Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Maximizing Wind Turbine Power with AeroVista – A Conversation with Nicholas Gaudern
We’re revisiting a great episode with Nicholas Gaudern, CTO of PowerCurve, discussing their new AeroVista software. AeroVista uses drone inspection data to evaluate wind turbine blade damage and power production potential. Allen and Nicholas discuss how this technology enables strategic repair planning to maximize power recovery while avoiding unnecessary 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!
PowerCurve – https://powercurve.dk
Pardalote Consulting – https://www.pardaloteconsulting.com
Weather Guard Lightning Tech – www.weatherguardwind.com
Intelstor – https://www.intelstor.com
Allen Hall: Welcome back to the special edition of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall, and this week, we’re going to go back in time to September of last year, where I sat down with Nicholas Gaudern, CTO of PowerCurve. And Nicholas and I discuss a new piece of software that PowerCurve has developed called AeroVista.
And AeroVista is a unique tool. It takes your existing drone images and then predicts the AEP for the turbine or the particular blade. A lot of operators that Joel and I have run across recently are interested to know what blades to repair based on the amount of damage. And we see damage from all over the world.
And there are blades that have very minor damage that you probably leave alone. There are some with very major damage and those you should obviously fix. It’s the ones in between where you’re not really sure. And this AeroVista piece of software is a predictive tool. It will help you design your campaign to repair blades during the warmer months.
So it’s a very powerful tool and a and a well needed tool for the industry. So I thought it was time to revisit this episode with Nicholas Gaudern of PowerCurve. Enjoy.
Leading edge erosion is a massive power losing problem for most wind farms. Almost every wind turbine blade that has been in service more than two years has some level of leading edge erosion. I’m your host, Allen Hall, and I’m here with our guest, Nicholas Gaudern, CTO of PowerCurve.
In this episode, we are discussing leading edge erosion, how it reduces average energy production, and when to address it for maximum revenue generation. And just a brief background on PowerCurve. PowerCurve designs, manufactures and installs power upgrades for wind turbine blades that help their clients make their wind projects more profitable.
PowerCurve’s Technology has been thoroughly tested and validated, and they continue to work closely with universities to refine it even further. And the upgrades have been installed on blades worldwide. Nicholas, welcome to the program.
Nicholas Gaudern: Hi Allen. Really nice to be back talking to you.
Allen Hall: So you have some new software tools at your disposal, and anybody that knows PowerCurve knows you guys are really good at aerodynamics to understand how blades produce power.
You wanna, you wanna describe what this little software breakthrough
Nicholas Gaudern: is? Yeah, I’d love to. So, so what I want to talk about today is, is our new tool that we’re calling a. It’s it’s an a p i, you can call it, it does something and you’ll get some really insightful data back. Maybe just take a, a step backwards.
It’s all about taking a, a data driven and an engineering driven approach to understanding the performance losses that you will get from damages and particularly leading edge erosion on a blade. So, We’re about modeling those losses and telling you how you can deal with it. Yeah,
Allen Hall: because there’s a lot of information on the internet today link.
You see a lot of it on LinkedIn talking about leaning edge erosion and, and how you should repair it and it should be repaired and how quickly should be repaired. Those are really interesting data points. Right. But I think the real critical decision is if you should repair it and how. How, how far how many years can you wait?
Right? Because it’s all about spending money and spending money wisely on your turbines to keep your production power up. But there’s really is not a tool out there today that tells you, Hey, we need to repair this turbine, but not that turbine. Yeah, exactly. And I think what
Nicholas Gaudern: we’re addressing here is, is this is not a new problem.
Leading edge erosion blade damages, and they’ve been around for a long time. They also think there’s been a lot of acceptance that they cause a power loss. How you go about quantifying that in, in a reliable manner in the field consistently is something that from what we see hasn’t, hasn’t been achieved.
So we set out with the goal of, of kind of cracking this problem, doing it in a way that users common data and existing data. We didn’t want to go out and put this big new data requirement into the field to be able to do these kind of calculations. It’s happened quite quickly, I think in the last few years, but I would say, you know, a huge percentage of the installed base of wind turbines stay are inspected annually, at least annually, by a drone.
And the primary focus of that drone inspection has been to assess the structural condition of the blades to look at whether there’s any critical cranks or when you should fix them so you don’t have a catastrophic failure, and that’s super important. There’s no link to aerodynamic performance and it’s simply not good enough to say, oh, well I’ve got the Cat five structural damage.
Therefore, that’s bad aerodynamically. It might not be, you know, you might have a crack in a certain place. These kind of almost invisible aerodynamically, but as very bad structurally. So what we do is we take existing damage metadata. So all of the data is captured by the drone companies, the drone inspection companies.
Then we map that onto an aerodynamic model of the Pacific turbine in question. So for example, if we’re out analyzing a a GE 1.5 or a Vestas V80, whatever, we will have built an aerodynamic model of that turbine. So we are taking as many assumptions outta the system as we can. So we look at the real data, so the real damages that were on the turbine at that time.
It’s mapped onto an ergonomic model of that real turbine, not some generic fence.
Allen Hall: So most wind turbine operators have a bunch of drone images and data they’ve accumulated over the last couple of years. So in that dataset, I just wanna understand this clearly here. So in that dataset that the operators already have, there is metadata that describes the damages that they have on the blades, the leading edge, erosion damage, maybe some lightning damage, maybe impact damage or a crack even.
All that damage is metadata already in their existing data that they have purchased.
Nicholas Gaudern: Yes. So that data exists and that’s an important thing with, with the system that we, we can go back historically, so we’ll, we’ll go forward. There’s new inspections are made, but if you want to see what has happened in the last three years in terms of your AEP loss from leading edge damage, we can do that because that metadata.
Will exist. Obviously there’s differences between drone inspection providers and the level of detail, et cetera, but fundamentally, it, it exists.
Allen Hall: So I have this metadata and I put it through the PowerCurve, API which you’re calling AeroVista. So I take this existing data set already purchased, I sent it to PowerCurve.
You process it and tell me how much power that blade is losing and what, what that means in terms of revenue generally. And you can do that over, over a trend line over the last couple of years. So I can kind of see how that blade is doing. Is it basically being the same or is it really dramatically dropping off?
Can you can tell those sort of things just from the metadata.
Nicholas Gaudern: Yeah, exactly. And, and this is the great thing about using a real turbine model. What has been really enlightening when we’ve been adding more and more models to the system is that you could have a hundred meter diameter rotor. Designed by one manufacturing with some erosion on, and you could have another one that’s designed by a different manufacturer that basically looks the same, you know, on the photographs.
But when you actually run the calculation, you may find that one of those rotors loses way more energy than the other. And that’s because it’s not just about how the erosion looks, it’s about what is the aerodynamic shape of the blade. What do the airfoils look like? What’s their performance? What’s the store margin?
What r p m is this turbine spinning at? So again, we’re taking all this into the, into the model that is just cutting out all these assumptions that you’d otherwise have to make if you didn’t build a model. So what you’ll find is that even on the same wind storm, it’s notionally seen the same weather, and it’s been maintained notionally in the same way.
The spread of AEP losses across the site can be quite dramatic. You may have half a percent loss on some turbines over here, but you might have a 2% loss on some turbines over here. So again, by using the real data of each turbine combined with this neurodynamic model, it allows you to get some incredibly valuable insight as to how much money you could be losing due to blade damages.
Then it can guide you to say, well, which turbine should I do something about first? Because if you just looked at the structural categorization, say you needed to pick half your fleet to repair in one year, you may say, oh, well all of them have cat three damages, so I’ll just go and I’ll repair some of them because you know, I can’t tell the difference.
The reality is though, that. That’s not a full picture of the aerodynamic behavior. It matters where that damage is, what type of damage is, and these are all the things that we’re modeling. So you can say, right, I’m gonna go and fix these five turbines first, which they were killing me in terms of performance and spend your money wisely because you can’t fix everything all the time.
We have to prioritize, and it’s a tool for prioritization.
Allen Hall: So when I hook, hook up your a p i and I, I go look for these losses that I’ve. Most operators have right now this is a pretty quick response time, right? You’re not sitting around waiting for months for the, for PowerCurve to come back. It’s like put the data in outcomes, the information, you’ll have it in a day or so
Nicholas Gaudern: under an hour, typically.
Wow. It’s, it’s really fast. So we, we built this in a very flexible and scalable manner. So, you know, we’re running it in, in the cloud on servers that can scale. So if necessary, you know, we can take hundreds of calls into the system simultaneously and deal with them really, really quickly. There’s no, there’s no handholding.
We’re not there checking, clicking buttons. This has been set up as a robust, scalable system, so the results come through incredibly quickly. So, yeah, it’s, it’s, it’s very, very robust. Got a pretty high headroom and hopefully as we grow and people start to use the system, We can scale with it. That’s the beauty of these kind of modern cloud setups.
Allen Hall: So if I’m doing a drone inspection at the end of the summer period, which, where we’re at, right? So a lot of companies like to take them at the end of the summer or at the beginning of the springtime just to get a status on where there are with their, with their, their damage. With, I get that, all that drone information, I get the metadata, I send it to PowerCurve and boom, within an hour I know what I need to do.
Or leading edge repairs. I, I can start scheduling people for next year now and tell them what they’re gonna be
Nicholas Gaudern: working on. So instead of having to, to guess right now, is it worth putting on LEP or is it worth re cleaning the blade or is it worth putting on bgs? You know, there’s all these options available to a customer and we’re hoping to just provide some insight into what is most valuable because.
You know, LEP is not some silver bullet. LEP itself changes the leading edge shape and therefore aerodynamic behavior of as section. And depending on the LEP that may be next to nothing, but it might not be. So if your erosion is, is really mild, you could use our tool. You might see, oh, I’m only losing 0.3% AEP from erosion.
Well, it’s probably not worth putting on LEP from an aerodynamic perspective because the LEP is probably in the same order of magnitude for losses, whereas m losing 3%, well, I should probably do something, but you know, you can then have a conversation with us about vortex generators, about LEP, about blade repair and will help to guide you as to what you should, what you should do.
So I think that’s the thing here. Once you have. A piece of data that is come from an engineering driven approach, you can start to make much more confident decisions about how you go about maintaining your fleet and carrying out more effective asset management. Does it
Allen Hall: also provide some information, like you could get another half a percentage point in AEP by putting on VGs?
Does it provide that sort of additional bonus information besides just the leading edge erosion issue?
Nicholas Gaudern: So as of today, you know, you’ll get the loss, you’ll get the loss broken down by blade as well. You’ll get a heat map that shows you which of the damages are contributing most to that loss. And yeah, as we get more customers, using the system will enhance the functionality, but driven by what the customers want.
I think, you know, we want to get it out into the market and used, we don’t want to. Assume what an operator wants to know. We want to have dialogues, get people using it, get the data flowing, and then we’ll start adding the functionality that that is most useful to the operator.
Allen Hall: So there, Avista a p I has been out for a little while now and you’ve, you’ve had some initial customers use it.
What’s the feedback been?
Nicholas Gaudern: Very positive. I mean, I think this system as, as a whole started life a couple of years ago. When we really started developing the engineering and the process behind how you do this. And then last year at keen Power in the U S A, we launched a, a version of the system.
It wasn’t called Avis at the time, but it was with sky Specs. So Skys specs had been a great partner in this service from a very early stage. So we launched this service with Sky Specs. So that was, yeah, over a year ago now. We’ve run a lot of turbines through the system and what we’ve seen is that it’s given operators the ability to really start looking at that prioritization of prepare and help to drive internal conversation about loss, because without a number, very difficult to talk about budgeting our air VGs or LEP whatever.
So the feedback has been strong in, yes, it is a valuable tool to prioritize. But we’ve also heard some interesting things that we maybe didn’t latch onto straight away, and that was, well, if you have historical data, you’ve got three years of inspection data, you’ll start to see a trend. You can then start to project that forward to plan future O&M campaigns on the expectation of erosion.
But then you could even take it one step further and say, well, I’m planning a brand new windstorm of this turbine type. What did I learn over the last few years in my other wind farms? And then you start to look at, you know, very important financial decisions about, you know, write downs and assets and depreciation, all these kind of things.
So once you’ve got that data set, there’s a whole world of decision making that it can open up. And I feel at the moment we’re scratching the surface. Yeah. And again, the more operators we engage with, I think more we’ll, we’ll learn that. Yeah, so the
Allen Hall: data analytics becomes really interesting there because it’s an unexplored area of leading edge erosion.
The progression on a sort of a national, even global scale with this a Vista a p i tool. Yeah, you can, you could then, theoretically you start projecting when a farm does certain turbines, maybe they don’t do some turbines, right? Because it may not be worth it. But it may give a, be the industry a better sense of.
What is the proper timing and regimen to do leading edge erosion repair?
Nicholas Gaudern: Yeah. And we’ll start seeing patterns. We’ll start seeing, you know are there particular turbine models that seem to suffer more than others, for example, you know, and that, and that would be very valuable. So for people making investment decisions.
So I think we’ve, we’ve got a really nice grounding in the tool. As I say, we’ve, we’ve done a lot of work with Skyspace. There’s a lot of calls gone through the system and that’s helped us to really tune it over the last year. Now it is open and open to the world where we can take a p I calls from, from anyone as long as they’ve had the right setup process with us.
So we’re in dialogue with a number of major drone operators around the world. I think to me, in the near term, it’s more likely we’ll be taking calls from the inspection providers because they’re typically the ones in control of the database and the tagging. And all that kind of stuff. Of course, if an operator themselves has a, has all that data to hand and they wanna go direct to us.
Sure. I just feel that, from what I see in the industry, it’s generally the, the inspection providers that are, that are best placed to call us, but it, it’s pretty operator specific I think. As wind
Allen Hall: farms start to hibernate in the Northern Hemisphere, now’s the time to get that drone data, start taking a look at it and figure out what the plan is for next season there.
I know we have seen a number of operators already planning for next year trying to get resources lined up because there’s only so many resources out there. ’cause you need to. Figure out who’s going to do some of these repairs and get them booked. And now’s the time that, that that happens. Using the ar vista a p I would be a quick way to, to help organize that for an operator.
Nicholas Gaudern: For sure. The data’s there. The data’s there. You’ve just got to use it. Where we are adding another stream to the decision making process and. It’s simply not good enough. You know, in these days of challenged energy prices and contracts and, you know, wind farm deployment, you’ve got to squeeze everything you can out of your assets, and that means using the data you have available.
Don’t throw away your two 3% ap. Do something about it, but it’s very hard to do something about it if it’s not visible to you, and that’s what I hope this tool is, is going to bring this. Consistent, reliable methodology to, to give that insight. The Arrow
Allen Hall: Vista, a p i is a result of years of collaborations with local universities.
You that help to basically define how this process works. You wanna describe what happened behind the scenes there? Yeah, so
Nicholas Gaudern: I think, you know, PowerCurve, we’re, we’re a small company, but we, we leverage a lot of things we’ve done over the years and we’re, we’re very proud to have been awarded, you know, EU funding, so, so r and d projects into TEX generators and leading edge erosion and, and other aerodynamic topics over the years.
And our current E U D P funder project is called lca, or Leading Edge Roughness Categorization. So this is a project that’s being led by D T U, the Danish Tank University, and then there’s a number of o e M partners. So you’ve got investors. Siemens, gaa, Len, Sue Long and then PowerCurve, part of the, the consortium as well.
So we are really proud to be part of that project with, with all of these big players in the industry and led by such a, I would say, a world renowned organization of D T U when it comes to wind energy research. So the whole idea of this project is to come up with a universal. Categorization system for leading roughness that is considering aerodynamic and air, air acoustic penalties.
So I think there’s this problem at the moment, like there is with structural tagging of images that individual companies individual operators, they have their own tagging criteria. What makes it to level three or a level four? And I think that can only go on so long before. The industry has to kind of come to a decision about what is the standard for tagging.
’cause then that allows much more effective conversations to happen between OEMs, operators and service providers, third parties such as ourselves. So over the next couple of years, Leah Cat is gonna be working to do a lot of wind tunnel testing and engineering analysis such as C F D, computational fluid dynamics.
To help move us towards this universal acceptance of a classification system for damages. So leading edge erosion. So I think this is a great project. I think it’s a lot overdue and with the partners involved and sort of the financial muscle of the OEMs, I think we can get a long way towards towards the goal and having that classification.
So, Keep watching this space. I’m sure you’re gonna see LinkedIn Post and other media from the OEMs, from D T U, from Power Codes explaining what we’re doing and, and why and how we’re contributing to, to the knowledge base around Leady and
Allen Hall: George. Right. And, and how do the operators connect up with the AeroVista?
A p i like would they just reach out to their local drone company? Do they contact PowerCurve specifically? Do they hook up with you on LinkedIn? What’s, what’s the process here?
Nicholas Gaudern: So I would, I would say if if your drone inspector hasn’t already spoken to you about it, then just contact Power Cove directly and we’ll, we’ll make it happen.
So if you want to go through your drone inspection provider, we’ll then talk to that provider. We’ll have an integration process with them to make sure they know how to talk to the a p i, you know, they send the, the right style format, et cetera, et cetera. The, the boring stuff. And then, yeah, they’ll get the data pipeline plumbed in and where.
We’re good to go. So it’s, it’s a simple process, you know, it’s, it’s designed to be light on, on input effort, but, but heavy on output value and just turn it around really quickly. As we were talking around earlier.
Allen Hall: So Nicholas, I really appreciate you being back on the podcast. We love having, you know, there’s just so many cool things happening in Blade Aerodynamics inefficiency, so it’s, it’s good to get the download.
Maximizing Wind Turbine Power with AeroVista – A Conversation with Nicholas Gaudern
Renewable Energy
ECO TLP Brings Concrete Foundations to Floating Wind
ECO TLP Brings Concrete Foundations to Floating Wind
Nicole Johnson Murphy, CEO of ECO TLP, and Gordon Jackson join to discuss concrete floating wind foundations, production-line construction, and markets from Hawaii to Japan.
Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!
Welcome to Uptime Spotlight, shining Light on Wind. Energy’s brightest innovators. This is the progress powering tomorrow.
Allen Hall: Offshore wind obviously is a big deal right now. There’s a lot of, uh, countries looking at it and investigating it, doing it, uh, but not really at scale yet. And this is where ECO TLP comes in and. Nicole, let’s just start there with a background. What problem were you trying to solve when you started Eco TLP?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Yeah, so, so we were designing for, uh, a site off of Hawaii in 2011, uh, for the Hico RFP. And so we were designing for 300 meter water depth from the beginning. Um, so we were always trying to find a way to work with the ports, with the vessel, with the infrastructure that was existing off Hawaii. And with, and that worked with Jones Act vessels.
So we were always trying to meet that [00:01:00] requirement with, you know, and meet the cost, try to, we saw there were much tighter margins in offshore wind than in oil and gas, for example, at that water depth. So we’re trying to find something that was cost effective.
Allen Hall: Next question, obviously is what makes those deep water foundations so difficult?
Gordon Jackson: Well, it’s the water depth, uh, primarily, um, you know, uh, you need to put foundations down in, uh, extremely deep water. Um, and they’re gonna be pretty flexible. Um, so you’re trying to control the, the amount of motion that you get at the surface through your, uh, uh, you know, your deep water, uh, facility. So, um, it’s really.
Really that challenge, you know, and, uh, you know, the weight of components through the water depth, like, um, you know, likes of chain would be completely impossible. Um, in 300 meters of water. Uh, you need to use something that’s a little bit lighter. Yeah, to mow you to the, uh, to the seabed
Allen Hall: [00:02:00] because it does seem a little odd just not to make the foundations taller, basically.
More steel drive it down in, we know that process, we understand that process. It works offshore, uh, near shore in a, in a lot of locations. But once you get to what depth as it becomes financially or engineering wise, impossible
Gordon Jackson: for offshore wind, fixed, fixed structures in, I mean, maybe a hundred meters of water are gonna be.
Economic. Um, but you know, they’ll be costly compared to what’s been done now because, uh, you know, of all the extra structure you need for the, uh, for the deeper water. But, uh, I think you’ll see, you know, a crossover between fixed and floating, you know, around the, um, you know, 70 to a hundred meter water mark.
You know, that’s sort the range.
Allen Hall: Well, and that leads to the next question, which is. It’s all financial, right? At some point, the numbers [00:03:00] don’t work. If the cost of foundations don’t come down, especially in fixed bottom offshore or floating offshore, we lose a lot of offshore wind resource. Uh, Nicole can, can you gimme a scale at what we’re missing if we don’t get to a more economical solution for floating offshore?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: So we’ve estimated for our market for, um, a very deep water market. So we, we now actually have a, a solution that goes across all water depths. So we’re starting with, um, you know, this, this gravity based structure now with, and, and Gordon’s team has been really involved in that, uh, development. And then now we can take that same slip form, concrete cylinder.
Format and take it across all the water depths. So, so we basically can hit every water depth now for a very low cost. It’s a very simple, just, you know, local, regionally designed and built, uh, system. We, we crowdsource the labor and the inputs. Um, and so we [00:04:00] try to, and we also try to give the procurement team of our clients their, you know, an ability to do their job and, and be able to bid out aspects of our design, um, across.
Different vendors. So you always wanna give, in construction, you always wanna give, uh, the procurement team a job to do so they can actually get that price, keep that price down on the installation.
Allen Hall: Yeah, that’s a unique look that eco TOP is putting to this problem. Which is moving away from steel, which is expensive obviously, and it’s sort of difficult to transport at times to a more localized solution, which is concrete.
And thinking about the problem a little bit differently, does that open up a number of doors then in terms of the countries that can get involved in, in floating or near shore, uh, wind projects, but just because you’re driving the cost down?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Absolutely. And I’ll let Gordon speak to the ax. He’s worked. His whole career in offshore concrete.
But I think it’s, I think it’s a, it’s a great, it’s the only way we would do it. We actually have shipyards in our companies, our partners own [00:05:00]shipyards, and we, we just would never probably ex try to try to create this many units across the world and scale and steel. We’d only do concrete.
Gordon Jackson: Yeah. My first concrete project sort of broke the mold of how you do, uh, construction of concrete offshore structures.
Uh, it was entirely built within a dry dock and, uh. After we’d gone on and delivered that project, um, that was in the late eighties. I spent the next 10 years, uh, working on projects all around the world, looking at doing the same sort of thing in different countries. Um, because you, you only needed, you know, 10, 12 meters of water, um, at the shore and you could, um, build a structure and um, you know, get it out there in the water.
Um. It really opened up the market for, for offshore concrete structures that, uh, that, uh, first project that we did.
Allen Hall: So using that first project as leverage and knowledge of how to do these things, how much advantage [00:06:00] does concrete give you over steel?
Gordon Jackson: It, it’s difficult to say because it bends country to country.
Um, and, um, you know, quite often you’re competing against, um, you know, steel built in some, uh, very low cost fabrication countries. Um, so if you’re in a high cost, you know, high labor cost country, like, you know, I worked in Australia, um, and um, you know, the labor cost there was extremely high. So concrete wasn’t particularly cheap, but the overall solutions that we came up with, um, were cheap.
You know?
Allen Hall: So does that involve basically like slip forms or how are you, how are you thinking about that problem? Because it’s a huge engineering task and you only learn. By doing it on some level because all great plans, uh, always run into trouble as soon as you try to implement them. So you took all that previous knowledge and then applied it to this problem, and now you have, uh, uh, basically [00:07:00] trimmed or, or slimmed, uh, the design down into, you have a, a very economical model, even in more uneconomical economies because of labor laws and cost of labor and access and those kind of things.
What does that look like now? And what’s your thought process on, Hey, this is what it’s gonna look like? Can we get, uh, keyside, how do we do this and how do we keep this thing simple?
Gordon Jackson: Uh, well the key thing is we’re looking at, uh, a production line approach, which has been, you know, it’s tried and tested for, um, for marine, for marine concrete construction, you know, construction of key walls and um, and you know, the like, um, we’re using exactly that same system.
We’ve just been tried and tested to create a production line of, um, eco TLP units or eco GBS units where we’re building, you know, onshore and where we’re going from station to station, doing a task at each station. [00:08:00] So it’s exactly like a production line, um, you know, that you’re be familiar with and, you know, you load out the completed structure onto a, a barge, um, and then you.
Submerge that barge and your structure floats off and that’s, that’s the real key to getting the, uh, the economy from the, the concrete basis.
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Yeah, and I’ll say that the opex is really something we focus a lot on because it’s, it’s not just what you’re doing on the CapEx and the development and the port, it’s actually that 30 year lifetime maintenance.
And this is a, when you, we fully submerge our floater, which is basically inert in the ocean. It’s, it’s very eco-friendly with the ocean. There’s no paint, there’s no, you know, maintenance on the floater over the lifespan. You’re, you’re monitoring those, the moorings and the, the weight of any marine, you know, buildup on those moorings and things like that.
But generally it’s a very low maintenance solution and it’s very heavy and kind of like a comfortable car [00:09:00] ride for the turbine. It, it really has slow motions. It, it’s, um, almost like a, you know, a high skyscraper in the water. You know, you’re just the top of that skyscraper is moving a little bit. But you’re, um, you’re really giving it that comfortable, slow ride over its lifetime.
It’s not hitting a lot of turbulence, like a, a different type of odor.
Allen Hall: Yeah. It is a different concept, really, right? That you have this mass at the bottom and you have this mass at the top, which is the, the cell on the wind turbine. And if you can design it just right, everything dampens becomes stable.
Even in turbulent water. How long did it take you to figure out that aspect of the design? Because it does seem like a lot of projects hit a, an end point right there because the motion of the turbine is not good for the lifetime of the turbine.
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: We, we look at it as a, a kind of hybrid spar, CLP, so, so the original design came from my late father who was, who had designed echo fis for children’s [00:10:00] petroleum in the early.
Uh, late sixties, I guess. And, um, so he’d come from oil and gas and he’d come from that concrete, uh, construction background. And, and he is very comfortable with it. And I think, um, Gordon, that’s part of why I like working with Gordon. ’cause Gordon has that same, uh, sort of long-term view on, on these construction principles.
Um,
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: and I think that, that what we saw though is the margins are so different from oil and gas, and so you have to have almost a poor man’s TLP is what we would call it because it’s. It’s gotta be a very simple version of A TLP that can roll out in mass quantities. And, and as you know, coming up with a company that, you know, business plan, you’d wanna be able to, to really scale the business.
And so we had to come up with something that you can make. In different parts of the world at the same time, you’re not tied to one shipyard or one construction.
Allen Hall: Well, even in terms of ship usage, you’re going to reduce the size of the ship considerably. You’re not using big dedicated ships that are really [00:11:00] expensive to operate or to keep in the area, even just to have them there as a lot of money.
You’re thinking about, uh, a different design in terms of. Simple ships that you can find locally. How much does that really lower the cost of deployment?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Quite a lot actually. I, I mean, it depends on, you know, so the other, there’s this other, other aspect of installing the wind turbine on the foundation. So we have this fixed to fixed platform concept where you come further, a little bit further offshore and, and give you that, that draft depth that we need.
And then we have a fixed platform that just stays in place and, and we bring the turbines to it and, and float them out. It’s all a self floating. Unit, whether it’s the GBS that, um, Gordon’s been working with us and or the eco TLP. So we, so we we’re really independent of those large vessels. Um, for the most part, you know, we’re, we’re really try and then you, once you install the turbine, you can tow the entire unit out with two tugs.
Two to three tugs.
Allen Hall: That’s remarkable. So essentially because you [00:12:00] used, uh, a basic. Uh, Henry Ford type process to, to create these foundations and to think about the problem differently. Not only can you deploy it, uh, easier than a lot of things we’re doing right now on top of it, it works over a variety of depths and I think that’s a the hard thing for people to grasp because when we talk about offshore particularly start getting off the continental shelves here, you’re talking about.
More than a hundred meters typically of water. But you also have a, the gravity based system and the TLP system are all sort of interconnected into the basic philosophy. Can you, can you explain like the, the, the backbone of how that engineering works?
Gordon Jackson: Uh, well it’s essentially, it’s, um, we’re using the same structural form in both, both fixed and floating.
It’s, it’s basically, it’s two cylinders, uh, you know, one inside the other. A little bit of structure, which joins the two cylinders together. Um, that’s it.
Allen Hall: Gord, you make it sound so simple, but the, the [00:13:00]engineering is complicated to get to that point. And once you get to that level of, oh, that design actually works in a variety of depths, that opens up your customer base quite a bit.
Have you had inquiries from sort of nearshore people? Or fixed bottom people thinking like, whoa, I could actually save myself a bunch of time and money, which is the, the real limiting factor on offshore wind at the moment. Are you starting to see some momentum there that, uh, operators, developers are starting to rethink this problem and not just do what they did last week?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Absolutely. I mean, one of the ways we came about the g you know, taking the Ecot P and transforming it to the eco GBS was, was recommended by a client, was, you know, that was their, their ask actions. That’s, that’s always the best way to start. A product development cycle because, you know, somebody’s interested.
Um, and I think, you know, and part of the reason I found Gordon to work with early on in our, um, the life of our company is, is his background in, in GBS development. He did, he developed the gravitas, uh, GBS [00:14:00] 10 years ago. So I think we, we got lucky that our, uh, civil structural engineering partner with AUP was, was already really comfortable with, you know, looking at this.
Allen Hall: Um,
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: so I think that’s, that’s part of, you know, you always want the clients to be interested, you know, before you start investing. You know, you don’t wanna design a product that’s in your head or your, you know, in your, in your company lunchroom without a real ask for it.
Allen Hall: Right? And I, I think also you have a, once you have the engineering pretty well done and.
Obviously do now you’re trying to touch a number of countries and every culture has its own way of, of one of the construction business to do it slightly differently. South Korea does it different than Scotland, for example. You are working across cultures and trying to make the the same design. Uh, apply to all those different areas.
Are, have you learned [00:15:00] some things from that? Is it, are you able to basically set the same assembly line in every place? Or, or are there different, different kinds of concrete, different kinds of access, different kinds of ports that you have to deal with? What are those variables there that, that change the way you do business?
Gordon Jackson: All the characteristics, ports are, uh, you know, obviously different. Um, but you know, really you just need space. Um. And access to reasonably deep water. Um, you know, from, from that, uh, from that space. And, uh, you know, it can get surprisingly difficult to find that, um, certainly in the UK and, uh, you know, in Northern Europe, people wanna build marines and, uh, waterfront living, uh, rather than having, uh, you know, an industrial facility, uh, you know, on the doorsteps.
So, you know, in, you know, developed countries. Um. It can be hard to find that space. But, um, you know, in some, some parts of the world, you know, there’s lots of [00:16:00] space, um, available. Um, some good port facilities that can be, can be utilized. Uh, and then it’s just in, in all civil engineering works, you know, um, you go to do the job, you go wherever the job is, you mobilize there.
Um. You know, you put in the systems, uh, and equipment that you need to build, build a structure, and then normally you go away at the end of the job, you know, you hand it over to the client. Um, you know what, what, um, what would be good here is if we could set up some regional centers where you’ve done the, done the investment in the yard, um, and then you can, uh, you can amortize those costs of development over a number of projects.
Then you should start to see, uh, you know, real, real good cost savings.
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Just one thing, you know, our footprint of our, of our cylinders is about a third of the footprint of a semi sub, for example. So, [00:17:00] so our footprint on the land port is very small.
Allen Hall: Well, I think that makes sense because if you watch the fixed bottom projects, particularly in the United States.
The first thing they had to do is rebuild the ports. The ports weren’t set for the scale and so they needed to expand the ports. That means you have to acquire land, you’ve gotta develop it. There’s a lot of processes involved. ’cause you’re talking about city, state, and federal government being involved.
Obviously federal in the United States is a problem. Uh, so just getting the port developed was a huge process for. Fixed bottom. You’re thinking about that differently though, because the, the reduced amount of space, the, uh, you don’t have to be in a huge industrial area, but all obviously it would be nice, but you do run against that problem.
Are you thinking, uh, when you talk about regional centers, are you thinking kind of Mediterranean, west Coast, us, Australia, one in Japan? How do you think about that problem? Because. [00:18:00] Once you get a a site established, it does seem like because of the, how fast you can move these things around that it’ll become a pretty good job center for a lot of people.
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: Yeah. There’s a long-term maintenance, you know, crew that needs to be developed while we build these. Um, yeah, I think, I think, you know, it’s been a moving target of what’s really gonna develop in offshore wind. It’s like Lucy and Charlie Brown with football. I think we, we constantly try to, you know, get lined up to, to kick football and then it falls.
It’s more of the developers I, I feel for on that ’cause they’re these investing tremendous amount of money for these, these development sites. Um, so, you know, we are open to any, you know, we’ve been, we’ve looked at, um, some developers are looking at steel production and concrete production, you know, two different reports servicing.
An array and we’re really flexible. It doesn’t, doesn’t matter. When we first started on that Hawaii project, we were gonna do floating pla, you know, floating, um, [00:19:00] barges to slipform. And, and we talked about that with Arab. Some still this floating dock idea and, and submerging that dock. And it’s just a matter of finding the right, uh, a large enough, um, dock for that type of, so then you’re not even using the land base port.
You’re learn, you’re using kind of just to. Maybe a 400 foot frontage on the, on the, along the port.
Allen Hall: Well, that’s amazingly small, right? Because if you look at some of these ports right now that are doing, uh, fixed bottom offshore, they’re massive, they’re huge sites. You’re talking about something roughly a 10th of the scale to get the same end result, which is turbines in the water
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: for our part of it.
I mean, we still, you still have the components and, and those are, that’s a, it’s another logistical challenge, and so I understand why the ports are. Looking at a lot more lay down space and things, but you know, maybe at a certain point these components are so large that they just stay on a vessel and they, and we, we take them off of a vessel directly and load them in.
Allen Hall: Yeah, I think that’s one of the, the considerations [00:20:00] is do you really tie it to land in, in terms of needing a, a massive amount of space, acres of space, thousands of square meters of space. Do you need that or is this, or can you do it much more efficiently because that overhead adds up over time. Not only are you trying to save on, on the ships and the, especially the dedicated ships, you’re also looking at smaller footprints on shore and doing it a lot more economically.
What does that future look like now, because it does seem like we’re at a precipice where floating wind is no longer just being discussed. In theory, it’s, it’s going to be implemented. What are those next steps here for Eco TLP?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: So next week we’re headed to Tokyo, to Japan for the wind. Expo and, um, Eric is also presenting at the Asia Wind Offshore Show.
Um, I think we’re, you know, we’re, we’re good to learn. I mean, there’s just so much to learn about each culture, and I think this is something that, you know, Gordon and I’ve talked about in terms of these international [00:21:00] projects, you’ve, you’ve gotta understand your culture that you’re moving into and you’ve gotta understand how to mediate across those different companies that come in.
Our company has seven different. Countries represented in our team. So right now, so, so we’re, we’re a US company, but we’re barely, you know, we’re just kind of by name, but I think most of our team members are, are not in the us and, and that’s international collaboration is something, um, I, I really, I really loved working on it.
And I think, so when we go to Japan next week, it’s really mainly just to learn. You know, we don’t. We have a lot to learn about Japan, and, and that’s what’s fun about each of these, these regions.
Gordon Jackson: And that’s where we can help because, uh, you know, we’ve got a presence in Japan. We’ve been doing offshore wind in Japan, so we’re there, we’re there to help eight to eco TLP with our, those little contacts and uh, you know, h do business, uh, uh, in Japan and things like that.
So, you know, [00:22:00] we have a big international network, so you know, it can help. Some, uh, in some areas, you know, open some doors and, uh, forge some, uh, some friendships between, uh, count companies.
Allen Hall: Courtney did a big project out in Perth, Australia, which is a difficult place, right. Australia is a very difficult place to manufacture things.
What are some of the lessons learned and and what was that process like?
Gordon Jackson: So he had a, a client, uh, a very small client who was prepared to. Seed responsibility for delivering his project to a, to a team, an alliance team. Uh, and he just, um, interviewed a number of teams and, uh, we were lucky enough to be selected, uh, as the team to deliver their project.
There was no tendering, uh, it was just done on, you know, how the, how the client felt about the, the individuals that he met. Um, and that, that was [00:23:00] very new to me. Um, and, um, the whole project was delivered, uh, by companies from the uk, from from Australia, from Singapore, uh, from be Netherlands, you know, the Marine, uh, the marine, uh, vessels.
You know, a lot of ’em are coming from, uh, from, uh, Northern Europe, uh, even though you’re in Australia. Um, and, um, you know, every company wants to do things differently and they all want to look after their interests, but the big thing about this alliance project was that, uh, you were, you were focused on one particular project and we were, um, we were coached and, and facilitated, and trained to, um, to throw away our, you know, our company affiliations and work together.
And, uh, you know, to collaborate together. And, um, [00:24:00] you know, we’re all working towards the, the end goal of delivering a particular product. And I think that’s, I think it’s got a lot of, um, lot of potential to be used in the offshore wind sector. This, this was, uh, you know, uh, an oil platform that we were gonna build on the, uh, the northwest shelf of Australia, um, which happened to be built in concrete, um, because the client.
The client came to us with a, with a, a notion of, of doing something in concrete, um, which we, we took his idea, uh, decided we could do something a little bit cheaper and more straightforward and, um, you know, went on to deliver it. We were given the opportunity to deliver it. And, uh, yeah, I, it was my best project.
Uh, it was a tremendous experience for all the companies involved. And you know, everyone made money so everyone’s happy.
Allen Hall: That is difficult, right? You, you do see on these offshore projects, people coming from around the world to [00:25:00] work on this one big effort, a lot of money, and at times, thousands of people involved.
You see companies stu stumble there, uh, obviously because you’re trying to tie cultures, you’re trying to tie companies together, but at the end of the day, you have to get this project done. Are, are there some top level lessons learned from that of, of how to bridge those differences?
Gordon Jackson: Well, I did another project, uh, this was a, a steel project, um, where we had a, a US oil company.
Uh, and, um. The successful contractor was Hyundai in Korea. And they said to, said to me over the course of the project,
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: uh,
Gordon Jackson: we always lose money with, um, with American oil companies. You know, why, why are we doing business with them? Uh, and it, and it all came down to the, you know, the, the approach to the [00:26:00]contract.
You know, um, Hyundai used to. Working in a more collaborative way with our clients, whereas, you know, this project, you know, this is what the contract says, this is what you’ve taken on to do, you know, there’s no negotiation, you know, you’ll do it and that’s how much money you’re getting. And, uh, you know, um, but they find that very difficult.
And, uh, it was at the time when they were sort of opening up their business more internationally. Um, and I think it was a big learning experience for them. Um. So, yeah. Um, I think a lot of the offshore wind tried to follow the same path and, um, yeah, I think more collaborative working is to be encouraged for me.
Um, you know, more talking to each other and negotiating rather than, uh, you know, imposs.
Allen Hall: Where should developers go to find out more about Eco TLP? [00:27:00] Because you have a gravity based system. You got attention lake platform, there’s a, there’s a lot inside of the company. What’s the first stop? Should they visit your website?
Should they connect with you on LinkedIn? Where do they go?
Nicole Johnson-Murphy: The LinkedIn where website is great.
Allen Hall: So go visit Eco TLP. It’s E-C-O-T-L-P. Com, Nicole and Gordon, this has been a great discussion. I’ve learned a lot. It’s very exciting because I think you’re on the precipice of something great. So thank you for joining me today.
Gordon Jackson: Thank you. Thank you.
Renewable Energy
Trump’s War in Iran
The meme here depicts where the United States has gone recently. Our president starts an illegal and unnecessary war.
Can he stop it? Neither quickly nor easily.
Does he deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? Absolutely.
Renewable Energy
Trump Faces Opposition from Our Top Entertainers
In case it’s not already clear, Trump supporters buy virtually zero of Neil Young’s music, if only because it’s aggressively anti-racist, e.g. “Southern Man,” and “Alabama.”
Imagine you’re a white person living in the Deep South, and you come across these lyrics: “Alabama, you have the rest of the union to help you along. What’s going wrong?”
How large is your appetite for this man’s music?
-
Greenhouse Gases8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change8 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
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
