Elsevier

Energy Policy

Volume 35, Issue 12, December 2007, Pages 6431-6444
Energy Policy

Technological learning in offshore wind energy: Different roles of the government

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.08.011Get rights and content

Abstract

Offshore wind energy is a promising source of renewable electricity, even though its current costs prevent large-scale implementation. Technological learning has improved the technology and its economic performance already, and could result in significant further improvements. This study investigates how technological learning takes place in offshore wind energy and how technological learning is related to different policy regimes. Offshore wind energy developments in Denmark and the United Kingdom have been analysed with a technology-specific innovation systems approach. The results reveal that the dominant forms of learning are learning by doing and learning by using. At the same time, learning by interacting is crucial to achieve the necessary binding elements in the technology-specific innovation system. Generally, most learning processes were performed by self-organizing entities. However, sometimes cultural and technical barriers occurred, excluding component suppliers and knowledge institutes from the innovation system. Danish policies successfully anticipated these barriers and removed them; therefore, the Danish policies can be characterized as pro-active. British policies shaped stable conditions for learning only; therefore, they can be characterized as active. In the future, barriers could hinder learning by interacting between the oil and gas industry, the offshore wind industry and academia. Based on this study, we suggest national and international policy makers to design long-term policies to anticipate these barriers, in order to contribute to technological learning.

Introduction

Wind energy is a renewable energy source and therefore can contribute to a more sustainable energy supply. A problem associated with traditional onshore wind energy is lack of area for the production of clean electricity. In densely populated countries, the visual impact and sound of turbines hinders the society's accepting of a larger scale implementation of onshore wind energy (Redlinger et al., 2001). Harvesting wind energy offshore can be a solution to this problem and can bring us a step closer towards a sustainable electricity supply. From a global perspective, especially in the densely populated countries around the North Sea, the offshore wind resource in shallow waters is enormous. The United Kingdom, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark together have enough technical potential to accommodate 114 GW of offshore wind energy (CA-OWEE, 2001).

The main barriers to the successful implementation of offshore wind energy are its currently high costs (Verrips et al., 2005). The benefits of an offshore wind project do not always outweigh the costs yet. However, as Junginger (2005) points out, technological learning in the recent past has improved the economics of offshore projects significantly, and it is likely to continue doing so in the future. This makes technological learning an interesting phenomena for society and policy makers, as it could change the outlook for offshore wind energy as a contribution to a sustainable electricity supply.

There is already significant knowledge about technological learning from other studies. Experience curve theory shows how the costs of technology generally decrease with its implementation (BCG, 1968). At the same time, discontinuities—e.g. because of radical innovations or unforeseen circumstances—can seriously disturb a ride down the experience curve (IEA, 2000) and make learning trajectories unpredictable (Kash and Rycroft, 2002). In a number of industries these discontinuities have been explained by finding out in detail how technological learning takes place. In other words, the ‘black box’ of technological learning has been opened by describing which actors learn, about which subjects they learn and how they do so. For onshore wind energy, several studies have attempted to realize this, for instance, Kamp (2002), Klaassen et al. (2005) and Agnolucci (2007).

Offshore wind energy is rather different from onshore wind energy. The accessibility of the installations is far more difficult, the environment is much more harmful due to higher wind speeds, waves and, for instance, salty conditions, the farm size is generally larger, as is the maximum size of the turbines, and the market size is currently still smaller than the onshore market size. Although we have quite some knowledge about how learning takes place in onshore wind energy, for offshore wind energy we are uncertain about how learning processes take place precisely. Scientific data are limited. For instance, Andersen and Drejer (2005) provide a brief insight into how learning takes place in offshore wind energy, focussing mainly on user–supplier relations. In order to explain cost reductions in offshore wind energy, we need to have more information on technological learning also in the industry of offshore wind energy.

The objective of this study is to open the black box of technological learning in offshore wind energy further, to provide insights for policy makers how to stimulate technological learning more effectively and efficiently. This study will answer two main questions. The first question is how technological learning takes place in offshore wind energy. The second question is how policies can foster technological learning. After this introductory section, Section 2 will discuss relevant theories. This results in a case study method in Section 3, proposing a case study of the Danish and British history. Section 4 presents the results from these cases and also discusses future trends. Section 5 describes the conclusions and discussion. Finally, Section 6 provides recommendations.

Section snippets

Theory

Innovation and learning are typically activities that take place in systems (Lundvall, 1992). Systems of innovation consist of actors/agents, the relations between them and institutions (Kern, 2000). Actors can be persons as well as organizations. Relations enable interaction between the actors. Institutions are sets of ‘common habits, routines, established practices, rules, or laws that regulate the relations and interactions between individuals and groups’ (Edquist and Johnson, 1997). One can

Method

To answer our research questions, we will take a case study approach. The cases of Denmark and the UK have been selected, for a number of reasons. First of all, these countries represent the vast majority of all worldwide realized offshore wind projects. Second, Denmark has been the frontrunner of offshore wind energy, and a large share of the worldwide offshore wind energy industry is located in Denmark. The UK holds the promise to develop into a big market in the future, but hardly has an

Results

This section consists of three sub-sections. We will start with describing the performance of the TSIS's in Denmark and the UK in Section 4.1. Next, we deal with policies and learning in Denmark and the UK in 4.2 Policies and learning in Denmark, 4.3 Policies and learning in the UK, respectively. Finally, based on our observations, we will design an outlook in Section 4.4. This will provide challenges for policies and learning in the future.

Conclusion and discussion

In this section, we will return to the research questions. The first question is how technological learning takes place in offshore wind energy. Basically, our observations in Denmark and the UK show that both TSIS's consist of mainly self-organizing entities. Turbine manufacturers, project operators, component suppliers and knowledge institutes have succeeded mainly independently in developing technology towards its current performance. The most important ways of learning were learning by

Recommendations and outlook

Based on our findings, we can formulate an advice to policy makers, taking into account the remarks in the previous discussion. The first lesson policy makers may take on board from this study is to establish stable and long-term policy regimes in order to stimulate technological learning. This conclusion is in line with the major conclusion of Negro (2007) resulting from her research on the development of a biomass energy TSIS. Both the Danish and British regimes have been relatively

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs for funding the study and providing guidance. In particular, we would like to thank Klaas-Jan Koops and Imar Doornbos for their input. Next, we would like to thank Shell WindEnergy for offering an internship placement in the business of offshore wind energy to the first author. Besides, we would like to thank all respondents to the interviews, especially Theo de Lange and Jos Beurskens (ECN), Per Dannemand Andersen (Risø) and Gijs van

References (74)

  • J.S. Brown et al.

    Organizing knowledge

    California Management Review

    (1998)
  • International Wind Energy Development. World Market Update 2000

    (2001)
  • International Wind Energy Development. World Market Update 2005

    (2006)
  • J. Buen

    Danish and Norwegian wind industry: the relationship between policy instruments, innovation and diffusion

    Energy Policy

    (2007)
  • Offshore Wind Energy. Ready to Power a Sustainable Europe

    (2001)
  • B. Carlsson et al.

    On the nature, function and composition of technological systems

    Journal of Evolutionary Economics

    (1991)
  • Personal conversation with Mr. Aidan Cronin, Vestas

    (2006)
  • P. Dannemand Andersen

    Sources of experience: theoretical considerations and empirical observations from Danish wind energy technology

    International Journal of Energy and Technology and Policy

    (2004)
  • Dannemand Andersen, P., 2006. Personal conversation with Mr. Per Dannemand Andersen, Risø, Roskilde, Denmark, 2 June...
  • Action Plan for Offshore Wind Farms in Danish Waters

    (1997)
  • Offshore Wind Power. Danish Experiences and Solutions

    (2005)
  • De Lange, T., 2006. Personal conversation with Mr. Theo de Lange, ECN Wind. Wieringermeer, 18 May...
  • The Social Effects of Energy Liberalisation. The UK Experience

    (2000)
  • Future Offshore. A Strategic Framework for the Offshore Wind Industry

    (2002)
  • De Bruijne, R., Van Grootheest, W., Iepsma, J., 2006. Instrumentarium duurzame elektriciteit. Onderdeel van het project...
  • C. Edquist et al.

    Institutions and organizations in systems of innovation

  • Prioritising Wind Energy Research. Strategic Research Agenda of the Wind Energy Sector

    (2005)
  • Enabling Offshore Wind Developments

    (2002)
  • M. Heymann

    Signs of Hubris: the shaping of wind technology styles in Germany, Denmark, and the United States, 1940–1990

    Technology and Culture

    (1998)
  • Hjelmsted, P., 2006. Personal conversation with Mr. Per Hjelmsted Pedersen, Energi E2. Copenhagen, 1 June...
  • A. Hoogerwerf et al.

    Overheidsbeleid—een inleiding in de beleidswetenschap (Governmental Policies—An Introduction into Political Sciences)

    (1998)
  • Experience Curves for Energy Technology Policy

    (2000)
  • Offshore Wind Experiences

    (2005)
  • IEA, 2006. IEA Wind Energy Annual Report 2005. International Energy Agency,...
  • Jørgensen, 2006. Personal conversation with Mrs. Maria Jørgensen, Danish Energy Authority. Copenhagen, 1 June...
  • Junginger, M., 2005. Learning in renewable energy technology development. Doctoral Thesis. Promotor W.C. Turkenburg,...
  • M. Junginger

    Unpublished Data on Offshore Wind Energy Projects

    (2006)
  • Cited by (51)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text