. 791–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Hatledal, L.I.; Zhang, H.; Halse, K.H.; Hildre, H.P. Numerical study for a catamaran gripper-monopile mechanism of a novel offshore wind turbine assembly installation procedure. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Trondheim, Norway, 25–30 June 2017; Volume 9. [Google Scholar]
  97. Devoy McAuliffe, F.; Lynch, K.; Sperstad, I.B.; Nonas, L.M.; Halvorsen-Weare, E.E.; Jones, D.; Akbari, N.; Wall, G.; Irawan, C.; Norstad, I.; et al. The LEANWIND suite of logistics optimisation and full lifecycle simulation models for offshore wind farms. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2018, 1104, 012002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Thumann, V.M.; Yetginer-Tjelta, T.; Van Foeken, R.J. Design & installation monitoring experience of large diameter monopiles for offshore wind farm in highly variable North Sea soil conditions. In Proceedings of the Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, USA, 1–4 May 2017; Volume 6, pp. 4623–4641. [Google Scholar]
  99. Li, L.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. Numerical simulations for installation of offshore wind turbine monopiles using floating vessels. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Nantes, France, 8–13 June 2013; Volume 8, pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  100. Puyang, Z.; Ding, H.; Le, C.; Zhang, S.; Huang, X. Preliminary analysis on integrated transportation technique for offshore wind turbines. In Proceedings of the ASME 2013 32nd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Nantes, France, 8–13 June 2013; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  101. Haugvaldstad, J.; Gudmestad, O.T. Testing of a new transport and installation method for offshore wind turbines. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 700, 012004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Beinke, T.; Quandt, M.; Schweizer, A. Developing standardized logistics processes for the offshore wind energy industry. In Proceedings of the DEWEK 2012, Bremen, Germany, 7–8 November 2012; p. 4. [Google Scholar]
  103. Sarkar, A.; Gudmestad, O.T. Installation of monopiles for offshore wind turbines—By using end-caps and a subsea holding structure. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 18–23 June 2011; Volume 5, pp. 309–315. [Google Scholar]
  104. Muhabie, Y.T.; Caprace, J.-D.; Petcu, C.; Rigo, P. Improving the installation of offshore wind farms by the use of discrete event simulation. In Proceedings of the World Maritime Technology Conference (WMTC), Providence, RI, USA, 3–7 November 2015; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  105. Ait-Alla, A.; Quandt, M.; Beinke, T.; Freitag, M. Improving the decision-making process during the installation process of offshore wind farms by means of information sharing. In Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Rhodes, Greece, 26 June–1 July 2016; pp. 144–150. [Google Scholar]
  106. Scholz-Reiter, B.; Lütjen, M.; Heger, J.; Schweizer, A. Planning and control of logistics for offshore wind farms. In Proceedings of the 12th WSEAS International Conference on Mathematical and Computational Methods in Science and Engineering, Faro, Portugal, 3–5 November 2010; pp. 242–247. [Google Scholar]
  107. Arshad, M.; O’kelly, B.C. Offshore wind-turbine structures: A review. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Energy 2013, 166, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Tranberg, B.; Kratmann, K.K.; Stege, J. Determining offshore wind installation times using machine learning and open data. In Proceedings of the Offshore WindEurope conference, Bilbao, Spain, 2–4 April 2019; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  109. Ding, H.; Zhang, P.; Le, C.; Liu, X. Construction and installation technique of large-scale top-bearing bucket foundation for offshore wind turbine. In Proceedings of the 2011 2nd International Conference on Mechanic Automation and Control Engineering, MACE 2011, Inner Mongolia, China, 15–17 July 2011; pp. 7234–7237. [Google Scholar]
  110. Rippel, D.; Jathe, N.; Becker, M.; Lütjen, M.; Szczerbicka, H.; Freitag, M. A review on the planning problem for the installation of offshore wind farms. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 1337–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Ekici, D.; White, M.; Drunsic, M. Offshore Wind Farm OWF Installation Best Practices Based on Field Experience. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, USA, 2–5 May 2016. [Google Scholar]
  112. Lange, K.; Rinne, A.; Haasis, H.D. Planning maritime logistics concepts for offshore wind farms: A newly developed decision support system. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference, ICCL 2012, Shanghai, China, 24–26 September 2012; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Volume 7555, pp. 142–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Backe, S. Strategic optimization of offshore wind farm installation. In Computational Logistics, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference, ICCL 2017, Southampton, UK, 18–20 October 2017, Proceedings 8; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Volume 10572, pp. 285–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Ozturk, T. On Using Simulation to Model the Installation Process Logistics for an Offshore Wind Farm. 2017; pp. 1–30. Available online: https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/60880/ (accessed on 23 July 2021).
  115. Semenyuk, M. Offshore Wind Farm Installation Planning. Decision-Support Tool for the Analysis of New Installation Concepts; TU Delft: Delft, The Netherlands, 2019; 150p. [Google Scholar]
  116. Versendaal, J. Exploring the Potential of the Pre-Assembled Installation Method for the Installation of Offshore Wind Turbines; TU Delft: Delft, The Netherlands, 2017; 66p. [Google Scholar]
  117. Scheltes, M. An Offshore Port Concept to Reduce the Construction Costs in Offshore Wind; TU Delft: Delft, The Netherlands, 2018; 218p. [Google Scholar]
  118. Faiz, T.I. Minimization of Transportation, Installation and Maintenance Operations Costs for Offshore Wind Turbines; Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow: Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 2014; 104p. [Google Scholar]
  119. Kumar, V. Optimization of Offshore Wind Farm Installation Procedure With a Targeted Finish Date; TU Delft: Delft, The Netherlands, 2017; 91p. [Google Scholar]
  120. Desemberg, J. Optimization of the Installation Process of Offshore Wind Turbines; University of Liège: Liège, Belgium, 2014; 111p. [Google Scholar]
  121. Uraz, E. Offshore Wind Turbine Transportation & Installation Analyses. Planning Optimal Marine Operations for Offshore Wind Projects; Gotland University: Visby, Sweden, 2011; 65p. [Google Scholar]
  122. BVG. Associates UK Ports for the Offshore Wind Industry: Time to Act; BVG: Swindon, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  123. The Crown Estate; ORE Catapult; BVG Associates. A Guide to an Offshore Wind Farm; BVG: Swindon, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  124. Roberts, A.; Blanch, M.; Weston, J.; Valpy, B. UK Offshore Wind Supply Chain: Capabilities and Opportunities. 2014. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-offshore-wind-supply-chain-capabilities-and-opportunities (accessed on 12 August 2022).
  125. Maples, B.; Saur, G.; Hand, M.; van Pietermen, R.; Obdam, T. Installation, Operation, and Maintenance Strategies to Reduce the Cost of Offshore Wind Energy. 2013. Available online: https://research-hub.nrel.gov/en/publications/installation-operation-and-maintenance-strategies-to-reduce-the-c (accessed on 12 August 2023).
  126. Teillant, B.; Raventos, A.; Chainho, P.; Goormachtigh, J.; Nava, V.; Ruiz, P.; Jepsen, R. Methodology Report and Logistic Model Flow Charts. 2014. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.france-energies-marines.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/DTO_WP5_ECD_D5.1.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjBmd2rnO2JAxVN5MkDHcTzKi8QFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw14c4Okoz9HYbdCiOP7KiAV (accessed on 18 August 2023).
  127. Akbari, N. Ports suitability assessment for offshore wind development-Case studies report. In Proceedings of the LEANWIND Consortium (2015), Cork, Ireland, 31 July 2015. [Google Scholar]
  128. Kaiser, M.J.; Snyder, B.F. Offshore Wind Energy Installation and Decommissioning Cost Estimation in the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf; TA&R study 648; U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement: Herndon, VA, USA, 2010; 340p. [Google Scholar]
  129. Walther, L.; Schwientek, A. Logistic Process Analysis to Develop the Supply Chain for Offshore Wind Farm Installations. In Pioneering Solutions in Supply Chain Performance Management: Concepts, Technology and Applications; Fraunhofer IML: Dortmund, Germany, 2013; pp. 89–103. [Google Scholar]
  130. Díaz, H.; Rodrigues, J.M.; Soares, C.G. Preliminary cost assessment of an offshore floating wind farm installation on the Galician coast. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering—OMAE, Busan, South Korea, 19–24 June 2016; Volume 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Lange, K.; Haasis, H.D. Offshore Wind Supply Chain Design: Analysis of logistics concepts for a cost-efficient installation of offshore wind farms—With a focus on the rotor blades. In Development in Maritime Transportatio and Exploitation of Sea Resources; Routledge: Offshore, UK, 2013; p. 8. [Google Scholar]
  132. CSCMP. CSCMP Supply Chain Management Definitions and Glossary; CSCMP: Nashville, TN, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  133. EWEA; Arapogianni, A.; Moccia, J.; Williams, D.; Phillips, J. Wind in Our Sails: The Coming of Europe’s Offshore Wind Energy Industry; EWEA: Brussels, Belgium, 2011; Volume 96. [Google Scholar]
  134. IRENA. Innovation Outlook: Offshore Wind; IRENA: Masdar City, United Arab Emirates, 2016; ISBN 9789295111356. [Google Scholar]
  135. Tjaberings, J.; Fazi, S.; Ursavas, E. Evaluating operational strategies for the installation of offshore wind turbine substructures. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 170, 112951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Crowle, A.P.; Thies, P.R. Floating offshore wind turbines port requirements for construction. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part M J. Eng. Marit. Environ. 2022, 236, 1047–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Halvorsen-Weare, E.E.; Nonas, L.M. Maritime logistics optimisation for predictive maintenance at offshore wind farms. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2023, 2626, 012040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Kaiser, M.J.; Snyder, B.F. Modeling offshore wind installation costs on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. Renew. Energy 2013, 50, 676–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Ward, P.A.; Corgnale, C.; Teprovich, J.A.; Motyka, T.; Hardy, B.; Peters, B.; Zidan, R. High performance metal hydride based thermal energy storage systems for concentrating solar power applications. J. Alloys Compd. 2015, 645, S374–S378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. de Vasconcelos, R.M.; Silva, L.L.C.; González, M.O.A.; Santiso, A.M.; de Melo, D.C. Environmental licensing for offshore wind farms: Guidelines and policy implications for new markets. Energy Policy 2022, 171, 113248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Peng, S.; Rippel, D.; Lütjen, M.; Becker, M.; Szczerbicka, H. Simulation-based scheduling for offshore wind farm installation using timed petri nets approach. Simul. Ser. 2020, 52, 56–67. [Google Scholar]
  142. González, M.; Santiso, A.; Jones, D.; Akbari, N.; Vasconcelos, R.; Melo, D. Offshore Wind Power Growth and Industrial Development in Emerging Markets. Energies 2024, 17, 4712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 17 06004 g001
Figure 1. Research stages.
Figure 1. Research stages.
Energies 17 06004 g001
Energies 17 06004 g002
Figure 2. Supply chain for the installation of offshore wind farms.
Figure 2. Supply chain for the installation of offshore wind farms.
Energies 17 06004 g002
Energies 17 06004 g003
Figure 3. Types of offshore wind turbine pre-assembly methods. Source: Adapted from [128].
Figure 3. Types of offshore wind turbine pre-assembly methods. Source: Adapted from [128].
Energies 17 06004 g003
Energies 17 06004 g004
Figure 4. Framework for logistical decisions in the installation of offshore wind farms.
Figure 4. Framework for logistical decisions in the installation of offshore wind farms.
Energies 17 06004 g004
Table 1. Keyword combination.
Table 1. Keyword combination.
IDContains in the Title
1Offshore windandInstallation
2Offshore windandTransportation
3Offshore windandConstruction
4Offshore windandLogistics
5Offshore windandAssembly
Table 2. Publications analyzed in SLR.
Table 2. Publications analyzed in SLR.
PublicationNumber of PublicationsReferences
Articles in journals64[1,4,11,12,13,14,15,16,18,20,22,26,27,28,29,30,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78]
Conference proceedings36[79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112]
Dissertations11[19,23,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121]
Technical reports7[122,123,124,125,126,127,128]
Books4[113,129,130,131]
Total122
Table 3. Analysis of studies with quantitative methods.
Table 3. Analysis of studies with quantitative methods.
CriteriaNumber of ArticlesPercentage
Climate (weather and environmental conditions)5487%
Turbine installation3150%
Turbine and foundation installation1931%
OWF installation (all components)813%
Region of study3658%
Table 4. Characteristics of a port to support the installation of offshore wind farms.
Table 4. Characteristics of a port to support the installation of offshore wind farms.
Port CharacteristicsRelevant Articles
Physical characteristics
-
Equipment and cranes
[10,23,76,127]
-
Water depth
[23,76,127]
Port connectivity
-
Location of manufacturers
[76,121,125,136]
-
Onshore logistics
[76,119,121]
-
Distance from the port
[9,10,12,76,121]
Layout
-
Workspace
[10,23,28,76,112,136]
Table 5. Characteristics of a vessel to support the installation of offshore wind farms.
Table 5. Characteristics of a vessel to support the installation of offshore wind farms.
Vessel CharacteristicsRelevant Articles
Deck space[28,119,131]
Vessel speed[28,60,84,119,121]
Vessel availability[113,120,121,125]
Operating limits[1,4,9,28,84,120]
Workability[104,119]
Crane performance[41,58,119,120]
Experience[74]
Loading capacity[9,84,116,121]
Table 6. Influencing factors in the choice of component installation strategy.
Table 6. Influencing factors in the choice of component installation strategy.
FactorsRelevant Articles
Vessel characteristics
-
Vessel stability
[37,121]
-
Vessel type
[20,94,113,119]
-
Vessel capacity
[128]
-
Vessel cost
[128]
-
Vessel speed
[128]
-
Crane capacity
[128]
Project characteristics
-
Type of foundation
[23,119]
-
Size and weight of components
[23,28,119,128]
-
Water depth
[23]
-
Distance from the coast and the port
[20,23,119,120,128]
Weather conditions[106,137]
Table 7. Influencing factors in the choice of pre-assembly method.
Table 7. Influencing factors in the choice of pre-assembly method.
FactorsRelevant Articles
Vessel characteristics
-
Vessel capacity
[110,128]
-
Vessel availability
[91,127,128,138]
-
Deck space
[18,20,121,128]
-
Crane capacity
[18,20,28,91,110,121,127,128,138,139]
Turbine characteristics
-
Turbine size
[18,121,128]
-
Turbine manufacturer
[30,125]
-
Turbine model
[27,128,138]
Port characteristics
-
Distance from port
[121]
-
Pre-assembly area
[18,125]
Table 8. Variables used for sharing information during the installation of offshore wind farms.
Table 8. Variables used for sharing information during the installation of offshore wind farms.
VariablesRelevant Articles
Port capacity[15,75,87,105]
Weather forecast[15,75,87,105]
Availability of vessels[15,87]
Table 9. Main variables considered in the aggregate planning of the installation of offshore wind farms.
Table 9. Main variables considered in the aggregate planning of the installation of offshore wind farms.
Main VariablesRelevant Articles
Fleet vessel[41,58,60]
Weather conditions[59,104]
Start date[41,58,104]
Operations time[60,89]
Operations costs[60]
Logistical strategies[60,112]
Table 10. Main parameters considered in the aggregate planning of the installation of offshore wind farms.
Table 10. Main parameters considered in the aggregate planning of the installation of offshore wind farms.
Main ParametersRelevant Articles
Number of turbines[41,58,60,89,104]
Operations time[41,58,59,104]
Turbine capacity[60]
Operational limits[41]
Number of vessels[89]
Number of components on the vessel[104]
Project characteristics[112]
Table 11. Main variables considered in the offshore wind farm installation schedule.
Table 11. Main variables considered in the offshore wind farm installation schedule.
Main VariablesRelevant Articles
Start date[20,40,44,74,86,114,119]
Pre-assembly method[20,86]
Number of turbines[20,40]
Risks[39]
Weather conditions[40,141]
Vessels[44,114,119]
Dock capacity[44]
Uncertainty in times[74]
Turbine power[119]
Foundation size[119]
Port[119]
Table 12. Main parameters considered in the offshore wind farm installation schedule.
Table 12. Main parameters considered in the offshore wind farm installation schedule.
Main ParametersRelevant Articles
Number of turbines[13,29,39,40,74,81,114]
Process time[13,20,29,40,44,86,106,114,141]
Distance from coast/port[39,74,114]
Operational limits[20,40,44,74,114]
Turbine/project capacity[20,39,40,74,86,114,119]
Vessel capacity[20,29,39,44]
Vessel speed[20,74]
Depth[74,114]
Pre-assembly method[39,86,119]
Weather conditions[13,39,106,119]
Number of vessels[20,29,74]
Table 13. Mathematical studies that focus on optimizing installation costs and/or installation time.
Table 13. Mathematical studies that focus on optimizing installation costs and/or installation time.
Performance GoalNumber of ArticlesPercentageMain Authors
Installation cost2744.3%[16,18,29]
Installation time3252.5%[26,28,29]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

González, M.O.A.; Nascimento, G.; Jones, D.; Akbari, N.; Santiso, A.; Melo, D.; Vasconcelos, R.; Godeiro, M.; Nogueira, L.; Almeida, M.; et al. Logistic Decisions in the Installation of Offshore Wind Farms: A Conceptual Framework. Energies 2024, 17, 6004. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17236004

AMA Style

González MOA, Nascimento G, Jones D, Akbari N, Santiso A, Melo D, Vasconcelos R, Godeiro M, Nogueira L, Almeida M, et al. Logistic Decisions in the Installation of Offshore Wind Farms: A Conceptual Framework. Energies. 2024; 17(23):6004. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17236004

Chicago/Turabian Style

González, Mario O. A., Gabriela Nascimento, Dylan Jones, Negar Akbari, Andressa Santiso, David Melo, Rafael Vasconcelos, Monalisa Godeiro, Luana Nogueira, Mariana Almeida, and et al. 2024. "Logistic Decisions in the Installation of Offshore Wind Farms: A Conceptual Framework" Energies 17, no. 23: 6004. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17236004

APA Style

González, M. O. A., Nascimento, G., Jones, D., Akbari, N., Santiso, A., Melo, D., Vasconcelos, R., Godeiro, M., Nogueira, L., Almeida, M., & Oprime, P. (2024). Logistic Decisions in the Installation of Offshore Wind Farms: A Conceptual Framework. Energies, 17(23), 6004. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17236004

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop