Hi Darren, thanks for sharing. Like many, SIF comes to this with an agenda, I am sure they would want to hold WTG sizes to max out sites on monopiles, which is their product. But it does not make them wrong. If you look at a range of arguments, it could make sense.
1. 🛠 Supply chain scaling and industrialising. So taking the SIF example, being able to double down on major investments in the comefort that, baring small investments, it can produce relevant product for a prolonged period of time. This brings more confidence to build capacity, but also allows you to refine manufacturing processes and innovate. This will bring costs down.
2. ⚓ Vessels. We need investors in this segment to have more confidence that the significant investment they make has a decent commercial lifecycle in the CapEx phase. If WTG sizes keep growing we will ALWAYS be short of optimal vessels.
3. 🌬 The WTGs themselves. OEMs are losing money, time to market is absolute key for all new larger platforms. I question the focus on world class reliability engineering when budgets are tight and time to market is make or brake. So we will see increasing serial defects. That will be fun on floating giga projects...
#energyandoceans
OWFA member Sif Group, and Vestas call for the industry to “scale up smarter, not harder”.
OWFA agrees that the industry needs to be as streamlined as possible and consider the entire offshore wind supply chain as it looks towards to technological innovations to solve the current capacity issues the industry is facing 💡 📈
Read their full opinion piece here:
https://lnkd.in/eiHPWTrk
#offshorewind #offshorewindfoundations #monopile #greentransition
Scale up smarter, not harder – why offshore wind ambitions can be met…
sif-group.com