Linda M. Kamp

Notions on learning applied to wind turbine development in the Netherlands and Denmark

Abstract This research investigates how methods of learning influenced the emerging wind power industries in the Netherlands and Denmark. It is found that the manufacturing and implementation successes in Denmark contrast with the relatively poor progress in the Netherlands, and that one of the reasons for this is the contrast in learning mechanisms between the countries. We start from the perspective of innovation systems. Within these systems we place the focus on four types of learning processes: learning by searching, learning by doing, learning by using and learning by interacting. It is concluded that in Denmark, learning by interacting was the most important learning process, while in the Netherlands it was learning by searching. The Dutch wind turbine innovation system was a typical ‘science-push’ innovation system. The aim was to develop large wind turbines at a fast pace, based on the results of scientific research. Because of the lack of contacts between the researchers and the wind turbine producers, the implementation of the research results was problematic. Contrarily, in Denmark the focus was on knowledge transfer between turbine producers, turbine owners and researchers. In this innovation system, conditions for learning by interacting were optimal. In this way, wind turbines were successfully, though slowly, scaled up and improved.

Socio-technical analysis of the introduction of wind power in the Netherlands and Denmark

Why was Denmark more successful in the introduction of wind power than the Netherlands? In this paper, we analyse both development processes. Our analytical framework consists of a combination of the socio-technical systems approach, which points at the importance of the openings that must be present at both the niche level: the regime level and the landscape level, for an innovation to be successful, and the innovation system approach. From this latter approach, we use the insight of functions that an innovation system needs to fulfil to be successful: entrepreneurial activities, knowledge development, knowledge diffusion, guidance of the search, market formation, resources mobilisation and support from advocacy coalitions. The socio-technical system viewpoint reveals the importance of explanatory factors outside the wind power innovation system. The function approach points at detailed explanatory factors within the wind power innovation system. We end with a discussion on our analytical framework and policy recommendations.

Wind turbine development 1973-2000: A critique of the differences in policies between the Netherlands and Denmark

In the 1970s, the Netherlands and Denmark both initiated policies to stimulate the development of wind energy. However, the results of these policies are very different. In Denmark, a flourishing wind industry exists nowadays, whereas in the Netherlands only one wind turbine producer remains. Furthermore, the total wind turbine capacity installed in Denmark by 2001 (2,340 MW) was five times greater than in the Netherlands. This paper investigates the differences between the wind energy policies in the Netherlands and Denmark, in particular the learning processes: Do the different learning processes explain the difference in success between the wind energy policies? The main conclusions are that, in the Netherlands ‘learning-by-searching’ (or R&D) was stimulated far more than in Denmark, whereas in Denmark ‘learning-by-using’ and ‘learning-by-interacting’ were far more important than in the Netherlands. The strong emphasis on learning-by-searching in the Netherlands resulted in a large amount of scientific research and a good international position of the Dutch wind energy researchers. However, the results of this research were little used by the Dutch wind turbine producers. In Denmark, the domestic market was larger and better organised than in the Netherlands, because at an early stage in Denmark, subsidies for wind turbine purchasers were available. Many contacts existed between the turbine owners, the turbine producers and the wind energy research institute Risø. Due to these contacts, much information was exchanged, which enabled the wind turbine producers to improve their products. Furthermore, because of these good contacts, the reputation of wind energy within Danish society was better than in the Netherlands, which resulted in less difficulty regarding turbine siting. These differences are important reasons for the difference in success between the Dutch and the Danish wind energy policies.

Danish and Dutch wind energy policy 1970–2000: lessons for the future

Both in the Netherlands and in Denmark, policies to develop a wind turbine industry and to install a large wind turbine capacity were started in the 1970s. However, the outcomes of these policies were very different. A flourishing wind turbine industry developed in Denmark, whereas in the Netherlands, a few companies started building wind turbines in the 1980s and 1990s, but presently no wind turbine producers exist. How can this difference be explained? A number of factors can be pinpointed. The main factors are the following: firstly, different technological choices were made; secondly, different policies were introduced for wind turbine owners in both countries; thirdly, the opinion of the utilities regarding wind energy in both countries was very different. Nowadays, both countries are focusing on offshore wind energy. The policy measures that are introduced and the technical choices that are made are path dependent. In other words, they follow from the policy measures and the technical choices in the past. How can the mistakes that were made in the past be avoided and what lessons can be learned for the future? We will elaborate on that in this paper.

Niche Strategies to Introduce Kite-Based Airborne Wind Energy

Kite-based airborne wind energy systems are new high-tech systems that provide sustainable wind energy. Instead of using a wind turbine, these systems use a kite to generate energy. Commercializing such new high-tech systems is a risky strategy, the failure rate is high. This chapter identifies barriers that block large-scale diffusion of kite-based airborne wind energy systems and specific niche strategies to deal with these barriers. The results are based upon literature research and interviews with six academic and industry experts active in the field of airborne wind energy. We identified the most important barriers to large-scale implementation of airborne wind energy. We show how particular barriers, such as the lack of knowledge of the technology and the lack of support and investment opportunities, interact and together block large-scale production and diffusion. The second result is that several niche strategies can be identified to tackle the barriers in this field. The “geographic niche strategy”, the “demo, experiment and develop niche strategy” and the “educate niche strategy” are identified as good strategies to introduce the kite-based systems. The chapter ends with a discussion of these niche strategies and how they relate to previous research into introduction of sustainable energy technologies.

Obstacles to and Facilitators of the Implementation of Small Urban Wind Turbines in the Netherlands

In this chapter, we combine the ‘functions of innovation systems’ approach and the ‘socio-technical systems’ approach. We first consider whether seven functions of the innovation system surrounding the technology have been fulfilled: market formation, entrepreneurial activity, knowledge creation, knowledge diffusion, mobilisation of resources, presence of advocacy coalitions, and guidance of the search. We then investigate the availability of a ‘space’ for this new niche technology within the incumbent energy system. We apply our framework to the development and implementation of small urban wind turbines in the Netherlands in the period 2000–2007. We show that critical functions, such as knowledge diffusion and market formation, were underdeveloped and that serious bottlenecks were present in the incumbent energy system. Based on this case study, we formulate implications for collaboration and for policy makers.