Published

2 years ago

May 29, 2024

Alice Rush

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

IntelStor Insights into Wind Turbine Blade O&M Costs

Phil Totaro, CEO of IntelStor, dives deep into the latest trends and data surrounding onshore wind turbine blade operations and maintenance costs. He discusses the strategies and innovations being employed to optimize blade performance, reduce downtime, and drive down costs.

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

Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall. As the wind energy industry continues to grow and mature, the focus on reducing costs and improving efficiency has never Been more important. Operations and maintenance costs can account for a significant portion of the total cost of energy production, making it a critical area of concern for wind farm operators and energy users alike.

In this episode, Phil Totaro, CEO and founder of IntelStor, will share the latest data and trends related to Onshore Wind Turbine Blade Operations and maintenance costs, which everybody’s wondering about is going to provide some valuable insights into the current state of the blade industry and how we manage blades.

You also discussed some of the strategies, innovations being employed to optimize blade performance, reduce downtime, and ultimately. Drive down costs, so whether you’re a wind farm operator, an energy user, or just simply interested in the future of renewable energy, this is an episode you won’t want to miss.

Welcome again. Thanks, Allen. Thanks for having me. So the IntelStor report you just published, and there’s some news about it on LinkedIn, is really fascinating because Joel and I have been wandering around Oklahoma and Texas and other parts of the country looking at blades. And there is a lot of concern.

About the costs associated with damaged blades and how to forecast that and how to appropriately budget for them, particularly in terms of all the new types of blades that are being introduced, the bigger generators, the three megawatts, the four megawatts, the six megawatt machines versus the one and a half and two megawatts that we’re kind of used to it becomes really a guessing game for a lot of operators because they don’t have a sense of How much is it going to cost me to operate this turbine, and how do I manage that, and how do I appropriately schedule my technicians?

Like, how many technicians do I need for a season? These are subjects that come up all the time, and, and if you’ve been around anywhere in Canada or the United States over the last year, there’s so much more talk about it now. And this is where your new tool comes in, your Onshore tool. Basically estimator or looking at turbine size versus the types of damage a blade may suffer.

Phil, will you, will you walk us through what this tool is at the top

Philip Totaro: level? Sure. Of course. So, What we have been repeatedly getting asked about is, for the ISPs we work with, they want to understand the, a detailed market forecast. And the only way to get to a detailed market forecast is, we obviously know based on the work that we already do, how much capacity we’re expecting to be installed.

And that’s not based on like estimates, that’s based on actual pipeline of turbines. And so we know in markets like the United States or Brazil, where, there’s reasonably good detailed publication of those turbine sizes, we, we’ve built out that, that pipeline. But what we then needed to do was determine, all right, how many of those units are going to be online within the next, 10 years or so?

What’s the, most importantly, what are the top kind of failure modes? And then what’s the probability and, and kind of the annual failure rate for each one of those type of failure modes on the turbine as a whole. And then we started looking at blades in particular because it, as it turns out, most people will recall either anecdotally or through some previously published information that gearboxes were probably the most expensive.

Item in terms of downtime that you could have on a smaller turbine. But as we go bigger the gearboxes and generators have actually become more slightly more reliable. You still have, your, your periodic faults and failures. But they’ve developed a lot of technology through either modularization or other up tower cranes and things like that that allow you to service gearboxes, generators, etc.

in situ. Blades, if you’ve got a major issue, you probably still need to take it down. And that can either involve a single blade swap kind of, crane mechanism or a big crane. And it’s basically all that said, what’s happening now with bigger turbines is the bigger the turbines go, the The more cost is involved because of the amount of repair time and the crane cost associated with undertaking that type of repair.

So as compared to gearboxes or generators or pitch systems and, and maybe main bearings that used to be like the, the biggest causes of, O& M expense and, and the biggest impact on downtime. Blades are now kind of, unfortunately, taking the, the lead. And I guess right up your alley, lightning is probably still, like, one of the number one causes of both minor repairs and major.

Repairs and replacements.

Allen Hall: Yeah, so we’re seeing the, the common faults that existed on the one and a half megawatt machines and two megawatt machines when they move up to three and four megawatt machines. They didn’t always require a crane. Pretty much when you get to three megawatts, four megawatts, you’re going to require a crane from most of the, the major items.

Any sort of trailing edge bond line on the back end to lightning damage to any, anything internal. Boy, it just seems like there’s a real risk reward to using a larger turbine at the minute. And, and that’s where I think this data is very interesting because we, we are moving away from the one megawatt machines.

We obviously we’re kind of the one and a half to two range at the moment. Right. And then we’re going to be in the threes. What does that mean in terms of operational costs? What do we need to be planning for here? Do we need to be ordering more cranes? Do we need to have other plans

Philip Totaro: to deal with this? So there’s a couple of things at play here.

One is Besides lightning damage, one of the number one expenditures that you’re going to have is actually been a fatigue failure in the route. That’s again, according to the data we’ve got, as far as the probability of occurrence and, and the annual failure rate, that’s one of the highest impact repairs that you’re going to have.

Again, besides lightning damage and followed closely by transportation damage, which, unfortunately, transportation damage is just kind of part of the cost of doing business, so to speak. But it can, it can vary. You can get to site and notice that you’ve got a few little things, maybe in the chips in the top coat that you just need to fix, or you could actually have some some severe issues with leading or trailing edge cracking or other things, you might get to site and notice that you’ve got some, missing parts or, or things like that.

Maybe they’re the the root inserts weren’t weren’t aligned perfectly correctly or, or something like that, when you go and try to install. So. There’s all kinds of things that, that can, have an impact here, but those are, those are probably the, the top issues you’ve got.

And then, you’ve, you’ve still got, while it’s infrequent, a full separation of the blade is probably the, the number five thing that happens in terms of total cost impact. So we’re looking at just for the U. S. market, by the way this year, it’s about 2. 5 billion in blade repairs that we’re anticipating are going to be necessary.

By 2030, we’re talking about 3 billion. And by, we, we only did our projection out about 10 years, but by, within 10 years, it’s going to be around 3. 3 billion. And that’s assuming that you have turbines that have no service lift. For turbines with a service lift, thankfully and since most, three, four, five, six megawatt turbines are gonna be installed that way from, from now on We’re looking at, anywhere from about two and a quarter billion up to, maybe three billion within ten years.

So, whether you’ve got a service lift or not, we’re talking, close to three billion dollars in, in a blade repair market alone that is Going to need to be serviced and those costs are continuing to inch up. So the other aspect of this that, that you asked about was regarding the growth in turbine size and, and power rating.

And what we’re noticing is that it’s not necessarily reducing the. The frequency of occurrence and the annual failure rate for specific failure modes. You’re still seeing lightning damage. In fact, with longer rotors, you may we don’t have enough data, unfortunately, because there’s not enough turbines out there, but you may actually see an increase in lightning damage as a result of longer blades.

So the reality of this is these, we’re kind of considering these estimates to be a bit conservative at this point. And we’re, we’re looking at a scenario where as turbines are getting bigger, Yes, you get more power out of it but you also get a higher impact on your downtime because for a single turbine going down, you’re not only talking about the repair cost and time you’re also talking about the, the loss of production.

And with that much of a, of an impact on lost production, it’s actually just as financially impactful to the asset owner. Because keep in mind that when we calculate these repair costs and the numbers I’ve just quoted, that’s literally only the, the actual cost of repairs. That’s not even taking into account the downtime which we will be kind of factoring into this.

When we kind of expand on this analysis later, later this year we want to be able to get down to a point where we can see what that impact is going to be on, on owners depending on the, the frequency of occurrence and regional distribution and all that, that sort of thing.

Allen Hall: So what I have seen from the field is as operators have chosen larger turbines, it seems great, right?

There’s less wires in the ground, fewer pads. Concrete everything adds up on that side, right? So it’s just less stuff, but what I’m seeing on the blade side is blades are newer less service history Transportation tends to be more of a problem You see more blade damage from transporting and lifting because of the blades have just gotten bigger and they’re harder to manage On top of that the the unknowns are still there, right?

so instead of We don’t have a good understanding, in some cases, in the early in the design phase of some of the twisting moments and, and the weird things you see out in the field. So you just experience it once they get out there. So instead of having a one and a half megawatt machine in which you have a proven service history, you get it up with this new big massive blade out there.

And what I’m seeing is that the failure rates go up. Not down. So the, the history we have with smaller blades seems to stop with those smaller plates. That’s not, you’re not having a, like a 3 percent failure rate doesn’t seem to be steady across platforms. What seems to be happening as the platforms get larger, the failure rates go up.

So even though you’re putting in fewer turbines, you’re, you’re still working against the failure rate going up. So you’re still roughly losing, you’re losing more power out of the farm than you were previously by having larger turbines is what it So is there really a savings? And this is where I want to get to folks.

I think this is the interesting piece to the analysis is, is it actually less expensive to put more turbines in of a lesser

Philip Totaro: power rating? If the availability is better and the reliability of the components is better, then yes. And, but here’s the thing, here’s the catch on why everybody wants a bigger turbine is because it’s necessarily a bit lower upfront CapEx.

It can, it can lower the, like you said, it’s a fewer number of pads, fewer electrical connections, et cetera. So everybody thinks about it in terms of, Oh, I’ve got to finance this, this project. And we’ve got to reduce the upfront CapEx as much as possible. So how can we do that? Well, let’s get the biggest turbines we can get.

And that’s the mentality. That’s what’s being, so basically what’s happening is developers and. The asset owners that they’re, if they’re doing a build and transfer a business model the asset owners and the developers who originally built the projects, they aren’t necessarily taking into account this total cost of ownership.

They’re assuming that, certain fault and failure rates that are underestimating what we’re actually seeing. And what it’s resulting in is actually bigger losses because of all the things we just talked about, what you’re seeing in the field and what we’re seeing from data.

Allen Hall: So the end of store data becomes really critical here because if you’re making those decisions, you need to understand a craneless repair versus a crane repair.

And the fact that it multiplies it times a hundred, a lot of cases on the cost and then the business interruption and all the other things that come with it. There is a real trade off here. We are crossing this threshold, which you guys are identifying of size versus quantity, right? That’s what it is.

Bigger size or more quantity. You need to pick one. The data, we don’t have a lot of data yet, and this is where I think the end of store data becomes really critical to the decision process, right?

Philip Totaro: Well, we hope so. And, and look, we’re, we’ve built this based on a data set that’s been collected from various independent power producers ISPs, and some academic research papers.

But we need more. And so this is a call to action, and frankly, an opportunity for asset owners and operators will pay you royalties for access to some of this information. You don’t have to give us like necessarily site specific data. We would certainly prefer to have turbine specific data so that we could identify which OEMs are really kind of, or which products are really the, the red headed stepchild, if you will, of the, the product family.

But we need to be able to quantify it. I think a lot of people know, kind of anecdotally, it gets talked about, texts from different sites talk to each other, Oh, this thing’s a big pain in the butt. That thing’s not, but You know that we need to quantify it and and in quantifying it at the end of the day, the reason that we do what we do with all this data is we’re trying to tell a story and we’re trying to attract investors to this industry.

Okay, we’ve got a good story to tell. Despite the fact that we’re going to have this, this O and M challenge, we’ve got a really good story to tell in terms of cost of energy in terms of, greening the electric system there, there’s a great story to tell here, but we need data to be able to convince people that we’ve got, a place where they can feel confident in parking their money.

The more data we can get our hands on in terms of fault and failure rates, in terms of, time it takes to do a particular type of repair, which, frankly speaking, It doesn’t necessarily have to be that sensitive, okay? It’s, we’re, we’re just trying to, come up with the best estimates that we can so that we can all work together to try and attract more investment to this industry.

That’s ultimately what we need to be able to do, and, and having the data at our disposal as an industry to be able to tell that story is absolutely essential.

Allen Hall: Does this help us better understand where the next plateau of wind turbine sizes will be? Like GE and Vestas have done offshore at 15 megawatts, is there going to be a data point crossing where you say, All right, 3 megawatts is as far as we should go onshore because it is the most efficient machine we’re going to be able to build and transport and install and maintain today.

Anything bigger than that is going to be trouble. For Doesn’t that data lead us to that kind of decision matrix and also in terms of PPAs? Because the PPA market is a sort of a fixed market out there And if you know what that sort of ballpark cap is for PPAs You’re really trying to keep your costs well underneath those PPAs ideally

Philip Totaro: that’s going to have a decision matrix too, right?

Well, and keep in mind something that we’ve been analyzing recently, which was If you’ve got a PPA that’s below what you’re getting for production tax credit revenue, so basically if your PPA is below, like, let’s say 26 a megawatt hour or, 26. 80 or whatever it’s indexed to these days, if you’ve got a PPA below what you’re getting for PTC revenue, you are absolutely dependent not only on the PTC revenue, but you are absolutely dependent on high availability.

If you do not have high availability, you’ve got a big problem, a revenue problem, and you’re not only going to have to repower, but you’re probably going to have to repower with refinancing a substantial portion of your project site. In that repowering cost any residual value that you haven’t already paid off from the original project, you got to carry that over if you’re debt refinancing your project or whatever you’re doing you’re, you’re going to have a certain amount of, of money left over that you’re going to have to include in, in that refinance.

The more you can pay that down, the faster it, which again, translates back to high availability. The, the faster you can generate revenue on your project, the faster you can reduce the residual value of your project down to a point where you’ve, you’ve broken even and you’re seeing a net positive return on capital that is essential in terms of financial health and, and portfolio viability.

The good news is we’re seeing merchant market prices trend back up there around, 35 to 40 this year. But, going back a few years, I mean, you were seeing power purchase contracts in the U. S. market get executed down like 10, 11, 12 for, for some projects. Now they might have only been like a three or five year duration on that On that PPA, but it’s still a problem, like you, if you’re not going to be able to then transition into a merchant market, if you’re going back to these, power off takers that are only going to pay you like 15 bucks a megawatt hour, you have to be on top of your availability.

Because availability equals PTC revenue equals financial viability of your project. And that’s

Allen Hall: where the IntelStor data comes in, right? Because IntelStor has done the analysis in all the wind farms in the United States to look at availability, which then goes to how the turbines are maintained, the type of turbine that is installed, all those little variables that do produce an availability number.

In a store has, you can go back and look and say, well, this turban did really well in this part of the country because they’re using this type of maintenance scheme. Maybe I want to repeat that because I know what my output will be at the end of the day. Well, my payback

Philip Totaro: time will be right. Absolutely.

And this goes back to what I just talked about. We’re trying to tell a story about. If there’s a particular asset owner or operator that’s doing a really good job and has a really financially healthy portfolio, that’s the kind of, place that investors want to be able to park their money.

That’s the type of, the people who originally developed that project. They’re going to get, an easier time of it, trying to go get financing. The people who are owning and operating those projects are going to have an easier time of it going and getting financing. And it’s largely down to the fact that they’ve taken things like this O& M challenge seriously.

They, they’ve recognized the fact that we’re seeing these issues and they’re getting on top of it by being proactive with their maintenance. Because of, again, all these things we just talked about, you need high availability, you need to reduce your OpEx cost, you need to reduce the frequency with which things fail, and you need to be able to detect that something’s going to fail earlier, so that before you need to call out a crane, you can, you can address it, and you won’t have that that escalation of cost that you necessarily see.

Thank you. So this was, I mean, look, I’ll go back to when we had our IntelStor event the O and M in San Diego, back in February, there was an independent power producer who was there that specifically asked for this. They, they wanted to know how much, we’ve got a finite amount of, of budget to spend, how much can we realistically.

Get out of, addressing all the things that were like a cat 4, cat 5 damage on, on the blade that we have to address to be able to get it back up and running. But going down into things that were maybe cat 2 or cat 3. Should we really put off doing the maintenance on those or are we going to get to a point where we’re going to incur a substantially increased cost later because we’re going to have more crane callouts than we would otherwise have?

And anytime you can reduce crane time, everybody already knows inherently that’s, that’s critical. And I

Allen Hall: think this data from what I’ve reviewed of it drives you to some questions about continuous monitoring systems. very much. And other types of systems just to, to keep your turbine from, and that could be technicians having more touch time with the lifts inside the turbines where you can get up and down and take a quick look like, like blade bolts seems to be a big issue, pitch bearings, big issue, right?

That seems to be industry wide. You, you have to stay on top of these things where before, I think, five years ago, ten years ago, you weren’t as on top of them, you didn’t need to monitor them, your farms were smaller even, and now that we kind of crossed this threshold, we’re like, Sunzea, which is, I don’t know how many turbines, 650 turbines or something like that.

Those numbers are massive. There’s no way you’re gonna be able to monitor all those turbines. Doesn’t that, with the, especially with the data you have, and the failure rates, and the projections forward, doesn’t that really force your hand into some sort of continuous monitoring systems so that you can then keep track of what your failure rates are and get ahead of some of these maintenance items.

Philip Totaro: The good news is that the reason that condition monitoring had such a hard time getting adopted with smaller turbines was because of As a percentage of cost of the overall turbine capex, a condition monitoring system was just too expensive. But the technology’s improved, the cost per kind of installed megawatt, shall we say, has come down a little bit.

Over the years based on just economies of scale with deploying more CMS systems. But as turbines get bigger, you can more sort of easily afford I’ll, I’ll say a full kind of condition monitoring system. If you’re getting up to the point where you have a four, five, six megawatt turbine, you’re almost going to want this because you also frankly, whether you’ve got a service lift or not, if you can avoid sending a tech up tower, That right there is, or multiple techs up tower, that right there is saving you, potentially thousands if not millions of dollars across your entire fleet during the course of a year.

If, if we go back to the data we just calculated, Cost Delta between for just for blade repairs for if you assume nobody’s got a service lift versus there’s 100 percent service lift adoption, it’s a diff it’s a difference of 300 million just in the time that techs are taking to climb towers. And that’s, again, that’s just for blade repairs.

We haven’t even done the math on, pitch systems, main shafts. Gearboxes, generators, converters, et cetera. Everything else that might necessitate having a tech go up tower. So, not, we’re, we’re not necessarily doing a, an advertisement for, the service lift companies, but, if I’m, if I’m the sales guy at a service lift company, I should expect my phone to be off the hook at this point.

Allen Hall: Yeah, I would imagine. So the, the IntelStor data is pointing everybody in the right direction. And I think the industry is starting to wake up to what, what data IntelStor has and the power it has and the advantage it gives you going forward, particularly as we build out more turbines across the United States and all over the world.

This data becomes important in the decision making process. So, Phil, how do people get ahold of you and check out IntelStor’s data?

Philip Totaro: They can visit our website, www. intelstor. com, intelstor.com/contact. You can reach out to me on LinkedIn, any way you can get in touch. We’re always happy to have a conversation, and we’d love to be able to help you.

https://weatherguardwind.com/intelstor-wind-turbine-blade-om-cost/

Renewable Energy

Brian Cox, PhD

Published

5 hours ago

July 7, 2026

Alice Rush

It’s always encouraging to see the emergence of another brilliant astrophysicist into our culture — not that his message here is particularly encouraging.

Brian Cox, PhD

Renewable Energy

GE Vernova Backs LM Wind Power, KKR Buys EDF Assets

Published

15 hours ago

July 7, 2026

Alice Rush

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

GE Vernova Backs LM Wind Power, KKR Buys EDF Assets

GE Vernova pumps $1 billion into LM Wind Power, and KKR buys EDF’s US and Canada renewables arm. Plus CIP sweeps South Korea’s offshore auction and the CME plans wind derivatives across three continents.

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!

The Uptime Wind Energy podcast, brought to you by StrikeTape. Protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit striketape.com. And now, your hosts.

Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall, and I’m here with Matthew Stead and Yolanda Padron. Rosemary is at GWO training this week. And we have an announcement about Wind Energy O&M Australia 2027. Matthew, you wanna give all the details?

Matthew Stead: Drum roll Um, very pleased to announce that WOMA 2027 will be at the East Pullman Hotel in Melbourne’s east, uh, not the other one, and, uh, 3rd to 5th of March.

Um, the first two days will be two days of wind O&M, uh, conferences, [00:01:00] uh, and then the Friday will be a half-day, uh, training session. More information to come.

Allen Hall: Well, she’s not here, so we can probably just announce it, that Rosemary will be giving a terrific four-hour-long seminar on blades and blade repair, so you sign up now.

Matthew, where do you go if you wanna just check out what’s happening at WOMA

Matthew Stead: 2027? Uh, well, actually, it’s woma2027.com.

Allen Hall: Uh, over at GE Vernova and LM Wind Power, there’s been a whole bunch of turmoil over the last couple of years if you haven’t been paying attention. Well, GE Vernova just injected about a billion dollars into that company.

So although LM recently has shown very little in terms of revenue, it definitely had needed some capital injection in, uh, at least according to the Danish press, the number of employees at the Danish site is about 20 to 30. So it’s really a fraction of what it once was. But [00:02:00] it does seem like GE is paying off all its existing debt and then giving it a little bit of a cash infusion to keep it rolling.

The question really is, is what is GE Vernova gonna do with that business now? Are they planning on keeping it? Are they trying to get s- to get it back to health where they can service the other, uh, OEMs that they manufacture blades for? Or is there a larger action that will happen in the near future?

What do we think?

Matthew Stead: Yeah, I’m really confused by this one. I mean, a cash injection just so that you’re not bankrupt on paper is, um, that’s just playing with money as far as I’m concerned. Or I’m not sure if it’s a US term, but, you know, shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic. It doesn’t– Does it change anything?

Allen Hall: Well, uh, th- they made no announcements about closing facilities. The LM blade facility in North Dakota still appears to be making blades. There’s the TPI factories, which are going through a transition r- right now, appear to be making GE [00:03:00] blades. I, I assume Gaspé up in Canada is still making blades, at least that’s the story.

If GE’s gonna rely upon LM to make blades, they’re gonna need to keep them open. Is, is this more of just keeping the factories open with a skeleton engineering crew and possibly moving the blade design group into the States? Is that– Or India or, or somewhere?

Yolanda Padron: And they’re still selling, right? They’re still selling blades.

It seems like they’re still planning on manufacturing blades. Do we think that maybe- They’re just trying to avoid that whole TPI bankruptcy deal to not have to kind of scrap for parts?

Allen Hall: Yeah, it’s a great question. I think TPI has been producing parts at high quantity, and some of the Things I’ve heard from the industry folk is that TPI is really busy in producing quality blades, and it’s like the bankruptcy transaction is not happening, which is great to hear because the [00:04:00]industry needs blades, and there’s a lot of repowering going on in the United States and a lot of activity in general, so they need blades.

But does LM continue to be a part of that?

Matthew Stead: Yeah, I mean, presumably the TPI, um, whole story only makes LM more important, you know, more important to have, uh, an additional manufacturer and, you know, providing, you know, options for the OEMs.

Allen Hall: It does seem like, though, the GE offshore, GE Vernova offshore is not a thing.

Although I’ve heard a couple of rumors that, yeah, GE Vernova is offering some products for offshore, it doesn’t seem like their heart is in it. I can see that happening. So are they just trying to focus on onshore business, and that’s it for the time being? Just let it play out and, uh, wait until the elections in 2028?

I know that’s gonna get me blocked on YouTube, but that, that does feel like what’s happening at the moment.

Matthew Stead: Yeah, I reckon it looks completely like that.

Yolanda Padron: I mean, it also looks like they’re [00:05:00] just kind of trying to play everything a little bit more safe, right? So they are scaling up, but not as fast as they used to, so scaling the blade sizes.

And then they’re– it seems like they’re, they’re having their FSAs cut quite a bit shorter than they used to, right? So are they maybe just trying to focus on, like, cash up front and just trying to play it safe until they can get their, their footing right again?

Allen Hall: Or is it focus on key customers? I could see GE Vernova actually doing that, that they have a history with certain operators worldwide, and they’re just gonna focus on producing and delivering for those customers.

Because you don’t see a lot of announced orders for GE turbines. Vestas is announcing things practically every week. Nordex is doing something similar. Siemens once in a while. But what you really don’t hear anything from in any quantity at [00:06:00] all at the moment is from GE Vernova. When a company needs cash badly enough, even the crown jewels go on the block.

And EDF, the French state-owned utility, has to fund the upkeep of 57 aging nuclear reactors and build six new ones, so it is selling. EDF has agreed to hand its US and Canada renewables business, EDF Power Solutions, to the private equity firm KKR. The business runs 5.6 gigawatts of renewable assets across the two countries.

Late last year, EDF’s chief executive floated selling anywhere from half to all of the unit in a deal that could be, well, it’s reported to be about $4.2 billion. That’s the latest news I’ve heard. This is a big transaction. KKR is Canadian, right? And is a massive investment firm Uh, which I, I don’t think have a lot of wind at the moment.

Uh, what is the [00:07:00] KKR play here?

Matthew Stead: I, I love this because this is, uh… So obviously I’m Australian, and Macquarie is a big Australian. So, um, Macquarie own a whole lot of wind farm, a whole lot of wind infrastructure. So I just see this as a wonderful g- you know, fight between KKR and Macquarie. And so KKR has a whole lot of, um, they o- they’ve got some, you know, stake in Australian wind farms.

They’ve got some work, you know, through Europe with wind farms. So I, I, I think this is a good thing, just a bit more global competition and a bit more global growth. And I think it’s all coming from the data centers and, you know, the future increase in growth of, um, demand.

Allen Hall: Yolanda, EDF’s wind fleet is a variety of turbines, right?

They have some GE, some Siemens. Anything else in their portfolio?

Yolanda Padron: I think they have a bit of Vestas there too, right? Is it something that we were saying? It’s– I think this is really interesting. Um, I know that there’s not– I mean, of course EDF is the latest, but there’s some [00:08:00] operators that seem to be, um, consolidating into a bit more of those just higher private equity firms, and it’s– Do we think that maybe this is the way that the US is going to lean towards?

I know we talked a lot about leaning towards funding the data centers and maybe a bit more the behind the meter things. Uh, but do we think that maybe that’s the future of the US? There’s a couple of companies that kind of just own all the major infrastructures and then- A

Allen Hall: couple Canadian companies.

Yolanda Padron: And what does it mean for, like, asset management and stuff, like, that’s really, really different from what they’re seeing in their desks in New York and stuff, and just the larger financial models versus what’s happening on the ground, and how will they connect everything?

Allen Hall: It’s a great question.

Matthew Stead: NextEra and Dominion, you know, things are only getting bigger. Scale’s, scale’s coming.

Allen Hall: Yeah. I wonder how much, uh, this transaction will have to go through regulators in the US, uh, because it scares me when you have a, a– such a [00:09:00] large foreign national company. There’s actually two involved in here, right?

So you, you have a, a French company and a Canadian company trying to transact on, in the United States on a lot of assets. Uh, it probably won’t be that quick if there’s any oversight at all. I, I’m guessing that we’ll hear noise about it. So we’re, we’ll have to keep listening to all the news sources about it and, and telling our valued listeners what’s going on.

Because there’s, uh, we know a whole bunch of people that work at EDF and like, love those people and are really concerned about what the future holds for them. I, at least it sounds like upfront that KKR is just gonna continue with operations, but I know, uh, uh, it’s a turbulent time, and if you work there, you, you hopefully things continue the way they’re, they’re supposed to because One of the things about EDF historically has been is that they’re really talented people, that they have hired well over time and that they know what they’re doing.

And every time we, Weather Guard and [00:10:00] Yolanda and I’m sure Matthew have dealt with EDF quite a bit They are on top of what they’re operating. They know how their assets work, and they know how to manage them, and so you’d hate to lose those people in a transaction like this. It would decrease the value of the assets, I would say.

Very interesting transaction.

Matthew Stead: Yeah. But, I mean, what if the counter, what if, um, this is all part of a, a growth strategy? You know, a growth strategy with wind, solar, and battery, you know, providing more power. So it might actually be an opportunity. So, you know, opportunity to do more and some more exciting work across all three disciplines.

Allen Hall: Definitely so. Uh, but it’s a little early. The ink hasn’t dried yet on the contract. So while offshore market pulls back in general, in a lot of places like the United States, another one is racing ahead. In, in South Korea’s latest offshore wind auction, one name walked away with the lion’s share, Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, CIP.

The Danish fund [00:11:00] secured more than one gigawatt of the 1.8 gigawatts on offer, including the single largest project and the only floating wind winner. And the appetite was record-breaking. They had a whole bunch of developers trying to bid on this. You had about 3.7 gigawatts being bid in, more than twice of the capacity available.

So for a country that only began competitive offshore bidding in 2022, that’s a few short years ago, that market is coming of age. This is a huge announcement by CIP, right? That, uh, they have bid into the system. They’re, they’re winning, and they’re bringing Siemens Gamesa to the table, which we haven’t heard a lot of Siemens Gamesa’s turbines being selected, but this is a massive order and really gonna help secure at least some portion of, of the Siemens Gamesa business.

Matthew, you’re closer to it. In, in South Korea, are you seeing the South Korean industry being built within [00:12:00] the country, or are you seeing, uh, partnerships with surrounding countries like Japan? ‘Cause it doesn’t seem like when– and I’ve looked at some of the South Korea, uh, efforts. It does seem like they’re trying to stand up their own offshore built-in country plan.

Is, is that the goal? You think Siemens is gonna end up building a, a factory in, in South Korea for some of these projects?

Matthew Stead: Maybe a couple of things. First of all, I have to apologize. I think, uh, we were talking the other week, and I, I, I sort of implied that floating offshore wind was dead, and I think we copped a bit of flack from that.

But, uh, anyway, wrong, wrong on, uh,

Allen Hall: floating offshore is dead.

Matthew Stead: Um, but um, you know, I’ve had a fair bit of interaction with, uh, South Korean, um, you know, Philippines, Japan, obviously. I think they’re all trying to get their industries up, but I, I don’t think they’ve got the scale So, you know, I think they, they really need like the Siemens Gamesas, the Vestas’s, um, to come in and, and partner with them.

I just don’t think they’ve got the scale, you know, the, the [00:13:00] installed fleet, the industry to really promote it. And, you know, to get the economies of scale, they’re gonna have to pull in the big existing incumbents. So, you know, good on CIP for, for pulling this off.

Allen Hall: In terms of South Korea industry, I think steel is one of their strongest, uh, industries at the moment, and obviously shipbuilding.

Those are the, that go hand in hand, so to speak. There’s a lot of steel in wind turbines, and particularly in floating offshore wind turbines. It would seem ripe for South Korea to get into that marketplace.

Matthew Stead: I’m not sure the intellectual property is in steel tubes. Um, I, I guess what I’m trying to say is the intellectual property is in the turbine nacelle and the blades and, um, you know, I, you know, correct what I said that, you know, obviously the steel and the steel manufacturing in South Korea is, is pretty amazing.

Um, but yeah, they’re clarifying what I said before.

Allen Hall: So is this gonna turn into the leading floating project in the world? You know, Greenvolt’s gonna happen in the [00:14:00] UK. There’s some talk of things up in Scandinavia. But in terms of speed, will this be one of the leading candidates in t- in getting things in the water just because of the capability of South Korea to, to build at scale?

Matthew Stead: think it’s really exciting. Yeah, I, I’m, I’m gonna watch very closely.

Allen Hall: I think this is gonna be amazing. I really do.

Yolanda Padron: I was gonna say, could you imagine, like, a, a turbine and a blade where everything is just perfectly manufactured or close to perfectly manufactured? I g- I went to one farm last week, and there were…

I mean, it was in the States, and there were so many patches on new blades. I was just talking to the people in operations like, “What’s, what’s going on here?” You know? Uh, so it’s just really… I don’t know. This is exciting.

Matthew Stead: Do you think, um, they’ll build a blade factory, Yolanda? Do you think they’ll actually take on the blades?

Yolanda Padron: I don’t know. Uh, I, I mean, it’d, it’d be great for them, I think, right? It’s a new area of business that they’re diving [00:15:00] into.

Allen Hall: If they don’t have to build the building at the port, I think Siemens would be willing to erect something near the shoreline. And in Korea, there’s a lot of major industry right on the shoreline.

It would be relatively easy, I think. You know, ev- it sounds easy now because you’re not actually doing it. But in terms of, you know, building a blade factory on the coastline of United States versus doing it in South Korea, South Korea’s gonna be way easier to do that and at scale quickly. That, that one seems like a win-win.

I d- if there’s any place on the planet that could do it quick besides the UK or, you know, Denmark, someone like Netherlands, someplace like that, Germany, it’s gonna be South Korea.

Matthew Stead: Maybe that’s a bet, you know. So prove me wrong again. My money at the moment is that Nacelles blades won’t be coming from South Korea.

Allen Hall: Well, if they don’t come from South Korea, they’re gonna be on a South Korea-built ship. We’ll be bringing th- those [00:16:00] blades in country. That’s what will happen. So wind is getting its own set of financial instruments, which sounds weird, right? Wind is wind. It’s in a very legacy style industry. The Chicago Mercantile Exchange is planning to launch wind derivatives across three continents, which are contracts that are tied to the grid in Texas, the markets in the UK and Germany, and just the Victoria state in Australia.

So today, most weather hedging happens through one-off over-the-counter deals that are sort of hard to trade and thin on liquidity, so it’s not a commodity you can pass around. A standardized exchange-listed contract changes all that. A utility or a wind farm owner could lock in a hedge in about 15 minutes.

The contracts would settle against independent data that models how much power the wind should have produced in a given place, likely supplied by [00:17:00] the Finnish firm, drum roll, Vaisala. Plans are not final, but they could go live within months. So they’re hedging on the wind. Does this sound like a smart move, or w- what are some of the consequences of this?

Matthew Stead: I think it goes back to that volatility. W- when there’s volatility, people can make money. Um, you know, and a side note, that’s where, that’s where offshore wind comes in because it’s much more predictable. Um, you don’t get the same lulls with offshore wind. Yeah. So I, I, I love all these, these creative ways of, um, generating, generating demand, financial demand.

Allen Hall: It can be played though, right? I mean, that’s one of the things about wind, ’cause each turbine is its own separate little power plant that all connect to a substation, so if you have bought a hedge and the substation goes kaput for 24 hours, you could lose your shirt. It does seem kind of risky, depending on what the scale is here.

If you’re doing all of Texas or all of [00:18:00] Victoria, maybe that makes a little more sense, but yikes. That’s gonna be a rough market.

Yolanda Padron: Yeah, the market’s already open, right? Like, you can bid day ahead, um, instead of just real-time prices. But so this, this would be really interesting for owners, right? To be able to track that a lot better than just that gut feeling, which obviously I know people working in trading aren’t just going off of their gut feeling.

I know it’s a very, very intense thing. Nobody go against me, please. This is very intense, and it’s better– They do a better job than I could ever do. They do great, 10 out of 10. But this– I think this is really interesting for those of us especially who maybe aren’t super in tune with what, uh, all goes into it.

So being able to have something that helps you plan it a bit more for, you know, people like you mentioned earlier, the people that have their home batteries in Australia and are just working on the market itself and maybe [00:19:00] not– don’t have those 10, 20 years of experience of, of actually working on the market.

So this is, this is exciting.

Allen Hall: Does that explain all the weather sources and the weather companies when we go to a wind, a larger wind or solar event that there does seem to be a lot of people offering weather insights? Is that what that’s about, is they can hedge? If you have a slightly better weather model, that would give you an advantage in this kind, kind– really kind of market?

Is that the, the goal of all those weather firms?

Matthew Stead: Uh, absolutely. And, you know, we’re, we’re part of that because, um, ice, ice, um, you know, reduces power output, and ice forecasting and weather forecasting is, uh, really important in, you know, the Nordics, where you don’t want to be promising certain power and find you can’t deliver ’cause everything’s iced up.

So, you know, we, we do work with forecasting companies to improve the, [00:20:00] uh, the quality, and it does have a mer-material difference on, on the financial markets.

Allen Hall: So is that something that we can all get paid for? by these weather companies and these, uh, forecast companies if we provide insights on lightning, so to speak, and icing, uh, is that a revenue chain for at least one of us?

Matthew Stead: Absolutely.

Allen Hall: Maybe I like this more and more. I was, I was very hesitant of this exchange, thinking like, “Oh man, not a, not another highly leveraged situation with energy. That doesn’t sound smart.” But, yeah, if we can make a small fortune, Matthew, I think we should do it.

Matthew Stead: Fun fact, there was a flight from, um, yeah, from London to Australia the other week, um, and it’s a direct flight, you know, so 17 hours, and, uh, there was a change in the weather.

So there was a change in the weather, and that aircraft didn’t have enough fuel to fly to Perth anymore, so it had to land in the outback of Australia.

Allen Hall: No. Did that happen?

Matthew Stead: Yep, because there was a [00:21:00] change in the weather.

Allen Hall: Are there just, like, kangaroos lined up in a runway shape to get the airplane on the ground?

Or how do they– Is there a runway out in the outback that would accommodate a large… That’s a large airplane that’s making a London to Australia trip. Triple 7380? It

Matthew Stead: was a Dreamliner. Um, but, um, it, yeah, it landed in Kalgoorlie. So Kalgoorlie’s a mining town. Yeah, they’ve got, they’ve got big stuff in Kalgoorlie.

Allen Hall: In this quarter’s PES Wind magazine, in which there is a whole bunch of great articles, a interesting article about grease. Grease not the country, although I would love to go visit Greece. Grease the lubricant that’s in all our bearings and keeps the world moving at any one particular time. Uh, Sh-Shell was talking about doing a lot of research on grease, and when poor lubrication, uh, happens, it’s one of the leading causes of bearing failure.

And so when you see a bearing all tore up, usually the first indication is, is there’s something wrong with the grease. Uh, [00:22:00] so Sh-Shell and bearing maker SKF and the University of, uh, Twente joined forces to answer a deceptively simple question: How do you predict when grease inside a bearing will let go?

Well, their answer comes down to film thickness. The microscopic layers of grease that keeps the steel from grinding on each other is the magic variable. The work won a major tribology award and is already feeding into, uh, some of the tools that operators use to schedule relubrication before a bearing fails.

And It all comes down to lubrication. That’s the lifetime of a wind turbine. There’s so many pieces that are rotating and are heavily loaded with really complicated bearing surfaces. If you don’t have the grease right, it’s just not gonna work. And what’s happening at Shell is one of those pieces, and we’re [00:23:00] learning so much more.

And as we, uh, evolve in the technology and become smarter about the molecules we use and how we use them, uh, this is gonna have a big impact. And I know, Yolanda, you’ve been up to– Well, you’ve been to a couple of wind farms recently. Do you s- see– still see huge grease problems that I usually see when I’m on site?

Matthew Stead: Mm-hmm.

Yolanda Padron: I didn’t think that was an issue that was gonna go away anytime soon. But it’s good to know that, that there’s something being done about it that’s more revolutionary than just paying someone to clean the turbine every once in a while.

Allen Hall: And the contaminants that get into the greases are a huge problem, particularly where there’s any sort of sand, dust that climbs in.

So keeping those joints clear and those rolling surfaces clear is a major effort. And knowing when to relubricate. And, and Matthew, you guys see pitch bearings and all kinds of problems up on blades that are lubricated that have run out of their lifetime early. It does seem like the first thing you see on particularly pitch bearings [00:24:00] is grease on the side of the turbine from them.

Matthew Stead: Yeah. I think that’s– uh, there’s even a special code that the, the visual drone inspection companies have. They’ve got codes for, um, grease and so, yeah, exactly, that’s an early flag. But also dust. You know, sometimes dust from the inserts and from the bolts. Yeah. So it’s, yeah, interesting topic.

Allen Hall: Well, I, I think it’s one of the key pieces to keeping the turbines running.

And I know if you travel a lot around wind turbines, the, the grease is the thing that the technicians always talk about, and there’s so many different tools to go out and look at these things. But lubrication, we gotta get to it. And, and Shell, and SKF, and a number of others are, are working at it to make, hopefully, our lives a little bit easier.

So if you wanna go check out this article by Shell, go visit peswind.com and download a copy today. That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on [00:25:00] LinkedIn, and don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode.

So for Yolanda, and Matthew, and an absent Rosie, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy podcast.

GE Vernova Backs LM Wind Power, KKR Buys EDF Assets

Renewable Energy

Trump and Illegal Aliens

Published

16 hours ago

July 7, 2026

Alice Rush

As all literate Americans understand, a) illegal aliens are not eligible for welfare, and b) the vast majority of U.S. welfare dollars go to poor, uneducated white southerners who almost exclusively voted for Trump.