The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast

Matt Sigala, Director of Asset Management at SkySpecs, joins to discuss blade inspection data, repair vendor management, and carbon fiber repairs.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

Allen Hall 2025: Matt, welcome to the program. Greatly appreciate it. So Matt Sagala has not been on the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. Although he’s been asked for the last five or six years to be on, he has had other commitments. So now that he’s available to be on the podcast, we love having him here.

Uh, if you don’t know Matt Sagala, Matt Sagala is a, a real special talent in wind. Very knowledgeable about repairs. He’s a composites person, but he, you know, it’s one thing to know composites and understand what that looks like, but also to run organizations that repair blades and manage blades and take care of large quantities of blades and do it very efficiently, where the assets are actually working and operating efficiently is hard to do.

So, uh, [00:01:00] Matt is now with SkySpecs in a recent change from a, a large global wind operator, and he’s come over to SkySpecs as Director of Asset Management. So Matt, congratulations first. Appreciate 

Matt Sigala: it. Appreciate it. 

Allen Hall 2025: So that’s a, that’s a big title there. What does that all mean, Director of Asset Management at SkySpecs? 

Matt Sigala: basically, it’s just the overview of your entire asset from the start of the inspections to the reviewing of, of the inspections, to creating the RFP, going out to blade budgets and repairs, uh, and then having the actual repair teams on site and us being able to help execute those repairs in a systematic way, um, without having to overload or, or burden your, your internal, uh, systems in-house.

Allen Hall 2025: Because as an operator, there’s a lot on your plate. 

Matt Sigala: Yes. 

Allen Hall 2025: And a lot of operators don’t necessarily have blade teams internally. You came from an organization- Yeah … that did have a really good, still does have a really good blade organization. 

Matt Sigala: Oh, amazing, yeah. 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah. Uh, that was unique, but a lot of operators in the United States or globally just don’t have [00:02:00] that resource.

SkySpecs has developed that resource over the last couple of years of we’re blade experts, we have all the data coming in, but we can also help you downstream when it comes to maintaining and repairing blades, which is, is sort of a new feature for- Yeah … SkySpecs. Now that you’re there and you’re seeing all the data, all the, the, 

the-

the,

data center, so to speak, of w- and you have access to blades globally, and you can put your fingers on it.

What are you seeing out there in terms of blade health and, and going forward? 

Matt Sigala: There’s a lot of work. There’s definitely a lot of work upcoming and into the future. Um, and you know, I think a lot of it could be risk-based with, with inspections, annual inspections, semi-an-annual inspections. I think that’s always the first line of defense on any blade management c- campaign.

Um, and then, you know, coming behind that, I think that’s where our preferred vendor lists and, uh, you know, being comfortable with working with certain suppliers on certain type of repairs. Um, we feel that, you know, we have an edge on the industry, [00:03:00] uh, with the data set that we have in hand, plus being able to build a relationship with ISPs.

And not only build a relationship with them, but be able to continuously give them mindful insight to their repairs from a year now to two years now. Because we’re the only ones really seeing those inspections and the repairs after they’ve been in operation for more than a year. It’s very rare that a, an ISP, uh, even on my side of the house when I was working with EDF, of being able to see a repair from year to year.

Um, I think that’s, that’s, that’s pretty massive and- Yeah … a lot of value within that, so. 

Allen Hall 2025: Oh, sure. Uh, you were one of the first ones when I met you years ago now, uh, that was a big proponent of more inspection. Yeah. That there are some blades in which you must inspect more. 

Matt Sigala: Yes. 

Allen Hall 2025: And here’s the reason why.

Matt Sigala: Yeah. 

Allen Hall 2025: Because you had thought through it a little bit and you’d come up with a plan. So you always had a plan. That’s one thing about Sagales, he always has a plan. You can ask him any question, he’s got a plan in relationship to blades. And you were the, you were the one that has said, “Hey, uh, there are certain blade types out there that we have seen that, well, you need to do a [00:04:00] little more inspection, and there are some others that it’s totally fine.”

Yeah. A, a yearly inspection is, is, is fine. Well enough. And that SkySpecs data, now that you have access to it, is that also f- feeding back into your- Definitely … logic of that? 

Matt Sigala: Yeah, yeah. How do you, how do you think about it? No, it’s, it’s, it’s opened my mind a lot kinda getting me out of just being in, like, the trenches of certain decisions and being able to see this whole data set as a whole now.

Uh, and holistically, it’s like, all right, m- there’s just certain things that I kinda need to adjust on my end. Um, definitely letting a lot of things just play out for, uh, this repair season and, and how things are running, and then kinda looking to make some changes into, into ’27. Um, but the data set, it’s, it’s amazing.

It’s, it’s almost over- overwhelming. Um, so just kinda going after- the low-hanging fruit as far as, like, the 62 twos, the 145s, and really understanding what those look like, uh, how we can help our customers 

Allen Hall 2025: that’s a large part of the fleet in the States, but globally too. SkySpecs has made a lot of, uh, recent advancements into, uh, certain marketplaces outside the US.

Mm-hmm. I won’t go into the specifics there, [00:05:00] but e- essentially, like, SkySpecs is becoming definitely more of a global company than a US-based company. Uh, and seeing turbines from outside the US, so you see a, a GE or a Vestas turbine operating in Germany or in the UK, and you see the same turbine in the States.

They’re not- No … performing the same, are they? No. It’s a completely different- Same turbine. 

Matt Sigala: Yeah, different wind regimes, erosion characteristics, crack propagation rates, everything. Even we were seeing major, you know, differences from the West Coast to, to central Iowa with the same type of platform. So you can only imagine, you know, start going from a, a larger scale on, on the globe, 

Allen Hall 2025: So you’re ac- because you have access to the data now, does that change the way you think about Blade management.

Matt Sigala: Yes. I- 

Allen Hall 2025: in terms of when to, when to inspect, when to repair, or just leave it. Are you able to have clear definition of the variables that go into that equation? 

Matt Sigala: Definitely so. and I think that’s the key to it. It’s, it’s, we- we’re really stepping away from that blanket approach of inspections where you [00:06:00] do have your baseline inspection, but after that you start getting into the granulars of, okay, you know, this site has X amount of the 622Ps or whatever they are, uh, we need to inspect more on, on a biannual or semi-annual inspection.

Um, and then we have, you know, certain turbines, like you said, that we, we touch once a year and it’s kind of just, just let it go. But, um, no, it’s, it’s very site specific, um, on-

Allen Hall 2025: That’s what I’m wondering … on- Is it how, how site specific is it? Very, very, 

Matt Sigala: very site specific. 

Allen Hall 2025: Really? Yeah. It’s- So like, uh, is Central Iowa is different than Central Kansas- 

Matt Sigala: Eh

Allen Hall 2025: in a sense, or is it more broader spread than that? It can 

Matt Sigala: get a little bit broader spread, but then we start looking into s- serial numbers for manufacturers, issues. Okay, are we seeing a certain batch that was released out and it’s in, you know, the northern part of Iowa or half the park? And so that’s what we’re really getting down to now is like serial batch issues and, and trying to track that across the region.

Allen Hall 2025: SkySpecs has been trying to use more AI over the last- Yes … six months to a year. Is that helping to sort through some of that data? 

Matt Sigala: Yeah, it’s accelerating it. Uh, definitely it’s not like the, uh, [00:07:00] all end answer, but it’s definitely, it’s, it’s- 

Allen Hall 2025: So you’re not just thumbing through Excel spreadsheets- Yeah, no

and looking at them one by one, you can actually use some, a little bit of 

Matt Sigala: AI to- A little bit … to sort it. Yeah, Yeah, sort it out, get a high, high res summary, and then being able to kind of like pinpoint where we wanna go from there on it and, and dive in. But still, you know, AI hallucinates and, and does its thing.

Oh, sure. And so we, we just, we wanna tread carefully with it, but making sure it’s clean, 

Allen Hall 2025: a sanity check, right? Yeah, exactly. While you’re there, a sanity check, like does that make sense? Exactly. Oh, okay. Exactly. Let’s, let’s scrape it again. Okay. So that’s a huge advantage, and I, I know on the repair vendor management side- Yeah

which has been a, an effort over the last year or two from SkySpecs, is to, uh, work with the ISPs and make sure that they’re doing the repairs properly and they’re vetted and they’re trained. Yes. That’s been a big effort in- internally in SkySpecs for a little while. Bringing you on really ramps that up in terms of the, the horsepower that SkySpecs can apply to that.

Yeah. Where are you going on that, uh, repair vendor management and the ISPs and the data that comes from, from [00:08:00] all of that side of the business, you know, opposite of the inspection side? 

Matt Sigala: Yeah, so with RVM, you know, my end goal is, is to have a preferred vendor list of contractors within SkySpecs. And I’m more thinking of them as like a toolbox of not just it being a crescent wrench, it’s more of, okay, this ISP is good for bulk LEP installation.

This ISP is good for Vestas wrinkles, you know, within the max cord. And, and so I think that’s where what I’m trying to, to map out now is, is kind of put everyone within their right socket place of, uh, where they belong in the toolbox- Sh- sh- sh- … and how I can be able to utilize them. And then actually from there, um, seeing what the bandwidth is.

And I think that’s like the real catch is being able to get- The right teams on site quickly, you know, when, when you run into those situations, and safely. 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah, because it’s hard. If you call up an ISP and say, “Can you come fix my leading edge problem?” No. Pretty much the answer’s always yes. Yeah, yeah.

Right? But you need a little bit of a sanity check there. Can they really do it when they got twel- 12 crews out right now? They only have 13, [00:09:00] so probably can’t do it right now. Yeah, 

Matt Sigala: exactly. 

Allen Hall 2025: That’s where SkySpecs can help sort that out a bit. 

Matt Sigala: Yeah, you know, on the QAQC side of things with, like, LEP where you- do

your 10 meters or 12 meters of, uh, LEP installation, and you’re trying to take a picture of 12 meters or, or 10 meters of, of LEP installation both, on both sides.

And so the reports are subpar. I think that they’re good enough, but what I’d like to start implementing is being able to have a, a post-installation inspection after the turbines have been running for three days to a week. Let’s refly, you know, the leading edges and get an idea of how the actual installation quality was.

Uh, ’cause I- in my opinion, you know, anything within the LEP that there’s a defect, it’s gonna pop up within that first two weeks of operation. Yeah. I think that’s something where we can capitalize on making the ISPs get back on that blade, fix it before they get offsite, and have prevent remob and, and such. 

Allen Hall 2025: Ooh, that’s a good idea. Yeah. Because a lot of times they’re demobed, they’re down at the next wind farm- Yep … or maybe in another state, and it’s, like, too late to get them back there to, to touch up. To touch 

Matt Sigala: up. 

Allen Hall 2025: Exactly. To do [00:10:00] minor work usually. Yeah. Uh, it’s usually m- not major stuff. It tends to be minor stuff, but to catch it- Yeah

is really important. So the Horizon system that, uh, an existing SkySpecs,

uh,

customer uses is, there’s a lot to it, right? Yeah, yeah. So there’s, there’s many branches to this tree. One of them is repair vendor management. Uh, obviously another one’s inspection and the, and one of those growth branches is solar.

Matt Sigala: Yes. 

Allen Hall 2025: Uh, what is the movement on solar within SkySpecs and repair vendor management? Is that something you guys are working on? Uh, and what, what is the plan for solar? Yes. 

Matt Sigala: It’s the, the same approach as RVM, um, where, you know, solar-wise, we, we still wanna be able to, you know, step in and then be that middleman of being able to inspect, be able to get your asset back up and running with, our preferred vendors, you know, and, uh, just have a more smoother, systematic approach to, to the, the maintenance side of the solar s- side of things.

I think [00:11:00] we’re, the blades, we got an early start on it from 2016, 2017 timeframe, so we’re, you know, well 10 years into this. Uh, and I think we’re at the point where, like, solar starts n- need to catch up, and I think SkySpecs has a, a big headstart on that. 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah. Just even on the inspection side, although, uh, solar inspections have been happening for quite a while- Yeah

the, the quality has varied quite a bit. 

Matt Sigala: Yeah. The, the amount of data, uh, that I’ve, I’ve been learning is it’s, it’s- … 2, 3X compared to, to, you know, what we’re pulling off off blades. Um, and so- Oh, 

Allen Hall 2025: sure … 

Matt Sigala: there’s t- tons more, you know, solar data that needs to be captured and, uh, processed. 

Allen Hall 2025: Thermal imaging. 

Matt Sigala: Thermal imaging.

A bunch of 

Allen Hall 2025: that, right, 

Matt Sigala: inverters. Top of the panel, bottom of the panel. Right. Yeah. Um, so that’s where I’m seeing a lot more, uh, data management is needed on that side too. And, and 

Allen Hall 2025: the, the vendor management of, of that tends to be a little more of l- the Wild West, in my opinion. Yes. ‘Cause the ISPs and wind, there’s a competency to it, and there’s a lot of training- Yeah

to do those things. To be a composite repair technician, you generally have to take- Some training, be out in, in the real world working for a couple of years- Yep … before you become competent at it. Solar doesn’t tend to be that way. 

Matt Sigala: No, [00:12:00] no. They’re very, they’re very John Wayne, I guess, like you said, the Wild West- Yeah

of, of, of, of it. But, um- Yeah, it has to 

Allen Hall 2025: move fast. 

Matt Sigala: It does, and I think that’s where, you know, SkySpecs can really help step in, uh, and be that technical bridge between the financials and the technical, and being able to safely execute, you know, uh, replacements, repairs, et cetera on, uh, on the, the solar side of things. 

Allen Hall 2025: Let me ask you a couple questions- Okay … about carbon fiber. Okay. Because I would be remiss to, to let you go without talking- … about carbon fiber, because it comes up a lot in discussions we have at Weather Guard- Yeah, definitely … with operators, be like, “I’ve got these carbon fiber blades. I don’t really have a good track record of repairing them.”

Matt Sigala: Yes. 

Allen Hall 2025: Or, the repair is complex and I really can’t find an ISP that knows what to do there. What are some of those repair inspection issues with carbon blades that may differ from your standard fiberglass blades that we’re all used to? 

Matt Sigala: Uh, it really depends on where the carbon’s at. So if, you know, we’re talking about a spar cap, um, you know, with unidirectional fibers being- A pultrusion Pultrusion.

[00:13:00] Um, you know, the, the repairs are, are becoming more and more trickier, uh, mostly when you start in- introducing oil ingestion to a lot of these turbines that have carbon. you know, we’re, we’re having to take a lot more steps in, in the repair process, in making sure that we’re executing the repair properly.

And then another thing that w- you know, with the carbon that will– seems to be an issue, uh, on the procurement side is being able to order, uh, you know, the right GSM UD directional prepreg carbon and, and being able to get that in the, into the field, um, just because it requires freezers and, and everything else.

There’s, there’s a couple more steps to, to the prepregs. But, Carbon loves lightning. 

Allen Hall 2025: It does. 

Matt Sigala: It’s, it’s unfortunate. Yeah. But, you know, it’s, it’s, it’s, uh, a, a whole different repair process, to be honest. 

Allen Hall 2025: Well, that’s what I’m hearing- Yeah … is that a lot of operators don’t want to touch it, especially if it’s in a pultrusion form.

Yes. If it is a hand layup carbon fiber structure, uh, from the OEM, that’s a little different than if I had this preformed,

uh, all unidirectional-[00:14:00]

Plank … y- Yeah,

this

kind of brick- Yeah … uh, of, of carbon. That’s hard to kinda grind into and get the layers back like you want to. Is it really repairable? I- and, and it’s in a sense, like is it repairable uptower or is it a downtower thing?

Matt Sigala: Um, no. The majority of the repairs… So I like to think of it if you got your… You break your blade into three sections. You got your max chord, your midspan, and your tip. Yeah. Uh, midspan tip, we, we can get away with uptower carbon fiber repairs. 

Allen Hall 2025: Okay. 

Matt Sigala: they do require aviation skillset as far as- Yeah … um, hot bonders being able- Okay

to pull your vacuums. And, and it’s… The big thing with the carbon prepreg is that you have to get above 80 C, and you’re more into the 140 C, 160 C, and you’re letting it heat soak for, for quite some time. Yeah. And that’s where you need those aviation style hot bonders and being able to get up there because alternately, it’s, it’s you’re having to soak the carbon at 80 C for six hours or eight hours, a little bit longer to, to get that full, full cook.

Um, and so that’s why right now I think there’s only a [00:15:00] very few qualified vendors out there, um, to do the carbon fiber repairs. it’s, it’s something that’s trainable. It’s not black magic. Um- No … it’s, it just takes time. It’s a different technician skillset. You go from reading layers and seeing your biaxials and UDs when you’re, when you’re grinding, to the carbon fiber, it’s all one layer.

It’s all black. Uh, so you, you’re, you’re more using y- uh, micrometer, and you’re, you’re taking your GSM of what your glass you’re gonna replace it with. You’re micing it. Okay, this is four thousandths or whatever, and then you ki- okay, now I’m like at 16 thousandths, X amount of layers, and now let’s go back.

And so it’s, it’s, it just takes time. It’s a process. It takes 

Allen Hall 2025: a lot more time- 

Matt Sigala: Yeah … 

Allen Hall 2025: for sure. A lot. It- does that then lend itself to more training and qualification verification on, on the skillsets that’s out on site? Which is one of the things that repair vendor management at SkySpecs does, right?

Definitely. You, you’re, you’re- clocking each technician of what their skill set is. So if you see a guy out there that only has fiberglass repair, but they’re [00:16:00] working on a pultrusion repair, that’s sort of a red flag- Red flag, 

Matt Sigala: yeah … 

Allen Hall 2025: in SkySpecs, 

Matt Sigala: right? Definitely. Yeah, definitely. Or not try- Well, understand the process, where they’re coming from.

Did it, was it an approved re- repair plan? Um, and a lot of these sites too, like I said, where, you know, they can’t get prepregded carbon, so we’re, they’re using, you know, GSM 600 UD fiberglass on- Right … some of these repairs. 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah. 

Matt Sigala: Um, which is not ideal. Not perfect. Yeah.

Um, but, uh, if, if you gotta get the turbine up in operation, it’s understandable. 

Allen Hall 2025: Oh, sure. Yeah. So what are the other big things that you’re seeing out there today? ‘Cause there’s a lot of work going on. There’s a lot of repower work going. A 

Matt Sigala: lot of repower work. the whole 80/20, uh, right now, that’s kinda what I’m trying to understand is, uh-

which companies are out there actually, uh, replacing blades, or is it just a gearbox generator, uh, repower, you know, where, where is the money need to be spent. Um, and then trying to understand, too, like the, uh, LEP, um, installations, VD- VG installations, uh, being able to get those on top of, uh, the repowers I think is, is a massive win. 

Allen Hall 2025: [00:17:00] Yeah. I, I, we have seen a lot more, uh, leading edge repair over the last two years, uh, mostly c- because of the, the changes in the law. Also, VG’s going on. Mm-hmm. Which you didn’t necessarily see, especially like three or four years ago. Yeah. You would occasionally see it because operators know they get some more power.

Matt Sigala: Yeah. 

Allen Hall 2025: Are, you’re seeing more of that just to get to that 80 percentile threshold- Threshold … on, on, on the starting the tax credits over again Are you guys involved in, on some of the advice, uh- Yes … how to go do that? Because I know a lot of operators, like VGs make sense to me, but I don’t know anything about them.

I’m not an aerodynamicist. Yeah. Just, Matt, does this make sense to go do? Is, is that some of the conversations you’ve been involved with? 

Matt Sigala: Yeah, we’re getting there. Like I said, I’ve only been here for a month now, but, but- Oh, come 

Allen Hall 2025: on … 

Matt Sigala: yeah, the con- 30 

Allen Hall 2025: days is plenty. 

Matt Sigala: The, uh, the conversations are definitely there.

and that’s something that we’re actually looking at in- in house and how we can partner up with, you know, s- certain assets out there that, that can, you know, feed a little bit more data into us. It’s creating like a, an aero packet of being able to- Mm … [00:18:00] install leading edge protection and then apply a VG, and then get yourself out of that neutral area and get you actually making the additional 1.4% energy or, you know- It’s a lot of money.

Yeah, it is. In

the- end, it’s, you know, times these massive fleets, it can add up pretty quickly. 

Allen Hall 2025: What’s your feeling on instrumentation of blades today? Are, are there blades that you, yes, you must be putting some sort of instrumentation on it. I’m thinking about, uh, root inserts is a big problem. Yeah. There’s some cracks on certain blades that seem to be almost ubiquitous.

And then, uh, there’s, there’s some blades that, you know, just seem to keep turning. Are, are you thinking about how SkySpecs gets data into the system? Are you starting to recommend, like, “Hey, uh, we definitely need to put some sensors out there to monitor this crack and just to watch it grow instead of yearly may not be enough”?

Or, or is the drone inspection enough? Or you’re, are, are you thinking about vibration sensors? How, what are you thinking about in terms of blades? Yeah, there’s 

Matt Sigala: definitely, definitely a need for, for sensors on certain [00:19:00]turbines. Um, I think at some point the visual inspections aren’t, aren’t enough, even on, uh, you know, quarterly.

Um, I’d still feel that a, a visual inspection, uh, you know, 30, 40% of the story. Uh, and then after that, you know, you’re kinda having to either internal inspections or getting hands-on inspection type situation. But, um, it’s more the financials of going out and having to reinspect the blade. If you’re continuously inspecting the blade, it’s, it’s almost easier to have the sensors on.

Uh, but it’s- The lack of data to put those sensors on to actually have, you know, good feedback is, it’s- 

Allen Hall 2025: Well, that- that’s one of the things I was thinking about SkySpecs not long ago is because you touch so many blades- Yeah … it, it may make sense that SkySpecs maybe runs a couple of test sites. Like, we’re gonna put sensors on some of these blades to see how this crack progresses, because I’ve seen it in Illinois, in Kansas, in Oklahoma.

If I, me, SkySpecs, have a data set that says, “This is how it progresses,” that could make sense. Yeah. Because you, what you would hate to see is, like, every [00:20:00] operator be doing the same thing over and over and over again. Exactly. Trying to learn the same lesson, where SkySpecs can be a focal point in that. Yeah.

Matt Sigala: No, I think that’s, that’s, uh, something that we, we could be working towards. Um, it’s definitely, you know, not in, in the making right now, but, um, some of this, you know, data keeps coming towards us. It’s, it’s something that we wanna, you know, stay sticky with, so. 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah. And, uh, let’s, let’s go back to the, the repair vendor management side.

Mm-hmm. Uh, I know talking to you before the move to SkySpecs that you had tracked Every technician in terms of their efficiency, the quality of the work, how they… And beyond that, like- Yeah … how they work with others. Do they show up on time? 

Matt Sigala: Yeah. 

Allen Hall 2025: Is that part of the thought process coming into the larger scale Horizon SkySpecs system is we need to be measuring things than just did they finish the turbine and move on?

Matt Sigala: Exactly. 

Allen Hall 2025: Is, is, is that gonna be, you see more of that, you think- 

Sigala: Yeah … 

Allen Hall 2025: over the next couple of 

Matt Sigala: years? I think it’s, it’s gonna be very, you know, ad hoc with each individual customer on, on what type of, you know, data they wanna track, but it’s literally [00:21:00] just a switch within Horizon to turn that on if, if, uh- 

Allen Hall 2025: Wow, I, I, if I’m an operator, I’m 100% turning that on.

Matt Sigala: Yeah. No, and I think it’s more of, uh, it helps the ISPs because the technicians know that their names are actually tied to it rather than them just going in there and doing a report, and we kinda get to see who they are at the end of it, so. 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah. 

Matt Sigala: Um- ‘

Allen Hall 2025: Cause there’s a big boon to technicians. Oh, massive. If you’re a good technician, man, you can get a lot of street credibility because you’ve demonstrated it time and time again, and you have a- Yeah

a, a whole data set that says, “Hey, I know what I’m doing.” Mm-hmm. “You should be hiring me.” 

Matt Sigala: Yeah. 

Allen Hall 2025: That’s extremely valuable. 

Matt Sigala: That’s something I, I push to the technicians even when I was on the other side of the house where, you know, doing interviews for hiring technicians. W- we’d ask, like, “Do you have a, a, a portfolio?

Like, you’re asking for X amount of money, like, you should have something to show for.” Some pictures. Pictures, previous repairs, you know. Start, s- definitely recommending to the technicians to- 

Allen Hall 2025: Yeah … 

Matt Sigala: you know, build a portfolio for yourself ’cause it’s, it speaks more than a resume at times. It’s a 

Allen Hall 2025: profession.

Matt Sigala: It is, yeah. You 

Allen Hall 2025: need to treat it as a profession. Yeah. It’s a 

Matt Sigala: skill- It’s not 

Allen Hall 2025: just a job … 

Matt Sigala: yeah, a skilled trade, so. 

Allen Hall 2025: It, [00:22:00] it, it really is, especially now as- Yeah … as we get into more carbon and complex blade designs, and everything’s just getting more advanced than ever. Yeah. You’d have to have that skill set.

Matt Sigala: Yeah. And I think it takes at least a minimum of three years to become a, a good blade repair technician or any type of technician in general. Like, you know, first year you’re learning. Second year is imposter syndrome, and third year you’re finally kinda getting into the groove of things and, and making some decisions.

So, um, and mostly, you know, hanging on a 5/16 cable, you know, 180 feet off the ground. Um, it, it takes a lotta, lotta training and development with those technicians, and just finding the right mindset right off the bat. It’s, like, the first thing that we look for. 

Allen Hall 2025: So what are the things that operators should know going into this repair season and in towards, you know, inspection season, which will start in a couple of months?

What should they be thinking about going forward here based on what you know now, now you’ve been on the data side of it? 

Matt Sigala: There’s a lot of work coming. There’s a lot of work to be distributed out there, uh, across all of our, our customers. Um, [00:23:00] but there’s a, a massive lack of quality, uh, within the ISPs. Um, and like, like I said, I think it’s not due to the It’s like, I think majority of it’s due to the rapid expansion of, you know, the volume needed for, for repair teams, and it’s constantly growing each year.

And, um, you know, these owners are being pushed a little bit harder to, to spin up these teams to, to get out there. Um, biggest thing is just, you know, taking care of the little steps, you know, making sure all your lines are drawn out on the blade. Like, that’s the stuff that I really see- … our engineers, you know, on, on the q- uh, quality side two or three.

Um, marking is just, you know, minimal stuff to where it doesn’t paint the full picture of the repair on the blade report, and so that’s why we’re raising the flags. Um, it’s not that they’re just going out generally and doing bad repairs. It’s just, like, the little steps in between. I think that’s what we’re kinda, like, focusing on.

other than that, just being safe. You know, these, these guys are, are, are, uh, like I said, hanging up on the, on those ropes or cables and, um, you know, making sure that, you know, they get home safe is, is w- our [00:24:00] biggest thing at the end of the day, too. It’s not only just getting the repairs done, but having the ROI, but it’s making sure that those technicians can, can have a, a safe job to come and go to and, uh, you know, be there, so.

Allen Hall 2025: Well, it’s, I’m sure SkySpecs is thrilled to have you. At least everybody I’ve talked to at SkySpecs is thrilled to have you there, and it’s like y- you’re plugging in this really knowledgeable person into this massive data set. And when you combine those two, you know, it’s, it’s squared. It’s not double, you know?

Yeah. It, it’s, it’s gonna really help SkySpecs out a lot, and I’m super happy for you. I think this is the right s- position for you to be, and eventually, like, you just gain so much knowledge. You- 

Matt Sigala: Definitely. 

Allen Hall 2025: You’re just one of those guys that you, you just think, “Man, Matt knows so much.” And if you haven’t talked to Matt Sagala, or you haven’t talked to SkySpecs, or maybe you are in SkySpecs, you’re in the Horizon system, and you just haven’t turned on the repair vendor management, now is the time to do that.

Matt Sigala: Definitely. 

Allen Hall 2025: Matt is a powerhouse here. He can help you, and the, and the whole team at SkySpecs. There’s a lot of people behind the scenes- Oh, [00:25:00] tons … that are- Yeah … are making this thing go. How do they get ahold of you, Matt? Do they go to LinkedIn or- 

Matt Sigala: LinkedIn, yeah. Um, or I can, you know, drop my, my email address with you, and you can put it up there.

But, uh, yeah, don’t hesitate. Reach out, or if you see me around- … um, you know, give me a call. Grab 

Allen Hall 2025: him. 

Matt Sigala: Yeah. Grab 

Allen Hall 2025: me. If you see Matt, grab him. Yes, Matt, it’s so great to have you on the podcast. We’ve been trying so long to do this, so it’s, it’s great to have you here. 

Matt Sigala: Likewise. No, this was fun. Greatly appreciate it.

Siemens Gamesa rebrands as Omterra, Goldwind questions ever-bigger turbines, and MIT revisits the century-old Betz limit.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

The Uptime Wind Energy podcast, brought to you by StrikeTape. Protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit striketape.com. And now your hosts

Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall, and I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, who is recovering from a very serious illness, Matthew Stead, who has been healthy pretty much all the Australian winter, and Yolanda Padron in sunny, hot Austin, Texas. Welcome, Rosemary

Rosemary Barnes: Thank you. I am recovering from man flu, and I say man flu because it’s just a cold, but I’m complaining a lot about it. 

Allen Hall: there’s gonna be a new name for Siemens Gamesa. So it was Siemens and then Gamesa’s a separate company. They merged. Siemens Energy, uh, broke off from Siemens AG. So [00:01:00] that’s a very well-known name, Siemens. It’s– Everybody knows Siemens at this point around the world.

And the, the one family had, as a company, had s- label on everything, right? So it’s, uh, Werner von Siemens started it 150 years ago. It’s been a long time since Siemens was started, but it’s everywhere. It’s on turbines, transformers, and power plants around the world, and now they’re changing their name, right?

So when Siemens Energy broke off from Siemens AG, they, they had a limited time they could use that name, so they have rebranding themselves or are about to rebrand themselves, and I wanna pronounce this right, Omterra. O-M-T-E-R-R-A. Now, we did a little research on this, and I think it’s Latin for all of the world.

It’s kind of a conjoined, uh, set of words, Latin words, kind of a, a schmear in a sense. So, uh, so the company that, you [00:02:00] know, that spun off in w- roughly 2020, if I remember this right, Matthew, does that sound right? It was roughly 2020 when Siemens Energy was established on its own. Uh, they’re gonna be changing their name to Omterra.

So instead of seeing, seeing Siemens Gamesa publications or Siemens Gamesa wind turbines, I guess they’re gonna have this new name, Omterra. What do we all think?

Matthew Stead: I think it’s great. I think, and if you go back to, you know, GE Vernova, um, I, I thought Vernova was a bit weird for a while, but now it just rolls off the tongue and easy. It just makes so much sense. Um, so I’m, I’m, I’m for it. I, I like it. I’ve already… You know, can already say it. It took a lot longer to say Vernova than it’s taking to say

Terra. 

Rosemary Barnes: I think that it– But it’s not Vernova, it’s GE Vernova, right? So everyone knows what it is. Whereas my understanding is it’s not Siemens Omtera, it’s just Omtera, which makes it sound like a new budget kind of [00:03:00] brandless, history-less, uh, company. So that’s… Yeah, I’m no 

branding expert, but I think that, uh, like they, they must have not been able to use the word Siemens at all, um, because otherwise you surely would, because it has a very…

Outside of, you know, their blade issues and bearing issues of a couple of years ago, they do have a, like a solid engineering reputation across many fields, so you wouldn’t probably intentionally divorce yourself entirely from that. So, um, yeah, I, I think it will take some getting used to for me

Matthew Stead: but everyone remembers. I mean, it’s not like– The people in the wind industry know their heritage, they know their history, so I don’t think it matters. I mean, you know, you know, they, they purchase the Senvion, you know, technologies or, you know, licenses in Europe. You know, y- y- you don’t forget these things, so I don’t think it matters.

I think it’s just a, it’s a color, it’s a, it’s a label

Yolanda Padron: I think it’ll be fine. I just think that there will be a little [00:04:00] bit of confusion down the line as with everything, right? Like I’ve, I’ve been on the side of conversations where I have to explain like Siemens versus like SGRE on paper and it’s like, oh, it’s– this is why th- there was that paper trail, uh, because people would think it was an absolutely different thing.

Um, so I, I can totally see those conversations coming, coming to play in the future where someone thinks that Ontier is a completely different entity that maybe they changed OEMs or something, um, for a site. But nothing a little history lesson won’t fix, I guess.

Matthew Stead: You just want people talking about you

Rosemary Barnes: Name change every year 

Allen Hall: Change your name every year. Well, that’s, that’s one way to approach it. I w- always wonder what the boardroom looks like and sounds like when this discussion is going on, because Siemens, Siemens Energy is a big company, and there had to be outsourcing of this to probably several marketing firms, mostly [00:05:00] in Germany, I’m guessing.

And they came back with a bunch of pitches, and eventually they picked one. But boardrooms are probably not the place to pick a name. And I always think like, “Oh, you just had such a opportunity to do something really cool or really impressive.”

Allen Hall: Well, we’ll see how it goes with Omterra. The, it’s gonna be, I’m sure, a huge marketing effort, and you’ll probably see commercials for it during the Super Bowl.

Developers are [00:06:00] eyeing Britain’s next big renewables auction and have been waiting to learn the rules and most importantly, the price. Well, this week the UK government delivered both. It confirmed a package of changes to the CFD scheme ahead of allocation round eight, aimed at simplifying the process and keeping good projects from being tripped up by some paperwork.

So AR7 was super successful, and they’re hopefully gonna have a, a great allocation round eight. Uh, unchanged from last round, here are some pieces to it. AR7 brought in 15 gigawatts of, of new capacity, uh, well below the ceilings, and the government is betting that that’s stability from AR7’s gonna exist for AR8, so they’re keeping the pricing limits the same.

And let me give you some of the numbers here. So everything’s in 2024 prices, just so we have a baseline here. It, 113 pounds per megawatt hour [00:07:00] for fixed bottom offshore wind, 271 pounds for floating offshore wind. That’s, uh, pounds per megawatt. And then 92 pounds per megawatt for onshore wind, and s- 75 pounds per megawatt for solar. So 271 pounds per megawatt hour in 2044 dollars is, you know, you’re probably talking, what, 290 pounds per megawatt hour. That’s a really good strike price or ceiling to allow, uh, some more floating wind into the UK waters

Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. Well, the UK have this newly signed agreement with Japan, right, to, to progress development of that technology. I feel like I, I haven’t looked up any numbers to back this up, but I feel like the gap between fixed bottom and floating is narrowing. It’s barely more than double now, which, um, yeah, I think is not that bad considering how little development there has been for floating offshore wind compared to fixed bottom.

So [00:08:00] yeah, I think that it is an interesting technology to develop. I, I know with the, um, auction rounds and ’cause it’s a government thing, it’s easy to think, “Oh, why are you spending any money on anything other than the cheapest one?” Because y- you know, like, it, it feels weird that the government would play, you know, when they’re purchasing power for their grid, that they would do any more than trying to just get, you know, bulk power at the cheapest price possible whilst ensuring, you know, reliability.

Um, but in the previous or the previous, the one– last one or the one before that, they had quite a few tidal projects announced that certainly, you know, an expensive and not mature technology. But I think that you can’t say the same thing about floating offshore wind. I think that it is on a, like a good, a good development trajectory, and there are certainly places on Earth where floating offshore is one of the most appealing technologies.

You know, if you think of through to 2030s, 2040s, there’s plenty of places where, um, you know, slightly higher [00:09:00] price paid for floating offshore wind will still be worth it because they have so few other options available. So it makes sense as an industry to in- invest in capabilities there. 

Matthew Stead: think it’s a really interesting method. It seems to be really successful, the contract for di-difference approach. So, um, I’m, I’m surprised that it’s not adopted more widely, um, in other locations, 

Rosemary Barnes: it is around a bit.

I would like to see it, like, in, in Australia, we are, we are developing some new wind projects, but not as fast as we need to, to, you know, hit our upcoming targets. And I think, like, while the government is doing some things to help move or help incentivize developers, it’s not working that well, and maybe CFD would be a, you know, a bit of a better way to, like, just actually guarantee that these projects are gonna go ahead.

​

Allen Hall: Australia has a shipping problem. there’s been a concern at state-owned transport hubs are becoming less supportive of [00:10:00] wind energy projects with ACEN Renewables saying that they will now have to truck a large transformer from a wind project or for a wind project in northern New South Wales from the Port of Adelaide.

That’s not necessarily close. And h- they also said that the Port of Brisbane has refused to accept passage of some big transformers for a solar farm. also there’s some, uh, something about blades not being able to be accepted in certain ports. Like some of the, uh, Australian state-managed or state-owned ports are not accepting renewables.

Rosemary Barnes: I think 

also that blades in Queensland can only be transported to site like one per day with a full police escort or something. It’s wild to

me ’cause, you know, like I lived in, in Denmark for so long and there were blades going up and down just the normal highway every single day, multiple like, uh, and three– they would go in sets of threes for obvious reasons.

Um, yeah, but the, the, the [00:11:00] Queensland government changed like a, a year ago or, or so, and it changed to a very anti-renewables government and they just threw all of the state’s renewable plans in the bin, 

Allen Hall: such a recent change that when they, at least the news articles I’ve seen about it, I’ve only seen a handful, that they have, um, like last year some big transformers, like really difficult to move items have come through those ports and they’re just not letting them through now. How does that work?

If you have a, a, a legal right to build a wind farm or a solar farm or, or substation or whatever’s going on there, how do they reconcile not allowing those components to come through a port? In what world does that make sense?

Matthew Stead: I mean, most of the ports are– yeah, most of the ports are privatized, so it’s up to the individual commercial entity that’s running the port, I would, I would imagine. So it’s beyond the control of the government, would be my first guess. 

Yolanda Padron: it seems like it’s an, a federal sort of thing that would give permits. 

Matthew Stead: No, I mean, I’ve done a bit of work in the Port of Melbourne and, [00:12:00] um, it’s facilitated by the government, uh, state government, not federal, and but the ports are largely privatized. 

Rosemary Barnes: I just pulled up an article and it says that it’s state-owned transport hubs are becoming 

less supportive of wind energy projects. Um, yeah, and that’s the reason for why they’ll have to get that transformer in northern New South Wales, so very close to Queensland. They have to go from Adelaide, where you live, Matt, all the way through South Australia, maybe Victoria, New South Wales, and then, yeah, up to nearly the border.

Allen Hall: Is that just a temporary blip that the next election cycle it’ll revert back or is this something that’s more long term?

Rosemary Barnes: uh, it’s not obvious that it’s gonna flip straight back, that’s for sure

Allen Hall: [00:13:00] for years, the race in wind has run mostly in one direction: bigger and bigger blades, bigger towers, bigger machines.

And now a chief engineer f- at one of China’s largest turbine makers says it’s time to pump the brakes. Bo Juul Petersen, uh, Goldwind’s chief engineer in Denmark, argues that scaling turbines up no longer makes economic sense. So it’s not an engineering question, it’s an economic question. His reasoning rests on a simple rule of geometry, the square cube r- law, which says that as a turbine grows, its materials and costs climb faster than the rotor area that earns the revenue.

Past a certain point, he says, bigger simply costs more than it makes. Have we crossed that threshold yet? Is 20 megawatts that, [00:14:00] uh, pivot point where it doesn’t make any more sense to make a larger turbine?

Matthew Stead: didn’t we have problems when we went from three to six? 

Allen Hall: One to two.

Matthew Stead: I, I, I think, uh, I think it’s good that someone’s actually coming out and saying this

Yolanda Padron: Whoa, whoa, whoa. Rosie’s on the podcast.

Rosemary Barnes: yeah, ex-excuse me, this is one of my topics of obsession that I constantly carry on about. I made a whole, a whole video about it with, um, equations to back up my opinions about scaling, um, and a very nifty tug of war metaphor between economic factors that favor big wind turbines and economic fav- factors that favor small ones.

And I think that we’re always a little bit ahead of, of what the right, the right balance is between those. So, you know, the benefits from having bigger turbines are that, um, you have fewer electrical connections, for offshore especially, that means less subsea cables and, um, yeah, just like much faster Faster construction of all that, you [00:15:00] know, less, uh, substructures and less, less of everything to install, less of everything to maintain as well.

You know, it doesn’t take so much longer to get up and do your annual maintenance checks of a big turbine compared to a small one. Like, it takes longer, but not, not that much longer. Um, but then all of the structural factors favor smaller turbines over bigger ones. blades especially, as they get longer, you get so many more problems in O&M, but they don’t show up on the developer’s spreadsheet, you know. The spreadsheet that you’re using to decide, um, your f- your final investment decision, it, it doesn’t, it doesn’t know that you’re gonna have a whole bunch of blade issues.

It doesn’t wanna know and so I think that that’s one factor that has pushed us past the economic point of where wind turbine size should be. And I think the other thing is prestige. I know that when I worked at LM, you know, we had the longest blade in the world.

It was 88 meters, was our first, um, world record that we set while I was working there. They’d had many before that. We had– They [00:16:00] had a, like, one-to-one scale printout of it that they took to WindEurope or WindHamburg, um, that everyone stood in front of, and then they lost it to somebody, and then they got it back again with the blade for the Halieade-X.

And we all know how well that went to, you know, have the world’s longest blade. Y- you know, it wasn’t so easy to make it, turned out. It’s very easy to announce and not so easy to make, um, with reliable quality. And now we’ve got all these Chinese companies, especially MingYang, is constantly announcing the world’s biggest something.

Um, don’t sell so many of them, but it’s not the point, isn’t to sell them, it’s to have the prestige of making the world’s biggest something. 

Allen Hall: Yeah, what would be the technology breakthrough that would allow it to be more stable at a 20 or 25 megawatt? Because right now I’m, I’m seeing 1% improvement here and there, not 5%, 10%.

Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, I mean, 1% improvement will eventually add up to what, what you need. Maybe it’s in

20 years’ time, not 10 years’ time. But y- you know, like you can imagine anything. maybe [00:17:00] they start somehow, like aero and automotive manufacturing technologies get cheap enough that we can start making wind turbine blades with all prepregs instead of y- you know, um, you know, dry fabric and infusion.

For example, maybe 3D printing gets cheap enough that you can make your whole, whole blade from an additive process. Like a- anything like that. But it can also be other things like maybe the cost of subsea cables in- increases like a whole lot, and then if, you know, like things on one side getting more expensive can make it more worthwhile to save hard problems somewhere else. So that’s why I say it’s like a, it’s a, a ve- it’s a multivariable optimization problem that changes every time you have a…

Like for every project to project from year to year, it’s always gonna be slightly different. So I don’t think it’s wise to definitively say 20 megawatts is the threshold that we should never cross. Like I, I don’t agree with that. 

Allen Hall: It’s one of those arguments, I think, about [00:18:00] any sort of technology about where the endpoint is. There’s too many variables to predict it. I always point to aviation in which older airplanes will hang around and hang around and hang around until the fuel price goes up enough where it doesn’t make sense to operate them.

So they will fly an airplane un-until they can no longer structurally do it. But if the price of oil shoots up and the price of aviation fuel bumps up, those airplanes get parked, and then they’re buying the new airplane with a more efficient engine. It’s a similar thing, I think. There’s just– You can’t tell where the technology’s gonna go or what the economic impacts of any part of that business will force you to do something different.

So it’s gonna be higher than 20 megawatts, guarantee you that. 

Yolanda Padron: Well, it’s one of those things too, right? Where if we’re repeating the, the same blade type and we’re getting smarter about operating that same blade type, then the economic cost goes down, [00:19:00] right? Like, eventually. ‘Cause then you’re not just experimenting on every new thing or having to take all of the, the funding into tr- specializing techs or getting very specialized techs onto your site and finding a new– kind of the wheel every so often. [00:20:00] So speaking of larger wind turbines, evidently we’ve been doing this all wrong, that we’ve had the calculations for the, uh, Betz limit has been off, and, uh, a group of MIT engineers, I guess, uh, have, have made a breakthrough.

Allen Hall: So basically every wind turbine that is spinning today is based on some fundamentals, uh, math, empirical data in, in some level, but on formulas that have led us to design the wind turbines and that core formula called the momentum theory. And if you hear blade designers who hang around blade designers, which I don’t necessarily recommend, but if you do hang around blade designers, they, they’ll say the momentum theory, momentum theory, like, “Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I got it.”

It, it, the– MIT is saying it breaks down exactly at the operating point where modern turbines try to live. Um, so for a century the fix [00:21:00] was a patchwork of corrections and useful, but with no real theory behind them. Now, a team at MIT said it has rebuilt the math from first principles, creating what they call a unified momentum model. It even nudges at the famous Betz limit, the century-old ceiling on how much energy a rotor can capture, and it bumps it up by a few percentage points, and that would be the first uptick to the Betz limit in over 100 years. All right, Rosemary, as our official Betz limit expert, does this make any sense?

Have the MIT folk something new? 

Rosemary Barnes: a wind turbine blade, its aerodynamics are just the same aerodynamics as what keeps an airplane in the sky, right? It’s, it’s all the… It’s just an airfoil. It’s just facing a wind speed, um, you know, a local wind speed. It’s complicated by the fact that [00:22:00] a wind turbine blade is also rotating, so the wind speed is different along the whole span, and that’s, uh– and so is the flow angle, and that’s why blades are twisted and tapered.

Um, but you know, essentially when you wanna figure out how much energy, uh, a wind turbine is gonna generate or you wanna design the blade so that it optimizes that amount, you’re just slicing it up into a whole bunch of little bits of 2D flow, exactly the same as an, an airplane. So if it doesn’t work for wind turbines, then it shouldn’t work for airplanes either.

So that’s one fundamental thing. And also at Betz limit, it’s not like it’s not driving design. It’s more like if you, if your design exceeds the Betz limit for a, um, a horizontal axis wind turbine, then you– it’s like a sanity check that you’ve done something wrong. Uh, that’s, that’s what I would say you would mostly use it for.

Um, but what I don’t understand, and maybe Alan, presumably you did read the, read the research or at least the press [00:23:00] release. Are they arguing that y- um, like the tips of a wind turbine blade are rotating, are moving fast enough that it’s approaching transonic flow? ‘ 

Allen Hall: Yeah, it’s a rental number thing.

Rosemary Barnes: there’s different types of aerodynamic equations depending on how fast the, airfoil’s moving.

And my understanding is transonic is like 0.8 Mach, um, 0.8, which is 274 meters a second, which is more than double what, um, the fastest tip speeds are currently. So I would think that you’re not quite approaching that yet. They’re– It’s not like a cutoff that, you know, all of a sudden at that exact, exact speed the air behaves totally differently.

But, um, y- yeah, like it seems far enough away that it’s not that relevant. But is that what they’re getting

at or, or is it something different? 

Allen Hall: I like doing sanity checks when I read things from MIT. So what blade [00:24:00] manufacturers and/or wind turbine OEM has designed a set of blades and go, “Oh my gosh, we’re getting more energy than what we calculated,” and not thought to themselves, “Huh, maybe we should look into that”? It’s, it’s, it’s hilarious almost that all the engineers working in wind for 100 years wouldn’t have stumbled across this, where the turbine produces more power than the Betz limit would say it would.

Y- 

Rosemary Barnes: yeah, as many people have commented on, you know, any one of my YouTube videos about wind turbine aerodynamics, if they would just put more blades in there, then, you know, less wind would just fly through without ever being, um, y- without ever hitting a blade.

So, you know, like obviously wind turbine, uh, blade aerodynamics people are stupid because if they weren’t, then they would see that you just put more blades in and you get more, twice as many blades, twice as much energy and w- What about three times as many blades? Three times as much energy.

And I [00:25:00] didn’t even go to MIT and that’s just, you know, like just 

brilliant 

Allen Hall: Obvious 

Rosemary Barnes: off the top of my head here. 

Allen Hall: it’s sort of ludicrous, honestly, and I see these things in wind occasionally. I see it more often in other areas, particularly aerospace, where, where you just have to go, “What are we spending time on?

Really? We’re working on this? On a fraction of a percentage point that we may have a slight error in?” Like, it does not matter. What are you gonna do with that? 

Rosemary Barnes: there’s two issues. One is that the person writing up the press release is not the person that did the research, and they will always blow it up to be much more groundbreaking than the engineers who actually worked on it probably think it is.

So, the, like, I think you have to, like, reserve your criticism of the work and try and criticize the press release. And then the second error that I commonly see is that people don’t have an un- good understanding of a status quo. So they think that they have smashed the status quo, but really it’s more to do with them not understanding the status quo than it is through [00:26:00] some legitimate, like, massive im- improvement.

So it could well be that this is all very good and correct work, just with limited practical implication. That would be my most expected, um, from this. 

Allen Hall: Rosemary, how many times a month do you get queries about wind turbine improvements that are just physically impossible?

Rosemary Barnes: Oh, I mean, if I read all of the comments on my YouTube channel, then probably quite, quite frequently. But, um, yeah, the most common one is just people thinking you can just add more blades and get a proportional increase in, um, in energy, you won’t get more power from adding more blades if that’s the only thing that you do, because in a well-designed wind turbine, which modern ones are, every, e- every air molecule that goes through the rotor disc is gonna interact with the, um, with, with a blade.

That’s how it’s, it’s designed. The blades are moving really fast, and so every molecule doesn’t get hit, but, you know, every, every molecule is affected and has some energy extracted from it. Um, then the other thing is people [00:27:00]who think if you reduce drag, like if you can come up with a lower drag airfoil or a higher lift airfoil, then you think, they think that that relates to more energy proportionally.

So they’re like, “Oh, this airfoil has twice as much lift, so it’s gonna be twice as much power.” It’s like, actually, you know, wind turbine designers are aware of the full range of, you know, airfoils that are available, including high lift ones, and they’re not using it because, you know, the same reason the airplane wings aren’t just, you know, like the highest, highest lift airfoil.

Y- you know, it’s more of a lift to drag ratio type thing, and that’s true for wind turbine blades as well, but also there’s structural considerations probably more so in a wind turbine blade than there are in, um, in airplane wings. So, you know, there’s some sacrifices made for that. Um, yeah, but those are the two, two main families of, of mistakes that I’d say people make.

Allen Hall: So 

Rosemary Barnes: Matt 

Allen Hall: up to his hand up for 

to MIT media representatives

Matthew Stead: uh, 

I had a couple of sort of quick and simple points. The first of all, uh, I’m actually a graduate of [00:28:00] MIT. I’ve graduated from, uh, from a course at MIT. Um, so that’s the first thing. Um, not in engineering. Um, the next one is like, so what? I mean, we can’t even reliably measure, um, you know, AEP the other one is all models are wrong. 

Yolanda Padron: But not just wind

Matthew Stead: the world is not perfect. All models are wrong, so trying to improve something that’s wrong, you know, might help a little bit, but does it really matter?

Rosemary Barnes: But it is also the job of academics to improve these models. So there’s nothing wrong with MIT spending a lot of energy to, um, you know, improve on an incorrect model with another incorrect model. Uh, if it’s more useful, that’s great, and even if it’s not, like isn’t that the job of 

Matthew Stead: yeah. 

Matthew Stead: you should add to where it has the most impact on humanity. You should actually put the effort into areas that have a greater impact on pushing the boundary. You know, pushing small boundaries does not help the world 

Allen Hall: Matthew is an MIT graduate, [00:29:00] the one thing that Matthew brings to the table is real-world experience. And that if you shelter yourself inside a laboratory at MIT, and I understand why you would do that, because I’m sure it’s a very pleasant place to work, and there’s a lot of benefits to that.

However, the way that MIT used to work back in the day, and not everything was roses then, but oh, okay, y- that people had industry experience. They had a knowledge of what was going on on the ground, and they were engineers, and they realized that formulas and reality don’t always align. And maybe we lost that somewhere in the ’80s and, or ’90s, but it does continue to be a problem, where back to Matthew’s point, if you’re going to use that amount of brain energy, put it to something that can help the world.

This isn’t necessarily helping the world That wraps up another episode of the Uptime: Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, and I’m sure that it will, we’d love to hear from [00:30:00] you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn, and don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode.

So for Yolonda, Rosemary, and Matthew, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime: Wind Energy podcast.

Allen covers Energy Capital Partners buying TPI’s blade factories, GE Vernova’s $1.7 billion rescue of LM Wind Power, offshore wind cutting oil burn during a heat wave, Scotland’s Caledonia approval, and 19 states suing the Pentagon over stalled wind reviews.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

Good Monday everyone.

A few months ago, we told you about a Houston bankruptcy court carving up TPI Composites. Well, that story just got a whole lot bigger. On July sixth, TPI walked out of Chapter Eleven. Zero debt. New owners. A private equity firm called Energy Capital Partners picked up TPI’s blade factories in Iowa and Juarez, Mexico for about twenty million dollars. Twenty million, against more than a billion dollars in liabilities.

ECP did not stumble into wind blades. They bought Calpine back in twenty eighteen, inherited seventy-seven power plants, and became GE’s biggest private gas turbine customer in the Western Hemisphere. That relationship, forged in gas turbine halls, is what brought them to composite factories. GE Vernova signed a five-year supply deal requiring it to send blade orders to ECP’s factories. GE is ECP’s partner, its customer, and was even the backup buyer if the deal fell through. So TPI lives on, leaner, debt-free, with locked-in demand from one of the biggest turbine makers on earth.

But now, the other side of that coin. While ECP picked up two blade factories for twenty million dollars, GE Vernova recently pumped one-point-seven billion dollars into its own blade company, LM Wind Power. LM’s equity had fallen to negative 575 million euros. Revenue dropped ninety-six percent in one year, from 2.1 billion Danish kroner down to just ninety-three million. The Danish workforce, cut to about twenty-five people. LM Wind Power has lost money every single year since GE bought it in twenty seventeen. Nine straight years of red ink.

So think about that. Two American blade factories now serve GE Vernova’s onshore business. One in Grand Forks, North Dakota, owned by GE, inside a division losing four hundred million dollars a year. The other in Newton, Iowa, owned by ECP, zero debt, five-year supply deal. The independent contract blade business that TPI Composites built is gone. Vestas took the India and Mexico plants in-house. GE’s supply is locked to ECP. The OEMs and their financial partners now own the factories directly. And that is a new era for wind manufacturing.

Now, let us talk about what those blades are doing once they are spinning. Earlier this month, a brutal heat wave hit the eastern United States. Air conditioners running full blast. Grid operators scrambling to keep up. And off the coast of New England, two offshore wind farms stepped up. Vineyard Wind, eight hundred and six megawatts off Massachusetts. Revolution Wind, seven hundred and four megawatts near Rhode Island. Together they pushed hundreds of megawatts into the grid right when people needed it most.

And here is the number that matters. Oil-fired power plants met about ten percent of peak demand on July second this year. Last summer, at the height of a similar heat wave, oil plants covered nearly fifteen percent. That is more than a gigawatt less oil burned. The projects that survived lawsuits, survived construction shutdowns, survived lease freezes, are now keeping the lights on in New England.

Across the Atlantic, Scotland just approved two massive offshore wind farms. The Caledonia North and South projects in the Moray Firth, up to one hundred and forty turbines spread across one hundred and sixty-five square miles. Enough power for two million homes. Ocean Wind is leading the development with a commitment of about 1.7 billion pounds. And here is what makes this project different. Caledonia South will mix fixed-bottom and floating turbines, up to thirty-nine floaters. That blend of proven and next-generation technology on a single project is something to watch.

Back in the United States, nineteen state attorneys general are suing the Department of Defense. The reason, wind project reviews. Federal law says any wind turbine taller than two hundred feet must go through a Defense Department check, to make sure it does not interfere with military radar or flight paths. Last August, the Pentagon stopped reviewing those projects. No explanation. No timeline for starting again. Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown is leading the coalition, joined by attorneys general from eighteen other states including California, New York, and New Jersey. They want a court to force the Defense Department to start doing its job again.

And finally, a story from the sea floor. Down in southern New England, lobster populations have been falling for decades. Back in nineteen ninety-eight, there were about fifty million lobsters in those waters. By twenty twenty-two, fewer than ten million. But something else is moving in. Jonah crabs. Fishermen used to throw them back. Now they are hauling them in by the thousands, selling them as a cheaper option to lobster. And researchers at the University of Rhode Island are finding that offshore wind foundations are acting like artificial reefs. Algae grows first, then barnacles and mussels, then fish and crabs follow. The question scientists are working to answer is whether these structures create new marine life, or just pull it in from the surrounding ocean. Either way, the turbines are not just making electricity. They are making habitat.

Now, here is what to watch. This Wednesday, July twenty-second, GE Vernova reports second quarter earnings. And the numbers we just talked about will be in the room. One-point-seven billion dollars pumped into LM Wind Power, a blade company that has lost money nine years straight. Twenty million dollars to let ECP walk away with two factories and a five-year supply deal. GE Vernova is guiding for four hundred million dollars in wind segment losses this year. Meanwhile, its Power and Electrification divisions are printing money, nearly five billion dollars in free cash flow last quarter alone.

So the question on that earnings call is simple. If you are spending eighty times more to keep your in-house blade maker alive than a private equity firm paid to buy your contract supplier, how long do you keep doing both? Watch for what GE Vernova says about LM Wind Power’s future, about North American onshore blade strategy, and about whether that 1.7 billion dollar injection was a rescue, or a goodbye. The answer could reshape who makes blades in this industry for the next decade.

And that is the state of the wind industry for the 19th of July, twenty twenty-six. Join us for the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast tomorrow.

Cory Mittleider of Malloy Wind and Loren Walton of NSK on main bearing failures, why the industry is pulling DLC coatings, and the material changes replacing them.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

Allen Hall: Cory and Loren, welcome back to the podcast.

Cory Mittleider: Thanks for having us.

Allen Hall: So we’ve got two bearing experts in one location, and this is the point where we start asking all of our bearing questions. Cory, you’re with Malloy Wind, and we’ve had you on the podcast two or three different times. Loren’s with NSK — we’ve had Loren on at least once before.

Loren Walton: Once, yes.

Allen Hall: Yeah, and that was good.

Loren Walton: I appreciate that. It was fun.

Allen Hall: There are a lot of bearing issues happening in the States at the moment, but also globally. Whatever happens in the States, you can pretty much find in Australia, Canada, Singapore, Mexico, South America, Brazil — everywhere. We’re hearing a lot about main bearings, and there’s a variety of things that I think you two know from being on the inside that we on the outside haven’t heard yet. I want to get some of those stories out and understand what’s going on, because operators are trying to keep their assets running, and bearings are a big issue. Let’s talk main bearings. What are you seeing in the field right now? What kinds of problems are happening?

Cory Mittleider: It seems like operators are coming to us and asking us to supply bearings that no longer have DLC. That’s a bit of a phenomenon lately. For a little over a decade we spent our time supplying bearings with DLC on the rollers to address problems found fifteen years ago.

Allen Hall: DLC is diamond-like coating.

Cory Mittleider: Correct.

Allen Hall: Which is a really hard specialty coating applied to the bearing surfaces to provide hardness and durability — or it’s supposed to provide durability.

Cory Mittleider: That’s a good point. It’s a coating that’s one to two microns thick — one to two thousandths of a millimeter — and a very hard material. The big feature was that it’s a dissimilar material to the steel. So when we break through the mixed and boundary lubrication regimes and those asperities touch each other, that dissimilar material prevents the welding and tearing that leads to the peeling damage we saw fifteen years ago. That peeling damage eventually turned into spalling, cracking, and other failures. So it made a lot of sense at the time to turn to something like this to mitigate the peeling.

Allen Hall: So the peeling damage was one of those issues where you basically had some sliding happening. In my electrical world, and from looking at these on the ground, you see things moving relative to one another instead of rolling relative to one another.

Loren Walton: It’s more of a welding and shearing of the contacts. I used a finger analogy last time: think of your asperities as fingers — one set is the roller, one set is the outer raceway. They weld under high load and high pressure, then they shear, leaving behind debris. That’s what creates the beginning of the peeling damage, and then it continues to create more debris, and the bearing starts to basically eat itself alive.

Allen Hall: The start of that process, though — is that a lack of lubrication, or a finish or hardness issue on the bearing?

Loren Walton: I love that question, because this is the crux of the whole thing, and I think it’s the part that gets missed. People immediately want to throw the whole thing out and start over with something different. Fundamentally, when we fixed the surface issue by adding the coating, the problems pretty much went away. We went from one-to-five years of life to ten-plus years, depending on the application — without changing the construction, the bearing type, or the contact angle. Just by adding the coating, we increased life significantly. The root of what you’re asking is that the bearing would operate better if it had the proper amount of separation. It’s not a fatigue issue and it’s not a loading issue. At its heart, the bearing isn’t able to create that separation. There isn’t enough speed, and there isn’t enough of a gap created by the lubricant.

Allen Hall: So ideally you have this almost molecular-scale film of lubricant between the two surfaces. If it isn’t designed properly, or you have an issue, that lubricant gets squeezed out of the space, and at that point you have trouble. That’s some of what I’m hearing on main bearings — especially when turbines have been curtailed and aren’t turning. Is that partly just the fact that there’s so much load?

Cory Mittleider: I think that’s a fundamental difficulty of the main shaft bearing. You’ve got extremely variable loads, from full load to idle, and a wide range of operating conditions — from northern North Dakota in the winter to Texas in the heat this week. High load, heavy load, incredibly slow speed, and even slower if it’s idling. It’s hard to reliably build that film. It’s not necessarily that there isn’t enough lubrication; it’s that the film isn’t building properly where it needs to be to separate the metal and the rolling elements.

Allen Hall: So the diamond-like coating was meant to solve that welding problem — you put the coated bearing in, and it worked okay until more recently, when all of a sudden we started having other issues. To me those aren’t related to the coating itself, but to other things happening up in the nacelle.

Loren Walton: If we recall some of your previous episodes, you were on the forefront of understanding and talking about DLC starting to become an accelerant to failure. I know you talked about it with Cory. Those episodes have aged very well. A lot of people now are recognizing what we were saying years ago and changing their strategy toward removing DLC — whether on bearings for newer turbines, typically two megawatts and greater, or in some cases going backwards and removing DLC as they do additional replacements, and looking for another solution, because there’s potential for additional issues you weren’t expecting by adding the coating.

Allen Hall: The coating is non-conductive, which is part of the issue, because you wouldn’t think bearings are conducting electricity. But as turbines got some of these uptower and downtower converters and inverters connected to the generator, we started seeing current levels — according to Motor Doc, where people like Howard Penrose have gone out and measured currents in the nacelles — of well over a hundred amps running through ground straps and the like, into bearings. That’s a lot of current. If you’re shoving that into a bearing that has DLC on it, you’re going to break it down and create these really hard steel bits stuck inside the bearing, which wear it like pouring sand inside a bearing. That’s what eventually happens, and it has nothing to do with the bearing. It has more to do with the electrical and control systems we stuck up top and didn’t pay much attention to, but probably should have. We created an electrical situation, and now all the upkeep comes to people like you to deal with. You haven’t seen a lot of work to eliminate it, although there are a couple of good attempts happening. The reality is: okay, we have to have a bearing, and I’ve got this current going around from the nacelle. How do I put those together in a way that removes the DLC?

Cory Mittleider: That’s what we’ve spent the last ten-plus years on. As a bearing supplier, we can’t change the whole system. We have to do the best we can to accommodate what’s happening in your system. We would absolutely encourage you, if you can identify and remove the electricity, please do that.

Allen Hall: They should. And there are a lot of people who do.

Cory Mittleider: There’s a pursuit of that, absolutely. But the turbine still needs to run.

Loren Walton: We work very closely with an owner-operator that did a lot of that work. To your point from before, it does sound like, from what they’ve investigated, the current has been there for a while. It’s been there in different models and different turbines. Maybe the way it presented, or its impact, wasn’t to the same extent as what we’re seeing now. That’s where I’d say there’s more to it than just the current. I think I said last time it’s not just a smoking gun. The bearing is sitting in front of a firing squad. You put it all together and now we’re in a tough position. But to Cory’s point, we get brought the application, we get brought the environment, and we get told, “Here, make it work.”

Allen Hall: And you don’t actually see everything that’s happened. You get all the mechanical loads, but they don’t tell you, “Hey, we’re running a hundred amps through this nacelle.”

Loren Walton: No, I don’t remember hearing that.

Cory Mittleider: No, that’s not usually disclosed.

Allen Hall: No one’s ever said that. So that’s a real troubling thing happening in the industry — we’re assigning blame to mechanical components when really it’s an electrical mistake. When you dig into it, what you find is that currents have been running up top for years, but what’s changed now is that with more focus on emissions from inverters, they’ve pushed things into higher frequencies. Higher frequency bands are harder to ground out and get rid of. When things were in the kilohertz range, we could partly ground them and they’d go away. Now we’re working at ten kilohertz and up, and that energy distributes into a lot of places, including the bearings, where it wasn’t before. That’s really hard to deal with. Some electrical designer sitting in a remote location, probably in Germany, designs the circuit, and now you bearing gurus have to go fix it.

Cory Mittleider: And that system’s probably well optimized for that particular package.

Allen Hall: For that particular package, right. It meets all the requirements and does everything they wanted — except for the effect on the bearings.

Loren Walton: You solve one problem and move it to another. That’s ultimately how it works.

Allen Hall: If you’re an electrical engineer, you’d never have thought you were destroying the bearings. The industry has moved quite quickly, though. Everybody started noticing this problem with DLC. They went out to check and figure out what the problem was, and, more importantly, to find a solution. Those solutions are unique, because the reason DLC went on in the first place was to extend lifetime. So if you’re taking the DLC out of the equation, can you still get to those lifetime numbers without it?

Loren Walton: Yeah, and that’s where our message has been that adjusting the material will get you the difference you’re looking for. I want to be very clear: I’m not saying DLC as a solution is bad. When it was applied in the right space — turbines with a lighter duty — it worked great. But once you add in additional factors, it becomes an accelerant to failure at certain points. So it definitely still has its place. But once you move away from DLC, you’re going to be right back where you started — regardless of construction — with the life that was always aided by DLC. Once you’ve removed it, you have to know for sure you’re not going right back to the peeling layers and the spalling you were seeing. From what we’ve investigated, the material changes are where you get that. Having a harder surface combats it, and having a better way to combat any additional debris introduced into the system helps.

Allen Hall: And reducing the possibility of generating that debris.

Loren Walton: Correct.

Allen Hall: So what does that mean in terms of bearing design — different alloys, different heat treats, different coatings?

Loren Walton: The first two, not the third. From the recipe of the steel, adjusting some of the alloying elements, there’s a lot you can do. A lot of people think of engineering mostly through the mechanics of it, but one part of mechanical engineering that doesn’t get talked about is material science. That’s the part we dive into extremely deeply, and it gives you the biggest bang for your buck when you’re moving away from a coating as your — I don’t want to call it a crutch, but as the thing helping you get by — toward changing the bearing from the inside so it lasts better once the coating is gone.

Cory Mittleider: I like describing it as being baked into the cake. It’s not a nice thing added afterward like a coating that’s one to two microns thick. It is the bearing.

Allen Hall: It’s hard to think about steel and a lot of the metals used in the bearing industry as unique chemistries, but they are. There are a lot of varieties of steel, just like there are a lot of varieties of copper or aluminum.

Loren Walton: Yes.

Allen Hall: You’d think steel is just steel — we make cars out of it, airplanes, whatever.

Loren Walton: I was talking to someone who’s more into gears, and even when I spoke of a carbon-nitride version of a bearing versus a carbon-nitride version of a gear, it’s not exactly the same. For all intents and purposes it’s easier for everyone to consider it as steel — one word, means the same thing. But once you get into how much chromium is in it, how much molybdenum, how much manganese —

Allen Hall: It comes down to that, and it can be very small percentages of the total.

Loren Walton: It can make a huge difference. And then you get into the heat treat — your time, your soaking, what you do for quenching. It all matters, and everyone does it differently, so you get different results.

Allen Hall: That’s the kicker. You see a lot of discussions where it’s just, “Oh, it’s been heat treated.” As an electrical engineer I used to see it that way too. But there’s heat treatment and there’s heat treatment. It depends on what you’re doing and what the result needs to be, because you’re changing the whole crystalline structure of the steel. The way you do it and the way you quench it all matters. It’s not one size fits all.

Loren Walton: That’s the part that gets glossed over so quickly, because everyone’s eyes go to what they can see. You change an angle here or there, or the bearing type, and you can see that. It’s different when you don’t have X-ray vision to tell you where all the alloying elements are and in what percentages, and then whether you carburized it, through-hardened it, or carbonitrided it. There’s so much to it that I can see people’s heads start to spin. That’s where we say there are a lot of experts out here — you two are among them, and there are others. Engage in conversations. Ask questions.

Allen Hall: That’s a great call to action — “Cory, help me understand what’s going on.” There’s a variety of bearings out there. Loren’s with NSK, a great bearing company with tremendous history. Those are a couple you can trust. But operators can feel inundated by the guy down the street trying to sell them a bearing, and you don’t know if that’s the right solution for your two-million-dollar wind turbine.

Cory Mittleider: These are critical infrastructure assets. Let’s make sure we understand what we’re doing and why. To Loren’s point, you can open three boxes and they all look the same, but what’s inside is what really matters.

Allen Hall: It’s a tremendously difficult business. With as many main bearings getting swapped out today, over the last couple of years there have been a lot of decisions made on the fly — some correct, some really wrong.

Loren Walton: I’d hesitate to say wrong, because I think people are doing the best they can. It’s not because they’re not trying.

Allen Hall: It’s because they don’t have the knowledge in front of them, or maybe they haven’t made the call to Malloy or NSK yet to get the ground truth.

Loren Walton: What you mentioned a second ago is pivotal. There’s been enough selling that we’ve kind of gotten away from the engineering. People hear “sales engineer” and they cut off at “sales.” If we can get back to the engineering, a lot more people will improve their assets. And it doesn’t have to be just listening to Cory and me — poll the audience. There are a lot of us out here. Everybody has a different background; we all know a little about this or a lot about that. Take the opportunity to learn. I’d liken it to your personal life: you wouldn’t buy a new vehicle or a stereo system without doing your own research. You wouldn’t just listen to the salesperson and buy the first thing you see. It’s the same here. If you’re making decisions without engaging at least the top three to five people in this space, you’re doing yourself a disservice.

Allen Hall: And that’s what happens a lot, because people get pushed. There’s a timeline, especially now with the repower situation — “I’ve got to put something on now.”

Cory Mittleider: Right. And new platforms — the next-generation three, four, five, six megawatt platforms, and offshore — are having their first failures. We need to learn from it. That’s where we’ve worked with operators to participate in the teardown and collect the sample. We get clues, we mark it up, and we do a lot of the investigation — metallurgy, metrology, raceway traces — to inform us on what the problem is on that specific platform.

Allen Hall: As we get to these bigger turbines, some data is coming back on O&M costs relative to a one or two megawatt machine, and it doesn’t scale linearly. It goes almost exponentially, because everything is more expensive. Replacing a bearing on a six megawatt machine is a much more expensive ordeal than on a two megawatt machine. What should we be paying attention to and monitoring more closely on these larger machines? The new shiny turbine is great, but that doesn’t mean you don’t have to monitor and maintain it.

Loren Walton: I’d start with verifying all your original fits and clearances. We’ve had cases with a four-point mount main shaft — two main bearings — where one side wasn’t installed properly from the beginning, so it didn’t actually float. It’s supposed to be a fixed side and a floating side; now you’ve got one side that’s not floating, and you get overload. So make sure you’re set from the start. A lot of machines now come already outfitted with instrumentation — vibration monitoring, oil monitoring, different ways to start trending from the beginning. Back when we got started, that wasn’t the case. You got your new turbine and in a lot of cases it had nothing on it — you were flying blind. Now that it’s there, use it.

Cory Mittleider: That’s a good point. Specifically to bearings, something earlier versions didn’t have, and newer ones mostly do, is auto-lubers.

Allen Hall: I see more of those lately.

Cory Mittleider: That’s great from a lubrication-delivery and reliability point of view, but it’s its own little machine. We’ve heard of cases where the auto-luber failed, or ran when it shouldn’t have, or for whatever reason had very large output. So you need regular assessment of the entire system, including uptower.

Allen Hall: You’ve got to monitor everything that’s uptower.

Cory Mittleider: It’s its own little machine. It requires its own maintenance. If you’re relying on it, you’ve got to check it.

Allen Hall: As we move into these larger machines and see more of them deployed, what are the useful things you should be doing in that first year to make sure your bearing is working optimally? Is it just checking vibration levels? Is it getting uptower and doing a quick sweep to confirm the grease isn’t oozing out where it shouldn’t be? Is it that simple?

Loren Walton: Having a regular maintenance interval definitely helps. Even getting grease sampling to understand your baseline levels after the first six months and the first year. In a lot of cases the turbines are under a couple-year warranty, so maybe you don’t have as much access. But as much as you can, getting a baseline is huge, because you’re going to want to compare later. You’ll want to say, “Okay, I took this grease sample — what does it mean? Does it normally run that high or not?” Same for vibration, getting the trending. For main bearings in general, more grease is better than less, because you can never quite get it all out when you’re regreasing. So a lot of that first year or two is about getting a good baseline so you know what you’re actually expecting, and what it means when you take a reading in year two or three.

Allen Hall: What does a grease sample look like in terms of the response you get back? I take a sample, send it to a lab, and it comes back with — what? Is it “good or bad,” or a bunch of chemical numbers about composition and dirt? I’ve never seen one.

Cory Mittleider: It’s a matrix. You can request different versions, but probably ten or fifteen different elements they give you numbers on, in parts per million. Iron and brass will be up there.

Allen Hall: So if you see something floating in the grease —

Cory Mittleider: Silicon, phosphorus, water.

Allen Hall: Water would not be great.

Cory Mittleider: No.

Allen Hall: So those reports come back, and I assume there’s more knowledge needed to interpret the results. What do you do?

Loren Walton: We have some guidelines we share with our partners and customers. If you see a certain amount of parts per million of copper, ferrous material, or the like, we can say, “That’s worth monitoring for a while,” or “You should probably purge it, try to get it out, and see if it stabilizes.” We get those questions and respond in kind. There’s definitely help available. If we work together, we typically have a lot more success. A lot of people right now feel like they’re trying to work in their own silos, and you don’t have to do that. You don’t have to be the subject-matter expert for lubricants, gears, bearings, and everything else. You can reach out to experts who can help, and hopefully that frees up your time to assess and work on other things.

Allen Hall: The turbines are so complex today. It used to be you could have one person on site who knew most of what was going wrong, because they’d made thousands of these things — there was a legacy. When you get to six megawatt machines, where you don’t have a lot of history, particularly in the United States, there’s really no one to ask. You’d better find somebody who knows what they’re talking about.

Cory Mittleider: And the operators are responsible for multiple systems — six or seven or eight systems they’re looking at. We can help with bearings; we’re niche and focused on that. If we can take that off your plate, now instead of six systems you’ve got five to worry about.

Allen Hall: That’s key. There are experts out there, and one thing the podcast is trying to do is give those experts a chance to talk so you know who to ask. Your phones should be ringing right about now, because it’s repower time, and it’s main-bearing repair and replace time, pitch-bearing repair and replace time. There’s a lot of bearing activity going on. I always say call Malloy Wind if you need somebody who really knows their stuff, the technology, and what’s going on internally. How do people get ahold of you two if they have questions? What’s the easiest way?

Loren Walton: I try to be at most of the industry events. We usually hold a booth. And my email, my phone number — I’m on LinkedIn, so reach out there. After our last discussion I had a few folks reach out, actually mostly from other countries. It was interesting; we heard about a few issues before they even hit the US. Some folks were having problems with the larger turbines, and we were able to get our teams in Brazil and Spain involved right away. Then once it started cropping up in the US, I could say, “Yeah, I already solved that.” We can put my email in the show notes.

Allen Hall: We’ll put it in the show notes for sure. And Cory, how do people get ahold of you?

Cory Mittleider: I’m pretty active at the events — ACP, and the Drivetrain Reliability Collaborative is another one we had a couple of months ago. Email, phone, and I’m pretty active on LinkedIn. I’ve had similar experiences to Loren, getting contacted from other countries across the globe. It’s fun to investigate problems and share results in the technical articles on our website, and have people send me a picture of an article I wrote and say, “Hey, let’s talk about this.”

Allen Hall: Your articles are great. Check out malloywind.com — just Google it and it’ll come right to the top. If you have bearing questions or something you’ve seen, that website is a great first place to get some answers. It’s very helpful. Well, Loren and Cory, I love having you on the podcast. We need to have you on more, because there’s a lot going on in the bearing world.

Loren Walton: There are things we didn’t even touch on today.

Allen Hall: You’re always welcome back.

Loren Walton: Awesome. Appreciate it.

Allen Hall: Thank you.

Rosemary previews Pardalote’s new hands-on blade repair course. EverWind’s Ocean Lake, Canada’s largest wind project, will feed a green hydrogen and ammonia plant in Nova Scotia rather than the grid. Plus BP’s exit from an offshore project in Japan, and the wake-effect lawsuit pitting SSE, Equinor, and Vårgrønn against RWE’s Dogger Bank South.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

The Uptime Wind Energy podcast, brought to you by StrikeTape. Protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit striketape.com. And now your hosts

Allen Hall 2025: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall. I’m here with Matthew Stead, Yolanda Padron, and Rosemary Barnes is back this week. 

Rosemary, you’ve been to a number of training courses over the last couple of weeks. The first off was GWO. What was your experience at GWO training? 

Rosemary1: It was the fourth or maybe even fifth time that I’ve done it. Um, I did it a few times in Denmark and then, uh, this is the second time doing it in Australia. also, this was my first time doing first aid in Australia. Last time they did GWO here, but my first aid was still valid from Europe, so I, I didn’t redo it. And it’s like so much about [00:01:00] snakes and spiders and jellyfish But a good, good rule of thumb, not 100% accurate, but good rule of thumb, if it is something from the ocean that stung you, then you put something warm on it, and if it’s something from the land that stung or bit you, then something cold on it,

Allen Hall 2025: well, how often do you usually take GWO training?

Rosemary1: You gotta do it every two years to be valid. I don’t do it every two years because, um, if you do it every two years, like within two years, then you can do the refresher course. So that’s three days instead of four However, um, because I don’t climb constantly, like often it will be six months or more in between climbs, I’ll just do it before I know that I’ve got a climb.

all the other people except for one were technicians who, you know, have been working for a while.

So they’re also doing the full course, not the refresher. So they get a little bit more practice than I do. But, um, it’s just not often enough. Y-you know, like every time I go it’s like I, I really feel the need to have the refresher, um, because I’m just not fully on top of it. ‘Cause it’s [00:02:00] not just that you need to know what to do. You need to be able to… Like if you need to use it, you’re gonna be freaking out, you know?

This is the worst thing that’s probably ever happened in your life, and now you’ve gotta remember all your training. It’s like you want it to be actually second nature to some extent. So yeah, first day is manual handling, which is v- you know, very– That one’s very easy and I would be happy to never do that again.

Like I will always remember that. Um, then you got fire, um, fire safety awareness, and that one’s just fun ’cause you just get to, um, light fires and put stuff out then first aid, which I definitely always want a refresher on.

The CPR dummies at this place, they had lights, um, and it lit up green if you were doing it right, and I haven’t used a dummy that was so advanced before, so that was quite good. I realized I wasn’t pressing hard enough. and then yeah, last two days is working at heights training, which is the most intense ’cause you got your harness on all day and, um, you know, climbing up and down and rescuing people.

this was Rite Training in Goulburn, and, um, the [00:03:00] instructor’s name was Claire. highly recommend doing that one.

Allen Hall 2025: Is that a general requirement in Australia that you have GWO before you can climb?

Rosemary1: Like, yeah, they will sometimes, um, let you climb if you are babysat by people. I would not recommend other engineers, like if you’ve never climbed a wind turbine before, like I would really not recommend that you just go up with a team and haven’t done the training because you do need to be able to use a ladder safely and, um, you can, y- you can easily, like even inside the nacelle, you could easily hurt yourself really badly if you’re used to working in an office, uh, you’re upping your danger level by, you know, like many, many, many times by going up a turbine and it’s just something that you gotta take seriously.

Allen Hall 2025: How busy are the courses in Australia? Are a lot of technicians trying to get in and get trained? 

Rosemary1: No, it’s people that have a job that are getting trained. But there were heaps of techs in this course. There were maybe eight or so, which is also part of the reason why it took a really long time.

Allen Hall 2025: So [00:04:00] this week, as we record, y- you’re presenting a blade repair course for engineers and technicians. a completely new area that you’re, uh, going into in terms of offering advice and expertise that it’s really hard to find on the planet. It’s probably a, a, a busy or, or requested course, I would imagine, in Australia, where you just don’t have access to a lot of the manufacturers.

Rosemary2: it’s a, it’s a course for just for engineers or technical type people, um, but including hands-on stuff. So the way that I I forced this to come into being was just the last five years. I, um, you know, I started working a lot on wind turbine blade repairs and, um, people would ask me, you know, “Have these repairs been done right?”

And the thing is that the only repairs that I had anything to do with when I was working at LM were weirdo ones, right? [00:05:00] Where the normal, like a technician couldn’t, couldn’t handle it. It was outside of, um, yeah, their, their standard, uh, kind of repairs that they can do for whatever reason. and now in the work that we do at Part Load, it’s primarily normal repairs, and I just didn’t know exactly what technicians know. You know, how do they, how do they know whether they can repair it or not? What do they know before they go up there?

When are they calling the engineer? Um, all that sort of stuff, like the normal stuff. eventually it became less about me learning, ’cause like I said, I kind of picked up most of it. Um, but now I’ve got staff that I’m training up to be, uh, you know, composites engineers and to work with these kinds of issues. There’s a lot of repetitive tasks involved in what we do when we, like, assess the condition of a wind farm.

A lot of what we do is look main- manually looking through photos and thing- if things are classified right or not. I [00:06:00] Found this guy from Direct Wind Services, Jurij Eska. He’s a blade engineer. He’s worked in Europe and then come back to Australia, so a little bit like me. And, um, I just worked with him on a few projects and I’m like, “Oh, okay. Well, this guy, uh, he really gets it.” And I asked him, “How do you, how do you train your technicians?

What course do they do? Maybe I can do that course.” And he said, “Oh, we train them ourselves.” And so then I asked him to put this course together. So where we started off the course yesterday, that was, um, uh, an indoor session where I was talking through how are blades designed, uh, certified, tested, manufactured, um, what kinds of manufacturing defects can you see and what do they do about them in the factory?

‘Cause you know that they’re doing a lot of repairs in the factory already before you ever see a, a brand new blade. and then the next three days we’re going to be working on, um, yeah, grinding and [00:07:00] infusions and a bit of a, a bit of theory about, um, composite repairs. 

Allen Hall 2025: What do you feel like are those key skill sets that engineers should know how to do, maybe not as well as a, a professional technician that does it a lot, but at least at a beginner’s level should be able to complete them before they start repairing blades on their own and giving advice about how to repair blades?

What, what are those key items?

Rosemary2: part of it is that I want them to be able to understand what is a bad damage and what’s not a bad damage cause you look a lot at images from the outside, but it’s really about what’s on the inside and how deep it goes is the real thing.

So, um, it’ll be about learning, you know, developing some judgment about, um, how bad it can be and how bad it can look on the outside. We’re not gonna be looking at so many real damages ’cause like obviously we’re just dealing with pieces that are in the, um, in the, uh, workshop and Yuri has [00:08:00] made some samples for us, um, purposely made them badly so that we’ve got some, you know, damage to find.

Allen Hall 2025: Are you addressing carbon fiber at all?

Rosemary2: Uh, I actually haven’t asked about that. I don’t think so. Carbon fiber is, um, is a real pain to work with because it’s conductive. Like, even grinding it makes a bit of a hazardous work environment. We did talk a little bit about the different materials yesterday and, um, about pultrusions. And actually, it turns out Yuri used to work somewhere where they, uh, manufactured pultrusions, and I had always, I was always under the impression that a pultrusion is, you know, like, perfectly s- perfectly straight.

That’s the point. And he’s like, “No way.” No way. There’s waviness in the pultrusions 

Allen Hall 2025: And on March 3rd through 5th at WOMA 2027, Rosie, you’re gonna give part of this course as part of WOMA, right?

Rosemary2: Little, little mini course. We’ll have to decide what, what makes sense to include, ’cause it was… Yeah, I went through really a, a fair [00:09:00]bit about blades yesterday, you know, like why they are shaped the way that they are. So we had to talk about aerodynamics and, um, why they’re made of composite. So we had to talk about, you know, like composite materials, like how, how they, how they work So I don’t know if, uh, people wanna write in comments that m- we should, we should do some sort of, um, poll beforehand to see what are the topics that are most interesting to people, ’cause I think we’ll have a half day, right? So we’ll need to be, we’ll need to be focused.

Allen Hall 2025: the description of repairs and what repairs should look like could be tremendously valuable. Everybody who has seen a repair always wonders, “Was that repair done right?” And s- and if you can have some general tools to know, like, “Uh, maybe there’s something not quite right here,” or, “That looks like a solid repair,” that would be a tremendous help to the industry, p- particularly for asset managers

Rosemary2: Yeah. And you know what I think is even more useful than being able to pick out when it’s wrong is to be able to know when it’s right. You can– Y-you know, like it is so– [00:10:00] It’s such a relief. Like it takes such a mental load off you when you’re just like, “Yeah, that’s all, that’s all good. That’s normal. Okay, I know that that– I knew that that would happen, so this is not a surprise.”

‘ know, once you know you can make that judgment, you can do it very quickly and focus your attention where it should be, so you don’t need to stress for an hour over every repair. You’re just like, “Yeah. Good, good, good, good, good.” And then, “Mm, please explain why you have chosen to not, not repair this, but just put a Band-Aid over it.”

that’s the goal of this training is to get everybody, y-you know, technical people, not people who wanna ever be a blade repair technician. They’ve got their own training that covers what they need to know. But this one is just, yeah, getting people like asset managers or my employees to learn what they need to know about composites, given that they have already got a strong engineering education.

So, um, you know, they know a lot of the stuff, but just need to know the composite-specific stuff and wind turbine blade-specific stuff

I will run this course again, by the [00:11:00] way, ’cause there was a lot of people who wanted to do it I couldn’t fit in. So it’ll happen at least once. I’ll keep on running it until everybody that wants to do it has, has done it. But, um, yeah, feel free

to get in touch 

Allen Hall 2025: So if you wanna attend Rosie’s short blade course at WOMA 2027, just visit woma2027.com and register today

​

Allen Hall 2025: [00:12:00] Well, over in Canada, they just approved a, really a wind farm big enough to power a small city, and almost none of the electricity is going to the grid, which is a very interesting aspect to some of the things that are happening in Canada at the minute.

So up in Nova Scotia, uh, they’ve conditionally approved the Ocean Lake Wind Project. This’d be the largest wind farm in the province’s history. Up to 158 turbines will rise, uh, generating as much as 1.2 gigawatts of power. But this power is not headed to households in Canada. Nearly all of it will be feeding Everwind Fuels’ green hydrogen and ammonia plant at Point Tupper, where clean electrons will become a fuel that can be shipped across the ocean to Europe. And Matthew, there’s been a lot of [00:13:00] projects like this in Europe that have stopped more recently, particularly in northern Europe and up in Scandinavia, uh, on the hydrogen side. Or at least they’ve slowed them down. Canada seems to be going into that breach maybe to fill that void. And is there a marketplace for this to occur up in Canada? 

Matthew Stead: Yeah, I think it’s very interesting. Um, you know, like you say, a number of canceled projects, and in Australia there’s been numerous canceled projects. So I like, um, the analogy or use of the term hopium rather than hydrogen, um, where, um, everyone’s hoping hydrogen will be the answer. Um, although, you know, what I, what I’ve read and understood is that, um, you know, the commercials just don’t really stack up and, um, yeah. So in terms of South Australia anyway, um, there was some major, um, hydrogen, uh, development planned with, um, you know, it, it never stacked up. So, you know, it sounds like a great [00:14:00] idea, um, but I’m not sure that the commercials will ever stack up unless you’ve got that guaranteed offtake for the, for the ammonium

Allen Hall 2025: Yolanda, what kind of uphill battle is this to get this wind farm up and running knowing that it’s one customer and that commercial market is a little shaky at the minute?

Yolanda Padron: what we saw, they have a lot of ca- caveats, right? So they’ve, they need to secure the customers before they start building and before they do anything, um, behind the meter. But it’s, I mean, it’s, it’s a pretty big wind farm, and it’s pretty far up north. But I mean, we, we talked to someone in, in northern US today who was having icing issues.

So I mean, of course we know Canada is no, no stranger to that, if they do make it work, I think it’d be really, really exciting to, to have sort of one technology power another, um, instead of just what we’ve been hearing a lot of the potential data centers and, and just wind po- [00:15:00] powering data centers.

Matthew Stead: Why not data centers? You know, seriously, like you said, Yolanda. why not go something that does have commercial demand?

Yolanda Padron: we’ve talked a lot about the potential of da- data centers, right? And we’ve talked a lot about people wanting to do them. Um, but there’s also a lot of talk of potentially doing data centers up in space and a lot of talk of maybe what if we do it offshore or, you know. And so I think there’s a lot of what ifs with data centers.

Of course, there’s a lot of what if with this, but just from a technology standpoint, I think this is really intriguing to have something that’s, that’s a little bit even more out there than what we’ve heard so far

Allen Hall 2025: Is it a build it and they will come type of s- situation here that hydrogen and ammonia may be the, the first offtake, but realistically, if that doesn’t work out, they can still connect to the grid and feed Canada, feed the Northeast of the United States or something else

Matthew Stead: Also, um, like Japan has [00:16:00] also expressed strong demand for, um, ammonia, and so, you know, they- they’re on the East Coast, aren’t they? So, you know, shipping it from East Coast to Japan is not gonna be so, so easy. I stick by what I said before. It’s hopium. it’s not a plan

Allen Hall 2025: I just saw an article today talking about Airbus continuing on with a hydrogen aircraft, and I think they were gonna work with a Japanese firm to work on that together. Six months ago I thought that died, but maybe it’s still in the offering. Maybe there’s an offtake for hydrogen. B- besides the, you know, replacement for some of the, uh, more unpleasant gases that are used in steel production and in some other industry things, maybe part of this is airplane fuel.

Which ammonia is one of those offerings also, right? The, there’s been a number of efforts to turn ammonia fuel into essentially jet fuel. They configure the engines to burn ammonia, which is a possibility. It does seem remote though, [00:17:00] honestly. There doesn’t seem to be a huge pull for hydrogen, and there’s not a, a major market for ammonia at at least at the moment.

So I don’t know. It, it’s… When you’re talking about gigawatts of capacity you’re gonna build, you, you hopefully have an offtake 

for it 

Yolanda Padron: if they designed it for it being not connected to the grid, right, it just is kind of like a behind the meter thing, and then could they later retrofit it into there? Like, how would all that permitting and everything 

Allen Hall 2025: I– 

well, that’s a great question. I– There are a number of, uh, connections between the United States and Canada at the moment. guess is that when they place this wind farm, they have that alternate route lined up, just like any wind farm in here in the States, that you’ll find them real close to high-voltage transmission lines.

Generally, those are the easy ones because transmission lines cost money and take time for permitting. I’m not sure Canada has those kind of restrictions, right? But Nova Scotia is not the easiest place in the world to do heavy construction work, just the [00:18:00] nature of Nova Scotia. It will be fascinating to see how they progress with this, but it’s something to keep an eye on because a lot of other projects like this have slowed down

Matthew Stead: Do you remember when some of the OEMs were talking about, um, putting electrolyzers on their offshore wind turbines? So the, the theory, the theory was you’ve got offshore wind turbine, you don’t connect it to the grid standalone, um, and you generate hydrogen or, uh, possibly ammonia on the actual wind turbine.

And then every now and then you just decant it, you know, drive up with a boat, you know, plug in the hose, and then suck out the hydrogen or ammonia. So, um, yeah, once again, all of those have gone quiet, haven’t 

they? 

Allen Hall 2025: speaking of Japan, a global oil giant is walking away from the Japanese offshore wind project, uh, but the project’s not dying. BP has told its Japanese partners it intends to withdraw from a wind farm planned off Yamagata Prefecture, uh, apparently worried about [00:19:00] profitability. The 450-megawatt project sits, uh, just off the coast, and it is led by trading house Marubeni, which says it will press ahead without BP.

Kansai Electric and Tokyo Gas remain on board also. So BP’s exit follows really a, a brutal year for Japan, where Mitsubishi has, and some others, have pulled out of, uh, at least three projects so far, uh, over rising construction costs, and I think a lot of that’s tied to inflation. Uh, the ambition’s still there for, uh, for a number of companies, but it’s just getting harder and harder to do projects in Japan.

Is this just the nature of the economy in Japan at the moment, or is this more about Japanese policy on the offtake, 

Matthew Stead: I, I’m not really deep into the details but, you know, it just appears to me like a blip. I mean, there, I think there’s a lot of commitment in Japan to, you know, carry [00:20:00] out their offshore developments and I, I think this is probably more just a blip, um, and a little, you know, internal corporate, you know, argument rather than a sustained issue on offtake agreements and so forth

Allen Hall 2025: Well, Yolanda, how hard is it to keep partners on a wind development in general? Are there a lot of moving pieces there until the turbines hit the water or hit the 

earth? 

there’s 

Yolanda Padron: I think a lot of moving pieces, but not, uh, I haven’t seen a lot of changes once it’s been publicly announced and everything’s, you know, everything’s been signed and everything. Um, I do think this is really interesting. I know we’ve talked a lot about, about having, about the idea of like sometimes people think wind’s really expensive, and the way that we’re gonna make wind work is just making it cheaper for everybody and just optimizing it as much as possible, um, and, and just being, having the turbines be as resilient as possible, right?

And I think such a strong player just backing out maybe [00:21:00] will incentivize some of the people in Japan to sort of try to see how they can optimize it a little bit more. I’m really excited to see it. I don’t know. It’d be… I think it’d be a nice it 

Allen Hall 2025: Isn’t the bonus to offshore wind the price stability? Although the price may be higher today than you may be happy to pay, the stability of that price is a huge leverage point when you compare it to things like oil and gas or natural gas, um, in particular, which are highly volatile, that for electricity, at least you have this fairly steady source at a fixed price that you can plan out 10 years, 20 years, 25 years, maybe even 30 years. And as batteries become more prevalent on the grid, that the math even gets better over the years. Isn’t that the bonus? And, and if [00:22:00] everybody can focus on the long-term effects to the economy is where all the action will be?

Matthew Stead: Yeah, I mean, when I first, um, started looking into wind, you know, 10 plus years ago, I, I won- wondered why. Why would you build offshore with all that expense? And then, you know, it became clear to me just around the, um, you know, the diversity, you know, the, the fact that you might get more wind at times that you don’t get onshore wind, and the fact that it’s more consistent.

Um, yeah, and, you know, so those… I- it’s really a trade-off, isn’t it? Between the capital costs and the, um, more reliable, more consistent, um, offshore wind. So I think, you know, I, I was convinced at the start, I thought it was crazy, but then obviously it’s, it’s a, it’s a… it makes sense

Yolanda Padron: Yeah, I agree. And I think, uh, depending on where you’re having your offshore wind farm, you run into things that you maybe haven’t run into before, right? I know onshore we run into a lot of things in the [00:23:00]US and Australia that we, you know, the, the turbines just maybe weren’t designed for, or there wasn’t a lot of research being done because it was being done in Europe and, and the conditions are really different.

Um, and just the same way, you know, the sea is different in different places. There’s different depths. There are diff- different things that you need to worry about. but yeah, I, I completely agree that there’s a lot more generation, um, offshore. It’s, it’s bigger turbines. Um, there can be bigger, larger costs. You know, if you need to do a blade replacement or something, it, it can get, again, really expensive really quickly. But, but it’s, it’s a trade-off for sure.

Allen Hall 2025: We’re gonna take a quick break, but when we come back, we wanna talk about a place where wind is being fought over versus projects slowing down ​

[00:24:00] over in the UK, there’s a big fight about offshore wind, and not just about where wind turbines will be planted, but more about how they will affect other wind turbines.

So RWE is defending the UK government’s approval of its three-gigawatt Dogger Bank South project, which won its consent order, uh, basically a month and a half ago. Uh, but the developers next door are taking that approval to court. Equinor, SSE, Vårgrön own the neighboring 3.6-gigawatt Dogger Bank wind farm, and they have filed for j-judicial review.

Their argument is technical, but the price tag is not. They say wake effects, where one wind farm steals the wind from another due to turbulence, could cut their output and cost them between €500 million and [00:25:00] €669 million over the life of their project. That’s a lot of money, Matthew. A half a million euros is not something to ignore.

It looks like this is headed to some judicial court or maybe arbitration. Wake effects, which are actually not that well understood from what I can tell at the moment, there’s a lot of discussion and argument about, uh, how real are they or, or what effect they can have on power output. Uh, there’s a lot of money at stake, and the location of some of these wind farms is pretty close to one 

another 

Matthew Stead: you know, we always, always talk about, you know, AEP loss and, you know, the, the challenge is actually measuring it. And, um, you know, I’ve heard different numbers, but, you know, plus or minus half a percent of AEP loss, um, appears to me from what– in discussions, you know, the, the limit of what you can actually ever measure on a good day.

Um, I just wonder, I mean, while those numbers, you know, €500, um, [00:26:00] million is a, is a big number, um, but what is that as a percentage of the overall output of that, of that facility? Um, I, I don’t know the answer, but, you know, if, if it’s, you know, half a percent, I think you’d be struggling to, um, struggling to justify that, that wake effect loss.

I mean, you know, going back to what you said, Allen, you know, there are wake effects of some sort, but it’s a question of how much. I mean, that-that’s why aircraft don’t take off, um, too closely, isn’t it? Because there’s wake effects. Um, so it’s definitely a given, definitely a given. Um, but, you know, how much of an impact it truly is.

Um, and I mean, there’s always other variables, you know, variables in the weather, you know, wind patterns, da, da, da, da, da, da, da, and how much do this– does this actually compare to those other, other variables? 

Allen Hall 2025: Yolanda, how would you even mitigate wake turbulence on an adjacent wind farm? Are there ways to do that today? 

Yolanda Padron: I think the, the aerodynamics, Allen, would [00:27:00] be a lot more in your court than, than in mine.

Matthew does have a really good point. I mean, what are we… With the UK wanting to ramp up offshore as much as they want to ramp up, right? They’re not going to just cancel a large project, and they need to… I mean, it’s not, uh, there’s a finite amount of space, right? So what, I mean, what, what are you, what are you gonna do?

It’s like, it’s what, like, what happens in onshore where you, you really hope maybe that you don’t get a wind farm that’s really, really close by. Um, but you might also want to plan for it. I mean, I know of sites that have le- that lease a little bit of extra land so that way no one else can lease it, or that they can, they can use that to, to travel between turbines.

Um, and it’s, I mean, it’s, it’s kind of… Isn’t it kind of just part of it, part of the trade?

Allen Hall 2025: it has to be, right, at some point. [00:28:00] The question in my mind about all this is how much wake is there? Is it directly impacting the adjacent wind farm? Is there– are there things that can be done to minimize that wake turbulence? I think the answer is yes, but as wind turbine blade designers, I haven’t seen the same level of wake reduction that we have seen more recently in aerospace.

It’s complicated to do some of these things on a wind turbine blade. You’re mass-producing. You’re making a blade a day or a blade in a day-and-a-half timeframe. Are you gonna design this really aerodynamic tip to go on to reduce the wake on a particular wind farm? Probably not, right? So it’s, it’s– is it worth doing that versus the, the cost it would be?

So it’s gonna cost 500 million euros in loss to an adjacent wind farm. Do you put that 500 million into the design effort and the molds and [00:29:00]everything else to make these blades different? Uh, it’s a tight trade-off, right? It– from the engineering side. It may be better settled in the courts, honestly. Just it may be cheaper to do it that way.

Matthew Stead: Uh, I, I was gonna go down a different avenue. I mean, obviously there’s always curtailment. There’s always curtailment due to grid congestion, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, maintenance. I mean, if they, if they just– when wind is coming from a certain direction, they could just de-rate and, uh, just not absorb as much energy, um, out of the wind when the wind is coming from that sector.

And so that would be a way of, um, not modifying the turbine, just de-rating it under a certain wind condition. I mean, the same thing occurs with noise curtailment all the time. Um, so there’s, there’s noise modes. There could be a, a wake loss mode. We should trademark that

Allen Hall 2025: Well, you know who’s gonna make money out of this no matter what? The 

lawyers. 

​

Allen Hall 2025: [00:30:00] Well, in this quarter’s PES Wind magazine, there are a number of great articles, and you can download the entire magazine and all those great articles at peswind.com. There’s a nice little article from Enerpac Tool Group, and if you’re not familiar with them, they make a, a number of tools that are handy in the wind industry.

Uh, and, you know, routine torque checks is kind of a pain, right? And the problem with a lot of those checks is that you have to haul around a heavy hydraulic pump to do it. And so if you’ve ever been to a trade show and seen some of these [00:31:00] pumps, it is a pain. And if you h- have to move around, especially on a w- wind site a lot, you really don’t wanna have a heavy pump that maybe is made for something, uh, more robust.

Uh, and you need something that’s portable. That’s what you really need, right? So the Enerpac Tool Group has really created this, uh, LU series they call. Which is a lightweight, portable, hydraulic pump, which is for intermittent work, which is what happens on most wind sites. It’s intermittent. Uh, so the product line director, Angie Wallace, uh, talks about this and says technician feedback has shaped this new tool, uh, from multiple carrying handles and an upward-facing gauge.

And that is a big thumbs up from me. When you put the gauge on the side of the tool where you can’t see it, such a problem. It’s like they’ve never used it. Well, obviously, the Enerpac has been talking to technicians, and they put the gauge where the technician can actually see it. Uh, and it’s designed to go through towers and, and tight [00:32:00] spaces.

Uh, so this is made specifically for offshore conditions. It’s ruggedized, and it’s a great tool. And a lot of times, Matthew, when you s- see the technicians about and some of the tools they carry, you’re like, man, that is not a good tool for this. That is, that is too much to be hauling around, particularly uptower.

It’s nice that we can see some tools that are designed job

Matthew Stead: I, I’m completely convinced. I, I don’t have much to say. Um, I mean, my, my day job is, um, you know, designing products and working out what products we’re going to, to work on, and, you know, the customer is the main voice you should listen to, um, at least in the first step. So always listen to the customer first, and I think from what you’ve described, customer first, and then develop the product to suit the application.

Yeah, so yeah, I’m convinced 

Allen Hall 2025: Yolanda, you’ve seen Interpack on sites, haven’t you? It does seem like I run across them once in a while at some of the US

sites 

Yolanda Padron: Every once [00:33:00] in a while. I do gotta say I love the idea of when, like, actual, like, boots on the ground people’s feedback is taken into consideration for, for anything really. And so this is, this just makes me really happy because I think a lot of times, like, as engineers, like, we love the idea of just, oh, I’m gonna do this really cool fancy thing, and then it’s just it- no one can use it, or a very specialized person has to be able to use it.

And so actually doing, you know, modifying a product so that it, it makes sense for the people using it, and I know we’ve, we’ve all talked about it a lot internally and, and we continue to work towards making it easier and easier on, on the people actually installing the product. Like, this is, this is really exciting.

Allen Hall 2025: So if you need a lightweight pump for tightening some bolts uptower, particularly if you’re offshore, take a look at this Enerpac line of LU lightweight series tools. It’s well worth it. And at that same time, you should check out PES Wind magazine. Just go to [00:34:00] peswind.com

That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out directly to Rosemary, and don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. for yolonda, Matthew, and Rosemary, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. 

​