Without floating foundations, offshore depends a lot on the specifics of the oceanbed. But DONG Energy, which I think is the world biggest developer of offshore wind, recently gave a bid on a subsidy of zero for a farm near Germany. Final investment decision is still in a couple of years so they may pull out of the bid if things don't develop as expected, but not without paying a big fee.

So offshore is expected to get cheaper.

There's a comparison with nuclear down in the thread. I think one important thing to keep in mind here is that these cost reductions coming from industrialization and improved economies of scale are REAL. They happen year over year, has happened for decades, and they will surely lower the price even further in the future. Just like solar. And battery tech for that matter. It's incremental improvements.

Please don't post unsubstantively here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

But what happens if you have a place like the North Sea surrounded by facilities for deploying oil rigs and associated infrastructure, for the oil to run out? There is considerable sunk cost in the infrastructure and with some subsidies to keep yards busy (as such things are needed for national security reasons) it all becomes a lot easier.

What happens is that you get crazy plans like this:

http://cphpost.dk/news/denmark-looking-into-building-north-s...

In a couple of decades, I think the North Sea is going have vast areas full of wind turbines.

One of the only complaints about offshore wind is it "spoils the view". A 250m high turbine can be seen from about 30m away - dogger is twice that distance.

Current plans are for 5GW of production, that's about 15% of the UK's current electricity demand, and more than is produced by the UK's wind farms in total.

If successful I can't see anything stopping expansion to the initial planned 9GW, other than capital funding.