Wind Power Project Cost and Supply Challenges

We’re hearing about the deteriorating economics around offshore wind. Let’s look at financial results for a huge operator in this space. The chart below shows revenue and margins for the offshore wind segment at Ørsted, the Danish green energy giant. We’re specifically looking at the results from the first half of the year in each of 2018 through 2023. The blue bars show revenue and map to the left axis. The dashed blue bars are government grants. The solid blue bars are all other revenue, besides the government grants. The units are millions of Danish krone (DKK) The red lines show margins and map to the right axis. The dark red dots and solid line show gross margin, excluding the effect of government grants. The light red dots and dashed line show operating margin, also excluding grants. We see the growth in revenue, with notable year-over-year declines in the first halves of 2019 and 2023. In both 2019 and 2023, the pace of new wind farm construction declined, which weighed against revenue. Importantly, revenue is growing far beyond what the grants are contributing. There’s a market for offshore wind farms and the power that comes from these farms. And Ørsted is tapping into that market, which is a win. The challenge is around margins. We’ve seen a decrease in gross margin, from a high of 40% in the first half of 2019 down to 23% in the first half of 2023. And that’s against rising revenue, meaning any economies of scale are getting outweighed by other factors, e.g. increasing prices from suppliers. Operating margin is even tighter, falling to 3% in the first half of 2023. The margin compression is part of the reason Ørsted’s stock has fallen 74% since it reached its peak in early 2021. Granted, the market experienced some irrational exuberance around all things clean energy circa late 2020 and early 2021. Still, the margin pressures are real. And with supply chain disruptions continuing to weigh against the offshore wind sector, Ørsted’s near-term outlook is choppy. If you’re a shareholder, your hope is that offshore wind costs come down in at least three ways: ⓵ More suppliers enter this expanding market, driving down component costs ⓶ Ørsted continues to accumulate scale and experience, improving financial and operational efficiencies ⓷ The developed world weakens barriers to new project construction and interconnection, reducing project costs Of course the stakes extend far beyond the company’s shareholder base. Offshore wind is an important component of a cleaner, lower carbon energy future. Any headwinds here put more pressure on other technologies to perform even better. Regardless, we can continue to watch Ørsted’s financial results as proxy for the ongoing viability of the offshore wind sector. #energy #energytransition #wind #offshorewind Ørsted

Local content just got more expensive in Taiwan. Yes. Even more expensive. Just got a call from a developer who used “predatory” to describe pricing by local suppliers who know that developers have no choice but to buy from them in order to satisfy made-in-Taiwan requirements. “Some of them are literally taking the piss.” Turbines are about 20% more expensive in Taiwan than Europe. That’s alright. What’s not alright is the price of the foundations, which have continued to go up and up and up. There’s obviously a lot of price collusion going on between the two suppliers Century Steel and SDMS, because my source report them submitting quotes with the exact same price! Onshore substations and domestic vessels are also both very expensive. As unbelievable as it seems, we are looking at Taiwanese wind farms costing 30-50% more than last year. “The costs just aren’t going to stack up. No one is going to pay that much. No one.” To eat all those costs, NTD$7.5/kWh is necessary for projects. But TSMC and the like barely want to pay NTD$5 to 5.5. Round 3.1 is running out of time. Engineering and surveying activities have been scant. Only CIP’s project appears at all active. FID? “Nowhere near.” At this point if Round 3.1 project gets built at all, grid connect will be 2028 at the earliest my source reckons. “There is no appetite from lenders to support these projects. None of them have CPPAs in place.” Note that most of the winners from last year’s 3.1 auctions have negotiated very favorable exit clauses in their contracts with the government. For them, there is not too much cost to dallying. Maybe they are just pushing ahead because they feel like they have to. But it’s not too long now before the other shoe is going to drop. What about the Round 3.2 auctions? Submissions are meant to start next week but these aren’t favorable conditions. Some developers are pushing for delays. What they need to get future projects going? A further relaxation to local content. “We know the government aren’t going to scrap the whole thing. But help us push our costs down. At the moment it’s simply too high!” <==this kind of sentiment I’ve heard from multiple developers, including ones who have traditionally more upbeat about localization. Does the government not know this? Of course they do. At least some of the factions are very sympathetic, but other are not and so it’s a political struggle. I’ve heard scant, scant, scant info about the president-elects energy strategy or position. For the moment, he doesn’t seem to be too fussed. Would that change when he takes office? Uncertain. But the whole thing needs to be sorted out!

𝗞𝗢𝗘𝗡 𝗘𝘅𝗶𝘁𝘀 '𝗦𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻- 𝗨𝗶 𝗢𝗳𝗳𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗪𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁' Korea South-East Power's (KOEN) decision to exit the 390 MW 'Shinan- Ui offshore wind project' underscores a tough reality: 𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬. Despite securing a 20-year stable revenue guarantee, rising material and construction costs caused the project to fail Korea’s Preliminary Feasibility Study. Now, 𝐊𝐎𝐄𝐍 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝟑𝟕% 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞, leaving questions about the future of public-sector involvement in offshore wind. Key Takeaways: 1️⃣ Balancing energy security and local supply chains with cost competitiveness remains a significant challenge. 2️⃣ Public-sector withdrawals can dampen investor confidence and delay progress—this isn’t just a Korea issue; it’s global. 3️⃣ Competing with lower-cost imports, like Chinese turbines, requires robust local manufacturing to sustain long-term growth. The Shinan Ui project is a reminder that while offshore wind has potential, overcoming financial and regulatory hurdles is key. #RenewableEnergy #OffshoreWind #Sustainability #EnergyTransition #SouthKorea

Over the last two decades, the #offshorewind industry has grown fast, lowered technology costs to be on a par or even cheaper than fossil fuels in some parts of the world, and increased efficiency through bigger and bigger turbines. Here are some of the reasons the industry is beginning to struggle: 1. SUPPLY CHAIN DISRUPTIONS - The COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 led to lockdowns, decreased industrial activity and reduced global energy demand. Some firms also missed policy deadlines that meant that they lost out on government support or subsidies for which they previously qualified, per the IEA. The war in Ukraine has also created logistics and supply chain issues, aggravated in some cases by the impact of sanctions. 2. RISING PROJECT COSTS - Despite mounting pressure to combat climate change by moving to renewable sources, financing projects has been a challenge. Overall project costs have risen around 40% over the past few years, developer Vattenfall said when halting its British Norfolk Boreas offshore wind farm in July, due to inflation, higher commodity costs and high costs of capital. 3. COMPETITION - As more governments have announced ambitious climate targets, pressure on companies to increase renewables development has increased. Established wind manufacturers, already competing with each other to drive down component and technology costs and increase wind farms' efficiency with huge turbines, also face new entrants. Traditional wind project developers, such as utilities, increasingly face competition from oil and gas majors seeking to diversify their portfolios, who have often outbid them in wind tenders and auctions. Some oil and gas companies, however, are also struggling with poor returns from renewables while oil and gas profits have hit record levels in response to high energy prices. 4. COMPONENTS - Most of the problems of Siemens Energy's wind unit Siemens Gamesa concern its onshore turbine fleet, where the group has discovered quality issues in certain components, including rotor blades and bearings. Among the issues which arise from operating wind turbines, wear and tear on turbine blades over time can lead to erosion. The increasing size of blades on turbines also raises the risk of lightning strikes and repairs. For offshore wind, harsh weather conditions can also result in corrosion of foundations or of the turbine. Leading wind turbine maker Vestas flagged quality issues with turbine blades in its onshore fleet in 2020 and provided an extra 600 million euros to fix them. #windturbine #energy #offshorewindenergy #supplychain #cost #sustainability https://lnkd.in/gDy7vYns

#netzero #offshorewind bids in UK’s #AR5. Not the outcome governments wanted but perhaps the one the sector needed? Today it was announced that no offshore wind projects bid in #UK’s #CfD Auction round 5 (#AR5). This is a major blow, as it will be cited by many in the coming hours and days, as the UK is the largest offshore wind market outside China, accounting for 42% of the operational fleet by the end of 2022 and awarded 7 GW in last year’s tender. The key reason for the lack of bidders was the low administrative strike price (bidding ceiling) in the tender. But the contextual factors played an important role too – a) there was a limited number of eligible bidders and they were all experienced. b) Limited upside on the revenue side compared with the #AR4 projects as the CfD locks in revenues for 15 years. Secondly, the declining #captureprices combined with the new #EGL limits upsides from the merchant nose. C) For projects to be built 2026-2028, developers would need to sign new supply contracts at elevated prices due to the tightening of supply/demand. D) Governments have already announced changes to the structure of the upcoming #AR6 so bidders are expecting more favourable conditions for in this round. Hattrick. This is not the first time we have heard about challenges in the offshore wind sector. #Suppliers have felt these challenges since 2016. #Developers have seen it coming and have now started to feel it – most notably through Orsted’s recent impairments of its US pipeline. Now, following seven years of falling subsidies, #governments are feeling it as they see offtakes being cancelled in US and UK and now a tender has been undersubscribed. This escalation is not benefiting anyone today, but it might just be that spark that can catalyse the change that sector is needing to get back on a more sustainable course. Read more about this Wood Mackenzie's recent #wmhorizons article: https://lnkd.in/eBmwdmfx. Considering the high demand in the 2028-2032 period for offshore wind, I would argue that the most beneficial action the UK government could take for the sector and the #energytransition is to accelerate the deployment. UK is one of the markets that is best positioned to do that because they have a large fleet of projects that are either permitted or in advanced stages of their permitting. To be concrete, the UK government should increase the ceiling prices, accelerate the permitting of the remainder of the fleet and introduce non-price criteria (see https://lnkd.in/esH5cKYn to learn more) where developers are being rewarded for getting their projects online earlier. Doing this would not just help the UK getting closer to its 2030 targets for #renewables, #jobs, and #energysecurity but also other markets as it would free up supply capacity in the 2028-2030 period.

Rising interest rates, supply chain challenges, increased steel costs make offshore wind less competitive than other renewables. Indexing PPAs to inflation is a good idea, but ultimately need to find a way to make OSW competitive with other technologies, or consumers ultimately foot the increased cost. “Of all renewable energy projects, offshore wind farms may be the most vulnerable to rising interest rates as they take longer to build and have higher upfront costs. According to George Bilicic, global head of power, energy and infrastructure at Lazard, building a U.S. offshore wind farm can cost $4,000/kw at the midpoint of estimates, compared with $1,360 for onshore farms and $1,050 for solar facilities. Average costs to build an offshore wind farm have shot up 36% since 2019, compared with 5% for land-based ones, in part because of pricier debt. Offshore wind is a promising clean-power technology because it should be highly productive once the capital is invested. As the ocean is windy, the capacity factor of offshore farms—a measure of how efficiently they generate electricity—is higher than both onshore wind farms and solar power. Installing wind turbines out at sea is also less controversial than on land, so the politics should be easier, in theory.”