wind-turbinevia Eco Watch / June 22, 2015 / Japan officially unveiled today its 7 megawatt (MW) wind turbine, the world’s largest offshore turbine to date. It is slated to be operational by September.

The Fukushima Wind Project, located about 12 miles off the coast of Fukushima, installed a 2 MW wind turbine in November 2013. The turbines are part of a pilot project led by Marubeni Co. and funded by the Japanese government with research and support from several public and private organizations, including the University of Tokyo and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.

The new turbine, which will tower 220 meters above the sea, will transmit electricity to the grid via submarine cable, according to The Japan Times. The government has allocated 50 billion yen ($405 million) for the project, which allows turbines to float in areas that are “too deep for traditional towers fixed to the seafloor,” says Bloomberg News. There are plans to add a third floating turbine with a generating capacity of 5 MW later in the year, which will bring the total output capacity of the project to 14 MW.

Offshore turbines, which have garnered a lot of support in Japan after the Fukushima disaster, “enjoy the benefit of more stable wind than onshore models, and are more efficient because they are not hampered by the constraints posed by land and transportation,” says The Japan Times. 

“Countries are exploring floating offshore wind technology and Japan is in a sense at the same level with Norway and Portugal,” which have about 2 MW of offshore wind generating capacity, Yasuhiro Matsuyama, a trade ministry official in charge of clean energy projects, told Bloomberg News.

In the U.S., Deepwater Wind broke ground (or should I say broke water) this spring on the country’s first offshore wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island. When it is finished, the five turbines will have a generating capacity of 30 MW.

Did you like this? Share it:
By Broc West| 5 Comments | Featured, News


  1. Seems like a PR move to me.

  2. $405M for an incredible 14MW peak power. WOW! That’s only $29k/kw peak. At an optimistic capacity factor of 40% that would be $72k per kw of avg energy. Only 10-20X the cost of clean, green 24/7, night/day, windy/calm, sunny/cloudy, north/south nuclear power. What disgusting, blithering idiot came up with the idea to throw all that money down the sewer on an intermittent, expensive, unreliable power source that only lasts for 12-15 yrs vs 50-100 yrs for ultra-safe GenIII nuclear. But of course, Oil Barons & Banksters get rich on the oil and gas trade, so they can’t allow any REAL competition for their noxious product. Wind, yeah, that will do lots. Pixie power for airheads.

    • Ultra-safe GenIII nuclear…………I think not. All types of reactor pose huge risk to the population as any type of accident would result in tragedy.The problem is people can’t see, hear, or smell radioactive isotopes and so believe everything is fine, but that couldn’t be farther from the truth. Nuclear is not at all safe, never was and still is not and remains unsafe to the point of making an area uninhabitable for all life. We are taking huge risk with nuclear as the very basics in which we need to survive , the very water we depend on, the soil we use to grow our food, and the air we breath, once contaminated with radioactive isotopes, changes our very existence. The future generations will be paying the price of nuclear and problems that we have, such as storage, leaks, water contamination, evacuation plans……… much more has yet to be solved. I commend the Japanese for seeking an alternative to nuclear. It is a step in the right direction in securing the future. Yeah, GenIII reactors could be considered safer that earlier reactors, but are still not where they should be. When dealing with nuclear, there is just no room for error. Technology and safety needs to advance further yet before it would make any sense to take such risks, as there are many cons to consider. The nuclear industry as always tried to downplay the risk, saying that accidents are unlikely and without plans when something does happen. They will always tell the people what they want to hear to benefit themselves. All it takes is one accident, one of which that has already happened that should make us rethink nuclear before it is too late. My opinion, we need to invest in renewable and alternative energy sources and I am glad to see the Japanese do just that and hope to see more countries look past nuclear and towards the future. Time will still be needed to assess nuclear further and who knows, maybe one day we can harness nuclear energy safely, I am not discounting it, I just know technology is not there yet.

  3. bogus betz law still has devesting efffects on natural . wind and hydro kinetic energy sorces,,there is no gaps between flat. opposing blades.!

  4. What STEFANIE says, I agree! I would rather pay more for safe, clean energy than see another Fukushima in my lifetime! Thanks STEFANIE for your wise synopsis! What pro-nuclear people do not see are the hidden costs like, err, the Fukushima clean-up???!!! What of the cleaning of the CO2 in our atmosphere that is NOT figured into our energy prices! What of nuclear storage and the facilities that need to be “rebuilt” over an over for the next few thousand years or so? Personally I would rather refurbish a wind turbine than hollow out another mountain to store waste that has thousands of years before it is no longer a threat! Who will foot the (future) bill once the profiteers are done with their nuclear mess!

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *