Wind Turbine Installation Vessels:

Global Supply Chain Impacts

on the U.S. Offshore Wind Market

Report Number: OSPRE-2021-02

Date: June 28, 2021

AuthorT: Charles Bocklet, Christian Herbosa, Greg Loweth, Matthew Griswold,

Lauren Quickel, Roan Gideon, Jay Borkland, Rocky Weitz, Barbara
Kates-Garnick, and Eric Hines
Preface and Executive Summary
In 2020, our team had the privilege of advising the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) on their December 2020 Report to Congressional Committees entitled “Offshore Wind
Energy: Planned Projects May Lead to Construction of New Vessels in the U.S., but Industry
Has Made Few Decisions amid Uncertainties.” During these efforts, it became clear to us that the
global Wind Turbine Installation Vessel (WTIV) fleet is inadequate to meet the future needs of
the U.S. offshore wind market. Furthermore, even though there was a general feeling in the air
that this was the case, the facts of the case were difficult to visualize and understand for most
people who were not directly involved in WTIV logistics. Finally, in response to this feeling,
which had a tendency to turn anxious, we had been observing for several years through the press
and at conferences most people thought the Jones Act was to blame. Our studies have shown,
however, that the problem is simpler and bigger than that: The U.S. is about to build the world’s
largest offshore wind farms, and there just aren’t enough vessels available in the world to handle
these projects in U.S. waters. This report represents our team’s attempt to follow-up on the 2020
GAO Report with visual analysis and logistics scenarios that can help offshore wind stakeholders
understand both the scale and the details of the challenge ahead.

Since the drafting and design of this report during Spring 2021, the Biden-Harris Administration
has announced a federal commitment to get to 30 GW by 2030 (March 29; White House, 2021);
North Carolina has announced its intention to procure 2.8 GW of offshore wind by 2030 and 8
GW of offshore wind by 2040 (June 9; Borkas, 2021); and BOEM has announced new
competitive lease sales for New York and New Jersey (June 11; DOI, 2021). Such rapid and
critically important developments are not uncommon in the offshore wind industry. We wish to
acknowledge that these developments would have changed our approach to the logistic scenarios
presented here. We would have focused either on 30 GW by 2030, or 40 GW by 2040 in light of
the White House and North Carolina announcements; and we would have incorporated more
detail into our discussion of the NY and NJ lease areas.

Nevertheless, the main purpose of our vessel analyses and logistics scenarios is not to report
breaking news, but to help people visualize the coming U.S. offshore wind build-out in terms
that are simple and clear. We plan to update our work in response to recent and future
developments, and we look forward to engaging with the global offshore wind community on
this discussion as it develops.

Eric Hines
Director, Offshore Wind Energy Graduate Program
Tufts University
Medford, Massachusetts

1
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the professionals and Wind Turbine Installation Vessel (WTIV)
shipbuilders we have consulted over the course of our work including: Ketil Arvesen of Fred.
Olsen; Stan White of Stanley White Engineering LLC; Dan Kennedy of Diamond Offshore;
Doug Hines of Offshore Wind Power Systems of Texas; and Lars-André Tobaben and Nick
Zenkin of LAUTEC. We would like to thank Mike McMahon (SOE) and Chisake Watanabe
(Fletcher) for their Spring 2020 work on vessels and shipyards in CEE-294: Ports and Supply
Chain for Offshore Wind and DHP-D205: Global Maritime Affairs. We are grateful for the
insight, enthusiasm, and assistance of our classmates in CEE-120: Engineering the Energy
Transition (Fall 2020) and CEE-293: Power Systems and Markets (Spring 2021). During CEE-
120, Bram Brakman and Theo Bartlett developed our original approach to analyzing the Hornsea
1 logistics through vessel tracking data; Richard Haight led our assessments of global WTIV
heavy-lift stability; and Will Ross led our efforts to imagine these studies within the larger
context of the offshore wind industry. Our classmates in CEE-293 include: Sophie Bredenkamp
(SOE), John DeFrancisci (SOE), Emma Edwardson (SOE), Julie Harris (Fletcher), Mohsen
Minaeijavid (SOE), Nick Westfield (Fletcher), and Rebecca Wolf (SOE); whose work on
Pathways to 2050 and Offshore Wind Grid Integration were helpful in contextualizing our
thinking on WTIVs and logistics. We would like to thank the team at the U.S. GAO, led by Matt
Rosenberg, for engaging with us during their study, and for acknowledging the Tufts database in
their December 2020 report. Finally, we would like to thank Massachusetts Undersecretary of
Energy Judy Chang, and her colleagues at the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources
(DOER), Coastal Zone Management (CZM), and the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center
(MassCEC) for listening to our presentations during spring 2021 and providing critical feedback
that challenged us to clarify and deepen our own understanding of these issues.

2
Contents
Preface and Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 2
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 4
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 6
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7
2 Vessels and Turbines: Basis for Analysis.............................................................................. 10
3 WTIV Geometric Analysis .................................................................................................... 14
4 Vessel Tracking Analysis and U.S. Logistics Considerations............................................... 18
4.1 Borssele III & IV ............................................................................................................ 19
4.2 Hornsea One ................................................................................................................... 20
4.3 U.S. Turbine Installation Rate Estimation ..................................................................... 21
5 U.S. Offshore Wind Build-Out Scenario and WTIV Demand .............................................. 23
6 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix A WTIV Dimensions .............................................................................................. 27
Appendix B Geometric Analyses of WTIVs ........................................................................... 30
Appendix C U.S. Offshore Wind Build-Out Scenario ............................................................ 37
References ..................................................................................................................................... 53

3
List of Figures
Figure 1. The Brave Term (left) acts as the Wind Turbine Installation Vessel (WTIV) for the 6
MW Block Island Wind Turbines, as the Caitlin or Paul (right) acts as a feeder vessel. (image
credit: Shuman, 2016) ..................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2: BOEM Lease Areas Bathymetry Map – Vineyard Wind LLC (BOEM, 2021). 50-meter
bathymetric contour highlighted in red. ........................................................................................ 12
Figure 3: Scylla installation profile for GE Haliade-X turbine at 50-meter water depth. ............ 14
Figure 4: Geometric analysis of WTIVs for Haliade-X OWT installation in 50 meters of water.16
Figure 5: Turbine and foundation description of the Haliade-X turbine. ..................................... 18
Figure 6: Aeolus vessel tracking data and categorization. Historic AIS data provided by BMAP
(Bloomberg, 2020). ....................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 7: Hornsea One vessel tracking data and categorization. Historic AIS data provided by
Bloomberg’s BMAP (Bloomberg, 2020). ..................................................................................... 20
Figure 8: Approximate installation times for Hornsea One and Borssele 3 & 4. ......................... 21
Figure 9: Build-out scenario for 2027. This year requires 5-WTIVs and reaches a cumulative
capacity of 14,305 MW. Maps for each year from 2022-2035 can be found in Appendix B. ..... 25
Figure 10: Robert profile in 50 m water. ...................................................................................... 31
Figure 11: Sea Installer profile in 50 m water. ............................................................................. 31
Figure 12: Sea Challenger profile in 50 m water. ......................................................................... 32
Figure 13: Aeolus profile in 50 m water. ...................................................................................... 32
Figure 14: Vole au Vent profile in 50 m water. ............................................................................ 33
Figure 15: Innovation profile in 50 m water. ................................................................................ 33
Figure 16: Scylla profile in 50 m water. ....................................................................................... 34
Figure 17: Bold Tern profile in 50 m water. ................................................................................. 34
Figure 18: Brave Tern profile in 50 m water. ............................................................................... 35
Figure 19: Wind Orca profile in 50 m water................................................................................. 35
Figure 20: Wind Osprey profile in 50 m water. ............................................................................ 36
Figure 21: Voltaire profile in 50 m water. .................................................................................... 36
Figure 22: 2023 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 250 MW. ............................................... 39

4
Figure 23: 2024 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 4,094 MW. ............................................ 40
Figure 24: 2025 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 6,646 MW. ............................................ 41
Figure 25: 2026 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 8,850 MW. ............................................ 42
Figure 26: 2027 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 14, 305 MW. ......................................... 43
Figure 27: 2028 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 20,345 MW. .......................................... 44
Figure 28: 2029 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 23,145 MW. .......................................... 45
Figure 29: 2030 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 27,420 MW. .......................................... 46
Figure 30: 2031 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 28,570 MW. .......................................... 47
Figure 31: 2032 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 29,570 MW. .......................................... 48
Figure 32: 2033 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 30,754 MW. .......................................... 49
Figure 33: 2034 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 31,754 MW. .......................................... 50
Figure 34: 2035 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 32,754 MW. .......................................... 51
Figure 35: 2035 U.S. offshore wind build-out scenario. Cumulative capacity = 32,754 MW.
Since the creation of this report, U.S. commitments have increased to 40,210 MW by 2040, and
there is a federal commitment to ensure the U.S. installs 30 GW by 2030. ................................. 52

5
List of Tables
Table 1: Ultra-large (12-15 MW) offshore wind turbines. ........................................................... 10
Table 2: Vessels chosen for analysis. ........................................................................................... 11
Table 3: BOEM offshore wind lease area approximate water depth ranges (BOEM, 2021b). .... 13
Table 4: Current Haliade-X-capable international WTIVs and their scheduled projects (GWEC,
2020; Energyfacts, 2020; Dominion, 2021). ................................................................................. 17
Table 5: Summary of state procurements and corresponding project installation years. (Work on
this table preceded the March 29, 2021 Biden-Harris announcement of 30 GW by 2030, which
will require more intensive WTIV usage in the run-up to 2030.) ................................................. 23
Table 6: Vessel dimensions used in geometric analysis. .............................................................. 28
Table 7: Current and future offshore wind projects and their estimated timeline through 2035.
Solicitations with no PPA/OREC have grey lease area cells. ....................................................... 38

6
1 Introduction
Since 2016, U.S. Atlantic Coast states have committed to procure approximately 40 gigawatts
(GW) of future offshore wind power by 2040. These efforts have been further bolstered by the
Biden-Harris Administration’s announcement on March 29, 2021 that it intends to fully support
the industry’s future build-out goals and to create tens of thousands of American jobs by
deploying 30 GW by 2030 (White House, 2021). Biden-Harris offshore wind commitments
include: new lease sales in federal waters; several hundred million in funding for ports and
vessels specialized for offshore wind; $3 billion in guaranteed loans to the offshore wind
industry; commitments to fund research and development; and partnering with industry to share
data in the interest of scientific advancement.

While these commitments represent some of the U.S. Atlantic Coast’s most important actions to
date in the fight against climate change, the execution of these U.S. offshore wind projects
represent unprecedented challenges, including extreme water depths, ever increasing turbine
sizes, and the shortest construction timelines experienced in the industry. In light of these
observations, it is important to note that there are currently no U.S.-flagged wind turbine
installation vessels (WTIVs) capable of 6+ MW offshore wind turbine (OWT) installations.

Figure 1 below illustrates the difference between the European offshore wind industry, which has
developed over 30 years, and the new U.S. offshore wind industry. The European experience is
represented by the European WTIV on the left, the Brave Tern, installing a 6 MW Block Island
OWT. The U.S. experience is represented by the smaller vessel to the right of the WTIV, the
U.S. flagged jackup vessel the Caitlin (or on alternate occasions by the Paul), which acted as
feeder vessels for the European WTIV. The feeder vessels transport OWT components from the
construction base port or manufacturing port to the wind farm for installation by a WTIV.
Compounding this difference in scale between Europe’s offshore wind experience, and the
experience in the U.S. is the fact that the 6 MW turbine depicted in Figure 1 is now considered
quite small. Most turbines planned for U.S. waters will be 12+ MW, and it is important to note
that the European WTIV on the left is currently being retrofitted with a taller crane to install this
new generation of turbines. In fact, the global WTIV fleet appears unprepared to install all the
12+ MW turbines that are now in the queue in for both U.S. and global projects.

7
Figure 1. The Brave Term (left) acts as the Wind Turbine Installation Vessel (WTIV) for the 6 MW Block Island
Wind Turbines, as the Caitlin or Paul (right) acts as a feeder vessel. (image credit: Shuman, 2016)

Under the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (Section 9503) the offshore wind energy
areas are legally considered to be U.S. ports (Smith, A., 2021). This means that under the 1920
benchmark legislation known as the Jones Act, any vessel transporting wind farm components
from port to the wind farm, or from wind farm turbine structure to wind farm turbine structure,
will have to be built in the United States (DOT, 2021). Dominion Energy, owner and developer
of the commercial Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project, which at 2,640 MW is the
largest offshore wind project planned for U.S. waters, has already commissioned what will be the
first Jones Act-compliant WTIV. This vessel, the Charybdis, is currently under construction in
Brownsville, TX and is expected to be delivered in December 2023 (Moore, 2020).

The five-turbine Block Island project was able to comply with the Jones Act requirement by
using the U.S.-flagged feeder vessels Caitlin and the Paul to load the components in port and
transfer them to the foreign-flagged WTIV at the offshore site. The incorporation of U.S.-built
jack-up feeder vessels presents a vessel strategy that allows for the use of foreign WTIVs, while

8
simultaneously circumventing these navigational barriers. This “feeder method” is the vessel
strategy that reportedly will be used for the Vineyard Wind 1 offshore wind project, which
recently selected DEME to supply a foreign-flagged WTIV to install components at the wind
farm for the project, and Foss Maritime to supply the U.S.-built feeder vessels (Vineyard Wind,
2021).

It is a matter of urgency, therefore, that the U.S. should prepare itself to address impending
market failures that may result from inadequate WTIVs, supply chains, ports, and land-based
transmission infrastructure. State and federal decision makers who can envision these potential
market failures before they occur will find new opportunities for U.S. innovation that not only
address global supply chain deficiencies, but also create U.S. jobs. This paper presents the
current global state of play in WTIVs and offshore wind farm installation logistics as a point of
entry to the larger discussion on WTIVs, feeder barges, supply chains, ports, and land-based
transmission.

9
2 Vessels and Turbines: Basis for Analysis
Wind turbine installation vessels or “jack-up vessels” are mobile platforms equipped with three
to six legs (also known in the industry as “spuds”), that are lowered to the ocean floor. The
vessel hull is raised (in industry parlance “jacked-up”) above the waves, creating a stable
platform that protects against damaging swells, and elevates the WTIV high enough to provide
crane access to structures over 150 meters above the water. While the existing global WTIV fleet
has ably and effectively installed thousands of megawatts of offshore wind to date in Europe and
Asia, this fleet is not prepared for the 12-15 MW turbines planned for the next several years.

On May 10, 2021, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued the Record of
Decision for Vineyard Wind I (BOEM, 2021a), confirming that the project has been permitted
for turbines with generation capacity between 8 MW and 14 MW, which will allow Vineyard
Wind to use the Haliade-X turbine for Vineyard Wind 1, as announced (Salzburg, 2021). This
project will usher in a new generation of ultra-large (12-15 MW) turbines in U.S. waters as
shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Ultra-large (12-15 MW) offshore wind turbines.
OEM Turbine Name Rated Capacity Rotor Diameter
GE Haliade-X 12, 13, 14 MW 220 m
GE link: https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-
offshore-turbine
Siemens Gamesa SG-14-222 14, 15 MW 222 m
SG link: https://www.siemensgamesa.com/en-int/products-and-services/offshore/wind-
turbine-sg-14-222-dd
Vestas V236-15.0 MW 15 MW 236 m
Vestas link: https://www.vestas.com/en/products/offshore-platforms/v236_15_mw#!

Turbines of this magnitude have never been deployed at a commercial scale wind farm, in
Europe or elsewhere. When this study was initiated in 2020, the GE Haliade-X was the largest
and most powerful offshore wind turbine (OWT) in the world, and several U.S. projects were
anticipated to use this 12 MW platform. For this study, the authors have assumed the type-
turbine for this analysis is the GE Haliade-X turbine with a hub height of 150 meters above the
ocean surface and a nacelle mass of 794 metric tons. By comparison, the 2016 Block Island
Wind Farm was constructed in Rhode Island state waters with GE Haliade 150-6 MW turbines
with 107-meter hub heights and approximately 400 metric ton nacelles.

There are several factors at play when lifting heavier nacelles to taller towers, and a crane’s
stated lift capacity is not the sole indicator of installation capability. Our research indicates that
nacelle installation capacity is limited by the crane lift capacity and height at the required reach.
While most of the cranes analyzed for this paper have a nameplate capacity greater than 800
metric tons, not all are capable of 150-meter lifts above the ocean surface. Determining a crane’s
maximum lift capacity above the ocean surface is a multi-variable problem. Therefore, an in-

10
depth visual and numerical analyses of vessels’ crane capacities are needed, and the appropriate
rating for a WTIV is the largest turbine it can install in a specified water depth. This report
focuses on a single benchmark rating: GE Haliade-X (12-14 MW) with 150-meter hub height in
50-meter water depth.

This research group chose twelve vessels from the Tufts Offshore Wind Vessel Database, which
was referenced by the GAO in their December 2020 report to Congress on WTIVs (GAO, 2020).
Table 2 explains why each vessel was evaluated in our geometric analysis. Some vessels were
not selected because of lack of public information or inadequate crane capacities. For instance,
the Bold Tern, which installed the Block Island Wind Farm, was not geometrically evaluated
because it has a nameplate capacity of 640 metric tons, eliminating it (at least for comparison
purposes) from consideration for installing the Haliade-X nacelle at a mass of 794 metric tons
(Arvensen, 2021). Similarly, the Blue Tern, Apollo, MPI Resolution and MPI Enterprise also
were determined not to have the lifting capacity at the required reach to install the Haliade-X.
Table 2: Vessels chosen for analysis.
Vessel Reason for Analysis
Robert Largest current U.S.-flagged WTIV. Illustrates status of U.S. jack-up capabilities
(Seacor Marine) compared to European and Asian sector.
Vole au Vent Executed installation of Coastal Virginia pilot-scale project (2x Siemens SWT-6.0-
(Jan De Nul) 154).
Sea Installer On March 31st 2021, Vineyard Wind announced they will use DEME vessel(s) for
(DEME) turbine installations (Vineyard Wind, 2021). These three DEME vessels have crane
gross tonnages capable of GE Haliade-X nacelle installations. However, according to
Sea Challenger our analysis, only the Innovation has the reach to install a GE Haliade-X at 150 m hub
(DEME) height in 50 m of water.
Sea Challenger installed Hornsea I.
Innovation Innovation installed Hornsea I. This WTIV is shown in Figure 3 as capable for installing
(DEME) a GE Haliade-X in 50 m of water.
Aelous Crane gross tonnage capable of GE Haliade-X nacelle installations. Installed Borssele
(Van Oord) III & IV (77x Vestas V164-9.5MW turbines).
Brave Tern Crane being upgraded in 2022 to perform taller and heavier lifts for next generation of
(Fred Olsen) turbines.
Pacific Osprey Crane upgraded in 2020 to perform taller and heavier lifts for next generation of
(Swire Blue Ocean) turbines.
Voltaire Contracted to transport and install turbines for Dogger Bank A & B projects in 2023
(Jan De Nul) (190x GE Haliade-X turbines).
Unnamed (Shimizu Construction began in December 2020 for the new Japanese vessel built specifically
Corp.) for next generation turbine installations (Energyfacts, 2020).
Charybdis First Jones Act compliant vessel capable of next generation turbine installations.
(Dominion Energy) Scheduled to build Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia project as well as Ørsted’s
Revolution Wind and Sunshine Wind projects. Estimated vessel completion date Q4
2023 (Moore, 2020; Dominion, 2021).

In addition to the reach and weight considerations, each vessel has a maximum working water
depth that is dependent on jack-up leg length and hull height to provide ample clearance above

11
the ocean waves. In the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Wind Energy Areas (BOEM
WEAs) offshore Massachusetts and Rhode Island, the water depths range from approximately 40
meters to 60 meters (NROC, 2021).

Figure 2: BOEM Lease Areas Bathymetry Map – Vineyard Wind LLC (BOEM, 2021). 50-meter bathymetric
contour highlighted in red.

Figure 2 is a depiction of page 5 from the BOEM Renewable Energy Leases Map Book (BOEM,
2021b), which shows the 50-meter contour running through approximately the middle of the
Vineyard Wind lease area. In the North Sea, wind farm sites are typically shallower. For
example, the Hornsea I farm ranged between 20-40 meters (PowerTechnology, 2021) and the
Borssele Wind Farm Zone ranges in depth from 16-38 meters (NEA, 2016). While U.S. lease
areas to the south of the WEAs offshore MA and RI generally are situated in water that his
shallower than 50 m, as depicted in Table 3 below, future lease areas in the New York Bight (as

12
shown in Appendix B), will extend into waters ranging between 30-60 meters, similar to the
WEAs offshore MA and RI.
Table 3: BOEM offshore wind lease area approximate water depth ranges (BOEM, 2021b).
State Lease Area Number Approximate water depth range
New York OCS-A 0512 25 m – 40 m
New Jersey OCS-A 0498, 0499 18 m – 32 m
Delaware OCS-A 0482, 0490, 0519 18 m – 34 m
Virginia OCS-A 0483 22 m – 32 m
North Carolina OCS-A 0508 28 m – 42 m

For this study, the research team chose the GE Haliade-X with 150 m hub height in 50 m of
water, because it provides round numbers that emphasize the potential heights of ultra-large
OWTs, and the potential depth of U.S. waters as new characteristics that are specific to the U.S.
offshore wind industry. While it might be fair to critique this choice as conservative, i.e. that
more WTIVs will be available to construct U.S. offshore wind farms than reported here, it is
important to consider the following: OWTs continue to grow larger; the rest of the world (i.e.,
Europe and Asia) are also placing demands on the global WTIV supply; and U.S. offshore wind
commitments continue to increase.

Once the type-vessel dimensions and operating water depths were established, the research team
developed scale drawings for each vessel with a simple boom crane with no jib-boom apparatus 1.
Additionally, all vessels were rendered at their maximum jack-up height to evaluate the
maximum crane hook height. Leg embedment into the seafloor was assumed to be 3 meters for
each vessel, accounting for various factors including sediment type and “spud-can” or foot type
(based on information from Arvesen, 2021). Minimum clearance above the water line for large
storm events was assumed to be 20 meters.

1
The jib-boom adds to the maximum lifting height, at the expense of lifting capacity. Thus, we did not
include the jib-boom in our calculations or sketches.

13
3 WTIV Geometric Analysis
The research team’s findings illustrate that nacelle installation feasibility depends on: 1) leg
length, 2) vessel depth, 3) maximum working water depth, and 4) maximum lifting height above
deck. Appendix A presents our definitions of these parameters. Figure 3 below envisions the
vessel Scylla as an example to illustrate two possible installation orientations: side-installations
and stern-installations. Side-installations are more commonly used to provide adequate vessel-to-
turbine clearance. This clearance is considered as a precaution to avoid swinging components
near the turbine tower during installation. The vessel-to-turbine clearance is measured
horizontally from the vessel hull to the turbine foundation. In Figure 3, the vessel-to-turbine
clearance in the side lift profile is 37.6 meters compared to only 10.7 meters in the stern
installation profile. Based on conversations with industry experts, the team has assumed that
approximately 35-40 meters of vessel-to-turbine clearance should be implemented for turbine
installations (Arvesen, 2021). Considering current understanding as to how side-installations are
most frequently performed, our geometric analyses assumes that side lifts will be used for
turbine installations. The graphics in this report do however, illustrate vessels in a stern lift
profile for a more detailed visual representation.

Figure 3: Scylla installation profile for GE Haliade-X turbine at 50-meter water depth.

Figure 4 below summarizes the most important conclusions of the team’s geometric analysis, and
is organized according to Future Capable, Existing Capable, and Existing Incapable vessels
assuming a water depth of 50 meters. Each vessel was drafted to scale in AutoCAD to compare
its dimensions with the GE Haliade-X turbine in 50 meters of water. Specified vessel parameters

14
include: main crane maximum lift capacity, maximum working water depth, and maximum lift
height above deck.

Future Capable vessels are currently being built with public data available on their dimensions
and lifting capabilities. These vessels’ super-tall ‘sky-scraping’ cranes illustrate that vessel
owners are trying to “future proof” new builds to meet the rapidly growing turbine sizes.

The three Existing Capable Vessels listed demonstrate the current lack of WTIV's capable of GE
Haliade-X turbine installations in deeper waters. It is important to note that the Pacific Osprey
became capable of these lifts because of a crane upgrade in 2020. Similarly, the Brave Tern will
become capable in 2022 after its crane upgrade. These crane upgrades are an economic
alternative to building a new vessel because many of the incapable vessels can be refitted with a
larger crane to meet higher lifting heights necessary for larger turbines.

The list of Existing Incapable Vessels is representative, but not exhaustive. These vessels were
chosen for reasons described in Table 4. The Sea Challenger, Sea Installer, and Vole au Vent are
all on the cusp of being capable of turbine installations at 50 meters, however they fall just short
in our analysis. These three vessels would be adequate at depths slightly less than 50 meters, and
they are also realistic candidates for crane upgrades because of their hull size and leg length.
Alternatively, the Aeolus is limited by a smaller working water depth of 45 meters. Thus, it is not
a strong contender for a crane upgrade. The Robert is far from capable of large turbine lifts, but it
is included in the figure to highlight the U.S. current jack-up vessel capabilities compared to the
European and Asian sectors.

15
Figure 4: Geometric analysis of WTIVs for Haliade-X OWT installation in 50 meters of water.

16
Table 4: Current Haliade-X-capable international WTIVs and their scheduled projects (GWEC, 2020;
Energyfacts, 2020; Dominion, 2021).
Capability Vessel Booked Projects
Charybdis Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind [2.7 GW] (United States)
Revolution Wind and Sunrise Wind [1.6 GW] (United States)
Future Unnamed Japanese offshore wind market [10 GW by 2030] (Japan)
Capable Voltaire Dogger Bank A, B, & C [3.6 GW] (United Kingdom)
Brave Tern Changfang and Xidao [589 MW] (Taiwan); Dogger Bank A, B, & C [3.6
GW] (United Kingdom)
Pacific Triton Knoll [857 MW] (United Kingdom) & Hollandse Kust Zuid I-IV
Osprey [1.5 GW] (Netherlands)
Existing Scylla Formosa II, Greater Changhua 1 & Greater Changhua 2a [1.3 GW]
Capable (Taiwan)
Innovation Hornsea II [1.8 GW] (United Kingdom)

Developers looking to charter international WTIVs will likely have difficulty finding an
available vessel. Table 4 shows bookings for Existing Capable and Future Capable vessels
shown in Figure 4.

17
4 Vessel Tracking Analysis and U.S. Logistics Considerations
Understanding how WTIVs have been used in past projects in the North Sea provides insight
into possible options for vessel utilization at U.S. sites. Historic vessel location data collected via
AIS transceiver can be used to accurately assess average installation timing and WTIV usage.
Using this movement data, each vessel’s performance during the foundation and turbine
construction phases can be broken down into three categories: time in port, time in transit, and
time at installation site. The foundation section consists of the monopile and transition piece,
while the turbine phase consists of the tower, blades, and nacelle. This relationship is illustrated
in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5: Turbine and foundation description of the Haliade-X turbine.

18
4.1 Borssele III & IV
The team’s analysis of the Aeolus’s performance on the Borssele III & IV project provides a
frame of reference for WTIV usage. The Borssele III & IV project consists of 77 Vestas V164-
9.5 MW turbines (Blauwwind, 2021). Although the Aeolus is not capable of installing a Haliade-
X turbine at 50m depth (Figure 4), the turbines in this project are the largest commercially
deployed to date. For this reason, we find the Aeolus’s performance to be a reasonable
comparison to future U.S. projects, though U.S. projects will employ the use of 12+ MW
turbines (Chesto, 2020). Figure 6 maps Aeolus activity based on data from the Bloomberg
BMAP tool (Bloomberg, 2020), and provides an estimate of vessel time in port, in transit and at
installation site.

Figure 6: Aeolus vessel tracking data and categorization. Historic AIS data provided by BMAP (Bloomberg,
2020).

19
The Aeolus was responsible for both the foundation installation (October 2019 through April
2020) and the turbine installation (May 2020 through October 2020). The monopiles were loaded
in Maasvlakte and the turbine components were loaded in Vlissingen, which are a 45 and 35
nautical mile trip from the project site, respectively. Figure 6 summarizes historic location data
collected via hourly AIS transmissions over most of the installation period. Notably, the Aeolus
split its time evenly between the foundation stage and turbine stage.

4.2 Hornsea One

Figure 7: Hornsea One vessel tracking data and categorization. Historic AIS data provided by Bloomberg’s
BMAP (Bloomberg, 2020).

At 1.2 GW, the Hornsea Project One (HS1), shown in Figure 7 above, falls within the range of
proposed project sizes in the U.S and is therefore a useful benchmark for this research. By total
capacity, it is currently the largest offshore wind farm in the world, consisting of 174 Siemens

20
Gamesa SWT-7.0-154 turbines that span across an area of 410 square kilometers. Located 120
km off the coast of Hornsea, England in the North Sea, HS1 has a depth across the site area
ranging from about 20-40 meters, which is at the lower range of the lease areas on the U.S.
Eastern Seaboard. The HSI turbines were installed using four WTIVs: Bold Tern, Innovation,
Sea Challenger, and Sea Installer (4COffshore, 2020). The vessels divided the project in the
following manner: Innovation installed all the monopiles and some transition pieces; Sea
Installer focused exclusively on transition pieces; Sea Challenger installed some transition
pieces and 83 turbines; and the Bold Tern installed 91 turbines. Note that since multiple vessels
were involved in this project simultaneously, the numbers in Figure 7 cannot simply be added
together to produce the conclusion that it took approximately 5.9 days to install each OWT.

4.3 U.S. Turbine Installation Rate Estimation

Based on our analysis, the installation rates for the Borssele III & IV and Hornsea One projects
were roughly similar, only differing by 5 to 7 vessel hours 2 for most phases of the installation.
The main difference between the two projects was driven by the foundation design. The
foundations were faster to install for the Borssele III & IV project because the transition piece
was integrated into the monopile, whereas the Hornsea project required an additional heavy lift
to set the transition piece.

Figure 8 below presents approximate installation times for the Hornsea One and Borssele III &
IV projects.

Figure 8: Approximate installation times for Hornsea One and Borssele 3 & 4.

2
A “vessel hour” is equal to one hour of one vessel’s time.

21
Recognizing that Figure 8 shows Turbine + Foundation installation to assume 64% of total
WTIV time, the possibility of using feeder vessels, as shown for the Block Island Wind Farm in
Figure 1 above, OWT installation time can be reduced to approximately 3 days. Considering
further that monopiles can be installed by floating, dynamically-positioned heavy lift vessels, or
even tugboats for concrete gravity based foundations and other float-out solutions, the wind
turbine generators (WTG, consisting of the tower, nacelle, and blades) can be installed in
approximately 1.5 days.

Weather and marine conservation regulations will likely limit the U.S. offshore wind build-out to
a seasonal window of approximately eight months. This eight-month estimate is based on reports
on the North Atlantic Right Whale protective measures agreed upon for the Vineyard Wind 1
project between Vineyard Wind, the National Resourced Defense Council, the National Wildlife
Federation, and the Conservation Law Foundation (Vineyard Wind, 2019). This agreement
identifies a 4-month “Red Period” between January 1 and April 30 where “no pile driving” is
allowed—referring to the installation of monopile foundations. The agreement also identifies a
“Yellow Period” of an additional one and half months (November and the first half of May)
where enhanced mitigation protocols will be required. While the provisions specifically relate to
monopile foundation installation, these five and a half month time of year restrictions plus the
recognition of weather-related delays provide for reasonable justification of an approximately 8
month (2/3 year) average annual construction window.

22
5 U.S. Offshore Wind Build-Out Scenario and WTIV Demand
In order to forecast vessel demand in the U.S. pathway to 2030, our team analyzed the projected
buildout on a year-by-year basis for each state. All procurements, Power Purchase Agreements
(PPAs) and Offshore Renewable Energy Credits (ORECs 3) were collected and processed into the
Gantt chart shown in Table 6 for further analysis. The turbine installation year was assumed to
be the final year of construction for each project. Refer to Appendix B for a more detailed table
of state solicitations and their estimated construction periods through 2035.

Due to unique aspects of the U.S. environment, detailed in Section 5.1, we estimated the WTG
installation rate to be two days per turbine. This does not include the foundation installation,
which is assumed not to need a WTIV. The vessel MW/year can be calculated as:

Vessel MW/yr = (365 days/yr) × 2/3 ÷ (2 days/WTG) • (12 MW/WTG) = 1,460 MW/yr

The vessel MW/yr value increases from 1,460 MW/year to 1,825 MW/year in 2028 because of
an assumed increase in turbine capacity from 12 MW to 15 MW. Our analysis also assumes that
vessels can travel from one project to another in the same year as long as each vessel is 20%
below its MW/year capacity. This estimation was made to account for transit time and permitting
delays incurred by working with different states and projects. The WTIV Demand in the table
below uses the described parameters to determine the number of vessels needed each year.
Table 5: Summary of state procurements and corresponding project installation years. (Work on this table
preceded the March 29, 2021 Biden-Harris announcement of 30 GW by 2030, which will require more intensive
WTIV usage in the run-up to 2030.)

The WTIV forecast demonstrates a demand of five vessels during the peak target construction
year of 2027, as shown in Figure 9. While Table 5 portrays that demand will decline after 2030,
this is unlikely to be the case. The Tufts University Offshore Power Research and Education
(OSPRE) program currently estimates that the U.S. will need approximately 300 GW of offshore

3
Power Purchase Agreements and ORECs are utilized by states to solicit renewable energy from a wind farm
developer. For more information on PPAs and ORECs visit https://www.e-education.psu.edu/eme801/node/605.

23
wind by 2050 to meet its net-zero climate goals. This will result in an order of magnitude
increase over the current goal of 30 GW by 2030.

The WTIV forecast shown in Table 5 was used to create a visual representation of offshore wind
buildout between 2023 and 2035, provided in Appendix C. Each figure illustrates by year the
projects in their construction phase in combination with an estimate of total WTIVs required for
the U.S. build-out that year. We have ordered the resulting figures by construction year to model
the offshore wind buildout through 2035.

The maps were created by estimating the capacities of current BOEM lease areas and New York
Bight Draft WEAs. For some procured projects that already have offtake agreements (solid
colored by state in Appendix B), areas were created by dividing the total project capacity per the
offtake agreement 4 by the turbine rating for an assumed turbine. For example, the 804 MW
Vineyard Wind 1 project was divided by the 12 MW turbine rating to obtain a total of 67
turbines. Many of the turbine rating numbers are based on assumptions, since most projects have
not yet announced their turbine model selection.

For the “Future Scenario” procurements, the WEAs were shaded by looking at state procurement
schedules and projects that do not yet have offtake agreements. The “nameplate capacity” in
these cases refer to the procurement amount as promised by a state, or the estimated capacity of
an unprocured project (e.g. Atlantic Shores). The number of turbines required for each
procurement was calculated in the same way as for the procured projects, by dividing the
capacity by the assumed turbine rating. All future scenario projects and procurements assumed a
turbine rating of 15 MW.

After calculating the number of turbines needed for each procurement or project, the WEAs were
populated by the projects and procurements. For procured projects with offtake agreements, the
lease areas are known. However, based on project capacities, the one nautical mile turbine grid
spacing, and turbine ratings, it is unlikely that many of these projects will need their entire lease
area to reach the project capacity. For example, to reach an 800 MW nameplate capacity with
one nautical mile grid spacing and 12 MW turbines, Vineyard Wind 1 and Park City Wind
(another Vineyard Wind 804MW project) are estimated to fill up approximately two thirds of the
Vineyard Wind OCS-A 0501 lease area.

After assigning each procured project the appropriate amount of space within its lease area, the
remaining space in the lease areas were filled out by “future scenarios”, as scheduled out by the
states. For example, Massachusetts has planned to make three 800 MW procurements in the mid-
to-late 2020s. Those projects were filled out in available lease area space and are shown by the

4
Offtake agreements constitute Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) and Offshore Renewable Energy Certificates
(ORECs)

24
hatched yellow spaces on the figures in Appendix C. In some cases, “future scenarios” had to be
distributed among two different lease areas in order to reach their required capacity.

After the projects and procurements were mapped, the offshore wind buildout was illustrated by
mapping which projects would be in their turbine installation phase each year through 2035 (see
Table 7, Appendix C). One sample of these figures is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Build-out scenario for 2027. This year requires 5-WTIVs and reaches a cumulative capacity of 14,305
MW. Maps for each year from 2022-2035 can be found in Appendix B.

By our estimates, displayed in Table 5, 2024, 2027, 2028 and 2030 will have the greatest demand
for WTIVs. As shown in Figure 4, there are only seven Haliade-X capable vessels in 50 meters
of water world-wide (both existing and planned), and five could be needed in 2027 to fulfill the
US buildout. If this scenario played out, it would pose enormous challenges to developers and
likely delay the U.S. build-out. After 2027, our data suggests that WTIV demand will decline
into the early and mid 2030s. We do not expect this to be the case if additional procurements are
solicited by states as they continue to reevaluate their energy demand and divest from fossil fuel
energy production.

25
6 Conclusions
The team’s WTIV analysis illustrates that of all of the vessels currently operating or
commissioned, only seven vessels will be available in the global fleet with the proper height and
capacity to install GE Haliade-X and larger turbines in waters of 50+ meter depth. Additionally,
Table 4 illustrates that six of these seven vessels are already booked for multi-year projects in the
European and Asian markets. The lack of supply and overwhelming demand indicates the
potential for a future market delays and potentially failure that could inhibit the highly
anticipated U.S. offshore wind buildout. Therefore, it is the opinion of this research team that the
United States must act now to build and secure the vessels needed to construct these projects.
Dominion Energy has led U.S. development in this area, but more vessels are urgently needed.
Furthermore, it is recommended that developers work together in coordinating construction
operations to best utilize the limited WTIV resources as efficiently as possible.

Developers have multiple pathways to achieve the U.S. build-out, some serving the public
interest better than others. Selecting a strategy that involves commissioning a fleet of U.S. built
WTIVs or feeder vessels could lead to a revival of American shipyard jobs. Constructing
regional systems of marshalling and manufacturing port infrastructure could create high quality
U.S. jobs and strengthen overall U.S. buildout capability. A coordinated port infrastructure
approach could preserve undeveloped coastal areas and repurpose existing brownfield sites.

As illustrated through this research, it is extremely important that the U.S. think long-term and
creatively about how to launch this major industry, which requires new engineering, new
policies, and new markets. A recent Tufts University study found that a proactively planned and
coordinated regional transmission system would result in lower energy prices and less
environmental impact than an unplanned radial approach (Smith et al., 2021). Likewise, a
deliberate and planned U.S. WTIV buildout would represent an efficient long-term solution to
reach the Biden-Harris Administration’s goal of 30 GW by 2030.

26
Appendix A WTIV Dimensions
The WTIV analysis for this paper was performed to evaluate the feasibility of installing offshore
wind turbine components from a geometric perspective. This aspect of the research highlights a
critical point of the turbine installation process: the crane’s ability to hoist the 794 metric ton
nacelle to a hub height of 150 meters above the ocean surface. To accurately analyze this critical
point, the dimensions of the vessel and the crane were determined as shown in Table A1 on the
following page.

27
Table 6: Vessel dimensions used in geometric analysis.

Sea Sea Vole au Pacific Brave

Dimension (m) Aeolus Innovation Scylla Charybdis Voltaire Unnamed
Installer Challenger Vent Osprey Tern*

Vessel Length 133.3 132.4 139.4 140.4 147.5 139 160.9 132.4 144.0 II 169.3 142
Vessel Height 9 9 10.1 9.5 11 11 10.4 9 12.0 II 14.6 X
Vessel Width 39 39 44.5 41 42 50 49 45 56.0 II 60 50
Leg Length 82.6 82.5 81 90 89 105 105 92.4 X 130 X
Max Water
55 55 45 50 65 65 70 60 X 80 65 II
Depth
Max Lift
120 I 120 I 120 I 120 I 122.5 I 132 I 130 I 141 I 125 II 130 158.0 I
Above Deck
Max Lift
900 I 900 I 1,600 I 1,500 I 1,500 I 1,500 I 1,075 I 1,250 I 2,200 II 3,000 2,500 I
Capacity (mt)
All Values from GAO Report (Tufts Database) unless specified below [GAO Source]
I – Values provided by Ketil Arvesen
II – Values obtained by alternative sources
X – Value not publicly available
*After renovation is completed
**Max Lift Capacity may not be feasible at installation. Crane charts must be used to determine lift capacity reduction at required heights

28
The input parameters listed in Table A1 are described below to explain how each dimension
relates to our analysis.

Vessel Length - Bow to stern length of the vessel hull. This does not include any overhanging
cranes or helicopter pads.

Vessel Height - Average hull height of the vessel from the cargo deck to the keel. Does not
include the pilot deck, sleeping quarters or any cranes. Important for total crane lifting height.

Vessel Width - Hull width of the vessel at its widest point. Used in determining turbine-vessel
clearance.

Leg Length - Total leg length. We assume a 3 m embedment depth of the legs into the ocean
floor for our analysis. Leg length is crucial for the crane’s total lifting height and the maximum
working water depth of the vessel.

Max Working Water Depth – Maximum water depth that a vessel can perform installations. As
indicated in Section 2.2, the vessel must have ample clearance between the keel and the waves
for safety.

Max Lift Height Above Deck – Maximum height that the crane hook can reach above the deck
elevation, accounting for sling length.

Max Lift Capacity – Maximum nameplate capacity of the crane. Capacities are reduced at
nacelle lift elevations. Crane charts must be referenced to determine reduced crane capacity at
these elevations.

29
Appendix B Geometric Analyses of WTIVs
The following figures illustrate the dimensions used in our geometric analysis. The geometric
analysis has been refined over the course of our research to incorporate more variables using
industry standard dimensions: such as maximum working water depth and maximum lifting
height above deck. However, the full story cannot be told without the dimensions listed in the
figures below.

30
 ġ
Figure 10: Robert profile in 50 m water.

ġ
Figure 11: Sea Installer profile in 50 m water.

31
 ġ
Figure 12: Sea Challenger profile in 50 m water.

ġ
Figure 13: Aeolus profile in 50 m water.

32
 ġ
Figure 14: Vole au Vent profile in 50 m water.

Figure 15: Innovation profile in 50 m water.

33
 ġ
Figure 16: Scylla profile in 50 m water.

Figure 17: Bold Tern profile in 50 m water.

34
 ġ
Figure 18: Brave Tern profile in 50 m water.

Figure 19: Wind Orca profile in 50 m water.

35
 ġ
Figure 20: Wind Osprey profile in 50 m water.

Figure 21: Voltaire profile in 50 m water.

36
Appendix C U.S. Offshore Wind Build-Out Scenario

37
Table 7: Current and future offshore wind projects and their estimated timeline through 2035.

PROJECTS AWARDED OFFTAKE AGREEMENTS (ORECs/PPAs) Year 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Construction Assumed Number of Nameplate
Project Name State Lease area Tot. Capacity (MW) 52 52 52 302 4,146 6,698 10,102 15,562 20,392 23,192 27,468 28,618 29,618 30,802 31,802 32,802
year end Turbine Rating Turbines Capacity
South Fork NY OCS-A 0486 2023 12 11 130 end
SkipJack MD OCS-A 0519 2023 12 10 120 end
Vineyard Wind MA OCS-A 0501 2024 12 67 800 end
Empire 1 NY OCS-A 0512 2024 12 68 816 end
Sunrise NY OCS-A 0487 2024 12 73 880 end
US Wind Inc MD OCS-A 0490 2024 12 21 248 end
Ocean Wind NJ OCS-A 0498 2024 12 91 1,100 end
Mayflower Wind MA OCS-A 0521 2025 12 67 804 end
Dominion 1 VA OCS-A 0483 2025 14 89 1,246 WTIV Construction end
Revolution CT OCS-A 0486 2025 12 25 300 end
Revolution RI OCS-A 0486 2025 12 17 202 end
Dominion 2 VA OCS-A 0483 2026 14 100 1,400 end
Park City CT OCS-A 0501 2026 12 67 804 end
Empire 2 NY OCS-A 0512 2027 12 105 1,260 end
Solicitations with no PPA/OREC have grey lease area cells.

Beacon Wind 1 NY OCS-A 0520 2028 15 82 1,230 end

AV / CVOW / BIWF ME VA RI NA - 11 / 6 / 6 8 52
Total 900 11,392
FUTURE SCENARIO (No PPAs or ORECs)
Atlantic Shores NJ OCS-A 0499 2027 15 80 1,200 end

38
Avangrid NC OCS-A 0508 2027 15 160 2,400 end end
Massachusetts MA OCS-A 0521 2027 15 53 800 end
Rhode Island RI OCS-A 0486 2027 15 40 600 end
Maryland MD OCS-A 0490 2027 15 27 400 end
Liberty* NY OCS-0500 & OCS-501 2028 15 80 1,200 end
New Jersey NJ OCS-A 0498 2028 15 80 1,200 end
Maryland MD OCS-A 0490 2028 15 27 400 end
Massachusetts MA OCS-A 0522 2028 15 54 800 end
New York NY OCS-A 0520 2029 15 77 1,150 end
Maryland MD OCS-A 0482 2029 15 26 400 end
Virginia VA New area 2029 15 83 1,250 end
New Jersey NJ OCS-A 0499 2030 15 67 1,000 end
Connecticut CT OCS-A 0500 2030 15 79 1,192 end
Virginia VA New area 2030 15 86 1,288 end
Massachusetts MA OCS-A 0522 2030 15 53 796 end
New York NY OCS-A 0500 2031 15 77 1,150 end
New Jersey NJ OCS-A 0482 & OCS-A 0519 2032 15 67 1,000 end
New York NY *** 2033 15 79 1,184 end
New Jersey NJ Hudson South 2034 15 67 1,000 end
New Jersey NJ Hudson South 2035 15 66 1,000 end
State Commitment Total 2,327 32,802
*For Liberty Wind, area from neighboring lease OCS-A 500 was added to accomodate 1,200 MW
***Hudson North, Fairway South and OCS-A 0512
Figure 22: 2023 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 250 MW.

39
Figure 23: 2024 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 4,094 MW.

40
Figure 24: 2025 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 6,646 MW.

41
Figure 25: 2026 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 8,850 MW.

42
Figure 26: 2027 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 14, 305 MW.

43
Figure 27: 2028 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 20,345 MW.

44
Figure 28: 2029 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 23,145 MW.

45
Figure 29: 2030 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 27,420 MW.

46
Figure 30: 2031 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 28,570 MW.

47
Figure 31: 2032 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 29,570 MW.

48
Figure 32: 2033 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 30,754 MW.

49
Figure 33: 2034 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 31,754 MW.

50
Figure 34: 2035 U.S. build-out. Cumulative capacity = 32,754 MW.

51
Figure 35: 2035 U.S. offshore wind build-out scenario. Cumulative capacity = 32,754
MW. Since the creation of this report, U.S. commitments have increased to 40,210 MW
by 2040, and there is a federal commitment to ensure the U.S. installs 30 GW by 2030.

52
References
4COffshore (2021). Hornsea Project One Offshore Wind Farm. Retrieved on June 13 from
https://www.4coffshore.com/windfarms/united-kingdom/hornsea-project-one-united-
kingdom-uk81.html.
Andrejasich, K. (2020). Ørsted, US Wind Push Back Operation Date for Md. Offshore Wind
Farms. S&P Global Market Intelligence. April 22. Retrieved on June 13, 2021 from
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-
headlines/216-rsted-us-wind-push-back-operation-date-for-md-offshore-wind-farms-
58153464.
Arvesen, K. (2021). Wind Turbine Installation Vessel Discussion. Phone/zoom interview with
authors. February 25.
Avangrid (2021). Project Overview. Kittyhawk Offshore. Avangrid Renewables. Retrieved on
April 28 from
https://www.kittyhawkoffshore.com/wps/portal/kittyhawk/projectoverview.
Blauwwind (2021). About the Project. Borselle III & IV offshore wind farm. Retrieved on June
13 from https://www.blauwwind.nl/en/about/about-blauwwind.
Bloomberg (2020). BMAP Interactive Mapping Tool. Retrieved through Tufts University
License on December 11 from https://www.bloomberg.com/.
BOEM (2021a). Record of Decision: Vineyard Wind I Offshore Wind Energy Project
Construction and Operations Plan. May 10. U.S. DOI, DOD, DOC. Retrieved on June 12
from https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/documents/renewable-energy/state-
activities/Final-Record-of-Decision-Vineyard-Wind-1.pdf.
BOEM (2021b). Outer Continental Shelf Renewable Energy Leases Map Book. Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management. March. Retrieved on May 20 from
https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/mapping-and-data.
Chesto, Jon (2020). Vineyard Wind Will Use GE Turbines for Its Massive Project off Martha’s
Vineyard - The Boston Globe. The Boston Globe. December 1. Retrieved on June, 2021
from https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/12/01/business/vineyard-wind-will-use-ge-
turbines-its-massive-project-off-marthas-vineyard/.
DOI (2021). Biden-Harris Administration Proposes Competitive Lease Sale for Offshore Wind
Development for New York and New Jersey. U.S. Department of the Interior, News
Release. Friday, June 11.
DOT (2021). Domestic Shipping, Special Exceptions. Maritime Administration. U.S.
Department of Transportation. Retrieved on February 7 from
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/ports/domestic-shipping/domestic-shipping.
Dominion (2021). Dominion Energy, Ørsted and Eversource Reach Deal on Contract to Charter
Offshore Wind Turbine Installation Vessel. Dominion Energy News Releases. June 1.
Retrieved on June 12 from https://news.dominionenergy.com/2021-06-01-Dominion-

53
 Energy,-rsted-and-Eversource-Reach-Deal-on-Contract-to-Charter-Offshore-Wind-
Turbine-Installation-Vessel.
Equinor (2021). Equinor Selected for Largest-Ever US Offshore Wind Award. We energize the
lives of 170 million people. Every day. Equinor, March 16. Retrieved on June 13 from
https://www.equinor.com/en/news/202101-us-offshore-wind.html.
Energyfacts (2020). “Steel-Cutting Ceremony for Shimizu Latest Wind Turbine Installation
Vessel.” December 9. Retrieved on June 12, 2021 from https://www.energyfacts.eu/steel-
cutting-ceremony-for-shimizu-latest-wind-turbine-installation-vessel/.
Power Technology (2021). Hornsea Project One, North Sea. Retrieved on June 13, 2021 from
https://www.power-technology.com/projects/hornsea-project-one-north-sea/.
GAO (2020). Offshore Wind Energy: Planned Projects May Lead to Construction of New
Vessels in the U.S., but Industry Has Made Few Decisions amid Uncertainties. (GAO
Publication No. 21-153). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved
on June 12 from https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-153.pdf.
Gilbert, R. (2021). Atlantic Shores Offshore Wind to Test Ocean Floor for Energy Project. Press
of Atlantic City, February 15. Retrieved on June 13 from
https://pressofatlanticcity.com/news/local/atlantic-shores-offshore-wind-to-test-ocean-
floor-for-energy-project/article_0b119ce7-6413-579a-a06f-1b0f50c5ce58.html.
GWEC (2020). GWEC Market Intelligence Releases Global Offshore Wind Turbine Installation
Database. Global Wind Energy Council, September 30. Retrieved on January 28, 2021
from http://gwec.net/g wec-market-intelligence-releases-global-offshore-wind-turbine-
installation-database/.
JDN (2019) Voltaire secured for Dogger Bank wind farms. Jan De Nul. October 22. Retrieved on
February 7, 2021, from https://www.jandenul.com/news/voltaire-secured-dogger-bank-
wind- farms.
Mayflower Wind (2021). Powering New England's Energy Future - Mayflower Wind - MA
Clean Energy. Retrieved on June 13 from https://mayflowerwind.com/.
Moore, K. (2020). Keel laid for first U.S.-FLAG offshore wind turbine installation vessel.
WorkBoat. December 17. Retrieved on June 12, 2021, from
https://www.workboat.com/offshore/keel-laid-for-first-u-s-flag-offshore-wind-turbine-
installation-vessel.
NEA (2016). Borssele Wind Farm Zone: Wind Farm Sites III & IV. Netherland Enterprise
Agency. August. Retrieved on June 13, 2021 from
https://offshorewind.rvo.nl/file/download/44692942.
NROC (2020). Northeast Ocean Data: Maps and data for ocean planning in the northeastern
United States. Northeast Regional Ocean Council. Retrieved on October 3 from
https://www.northeastoceandata.org/.
Ocean Wind (2021). The first offshore wind project in New Jersey delivering 1,100 MW of
clean, reliable power. Retrieved on June 13 from https://oceanwind.com/.

54
Salzburg, R. (2021). Vineyard Wind 1 is a go. MV Times. May 11. Retrieved on June 16 from
https://www.mvtimes.com/2021/05/11/vineyard-wind-1-go/.
Power Technology (2021). Sunrise Wind Project, New York. Retrieved on June 13 from
https://www.power-technology.com/projects/sunrise-wind-project-new-york/.
Schuman, C. (2016). Wind farm turbine installation begins. Block Island Times. August 5.
Retrieved on June 13, 2021 from https://www.blockislandtimes.com/article/wind-farm-
turbine-installation-begins/47147.
Smith, A. (2021). H.R.6395 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2021. Congress.gov, January 1. Retrieved on June 13 from
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6395.
Smith, K., Lenney, S., Marsden, O., Kates-Garnick, B., Stankoviü, A., and Hines, E. (2021).
Offshore Wind Transmission and Grid Interconnection across U.S. Northeast Markets.
OSPRE-2021-01. Tufts University. Digital library link:
https://dl.tufts.edu/pdfviewer/br86bh77z/47429p92q.
US Wind (2021). Maryland Offshore Wind Project. US Wind. Retrieved on June 13 from
https://uswindinc.com/maryland-offshore-wind-project/.
Vineyard Wind (2019). Vineyard Wind – NGO Agreement. National Wildlife Federation,
National Resources Defense Council, Conservation Law Foundation. January 22, 2019.
Retrieved on June 13, 2021 from https://www.clf.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/01/Final_VW-NGO-NARW-Agreement-012219-NGO-fully-
executed.pdf.
Vineyard Wind (2021). Vineyard Wind Selects DEME Offshore US for Wind Turbine
Installation. March 31. Retrieved on June 12 from https://www.vineyardwind.com/press-
releases/2021/3/31/vineyard-wind-selects-deme-offshore-us-for-wind-turbine-
installation.
White House (2021). FACT SHEET: Biden Administration Jumpstarts Offshore Wind Energy
Projects to Create Jobs. Statements and Releases. March 29. Retrieved on June 12 from
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/29/fact-sheet-
biden-administration-jumpstarts-offshore-wind-energy-projects-to-create-jobs/.

55