Quotes from Nantucket Current article (emphasis added):
“While we continue to work to finalize our root cause analysis, our investigation to date indicates that the affected blade experienced a manufacturing deviation,” said GE Vernova CEO Scott Strazik. “We have not identified information indicating an engineering design flaw in the blade or information of a connection with the blade event we experienced at an offshore wind project in the UK, which was caused by an installation error out at sea. We are working with urgency to scrutinize our operations across offshore wind. Pace matters here. But we are going to be thorough, instead of rushed.”
“It’s been 11 days since the event, and just to reinforce from the start, we have no indications of an engineering design flaw,” Strazik said. “We have identified a material deviation or a manufacturing deviation in one of our factories that, through the inspection or quality assurance process, we should have identified. Because of that, we’re going to use our existing data and reinspect all of the blades we’ve made for offshore wind. For context, this factory in Gaspé, Canada where the material deviation existed we’ve made about 150 blades.
Any comments from the CVA, assuming there was one?
Meanwhile, Nantucket will renegotiate their “Good Neighbor Agreement” with Vineyard Wind. Is this a lesson for other municipalities?
[…] the July 25 post, BOE described the developer’s excuse for the failure and the decision by the Nantucket […]