Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Leading Edge Erosion : Solutions and Takeaways from the International Symposium
Allen Hall, Nicholas Gaudern, and Rodolfo Meleiro discuss leading edge erosion at the International Symposium on Leading Edge Erosion in Denmark, focusing on the current state of the problem, solutions, testing methods, and key takeaways from the conference.
PowerCurve: https://powercurve.dk/
Arthwind: https://www.linkedin.com/company/arth-wind-services&consulting/
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 special edition of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. And we are in Roskilde, Denmark at the 5th International Symposium on Leading Edge Erosion and Wind Turbine Blades. And I’m here with Nicholas Gaudern of PowerCurve and Rodolfo Meleiro of Arthwind. So we have a world perspective here on leading edge erosion.
We have Europe. Brazil, which is a lot of wind energy there. Thank you for being here and I’ll try to cover the America as best I can. So this has been a really interesting conference. It’s held at DTU which is, this is a wind energy center. So this conference has been organized and it has international flavor to it.
We saw presentations from India, Denmark, obviously there were German. Yeah. Presentations, Japan, China u. S. Sandia has been here. So there’s a paper from Cornell today. So there’s been all sorts of people worried about leading edge erosion. And I think it’s a really hot topic. And that’s the reason why I came to, to see the action here, because there’s.
So much that we don’t know. And I figured if anybody does know it’s a DTU, so it’s time to get over there and to find out what’s going on. So this whole podcast is really to discuss what we have seen and heard and try to figure out what the state of the industry is and where it needs to go.
And just first impressions, really One of my first impressions, I’ll just start. One of my first impressions was we have a long way to go. Yes, that we don’t know a lot. Yeah, and I wish I had been shocked so far So we’re at the end of day two and day one was pretty intensive on this or the mathematical Computational side.
Nicholas Gaudern: We don’t know a lot. We’ve had a lot more materials as well today So I think it’s nice that we have that really cross disciplinary approach here. So we’ve got materials. We’ve got structures. We’ve got data We’ve got metrology, meteorology, aerodynamics So it is bringing all of these expert field together which I think is really important.
There’s also the risk that there’s a lot of noise, because obviously there’s issues to be resolved in all of these different fields. And then, it may make it a little bit harder to focus on what really matters I think.
Allen Hall: There’s a lot of data smoothing that’s happening at the minute, from what I can tell, and different approaches to data smoothing, and I’m not even sure.
Everybody has settled on that.
Nicholas Gaudern: No, and I think we had like a discussion at the end of the day yesterday, like a shouting across the lecture theatre kind of discussion at the end of the sessions. And I think what was clear is there is more of a consensus about the AEP losses that we’re seeing, which is important.
And that’s really helpful because I think if you start seeing big scary numbers 15, losses, sure, those might exist in a very extreme scenario on a very particular type of turbine, but I really want to make the point here that is not the norm at all. We wouldn’t have an industry if 20 percent AEP every time they got some erosion.
So I think that’s been a really nice thing for me to see, this show that there’s show, conference, there’s there’s been a lot more, yeah. Say, convergence on small but significant numbers one and a half percent, two percent AEP losses. That’s plenty to worry about, we don’t need to.
Allen Hall: No, I think that’s right is because Rudolfo and I were just talking about that before we recorded here.
We saw a presentation that said 25 percent this morning, and everybody in the audience is no. No, they can’t be, but it does matter where you are in the world though. Yes. And having seen more recent pictures from Central America, India, some places in Brazil, they have really tough rain environment.
What happens in the United States is not what happens in Brazil.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Of the data I’m bringing, half of Brazilian fleets right now does not have LEP anymore. They have delimited. Yeah. Okay. So that’s the status Brazil has right now. Brazil is a relatively new industry. So the first older wind turbines are reaching 10, 12 years. Sure. And now some of those are requiring the maintenance.
And the owners are looking at, and that’s what you’re seeing, we’re seeing very degraded leading edge.
Allen Hall: Put your hand through the leading edge kind of degradation?
Rodolfo Meleiro: There is that, but that’s not common. That’s not common. But no more leading edge protection, no more top coat, laminate exposed, laminate damage.
That that’s a lot. So it’s a structural repair.
Allen Hall: It’s a structural repair, okay. All right.
Rodolfo Meleiro: And we were discussing that before. That’s extra cost. Besides reapplying the lesion edge, having to do the laminate repair, that’s a very extra cost, extra time for the machine stoppage, extra problems for everybody.
Allen Hall: I think that’s why we’re all so concerned about it. And this is the discussion that was held last night as part of the IEA group, right? What was the name of the IEA group?
Nicholas Gaudern: So there’s the IEA task 46, which is focusing on the leading edge erosion. And then there’s also, it’s not IEA, but there’s a Danish funder project EUDP funder called LEARCAT, leading edge roughness categorization.
So that is involving a lot of LM led by DTU and Powercurves also.
Allen Hall: And I guess. LM is representing GE. We don’t need them now.
Nicholas Gaudern: In a sense, yes. Exactly. So LearCat is also feeding in and collaborating with the IEA task because there’s a lot of shared knowledge and goals there.
Allen Hall: But they’re going different directions though.
That was my opinion being an electrical engineer and a lightning person is that the IEA was about trying to create some categories so that in a damage report they could say it was Leading edge erosion too,
Nicholas Gaudern: but yeah, I think the IEA is being more broad, they’re trying to bring in structural repair considerations and a bit more of a, it seems a little more holistic, whereas LearCat is very much focused on The aerodynamics and the air acoustics and the impact of different types of damages.
So there’s no structural focus there, for example.
Allen Hall: And I think this is where I think that program has a lot more to deliver in terms of what value it would bring to the industry. Yes. So the Leocat. Program from some of the discussions in the discussions were great yesterday because and maybe we could throw up some b roll here to show what we’re what happened, but in that program They’re actually taking real damage off of blades like taking a mold off of a damaged blade Yeah, then creating a leading edge of the putting on to a blade in a wind tunnel and actually doing real experiments in the wind tunnel to measure AEP loss, drag, essentially, drag to lift, and then acoustic noise to come off, different kinds of damage.
Nicholas Gaudern: And that’s really important because, we were talking just at the start of this session about what is the AEP loss number? Because you have to have a realistic number that people can believe in and trust. Because otherwise, it either gets way too much attention and people get scared.
Or it doesn’t get any attention at all. So you have to find that balance. Now, I think LearCat should deliver a lot towards that. So there’s this fantastic wind tunnel here, the Pool of Core wind tunnel, a really big, impressive new facility. And I was up there yesterday having a look at the first models for the LearCat project.
Oh wow, okay. So 3D printed leading edge modules. from these laser scans and these molds that have been taken in the field, and then they can carry out these really precise measurements to say what is the lift and drag impact.
Allen Hall: Because the ultimate result of this is to help. Wind turbines in the United States and in Brazil, which have tend to have a lot of leading edge damage, probably more than what I’ve typically seen in Europe, at least in northern Europe.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So the issue then is computationally, you want to be able to take drone scans. This is what Aravista does. This is the power of Aravista approach to it, was basically taking some scans, some photographs, and then driving that to an AEP loss number so that you, the operator, can understand.
When do I schedule maintenance or do I schedule maintenance? You
Nicholas Gaudern: need to know when to make a decision.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Doing business is a business that has to stand for itself. Yes. All decisions comes down to downtime, to the cost, and yes, a reliable model and a reliable prediction of how much you are losing production.
Yes. And how much it will cost you to repair, that’s just a business case model. So that drives a decision, okay, this month is the correct month to stop the machine, do the repair, and go back to the regular production and have another maintenance predicted for X years, X months.
Nicholas Gaudern: And I guess the bigger the turbine is, the more important that is as well.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Totally the more important it is for many reasons, because. The bigger the turbine PP is increasing, so the erosion’s increasing, the bigger, the turbine, bigger problems.
Nicholas Gaudern: And the more money you lose
Rodolfo Meleiro: and the more money you lose because you’re not stopping anymore a one and a half machine mega watts machine, you’re stopping 5, 5, 6 megawatts machine.
So it’s much more power illusion by each minute, by started.
Allen Hall: Offshore. Multiplies that and then that was mostly the discussion here because Europe is so much offshore and America is just getting started and Brazil is going to be doing the same thing that America is doing here shortly, right? So instead of 5, 6 megawatt machines, we’re talking 10, 12, 18 megawatt machines.
Then it really becomes important because the cost to get out to the site to do a leading edge repair is so expensive that you’d want to do preventative approaches before you even deploy the blades, in my opinion. That’s not a discussion I heard this week, which is odd. Not so much. Why? What am I missing here?
It would seem to me as an OEM that I know that’s going to be a problem. I know when I put an 18 megawatt machine out in the water that I’m going to have leading edge erosion. I probably ought to put some protection on it just to. extend the lifetime?
Nicholas Gaudern: I think, Again I can’t speak for every turbine, but from what I’ve seen, every recent offshore deployment will have some form of LEP.
Okay. But of course, I think the technology has moved on a lot in recent years. Yes. From some of the early coatings and tapes to some more advanced now shells, soft shells, hard shells, other kinds of coatings. And that is making a difference, but I’ve still seen some photos of some pretty shredded blades.
Allen Hall: Yes, I have too. So again, that comes down to, I think it’s in the part of the discussion here, and I want to dive into this a little bit, is it’s not just the shell, it’s not just the coating. The failure mechanism for leading edge erosion has to do with the assembly of all of it. Yes. Because, and this is my simplistic approach to it, electrical person talking electrical things.
It’s much like a radio wave passing through different materials. There’s impedance mismatches. There’s boundaries, right? So you’re, when you, when the rain particle hits this surface, it then puts a force or transmits energy through this material. And at every boundary, if there’s a discontinuity, there’s a lot of force to rip it apart, to break it apart.
Nicholas Gaudern: We saw some interesting presentation yesterday when we looking at the hail impacts on on leading edges as well. And that kind of impact damage you get. So offshore, it’s just a much more hostile environment. Sure. In terms of the, so you’ve got that corrosion, the uv, uv, I think uv, the winds.
So yeah it’s tough, but it also makes it even more important to understand…
Allen Hall: what the losses are. Yeah. I think the key, right? If you’re dealing with an 18 megawatt machine, a 20 megawatt machine, the losses get to be. Astoundingly big. And because of the cost,
Nicholas Gaudern: Even if you’re using a few tenths of a percent AEP, that’s worth doing something about.
Allen Hall: Yeah. I totally agree. So I think there’s like a multidisciplinary approach to this. One is to understand what the materials are doing. And I haven’t heard a lot of discussion about that. Maybe just because the researchers are super smart and they already know when they walk in here. I haven’t heard the story.
I don’t, I’m not catching it, but it seems like the material has a lot to do with it. The application has a lot to do with it. The laminate in which is being applied on, the thicknesses of which is being applied, the temperatures, the humidities, all those things play into whether that coating or that shell or whatever it is, has a long lifetime.
And are we controlling those variables and is the word that the researchers are writing down and is in sort of technical terms, is that being translated to. To the engineers and the mechanical people on the floor who are actually doing the work.
Rodolfo Meleiro: I don’t always like to give the exact, not example, but effect every blade, two thirds of the blade weight is manually put by somebody in that, that’s the couch.
It’s true that roughly one third of the blade weight in resin that goes by infusion process. It’s more automated, but all the to shooters. The paint, the fabrics, the core, everything someone puts on his back go, sits in the molding position fits correctly. So we’re talking about your touch to blade.
20 tons are manually put into that blade, the product. Yeah. And then we discuss how much of the variable on the micros of thickness of coach right, will affect the life. So it’s so very complicated things. That right now we do with control, but it’s not that level of control. Yeah. So we have, there are a lot of variables.
Allen Hall: There’s a lot of variables in the application of coatings
Nicholas Gaudern: and the environments that these turbines sit in. I think that’s also an important thing here with things like rainfall, average annual rainfall, that will have a erosion, but also that doesn’t tell you the whole story, like even among the turbines on one site, the variability and erosion.
It can be quite dramatic, and it’s because of this handcrafted product, this, that we’ve just been saying, Rodolfo. and the really local microclimates and the individual operation of that turbine. So it’s really important that you get out there and you look at the turbines.
Allen Hall: And the data you provided yesterday was amazing because you looked at what, 1500 turbines?
Nicholas Gaudern: Yes. Yeah. Yeah. We were really fortunate to be able to present that. So we, we did a project last year with One of the big U. S. operators, one of the top four U. S. operators, and we looked at a sample of their fleet with, yeah, over 1, 500 wind turbines. There was eight different turbine models, so we have nice spread of models from different OEMs.
Okay. Rotor diameters between about 80 and 120 meters. And ages from two to 15 years. So we have a really nice spread population. And what we found was that firstly there’s a lot of damage so we receive all of the metadata from the drone inspections to say what damage is and where was it found, on those turbines, there was more than 95, 000 tagged damages.
Allen Hall: Whoa, okay. So pretty much everybody, every turbine had some level of Yeah, exactly. Danny Ellison told me that a long time ago. He said every turbine has leading edge erosion. Every one of them. Yeah.
Nicholas Gaudern: So that’s that’s really important because then you can start to look where is that damage?
And kind of unsurprisingly, most of it is towards the tip. Sure. So most of it’s in the outer 20 percent of the span because that’s where your tip speed’s highest and you’re going to get that erosion starting.
Allen Hall: But there was no, there was not when I got to the summary, I want to get to this point, it wasn’t like a particular OEM had a particular problem.
No. Everybody had basically had the same problem. And even turbines that were next to one another at the same wind farm had a different result.
Nicholas Gaudern: That was super interesting. So what we’re finding is by actually looking at The real inspection data and then coupling it to a model of that turbine. We aren’t going to detail, but basically we built a very nice area model from a laser scan, a lot of CFD modeling.
So we know exactly how the aerodynamics performs. You could have two turbines next to each other, one loses 2%, the other loses half a percent. And you need to understand that because you need to be able to prioritize what turbine you go to fix first and what to do with it. Otherwise you’re just wasting money.
Exactly. On average over that fleet, that 1500 sample, The average AEP loss we found was around half percent. Not dramatic, but enough. But the spread was some turbines losing nothing, some losing over two and a half percent. Okay. The spread is large and some of it’s quite dramatic.
Allen Hall: So there is an inconsistency, I think if I were making a product, I would like to see them all the road, roughly the same.
And that’s not what’s happening today. And is that coupled to some of the more materials based discussions we’ve heard about today, which is our focus around the mechanism in which leading edge erosion happens. That we’re just not paying that much attention to it. What is driving that? Or is it because when I get out in the field and, different lifts and different handling techniques and this blade set out in the field before we put it up?
Nicholas Gaudern: I’m interested particularly to hear your thoughts on this Rodolfo, because I know you’ve spent a lot of time in factories over the years. Cost. I want to say cost, there’s such a huge drive for cost out in the industry, that’s going to affect your solutions, your lead energy protection solutions, finish quality.
Rodolfo Meleiro: For sure. For sure. I have heard that men know more than once regarding what, which solution the OEMs decide to put on the blades and cost is a driver for that too. Sure. Then. But I think the biggest cause for all this variation is the nature of the business itself. As I said, we have too many manual labor operation.
They, I don’t know if you guys know, but right now I would say or dare to say that most, if not all of the blade leading edge is applied by roller.
Allen Hall: Yeah. Yeah. That’s my impression.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Yeah. And I have also, I think it’s almost a, it’s a an artist’s work to apply 15, 20 meters of leading edge and assure it to have the 0.
1, 0. 2 millimeters thickness. Without variation. Yeah. So there are variation, there are measurements for sure. But you don’t measure you don’t do the right measurements every 200 millimeters. So you have variation in this region and that variation is blade by blade. Yeah. And I think each blade is a, is a.
Badge, artisan artisanal work. Yes.
Nicholas Gaudern: Yeah, that’s right. But partially it is. Yeah. Yeah, it is. And I think, you do, cost is obviously really important because, the reason that we’re able to have such an international symposium today Is because the industry has been really successful in recent years at driving down cost, increasing deployment.
Wind energy is so big now. And even for someone who’s been in the industry for a few years, that was hard to imagine 10, 15 years ago. So cost is important, but I think now we’re getting these huge turbines producing so much energy, you can’t afford any kind of downtime. I’ve heard stories of blades on offshore wind farms being brought back to shore for leading edge repairs because the erosion is so bad.
Imagine the cost of doing that. That’s insane. And I think you’re not going to want to go for your super robust, super high cost LEP solution on all turbines. But for ones that are going to be in these extreme offshore environments you probably do.
Allen Hall: I haven’t even heard discussions about what the OEMs are offering, if anything.
And I know there’s some big operators here. I thought they would be asking very direct questions. We use X. What if we change to Y?
Nicholas Gaudern: Question. There’s a lot of, there’s a lot of products out there at the moment. And there seems to be a new LEP product quite often, I would say at the moment. And there’s.
Again, that’s why real trustworthy numbers come into it in terms of losses, because They’re all over the place. LEP changes aerodynamics, right? But I do think that maybe sometimes operators and OEMs get a little bit too hung up on a few tenths of a percent. So they say, okay compared to my polished wind tunnel model, if I put this LEP on the aerodynamics is a bit worse.
And I can measure it. And sure, you can, and you should care about the small things, but if it stops the erosion happening, that’s the bigger thing to worry about.
Rodolfo Meleiro: And I think the business case up to now the driver for the cost reduction industry was wrong. The OEMs always think about the machine price.
It must be seen the lifelong operation of the machine price. They said that’s cost is important and it was less important on the older turbines because they were more robust. They, they have less problems for many reasons, even though they have a lot of problems, but we are reaching something that’s strange because everything improved, the quality improved of the production, the quality of materials, the knowledge improved, but you’re having more problems.
And I think that this case of the leading edge is a possible improvement to, for sure, investing in apply the better. A stronger leading edge in the factory is 10, 100 times less expensive than applying a field.
Allen Hall: Yeah. And that’s, that I think that message is getting heard more and more is it’s better to get it out of the factory, correct, than have to do it secondarily.
The United States where we have 77. A thousand wind turbines running currently, something like that. There’s a couple hundred thousand blades. Yeah. There’s a lot. Probably right. There’s a, at some point, you can do so only so much in the factory, the vast majority of the problem in Brazil, United States, even Europe is you’re going to have to deal with what’s out there right now because you need to extend the lifetime.
I know the weird thing for me sitting in there is they’re talking about 25 year lifespans on turbines here, and I’m thinking. 10 years and it’s over in the United States. They’re going to repower this thing and it doesn’t matter. And the model is totally different.
Nicholas Gaudern: That is very different. I think if you look at lots of European countries, particularly Germany, they do run the turbines a long time.
They do. And there’s a lot of folks on life extension and really squeezing everything out. But I agree, all the customers we work with in the US, it’s this perpetual conversation about when we’re going to repower, when we’re going to repower. And they do consider a much shorter time horizon, I think.
Allen Hall: And that’s shorter.
Time span in the U. S., my thought is, and it’s on the same wavelength as Rodolfo, is put a better LEP on, out of the factory, if you can, if you can’t, most likely they are not going to buy that, right? That the operators typically don’t do that. All right, so you got two years of warranty, you got two years of warranty, and then you own it.
And the leading edge protection may not be included in the warranty. Depends.
Rodolfo Meleiro: If it’s normal, where else?
Allen Hall: It’s not in there. All right. So the model then in my mind is if I have a 10 year lifespan and I’m thinking us right now at year three or four, I’m going to have leading edge erosion. Now it won’t be bad enough that I have to go and do a bunch of structural repairs.
But what I will do was I would get a robot out there. Or something and get that leading edge repaired and at the same time put VGs on.
Nicholas Gaudern: Check if the business case is there, right? Again, that comes down to the simulation.
Allen Hall: I think the business case has to be proven by simulation, right? That you have to go look at the model.
The model in my head is based upon what Nicholas, you have told me. So I’m running the calculation up here. Yes, I think if you use something like an AeroVista to do the calculation, I think what you’ll find is. You put it on a year three or four, you’re trying to get to year 10, right? So you’re trying to make this blade, not touch it for about six years, maybe seven.
The way to do that is to put on a better LEP product, put on VG. So at that last year, nine and 10, it makes you power.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Just BC1E, which is also a driver for the industry,
Allen Hall: inspection. Inspection. Yes. So
Rodolfo Meleiro: That’s what’s missing in this case, because I think there’s a point, I have voice when I come to this conference, I have two questions I try to see if we’re moving to answer.
First one is how much we lost with the erosions and how we can prove that and then put a stone on top of that, because we totally agree, we’re all on the same boat that we have lost. But yes, we, when we still see numbers from half to 25, we don’t have a big alignment. And the second question is how much time my LEP lasts?
Yes. So those are the two questions. And right now, the best thing we have. It’s the simulations which show visible results and to how long it lasts is inspection. So you inspect and with inspections, you see the evolution of the problem and then you predict, okay, so with this level of the, of damages, I’m losing This amount of production, and then you see whether the curve of the cost of repair intersects with the cost.
And you decide that’s the sweet spot.
Allen Hall: So here’s the maintenance. Here’s the trouble, Rodolfo, with that approach. And so that approach is used in lightning protection all the time. Like they want to go do some, a five year experiment on to see if this works or not. The problem is the industry’s growing so fast in Brazil.
The industry is growing faster than it is in the United States. Yep, it’s going to explode. The amount of money going into Brazil to build wind turbines is insane at the moment, which is great for Brazil. But if you start making yourself several thousand turbine, say that’s a thousand turbines a year, 2000 turbines a year, 5,000 turbines a year, and you miss.
You have a huge problem, and then you’re right, and inspections become the number one priority to go out there and inspect, inspect, inspect. You should be doing inspection automatically. Yes. But what’s happening is they’re doing inspection plus an inspection because they have so much degradation they can’t keep up with it.
They’re trying to put a curve. Engineers are in the front office back there, or in the back office, sitting there going, Okay, this is year three, I have this much erosion. Next year, I’m going to have twice as much.
Nicholas Gaudern: But yeah go and look at it. Exactly. Go and look at it.
Allen Hall: You have to go look at it. I think that’s going to be the key.
I do think if you’re not going to go buy some better LEP system, the robots are pretty good. Now, Rodolfo, I went to Lafayette, I watched this thing go on. The robot installation is pretty controlled. Way better than I think is what’s happening in the factory. Am I wrong about that?
Rodolfo Meleiro: No, I was in Botafogo. I have visited.
I don’t know if it’s true. I have seen the robots. I will have to see. I think it’s available that you have robots doing that. And I agree. It’s unquestionable that a process done by robots. Yeah. A xip door process done by machine has less variation and it’s going to be here a great results. I totally agree.
I just would join that with the best material. And we have customers in Brazil right now that they’re doing exactly this discussion. I am going to do a big protection campaign. What material do I put? . And they’re trying, they, they’re, okay. I’ll put you three solutions. So I can run for two years, compare, so I decide what to do with the rest of my fleet, because they don’t have that.
Allen Hall: They don’t want to do it twice, though. No. So that, and that system sets up to do it twice. And that’s where this conference, I think, comes into the symposium. And the people here should be able to direct an answer to, because a lot of terms in Brazil, in a particular area, northeast Brazil.
And so the weather’s a certain way. I, we should be able to plug that into a model Northeast Brazil, four megawatt this OEM, and go, this is the right solution based on all the knowledge that we have. Am I crazy? I think that’s the only way to do it.
Rodolfo Meleiro: That’s the desire, that’s what they were to do.
But we are missing this is this theoretical. Yes. So they’re doing practical.
Allen Hall: Yeah, they’re doing all that. They’re doing all practical. And the operators are doing it, which is the worst way to do it because they’re already cut short because they don’t have a lot of time to sit there and monitor
it.
Nicholas Gaudern: So it’s hard. They won the the late presentations yesterday by David Manchi. Oh, yes. Really talking about a lot of the IEA work and the Sandia work and the work that’s been going on. I think he made a really good point about we have to do more modeling. And we have to trust the modeling.
Because when you start going to the field to hunt down a few tenths of a percent, it is nigh on impossible to do that with SCADA data. It is. So SCADA is a really valuable tool and can be used lots of ways. But you have to understand its limitations. And trying to track, say, leading edge erosion losses of a small magnitude.
is incredibly challenging. And I think there’s maybe been a little too much stock placed in it. Rather than saying we know how to model a wind turbine. We’ve clearly known that for a very long time because we have wind turbines. Yeah, we do. So let’s just extend that trust and that confidence to use those models in slightly different ways.
Yes. If we can design a blade. And it’s aerodynamic characteristics with a model, you can also understand how it degrades with a model as
Allen Hall: well.
But you, Nicholas, you’re taking it from the blade designer, which has used a BEM model into a computational model. And I think for a lot of operators that haven’t worked with PowerPer before, they don’t realize the power that sits in that model.
Yeah. If you have an actual blade scan, which you do, you’re not guessing at what the shape is. You’re actually taking the real model and applying. Real damage to get a real number out of it. Something they couldn’t measure with the SCADA system.
Nicholas Gaudern: No, exactly. And I think that’s, there’s been a lot of focus on the LearCat project.
The team at DTU, like the LearCat team at DTU Alexander, for example, he made a presentation yesterday looking at the CFD results, these really amazing CFD results of modeling the full 3D erosion in CFD and looking at how the lift and the drag changes, the flow patterns or the buildup of the turbulence.
And these tools are super powerful, but you’ve then got to look, how do you plug that into some of the industry standards, because the industry standard is still BEM, Bladel Momentum, that’s how you certify turbines, but
Allen Hall: you can’t use that to do these flying measurements and look at leading edge erosion.
That model will not produce accurate results.
Nicholas Gaudern: You’ve got to supplement it with the higher order models. Yeah. Like lots of things, each tool has its place. To me, the job of. of the engineer is to bring all the tools at your disposal together, understand the limitations and the benefits and then fuse them to get the best answer.
Allen Hall: Where can people go to see about LearCat?
Nicholas Gaudern: Where would you go on the web? So there’s a LinkedIn page for LearCat. There’s also a project site on the DTU you just search for LearCat on LinkedIn, that’s probably a good
Allen Hall: Okay, it’s important for operators and engineers involved in blaze to get to that site to see what’s going on to understand what the state of the industry is, because there are some powerful tools.
We can argue about what L. E. P. Solution we want to put on. However, we shouldn’t be arguing about what the losses are and what turbines to go fix. I think that Should be done and my opinion should be thrown on VGs while you’re at it because I think it makes the lifetime longer.
Nicholas Gaudern: But it’s a really good point and actually to throw a little bit of a curve, but we’re talking a lot about leading edge erosion.
That’s the seminar here, but. What about contamination? Exactly. Contamination, the kind of anti erosion, you’re building up the surface. But aerodynamically, it’s the same thing in lots of ways. It’s losing your lift, it’s increasing drag. It’s the same problem.
Allen Hall: And we used to get pictures from, Brazil can be pretty dirty at times.
Yep. Oklahoma, Texas. can be, the blades can be pretty dirty depending on the time of year, until it rains, basically.
Nicholas Gaudern: India, the same issue. The nice thing is that, a lot of the techniques and things that we’re talking about at Frozen, they can be transferred to think about contamination. The only real issue is that I see is you can’t put leading edge protection on to solve contamination.
Because it’s building up on the surface. Okay, maybe we could talk about really hydrophobic coatings and all these kind of things. But in general, you can say leading edge protection doesn’t stop contamination.
Allen Hall: Don’t get me started on hydrophobic coatings because I think we’re having all kinds of discussion about that.
But you’re right? Yeah. Uh, this is, it’s wintertime. It’s February right now, right? We’re in Denmark. It’s snowing today, of course. Every place I go, it snows. When I went to Latvia, it snowed. But those coatings, when you started adding any coating to a blade, isophobic coating, hydrophobic coatings leading edge erosion is a different animal and I think you changed the properties, based on what I saw here today, you’re going to change the properties of leading edge erosion.
Nicholas Gaudern: Yes. Yeah, exactly. They are linked and contamination is a difficult one to deal with. It’s also super localized. We see some blades, particularly up in like Norway, Sweden, five, six years old, they look perfect. Isn’t that insane? It’s true. But other blades, they’ve got proper crusts on the leading edge, but that’s, you’re mentioning VGs, that is where VGs can really come in.
And you see quite a few turbines out there with VGs towards the tip. And their main purpose is to give robustness to the power curve. Because when you have contamination or erosion, it damages the aerodynamic performance. It’s harming that boundary layer over the surface. And the VG is there to re energize the flow.
and recover the lift that’s being lost. So a VG doesn’t care if it’s erosion or contamination, it will still recover losses. So again, you do need to think as an operator about. LEP, repairs, inspection, but also upgrades, aerodynamic upgrades, because there’s a
Rodolfo Meleiro: lot of things you can do. But that comes out, interesting question.
Again, why the OEMs doesn’t put that on the factory? Already.
Allen Hall: I think that’s a really That’s a great question.
Rodolfo Meleiro: I One thing, we’re talking about today the maintenance of the leading edge. If all the OM when it sell the turbine, they says, oh, you have to consider every four years repaint the leakage. The operators just do what the manual says. Yes. Yes. I don’t think they say, oh, I want to do that. No they’ll do what the manual says. So if they Exactly. Sell the turbine, even maintenance plan. Yep. , they they, the owner they will put on this business with, if he decide to buy the turbine, he just follow the business plan and that’s it.
Nicholas Gaudern: Your point about VGs in the factory is an interesting one. I would say, again, anecdotally
Rodolfo Meleiro: It isn’t a tip because of the first work that I did, the Yes, the More and more I’m doing that right now, but That’s the chip. I have some knowledge.
Nicholas Gaudern: No, you don’t see that so much. I would say Siemens, Siemens put on quite a lot now.
Allen Hall: Has done it more recently. Yeah. That’s the only one I really have seen.
Nicholas Gaudern: Tends to be as an aftermarket from what I’ve seen. Yeah. And that’s just because I think firstly, the knowledge level has been increasing quite dramatically in recent years because of things like the symposium we’re at now. So the knowledge of how a VG can help you.
I didn’t know that it’s a cynical thing to say, but I think OEMs really like their service business. They make a lot of money from service.
Allen Hall: I just saw Vestas numbers and you have a separate line item for service. It’s amazing.
Nicholas Gaudern: I think given the choice, they’d maybe prefer to put some parts on as a package they sell separately a few years down the line.
Sure, it’s a, it’s the whole money. But aerodynamically, yeah, as you say, Rodolfo, most new big blades have VGs in the route. Anyway, towards the tip, it’s a bit different between the OEMs for sure. But, um, they can really help.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Allen as you said, they can help to give robustness. Yes, it’s the robustness.
Protect it from the degradation, minimizing the effects of possible loss.
Allen Hall: Yes, exactly. Now, the best new product that Rodolfo and I were talking while you were out for a minute, Nicholas, was the best new product we’ve seen here so far is this company called Helicoid. I’m going to pronounce, I can’t pronounce it because I’m American, but it’s spelled H E L I C O I D.
Helicoid? Helicoid, yeah. All right. Helicoid. So the presentation started off this we’re from Hale Co. We’re based in the United States and the uk and we’re making pickleball boards, perhaps . I don’t know where this discussion’s gonna go, but it’s gonna be interesting. Let’s go. So the it the technology, I’ll describe it as a technology.
The tech technology is. They’re using the fiber construction of a, was it a shrimp? Like the little critter that he beats, right? Yeah. So on some of them they have this hammer device that they use to repel crabs, because crabs like shrimp evidently. So these shrimp have these hammer devices which have this fiber that’s really hard.
Now, I guess they can use it to crack the shells of these crabs and defend themselves. But when they start looking at this fiber construction, it’s really tight. So there’s not a lot of other stuff. It’s almost all fiber. And what they realized was if they took unidirectional fiber and instead of going 090, 090, 45, you go 030, 60, 90, something like that, where you have less.
space, as resin rich areas, that it makes it extremely tough. And when you rain erosion that material without any coding on it at all, you don’t get the punch through. So it’s the uni plies and the 090 plies that we put around the leading edges today, if we haven’t, or just glue join, that we punch through.
So when we saw, when Rudolph and I saw that, I was Like, ugh. Yeah, here we go. Yep. So even if the LEP fails, you’re probably not gonna, it is gonna give you a longer time before it eats to the laminate. We have to do a structural repair, so it lends itself to robotics. That, okay. I have some, I see the coating is missing.
I’m gonna call aeros. They’re gonna be here, in three months. Three months. It’s not gonna eat through that laminate because it’s designed in a different way. To last longer terrain erosion. Rodolfo, is that the logic there?
Rodolfo Meleiro: That’s the logic and I think that’s genius because we go back to the same discussion to have time to plan the maintenance on the right time.
Yes. And that’s a big difference. We’re discussing that also. Doing the repair for only the paint cost X. Doing the repair for the paints plus the laminates cost between two to three X. Yes. So it’s a, just talk about doubling, maybe three times the cost and time of the machine to stop it.
And you have a material or you have a construction that can protect you from that. So you have time to do the repair before you reach this two, three times penalty. That’s great.
Allen Hall: The pictures that they were showing was of a standard leading edge design, fiber design, right? And then they applied this material over it as a Couple, couple.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Like two layers of this stuff, right? It was they did a reference sample, like six layers, normal material. Oh, yes. And the other one, four layers normal, plus two layers of dead material.
Allen Hall: Exactly. And So it would replace some of the structural applies or could be secondarily added because how much of this material would you really need on a blade?
Half a meter wide, maybe? It wouldn’t, yeah, it wouldn’t be necessarily, you’re not using millions of dollars of this material.
Rodolfo Meleiro: You, I would consider that as a, And when you do the lesion as a protection just semi width of the paint. So we’re talking 200 millimetres, 300 millimetres maximum. Yeah,
Nicholas Gaudern: You don’t need to cover more than that.
Rodolfo Meleiro: Yeah, it’s a little much,
Allen Hall: it’s a little much. So it’s a small amount. It’s something that would already fit into the manufacturing process, whether you could injection, inject resonant to it, whether it flow right. And all those things have to be worked right. And that’s when you have tight fibers like that, it can be a little bit difficult to get the resonant between them.
But. The logic makes sense, that it’s, it could be a simple addition for an OEM or even in a repair situation, like if I had a cracked open leading edge, I could repair this material, so I’m trying to get to my 10 year lifespan in America, I would do it with this material. In fact, I probably wouldn’t go fix the LEP at year 9, I would just let it go, because I know I got probably a year with this stuff.
Nicholas Gaudern: Can protect. Yeah. A part of you might be losing lots of AEP.
Allen Hall: You’re gonna lose a lot of AEP, but at that point, the way that Americans run their turbines, Nicholas, you don’t want to know. But I do think there is a plan to get more power out, right? And I think overall, it’s an overall number.
Sure.
Nicholas Gaudern: And. This is a perfect application for composites, right? Which you can put the fibers wherever you want them, whatever orientation you can do it.
Allen Hall: So the pickleball solution actually turned into something real. So that presentation, which didn’t start out on the best foot, my opinion, all of a sudden at the end, I’m like, holy moly.
I think this is good. Is it me? We’re both over here. Wow, this is cool. Because I do think that kind of technology can help get us bias a little more time LEP solution is going to be, which we don’t
Nicholas Gaudern: Well, we had a, there was another presentation yesterday on metallic research. Obviously not a new concept and they were showing, obviously the upfront cost is going to be a lot higher, but lifetime costs should be much lower.
Yeah, it is, it’s,
Rodolfo Meleiro: I think the concept is right, but the implementation proposals, I think it’s lacks something, it’s too, I think it’s complicated.
Allen Hall: It’s complicated.
Rodolfo Meleiro: It’s much more complicated than the proposal, but yeah, I think that there’s a point. Maybe the, as we discussed it, maybe we should have some more focus.
So on better materials. On a different approach to really extend the life, really extend the life or to have a cost effective material that gives us this maintenance plan that can be really predictable and affordable.
Nicholas Gaudern: Yeah. I’m not sure you need to go full metallic leading edge on most onshore sites.
It probably is overkill.
Allen Hall: When the discussion about metal leading edge has come up, I thought we are still in a new frontier. We have not. Got to a solution. We haven’t arrived at a solution. We’re still in the middle of a solution We’re using a solution that was on propellers back in the 1930s. That’s where we’re at right now I was like we’re trying everything.
Yeah that we should be keep ourselves open to everything and When if it’s a composite solution if it’s a leading edge protection coating or a shell or maybe it’s metal who knows Yeah, but we gotta hurry and it’s it’s a difficult one, right?
Nicholas Gaudern: Because you don’t want to you don’t want to stimmy innovation You don’t want to stimmy research.
Sure. However We can’t pretend that the wind turbine industry is a cottage industry anymore No, the number of turbines that are being installed means that we do have to speed up. We have to speed up. I don’t think we can have 10, 15, 20 competing LEP solutions that have vastly different properties and and maintenance regimes because there’s just too much choice.
And then every time an operator wants to decide on a solution, they don’t really know what to pick. They then have to set up their own test campaign because there’s not enough data out there. And then I just feel like we just keep going in circles a lot. So yeah, there’s that balance, which you have to innovate, you have to try new things, you have to open the box.
But we also have to have a solution that surely a lot of people agree works.
Allen Hall: So that gets to my point about time frame. And one of the pain points for me watching this is I know how painful it is for operators to deal with this and all the tools and resources they’re trying to go get. At the same time the academic part of this.
is out to 2025, 2026, which is fine. I think that’s fine, but we’re on 2024. We need solutions now.
Nicholas Gaudern: We gotta, how many gigawatts is going in
Allen Hall: next year?
Yeah, way more than we even want to think about, honestly, because the consequences of doing. Having leading edge erosion problems offshore gets super expensive in the United States.
The opposition to offshore wind is at fever pitch at the moment. If they had to drag back. Blades to get repaired next to the New York, Boston, Philadelphia corridor, that would erupt. And you can’t have that. I think as an industry, you can’t have it as maybe as an OEM, you could survive it. But as an operator, I don’t know if that would really help your case.
Nicholas Gaudern: I think that the kind of event right now at this symposium. It is bringing lots of the right people together. Operators, OEMs, academia, third parties, all have to be talking together. You need to share as much knowledge as possible so that people don’t have to go and repeat a test all the time because they want their own data.
Allen Hall: It’s true. It’s nice to have your own data, but that data on a backup, what is published, right? It’s that validation piece. Fine. Go run the test and we’re going to go visit the R& D test systems, Rainerose facility that are building at DTU, which is supposedly magnificent. It sounds magnificent and we’re going to go tour that tomorrow.
So I’m really interested to see how tight the controls are. This is getting back to the variability problem. Rainerose and testing, one of the complaints obviously is, Every rain erosion test facility, that’s not R& D test systems rigged. That gives you a different result. R& D test systems just narrowed that down quite a bit, for sure.
Again, the variability is too much, and yeah, that’s why an OEM goes out and repeats these tests, is because they know, I can get a different result.
Nicholas Gaudern: But yeah, it’s a big time suck that we can’t necessarily afford.
Allen Hall: No, but if I’m if I’m an OEM today. And I don’t have an internal rain erosion test set. I know where I’m going.
Yes. I’m coming to Roskilde. I’m going to the DTU rain erosion facility because they know what they’re doing and they have the best, going to have the best facility in the world. And the consistency of that test should be better than anything else you can get. And even just talking to some of the people that work there their knowledge of rain erosion and the types of variables that apply in that test was.
Astounding. I’ve been around main rosin testing a long time, almost 30 years. So I’ve seen a lot of it that is going to be crazy. Great. Yeah. It’s fantastic. Rodolfo Nicholas. This has been fantastic. It’s great to see you. Yeah. I’d like to see you in some place where it’s warmer. We got to get to Brazil.
We got to get to Brazil.
Rodolfo Meleiro: It always gets snowy. You’re going to the wrong place. You go to Brazil. There’s no snow anywhere.
Allen Hall: Yes. Yeah. We should go to Brazil sometime. But yeah I appreciate you having me on the podcast and this has been fantastic. So maybe we’ll see you here next year. Absolutely. For the sixth. Thanks for having me. All right. Pleasure.
Leading Edge Erosion : Solutions and Takeaways from the International Symposium
Renewable Energy
GE Vernova Backs LM Wind Power, KKR Buys EDF Assets
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?
I
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.
Renewable Energy
Trump and Illegal Aliens
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.
If it weren’t for those two facts, the author of the meme at left would have a good point.
College professors and movie producers in California, and stock analysts in New York aren’t on government assistance.
Renewable Energy
This Is Funny, but it Cuts to the Bone
Fans of our top comedians will love this video, a fictional reenactment of George Washington’s addressing an open meeting of citizens in the newly formed United States, concerning potential frailties of the soon-to-be-ratified Constitution.
https://www.2greenenergy.com/2026/07/06/george-washington/
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
