Conference programme

Back to the programme printer.gif Print




Delegates are invited to meet and discuss with the poster presenters during the poster presentation sessions between 10:30-11:30 and 16:00-17:00 on Thursday, 19 November 2015.

Lead Session Chair:
Stephan Barth, ForWind - Center for Wind Energy Research, Germany
Frans A. van der Loo LOO e-Consult, The Netherlands
Co-authors:
Frans A. van der Loo (1) F
(1) LOO e-Consult, Leiden, The Netherlands

Share this poster on:

Printer friendly version: printer.gif Print

Presenter's biography

Biographies are supplied directly by presenters at EWEA 2015 and are published here unedited

Frans A. van der Loo joined in 1986 a citizens windpower cooperative and since then he is involved in the implementation of windpower. As an expert at the National Agency for Innovation and Sustainability he managed the (national) Taskforce Windpower Implementation (2000-2005). From 2005 on he joined the Ministry in the national Energytransition-programme, implementing transition-policies and innovation-programmes. Since 2012 he works as an independent consultant (LOO e-Consult), cooperating with the national innovation programme Windpower offshore (TKI-WOZ) and the research programme on ‘Reponsible innovation in windpower offshore’. He is an active member of NWEA, the Netherlands Wind Energy Association.


Poster

Poster Download poster (5.13 MB)

Abstract

Dutch offshore windpower: from impasse to take-off

Introduction

.1. Introduction
In 2005 The Netherlands had no offshore windfarm, no offshore policy and no offshore subsidy. Anno 2015 two windfarms are operating, two being built. A clear political committment and a clear policy trajectory including budget towards 4450 MW in 2023 have been established. The first 700 MW tender is scheduled for end 2015.
What caused this change? And why did it take so long? Dutch offshore windpower presents an interesting case of energytransition.


Approach

.2. Approach
Based on documents and publications and on interviews with stakeholders an analysis has been made of this 10-years period and the social-political process resulting in the present take-off.


Main body of abstract

.3. Transition process
What caused the change and why did it take so long? The answer is: ‘it is not only technology, stupid, it is a transition!’. Windpower development is the result of a societal transition. We will highlight 3 key-features from this Dutch transition process.

Multilevel process
Windpower development is the outcome of a transition process at different levels: macro, meso and micro. At macro level the 10-years period started to be positive for windpower, the Kyoto-treaty came into force (2005) and Al Gore got the Nobel prize (2007). Then the financial crisis broke out (2008), ‘Climate-gate’ tended to discredit windpower and the Copenhagen Climate conference failed to be a success (2009). Fortunately, the EU 20-20-20 goals (2009) and the Fukushima and Energiewende events (2011) created some new window of opportunity and new dynamics. At meso level Dutch windpower had to deal in this period with 5 political coalitions, all different with varying policies, reflecting the varying contexts at macro level. At the end of the period the unease in society about the lack of continuity in energy policy led to a National Energy Agreement (2013), initiated by a citizens initiative (2010). Windpower was made an important cornerstone in the agreement. At micro level offshore windpower became ‘visible’ with the realisation of the first 2 windfarms Egmond aan zee (2006) and Prinses Amalia (2008). The windsector gradually united into one association (NWEA, 2005). All developments at these various levels were closely intermingled.

Political paradigms
A clash of paradigms hampered a quick development of offshore windpower. First the windpower development was driven by a political paradigm of Climate change policy and the urge to implement windpower. With the financial crisis another paradigm took hold. Implementation was considered too expensive, industry policy replaced climate change policy, innovation must lead to costprice-reduction. The windsector operated pragmatically and integrated the two paradigms: innovation ok, but this requires experience in practice. A Green Deal now focuses on both implementation and costprice-reduction.

Windsector getting mature
The windsector itself worked hard to get mature. Offshore windpower got real with the first 2 offshore windfarms. The industry united into NWEA, the Netherlands Windpower Energy Association (2005), and learned to speak with an united voice, gradually NWEA evolved as the (one and only) spokesman for windpower. The wind sector made itself more acceptable to and more accepted by the incumbent energy-regime. As a result, offshore windpower was acknowledged as one of the topsectors of Dutch Innovation policy.


Conclusion

.4. Conclusion
Offshore windpower development is not a matter of technological innovation only, but requires a (societal) transition process. Such a transition process takes time and depends on windows of opportunity.


Learning objectives
.5. Lessons learned
Some lessons learned are :
● Ensure an active windpower policy at all 3 levels, micro, meso and macro. Be ready to take advantage of windows of opportunity;
● Be aware of paradigms in the political process. These could cause impasses. Think as your opponents, act flexible, work out compromises.
● Windsector : do your homework, get united, get strong, get mature.