Published

3 years ago

January 4, 2024

Alice Rush

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Improving Blade Quality: Challenges and Opportunities with Mohammed Fajar

Rosemary had a great discussion with blade expert Mohammed Fajar about blade defects, the blade design and certification process, and how optimization and automation could improve blade quality. Mohammed provides perspective on recent issues with turbine OEMs like Siemens Gamesa, and expresses optimism about wind power’s future, particularly offshore! With both of their extensive blade knowledge, they explore how human factors in blade manufacturing lead to inconsistencies and why the industry struggles to implement more automation.

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!

Pardalote Consulting – https://www.pardaloteconsulting.com
Weather Guard Lightning Tech – www.weatherguardwind.com
Intelstor – https://www.intelstor.com

Rosemary: Hello and welcome to a special episode of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m Rosie Barnes and today I’m joined by Mohamed Fajar, founder and blade consultant at Apex Wind. We used to be colleagues actually at LM Wind Power when Mohamed was a senior structural design engineer who took five blade designs through the certification process.

So wind turbine blade defects are very topical at the moment with what’s in the news with Siemens Gamesa and also TPI, we’ve talked a lot about that on the podcast. And I thought that Mohammed would be the perfect person to have on to tell us about how the blade design and certification process works, or maybe more accurately how it should work to ensure that blade defects aren’t a problem.

They’re not supposed to be. So thanks heaps for coming on, Mohammed.

Mohammed: Thank you for inviting me.

Rosemary: So I just wanted to start out. Can you tell us a little bit about your background and what you’re doing now at Apex?

Mohammed: I graduated in 2014 as a master in engineering in France about composite structures and materials.

And since then I joined LM Wind Power in Denmark and my journey with blades started. So I started as a structural design engineer. Yeah. As you say, designing blades, for various OEMs, uh, taking them from the conceptual design to the Yeah. Manufacturing and handover to, to the factories. Also worked at yeah, a company called R& D test systems also in Denmark doing test systems for wind.

And then another three and a half years in Vestas in the innovation department. I was working a little bit as the blade owner in the department tech lead in, in all blade related projects. One of them, it’s the, yeah, cable stay drawtor where I also worked on it from the start to almost the end of it.

And then since July 23 I went on my own. I started Apex Wind, as you mentioned, and the goal is, yeah, to have this. It’s a consultancy company, a hundred percent focused on blades. Uh, helping developers, OEMs and startups yeah, to have a blade expert on the side when they need it.

Rosemary: Yeah. It’s good timing to pick a company like that, founding a company like that, because it’s definitely such a need for blade consultants these days, but with yeah, all of the issues that we’re seeing.

Mohammed: Yeah. One of the things that really motivated me to get in, because when it was, for example, on the OEM side, sometimes I feel that there was a struggle finding someone who knows about blades and can help with blades.

Often you end up, even if you want some CAD resources, you end up hiring someone who works with steel or something, and then almost have to teach him how to work with composites. And there was never this full package for people who knows about the whole value chain of blades to know about the design and then the manufacturing, the certification, the testing.

Often I compare it to some other components of let’s just say the nacelle in in, in big companies. You will have the same number of engineers working on the nacelle as working on the blades. And in the place we’ll have all these specialists on lightning on, on foams, on glass and then on liquids and then paint. And that’s why actually sometimes it gets very hard to get that person who can cover all these areas at once.

But yeah, and then the demand is big, but also the issues and the struggles, often they make a lot of noise in the media, but also the cost a lot of money to both, yeah, OEMs, developers and insurances and insurers and so on. And yeah, actually had this. sentence or this mission, when I started, just try to make blades a little bit more reliable again. Because with all I thought, I don’t think there’s a specific person or company to blame, but there is this pressure on costs.

There is these quality issues that keeps coming and then The companies that are trying to fix it, they’re spending money on it, they start maybe spending a little bit of on innovation on new products and so on. And then you just end up just fixing what you have. And sometimes it gets too big that you stop selling some platforms or turbines like what’s happening to Siemens Gamesa at the moment onshore.

Yeah, if I can help a little bit with that, I will be very happy.

Rosemary: Yeah, it’s a timely service that you’re offering. And I think that a lot of manufacturers would be happy to have that resource available. I think maybe it’d be good to start out by giving some background for people that aren’t totally familiar with, what are the issues with blade defects these days?

Can you maybe help just summarize? So I’m talking about Siemens Gamaces their issues with, I think they’ve had some wrinkles and some issues with their bearings as well. Maybe not so specifically blade related. Last time that I checked in, they were up to quite a few billions of dollars in expected cost to remedy that.

And then there’s a little bit from TPI as well, not to the same extent. Is that the issue as you said, or do you have anything to add about what the state of wind turbine blades are these days?

Mohammed: Actually, yeah, there is actually Yeah, a big group of blade defects that happens and some of them happen just during the transport and sometimes they’re just aesthetic.

Majority of them, or like at least the ones that have worse consequences, is the ones that happens often in the factory or even worse during the design. But actually what happens during the design, I have just a feeling that it’s maybe OEMs, they will have a really hard time to admit it. So often outcome of the root cause will come as manufacturing and we all can do, cannot do much except trusting that.

But yeah, in the factories, actually, there is a lot of NDT, non destructive testing that you can do in UT scanning and so on. And you can, again, you find the defect that you find, and then the ones that you don’t find, that’s the one that goes in the turbine.

And that’s the ones that we hear about them a few years later. And yeah, you mentioned wrinkles, wrinkle, it’s actually it’s main and one of very dangerous defects that happens. Yeah, as you said, Siemens Gamers, they also mentioned they had one of these defects in the platforms. They have stopped and they’re actually the physics are easy. Like you have laminate, if half of it is wrinkled, then basically you lose half of the strength. And then once the part that is not wrinkled cracks, then the part that is wrinkled it gets straight and then cracks again. Now actually a lot of days they have these protrusions, carbon protrusions where wrinkles, it’s less of an issue because you can actually control it before placing it on your blade.

But at least let’s say in the root part where you cannot use these protrusions wrinkles yeah, are very present. And sometimes you cannot even find them with this UT methods because if there is just some foam in between the glass, then you cannot get the signal anymore. And let’s say they don’t come from your design and then you have, you design a blade and then mark and then you fix.

You manufacture it in four different locations in Europe and South America and China, you can get three blades that are almost completely different because at one point your design documentation and QMS systems and quality and so on, it has some limitations. And then it ends up at the hands of the people, placing those plies and applying that vacuum and gluing your blade together.

And that’s actually one of the main struggle that people try or OEMs trying to fix, but you do your best, you train people and so on. But there is, yeah, there’s a big turnover in in, in those factories and you end up sadly with, in some cases and actually the CEO of Siemens Games mentioned it in his call last week that he mentioned the Mexico factory. Then it means that Okay, sometimes just one factory can have a lot of defects that some other factories doesn’t have.

And even if your design and all your processes are exactly the same, right? And this also proves or shows how complex is the whole situation because that blade the if it’s designed in, I don’t know, in, in the US or in China, you, it is the same certificate and it’s certified by the same certification body and everything is checked in the same way, but at the end you will manufacture it in two places.

You might get two places that are pretty different actually.

Rosemary: That’s a really good little teaser for the issue that I want to get to at the end. And it raises the whole point of what I wanted to talk to you about, which is how are we supposed to make sure that doesn’t happen. That you just have blades of random quality making it onto wind turbines, which I think is every, wind farm owners biggest nightmare is that, they’ve bought these very expensive wind turbines.

How do they know that they’re not going to the blades aren’t just going to snap off. So I was hoping that you could walk us through step by step, how the process works, so starting off with yeah, how do you even design a blade, a wind turbine blade, and then what is the certification, the manufacturing, the quality checks, how does that work to yeah, supposedly ensure the high quality of all these blades.

And then maybe after you’ve talked about all that, we can go through how it goes wrong and why?

Mohammed: First you will decide that, okay, there is a specific type of turbine that you’re interested in making. Then actually you will have your loads team and aero team and also a little bit the structural team working on defining just the big parameters of this turbine, the exact diameter, the core distribution, the twist, uh, and so on.

And then the outcome of that first step will be an outer geometry of your blade that still might be changed later on during the design phase. But as they say, the big dimensions are fixed and then a good idea about your loads the fatigue loads and then the static loads in the different direction that you will need to design the blade for.

Once you have that, then you will have the structural design engineers starting working. And basically what they will do, they have different tools and then they will start placing almost layer per layer. You can have like thousands of layers sometimes in some blades. Placing that, running your analysis with the loads and then checking the main first failure modes or design drivers, let’s say the strain distribution, the buckling in some panels on the blade. And then iterating, a lot of iterations, adding a little bit of material here, removing from there, checking your load models, making sure that the loads don’t go up too much. Checking some constraints you might have, maybe some tip to tower clearance, maybe some specific ion frequencies that you want to avoid.

And at the end of this first step, then you will have a first kind of conceptual design with the right geometry, the right trailing edge thickness, the right blade circle diameter, root circle diameter. Once you get all that, then actually you go one step further into your design and you start doing some finite elements analysis, which is a little bit some more details analysis on like very small details on your design.

So once you get all that done, then you start involving the certification actually, which is a third party that often the customers will ask for them to certify your product. And then you start sharing with them some of your models. And while they are doing that, you will actually start preparing your full scale testing, because every blade needs to go through a full scale test. And in that phase, you also have some people from the third party certifying your blades coming and doing some audits. Yeah, you manufacture the blade, you ship it for testing. You do full scale tests which take actually many months, the fatigue testing, it’s many millions of cycles.

And then you have to do a static or extreme test before and after that one. And then depending on how much risk you want to take, you can launch the full the serial production before the end of the testing, because often you cannot afford waiting six months or a year for the testing to be completed.

Rosemary: I’m assuming that the team on the certification company is not as big as the team at the manufacturer. So how can they possibly check all of that information in enough detail to be sure that you’ve done it right? Or are they then relying on the fact that you’ve made a test blade didn’t break that means everything’s okay. I just how do they get enough certainty from it?

Mohammed: They check what they can do. They cant rebuild the models, maybe some try to build some the, that finite element modeling and run it. But no matter what they do, they will have to put a lot of trust in what you have done. As I said, there’s many people working on that blade design sometimes can easily go up to 50 or a hundred. And then when you look at the certification parts, two or three people working, for example, on that structural design part, or even less.

They will not certify that this blade is perfect, but it was again, certify that you follow the steps that you have to, and you follow this IEC standard 61400 for lightning or for structural or for testing. And so the system has large limitation and that’s also why, for example, many developers, they have their own qualification system.

Of course. The certification you need to certify, but themselves, they will try to look at some design parameters. They have, they will look again through the, I don’t know, the power generation data. They will go and do some audits in the factories. And even after doing this you catch what you catch and then what you don’t know, you probably never know it.

And some defects, they appear during the lifetime and some they don’t even appear actually because they’re not that problematic. And we learned to live with that. I would say the majority don’t have any problems, but if you are a developer, you don’t want to get those ones that fail so you have to do all these checks.

Rosemary: Okay, so I’ve got a follow up question. I know that you mentioned that you make usually one test blade. It’s one of the first blades that you have made. There’s a high chance that it you know, has a lot of the issues in it that you haven’t figured out yet. I’ve spent a lot of time in wind turbine blade factories, and I know that every blade that comes off the end of a production line is not exactly the same. There’s different defects in every blade and they’re always doing repairs.

So how can you hope to capture the whole range of problems that you might have if you just test a single blade? How does the certification process deal with that or the design and certification process, is a better question to ask.

Mohammed: If you do some lab tests of small composite parts, you really need to test a big population to really be certain of integrity of that part.

In blades it’s a bit different because we talk about blades of 100 meters, it’s a high cost, and it’s also every blade takes many months, so you cannot afford doing seven tests, it will ruin the whole business. One way of dealing with it it’s basically with partial coefficients. So in, in the certification standards, basically because of the, this variation in manufacturing, you will add a factor of, I don’t know, just saying random numbers of 1. 1. Because of this variations in fusion or in, in the uncertainties about your load model and so on. You will keep adding these small partial coefficients and then you end up sometimes depending on your process, you end up with, I don’t know, partial coefficient of, let’s say two.

And that’s already actually means that your blade, it’s actually two times stronger than the nominal one, but it’s because there’s a lot of variations again. And then there is variations in the loads, there is variations in the structure and you don’t want these variations to start overlapping that you will have in some cases a blade that is weak enough because of all these deviations.

And then a load model that is not conservative enough that you will end up with these blades failing. And then you also do overtest actually those blades to some level. In static you will test them 10 percent more and then in fatigue depending on your number of cycles and your strain, you might test it up to 33 percent more.

Rosemary: No matter what your best efforts are sometimes you are going to get, defects that occur occasionally in serial production that didn’t happen in the test blade. Or I guess you do get the occasional unlucky blade where just every single possible parameter you’re at your worst case scenario, and they will all line up like holes in Swiss cheese.

So then you see issues like what we’re seeing in the news today with Siemens Gamesa, TPI, the main ones that I’ve heard of, which you’ve already talked about today. Do you feel like there are more blade defects than normal at the moment?

If you do think that there’s more than the normal amount of defects, what’s your thoughts on why that is and what that means for the future of wind?

Mohammed: Actually, I think there’s much less defects than before.

Because also, actually, there was a lot of progress yeah, but when just the engineering part, there was some, actually now more, much more calculation is done than before. And also in the manufacturing with all these new methods of being lean and then the quality management system and so on. I think they are getting less, but actually the ones that still makes it to the blades, those defects, they have a bigger impact now because we’ll, we became better, I think, as making blades at making less defects, but we also squeezed all the kind of the juice where we really pushing the limits and then going really designing to the limits and so on.

So maybe before you would have 10 small defects because of your manufacturing, but you had a little bit extra capacity in your structure that did want to be a problem. But now maybe let’s say you have just one out of these 10, but because of The very optimized blades, I would say one wrinkle that you don’t catch might be a big problem.

And that’s why having control over your manufacturing, it’s actually, it’s so important if you want to keep innovating, bringing new materials and then having this detailed analysis that you can use. You cannot benefit from that if you’re manufacturing is not like really almost perfect.

And that’s the problem I think blades have. I think almost everybody will agree with me. It’s the manufacturing that is still very like labor intensive. And then when it’s humans making that, it depends on where they are, if they had a bad night, if they have paid well, if they are stressed and all these factors, actually. You can have the best design you want.

You can reduce the number of defects, but yeah, the human factor is so important and then how can that be fixed? Often it will require money. And then again, the business case start suffering. Because you can say that why aren’t we automating all this process some simple ones like placing glue or placing some layers?

But, I worked in some many actually projects trying to add automation into factories. Very often you end up having more expensive blades that nobody will want to buy. And then you end up somehow, I don’t know if it’s intentionally or not admitting to like to have this quality issues than to invest in automation and then remove these quality issues.

Because at the end, even if those blades fails, it’s still actually better business case than a fully automated factory.

Rosemary: Okay. That’s a, yeah, that’s a really good perspective. And maybe we’ll have you back on another time to talk about wind turbine blade manufacturing, because I think that’s a whole huge topic that people don’t necessarily understand that well.

Yeah, particularly how manual the process is and all the quirks of composite materials. Thanks so much for coming on. And can I just ask a parting question? What do you think the future for wind is? Are we going to, make it out of this current crisis? Will we see bankruptcies? Do you think it’s overblown?

What’s your little snapshot of where you think we’re going?

Mohammed: I think there is still a future for wind, also mainly for offshore. Actually, it looks very promising. LCOE, it’s just decreasing and decreasing. And maybe that’s also why we are seeing all these problems. But I think it will stabilize at one point. I hope that will happen.

And then we have this healthy kind of industry where nobody’s taking kind of the losses. If it’s a supplier, OEM, or a developer, or the end customer. I think actually, I’m very positive, I would say. And then I think the solution in all that will often be, yeah, technology and innovation. I know also trying to keep the amount of platforms and product existing in the market very limited so that OEMs can benefit from it.

But only the market can regulate itself. And only the market will regulate the size of turbines. Only the market will regulate the end price. And it has to converse to a good balance point.

Rosemary: Thanks a lot for listening to this episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. Don’t forget to like and subscribe if you’re watching on YouTube. Or if you are listening on a podcast, please leave us a review. It makes a big difference to other people finding the podcast. Yeah, thanks again and we’ll see you in the next episode.

Improving Blade Quality: Challenges and Opportunities with Mohammed Fajar

Renewable Energy

WindQuest Advisors on Repowering and Rising O&M Costs

Published

6 hours ago

July 9, 2026

Alice Rush

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

WindQuest Advisors on Repowering and Rising O&M Costs

Dan Fesenmeyer, Managing Partner at WindQuest Advisors, joins to discuss the repowering rush and the FAA permitting stall, rising O&M costs on larger turbines, tariff pass-throughs, and AI data center demand.

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

Allen Hall: Dan, welcome back to the podcast.

Dan Fesenmeyer: It’s great to be here. Great to see you again.

Allen Hall: There is so much happening in your particular area. Your name pops up quite a bit within Weather Guard because, uh, we’re dealing with a lot of operators and- A number of times we’ll ask them, “Have you read your turbine supply agreement?”

“No.” “Have you read your full service agreement?” “No.” “Well, maybe you should do that.” And then we say, “Have you talked to Dan? You should call Dan, ’cause he can help you understand what you have signed.” Mm-hmm. “Oh, that’s probably a good idea.” So now that you’re here, WindQuest Advisors, of course, obviously is your company.

Mm-hmm. And you’re talking to a number of operators. The, the big hurdle at the minute, the nearest short-term hurdle, is repowering. There’s just a lot of [00:01:00] repowering efforts going on- Mm-hmm … trying to get turbines in, start a project. There’s a July 4th deadline and an end of the year deadline. There’s a couple deadlines after that.

What are you seeing right now from operators i- in terms of repowering? What’s the effort happening?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, there was a ton of effort to start physical work. That window’s obviously closing-

Allen Hall: Yes …

Dan Fesenmeyer: very quickly, but it’s still open. Uh, and then once you’re past that window, my understanding is if you get your repower completed by the end of ’27, you didn’t really need to have started physical work.

But I think most folks, start physical work is kind of the insurance piece of it-

Allen Hall: Sure …

Dan Fesenmeyer: if things take longer. Uh, another thing that’s popped up is obviously FAA and other permitting.

Allen Hall: On the permitting side, from the federal’s, uh, standpoint, is that stopped? Or, or are projects able to continue putting turbines in the ground, or what’s the status?

Dan Fesenmeyer: My- From what I’ve seen, I think on the opening session here at [00:02:00] ACP, it was said, they said that there’s, like, 130 projects that are-

Allen Hall: At least …

Dan Fesenmeyer: caught. Yes. And I’m, I’m involved with some of them, and I have a fairly small shop, and there’s just no FAA variances or permits or- They’re not issuing- … mitigation studies.

Everything seems to have stopped.

Allen Hall: So they’re not even reviewing the documentation that’s been submitted by the operators at all?

Dan Fesenmeyer: That’s what it seems, yes. Yeah.

Allen Hall: Is that legal? Uh, uh, usually those federal requirements have a timeline which they’re able to review those permits and get them approved or disapproved them.

You’re s- Right … I think what I’m hearing is, what you’re saying is they’re not even looking at them.

Dan Fesenmeyer: That’s correct. That’s what I’ve heard and seen.

Allen Hall: Okay.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah. Yeah.

Allen Hall: So what is an operator to do then? How does this, how do they meet some of these deadlines if they can’t get the permit?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, I mean, it stalled a lot of projects ’cause of the associated risk with it.

Although I’ve seen some, uh, you know, some repower folks think, “Well, you know, I’m just repair- repowering like for like, or I’m not changing much.” [00:03:00] But if your, if your rotor’s changing or pad location’s changing, you need to update those permits.

Allen Hall: So the, the groups and the operators that are repowering the existing turbines are putting basically the same turbine in the same hole.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well,

Allen Hall: I- Would that be okay?

Dan Fesenmeyer: I would say originally- The initial push on repower was kind of your larger rotors- Sure … new drivetrain, et cetera. Yes. The market seemed to shift more towards, “Hey, let’s do smaller upgrades, component exchanges.”

Allen Hall: Okay.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Getting more towards the minimal investment, so to speak.

Allen Hall: The 80% investment portion.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yes.

Allen Hall: Right.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah. And less about, you know, a big new machine head, for example.

Allen Hall: Well, if that gets you through and gets you the, the, uh, tax credit started back up again, which is the whole point- Right … there would be a reason to do that.

Dan Fesenmeyer: That’s right.

Allen Hall: Is there a marketplace then for those components if you’re gonna repower a GE 1.5 machine, which there’s a lot of them- Mm-hmm

in the United States? Are you seeing a big emphasis to go get a new gearbox, [00:04:00] to upgrade the blades- Yeah, and, and- … kind of

Dan Fesenmeyer: thing? Or just do maybe a drivetrain and s- Okay … and leave the rotor or, or-

Allen Hall: So do a gearbox and-

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah. Gear or just full drivetrain- Or generator … or yeah, s- things like that. And, um- Wow

people are comfortable doing it, and then it’s e- it’s easier, obviously.

Allen Hall: Sure. It’s faster.

Dan Fesenmeyer: And faster, and you don’t necessarily have to touch permits or, yeah.

Allen Hall: And is part of that repowering, I know one of the questions- Mm-hmm … that’s been bandied about quite a bit is, do I have to buy a, a new generator or a new gearbox, or is a refurbished gearbox enough to check the box in terms of upgrading or putting 80% of the value back into the turbine to qualify for those tax credits?

Dan Fesenmeyer: I’m not a tax expert, but I’ve seen people do both.

Allen Hall: Okay. Well, that’ll tell you.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah. Yeah.

Allen Hall: They’ve obviously talked to- Right … tax advisors about that.

Dan Fesenmeyer: It’s, it’s their level of risk and whether they have outside tax money or whether- … they’re kind of balance sheet or taking it themselves. It’s, it’s- Yeah … more of a risk profile that [00:05:00] everybody’s different on.

Allen Hall: Okay. So that has changed the landscape quite a bit. So now it’s, once this window of opportunity passes by, we’re into brave new world. Mm-hmm. And operating turbines now not really 10 years, operating till end of life, which could be 20, 25 years. Have operators started thinking about that and starting to address some of the, the, especially the contracts around that?

Are they starting to rethink contracts? Are they starting to approach full service agreements differently? Is, is the marketplace changing in the US?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah, I think so. I mean, it, it, depending what you have and what you’re doing, whether you have an existing agreement or you need a new one, and whether it’s a renewal or if you’re doing, let’s say, a drivetrain or new machine head, then there’s usually a service contract that’s going to come with it- Sure

’cause it’s essentially a new machine. Largely a new machine. Largely,

Allen Hall: yeah.

Dan Fesenmeyer: But in the case of a gearbox, right, you’re probably out of your longterm O&M agreement anyway, and, uh, whether you’re… And you probably [00:06:00] have, you don’t have the unplanned coverage anymore. Right. So it’s really, you’re on, you’re kind of on your own risk.

Allen Hall: Okay, so that’s the repower scenario. Mm-hmm. What’s happening new turbine-wise? It seems like the, a lot of the operators are choosing six megawatt, seven megawatt, eight megawatt machines tends to be the, the, the band of opportunity for a lot of operators. What are they working on right now in terms of, uh, TSAs, full service agreements?

What are you seeing out on the landscape US-wise?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, I think, um, the TSAs haven’t changed much.

Allen Hall: Okay.

Dan Fesenmeyer: But the- The, the scope and the risk has changed a bit, and the, the OEMs are, you know, holding their cards closer, and it’s hard to get to certain terms that– harder than it used to be.

Allen Hall: So let’s, let’s talk about that for a minute because, uh, there’s been some recent reports speaking to the O&M costs for larger machines.

And so the, the goal was if I went from a [00:07:00] two-megawatt machine to a six-megawatt machine, my O&M cost may be 3x because of the size of the turbine, but ideally they drop. That, uh, the same amount of effort into a larger, m- newer machine, uh, so, uh, my spend wouldn’t go up that much. In, in some places on the planet that I’ve seen feedback about that is that the O&M costs are not 3x, they’re 5x.

So the, the cost to operate the turbine, the six and eight megawatt machines, is higher than it would be proportionally to a two-megawatt machine. I think operators are just trying to start to figure that out. Are the OEMs already knowledgeable of that fact and are s- trying- I, in, in- … to phrase the conversation

Dan Fesenmeyer: mean, in the pricing that you get from the OEMs for the full scope agreements, that’s largely in there already.

Allen Hall: Yes.

Dan Fesenmeyer: And I always tell people look at it on a dollar per kWh or dollar per megawatt hour- Ah … basis versus a dollar per turbine, and you- Sure … you’ll see a different number.

Allen Hall: Different calculation done.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Right. But [00:08:00] these, these larger machines, they need larger cranes. They need tall– Yeah, they have taller towers, so a different crane setup, and these components become very, very large. So- Everything gets harder … everything gets d- more difficult. In a basic sense, it’s still oil and gearbox and, you know, tho- tho- Right

that kind of basic service. But when you get into major components and more major maintenance items, then it’s bigger, it can be harder.

Allen Hall: So what does a operator think about that now that they have a little bit of experience? Obviously SunZia, which is a huge project, three and a half gigawatts, uh, a l- several hun- like around 900 turbines, all of them bigger turbines.

It’s a r- for, uh, really the first real taste in America of larger turbines. What are the operators thinking about that, and how are they thinking about what sizes to go with in the future? Or, or, or do they not really have a choice? Like, GE offers six, Vestas offers six, Siemens will offer a six or a seven, [00:09:00] so those are your choices.

They’re– You’re not able to get a two megawatt machine anymore.

Dan Fesenmeyer: I mean, I think, uh, it really comes down to your, your site. Okay. And the larger machines are generally better when you have land constraints or, uh, y- your, your wind resource varies very differently. Think of a ridgeline, and you only have a certain number of pads.

But generally, it’s kind of a pad constraint to push you to the larger, and then your smaller, “smaller,” four and four to four and a half- … megawatt machines, those are still kind of the workhorses of, of the US, in my opinion. Their NCS better, they’re e- they’re lower cost, but you need more pads. So it’s always that trade-off of pads versus space, spacing, uh, and in the end, you just want to get the most AEP out of that site.

Allen Hall: In terms of marketplace, are you seeing prices generally rise dollars per megawatt on [00:10:00] new turbines? ‘Cause the, at least the market indication is that, uh, some of the OEMs have- Real strength in the marketplace today. This is an, an OEM-strong market. They can set- Mm-hmm … prices now. There’s fewer players. China has been eliminated from a lot of lo- locales.

Mm. So they don’t have the competition. That allows them to raise prices. Are you starting to see that flow down in some of the contracts, that, hey, the prices are going up? But, but i- inflation has been a big part of that, too. Well,

Dan Fesenmeyer: yeah, yeah. I mean, there’s… And tariffs, right? The, uh, that, that’s the most interesting one right now, and you have to kind of peel apart what’s my pre-tariff price versus my post, and then what’s the exposure if these tariffs change?

And-

Allen Hall: Is that in the contracts now? Are they able to write contracts that tie them to what the tariffs could be, so your final price really depends on what the tariffs are today or tomorrow?

Dan Fesenmeyer: It’s generally… Well, things have changed and, and things are always fluid, but, [00:11:00] but most recently it’s, “Well, here’s what the tariffs are today,” and when we either bring in the component or when the OEM’s actually paying that tariff, it’s kind of a pass-through

Allen Hall: in essence.

So they’re just handing you the, the bill for the tariff- Yeah … in a sense.

Dan Fesenmeyer: I mean, that- that’s it. And then you can maybe negotiate and do some things around that to share risk a little bit. Mm-hmm. But the basic premise is, you know, there’s transparency on here’s the countries and the tariff rates. If these change, that’s on the buyer.

Allen Hall: So the OEMs are trying to address that in, in some form w- by moving production into the United States. Vestas has a large blade facility in Colorado. They’ve been expanding that over the last several months. They’ve been hiring quite a bit. Uh, GE with LM up in North Dakota and TPI, and all the discussions around TPI at the minute is to really bolster their supply chain.

Uh, they’re trying to get away from the tariffs as much as they can. Are, [00:12:00] are you… You think you’re still gonna see more of that where a Siemens, a GE, a Vestas are gonna be investing more in the United States to avoid that tariff, or is it just impossible?

Dan Fesenmeyer: I, I mean, I think you… What they’ve done, I… It seems to me, I’m not obviously an expert on that, but it- they’ve moved things where they can And to capture- Mm

you know, where you already have capacity. But starting, yeah, building a new plant somewhere, I’m not sure how wise that is in the environment that we’re in.

Allen Hall: Yeah, you saw a lot of plants that were proposed two, three years ago that have, were never built. It does seem like existing plants that were on site that were closed got reopened.

Kansas, Iowa- Mm-hmm … some of those plants got- Mm-hmm … started over again, which is easier to do, which makes a lot of sense. So they’re going after the, the easiest things first still. We’re in that phase of we’re not gonna put a lot of money into the United States however. We’re gonna utilize what we have and maybe grow what we have.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Right. Or, or similarly, you can move from, if you have more of a… All these supply [00:13:00] chains are global at this point.

Allen Hall: Sure.

Dan Fesenmeyer: But if you happen to have a factory in a country with a lower tariff and versus one that’s higher, maybe you move that. You’re not bringing it over to the US, but you’re moving from, let’s say, India to the UK.

Allen Hall: Sure. So, so- Okay, so there, there’s a lot of sh- card shuffling going on- Yeah … to avoid tariffs.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah, and unfortunately then the tariffs change and- … perhaps you have to change back. And, and the other one, uh, that’s out there, obviously the Supreme Court had their ruling on tariffs, so folks are waiting for a Section 232, which is

Allen Hall: still- Untouchable, in a sense?

Uh-

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, it- people are just waiting for what, what will Section 232 be. And it’s been looming for months now.

Allen Hall: Over a year.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yes. So, and, you know, we’re waiting, I guess.

Allen Hall: Is the feeling about that in the industry, uh… I’ll, well, I’ll use a couple of good examples, I think, which, uh, offshore wind being a real stress point United States, and a lot of [00:14:00] the administration’s work to limit offshore development got stopped in the courts.

So anything that was sort of building turbines, putting, had ships out, putting- Mm … uh, monopiles in, they never got stopped. They were delayed a couple of weeks, but they were never really stopped, and it feels like from the outside looking in, is that the courts are not gonna allow some of these, uh, movements by the administration to take effect.

Is the industry in the United States seeing the tariffs and some of the more extreme things that are happening as temporary or, or are they being a little more cautious, saying, “Yes, offshore wind has won a, a number of lawsuits”? But we may not. And th- with the Department of War and 232 and all those events that are happening, what is the outcome there, and w- how are operators thinking about that?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, I think we’re in a, in a market where if you have a project that can get built within this window-

Allen Hall: Yeah …

Dan Fesenmeyer: and [00:15:00] you’ve safe har- Like, those projects- And you’re, you’re just in … are desperately moving forward.

Allen Hall: Okay.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Then- ‘

Allen Hall: Cause the trend has been, if you can get it in the ground, they’re gonna let it be developed.

They haven’t been able- Right … to stop anything halfway through. Well,

Dan Fesenmeyer: other, like, the FA is a good example of it-

Allen Hall: Sure …

Dan Fesenmeyer: being stopped. But- Yeah … if you have a project that’s being built, you’re moving forward, and then projects that are outside the window, it’s more of a greenfield development view of, of life.

And seems like some folks are selling p- assets, some folks are buying- A

Allen Hall: lot of that …

Dan Fesenmeyer: development assets.

Allen Hall: Let’s go down that pathway for a minute because I did think- Yeah … that’s a very interesting piece to what’s happening in the United States at the minute. There’s a lot of transactions, big dollar transactions happening for wind- Mm-hmm

on buying, selling portfolios, not just farms. It used to be farms. Right. We’ll sell a farm. Yeah. It was. We’ll swap farms, that kind of thing. Now it’s like, uh, would you like our whole portfolio, wind, solar, battery?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Mm-hmm.

Allen Hall: Is that playing into a lot of the decisions that are [00:16:00]happening on the ground right now, that a, a developer or an operator that has assets is saying, this is a prime time to sell.

There’s a l- I have my tax credits already locked in. We’re golden here- Mm-hmm … for several years. The value is never gonna get higher. I need to get out. I- is that the marketplace today, is-

Dan Fesenmeyer: I think for some. I mean- Yeah … everybody’s got different, uh, motivations, whether they wanna get into wind, get out of wind, greenfield versus repower.

Uh, it, it’s, it’s really their view of the world and their risk profile moving forward, and whether this is a short-term play, long-term. Do we wanna get out of wind? Some people are essentially doing that. Uh, it’s, it’s across the board.

Allen Hall: How’s AI data centers playing into this? What are you hearing?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Oh, I mean, that’s what everybody talks about, AI and data centers, and the demand for power is there.

And- The [00:17:00] issue that, that a lot of us see is wind and solar and battery can all help with that.

Allen Hall: Sure.

Dan Fesenmeyer: And if you want a gas turbine, that’s great, but my former colleagues at GE are gonna tell you it’s 2030- Yes … or later to get one, so what do you do between now and then? And you’re seeing prices go up, which makes these wind farms look pretty good.

Power profile’s nice. Yes. Uh, but you still have hurdles to get, like the FAA, US Fish and Wildlife, all these other hurdles to, you know, that are slowing down wind and solar for that matter too.

Allen Hall: Solar’s been slowed down for sure.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Allen Hall: Does that change, though, with the demand for power in AI data centers?

And it does seem to be a priority in the United States to, to win this AI race. Mm-hmm. Does that loosen some of the reins on renewables to let them go, like just look the other way for a while, while they put a new solar field or wind farm in?

Dan Fesenmeyer: It stands to reason that will happen. Haven’t really seen [00:18:00] it, unfortunately.

But I wo- But I think it will, right? I mean, it, it, it, it almost has to at some point.

Allen Hall: There’s a lot of pressure on Washington DC to let data centers start being developed and, and go.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Mm-hmm.

Allen Hall: But a- as you pointed out, gas turbines are hard to get, and they can’t scale up at the rate at which the demand is.

Right. So your alternative is something really simple, quick and efficient, which would be wind and solar and a little bit of battery. Yeah. I- is that change in the thinking of operators and how they’re thinking about their assets, one, and two, what they’re thinking about in the future? Or are they trying to hook up with an- a- I mean-

a Google, a Facebook, a- Yeah, I

Dan Fesenmeyer: mean, the offtake’s- … SpaceX … there, and that’s generally, you know, it used to be utility PPAs. Then it turned- Right. … into hedge things and C&I. Yeah. And now it’s more, you have this, the data center offtake.

Allen Hall: Is the data center offtake, thinking about it from a, a financial standpoint, which they’re probably not being tied to the grid.

At [00:19:00] least a lot of these, or at least the talk is right now, is the not being connected to the grid to be sort of standalone, feeding a data center, and maybe a piece of fiber optic coming out of the data center. But that’s essentially it. Maybe some backup power on the grid just in case things go horribly wrong, but standalone power for data centers does make sense.

It would, it would seem to lessen the requirements on wind and solar in terms of interacting with the federal government or the, the power company in a sense. Does that make wind and solar a little more viable because it’s not connected to the grid?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, I mean, it will be connected to the grid because when the wind stops blowing, the utility will usually, you know, or, and the sun stops sh- shining- Sure

uh, the utility will kind of provide that power. That w- Or the gas turbines that they have would- Gas turbine will kick

Allen Hall: in, right.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yes. Yeah. But, but generally speaking, you’re never truly off the grid, but it does speed things up with interconnection and, and, you know, your T&D [00:20:00] line is much shorter.

Allen Hall: Right.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Or not, you know- Much

much, much shorter. Yeah. Depending where the, the resource is and versus the plant or the, the data center.

Allen Hall: So what are the things that we don’t know in the industry that you’re in touch with that we should know? ‘Cause there, there must be a lot happening behind the scenes that we don’t hear out in public or in the common spaces of some of these conferences that are happening behind the scenes.

What is, what is the status right now? What do you think the status is of wind?

Dan Fesenmeyer: I mean, it’s, I, I, I’m a big sailor, and sometimes the wind’s blowing hard- … you’re going fast, and sometimes you sail into what we call a hole- Yeah … and it’s just dead quiet. We’re not quite there yet, but, um, it, it’s kind of we’re going through a bit of a lull right now.

And I think, I think what people don’t realize is the multiple roadblocks that the industry’s facing. In the past, we’ve had PTCs lapse, and the question is when and if it [00:21:00] will be renewed. Yeah. Now you have other roadblocks, you know, whether it’s, again, FAA, Fish and Wildlife, permitting, different localities.

Some… And this goes back to the data center. A lot of local, you know, communities don’t want a data center.

Allen Hall: Right. There’s a lot of-

Dan Fesenmeyer: Right? And they’re like, “Well, wait a minute. My power prices as a citizen are gonna go up- True … because of it.”

Allen Hall: Yeah, it’s true. We’ve already seen it.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah. Yeah. So, so there’s a lot of just new barriers that have come up.

Allen Hall: Okay. That-

Dan Fesenmeyer: But wind developers are an extremely resilient bunch, and-

Allen Hall: This isn’t the first rodeo-

Dan Fesenmeyer: Right …

Allen Hall: where they’ve had these issues pop up- Yeah … and PTCs stop and other world forces affect the industry. What’s the outlook over the next three to five years, do you think? Different administration in a couple years, maybe different outlook, more demand on…

for power, AI data centers. Is- it just gonna [00:22:00] overwhelm any resistance to wind and solar and battery?

Dan Fesenmeyer: I mean, it, it, that’s kind of a crystal ball, but I think if these data centers start getting built out like people think they will, there’ll be demand for power. And, now we’re talking basic economics, Supply, demand. People need power, then power plants will get built and, whether it’s gas, wind, solar-

Allen Hall: All of the above

Dan Fesenmeyer: All of the above, right? And, and I think it will ultimately follow that. I think the, administration will let you know if there’s not enough power or power gets too expensive, something has to break and fill that gap

Allen Hall: because- So let the economics play out a little bit.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah, right? Yeah. ‘Cause we’re, we’re voters, right? And- Sure … and, um, people vote often with their pocketbooks.

Allen Hall: And wind and solar are cheap sources of energy, and they’re gonna come to the top of the list almost every time.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Yeah.

Allen Hall: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I, I agree with you. Uh, it’s good to see you again. We saw you a few months [00:23:00] ago at WOMA in Australia, and that was wonderful.

And I tell a lot of the operators we talk to, “You better be talking to Dan and WindQuest Advisors because you really need to understand what your contracts say and the contract you’re signing, and you need to have a better sense of what’s happening, a little more broader speak in the United States and elsewhere- Mm-hmm

and they should be talking to you.” So how do they call or how do they contact WindQuest Advisors to get started?

Dan Fesenmeyer: Well, www.windquestadvisors.com or reach out to Allen and his team. You’re on LinkedIn. I’m on LinkedIn as well- … both personally and my firm. And, um, ask a friend ’cause I have a, we have- … big networks that everybody…

You know, it’s, it’s a small community here. It

Allen Hall: is.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Right?

Allen Hall: It is.

Dan Fesenmeyer: And, and people bounce around different firms and, but people stay connected, so, um, that’s a great way to find each other as well.

Allen Hall: Yeah. Great to see you, Dan. Likewise. Thank you. Thanks for being on the podcast. And yeah, we’ll hopefully see you in Australia in a couple months.

Dan Fesenmeyer: Looking forward to

[00:24:00] it.

WindQuest Advisors on Repowering and Rising O&M Costs

Renewable Energy

America’s Brand: Indifference to Human Pain

Published

16 hours ago

July 8, 2026

Alice Rush

There are essentially two forms of government on this planet: those that care about the wellbeing of their citizens and serve their interests and those that don’t.

Until the late 20th Century, one could have plausibly argued either way re: the United States. Since about 1980, it’s been clear that we really couldn’t care less about the sufferings of the common American.

It’s really become part of our brand. Billionaires deserve tax cuts. The middle class is shrinking, and the poor deserve a kick in the ass for not working harder.