The financial cost of decades of climate inaction and the risks inherent in rushing to catch up were laid bare on Monday when a German industrial giant forecast a jaw-dropping 4.5 billion euro (US$4.9 billion) annual loss.
Siemens Energy AG’s woes stem chiefly from technical problems with a new generation of onshore wind turbines. Wind power is vital to cutting carbon emissions, and the industry has raced to launch bigger and more powerful machines.
However, the Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy SA wind business moved too fast and has now discovered abnormal vibrations arising from blades and bearings which might have to be replaced.
While the affected models represent only 4 percent of its installed fleet, the direct costs of rectifying the problems are estimated at 1.6 billion euros. The company faces further unexpected costs related to ramping up production of offshore turbines, as well as unfavorable tax effects. Bernstein Research analyst Nicholas Green has evocatively dubbed the problems “Turbinegeddon.”
The wind industry should be flying high but instead is entrapped by a cornucopia of troubles. Projects are too often held up by red tape and NIMBYism, while contracts signed years ago have become onerous due to material and logistics cost inflation. Chinese companies that dominate their home market are looking increasingly to expand overseas, pressuring pricing.
An even bigger concern is that powerful new turbines might prove unreliable — small component irregularities can cause turbines to malfunction. The rotors of a high-spec onshore model span 170 meters and a nacelle (the central structure) can weigh several hundred tonnes (the latest offshore turbine designs are even larger). Needless to say, it is not straightforward to repair massive equipment high above the ground and compensate wind park owners for forgone electricity production. Though Siemens Energy might be able to recoup some money from subcontractors and suppliers, most of the financial risks often lie with the manufacturer.
Vestas Wind Systems A/S and General Electric Co have had their own warranty issues, but one cannot necessarily conclude the entire industry has a problem. Gamesa has many homemade issues: The business has had six leadership changes in as many years, Bernstein says. Oversight of its supply chain and communication about potential issues seem to have been lacking.
Regrettably, the latest problems became apparent only after Siemens Energy completed a 4 billion euro buyout of Gamesa’s minority investors in December last year, thus ensuring even more of the financial risk accrued to itself (For its part, German engineering giant Siemens AG is looking to reduce its part ownership of Siemens Energy; for now it owns a 32 percent stake, spread across the company and its pension arm).
Siemens Energy is fortunate the rest of its activities — comprising things like gas turbines and electricity-grid connections — are performing well. The cash impact of fixing the technical issues would also be spread over several years. Management ruled out raising equity.
However, turbine manufacturers might decide they need to raise prices and move more slowly to avoid similar issues. Siemens Energy is being more selective about order intake and has delayed turbine deliveries until it can get to the bottom of the current problems. Management has also vowed to “put stability and profitability first before growth.”
These events might also push up wind companies’ cost of capital amid lingering fears that problems with more turbines would arise — Siemens Energy has shed more than 6 billion euros of market value since the issues were first revealed in June.
These effects tend to hold back the energy transition just at the moment we need it to speed up. It is the kind of thing that happens when you ignore a massive problem (climate change) for decades and then race to catch up.
Chris Bryant is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering industrial companies in Europe. Previously, he was a reporter for the Financial Times. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS