Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Vineyard Wind’

A recent Nantucket Current piece criticizes the Nantucket Select Board for failing to address community concerns about the attached Good Neighbor Agreement (GNA) with Vineyard Wind. In particular, any discussion about the GNA was throttled at a recent public forum on the SouthCoast Wind project.

Some key points from the article and related thoughts:

  • Over 2,000 individuals and 150 businesses have signed a petition asking the Nantucket Select Board to withdraw from the GNA.
  • The GNA established a long-term relationship between Vineyard Wind and Nantucket. In essence, Nantucket became a partner and an advocate for the projects.
  • Sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the GNA are particularly striking and believed to be unprecedented in the history of Federal offshore energy programs.
  • Section 5.2 defines Nantucket’s broad advocacy responsibilities.
  • Section 5.3 stipulates that “the Nantucket Parties shall use their reasonable best efforts to inform federal, state, and local elected officials of their support for the Projects” throughout the environmental, historical, and state review processes. Wow, nothing subtle about that directive!
  • By signing the GNA with Vineyard Wind, Nantucket withdrew from the important National Historic Preservation Act consulting process for these projects.
  • Vineyard Wind, New England Wind, and the other projects that are covered under the GNA will add approximately 350 turbines off Nantucket’s south shore beaches.
  • Given the partnership with Vineyard Wind, it’s difficult for Nantucket to challenge the mitigations for another project, SouthCoast Wind, which is not covered by the GNA.

The Nantucket GNA controversy should be carefully considered by other communities that are tempted by developer incentives to enter into agreements that may not be in their best long-term interest.

Will Nantucket exit (Nexit) the GNA? The pressure is building.

Read Full Post »

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 »

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 »

Damaged Vineyard Wind turbine; Kit Noble photo
BSEE statement to the Nantucket Current

Comparing the above BSEE statement with recent GE Venova (GE) statements:

  • GE: We were “granted approval to return to installing new blades on turbines at the project once stringent safety and operational conditions are met.” (Positive spin of the BSEE statement implying that approval is assured.)
  • GE: “We have finalized root cause analysis and confirm the blade at issue at Vineyard Wind was caused by a manufacturing deviation from our factory in Canada.” (Then why doesn’t BSEE have the analysis? Is the Canadian plant being scapegoated?)

Finally, as expected, we can now conclude that the blades being shipped from New Bedford to France were defective.

Rolldock Sun arriving in Cherbourg with defective blades

Read Full Post »

Breaking report from the Nantucket Current:

Read Full Post »

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?

Read Full Post »

The author of the New Bedford Light article about turbine blades being transported from New Bedford to Cherbourg posted (below) that there are six blades on the vessel.

It looks like she may get some help from French journalists who have picked up on this story. The Rolldock Sun is scheduled to arrive in Cherbourg on Oct. 16.

GE Vernova or Vineyard Wind could simplify things by explaining the shipment.

Read Full Post »

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 »

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.” 

    Read Full Post »

    Federally funded decommissioning in the Matagorda Island area of the Gulf of Mexico. Not a success story.

    I’m not typically aligned with the sponsors of the attached “Plug Offshore Wells Act,” but the call for transparency is understandable given that taxpayer funds are, for the first time, being used to decommission offshore platforms in the Matagorda Island area of the Gulf of Mexico, massive liabilities associated with the Cox bankruptcy loom, and the Hogan and Houchin saga drags on without resolution.

    The bill would require an annual report on well, platform, and pipeline decommissioning including applications, deadlines, and enforcement actions. BSEE does have a good facility infrastructure page for the GoM, but much of the information called for in H.R. 9168 is not publicly available.

    Improved oversight of decommissioning requirements for offshore wind projects should also be considered in light of the precedent setting waiver granted to Vineyard Wind and BOEM’s “modernization rule” that relaxes financial assurance requirements for wind development.

    Read Full Post »

    « Newer Posts - Older Posts »