IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v35y2015i4p587-593.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Analysis for U.S. Offshore Wind Farms: The Need for an Integrated Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Staid
  • Seth D. Guikema

Abstract

Wind power is becoming an increasingly important part of the global energy portfolio, and there is growing interest in developing offshore wind farms in the United States to better utilize this resource. Wind farms have certain environmental benefits, notably near‐zero emissions of greenhouse gases, particulates, and other contaminants of concern. However, there are significant challenges ahead in achieving large‐scale integration of wind power in the United States, particularly offshore wind. Environmental impacts from wind farms are a concern, and these are subject to a number of on‐going studies focused on risks to the environment. However, once a wind farm is built, the farm itself will face a number of risks from a variety of hazards, and managing these risks is critical to the ultimate achievement of long‐term reductions in pollutant emissions from clean energy sources such as wind. No integrated framework currently exists for assessing risks to offshore wind farms in the United States, which poses a challenge for wind farm risk management. In this “Perspective”, we provide an overview of the risks faced by an offshore wind farm, argue that an integrated framework is needed, and give a preliminary starting point for such a framework to illustrate what it might look like. This is not a final framework; substantial work remains. Our intention here is to highlight the research need in this area in the hope of spurring additional research about the risks to wind farms to complement the substantial amount of on‐going research on the risks from wind farms.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Staid & Seth D. Guikema, 2015. "Risk Analysis for U.S. Offshore Wind Farms: The Need for an Integrated Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 587-593, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:35:y:2015:i:4:p:587-593
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12324
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12324?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George E. Apostolakis, 2004. "How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 515-520, June.
    2. Stephen Rose & Paulina Jaramillo & Mitchell J. Small & Jay Apt, 2013. "Quantifying the Hurricane Catastrophe Risk to Offshore Wind Power," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(12), pages 2126-2141, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrea E. Copping & Alicia M. Gorton & Roel May & Finlay Bennet & Elise DeGeorge & Miguel Repas Goncalves & Bob Rumes, 2020. "Enabling Renewable Energy While Protecting Wildlife: An Ecological Risk-Based Approach to Wind Energy Development Using Ecosystem-Based Management Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Yu, Qing & Liu, Kezhong & Chang, Chia-Hsun & Yang, Zaili, 2020. "Realising advanced risk assessment of vessel traffic flows near offshore wind farms," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    3. Bonnie Ram, 2016. "Commentary on “Risk Analysis for U.S. Offshore Wind Farms: The Need for an Integrated Approach”," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 641-644, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    2. Johnson, Caroline A. & Flage, Roger & Guikema, Seth D., 2021. "Feasibility study of PRA for critical infrastructure risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    3. Terje Aven, 2018. "An Emerging New Risk Analysis Science: Foundations and Implications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 876-888, May.
    4. George E. Apostolakis & Douglas M. Lemon, 2005. "A Screening Methodology for the Identification and Ranking of Infrastructure Vulnerabilities Due to Terrorism," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 361-376, April.
    5. Kresning, Boma & Hashemi, M. Reza & Shirvani, Amin & Hashemi, Javad, 2024. "Uncertainty of extreme wind and wave loads for marine renewable energy farms in hurricane-prone regions," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    6. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    7. Senderov, Sergey M. & Smirnova, Elena M. & Vorobev, Sergey V., 2020. "Analysis of vulnerability of fuel supply systems in gas-consuming regions due to failure of critical gas industry facilities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    8. Luca Allodi & Fabio Massacci, 2017. "Security Events and Vulnerability Data for Cybersecurity Risk Estimation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1606-1627, August.
    9. Tidwell, Vincent C. & Lowry, Thomas S. & Binning, David & Graves, Jenny & Peplinski, William J. & Mitchell, Roger, 2019. "Framework for shared drinking water risk assessment," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 37-47.
    10. Wang, Hao & Wang, Tongguang & Ke, Shitang & Hu, Liang & Xie, Jiaojie & Cai, Xin & Cao, Jiufa & Ren, Yuxin, 2023. "Assessing code-based design wind loads for offshore wind turbines in China against typhoons," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 669-682.
    11. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    12. Qian Zhou & James H. Lambert & Christopher W. Karvetski & Jeffrey M. Keisler & Igor Linkov, 2012. "Flood Protection Diversification to Reduce Probabilities of Extreme Losses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1873-1887, November.
    13. Aven, Terje, 2020. "Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Misuri, Alessio & Landucci, Gabriele & Cozzani, Valerio, 2021. "Assessment of risk modification due to safety barrier performance degradation in Natech events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    15. Senderov, Sergey M. & Vorobev, Sergey V. & Smirnova, Elena M., 2022. "Peak underground gas storage efficiency in reducing the vulnerability of gas supply to consumers in an extensive gas transmission system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    16. Terje Aven & Louis Anthony Cox, 2016. "National and Global Risk Studies: How Can the Field of Risk Analysis Contribute?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 186-190, February.
    17. Terje Aven, 2010. "On the Need for Restricting the Probabilistic Analysis in Risk Assessments to Variability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 354-360, March.
    18. Sykes, Peter & Jones, Ken & Wildsmith, John. D., 2007. "Managing the potential public health risks from bioaerosol liberation at commercial composting sites in the UK: An analysis of the evidence base," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 410-424.
    19. Emanuele Borgonovo & Alessandra Cillo & Curtis L. Smith, 2018. "On the Relationship between Safety and Decision Significance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(8), pages 1541-1558, August.
    20. Emanuele Borgonovo & Alessandra Cillo, 2017. "Deciding with Thresholds: Importance Measures and Value of Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(10), pages 1828-1848, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:35:y:2015:i:4:p:587-593. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.