Good morning. My name is Anette Olsen, and I'm the CEO of Bonheur. A heartily welcome to everybody for the first quarter presentation. Today, we will start as usual with our CFO, Richard Olav Aas, who will take us through the main figures, and then we have the different responsible or the subsidiaries that will present their companies. Richard.
Thank you, Anette, and also a warm welcome from me this morning. The first quarter results are characterized by that we had some headwinds in the renewable energy segment, but still a good result. That is more or less compensated by strong results in the service segment and also a strong improvement in the cruise segment. I think you should have that in your mind when we go through the numbers. Starting here on the first slide, going to the right as a start, we had operating revenues close to NOK 3 billion this quarter, which is an improvement of almost or more than NOK 500 million from first quarter last year. Like I said, EBITDA was on par with last year. The reduction in renewable energy is compensated by strong improvements in wind service and cruise.
The EBITDA ended at the same level of NOK 926 million. I move away from the consolidated figures and into the various segments. To the left, we see renewable energy had a very strong first quarter last year with an EBITDA of NOK 1,220 million. That is now reduced to NOK 763 million. Still a very good performance, but a steep reduction. That is really related to three items. We have less wind. The wind speed was actually 17% lower than in first quarter 2022, mainly related to Norway and the U.K. Sweden was okay. Also lower than normal, 12% lower than normal. The second most important thing is the high price levies that's been introduced both in the U.K. and Norway that took down the EBITDA with NOK 134 million.
We have booked that as an OpEx. I'll come back to that. Thirdly, the power prices, they are still at a good level, but lower than last year. Those three elements took down the EBITDA of more than NOK 400 million from first quarter last year. Wind service normally has a first quarter that is not so good due to seasons. Last year it was actually a loss, EBITDA loss of NOK 9 million. This quarter, the wind service had a EBITDA of NOK 206 million. The main reason for that is, again, another quarter with strong operational performance in Fred. Olsen Windcarrier. Alexandra will come back to that. The Tern vessel had 100% commercial utilization. Brave Tern was on transit back from Taiwan, but that was paid transit.
Backlog has strengthened further to NOK 522 million, we have not included one agreement we have with our partner Shimizu in the backlog. Alexandra will come back to that because that is a little bit separate out of the normal backlog. That's also an important milestone in the quarter. Global Wind Service, a more normal operational quarter, an okay start to the year. A milestone, really a milestone. Cruise Lines had a positive EBITDA for the first time since the COVID outbreak now, three years ago had an EBITDA of NOK 5 million. 3 ships in operations. Bolette was 14 days in dry dock.
Occupancy is still low, 66%, that shows a little bit the potential with the new ships that even if we only fill the three ships with 66% occupancy, we still made a positive EBITDA. You can see some of the reason on the next bullet point that the net ticket income is now at 180 per passenger, which is up from 133 one year ago. That comes on the top of a good start on the booking season. January and February are the very important months of booking, we have seen good demands and good bookings in the first quarter. A little bit positive there on cruise after three years with very red numbers.
Other investments, more or less on the same level as first quarter last year, NOK 48 million negative compared to NOK 39 million. Slightly weaker for NHST. We're also investing and Sophie will come back to that on 1848. We are investing in technologies in floating wind and floating solar, as we think technologies will be the key differentiator in floating solar and floating. Quickly on the parent company, equity ratio of close to 74% by the end of first quarter, a strengthening from last year, and cash in parent about NOK 2.6 billion, which is more than NOK 500 million improvement from first quarter last. A good financial position. On the consolidated summary, already commented on the improvement on revenues and the stable EBITDA.
What you can see is that we have introduced here on the tax side, the high price levies as a part of our OpEx. We split it out, so it's transparent how much it represents. These are the extra levies that the Norwegian and the U.K. government have introduced when prices are above a certain price level. In total, that was NOK 134 million in first quarter 2023. Depreciation more or less on the same level. Net finance this quarter was quite positive with NOK 95 million, profit, compared to a loss of NOK 14 million in first quarter 2022. Net interest on a normal level. We had quite a lot of currency gains due to the weak Norwegian krone. An improvement of more than NOK 100 million.
EBIT was up NOK 111 million, mainly due to the net finance line. On the tax cost, somewhat lower. A part of the reason there is a good result in FOWIC, which is a part of the Tonnage tax regime. There is an improvement on tax of NOK 25, despite that we pay more corporate tax in the U.K. and also the ground rent tax in Norway that's booked to the tax cost. The net result, an improvement of NOK 135 million, up to a net result of NOK 565. What is very positive this quarter for the shareholders of Bonheur is that more of the results comes from 100% controlled entities like FOWIC and less losses in Cruise.
While where we have the joint ventures on the renewable energy side is where we have the reduction in the results. Shareholders of the parent company had NOK 326 million out of the NOK 565 million in result this quarter, compared to only NOK 54 million in first quarter last year. We're generating good cash flow in the quarter. The net interest bearing debt was reduced to NOK 4.4 million. Good improvement in working capital in the quarter and not too much CapEx in the quarter. Going a little bit deeper on the revenues, the improvement of NOK 522 million on the revenues. As you can see, Cruise Lines is the big contributor with improvement in occupancy and prices. Close to NOK 500 million improved revenues in Cruise.
While the reduction in renewable energy due to lower wind and prices is netted out by more utilization on the Tern vessels of NOK 308 million. On the EBITDA, renewable energy, a reduction again of NOK 457 million, which is then compensated by improved results in wind service and Cruise. To repeat, since it's a quite big number on renewable energy, three items driving down the results. 17% lower wind speeds, more than NOK 130 million in levies, high-price levies, that is booked as OpEx, thirdly lower prices, and that's in descending order. Wind service, NOK 215. A good start of the year of all companies in that segment.
Cruise Lines, I can come a little bit more back to the details on Cruise Line towards the end of the presentation. On the balance sheet and the debt and the cash side, I said we had a good development in cash this quarter with reduction in working capital. We see here from the table what we control 100%. We have a cash position now of NOK 4 billion, an external debt of around NOK 3 billion. Renewable Energy sits with slightly more than half a billion NOK in cash on the 100% controlled entities. Windcarrier and Global Wind Service sits with close to NOK 600 million in cash compared to NOK 500 million in external debt. Cruise Lines, good start of the year and then have still some cash left.
We have supported Cruise Lines extensively during COVID, let's hope that that now will soon come to an end. Bonheur ASA, plus some minor companies, sits with close to NOK 2.7 billion in cash compared to the bond debt of around NOK 2.2 billion. In the joint ventures, renewable energy generated strong cash flow in first quarter and also in the fourth quarter and has a cash position in the JV of NOK 1.6 billion compared to an external debt of NOK 5.7 billion. Wind service, which is UWL, Global Wind Service and Blue Tern has a cash position of around NOK 500 million compared to an external debt of NOK 1.2 billion, which is in line with how we want to capitalize the group.
Finally, my part of the agenda before I revert to Cruise towards the end is that we want to talk a little bit about our sustainability reporting. We have made an effort this year in all the main subsidiaries with good engagement from a lot of employees. I want to thank every employee that has contributed to this. It's been a good effort. That's resulted in a new sustainability report that we have issued now. I think it's very important to say this reporting is one thing. We have lifted ourselves in the reporting side. More important is this is very high on the agenda in all subsidiaries and not all the reporting, but what we actually do, which is the most important thing.
This is well-rooted, especially in the renewable energy subsidiaries. Some of the highlights from this year report is that we have a record high renewable energy production, substituting CO2. We have increased the wind development pipeline in a very good way. We are very careful in how we select sites and how we develop sites, regarding both biodiversity, how we think about roads, and so on. We had a significant installation activity of both onshore and offshore wind power in Global Wind Service and Fred. Olsen Windcarrier. We have worked hard to reduce emission from the vessels, especially in the cruise lines, working with the machine learning tools, artificial intelligence, itinerary planning, what have you, to take down the emissions from the vessels.
Of course, this is important for us, and that we work in this direction and that we strengthen our efforts, both on the reporting and how we work, but it's also a big expectation from our partners, finance partners, operational partners, and so on. We have also updated our Green Finance Framework to include the EU taxonomy assessment, and that's what you see to the right bottom is, where we have used a software program, based on the EU taxonomy, to see how aligned our turnover, the CapEx and OpEx is with the taxonomy. We see we are quite green on the turnover. We still have some red that we continue to work on. On the CapEx and OpEx, it's on a lower.
All in all, I encourage you to read the report. We have a strong emphasis that we should walk the talk, and I can assure you that there's a lot of effort, great effort by a lot of employees in this area, and most importantly, what we do and not so much what we report, but we have also now strengthened our reporting in this area. I think that takes me to the end of my presentation.
Good. Thank you, Rikard. Just to remind all of you that, questions, the session will happen at the end. Next is Anders Bade, Co-CEO of Fred. Olsen Renewables.
Thank you, Anette, welcome to all of you on the call. I will start with the development portfolio as normal. I'll take it market by market, and this slide focused on onshore wind. Starting with U.K., we have five sites consented that we're working to bring forward to FID. We have on the development portfolio an increase by 50 megawatts this quarter to 800 megawatts. It should be noted that when a site turns into what we here call development, that's when we have site control and secured land rights. We start to de-risk, typically sites will fall away when we de-risk them closer to consent, because we don't want to invest in sites that we don't think will be consented.
When there is an increase in the number of megawatts, the new sites are more than compensating also for the de-risking activities where we remove some sites. Norway, increasing with 100 megawatts this quarter. That's related to actually Finnmark, where we have 2 sites in partnership with Finnmark Kraft. They could each be 450 megawatts, and they are progressing. We have only included 1 of them in these figures, but now 225 is included, which increases to Norway to 1,150 megawatts. In Finnmark, as I've stated before, the municipalities are forward, are positive, we're moving forward. Sweden, increasing with 75 megawatts for the quarter. We also now have a solid portfolio in southern Sweden, in SE3 and SE4, combined with our main footprint in northern Sweden.
That's a key market for us. We also have Välkommen Consented, which we have now got the consent to increase the pipe from 210 to 250 meters. That was appealed, but then the burden is on the people who appeal that the 250 will be worse than 210. We are quite confident that that will be also finally approved. That will increase Välkommen to also 160 MW and better wind speeds. Italy still increasing. Now a portfolio of 300 MW in a highly competitive market. We don't report the figures here on PV, land-based PV and on floating solar. Some of you who follow the national news in Norway, you will have seen that we are active, for instance, in Norway in PV.
We have some sites under development, but they are early phase. We don't report the figures here. The same goes for floating solar, where we are particularly focused in Southeast Asia and southern Europe. Going to the next slide, we see the production steadily increasing. We now with Fäbodliden, at the end of the year, we'll have 14 operational Fäbodliden two. We'll have 14 operational wind farms. Production for the year as the prognosis for 2023 is somewhat lower than P50 due to the reasons of the wind speed that Richard mentioned, which I will come back to on the next slide. We go to the next. This is always an important slide. The upper left corner, you see the capacity factor and the generation.
As Rikard mentioned, it's been lower wind speeds in U.K. and also actually particularly this time Norway. You see capacity factors significantly higher in Q1 last year than they've been this year. They're also lower than P50 for the quarter, the wind speeds. Sweden is a more healthy production and more on par with P50. Our prices in the down left corner that you see them coming down still to a healthier level, a strong level compared to historic figures, but lower than what they were over the last 18 months. The key reason for that is the gas price, which you will see on the upper right corner. The blue line there shows the gas price coming down from the peak almost EUR 300 per megawatts hour, now closer to 50.
That's a, I would say, healthy reduction for the European economy and also for not supporting Putin. Obviously it's drives down the power prices. Now you had with the peak gas price, you had some switching from gas to coal in terms of production. Coal was to a larger extent price setter than what it normally is. Now with the current gas prices, it's really gas that sets the price because it's now switched back more to gas production. It's the combination of the gas price and the carbon price, which typically is the price setter. You need to multiply the blue line with around 2 and divide the green line carbon prices with 3 to get to the marginal cost of running a gas-fired power plant.
Gas is the dominant price setter. Hydrologically, the balance in Scandinavia is now for Norway. It's about normal for the year. Hydrologic balance includes the snow, which has not yet melted. Norway is now also balanced north and south, which is very different to the situation we had 1 year ago. While in Sweden, there's somewhat less snow actually. It's not the water itself, it's the snow, which is somewhat less. A little bit weak hydrologic balance in Sweden, which maybe supports a bit stronger power prices than normal in northern Sweden going forward. I will also cover 2 other topics this quarter. First 1 slide on floating solar and then 2 slides on sector specific taxes.
On floating solar, the aim with this slide is that combined with slides from Sofie and Fred. Olsen 1848 later on the call, we'll give you an overview of what Nør is doing in the area of floating solar. As mentioned previously, floating solar is a key part of Fred. Olsen Renewables long-term strategy, and we focus on near shore. We do that for two reasons. It's a large untapped market. We have large sea areas available close to coastal demand centers worldwide. Typically, in those areas you have limited alternatives because you lack land close to demand centers both for onshore solar and for onshore wind. Near shore floating solar has a good fit with the capabilities of Fred. Olsen companies in general, and Fred. Olsen Renewables in particular.
We are really there building on the 175 years of maritime and offshore experience across the different Fred. Olsen related companies. We are an early mover. We started to work on this some years back, We're building the competence on how to construct and operate these floating solar farms in the sea. We develop a very attractive value proposition to project partners. As mentioned previously in previous presentations, in new markets, we aim to partner with strong local power companies Hence with that partnership, we will have a strong go-to-market approach. De-risking is absolutely key to unlock the potential. We have taken a very systematic approach.
We have performed rigorous mapping across all known floater concepts, and we have done that together with SERIS, our partner, which I mentioned on the right-hand side, and we have identified a high number of important failure modes. We have very systematically grouped those failure modes and started to de-risk. You can see some of the key aspects that we de-risk. It's about environmental impact. It's certainly about extreme wind and wave loads. The systems have to sustain the extreme 50-year wave and strong winds. It's all about lifetime. How to make sure the solar farms will stay there and stay healthy for 25-30 years. Marine growth is a key aspect. System design, power production estimates and obviously also how to do efficiently O&M. We are doing some of this standalone as Fred.
Olsen Renewables, but we really rely on high quality partnerships and they have been for SERIS established since 2020. With the SERIS we address all the top side issues. SERIS is renowned to be the world leader in floating solar. It's a research institute for freshwater and we now jointly have exclusive partnership in seawater. Fred. Olsen 1848 is also a key partner and Sophie we will come back to that. That's particularly on the anchoring, mooring and floater design for us. We also have other partnerships and which are with vendors and suppliers, which is supported by the Horizon 2020 program from the EU. You also see we have a grant contribution on the other partnerships we have. Moving to the final section, the unfortunate topic of sector specific taxes.
This is such an important topic that we will also recap one of the slides we presented at the previous presentation. Here see the tax rate of and its % of net revenues. It's not of net profit. We show it for net revenues is that some of the costs are not deductible before the tax. Of course, if it was on net profit, this will be not as difficult to handle. As you will see, especially on the right-hand side and for Norway in general, the taxes are very, very high. Starting with U.K. and at power price of GBP 100 per megawatts hour, you have 17% taxes. That increases significantly when you go to a higher power price.
You see the estimated marginal tax in case of GBP 150 per megawatts hour, which is more than two-thirds of net revenues. This surely has an impact on how quickly operators are able to make financial investment decisions, as this will hamper the profits over the next years. If U.K. is a challenge, then Norway is certainly much more problematic. In Norway, with their proposed taxes proposed in Q3, Q4 2022, still not concluded, I'll come back to that. We have a tax of almost two-thirds of net revenues for Lista, even at GBP 100 per megawatts hour. If you look at the marginal tax rate, when you move up to GBP 150 per megawatts hour, we are taxed 85% of net revenues, not of net profit.
Net profit is much higher. This is a significantly higher tax than what you have for, even for oil and gas with the super profit they have had. It's really key to get this right. We have worked intensively with this, both, to inform the government and also, work with the industry. If you look at the next, slide. The problem with onshore wind taxation is that it builds on the premise that there is super profit. There is no long-term super profit in onshore wind. On top of that, the proposal is to have a ground rent, a resource tax, which is not cash neutral, so it will not be like what's proposed for oil and gas and hydropower, where the government co-invest.
The regime here is proposed to be clearly less favorable. That will increase the break-even electricity prices by between 20%-25%. Consequences of this, obviously you can expect on the marginal new onshore wind Greenfield Investments in Norway if this tax is implemented, which again, will lead to long-term power deficit. It will clearly jeopardize establishment of new green industrial solutions and have high power prices for the consumer. This is then also happening simultaneously as EU is implementing a response to the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act. The ERA in the U.S., as you would know, have strong tax incentives for renewables and also other strong incentives. EU is discussing how to best deal with that and stay competitive. Norway is then going in the, with this, if this is implemented, in a completely different direction.
The good thing is that it's very consistent position from the industry in the consultation process. Both onshore wind companies, big industrial users and industry associations are clear on the two key positions that we also have had from the start. If implemented, the resource tax for new onshore wind projects must be made fully cash neutral, like what you have for oil and gas and for hydropower. You cannot do this retroactively, so you should not implement this on existing wind farms. It really will deteriorate investor confidence. We expect the government to have a final proposal to parliament over the next month, and it will be really key to get this right. With that, I'll hand back to you, Anette.
Thank you, Anders. We will now get a presentation, from Lars Bender, CEO of Fred. Olsen Seawind. Lars.
Thank you. Yes. I'll today take you through the activities in the quarter of Fred. Olsen Seawind. I'll start by saying we've had a busy quarter with a lot of interesting activities. I'll start the presentation by giving you a short update of each of our core markets. I'll do a short deep dive on Norway. In the end say a bit about the global outlook in offshore wind. If we start with the update in our core markets, in Ireland, the Codling Wind Park project have submitted a bid into the CFD auction. We are expecting the results of that or provisional results on the 11th of May. In this presentation, I'll not go into further detail, just say that we are awaiting the results of that auction.
If we then turn to Scotland, we have the Muir Mhòr project together with Vattenfall in a 50/50 joint venture. That project is very much progressing according to plan. We have a focus in this year on data collection on site. We have already deployed a glider to site measuring wind speeds. We have a geotech campaign on the way. These activities will support our consent application, but is also the basis for future design of the wind farm. Overall, it's progressing according to expectations and plan in Scotland. If we then turn to Norway, we have in this quarter received a update around the framework for the first offshore wind round, I would like to spend a bit more time on giving a view on what we see in Norway going forward. If we Turn the slide.
I think the first thing that's important around Norway is to remember the fundamentals of Norway when it comes to offshore wind. I think we as a company, and together with our partners in Hafslund and Ørsted in Blåvinge, have a strong belief in Norway due to the fundamentals for offshore wind. First of all, there are good wind speeds across the West Coast, some of the best worldwide. Norway will, if you look at the predictions for the power balance in Norway, have a power deficit around 2027, and at least in a long-term perspective, offshore wind can be part of offsetting that. Third, offshore wind represents a significant potential for job creation. Norway have had and has still a strong industrial offshore heritage, both from oil and gas and other parts as well.
There is a really good skill set to develop into a new industry in offshore wind. Those fundamentals makes Norway an attractive place for offshore wind. We have in this quarter seen that NVE has come with a projection of new areas for Norway up against the target of 2040 with 30 gigawatt. That is positive that we now see that long-term development. We've also in this quarter seen news around the specific rounds in Utsira Nord and Sørlige Nordsjø II . If we start with what we see in Utsira Nord, we see three areas developing for floating wind in Utsira Nord in the first round. It will be a two-step process. First, the competition on qualitative conditions for seabed, and then a second round for CFD two to three years later.
The submission date for the first competition on seabed is set to first September, first of September this year. A very fast-track process. Overall, what we see without having full visibility is a good start for floating wind in Norway. There has been extensive dialogue between developers, industry, and OED around criterias. There's a reasonable balance between coexistence and also the predictability and frame conditions for developers. On the floating side, there's a positive view, I think in general both for us, but also in the industry around Utsira Nord. If we then turn to Sørlige Nordsjø II , the view is a bit different. The competition there will be a one site competition, so it's one site of 1,500 megawatts. It'll be a combined seabed and CFD auction.
Basically, both the price and the exclusivity will be awarded in one round based on a price. The auction date is currently expected for late this year in December. I would like to spend a bit more time on Sørlige Nordsjø II and the frame conditions in Sørlige Nordsjø II, because there's no doubt when it comes to Sørlige Nordsjø II, we are concerned around the framework that has been published by OED and the government. If we flip a slide. What we are concerned about is the auction parameters. I know this is a busy slide, but I'll try to take you through it in a good way. We start on the left-hand side.
There are at least five parameters, and there are more, but which we see are detrimental to getting a really good start for bottom-fixed offshore wind in Sørlige Nordsjø II . First of all, the OED has set a cap price of EUR 66, and a total cap of EUR 15 billion. Those two caps in combination are way lower than what we see in other markets. Second, and most importantly, the caps does not take into account the recent cost increases we've seen in offshore wind within the last year. On the right-hand side, you will see a curve illustrating the development in turbine prices. If you take that from the bottom to the top, we see an increase of around 50%. We have seen significant increases in prices on CapEx. It goes for other elements than turbines as well.
The cap we then see at EUR 66, it's difficult to see that has been adjusted for those cost increases. Again, just on a par- to- par basis with comparison with other markets, it is significantly lower. On top of that, there is an uncertainty on tax regime, which I referred to Anders' presentation earlier, that goes also for offshore wind. We don't have full clarity on what the tax regime will be going forward. Second point, which is important, is there's no indexation during operation of the wind farm. That basically means that the compensation you get will be decreasing in real terms during the CFD period. That increases the risk profile for developers, but is again also an element which we see is not on par with other markets.
Third element, the CFD is compensated in Norwegian kroner instead of in euro, which basically means we will have the revenue side in Norwegian kroner, and most of the cost side will be in euro, the CapEx side. That mismatch creates a risk on the currency exchange rate. Again, is probably not the industry norm. We see in other regimes is either it's a euro-based contract or there's a choice between the local currency and euro. Fourth element is the capture price risk.
Currently, the CFD price will be measured against market price on a monthly basis, which of course increases the risk of cannibalization on price, and the significant risk here is left with the developer in relation to the capture price. Our best estimate is that that will actually reduce the cap price with some way around 10%. Again, it's different from what we see in other markets. The fifth element that I will mention is low prices. The current auction regime sets a floor of EUR 5 per kWh, and below that we will not as developers be compensated. That's also different to what we see in other markets. Normally, this is set at zero. When you look at this as a combined picture, we see conditions that are different from other markets and significantly worse.
Second, we see that the conditions are not in line with the cost increases we've seen in offshore wind over the last year. Overall, it's something which we've looked at very carefully in our partnership, Ørsted and Hafslund. We see Sørlige Nordsjø II as with the current regime and the current CFD regime, we're expecting to be unattractive as an investment for developers, and that is especially also taking into account the recent cost increases in offshore wind. If we then add on top of that and flip a slide, it is important to put Norway into context of the global offshore wind picture. What you see here illustrated by the left-hand side is that against 2030 we see a significant increase in build up of offshore wind with significant growth rate.
On the right-hand side, you see targets for wind market growth towards 2050. Those two in combination illustrates an almost exponential growth in offshore wind. We see regimes across the world being more and more favorable towards offshore wind. Obviously, the point when we put this in context with Norway is that money and jobs will flow where the frame conditions are stable, predictable and most favorable. Our concern in our consortium and as a developer is of course that Norway is not on par with what we see in the rest of the world and will not be able to compete for developing offshore wind on bottom fixed. I would like to go back to my first point, because we do remain of the view that the fundamentals in Norway are attractive.
It's also very important to stress that in order to capitalize for Norway on those fundamentals, we need a solid framework also in Sørlige Nordsjø II, which will get us a good start for offshore wind in Norway. With that, I will turn to the next slide and the more global outlook. What we see globally is, as I said before, a development of offshore wind across all countries. We see increasing targets being set by governments. We see more and more framework in various countries. There is a tendency to a large growth across the globe. There's no doubt that political ambitions needs to be followed up by actual framework. It needs to be followed up by increase in supply chain capabilities and so forth. There is a positive tendency when we look at the market in general globally.
This is also supported by the Inflation Act in the U.S., supported by the EU Green Deal. As a market outlook, as a global market outlook, this is positive. From the Fred. Olsen Seawind perspective, we are of course investigating these opportunities. We have a solid platform already of projects and corporations, but we naturally want to use that platform and expand on it together in some markets with our sister companies, where we see that as a differentiating sector. Overall, on a global scale, we remain positive when it comes to the outlook for offshore wind. With that, I will give the word back to you, Anette.
Thank you, Lars. Before I welcome Sofie Olsen Jebsen to talk about 1848, I would like to inform the one of you that do not know that 1848 was our year of inception. This year, 2023, marks the 175 year anniversary. We are very proud and hope that this is a good omen also for the further development of Fred. Olsen 1848 and the technology. No pressure, Sofie.
Thank you. Just to follow up on that, I can say that the reason for the name Fred. Olsen 1848 is because we want to continue to stay in the forefront. We try to develop solutions to solve the industry's challenges, and that can be tomorrow's solutions for renewable energy technologies. We're having good speed with the development of the technologies that we're doing in floating offshore wind. Brunel, the floating foundation, Ramboll is currently progressing well with their design scope. We have also had a very good reception of the Brunel maintenance solution pictured on the bottom here, and that was launched not too long ago.
We're also progressing well with the floating maintenance solution, where the ongoing FEED study is currently detailing all the technical, operational, and commercial properties of the solution. Today, I wanted to spend most time talking about floating solar. As Anders mentioned, floating solar has a large potential. We have been working on trying to solve the challenges in floating solar for quite some time, together with Fred. Olsen Renewables and their development expertise. We see that for floating solar nearshore and offshore technologies, there are some challenges that have to be overcome. It is the handling of wave loads, and especially when these wave loads are combined with wind. There is the issue of actually building a cost-efficient solution that can operate and also solve these technical issues.
As a response to this, we have developed Bolette, which you see on the picture below here. That is a floating PV power production system. It consists of a pre-tensioned rope mesh, which allows the PV modules to move freely and independently within the mesh. This enables the environmental forces to be taken up by the rope mesh and the mooring system. This elegantly simple solution makes Bolette move with the motions of the ocean quite differently from other solutions. It is cost efficient as it utilizes existing technologies and components. We also have created an integrated maintenance solutions because maintenance of these islands is key, especially when the one you see on the picture consists of over 7,000 solar panels. You have to have an efficient way of maintaining and cleaning.
We have designed it to handle high wave loads and tropical storms. Our ability to utilize existing supply chain makes us able to source locally. Sustainability is, of course, very important, so all the components are tagged, and they can also be recycled. The islands are scalable and can be adjusted in size to fit each project needs. Talking a bit about the current developments, we have installed six panels at Herøya in Norway. You see on the bottom left picture there. We've also had a very successful tank test at SINTEF Ocean in January, also pictured here, where we tested with very high wave loads. Now we are designing and procuring for a 150 kilowatts project that we will put in the water after the summer this year.
We will use the learnings from this, and we are also currently optimizing. We'll use the learnings from this to optimize the design. We are very enthusiastic about this solution and believe that it has the potential to unlock the great potential there is in nearshore and offshore floating solar. Thank you.
Thank you, Sofie. Alexandra Koefoed, CEO of Fred. Olsen Windcarrier, welcome. You've had a challenging year but strong performance.
Thank you. I will dwell a little bit on Q1 for Fred. Olsen Windcarrier. All in all, activity-wise, it's been a quarter which has been as expected, but sometimes that's a good thing. Bold Tern, she is still in Taiwan. She completed the Formosa 2 project early in the quarter and then went basically straight on to install the same kind of turbine on Greater Changhua for Ørsted. We stayed on that project as long as we could until we had to leave for further commitments. There are still 14 turbines to be installed on that project, that presents some opportunities for later in the year. Brave Tern, as mentioned by Richard already, she transited back to Europe.
Very early in Q2, she went on hire on the Saint-Brieuc project in France, so she will be in France for the remainder of the year. That mobilization was a paid transit back to Europe, but that income was actually registered in 2022 because it was linked to a project that completed at that time. Blue Tern, she has done what she's been doing for the last couple of quarters. She has installed pin piles on the Neart na Gaoithe Wind Farm in Scotland. By the end of this quarter, we expect her to transit over to the turbine scope. That will be good to start installing some turbines at the Neart na Gaoithe. That leaves us to the results for the quarter. It has been a good start to the year.
Not as strong as the fourth quarter linked to Brave Tern's transit, but still a revenue of almost EUR 36 million and an EBITDA of EUR 17 million for the first quarter. We're now expecting the vessels to be working fully for the next two quarters. Contract backlog. It now sits at EUR 522 million, compared to EUR 553 million in last quarter when you're looking at our vessels. Again, a quarter that went more or less as planned, at least in relation to reservation agreements. Last quarter we reported two reservation agreements which have, as planned, materialized into two firm contracts. One of them was Thor. This is a landmark project for Windcarrier. It will be installed in 2026.
At that time, it will be the biggest wind farm in Denmark. The client is RWE. It's also an important project because this is the 14, 15 megawatts size Siemens turbine that we'll start installing in 2024, 2025, which means our existing vessels have sort of proven their viability for that generation turbines. We are very happy to have won that, and that was launched last week at WindEurope with all the other contractors for the Thor Project. Something we're looking very much forward to. The other contract is an undisclosed contract also in Europe, with Blue Tern for 2025.
I guess the most significant news in the quarter, we've also signed a reservation agreement in APAC, which is linked to a third-party vessel, which means we will be the contract entity for the end client. The vessel involved is a vessel that's not owned by Fred. Olsen Windcarrier. This is currently not reflected in the backlog because of course the EBITDA margin on that will be different than on our fully owned or partly owned vessels. This is sort of the Shimizu Corporation that we signed back in 2020 that's starting to materialize. Once we have a firm contract, we will communicate a little bit more on that. That means already in 2024, that corporation will have a positive EBITDA contribution for Fred. Olsen Windcarrier.
Of course the backlog has changed in terms of we've completed works and there's also been some extensions to existing contracts, but those changes are more minor. Tender activity is still very significant, both in terms of T&I and O&M, and we also see the clients are getting worried about the bottleneck in the market and are willing to entertain a different type of contract discussion than previously, which has been very project linked. Now we see at least the willingness to entertain different discussions. We see that as a very positive sign for Windcarrier going forward. Well, I think that concludes my presentation.
Thank you. We will now open for questions.
I think we should just comment briefly on cruise
Yeah. Sorry.
I forgot the cruise part.
Yeah, yeah.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Very important.
Move on more, Jørn. Yes. Cruise, like I said, a milestone. First, first quarter with positive EBITDA. I think if you reflect back on 2022, which was a year with great losses, we saw in 2022 two things that we were struggling to get customers back cruising, especially with the Omicron outbreak in the first quarter and then the war in Ukraine. We also saw the bunkers prices skyrocketing in 2022. I think two focus areas on the cruise lines going into 2023 has really been on two fronts. It's getting the sales and the customers back to cruising, and it's been enormous effort in the sales departments and other departments in Ipswich to engage the organization to take in more customers.
Actually the number of people selling in Ipswich has more than doubled, taking in calls. It's been a strong effort to get the organization more sales oriented, and we see a success of that in the first quarter this year that we have got a really good start of the year in the booking. How much of this is pent up demand from customer savings on COVID? We were really worried about the British economy, lack of spending power and so on. Anyhow at least cruise lines have done their part and see customers are coming back and hopefully this is a lasting trend. The other one was the bunkers.
We have had a lot of attention and efforts on the bunker area, looking at itineraries, where can we sail differently, slow down speeds, or can they bunker smarter in the right ports and so on. I think who should believe 2 years ago that really cruise lines was the forefront in the group in artificial intelligence. I think they have used the crisis to really install some very intelligent software on both Bolette and Borealis and it's going on now in Balmoral on self-learning systems on how to optimize fuel. They're actually now in the forefront in the group of companies on the use of artificial intelligence to bring down the fuel consumption.
Yeah, a good start of the year and hopefully a turning point. Still the customer sentiment in the UK is difficult to judge how long it will be last, but at least I think we are doing what we can and we will continue to try to improve the cruise business. With that done, it does.
Thank you. We will now open up for questions.
If you wish to ask a question on the phone, please press star followed by one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. That is star one if you wish to ask a question. Your first question comes from the line of John Olaisen from Norway. Your line is open.
Yeah, thank you for taking my question. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. After hearing your presentation and your view on the Norwegian offshore round, I just wonder, does this mean that you will not hand in an application if for Sørlige Nordsjø II if the terms remain as they are right now?
Lars, I think you better.
Yeah. That decision has been taken yet. Currently we are of the view that it's not only something we just say, it's also obligation now to kind of speak up around what we see on the frame conditions. We've considered this carefully together with our partners in Ørsted and Hafslund. We hope together with industry and organizations that we can get a better framework than it is today. The decision on how we treat this going forward has not been taken.
Within the partnership, is it one-third each? You can just remind us. It's an equal partnership?
Yes, that's correct. We are equal partners with a third each.
Yeah. Within the partnership, does this have to do all three have to agree when to apply or not? How does it work?
If you're talking about the specific view, I put forward today, this is of course aligned within the partnership. We are in agreement.
It's also obvious if you look at the size of these projects, if you are to bid or invest or whatever it may be, agreement between the partners is an important preconditions for a, for a good way forward when you look at these, the size of these projects.
I presume you have discussed your concerns with the government. What's the feedback? Do they see the argument? Do you think it's likely that there will be some changes?
I think that's always very difficult to answer. I think we're doing whatever we can. We have had discussions with government around this. We have put the views forward, and obviously we hope that these will be taken into considerations, and we'll continue that dialogue. I think it's fair to say that the industry and the organizations, we have a combined view here, so of course, when we stand together, it's the hope that we can impact this.
Yeah. All right. Thank you very much for taking my questions. Thank you. Bye-bye.
Once again, if you do wish to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from the line of John Olaisen. Your line is open.
Yeah. If no other questions, I would happy to take a couple of more. On the turbine installation vessel side, you have a good visibility now for a couple quarters. It seems that prices are up. We're seeing Cadeler reporting very strong day rates on some new contracts with visibility many years down the line. Could you update us on your plans for a potential new build?
I think-
Do you share the view that the market has tightened significantly over the last few months as well, and the visibility is getting better, and a new build could be more a current issue and coming quick, coming quicker from you guys, and then what we thought?
I think, good question. I think it's not a surprise question. Alexandra. I, to be perfectly honest, the answer will probably be the same until we actually announce a possible new build. It's definitely something we are working on. It's in discussions with clients, we're in discussions with yards, as I mentioned, we do see that market conditions are more favorable than possibly a couple of years ago.
Yeah, it seems like it. Also there are a lot of... Well, at least, not a lot, there are a few newcomers into that market as well. I just wonder, do you think consolidation could be taking place? Probably an advantage to have a bigger entity, I would presume.
That is also a very, very difficult question to answer. We have seen consolidation in the industry in the past with where more speculative players have joined forces with the sort of more of companies with more industry experience. I think that's at least something we've seen in the industry to speculate on what's gonna happen forward. I think that's not really up to me.
My final question then is regarding cruises. Is it possible to give some kind of indication of what kind of occupancy rate we should expect for this summer, Q2 and Q3?
I think you saw that the occupancy rate is presently for the quarter 66%.
For this summer, I think, we have not given any figures.
I don't think we should speculate, but I think you see from what Richard told you that we have very strong bookings.
Yeah. Without guiding anything.
Jon, I think we just without guiding anything, I think what you could do is that cruise lines is in a way a seasonal business. If you go back pre-COVID, and we have the reporting, I think on a quarterly basis on occupancy back to 2012 or 2013, I think in the.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
... you can take a look at this, see how much it swings. I think what we say is that we have good bookings. So.
Is booking then back to like more normal seasonality pre-COVID already?
I think that's what I'm saying too is that we have spent a lot of time on getting people back to cruising again. We have quite a lot of newcomers to Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines as well in the booking now and also working more on the direct. Yes, I think we are seeing that things are more back to normal, but a caution, it's early days. The U.K. economy is fragile. Consumer spending could be fragile. Right now, it's very strong demand. You see it also here in Scandinavian countries, a very strong demand for traveling this summer across the board. How long this will last or which is pent-up demand, it's very difficult to judge.
My very final question. How have winds been so far in Q2 in your relevant areas for the renewable energy business?
That we don't comment on. Jon, that would be, kind of, skewed information. Yeah.
Okay. Okay. All right. Thank you very much for taking my questions. Have a nice day. Thank you. Bye-bye.
Thank you.
Your next question comes from line of Jonas Fremming of SB1 Markets. Your line is open.
Good morning, thank you for taking my questions. The first question is to Fred. Olsen Seawind. Can I give some clarity on the expected CapEx or some kind of a CapEx range on the Codling wind farm?
Yes, thank you for the question. As I said earlier, given that the bids in the competition are currently on evaluation, we've made a very deliberate decision that we do not comment in detail on Codling in this quarter, and I will remain with that statement. So sorry about that, I think we'll not go into those details for now.
Okay. That's okay. I guess this question is to Alexandra. In terms of the backlog for Fred. Olsen Windcarrier, could you give some clarity on available contract days for 2024, 2025, 2026, 2027? Also 2023, maybe.
I could give some clarity, although we do not intentionally don't provide the vessel occupancy, because of course, that is also very useful for our competition to see. We have a strong backlog for the coming four years. There are some openings partly in shoulder seasons and also on some very capable assets in price season. In terms of the backlog, you see that it's not a sold out backlog. There's still available days to sell on the vessels.
Okay. Are any of the backlog years fully booked or are there some openings each year?
Some of the vessels are more or less fully booked for the period, you see, and some of them are not. I think that's as concrete as I'm going to be again, because this is very valuable information for our competitors and bidding processes with clients.
Okay, thanks. Just a follow-up on a previous question. Alexandra, you said that you are discussing a new build with clients. I'm just curious, how do you expect the payback level to be if you were to order a new build? Would maybe four or five years be possible?
I don't think I'm gonna comment on that, Jonas. I understand that's something you are very keen to know, but again, I'm not gonna be that specific.
That's fine. Thanks. The last question from me, it's related to Global Wind Service. Could you give some clarity on the margin development in this quarter and, you know, going forward as well? Thanks.
I think the best one to answer that is Richard.
Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Global Wind Service is a complete different economic setup than Windcarrier. It's very little CapEx, and it's more the capital is in working capital, and it's has more the feature of a kind of a construction like setup. Of course, the margin, EBITDA margin level you should expect in Global Wind Service is significantly lower than what you have in Wind Service due to the capital nature. Having said that, the return on the capital in Global Wind Service historically has been quite good if you go back to the history.
I think Global Wind Service, we won't guide on the margin, but I've given you some clues on kind of what your comps should be on Global Wind Service, that the comps are really not asset heavy industries like Fred. Olsen Windcarrier, but more in the construction area.
Would a 5% EBITDA margin be a realistic assumption for 2023 and 2024 and so on?
I will not guide on that.
Okay. Thank you. That's all from me. Have a great day.
Thank you.
There are no further questions from the phones. I'd like to hand back.
All right. If no more questions, then thank you very much.