Review Paper

Energy & Environment

0(0) 1–39
Offshore wind energy status, ! The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
challenges, opportunities, sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0958305X20946483
environmental impacts, journals.sagepub.com/home/eae

occupational health, and

safety management in India

J Charles Rajesh Kumar1 , D Vinod Kumar2,

D Baskar3, B Mary Arunsi4, R Jenova5 and
MA Majid6

Abstract
Offshore wind is at its infancy in terms of technology and capacities in India. The Ministry of New
and Renewable Energy (MNRE) announced medium and long term offshore targets of 5 GW and
30 GW by 2022 and 2030, respectively. The location of the first offshore wind park has recently
been identified, and the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) has signed a contract with the
Government of Gujarat to establish the 1000 MW of offshore wind energy capacity by 2019.
To achieve the ambitious targets, India will require demand and resources planning, and policy
support at an unprecedented scale. The MNRE notified the country’s offshore wind energy policy
in 2015, and draft offshore wind energy lease rules in 2019. In this paper, several offshore wind
energy challenges have been identified, and a clear policy road map and effective support schemes
required to trigger offshore wind development activity for medium to long term are suggested.
The environmental consequences of European offshore wind farms are assessed to optimize

1
Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Vinayaka Mission’s Kirupananda Variyar Engineering College,
Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, India
2
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vinayaka Mission’s Kirupananda Variyar Engineering College, Vinayaka Mission’s
Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, India
3
Department of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Vinayaka Mission’s Kirupananda Variyar Engineering College, Vinayaka
Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, India
4
Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Bengaluru, India
5
Government Primary Health Center, Mulanur, India
6
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Engineering, Effat University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Corresponding author:
J Charles Rajesh Kumar, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Vinayaka Mission’s Kirupananda
Variyar Engineering College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem 636 308,
Tamil Nadu, India.
Email: [email protected]
2 Energy & Environment 0(0)

future monitoring of offshore wind programmes in India. Furthermore, the occupational health
and safety management requirements are highlighted to ensure that the accidents, vulnerabilities,
and hazards are avoided. The research and development (R&D) considerations are provided to
assist policymakers, potential investors, stakeholders, designers and manufacturers, contractors,
professional advisers, and wind farm developers in their decisions and planning.

Keywords
Offshore wind, European offshore, occupational health, safety management, environmental
impacts, policies, challenges, opportunities, employment, R&D

Introduction
India is one of the fast-growing major economies and demands secure access to new energy
sources to overcome poverty, enhance well-being, improve competitiveness, productivity, and
strengthen economic growth. The population of India is 1.35 billion, and about 300 million
people lack access to electricity. The energy consumption has been growing at a rate of 4.2%
per annum (In 2018–19, the energy requirement was 12,74,595 GWh, and availability was
12,67,526 GWh), and the country is struggling to provide power for the ever-growing needs of
the citizens. Also, the growing concern about the change in climate, coupled with the desire to
enhance energy self-sufficiency, is urging policymakers to think of new power generation
possibilities.1 In the Paris agreement, India committed to reduce the intensity of greenhouse
gas emission by
35 percent below the 2005 levels by the year 2030. Around 40 percent of
India’s energy capacity would be based on renewable energy, and 2.5 to 3 billion tons of CO2
equivalent carbon will sink through forest.2 By the year 2022, the target is to install 175 GW
renewable energy, which comprises of 100 GW of the solar, 60 GW of the wind, 10 GW of the
small hydropower and 5 GW through biomass power.3 As of October 2019, the national
installed capacity, including conventional and renewables, was 364.96 GW, of which renew-
able aggregate installed capacity was 83.37950 GW (small hydro, wind, solar, and biopower
(biomass power, waste to energy (WTE)). Including the large hydropower installed capacity of
45.39922 GW, the country has already crossed about 73.59% of the target of 175 GW. In all
probability, the country planned to overachieve its 175 GW renewable energy generation
capacity target to 227 GW within the same timeline.
Wind energy is an alternative energy that effectively replaces fossil fuels.4 Onshore wind
farms are located on land, and offshore wind farms are located in bodies of water.
Traditionally offshore windfarms ruled the market; however, improvements in technology
have led the wind sector to see towards achieving offshore wind farms.5 Onshore wind
performs a leading role in the production of renewable power in India with a capacity of
37.09002 GW as of October 2019; hence offshore installed capacity will be a critical addition
to the Indian wind power sector along with the onshore wind sector. The cost of the offshore
projects is costlier than the onshore, but it comes with the inherent benefits of ample wind,
higher wind density, and speeds, higher plant load factor (PLF), and have no land acqui-
sition challenges.6 Wind turbines used in offshore wind projects are of larger dimensions and
capacities and will be an essential component of the sustainable power source.7
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 3

Offshore wind offers several significant opportunities, and in particular, this helpful
resource provides potentially a more economical cost of energy, and still, it faces a chal-
lenge. The techniques and instruments used for evaluating and predicting coastal wind
resources are becoming far more costly and quite often infeasible for offshore wind.
More advanced models like LIDAR need to be introduced. Acquiring adequate and long-
term data in the wind, wave, climate, bathymetric data, human activities, and ecology,
maintaining those data, and combining them efficiently into additional activities and strat-
egies are critical. The challenging offshore conditions add more uncertainties to the prices
associated with the forecast methods, vessels, weather windows, and equipment.
Furthermore, the offshore wind developers are not provided with adequate returns with
an effective incentive mechanism, and there are few regulatory barriers to deployment.
Under the country’s national monitoring of wind program, around 74 met masts having
different heights are installed at the selected locations (eight demarcated zones) across the
coastlines (7600 km) to measure offshore wind potential. The National Institute of Ocean
Technology (NIOT) has identified two feasible sites off the Tamil Nadu coast
(Rameshwaram and Kanyakumari) for offshore wind installations, and a wind farm with
1 GW each recommended after preliminary assessment.8 To validate the wind potential at the
eight demarcated zones on the coastlines of Tamil Nadu and Gujarat, the Facilitating
Offshore Wind in India (FOWIND) project in association with the MNRE and the
National Institute of Wind Energy (NIWE) initiated Light Detection and Ranging
(LiDAR) based measurements. MNRE is planning to install more numbers of LiDAR in
Tamil Nadu and Gujarat. Between November 2017 and June 2018, precise data about the
quality of offshore wind was obtained from one LiDAR installed near the Gulf of
Khambhat.9,10 The oceanographic and seabed condition surveys related to the eight demar-
cated zones are initiated and observed that the results obtained are encouraging and prom-
ising.11 The first national offshore wind energy policy, describing the country’s roadmap, was
released in October 2015.12,13 The 5 GW of medium and 30 GW of the long-term offshore
wind target by 2022 and 2030, respectively, was announced by the MNRE to give confidence
to the wind energy sector.
To build India’s first offshore wind energy project (off the coast of Gujarat), the NIWE
invited expression of interest (EoI) from suitable and qualified bidders on 10th April 2018.
EoI has evoked a strong response from the local and global industries. The tender will be
out for a 1 GW capacity, with possible incentives to the industry for a few years in inline
with other renewable energy projects.14Thirty-four companies from different parts of the
globe participated in EOIs, and the Indian wind energy industry players who had submitted
their EOIs are Greenko, Sterlite, Shell India, CLP, Torrent, Suzlon, and Inox Wind.15
There is a concern for the cost of electricity produced from the offshore (cost around
Indian Rupees (INR) 12 per unit, compared to around INR 2.43 per kWh for onshore
wind energy),16 the grid integration and procuring equipment. Onshore wind farms have a
typical capacity of around 2.5 MW turbines, and offshore wind farms have a capacity of
6 MW capacity turbines and larger windmill blades. However, most firms in the country do
not yet manufacture such high-capacity machines, so parts for wind turbines have to be
imported.17 In terms of logistics, placing massive blades on Indian roads is next to imprac-
ticable, and this is the reason wind blades on average are smaller as compared to other
counties such as China. Globally, there is around 18.813 GW (the year 2017) of installed
offshore wind power capacity, 71% of it in European seas, and the rest in the US, China,
4 Energy & Environment 0(0)

South Korea, and Japan. If India achieves the 5 GW target despite the challenges, it will be
one of the first markets to do so on a broad scale.18–20
In the United Kingdom (UK), offshore wind has generated more than 18000 employment
and expected to increase 30000 by 2020.21,22 Similarly, India should establish policy design
to provide clarity and consistency to a prominent offshore wind industry to accomplish
energy independence and economic growth along with the potential of creating employ-
ment. Policy design should include regulations on the recruitment process, working time,
work and leave schedules, shift duration and overtime, day and night shift rotation, security
checks, safety regulations, contracts for the offshore wind sector employees. Medical
requirements for offshore work, physical and psychosocial stressors, adjustment to the
marine environment, cabin accommodation, travel to and from the installation, marine
shift rotation patterns, accidents, and injuries, injury and illness risks, and sleep and
health measures are to be included.
The policy design is essential for long-term growth, reduce investment risk23,24 and a
threat to life during all stages of design, installation, operation, maintenance, and decom-
missioning of the offshore wind farms.25–27 Every worker should get the proper training to
guarantee safety in their work environment and aware of various hazards, hazardous gases,
slips, falls, trips, cranes, confined areas, first aid, personnel transfer, and noise vulnerability,
etc. There are notable advantages of offshore wind energy resources both economically,
socially, and considering energy security. It has a part in fighting climate change and meet-
ing set renewable power objectives.
Nevertheless, stakeholders and the public must be conscious of safety and health.
Offshore wind policymakers and regulators must include the challenge of increases in acci-
dents in the offshore wind sector, which were experienced by other well-established offshore
wind sectors around the globe where offshore turbines have been running since 1991. If this
is not considered, then there is a threat to employee’s safety and health. There should be an
occupational safety policy in solving the skills gaps and sparse safety data and information
regarding health and safety.28 The questions concerning the environmental consequences of
offshore wind advancements are progressing and remain unanswered. There are still sub-
stantial knowledge gaps in the field of the ecological effects of offshore wind farms.29,30
Offshore wind farms installation noise temporarily relocates some fish and aquatic mam-
mals.31 The sounds released during pile driving could create hearing impairment, mask
communication, or disorient animals and fish as they migrate out of the zone to avoid
the noise.32 There is also a danger to the life of marine animals by ships or being interrupted
by vessel movements connected with surveying and installation ventures.33 On the other
hand, wind turbines may work as artificial reefs and increase food sources.34,35
In 2016 India and the EU agreed on a collaboration called European Union-India Clean
Energy and Climate Partnership. As a climate bank, the European Investment Bank (EIB) has
invested up to EUR 3.4 billion in India’s climate-related activities. As of February 2020, EUR
600 million of funding agreements also need to be signed out of 3.4 bn. The other EUR 2.8 bn
has been officially invested and has been distributed almost exclusively in the last six years.
Marginally over half of the EUR 3.4 billion portfolios is for Indian metro projects, and the
remaining is for wind and solar projects. The EU is working to develop tender material for
Indian offshore wind energy programs. India has extensive offshore wind capacity, but it has
not yet taken off. The EU has carried out studies in India by geographically mapping regions
where the conditions of wind and soil are suitable. According to the European Union’s (EU)
Climate and Energy, offshore wind power growth should currently be the first preference for
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 5

India, and on that front, it needs a sustained policy. EU and India join hands to promote
Indian offshore wind ventures. India has enormous offshore wind potential because of its vast
coastline. Initially, it will be more expensive than solar, but the costs will gradually decrease,
making it a significant contributor to expanding the share of renewables in the country’s
energy mix. The new problems involve strategic problem-solving, the application of learned
lessons, and innovative approaches to achieve required changes.
The progress, challenges, R&D, policy, regulations, legislation, sanctioning, and environ-
mental problems in the offshore sector are focused and presented in this work. Based on the
review, policy recommendations and implementation frameworks are provided to boost
offshore wind sector development and investment. Occupational and health safety chal-
lenges in the offshore wind are analyzed. The paper is intended to raise awareness of the
health and safety for the worker in the offshore wind sector of India. Furthermore, an
attempt is made in this work to concentrate the environmental implications due to the
Indian offshore wind energy sector and suggested ways to mitigate them based on experience
from the offshore wind sectors in Europe. The impact of climate change on wind potential in
India is included to indicate the future sustainability of wind farms under the changing
climate. The challenges of the offshore wind sector are combined and provided recommen-
dations for the short and long-term success, which will help the regulators’ to obtain a
balance between change in climate objectives and existing environmental legislation in
India and the rest of the world.

Comparison of onshore and offshore wind farms

Onshore and offshore wind turbines are employed to harness the energy produced by
moving air to generate electricity. The first onshore wind turbine was constructed in the
late 1800 s and initially dominated the market.36 Onshore wind is cheaper and requires fewer
infrastructure and limited advanced and specialized technology. Besides, onshore has a low
carbon footprint and a limited physical effect on the environment and does not emit green-
house gases. The significant obstacle to the optimization of onshore wind turbines is the
variability of wind speeds, and the turbines have a substantial visual impact, hinders birds
and bats, and contribute to noise pollution. Onshore wind turbines are optimized for specific
wind speed and experience a rather severe loss in performance when high-energy wind gusts
blow through onshore wind farms.
Horizontal axis wind turbines are most extensively utilized for generating power in India,
although some prototypes of vertical axis wind turbines were developed and experimented in
India.37 If the wind changes directions, the risk of damage in wind turbines is severe. Many
of the challenges that plague onshore wind are considerably eased in offshore farms and
emerging as an alternative or supplement to the onshore wind energy sector in the last ten
years.38 Wind speeds are consistent and higher, and turbines are optimized to operate at
very high efficiencies compared to onshore wind turbines. Offshore wind speed is higher in
the afternoon and will contribute more energy to the grid and meet peak load.
The power generated by offshore wind farms does not require costly transmission lines
extending the several miles, as in the case of onshore wind areas. However, offshore wind
farms are costly to establish due to underwater construction and must withstand the extra
wear and tear due to massive wind speeds. Thus, the offshore wind turbines are costlier and
much more expensive to install. Complex structures and arrangements must spread up from
the ocean floor to support the wind turbine in the sea, and the design and construction of
6 Energy & Environment 0(0)

these supports usually make up as much as a higher percentage of the price of offshore
equipment. Last not the least at an offshore wind farm, turbine maintenance is a significant
undertaking that needs a helicopter with qualified technicians and requires the rental of a
costly jack-up rig, all while battling the changeable weather of the open seas. Moreover,
though the offshore wind may be more costly, it is more accepted in the public eye and is
becoming competitive. Offshore wind may be feasible someday soon in India, but for a
while, the onshore wind is demonstrably competitive.39,40

Global top wind turbine manufacturers

Offshore wind capacity is expected to boost by more than 80 GW by 2024, according to the
latest report published by Global Industry Analysis.41 Nearly all wind energy expansion has
come from the growth of land-based wind farms. Because of the restricted growth capacity
of onshore wind power, the world sees offshore wind power as the focus of future devel-
opment. Wind power is necessary to achieve the energy transition and is accomplished
utilizing onshore, and offshore wind installed capacities. Globally, India has achieved
fourth place in onshore wind installed capacity after China, the US, and Germany.
Global wind power capacity could rise by more than half over the following five years, as
prices remain to drop, and the market returns to increase after this decade. The cumulative
global wind power capacity stood at 430 GW in 2015 and rose to 539 GW at the end of 2017
and is expected to grow by 56% to 840 GW by the end of 2022 as other countries are
generating renewable power to reach their emissions reduction objectives and energy
costs. Worldwide onshore wind installed capacity added in 2018 was 53.9 GW and cumu-
latively reached 600 GW. Around 200 GW was installed in China, close to 100 GW was
installed in the USA, 56.132 GW, and 32.848 GW was the cumulative installed capacity in
Germany and India, respectively.42
Table 1 shows the world’s top fifteen onshore wind turbine manufacturers in 2018,
according to GEWC report-2018. The top ten among them will dominate the global wind
power market in 2018/2019 due to their notable wind energy capacity installations, which
account for over 75% of the total world’s installed capacity. Denmark based wind Turbine
manufacturer Vestas continued the world’s largest wind turbine manufacturer and supplier

Table 1. Global top 10 wind turbine manufacturer’s market share for 2017 and 2018.20

2017 2018
Installations Installations Market share
Manufacturers (GW) (GW) 2018 (%)

Vestas wind systems (Denmark) 7.5 10.0 19.6%

Xinjiang Goldwind Science & Technology Co. Ltd (China) 5.7 7.0 13.7%
Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy SA (Spain) 8.6 6.1 11.8%
GE Renewable Energy (USA) 4.8 5.1 9.9%
Envision Energy limited (China) 2.8 3.7 7.2%
Mingyang wind power group limited (China) 1.2 2.5 4.9%
Enercon GmbH (Germany) 3.8 2.5 4.8%
Nordex Acciona SE (Germany) 3.1 2.4 4.7%
Guodian United Power technology Co. Ltd (China) 1.3 1.3 2.5%
Shanghai Electric wind power equipment Co. Ltd (China) 1.1 1.1 2.1%
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 7

in 2018.43,44 India has powered its way into the global platform of renewable energy gen-
erators with Pune-based Suzlon Energy obtaining a position among the globe’s top fifteen
players. Suzlon is the only Indian manufacturers in the line-up and has a presence in
Denmark, China, Spain, and the USA.
FOWIND consortium finished the review of prospective wind turbine offerings for the
Gujarat region. The main drivers for the choice of wind turbines are 1.Site suitability
(capacity to resist the weather conditions of the site over the service life of the design), 2.
Wind turbine suitability, for example, comparisons of 4 MW, 6 MW, and 10 MW turbines,
3.Wind turbine generators (WTG) record of accomplishment (the measurement of reliability
of wind turbines), 4. Site-specific power generation (which considerably adds to energy
costs). Only rated capacity wind turbines higher than 3.0 MW were recognized, as shown
in Table 2.

Global offshore wind installed capacity – Year, country and

continent wise
Globally, the offshore wind energy generation, transmission, and integration are growing at
an accelerated pace.45Figure 1 shows the cumulative offshore wind installed capacity from
2007 to 2018. The capacity addition was below 1 GW each year for the period from 2007 to
2011, and increased exponentially after that, reaching 22.045 GW in 2018.46 As per
the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), offshore wind power has recently
witnessed accelerated technology price decrease and substantial uptake in various markets.
The North Sea today is the home of extensive (90%) offshore wind farms around the globe.
As can be seen from Figure 2, the UK and Germany have established leaders, and China
recently appears as an essential player in the sector. According to IRENA’s 2050 transfor-
mation roadmap, it is expected to achieve 520 GW of offshore cumulative installed capacity
if the globalization of offshore wind is encouraged.47 This accomplishment will estimate
nearly 4.23% of global electricity generation.
Europe is the top leader in offshore wind installed capacity.40,48,49 In 2017 the offshore
wind installed capacity was 13.396 GW and reached 18.499 GW in 2018, as shown in
Figure 3. The rest of the world contributed 4.543 GW to achieve a global installed capacity
of 22.045 GW. The UK has the potential to continue to lead the globe in offshore wind
energy as it has more than 48 GW of offshore wind energy projects at various stages of
development and operations.18 The world’s biggest offshore turbine of 8.8 MW was installed
in the UK, and 657 MW Waley 3 extension is the world’s largest offshore wind farm of
UK.50 However, the development of offshore wind sectors in other countries is moving
forward to exceed these leading runners. Countries such as Canada, Australia, India,
China, the Republic of Korea, Japan, USA, and Turkey have determined strategies to
improve their offshore wind sector over the next several years. India’s MNRE has stated
ambitious proposals for 5 GW of offshore wind energy by 2022 and 30 GW by 2030.51

Global offshore wind installed capacity – Projections (annual

and cumulative)
Figure 4 shows the forecast for cumulative offshore wind power capacity worldwide from
2013 to 2020. According to Bloomberg’s new energy finance (BNEF) by 2020, the
8 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Table 2. Wind turbine for Gujarat zones.20

Rated power of The diameter of Rated productivity

Wind turbine the turbine (MW) the rotor (m) of rotors (kW/m2)

Generic 10MW 10 190 0.35

Generic 6MW 6 154 0.32
Generic 4MW 4 120 0.35
Wind Lens 5 100 0.64
Samsung heavy industries S7.0-171 7 171 0.30
XEMC - Darwind XD128-5MW 5 128 0.39
Seawind 6 6.2 126 0.50
XEMC - Darwind XD115-5MW 5 115 0.48
Aerogenerator X 10 270 0.17
Senvion 6.2M152 6.2 152 0.34
Taiyuan heavy industry TZ5000-153 5 153 0.27
Senvion 6.2M126 6.2 126 0.50
Sway turbine ST10 10 164 0.47
GE Haliade 6MW 6 150.8 0.34
Siemens SWT4.0-120 4 120 0.35
Goldwind GW154/6.7MW 6.7 154 0.36
Siemens SWT4.0-130 4 130 0.30
Goldwind GW164/6.45MW 6.45 164 0.31
Siemens SWT-6.0-154 6 154 0.32
Goldwind GW171/6.45MW 6.45 171 0.28
Siemens Gamesa SWT-7.0-154 8 154 0.43
Guodian power UP6000-136 6 136 0.41
Siemens Gamesa SWT-8.0-154 8 154 0.43
Hitachi HTW5.0-126 6 136 0.40
Sinovel SL6000/155 6 155 0.32
Hitachi HTW5.2-127 5.2 127 0.41
Sinovel SL5000 5 126 0.40
MHI Vestas V117-4.2MW 4.2 117 0.39
Sway turbine ST10 10 164 0.47
MHI Vestas V164-9.5MW 9.5 164 0.45
2-b Energy 2B6 6 140.6 0.39
MHI Vestas V164-8.0MW 8 164 0.38
Adwen AD 8-180 8 180 0.31
Mingyang SCD 6MW 6 140 0.39
Adwen AD 5-116 5 116 0.47
Mingyang SCD 6.5MW 6.5 140 0.42
Adwen AD 5-132 5 132 0.37
Envision EN-4.0-136 4 136 0.28
Adwen AD 5-135 5 135 0.35
HQ5500/140 (Hyundai Heavy Industries) 5.5 140 0.36
Aerodyn Engineering aM 5.0/139 5 139 0.33
H151-5MW (CSIC Haizhuang) 5 151 0.28
Aerodyn SCD 6MW 6 140 0.39
H127-5MW (CSIC Haizhuang) 5 127 0.39
AMSC SeaTitan 10MW 10 190 0.35
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 9

25
22.045
Global off-shore installed capacity

20 18.8

14.4
15
12.2
(GW)

10 8.7
7
5.4
5 4.1
3.2
1.5 2.2
1.1
0
FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018
Financial Years

Figure 1. Global offshore wind cumulative installed capacity (GW) from 2007 to 2018.

20 18.813
Offshore installed capacity (GW)

18
16
14
12
10
8 6.836
5.355
6
4 2.788
0.877 1.271 1.118
2 0.202 0.092 0.025 0.005 0.002 0.002 0.099 0.065 0.038 0.008 0.03
0

Countries with installed Offshore wind

Figure 2. Global offshore wind cumulative installed capacity, Country-wise from 2007 to 2017.
Cumulave installed capacity (GW)

20
18 18.813
16 12.6 14.33
13.396
14 12.2
12 11.1

10
8
6
4 2.419 2.998
1.7 1.1
2 0.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
Europe North America South America Africa Asia Australia Total
Connents
2017 2016 2015

Figure 3. Global offshore wind cumulative installed capacity –Continent wise for the years 2015, 2016
and 2017.
10 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Global offshore wind projecons-Annual and Cumulave

40
Offshore installed capacity

29
30 24
20
20 16
11 13
7 8
(GW)

10 2.2 2.5 3.1 3.5 4.5 4.5

1.6 1.3
0
FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020
Financial Years

Annual Capacity addion Cumulave installed Capacity

Figure 4. Global offshore wind cumulative installed capacity projections: 2013–2020.44

cumulative installed capacity would reach between 29 to 34 GW and expected to reach

71 GW by 2025. The offshore wind installations in China are growing at an accelerated
pace and will exceed Germany and the UK in 2022, accounting for a third of the cumulative
market by 2030. Growth in Europe will continue centered around North Sea states with
Germany and the UK as significant players.52,53

Global offshore wind cost and performance outlook

Directed by technological innovation and non-technological enabling determinants, off-
shore wind will grow a vital part of the world energy mix. However, the industry has to
reduce prices, integrate onshore energy grids, and achieve a foothold in the critical market.
The cost of recently commissioned offshore wind farms will be between 0.06 USD/kWh and
0.10 USD/kWh for the years 2020 and 2022. The projection is based on the current pattern
of progressive change and costs awarded in auctions between 2016 and 2018. In 2017, it was
0.14 USD/kWh, and it shows that there is a decline in cost when compared with recent
years.54 Worth to point out that the drivers helping to reduce the cost of electricity are the
advancement of offshore wind turbine technologies, increasing developer experience
(lowering the cost of capital), competitions, and efficient operations and maintenance.
The upfront capital cost, which includes civil works, the turbine, foundations, installation,
the grid connection to onshore, planning, etc. dominates around 45% of the total installed
cost (4697 USD/kW in 2016 for a Europe offshore wind farm). Still, in the year 2017
declined to 4000 USD/kW and is anticipated to decline further. Initially, the capacity of
the turbine was 6 MW, with a rotor diameter of 150 m. Currently, 9.5 MW turbines will be
installed, and 12 MW pilot turbines by GE Company (Haliade-X turbine) are in develop-
ment, which will significantly improve the capacity factor.55 The manufacturers are also
working on ideas for even bigger turbines. “Hywind” floating wind farms with a capacity of
30 MW in the UK is in progress, and targeting a power price between 0.05 USD/kWh and
0.07 USD/kWh by 2030.
Renewable offshore power includes both offshore wind and ocean power and provides
excellent growth potential. The hybrid offshore wind and wave power systems with a com-
bination of an offshore wind turbine and wave energy converters in one structure is now an
inherent environmental benefit since it leads to, (i) increased use of natural resources and (ii)
reduced impacts connected with the effects of onshore wind facilities. Compared with wind
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 11

Figure 5. Types of fixed bottom foundations for turbines (a) Monopile, (b) Monopod Caisson, (c) Gravity
base, (d) Tetrapod caisson, (e) Asymmetric-tripod caisson, (f) Jacketed Caisson, (g) Tripod Caisson, and (h)
Tripod pile.59

energy, wave energy is more intense and constant, providing excellent predictability. Wave
energy harvesting, however, is at a comparatively immature stage, and despite the develop-
ment of several wave energy converters, powerful technology has not yet developed.

Inspiration from the world offshore sector

India has taken the first significant move towards establishing offshore wind farms, which
will put India in the same league as other nations investing in offshore wind power. Europe
is leading in the offshore wind sector and setting inspiration for the world. India is looking
at the European offshore industry in terms of the policy, installation, operation, mainte-
nance, and decommissioning of offshore wind farms.56–58 The following are the inspiration
for the Indian offshore wind industry.

a. FOWIND offshore wind feasibility study led by GWEC (global wind energy council) on
Tamil Nadu and Gujarat building information sharing and structural collaboration with
European Union and bringing global attention. This initiative serves as a platform for
expanding offshore R&D.
b. Figure 5 shows that the standard turbine foundations used around the world, for example
(a–c), are used for less than 30 km and (d-h) used between 30–60 kms. The examples are
highrise pile cap (0–20 m), Monopile (0–20 m), concrete gravity base (0–40 m), tripod (0–
40 m), tri-pile (0–50 m), jacket (0.50 m) and suction bucket (0–55).

Table 3 shows the global offshore wind project statistics. In 2007, the distance between
onshore and offshore was 20–30 km, and now it increased to 80 km. The offshore turbines
installed from depths of 20 m until 2013, which is increased to 40 m.59

c. Competitive tendering and innovations will bring down the cost of new offshore wind
capacity per MW and increase performance. WindEurope report on 11 February 2018
identified the investment cost between 4.41 and 2.45 Million Euro between 2013 and 2018,
respectively, for the European offshore industry. The decreasing cost (Table 4) is due to
increased capacity, advanced technology, financial assistance, and large capacity turbines.
The investment cost of new wind farms in 2018 in the UK was 2.906 Million Euro/MW,
Belgium was 2.55 Million Euro/MW, the Netherlands was 1.912 Million Euro/MW,
Denmark was 1.818 Million Euro/MW and Germany was 1.6 Million Euro/MW.
12 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Table 3. Global offshore wind projects statistics.20

Distance
Number between
Cost of turbines shore on
Operating (USD Capacity and capacity Depth of offshore
Country Project year Billion) (MW) in (MW) water (m) (km)

Denmark Middelgrunden 2001 0.051 40.0 20  2.0 5–10 2–3

Horns Rev 2002 0.295 160.0 80  2.0 6–14 14–17
Nysted 2004 0.316 165.6 72  2.3 6–10 6–10
Horns Rev Expansion 2009 0.854 209.3 91  2.3 9–17 30
UK North Hoyle 2003 0.138 60.0 30  2.0 5–12 7.5
Scroby Sands 2004 0.136 60.0 30  2.0 2–10 3
Kentish Flats 2005 0.179 90.0 30  3.0 5 8.5
Barrow 2006 0.172 90.0 30  3.6 15 7
Burbo Bank 2007 0.170 90.0 25  3.0 17–23 5.2
Inner Dowsin 2008 0.289 97.2 27  3.6 10 5.2
Gunfleet Sands I 2009 0.406 108 .0 30  3.6 2–15 7
Rhyl Flats 2009 0.358 90.0 25  3.6 8 8
Robin Rigg 2009 0.651 100.0 60  3.0 >5 9.5
Gunfleet Sands II 2010 0.275 64.8 18  3.6 2–15 7
Walney 2010 0.440 90.0 18  5.0 4–20 30
Thanet 2011 1.200 300.0 100  3.0 20–25 7–8.5
London Array 2012 3.095 630.0 175  3.6 28 >20
Sheringham Shoal 2013 1.500 316.8 88  3.6 16–22 17–23
Netherlands Egmond aan Zee 2007 0.170 90.0 25  3.6 10 5.2
Princess Amalia 2008 0.582 120.0 60  2.0 19–24 >23
Lillgrund Sweden 2008 0.254 110.4 48  2.3 2.5–9 10
Sea Bridge China 2010 0.345 102.0 34  3.0 8–10 8–14
Belwind Belgium 2011 0.897 165.0 55  3.0 20–35 46

Table 4. Global offshore wind projects statistics.

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Investment (Million 3.7156 4.2123 3.9134 4.4146 4.2308 4.3621 3.6627 3.304 2.4502
Euro/MW)

d. In 2019, the Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for Europe60–62 offshore wind ranged
from 99 USD to 175 USD per MWh, whereas onshore wind ranges from 58 USD to 76
USD per MWh. Electricity cost reduction for projects commissioned is turbine design
(offshore specific turbine designs), development, foundations, electrical interconnections
(advanced offshore electrical interconnection equipment.), installations (bespoke offshore
wind installation vessels), and, operation and maintenance.
e. Continuous advances in blade and drivetrain technology will allow even more giant
turbines with higher power ratings. The 150 m and 6 MW rotor diameter is the rated
capacity of today’s offshore wind turbines. Because of higher reliability, lower
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 13

foundation, and installation prices per MW, they give a lower LCOE.7,63–65 10MW
turbines are expected to be marketed in the 2020s and 15 MW in the 2030s.
f. Bespoke vessel or tugboats66 are employed in towing the turbine foundation structure
after establishing the turbine and the foundation together. Floating systems or bottom-
fixed systems can make use of this innovation, which has the potential to decrease the cost
of installation and reduce exposure to well-being and safety hazards.
g. Floating foundations have a high potential impact allowing access to large regions of the
offshore wind sector with a reliable wind resource and proximity to high-density popu-
lation centers in waters more than 50m deeper. Mid-depth floating foundations are 30m–
50m deeper, which are considered a low-price alternative to a fixed foundation in water.
The floating foundations are anticipated to begin to be commercially ready by 2020.
h. Multiple innovation opportunities are offered by offshore electrical interconnection. The
amount of offshore high voltage alternating current (HVAC) infrastructure requirement
is reduced considerably by using HVDC transmission from offshore projects to minimize
losses and cable expenses. New markets are possible with innovation projects dealing in
lowering the cost of HVDC infrastructure and connecting offshore HVDC substations to
the inter-state HVDC super grids and international HVDC super grids.67–71
i. Site layout optimization for better utilization of the wind resource, reduction of wake
effects on the aerodynamic, maximum use of changing seabed conditions based develop-
ments, and innovations are already entering a market stage. These innovations will allow
further informed and holistic layouts of the offshore wind sector and provide openings in
operation, maintenance, and service in wind farms.
j. There are three different types of floating foundations available for offshore wind turbines,
such as spar buoy, spar-submersible, and tension leg platform, which are shown in
Figure 6. Turbine foundations in water depths below 50m are currently fixed directly
on the seabed, limiting access to sites with more significant winds and active potential
markets. Floating foundations will be installed in deeper waters and make easy installa-
tion. They are cheap because it reduces the number of offshore activity and bypasses the
use of heavy-lift vessels. Floating bases are buoyant arrangements supported by mooring
methods.72,73
k. In the offshore wind sector, numerous full-scale prototypes have been deployed. In 2009
Norway’s spar buoy, in 2011, Portugal’s semi-submersible, between 2011 and 2015
Japan’sspar and semi-submersible, was installed. So far, there has been no tension-leg
platform for a wind turbine, and understudy is the concept of multi-rotor wind turbines
and vertical axis wind turbines (VAWT). Airborne wind turbines operating in low or high
altitudes begun to get attention. Airborne wind power employs free-floating devices such
as tethered wings, kites, and balloons, which are suspended high up in the air, harvesting
the strong, steady winds high above the ground. Repowering existing projects with the
latest turbine technology will help in cost reductions.74
l. Technological innovations and non-technology innovations (improved tools to overcome
financial uncertainties, new market strategies, and various site options) can reduce
the LCOE for offshore wind sectors. It is predicted that by 2015, LCOE will be
USD 170.47/MWh; by 2030, LCOE will be USD 95.28/MWh, and by 2045 LOCE will
be USD 70.72/MWh, which will cost-effectively decarbonize the energy sector with the
potential impact of advanced technologies.
14 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Figure 6. Floating foundations for the turbines (a) Tension leg flatform (mooring stabilized), (b) Spar buoy
(Ballast stabilized), (c) Semi-submersible (buoyancy stabilized).73

Timeline of India’s offshore wind announcements

NIWE, under MNRE, has broad expertise in onshore wind resource evaluation, measure-
ment, and certification of wind turbines. A preliminary assessment has resulted in establish-
ing “met masts,” which serve as representative of offshore wind potential. 74 “met mast”
with several heights has been placed across the coastlines. NIWE and FOWIND consortium
has performed investigations resource evaluation and preliminary feasibility investigations
along the country’s coastlines and demarcated eight zones each in Gulf of Khambat
(Gujarat) and Gulf of Manner (Tamil Nadu).
FOWIND is investigating the grid, port, and supply chain infrastructure for offshore in
India and is undertaking LiDAR-based evaluation. Based on the FOWIND statement,
NIWE has started the confirmation and validation of the investigations. FOWPI consor-
tium is preparing to do preliminary studies for expanding wind farms in a particular zone
demarcated by FOWIND. The country is very cautious not to duplicate errors made by
Europe and China. The offshore wind announcements in the country were gathering speed
in 2018–2019. The most relevant of these announcements was in June 2018 by the MNRE
setting an intent medium- and long-term offshore wind objective of 5 GW and 30 GW by
2022 and 2030, respectively. To reach India’s 2030 offshore wind target, it will require to
install at least 3 GW yearly over the following decade. Achieving this objective will demand
a titanic struggle that will require policy support, planning, and resources at an unprece-
dented range. India’s national offshore wind power policy was published in October 2015 by
NIWE, and it carried out the necessary studies, surveys before final bidding and acted as a
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 15

single window for facilitating essential clearances needed for the construction of the projects.
MNRE invited EoI in April 2018 for 1 GW of offshore wind projects in Gujarat. The first
offshore wind energy project will be developed in the Gulf of Khambat (off the coast of
Gujarat). The predetermined region is positioned 23–40 km seaward side from Pipavav port.
Around 35 companies and consortiums responded, including international and national
developers, utilities, manufacturers, and service companies with expertise in various sections
of the offshore wind value chain, showing the developing interest in the country’s offshore
wind project.
MNRE held conversations over two days in April 2018 with enthusiastic individuals
following the EoI. In the subsequent stage, the ministry will create the primary tender
document based on the preliminary discussions with international and national companies.
The foreign companies included in EoI are Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, Orsted
(Denmark), Alfanar (Saudi Arabia), Deep Water Structures (USA), WPD Offshore
Solutions, Pure new energy, Senvion (Germany), EON Climate (Germany), Heerema
Marine (Singapore), Canadian Northland Power, Macquarie Group (UK) and Innogy
Renewable (UK), Park Wind (Belgium), Equinor (Norway), Saipem (Italy). The national
(domestic) companies included in EoI are Greenko, Van Oord, Engie Energy, Sterlite, Leap
Green, Mytrah, Shell India, CLP, Torrent, Inox Wind, Renew Power, TerraForm Global,
Rattan India, and Suzlon. Following the EOI, now the MNRE is working towards floating
a tender to invite bids from offshore wind developers. In the subsequent phase, another
1 GW tender is proposed off the coast of Tamil Nadu in the Gulf of Mannar. The first
Indian offshore wind tender is likely by mid of 2019.75

FOWIND consortium and LiDAR

In 2014, FOWIND conducted a feasibility study (techno-commercial study and preliminary
resource evaluation) in coastal areas of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, as shown in Figures 7
and 8. Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) is implementing the four years (December
2013 to March 2018) FOWIND project in India. On 29 June 2015, FOWIND submitted its
pre-feasibility report regarding strategies for installation, designing wind farms, and project
sitting. On 6 June 2016, FOWIND published a report relating to logistics, ports, and supply
chain. On 23 October 2017, FOWIND submitted a grid integration report for Gujarat and
Tamil Nadu. European Union supported the study with e4 million and e500000 by Gujarat
Power Corporation Limited (GPCL). Various partners of the consortium are Tamil Nadu
Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), Gujarat Energy
Transmission Corporation Limited (GETCO), DNV GL, the center for the study of the sci-
ence, technology, and policy (CSTEP), and the World Institute of Sustainable Energy (WISE).
The first site was selected at the Gulf of Khambhat for carrying out the LiDAR-based
measurements on a monopole structure. The monopile (platform þ substructure) has been
installed in March 2017 together with an automatic weather station comprising anemome-
ter, wind vane, temperature, and pressure at the 17 m level to measure the offshore wind
resource. In November 2017, FOWIND commissioned the country’s first offshore remote
sensing instrument LiDAR.76–79 The LiDAR unit was situated about 23 km from the
Gujarat coast (Pipavav port) in the southeast direction, which is shown in Figure 9.
Initially, before installation, the LiDAR instrument was verified against the 120 m long
met mast in the test station, which is located at Tamil Nadu (Kayathar). FOWIND pro-
cured Leosphere Windcube v2 LiDAR from MeteoPole and used it for collecting data
16 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Figure 7. Offshore wind potential zones in Tamil Nadu -Identified by FOWIND.11

Figure 8. Offshore wind potential zones in Gujarat -Identified by FOWIND.11

Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 17

Figure 9. The offshore wind project site in Gujarat.11

between November 2017 and June 2018 for analysis. The NIWE released its first statement
on offshore LiDAR wind data investigation in December 2018. NIWE has also installed the
100 m height meteorological mast at the Jafrabad coast in the line of sight with the LiDAR
position at a distance of 25 km for correlation and validation with the LiDAR computation.
Windcube V2 LiDAR can be programmable for 12 various heights with minimum height
40 m and maximum height 200 m.
Based on the analysis of Table 5, which shows the wind speed and Table 6 which shows
the wind density, it was found that the LIDAR gives good correlation coefficients with the
metrological mast wind speed & direction at inspected heights (60 m, 90 m, and 120 m) as
shown Table 7. Wind speed [m/s] and configuration of LIDAR at different heights [m] and
Wind power density [watts/m2] and configuration of LIDAR at different heights [m] is
shown in Figures 10 and 11.
A good evaluation of wind resources is essential to a successful project. The MNRE/
NIWE has made continuous attempts to develop a favorable atmosphere for developing the
country’s first offshore wind project victory. Accordingly, the LIDAR offshore measure-
ment campaign and the country’s first of its kind was launched in the Gulf of Khambhat, off
Gujarat coast. LIDAR platform level measurement heights are 40 m, 60 m, 80 m,
87 m,199 m, 107 m, 120 m, 140 m, 160 m, 180 m and 200 m. Wind speed, wind direction,
temperature, pressure, and relative humidity are various parameters considered. The site
air density at the platform (m) was 1.150 kg/cubic meter based on measured temperature
18 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Table 5. Offshore wind project site – wind speed (m/s) (November 2017–November 2018).11

Height (m) 40 60 70 80 87 100 104 120 140 160 180 200

Nov-17 5.39 5.64 5.73 5.83 5.89 6.00 6.06 6.21 6.36 6.50 6.64 6.73
Dec-17 6.41 6.94 7.05 7.17 7.25 7.36 7.44 7.58 7.74 7.89 8.00 8.06
Jan-18 4.96 5.25 5.35 5.43 5.49 5.58 5.63 5.75 5.87 5.97 6.06 6.11
Feb-18 5.72 6.06 6.18 6.27 6.31 6.36 6.39 6.48 6.51 6.56 6.59 6.57
Mar-18 6.20 6.56 6.72 6.87 6.95 7.05 7.11 7.26 7.35 7.41 7.45 7.49
Apr-18 6.49 6.66 6.74 6.81 6.84 6.88 6.90 6.98 7.02 7.07 7.10 7.12
May-18 8.36 8.50 8.57 8.62 8.65 8.68 8.71 8.78 8.83 8.88 8.91 8.86
Jun-18 9.33 9.52 9.60 9.67 9.72 9.77 9.82 9.75 9.85 9.98 10.10 10.17
Jul-18 9.62 10.01 10.10 10.52 10.57 10.57 10.58 10.70 10.83 10.96 11.07 11.14
Aug-18 8.83 9.10 9.20 9.68 9.72 9.79 9.81 9.89 10.00 10.13 10.24 10.29
Sep-18 6.28 6.41 6.48 6.77 6.81 6.91 6.94 7.05 7.14 7.21 7.27 7.29
Oct-18 4.33 4.49 4.58 4.68 4.73 4.80 4.85 4.8 5.08 5.16 5.23 5.5
Nov-18 4.79 4.96 5.05 5.13 5.18 5.22 5.26 5.36 5.42 5.48 5.55 5.58

Table 6. Offshore wind project site – wind power density (watts/m2) (November 2017–November
2018).11

Height (m) 40 60 70 80 87 100 104 120 140 160 180 200

Nov-17 105 122 128 134 138 147 151 162 176 189 201 210
Dec-17 192 244 256 268 277 291 299 317 340 362 379 389
Jan-18 85 105 111 117 121 128 132 141 150 159 166 170
Feb-18 138 164 176 185 191 198 203 214 225 236 246 249
Mar-18 147 175 188 202 209 218 224 239 248 256 261 266
Apr-18 174 186 193 198 201 204 207 213 218 223 228 231
May-18 351 369 378 385 388 392 396 406 413 421 427 421
Jun-18 491 523 538 550 558 569 578 576 597 622 648 666
Jul-18 558 621 637 716 725 724 725 748 775 803 830 846
Aug-18 440 481 495 577 585 598 602 616 637 662 684 695
Sep-18 177 191 197 231 234 247 249 262 273 283 290 294
Oct-18 58 65 69 74 77 81 83 91 97 102 107 108
Nov-18 76 85 90 95 98 101 104 111 118 124 130 134

Table 7. Offshore wind project site – correlation coefficients for wind speed and wind direction.11

LiDAR verses mast 120 m 90 m 60 m

Correlation Coefficient (R2) for Wind Speed 0.998 0.997 0.997

Correlation Coefficient (R2) for Wind Direction 0.998 0.998 0.999

and pressure. The correlation coefficient of termination between LIDAR information and
coastal mast information from Jafrabad was estimated above 0.8, which seems to be a nice
correlation.
The 12 sector wind roses are available at different heights (40 m to 200 m) depending on
wind direction information. The wind characteristics are shown in Tables 8 and 9. Offshore
wind energy in India could play a very significant role due to the high wind resources close
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 19

8.2
8 7.89 7.92
7.81
Wind speed [m/s] (average )
7.8 7.72
7.62
(Nov 17 - Oct 18) 7.6 7.48 7.52
7.36 7.41
7.4
7.19
7.2 7.09
7 6.83
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.2
40 60 70 80 87 100 104 120 140 160 180 200
Height(m)

Figure 10. Wind speed [m/s] and configuration of LIDAR at different heights [m].

400 372 379

360
346
350 332
Wind power density [W/m2]

316 321
303 309
300 271 281
(Nov 17 - Oct 18)

243
250

200

150

100

50

0
40 60 70 80 87 100 104 120 140 160 180 200
Height (m)

Figure 11. Wind power density [w/m2] and configuration of LIDAR at different heights [m].

Table 8. Wind characteristics (November 2017–October 2018).11

Annual average windpower density, wind speed, air density, pres-
sure, temperature (April 2017–March 2018).11
Wind power density (W/m2) 232.3
Wind speed (m/s) 6.12
Air desnisty (kg/m3) 1.15
Pressure (mb) 1006.16
Temperature ( C) 26.22
Number of data available (10 minutes interval) 3821.3
Percentage of data availability 77.71%
20 Energy & Environment 0(0)

Table 9. Wind characteristics (November 2017–October 2018).11

100 m North 100 m South 80 m 60 m 20 m

Wind Wind Wind Wind Wind

Wind power Wind power Wind power Wind power Wind power
Air density speed density speed density speed density speed density speed density
(kg/m3) (m/s) (W/m3) (m/s) (W/m3) (m/s) (W/m3) (m/s) (W/m3) (m/s) (W/m3)

1.175 7.01 296.75 7.02 295.96 6.6 245.55 5.88 176.09 4.27 81.97

to high-energy demand centers. The information will provide a more comprehensive long-
term perspective for offshore wind developments. This will support project developers con-
cerning offshore wind problems and possibilities in India. The FOWIND Consortium
released a study proposing that the best timeline for projects was to add 500 MW by
2022, raise this by 2027 to 2- to 2.5 GW, and lastly reach 5 GW between 2028 and 2032.
Developers need to work together to bring synergy. Combined with enthusiasm and yes-we-
can-do mentality, there is a lot of drive-in corporate India. However, having a feasible
timeline is also essential.
India is attempting to surpass coal in the generation of electricity. If wind speed is less
than about 2.5 m/s, then wind turbines will not be able to produce electricity, and if it is
more than about 25 m/s, the turbines will have to be shut down to prevent harm. Global
Offshore Wind Speeds Rankings shows that Taiwan Strait sea (Fujian Putian City Flat Bay
(Zone E)) wind speed is 12.12 m/s, followed by the Baltic Sea (8.92 m/s). The average off-
shore wind speed of India was 7.92 m/s at 200 m LIDAR height, therefore, demonstrates
potent, promising offshore wind potential on India’s west coast (Gujarat).

National offshore wind policy in India – 2015

On May 29, 2013, MNRE released a draft national offshore wind energy policy. The gov-
ernment aimed through the policy to promote investment in the clean energy sector, reduce
India’s carbon footprint, and achieve energy security in a relatively new industry. The union
cabinet established the National offshore wind energy policy-2015 in September 2015.80,81
The Policy was intended to be a comprehensive document to assist prospective developers
with preliminary resource assessment and demarcation of blocks; guide on conducting an
environmental impact assessment study of a proposed offshore wind farm’s effects on aquat-
ic life; provide guidance on conducting oceanographic studies to determine construction,
operational, and maintenance costs; assist in sea bed lease arrangements; and offer a single-
window procedure for statutory approvals, grid connectivity, incentives, technology, and
data security.82,83

Draft offshore wind energy lease rules – January 2019

In January 2019, the MNRE released draft offshore wind energy lease rules-2019 for
encouraging action in offshore wind, which remained dormant. The draft rules propose
that offshore sites be rented out to offshore wind project developers for 35 years, including
five years of prospecting and thirty years of installation and operation. Numerous other
provisions have been introduced that relate to fees, identification of project sites (geological
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 21

and geophysical surveys, geotechnical investigations and survey), and penalties.

Furthermore, revocation of the lease (environmental pollution could lead to dismissal of
clearance), and limitation on wind power production to address any national security con-
cerns of India (contract does not give licenses for mineral extraction or access to resources
under the sea bed and seawater) are also included in the draft. The area incorporated under
a contract will be 100–500 square km depending offshore wind farm capacity (shall have no
power to prevent, bar, restrict the public livelihood and other activities like the fishing, etc.,
area under the lease).To get the contract, candidates have to deposit INR 1,00,000/MW
(USD 1406.2) for installations and INR 1000/square km (USD 14) for prospecting.
The candidates have to pay yearly contract fees, a sum estimated for each square km cov-
ered by the contract at the rate of INR 10000 (USD 140) each year.84,85

Expected environmental effects by offshore wind farms and

recommended mitigation measures
The country intends to go high on offshore wind energy for sustaining the energy security in
India, but harm to aquatic ecology and birds has continually been a controversial issue.
The significant environmental concerns associated with offshore wind advancements are
raised noise levels, the chance of collisions, changes to benthic (ecological area at the very
bottom of the sea) and pelagic (uppermost layers of a water body) habitats, changes to food
webs, and pollution from risen vessel traffic or release of contaminants from seabed depos-
its. The possible impacts of offshore wind farm construction and operation will vary
amongst species, depending on their possibility of interaction with the cables and structures,
responsiveness, and response avoidance. The growth of the offshore wind farm in the ocean
will create some immediate negative consequences from physical disruption of the local
habitat as well as noise pollution both above and below the sea surface.31,86,87
The mammals are disturbed by the fast-moving ships (increased vessel traffic) during
construction and pile driving (the most popular method employed to secure the turbine
foundation to the seafloor). The loud noises, vibrations, sounds emitted during pile driving
could produce hearing impairment, spatial displacement, or masking of calls as mammals
migrate out of the region to bypass the sound.88,89 The loud vibrations, and the noise
emitted during pile driving, could produce hearing impairment to fish. There is also a
danger to sea turtles and fish due to disturbance and collision from ship movements con-
nected with activities of installation and surveying. The turbines may generate an artificial
reef, and draw varieties of fish. The construction period can create a disturbance and sed-
iment redistribution, and the risk is subjected to timing and location.90–95 Influences of wind
farms on birds depend on the altitude of the poles, the complete area of the wind farm, the
diameter of the rotor, the color of the poles, the placing of the poles, and the distance
between turbines (preferably 1000 m to 2000 m). The collision dangers also correspond
with the weather conditions (low visibility during the night and in foggy weather) and the
bird’s maneuverability. Cable laying is expected to disturb molting birds, and the acoustic
communication of seabirds is expected to be masked.96–98 The potential impacts on Benthos
are due to the redistribution of (contaminated) sediments released during construction.
Sediment spill from the new earthwork and sediment resuspension caused by the ship’s
propellers may hinder the organism’s settlement and development. A change in turbulence
might influence macrobenthos. The effects of the sediment spill on the bottom flora and
22 Energy & Environment 0(0)

fauna are expected to have minor effects.99,100 Noise and vibration produced by turbines
have no adverse impacts on marine invertebrates. There is no impact on hydrography (water
levels, waves, and tidal currents) due to the construction, operation, or decommissioning of
the wind farms. The consequences are only detectable near to the poles, and the variations in
wave altitudes are small and in the order of about 10 cm (0.1 m). Reportedly, the sound,
vibrations during construction create environmental pollution to the community.91

Recommended mitigation measures to reduce the expected impacts on the environment

MNRE should generate a written policy defining environmental safety for the offshore wind
sector. Absorbing paint and compact, well-organized placement of the poles, lights on top of
the turbines, and the light coloration of the poles increases visibility and avoid the collision.
Synchronized flashing of the lighting from the blades at night and the synchronized sweeping
movement at day prevent the accident. The wind farms should be meticulously designed
considering the bird migration paths. During periods of substantial collision risks, turbine
operations should be stopped. Construction must be scheduled to bypass the period of spawn-
ing to enable individuals to move away from the sound and vibration source. During foraging,
breeding and resting of the individual’s construction work should be withdrawn. Heating and
electromagnetic field effects can be avoided by isolating the cables. Include community input
into wind power facility layout and siting. Adhere to country-specific standards for marking
turbines, which includes environmental conditions, navigational, and aviation.

Expected occupational health and safety management in the offshore

wind sector
Risks to workers’ safety and health associated with offshore wind farm construction can
happen throughout the major phases of the project. The operators can be exposed to risks
that can end in mortality, acute injuries, and ill health during the several stages of an
offshore wind farm project. Sitting, maintaining, servicing, erecting, and dismantling wind
turbines are the areas of health risks. Furthermore, working at heights, manual handling,
electrical dangers, working environments such as remote areas, extreme weather, or working
at sea also pose health risks. The workers usually work at height, climb ladders several times
a day, operate in limited spaces in uncomfortable positions, spend considerable physical
effort, or be exposed to dust, fumes, and chemicals. For example, in UK Caithness
Windfarm Information forum reports the cases of wind turbine associated incidents and
accidents.101 An average of forty-four accidents per year (1999–2003), 94 accidents per year
(2004–2008), 156 accidents per year (2009–2013), and 173 events per year (2014–2018) are
reported. Around the world, 2457 accidents till March 2019 were reported, which includes
fatal accidents of 145, personal injury of 171, 150 incidents of wind turbines impacting upon
human health, a total of 415 separate incidences found was due to blade failure, 365 fire
incidents due to fire.102–111

Recommendations for occupational health, safety, and wellbeing of the workers in the
offshore wind sector in India
MNRE should generate a written policy defining occupational health and safety for the
offshore wind sector. The policy should include details regarding training, compliance with
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 23

standards, provision of personal protection equipment, injury and sickness, control of

accidents, compliance with anti-retaliation regulations, and record-keeping (a database con-
cerning injuries and illnesses). MNRE must provide adequate funds to develop a database,
and extraordinary research is required on the pathological, physiological, and functional
impacts of common and possibly dangerous worksite exposures (physiochemical, biome-
chanical, biological, and psychosocial) on workers. Offshore wind farmworkers should get
training on the following: skilled climber, tower rescue, construction safety, first aid (auto-
mated external defibrillation, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Furthermore, training
should be on mechanical safety, metering equipment practical evaluations, torque equip-
ment, and other tools of the trade, rigging practices, and crane signal. Safety manual han-
dling, working in confined areas, operating at height, offshore survival training, and fire
awareness also should be included.

Impact of climate change on offshore wind power in India

In 2018, Nature Geoscience used ten global climate models to examine significant wind
generation variations around the globe. It suggested that wind power would shift across
the Northern Hemisphere, with substantial regional differences. Hyderabad-based renew-
able energy company Greenko Group stated the company faced some headwinds in wind
power generation between 2016–2018. India has seen an inter-annual fluctuation in wind
speeds, according to the National Institute of Oceanography. According to the 2016–17
Economic survey, The effect of climate change is also apparent from the fact that India,
owing to severe weather events, experienced annual losses of $9–10 billion.MNRE men-
tioned that there is no data from the ground that conclusively shows solar and wind power
production has been impaired because of the consideration of climate change. Neither
report from the Intergovernmental Commission on Climate Change (IPCC) acknowledges
these considerations. Occasionally, some articles have examined solar and wind energy inter-
seasonal variability, but there is little to indicate any long-term impacts. Ministry of earth
sciences mentioned that while the effects of climate change are apparent because the min-
imum temperature has risen, but there has been no noticeable impact on wind patterns.
However, scientists acknowledge that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, which create
changes in the global circulation of the atmosphere and potentially affect wind power,
should be taken into account. Climate change is a significant factor that needs to be con-
sidered before planning wind resources. Because of the warming, the atmospheric circula-
tion is expected to shift, which may also influence the wind patterns.
Weather scientists and developers have pointed out that changing weather patterns could
adversely affect India’s capacity to generate renewable energies, including offshore wind.
The weather is bound to change owing to climate change. As rainfall patterns change, the
intensity and frequency of substantial rainfall shifts, the warming shifts, and corresponding
changes may also occur in the wind regime as per the Meteorological Department of India.
Earth’s temperature elevated over a period fundamentally due to greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions.112 Elevated warming in the Indian Ocean and the resulting weakening of the
Indian summer monsoon may be impeding India’s goal of leading the offshore wind power
generation. The warming of the Equatorial Indian Ocean has resulted in wind speed decreas-
ing. A substantial change in wind speed and wave height magnitude was observed as a
result. Owing to the shift in wind speed at various offshore locations, wind energy output
may increase or decrease due to climate change.113 Future wind speeds on India’s east and
24 Energy & Environment 0(0)

west coasts grew by 46 percent due to climate variation.114,115 The shift in wind speed could
have a significant impact on the design of offshore structures. The wave height is expected to
rise by 27 percent - 44 percent near the Bay of Bengal coastline and by 22 percent -32 percent
at the Arabian Sea coastline due to climate variation.116 An offshore wind turbine (OWT)
production may vary due to fluctuations in wave height and wave period.117 The wave
height may rise by 26 percent resulting in an increase of 10 percent in wind speed,118
which may significantly impact offshore structure design. Climate change has an impact
on the responses of OWT, fatigue life of OWT, and model of OWT.
As wind turbines grow taller and more substantial, they are more vulnerable as well.119
Margins of safety in the design and operation of offshore wind turbines should be expanded
to respond to climate change. The output is hugely dependent on wind speeds, and a small
adjustment can have a significant effect on generating electricity.120Table 10 covers the
critical climate change effects on wind generation.
The rising global warming is likely to impact local wind magnitude and pattern, and this
impact may or may not meet the global trend predicted. Therefore, regional-level assess-
ments are essential when making engineering infrastructure-related decisions. These are
typically accomplished utilizing simulated wind data from numerical climate models.132 In
the prospect, the wind potential may rise by 5% to 7% along eastern offshore. Extreme wind
above survival speed (50 m/s for 1.5 MW to 2 MW turbines) can harm the wind turbine. No
significant variation in the intense wind along the Indian coastline could be anticipated.
Thus along the offshore Indian region, due to severe wind loading, there is most definitely
no chance of damage or failure of wind turbines in the future.133 Compared to the past, wind
potential may be significantly elevated in the future. It may be attributed to the increased
wind activity needed to run the wind turbines within the desired speed range. Therefore
climate change is likely to support the Indian offshore sector. In the prospect, the inter-
annual variability in the wind and its potential could be high, presenting a slightly more
non-uniform output power.134

Challenges of deployment offshore wind power in India

a. The critical challenges include subsea cabling, resource characterization, installation of

turbines (grid interconnection, logistics), turbine foundation, operation, transmission
infrastructure development, reliable integration into the national grid so that during
transmission there is no significant loss of electricity and coastal security throughout
construction and operation phase.135–138
b. The notable difficulties that exist in offshore wind energy deployment include the high
onetime cost for mobilization and demobilization of offshore barges and additional
equipment needed for constructing the offshore wind farm and offshore transmission
line network.
c. Lack of trained personnel with fundamental technical abilities, education, and speciali-
zation to design, install the turbine, turbine foundation construction, maintenance of
submarine electrical and communication cables, faults, and repair.
d. The installation operation such as crane and lifting are connected with maintenance of
blades, nacelle. There is a possibility of collision, either with a helicopter, vessels, or
drifting objects during access to the turbine from helicopters or vessels. Furthermore,
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 25

Table 10. Impact of climate change on wind generation.

Climate shifts Consequences

Wind speed a) Wind speed variations can decrease the production (since turbines can not
changes function in extremely high or low winds).120
b) Since the energy in the wind is the cube of wind speed,120–122 at operating
wind speeds, wind speed significantly affects performance.
Variations in wind a) Variations in wind distribution can influence the match between the input of
distribution, daily wind energy into the grid and the everyday demand for load.120,122
or seasonal b) Seasonal changes can influence the plants’ profitability because of the evolution
of price.123
Fluctuations in a) As foreseen with climate variation, rising air temperatures will result in slight
temperature declines in air density and power output.121,124,
b) Sea ice drifting due to ice melting can degrade offshore wind turbine foun-
dations118,120,124 and influence activities at wind farms in northern latitudes.121
c) Variations in severe cold periods can affect production (e.g., blade icing by the
turbine).120 Ice can directly impact performance and durability on turbine
blades.118,125
d) A temperature rise could raise operational expenses and impact equipment
efficiency.126,127
e) Very low or high temperatures will impact different parts of wind farms.124,128
f) Permafrost conditions variations can affect road building and wind farm
repairs.121
Rising sea level a) Increasing sea levels could weaken the foundations of offshore turbines in low-
lying coastal regions120 and onshore turbines in coastal areas.121
Weather extremes a) Any extreme incident could destroy infrastructure and make access more
complicated.120 Hurricanes or storm surges can affect offshore farms in that
respect120 and influence on wind turbine lifespan.121
b) The turbine design will be influenced by predicted turbulence strength, wind
shear and transient wind conditions such as the speed of wind or directional
shifts.119,121
c) Wind farms can be shut down during very high or low wind speeds.129
Others a) Current tools are challenging to quantify the variations in turbulence intensity,
vertical wind shear, and directional distribution.121,130
b) Winds can be influenced by widespread circulation (irregularly periodic fluc-
tuation in winds and temperatures at sea surface) and seasonal patterns.131
c) The structural conditions of offshore farms can be affected by changes in wave
activity124

most expected accidents include falling objects during lifting operations, occupational
accidents concerning working at heights, structural failure, blade failure, and ice throw.
e. Emergency handling may be challenging because of high waves, quick-changing weather,
and strong wind.
f. Absence of coordination and regulation (inspections and follow-up of maritime, avia-
tion, and energy regulations) among authorities working nationally and internationally.
g. New lanes, proper lighting for commercial ships to pass on for assigning no-go areas of
offshore windfarms planning will be a complicated procedure, system, or mechanism.
26 Energy & Environment 0(0)

h. The offshore wind turbines can produce more MW of power (2 to 3.6 MW) than con-
ventional onshore wind turbines. The price is higher on the per kWh basis. The expanded
expense is because of the techno scientifically reinforced foundations, gravity-based
structures, elevating and anchoring wind turbines and substations above the sea level
(ASL), and provision of corrosion protection attributes to the wind turbines from salt-
water and air that can destroy the foundations.
i. Turbine installation and maintenance of vessels (jack-up ships and crane), specialized
equipment presents a formidable barrier to offshore wind development.
j. Burying and maintaining cable (beneath the seafloor to bypass interference with shipping
and fishing) demands specialized personnel, equipment, and vessels, which are in short
supply and costly.
k. The opposition from residential areas to offshore wind farms adds significant challenges
that could slow down the growth.
l. Offshore wind sector encounters technical risks such as construction, operation & main-
tenance, technology, and financial risks such as resource availability, insurance, and
market risk.
m. A single entity does not fulfill the manufacture and installation of offshore wind farms.
For instance, EPC, supply and construction, design, assembly, and cable installation are
connected with multiple main contractors and subcontractors. The project risk
continues throughout all the stages, which depend on the contractors’ execution and
standards of the numerous constructors involved in project development, and this also
affects incoming investment from primary bankers and commercial organizations pro-
viding debt financing.
n. There are difficulties in acquiring regulatory approvals. The international builders and
local builders needed to deal with the sanctioning requirements of India. There is no
uniform permitting methods followed by local, state, and national regulatory agencies.
There is a lack of clearly defined or described administrative authority (jurisdiction),
which may lead to a conflict among two or more regulatory agencies. The ambiguity
and complexity in regulatory approvals may delay offshore wind farm construction and
development.
o. There are corrosion risks for offshore wind turbine foundations, and corrosion protec-
tion standards and strategies are not available.

Recommendations to overcome the challenges in the deployment of the offshore wind

sector

a. The government and industry require to operate collectively to decrease the investment
and choose the most economical offshore wind farm areas without adversely affecting the
environment.
b. Catalyze a decrease in technology expenses through R&D funding because technology
development could decrease the required investment.
c. Provide project developers adequate returns with an effective incentive mechanism
(Feed-in tariff). The renewables obligation requires to be extended and expanded.
d. Eliminate regulatory obstacles to deployment, and implement regulatory change in
grid and planning. Share grid capacity and change rules for network enhancement
determination.
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 27

e. With substantial nonrecourse debt financing, funding for offshore wind development can
be improved.
f. Consider plans to upgrade respective onshore electrical networks to accommodate higher
levels of offshore wind energy.
g. The approval process for the electrical network connection and offshore wind must be
fully streamlined and regulated.
h. Make offshore wind farms landmark tourist attractions worthy of admiration for the
unique design and engineering and the more favorable aesthetic impression of offshore
turbines from the public.
i. Corrosion protection must be prescribed in future offshore wind sector guidelines based
on experiences from the oil and gas industry. Precise guidelines for internal corrosion
protection based on the practices of recent wind turbine foundation projects of European
offshore wind projects must be provided, which should include standards and the corro-
sion protection strategy for the internal surfaces of turbine foundations.

Findings and recommendations based on the research to enhance

offshore wind policies in India
The following recommendations are proposed for the offshore wind policy development
process based on current research.

a. To accelerate the offshore wind energy sector, build an exact time-bound target, clear
framework, national plan, long-term, and short-term strategic plans. It might be inap-
propriate for the nation to set long-term goals given the present unpredictable resources
and LCOE.
b. Even though the offshore market segment is still small compared to onshore wind energy,
it should plan to create a job, carbon-free energy (decarbonization), pricing, affordabil-
ity, and uninterrupted availability of power (energy security). Policymakers should create
as much transparency about the projected market size and long-term policy direction as
possible.
c. Guarantee effective project management and executed development in the
pre-commercial stage (demonstration project) to prepare for possible commercial
development (commercial projects). Before sanctioning a demonstration project, strate-
gic environmental assessments should be conducted to evaluate the impacts on the envi-
ronment, including marine life. Also, crucial to ensure early "buy-in" by grid operators
and services to facilitate energy evacuation. The policymakers should also ensure that the
industry has a single-window clearance mechanism. The ministries and departments
should provide the necessary authorization to bypass any regulatory delays.
d. Establish and enhance a public-private partnership for investment. The public-private
partnership is the crucial element for the success of the offshore wind sector, which will
overcome the regulatory, technical, and financing challenges and reduces the debt profiles
of the government.
e. Efforts should be taken to provide an adequate volume of finance in the stable pipeline to
maintain the smooth operation of the offshore wind industry. Risk-free and risk-
informed assistance should be administered to reduce the higher cost of industry devel-
opment. The country should focus on the possibilities of reducing costs and increase
28 Energy & Environment 0(0)

profits through longterm strategic plans. Technology costs can be reduced through local-
ization and learning from other renewable energy markets.
f. Provide local supply chain opportunities in the offshore wind sector that will serve both
domestic and international markets. The local supply chain will considerably have an
economic impact on the country, create employment, manufacturing, and extra revenue.
The skilled workforce can be achieved through local skills development programs to
construct skills and critical competencies for the local community.
g. Have a government-owned or supported entity improves initial offshore farms and con-
nected transmission network and then sell the sites to offshore wind developers. Private
players have adopted this model successfully in the onshore wind market. In the long
term, the country can examine and select the best practices from the European offshore
wind sector.
h. Offshore wind installations are costly and require a tariff subsidy. To support the tech-
nological advancements, new deployment methodologies, the economy of scale, the
country would need to give guaranteed offtake at a more substantial tariff. A program
similar to generation-based incentives (GBI) would be necessary to support utilities enter
into a power purchase agreement (PPA) with offshore wind farms. Offshore wind proj-
ects should also be presented with a must-run situation and should not have dispatch
uncertainty.
i. The ministry would also require to state a precise trajectory of new projects and capacity
objectives to guarantee that domestic manufacturers can prepare to construct essential
infrastructure and facilities.
j. Research, testing, and learning should be built for the offshore wind sector.
k. Emergency preparation plans and training sessions should be instituted.
l. Success and failures in managing safety, relevance, and experience transfer from other
industries such as offshore oil and gas, onshore wind, fish farming, and marine opera-
tions should be considered.
m. Develop risk evaluation processes that are independent of historical occurrence. Develop
and implement offshore wind industry reporting and safety performance indicators
system for incident reporting. Identify the regulatory and regulatory obligations and
identify criteria for the successful engagement of contractors in safety practice and
planning.
n. Promote information sharing within the industry, including the establishment of
common language and terminology with which to define cost components.

Recommendations for offshore research & development and

demonstration (R&D)
The R&D enables India to push the wind industry forward, deliver a lower power cost and
higher annual power generation. Few recommendations are provided for R&D activities in
offshore wind technology developments.

a. R&D activities must be concentrated mainly on finding methods to operate the facilities
more efficient and environmentally friendly.
b. Develop research, development, and demonstration to improve high-impact innovations
through a commitment to all the stakeholders.
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 29

c. Steering R&D, maximizing the impact of grant funding and facilitating the demonstra-
tion of substantial turbines and innovative concepts. Beneficial synergies can also be
observed beyond offshore wind or renewables and outside the power sector as a whole.
d. Research and technology organizations must guarantee that all areas of the sector
advancement to market in step; for instance, there is little value in producing next-
generation turbines if the needed innovations to install them have not been created.
e. Research and technology organizations and R&D enablers must manage technology and
Levelized cost of energy (LCOE) roadmaps and monitor growth, to steer R&D focus in
an ecosystem of emerging requirements.
f. Maximizing the impact of grant and funders must concentrate on quantifying the cost of
energy implications, the possible market share, and the influence of innovations concern-
ing other sector objectives.
g. Funders must maximize the advantage of grant funding for small-sized and medium-sized
companies by incorporating an incubation supporter element.
h. Development of collaborative research and R&D systems, along with public grant fund-
ing, will help small-sized and medium-sized sectors engage and decrease power costs from
offshore wind.
i. Associated bodies should consider imposing restrictions on developers of commercial-scale
projects that they include one or more areas where innovative technology can be demonstrated.
j. Collaboration in different areas, various kinds of technological advancement in sectors
beyond offshore wind can also help to increase offshore wind. Policymakers require to
recognize such connections so that the total value of R&D for these technologies to be
reflected in coordination between areas and decisions concerning funding.
k. Promoting competitive conditions in which a decrease in the cost of power is rewarded
through the right to deliver new projects and financed through the provision of targeted
public R&D funding.

Conclusion
Offshore wind power projects in India growing up prominently and demand funding from
the financial institutions. Onshore wind power projects have already surpassed the invest-
ment costs and are profitable as well. The country has experience in attracting investment in
the onshore wind sector. It does not yet have experience in expanding the offshore wind
market, which is still in the initial stages of technological development and capacity addi-
tions. However, offshore wind energy plans by MNRE are attracting investors, and offshore
wind farms could soon be constructed across the coast of Gujarat. India requires frame well
structured, reliable, risk minimalizing permitting processes in place. Even though the policy-
makers are recognizing the various advantages of offshore wind, they should also look to
innovations and learn lessons from the European offshore wind energy sectors. Policy,
regulatory, and financing structures should be combined to make a sustainable, commer-
cially active offshore wind policy that can overcome the organizational, technical, and
financial obstacles. The well-developed system will support industry expansion and reduce
energy costs. Expanding wind turbines in the hostile aquatic ecosystem continues complex,
and the risks connected with the capital expenditure and substantial investments should also
be considered. A considerable measure of regulatory reform is needed, including coordina-
tion across departments and stakeholders. The policymakers have a significant part of
performing in building the right incentive, grid connection, and consenting administration
30 Energy & Environment 0(0)

that ensures offshore wind sector faith and catalyzes finance, assisting to reduce project
uncertainty and drive technologies towards advancement.
Investigation of site, assessment of resources, assessments of environmental impact, and
additional technical examinations and discussions with local communities and other admin-
istrative procedures require more than five years. The overall project timeline given is five
years, and the developers do not have enough time for excellent visibility on upcoming
tenders and the regulatory framework. Time lapses of offshore wind energy projects
(tender results announcement to wind farm starts to operate-grid connection) are significant
and should be taken into consideration in sectorial planning. Once the offshore wind sector
in full operation after a few years as per the plan in the right order, it could reduce energy
costs continuously. The advanced technology will support integrating offshore wind energy
into onshore grid systems and provide an environment-friendly solution, occupational
safety & health focus along with cost competitiveness and an efficient supply chain.
Effective grid integration of offshore wind and transfer of power from the production
points to the load centers has a significant part to play in meeting current India’s vision
of self-reliance in the power sector, and LCOE could fall below onshore wind energy.
Concerning offshore wind occupational health and safety, India does not have the proper
regulation. Stakeholders and the general public need to be conscious of health and safety
implications and policymakers, and regulators must make an informed decision to solve the
challenge of increased accidents due to skills gaps and incomplete safety data and informa-
tion. Policymakers must begin to identify and address the impacts of European offshore
wind farms on the environment and ways of mitigating them in Indian offshore wind farms.
The offshore wind energy sector in India is facing several hurdles in areas of construction,
financing, and operations and appears to be dull and less mature than onshore wind tech-
nology. Even though the country is moving forward with ambitious plans and the success
ultimately depends on the configuration and integration concerns.
Several R&D efforts have to be undertaken concerning marine hydrodynamic technology
such as ocean wave and tidal current energy. The characteristics of various foundation
types, the mechanical aspects of soil, and the design of offshore foundations need to be
included in the R&D. Studies on new manufacturing and coating techniques are required to
improve the corrosion resistance, durability of tower and foundation materials are needed.
Besides, systemic health surveillance systems are necessary to secure safety requirements and
ensure long-term serviceability. Systemic structural health monitoring systems should be
combined with supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems with efficient
diagnostic and prognostic algorithms. A deeper understanding of the dynamic response of
innovative and ecologically friendly foundations is required. The R&D focus should be on
the grid, mitigating transmission losses through various technologies such as HVDC, and
reducing the cost significantly to make the ambitious project becomes a reality.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 31

ORCID iD
J Charles Rajesh Kumar https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2354-6463

References
1. Dawn S, Tiwari PK, Goswami AK, et al. Wind power: existing status, achievements and govern-
ments initiative towards renewable power dominating India. Energy Strategy Reviews 2019; 23:
178–199.
2. Aggarwal P. 2 C target-India’s climate action plan and urban transport-sector. Travel Behaviour
and Society 2017; 6: 110–116.
3. Charles Rajesh Kumar J, Mary Arunsi B, Jenova R, et al. Sustainable waste management
through waste to energy technologies in India – Opportunities and environmental impacts.
International Journal of Renewable Energy Research-IJRER 2019; 9: 309–342.
4. Charles Rajesh Kumar J and Majid M.A. Renewable energy for sustainable development in
India: current status, future prospects, challenges, employment, and investment opportunities.
Journal of Energy, Sustainability and Society 2020; 10: 1–36.
5. Chaithanya S, Bhaskar Reddy VN and Kiranmayi R. A state of art review on offshore wind
power transmission using low-frequency AC system. International Journal of Renewable Energy
Research-IJRER 2018; 8: 141–149.
6. Hevia-Koch P and Klinge Jacobsen H. Comparing offshore and onshore wind development
considering acceptance costs. Energy Policy 2019; 125: 9–19.
7. Dedecca JG, Hakvoort RA and Ortt JR. Market strategies for offshore wind in Europe:
a development and diffusion perspective. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2016; 66: 286–296.
8. Kulkarni S, Deo MC and Ghosh S. Effect of climate change on wind persistence at selected
Indian offshore locations. Procedia Eng 2015; 116: 615–622.
9. Hasager CB, Pena A, Christiansen MB, et al. Remote sensing observation used in offshore wind
energy. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Observ Remote Sens 2008; 1: 67–79.
10. Chaurasiya PK, Ahmed S and Warudkar V. Wind characteristics observation using Doppler-
SODAR for wind energy applications. Resour Efficient Technol 2017; 3: 495–505.
11. Krishnan B and Bastin J. First offshore LiDAR wind data analysis. Report, National Institute of
Wind Energy (NIWE), India, December 2018.
12. Mani S and Dhingra T. Policies to accelerate the growth of offshore wind energy sector in India.
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2013; 24: 473–482.
13. National offshore win energy policy. India: Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, 2015.
14. Sharma SK and Kar A. Wind power developments in India. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev
2015; 48: 264–275.
15. EoI for development of first 1000 MW commercial offshore wind farm in India, off the coast of
Gujarat, www.eqmagpro.com/eoi-for-development-of-first-1000-mw-commercial-offshore-wind-
farm-in-india-off-the-coast-of-gujarat/ (2018, accessed 24 May 2018).
16. Wind tariff drops to a new low of Rs 2.43/unit, the economic times, www.economictimes.india-
times.com/industry/energy/power/wind-tariff-drops-to-new-low-of-rs-2-43/unit/articleshow/
62205511.cms, (2017, accessed 22 December 2017).
17. Jolly S, Spodniak P and Raven RPJM. Institutional entrepreneurship in transforming energy
systems towards sustainability: wind energy in Finland and India. Energy Res Soc Sci 2016; 17:
102–118.
18. Higgins P and Foley A. The evolution of offshore wind power in the United Kingdom. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev 2014; 37: 599–612.
19. Opening up a new market for business. Global wind report, annual market update, 2017.
20. Renewables. Global status report, Renewable energy policy network for the 21st century
(REN21), 2018.
32 Energy & Environment 0(0)

21. Cheshire B. Offshore wind playing a lead role in the UK’s green energy transformation.
Renewable Energy Focus 2016; 17: 23–24.
22. Klain SC, Satterfield T, MacDonald S, et al. Will communities “open-up” to the offshore wind?
Lessons learned from new England islands in the United States. Energy Res Soc Sci 2017; 34:
13–26.
23. Poulsen T and Lema R. Is the supply-chain ready for the green transformation? The case of
offshore wind-logistics. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2017; 73: 758–771.
24. Abbasi SA, Tabassum-Abbasi and Abbasi Tasneem. Impact of wind-energy generation on cli-
mate: a rising spectre. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2008; 59: 1591–1598.
25. Sen EA. Occupational safety management in the offshore wind industry – status and challenges.
Energy Procedia 2012; 24: 313–321.
26. Seyr H and Muskulus M. Safety indicators for the marine-operations in the installation and
operating phase of an offshore-wind farm. Energy Procedia 2016; 94: 72–81.
27. Sobiech C, Droste R, Hahn A, et al. Model-based development of health, safety, and environ-
ment plans and risk assessment for offshore operations. IFAC Proc Vol 2012; 45: 49–54.
28. Preisser AM, McDonough RV and Harth V. The physical performance of workers on offshore
wind energy platforms: is pre-employment fitness testing necessary and fair? Int Arch Occup
Environ Health 2019; 92: 513–522.
29. Bush D and Hoagland P. Public opinion and the environmental, economic and aesthetic impacts
of offshore wind. Ocean Coastal Manage 2016; 120: 70–79.
30. Zheng L, Zheng L and Wei L. Environmental impact and control measures of new wind power
projects. Procedia Environ Sci 2011; 10: 2788–2791.
31. Maslo N, Claramunt C, Wang T, et al. Evaluating the visual impact of an offshore wind farm.
Energy Procedia 2017; 105: 3095–3100.
32. Bouman EA, Oberg MM and Hertwich EG. Environmental impacts of balancing offshore wind
power with compressed air energy storage (CAES). Energy 2016; 95: 91–98.
33. Busch M, Kannen A, Garthe S, et al. Consequences of a cumulative perspective on marine-
environmental impacts: offshore wind farming and seabirds at North-Sea scale in the context
of the EU marine strategy framework directive. Ocean Coastal Manage 2013; 71: 213–224.
34. Kausche M, Adam F, Dahlhaus F, et al. Floating offshore wind – economic and ecological
challenges of a TLP solution. Renewable Energy 2018; 126: 270–280.
35. Ryan K, Danylchuk A and Jordaan A. Consideration of scales in offshore wind environmental
impact assessments. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2019; 75: 59–66.
36. Dolores Esteban M, Diez JJ, Lopez JS, et al. Why offshore wind energy? Renewable Energy 2011;
36: 444–450.
37. Charles Rajesh Kumar J, Vinod Kumar D and Majid MA. Wind energy programme in India:
emerging energy alternatives for sustainable growth. J Energy Environ 2019; 30: 1135–1189.
38. Wang X, Zeng X, Li J, et al. Lateral bearing capacity of hybrid monopile-friction wheel foun-
dation for offshore wind turbines by centrifuge modeling. Ocean Eng 2018; 148: 182–192.
39. Hong L and M€ oller B. Offshore wind energy potential in China: under technical, spatial and
economic constraints. Energy 2011; 36: 4482–4491.
40. Breton S-P and Moe G. Status, plans, and technologies for offshore wind turbines in Europe and
North America. Renewable Energy 2009; 34: 646–654.
41. Cohen A. As global energy demands grows, so does appetite for offshore wind. Forbes, www.
forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2019/03/26/as-global-energy-demands-grows-so-does-appetite-for-
offshore-wind/#5ab532d665e7 (accessed 26 March 2019).
42. Installed Capacity by the end of 2018 (MW). Germany: Wind Energy International (WWEA), 2019.
43. Jin X, Rong Y and Zhong X. Wind turbine manufacturing industry in China: current situation
and problems. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2014; 33: 729–735.
44. Arantegui RL. Globalization in the wind energy industry: contribution and economic impact of
European companies. Renewable Energy 2019; 134: 612–628.
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 33

45. Kota S, Bayne SB and Nimmagadda S. Offshore wind energy: a comparative analysis of UK,
USA, and India. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2015; 41: 685–694.
46. Mehdi RA, Schr€ oder-Hinrichs J-U, van Overloop J, et al. Improving the coexistence of offshore
wind farms and shipping: an international comparison of navigational risk assessment processes.
WMU J Marit Affairs 2018; 17: 397–434.
47. Global energy transformation, a roadmap to 2050.Report, International Renewable Energy
Agency, UAE, January 2018.
48. Snyder B and Kaiser MJ. A comparison of offshore wind power development in Europe and the
U.S.: patterns and drivers of development. Appl Energy 2009; 86: 1845–1856.
49. Voormolen JA, Junginger HM and van Sark WGJHM. Unravelling historical-cost developments
of offshore wind-energy in Europe. Energy Policy 2016; 88: 435–444.
50. Mani S and Dhingra T. Critique of offshore wind energy policies of the UK and Germany – what
are the lessons for India. Energy Policy 2013; 63: 900–909.
51. From zero to five GW: offshore wind outlook for Gujarat and Tamil Nadu 2018–2032. India:
National Institute of wind and energy, 2017.
52. Global offshore wind capacity to grow sixfold to 115 GW by 2030. BloombergNew York: BNEF/
S&P Global, Electric Power, 2018.
53. Global offshore wind market report 2018. Norway: Norwegian Energy Partners, 2018.
54. Renewable power generation costs in 2017, key findings and executive summary. UAE:
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), 2017.
55. Haliade-x offshore wind turbine platform. France: GE Renewable Energy.
56. Higgins P and Foley AM. Power system performance of offshore wind in the UK in 2030. In:
Sayigh A (eds) Renewable energy in the service of mankind. Vol. I. Berlin: Springer, 2015,
pp.811–826.
57. Rockmann C, Lagerfeld S and Stavenuiter J. Operation and maintenance costs of offshore wind
farms and potential multi-use platforms in the Dutch North Sea. In: Buck B and Langan R (eds)
Aquaculture perspective of multi-use sites in the open ocean. Berlin: Springer, 2017, pp.97–113.
58. Giebel G and Hasager CB. An overview of offshore wind farm design. MARE-WINT. Berlin:
Springer, 2016, pp.337–346.
59. Argin M, Yerci V, Erdogan N, et al. Exploring the offshore wind energy potential of Turkey
based on multi-criteria site selection. Energy Strategy Rev 2019; 23: 33–46.
60. Ioannou A, Angus A and Brennan F. Stochastic prediction of offshore wind farm LCOE through
an integrated cost model. Energy Procedia 2017; 107: 383–389.
61. Renewable energy technologies, cost analysis series. Vol. 1. UAE: International Renewable Energy
Agency, 2012.
62. Marchenko O and Solomin S. Economic efficiency of renewable energy sources in autonomous
energy systems in Russia. Int J Renewable Energy Res IJRER 2014; 4: 548–554.
63. Olaofe Z O. Assessment of the offshore wind speed distributions at selected stations in the South-
West Coast, Nigeria. IJETP 2018; 14: 1–577.
64. Ebenhoch R, Matha D, Marathe S, et al. Comparative levelized cost of energy analysis. Energy
Procedia 2015; 80: 108–122.
65. Zupone GL, Amelio M, Barbarelli S, et al. Levelized cost of energy: a first evaluation for a self
balancing kinetic turbine. Energy Procedia 2015; 75: 283–293.
66. Driving cost reductions in offshore wind – the LEANWIND Project final publications. Wind
Europe, European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and
demonstration under grant agreement No. 614020, November 2017.
67. RuiLi L, Yu L and Xu Operation of offshore wind farms connected with DRU-HVDC trans-
mission systems with special consideration of faults. Global Energy Interconnection 2018; 1:
608–617.
34 Energy & Environment 0(0)

68. Torres-Olguin RE and Garces A. Grid integration of offshore wind farms using a hybrid HVDC
composed by an MMC with an LCC-based transmission system. Energy Procedia 2017; 137:
391–400.
69. Marvik JI and Svendsen HG. Analysis of grid faults in offshore wind farm with HVDC connec-
tion. Energy Procedia 2013; 35: 81–90.
70. Luque A, Anaya-Lara O, Leithead W, et al. Coordinated control for wind turbine and VSC-
HVDC transmission to enhance FRT capability. Energy Procedia 2013; 35: 69–80.
71. Kirby N, Xu L, Luckett M, et al. HVDC transmission for large offshore wind farms. Power Eng J
2002; 16: 135–141.
72. H, Bailey K, Brookes PM and Thompson P. Assessing environmental-impacts of offshore wind
farms: lessons-learned and recommendations for the future. Aquat Biosyst 2014; 10: 8–13.
73. Lehr JH, Keeley J and Kingery TB. Alternative energy and shale gas encyclopedia. Hoboken: John
Wiley & Sons, 2016.
74. Myhr A, Bjerkseter C, Ågotnes A, et al. Levelised-cost of energy for offshore floating wind
turbines in a life-cycle perspective. Renewable Energy 2014; 66: 714–728.
75. Chauhan A. India readies to kick off its offshore wind sector. Energy & Natural Resources, HIS
Markit, 2019.
76. Facilitating offshore wind in India, project granted under Indo-European cooperation on renew-
able energy, 2014.
77. Feasibility study for offshore wind development in Tamil Nadu, the European Union, is a unique
economic and political partnership between 28 European countries. Facilitating offshore wind in
India, 2018.
78. Procedures for offshore wind. FOWPI, first offshore wind project of India, European Union-
funded project, 2018.
79. Alluri SKR, Gujjula D, Krishnaveni B, et al. Offshore wind feasibility study in India, stability
control and reliable performance of wind turbines. London: IntechOpen, 2018.
80. Sangroya D and Nayak J. Effectiveness of state incentives for promoting wind energy: a panel
data examination. Front Energy 2015; 9: 247–258.
81. Tagotra N. The political economy of renewable energy: prospects and challenges for the renew-
able energy sector in India Post-Paris negotiations. India Q 2017; 73: 99–113.
82. Draft national offshore wind energy policy 2013. India: Ministry of New and Renewable Energy,
2013.
83. Singh JP. FOWIND capacity building workshop, proposed national offshore wind energy policy,
2014.
84. Sawhney A and Amarchand Mangaldas C. Offshore wind energy: a game changer? “Energy
world”. The Economic Times, www.energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/energy-speak/offsh
ore-wind-energy-a-game-changer/3532 (2019, accessed 18 April 2019).
85. Durakovic A. India issues draft offshore wind lease rules. www.offshorewind.biz/2019/01/31/
india-issues-draft-offshore-wind-lease-rules/, (2019, accessed 31 January 2019).
86. Zheng L and Wei L. Methods to estimate the visual impacts of an offshore wind farm. Appl
Energy 2017; 204: 1422–1430.
87. Willsteed EA, Jude S, Gill AB, et al. Obligations and aspirations: a critical evaluation of offshore
wind farm cumulative impact assessments. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 2018; 82: 2332–2345.
88. Thompson PM, Hastie GD, Nedwell J, et al. Framework for assessing impacts of pile-driving
noise from offshore wind farm construction on a harbor seal population. Environ Impact Assess
Rev 2013; 43: 73–85.
89. Bailey H, Senior B, Simmons D, et al. Assessing underwater noise levels during pile-driving at an
offshore wind farm and its potential impact on marine mammals. Mar Pollut Bull 2010; 60:
888–897.
90. Popper AN and Hastings MC. The effects of human-generated sound on fish. Integr Zool 2009; 4:
43–52.
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 35

91. Gill AB, Bartlett M and Thomsen F. Potential interactions between diadromous-fishes of U.K.
conservation importance and the electromagnetic fields and subsea-noise from marine renewable
energy-developments. J Fish Biol 2012; 81: 664–695.
92. Popper AN and Hastings MC. The effects of anthropogenic sources of sound on fishes. J Fish
Biol 2009; 75: 455–489.
93. Westerberg H and Lagenfelt I. Sub-sea power cables and the migration behavior of the European
eel. Fish Manage Ecol 2008; 15: 369–375.
94. Wahlberg M and Westerberg H. Hearing in fish and their reactions to sounds from offshore wind
farms. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 2005; 288: 295–309.
95. Metcalfe J and Thomsen F. A novel field study setup to investigate the behavior of fish related to
sound. The effects of noise on. Aquatic Life 2012; 730: 389–391.
96. Masden EA, Reeve R, Desholm M, et al. Assessing the impact of marine-wind farms on birds
through movement-modeling. J R Soc Interface 2012; 9: 2120–2130.
97. Desholm M and Kahlert J. Avian collision risk at an offshore wind farm. Biol Lett 2005; 1:
296–298.
98. Furness RW, Wade HM and Masden EA. Assessing the vulnerability of marine bird populations
to offshore wind farms. J Environ Manage 2013; 119: 56–66.
99. Causon PD and Gill AB. Linking ecosystem services with epibenthic biodiversity change follow-
ing the installation of offshore wind farms. Environ Sci Policy 2018; 89: 340–347.
100. Neff JM, Bothner MH, Maciolek NJ, et al. Impacts of exploratory-drilling for oil and gas on the
benthic-environment of Georges bank. Mar Environ Res 1989; 27: 77–114.
101. Summary of wind turbine accident data to 31 March 2019, accidents – Caithness windfarm
information forum, 2019.
102. Mette J, Garrido MV, Harth V, et al. Healthy offshore workforce? A qualitative study on off-
shore wind employees’ occupational strain, health, and coping. BMC Public Health 2018; 18:
172–186.
103. Droste R, Lasche C, Sobiech C, et al. Model-Based risk assessment supporting development of
HSE plans for safe offshore operations. In: Stoelinga M and Pinger R (eds) Formal methods for
industrial critical systems. Berlin: Springer, 2012, pp.146–161.
104. Mette J, Garrido MV, Preisser AM, et al. Linking quantitative demands to offshore wind work-
ers’ stress: do personal and job resources matter? A structural-equation modeling approach.
BMC Public Health 2018; 18: 934–949.
105. Occupational safety and health in the wind energy-sector. European-Risk Observatory Report,
the European agency for safety and health at work, 2013.
106. Plc M. An assessment of the environmental-effects of offshore wind farms. USA: ETSU-
Department of Trade, 2000.
107. Gjodvad JF and Ibsen MD. ODIN-WIND: an overview of the decommissioning process for
offshore wind turbine. In: Ostachowicz W, McGugan M, Schr€ oder-Hinrichs J-U and Luczak M
(eds) MARE-WINT. Berlin: Springer, 2016, pp.403–419.
108. Atallah AM, Abdelaziz AY, Ali M, et al. Cable laying precautions in offshore wind farms with
reactive power compensation. In: Kamala kannan C and Padma Suresh Subhransu Sekhar Dash
Bijaya Ketan Panigrahi L(eds), Power electronics and renewable energy systems. Berlin: Springer,
2014, pp.553–562.
109. Giebel G and Hasager CB. An overview of offshore wind farm design. In: Ostachowicz W,
McGugan M, Schr€ oder-Hinrichs J-U and Luczak M (eds), MARE-WINT. New Materials and
Reliability in Offshore Wind Turbine Technology. Berlin: Springer, 2016, pp.337–346.
110. Beauson J and Brondsted P. Wind turbine blades: an end of life perspective. In: Ostachowicz W,
McGugan M, Schr€ oder-Hinrichs J-U and Luczak M (eds), MARE-WINT. New Materials and
Reliability in Offshore Wind Turbine Technology. Berlin: Springer, 2016, pp.421–432.
36 Energy & Environment 0(0)

111. McGugan M. Design of wind turbine blades. In: Ostachowicz W, McGugan M, Schr€ oder-Hinrichs
J-U and Luczak M (eds), MARE-WINT. New Materials and Reliability in Offshore Wind Turbine
Technology. Berlin: Springer, 2016, pp.13–24.
112. Arnell NW and Reynard NS. The effects of climate change due to global warming on river flows
in great Britain. J Hydrol 1996; 183: 397–424.
113. Lizuma L, Avotniece Z, Rupainis S, et al. Assessment of the present and future offshore wind
power potential: a case study in a target territory of the baltic sea near the Latvian Coast. Sci
World J 2013; 2013: 126428.
114. Kulkarni S, Deo MC and Ghosh S. Changes in the design and operational wind due to climate
change at the Indian offshore sites. Mar Struct 2014; 37: 33–53.
115. Deepthi R and Deo MC. Effect of climate change on design wind at the Indian offshore loca-
tions. Ocean Eng 2010; 37: 1061–1069.
116. Radhika S, Deo MC and Latha G. Evaluation of the wave height used in the design of offshore
structures considering the effects of climate change. Proceedings of the IMechE 2013; 227:
233–242.
117. Grabemann I and Weisse R. Climate change impact on extreme wave conditions in the North
Sea: an ensemble study. Ocean Dyn 2008; 58: 199–212.
118. Marine climate change guidelines. Danish Hydraulic Institute Report, Hørsholm, Denmark,
July 2016.
119. Pryor SC and Barthelmie RJ. Assessing the vulnerability of wind energy to climate change and
extreme events. Clim Change 2013; 121: 79–91.
120. Johnston PC. Climate risk and adaptation in the electric power sector. Manila, Phillippines: Asian
Development Bank – Publications, 2012.
121. Pryor SC and Barthelmie RJ. Climate change impacts on wind energy: a review. Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev 2010; 14: 430–437.
122. Carvalho D, Rocha A, Gomez-Gesteira M, et al. Potential impacts of climate change on
European wind energy resource under the CMIP5 future climate projections. Renew Energy
2017; 101: 29–40.
123. Solaun K and Cerda E. Impacts of climate change on wind energy power – four wind farms in
Spain. Renew Energy 2020; 145: 1306–1316.
124. Mr oz A, Holnicki-Szulc J and K€arn€a T. Mitigation of ice loading on off-shore wind turbines:
feasibility study of a semi-active solution. Comput Struct 2008; 86: 217–226.
125. Hochart C, Fortin G, Perron J, et al. Wind turbine performance under icing conditions. Wind
Energ 2008; 11: 319–333.
126. Acclimatise carbon disclosure project report. Global Electric Utilities Building business resilience
to inevitable climate change, CDP001/02, Carbon Disclosure Project, Oxford, 2009.
127. Gaetani M, Vignati E, Monforti F, et al. Climate modelling and renewable energy resource
assessment. JRC Sci Policy Rep 2015; 1: 1-55.
128. 135[79] DNV. Guidelines for design of wind turbines. 2nd ed. Denmark: Det Norske Veritas and
Risø National Laboratory, 2002.
129. Devis A, Van Lipzig NPM and Demuzere M. Should future wind speed changes be taken into
account in wind farm development? Environ Res Lett 2018; 13: 1-11.
130. Arent DJ, Tol RSJ, Faust E, et al. Key Economic Sectors and Services (Chapter 10). In: Clim
Change 2014. Impacts, Adapt. Vulnerability. Part A Glob. Sect. Asp. Contrib. Work. Gr. II to Fifth
Assess. Rep. Intergov. Panel Clim. Chang. Chang. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press,
2014, pp.659–708.
131. Greene S, Morrissey M and Johnson SE. Wind climatology, climate change, and wind energy.
Geogr Compass 2010; 4: 1592–1605.
132. Kulkarni S, Deo MC and Ghosh S. Performance of the CORDEX regional climate models in
simulating offshore wind and wind potential. Theor Appl Climatol 2019; 135: 1449–1464.
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 37

133. Kulkarni S, Deo M.C and Ghosh S. Evaluation of wind extremes and wind potential under
changing climate for Indian offshore using ensemble of 10 GCMs. J Ocean Coastal Manage 2016;
121: 141–152.
134. Kulkarni S, Deo MC and Ghosh S. Framework for assessment of climate change impact on
offshore wind energy. Meteorol Appl 2018; 25: 94–104.
135. Alwazani H, Bahanshal S, Kumar CR, et al. Economic and technical feasibility of solar system
at Effat University. In: 2019 IEEE 10th GCC conference & exhibition (GCC), Kuwait: IEEE,
2019, pp. 1–5.
136. Martin R, Lazakis I, Barbouchi S, et al. Sensitivity analysis of offshore wind farm operation and
maintenance cost and availability. Renewable Energy 2016; 85: 1226–1236.
137. Bastia R and Radhakrishna M. Exploration in the Indian offshore basins – some challenging
issues related to imaging and drilling. Dev Pet Sci 2012; 59: 319–359.
138. Lange M, Page G and Cummins V. Governance challenges of marine-renewable energy develop-
ments in the U.S. – creating the enabling conditions for successful-project development. Mar
Policy 2018; 90: 37–46.

J Charles Rajesh Kumar received the Bachelor of Engineering degree in Electronics &
Instrumentation Engineering from the Madurai Kamaraj University, India, the Master of
Engineering degree in Electronics & Communication Engineering from Anna University,
India, and Master of Business Administration degree in Financial Management from the
Indira Gandhi National University, India. He has been bestowed the Gold medal for excel-
lence in Master of Engineering degree by the Anna University. He has been a Faculty
member of Engineering at various Universities of repute in India and abroad. He has
published numerous research articles in refereed impact factor journals and conference
proceedings, indexed in Thomson Reuter’s Journal Citation Report (JCR) and Scopus.
His current research involves VLSI design, System on Chip (SoC), Network on Chip
(NoC), Embedded Systems, Energy harvesting for wireless sensor networks, video coding,
and Image processing.

D Vinod Kumar received his Bachelor of Engineering in Electronics & Communication

Engineering from Periyar University, Salem, Tamil Nadu, India, Master of Engineering
in Applied Electronics from Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. He obtained
his Ph.D. Degree in Interdisciplinary in Electronics & Communication Engineering and
Computer Science Engineering from Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed
to be University), Salem, Tamil Nadu, India. He also received a Master of Business
Administration from Periyar University, Salem, India. He is currently working as
Professor & Head of Biomedical Engineering, Vinayaka Mission’s Kirupananda Variyar
Engineering College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University),
Salem, India. He is also a member of the Board of Studies, Faculty of Engineering &
Technology of Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University),
Salem, India. He has a vast experience of 17 years in teaching, research, and administration.
He is currently a Member of Institution of Engineers. Life member of Indian Society for
Technical Education (ISTE), Member of IEEE (USA). His current research interests include
Image Processing, VLSI design, Embedded Systems, and Biometric systems. He has served
as a reviewer and published many papers in peer-reviewed National & International journals
38 Energy & Environment 0(0)

listed in Scopus, Thomson Reuter’s Journal Citation Report (JCR) SCI & UGC refered and
conference proceedings.

D Baskar received his Bachelor of Engineering in Electrical & Electronics Engineering from
Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, Master of Engineering in Power System
Engineering from Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University),
Salem, Tamil Nadu, Currently pursuing Ph.D. Degree in Electrical & Electronics
Engineering from Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University),
Salem, Tamil Nadu, India. He also received a Master of Business Administration from
Periyar University, Salem, India. He is currently working as Assistant Professor of
Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Annai Teresa College of Engineering, Viluppuram,
India. He has an experience of 11 years in teaching, research, industry, and administration.
His current research interests include Power System, Pattern Recognition, Machine
Learning & Artificial Intelligence. He has served as a reviewer and also published many
papers in peer-reviewed National & International journals, which are listed in Scopus,
Thomson Reuter’s Journal Citation Report (JCR) SCI & UGC refereed and conference
proceedings.

B Mary Arunsi received her Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) from
the M.S. Ramaiah Medical College and Hospital (M.S.R.M.C.) affiliated to the Rajiv
Gandhi University of Health Sciences (R.G.U.H.S.), Karnataka and is recognized by the
Medical Council of India (MCI). She is currently working as a Medical Officer in Chinmaya
Mission Hospital (C.M.H.), Bangalore, Karnataka. She has published numerous research
articles in refereed impact factor journals and conference proceedings, which are indexed in
Thomson Reuter’s Journal Citation Report (J.C.R.) and Scopus. Her current research
interests include Pediatrics and Child Health, Occupational Health, Biomedical waste,
and Safety management, Infection Prevention and Control (I.P.C.), Diabetes and
Metabolic Disorders, and Infectious Diseases.

R Jenova received her Master of Arts in Public Administration, Master of Philosophy in

Public Administration, and Master of Arts in Sociology from Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India. She is a Registered Nurse in Tamil Nadu Nursing Council
after obtaining Auxiliary Nursing Midwifery (A.N.M.) / Multi-Purpose Health Worker (M.
P.H.W.) certificate from Government Training Centre, Dindigul, Tamil Nadu, India. She
served as a Nurse in Government Primary Health Centre (P.H.C.) for more than 30 years.
She was bestowed with the "Tamil Nadu Best Nurse Award" in 2018 from Governor of
Tamil Nadu and the State’s Health Minister. She has published numerous research articles
in refereed impact factor journals and conference proceedings, which are indexed in
Thomson Reuter’s Journal Citation Report (J.C.R.) and Scopus. Her current research
interests include Occupational Health, Health Assessment, Infection Prevention and
Control (I.P.C.), Artificial neural networks, and Maternal and Child Health.

MA Majid received MSc degree in Electrical Engineering from King Fahd University of
Petroleum and Minerals (K.F.U.P.M.), Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, in 2002. In 2011, he was
awarded his Ph.D. degree in Electronic and Electrical Engineering from the University of
Sheffield in the U.K. He was an E.P.S.R.C. Prize Postdoctoral Fellow at The University of
Charles Rajesh Kumar et al. 39

Sheffield for one year (2011–2012). From 2012 to 2015, he continued as a postdoctoral
fellow in the electrical engineering program at King Abdullah University of Science and
Technology (K.A.U.S.T.), Saudi Arabia. Currently, he is an Assistant Professor in the
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Effat University, where he is engaged
in applying III/V semiconductor quantum dot/quantum well devices to biomedical imaging
applications, Optical communications to solid-state lighting.