Weather Guard Lightning Tech

PelaStar: Revolutionizing Floating Offshore Wind with Tension Leg Platforms
We talk with Ben Ackers, CEO of PelaStar, a company revolutionizing the industry with their tension leg platform design. PelaStar’s innovative technology provides stability for large wind turbines in deep water conditions, paving the way for cost-effective and efficient floating wind farms at scale. Visit https://pelastar.com/ for more info!
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, Allen Hall, along with my co host, Joel Saxum. With the increasing demand for clean energy, offshore wind has become a crucial component in the global energy mix. However, many of the world’s best wind resources are located in deep waters where traditional fixed bottom foundations are not feasible.
And this is where PelaStar comes in. PelaStar is changing the floating offshore wind industry with their 10 leg platform design, which provides stability for large wind turbines in deep water conditions. Our guest today is Ben Ackers Chief Executive Officer at PelaStar. Ben brings a wealth of experience in the maritime industry to lead PelaStar’s efforts in making floating offshore wind a reality on a large scale.
Ben, welcome to the show. Thanks for having me. There’s a lot to talk about because with the recent auctions or the outlines of some offshore wind sites off the coast of Maine, and then obviously off the coast of California, floating wind is going to be huge in the United States, and it’s already becoming something of an item over in Europe.
You at PelaStar have been trying to answer some of the problems that we have with floating offshore wind and maybe you can just give us a little bit of background on PelaStar and what you’re working on right now.
Ben Ackers: Absolutely. First of all, PelaStar is, as you said, a tension leg platform which sets it apart from a lot of the platform technologies that you’ll see that have been deployed in demonstration and pilot projects. We’re really the next generation of technology that the industry needs to bring down the cost of energy for utility scale floating wind farms. We started developing PelaStar around 2009. The idea comes out of our parent company, Glosten, which is a naval architecture, marine engineering consulting firm headquartered in Seattle.
We’ve been around for over 65 years. And as our engineers were looking at the challenge of how do we put turbines offshore? We evaluated the different archetypes of the time. Semi submersible spars. And ultimately landed on tension leg platform is what we thought would be the best way to bring down the price of energy in the long run by developing platforms that have the lowest mass and the least amount of motion to drive down capex and operating costs.
Joel Saxum: So a quick question then there, we’ll dive right into it is you highlighted what you believe the Or what in, it’s physics, right? But what the tension leg platform has advantages over some of the other technologies that are out there, because like we, we talked about a little bit off air there’s a lot of options and ideas and demonstrators and stuff, but nobody has really taken that the front runner, the pole position in the race for what’s going to be built at scale in offshore floating.
So that’s The tension leg platform idea. What are the advantages of it over some of the others?
Ben Ackers: Principally, the classic advantages of a tension leg platform are that you can design a platform, a hull with the lowest mass of any of the systems because we’re not using the platform itself to provide stability to the turbine.
We simply need less mass. steel or as others might use concrete to provide that stability. And then we’re stabilizing the platform with tendons that are vertically stiff so that we have very little vertical motion and very little rotation of the system because it’s basically a rid, effectively a rigid structure in the vertical direction.
Now it does, it is soft in the horizontal direction, so there is some movement back and forth. But ultimately. By restraining that motion, we provide the turbine with an ideal environment for operation. So we keep motions down low enough so that turbine is producing power and with an efficiency equivalent to if you’d put that turbine on a monopile.
Joel Saxum: That that’s hugely important, right? Because we’re, you mentioned CapEx in, a couple of minutes ago, but OpEx, because Allen and I, we were always talking, we’re all engineers at heart and thinking, you got this turbine up there and now you’ve introduced a few more degrees of freedom with some of the floaters, right?
We’re talking Highwind Scotland and stuff like that, where now you used to have the monopile and you have a little bit of movement in it, but now you have this and all kinds of rotation and all those things. So you’re actually it’s possible in my mind that you guys are taking out some of the future O& M costs by possibly saving on bearings or rotating equipment by lowering some of that movement.
Ben Ackers: That’s absolutely what we’ll leave, but it goes beyond just reducing wear and tear on the turbine, which is obviously really important, but it’s also about accessibility and workability, right? Because in the conditions in which we’re maintaining offshore wind turbines today even in shallow water, where we’re using SOVs with walk to work gangways, CTVs, daughter craft to board the platforms, our platform is not moving.
And with our central column design, we present as a monopile. So you just translate all of those things that have already been matured in offshore wind today. And we can use those same systems, same procedures, same equipment to get people on and off the platform. Whereas other platforms that have more motion, that becomes a greater challenge.
So we’re either those platforms are, you’re either going to have to limit. The times that you can actually access the platform because of that motion, or you need to build more robust equipment to deal with the relative motions between the platform itself and the vessels you’re using to access it.
And that’s all going to cost money. And then once you get people on the platform if the platform’s moving, they can simply just get less done. They’re less efficient versus being on a stable platform to get their work done.
Allen Hall: So the basic PelaStar design I’ve seen on your website, and your website is fantastic by the way, people should go there, check it out, just go to PelaStar, I think, PelaStar. com, and you can see all the details there’s basically a monopile type tower, and there’s five steel legs coming off to the side, like spider, and then there’s tension lines going all the way down to the bottom of the ocean. It’s that simple. And the one of the unique features I thought was the ability to transfer the components to the assembly site, like everything can be barged up.
So you don’t have, you can make the system pretty much anywhere, put it on a ship, haul it to the site and assemble it right at the coast line, I assume at a dock and then just tug it out to where you need to be. So you’ve thought about this from a lot of different aspects. It’s really simple. But it does a very difficult task at the same time.
There’s always that fine line. Where’s all the magic in all this? Is, there’s always that real, that piece that makes it all tie together. Is it the tension lines? Is it the anchors that make all this possible?
Ben Ackers: First of all, simplicity is The the cornerstone of our design philosophy that in order to take advantage of the TLP, this low mass structure, our goal is to leave as little complexity in the water as possible.
And a lot of times people will say, it looks too simple. There’s gotta be, there’s gotta be something more to it. And there is a lot to it. So first of all, there, there are so many factors to consider in design that you already know how hard it is to design for turbines, either even on land or Fixed offshore turbines the interaction with the environment and the complexity of the turbine, its loads, the wind loads, the control system, all of that requires a lot of work and a lot of fine tuning.
And you can’t just go to a clean sheet of paper, draw a platform and see if that works. It, it takes a lot of iteration, a lot of optimization to bring this all together. Now there’s certainly complexities to address a platform like PelaStar that’s designed for excellent operation and low construction cost is one that is also harder to install.
And so our some of where that secret sauce is, how do we get that platform that when the, those arms go underwater. It loses stability. How do we get it installed? So we’ve developed an installation system called crawl down installation where we float the platform out to the site. And then we deploy tendons with the platform and those tendons are extra long, longer than they have to be.
So that we can grab onto those with tools we call jacking tools and actually pull the platform down to its installed draft. And then we can remove those excess lengths of the tendon, remove all the special tooling that is that, that is complex, get that off the platform so it doesn’t stay at sea.
So we don’t have to buy 500 copies of that equipment, take it to the next platform. reuse it for installation. But I, you asked what about the tendons? The tendons are also incredibly important. If you were to have just carbon copied oil and gas technology into offshore wind, we’d all be using tendons that were either steel bar or steel pipe.
And while that works great in oil and gas when you’re deploying one platform and you can wait a long time pipe is hard to deploy. And so we looked very early on, we decided that we wanted to pursue synthetic fiber tendons. The reason being that they’re far easier to deploy. Literally you have them on a spool and you unspool them into the water.
And they have Excellent performance properties. We actually get damping out of the synthetic fibers that you don’t get in a steel tendon and that improves system performance, reduces fatigue loads, makes the controller easier to design and they’re very cost effective. It’s required a lot of new technology development.
And that’s something we’ve been working on with our partners, FiberMax and Dyneema for over a decade now to get the performance that we’re targeting and the technology qualified so we can deploy on real platforms.
Joel Saxum: So this is where I want to make sure that we don’t miss this because I made a mistake a few episodes ago, talking about the depths.
So I’m not going to make this mistake again. So we want to, I want you to be clear, Ben, on where you guys can install. And if you do have some limitations if there’s certain soil subsurface you can’t anchor into or basically if you can do anything and what, Depths and what this looks like, right?
Ben Ackers: We actually have a great range of site conditions that we can install. And I would say in terms of bottom conditions really the only difficult substrate would be a mud. And you can use a suction pile anchors in those conditions. It’s a, it’s already been done by oil and gas, but it is pretty expensive.
So we’d like to see our preferred seabed would be a sand gravel clay mixture. We have excellent cost effective anchor options there, but also if you start to introduce hard rock seabeds with either some overburden or just clear rock, there are good anchor solutions for that too. So that covers most of the seabed conditions that we’re going to find.
Now as far as depth goes we actually can deliver cost effective solutions for modern turbines in the 15 range down to about 70 meter water depth. And that is, that’s it. On the shallow end of a lot of people’s expectations. We’ve worked hard to optimize the design to make that happen.
But actually we’re finding that that’s a pretty compelling case to developers who actually, who have a hard time getting some of these immersibles even to work in those depths, because it’s actually very challenging to design catenary and top mooring systems that work in that depth range as well.
Yeah. That’s shallow. Yeah. Yeah. Then on the deep end as you get deeper we do get into arguably a soft sweet spot in the a hundred to 300 meter range. In terms of overall cost performance, but we can keep going from there. It’s just a matter of lengthening tendons in our system.
So we’re working closely right now, focused on the water depths that we’re going to find in the California lease areas between 750 and 1300 meters. That 1300 meter is going to be a pretty much a hard cutoff in the U S for some time now based on what Boehm is going to cite for lease areas And so we’re working on solutions there.
There are a lot of technical challenge going that deep. However, oil and gas has conquered the, this depth territory. It’s not a technical feasibility issue. It’s a techno economic issue. How do we produce the most cost effective mooring solutions when you have to simply buy more tendon? And that’s an area of That’s our primary area of research and development focus right now is how best to do that cost effectively and what kind of design trade offs are we going to make to make what we call ultra deep water more economically feasible.
Allen Hall: Does the tendons. Are there tendon changes based on the water depth? I know Dyneema is a magical material. We use it. I’m an electrical engineer and we use it for electrical things. It has great electrical properties, by the way, but also has wonderful mechanical properties. You see it in sailing all the time.
Are there any design, changes that are relative to where the wind turbine is going to be installed?
Ben Ackers: I would say that’s really only a function of depth. We we’ve Dyneema as our core load bearing fiber works great from that 70 meters out through a few hundred meters. As we get into ultra deep water, it’s not I know we have to ask ourselves, this is a a very high performance fiber and you do pay for that performance and you need to ask yourself if you need to pay for that performance over the length of the entire tendon.
We always find value of having that those properties somewhere in what I’ll call the tendon stack, but it’s not clear that we need that for the whole length. So we might be looking at other materials through the tendon stack for a more efficient tendon design.
Joel Saxum: Yeah, so I’m thinking I’m on the construction side again, because now we’re talking about differences in length and differences in materials in the tendon stacks and going back to what you said, where we can, this thing can be built case side and then basically brought to site rolled over or rolled over, but install the onsite.
So if you were to say, I know that the water depth thing is a little bit different there, but if you were to say, giving equal, A monopile installation versus this installation with the PelaStar system. Time wise, is it half the time to install PelaStar? Is it double the time to install PelaStar if you were to put them on site?
Ben Ackers: That’s interesting because we don’t do a lot of direct comparisons with the timeframe of fixed fixed pile installation. But I can tell you that we can typically get anchors installed in it, it does depend on the anchor type in the seabed conditions, but that, that operation we’re focusing on anchors that are being specifically developed for floating offshore wind. So we’re not using a lot of the traditional anchor types that are technically feasible, but are quite expensive. Some of the innovative anchor developers are using their own proprietary subsea installation. methods that decouple installation from vessels that drives down the vessel size we need for installation.
And then they’re using Subsea Robotics to automate the installation process. So we can get a, an anchor spread of our five anchors installed in 24 hours. And then When we bring the platform out, it takes a couple of days to get the tendons deployed, hooked up to the platform with the platform crawled down and the cable connected.
So that’s about a three day evolution offshore.
Joel Saxum: That’s cruising. So immediately comes to mind. This is from my oil and gas background. The company subsea micropiles. And the cellular robotics team that’s just up the street from you in Burnaby B. C. that builds that robot. It’s, if you haven’t ever seen this thing before, I have an offshore world, it’s really cool.
It’s it started life as a geotechnical, drilling, seafloor geotechnical drilling rig. So instead of having to do geotechnical from a boat, you put this thing over, it’s an ROV, it goes to the bottom and it auto, it will, can do CPT coring and in all kinds of things. But now they’ve adopted it. Subsea micropiles has adopted it to actually do in not even in situ tests, but actually geotechnical drilling tests.
And then at the same time, they can install the subsea micropiles in the subsurface, drill them down, and then they hook them up as anchors, leave a buoy on them, move on to the next one. And then you guys can come right behind them and just hook up to the anchors. That’s fricking slick, man.
Ben Ackers: Exactly. And their anchor is good for a lot of rocky seabed conditions.
There are for the softer sediments we’re we work closely with a company called Triton Anchor in Massachusetts, and they’re developing a helical group pile system that is excellent actually. And then Schottel Maritime Technologies also has a groutless mechanical toggle rock anchor system, very similar to subsea micropiles, but they don’t need to grout, but then they need a harder rock material for their system.
Yeah, mostly we’re looking at grouped anchor solutions to get away from the heavy drilling that you would expect for a more classical rock anchor.
Joel Saxum: Another question for installation and O and M the in, in farm collection, power cables, and the main export lines and stuff like that. So now the main export lines, you’re going to have.
A little bit of a navigation to do to make sure that of course the anchors and stuff are not in the same pathways. But what is the hookup for comms and power, import, export, all that stuff look like with the PelaStar platform?
Ben Ackers: It looks like a lot of other platforms. The fact is that with our lower motion.
It’s actually a little bit easier to design the dynamic cable that connects the platform to the inner array cables just because we’re not moving that much, it’s straightforward. One cable with all the export power and data that cable is generally prelaid on the seabed a couple of days before we come out with the platform.
And then we send once the platform is installed and locked off on the tendons, we send down a messenger line through an I tube that goes up the center column of the platform. An ROV makes the connection to that dynamic cable. And then we pull that cable up through. Our eye tube a bend stiffener will lock itself off at the base of the platform and then the the cable will come up and we’re looking at some kind of cool, innovative new systems that they will auto latch in place And we can do that entire operation without putting anybody on the platform.
And then but with it held in place temporarily, then we can get all of our temporary installation equipment off the vessel and wait then for an SOV to come out with a crew that actually secures the final hang off joint and terminates the cable into the switchboard.
Allen Hall: PelaStar was invited to participate with the Department of Energy in the Floating Offshore Wind Readiness prize and it, there was a, that’s been going on for about a year, I think, or so. What, where is that at right now? And what’s the next phase of that?
Ben Ackers: FLOWin is a three phase competition. The first phase was completed a little bit over a year ago. And in phase one, there were 43 teams all led by platform technology that competed to Demonstrate to the Department of Energy that we had technologies that were mature enough to justify moving on to the next step of industrialization and planning for cereal production.
So we completed our submissions for phase one in January of 2023. And of those 43 teams nine were awarded phase one prizes and we were among one of those 19 among those nine teams. So that came with a cash prize and a voucher to get some work out of National Labs as well. And then, but what it really brought with it was an invitation to participate in the phase two round.
We completed our submission for phase two. And on March 1st, so just very recently. And now we’re all waiting patiently to hear the results. What I’m expecting to hear those in mid May, I think, and we’re, we expect five teams to be awarded phase two prizes. And what we had to do in phase two was to show that we have a, that we are developing real plans with real suppliers to manufacture these platforms at scale, at the pace of one a week to deploy gigawatt scale farms in one to two years on a regular pace, one a week.
That’s a lot to ask. It’s actually one of the, I think our biggest takeaways from really digging into this in phase one and looking at our production throughput from the steel showing up at a fabrication facility to locking off the platform on its tendons, looking at that entire chain we actually found that it was pretty achievable to get to that level as long as you have a fabrication facility that is built around hitting that production target. And we were able to do that working with a partner here Pacific Northwest Everett Floating Structures that has ambitions to be one of those fabricators. And with some help from some European industrial engineering companies to design a manufacturing facility to with. with two assembly lines essentially to fabricate all of the modules we need to assemble a full platform and do that at a rate of one a week. And then we, and then as you were commenting earlier the general plan is that we develop those facilities in our target regions, whether they be U. S.
West Coast, U. S. East Coast, Scotland, Eastern Australia, and then then we ship those modules to an assembly and integration facility that would be local to the wind farm itself. And there we can complete final hull assembly and integrate the platform with the tower and the turbine. And we had to also end up with two assembly lines at that facility to hit that one a week target.
Allen Hall: Okay. That’s impressive. So what, when can we expect to see a Palastar project? platform in the water probably off California first. I’d assume that’d be the first place to go.
Ben Ackers: We’d like that to happen. We’d like to see something like a pilot project, maybe proceed to these utility scale deployments and see that maybe something like 2028 with any luck, and then then we would start seeing the real deployments probably in the 2032 to 2034 timeline.
But hopefully we’ll see PelaStars popping up before then in other parts of the world.
Allen Hall: See, that’s a realistic timeline, Joel. That’s one thing that we don’t get a lot of at Offshore Wind is a reasonable amount of time because there isn’t a lot of infrastructure that needs to be built up before you can do one a week.
It takes a little time, yeah.
Ben Ackers: And a lot of money, right? And workforce training. training the men and women that we’re going to need to build and operate these platforms is a huge heavy lift in addition to the investment in these facilities.
Joel Saxum: What I’m hearing here is that you guys cause we’ve been talking with We talk with everybody in the industry, right?
And floating offshore wind, it’s at such a early stage in most places. I’m over here in Bilbao, right? We’re right on the coast and there’s a couple of demonstrators out in the water here, some people taking tours to them on the show floor this week I saw a couple of different types of platforms, but it just doesn’t seem like.
Anybody’s as far along with as much support and as much proper planning and engineering complete as you guys are from this conversation we’re having right here.
Ben Ackers: Indeed. There are a lot, there’s a lot of competition out there. We often joke every year, I feel like we had another 20 concepts that people are developing with.
Let’s say there’s about 120 out there and we’ll say, there’s probably 30 real competitors and there are definitely, obviously platforms that are already out in the water that are competitors. have successfully deployed. So I don’t want to take away from the, from their engineering accomplishments they’re great.
And they’re and a few of them are doing the same thing, planning through this whole production throughput and serial production plan. They know that’s, what’s important to, because the reality is as good as our technology is, if we can’t do, if we can’t deliver it. developers can’t buy it.
So certainly there is an upper echelon of technologies that are carrying things through this far because if They don’t have a product to sell. But I appreciate the head nod. It’s been a lot of hard work and we see the importance of all of this.
Allen Hall: Obviously, PelaStar is doing a lot of wonderful things.
How do people connect with PelaStar? How do they see this Tension Lake platform? How do they connect with you?
Ben Ackers: They can give me a call, send me an email. I’ll be in Sacramento in the middle of May and that’s actually around when we expect DOE to announce that phase two prize winners.
And yeah, so send me an email. Happy to talk.
Allen Hall: And this has been fantastic. We have to stay in touch as this effort grows and it would be great to see In California and close to me in Maine at some point and yeah, Palastar is going to be helping lead that way. So I really appreciate you being on the program.
I’ve learned a ton. Thanks so much.
Ben Ackers: You bet. Thanks for having me.
https://weatherguardwind.com/pelastar-floating-tension-leg-platform/
Renewable Energy
Profound Nihilism?
Normally, “nihilism” means the belief that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. Trump was elected by mean-spirited idiots, but they could hardly be called “nihilists.” For example, they believe very strongly in white supremacy, the dismantling of the federal government, saving people from the lethality of vaccinations, etc.
Now, there is a secondary meaning to the word, i.e., those who reject established social systems. In this sense, I suppose they are indeed nihilists, in that they reject lawfulness, honesty, human rights, truth, science, tolerance, and compassion.
Renewable Energy
Vestas Shares Jump 20%, UK Blocks Ming Yang Factory
Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Vestas Shares Jump 20%, UK Blocks Ming Yang Factory
Vestas doubles second quarter profit and adds €4.7 billion in market value overnight. Plus EnBW finishes He Dreiht after a V236 blade break, the UK blocks Ming Yang’s Scottish factory, and India rules turbines are movable goods.
The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast is brought to you by Weather Guard Lightning Tech, creators of the StrikeTape Ultra LPS retrofit. Subscribe to Uptime’s Substack newsletter. And check out Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” Youtube channel. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!
The Uptime Wind Energy podcast, brought to you by StrikeTape. Protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit StrikeTape.com. And now, your hosts
Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall, and I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, Matthew Stead, and Yolanda Padron. And three out of the four of us will be in Melbourne Australia talking to a number of operators and interested parties about WOMA 2027. Matthew, where will we be the couple of days we’re in Melbourne?
Matthew Stead: So, um, first of all, we’ve got the Pullman, uh, East Melbourne, which is, uh, where the venue will be for, for 2027. Um, so that’ll be our home base. Um, we’ve got around about eight meetings planned already. So what we’re doing is we’re talking to the operators and a few other industry, um, players about [00:01:00] what we need to talk about, how we’re gonna move the industry forward in Australia.
Uh, so it’s gonna be jam-packed, but there’s a little bit of time left on the Friday afternoon if there’s any late-minute, um, people that wanna get in contact and catch up with us, um, for next Thursday, Friday, or actually Friday. Uh, so yeah, it’s gonna be a, a jam-packed time. I think we’re gonna be tired, too many coffees, and talking to all the key, all the key operators, uh, about what they wanna hear about and how we can move the, the industry forward.
Allen Hall: And if someone wants to put an input into the WOMA panel about what will be discussed at WOMA 2027, Matthew, how would they do that? How do they get ahold of you?
Matthew Stead: Well, we have a wonderful website, and that’s got all the details you could ever want. Um, you can also register on the website, so please register.
Otherwise, um, I’m sure we’re gonna be a sellout this year for sure. So woma2027.com.
Rosemary Barnes: I just wanna add that when people talk to [00:02:00] me about the event, they always say how they love that the topics are so relevant, and the reason why that they’re so relevant is because we make sure to go around to operators and find out what are the issues that they’re really dealing with.
So anybody that’s thinking of attending, even if you can’t, you know, meet us up, meet up with us in Melbourne, get in touch and tell us what are the, yeah, what are the topics that you’re struggling with that you’re not, um, you’re having trouble finding enough information, having trouble finding the people that can help you.
And y- yeah, like we take all of that information, and that’s how we come up with our agenda each year. And yeah, I mean, for us, that’s the, the main thing is that this has to be really relevant, up-to-date information for the industry, and we need your help to make sure it stays that way. I
Matthew Stead: mean, that’s what we’ve done the last two years, so this is– we’re just repeating the formula, um, listening to the operators and getting the good topics and the good speakers.
Allen Hall: Well, Vestas has had a good quarter. Uh, the, for the last couple of years, honestly, s- [00:03:00] Vestas has been really thin on margins. There was questions about it continuing on. Rising costs mostly, uh, supply chains, especially during COVID, were bad. Uh, and, uh, but for the most part, the shareholders stayed attached.
Well, that story is changing rapidly. The world’s largest turbine maker posted second quarter operating profits of $400- €46 million, more than double what the analysts had expected, and it’s raised its full-year margin guidance alongside half-year results for the first time in a decade. The shares climbed about 20% in Copenhagen, adding roughly €4.7 billion of market value in a single session.
Now, the chief executive, uh, Henrik Andersen, ha- put it plainly to, uh, uh, in a couple of news sources that something much bigger is happening and Vestas is gonna be the, the leader in wind. That’s how I read it, that everybody [00:04:00]at Vestas was super happy with the, the change in direction and things were moving up steadily.
But a 20% jump in a day is remarkable. You don’t see that in large industrial businesses like wind energy. Matthew, this has real implications on what happens next for Vestas because success like this usually means more orders.
Matthew Stead: Yeah, I wonder what’s going on under the hood there. Um, I mean, Vestas is a quality company, although, although can I just do a quick segue?
How many turbines were installed in Denmark in the last, uh, two years? Like last year and the year before?
Allen Hall: I don’t know. How many?
Matthew Stead: I believe it was eight turbines installed onshore in Denmark last year, and the year before it was 12. So, you know, maybe, maybe Vestas needs to focus on their own backyard a little bit as well.
Allen Hall: I’m not sure there’s a lot of opportunity there. Yeah, onshore.
Matthew Stead: How can you ever be full? I mean, there’s always, um, [00:05:00] uh, you know, um, you know, resiting or, um, you know, upgrades and-
Rosemary Barnes: You know what? Allen and I are probably gonna get some time in Jutland, uh, later this year, um, and that area and the old wind turbines there was actually the inspiration for my whole YouTube channel.
It just, ’cause there’s, you know, there’s turbines there from, the earliest one is, um, from the ’70s and still going. I think it’s one and a half megawatts, actually huge for, for that time. Um, and it was like community made, um, at Tvind. But anyway, I’m interested to revisit the site and have a look and see are these, you know, all these old turbines still there.
It’s only, like six years since I went through and did the experience but for the most part, they don’t seem to be yet pulling down the, the small old ones and putting up big ones. There’s a lot of, a lot of them are community owned. Um, and yeah, I mean, Danish people love wind turbines, but there’s only so many that you can have onshore.
Like, people are happy to live near them by, you know, the standards of people in other countries, but you don’t want [00:06:00] one in your literal backyard. I think that there is, there, there is a, a limit to how many more onshore wind turbines that you can get in that area and offshore expansion is the more likely way to go.
Um, and also I think it’s, it’s, it’s good to recognize that if you have a domestic only or a domestic first strategy, that will only get you so far and then you have to expand, and I think Denmark did that really well. I think Germany a little bit less. I think that Enercon were a bit surprised, um, by their strategy.
It, uh, they had a real hard time anyway when they had to transition away from mostly Germany to getting overseas. And obviously, like if you look at China, they have most of their installations are in China. They are trying so hard to get outside of China because it’s not, like even a market as big as China, it’s got decades to go before it will be full.
Um, you can still recognize that that’s not your, like long-term strategy for growth has to involve expansion, I think.
Allen Hall: I think Vestas, regardless of what happens in Denmark, is making a play for the United States. That seems to be [00:07:00] where a significant effort is happening at the moment and on offshore. Their– Vestas seems very excited about the offshore opportunities.
Of course, there’s a ton of wind turbines gonna be installed in the UK and, and all around Northern Europe. Offshore, the opportunities to buy turbines, there’s only a couple that you could get today. Uh, uh, the GE Vernova offerings I, I don’t think are gonna fit the mold, and I don’t know if GE’s even actively selling.
So their competitor realistically is Siemens Gamesa, which does seem like the smaller player at the minute versus Vestas, which is heavily pushing the V236 and will fill order books like crazy, I think, uh, just based upon the, the history they’ve had and everybody knowing who they are. So Also on the move in Australia, right?
Vestas is huge in Australia right now.
Rosemary Barnes: I think it’s really good that their, um, yeah, finances, uh, are [00:08:00] looking a bit better ’cause it’s been funny. Like, I tried early on in my wind career to invest in, you know, wind turbine manufacturers knowing that there would be immense growth, and I was right. There, there was immense growth.
Not that that was so hard to figure out that there would be, but it did not lead to any kind of, um, return on, on anything, you know. Like, that did not keep pace with the just general market. Um, so I, I stopped trying to, stopped trying to invest to that. But it has been really, really hard for the companies to, you know, raise money or y- you know, do any of the things that they need to do because they’ve always, like, they’re growing, growing, growing, but finances has been so tight that it has been a real constraint on the amount of engineering that they could do, and I really hope that Vestas are gonna take this opportunity that they’ve got compared to, you know, a lot of the other manufacturers.
Vestas do have really strong, um, innovation and, yeah, engineering capabilities for doing– you know, developing new technologies and improving them, and I really hope that they’re taking this opportunity to build that up. There are a lot [00:09:00] of very good engineers with a lot of experience in the industry in that area that are working in other fields at the moment because, you know, there’s been a lot of contraction in Denmark.
So I don’t know, it seems like a really good time to hire back some of that really in-depth knowledge and, yeah, get a- get ahead of, you know, some of the future quality problems. We’re going through such a hard time at the moment from the fast development that happened in the 20-teens when there wasn’t a whole lot of money around.
We’re dealing with quality problems now, so, you know, maybe we can get ahead and not have the next round of them if we can invest in just a lot more, uh, engineering capacity.
Allen Hall: When you have success like Vestas has, usually the upper level management and some of the executive team starts getting pilfered, that they’ll get offers to repeat that success at another company, and it sounds like that process has started already.
There’s a couple of executives that have recently departing or are in the midst of departing from Vestas. [00:10:00] I would see that continuing f- at least for the next six months, uh, because everybody wants to repeat that, right? If you can get a 20% increase in your valuation overnight, uh, I can, I can list a number of companies, regardless of industry, that would love to participate.
Even in a 5% increase, that would be remarkable. So, um, Vestas is gonna have a hard time holding onto this. That’s just the nature of the business where things are successful, people will wander. And Rosemary, I, I think they’re– And Yolanda In, in my book, Vestas should sort of s-stand down and just make quality products.
I’m not sure you sh-should tinker too much at the time being and just make the good stuff better. That seems like a way to really increase profits.
Yolanda Padron: Yeah, I mean, solving a lot of the issues that– And, and that’s not just a Vestas exclusive thing, right? All of these OEMs have some sort of issue that maybe– I know Rosie’s touched a lot on, on it, where [00:11:00] you build this version A and then version B solves one of the small little issues, but now it creates another little problem, and then you have version C, and then everything just kinda has its own niche little issue, um, that really expands over time.
So if they could solidify what they already have in, in a, in a model that, that would help them just even keep a lot of their customers, I think that’d be great, and it would help, certainly help them, um, not continuously, like, rotate around the customers, ’cause it almost feels like, at least in the States, right, you, you get GE to be really, really strong and have a huge market share, and then GE starts focusing more on gas turbines, so then they all go onto Vestas, and then they all go onto Ontara now.
Um, and then just, you know, just kind of everybody starts cycling through them because they just kind of want something that’s better quality than what they’re getting in the long haul.
Matthew Stead: Allen, you, you talked about you think there’s something big under the hood. I think you, you [00:12:00] thought that maybe Vestas was angling towards something or being quite bullish.
Do you think that they might take over GE Vernova?
Allen Hall: I don’t think they’re gonna grab Vernova, and I don’t think Vernova is for sale at the minute, but I wonder if Siemens Gamesa is, or Nordex. I mean, Nordex has done terrific the last couple of quarters and is making inroads in places that I didn’t think possible three, four years ago.
Uh, the European marketplace is be- becoming really unique in that sense that there’s a lot of money being put out. But is there a sole perfect solution for Europe? Not at the minute, ’cause you got two competitors there, and then China trying to, to work its way in. Will the Europeans come together and form something more united, even if it’s just a partnership, a loose partnership, versus letting China on the shores?
We’ll see. 64 of the largest machines that Vestas has builds are standing off the German coast, but one blade is missing a [00:13:00] piece. We’ll talk about that when we come back.
Speaker: Are you overspending on lightning repairs? Most operators are because solving lightning damage is complicated. Weather Guard Lightning Tech helps operators reduce lightning damage. Our innovative StrikeTape lightning diverter protects over twenty thousand blades worldwide. Now, StrikeTape Ultra installs faster than ever.
StrikeTape Ultra cures uptower in just fifteen minutes, even in cold weather. Visit weatherguardwind.com to schedule a call.
Allen Hall: Well, Germany’s largest offshore wind farm is now fully installed, and EnBW confirmed this, uh, past week that all 64 of the Vestas V236 15-megawatt turbines are s- standing at the He Dreiht wind farm about 85 kilometers northwest of Borkum. Uh, 960 megawatts, [00:14:00] 2.4 billion euros invested. Man, these offshore projects are expensive to get installed.
Uh, so it’s power for roughly 1.1 million households, and there’s no state subsidy behind any of it. And so this is a little bit of a u- unique situation. Uh, th- well, the one footnote about the wind farm is they had a V236 blade break and fall into the North Sea, and they had fished it out and I think I passed along s- pictures that I saw online of, uh, one of the police boats pulling the shear web out of the water I don’t know what to think anymore about some of these offshore blade issues.
Obviously, Vestas is very conscientious about it and will be doing RCAs and engineering reviews and all the above to go identify what the problem is. But it does just lead to a little bit of a pause of do– what is going on for some of these offshore [00:15:00] wind blade installations or, or whatever’s causing these blades to break?
Do we have a good handle on it? Yolanda, is– are we following up on all the design details so that we can prevent these things in the future?
Yolanda Padron: I mean, I’d, I’d hope you’d be following up on the design, right? Like, and, um, but I think there is still a little bit of a disconnect from, from what we’ve seen, and again, not just Vestas exclusive, um, between the people who are designing and the people who are manufacturing, the people who are in operations, right?
So, uh- The, from what we’ve heard, uh, this could have potentially been a, um, partially because of a transportation issue, which is what happens a lot in onshore. It’s a lot more common than we would like it to be. Um, and so that even goes beyond what would go on in the design studio and what would go on in the manufacturing and what would [00:16:00] go on even just for the people that are running the site, right?
So, so some sort of, um, in between, uh, EPC error. Um, but yeah, I just think that, like in a lot of industries, there should be a lot more communication between all of these teams on the lower level, so that way a lot of these problems can, can be avoided.
Allen Hall: I’m wondering if it’s actually an issue on the, the testing side.
And, uh, the one question that just popped up, and we saw from the ORE Catapult, uh, survey that’s being conducted at the moment, and if you haven’t participated in that, you just visit ORE Catapult and answer some of the survey questions. But torsion on a blade, which is very difficult to test for, and it really isn’t tested for today, but does happen during the move and the transportation of these big offshore blades.
Is it one area that we need to do a little more work in or maybe spend some more time focusing on it to see what is happening as blades are [00:17:00]moved?
Rosemary Barnes: The thing about te- torsion is that it is much more significant as blades get longer. I can’t, I can’t remember the equation off the top of my head, which is, um, bothering me.
But I think it scales with, like, the fourth power or something of, of length. And so whilst it was always a bit of a problem, it’s much more of a problem as it gets, as blades get bigger. I mean, they’ve never, like, fully tested a blade, and there was always a lot of reliance on, hey, y- you know, like we’ve tested certain things that is possible to test in a test facility on the ground.
But they also rely on their decades of experience of how blades actually behave in the field. But, you know, remember, that’s a real lagging, lagging indicator because y- you know, their decades of experience is mostly with lots smaller blades. Now, blades are really different because they’re longer and different effects are, are taking over.
It’s not just, uh, torsion, but it’s also the laminates get much thicker, and then y- you know, you, you have issues with the way that they’re curing, [00:18:00] and there’s a lot more just space for, um, defects to be present in a really thick laminate All of those things add up. Oh, yeah, then add in addition, like new materials, carbon fiber is new, and then new ways of producing it, you know, pultrusions, um, all kinds of different materials like balsa’s being replaced with foams and, um, like, you know, 10 times that number of what sounds like a small innovation, but all of these things have the potential for damage and don’t have a really long track record in the field to be able to kind of calibrate.
We do need to remember that, like, when you do something new, things are gonna break, uh, sometimes, they’re gonna fail sometimes. If they don’t, then you’re definitely being too conservative, and your product is costing more than it should, and nobody wants more expensive wind energy, right?
Matthew Stead: Rosie, Rosie, I, I know you’re doing some, some excellent work on, um, industry studies around erosion and temperature and so forth.
Um, I just wanted to let a little secret out of the bag that, um, in the future there will also be some [00:19:00] other studies on torsion and blade twist and blade dynamics. So, um, just a few things are in, in train at the moment, which I can’t share, share, but, uh, watch this space around better understanding blade twist.
Allen Hall: The Hydride wind farm runs on European turbines, but the next one might not. Two governments with two very different answers on who gets to build Europe’s wind fleet.
Delamination and bondline failures in blades are difficult problems to detect early. These hidden issues can cost you millions in repairs and lost energy production. CIC NDT are specialists to detect these critical flaws before they become expensive burdens. Their nondestructive test technology penetrates deep into blade materials to find voids and cracks traditional inspections completely miss.
CIC NDT maps every critical defect, delivers actionable [00:20:00] reports, and provides support to get your blades back in service. So visit cicndt.com because catching blade problems early will save you millions
Well, two countries and two decisions, one question. In Scotland, the UK government blocked plans for the Chinese manufacturer Mingyang to build a turbine factory, uh, near Inverness on national security grounds. 1.5 billion pounds of investment, up to about 1,500 jobs. And First Minister John Swinney has asked the new prime minister to reconsider.
And the UK energy secretary minister called that request irresponsible. Meanwhile, up in Denmark, Vattenfall has just won two offshore wind farms and will not say whether it will buy European turbines. Danish suppliers are not taking that quietly. So [00:21:00] the Scotland question about the Mingyang factory is at least being discussed again with the new prime minister in the UK.
It does seem like there’s a lot to do and get the government formed and make all this stuff happen. But I don’t see a Burnham administration changing the outcome for Mingyang, but I could be wrong. At the, the same time, Vestas is pushing for a more Eurocentric focus and to really keep out the Chinese.
Uh, something has to give here pretty soon.
Matthew Stead: I actually think Mingyang should, um, set up a factory in Scotland. I, I mean, what’s wrong with that? I mean, uh, why is that a security issue?
Rosemary Barnes: Set up the factory and put the, like, whatever you’re worried about, put protections in place for it, require it to be a local joint venture or whatever.
You know, we’ve seen the blueprint in many of what used to be, you know, less rich countries. That’s how they, you know, got a head start on some of these technologies. It’s not like, I don’t think that China [00:22:00] has a head start on wind, wind turbine technology, but they certainly have different ways of doing things that, um, yeah, we could, we could learn from.
But I think across the board, wind turbines, batteries, solar panels, whatever, let them set up factories, put the rules in place that mean that your country benefits from it and you’re getting the, you know, the information transfer.
Yolanda Padron: Do you think that’ll, like, impulse a lot of these more established European companies to maybe start fixing some of the issues that they’ve known about for, for a while, um, particularly regarding the blades and everything that we’ve talked about earlier?
Like, there’s enough competition there, so maybe they need to start looking a little bit more deeply into their problems.
Allen Hall: Do we think that Chinese operations have been out front, forward, honest, I’ll even use, about their blade issues?
Rosemary Barnes: No, but this is a good way to find out, isn’t it?
Allen Hall: Governments decide who is allowed to build a turbine after a discussion on Scotland.
Uh, but, but [00:23:00] occasionally, a court decides what a turbine legally is. India has just settled that question, and the reasoning should be of interest to anybody who ships machines across a border right after this. As wind energy professionals, staying informed is crucial and let’s face it, difficult. That’s why the Uptime Podcast recommends PES Wind Magazine.
PES Wind offers a diverse range of in-depth articles and expert insights that dive into the most pressing issues facing our energy future. Whether you’re an industry veteran or new to wind, PES Wind has the high-quality content you need. Don’t miss out. Visit peswind.com today. A tax fight in India has produced a definition every turbine supplier should read.
Is a wind turbine bolted to a concrete foundation movable goods, or is it immovable property? State tax authorities argued immovable, which would have [00:24:00] taxed erection and commissioning contracts at 18% instead of 5%. The Andhra Pradesh, uh, High Court disagreed, and on the 12th of August, the Supreme Court declined to interfere.
The reasoning rests on something this whole industry takes for granted. A turbine can be taken down, moved, and put back up. So a turbine is a movable object, and it has less taxation. Bonus. So this is a really interesting discussion that’s happening in India because it’s probably symptomatic of things we’re seeing elsewhere across the world about taxation for wind turbines, right?
That, um, if there’s a way to tax a wind turbine, we’re gonna try to do it. This is a unique way, uh, that happens in India where depending on if it’s permanent or movable, the tax rates are different. I, I guess that would apply to a lot of components inside a wind turbine too, Matthew, don’t you? Like the, the generator, the, the big heavy things, [00:25:00] gearbox, generator, blades, rotors, tower sections, would be taxed at a, a lesser rate.
Matthew Stead: I agree with the court case that it’s all movable and, uh, you can actually buy turbines on the secondhand market, can’t you? I mean, if I wanted to buy, yeah, whatever, whatever, I could buy one and, and put it up in my backyard if I had a bigger backyard. Um, so yeah, I vote for movable. I vote for lower taxes.
Yolanda Padron: The way that it would work a lot of times in the US is, I mean, it’s, you pay, the company itself pays a lot less than they would’ve over time, right? Just by pure, the, the regular kind of tax laws. Um, but the community, there’d be just direct donations to the community, so then they’d get, uh, like money would actually come into the community where the turbines were being built instead of just distributed around the state, which I mean, in a state as big as Texas, it gets, um, but easier for that c- um, that county to get a lot more, uh, funding than they would typically get if it was [00:26:00] through a big enough area.
Um, but yeah, no, I agr- I completely agree with you guys that, that this should be a movable good. I mean, how many times have we seen, uh, even just a blade, um, that it looks like it’s, uh, just a, a failed blade that they have to go in and replace, and then they take it out, fix it, and then just bring it back to the same site or take it to another site across the country.
And, and to that point, like if you were to h- judge it as something that’s immovable, would then any blade replacement just not be taxed? Because then it’s, you’re moving that one component and two, but it’s essentially the same turbine. Like, I don’t know how that all would make sense.
Allen Hall: I think the Uptime Supreme Court agrees with the Indian Supreme Court that wind turbines are movable, and that’s good.
Well, that wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. [00:27:00] Reach out to us on LinkedIn. And if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It really helps other wind energy professionals discover the show.
And don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. For Rosa, Yolanda, and Matthew, I’m Allen Hall. We’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy podcast.
Renewable Energy
Vermont and Florida: A Key Difference
Can’t swear that the story here is authentic, but it sure rings true.
Vermont is a somewhat quirky state, but it protects its citizens very well. FWIW, this is where I want MY tax dollars going too.
Florida is a deeply red state that, true to form, wants as much ignorance as it can possibly produce. Educated people aren’t voting for people like Ron Desantis.
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
