The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast

GE Vernova posts a record quarter as gas and grid surge while wind orders drop 40%. Plus Envision grid-connects its first AI turbine for Fortescue. Visit https://woma2027.com/ to register speaking and sponsorship interest!

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!

If you haven’t visited woma2027.com, you should do so right now because we are putting together all of the, uh, events at WOMA 2027, which is March 3rd through 5th in Melbourne at the Pullman, Matthew, Pullman East? Pullman East Melbourne. And it’s packed full. Our, in fact, actually, we have so many people applying to attend the event, we’re getting a little nervous on if the size of the venue is not large enough, and we, we have a lot of people already chime in wanting to be sponsors, which is great.

But I wanna talk about what you will experience at WOMA. We’ve done it for two years now, and the feedback has been great. And Yolanda, you’ve been to the one just this past February, and participated in panels and saw some of the, uh, workshops and was involved in a lot of WOMA 2026. What are you expecting in 2027, and what did you think of 2026?

Yolanda Padron: I thought [00:01:00] 2026 was great. I loved seeing everybody there. Uh, got to meet a lot of new people. It was, it was sweet. There was a lot of r- people returning from WOMA 2025, um, and a lot of new people that were told that that was the event to be at to learn about wind, which was really, really nice to hear. Uh, something that I loved, especially since we’ve been through quite a few conferences since then and before then, was just the fact that, like, you’re, you’re just talking about problems and just talking about solutions, and you’re talking about real stories, and it’s nothing that’s super, super public.

You know, like, you, you can have real conversations with real people. I know during a panel I mentioned a, a solution to an issue that I had seen that was kind of niche, and then, uh, like three minutes later, like I had had some people come up to me and we all talked about the problem that we saw and then [00:02:00]talked about their problem, and it was really similar, and obviously in a totally different continent.

And it was, it was good to, to be able to have those conversations that you usually wouldn’t have elsewhere, especially if everything’s just really, really public and just big and you’re having a lot of people sell at you, and it’s, it’s just something that we’ve really shied away from. What, what was your favorite part of it?

Matthew Stead: I, I think, um, it was really the fact that it was a a technical, useful, helpful conference rather than having some rando talking about things that they’re told to talk to you about 

Allen Hall: It’s real answers from real problem solvers. And everybody’s gonna be in Melbourne on the 3rd through the 5th of March 2027.

If you’re interested in attending, you need to go to woma2027.com. If you’re interested in sponsoring, it’s also woma2027.com. There’s limited [00:03:00]sponsorship left, so if you wanna do something, you better get in quick. And if you wanna attend the event, and I suggest that you do, that you visit woma2027.com and get registered today

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

Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall. I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, Matthew Stead, and Yolanda Padron. It’s been a busy day as we record because GE just announced its second quarter earnings and a bunch of things about the business. They had an investor call early, early, early on the East Coast, and even earlier for those on the West Coast of the US, and it was a very good quarter for GE, but a really lopsided one.

Uh, GE Vernova reported second quarter orders of [00:04:00] $24.2 billion, up 88% with a backlog that has now climbed to $176 billion. Free cash came in at $5.1 billion. Man, $5.1 billion is a lot of cash, everybody, which is more than the company generated in all of last year. So they made more in one quarter in cash than made in all of last year, and management is raising its full year guidance, but the strength is coming from gas power and the electric grid, not from wind.

The wind segment saw orders fall 40% and revenue slip 10%, and the company still expects wind to lose about $400 million this year. Although in the investor call, they did say that the forecast for wind in Q3 and maybe even Q4 was to be essentially break even on the EBITDA scale. So that’s a, a, a good number.

It does seem like GE is being more [00:05:00] aggressive on pricing and selective on the projects they are choosing to participate with. Repowers was way down, if I remember correctly. Uh, they are not doing a lot of that at the moment. So there is a slowdown they’re seeing in wind, but they’re more than making up for it in gas turbines and electrification.

Orders for gas turbines are out to ’30, ’31, and I think they’re gonna close out all of ’30, ’31, um, book orders for gas turbines here shortly. So if you want a gas turbine, Matthew, you’re gonna have to get in line because your GE has a long list of, of clients in front of them. What does this mean for wind?

When I hear the discussion where GE is focused on gas and electrification because of the huge cash flow that comes in their door- Does that mean a good positive things for wind because they have the cash to kinda hang around wind? Or is it gonna be set aside for other [00:06:00] more profitable business segments?

I 

Matthew Stead: mean, GE’s had a number of setbacks over the years. Um, you know, we know, we know all about them. We’ve been talking about them, you know, multiple times. But, you know, they’ve gotta just wait it out, don’t they? Um, you know, wind is not gonna go away, so they just need to wait it out, get their problems out of the way, get their cash flow in, build the order books again, just wait for things to improve.

Um, I, I think one thing I just wanna pull out, the Sands Ear, i- isn’t that a massive achievement? 

Allen Hall: It is. It’s, it’s a colossal engineering achievement on its own. Forget about just delivering and manufacturing all those turbines and getting them installed. And that’s a pattern energy project, and Fairwind I think was involved with that in terms of project development, EPC items.

It’s huge. It’s gigantic. But it may be the last one we see in the United States for a while. 

Matthew Stead: And but Vineyard, you know, they’ve gotta resolve that, don’t they? We’ve spoken about that before. Get that one out the way, clear out the decks and, yeah. That’ll come good. 

Allen Hall: Rosemary, of our former GE [00:07:00] employees, I guess we have two of them here.

I’m one. Not of wind, but of another division. What’s your thoughts on GE Vernova at the minute? 

Rosemary Barnes: These days I see them through the O&M lens. That’s how I work with them, is when my clients need support for all their wind farms and It’s just, it’s just never enough. It’s not a GE-specific thing. Uh, you know, across Australia, anybody with a full service agreement does not…

Uh, the, the company performing that agreement just gives the impression that they just do not have enough, um, uh, enough people. Y- you know? It’s just, just hands or maybe it’s budget. Uh, I guess it, it’s both at the same time. Yeah, I mean, I see some good things like their, the pace of new technologies has slowed and they’re consolidating, which was needed, but it’s just hard to imagine that it’s even gonna be enough considering how many fewer blade engineers that they’ve got now.

Like, how are they, [00:08:00] how are they going to get the, you know, the issues with the platforms that they are, uh, pushing, how are they gonna get all that under control with so many fewer engineers? And will they ever be able to, you know, go back to innovating a- again when they’ve lost so much of their, you know, institutional knowledge?

Allen Hall: Two things they did not mention during the phone call today or in any of the documents that I saw was TPI Composites and that EPC has acquired that and is now operating the factories, uh, making GE blades. And LM Wind Power was not discussed either, although LM Wind Power has been integrated into the overall financials of the company, so it’s not a standalone financial entity like it was last year.

So you can’t really r- read the tea leaves of what’s happening at LM, but nobody talked about or even asked on the investor call what was happening on the wind side. They were very interested in gas turbines and what the order rate was going to be, and GE was concerned [00:09:00] on their side, saying that they’re trying to ramp up production to make more gas turbines, but there’s limitations to how much they can do.

Rosemary Barnes: I guess that’s the s- the zeitgeist now, right? Or it’s the, I don’t know, like, it’s, it’s a sign of the times. Everyone’s obsessed with data centers, and for some reason, data centers are obsessed with gas turbines, um, even though, like, it’s not a fast solution to, uh, y- you know, to, to anything. So I don’t… You know, I’m not saying that building a, you know, a wind farm or solar farms, batteries, those are not without challenges.

But I really don’t think that the, yeah, gas turbine challenge is so much easier than the, um, yeah, than the renewables challenges. It’s a bit weird to me how everyone has just kind of latched onto, “Oh, you need new power, then it needs to be gas.” It’s just a bit weird to me. 

Allen Hall: GE was predicting a peak of orders in gas turbines to happen sometime in 2026.

They, they think that the demand curve is gonna trend downward because everybody is already in [00:10:00] line essentially, and it’s five years out, so not many other people are gonna join that line to make it seven, eight years out That also indicates that sort of the d- the demand for gas turbines may be waning a little bit, or there’s just a backlog, they just can’t produce more.

Is that going to then maybe finally open up the best solar wind discussion for AI data centers? 

Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, I wonder if it’s partly because y- you know, in a lot of cases… So people wanna build data centers, and then those data centers need power. You can’t just plug into the grid in an easy, timely manner. So then now they’ve gotta BYO their own power, and in fact, in Australia they’ve just announced a, a policy where you will have to…

You can bring your own power, and it will have to be renewable, actually, in Australia. So, um, at least that’s, at least that’s a win for, you know, generation source. 

Allen Hall: Yeah. The, the AI data center discussion and gas turbines in the United States has more recently been focused [00:11:00] on, on the AI data centers that use those gas turbines, and the number of gas turbines that they’re choosing, and that they’re choosing gas turbines that fall under some sort of EPA threshold on size.

And what is happening, and which, uh, SpaceX has done and some others have done, is they go underneath that threshold on the size of the gas turbines, and then they, you know, and they daisy chain them together, right? So you, you… Instead of having one massive, I don’t know, two-megawatt generator of some sort, you have a bunch of 200 kilowatts, and you just stack them all together.

And the concern is, is that are some of these data centers violating EPA, the… If not the actual rule or the intent of the rule in terms of emissions, and it’s causing a little bit of a stink. It’s, it’s raised enough of, uh, the noise floor about it that you’re, you’re hearing it on podcasts, you’re hearing people involved in AI data ce- [00:12:00] data centers push back on it saying, “It’s all legal.

It’s all legal.” So it’s gonna come to a head pretty quickly in the United States. 

Rosemary Barnes: It was some real, like, real sketchy loophole finding, right? Like, I can’t remember the exact wording, but you’re not supposed to be able to just chuck in a diesel generator or a gas turbine in without any kind of planning, right?

But they found a loophole where it’s like, okay, well, you know, it’s just like a truck except for that there’s no truck, and so it was called, like- off-road or non-road use or something. And it’s just, like, clearly not the, um, the meaning of the, of the law, right? The spirit of the law had, like, obviously been broken.

In Australia we have a saying, the pub test. It doesn’t pass the pub test. Like, if you said that to someone in a pub, then they would be like, “What the hell is that? That is not right.” They have closed the loophole. However, I think that they also kind of quietly just allowed them to keep the ones that they had or had planned or something, so [00:13:00] it’s, like, overall by far not ideal.

But I think that it’s just, like, you can, you can do that for a single site, but it’s obviously, like, the more that you do ridiculous stuff like that, that you lose the community ac- acceptance, which they barely had and definitely don’t really have anymore. Um, and secondly, yeah, like people, uh, people close the loophole and they respond.

It’s, it’s much better, and we see it with wind as well. Like, yeah, you can do things technically by the law, but if you wanna have a, you know, sustainable, uh, industry through the years, through the decades, you actually have to kind of, you know, think, “What happens if I do y- push to the furthest extent of the law, um, to get away with whatever I can?”

What’s gonna happen is regulation is gonna come down on you and you’ll lose the ability to kind of self-regulate. 

Allen Hall: We’re gonna take a quick break, but when we come back we’ll meet a wind turbine that runs on artificial intelligence, Rosie.[00:14:00]

Delamination and bondline failures in blades are difficult problems to detect early. These hidden issues can cost you millions in repairs and lost energy production. CIC NDT are specialists to detect these critical flaws before they become expensive burdens. Their nondestructive test technology penetrates deep into blade materials to find voids and cracks traditional inspections completely miss.

CIC NDT maps every critical defect, delivers actionable reports, and provides support to get your blades back in service. So visit cicndt.com because catching blade problems early will save you millions

In the red dirt of Western Australia, a mining company and a Chinese turbine maker are trying something new. Envision Energy says it has grid connected its first [00:15:00] artificial intelligence wind turbine prototype for Fortescue’s Nullagine Wind Project in Pilbara. The full project will use 17 of Envision’s EN182 turbines, each rated for 7.8 megawatts and built to handle mining sites, desert heat, and tough grid rules.

The turbines- The turbines pair a self-erecting tower from Nabler Wind with a hub standing an astonishing 188 meters tall. Behind it all sits Envision’s Energy Foundation Model software that company calls the world’s largest physical AI system. The goal is to swap diesel and gas for wind across the mine’s fleet and processing sites.

So this is an effort by Fortescue to power mining operations with electricity. It’s a pretty ex- exciting [00:16:00] project if you’re watching. The Envision artificial intelligence piece is an aspect that I didn’t know much about, and I still am trying to gather more information on, because there’s not a ton of info about what AI means in terms of a physical system.

And maybe Rosie, you know a little bit more, or Yolande, you can brief us on what this really is. 

Rosemary Barnes: We just need to start with a pronunciation lesson, Allen. Sorry. 

Matthew Stead: Not Pilbara, Pilbara. Pilbara. 

Rosemary Barnes: I, I don’t actually… I hadn’t heard that part about AI and that it doesn’t… I, I don’t know. It’s, it’s such a buzzword that it might not mean anything, you know.

However, there’s so many cool aspects to that project that aren’t related to AI. Um, yeah, the tower height, the tower erection technology. I’m interested to hear that they have taken the heat of the environment into [00:17:00] consideration, ’cause that’s one of the, my obsessions actually, as long as I’ve been working on wind turbines, and ever since I found out how, you know, the materials qualification and certification process works, that it just doesn’t take into account the really high temperatures.

That’s one of the projects that Padlo has going on at the moment, is, um, putting sensors on some turbines to, like, look into that more. Um, yeah, because we do see in Australia a lot of sites have, you know, even within a few years, they might have 20 years of operation left, but we already see a whole lot of cracks that look suspiciously like end of, end of life fatigue cracks on them.

So yeah, we are looking into that more, and it’s very interesting to hear that Envision have taken the heat into consideration. I hope it includes the blade structure as well as just, you know, other turbine components, electronics, and that sort of thing. 

Allen Hall: It does sound like they’re pairing batteries or BESS with wind turbines, where the BESS is located at the base of the turbine.

That would make sense in [00:18:00] Australia, particularly around where mines are, because it tends to be very remote, and storing electricity would make sense. The Discussions I’ve seen on YouTube deal with more on the energy trading side, that the wind turbine stores energy, of course, and it does it very efficiently into the best system, and then the AI system sits on top of that to help arbitrage the energy that’s stored in the battery to make more money.

Not a bad way of doing it, but it does lead to a ton of questions about national security, the use of AI, the, uh, and how this is all going to integrate together from a asset manager side. Yolande, I know in the United States we have a lot of restrictions about the technology that is in wind turbines and the, and the firewalls that exist there, where you, you can’t even plug into a wind turbine without having a lot of approvals.

Is AI coming in wind [00:19:00] turbines in the US and the rest of the world, or is this mostly a Western Australia event? 

Yolanda Padron: We talked a little bit about a trading company a couple episodes ago, right? And that was a… It sounded like it’s, it’s coming. Um, I, when I first read the article that we’re talking about for Fortescue, I thought this was more of, like, a SCADA self-learning AI type thing, where, like It, it kind of learns from the, from itself, and then maybe it, it tells you you’re more likely to be seeing some sort of blade issue that wasn’t shown before 

Rosemary Barnes: I heard, um, Andrew Forrest speak at a smart energy conference earlier this year, and he was talking about not for, um, not for wind, but for the solar and battery projects that they’ve already got there.

He called it a self-healing grid, and AI was the technology that enabled that. And so he, [00:20:00] he was saying, and I can’t remember the, the details specifically either, but when there was a, a disturbance, something that would’ve caused the, you know, without the AI, um, you know, layer looking after everything, a fault that would’ve shut the whole site down was able to self, self-heal with no interruption to supply.

Um, and that that was the kind of AI that, uh, they were talking about. I believe that the new wind farm addition to that is the same sort of thing, where they’re looking at, you know, a very complex system with… I mean, they don’t have energy prices to deal with, uh, in that case because it’s self-contained.

They’re not conne- connected to any external grid. Um, but you know, they’ve got wind, they’ve got solar, they’ve got, uh, so obviously weather conditions related to those two going on. They’ve got batteries, they’ve got, you know, yeah, the, um, availability of every single different… of probably many [00:21:00] thousands of different components in that system that, um, y- you know, you need to make sure that if there’s a failure or when there’s a failure in any one or combination of those things, that you’re always going to be able to reroute around that and kind of heal itself.

So it probably does include some of, of what you were saying, Yolanda, but I think when they say this is the biggest physical AI, like, I think that that might be a little bit of a meaningless term because y- you know, like, there’s AI… It, it could be like… I, I don’t know. It, like, what, what does that mean?

Like, if you have AI that is, um, you know, playing some role in controlling America’s electricity grids, then that would be the biggest, the biggest one, even if it was, you know, like a tiny little, playing a tiny role. I, I, I don’t know what that specifically means and… Is it bad marketing ’cause it’s just confusing and makes you assume that it’s, um, just meaningless buzzword cool [00:22:00]sounding thing 

Allen Hall: It’s probably genius marketing because they attach AI to whatever the product is.

So we have AI lightning diverters at Weather Guard. EOLOGIX-PING has AI CMS, and Partload has whatever Partload does, AI-Partload. So that’s the smart move, th- uh, because it does seem to raise the value 

Rosemary Barnes: But you know what? Partload is anti-AI because 90% of our work is you get, you know, drone inspections, and they use AI, and then it w- and it works really, w- it works really…

I’d never wanna make it sound like it is bad technology because, you know, the status quo before we had drones with using AI was to just not inspect your blades. So, you know, like, we’re doing much better than that now. But everything that we do is where AI was not able to do it or AI did it wrong. So y- you know, um, like I- we use AI in that everything that comes into us is AI.

Allen Hall: Well, if the same AI [00:23:00] technology that is reviewing blade images is being applied inside of a wind turbine, what do you see as a likely outcome there, Rosemary? 

Rosemary Barnes: Well, it’s not, I mean, it’s not the, it’s not the same. And like I said, uh, it’s very easy for me to be like, “Oh, AI, you know, makes all these mistakes,” but it, I only see the mistakes.

I don’t see the 90%-plus of correctly categorized things. I don’t, they’re not relevant to me. Um- Uh, but I think for controlling a complex system, like it, it is… That, that’s a really great application. I mean, I think it’s like with any like super hyped up technology, it’s like really useful in a few things, and that’s what leads to the hype, and then people start to just wanna apply it everywhere.

It becomes the, you know, like when the only tool you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Like, that’s where we’re at. Like AI is this, um, is this hammer that we’ve got, and everyone wants to solve every problem with it. And I do it myself, you know. Like I hate writing LinkedIn posts, and so I’ll work with, with Claude or, um, I [00:24:00] use NotebookLM as well to, you know, I draft my LinkedIn post.

And you’re like, “Well, th- no, that sucks. Do this, do this, do this.” And then, you know, like half an hour later, you’re like, okay, I could very easily have written my own post in less time, and I could… I, I try again and again because I just, I, uh, you know, hate that kind of writing so much. But yeah, I think that like economy-wide, that’s the problem, that everyone is just trying to whack every problem with AI regardless of whether it’s the right one.

Allen Hall: Okay, so there’s gonna be products that are gonna incorporate AI or have AI somewhere hyphenated in the name of the product. What products should not be using AI right now? 

Matthew Stead: Yeah, I think there’s… Uh, I wanna add to the… You know, go back a few steps. That calling this the largest, you know, physical AI device is complete rubbish really.

That’s stupid, really. It’s like, like, like what you said, Rosie. It’s like putting an AI machine on a road, and then it becomes the world’s largest AI infrastructure. I mean, that was, that was pretty stupid, um, [00:25:00] really. And that, that’s just marketing. My, my view is if you can’t explain what it does, you shouldn’t be using the word AI So in marketing, you know, you can’t just say, “Oh, it’s AI ’cause I don’t understand what it does.”

You should actually be able to explain, “This is what this product does, and this is why it does it, and we use AI to help make that occur in a smart way.” Rather than just being randomly talking about, um, AI solving all of these complex issues and not actually knowing how it’s done is rubbish. 

Rosemary Barnes: To answer your question, Allen, I think AI shouldn’t be used for most creative stuff.

Like video, um, creation, everybody hates it, and companies keep on pushing it, and it sucks. And I think also it’s kind of… It, it makes people so angry, I think it’s gonna backfire if it hasn’t already for most, [00:26:00] most people that are using it. Um, yeah, so that would be one thing. And also, uh, you shouldn’t use too much AI for, like, I see it heaps on LinkedIn now, and it’s, it’s kind of…

Like, at the first time you use AI, you’re like, “Whoa, th- this is pretty, pretty good. Like, this is something, you know, like I could… That’s very similar to the stuff that I, yeah, used to post on LinkedIn or the infographics that I used to make.” But the issue is that, like, it looks that way the first time, but then once you use it a bit and you can recognize that it’s AI, then you see it everywhere and it, it turns you, really turns you off whoever’s put it out there.

And so, like, there’s so much on LinkedIn now where it’s, like, just AI-generated things. It’s… Even if, you know, like, if an expert has created it and edited it afterwards and made sure that the output is accurate, then I wouldn’t call it AI slop. But it is also, like, it’s always too [00:27:00] wordy. It’s, um, you know, it’s just like the style is just clearly e- the h- if the point is that you’re trying to express, “I’m an expert.

These are my expert opinions. I know what I’m talking about,” AI is not doing that for you. Like, you write your post or create your graphic with AI, it’s just not doing that for you. So I think that that is another example of where people shouldn’t be using AI. 

Allen Hall: 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 to us on LinkedIn. And if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It really helps other wind energy professionals discover the show. And please, please, please don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode.

For Rosie, Yolande, and Matthew, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy [00:28:00] podcast.

Allen covers the V236 blade failure at He Dreiht, Maine’s first full-size floating turbine, and Japan’s wind-powered data center.

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!

Happy Monday Everyone

The V236 just had a bad week last week.

a blade failed on one of the turbines at ENBW’s [EN-bay-vay’s]

HE DREIHT [hay DRYT] offshore wind farm

in the German North Sea.

Nine hundred and sixty megawatts.

There are 64 of those V236 machines.

The project hit first power just last November.

ENBW says no one was hurt.

VESTAS says it has launched a root cause investigation.

But a blade failure on your flagship turbine …

at one of Germany’s biggest offshore wind farms?

That will be a headline.

And the industry is watching.

Now … from the North Sea … to the coast of Maine.

The UNIVERSITY OF MAINE has done something

no one in America has done before.

They put a full-size floating wind turbine in the ocean.

And it is delivering power to the grid.

The platform is called VOLTURNUS [vol-TURN-us].

It was assembled onshore … in Brewer, Maine …

then towed thirty miles down the PENOBSCOT [peh-NOB-skot] River

and out to sea.

No specialized heavy-lift vessels.

No deepwater pile driving.

The hull is made of concrete … sourced locally.

Not imported steel.

Eighty percent of the best offshore wind in America

sits over water too deep for fixed-bottom foundations.

Floating platforms like VOLTURNUS

could change that math entirely.

Meanwhile … in Japan …

wind energy just found a brand-new customer.

Data centers.

EURUS [YOO-rus] ENERGY and TOYOTA TSUSHO [TOY-oh-tah TSOO-shoh]

have broken ground on a wind-powered data center

in HOKKAIDO [hoh-KY-doh].

It is the first data center in Japan

directly connected to a wind farm.

The facility sits next to the KOBAOKO [koh-bah-OH-koh] Wind Farm …

forty-two megawatts …

with a private power line running straight to the servers.

And here is the bigger picture.

Japan has most of its data centers packed into Tokyo and Osaka.

HOKKAIDO has the wind … but not the demand.

So instead of sending the power somewhere else …

they are bringing the demand to the wind.

TOYOTA TSUSHO already operates ten wind farms in the region …

more than five hundred megawatts.

They are planning a much larger data center cluster by twenty thirty.

Ten to twenty megawatts of capacity.

And speaking of scale …

China just laid out its five-year plan for renewables.

The target?

A fifty-three percent jump in renewable energy consumption

by twenty thirty.

According to BLOOMBERG …

renewable power use should rise to about

one-point-eight billion tons of coal equivalent …

Wind and solar generation alone

should nearly double …

from two-point-three trillion kilowatt-hours

to four trillion.

And here is the part that matters for reliability.

China wants wind and solar … backed by storage …

to provide twenty percent of electricity

during peak summer and winter evening hours.

That is double the current level.

Three hundred gigawatts of peak generation from renewables.

That is not an aspiration.

That is a published national target.

Now … before we go …

a story from the other end of the scale.

In KONGIGANAK [KAHN-gig-uh-nak] … a village in western Alaska …

they built five wind turbines.

There is no grid connection.

No transmission lines running to the outside world.

For years … the village ran on diesel generators.

The turbines changed that.

But they created a new problem.

Sometimes … the wind made more electricity

than the village could use.

No grid to send it to.

No big battery bank to store it in.

So the engineers came up with something simple.

They put special ceramic heaters inside every home.

When the wind blows hard …

the extra power flows into those heaters.

Dense ceramic bricks soak up the energy as heat.

And when the wind dies down …

that stored heat slowly releases into the house.

In Alaska … where winter never seems to end …

surplus wind power now keeps homes warm

and cuts diesel bills at the same time.

There is a shift in the wind energy business at the moment.  

It used to be utilities buying megawatts.

Now it is tech companies buying uptime.

Remote villages buying independence from diesel.

And entire nations buying credibility on their climate commitments.

Each of those buyers has a different definition of reliability.

And every one of them needs turbines that can run for years and years.

The wind industry has never had more demand.

The question is whether the hardware

can keep up with the ambition.

`That is the state of the wind industry

for the twenty-seventh of July … twenty twenty-six.

Join us for the Uptime Wind Energy podcast tomorrow.

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.