Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘accidents’ Category

More on the alleged GE Vernova turbine blade data falsification. Possible US civil or criminal penalties?

Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged , , , , , , , on November 13, 2024| Leave a Comment »

LM/GE Vernova turbine blade plant. Photo credited by the New Bedford Light to Jean-Philippe Thibault/Journal Gaspésie Nouvelles.

On Oct. 24, Radio Gaspesie reported serious data falsification allegations related to the manufacturing GE Vernova turbine blades at their Gaspé, Quebec facility. GE Vernova’s delay in commenting on those charges is surprising given their economic and legal implications in both Canada and the US.

GE Vernova has informed the New Bedford Light that they have taken corrective actions at their blade facility in Gaspé after an extensive internal review of their blade manufacturing and quality assurance program. However, they have yet to comment on the data falsification allegations.

Actions speak louder than words, and the Light reports that GE Vernova laid off nine managers and suspended 11 unionized floor workers at the Gaspé factory. A representative for the union informed the Light that the production manager has been dismissed and the general manager has resigned.

Neither Vineyard Wind nor BSEE, the Federal safety regulator for the Vineyard Wind project, has commented on the matter. BSEE’s investigation of the blade failure is still pending and has seemingly gotten more complicated as a result of the manufacturing issues.

In addition to legal proceedings in Quebec, GE Vernova and Vineyard Wind are subject to possible civil and criminal penalties in the US. Civil penalties, which are administered by BSEE, seem likely given the extensive pollution from turbine blade fragments.

Criminal penalties, which are possible if the data falsification charges are proven true, are imposed by the Dept. of Justice. The applicable criminal penalties statute is pasted below.

43 U.S. Code § 1350 – Remedies and penalties – (c) Criminal penalties

Any person who knowingly and willfully (1) violates any provision of this subchapter, any term of a lease, license, or permit issued pursuant to this subchapter, or any regulation or order issued under the authority of this subchapter designed to protect health, safety, or the environment or conserve natural resources, (2) makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any application, record, report, or other document filed or required to be maintained under this subchapter, (3) falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method of record required to be maintained under this subchapter, or (4) reveals any data or information required to be kept confidential by this subchapter shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $100,000, or by imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both. Each day that a violation under clause (1) of this subsection continues, or each day that any monitoring device or data recorder remains inoperative or inaccurate because of any activity described in clause (3) of this subsection, shall constitute a separate violation.

Read Full Post »

Quebec media outlet is reporting possible data falsification at plant where defective Vineyard Wind turbine blades were manufactured

Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged , , , , on November 8, 2024| 4 Comments »

See the translated excerpts below from a Radio Gaspesie report. This is a massive scandal if true.

“Yesterday, the vice-president of global operations at GE Vernova reportedly addressed all employees at the Gaspé plant to provide an update on the situation.

The investigation, led by GE Vernova’s lawyers, reportedly revealed that employees were asked by senior company executives to falsify quality control data. Data associated with a well-made blade was then associated with poorly made blades. Our sources indicate that this is a widespread practice in the industry.

The senior management of the Gaspé plant also allegedly implemented a points system that encouraged employees to skip verification steps, thus prioritizing production quantity over quality.

Our sources say the points system allegedly involved tight management oversight that bordered on intimidation of employees.

The oversized 107m blades that were produced in Gaspé for the construction of marine parks are said to be affected. The integrity of the entire production of the longest blades in America is currently being called into question.“

Read Full Post »

Another important helideck safety alert (attached)

Posted in accidents, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , , , , on November 7, 2024| Leave a Comment »

“On Sept. 16, 2024, a routine helicopter approach at an offshore facility nearly resulted in a serious accident due to a failure to follow proper helideck procedures. Before landing, the helicopter pilot visually confirmed that a nearby crane was securely stowed and stationary (Figure 1). However, as the helicopter neared the helideck, the crane operator unexpectedly raised the crane boom, bringing it alarmingly close to the landing area as the helicopter was 10 feet from touchdown. The pilots swiftly executed a go-around maneuver, successfully avoiding a collision and ensuring the safety of the crew and passengers onboard.”

Good work by BSEE in continuing to identify and address helideck safety issues. This is the 4th helideck safety alert issued in 2024.

Meanwhile, why are we still waiting for the final NTSB report on the tragic helideck crash that occurred 2 years ago?

BSEE Safety Alert 491 – Vigilance Required in Offshore Helideck OperationsDownload

Read Full Post »

BSEE letter to Vineyard Wind: shut-in order remains in effect, environmental damage study required

Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, tagged , , , , , , on October 17, 2024| Leave a Comment »

The attached letter was obtained by the Nantucket Current through a FOIA request. Key points:

  • Vineyard Wind power generation and blade installation suspension order remains in effect.
  • Vineyard Wind directed to conduct a site-specific study that evaluates the environmental harm and other potential damage from the blade failure, and to identify potential mitigation measures.
  • Vineyard Wind was required to submit a plan for the study by Oct. 11. It’s not clear whether the plan was submitted.
  • The study must include a mass balance of unrecovered debris material based on the weight of debris recovered and the weight of the subsea debris retrieved.

Comments:

  • The study requirement is appropriate given the significance of the blade incident and the implications for offshore wind development.
  • Why was a FOIA request needed to learn about the study requirement?
  • What about the 6 turbine blades being returned to France? Were they defective?

DOI-2025-000302Download

Read Full Post »

Good leadership by BSEE on helideck safety. Regulatory fragmentation needs to be addressed.

Posted in accidents, Gulf of Mexico, Offshore Energy - General, tagged , , , , , , on October 16, 2024| Leave a Comment »

David Scarborough, Island Operating Co., was one of the 4 workers who died in the 2022 crash at a West Delta 106 platform.
BSEE Safety Alert 490 – Helideck Condition Notifications and VerificationDownload

Read Full Post »

Nord Stream litigation: Insurers’ assertion is “embarrassing for want of particularity”

Posted in accidents, climate, pipelines, tagged , , , , , , on October 14, 2024| 4 Comments »

Jeffrey Brodsky, a journalist who traveled to all four Nord Stream blast sites, shared Nord Stream AG’s response (attached) to the 30 Sept. court filing by the insurers.

Particularly noteworthy is Nord Stream’s response to the insurers’ claim (par. 22.2 (a) of their filing) that the pipeline damage was the result of “the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.” In par. 13.1 of their response (attached), Nord Stream called the insurers’ assertion “embarrassing for want of particularity.” (clever wording that may prove useful in the future 😉)

Brodsky’s observations on the Nord Stream filing:

  • Nord Stream AG calls the insurers (Lloyd’s and Arch) failure to provide evidence for the country that blew up the pipelines “embarrassing.” (See above comment.)
  • Nord Stream argues that the insurers still must pay even if the sabotage was an act of war. This aligns with what legal scholar Said Mahmoudi told Brodsky.
  • Mahmoudi: “The defendants’ argument is prima facie irrelevant if one cannot prove that the damage is caused by a named government that has been directly involved in a war in the area. The burden of proof in this case is…on the defendant.”
  • Mahmoudi: “Even if the sabotage is an act of terrorism, the author of the act can be a state or a private entity.”
  • Mahmoudi: “If a private entity, the insurance company, is the only source for the compensation; if a state is responsible for the terrorist act, it is the insurance company & that state that have a legal obligation to compensate for the damage.”

Related comment by Erik Andersson: Nord Stream AG has consistently claimed they should receive compensation regardless of whether or not a government was responsible for the sabotage. Nord Stream AG does not seem interested in providing an alternative to Lloyds’ claim that Ukraine did this as an act of war. (That horse might be too big to ride 😉)

2024-10-07 – Nord Stream AG v (1) LIC and (2) Arch – CL-2024-000094 – Amended ReplyDownload

Read Full Post »

Good reporting by the New Bedford Light on turbine blades being returned to France

Posted in accidents, Offshore Wind, Regulation, tagged , , , , , , on October 9, 2024| 1 Comment »

New Bedford Light: The Rolldock Sun leaves New Bedford on Friday with two blades visible. Credit: Courtesy of West Island Weather

Per the New Bedford Light, the turbine blade delivery vessel Rolldock Sun was seen on Friday carrying at least two blades out of New Bedford. It was not headed for the Vineyard Wind site. According to vessel tracking websites, the Rolldock Sun was en route to the Port of Cherbourg, where GE Vernova has a blade manufacturing facility. 

The most likely explanation for returning the blades to Cherbourg is that defects were detected or suspected. The blade that failed, reportedly as a result of a manufacturing issue, is probably not the only one that was defective.

The New Bedford Light asked GE Vernova, Vineyard Wind, and the Federal regulator BSEE why the blades were being transported to Cherbourg. They received the following responses (my comments in parentheses):

GE Vernova: “No comment on this matter.” (This is the worst possible response. In the absence of information, people are left to speculate. If there was no problem with the blades, why wouldn’t GE simply provide an explanation? Their non-response simply reinforces suspicions that the blades were defective. If that is the case, why not take credit for procedures that identified the suspect defects, albeit belatedly?

Vineyard Wind: “The weekend has gotten in the way of the information flow,” and they would share information should they hear anything. Another request for information was not answered as of noon Monday. (Not exactly confidence inspiring from the company whose blade failure littered beaches and the offshore environment. They are deservedly being watched, and need to be more transparent and responsive.)

BSEE: A BSEE spokesperson did not answer questions and said by email that the agency has no new information. (Disappointing, but not surprising.)

Read Full Post »

Erik Andersson’s informative Nord Stream update

Posted in accidents, pipelines, tagged , , , , , , on October 8, 2024| 4 Comments »

Swedish engineer Erik Andersson has personally investigated the September 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. He is perhaps the most informed independent investigator of the incident and the associated legal and political drama.

Andersson provided an updated defense document filed by the pipelines’ insurers (attached) and posted his observations on X. His X comments are consolidated below.

  • Nord Stream insurers Lloyds & Arch just filed an amended defense document (attached) which reveals technical details confirming a fifth Nord Stream bomb, which failed to break the NS1B line, placed just 90 meters from the successful bomb on NS1 line A.
  • Lloyds & Arch intend to prove in court that the government of Ukraine ordered the destruction.
  • The insurers have access to classified information in the criminal investigation which not even the victims have had up to now.
  • The insurers doubled down on their previous claim that the destruction was an act of war (and thus they are not liable). They all but say it was ordered by the Ukrainian government, and will rely on “expert evidence” of this.
  • The locations of the northern Nord Stream bombs are marked on the nautical chart (pasted below). The previously known bombs have orange markers and the new bomb we learned about in the NS vs Lloyds filing is marked red.
  • I (Andersson) have repeatedly said that I dismissed Seymour Hersh claim of 8 bombs after my expedition, and have assumed there were exactly four bombs. This has now been proven false, and I think that we again have to account for the possibility that there were perhaps 8 bombs, and that Sy Hersh is perhaps right in his claim that “the Americans sped back to the crime scene to remove the unexploded bombs.”
  • Andersson’s personal view is that it doesn’t matter much if Team USA trusted and protected the Ukrainian sailboat crew so they could place the bombs, or if they just waited for the sailboat cover operation to finish before detonating the bombs they had placed there by other means (making sure they didn’t do anything that couldn’t have been done from a sailboat).
  • The presence of American, Danish and Swedish warships in the area, with all their surveillance capabilities, including the underwater surveillance, makes it a very hard sell that the Ukrainians did this alone without American participation.
  • American warships were also present at the crime scene when it was closed off (justified by an erroneous interpretation of international law) and cleaned up by the Swedish investigation. If any materials were found which contradicted the sailboat narrative, these materials could have been removed.
  • It’s impossible to trust the investigations when (1) the crime scene was illegally blocked & cleaned with US military protection, (2) international investigation was blocked, and (3) the Swedish and Danish investigations were closed with a bogus justification contradicting the premise of “jurisdiction” which was used to seize control of all information in the first place. (Very interesting point about Sweden and Denmark. After 16+ months of investigation, they both punted. Sweden suddenly didn’t have jurisdiction and Denmark decided they didn’t have sufficient grounds to pursue a criminal case.)
2024-09-30 Nord Stream v (1) LIC and (2) Arch – CL-2024-000094 – Amended DefenceDownload

Read Full Post »

Wind turbine incident statistics

Posted in accidents, climate, Offshore Wind, UK, tagged , , on October 7, 2024| Leave a Comment »

Given the absence of industry and government data on wind turbine incidents, Scotland Against Spin (SAS) has done yeoman’s work in filling the void. SAS gathers information from press reports and official releases. A PDF of the latest SAS update summary is attached. You can view their complete incident compilation (318 pages) here. Kudos to SAS for their diligence.

As good as their work has been, SAS acknowledges that their information is far from complete and may only represent the tip of the wind turbine incident iceberg. Per SAS:

  • In 2011, RenewableUK confirmed that there had been 1500 wind turbine incidents in the UK alone in the previous 5 years.
  • In July 2019, EnergyVoice reported a total of 81 cases where workers had been injured on UK windfarms since 2014. The SAS table includes only 15 of these incidents (<19%).
  • In February 2021, the industry publication Wind Power Engineering and Development admitted to 865 offshore accidents during 2019. SAS captured only 4 (<0.5%).
  • A 13 August 2018 publication by Power Technology reported 737 incidents from UK offshore windfarms during 2016 alone, with the majority occurring during operations rather than development. 44% of medical emergencies were turbine related. In comparison, only 4 UK offshore incidents are listed in the SAS data – equivalent to 0.5%.

    Lars Herbst had previously reported, based on the Wind Power article cited above, that “with an estimated 700,000 blades in operation globally, there are, on average, 3,800 incidents of blade failure each year.” Lars noted that the annual blade failure rate of about 0.5% translates to 1.5% of all operating wind turbines experiencing a blade failure every year, a remarkably high failure frequency.

    A sad irony is that one of the five operational Vineyard Wind turbines experienced a very impactful blade failure less than 5 months after the project had begun delivering a limited amount of power and government officials were patting themselves on their backs and declaring victory.

    “This marks a turning point in the clean energy transition. After many decades of advocacy, research, policymaking, and finally construction, America’s offshore wind industry has gone from a dream to reality,” said Governor Maura Healey. “Across Massachusetts, in 30,000 homes and businesses, when you turn on the light, you will now be using clean, affordable energy. This will make the air we breathe safer and healthier, save customers money, and bring us one step closer to achieving net-zero emissions.” 

    Turbine-Accident-Summary-to-30-September-2024Download

    Read Full Post »

    More Nord Stream intrigue

    Posted in accidents, energy policy, tagged , , , , , on September 30, 2024| 5 Comments »

    Just when the media seemed to be settling on rogue Ukrainians in a rented yacht being responsible for the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, comments by a Danish harbor master have muddied the waters.

    On the second anniversary of the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage, the Danish publication Politiken posted comments from John Anker Nielsen, harbor master on Christiansø, the small Danish Island near the explosion sites.

    Swedish engineer, Erik Andersson tweeted an excerpt from the Politiken article:

    “For the first few days, the harbor master said he was “not allowed to say a thing”. But today, John Anker Nielsen can reveal that four or five days before the Nord Stream blasts, he was out with the rescue service on Christiansø because there were some ships with switched-off radios. They turned out to be American naval vessels, and when the rescue service approached, they were told by Naval Command to turn back. Therefore, the harbor master has some faith in the theory that American star journalist Seymour Hersh, among others, has put forward without any documentation: that the US was behind the sabotage. The Americans have these small unmanned submarines that can solve any task, John Anker Nielsen has been told.”

    Erik commented further:

    The harbor master isn’t making this up. He wasn’t alone on the rescue vessel ordered to stay clear of the American warships.

    Read Full Post »

    « Newer Posts - Older Posts »