Wind Energy Giant Vestas Has Grand Vision for the Future
Here’s the president of Vestas Americas, Chris Brown, speaking to a large audience at WINDPOWER 2016. An excerpt:
Sustainability is the next chapter in human progress, and the key is making renewable technology economic.
The benefits are:
Moving from scarcity to abundance.
Changing from destructive to creative.
Shifting from resource constrained to technology enabled.
Lofty words, but I think he’s dead on.
The catch phrase for years amongst my closest renewable energy manufacturing friends has been, and remains “the global energy technology imperative is for low cost and abundant energy for all peoples”.
And this of course is where the world’s best and brightest scientists and engineers are leading us through new age technology R&D.
Big and expensive wind energy will not feature in the new age energy era and serious minds in the global industry know that including Vestas Chris Brown of course.
But that is not to say wind power (obsolescent as it may be) has not played a vital role to get the energy tech research momentum to where it is today.
Historians will look back fondly in time and say “wind and solar power mobilised the new age power industry”.
So well done wind power – and thank you for all you have achieved throughout the global village.
I try to show courtesy and respect to all commenters but really…We’re signing PPAs for wind energy at <$0.03/kWh. Please do a bit more study on the subject.
Craig,
As President of Vesta Americas Chris Brown is, as expected, an enthusiastic advocate for Wind Power Technology.
Of course Chris is an important player in renewable energy, but it doesn’t mean his partisan scenario should be accepted without critical analysis. ( Nor dismissed simply because he has a vested interest in in Wind Power).
Perhaps, his comments should accepted in the same spirit as his assertion that (PP) ” Golden State Warriors shocked the world “.
The fact that almost no one outside the sport of basketball, or US fans of basketball, has ever heard of the Golden State Warriors, let alone be “shocked” by their activities, is to be accepted as just obviously exaggerated advocacy.
But, it’s still interesting stuff….
You’re amazing. You may be amused to know that my wife can’t understand why I’m not angry and frustrated with you and that I actually like you. I guess it’s just that stuff like this makes me smile for some reason.
Craig,
Thank you for those kind words, believe me when I say they are very much reciprocated.
Perhaps it’s my analyst training that makes me fairly cynical about the claims of well meaning, but overly optimistic advocates.
The road to success for new technologies is littered with the wreckage of projects and dreams that once seemed so promising. Like you, I understand that’s just the price of progress.
Not every enterprise will succeed, even potentially useful products can fail for a myriad of reasons, not all connected to the product.
As an investment banker, I’ve had my share of losses and failures. Fortunately, I’ve also had enough wins to keep me in business.
I understand (even share) your frustration and passionate desire to change the world’s attitude to environmental issues.
When I was young I was so passionate about my beliefs I went to fight a war. What I found was the world was far more complex than I imagined and I realized that rushing into things without very good analysis of the real issues, led to making bad decisions for the right motives.
I have no interest in fighting a “crusade” of “blame” against anyone. I don’t hate Exxon, or Chevron. I think it’s kinds pointless and silly to waste time on hating the producers of indispensable products.
Isn’t it better to harness these 600 lb Gorilla’s to help clean up some of the disadvantages created by the age of Oil ?
Like you, I also believe the development of efficient clean tech is the bast solution for the planet’s bio-sphere. The process of selecting, developing and commercializing Clean Tech may not be rapid, but it’s an in inevitable evolution.
Wind and solar power are appropriate in some limited circumstances. That would include remote areas where, at least for now, connecting to the grid is unlikely to occur and some power, even if it is not completely reliable, is far better than no power or small Diesel power. It would also include areas where there is hydro power but not always sufficient water in which case renewable systems could prevent running out of water. In some places, geography makes pumped water storage practical which is the ONLY storage technology currently capable of storing the huge amounts of energy required to make renewables reliable.
To reduce CO2 emissions to an acceptable level as global demand for power for various purposes increases by about FOUR TIMES, we will need to get about 90% of our power from sources that do not emit CO2. I have seen no convincing evidence that it will ever be practical to get, on a global bases, 90% of our power from non-CO2 emitting sources by using renewables. Germany and Denmark seem to be strongly committed to renewables and yet, even though at times they have a surplus of power, at other times they are dependent on importing non-renewable power from other countries and burning more coal. If renewables were actually capable of doing the job, surely that capability would by now have been demonstrated.
What may happen is that more and more renewable systems will be built until it becomes inescapably clear that we are on the wrong track. That will have delayed nuclear power by many years by which time the total amount of CO2 emitted will be far greater than if we had committed ourselves to nuclear power immediately upon realizing that CO2 emissions had to be practically eliminated. The end result is that the global disaster will be far greater than it could have been.
Fortunately other countries, with the aid of U.S. scientists, are doing R & D to develop better nuclear technologies. However, it may be years before they are ready for implementation. Meanwhile, we should be expanding the best current nuclear technology, which may be the Westinghouse AP1000 reactor with passive emergency cooling, as quickly as possible to reduce the magnitude of the disaster which probably can no longer be completely prevented. Then, after better nuclear technologies have been developed, we can use them to continue expanding nuclear power and, as older nuclear power plants are decommissioned, we can replace them with a superior nuclear technology.
Well of course Frank you are precisely correct. What is most pertinent is the discussion about “stranded capital energy assets”; they are poking up everywhere and we will see that issue expanding rapidly this year.
We need more advocates and expert commentators on modern endurable global energy technology polices, to get busy enlightening a misinformed global electorate on this important subject.
Craig is a great man and I admire his passion and involvement, but he is not an objective or skilled visionary on the subject of energy technology. Craig is more a “media sound bites” grabber who will heap praise on every warm and fuzzy piece of commentary from those embedded in the global energy industries that demonstrably have no interest in objectivity or consumer advocacy.
To be fair, there is a lot of very useful “warm and fuzzy” commentary out there but let’s get real please, the ordinary mums and dads of the world are being brainwashed beyond redemption it seems on this subject.
The world’s best and brightest physicists and engineers though know differently to Craig, and are busy advancing the future [and absolutely necessary] global energy sciences in the right direction. In my mind this is amazing and admirable, I don’t see any supporting commentary coming from Craig to their monumental efforts and Frank Eggers would agree on this point I am sure.
So forum members please – step up to the plate. Let’s remain very supportive of the great efforts we are witnessing everywhere in the current crop of Renewable Energy Sciences, but let’s also remember that the science is an unfolding one and soon to encompass new age renewable energy technologies including molecular science technologies.
So let’s broaden the discussion please. Craig you have infinite capacity to take all this stuff on board and do a great job with it. I also know that you know that I am correct.
Please remember also, my lively hood is derived from the renewable energy industry we all know. I am an Off Grid Solutions designer; inverter manufacturer and system installer. But I can’t hide behind all that and speak out only as a vested interest person in the industry. I must still search for professional detachment in my commentary.
Try it sometime – it is cathartic.
Lawrence Coomber
Lawrence, thank you for such an insightful post.
Like you I admire Craig’s dedication, passion and advocacy. I may not always agree with his approach, but I always admire his commitment and integrity.
I’m not a scientist or engineer, but luckily I have access to a team of bright tech savvy people who can dumb it down sufficiently for me to understand the principles.
Craig, and people like Craig, are very important communicators and opinion makers, without their advocacy, no broad mass consent to implement change is possible.
Lawrence,
I am not a scientist or engineer either. However, I don’t believe that it is necessary to be either to understand the basics.
My degree is in business administration which is helpful to understand the economics of power systems. Some engineers lack the background to understand that. I have, at the college level, had a year of chemistry, a year of zoology, and about two years of physics all of which I find helpful in understanding the issues.
As I’ve said before, if I had my way, a year of biology, a year of chemistry, and a year of physics would be required for high school graduation. It would also be helpful at the high school level to have a course on how to evaluate investments, including discounted cash flow and internal rate of return. To get a degree, the same courses should be required at the college level. There are entirely too many people who are totally incompetent on these subjects. That creates problems because it makes them subject to unscientific and irrational ideas and causes them to influence decision making politicians in ways that are contrary to public interest.
Unlike many people who strongly favor renewables, Craig is fair minded and does not attack people with differing opinions; that is greatly to his credit. Also, he is not 100% opposed to nuclear power. Similarly, there are people who are 100% opposed to renewables and don’t understand that renewables have an important, although limited rôle to play, in areas where connecting to the grid would be impractical.
We are all products of our era and upbringing and this seems an immutable truth from my experience, and the reflective comments from both MarcoPolo and Frank Eggers add some weight to this theory.
We share some common history; notably age! I am guessing that you are both “elder statesmen” like me [67]. Craig is looking very fit at about 45 I estimate?.
A short CV always helps to understand why people express themselves as they do in contentious debates, and there is no more contentious issue around today than the future of global energy technologies.
I joined the Navy in 1965 as an electrical engineer [artificer] and served until 1985. My specialisation was missile and weapons systems. I volunteered for foreign Navy service with the US, Canadian, British, Malaysian, Japanese, French and New Zealand navies, and like MarcoPola spent 1969-70 serving in the Vietnam War. I learned a lot early in life.
My formation years were spent almost entirely on sea service overseas and I often visited “stone age like” places in African states and the Indian sub continent. When I first visited rural China in 1971 [while it was still closed] people’s existence was not that far removed from ancient times. This period introduced me in stark tones, to the perpetual tyranny imposed on people by the absence of human resources such as electricity and water being freely available. Unfortunately not that much has changed for a staggering 25% of the world’s population to date.
In 1985 I started a design and manufacturing company in Queensland and turned my attention to semi intelligent water and energy industry products and systems. Initially for products for use by Government Utilities customers only, then civil customers quickly followed.
Fast forward 20 years, I added energy technologies lecturing to young technicians and engineers to my working life and started mentoring international energy engineering undergraduates and post graduates in India and China in renewable energy technologies. Instituting university graduation awards at the NMIT Melbourne quickly followed for the top achieving graduates [male and female] in renewable energy studies. I am still active in this role.
In 2007 my company set up an office in Shenzhen China, I trained some local graduates, and then became manufacturing quality systems consultants to the broadly based Chinese Renewable Energy Manufacturing industry. We also started our own company manufacturing facility in Wuxi for Off-Grid and Micro-Grid solutions products.
So I have an understanding and vision about global future energy needs to drive the technologies and new age business of the future. I don’t believe in the frugal use of pitifully inadequate energy supply services as something we should all accept by stealth. I believe that real global progress can only be achieved by a massive increase in the availability and use of energy. The new age industries ready to come into focus are energy intensive ones; artificial food production to replace traditional agriculture and farming; infrastructure development and rebuilding technologies and systems; human transport technologies; health and education technologies; they are all energy intensive.
So all renewable energy advocates should have a t-shirt with a slogan on it that echoes the global energy technologies future imperative: “I support technologies that provide for low cost and abundant energy for all people”.
This catch phrase makes Chris Brown from Vestas comments about future big wind look very narrow focussed in comparison.
In 2015 I was invited to act as a consultant to the Eritrean Government in World Bank funded renewable energy electrification projects in that country, and similarly with the Gujarat [India] Provincial Government along with many other Asian Ministries of Energy trying to get a handle on how to move renewable energy initiatives forward economically and efficiently, which is not an easy equation to resolve.
More recently I am the project manager for the establishment of the world’s first purpose built and dedicated Renewable Energy Technologies Center of Excellence and Training Academy for international engineers in Jinan China. I am very excited about this project; it is a truly global focussed facility of training excellence due to open in May 2017.
In closing, I believe I qualify as being “in the industry” and it’s easy to figure out why I speak about energy technology issues as I do. I know the industry well from the inside out having operated extensively in the field. I have influenced young energy professionals, on the ground and in the classrooms around the world. I have influenced manufacturing quality standards throughout China, and I have developed a very finely tuned “sniff meter” to filter the BS from well considered and qualified commentary from those also “in the industry”.
Beyond that I am an ordinary father of two [Lawyer and Energy Engineer] with a wonderfully skilled wife who still does the company accounts after 40 years.
Until about five years ago I strongly favored renewable energy systems, including wind and solar power. Then I took a motorcycle trip from here in Albuquerque, NM, to Savannah, GA, a 5500 mile round trip, and noticed that in many wind farm all the blades were stationary. Then I belatedly began to wonder whether the intermittent nature of renewables had been given adequate consideration. After spending many hours looking for information, I found that it was generally assumed that, if over a wide area renewable systems were interconnected, we’d have reliable power. However, I was unable to find any proof that that would work. There had never been an actual study to prove it even though there were numerous claims that it would work. Since then most advocates of renewable energy have realized that interconnections alone will not make renewables reliable, so they have changed their position and asserted that energy storage systems will solve the problem. However, there is no proof of that either and the extremely huge amounts of storage that would be necessary to make it work would require storage technologies which currently do not exist and may never exist. The cost of storage using current technologies would greatly exceed the cost of renewable power generation systems so even the systems themselves were free they would not be practical.
I was never totally opposed to nuclear power although I had strong reservations about it. But upon studying nuclear power for countless hours I discovered that many types of nuclear reactors are possible and it seemed certain that with R & D, nuclear technologies could be designed to circumvent the problems associated with our current pressurized water uranium reactors. The liquid fluoride thorium reactor (LFTR) seems especially promising, but there are also several other possibilities. In any case, I found that the nuclear disasters which have occurred were the result of inexcusable decisions and carelessness which could easily have been prevented and that even with its risks, the dangers of global warming are far greater than the dangers of even our current mediocre nuclear technology. Thus, I strongly support nuclear power.
We could reduce CO2 emissions somewhat by using energy more efficiently but that would not reduce CO2 emissions by enough to make much difference considering that as poor nations increase energy usage to lift their people out of poverty, global demand for energy will greatly increase despite using it more efficiently. And, I do not believe that people should be forced to live in poverty to reduce CO2 emissions. A high quality of life requires abundant affordable energy so the challenge is to increase available energy while reducing CO2 emissions to perhaps 10% of what we are now releasing.
Instead of ingesting only information with which I already agree, I am more than willing to examine information with which I do not agree. Thus I am willing to change my positions when new information seems to require it. That seems to be somewhat unusual.
At age 78 I am probably the oldest one here but despite my age, my brain still seems to function quite well. I’ve always made a point of keeping myself physically fit and, from what I’ve read, doing so helps to maintain brain function.
Here is the title of an article of great interest:
“Angela Merkel strikes deal with German states to put brakes on green energy”
And here is the link to the article:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/01/angela-merkel-signs-deal-with-german-states-to-regulate-green-energy-rollout
It is well worth reading. The link was posted in bravenewclimate.com which I have found very informative.
This will be my final comment on this particular subject: [Wind Energy Giant Vestas Has Grand Vision for the Future] and to conclude, Frank Eggers has saved the best for last on this and hit the nail on the head in his previous post which included a link to recent commentary in The Guardian.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/01/angela-merkel-signs-deal-with-german-states-to-regulate-green-energy-rollout
The key point to take from this is the quote by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel which reads:-
“Generous green subsidies have led to a boom in renewable energy, such as wind and solar power. But the rapid expansion has pushed up electricity costs in Europe’s biggest economy and placed a strain on its grid”.
Here is another quote from The Guardian 18 months earlier than Angela Markel’s comment:-
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/may/14/wind-power-china-desert
“So, unlike in most other industries, the primary consideration of those entering the wind-power sector should be not their ability to make a profit but their ability to withstand losses – from construction right through to operation. Whether or not they ultimately see a return on their outlay depends on the government’s policy towards and investment in renewable energy. In other words, it is a gamble.
But that gamble has brought both investors and special interest groups swarming to the sector. Within just a few years, an entire industrial chain has formed, from component manufacturers to turbine assemblers to wind-farm operators. The sector is more than doubling in size every year.
Shi Pengfei, deputy chair of the China Wind Energy Association, is blunt: “It isn’t that wind power is showing signs of over-heating. It has already overheated.” Stimulated by policy thrust, government interests and business investment – and with the emerging possibility of turbine manufacturing outstripping demand – the country faces the knotty task of macro-managing the wind industry.”
It doesn’t take an Einstein to figure out what these global wind tech trends are telling us and any 12 year old would make a good fist of writing a press release that we can expect to see from the US Department of Energy within 12 months based on well documented [but not often openly discussed] negative trends in the Big Wind Energy Global fiasco.
Concluding, to remain a relevant and serious commentator in the renewable energy industry, the simplest self-examination one can make is to look at yourself in mirror every morning and ask yourself this question: “with regard to all people everywhere and their future energy imperatives, as a responsible commentator, am I a part of the solution or just another part of the problem?”
Commentators please be wary of the self-serving greedy throw away lines from people like Vestas Chris Brown. I would be happy to challenge him any day in an open debate about the damage being done by the out of control “runaway train wind industry” unfolding under his watch.