Published

2 years ago

March 21, 2024

Alice Rush

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Offshore Wind Innovation Hub: A Launchpad for Cutting-Edge Technologies

Allen and Joel interview Tone Søndergaard, Director of the Offshore Wind Innovation Hub. The hub’s six-month accelerator program provides mentorship, industry connections, and resources to help startups scale. Tone shares insights from the first cohort’s outcomes and discusses the global application process for cohort two. If you’re interested in learning more, visit https://www.offshorewindnyc.com/.

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. I’m your host, Alan Hall, along with my co host, Joel Saxam. Starting a new business in the wind industry is particularly difficult. Uh, there are multiple challenges beyond creating a product that the industry needs or wants. Fundraising, staffing, finding an office, technology development, marketing, international sales, the list goes on.

Well, there is help on the way. The Offshore Wind Innovation Hub, located in Brooklyn, New York, is a groundbreaking initiative launched by the NYU Tandon School of Engineering in collaboration with Ecuador, and supported by the New York City Economic Development Corporation. The hub’s mission is to accelerate the growth of the offshore wind industry by supporting startups developing cutting edge technologies, by providing access to mentorship, industry connections, and resources to scale up.

The hub aims to position New York City as a major player in the rapidly growing Offshore wind sector. Leading this ambitious initiative is Tone Sundegaard, uh, the director of the Offshore Wind Innovation Hub. With a background deeply rooted in the Danish wind industry and expensive experience fostering clean tech collaboration between Denmark and the United States, Tone brings a wealth of expertise and passion to her role in shaping the future of offshore wind innovation in New York City and beyond.

Tona, welcome to the program.

Tone Søndergaard: Thank you so much.

Allen Hall: So there is a lot to talk about today, uh, because Hey, we know a lot of small businesses in wind that are trying to get established. We are one of them Uh, and and uh your offshore wind innovation hub Popped up on our radar screen recently, like, Oh, Hey, there’s a lot going on there that we didn’t know about.

And let’s get some, get them on the podcast to talk about all the great activities that are happening there. But I want to first step back and talk about what are some of the problems with starting a small business in wind.

Tone Søndergaard: I think one of the reasons we really started this innovation hub and found that there was a need for an accelerator program and ecosystem development for the smaller businesses within offshore wind was partly twofold in a way.

The first reason really being that we found that smaller businesses, especially within offshore wind, were challenged by what we call information asymmetry, and it was really difficult for many of the smaller businesses who wanted to either move into offshore wind or pivot into offshore wind from other industries to figure out Precisely what is my value proposition?

Precisely when in the supply chain do I fit in? Um, and data in this industry tends to be fairly privileged and sort of like held by some of the really major corporations. Um, so that was really one of the problems that we wanted to try and solve with Innovation Hub was to try and give smaller players access to some of this information and so that they much more efficiently and effectively, um, could enter this industry.

Joel Saxum: Okay, so we’re talking Econor. Econor is Norwegian.

They’re a long ways away. If you’re a United States company, they’re a big, and like, you could look at Econor, it’s like go on LinkedIn. Oh, we have, I don’t know what the number is, but 20, 000 employees or whatever, like, where do I even start? Like, how do I find a stakeholder to even talk to let alone get, you know, to the point where we’re making decisions and making plans and stuff like that.

So it’s a black hole really in some of these large companies when you go into it.

No, completely agree. And I think you were sort of like echoing precisely some of the challenges we also saw with our first cohort, which just ended in December here in 23. Precisely that sort of like wayfinding within some of these like massive energy companies, right, which are setting up shop maybe for the first time in the U.

S. or maybe they have some sort of like oil and gas business already, but it’s completely new structures they’re creating here. Um, and that can be really difficult to wayfind, right? Like what department do I even fit into if I don’t really know what What department does what? You know? So even if we ask sort of like a startup or a relatively new business, like what department in one of the big companies would you like to contact with, they’re like, um, I, I don’t actually know which one does that.

You know?

Yeah. There’s, I mean, there’s, it’s sales 101. You can Google how do I do a sales plan and it will be like stakeholder map and find your personas and stuff. But you’re like. I don’t know. Yeah. Yeah. That concept

Allen Hall: is great. But where do I start? Because I think in wind, uh, it’s a renewable energy.

There’s a lot of focus on it. There’s a lot of tech around it. And I don’t, a lot of smart people are thinking about that industry, getting into that and taking that idea and making it into a product. That’s one phase, right? And I think a lot of the engineers out there that I’ve seen in, in offshore wind and onshore wind have gotten to the, like, Hey, we can make the thing.

Yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely. But, when they get to, now I need to sell it, I need to market it, I need to establish a company, that’s where they have the problem. And a lot of the small companies that Joel and I have been around the last several years that have had great tech, unbelievable tech, have failed because of all the other pieces.

And I, this is where the offshore wind hub comes in, right? So that, uh, can you explain like what things you’re offering to fill those voids that a typical engineer running a company. Misses.

Tone Søndergaard: Absolutely. And I think, you know, in, in startup world or in the accelerator world, we call this kind of like the valley of death or the mountain of opportunity is sometimes it’s also framed as, you know, so that’s a great one, but, um, but you’re precisely right.

What we see a lot of our founders or small businesses coming to us with this, a well functioning product, right? Like it’s a well functioning product. They kind of figured out how to sort of like do the basis of that, but what they are struggling with. And, and one of the things we also focus a lot on for the.

for the Innovation Hub program is to help them with creating that first collaboration with a big energy company, right? Figuring out how do we de risk that collaboration so that they get the information they need to truly figure out what is my value proposition? Because one of the things that we see them come to us with is in order to really scale their business.

What is my business model? How do I price my product? How big of a challenge am I actually solving? And am I sort of like approaching the market with the right type of doing that? So we see a lot of the, the sort of like entrepreneurs that we work with really sort of like need to sort of like scope that out to be able to have a scalable business that, you know, will, will make it great in this industry.

Joel Saxum: You’re helping that entrepreneur, that small company, that, that idea, or sometimes it’s not a small company, sometimes a big company, it’s just a division, something they started. Either way, you’re helping that entity by de risking, understanding, building business models, the international business things we talked about a little bit off air.

Um, but then you’re also say like this, you guys are in partnership with Econor here. However, you’re also building an ecosystem for offshore wind. So it’s not just Econor that you guys have access to, right? But, but you, you’re de risking the technology for them as well. Because when those big companies that have billion dollar assets offshore, And someone comes to them with this new tech, immediately their hair gets up on the back of their neck, like, you know, Should we take this risk on?

Should we trust these people? Is it, because, because, and here’s the, here’s the trouble with offshore. Okay, so again, I’ll, I’ll go back to case study type thing, or examples. Weatherguard Lightning Tech, putting strike tape on. You put strike tape on 10 turbines in Texas, and it costs you X. You go try to put strike tape as a test on 10 turbines offshore, And it costs you X times five or 10 just because of vessel time and downtime, all these different things.

So it’s really hard to test products offshore as well. And for the company that owns those assets or is paying for that time and that effort that they need a de risk for them too. And you can, you know, as a business person, you can understand that.

Tone Søndergaard: You’re so right. Like that what we are kind of experiencing actually is like working closely with an entity like Equinor.

It’s precisely like they get a framework by which they can collaborate with a small business for six months, which is part of our accelerator, if you accept it in, right? You get mentorship, but you also get that collaboration where you can kind of, where both sides can sort of like feel each other out a little bit, right?

And in a, in a setting sort of like test out or figure out what is, what is the road to testing this? Because I think you’re precisely right, what we hear from many of the developers or the big sort of like OEMs is it’s really risky right now, right? Right. All of them are feeling like they’re taking on a lot of risk in a, in a market that’s completely new and where the supply chain feels, you know, not fully established yet.

Um, so I think that’s really sort of like what we also try and tackle with this.

Joel Saxum: Pair up with who your end user will be right away at the early stages in your product so that you’re not building a. solution and looking for a problem. You’re actually found a problem and you have a solution and you’re working toward directly towards it.

Tone Søndergaard: Like an additional part of this and what you also hinting to, right. As we see quite a lot of like technical founders coming into our startup programs, people have amazing ideas, but maybe they need some help with the pitching, right? Like it, It’s a space where you need to be good at selling your product.

And that maybe isn’t necessarily what you learned during your PhD, where you develop something magnificent, right? Like maybe that was not top on the charity list, you know?

Joel Saxum: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Sure, for sure. You did, you, you got a PhD, So you’re, you got, now you’ve got to figure out, Uh, the grassroots way, like by, by paying how to sell things, not to commercialize things, but you get in on board with state offshore wind accelerator program.

Now, all of a sudden you have this whole team around you get, we’re going to help you commercialize this thing. Here’s how we’re going to do it. Here’s the partnerships. It’s, it’s a fantastic initiative. I applaud you guys for doing this.

Allen Hall: So the first cohort has just passed through the program, uh, I think it’d be helpful for everybody listening to understand what the program looks like.

It’s a six month program, how to get selected, what happens once you’re accepted, and what is, and what is that first cohort experienced in their run in that timeframe?

Tone Søndergaard: So we’re actually searching for our cohort two right now. So like shout out to everyone out there who maybe had a great idea. Sitting there being, uh, an innovator or, uh, being at this stage where we’re looking to engage.

We often sort of like take in companies who are sort of in that early revenue phase or maybe more established in another industry and then pivoting into offshore wind. Um, and the program essentially is so that you apply, you have to do that by like end of March essentially. Then sort of like this fairly vigorous down selection process starts, we have, uh, I think 20 plus technical evaluators who looks at the different technologies, figuring out is this, you know, something that is actually solving a problem that the developers have, uh, both specifically for Equinor, but we also have the National Offshore Wind Research and Development Council, helping us sort of have that national outlook on things, um, and then halfway through the selection process, we invite the 12 finalists, To come to New York, pitch at a public pitch event, but also interview with us and all of the partners behind the program to really sort of like scope out.

How is your fit within this program? Are we the right ones to help you? Because I think it’s important to say that we are a non dilutive accelerator. We don’t take equity. Um, so we have, you know, one pure goal and that’s finding the startups who we can help the most, um, throughout the six months. which you’re hinting to, right, if selected to be part of the sex, which is, happens in June, then this six months intensive process, uh, with my fantastic team, um, and all of the partner organizations who also all sort of like contribute to the programming, um, includes, uh, three trips to New York, coming here for a week at a time, workshop more than, you 25 different like expert sessions, but also a lot of what we call peer to peer work.

Um, we really utilize that the different founders or executives entering the program have different types of learnings that they can share with one another and grow their understanding in that sense. Um, but then they’re also paired with an Equinor mentor who can really sort of like dive into the technical challenges they might be facing.

Um, and then of course we try and really help them build their business by just overloading with, with their contacts within, within the offshore wind industry, right? Um, all with the aim to answer the last part of your question, what are the outcomes? I think. More or less all of our companies from cohort one now have revenue streams in New York, so they actually managed to sort of like do that.

We are seeing a hopefully great fundraising news coming out from some of them very soon. Um, many of them looking to establish shop in New York, like actual manufacturing facilities coming to New York because of this program. Um. Yeah, that, which is a fantastic outcome, um, and yeah, their first hires, you know, that’s also what we do a lot, helping them find hires.

Some of, we utilize NYU’s intern programs to get them great, sort of like talented, but we also help them hire more sort of like a C level or mid level people, which is what many of them maybe need in New York. So tons of different types of outcomes in that sense, but all really exciting. And we’re so proud of our first cohort.

Allen Hall: Applicants to your program are not limited to New York or New York City. It’s a global open calling for tech companies to apply, right? I think your first cohort had a number of non U. S. companies apply. You want to describe who you’re looking for?

Tone Søndergaard: We are looking for the most promising, both hardware and software, from all over the globe.

In our first cohort, we had half European companies, half American companies joining our cohort. Hopefully this year we’ll have even more great startups also from either the South American continent or from Asia, where we’re seeing great applicants coming in from. You know, they’re really starting to catch on to offshore wind as well.

So that’s super exciting. And what we’re really looking for is precisely like technologies that can help American developers lower the cost of developing these projects. So one of the key things we’re looking for. Is a technology’s innate, like, ability to facilitate that kind of like either cost reduction or efficiency gains or whatever your sort of like technology works on.

Allen Hall: That applies to hardware companies and software companies, right? It’s both.

Joel Saxum: Absolutely. If you’re in wind, you know that a lot of technology that’s used in the States comes from Europe, right? Comes from Northern Europe, comes from the Danes, comes from people over there. So that’s a, that is a non trivial thing to navigate because people don’t, a lot of people don’t realize it.

It doesn’t matter where you are in the globe, that’s a tough way to do business if you don’t understand it. So getting these people in one room together to share experiences, to share business knowledge, engineering knowledge, whatever that may be, that’s a huge advantage of this program.

Tone Søndergaard: And I think you’re precisely right.

What we see that especially the different founders or executives can learn from one another. It’s actually that like business culture part of it. I think so. Like technology wise, many of them again have figured that out. And that’s maybe more similar. But how you sell a product is really different between even the same people.

Like maybe European headquartered developers, how they operate in Europe and how they operate in the States is completely different. Um, and many of them are kind of like struggling with that being like, if I’m European, cold calling might not be such as a like way of going about things, right? And like, how, how much humor should I use in my first couple of meetings?

You know, it’s like,

Joel Saxum: Sure, for sure.

Tone Søndergaard: Stuff like this and like, scoping out like, what is the, what is the culture I’m going for here? Like, how insistent can I be? How, one of the questions we really encounter often is like, when do I start talking about the price of my product? Like, when is that appropriate, right?

And that differs, um, between the U. S. and Europe in many ways. So we really try and focus on, on them learning some of that from one another, because that’s often more effective than, you know, sort of like a set of experts coming in and telling you how to run your business that rarely works as well, you know?

Joel Saxum: Experiential on the same plane, right? To be honest with you, the way you sell things, even within the United States, is different. You sell something different to someone from the northern Midwest, then you do Texas, then you do California, then you do Massachusetts. So even just here, you got to understand those, those kind of, um, ends and outs, I

Allen Hall: would say.

This is a great program. And I know that’s a little bit of a short timeframe to get into cohort two. How do people connect with the hub? How do they apply to the hub? And what does that process, that application process look like?

Tone Søndergaard: Everyone interested in reading our full call for innovators should go to offshorewindnyc.com

That’s kind of easy. Um, there we have sort of like laid out the full, full material. That’s also where the app, online application portal is. And it’s, uh, I would say it takes, depending on how many application one has behind them, like it maybe takes three, four or five hours to fill out the application.

So it’s a little bit of a time commitment, but we really try to make it, you know, as intuitive and as straightforward as possible. Um, So that’s kind of like the really easy way of doing it. If you have questions and we really encourage all our potential applicants to reach out to us first, we happy to help sort of like maybe frame the, the application you have in mind a little bit.

Talk through some of the points where you’re a little bit in doubt about should I be specific here or be more broad? How do I make the strongest case for precisely my solution? Then you can reach out to me or my team. And we take 30 minute calls with everyone who’s interested in applying. And that can also be facilitated through the website.

Allen Hall: And there’s no application fee. It’s totally free. It’s all online and you can apply from anywhere.

Tone Søndergaard: You can apply from anywhere. No application fee. Even if you join the cohort, there is, again, there’s no fee of joining. Everything is free for the, for the cohort selected and, um, and we provide travel grants.

So if you, if you come from far away, we’ll help you sort of like make it possible coming to New York.

Allen Hall: Right. That’s an important note because if you do come from Europe or South America or even Japan, even South Korea, big wind in places. Or Austin, Texas. Austin, Texas, which is a long ways away, right? It’s not free to travel and travel is expensive today.

So it really. It’s a smart move because you want to get the innovation out into service as quickly as you can. You need to accelerate it and you are. And that’s why this program is so innovative. I like that Equinor stepped into the space. I like, Tona, what you’re doing and the efforts you’re making. I, The first cohort is really interesting if you can go online, I encourage everybody to go online and look at the list of the first cohort and where they’re going, that’s a fascinating list.

Tona, I really appreciate you being on the program, we’re going to blast this out to everybody, so if you’re interested and you have a tech company and you’re trying to grow an offshore wind, you need to get a hold of Tona. And you need to get a hold of her fast and you need to be applying for this program, so Tona, thank you so much for being on the podcast, we love having you.

Tone Søndergaard: Thank you so much, it was a pleasure being with you today.

Offshore Wind Innovation Hub: A Launchpad for Cutting-Edge Technologies

Renewable Energy

Benefits of Solar Power Solution in Manufacturing Facilities

Published

19 hours ago

December 12, 2025

Alice Rush

In today’s dynamic manufacturing world, energy is more than just a utility; it’s the spark that keeps production running. Industrial facilities, powered by massive engines and heavy machinery, often operate 24/7, driving output but also consuming enormous amounts of electricity.

The issues? Soaring energy costs and a growing environmental footprint.

Sometimes it’s like a cycle that often feels impossible to break, but what if your facility could draw energy from a cleaner, more reliable, and cost-effective energy source?

Yes, you heard it right, and that’s where solar power comes in!

As electricity prices continue to rise and corporate sustainability goals become more pressing, manufacturers are rethinking how they power their commercial operations.

Therefore, solar energy is emerging as a game-changing solution, offering reliability, long-term savings, and a sustainable path forward for the Australian manufacturing industry.

In this blog, we’ll explore how manufacturers are successfully implementing solar power, featuring real-world case studies from Cyanergy that highlight both the business advantages and environmental impact.

So, let’s explore how solar energy can help your manufacturing facility reduce costs and enhance efficiency, achieving long-term sustainability.

In this blog post:

Why Solar Energy Is Essential for Modern Manufacturing Facilities?

In Australia, manufacturing facilities typically have large roof or yard footprints, significant and relatively
stable electrical loads, including lighting, motors, HVAC, and other machinery. So, the energy used every day is
enormous.

By harnessing the sun’s energy, factories can significantly cut operating
costs, reduce carbon emissions, and gain greater control over long-term energy stability.

Beyond the environmental benefits, solar power also strengthens a company’s competitive edge and brand reputation in
an increasingly eco-conscious market.

Here we’ve penned down the importance of solar power in the manufacturing industry:

Energy cost mitigation

So, how solar energy reduces manufacturing costs in Australia?

With electricity prices rising and energy market volatility increasing, incorporating solar energy offers a
way to
reduce grid dependency and lower utility costs in the long term.

Ensure Operational Continuity & Resilience

Solar panel systems, when paired
with
battery storage, can help smooth peak energy demand, reduce grid dependence, and improve functioning
time.

Promote Sustainability and Brand Value

In larger industries, many manufacturers are under pressure from customers, regulators, investors, and
internal
stakeholders to reduce
their carbon footprint.

Solar helps them to achieve energy freedom, powering businesses with a sustainable energy source.

Increase Asset value & ROI

Solar systems, when sized appropriately and properly optimised, can deliver payback in a few years and
continue to
provide savings thereafter.

According to Cyanergy’s capability statement, we delivered a 490
kW system that generated 752 MWh for a manufacturing client, with a 37-month payback period.

This shows that industrial-scale solar can deliver real, practical results for manufacturers.

Now, let’s examine solar power solutions for manufacturing facilities, case studies, and best practices to ensure a
clear understanding.

Case Studies from Cyanergy: Real-World Manufacturing Success in Australia!

In this part of the blog, we have selected three examples from Cyanergy to illustrate how manufacturing facilities are utilising solar energy.

These are not generic installations; these are production-oriented businesses taking real steps across different states of Australia.

1. Uniplas Mouldings International – Wetherill Park, NSW

Project Overview

System size: 490 kW solar system installed in staged phases
Investment: AUD $591,823.71.
Annual generation: 752 MWh
Yearly energy costs before solar: approximately $647,000.
After solar: $456K, which is approximately 55% of the previous
Payback period: 37 months

Why it matters

For Uniplas, a large industrial manufacturer, the solar system not only significantly reduces their operating energy
costs, but the payback of just over 3 years means that the return on investment is also attractive for the
business.

The staged approach also allowed them to access multiple subsidies and implement the project rapidly; for example,
the first stage of 200 kW was completed in four weeks.

This clearly shows how manufacturing operations can incorporate
solar without any significant disruption.

2. AC Laser – Thomastown, VIC

Project Overview

System size: 99.45 kW
Annual generation: 141.75 MWh
Annual electricity cost before solar: $79,000.
After solar: $38,160, a reduction of more than 50%
Payback period: 26 months

Why it matters

This is a smaller-scale manufacturing facility compared to Uniplas, yet the results are impressive: a more than 50%
cost reduction and a shorter payback period.

This shows that not only large-scale commercial properties but also mid-sized manufacturing operations can benefit
from solar, not just large ones.

Insights Gained from the Case

Don’t wait until your business is huge, as size is scalable.
The solar system’s size aligned well with the manufacturing load, saving thousands of dollars.
Rapid ROI shows manufacturing facilities can justify solar as a capital investment for their business.

3. Specialised (Cycling-Industry manufacturer) – Port Melbourne, VIC

Project Overview

System size: 39.6 kW
Annual generation: 47.32 MWh
Electricity cost before solar: $26,720; after solar: $17,770
Payback period: 45 months

Why it matters

Although smaller, this project depicts that solar energy is a viable option for manufacturing across various sizes
and sectors, even in facilities with a relatively small carbon footprint.

The case emphasises sustainability as a business value and how solar can support brand positioning as well as cost
savings.

Major Takeaways

Solar supports both cost and branding sustainability
goals.
Even medium-sized systems can provide meaningful savings.
The ROI
generated must be viewed in terms of both financial and reputational benefits for any
business, whether it’s large or small.

Is Now the Right Time for Manufacturers to Transition to Solar Energy?

After knowing the numerous benefits of solar solutions, you may be tempted to go solar. However, transitioning from
traditional energy sources to solar energy comes with a cost.

From government
incentives to long-term cost savings, the financial case for solar energy is compelling.

Still wondering, is it time for businesses to go solar? Here’s why you should act now:

Electricity prices continue to rise in many markets, strengthening the return on investment for solar
energy.
Many governments and utilities offer incentives, favourable tariffs, or rebates
for industrial solar projects.
Day by day, the pressure for sustainability reporting and corporate social responsibility (CSR) is
intensifying. Manufacturing facilities with high energy loads are often subject to inspection.
Technology costs have fallen recently, making solar panels and inverters
more affordable than ever and reducing payback time.
With the right sizing and execution, the solar system becomes a long-term asset that pays for itself,
releasing capital for other manufacturing investments.

Best Practices for Manufacturing Facilities Considering Solar

Solar can be a powerful game-changer for manufacturing companies and large commercial buildings when implemented correctly.

But that doesn’t mean it’s as easy as flipping the switch.

Therefore, before investing in Solar power, ensure you understand every step that leads to real savings and sustainable success for your business.

1. Conduct a detailed energy assessment & align solar to load

Before installation, it is essential to understand your manufacturing facility’s energy usage patterns, including the peak usage limit, daily load curves, and seasonal variations.

The better the match between system size, orientation, and actual usage, the higher the yield and the quicker the payback.

At Cyanergy, we provide a customised design based on site analysis.

2. Use staging or modular deployment

If you have a large manufacturing site, you may benefit from staging the solar solution in phases.

For example, in Uniplas’s case, the installation was divided into three stages. This enables access to multiple subsidies, enhances cash flow, and mitigates the risk of disruption.

3. Optimise your system size & measure consumption rate

Over-sizing or under-sizing can both cause significant loss in a business. Therefore, the design should minimise waste and maximise the use of solar energy on-site.

As in AC Laser’s mid-sized facility, a 99 kW system fits their load and delivers huge savings.

4. Check your rooftop or plant infrastructure

Is your rooftop compatible with solar panel installation?

For manufacturing facilities, factors such as roof strength, shading, orientation, structural constraints, and maintenance access are crucial.

Ensure the facility can support panels, inverters, wiring, and monitoring systems without compromising building aesthetics.

5. Perform regular monitoring & performance tracking

Everything requires a certain amount of care and maintenance to function properly over time. The story is the same for a solar panel system.

Real-time monitoring allows you to spot performance issues, shading effects, degradation, and inverter downtime.

Cyanergy emphasises continuous monitoring post-installation.

6. Research on financial modelling & payback analysis

When going for solar, always calculate realistic payback periods, ensure system cost fits within capital budgets,

You should also check the available incentives, tax benefits, payback time, and how to stack several rebates for maximum savings.

For example, many Cyanergy projects offer a 2–4 year payback, with several solar rebates that can be combined with the VEU Rebate.

7. Align with sustainability and your brand strategy

In manufacturing factories, incorporating solar energy can be a substantial component of a broader sustainability strategy. Why?

Solar reduces your dependency on harmful fossil fuels, cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

It positions your brand and promotes your business, demonstrating corporate responsibility and improving stakeholder perception.

8. Maintenance & lifecycle planning

Solar systems require periodic maintenance, inverter replacements, cleaning, and monitoring.

So, manufacturing facilities should incorporate service arrangements into their design. Plan for system longevity, degradation, and eventual replacement or upgrade to ensure optimal performance.

9. Consider adding Battery storage

Even though optional, integrating battery storage or demand management can enhance value by enabling peak shaving, reducing demand charges, and storing excess energy for nighttime use or during grid outages.

10. Engage stakeholders and minimise disruption

In manufacturing, you can’t easily stop production. Plan your solar installation during low-production periods, coordinate with your team, and prioritise safety to minimise downtime.

Final Notes: Ready To Take The Next Step?

For manufacturing facilities, solar power isn’t just about being eco-friendly; it’s a smart business move for Australians. Cyanergy’s case studies showed that even large manufacturers can achieve paybacks of 2–4 years, reduce costs, lower emissions, and enhance brand value.

With proper planning, energy assessment, correct system sizing, phased installation, and active monitoring, solar can deliver lasting benefits.

So, if rising energy bills or sustainability goals are on your radar, it’s time to view solar energy as an innovative manufacturing solution, apart from just a renewable energy source.

Reach out to Cyanergy, conduct an energy audit, and engage a solar specialist with manufacturing experience today. Cyanergy is here to help!

Your Solution Is Just a Click Away

The post Benefits of Solar Power Solution in Manufacturing Facilities appeared first on Cyanergy.

Benefits of Solar Power Solution in Manufacturing Facilities

Renewable Energy

Morten Handberg Decodes Blade Damage Categories

Published

2 days ago

December 11, 2025

Alice Rush

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Morten Handberg Decodes Blade Damage Categories

Morten Handberg, Principal Consultant at Wind Power LAB, returns to discuss blade damage categorization. From transverse cracks and leading edge erosion to carbon spar cap repairs, he explains what severity levels really mean for operators and why the industry still lacks a universal standard.

Welcome to Uptime Spotlight, shining Light on Wind. Energy’s brightest innovators. This is the Progress Powering tomorrow.

Morten, welcome back to the program. Thanks, Allen. It’s fantastic to be back again. Boy, we have a lot to discuss and today we’re gonna focus on categorization of damage, which is a super hot topic across the industry. What does a cat five mean? What does a category three mean? What does a category 5.9 I’ve I’ve seen that more recently.

Why do these defect categories matter?

Morten Handberg: Well, it matters a lot because it really tells you as, uh, either an OEM or as an operator, how should you respond to your current blade issue. So you need to have some kind of categorization about what the defect type is and what the severity is. The severity will tell you something about the repairability and [00:01:00] also something about the part of the blade that is affected.

The type of the defect tells you something about what is the origin From an operational point of view, it doesn’t make as much sense in a way because you really just wanna know, can this be repaired or not? You know? And you know, what does it need to repair? That’s what you need, what you really need to focus on as an operator, whether it’s then del elimination, erosion, peeling.

Uh, transverse cracks, it’ll all come down to repairs. It does matter for you because it will tell you an underlying, you know, are there reason why I’m keep seeing all these damages? So that’s why you need to know the category as well. But purely operational. You just need to know what is the severity side know, what does it take to repair it?

Allen Hall: So as the operator, a lot of times they’re getting information from different service providers or even the OEM. They’re getting multiple inputs on what a damage is in terms of a category. Are we getting a lot of conflicting information about this? Because the complaint from [00:02:00] I hear from operators is the OE EMM says this is a category four.

The ISP says is a category five. Who am I to believe right

Morten Handberg: now? Well, there is a lot of, a bit different opinions of that. It almost becomes a religious issue question at some point, but it, it really dives down to that, you know, there is no real standardization in the wind industry. And we’ve been discussing this, uh, I wanna say decades, probably not that much, but at least for the past 11 years I’ve been, been hearing this discussion come up.

Uh, so it’s, it’s something this was just been struggling with, but it also comes down to that. Each OEM have their own origin. Uh, so that also means that they have trended something from aeronautics, from ship building industry, from, you know, uh, from, from some other composite related industry, or maybe not even composite related.

And that means that they are building their own, uh, their own truth about what the different defects are. There is a lot of correlation between them, but there is still a lot of, lot of tweaks [00:03:00] and definitions in between and different nomenclature. That does add a a lot of confusion.

Allen Hall: Okay,

Morten Handberg: so

Allen Hall: that explains, I mean, because there isn’t an industry standard at the moment.

There is talk of an industry standard, but it does seem like from watching from the outside, that Europe generally has one, or operators specifically have one. Uh, EPRI’s been working on one for a little while. Maybe the IEC is working on one, but there isn’t like a universal standard today.

Morten Handberg: There is not a universal standard.

I mean, a lot of, a lot of OEMs or service providers will, will, will claim that they have the standard, they have the definition in wind power lab. We have our own. That we have derived from the industry and in, in general. But there is not an, uh, an industry agreed standard that everyone adheres to. That much is true.

You could say in Europe, a lot of owners have come together, uh, in the Blade Forum, and they have derived, there’s a standard within that. Um, uh, and with a lot of success, they’d written, the [00:04:00] Blade Hamburg I think was very helpful because it was operator driven, um, approach.

Allen Hall: So there is a difference then between defects that are significant and maybe even classified as critical and other defects that may be in the same location on the blade.

How are those determined?

Morten Handberg: The way that I’ve always approached is that I will look at firstly what kind of blades type it is. So how is it structured? Where are the load carrying elements of the blade? That’s very important because you can’t really say on a business V 90 and a Siemens, uh, 3.6 that the defect in the same position will mean the same thing.

That’s just not true because they are structured in very different ways. So you really need to look at the plate type just to start with. Then you need to look at, is it in a. In a loaded part of the blade, meaning is it over the, the load carrying part, um, uh, laminates? Is it in a, in a shell area? And you know, what is the approximate distance from the roof?

Is that, that also tells you something [00:05:00] about the general loads in the area. So you know, you need to take that into consideration. Then you also need to look at how much of the blade is actually affected. Is it just surface layers? Is it just coating or is it something that goes, uh, through the entire laminate stack?

And if that is on the, on the beam laminate, you’re in serious trouble. Then it will be a category five. If the beam laminate is vectored. And if you’re lucky enough that your blade is still sitting on the turbine, you should stop it, uh, to avoid a complete BA bait collapse. Uh, so, so you need, so, so that, you know, you can, that, that is very important when you’re doing defect categorizations.

So that means that you need

Allen Hall: internal inspections on top of external

Morten Handberg: inspections. If you see something, uh, that is potentially critical, then yeah, you should do an internal inspection as well to verify whether it’s going through, um, the entire lemonade stack or not. That that’s a, that’s a good, good, good approach.

Um, I would say often, you know, if you see something that is potentially critical, uh, but there is still a possibility that could be repaired. Then I might even also just send up a repair [00:06:00] team, uh, to see, you know, look from the outside how much of the area is actually affected, because that can also pretty quickly give you an indication, do we need to take this blade down or not?

Sometimes you’ll just see it flat out that, okay, this crack is X meters long, it’s over sensitive area of the blade. You know, we need to remove this blade. Uh, maybe when, once it’s down we can determine whether it’s repairable or not, but. We, but it’s not something that’s going to be fixed up tower, so there’s not a lot of need for doing a lot of added, um, add added inspections to verify this, this point.

Allen Hall: Let’s talk about cracks for a moment, because I’ve seen a lot of cracks over the last year on blades and some of them to me look scary because they, they are going transverse and then they take a 90 degree and start moving a different direction. Is there a, a rule of thumb about cracks that are visual on the outside of the blade?

Like if it’s how, if they’re [00:07:00] closer to the root they’re more critical than they’re, if they’re happening further outers or is there not a rule of thumb? You have to understand what the design of the blade is.

Morten Handberg: Well, I mean the general rule of thumb is transfers cracks is a major issue that’s really bad.

That’s, uh, you know, it’s a clear sign, something. Severely structural is going on because the transverse crack does not develop or develop on its own. And more likely not once it starts, you know, then the, uh, the, the strain boundaries on the sides of the cr of the crack means that it requires very little for it to progress.

So even if in a relatively low loaded area with low strain, once you have a, a transverse crack, uh, present there, then it will continue. Uh, and you mentioned that it’s good during a 90 degree. That’s just because it’s doing, it’s, it’s taking the least path of the path of least resistance, because it’ll have got caught through the entire shell.

Then when it reaches the beam, the beam is healthy. It’s very stiff, very rigid laminate. So it’s easier for it to go longitudinal towards the [00:08:00] root because that’s, that, that, that’s how it can progress. That’s where it has the, uh, you know, the, the, the strain, uh, um, the, the strain high, high enough strain that it can actually, uh, develop.

That that’s what it would do. So transverse cracks in general is really bad. Of course, closer to root means it’s more critical. Um, if there is a crack transverse crack, uh, very far out in the tip, I would usually say, you know, in the tip area, five, 10 meter from the tip, I would say, okay, there’s something else going on.

Something non load related. Probably causes, could be a lightning strike, could be an impact damage. That changed the calculation a little bit because then, you know, it’s not a load driven issue. So that might give you some time to, you know, that you can operate with something at least. But again, I, I don’t want to make any general rules that people then didn’t go out and say, well, I did that, so, and, but my blade still broke.

That’s not really how it works. You need to really, you need to, to, uh, look at cracks like that individually. You can’t make a a common rule.

Allen Hall: Another [00:09:00] area, which is under discussion across the industry are surface defects and there are a variety of surface defects. We’re seeing a lot of hail damage this year.

Uh, that’s getting categorized as lightning damage. And so there’s obviously a different kind of repair going on. Hail versus lightning. Are there some standards regarding surface defects? Uh, the visuals on them? Is there a guideline about

Morten Handberg: it? Well, I mean, uh, some of the, uh, some of the, how do you say, omic couture, some of the, uh, some of the standards, they do provide some guideline to determine which surface kind of surface defect it is, you could say, on the operational points, as long as it’s surface related.

Then the repair methodology is the same, whether it’s peeling, erosion, voids, chipping scratches, the repair is the same. So that in principle does not change anything. But in the reason why it matters is because we need to understand the [00:10:00] underlying issue. So if you have lot of peeling, for instance, it means you have a very low quoting quality, and that is something that is either post post repair related or it’s manufacturing related, depending on the blade, on the age of your blade.

So that’s very important for you to know because if you have peeling somewhere, then more likely than not, you’ll also have have issues with it elsewhere because, you know, tend to, they tend to follow each other, you know, coding quality issues. So that’s a good thing to know for you as an operator that you, this is just one of many, erosion is important, but often gets miscategorized because erosion is a leading edge issue.

Um, so we only see it on the, on the very edge of the leading edge. So approximately 40 millimeter band. That’s typically what we see, and it’s straight on the leading edge. So if someone’s claiming that they see lead, leading edge erosion on the, on the pressure side, shell or ide, shell, it’s miscategorizing because that’s what you, that’s not why they have to have the ring.

Uh, impacts ring can still, still [00:11:00] hit the shells, but when it hits the, the, the shell areas, it will ricochet because it hits it at an angle. Leading edge gets straight on. So it gets the entire impact force and that’s why you get the erosion issue because of, of fatigue essentially. Uh, coding fatigue. So that’s very important.

There is something that you know you can really utilize if you just know that simple fact that it’s always a leading edge, it’s always uniform. It, you can track that. And if you have leading edge erosion in one area, you will have it in the entire wind farm. So you don’t need to do that much inspection to determine your erosion levels, voids, pinholes.

They are manufacturing driven because they are driven by either imperfections in the coating, meaning you have a sand, grain dust, or you had, uh, air inclusions underneath your coating. And they will weaken the structure. And that means that, um, rain effect or other effects causing strain on your coating will accelerate a lot faster.

So they will develop and create these small, um, yeah, uh, how do you [00:12:00] say, small defined holes in your coating. So that’s why it’s important to know. But if you’re running a wind farm 15 years, 10 years down the line. Then it’s more important for you to know that it’s a surface defect and you need to fix it by doing coating repair.

You don’t need to think so much about the, the underlying issue, I would say.

Allen Hall: Okay. I think that’s been miscategorized a number of times. I’ve seen what I would consider to be some sort of paint adhesion issue because it’s sort of mid cord and not near the leading edge, but sometimes it just looks like there’s massive peeling going on and maybe, uh, it’s easy to assume that maybe is erosion.

It’s just a weak adhesion of paint. That that’s what you’re saying?

Morten Handberg: Yeah. If it’s, if it’s midspan, if it’s shell related, then it’s, it’s a, it’s a coating quality related issue. It doesn’t really have anything to do with erosion. Um, you could say erosion. We can, we can, we can, uh, we can look at in, in, in two areas.

So you have the out or third of the leading edge. [00:13:00] That’s where you would have the theoretical leading edge erosion breakdown, because that’s where you have rain impact high enough that it will cause some kind of degradation, but that all of your leading edge will suffer in the same way because the tip speed of the outer four meters of your blade.

Versus the re the other, you know, uh, 10, 12 meters depending on length of your blade. Sometimes it’s a lot longer, but they are getting degraded in a much different way. So the out of pew meters, they can get what’s called structural erosion. So that means that the erosion goes fast enough and it’s progressive enough that you can start to damage the laminate underneath.

You won’t see that further in because the, the impact is just not that great and you will likely not see structural erosion over the lifetime, but the out a few meters, that’s important. And that’s where you need, need to focus your, that that’s where you need to pay attention on what kind of materials you add because that can save you a lot of repair, re, re repair.

And, uh, down the line, how do you categorize

Allen Hall: leading edge erosion? A lot of [00:14:00] times I see it, uh, from operators. Let’s say it’s, uh, category four because it’s into the fiber. But is it always a structural issue? Is there a lot of loading on the leading edges of these blades where you would have to come back with structural applies to repair it?

Or is it just a aerodynamic shape and does it really depend upon who the OE Em is?

Morten Handberg: Well, I mean, I’ve seen erosion category five as well, and I think it’s a mis misinterpretation. I think it’s, you know, people are trying it to raise awareness that, hey, there was a serious issue with erosion, but it’s a wrong way to use the severities.

Because if we look at severity five, severity five, if you have a critical issue, your blade is about to come down if you don’t do anything. So category five means you need to stop your turbine. Maybe you can repair it, but that really depends on the, uh, on what is damaged by, on, on, on the blade. And you can determine that once you removed it and looked at it on, on, on the ground.

But you need to stop. Category four is a severe structural damage. It’s not something that [00:15:00] is causing an immediate threat, but it’s something that will progress rapidly if you don’t do anything. So here you need to look at the damage itself. So how does it affect the structure and can you operate it curtailed, uh, or can you operate it, uh, or can you operate normally and repair it within a short time window?

That’s what you can use because it’s something that is. Uh, that can, that can develop into an, into an imminent issue if you don’t react to it. Severity three is more for your, is more your annual maintenance schedule. So that is your, your minor structural damages and it’s your erosion issues. So that’s something that there is a severity Three, you need to look at it for next year’s budget.

Severity two means that. Something that’s gradually degradating your coating on the blade, but it’s not something that means anything at this point in time. So one is your coating, is your surface damage or minor surface damage. Pinholes uh, contamination. It’s really light issue, so it’s not something you really need to consider.

So. [00:16:00] Severity ones, you, you really mean that, that it’s, you don’t need to think about this anymore. You know, it’s, it’s not an issue. So erosion will fall typically within severity two to severity four. Severity four being you have a hole in your blade from erosion, basically. Uh, because you can still have structural degradation of deleting it and still being a severity three, because it does not really change your maintenance cycle in any, in any way.

You don’t need to do anything immediate to fix it. Um, so that’s why I would put most of erosion defects in severity three and just say, okay, it’s something we need to plan a leading edge, a leading edge ERO repair campaign next year or the year after, depending on the severity of it. That’s why, how I, I would approach,

Allen Hall: that’s good insight, because I do think a lot of operators, when they do see a hole in the leading edge, think I have to stop this turbine.

But at the same token, I have seen other operators with holes. I could put my fist through. That are continuing to use those blades and they will say, it’s not structural, it’s not [00:17:00] great aerodynamically, but the, we’re still making power here. We’re still making rated power. Even with the hole and the leading edge, it’s not going to progress anymore.

It’s a, it’s a, it’s a progression that we understand. That’s how they describe it. It will get worse, but it’s not gonna get catastrophic worse.

Morten Handberg: I mean, if you run it long enough, at some point, something secondary will happen. Sure. But again, that’s also why we use the severity four category for erosion, where you have severe structural degradation because it does starting to mean something for the integrity of the blade.

It will not mean that it’s coming down right away when you see a hole in the blade from erosion. That’s, that’s the entire purpose of it. But it does it, you use it to raise awareness that there is something you need to look at imminently or at least react to, uh, and make a plan for. You can’t just pull, you can’t just delay it until next year’s, uh, maintenance campaign.

We have an active issue here, so that’s why I think severity four applies to erosion. That has penetrated all structural layers.

Allen Hall: Are there some [00:18:00] blade damages that are just can’t be repaired or, or just have too much difficulty to repair them, that it’s not worth it? And how do you know? How do you understand?

That blade is not repairable versus the one next to it which looks similar, which can be repaired. What goes into that assessment?

Morten Handberg: So one is, is the, is the beam laminate damaged? If it is, then uh, either it comes down to a commercial decision. It’s simply not fixable and, and restoring it in, you know, restoring it back, uh, to original form ship.

And there’s also the, the, uh, the, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, uh, returning element of carbon fiber, because carbon fiber adds another level of complexity repairs, because you’re so dependent on the pristine quality of the carbon for it to, to, for, to utilize the, the, uh, mechanical strength of carbon. And if you, if you don’t apply it in the right way, then you can create some high stress zones.

Where, you know, the [00:19:00] cure is as bad as the disease really. So that’s why you have to be extra careful with carbon repairs. But they can be done. But it, you know, it really comes down to a commercial decision then. So in principle, unless the blade is deformed, uh, or, or, or damaged in such a way that you have to remove a large part of the s shell lemonade in a loaded area, then most things they can, in principle, be repaired.

It’s just a matter of is the, is the cost of the repair. Cheaper than the cost of a new blade. And that calculation might, you know, depend on are there any, any spare blades available? Is this blade, uh, still in production? And if I don’t repair this, then I don’t have any blade for my turbine and then I can’t operate anymore.

That also changed the calculus right along quite a lot, so I think. For a lot of damages. It, it’s more of a, it’s often more of a commercial decision rather than a technical, because ca glass fiber is very forgiving. You can repair a lot, even if it’s really severe. I mean, I’ve seen blade repairs that took [00:20:00] 3000 hours, but it was deemed worthwhile because you couldn’t get a, a bare blade.

And in most other cases, that would’ve been been scrapped, you know, without, you know, without blinking. Um, so, so, you know, if you really want to, you could repair it. In a lot of cases,

Allen Hall: how difficult is it to repair carbon protrusions, because it does seem like when they manufacture those protrusions, there’s a lot of quality control going into it.

The fibers have to be in the right direction all the time, and they’re really compacted in there. They’re tight, tight block of carbon that you’re purchasing and sliding into into this blade. Are they really repairable in sections or is it you have to take out the whole length of a pultrusion and replace it?

I’m, I’m trying to understand the difficulty here because there’s a lot of operators in the United States now that have some portion of their fleet is carbon spar cap, not a lot of it, but some of it. How [00:21:00] difficult is that to repair?

Morten Handberg: Well, it’s difficult enough that a lot of OEMs, they will say if you have a damage to the carbon, it’s a non-repairable defect.

That is to a large extent the general rule. Um, there are, there are, uh, there are ways and some of it is replacement of the protrusion. Um, other, another method is, is to do a vacuum infusion lamination. I’ve also seen some repairs with success where, uh, glass fiber is utilized instead of carbon fiber. So you reply, so you, you, um, you calculate the mechanical strength of the carbon.

And then replace that with an equal amount, you know, strength wise of glass fiber. The problem is you are to a degree playing with little bit with fire because you are then changing the structure of the blade. You are increasing the thickness and thereby you are changing the stiffness. So it’s, you have to be really [00:22:00] careful, uh, it’s possible.

And uh, again. All if all other options are out and you want this blade really to get up and running again because it’s your only option. Maybe it’s worthwhile to, to investigate, but it requires a lot of insight in and also a little bit of, uh, how do you say, uh, you don’t, you shouldn’t be too risk adverse if you go down that that route, but, but again, it is possible.

It is technically possible. But it’s something you do for the outer, uh, outer areas of the blade where you have less loads and you’re less sensitive.

Allen Hall: Can those carbon repairs be done up tower or are they always done with the rotor set or the blade drop down to ground?

Morten Handberg: I know some carbon repairs have been done up tower, but in general it’s down tower also, just because if you have damage to your carbon, it means you have a severe structural issue.

So you wouldn’t generally try to do it that well, I would, not in general, but, but the, the, the cases I’ve seen that, that has been downturn repairs. Yeah.

Allen Hall: Do you think about the categories differently? If it includes carbon [00:23:00] as a structural element?

Morten Handberg: No, because carbon is part of the load carrying laminate. If you’re to the load carrying laminate, then it becomes a four or five immediately.

Um, so, uh, so I would say the same rule applies because ag again, it’s a very rough scale, but it applied, but it gives you a sense of where, you know, what is the urgency, which is what I think we in generally need. And I like the more simple model because it’s more applicable to the general industry and it’s easier for, uh, you know, it’s easier to, to implement.

Um. And it is easier to understand than if you have a too too gradual, uh, scale because it’s difficult for the people who are sitting and assessing to determine if, uh, you know, what, what category it is. And it’s difficult for the people who have to read the report afterwards. And it’s also about, you know, what is the purpose?

And in general, I would say, well, this, the defect categorization, the severe categorization is to determine can this be repaired or not? That’s what we use it [00:24:00] for. So that, that, that’s how we, it should be applied.

Allen Hall: Is the industry going to have a universal standard? Soon. Is that possible? Or is this really gonna be country by country, region by region?

How we think about blade defects and blade repairs?

Morten Handberg: I think that. Given the, uh, the, how do you say, the individual interests in having their own model from the different OEMs or service providers? I think the, when they’re choosing a pope, they have an easy task ahead of them, you know, deciding that. Then we have the agreeing on an on inte standard and on plate.

Allen Hall: Pope is currently an American, so that tells you something. The world has shifted. There is still hope. Maybe there is still hope because it, it is a very difficult problem and I hear a lot of conflicting opinions about it and they’re not wrong. The opinions I hear when they’re explained to me, they have a rationale as to why.

They’re calling something a cat four versus a cat three. [00:25:00] It all makes sense, but when you get two engineers in the room, they’re rarely are going to agree. So I’m just thinking maybe, maybe there isn’t a, a yeah, maybe there isn’t a time where we’re all gonna come together.

Morten Handberg: I think that, you know, it’s, it’s also about what are you willing to accept and what are you willing to s.

You know, as an OEM, as a blade engineer, as a service provider, in order to make common agreement. Because I think if we were willing to, you know, set aside differences, um, and then agree on, okay, what is the, what, what is that, what is the, the ma the industry needs and what, what fulfills the purpose? We could agree tomorrow, but that’s not where we are, uh, at the moment.

So, so I don’t see that happening anytime soon. But yes, there, there was a way to do an in to make an international standard. Um, for blades and I, I would say maybe it’s, if the IC made, made, made one, then maybe that that could, uh, that could fix it. Uh, maybe if, uh, they’re starting to become more [00:26:00]focused from governments, uh, and you know, that it wind industry becomes recognized as critical infrastructure.

That then there is a requirement for international standards on what are defects, to make it easier to determine what is critical or not, so that proper reaction can be made. That will also help it. But again, as long as it’s only about late experts having to agree with each other and that’s the only then, then we’re, then we will not get to a point where we’re going to agree on, on everything.

No.

Allen Hall: Wow. This is a continual discussion about blade defects and categorization and Morton. I really appreciate. You’re giving us your thoughts about it because I trust you one and two, you’re on the leading edge of what the industry is thinking. So it’s very good to get you in here and explain where categorization is and, and two operators that are listening to this podcast understand you’re probably getting a lot of different opinions about categorization.

You need to sit down and figure it out for yourself, or reach out to Morton who can explain what you should be thinking and how you should be [00:27:00]thinking about this problem. Morton, how do people get ahold of you to learn more?

Morten Handberg: Easiest way is to reach out to me on LinkedIn. Um, I have a very active profile there.

You can always write me and I’ll always write, write, write it back. You can also write to me on my company email, m me h@windpowerapp.com. Um, those are the two easiest way to get, uh, get in, in, uh, get in touch me. And I would say, as an owner, what you need to know. Is it a structural issue or is a surface issue you have?

And then plan your repairs from there. That is, that is the. Basic, yeah, that, that you need to have, and then forget about the others, the other side of it, you know, if it’s one defect type or another, that’s not necessarily what’s going to help you. It’s all about getting the blades repaired. And, uh, and the turbine up and running again.

That should be the focus.

Allen Hall: Absolutely. Morton, we love having you on the podcast. Thank you so much for joining us. It’s good to be here. See [00:28:00] you.

Morten Handberg Decodes Blade Damage Categories

Renewable Energy

How Sparacino Farms Saved Thousands with Cyanergy Solar?

Published

4 days ago

December 9, 2025

Alice Rush

At the heart of regional NSW, Sparacino Farm is more than just a place that grows avocado and citrus. It’s a family-run operation that was established in 1973 and is currently run by two brothers, Joe and Alf Sparacino.

The family has extensive knowledge about farming and practices ways that make farming more sustainable and productive with their hard work, resilience, and smart decisions.

So, when it came time to tackle rising energy costs, the Sparacinos wanted a solution that would reduce expenses without compromising their values.

With Cyanergy’s smart solution, Sparacino Farm took a strategic step toward energy independence. They planned to install solar panels, thus reducing their dependency on the grid.

For them, this wasn’t just about going solar. It was about making the farm more efficient, more sustainable, and more secure for the future.

With a 99.8 kW solar panel system tailored to their operations, the Sparacino family has cut costs, reduced emissions, and reinvested where it matters most, back into the land that sustains them.

So, if you are thinking of going solar for your business? You’re in the right place.

This blog dives into every detail about how Sparacino Farms Saved Thousands with Cyanergy Solar, how they made it happen, and how you can too.

In this blog post:

The Energy Challenge: Rising Electricity Costs on the Farm

Energy expenses are becoming one of the most significant costs for businesses, commercial properties, and farming,
and in Australia, most of the residents strongly agree on that.

Agriculture is an energy-intensive industry. Over the years, as machinery has become more advanced and irrigation
systems run longer hours, the electricity
bill has soared.

For the Sparacino family, the electricity cost had become a significant issue, too.

Like many others, they found themselves facing unsustainable energy costs that were cutting into profits and limiting
growth opportunities.

So, faced with rising power bills, the Sparacinos began looking for a long-term, cost-effective energy solution.

Why Solar? | Sparacino’s Motivation for Change!

For the Sparacinos, the decision to go solar wasn’t just about saving money; it was about securing the future of the
farm. Also, solar energy made perfect sense, especially in Australia, where abundant sunshine makes it a
reliable and renewable option.

Not only this! Investing in solar energy offered several key benefits to them, which include:

Predictable energy costs.
Increased energy independence.
A reduced environmental carbon
footprint and lower emissions.

For instance, before going solar, the farm’s annual electricity bill hovered around AUD $48,000, which is a high cost
for a mid‑sized agricultural business.

However, after installing solar panels, the bill dropped to $12,000, bringing substantial savings for the Sparacinos.

About Sparacino Farms| Design & Implementation of a Dual System

When the owners of Sparacino farm contacted Cyanergy, our expert team conducted a thorough assessment of the farm’s
energy needs and financial goals.

We proposed a hybrid layout that consists of one large system dedicated to the commercial farm operations, and a
second system for the residence, expanded with battery storage.

Systems Specifications

So, now let’s have a look at the equipment list and the project snapshot of Sparacino Farm for a detailed concept:

For System 1: Commercial System

172 Longi 580W panels
2 Sungrow 3-Phase Inverters (one 30KW
& one 50KW)

For System 2: Residential System Paired with Battery

63 JA Solar 440W panel
2 Sungrow 3 Phase 10KW inverter
1 Sungrow 19.2KWh Battery

The Power of Smart Farming: Annual Savings Breakdown!

Farming smarter, not harder, and that’s exactly what the Sparacino farm owners did, and their bottom line proves it all.

After installing solar energy, their savings began to add up quickly. Moreover, besides reducing operational costs, they increased long-term sustainability, making their investment worthwhile.

Here’s a closer look at their annual savings, which gives a clear reflection of how impactful the switch to solar has been for the farm.

Financial Impact:

Before adding solar: AUD $48,000 per year in electricity bills
After installing solar: around AUD $12,000 per year
That’s a 75% reduction in energy bills.
Monthly savings average AUD $3,000
Projected payback period: 30 months or 2.5 years

After the payback period, every dollar saved is pure gain, drastically improving the farm’s economic resilience.

Other Benefits

The system generates 165.87 MWh per year in clean energy, significantly reducing reliance on grid-supplied power.
The residential battery adds flexibility, capturing excess solar power for nighttime use, increasing self-consumption, thus offering energy freedom.
The system contributes meaningfully to lowering the farm’s carbon footprint, aligning with Australia’s net-zero 2050 emission goal.

From an operations standpoint, the farm now has more predictable energy costs, less exposure to rate hikes, and insulation against volatility.

Project Challenges and Key Takeaways

Even though there were no major hurdles reported in the case materials, from analyzing their approach to solar
project experience, we shared a few insights that can be useful for you.

Accurate energy calculation, modeling, and load profiling are critical

If you are planning to go solar, make sure to perform a proper energy audit. Wondering why?

Because, depending on your energy
usage, if your system is oversized or undersized, you either waste capital or fall short of
savings
expectations.

Proper battery sizing and integration

Adding battery
storage increases capital cost in any solar setup.

Cyanergy’s choice of a 19.2 kWh battery shows a moderate approach that’s enough to capture excess solar in a
short
time.

Regular monitoring and maintenance

For long-term performance and to catch any issues early, real-time or periodic monitoring is essential.

Cyanergy emphasizes real-time performance monitoring in its broader communications.

Look for incentives or regulatory changes.

Australian businesses can generate Small-scale Technology
Certificates (STCs) or other incentive mechanisms to offset high energy costs.

At Cyanergy, we help you to understand how these certificates and
subsidy
schemes factor into project viability.

Scalability and future growth

It’s wise to design systems with space or modularity in case demand grows or additional assets require extra
power.

Partnering with Cyanergy: Choosing the Right Solar Experts

The Sparacino Farms case isn’t just a financial win; it’s a milestone for Australians.

It shows that even if you are living in a sector as grounded as agriculture, you can leap forward into innovation.

Their story illustrates a powerful truth that says when you pair vision with technology, backing it with a thoughtful plan, you can turn a solar dream into a profitable reality.

So what are you waiting for?

Join us today and explore all our solar products to find your perfect deal.
Also, check our recent projects on commercial properties to have a clear idea about our services.