Vestas now into profit with generous plans for global growth in wind power

When windmill supplier Vestas takes half page colour ads in the Wall Street Journal inviting readers to go and look at their Q2 08/09 results at vestas.com - you know it's good news.

It is .. but good news has been a long time coming .. see Thursday, March 30, 2006 Vestas, Big sales more losses in the wind farm business Vestas, the world's largest producer of wind turbines, lost nearly DKK 1.2bn (EUR 116m) on sales of DKK 26.7bn (EUR 3.58bn)last year (04/05) up 52% on the previous year. The company's board called the loss 'disappointing' and 'totally unacceptable'. see also Friday, November 25, 2005 Wind Energy - more problems / losses stack up for Vesta.

Investors, like Lord Patel who have hung in there have seen some modest gains as they have finally solved a lot of the problems of manufacture and reliability in use.

June 27th Order for 36 wind turbines with a combined output of 66 MW on 4 sites of 28 units of V90-1.8 MW wind turbine , eight units of its V80-2.0 MW wind turbines, installation and 5 year contract from Spain's Enel Union Fenosa Renovables (EUFER).

June 27th Order for 50 wind turbines for China 50 turbines in two projects totalling 100MW in China with a subsidiary of China Datang Group, a leading wind power producer in China, Delivery of the turbines is scheduled to begin at the end of the year and be completed in the first half of 2009.

June18th Order for 36 wind turbines for a 66MW Trapani Salemi project in Sicily from Suez' unit WINDCO Spa. due to come on stream October 2009.



The Statement says that the continuing improvement in profitability is attributable to the higher prices which Vestas initiated in 2005 and improved operational efficiency...."The overall demand pressure on the industry persists, and there are still long lead times for a number of key components; up to 15 months." ... Cash flows have improved and large inventories have helped to stabilise production capacity and Vestas’ ability to supply in the second half of 2008.... and explain the short lead times on the new projects listed above.

They also stated that order backlog on June 30 of 7.2 billion euros (US$10.73 billion). This compared with 4.8 billion at the end of the first quarter and was 67 % up on the figure at end-June last year. Note turnover year on year for Q2 is only up 3% 1067 to 1094 DKK.

These guys have vision

.."Vestas expects that modern energy (what BERR calls sustainable) will account for at least 10 % of global power production in 2020. To achieve this, more than 900,000 MW of modern energy must be installed over the next 12 years, which translates into annual growth in installed capacity of 20-25 %. The market will thus rise to an average of at least 80,000 MW per year over the next 12 years, against 20,000 MW in 2007 (ie 4 fold increase)."

By 2010 Vestas aims, together with its sub-suppliers,(and 17,370 staff worldwide) ) to be able to manufacture, ship and install 10,000 MW. In 2007, Vestas shipped a total of 4,974 MW.

On 2 June 2008, The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Andy Karsner and 5 wind turbine manufacturers, (GE Energy, Siemens Power Generation, Vestas Wind Systems, Clipper Turbine Works, Suzlon Energy, and Gamesa Corporation) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with a view to jointly seeking to increase the proportion of wind power relative to overall US power production from the current level of 1% to 20 % by 2030. See DOE Report 20% Wind Energy by 2030- May 2008
this addresses the 20% Wind Scenario:The 20% Wind Scenario presented here would require U.S. wind power capacity to grow from the current 11.5 GW to more than 300 GW over the next 23 years. (If interested in wind energy and how a modern industrial nation with an established manufacturing base should act in planning for, it this is a must read). BERR please Note , orders backlog, staff recruitment (see below) a5 month delay on component supplies Ditto on nuclear power.

Vestas has a blade factory in Windsor, Colorado,with an annual capacity of 1,800 blades, a second plant near Brighton, Colorado, will double capacity by 2010.

China’s most recent statement regarding wind power is to have an installed capacity of 100,000 MW by 2020, which is largely the same as the global capacity at the end of 2007.

On 26th June 2008, the UK government announced its fairytale plans for achieving 20 % renewable energy by 2020. The Vestas Isle of Wight factory will cease making the blades for its V82 turbine (which now mainly go to US) and change in 2010 to 44-metre blades for the V90 turbines which is predicated on the UK expansion using the V90-2.0 MW and 3.0 MW turbines are particularly well suited for this market, onshore as well as offshore. IOW will also become an R&D centre. The Cambeltown factory will shut.

Vestas expects to employ up to 1,500 people in the UK in 2010, against 1,114 employees today.

It is of interest that Vestas launched a global employee bonus programme, from Jan1 2008 in which eligible employees may achieve a bonus of up to 8 per cent of their base salary. The way this has been introduced suggest that recruitment of qualified engineers and their retention is a problem.

Looking for Press comment on Vestas results - we found this from Reuters "Shares in Spanish wind turbine maker Gamesa rise to the top of Madrid's leaderboard, up 4.2 % to 30.01 euros after Danish rival Vestas reports its order backlog has ballooned on soaring oil prices.

For those interested in investing in wind power, especially in the US you might look here at the report that The Goldman Sachs Group 21st March 2005 announced it will acquire Houston, Texas-based Zilkha Renewable Energy.

Goldman Sachs was then invested in 30 power-producing entities. “Goldman Sachs doesn’t invest in sectors that they think are stagnant or declining,” said Chris Taylor of Zilkha. This by the way was Zilkha of Selim Zilkha the son of the Banker of Baghdad who set up Mothercare in the UK, sold out. Setup an oil facilities company using the (then) new computer technology to exploit Gulf oil wells declining rserves and sold out for US$1 Bn to El Paso Gas ...then set up Zilkha energy investing in wind whcih he sold out to Sacks of Gold.

Zilkha Energy was an early investor in UK wind energy with the $80Mn. 10 sq Km site with 30 Vestas V80 2MW units at th North Hoyle field off Rhyl (Total Installed capacity 60 Mw. annual Load Factor 35.8% - UK Average 27.1%) which is the longest running offshore development(commenced Nov.2003) in the UK and now owned from 2005 by Beaufort Wind Limited.***

A BERR report on North Hoyle provides useful information - total overall final project cost totalled £81m (prior to grant) which equates to £1.35m/MW. The BERR (DTI as was) grant for the project of £10m reduced the total cost to £1.18m/MW. Total metered output 2007 was 117,000 MWh Annual operating costs in 2007 ( 3rd year of operation) amounted to £2.8m (equivalent to £47/MW or 1.51p/kWh - compare this with British Energy nuclear power realised sale price £45.7/MWh ).

As a bribe to operators The Energy White Paper 2007 declared the government’s intent that from 1st April 2009 wind ROCs will be banded:– Offshore wind farms to receive 1.5 ROCs per MWh. – Onshore wind to continue receiving 1 ROCs per MWh.

TO really understand the UK Renewables business got to Renewable Energy Foundation The REF is charity , supported by private donation and has no political affiliation or corporate membership. In pursuit of its principal goals REF highlights the need for an overall energy policy that is balanced, ecologically sensitive, and effective.

REF is part of a growing national consensus that the United Kingdom's energy policy is unbalanced, and that the drive for renewable energy generation has been inadequately planned.

*** Beaufort Wind Energy was owned 100% by Zephyr Investments .Three partners: RWE Innogy, Englefield Capital LLP4, and the Bahrein based First Islamic Investment Bank E.C. (F.I.I.B) (called Arcapita from April 2005) through its investment vehicles arranged by its subsidiary, Crescent Capital Investments (Europe) Limited, took one third (Jan 2004)each of the share capital of the investment fund, Zephyr Investments Ltd, established in April 2003.

RWE Innogy's retail subsidiary, npower, continue to purchase power and Renewable Obligation Certificates from Beaufort Wind Ltd under long term purchase contracts as part of its strategy to meet the UK Government's Renewable Obligation targets.

In August 2007 , Englefield Capital, sold their 1/3 rd stake and Arcapita Bank sold their 1/3rd stake in Zephyr which owned 17 wind farms = 20% of UK wind farm capacity for £145 Mn each (they said their cost was £55Mn each) to Infracapital, a European infrastructure fund managed by Prudential M&G, and a subsidiary of an investment entity advised by JPMorgan Asset Management, will each buy half of Arcapita's stake.

The value of Renewable Obligation Certificates dropped during 2007 from about £48 to £32 as more renewable energy came on stream.

If you have got this far, the North Hoyle farm generates electricity at say £47/MW it sells that for roughly that price and receives £33 for each ROC (it was £48 in 2007) which is effectively the gross profit. That is why they need a bribe from April 1st in 2009 to receive 1.5 ROC's for each MW generated.

Vestas, Big sales more losses in the wind farm business

Vestas, the world's largest producer of wind turbines, lost nearly DKK 1.2bn (EUR 116m) on sales of DKK 26.7bn (EUR 3.58bn)last year up 52% on the previous year. The company's board called the loss 'disappointing' and 'totally unacceptable'.

Three factors had helped cause the losses last year: disappointing North American earnings, a lack of components, and vastly increased guarantee provisions.

Vestas expected better financial results in 2006. The company has already secured 60 percent of its projected earnings of DKK 28bn (EUR 3.7bn) through long-term orders.

It also predicted a growing market for wind energy in the coming years and maintained its 2008 goal of a 10 percent operating margins.

Vestas shares rose 11.25 dkr to 155, extending yesterday's more than 8 pct surge. JP Morgan upgraded to 'neutral' from 'underperform' on a reduced risk outlook after yesterday's full-year report, with the announced share capital increase of 10.3 mln shares being much smaller-than-feared. Vestas also announced winning 3 orders in China for the delivery of a total of 280 V52-850 kW wind turbines.

Asia Wind Power (Mudanjiang) Co. Ltd. and Hong Kong Wind Power (Muling) Co. Ltd. - both subsidiaries of Hong Kong Construction (Holdings) Limited - have placed an order for two wind power plants located in Muling in the Heilongjiang Province for a total of 58 turbines.

Gansu Datang Yumen Wind Power Co. Ltd, which is a subsidiary of China Datang Corporation, has placed an order for 58 turbines for the Yumen Diwopu project.

Datang Chifeng Saihanba Wind Power Generation Co. Ltd, which is also a subsidiary of China Datang Corporation, has placed an order for a total of 164 turbines which will be the largest wind power plant in China.The plant will be located in Chifeng, in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region.

All 3 orders include supply and commissioning of the turbines as well as Vestas Online remote monitoring systems for each site. Delivery of the turbines will begin in the spring of 2006, and installation is expected to be completed during the second half of 2006.

An order was recently obtained from the Spanish wind farm developer, Generaciones Especiales I, S.L. (GENESA). GENESA belongs to Neo Energía, which is HC Energía and Edp’s new company for development of renewable energy for the Neo Energía Group. The order is for a total of 39 units of the V90-1.8 MW wind turbine for two wind power projects in Spain, Munera I and Munera II at Albacete, the third in the region of Castilla La Mancha which is the second largest region in Spain in terms of MW installed..

An order for a total of 55.5 MW for the Italian market has been received from Italian Vento Power Corporation (IVPC) for three turnkey wind power plants. Two on Sicily and one in the Puglia region. In total, the order consists of 30 units of the V52-850 kW turbine and 15 units of the V80-2.0 MW turbine. All three wind power plants are expected to be fully commissioned by the end of 2006.

For previous post on Vestas go here http://postmanpatel.blogspot.com/2005/11/more-problems-with-wind.html
http://postmanpatel.blogspot.com/2005/11/wind-energy-more-problems-losses-stack.html

Wind Energy as a source of electricity - benefits overblown

Amazingly the limitations of using wind energy as a source of electricity generation in the UK and Europe are slowly becoming understood....

Costing the Earth BBC4

Wind Rush (First broadcast 30th August 2007 9.30 can be listened to again for 7 days only)

Wind power is a fast growing renewable energy sector in Britain. The government is investing massive amounts of money in its future. xperts interviewed on Costing the Earth claim the power Eof the wind to deliver electricity is being overestimated by companies keen to cash in on big subsidies.

In order to fight climate change we have meet targets set by the EU which wants 20% of our energy to come from renewable sources like the wind by 2020. The government has admitted its struggling, but says it is determined to meet its obligations. Companies which hit green energy targets are rewarded under the government’s Renewables Obligation Certificate Scheme or ROCs.

On paper wind power is a great proposition. We are the windiest nation in Europe – but despite the government having subsidised the wind industry to the tune of half a billion pounds so far - as yet its failed to deliver half of one per cent of our electricity needs.

Michael Jefferson Policies Chairman of the World Renewable Energy Network and former Chief Economist with Shell believes the industry is encouraged to exaggerate not only wind speeds but the amount of potential wind energy a farm can supply. He worries there are many badly sited poorly performing wind farms in England.

Engineering consultant Jim Oswald has analysed the figures submitted to the electricity watchdog Ofgem on every wind farm's load factor - the amount of wind generated across the year. The recommended load factor for a viable and efficient wind development is 30%, but he says the average across Britain is 28%. He says the problem lies with the volatility of the wind and although Britain is the windiest country in Europe, it’s not consistently windy enough to generate a regular energy supply.

Sometimes we have high winds and often no wind at all and there is no way of storing wind energy. He also says that many wind farms are being built in places where there will never be sufficient wind power to generate enough electricity. He has serious concerns that with no long term strategy for upgrading our electricity infrastructure over the next decade an over reliance on wind power could result in major power failures and increase our electricity bills by up to 50%.

See also Wuthering Heights Der Spiegel report August 20th 2007

The Dangers of Wind Power By Simone Kaiser and Michael Fröhlingsdorf
Wind turbines are appearing worldwide. They grow bigger and bigger, the number of dangerous accidents is climbing. How safe is wind energy?

Mishaps, Breakdowns and Accidents

After the industry's recent boom years, wind power providers and experts are now concerned. The facilities may not be as reliable and durable as producers claim. Indeed, with thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having been reported in recent years, the difficulties seem to be mounting. Gearboxes hiding inside the casings perched on top of the towering masts have short shelf lives, often crapping out before even five years is up. In some cases, fractures form along the rotors, or even in the foundation, after only limited operation. Short circuits or overheated propellers have been known to cause fires. All this despite manufacturers' promises that the turbines would last at least 20 years.

Insurance costs increasing in Germany

Among insurers, who raced into the new market in the 1990s, wind power is now considered a risky sector. Industry giant Allianz was faced with around a thousand damage claims in 2006 alone. Jan Pohl, who works for Allianz in Munich, has calculated that on average "an operator has to expect damage to his facility every four years, not including malfunctions and uninsured breakdowns."

Many insurance companies have learned their lessons and are now writing maintenance requirements -- requiring wind farmers to replace vulnerable components such as gearboxes every five years -- directly into their contracts. But a gearbox replacement can cost up to 10 percent of the original construction price tag, enough to cut deep into anticipated profits. Indeed, many investors may be in for a nasty surprise. "Between 3,000 and 4,000 older facilities are currently due for new insurance policies," says Holger Martsfeld, head of technical insurance at Germany's leading wind turbine insurer Gothaer. "We know that many of these facilities have flaws."

Flaws And Dangers

In December of last year, fragments of a broken rotor blade landed on a road shortly before rush hour traffic near the city of Trier.

Two wind turbines caught fire near Osnabrück and in the Havelland region in January. The firefighters could only watch: Their ladders were not tall enough to reach the burning casings.
The same month, a 70-meter (230-foot) tall wind turbine folded in half in Schleswig-Holstein -- right next to a highway.

The rotor blades of a wind turbine in Brandenburg ripped off at a height of 100 meters (328 feet). Fragments of the rotors stuck into a grain field near a road.

At the Allianz Technology Center (AZT) in Munich, the bits and pieces from wind turbine meltdowns are closely examined. "The force that comes to bear on the rotors is much greater than originally expected," says AZT evaluator Erwin Bauer. Wind speed is simply not consistent enough, he points out. "There are gusts and direction changes all the time," he says.

But instead of working to create more efficient technology, many manufacturers have simply elected to build even larger rotor blades, Bauer adds. "Large machines may have great capacity, but the strains they are subject to are even harder to control," he says.

Even the technically basic concrete foundations are suffering from those strains. Vibrations and load changes cause fractures, water seeps into the cracks, and the rebar begins to rust. Repairs are difficult. "You can't look inside concrete," says Marc Gutermann, a professor for experimental statics in Bremen. "It's no use just closing the cracks from above."

The engineering expert suspects construction errors are to blame. "The facilities keep getting bigger," he says, "but the diameter of the masts has to remain the same because otherwise they would be too big to transport on the roadways."

German wind turbine giant Enercon, for its part, considers the risks associated with offshore wind power generation too great, says Enercon spokesman Andreas Düser says. While the growth potential is tempting, the company does not want to lose its good standing on the high seas.

See for example

Dong Energy ( a Danish consortium formed this year from DONG, Elsam, ENERGI E2, Nesa, Copenhagen Energy’s power activities and Frederiksberg Forsyning) and the Swedish energy combine Vattenfall run the Danish Horns Rev and Nysted offshore wind farms and have completed an 8 year, 144 page year environmental impact study (PDF Alert / English),in conjunction with the Danish Energy Authority and Danish Forest and Nature Agency.The publication can be also ordered from the Danish Energy Authority’s Internet bookstore ISBN: 87-7844-625-2.

Offshore the availability of the small nearshore farms is also high, but in 2004 the availability for Horns Rev was low due to a comprehensive repair of the gears and transformers on all the Vestas turbines. However, in 2005 all turbines operated nearly 100% with an availability of 95%, where as the Siemens (Bonus) turbines at Nysted reached 97%.

Vestas has had increasing problems of reliability ..

Vestas, the world's largest producer of wind turbines, lost nearly DKK 1.2bn (EUR 116m) on sales of DKK 26.7bn (EUR 3.58bn)last year(2005) up 52% on the previous year. The company's board called the loss 'disappointing' and 'totally unacceptable'.

Three factors had helped cause the losses last year: disappointing North American earnings, a lack of components, and vastly increased guarantee provisions.

This was from the Vestas Annual report in 2005

“The most important technological challenge for the company is to increase product reliability”

“The group has given priority to project deliveries with relatively low margins to the US market…”

“…from the shortage of key components..”

“ Currently the main focus of the technology R & D is to reduce the number of component failures in Vestas’ products.”

"In accordance with the highly inentsified focus on product reliability, Vestas has decided to postpone ... production of the V120 - 4.5 Mw turbine to 2009..."

Then there are other problems which were highlighted

On this last point it is essential to read ...

See Interim Report - System Disturbance on 4 November 2006
union for the co-ordination of transmission of electricity

Section 5.1 Page 25

About 40% of the total generation units which tripped during the incident were wind power units. Moreover, 60 % of the wind stations connected to the grid at 22:09 tripped just after the frequency drop.

Sect 8.1 Page 51
"The events in the evening of 4 November 2006 have been the most severe disturbance in the more than 50-year history of UCTE regarding the number of involved TSOs and the amplitude of the registered frequency deviation."

Page 52
"During the disturbance, a significant amount of generation units tripped due to the frequency drop in the system which resulted in the increased imbalance. Most of this generation is connected to the distribution grid (especially wind and combined-heat-and-power)."

Finally the difficulties of controlling wind energy networks has all sorts of physical and financial consequences.....

Hugh Sharman is an Englishman living in Denmark and is a Principal in Inteco, a Danish energy brokering and consulting outfit.Here is a lucid and sensible document he has written, which anyone who wishes to consider the arguments about the use of wind powered electricity generation should read. (PDF Alert).Now this month he has published an item for Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineering, vol 158, p. 161 (not online but available at cost of US$33 – Abstract at end of this post). In this he provides a technical analysis of the problems of power distribution where generation is in the North and West but consumption in the South and East of the UK.

Enercon v Echelon - how comercial espionage actually works at the nation state level

We pointed out in a post on Thursday, August 30, 2007 Wind Energy as a source of electricity - benefits overblown that there are the limitations in using wind energy as a source of electricity generation in the UK and Europe .

With thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having been reported in recent years, the difficulties seem to be mounting. Gearboxes hiding inside the casings perched on top of the towering masts have short shelf lives, often crapping out before even five years is up. In some cases, fractures form along the rotors, or even in the foundation, after only limited operation.

We quoted Andreas Düser of German wind turbine giant Enercon, for its part, considers the risks associated with offshore wind power generation too great. While the growth potential is tempting, the company does not want to lose its good standing on the high seas.

Dong Energy the Danish consortium had to comprehensively replace the gears and transformers on all the Vestas turbines on the massive Copenhagen offshore site and manufacutere Vestas is struggling to make profits. Last year Vestas, the world's largest producer of wind turbines, lost nearly DKK 1.2bn (EUR 116m) on sales of DKK 26.7bn (EUR 3.58bn)last year(2005) up 52% on the previous year. The company's board called the loss 'disappointing' and 'totally unacceptable'.

Three factors had helped cause the losses last year: disappointing North American earnings, a lack of components, and vastly increased guarantee provisions.

Now Moon over Alabama has an intriguing report on Enercon the third largest manufactuere of wind turbine systems in Germany.. They don't sell trubines for use at sea and they don't sell in America.

Enercon wind turbine generators are unique in that they don't have gear boxes to wear out, breakdown. They do have distinctive drop-shaped generator housings, designed by Lord Norma Foster , and their towers, are painted light green at the base to blend in with their surroundings (Enercon Natural Color Scheme).

The main rotor turns directly within a "nearly frictionless (?) annular. The moving part of the generator consist of perma magnets and the static part, the stator, is a ring of copper wires. When the rotation of the perma magnets induces energy into the stator, a part of that energy also provides wste (and unwanted ) that heats the copper wires which can lead to isolation problems or even fires.

The new type of E-82s avoids that problem. Its stator is water-cooled in a closed loop system and in the picture above one can see the heat exchangers of the cooling system on the front top of the machine house. You can see details by this scrolling down this page.

Normal E-82's have 2 megawatts output. This water-cooled version is said to generate 3 megawatts fully loaded.

The immediate puzzle is - There are no Enercon wind turbine generators in the United States.

As the wikipedia Enercon entry says:

Enercon was prohibited from exporting their wind turbines to the US until
2010 due to infringement of U.S. Patent 5,083,039. [...] Enercon claims their
intellectual property was stolen by Kenetech (US Windpower, Inc.) and patented
in the US before they could do so. Kenetech made similar claims against Enercon.

According to the European Parliament: "Kenetech seeking evidence for legal
action against Enercon for breach of patent rights on the grounds that Enercon
had obtained commercial secrets illegally. According to an NSA employee,
detailed information concerning Enercon was passed on to Kenetech via
ECHELON."

The story has it's origins in the early 1990's . It is alleged, though not proven, that the CIA 'aquired' the technical information which was patented in the U.S. by Kenetech. Later the NSA was involved to 'prove' that Enercon was in breach of that Kenetech patent.

The NSA listened in to Enercon communication and 'aquired' codes needed to enter and shut down Enercon wind generators. Some folks on Kenetech's payroll used these codes and then climbed up into the machine house of one Enercon generator in Germany. There they took plenty of pictures. These pictures were used against Enercon in the U.S. patent case by Kenetech.

Now one has to ask how did this work ...did someone at Echelon / NSA say to Kenetech say..." hey we were listening in and we heard ..." or did someone ask Echelon / NSA to perhaps take a look see ?.

"Kenetech’s complaint before the ITC alleged that Enercon GmbH (Enercon) and New World Power Corp. (NWP) planned to import into the United States certain variable wind turbines that infringed Kenetech’s U.S. Patent No. 5,083,039 (the ’039 patent). On August 30, 1996, the administrative law judge made an initial determination that Enercon had violated section 337 by selling for importation variable wind turbines that infringed claim 131 of the ’039 patent and issued an order excluding Enercon’s variable wind turbines from entry into the United States until the expiration of the ’039 patent. "

In an article in Die Welt in 1999 Treachery amongst friends by Oliver Schröm, a Ruth Heffernan described how on a cold day near Aurich on 3rd March 1994 with a Kenetech employee Robert; Bob" Jans and Ubbo de Witt they spied on an E-40 which they were able to enter after using the codes to stop the rotors. They spend over an hour examining the equipment and taking photographs.

She explained a US secret service coworker had revealed that they had listened to the firm from Aurich (Enercon) and had heard telephone conversations and that secret codes and secret research documents were intercepted and were passed on to Kenetech their American competitors.

The same article claims that Airbus faxes and communications with the Saudies were passed on to Boeing and they lost a 6 Bn Mark order for Airbus planes. They also say NSA listened i to hotel rooms of Japanese auto delegates at a trade conference.

Danish Offshore windfarms get a good report and plan for expansion

Dong Energy ( a Danish consortium formed this year from DONG, Elsam, ENERGI E2, Nesa, Copenhagen Energy’s power activities and Frederiksberg Forsyning) and the Swedish energy combine Vattenfall run the Danish Horns Rev and Nysted offshore wind farms and have completed an 8 year, 144 page year environemntal impact study (PDF Alert / English),in conjunction with the Danish Energy Authority and Danish Forest and Nature Agency.The publication can be also ordered from the Danish Energy Authority’s Internet bookstore ISBN: 87-7844-625-2.

This was released this week at the Final Results: The Danish Monitoring Programme conference held in Denmark , the report also contains commentary from the International Advisory Panel of Experts on Marine Ecology, which gave the report a positive evaluation.. The report confirms that both the Horns Rev and Nysted offshore wind farms will be doubled in size in the coming years.

The final chapter on the economics of wind power both on and off shore is most revealing ..

Offshore the availability of the small nearshore farms is also high, but in 2004 the availability for Horns Rev was low due to a comprehensive repair of the gears and transformers on all the Vestas turbines. However, in 2005 all turbines operated nearly 100% with an availability of 95%, where as the Siemens (Bonus) turbines at Nysted reached 97%.

.Which confirms the problems Vestas have been experiencing in design , manufacture and maintenance of their devices (see Lord Patel many previous posts) .. and an intersting way of comparing investment costs ..

.....with an expected electricity production output of approx 12,000 MWh per year for a 3 MW offshore wind turbine,the wind turbine will generate the equivalent amount of energy needed for manufacture, transport and operation of the wind turbine in approx eight months.

Expansion is now in train and In June 2005, DONG Energy,was chosen to build a 200 MW off shore wind farm at Horns Rev 2. The price has been set at approx EUR 0.069/kWh fixed for 50,000 full-load hours, which corresponds to approx twelve years’ electricity production. The farm will commence operation in 2009.

A consortium of DONG Energy and E.ON Sweden was appointed to build a new farm at Rødsand on 6 April 2006. The tender submitted off ered the lowest kWh price of approx EUR 0.066/kWh fixed for 50,000 full-load hours.

Both of these sites will each provide some 2% each of Denmark's load and help towards the national goal of 50% renewable energy by 2025.

Perhaps most interesting in the light of the announced increase in gas and electricity charges in the UK for infrastructure / pipeline , grid networks yesterday is the observation ...

It is envisaged that bottlenecks will be created if the transmission grid is not reinforced when the Horns Rev 2 and Rødsand 2 off shore wind farms are grid connected in these areas by 2009/2010. Such bottlenecks can limit the possibilities for fully exploiting wind power. Depending on the location, it is therefore to be expected that future Danish wind power expansions will necessitate a corresponding expansion of the transmission grid if it is to make full use of wind power.

Let's hope that the UK companies sucking this money from consumers with the help of OFGEN take note of the comment ..

The investments in transmission lines have service lives of 30–40 years so it is important that the system responsibility can be planned from a very long-term perspective.

Don't hold your breath.

China / US Trade - it swings both ways

When Dubya was in China last November Boeing announced an order for 150 single aisle 737 airliners.Chinese airlines confirmed orders for 50 of them in December and a further 20 at the end of January.In advance of the visit of Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to the United States next week (April 18 to 22) have confirmed the remaining 80 single aisle aircraft.

This is part of 27 contracts that have been sealed with a total of US$16.2 Bn to be to coincide with his visit by 200 Chinese businessmen representing 110 enterprises.

These contracts include (as well as the Boeing deal) US$1 Bn with electronics service provider Flextronics (HQ in Singapore, Software Div. was Hughes Software 60% of Flextronics' Asian operations are located in China.) and a software contract of US$ 300 Mn with Qualcomm Inc.,(leading developer and innovator of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA)) US$ 560 with telecommunications giant Motorola and a US$ 350 Mn contract with General Electrics (named "World's Most Admired" Company in FORTUNE magazine's annual poll of executives), for power equipment and other machinery.

Major US car manufacturers were also awarded contracts including one worth 300 million dollars for General Motors and a 110-million-dollar deal with Ford Motor, the report said.

It must be remembered of course that whilst this is heralded as a big hi tech deal a great deal of the composites fabrication of the forthcoming twin engined Boeing 787 Dreamliner will be made in China to be shipped to Everett to join parts from a worldwide supply chain, including leading edge French and Japanese In Flight entertainment systems.Chengdu Aircraft Industrial (Group) Co. Ltd will provide rudders Today, more than 3,400 Boeing airplanes -- one third of Boeing's world fleet -- have major parts and assemblies built in China. Examples of major parts and assemblies built for Boeing by Chinese industry include the 737 horizontal stabilizer from Shanghai Aircraft Corp., 737 vertical fin from Xian Aircraft Corp., 737 tail section modules from Shenyang Aircraft Corp., and 757 empennage and aft fuselage section from Chengdu Aircraft Corp. All are AVIC I affiliates.

Danish wind turbine company Vestas have decided to double the size of their new Tienjin factory by the middle of 2007, will double the original factory’s annual production capacity from approximately 600 blades to approximately 1,200 blades and increase staff from 240 to 400 employees.Total investment will be Euros 13 Mn.

In the US 2006 is expected to be an even bigger year for wind energy installations (now in 30 states) thanks to the extension by Congress of the wind energy production credit before it expired for the first time in the credit’s history. Installations will exceed 3,000MW. The final tally of 2,431MW boosted the cumulative US installed wind power fleet by over 35%, bringing the industry’s total generating capacity to 9,149MW.

As a result, Vestas who have a huge share of the US market (they continue to lose money however, year on year) will be shipping many of those blades (and turbine nacelles) to the US from China

So Hi tech transfer goes both ways.... so long as the tax credits bear up for Salomon Bros one of the US' biggest wind energy investors.


China / US Exports Imports Balance Millions of US$

January / Feb 2006 Exports 7,581.1 Imports 39,331.5 Net Balance -31,750.4
January / Feb 2005 Exports 5,691.4 Imports 35,790.0 Net Balance -29,100.4

Total 2005 Exports 41,836.5 Imports 43,462.3 Total -201,625.8

Wind Energy - more problems / losses stack up for Vesta.

Danish company Vesta Wind Systems A/S (pdf alert) are the largest European manufacturer of tower based, onshore and offshore, wind powered electricity generating systems.

In a surprise announcement today they have announced that this year they expect to make a loss of 3% of turnover contrary to an expected profit.

It is evident the company has major problems, even though sales are brisk (T/O 2005 + - Euros 3.6 –3.8 Bn).

In September they laid off 625 employees in Denmark and have commenced blade production in Tienjin, China. Nacelle production is being moved to Spain (may possibly move to Tienjin also to meet Chinese local production content criteria) and the Asia Pacific office opened in Singapore.

The Company announcement carries some startling quotes…

“The most important technological challenge for the company is to increase product reliability”

“The group has given priority to project deliveries with relatively low margins to the US market…”

“…from the shortage of key components..”

“ Currently the main focus of the technology R & D is to reduce the number of component failures in Vestas’ products.”

"In accordance with the highly inentsified focus on product reliability, Vestas has decided to postpone ... production of the V120 - 4.5 Mw turbine to 2009..."

Evidently the design, development, manufacture of these skyscraper high behemoths involves engineering / material problems which remain to be solved. Maintaining these structures in remote and hostile , and increasingly marine climates is very demanding – suggesting that projections of output may be somewhat optimistic in terms of utilization and running maintenance costs – which is what many sceptics have maintained for a long time.

Making sense (?) of UK Offshore wind farms

The UK DTI's Wind Energy Programme, was set up to "enable offshore wind power development and to support UK industry"

The first offshore wind project they supported was Blyth Offshore Wind Ltd . This was a commercial consortium of Border Wind,PowerGen Renewables (a joint venture between Abbot Group and PowerGen),NV Nuon Duurzame Energie and Shell Renewables.

This £4 Mn. 2 x 2 Mw offshore wind turbine project, 300metres apart, 800 metres offshore at Blyth, NE England, received financial support from the European Commission Thermie Programme. It is being monitored and evaluated as a part of the DTI's Wind Energy Programme. It hasn't produced any electricity for over a year. Nor will it produce any for at least 6 months.

Start here.

It must be remembered what the scale of financial support for "renewable energy" is both by the Renewable Obligation Certificates and directly ...as the National Audit Office reported (HC 210 Session 2004-2005 | 11 February 2005) .."Total public support for the renewables industry is expected to average £700 million per annum between 2003 and 2006. Around two thirds of this support will come through the Renewables Obligation, the cost of which is met by consumers and will reach up to £1 billion per annum by 2010 (the equivalent of a 5.7 % increase in the price of electricity). On Page 9 they state that ;

"For the transmission network (parts of the networks to be upgraded to cope with remote wind generation)this could cost between £1.1 billion and £1.3 billion by 2010..."

which ofgem have agreed (Dec 2006) for power transmission companies to spend and charge for to their users.

The Renewable Energy Federation (REF) says an average wind power station might earn 30% of its income from electricity sales and 70% from indirect subsidy (figure calculated on the basis of data in The Renewables Obligation: Ofgem’s first annual report, February 2004, and other official figures from Ofgem and the Non-Fossil Purchasing Agency Ltd.).


Their graph on page 8 (based on ofgem figures) shows that offshore wind was producing virtually no electricity in 03/04 and that by 2010/11 it would be generating 50% of the 10% target of renewables .

Originally the project was to use 750 Kw turbines but it was finally decided to use 2 V66 turbines with 33metre rotors at a hub height of 62 metres were designed and made by Danish company Vestas, using their "Opti Speed" system ensuring electricity generation even with varying wind speeds. The blades are also equipped with microprocessor-controlled pitch regulation, designed to ensure continuous and optimal adjustment of the blade angles in relation to the prevailing wind. The Predicted Annual Energy Output was 10,500MWh or 2,240 homes.

This decision to upgrade the power output, involved increasing the monopile foundation diameters from 2.5 metres to 3.5 metres.

The key contractors were the marine division of AMEC Capital Projects and Seacore, of Gweek in Cornwall, who surveyed the site with 20 metre boreholes in 1998 and in 2000 returned to install the 2 units in 8 (6 -11 m) metres of water with AMEC's Wijslift 6 jack-up(owned now by Seacore and renamed Excalibur) and used special large diameter sacrificial coring bits to assist with drilling deep sockets in the seabed rock to receive the turbines' steel 150 tonne monopile foundations in an impressive and successful underwater engineering project .Seacore had completed a similiar project in February 1998 for a similar 2.5 MW wind farm in the Baltic Sea off the island of Gotland for Vindkompaniet of Hemse, Sweden. Reading the details one might say this was constructed on the lines of a brick built outside toilet.

Amec erected the 2 turbines on top of the monopiles which were 6 metres above the water surface. which were commissioned and opened officicially by energy Minister Helen Liddell on December 6th 2000.

Powergen's executive director of UK operations at the time , Nick Baldwin, said: "We are confident that the Blyth project will demonstrate the robustness of the technology and lead to the further harnessing of the UK's substantial offshore wind asset."

It is worth noting what the NAO report previously referred to, says on page 56 (when Blyth had been in operation for several years) .....

"Offshore - There is relatively little direct industry experience of operating offshore. As such, the sector requires further development, demonstration and assessment before becoming a proven and commercial technology. The success of onshore wind provides some confidence, although uncertainty remains over the potential for a substantial reduction in costs."

Straws in the wind

The Oswald consultancy have conducted a detailed and excellent survey (pdf alert) (published 1st Nov 2006 for the renewable energy foundation) of the actual output of UK windfarms in their report for the UK. Page 18 shows the results for 2005 of the North Hoyle site and Scroby Sands ... but no information is presented for Blyth.... which puzzled Lord Patel. he found out why.

The reason was that the two expensive turbines at Blyth were not generating electricity.

Why ?

Well, the BBC consumer affairs program You and Yours and John waite on Friday Jan 7th 2006 at 12.00 reported that their man in the North East had checked up on the stationary rotors - and it turns out the cable, the thicknes of a man's upper arm, carrying the electricity ashore had not been buried. It was left on the rocky sea bed (which took some fine drilling skills to penetrate) and has broken / severed / rotted / rubbed despite underwater checks... anyway it isn't conducting any electricity.

Everyone seems a little uncertain when this happene, but it appears to have broken some time in 2005 ... and nobody seems keen to foot the bill to replace it - claiming that such cable is currently in "short supply" (Ho.Ho.Ho.) .. which would appear to be a limiting factor on erecting any more such units ?

The dreadful dickie bowed, Professor Fell seemed amused by this when questioned, especially as his New and Renewable Energy Centre (with which he is no longer connected) is quite handy for the site (Ridley Street, Blyth) . Indeed the website claims ...

"NaREC headquarters are situated in the shadow of the Blyth port onshore and offshore wind turbines. The North East of England is especially well-equipped for both onshore and offshore wind development and manufacturing, due to its experience in shipbuilding and deep sea oil rig development."

The Learned Dr Fell also admitted that lightning struck one of the original turbines before the Minister opened it to be replaced at a cost of "hundreds of thousands of pounds" by the Danes with a specially constructed barge.... which might go some way to explain the very high insurance costs for wind energy systems in Germany (see REF report)


The Royal Academy of Engineering report, The Costs of Generating Electricity (March 2004 ISBN 1-903496-11-X), estimated that wind power onshore and offshore were the most expensive form of generating electricity (expressed in terms of a unit cost (pence per kWh) delivered at the boundary of the power station site - transmission costs not included), at over 5p per kWh and 7p per kWh respectively, as compared to say coal and gas, which in their various forms are just under 2p per kWh or just over 3p per kWh.

It is worth pointing out that the New and Renewable Energy Centre says wind energy costs are somewhat different, estimated at 2.5p – 3.5p/KWh on shore in 2003 by the Carbon Trust but agree on offshore costs estimated at 5p – 8p/KWh in 2003 by the Carbon Trust.... adding ..."but costs are gradually falling".


Dong Energy published their report on the Copenhagen off shore wind farm last month
http://www.ens.dk/graphics/Publikationer/Havvindmoeller/havvindmoellebog_nov_2006_skrm.pdf
See post by Lord Patel December 6th and noted that "in 2004 the availability for Horns Rev was low due to a comprehensive repair of the gears and transformers on all the Vestas turbines."

Based on the (admittedly) limited experience of offshore wind farms the diversion of public funds and charges on consumers cannot easily be supported. It is time some very hard questions were asked about the further expenditure on these expensive and accident prone bits of kit.

1. They are expensive to build
2. They are expensive to insure, maintain and run
3. The electricity production costs are high in comparison with other sources and there is no evidence that costs will decline.
4. They impose huge construction costs on the current transmission networks
5. They may produce problems in transmission networks - see the recent European blackout which official reports so far point to wind energy units causing supply disruptions exacerbated by cascading load shedding tripping other units.

On this last point it is essential to read ...
See Interim Report - System Disturbance on 4 November 2006
union for the co-ordination of transmission of electricity

Section 5.1 Page 25

About 40% of the total generation units which tripped during the incident were wind power units. Moreover, 60 % of the wind stations connected to the grid at 22:09 tripped just after the frequency drop.

Sect 8.1 Page 51
"The events in the evening of 4 November 2006 have been the most severe disturbance in the more than 50-year history of UCTE regarding the number of involved TSOs and the amplitude of the registered frequency deviation."

Page 52
"During the disturbance, a significant amount of generation units tripped due to the frequency drop in the system which resulted in the increased imbalance. Most of this generation is connected to the distribution grid (especially wind and combined-heat-and-power)."

There is also a report (in German) here at the E-on / Netz website. It adds little to understanding and seeks to exonerate the company from blame.

FOOTNOTE Late News

On Jan 2nd E.ON UK Renewables placed an order with Vestas for an offshore wind power plant with 60 units of their V90-3.0Mw wind turbine on 130 metre high pillars, for installation in 2008 and operation from spring 2009 on the Robin Rigg Sandbank 9 Km offshore in Solway Firth, W Scotland. This £200Mn project received planning permission by the Scottish Executive in March 2003 after a long battle although the electricty generated will benefit Cumbria.

Nuclear power sees a shift in the wind. Areva to take over REpower

The morning of 15th January 2007 on the Leipzig Energy Exchange EEA saw an extraordinary event. The price for a megawatt-hour of electricity fell to Eur 0. Zero.

The fierce storms of the previous few days had produced a surplus of wind-generated electricity - almost as much power was produced as all of the nuclear power plants in Germany combined.

Electricity cannot be stored and so , by law, wind-generated electricity has to be supplied to the mains grid at a fixed price. The price on the Energy Exchange forms the baseline for German national wholesale prices and as a reference for mains and distribution costs, taxes and duties, and forms 20% of the final consumer price in Germany.

The morning of 22nd January 2007 on the Hamburg Stock Exchange saw Areva S.A. the French Nuclear power manufacturing company a 30% share holder in REpower Systems AG (since 2005) make a friendly take over offer of Euro 144 per share (Total Euro600 - US$777Mn) a premium of 44% on the 3 month average Stock Exchange price and 17% up on FRiday's close. The shares ended the day 24% up.

The 2nd largest shareholder is the Portuguese industrial group Martifer Construcoes Metalomecanicas, which has 25.4%.- which in turn is 25% owned by Mota-Engil SGPS SA, Portugal's biggest construction company.

Repower, Germany's third-largest maker of wind-power equipment behind Vestas Wind Systems A/S and Enercon, made a loss last year of Euros 8.3 Mn but a 1Euro 1 million profit in 9 months on sales 50% higher at Euros 292.6 million.

Areva see the business complementing their sales (they have a very full order book for nuclear power) to their clutch of Utility customers in Europe and are eyeing the US market where the Global Wind Energy Council says a record 2,431 megawatts of wind-energy generating capacity was added in 2005, the most of any country worldwide.

Dutch / Belgian sustainable energy supply projects struggle for finance and bankruptcies loom

Econcern is the holding company of Ecofys, Evelop, Ecostream, OneCarbon and Ecoventures. The mission of these European companies is to ensure ‘a sustainable energy supply for everyone’.

Based in Utrecht Econcern and founded by A va Wijk (now with 1,400 staff) the company objective is ... “a sustainable energy supply for everyone”.

Rising oil / gas prics,inceased energy security concerns in Europe and the former Soviet republics with the growing realisation that fossil fuels economy cannot continue forever, has been good for rapidly gwing Econcern . In 2007 the company made a profit of €85.9 Mn on a turnover of €442 Mn and looking for a stock market listing - and more expansion.

Projcts underway fall off Credit Cliff

Profits began to evaporate in September and van Wijk expects a loss making year and some infrastructure projects are delayed. For example the Belwind, an €850 Mn offshore park 50 kilometers off the Belgian coast at Bligh Bank a total of 330 MW using 110 Vestas V90 3-MW turbines, designed to produce 1.2 TWh of electricity on an annual basis. . Construction has been delayed/ stopped (?). The ultiate financiers, Belgian bank Dexia and Dutch Rabobank, have pulled out and no new lead partnes can be found. KPMG Tax & Legal Advisers burg. C.V.B.A.: Created the business model of Belwind N.V.

Alex Oostvogel, financial director of Emergya Wind Technologies (EWT), a Dutch manufacturer of wind turbines. “Banks are more cautious. They have tightened their credit criteria and examine a new growth sector more critically.” The development of the sector has been rought to a grinding halt. Oostvogel says “It feels like we are suddenly cycling in sand.”

Emergya uses their proprietary direct drive turbine which provides a long-lasting slow rotating EWT-design multi-pole ring generator. This drive solution with a track record of over 200 operational units worldwide, replaces a complex high-speed geared drive train common in most competitor wind turbines. A large single main bearing carries both the rotor assembly and generator rotor, and reduces the number of rotating components

Ad van Wijk of Econcern has a gloomy view and says that if the ash crisis lasts 2 years, bankruptciesloom he predicts. Van Wijk informed his own personnel that downsizing is unavoidable at Econcern.

The Utrecht based DE Koepel foundation (Stichting) , an association of sustainable energy companies is naturally seeking some help for their members and advocates for a lower VAT tariff on energy-efficient construction. They also demand , consumers and companies must be able to deduct the investments from income and corporate tax. (HoHoHo.) Both the provision of credit and the requirement of sustainability must be secure they say looking through rose tinted glasses.

O'Bombers stability pork Barrel Bill - fed funds will oust Bank financing

The 1100 page Bill grudgingly approved by what they comically call lawmakers in theUS Press, includes one measure that will allow renewable energy developers to seek grants directly from the federal government. The wind and solar energy sector in the US is suffering as tax breaks used by banks, which used to be a primary source of financing ae eing discarded as they become averse to cean energy risks and their current nugatory rewards.

UK Wind Energy - Bubble bows up

Energy companies know about energy and they know about money. They know how to make both. They also know a lousy investment when they see one.

E.ON UK and Energi E2 joint developers of the £100 Mn Scarweather Sands off Porthcawl, S. Wales with a projected 30 turbines, each 400 ft tall, claimed output of 100 Mw , have stated the project is no longer financially viable.

The Welsh Assembly members approved the plans in July 2004, but Jason Scagell, director of E.ON UK Renewables, said: “ ….building Scarweather simply isn't possible under current market conditions. Demand for the supply of key components such as turbines, offshore cabling and foundations is so high at the moment that it's very difficult to make projects cost effective."

E.ON also withdrew from the Tunes Plateau project in Northern Ireland last September and United Utilities withdrew from several projects in the North West, one of which Scout Farm has received approval but there appears little propects that the project will now go ahead.

The British Wind Energy Association is quoted in the Guradian this week saying the problems faced by E.ON were shared by many other members. The BWEA said almost all 10 of the similar schemes given the go-ahead under the government's first round of offshore licensing were delayed by this or other issues, such as difficult contract negotiations – although the Burbo Bank scheme off Liverpool has been awarded £10Mn of Lottery Funds!

The BWEA claim this is due to the tax credit scheme in the US raising demand, although most (i.e nearly 98%) of their new build is onshore. E-on’s partner in Wales the Danish group Energi E2, identify the cost of offshore cabling as a major problem inhibiting the development of offshore schemes. There are also problems being raised of the effect on subsea cabling on marine organisms (see COWRIE research paper)

– a conference was held this week about this subject.
COWRIE Data and Information Management Seminar
Monday 5th December 2005-11-25 IMAREST, 80 Coleman St, London
1000-1630
By Invitation Only


We posted recently the financial and production problems leading to losses at Vestas, one of the world’s largest wind turbine manufacturers.

The UK is Britain is currently bottom of the European renewable energy table. Wind supplies just 0.6% of our electricity, compared with 18% in Denmark.

It is evident that the whole bubble of wind generated electrical energy has burst. It was ill thought out, the financing hopelessly flawed and the details of construction not sufficiently understood and the huge problems of distribution and connection to the National Grid been overlooked, ignored or dismissed.

The contribution of wind energy offshore and onshore in the total UK energy budget will continue to be negligible, hugely costly and will involve maintenance costs that will eventually prove to be unsustainable.


Recent blogs on same topic here

More problems with wind

Hugh Sharman is an Englishman living in Denmark and is a Principal in Inteco, a Danish energy brokering and consulting outfit.

Here is a lucid and sensible document he has written, which anyone who wishes to consider the arguments about the use of wind powered electricity generation should read. (PDF Alert).

Now this month he has published an item for Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineering, vol 158, p. 161 (not online but available at cost of US$33 – Abstract at end of this post). In this he provides a technical analysis of the problems of power distribution where generation is in the North and West but consumption in the South and East of the UK.

Generators are paid, as it were, ex-works, passing up the opportunity to lose the 10%-20% lost in transmission. Of the proposed 11 Gigawatts to be built , some 7 Gigawatts will be generated in Scotland connected by the current single aerial 2 GW connector.

Sharman points out both the unwillingness to address the costs of bridging the gap, by politicians which will inevitably be from the public purse. Meanwhile major projects like the Isle of Lewis remain unbuilt until this problem is resolved.

Sharman , based on his deep knowledge and experience reckons 10 Gigawatts is possible.

It is therefore unsurprising that United Utilities bowed out of their interests in North West wind farms. Some time ago. Readers are also directed to the problems Vestas Wind Systems are having in producing reliable equipment posted about last week. It is evident that efficiencies (utilization) are going to be lower than expected and maintenance costs higher. Already installed costs have gone from an initial £1.15 MN per MWatt to £1.75 Mn - and the installers are losing money - and the National Lottery is also picking up 20% of the cost! Good causes indeed.

Why UK wind power should not exceed 10 GW Abstract

Britain's wind power reached 1 GW in June this year, making it the eighth largest national installation in the world. Over the next 5 years a further 6 GW is likely to be built at a cost of £7 billion in the rush to meet the Government's target of 10% renewable energy by 2010. The plan is for wind energy to deliver three-quarters of the target but that, as this paper explains, would actually require 12 GW, meaning the target will not be met. Furthermore, experience in Denmark and Germany shows that the UK will find it impractical to manage much over 10 GW of unpredictable wind power without major new storage schemes or inter-connectors. The paper concludes that while wind power should be exploited as fully as possible, it must not be at the expense of renewing existing firm generating capacity.

Also see (not online) "UK wind power takes a battering" by Rowan Hooper, New Scientist 12th November Issue 2525