Connect with us

Published

on

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Why Do Renewables Matter for Grid Stability?

This week we discuss Australia’s recent cancellation of wind projects due to political changes and community opposition, the complexities of grid interconnects, and the need for strategic renewable energy planning.

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 FacebookYouTubeTwitterLinkedin 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!

You are listening to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast brought to you by build turbines.com. Learn, train, and be a part of the Clean Energy Revolution. Visit build turbines.com today. Now here’s your hosts, Allen Hall, Joel Saxum, Phil Totaro, and Rosemary Barnes. 

Well, welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I am Allen Hall and I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, who’s fresh from. Sweden, she just traveled all around the world to record this episode. Uh, Phil Totaro is out in California and Joel Saxum is up in the cold north of Wisconsin. And we, we’ve been just discussing off air. All the craziness has been happening in the wind industry.

And I, I have to admit, you know, I thought last week was. Insane. Well, we just, uh, put it on steroids. So not only are we canceling a lot of projects in the United States currently, we’re all, we’re starting to be cancel [00:01:00] them on Australia and over in Queensland. The Queensland Deputy Premier, uh, has used his ministerial powers to refuse planning approval for the moonlight range when Farm Near Rock Hampton.

Now I, and I’m sure I murdered that name Rosemary, so please forgive me, but it was gonna have 88 turbines in about 450 megawatts of capacity, enough to power about a quarter million homes in Australia and tied with, it’s about 300 construction jobs and 10 permanent positions to make that wind farm go.

But there’s was like a two month public consultation period that happened. And during that consultation period, about 80 per 90% of the local residents, and when I say local residents are about 150 local residents, uh, replied back and were concerned about some of the, the known people that are gonna be there because it’s gonna like double the population, right.

And 300 construction workers in a, an area of 140 people, 150 people. Uh, and based on [00:02:00] that boom, perhaps the, the project was canceled. What is happening in Queensland that we need to understand that projects just kinda get wiped away like that with 140 people, 150 people chiding in.

Rosemary Barnes: So what’s happened is that the Queensland government, the Queensland State Government, it was labor for quite a while and they had, uh, renewables targets and net zero targets and stuff like that.

And then, um, the government changed last year, so now there’s a, a liberal government, which means conservative in Australia. They’re in power and they wanted to change their planning regulations. But what is a bit weird is that they wanna do it retroactively. So they’ve changed the rules in April, and now they’re going through projects that have already been approved to see if they meet the new rules rather than the rules at the time that they were approved.

But the weirdest thing is that I’m pretty sure that this specific wind farm that they revoked, they were the ones to approve it shortly after [00:03:00] they came into government. They approved this wind farm and then they changed the rules a few months later, and then they did a new round of community consultation.

Um. And they say that 85% of local residents were, um, you know, in favor of reassessing. The issue is that now we’re at this stage of the energy transition where, you know, we’re up over 40% renewables across Australia. Um, that’s primarily wind and solar. We’re getting to the point now where we kind of, you can’t just add things as they’re convenient and easy.

You have to get a bit more strategic. Think about the whole energy system. I was looking forward to that coming online because it will make the whole system more robust and less, um, yeah, less fluctuations. You know, it would really even things out quite a lot to have, um, a lot of that Queensland wind in the mix.

So it will be a, a real shame and a, a problem for, uh, the whole of the Australian East Coast Grid. If Queensland opts out of any more wind energy.

Speaker 4: But once [00:04:00] they approve these plans, it sort of, you have to think about the grid as an entity and unplugging some capacity. There does have consequences further down the transmission line in this case.

Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, but each, each state has responsibility if they’re interconnected, but each space, each state has responsibility that they are gonna be okay regardless of what, they can’t control what the other states do. So. Every, um, every state has to make sure that they are okay on their own, and they are, they are planning for that, you know.

Um, so yeah, like Victoria’s got, got a lot of plans for, for batteries and interconnectors and stuff, and, uh. I mean, new South Wales is building renewable energy zones. Everyone’s got their own plans moving ahead. It would’ve, it would’ve made the whole job easier. But you know, like any interconnector, um, or yeah, interconnection between two, two grids, you can’t, like, you kind of, you plan for it, but you can’t, you have to also plan for the scenario where that interconnection goes down or you, you know, [00:05:00]um, whatever reason you might not get the energy that you plan on from the other states.

So. It is a tricky, tricky aspect I think of planning.

Joel Saxum: Mir. Lemme ask you a question, and this is popping into my head right now because it’s basically political games between parties and these kind of things. And normally we don’t talk politics on the show and we try to stay away from that. And I’m going to, I’m gonna skirt it.

But a couple months ago I, when I was uh, down, I was invited to testify the Texas Senate and I was uh, always amazed. The lack of technical knowledge in the room, right? There’s these people setting their chain. They’re, they’re putting bills forward, they’re putting things, doing things that really affect the general populace, but their knowledge base is coming from like their chief of staff and their chief of staff is a political science major, and that person is just googling whatever.

They want to see in the bill, so they’re putting things out that just didn’t make sense. Right. When it comes to Australian [00:06:00] politics, is it the same kind of stuff? Is it more of just like these political arguments versus the technical ones, or how do they get information into these decisions? Because this decision to me just seems like.

It seems like it’s not based in, in scientific fact or scientific method around anything. It’s just like, oh, we don’t like these things. Let’s get rid of ’em.

Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. I don’t think it’s trying to be based. They’re not, they’re not even the, yeah, the government is not trying to say that it’s based on any kind of science or anything they’re saying that it, you know, they’re mostly citing things that community consultation.

Um, so you know, it’s more about people’s feelings, which is, you know, a valid, a valid thing. I was listening to a podcast about Texas, actually, I’m halfway through it still, um, about what’s going on there with, um, some of their proposals to, you know, require everybody to have a hundred percent firming for each individual project.

And I do think that Texas is trying really hard to, uh, you know, like, um, to, to, you know, they’ve got, you’ve got a pretty flexible system and allow, you know, [00:07:00] um, uh. And allow companies to make their own decisions about how, you know, what kind of energy sources they’re gonna have and how they’re gonna make money and let the market take care of it to a certain extent.

And it’s really similar to the Australian electricity market as well. They’re, um, they are, they do share a common basis and some of the same people worked on the, um, market design of both of them. But I feel like Texas is trying as hard as possible to intervene to make sure that none of the, you can get none of the benefits and all of the disadvantages of a system like that.

So. That is a bit interesting,

Speaker 4: but at some point, Rosemary, and maybe we’ll talk about this after the break, maybe that’s the thing to do, is to talk about this after the break. It takes so long to get projects approved because of the interconnect that this engineers have to go back and look, make sure if this is going to work, how do they connect this energy source into the grid?

How do they make it work in the United States? And I want, I want want to get over the break here. I want to talk to Phil about this. We spent all this time doing the engineering work and then all of a sudden, poof, it’s gone. What [00:08:00] is the point of doing all the engineering work? Engineering? If at a moment’s notice you can yank this project,

Speaker 9: don’t let blade damage catch you off guard.

eLog ping sensors detect issues before they become expensive to consuming problems from ice buildup and lightning strikes to vibrations and internal cracks. EOGs Ping has you covered. Their cutting edge sensors are easy to install, giving you the power to easily stop damage before it’s too late. Visit eLog ping.com and take control of your turbine’s health.

Today,

Speaker 4: Phil, explain what is happening on the interconnect and why it takes so long to get projects approved and all the in supposedly because of engineering, it takes a long time to understand what effect of adding a 500 megawatts will do to a grid. Then instantaneously you just delete a project. Doesn’t that really affect all the work that the engineering [00:09:00] just completed and spent all that time doing?

It’s not, you just can’t plug 500 megawatts into a grid willy-nilly. You have to. You have to plan for it, but to delete a project does,

Phil Totaro: has like cascading problems. Right. I think you also just kind of answered your own question regarding what’s the challenge here. It’s, you know, if you wanna add five megawatts to a grid, that’s a lot easier to integrate because the, the grid can probably handle it.

It was a little bit over designed. But when you start talking about adding or subtracting 500 megawatts plus at a time, and you know, there are terawatts worth of solar projects that have been proposed. Obviously they’re all not, not gonna get built. Um, but, uh, when you, when you’ve got that volume in. The interconnection queue.

Every single one of those has to be independently studied. And then every single one of those, you know, the, how each one goes together and, and the impact of one on the other and the whole [00:10:00] system that all needs to, to go together. Originally, the way that things were being, um, permitted for interconnection was that, um, if you had like utility PPA in place, they would kind of put you to the front of the queue.

Um. And nowadays what they’re doing is it’s kind of first come, first serve. So when they’re trying to figure out all the, you know, impacts on, on the grid from adding whatever the capacity is that you’re proposing, they have to take that into consideration in relation to everything else that’s been proposed and everything else that’s already on the grid and, and operating

Speaker 4: well.

I’m just wondering what the effect of an IRA. Bill change is going to be right. So the, you have an IRA bill, it’s been around for a couple of years. You had a lot of applications to put, uh, uh, power sources onto the grid. Some of them have gotten approved. Or close to approval. So you have this expected pipeline of capacity being added to the grid.

[00:11:00] And then if the IRA bill changes in the way it’s currently proposed, where you have six months or 5% or no, 60 days after the passage, you have to have 5% of the total investment re in the ground, so to speak. Bent. Yeah. Spent, uh, otherwise it doesn’t count. Right? So then you, you’re pulling the plug on some projects, I think.

Doesn’t that just completely just wipe out all the planning that has happened in terms of the interconnect over the last couple of years that it, it really throws a kink in the works, right? I, I, I’m thinking about this correctly. It’s playing around. I’m the electrical engineer on the panel, I think, am I the only one that’s an electrical engineer?

Okay. So when you add capacity, it’s not easy. Because you’re adding reactive power. You got real power and reactive power, right? So you got transmission line. When you start adding transmission line, you have this sort of, you have this inductive thing that’s [00:12:00] happening and you gotta balance it. Although it doesn’t work, you have.

Big problems ’cause you’re not really moving electrons, you’re moving tic and electric fields around, right? So you kinda got these waves going. It’s electromagnetics, it’s the electrons are not, are just rattling back and forth in the wire to create these waves. That’s what’s providing power to the world at the minute.

If we can’t do that efficiently, if we don’t plant it out, then you have problems. You have unevenness and the grid doesn’t like unevenness. One of the reasons maybe Spain disconnected from the grid was because of the unevenness. The frequency changes, the loads disconnecting bad stuff happens, and then they don’t have power for 10 hours or whatever the amount of time was.

That’s a huge freaking problem. I don’t think anybody has really thought this through. I, I’m okay if you want to pull the plug and all the $26 a megawatt hour. Okay, sure. But doing it at 60 days is too [00:13:00] freaking soon you’re gonna create problems. Well, going back to the Australia problem and the now the American problem, you have to increase the amount of electricity on the grid period.

There is a certain growth rate, I think 3%, two to 3% is generally acknowledged as that growth rate. I don’t know what it’s exactly in Australia, but it’s gonna be somewhere close to that. If that’s the case, you cannot be altering. You can’t go from 3% to 1%. You’re gonna have problems three or four years from now.

Rosemary Barnes: Even if it’s 0%, you’re still gonna have problems because the thing is, in Australia, at least, you, our coal power plants are really old and they, uh, borderline economic to run even an old power plant that’s already paid, you know, it’s paid back all of the um, you know, capital expenditure. They’re borderline to run, right?

So they’re all announced closures. They’re, as they get closer to their end of life, they’re getting less and [00:14:00] less reliable. And, you know, it’s one thing if, uh, you know, it’s not windy for a little while and wind power turns down. That’s something that everyone’s planned for. With coal power plant when that, you know, that’s a, a gigawatt all in one go when that goes off the grid, that is, um, challenging, um, planned for, but you know, it, it’s a bigger deal.

You start to see a few of those happen at the same time and your electricity system suddenly falls apart. So yeah, even if you want to just have, maintain zero growth if you still want electricity into the future. You have to plan. And the planning today does involve replacing the existing coal plants with renewables.

If you wanna place it with, replace it with something in something else, something instead, then you need to do that along a long way ahead of time. It takes longer to build a coal power plant than it does to build a wind farm. Um, and. Who’s gonna pay for it, you know, then there’s nobody interested, no, no private company is interested in building new thermal, uh, power plants in Australia because they’re not economics.

So it’s not, you can’t just simply say, we want [00:15:00] things to stay exactly the same. They can’t. Your coal, coal power plants are dying. You know, you have to replace them. You can’t just pretend that you don’t need to replace them with anything, because that’s just not based on reality.

Speaker 4: Yes. And so the argument that’s being made at the moment, and going back to Rosemary’s point about the coal plants, ’cause that discussion is happening in the United States, now all of a sudden we’re talking about coal again, is that there’s just a certain amount of load.

Always on the grid. The coal plant just provides all that power that the grid, uh, demand doesn’t vary up and down all day, which it totally does, right? So coal plants and gas, fire plants in general don’t nuclear. I’ll throw into that, into the mix. Don’t like going up and down, right? They like to be constant, but the usage is not constant.

Is anybody talking about this? I don’t get it. I mean, the duck curve is real.

Rosemary Barnes: I’m, I’m talking about it. We’re talking about it. You know, people talk about it, but I’m not sure. I’m not sure everybody gets it. Like, last time I was at Queensland, I, I was [00:16:00] up there, you know, um, going, uh, to one of the big, big wind farms that, that are there.

It’s already there, already running. And I was there at seven o’clock in the morning. Uh, I was just driving on to site and the turbines had been running. Then all of a sudden it’s like the whole wind farm slows down to a stop at seven in the morning. The sun is barely up, you know, so there’s a small amount of, of solo’s, heaps of rooftops, solar in Queensland because there’s just so much sun.

It just really makes money and it takes like three years to pay back for your system. Um, so what’s caused that? It’s because no one’s using much electricity at that time of day. Coal can’t turn down beyond a certain level. The rooftop solar also, you can’t stop households from using their own electricity that they’re generating.

So there’s just coal power. Plants are supplying more electricity than the grid needs, and so everything else shuts down. But the prices then, then they’re negative. That means the coal power plants are paying to generate electricity. It’s not, you know, they, they don’t get it for free. Sometimes they’re paying, you know, negative hundreds [00:17:00] of dollars an hour, um, a megawatt hour just to generate through the middle of the day so that for a couple of hours in the evening, they can make, you know, a few hundred dollars a megawatt hour, two.

Generate, but now there’s heaps of batteries coming into the grid and they’re going to reduce that evening price spike. So it’s, it’s just like things are gonna change even faster over the next couple of years.

Phil Totaro: And that was actually the one big pillar of Labor’s proposal for renewable energy was, yeah, we’re gonna do transmission.

Yeah, we’re gonna do more generation, but we need to have, especially consumer based battery storage systems. With some type of maybe subsidy or some other type of regime that facilitates the adoption of that technology because we, you know, the, in Australia, we need that to be able to take some of that power to, to basically eliminate that duck curve.

Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. Well, the Queensland government has just canceled all of the bomb hydro projects in the state as well. So, you know, they just like, they’re just nothing. You know

Joel Saxum: why?

Rosemary Barnes: Because they just don’t want [00:18:00] anything, anything, uh, any of these green projects, they don’t want any. Negative, uh, you know, negative effects from a new infrastructure project, unless it’s from, um, fossil fuels.

That’s okay. You can have a new coal mine or a new, new, uh, you know, expand gas infrastructure, but just don’t, don’t do it for clean energy reasons.

Speaker 4: But those devices are not meant to handle flexible loads. Coal is not meant to handle a flexible load. So what are you doing if you, if you know you have a certain amount of fix?

Sure. Inflexible, we’ll call it. And you have a lot of flexibility because that’s the way. The grid is developing at the moment. You have this flexible demand that you need to meet with something that you can turn on and off. So when they see wind farms being turned off, that’s a good thing. The reason they’re doing that is because the grid needs that.

You have to turn those things off. Otherwise you have grid collapse. You will damage the grid for crazy [00:19:00] reasons by leaving too much. Too much power on it, feeding it and not enough pulling it off.

Rosemary Barnes: And the coal power plants, they, they have to pay a lot of money for the fact that they’re not flexible in that way.

But you know, what I think is, is really gonna help, um, is so, I mean the Queensland government, I, I don’t know if they had any incentives for household batteries. Not, not that I’ve heard of, but the federal government has announced a 30% rebate. But I think that what’s really going to change things is because, so rooftop solar has changed the way that the average person thinks about energy in Australia.

Because once you’ve got rooftop on, yeah, solar panels on your roof, and one in three Australian households do already. Then, you know, you’ve got a real economic incentive to use electricity when the sun is shining, right? It’s, um, the, you feed in tariff that you get for giving it to the electricity grid is not anything close to what you pay to bring electricity in.

So, e everybody is naturally kind of incentivized when you get household batteries. Then it’s going to just really boost the extent to which households can shift their demand around. ’cause at the moment, like [00:20:00] if you’re at work all day. You can’t choose to do your, you know, um, I don’t know, dry your clothes in the middle of the day.

Um, and if you would hang ’em out probably on the line anyway, if you did. But you know, there’s only so much that you can shift your loads around if you are out of the house during the day when it’s sunny. But if you’ve got a battery, then all of a sudden households are gonna be trying really hard to make sure that they are only.

You know, relying on, they’re as energy self-sufficient as they can be. I’m not talking about going off grid, but I’m talking about, you know, using mostly self-consumption. Um, and I think that that is really gonna change how much, uh, you know, a non-friendly to renewables government can really bamboozle people because they will get this understanding you, you know, of, of what it means and um, and to what extent you can shift things around To what extent solar plus batteries.

Can, uh, you know, supply the bulk of, um, bulk of power, which in a state like Queensland is, you know, especially true. So I think the discourse should change over the next few years [00:21:00]

Speaker 4: 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 ps win.com today. The grid stability is economic stability.

That’s exactly what it is. And I, I’m not an analogy person as an engineer. I don’t like using analogies, but I’ll use this analogy ’cause I think it applies to the United States and it kind of clears this up. When the US started putting train tracks down, where are all the cities at? They’re on the train tracks.

That’s where they are. When the US started to put highways in, where did all the cities develop? Along the highways when the, I, I, when, when the [00:22:00]Eisenhower administration went to this kinda the super highway thing, right? So Interstate 95 and 10 and all those, where did all the industry and people move right to the super highways is exactly where they are.

If you are not on the electricity grid, if you wanna isolate yourself from the grid, you are isolating yourself and your future generations from economic success. Growth, you just are. So you wanna be on that grid. You need to be near that grid. If you want your children and your children’s children to have a life, they gotta be near that damn grid.

And if you do, if you make a grid that’s unstable, like this happened in Spain and other places, it’s not just Spain. I mean, Spain’s the most recent case. When the grid becomes unstable, you become economically unstable. America cannot have an unstable grid. Australia cannot have an unstable grid. Canada cannot have an unstable grid.

Brazil cannot have an [00:23:00] unstable grid, and for for some freaking reason, we don’t seem to understand that when politicians get involved in this, and Joel pointed this out, when you start unplugging unplugging projects and saying, we’re gonna fill this with some other sort of power sub source, that you are screwing with the economic viability of your community.

That is what you are doing.

Rosemary Barnes: The average person, uh, that doesn’t understand the electricity system well to it sounds more reasonable. That a really constant out, out load, you know, base load generator is more reliable. We all know it’s not, it’s not true. Um, however, it’s just, it’s a simpler message and that’s why I say that as batteries come into households with rooftop solar.

Then they’re gonna understand how reliable, um, variables plus, uh, batteries can, can be

Speaker 4: rosemary. I think the average person will never understand that, which is why the politicians are not talking to that. What, and Joel, correct me if I’m wrong here, but the latest I’ve, I’ve heard of the United [00:24:00] States and it’s a little bit of a different argument.

I think Rosemary’s right on the technical side. Don’t get me wrong. She’s totally right on the technical side. On the politics side, here’s what, here’s what I hear in the United States at the minute. Well, those wind turbines are ugly. What the hell does that have to do with the grid? Security? Nothing. Coal plants are freaking ugly.

They are ugly. No one wants to live next to a coal plant. That’s why we’re closing them down because they are awful to live next to.

Joel Saxum: Yeah. It’s, it’s a mo it’s a, it’s a, it’s a politically driven, but it’s emotional versus technical, emotional, political, whatever you want to call it. You hear a lot of influence from all these things, you know?

Here’s the opposite side of that. I think wind turbines are fricking beautiful. I think they look like works of art on the horizon. They’re cool as hell. Some of the, Alan, think about this. How many times you and I have literally pulled over on the side of the highway to take pictures at sunset together?

Like we’re on a date.

Speaker 4: We’re not on a date

Joel Saxum: officially, by the way. We’re not, yeah. Yeah. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. To me, they’re beautiful. I think they’re amazing. They’re awesome, right? So then it’s [00:25:00] just this emotional thought. You like them or you don’t this, it’s the nimbyism thing. It’s the Nantucket don’t wanna see it off the coast.

But they don’t realize that their energy future, their economic future is hanging in the balance of what they don’t like to look at.

Phil Totaro: If you go to any. Midwestern county meeting where they have, you know, a community session talking about a new renewable project they wanna build. That is precisely what ends up happening anyway, because the, all the arguments that people come in with are whatever they’ve Googled on the internet, and we used to have experts there, either from the project developer.

And, and they still send their own people. But see, the problem is the, the community’s like, oh, well of course you’re gonna say nice things about the project you wanna build. But what we also used to have were people from awe that had a network of grassroots folks that could go out and provide independent support during those kinds of meetings.

We lost that grassroots when they pulled [00:26:00] out and sent everybody into Washington because that’s where they think policy gets made. And it, but it’s not. Making the right kind of policy because you need to be able to change people’s minds in the local communities. And the lack of grassroots is what’s killing the industry at this point, and nobody’s investing in that anymore.

Rosemary Barnes: Pol, let’s be honest, have politicians ever understood how the electricity grid works like in the, you know, the electronics kind of way? No, your average person under doesn’t understand that. So we’ve, you know, engineers, electrical engineers, power system engineers have got on with the job of keeping the grid reliable despite a lot of challenges for, you know, over a hundred years now.

And if we would let them get on with it, then they would continue to do that. But now electricity is political because of, um, you know, climate change. And so that’s why we, you have all these problems where people want to, you know, mess with the way that engineers have always have always done things. So.

Speaker 4: Sun Zia, the largest wind energy and solar project in America at the moment is being built [00:27:00] right as we speak. It’s about three gigawatts. Alright? So plugging in three gigawatts anywhere is a big deal. No matter how big your grid is. Three gigawatts is a lot of power. It’s run into legal problems again, and maybe they’re all justified.

But if you take three gigawatts that are planned, co plan capacity. That all of a sudden disappears, could disappear, or could be delayed by a couple of years. That’s a big deal. And I, I think all the electrical engineers in the world would say, uhoh, we got a problem here that we need to get fixed. And I think that is gonna be more common now than it has been previously because of the size of the projects.

The projects are getting massive. Instead of putting in 50 megawatts or putting in 500, instead of 500, they’re putting in five gigawatts.

Rosemary Barnes: But is that so different to, you know, like you’ve had, you know, gigawatts or multiple gigawatts of nuclear power that turns out to take 20 years to build instead of 10?

You know, and that’s the same sort of thought of challenge. You, you, you, you [00:28:00] gotta, you gotta, in your planning people are ob Yeah. People are obviously aware that things can get delayed, uh, or whatever. So I don’t know if it’s a, a brand new, unique challenge. It’s a, a challenge for sure, but I’m not sure that it’s unprecedented.

Joel Saxum: I think the trouble, the trouble that what you say unprecedented. I’m, I’m, I, I, I disagree with you because when I hear, like, I’m sitting in the Ercot market, right? And I watch what the Ercot like. 2, 5, 10, 20 year plans are great. Looks like we’re gonna be fine. They, they were the ones who put in the crest lines, which are the, the big transmission lines that go west in the state to grab all the renewables and bring ’em to Dallas and bring ’em to San Antonio and bring ’em all great.

But they’re being undermined right now by the politic politics. And the politics are literally quoting the, the DC politics and saying like, we’re, and they’re standing up against renewables and it’s like. Okay. Whatever your political ideal ideology is, is [00:29:00] do you, but when you’re looking at stopping growth, stopping energy generation of the only sources that are deployable fast enough, you can only build solar and wind and batteries fast enough to keep up with the de growth and demand.

Right Now, you can’t get, we’ve said this before in the podcast. You can’t, I can’t go to GE and order a thermal generation. I can order a natural gas plank and, and get it next year. I’m not gonna get it until like 20 30, 20 32 thought if I’m lucky. And by 2032, the demand in the erco market is gonna be over two and a half times what it is right now.

So you better start building wind and solar. So if you’re passing legislation that’s undermining the ability to do that, we’re screwed. Like, I’m gonna go, I’ll come, go get solar panels and batteries for the house because you’re gonna have to have,

Speaker 4: do states start to take over. Where the federal government is stepping away.

You can’t, if you cross state lines, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. In terms of, in terms of development, Joel, I’m not, I’m not saying in, in, you know, providing, [00:30:00] basically what I’m thinking is if it’s a $31, a megawatt hour production tax credit, and the federal government pulls it, which is the problem, they pull it, they, they bring it back, they pull it again.

Okay. If, if I wanna have some stability, and if I’m in Kansas and the electricity is being generated in Kansas by wind and solar and a bunch of other things, same thing about Iowa. I don’t want that nonsense going on. I want them to know that the power is gonna be there when I need it, because my economic viability is relying upon that.

It depends on that to happen. So do I take the production tax credits and build it into my. State somehow, either in terms of. Rate increases or subsidies from the state

Phil Totaro: government. The only way that they can pay for that kind of a subsidy at a state level is to raise prices or taxes or, yeah. Or taxes.

But probably raising rates, uh, is the easier way to make that [00:31:00] happen. ’cause changing the tax code means more state level, you know, provisions need to be put in place. It’s just easier to jack up the, the, the utility price. So that’s, that’s likely the outcome if they go that direction. The reason why the industry’s pushed for federal, um, you know, tax subsidies in the first place is that it.

It provides a bigger, more economically viable pool to pull from for, for those subsidies as opposed to leaving it up to the states where states are then gonna get into competition with one another. Where one’s, you know, Kansas is gonna make their subsidy, you know, 32 bucks and then you know, somebody, Oklahoma’s gonna make theirs like 35 and then, you know, which, which sounds good.

I mean, it sounds like, okay, capitalism, yay, capitalism. But that’s gonna end up, but that’s also gonna end up having the, the same effect that you were talking about before, Alan, because [00:32:00] somebody that was proposing a project, even if it’s like, let’s say it’s somewhere in the Southwest Power Pool. Even if you were proposing a project to be built to connect to one node y, you know, based on.

The, the inconsistency of the state subsidies, you may pull your project from one node and now wanna stick it into another node because you’re getting a higher subsidy over here. That’s why a federal subsidy is actually better, um, because it provides more consistency to the entire industry, regardless of where you’re building the project.

Speaker 4: But it’s a brave new world right now. Phil. There has not been consistency at the federal government level. It has been very, if anything, inconsistent, consistently inconsistent. So it’s gonna be consistently inconsistent. Then the states are gonna take over or the utilities are gonna take over and make it consistent.

Joel Saxum: So let, lemme give you a rundown of states and, and I’m just saying for money to be able to possibly do their own PTC. These are the states in 2024 that ran at a budget surplus, Texas, [00:33:00] Florida. And now it gets weird. Oregon, Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, South Dakota, Wyoming, Nevada, Wyoming, big wind state, of course, Texas, big wind state.

There’s a couple of big wind states in here. The rest of ’em, solar, of course, you can put anywhere. Uh, Oregon’s a big, Oregon’s, a pretty decent sized wind state as well. Uh, but I, I think you could see that. I, but I think you would, to what you’re saying, Phil, I, I under completely understand federal’s better.

However, if they’re not gonna do it and the states start doing it, great, but I think you would see some lawsuits instantly because people would be like, and it’s because the power pools don’t follow state lines. Ercot is the only one that is within one state. No lawsuits there. But if you’re in S Southwest, you’re in Meso, you’re in the PJM, you’re anywhere else where that stuff can cross the the electrons.

Technically you can cross state lines. Then you’re gonna run up a lawsuit. It’ll get stopped up instantly.

Speaker 4: I could see ways of structure would, would [00:34:00] work where everybody would be happy.

Joel Saxum: It’s about time. It would make com, it would man, it would make, it would make investment in states competitive. Think about that.

If you’re sitting here in South Dakota and Minnesota and Minnesota’s offering you $30 megawatt hour, all of those jobs are gonna Minnesota. You know, all those jobs are gonna Minnesota, all that construction’s going over there, all that spend is going over, all that economic growth is going over there.

That’s

Speaker 4: as easy as it is. That’s exactly right. That is the railroad of the 2020s. It’s exactly what it is. And if you’re not willing to hop on that train, man, you’re gonna pay a price. And it’s not gonna be a five year penalty, it’s gonna be a hundred year penalty. That’s what we’re talking about right now.

So. Get on this electricity train, but thank you for listening to this podcast. Hey, there’s everybody’s frustrated at the minute we’re all trying to figure out ways to make the electricity grid more reliable, more consistent, and, uh, better than it is today. So thanks for listening. This is EP Time Win Energy podcast for Phil [00:35:00] Ro Joel Saxon, and now The Missing Rosemary Barnes.

We’ll see you next week.

https://weatherguardwind.com/renewables-grid-stability/

Continue Reading

Renewable Energy

North Carolina needs more certainty before committing to an expensive new gas plant

Published

on

Despite massive uncertainty across the economy, Duke Energy is plowing ahead with its plan to build new fossil gas-fired power plants to serve data center, manufacturing, and other large customer load that may not even show up. Duke has asked the NC Utilities Commission for permission to build a combined-cycle (CC) gas plant in Person County, North Carolina, at the site of Duke’s Roxboro coal plant.

SACE has argued against the need for this gas power plant in the Certificate of Public Need and Necessity (CPCN) docket, submitting testimony to the Commission on Monday, June 9, 2025. Here’s a summary of that testimony (prepared by Synapse Energy Economics, Inc.), which explains what this all means for Duke’s billpayers, and how Duke can make changes within its control to protect customers and reduce pollution. These recommendations include:

  • Not approving this new gas power plant because the risks that it will increase bills are too high. Instead, Duke should improve the processes that are holding back lower-cost renewables and storage, then use renewables and storage to meet new load.
  • Instead of approving this specific gas plant, the Commission should order Duke to use an all-source procurement process to determine a portfolio of flexible assets that can meet the utility’s needs based on real-world costs.
  • In the event the Commission approves this gas plant, it should protect customers from high bills due to volatile gas prices by instituting a fuel cost sharing mechanism for the fuel costs spent to run this plant.

Duke Doesn’t Need this Risky Gas Power Plant

Duke’s claim that it needs this fossil gas power plant is based on outdated analysis. In this CPCN docket, Duke relies on its 2023 Carbon Plan Integrated Resource Plan (CPIRP) modeling and the CPIRP supplemental update and analysis filed in January 2024. The world has changed dramatically since then, and it is important that the Commission review the latest information before approving expenditures that will impact customer bills for decades.

Duke’s load forecast – once based on steady, predictable growth – is now subject to significant uncertainty as 1) data center developers look around the country for the best deal and the fastest interconnection to the grid and 2) manufacturers announce projects and then pull back as political uncertainty changes the economics of those projects. Under Duke’s current rate structure, prospective companies and site developers do not need to commit much money to become part of Duke’s load forecast. They have very little “skin in the game,” and Duke currently does not have policies in place to change this. If the Commission allows Duke to build an expensive fossil gas plant for load that doesn’t materialize, Duke’s remaining customers will be on the hook to pay for it.

Duke’s own load forecast updates since 2023 show that there are wild swings in its predictions. In the Spring of 2023, Duke anticipated 8 new large load projects during its 10-year planning forecast period, requiring an average of 169 MW each. Then for Fall 2023 (the supplemental update filed in January 2024), Duke anticipated 35 projects requiring an average of 111 MW each. In Summer 2024, Duke changed its forecast again, projecting 39 projects requiring an average of only 103 MW. And in May 2025, Duke filed an update showing a reduction in the number of projects back down to 35 but a dramatic increase in average need – back up to 169 MW. Duke’s forecasts will continue to show swings up and down – both in the number of projects and megawatts – until Duke has policies in place that require more commitment from the companies that knock on its door requesting service. Duke also has not published information regarding the location of these loads – the latest forecast applies to all of Duke Energy in both North and South Carolina.

It is also important to know that that this gas plant isn’t needed to meet growing load from existing customers or to replace retiring coal plants (according to Duke’s own testimony). This gas plant is being justified by new manufacturing and data centers claiming they will be operating somewhere in Duke Energy Progress or Duke Energy Carolinas territory in North or South Carolina.

Even if the load shows up, this plant won’t be needed for long

Even Duke admits that it doesn’t “need” this fossil gas power plant for very long. These kinds of power plants, combined-cycle plants, are typically used about 80% of the time, i.e. they are “baseload” power plants. But even absent federal carbon regulations, Duke expects this power plant’s usage to decline significantly throughout its 35-year lifetime (from 80% in 2030 decreasing to 46% by 2040 and only 13% by 2050 onwards). As cheaper renewables and storage with zero fuel costs are brought online, they will displace this plant. Duke is proposing to build a giant power plant that will very quickly run less and less – but Duke’s customers will continue to pay for it until 2065—15 years past a state law requiring Duke’s generation fleet to be carbon neutral. This represents a significant change in how power plants are built and run, and this is not in the best interest of Duke’s billpayers. To add insult to injury, Duke hasn’t even procured all of the equipment needed to build this plant, so the costs could skyrocket even more than they already have since last year’s carbon plan proceeding.

Renewables are flexible, would protect customers, and would reduce pollution

Duke’s model only chose a gas plant to meet this capacity need because of limits Duke imposed on the model. Duke claims it cannot interconnect renewables and storage fast enough to meet this capacity need, but the reasons it cannot interconnect those resources faster are all within Duke’s control. As Synapse recommends, Duke needs to update its processes that are holding back renewables and storage from serving customers with low-cost and low-risk resources. These processes include interconnection and transmission planning.

SACE has been advocating for improvements to these processes for years, and Duke has made changes to both its interconnection process and transmission planning. Duke was one of the first utilities in the Southeast to implement cluster studies in its interconnection process, and it is in the midst of the first scenario-based transmission planning exercise in the region. But is there evidence that these updates have helped if Duke continues to limit solar and storage in its future resource modeling? Given the much quicker interconnection process recently demonstrated in Texas, this raises the question of how hard Duke is really trying to streamline renewables interconnection.

Modular, flexible resources such as wind, solar, and energy storage can be adjusted in quantity based on market conditions. As our testimony from Synapse states, “This modularity, combined with the fact that solar and wind have zero exposure to fuel price volatility once they are constructed, makes these resources particularly valuable in the face of trade tariff uncertainty.”

The bottom line is that the Commission needs a lot more certainty about load growth and costs before committing Duke’s billpayers to any type of large fossil gas power plant. We simply do not have that now.

The post North Carolina needs more certainty before committing to an expensive new gas plant appeared first on SACE | Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.

North Carolina needs more certainty before committing to an expensive new gas plant

Continue Reading

Renewable Energy

Ultimate Guide To Understanding Every Type Of Solar Panel

Published

on

Are you thinking of switching to solar but feeling overwhelmed by the wide range of panel options available in the market? 

You’re not alone, as many others feel the same way. 

In a sun-drenched country like Australia, where electricity prices seem to climb every year, more households are turning to solar as a smart, sustainable solution.  

The reason for this energy transition is apparent: harnessing clean, renewable energy gives you energy freedom, saves you costs on electricity bills, and reduces your reliance on fossil fuels, lowering your carbon footprint.   

Moreover, solar panels are not only good for the planet; they’re an investment for your future!  

But with so many types of solar panels, how do you know which one is right for you? 

  • Which panels perform best in Australia’s diverse climate?
  • What type suits your roof, your budget, and your energy needs?
  • And most importantly, are they really worth the cost? 

Well, in this comprehensive guide, we’ll explain the above questions and everything you need to know about solar panels in Australia.  

From solar panel types to benefits and efficiencies, this ultimate guide on all types of solar panels in Australia will help you find the most suitable panels for your home and financial needs. 

So, tag along to learn more details!  

What Are Solar Panels? | Breaking Down the Power of the Sun!

Let’s begin by addressing a very basic question: What is a solar panel, and how does it work? 

A solar panel is a device that converts sunlight into electricity using photovoltaic (PV) cells. Instead of burning fossil fuel, these different types of solar panels generate clean, renewable energy with Australia’s abundant sunlight.

How Solar Panels Work: A Simple Breakdown!

At the core of every solar panel, there is a set of photovoltaic (PV) cells. These cells are responsible for converting sunlight into usable electricity.  

When sunlight hits these cells, it excites electrons within the silicon-based material, creating an electric current. This current is then captured and converted into alternating current (AC) through an inverter, making it suitable for household or commercial use.  

However, solar panels cannot store energy for later use. Therefore, you might need to add battery storage to keep your home illuminated at night or during low-light hours. 

Are They Worth It for Australians?

Solar panels are generally a smart investment for most Australians due to the country’s high solar exposure, government incentives, and rising electricity costs.  

With abundant sunshine, households in most Australian cities can generate a significant portion of their electricity needs from solar. This energy switch can be a significant key to reducing power bills while enhancing grid stability. 

For example,  a 6.6 kW solar system can save households $1,000–$2,500 per year, depending on usage and feed-in tariffs. They can reduce your power bills by up to 70% 

Moreover, the federal Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme (SRES), energy-saving schemes and various state rebates and incentives significantly reduce the upfront cost of solar systems.

So, with all these long-term savings, generous incentives, and positive environmental impact, solar panels offer a sustainable solution, making them a worthwhile financial and environmental investment for all.  

What Are the Most Popular Types of Solar Panels Available in Australia?

types of solar panels

Australia’s strong solar market offers various solar panel options tailored to different needs, budgets, and property types. Homeowners can access high-quality solar technologies from both local and international manufacturers, creating a global bond.  

However, instead of making a blind choice, it’s wise to understand the different types of panels, as each has different efficiency, durability, and cost advantages.  

So, before moving further, let’s have a glimpse at the most popular types of solar panels currently available in Australia:  

Monocrystalline Solar Panels: Premium Efficiency and Longevity

Monocrystalline solar panels are the most efficient type of solar panel. They are made from a single, pure crystal structure, which allows electrons to move more freely, resulting in higher efficiency.   

These panels are easily recognizable by their dark black color and rounded edges. While they are more than other types, their high efficiency and longevity make them a great investment. 

What are the Pros? 

  • High performance in low-light and high-temperature conditions. 
  • Sleek, modern look. 
  • Lower long-term cost per watt. 
  • Best for homeowners with limited roof space.  
  • Incredible longevity and efficiency.  

Talking about Cons: 

  • Monocrystalline panels are expensive. 
  • The manufacturing process results in silicon waste. 

Polycrystalline Solar Panels: Reliable and Cost-Effective

Polycrystalline solar panels are made from multiple crystal structures, which gives them a blue hue with a speckled look.  

They are less efficient than monocrystalline panels but are also less expensive. These panels are great for those with ample roof space and a tighter budget.  

What are the Pros? 

  • More affordable than Monocrystalline panels. 
  • Leaves less waste during production. 
  • Offer decent performance for residential use. 
  • Easier manufacturing process.

Talking about Cons: 

  • Less efficient. 
  • Require more space than Monocrystalline panels. 
  • Lower the aesthetic appeal of homes. 

Thin-Film Solar Panels: Lightweight and Versatile

Thin-film solar panels are the most affordable but least efficient type, with energy efficiency ranging from 7% to 18%. They are made by layering photovoltaic materials onto a surface.  

These panels are flexible, lightweight, and ideal for industrial and commercial use in Australian landscapes. 

The types include: 

  • Cadmium Telluride (CdTe) Panels 

Cadmium telluride is the most common thin-film panel, constituting about 5% of solar panel sales. These panels can achieve an efficiency rating of 9% to 15%. 

They are made from cheaper, toxic materials such as cadmium telluride and cadmium sulphide, which can pose environmental and health risks. 

  • Amorphous Silicon (A-Si) Panels 

Amorphous silicon panels use a different technology that makes them very flexible. Instead of using crystalline silicon wafers, these panels use a thin silicon strip with a rubber-like texture. 

These panels are incredibly lightweight, versatile, non-toxic, and cheap, but have a low efficiency rating of about 7%. 

  • Copper Indium Gallium Selenide (CIGS) Panels 

CIGS panels are the most efficient thin-film panels available. They are composed of copper, gallium, indium, and selenide layers placed on a base of steel, glass, plastic, and other materials. 

These panels can be installed where standard panels cannot fit. They have a high enough efficiency rating of 12% to 15%.  

Bifacial Solar Panel: Power from Every Angle!

Bifacial solar panels can generate power from both sides, capturing sunlight that hits the front of the panel and light that reflects onto the back. It’s like double the sides, double the Power! 

This can increase energy production by up to 30%. They are ideal for ground-mounted solar systems or buildings with reflective roofing.  

Concentrated PV Cell (CVP)

Concentrated PV cells are the most efficient type of solar panel available today. They use lenses or curved mirrors to focus sunlight onto a small area of high-efficiency solar cells.   

However, they require direct sunlight and a cooling system to function effectively. They are more suitable for large-scale commercial projects in sunny locations.   

Solar Panel Types by Efficiency and Longevity: A Detailed Comparison

Type Efficiency Lifespan Perfect for
Monocrystalline 18–22% 25+ years Homeowners with limited roof space or those prioritizing efficiency and longevity.
Polycrystalline 15–17% 20–25 years Budget-conscious users with ample roof space.
Thin-Film 10–13% 10–20 years Large buildings, factories, and unconventional surfaces like car roofs or windows.

5 Factors to Look for While Installing a Solar Panel in Australia

Choosing the right panel is just half the job, where installation quality and system design play a huge role in overall performance. 

So, here we’ve listed what to consider before installing a solar panel on your property:

1. Sun Exposure and Roof Orientation

Proper sun exposure is a significant factor for maximizing energy production. In Australia, a north-facing roof typically captures the most sunlight.  

Also, ensure your roof is free of large trees, chimneys, or other shading.

2. Solar Panel Efficiency

Higher solar panel efficiency means more power, which ultimately leads to faster return on investment (ROI). This is especially important if your roof area is limited or you live in a rented property.

3. Durability and Warranty

Look for panels that offer 25-year performance warranties and 10–15-year product warranties.  

These warranties can provide long-term peace of mind and potentially save you significant repair or replacement costs.  

4. Installer Credentials

Once you decide to install solar, choose Clean Energy Council (CEC) accredited installers.  

They’ll help make sure your system follows Australian rules and let you know about rebate eligibility criteria.  

5. Proper Installation and Aftercare

Lastly, the installer will mount the solar panels on your roof and connect them to a solar inverter.  

After the installation, the system will need to be inspected by a certified electrician. Then, a monitoring app will track how much electricity your system produces and how much you use.

Some Other Hidden Factors That Might Impact Your Solar Setup!

While planning a solar installation, most people focus on the obvious elements like panel type, system size, and cost.  

However, beyond these core considerations, there are several lesser-known factors that can quietly influence the efficiency, longevity, and overall success of your solar setup.   

This includes: 

  • Hail Rating of the Panel 

This rating indicates how well solar panels can withstand hail impacts. Panels are typically tested by firing ice balls at them to simulate hail.  

A higher hail rating means better durability in hail-prone areas, reducing the risk of cracks and performance loss. Crystalline panels can handle hail hitting speeds up to 50 mph, while thin-film panels are thinner and less resistant. 

  • Temperature Tolerance of the Panel 

Solar panels become less efficient at high temperatures. Temperature tolerance, often measured as a temperature coefficient, tells you how much performance drops per degree above 25°C.  

Lower coefficients mean better performance in hot climates. So, here are the temperature coefficients for different panel types: 

    • Monocrystalline: -0.3% to -0.4% / °C  
    • Polycrystalline:  -0.4% to -0.5% / °C 
    • Thin-film: -0.2% to -0.3% / °C 
  • Fire Rating of the Solar Panel 

Solar panels and mounting systems must meet fire safety standards. The fire rating is usually classified in Class A, B, or C, reflecting the system’s resistance to fire spread and ignition.  

Class A is the most fire-resistant, which is crucial in wildfire-prone regions like Australia. 

  • Light-Induced Degradation (LID) 

LID (Light-Induced Degradation) is a common issue in crystalline solar panels, where they lose about 1–3% of their performance during the first few hours or days of sun exposure.  

It happens when sunlight reacts with tiny amounts of oxygen left in the silicon during manufacturing.  

This reaction slightly disrupts the silicon structure, reducing the panel’s efficiency. 

How to Choose the Right Solar Panels for Your Property?

Every home has different setups, so the solar panel installation process also varies from home to home. Here’s a stepwise checklist to help tailor the perfect setup: 

Step 1: Assess Your Energy Needs 

Before choosing solar panels, look at how much electricity your home uses. Check your electricity bills to calculate your average daily usage in kWh 

If you’re planning to expand or add things like an electric vehicle or a home addition, consider how that might increase your energy needs in the future. 

Step 2: Evaluate Roof Size and Position 

In Australia, your roof’s position and condition matter greatly for solar energy generation. Therefore, while installing the panel, you should consider: 

  • Roof orientation, as south-facing roofs typically capture the most sunlight.
  • Proper tilt and shading for minimal shading from trees, chimneys, or nearby buildings.
  • Larger roofs offer more installation space, while older roofs may need repairs, so check the roof size and condition first. 

However, if you have limited space, go for high-efficiency monocrystalline panels, and Polycrystalline might be a better value for plenty of space. 

Step 3: Set a Budget 

Solar Power System prices vary widely from place to place. But with our 440W Tier-1 Panels and 5kW Wi-Fi Inverter in a 6.6kW Solar Power System, you can enjoy the benefits of solar power without a hefty price tag. 

  • For 6.6 kW System: 

Original Price starts from $3,690.00 

Cyanergy’s VIC Offer Price starts from $890.00 

  • For 10.12kW System 

Original Price starts from $5,770.00 

Cyanergy’s VIC Offer Price starts from $2,970.00 

  • For 13kW System 

Original Price starts from $7,130.00 

Cyanergy’s VIC Offer Price starts from $4,330.00

Step 4: Find a Trustworthy Installer & Factor in Rebates 

Federal STC rebates and various state-based incentives can save you thousands off your upfront cost, so look for a certified, experienced installer who can help you claim them.

So, Which Solar Panel Type Should You Use?

Honestly, there is no specific answer to this question. The panel type and effectiveness depend on several factors, including your installation location, budget, and aesthetic preferences.  

However, here we’ve shared a quick guide based on different situations to make your purchase decision easier:  

Different Scenarios Recommended Type
Limited roof space or rental property Monocrystalline
Tight budget with big roof space Polycrystalline
Flexible portable solutions Thin film
Need long-term high output Monocrystalline
Off-grid or rural installations Thin-Film or Hybrid

Some of the Best Solar Panels in Australia (2025 Edition)

Best Solar Panels in Australia

When choosing the best solar panel brands in Australia, performance, durability, and warranties matter most. 

  1. SunPower
    • Efficiency: Up to 22.8%
    • Warranty: 40 years (industry-best!)
    • Why Choose: Premium performance and extreme durability
  1. REC Solar
    • Efficiency: Up to 21.9% 
    • Warranty: 25 years
    • Why Choose: Excellent value for performance, strong Australian support
  1. Q CELLS
    • Efficiency: Up to 21.4%
    • Warranty: 25 years
    • Why Choose: Robust tech with good performance in varying light conditions
  1. Jinko Solar
    • Efficiency: Up to 21%
    • Warranty: 25 years 
  1. LONGi Solar
    • Efficiency: 20%
    • Warranty: 25 years
    • Why Choose: Solid mid-range performer, good balance of cost and quality 

For any queries, contact Cyanergy. Here, our solar experts will provide the best solution based on your preferences.  

Remember, with the right panel type, a trusted installer, and a bit of planning, you can enjoy decades of clean, affordable electricity. 

Your Solution Is Just a Click Away

The post Ultimate Guide To Understanding Every Type Of Solar Panel appeared first on Cyanergy.

Ultimate Guide To Understanding Every Type Of Solar Panel

Continue Reading

Renewable Energy

Wind Turbine Monitoring: Fibersail’s Predictive Maintenance Could Save Operators Billions

Published

on

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Wind Turbine Monitoring: Fibersail’s Predictive Maintenance Could Save Operators Billions

Wind turbine blade failures represent the largest ongoing expenditures facing wind energy operators, with over $5-6 billion spent annually on unplanned repairs. What if wind turbine monitoring detected blade damage before it becomes catastrophic – and could give operators a clear strategy to prevent failure?

That’s what Fibersail, based in Portugal, with offices in the Netherlands, has developed with its innovative fiber optic sensing system.

Fibersail CEO Carlos Oliveira joined us to discuss why they developed this new turbine monitoring system, what they learned along the way, and how it’s working for wind farms around the world.

You can listen to the interview here or read the highlights below.

The Future of wind turbine Monitoring

As the wind industry continues to scale and turbines grow larger, the need for advanced monitoring systems has increased as well. Fibersail’s fiber optic technology represents a fundamental shift from reactive maintenance to predictive maintenance, potentially saving the industry billions while improving the reliability of renewable energy generation.

Wind Turbine Monitoring is a Billion-Dollar Problem

Most operators face the same stark reality: traditional monitoring systems simply aren’t equipped to handle today’s massive turbine blades. As Oliveira put it, “We are building bigger and bigger blades, using old technology. It does not work.”

Where turbines once showed problems after 5-8 years of operation, today’s operators routinely see major blade issues within the first year or two of operation—sometimes even during the warranty period. This dramatic change has led to some major companies recognizing billions in losses due to blade-related issues. It’s conceivable – realistic, even – that if this trend continues, it could put the entire wind industry at risk.

Why Go Beyond Traditional SCADA Systems?

Most wind turbines today rely on SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) systems for monitoring, but they weren’t designed to detect the structural issues that lead to blade failures. Fibersail’s fundamentally different approach brings advanced sensing technology directly to the blade structure.

The company’s fiber optic technology provides real-time data about blade behavior that simply isn’t available through conventional monitoring systems.

The Shape-Sensing Revolution

Fibersail’s innovation is its unique “shape sensing” technology. The concept originated from measuring sailboat sails and has evolved to monitor wind turbine blades—essentially treating each blade as a “rooted sail.”

Here’s how it works:

  • Fiber optic sensors are installed directly inside the blade, running from root to tip
  • The system monitors the blade’s shape in real-time, detecting minute changes that indicate structural issues
  • Dual validation occurs by monitoring both shape changes and frequency variations
  • All complexity is encapsulated in a robust system that field technicians can easily install

A Pragmatic Implementation Strategy

Ideally, a sensing system that is built into the blade would be an OEM integration, but Fibersail knew that would delay market entry, possibly for years, while operators and quite possibly the industry – ran out of money and out of business.

Rather than waiting for OEM integration, then, Fibersail began working directly with wind farm operators—the ones who face the immediate financial impact of blade failures.

“The owner-operators are the ones who have the problem to solve,” Oliveira explained. And by working directly with wind farming operations, Fibersail is better able to gather real-world data to prove how the sensing system saves blades, and money. The strategy is paying off.

The company is currently collecting field data from multiple installations, with promising early damage detection and damage propagation projects underway. This real-world validation is crucial, Oliveira emphasized, saying, “Nothing is as valued as the data from the field.”

installation data from Fibersail

From Data to Actionable Intelligence

Perhaps most importantly, the data Fibersail provides is not just graphs and charts, but actionable intelligence. Oliveira calls the solution “elegantly simple.” When the Fibersail system detects a problem or potential damage propagation, it sends an email alert to operators, allowing them to prioritize their limited maintenance resources effectively, and to focus on turbines that need immediate attention, while allowing others to wait for scheduled maintenance.

Blade Manufacturing: Variations Happen

Unfortunately, in working with wind farm operators, Fibersail has seen firsthand the frustrating reality of blade manufacturing variability. While blades are theoretically identical when they leave the factory, manufacturing tolerances mean each blade is slightly different. Add a few years of operation, repairs, and patches, and operators end up with what Oliveira colorfully describes as “Frankenstein turbines.”

This variability makes traditional numerical models inadequate for predicting real-world blade behavior – and it highlights the need for actual sensing technology.

Overcoming Installation Challenges

One of the biggest hurdles in the industry is navigating warranty restrictions and service agreements that can prevent operators from installing aftermarket monitoring systems. Fibersail positions itself as a solution provider for the entire industry, not just for the owners and operators, but also working with manufacturers and developers.

The company aims to create three-way partnerships between Fibersail, the customer, and the OEM when possible. The entities are more likely to work together when they see how the technology benefits all parties, by reducing costs and improving reliability – always a key to navigating warranty issues.

Oliveira noted that Fibersail understands its customers need to comply with strict cybersecurity requirements, which is simply a necessity in today’s complicated energy industry.

Tailored Solutions at Scale

Fibersail offers a modular product line that can be customized based on customer equipment, site conditions, and other operationall factors, including –

  • Basic load sensors for customers needing fundamental load data
  • Shape sensors for early damage detection
  • Hotspot sensors for comprehensive damage monitoring
  • Integrated systems combining multiple sensing technologies

Because of the company’s flexible offerings, customers can start with a basic monitoring system and add complexity as needed.

Expanding into Offshore

While Fibersail is currently focused on onshore installations, the company is expanding to offshore applications, with the first Fibersail offshore installation in the Netherlands planned for this summer. In the more challenging offshore environment, the company expects that the return on investment will be even greater.

For More Information

Learn more about Fibersail’s innovative blade monitoring technology at fibersail.com or connect with the company on LinkedIn for the latest industry insights and project updates.

Fibersail CEO Carlos Oliveira

https://weatherguardwind.com/wind-turbine-monitoring-fibersails-predictive-maintenance-could-save-operators-billions/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com