Eize de Vries – Turbine firms learn by scaling quickly and taking risks

**Ian Griggs** (0:03)
Hello, and welcome to the Windpower Podcast with me, Ian Griggs, editor of Windpower Monthly. In this episode, I spoke to Windpower Monthly's technology and market trends correspondent, Eize de Vries, about the widening gulf between Western and Chinese turbine manufacturers in their approach to research and development. I spoke to Eize to get his views on different industrialization and scaling strategies for offshore wind turbines, and to help navigate a tricky conundrum for the industry. Is it better for OEMs to perfect and refine the technology they have already developed, or to take risks and rapidly innovate the next generation of turbines?
Welcome to the show, Eize.

**Eize de Vries** (0:52)
Thank you, Ian.

**Ian Griggs** (0:53)
We're going to talk about offshore wind for this episode of the Wind Power Podcast.
For the first half, we're going to look at bottom fixed, and then we'll look at floating wind. Starting with bottom fixed, looking at the industrialization and scaling strategies for offshore wind in Europe and in China, how would you compare the approach of these two geographical regions in the past years?

**Eize de Vries** (1:17)
Quite a big difference. In Europe, we have this ongoing discretion on standardizing the size of wind turbines. One popular size is 15 megawatt.
With 236 meters rotor diameter. Not surprisingly from the two European suppliers, Siemens, Gomesa and Festos. Some say it is an ideal size, so we have to industrialize this one. And even for a prolonged period, some even suggest that they should keep this size until 2037, which is quite a long time.

**Ian Griggs** (1:50)
Indeed.

**Eize de Vries** (1:51)
And then, as again, some suggest and perhaps make a jump to 30 megawatt. So doubling in size.
While the Chinese have a different approach, they have a much faster innovation page and scaling page. So in China, you saw, for instance, last year, there was a prototype with 26 megawatt and 313 meter rotor diameter. So that is quite a big difference. And Ming Yang, I think they are about to install a 22 to 25 or 24 megawatt machine with 312, so about the same rotor. And there are also plans in China to next year install a 30 megawatt machine with 330 meter diameter. And Wind Day has announced a 28 megawatt prototype with an undisclosed rotor diameter, but you can bet it will be again slightly bigger, considering the Chinese always like a lower specific power rating. And as we discussed before, the rotor is the motor, so we always like to know always not only the rating, but also the relationship between rating and rotor size.

**Ian Griggs** (3:12)
Before you go on, just explain for those listening, why it's so important to look at the power rating in combination with the rotor diameter, to understand a new platform better.

**Eize de Vries** (3:27)
Well, for the European situation, where there is a big focus on the North Sea, with often mean wind speeds between 9.5 and 10.5 meters per second, then according to many experts, between 340 and 350 watts per square meter is an ideal specific power rating. If you have less, for instance, if you would do 150, then a lot of wind is not produced, because then the generator reaches rated power, while there is much more energy in the wind, also for where they could benefit in higher rating. While in China, where they have, especially in the South, you could have only 7, 7.5 meters per second. So there it is more beneficial. They have a bigger rotor to compensate for the lack of wind. And that is why you find in China, even for these larger turbines, like for instance, the latest Ming Yang 18-megawatt machine with 292 meters, that one has roughly 265 So that is watts per square meters.
And interestingly, in China, when I was there last year, I discussed with the factory manager and he told me that the 14-megawatt machine with 260 meter was already too small. So it was, the developers want the bigger one. And so they now go for 18-megawatt, 292 And remarkably, they have the same specific power rating. Both of them, both 265
But then for the European market, Ming Yang tries to enter the specific markets with an 18.5-megawatt model with 260 What has then a specific power rating very much aligned with the European competition? So in other words, you have to adapt the specific power rating for any market.

**Ian Griggs** (5:15)
Thank you, Eize, that's a really good explanation. This really kind of feeds into what you've just been talking about. How would you characterize the scaling pathways of the OEMs operating in Europe and China? What do you think are some of the risks and rewards that come with different approaches?