Challenges of Increasing Wind Turbine Capacity

India crossed 54 GW of installed wind capacity in 2025. After years of slowdown, over 4 GW was added in FY24. New turbines installed today deliver 30–40% more capacity per machine than older fleets. This is a clear recovery. But 2025 was not about whether India can add wind capacity. It is about whether that capacity can deliver power on time and at scale. Over the last few years, a pattern has emerged across Indian wind projects. Capacity moved faster than the system around it. Projects were awarded before evacuation timelines were firm. Higher-capacity turbines were connected to weak grid nodes. Manufacturing scaled in bursts, not in steady cycles. Commissioning slipped even when turbines were ready. This is the execution gap India now needs to close. If wind is to play a larger role in India’s power mix, four things must move together. Auctions must reflect execution readiness. Capacity should be awarded where land access and evacuation are already clear. Grid strength must match modern turbines. Bigger machines push more power through fewer nodes. Grid reinforcement and reactive power planning now matter as much as transmission availability. Manufacturing needs long-term visibility. Stop-start auction volumes increase cost and risk across the domestic supply chain. Operating capability must evolve. Forecasting accuracy, SCADA performance, and grid compliance now directly affect realized returns. At Inox Wind Ltd., our 2026 focus is execution discipline. We are prioritizing grid-ready locations, aligning early with offtakers and utilities, and planning manufacturing around longer-term deployment visibility rather than short auction cycles. India has already proven it can build wind capacity. The next test is converting that capacity into reliable power, on schedule. 2026 should be the year the wind ecosystem starts moving in sync. #windenergy #windpower

As #offshorewind continues to grow globally 🌎, we need to ensure the long-term success of our industry! Recently, I've been reflecting on two concerns: the "arms race" in WTG technology and the auction formats Here’s some food for thought: Over the past 15 years, WTG rated capacity has already more than quadrupled. While this is an amazing technical achievement, bigger is not always better. We need to stop ✋ the race for the next bigger model and instead focus on standardization, industrialization, serial production, and product reliability. A 20+MW machine with a close to 300 meter rotor diameter will have an ripple effect on all aspects of the projects: 👉🏼 foundations will increase in size, which will lead to a need for expanding or building new fabrication facilities, 👉🏼 cranes will need upgrading or even new vessels will need building to install heavier foundations and also larger nacelles at larger hub heights 👉🏼 inter array voltage levels will need to increase to 132kV to allow for a reasonable number of WTGs per string, 👉🏼 learning curves and teething issues will start again as we deploy new technology and equipment All this comes at a time, we’re we need to focus on accelerating 🚀the #energytransition and hence the successful build out of offshore wind. Let’s build a few thousand turbines of a model before moving on to the next! There is no fundamental reason we need a 20MW turbine to be successful right now. On the contrary, there is tremendous opportunity in standardization and modularity to improve efficiency and ultimately reduce costs. Some of the most successful times for offshore wind were when the industry was building similar projects, one after another, with only incremental changes. ❓Siemens Gamesa , Vestas , GE Vernova, I would love to hear your take on this? Auction Formats We overall need less focus on making money 🤑with seabed rights and more focus on mechanisms that ensure that these projects get built and get built quickly! It‘s not helping the businesses case of any of these projects to pay hundreds of millions many years before the first turbine spins and the first kWh is ever produced. Policy makers 🧑⚖️ need to adress this or all their ambitious offshore wind targets are at risk. In line with the aforementioned thoughts on turbine technology and modularity, governments should do the same. Some, potentially bold thoughts: 👉🏼 limit project sizes and the amount one player can win in a single auction to diversify and increase the amount of players able to compete. 👉🏼 reward projects that prove they can be implemented quicker 👉🏼 established bid securities that prevent walking away and intermediate milestones that need to be met to prove continuing project development 👉🏼 integrate sustainability criteria (e.g. maximum CO2 footprint) and system thinking (e.g. project that support wider decarbonization) as award criteria. Smart design can create for win win situations.

Bigger Turbines, Bigger Problems – Let’s Focus on What Works! The race for bigger turbines isn’t just slowing delivery—it’s creating a ripple effect across the entire supply chain. Bigger turbines mean bigger everything: •Installation Vessels: We need larger, more expensive vessels that are in short supply. •Cables: Longer and thicker cables for higher capacities add to the cost and complexity. •Blades and Towers: Manufacturing, transporting, and installing massive blades and towers is becoming a logistical nightmare. The Real Cost of “Bigger” Every time we increase turbine size, we have to scale up the entire ecosystem around it: •Retool factories for larger components. •Build or retrofit installation vessels. •Develop new infrastructure to handle the scale. This doesn’t just slow things down—it makes the entire industry less efficient and more expensive. The Better Path Forward •Stick to Proven Sizes: Focus on turbines that are fully tested and don’t require constant scaling of infrastructure. •Streamline Supply Chains: Use existing vessels, cables, and logistics to deliver more turbines, faster. •Prioritize Delivery Over Size: Meeting renewable energy targets requires volume, not just bigger machines. It’s time to stop chasing bigger turbines and start focusing on what works. What do you think—is it time for the industry to rethink its approach? #OffshoreWind #WindEnergy #RenewableEnergy #CleanEnergy #EnergyTransition #TurbineTechnology #ProvenSolutions #EnergyEfficiency #Sustainability #GreenEnergy #InfrastructureChallenges #NetZero #EnergySecurity #SupplyChainResilience #Innovation #TestedTechnology #ClimateAction

🌍 WTG OEM warranty provisions, driven by failure rates have climbed in line with WTG size growth. Is this something the industry is getting a grip on, or a problem? The rapid growth in size and population of WTGs, the trend towards larger turbines, while promising greater efficiency, has also led to an increase in defects and failures. 🔧 Recent incidents, such as the catastrophic blade failure at Norway's Odal wind farm, highlight the potential for significant, possibly serial, defects in WTGs. These failures aren't isolated; similar issues have been reported globally. 💰 With warranty provisions already weighing heavily on OEM's finances (5.4% of revenues in 2023 compared to 2.8% in 2018), the financial strain is onerous. For SGRE, for instance, this figure jumps to 22% of its annual revenue, underscoring the severity of the problem. ⚖ Maintenance or component replacement, leading to operational disruptions and financial losses are a concern to the reinsurance sector. Insurance policies covering “all risks” are common for project owners and OEMs, ensuring payouts regardless of the loss cause. However, if a defect is identified as the cause, insurers might seek reimbursement from the manufacturers, a process known as subrogation, however, it comes with complexities. 🏗️ The industry's race to introduce new, larger models without adequate reliability engineering has been a key contributor to these issues. It does not take an expert to suggest that a more cautious approach, focusing on quality and standardisation to mitigate risks is a must. However, the pressure from rising interest rates and competition from Chinese OEMs complicates this somewhat. ⚠️ For floating wind projects, the stakes are even higher. Unlike their more common fixed-bottom siblings, floating structures lack in-situ solutions for main component exchange at this moment. Issues such as main bearings requires the whole rotor be taken down to replace it due to the Direct Drive technology .This means any significant repair requires towing the WTG back to port—a process fraught with risks to the turbine, cables, and the limited availability of suitable quaysides. The costs and logistics of such operations are prohibitive. What is positive that this now out in the open and so can be addressed hopefully. If you want to discuss WTGs and where the sector is with main component exchange, OWC's Innovation Director & Head of WTG Engineering Tim Camp will be among the team attending RenewableUK's GOW in Manchester in June. Pop by our booth C34 to catch Tim or our other experts. --------------------------------------- 📞 📧 Contact me or OWC if you want to chat about support for your renewable energy project, investment, or market entry. ➡ Join a community of 5k and subscribe to the loudest, most seriously caffeinated #offshorewind newsletter on LinkedIn 👉🏼 https://lnkd.in/erRNk4MB