Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Statkraft Sells Offshore Wind, Torsional Blade Testing
Allen and Yolanda discuss Statkraft’s workforce cuts and sale of its Swedish offshore wind projects. They also cover ORE Catapult’s partnership with Bladena to conduct torsional testing on an 88-meter blade, and the upcoming Wind Energy O&M Australia conference.
Register for ORE Catapult’s Offshore Wind Supply Chain Spotlight event!
Visit CICNDT to learn more!
Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly email update on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary Barnes’ YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!
You are listening to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast brought to you by build turbines.com. Learn, train, and be a part of the Clean Energy Revolution. Visit build turbines.com today. Now here’s your hosts, Alan Hall, Joel Saxon, Phil Totaro, and Rosemary Barnes.
Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall in the Queen city of Charlotte, North Carolina.
I have Yolanda Padron in of all places, Austin, Texas. We’re together to talk to this week’s news and there’s a lot going on, but before we do, I want to highlight that Joel Saxon and I will be in Edinburgh, Scotland for the re Catapult UK offshore supply chain spotlight. That’s on December 11th, which is a Thursday.
We’re gonna attend that event. We’re excited to meet with everybody. Over in the UK and in Scotland. Um, a lot of people that we know and have been on the podcast over a number of years [00:01:00] are gonna be at that event. If you’re interested in attending the OE Catapult UK Offshore Supply Chain spotlight, just Google it.
It’s really inexpensive to attend, and I hope to see most of you there, Yolanda. There’s some big news over in Scandinavia today, uh, as, as we’re reading these stories, uh, the Norwegian State owned Utility Stack Craft, and it’s also one of Europe’s largest renewable energy companies. As, uh, as we know, I’ve been spending a lot of money in new markets and new technologies.
Uh, they are in electric vehicle charging biofuels and some offshore wind development. Off the eastern coast of Sweden. So between Finland and Sweden, they’re also involved in district heating. So Stack Craft’s a really large company with a broad scope, uh, but they’re running into a little bit of financial difficulty.
And this past July, they announced some [00:02:00] workforce reductions, and those are starting to kick in. They have 168 fewer employees, uh, by the end of this third quarter. 330 more expected to leave by the end of the year when all the dive are complete. This is the worrisome part. Roughly 1000 people will longer work for the company.
Now, as part of the restructuring of Stack Craft, they are going to or have sold their offshore portfolio to Zephyr Renewable. Which is another Norwegian company. So Stack Craft is the Norwegian state owned renewable energy company. Zephyr is an independent company, far as I can tell my recollection that’s the case.
So they agreed to acquire the bot, the uh, offshore Sigma and Lambda North projects, which makes Zephyr the largest offshore wind developer. Sweden, not Norway, [00:03:00] in Sweden. Obviously there’s some regulatory approvals that need to happen to make this go, but it does seem like Norway still is heavily involved in Sweden.
Yolanda, with all the movement in offshore wind, we’re seeing big state owned companies. Pulling themselves out of offshore wind and looks like sort of free market, capitalistic companies are going head first into offshore wind. How does that change the landscape and what should we be expecting here over the next year or two?
Yolanda Padron: We, we’ve seen a large reduction in the, the workforce in offshore wind in all of these state owned companies that you mentioned. Uh, something that I think will be really interesting to see will be that different approach. Of, you know, having these companies be a bit more like traditional corporations that you see, not necessarily having them, [00:04:00] um, be so tied to whatever politically is happening in the government at the moment, or whatever is happening between governments at a time, um, and seeing exactly what value.
The different aspects of a company are bringing into what that company is making into, um, what, uh, the revenue of that company is, and not just kind of what is, what is considered to be the best way forward by governments. Do you agree? Is that something that you’re sensing too?
Allen Hall: The COP 30 just wrapped down in the rainforest of Brazil, and there has not been a lot of agreement news coming out of that summit.
Uh, I think next year it’s gonna move to Turkey, but Australia’s involved heavily. It was supposed to be in Adelaide at one point and then it’s moved to Turkey. [00:05:00] So there doesn’t seem to be a lot of consensus globally about what should be happening for renewables, and it feels like. The state owned companies are, uh, getting heavily leveraged and losing money trying to get their footing back underneath of them, so they’re gonna have to divest of something to get back to the core of what they were doing.
That’s an interesting development because I think one of the question marks regarding sort of these state owned companies was how fast were they willing to develop the technology? How much risk were they willing to take? Being backed by governments gets a little political at times, right? So they, they want to have a, a steady stream of revenue coming from these operations.
And when they don’t, the politicians step in and, uh, lean on the company is a good bit. Does the move to more, uh, standalone companies that are investing sort of venture capital money and bank money taking loans? I assume most of this [00:06:00] does that. Change how the offshore industry looks at itself. One and two, what the OEMs are thinking.
Because if they were going to sell to an TED or an Ecuador, or a stack raft or vattenfall, any of them, uh, you know, when you’re going to that sales discussion that they’re backed by billions and billions and billions of, of kroner or whatever the, the currency is. So you may not have to. Really be aggressive on pricing.
Now you’re dealing with companies that are heavily leveraged and don’t have that banking of a government. Do you think there’s gonna be a tightening of what that marketplace looks like or more pressure to go look towards China for offshore wind turbines?
Yolanda Padron: It’ll definitely get a bit more audited internally, exactly what decisions are made and and how objective teams are.
I think that there’s. [00:07:00] In all of the companies that you mentioned, there’s some semblance of things that maybe happened because of what was going on politically or, or because of ties that certain governments had to each other, or certain governments had to specific corporations, um, which was a, a great way for those companies to operate at the time and what was, what made sense.
But now that it’s. A third party who genuinely, you know, needs that cash flow in from that business or that part of the business, it’ll, I think you’ll definitely start seeing some, some greater efficiencies going on within
Allen Hall: these teams. Well, I would hope so. If you think about the way the United States moved pre, uh, the current administration.
There were a number of US based companies sort of going 50 50 on a lot of the [00:08:00] offshore development, and then they slowly started backing away. The only one that’s still really in it is Dominion, was the coastal offshore, um, coastal Virginia offshore wind project that is still progressing at a good pace.
But, uh, everybody else that was involved in, and they’re not the same kind of structure as an Ecuador is. They’re not, uh, there’s kinda state-owned entities in the United States and states can’t have deficits, unlike nations can. So the US deficit obviously is massively large, but state deficits don’t really exist.
So those electric companies can’t get highly leveraged where they’re gonna bleed cash. It’s just not a thing. It’s gonna happen. So I think I saw the precursors to some of this offshore turbulence happening in the United States as the. They didn’t see a lot of profit coming from the state electric companies.
That seems to be flowing into Europe now pretty heavily. That started about six months [00:09:00] ago. How are they gonna structure some of these offshore projects now? Are they just gonna put them on hold and wait for interest rates to come down so that the margins go up? Is is that really the play? Is that you have the plot of land?
You already have all the, the filings and the paperwork and authorization to do a project at some point, is it just now a matter of waiting where the time is? Right. Financially,
Yolanda Padron: that question will be answered by each specific company and see what, what makes sense to them. I don’t think that it makes sense to stall projects that if you already have the permits in, if you already have everything in, and just to, to see when the time is right, because.
Everything’s been ramping up to that moment, right? Like, uh, the water’s always already flowing. Um, but it, it’ll, it’ll definitely be interesting to see what approach, like where, where each company finds themselves. I, they’ll have to rely on [00:10:00] what information has come out in the past and maybe try to analyze it, try to see exactly where things went wrong, or try to pinpoint what.
Decisions to not make. Again, knowing what they know now, but with everything already flowing and everything already in queue, it’ll have to be something that’s done sooner rather than later to not lose any of that momentum of the projects because they’re not reinventing the wheel.
Allen Hall: Siemens is developing what a 20 odd megawatt, offshore turbine?
22 megawatt, if I remember right. 21, 22. Something in there. Obviously Ming Yang and some others are talking about upwards of 15 megawatts in the turbine. If you have a lot of capital at risk and not a lot of government backing in it, are you going to step down and stay in the 15 megawatt range offshore because there’s some little bit of history, or are you gonna just roll the dice?
Some new technology knowing that you can get the, the dollar per megawatt [00:11:00] down. If you bought a Chinese wind turbine, put it in the water. Do you roll that? Do you roll that dice and take the risk? Or is the safer bet and maybe the financing bet gonna play out easier by using a Vestus 15 megawatt turbine or a Siemens older offshore turbine that has a track record with it.
Yolanda Padron: I think initially it’ll have to be. Using what’s already been established and kind of the devil, you know? Right. I, I think it’ll, there’s a lot of companies that are coming together and, and using what’s done in the field and what operational information they have to be able to, to. Take that information and to create new studies that could be done on these new blades, on these new technologies, uh, to be able to take that next step into innovation without compromising any [00:12:00] of the, of the money, any of the aspects really like lowering your risk
Allen Hall: portfolio.
Yeah. ’cause the risk goes all the way down to the OEMs, right. If the developer fails and the OEM doesn’t get paid. It, it’s a. Catastrophic down the chain event that Siemens investors are looking to avoid, obviously. So they’re gonna be also looking at the financing of these companies to decide whether they’re going to sell them turbines and.
The question comes up is how much are they gonna ask for a deposit before they will deliver the first turbine? It may be most of the money up front. Uh, it generally is, unless you’re a big developer. So this is gonna be an interesting, uh, turning point for the offshore wind industry. And I know in 2026 we’re gonna see a lot more news about it, and probably some names we haven’t heard of in a while.
Coming back into offshore wind. Don’t miss the UK Offshore Wind Supply Chain Spotlight 2025 in Edinburg on December 11th. Over 550 delegates and 100 exhibitors will be at this game changing event. [00:13:00] Connect with decision makers, explore market ready innovations and secure the partnerships to accelerate your growth.
Register now and take your place at the center of the UK’s offshore Wind future. Just visit supply chain spotlight.co.uk and register today. Well, as we all know, the offshore wind industry has sort of a problem, which is now starting to come more prevalent, which is the first generation of offshore wind turbines that prove that the technology could work at scale or getting old.
We’re also developing a lot of new wind turbines, so the blade links are getting much longer. We don’t have a lot of design history on them. Decommissioning is expensive. Of course, anything offshore is expensive. What if we can make those blades last longer offshore, how would we do that? Well, that question has come up a number of times at many of the, the conferences that I have attended, and it looks like ORI Catapult, which is based in the UK and has their test center [00:14:00] in Blythe, England, is working with Blade Dina, which is a Danish engineering company that’s now owned by Res.
So if you haven’t. Seeing anything from Blade Dina, you’re not paying attention. You should go to the website and check them out. Uh, they have all kinds of great little technology and I call it little technology, but innovative technology to make blades last longer. So some really cool things from the group of Blade Dina, but they’re gonna be working with re catapult to test an 88 meter blade for torsion.
And I’m an electrical engineer. I’m gonna admit it up front, Yolanda. I don’t know a lot about torsional testing. I’ve seen it done a little bit on aircraft wings, but I haven’t seen it done on wind turbine blades. And my understanding, talking to a lot of blade experts like yourself is when you start to twist a blade, it’s not that easy to simulate the loads of wind loads that would happen normally on a turbine in the laboratory.
Yolanda Padron: Absolutely. I think this is going to be so [00:15:00] exciting as someone in operations, traditionally in operations, uh, because I think a lot of the, the technology that we’ve seen so far and the development of a lot of these wind projects has been from teams that are very theory based. And so they’ve, they’ve seen what simulations can be done on a computer, and those are great and those are perfect, but.
As everyone knows, the world is a crazy place. And so there’s so many factors that you might not even think to consider before going into operations and operating this, uh, wind farm for 10, 20 years. And so something that Blade Dina is doing is bringing a lot of that operational information and seeing, like applying that to the blade testing to be able to, to get us to.
The next step of being able to innovate while knowing a little bit [00:16:00]more of what exactly you’re putting on there and not taking as big a risk.
Allen Hall: Does the lack of torsional testing increase the risk? Because if you listen to, uh, a, a lot of blade structure people, one of the things that’s discussed, and Blaina has been working on this for a couple of years, I went back.
Two or three years to see what some of the discussions were. They’ve been working with DTU for quite a while, but Dina has, uh, but they think that some of the aging issues are really related to torsion, not to flap wise or edgewise movement of the blade, if that’s the case, particularly on longer blades, newer blades, where they’re lighter.
If that’s the case, is there momentum in the industry to create a standard on how to. Do this testing because I, I know it’s gonna be difficult. I, I can imagine all the people from Blaina that are working on it, and if you’ve met the Blaina folk, there [00:17:00] are pretty bright people and they’ve been working with DTU for a number of years.
Everybody in this is super smart. But when you try to get something into an IEC standard, you try to simplify where it can be repeatable. Is this. Uh, is it even possible to get a repeatable torsion test or is it gonna be very specific to the blade type and, or it is just gonna be thousands of hours of engineering even to get to a torsion test?
Yolanda Padron: I think right now it’ll be the thousands of hours of engineering that we’re seeing, which isn’t great, but hopefully soon there, there could be some sort of. A way to, to get all of these teams together and to create a bit of a more robust standard. Of course, these standards aren’t always perfect. We’ve seen that in, in other aspects such as lightning, but it at least gets you a starting point to, to be able to, to have everyone being compliance with, with a similar [00:18:00] testing parameters.
Allen Hall: When I was at DTU, oh boy, it’s probably been a year and a half, maybe two years ago. Yikes. A lot has happened. We were able to look at, uh, blades that had come off the first offshore wind project off the coast of Denmark. These blades were built like a tank. They could live another 20, 30 years. I think they had been on in the water for 20 plus years.
If I remember correctly. I was just dumbfounded by it, like, wow. That’s a long time for a piece of fiberglass to, to be out in such a harsh environment. And when they started to structurally test it to see how much life it had left in it, it was, this thing could last a lot longer. We could keep these blades turned a lot longer.
Is that a good design philosophy though? Are should we be doing torsional testing to extend the lifetime to. 40, 50 years because I’m concerned now that the, well, the reality is you like to have everything fall apart at once. The gearbox to fail, the generator to fail, the [00:19:00] blades, to fail, the tower, to fail all of it at the same time.
That’s your like ideal engineering design. And Rosemary always says the same thing, like you want everything to fall apart and the same day. 25 years out because at 25 years out, there’s probably a new turbine design that’s gonna be so much massively better. It makes sense to do it. 20 years is a long time.
Does it make sense to be doing torsional testing to extend the lifetime of these blades past like the 20 year lifespan? Or is, or, or is the economics of it such like, if we can make these turbines in 50 years, we’re gonna do it regardless of what the bearings will hold.
Yolanda Padron: From, from speaking to different people in the field, there’s a lot of appetite to try to extend the, the blade lifetime as long as the permits are.
So if it’s a 50 year permit to try to get it to those 50 years as much as possible, so you don’t have to do a lot of that paperwork and a lot of the, if you have to do [00:20:00] anything related to the mono piles, it’s a bit of a nightmare. Uh, and just trying to, to see that, and of course. I agree that in a perfect world, everything would fail at once, but it doesn’t.
Right? And so there you are seeing in the lifetime maybe you have to do a gearbox replacement here and there. And so, and having the, the blades not be the main issue or not having blades in the water and pieces as long as possible or in those 50 years, then you can also tackle some of the other long-term solutions to see if you, if you can have that wind farm.
For those 50 years or if you are going to have to sort of either replace some of the turbines or, or eat up some of that time left over in the permit that you have.
Allen Hall: Yeah, because I think the industry is moving that way to test gear boxes and to test bearings. RD test systems has made a number of advancements and test beds to do just that, to, [00:21:00] to test these 15, 20, 25 megawatt turbines for lifetime, which we haven’t done.
As much of this probably the industry should have. It does seem like we’re trying to get all the components through some sort of life testing, whatever that is, but we haven’t really understood what life testing means, particularly with blades. Right? So the, the issue of torsion, which is popped its head up probably every six months.
There’s a question about should we be testing for torsion that. Is in line with bearing testing that’s in line with gearbox testing. If we are able to do that, where we spend a little more money on the development side and the durability side, that would dramatically lower the cost of operations, right?
Yolanda Padron: Absolutely. It, it’d lower the cost of operations. It would lower the ask. Now that. A lot of these companies are transition, are [00:22:00]transitioning to be a bit more privatized. It’ll lower the risk long term for, for getting some of those financial loans out, for these projects to actually take place. And, you know, you’ll, you’re having a, a site last 50 years, you’re going to go through different cycles.
Different political cycles. So you won’t have that, um, you won’t have that to, to factor in too much, into, into your risk of whether, whether or not you, you have a permit today and don’t have it tomorrow.
Allen Hall: It does bring the industry to a interesting, uh, crossroads if we can put a little more money into the blades to make them last 25 years.
Pretty regularly like the, the, you’re almost guaranteeing it because of the technology that bleeding that’s gonna develop with Ory Catapult and you get the gearbox and you can get the generator and bearings all to do the same thing. [00:23:00] Are you willing to pay a little bit more for that turbine? Because I think in today’s world or last year’s world, the answer was no.
I wanted the cheapest blade. I wanted the cheapest, uh, to sell. I could get, I wanna put ’em on a tower, I’m gonna call it done. And then at least in the United States, like repower, it’s boom, 10 years it’s gonna repower. So I don’t care about year 20. I don’t even care about year 11, honestly, that those days have are gone for a little while, at least.
Do you think that there’s appetite for say, a 10% price increase? Maybe a 15% say 20. Let’s just go crazy and say it’s a 20% price increase to then know, hey, we have some lifecycle testing. We’re really confident in the durability these turbines is. There’s a trade off there somewhere there, right?
Yolanda Padron: Yeah. I mean, spending 10, 20% of CapEx to it, it.
Will, if you can dramatically increase [00:24:00] the, the lifetime of the blades and not just from the initial 10 years, making them 20 years like we’re talking about, but some of these blades are failing before they hit that 10 year mark because of that lack of testing, right. That we’ve seen, we’ve talked to so many people about, and it’s an unfortunate reality.
But it is a reality, right? And so it is something that if you’re, you’re either losing money just from having to do a lot of repairs or replacements, or you’re losing money from all of the downtime and not having that generation until you can get those blade repairs or replacements. So in spending a little bit more upfront, I, I feel like there should be.
Great appetite from a lot of these companies to, to spend that money and not have to worry about that in the long term.
Allen Hall: Yeah, I think the 20 26, 27, Joel would always say it’s 2027, but let’s just say 2027. If you have an [00:25:00] opportunity to buy a really hard and vested turbine or a new ing y, twin headed dragon and turbine, whatever, they’re gonna call this thing.
I think they’re gonna stick to the European turbine. I really do. I think the lifetime matters here. And having security in the testing to show that it’s gonna live that long will make all the little difference to the insurance market, to the finance market. And they’re gonna force, uh, the developers’ hands that’s coming,
Yolanda Padron: you know, developing of a project.
Of course, we see so many projects and operations and everything. Um, but developing a project does take years to happen. So if you’re developing a project and you think, you know, this is great because I can have this project be developed and it will take me and it’ll be alive for a really long time and it’ll be great and I’ll, I’ll be able to, to see that it’s a different, it’s a different business case too, of how much money you’re going to bring into the [00:26:00]company by generating a lot more and a lot more time and having to spend less upfront in all of the permitting.
Because if instead of having to develop two projects, I can just develop one and it’ll last as long as two projects, then. Do you really have your business case made for you? Especially if it’s just a 10 to 20% increase instead of a doubling of all of the costs and effort.
Speaker 4: Australia’s wind farms are growing fast, but are your operations keeping up?
Join us February 17th and 18th at Melbourne’s Poolman on the park for Wind Energy o and M Australia 2026, where you’ll connect with the experts solving real problems in maintenance asset management. And OEM relations. Walk away with practical strategies to cut costs and boost uptime that you can use the moment you’re back on site.
Register now at W om a 2020 six.com. Wind Energy, o and m Australia is created [00:27:00] by Wind professionals for wind professionals. Because this industry needs solutions, not speeches,
Allen Hall: I know Yolanda and I are preparing to go to Woma Wind Energy, o and m Australia, 2026 in February. Everybody’s getting their tickets and their plans made.
If you haven’t done that, you need to go onto the website, woma WMA 2020 six.com and register to attend the event. There’s a, there’s only 250 tickets, Yolanda, that’s not a lot. We sold out last year. I think it’s gonna be hard to get a ticket here pretty soon. You want to be there because we’re gonna be talking about everything operations and trying to make turbines in Australia last longer with less cost.
And Australians are very, um, adept at making things work. I’ve seen some of their magic up close. It’s quite impressive. Uh, so I’m gonna learn a lot this year. What are you looking forward to at Wilma 26? Yolanda. [00:28:00]
Yolanda Padron: I think it’s going to be so exciting to have such a, a relatively small group compared to the different conferences, but even just the fact that it’s everybody talking to each other who’s seen so many different modes of failure and so many different environments, and just everybody coming together to talk solutions or to even just establish relationships for when that problem inevitably arises without having it.
Having, I mean, something that I always have so much anxiety about whenever I go to conferences is just like getting bombarded by salespeople all the time, and so this is just going to be great Asset managers, engineers, having everybody in there and having everybody talking the same language and learning from each other, which will be very valuable.
At least for me.
Allen Hall: It’s always sharing. That’s what I enjoy. And it’s not even necessarily during some of the presentations and the round tables and the, [00:29:00] the panels as much as when you’re having coffee out in the break area or you’re going to dinner at night, or uh, meeting before everything starts in the morning.
You just get to learn so much about the wind industry and where people are struggling, where they’re succeeding, how they dealt with some of these problems. That’s the way the industry gets stronger. We can’t all remain in our little foxholes, not looking upside, afraid to poke our head up and look around a little bit.
We, we have to be talking to one another and understanding how others have attacked the same problem. And I always feel like once we do that, life gets a lot easier. I don’t know why we’re make it so hard and wind other industries like to talk to one another. We seem somehow close ourselves off. And uh, the one thing I’ve learned in Melbourne last year was.
Australians are willing to describe how they have fixed these problems. And I’m just like dumbfounded. Like, wow, that was brilliant. You didn’t get to to Europe and talk about what’s going on [00:30:00] there. So the exchange of information is wonderful, and I know Yolanda, you’re gonna have a great time and so are everybody listening to this podcast.
Go to Woma, WOMA 2020 six.com and register. It’s not that much money, but it is a great time and a wonderful learning experience. That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. And if today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn and don’t for, and don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode.
And if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It really helps other wind energy professionals discover the show and we’ll catch you on the next episode of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. This time next [00:31:00] week.
https://weatherguardwind.com/statkraft-offshore-torsional/
Renewable Energy
EchoBolt’s BoltWave Makes Bolt Inspections Easy
Weather Guard Lightning Tech

EchoBolt’s BoltWave Makes Bolt Inspections Easy
Pete Andrews from EchoBolt joins to discuss ultrasonic bolt inspection, the Bolt Wave device, and blade stud defect detection.
Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!
Welcome to Uptime Spotlight, shining light on wind. Energy’s brightest innovators. This is the Progress Powering tomorrow.
Pete Andrews: Pete, welcome to the program. Good to be back. Yeah. See you face to face. Yeah. Yes. This is wonderful. It’s a really great event to catch it with loads of the. UK innovation that are happening in the supply chain. So it’s, yeah, really nice to be here.
Allen Hall: This is really good to meet in person because we have seen a lot of bolt issues in the us, Canada, Australia, yeah.
Uh, all around the world and every time bolt problems come up, I say, have you called Pete Andrews and Echo Bolt and gotten the kit to detect bolt issues? And then who’s Pete? Give me Pete’s phone number. Okay, sure. Uh, but now that we’re here in person, a lot has changed since we first talked to you probably two years ago.[00:01:00]
You’re a bootstrap company based in the UK that has global presence, and I, I think it’s a good start to explain what the technology is and why Echo Bolt matters so much in today’s world.
Pete Andrews: Yeah, absolutely. So, um, as you said, we’re a uk, um, SME, there’s a team of 13 of us based here in the uk. Yeah. But we do deliver our services internationally, but really focused on Northern Europe.
Yeah. But increasingly we’ve done more in the US and North America, a little bit in Canada. Um, but our big offering really is to help wind turbine operators and owners reduce the need to routinely retire in bulks. So we have a quick and simple inspection technology that people can deploy, find out the status of their bolt connections, and then.
Reti them if necessary, but the vast majority of the time we find that they’re static and absolutely fine and can be left [00:02:00] alone. So it’s a real big efficiency boost for wind operators.
Joel Saxum: Well, you’re doing things by prescription now, right? Instead of just blanket cover, we’re gonna do all of this. It’s like, let’s work on the ones that actually need to be worked on.
Let’s do the, the work that we actually need to, and instead of lugging, like we’re looking at the kit right here, and I can, you can hold the case in one hand, let alone the tools in a couple of fingers. As opposed to torque tensioning tools that are this big, they weigh a hundred kilos, and those come with all of their own problems.
So I know that you guys said you’re, you’re focused here. You do a lot of work, um, in the offshore wind world as well. Yeah. I mean, offshore wind is where you add a zero right? To zeros. Yeah. Everything else is that much more complicated. It costs that much more. It’s you’re transitioning people offshore to the transition pieces.
Like there’s so much more HSE risk, dollar risk, all of these different spend things. So. The Echo Bolt systems, these different tools that you have being developed and utilized here first make absolute sense, but now you guys are starting to go to onshore as well.
Pete Andrews: Yeah, that’s right. So I mean, as as you said, that there’s really [00:03:00] three main benefit areas we focus on.
The first one is the health and safety of technicians, right? As you said, some of the fasteners used offshore now are up to MA hundred. So a hundred millimeter diameter bolts,
Joel Saxum: four inches for our American friends. Yeah, absolutely.
Pete Andrews: And they probably weigh. 30 kilos plus per bolt. Yeah. Um, so just the physical manual handling of that sort of equipment and the tightening equipment for those bolts is a huge risk for people.
If you think 150 bolts lifting or maneuvering, the tooling around on on its own can cause all the problems. So as well as the inherent risk of the hydraulic kit failing. So occasionally we see catastrophic tool failure. Is, which have really high potential severity, you know, sort of tensioner heads ejecting or crush injuries from Tor.
So that is really a key focus for our customers, just to [00:04:00] keep their teams safe, but also you have to be the cost effective and the the major cost benefit we allow is that we don’t have to revisit every bolt and every turbine like you’d have to do if you were retyping. So we believe there’s something of the order of a million pounds per installed gigawatt saving.
By moving from a routine REIT uh, maintenance strategy to a focused condition based inspection, you significantly reduce the amount of intervention you make and keep your turbines running more and reduce the boots on the ground on the turbine. So three real kind of, um, key. Benefits for people adopting our technology
Allen Hall: because we routinely see tower bolts being reworked or retention depending on who the manufacturer is.
And I’m watching this go on. I’m like, why are [00:05:00] we doing this? It seems, or the 10% rule, we’re tighten 10% this year, and they’ll come back and see how it’s going. That’s a little insane, right, because you’re just kind of. Tensioning bolts up to see if one of them has a problem and then you just do more of them and we’re wasting so much time because echo bolts figured this out years ago.
You don’t need to do that. You can tell what the tension is in a bolt ultrasonically, which was the original technology, the first gen I’ll call it, uh, that you could tell the length of the bolt. If the length of the bolt is correct within certain parameters, you know that it is tension properly. If it’s shrunk, that probably means it’s not tensioned properly.
That’s a huge advantage because you can’t physically see it. And I know I’ve seen technicians go, oh, I could take a hammer and I can tell you which ones are not tensioned properly wrong. Wrong. And I think that’s where equitable comes in because you’re actually applying a a lot of science simply [00:06:00] to a complex problem because the numbers are so big.
Pete Andrews: Yeah, I mean that, that, that’s been the real. Driving force between our offering is to simplify it. So ultimately we’re based on a non-destructive testing technique. It’s an ultrasonic thickness checking technique, but when from the non-destructive testing background, it’s crack detection, people have time, they can be, it’s a very precision measurement.
People have to be trained in the wind industry. We’re trying to inspect. A thousand, 2000 bolts a day at scale. It’s a completely different, um, ask of the technology and the way the technology has been developed historically has required too much technician expertise, too much configuration and set up time, and hasn’t delivered on the, on the speed that’s needed to be efficient in wind.
And that’s where our bolt wave [00:07:00] unit we’ve, that we’ve developed over the last. 18 months, let’s say, where all of our focus has gone to make it as slick and as easy for a client technician to pick up with minimal training. It’s through an iOS interface. Everyone understands it intuitively. Um, it’s a bit like using the camera app on your phone.
You know, you’re just hitting measure, measure, measure, measure, measure 10 seconds a bolt as you move the, um, ultrasonic transducer across, and then the data gets moved. Automatically to the cloud, to our bolt platform. And customers can view it in near real time. The engineer in the office can see the inspections happened.
They can see if there are any anomalous bolts, and then there can be communication there and then whether an intervention is necessary. So it’s sort of really changed the way our customers think about managing their, um. They’re bolted joints.
Joel Saxum: Well, I think these are, these are the kind of innovations that we love to see, right?
Because [00:08:00] we regularly talk about a shortage of technicians, and this isn’t, I was just learning this this week too, like this is not a wind problem. This is a everywhere problem. No matter what industry you’re in. Use are short of technicians. But we’re seeing like a tool like this is developed to be able to scale that workforce as well.
Right. You don’t need to be an NDT level three expert to go and do these things. ’cause there’s a very few of those people out there. Right? Right. We know the NDT people, a lot of NDT people, and that’s a hard skillset to come by. Yeah. This can be put in the hands of any technician. Yeah, a quick training course.
Just, Hey, this is how you use your iPhone. You can check Instagram, right? Yeah. Okay. You can off figure. Yeah, have fun. See you at lunch. Um, but they can, they can make this happen, right? They can go do these inspections and you’re getting that, that, uh, data collected in the field. Centralized back to an SME that’s looking at it and you don’t have to put that SME in the field and try to scale their ability to go and travel and do all these things.
They can be in the office making sure that the, the QA, QC is done correctly. I love it. I think that that’s the way we need to go with a lot of things. [00:09:00]Uh, and you’re making it happen.
Pete Andrews: Yeah. And it’s a real kind of. F change in mindset for us. So originally when we started Ebot, we were using third party hardware.
Yeah. Which required a bit of that specialism. Yeah. A bit of care about the setup of the project, getting multiple parameters configured before you got going. And it wasn’t really something we could put in the hands of a customer.
Joel Saxum: Yeah.
Pete Andrews: Which meant Ebot scale was limited to what our own team could go and do, and regionally as well.
You know, so we’re UK based. Probably 60% of our customers are uk, but now we have this Northern Europe offshore wind is obviously on our doorstep, but then increasingly we’ve done more and more in North America, so we’ve probably been to five or six sites now in North America and expect that to be a growth market because we can, we can now ship the devices over there, give some virtual training help.
Uh, [00:10:00] people set themselves up and then that opens up that market, you know, so it’s been a real change in strategy for us, but has allowed us to have far more impact than we otherwise would just try to be a pure service.
Allen Hall: Well, let’s talk about the big problem in the states of a minute, which are the root bushing or inserts that are loose in some blades.
When you lose that pushing, you also lose the tension on the bolt that can be measured. Is that something you’re getting involved with quite a bit now because of just trying to determine how many bolts are affected and, and where we are on the safety scale of can we run this turbine or not? Is that something that EE bolt’s been looking into?
Pete Andrews: Yeah, absolutely. So I, I’d say there’s sort of two halves of what we do. There’s the, there’s the bulk wholesale monitoring of. Typically static connections to eliminate this routine retitling where it’s not needed typically, typically. But then we have these edge cases of certain [00:11:00] connections and certain platforms that have known bolt integrity problems, and we are working with clients to really, um, manage those integrity risks.
Blade stud is an absolute classic, you know, sort of, I think almost every turbine OEM on some, if not all of their platforms has got. Embedded risk into their blades, pitch bearing connections. Um, so yeah, exactly as you said, our customers are using the technology for two things really. One is to ensure the bolts have been tightened to the preload that was specified or the target window.
And quite often we find there is an opportunity to increase the preload and therefore increase the resistance to fatigue failure. So. You know, particularly on older sites where the bolts perhaps not in the condition they were on day one. Well, they definitely won’t be. Um, when people have gone and retti them, they haven’t got back to where they, they should be.[00:12:00]
So we can prove that and increase a bit of that resilience, but then also start to look for the segments around the joint where, um, the bolt might start loosening or failures are occurring, and find areas where they can really hone in. And actively manage risk. And that sort of leads to what we’ve decided to do for the next year, particularly with Blade Stud in mind, is evolve this technology.
So whilst it’s also measuring the elongation, we will do a defect scan at the same time. So you’ll monitor your blade stu, um, connection and we’re hoping that we can set the device to flag to you there and then. We believe this bulk has got a defect while you’re here, get it changed out before it fails and, and all the knock on problems, um, from there.
Joel Saxum: So what you’re just pointing to there is a, is a workflow, right? So to me that is typical [00:13:00] of some of the amazing, innovative companies in the UK that I’ve run into throughout my career. And that is, you’re a group of SMEs, you know, bolted connections. That’s what you do, right? But then you’re like, hey. If there’s a tool, we could make a tool that would make our lives a bit easier, then it’s like, well, we could make the entire industry’s lives a little bit easier as well.
So let’s iterate on that. And now you’re able to send these kits around the world to look at these things. Hey, you have a problem with this specific model. We can help you with this because we know the failure mode and we know how to look for it. Let’s do that for you. Also here, you’re doing bolt bulk measurements.
We got that for you. But it all kind of flows back to the fact that Echo Bolt is a team. A bolted connection, SMEs that are making tools and being able to also provide consulting if need be. Yeah. Right. Um, to, to an entire industry. And I think that, um, this is my take on it, right? Wind is stop number one. I think you guys are gonna do a fantastic year, but there’s a lot of, uh, opportunity out there in bolted [00:14:00] connections as well.
Allen Hall: A tremendous amount blade bolts being broken from defects in the crystalline structure. What appears to be a more. Rapidly developing issue across fleets that I’ve seen. I went to a farm this summer and the number of blade bolts that were there on the table that were broken on the conference room table was And the whiteboard office.
Yeah. Yeah. This one,
Joel Saxum: this one.
Allen Hall: Your hard head is not gonna protect you from this one. It’s, it’s, it was this, um, I couldn’t imagine the amount of time they were spending hunting these things down. And of course, the only way they were finding ’em was they were broken. You like to catch ’em before they break because it becomes
Joel Saxum: a safety risk.
Just not too long ago we saw an insurance case where there’s an RCA going on and it is pointing at an entire tower came down. Right. And it is pointing at a mid, mid tower section bolted connection. How often do you guys run into those problems? Or are you contacted by insurance companies or anything like that to, to take a peek at those?
Pete Andrews: We haven’t done anything directly for insurance [00:15:00]companies, but we have been engaged by. Engineering consultancies that are doing RCA type activities. Okay. Um, things like at the end of defect liability periods mm-hmm. A customer has, has seen, they’ve had a lot of, uh, issues from an OEM, maybe an OE EM has offered a modification or an upgrade, assessing whether that upgrade is actually solved the problem or not.
We’ve got involved in, um, but the tower. Issue specifically. It’s actually very rare we find, um, problems with tower connections, but where we do is often where they haven’t achieved good flange flatness, ah, during installation or the bolts have been, let’s say, left out in the elements for a period and lubrication has been, has deteriorated before the bolt’s been installed.
So there are cases out there, but what I would say is. [00:16:00] To think about your whole life cycle, so ensure the bolt’s installed correctly and we can help with that with a QA to say, yes, this torque or tightening method has got you to the load that you want. Do some through life monitoring, but often if you install it correctly, it will it’s operational life.
You will have very little concern. But then in the UK market, we’re increasingly getting involved again at the end of life, right? Life extension where life extension turbines are 20, 25 years old. How does an operator make a decision to carry on running without replacing all bots? Um, and that’s where increasingly we being asked to use the technologist just to say, actually the joint is fine.
The bolts have run in a good, um, operational envelope. Run them on. Don’t replace a hundred percent of them like you might have been recommended to from your, um, yeah. Turbine supplier side. [00:17:00]
Allen Hall: So Pete, if someone’s doing a repower where they’re basically putting a new one in the cell on an existing tower, they’re making a lot of assumptions about all the bolts from the ground up that they’re gonna be okay.
And I know we’re talking about that. We’re in a lot of installations where. If the turbine has gone through a repowered or two. So now those bolts are 20 years old. Yeah. And trying to get ’em to
Joel Saxum: 30 35. 35
Allen Hall: 40. Yeah. I don’t know what they’re doing. By those bolted connections. Are they just like replacing the bolts?
Are they hitting ’em with a hammer again? Is that the, yeah,
Pete Andrews: I mean, they might replace ’em, but you’ve got a problem with the foundation bolts. ’cause they’re obviously often anchor bolts set into concrete, so you have to reuse them and. With the projects, both in wind and in process power industry with the chimney stacks to try and ascertain whether foundation bolts that are set into concrete are still suitable for operations.
So look for corrosion losses, look for [00:18:00] defects. Um, so yeah, they’re all things that need thinking about before you just make the snap decision to repower. But I think
Joel Saxum: a lot of that, uh, going back to a couple minutes ago, you were talking about at the commissioning phase, making sure that you have proper qa, QC of how these things were installed day one, and then making sure that before commissioning of a turbine, they’re checked.
I think that’s really important. We’re starting to see that in the blade world now too, where we’ve been talking about it for a long time, and now when you talk to operators, they’re like, we’re getting inspections done on the blades before they’re hung. Or at the factory before they’re hung. After they’re hung.
Like they want a good foundation baseline. Are you seeing that in the bolted connection world too?
Pete Andrews: Yes. Sort of. It’s just emerging for us. What we’ve found is, so most of our customers are in the operational phase ’cause they are the ones feeling the pain. Yeah. Of the routine retitling work. When they do major components, they sometimes engage us to come and say, can you check [00:19:00] before and after the blade was removed?
What was it? Before we took it off from a a bolt load perspective, what is it afterwards? Can you then recheck after 500 hours When we retalk it? And what we’ve seen there often is the initial install hasn’t got them to where they needed to be and they’ve had to go and do the break in maintenance or the 500 hour REIT to get the bolts to the right load.
So one of the questions that we have is whether. Some of the defects are actually being initiated very early on in that initial running in period and whether if, if actually you’d taken the time at, at the point of assembly to make sure you were correct, whether that avoids some of the knock on integrity concerns.
So yeah, it’s interesting area.
Allen Hall: Well, bolts are what hold wind turbines together and you better know you have the right. Tension and [00:20:00] torque on your bolts to get to the lifetime of the wind turbine and to, and to check it once in a while. And I know there’s a lot of operators I can think of right now in the United States that are sort of doing that job somewhat.
I I think they have missed out on opportunities to save a lot of money and to call it echo bolt. How do people get ahold of you? Because that’s one thing I run into all the time. Like, Hey, hey, you gotta talk to Ebol, call Ebol. How do they get ahold of you?
Pete Andrews: So the easiest ways are via our website. Which is echo bolt.com.
Um, LinkedIn, you’ll find us at Echo Bolt on LinkedIn. Reach out. Our email would be info@cobolt.com. So any of those route and you’ll, uh, reach me and the team and more than happy to speak to you about any of your faulting concerns or problems. We are, uh, yeah, we’re passionate about your problems.
Allen Hall: Pete, thank you so much for being on this podcast.
I, it is great to actually see you in person and see the bolt wave technology. It’s really [00:21:00] impressive. So anybody out there that needs bolt tensioning to checking tools, you need to get ahold of Pete at Echo Bolt and get started today. Thank you Pete. Thanks guys. It’s great to be here.
Renewable Energy
Carbon Capture and Synthetic Fuels
As we’ve noted in the past, the idea of capturing CO2 from the atmosphere is completely unfeasible, since 99.96% of the air around is something other than CO2 (mostly nitrogen). However, there are environments that change this equation radically, cement plants being one of them, where the concentration of CO2 emissions is as high as 30% (versus .04%).
Now, this brings the subject of synthetic fuels into the realm of possibility. Sure, if you want to make gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel, you’ll need two other things: hydrogen (which can come from electrolyzing water), and a considerable amount of energy, as these processes are heavily endothermic, meaning that energy must be supplied from external sources.
The good news is that we have enormous amounts of off-peak wind and nuclear that are wasted every day. Please see: Doty WindFuels.
Renewable Energy
What Trump Is Actually Doing
With each passing day, there are fewer and fewer American voters who believe the bullshit at left.
Is Trump working hard to stay out of prison? Enrich himself and his family? Of course.
Could be possibly care less about anything else? Obviously not.
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
