By P Gosselin
The Alpha Ventus offshore wind farm near German North Sea island of Borkum is set to be dismantled after being in operation for only 15 years.
It has become too unprofitable to operate without massive subsidies.
Symbol image, produced by Grok 3 AI.
Alpha Ventus is noted as being Germany’s first offshore wind farm. Construction works commenced in August 2007 and the first turbine was installed in July 2009. The pioneering wind farm was officially commissioned on April 27, 2010.
According to Blackout News, a decisive factor for dismantling the pioneer project is the expiration of generous subsidies made possible through Germany’s EEG renewable energies feed-in act. The subsidy meant that the Alpha Ventus wind farm got 15.4 cents per kilowatt hour after being put in operation. Now that the subsidy has run out, the wind farm operators receive only the basic tariff of 3.9 cents per kilowatt hour, thus making the farm unprofitable.
Another factor: the older Alpha Venus wind farm is being eclipsed by more modern, more efficient turbines.
Offshore wind farms have high costs
Overall, offshore wind farms are significantly more expensive to operate than onshore wind farms due increased maintenance costs, poor accessibility, harsh environments and the specialized equipment and personnel needed to conduct operational works.
Offshore wind farms are significantly more expensive to operate than onshore wind farms due to a combination of factors stemming from their challenging marine environment and remote locations.
Offshore turbines are exposed to corrosive saltwater, strong winds, large waves, and potential storms, which acts to accelerates wear and tear on components. This leads to more frequent failures and the need for more robust and expensive materials.
And when turbines break down offshore, the time required to access, diagnose, and repair them is typically much longer than for onshore turbines due to weather limitations and logistical challenges. This results in more significant losses in electricity generation and revenue.
What a pathetic waste of valuable resources.
It would be interesting to see a project review for this disaster.
Who could possibly have predicted that offshore wind farms would turn out to be a financial and operational disaster? Answer: Everybody but green policymakers.
On Sunday, I asked DEEPSEEK to list the top 10 countries by wind and solar penetration with GDP above USD1tr. This its the answer based on its 2023 data:
Here are the top 10 countries by wind and solar power penetration (as a percentage of total electricity generation) with a GDP greater than USD 1 trillion (based on recent data):
Germany: ~35% (wind and solar combined).
Spain: ~25% (wind and solar combined).
United Kingdom: ~25% (wind and solar combined).
Italy: ~20% (wind and solar combined).
Australia: ~20% (wind and solar combined).
France: ~15% (wind and solar combined).
United States: ~12% (wind and solar combined).
China: ~10% (wind and solar combined).
Japan: ~10% (wind and solar combined).
India: ~8% (wind and solar combined).
I then asked it to provide the coefficient for the best fit trend line of cost per kWh for each percent increase in wind and solar penetration. It advised USD0.021 per percent penetration.
I then asked it to forecast the cost of electricity in Australia in 2030 if the Federal Government achieves its 82% target. It forecast USD1.50/kWh. If you think that a 5-fold increase from 2023 to 2030 is ridiculous then you only have to look at the present price increases of around 10% per annum that is making very little difference to the penetration. Also in 2007 you could buy an ounce of gold for AUD1000. Today and ounce of gold takes AUD4,600.
Inflation is rampant In Australia and it is going to get worse unless there is a 180 degree change in course and coal gets back to the front of the energy queue.
15 x 3% =45% reduction
Nobody mentioned that problem
‘Now that the subsidy has run out, the wind farm operators receive only the basic tariff of 3.9 cents per kilowatt hour, thus making the farm unprofitable.’
Euro 0.039 per kWh? I thought electricity was supposed to be expensive in Germany. Right now in CT (second or third highest electricity prices in the US), the ‘standard service rate’ for energy provided by the utility is USD 0.1119 per kWh.
“It has become too unprofitable to operate without massive subsidies.”
I thought that applied to all wind farms.
Unbelivable! Next you will tell me that unicorns don’t exist!
So, how much energy did this wind farm actually generate in its 15 year lifetime? And how much energy was required to build it and now dismantle it? Basically – what was the total EROEI? If it was positive (which I doubt) this should be quoted in terms of the total subsidy to report to German consumers just what they have paid for this political bit of virtue signaling.
I personally don’t care about the CO2 balance because CO2 is plant food for me, but I bet that calculations is negative as well. I don’t know how these turbines were anchored, but you can bet there were tons of concrete involved.
The only way that I psychologically survive looking seaward from shore at my location in New England and seeing a (thickening) forest of turbines is the knowledge that I am staring at the past of a better future, one in which the wind farms here have been dismantled as well.
“Another factor: the older Alpha Venus wind farm is being eclipsed by more modern, more efficient turbines.”
Which also won’t be profitable.
Is anybody privy to the maintenance logs of these offshore wind systems?
Repair records, reliability figures and the like?
What is the ‘uptime’ figure (negating lulls in wind) – is it even ‘two nines’ (99%)?
Does anyone know or is there a report showing how many of those wind turbines are/were still actually operational when this decision was made? Given the environment, I would not be surprised if a significant number were no longer working.
No matter what the price is, the value of non dispatchable energy is likely negative. Nobody would buy this power if it was not mandated by law.
Let me guess what they’re going to replace it with.
Hurrah! The collapse continues, with breathtaking speed
It was a matter of time, and therefore a matter of how much damage was done to ordinary people before these companies and all the other blood suckers were sent packing
Thankfully, although much damage has been done, the preposterous net stupid never really took off in most of the developed world, except for evs, which have also reached the end of the road, pun intended
Witness in the coming months/years many of those who promulgated climate religion in one form or another either undergo fake Damascene conversions or go totally quiet
The UK has a functioning off-shore Windmill Farm that is getting ready to shut down because their subsidies expired.
The UK needs lots of generating capacity.
Why don’t the Climate Alarmists in the UK government propose to continue paying the subsidy to keep this windmill farm online?
It appears they don’t want this windmill farm to continue.
Strange. How does this make sense to a Climate Alarmist? Money is no object? Right? You’re saving the World! Right? Maybe not.
“And when turbines break down offshore, the time required to access, diagnose, and repair them is typically much longer …”
This seems logical, but how many and what type of “break downs” have happened? One, two, or two dozen: Inquiring minds want to know.
30 year life, right?
In the US, some 6000 on-shore WTs have been replaced by 4000 larger ones in the last 28 months. No press notice, of course.
They would rather buy Chinese solar panels made with slave labor in western China and an array of coal fired power plants. The same goes for EVs and batteries made without enviro regulations.
Maybe airdrop leaflets of this news to voters in NJ, NY, MA, RI, and DE.
geez. what is it about salt water, iron, and electricity that just won’t cooperate?
Are there any stats on total cost to build and total energy created?
As a business man these issues are blindingly obvious, right from the get go.. how these projects ever get off the ground is something that amazes me. Clearly there is a lot of lies being told.
More good news, stop building them they are not a substitute for fossil fuel and nuclear. Everybody knows that.
It is the same – at different levels of course – with all off shore generation. It is lunacy and it has to stop.