Copyright shetlandtimes
An investigation into turbine blade faults at the Viking Energy windfarm has posed more questions than answers - leading to renewed accusations of secrecy. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) released a two-sentence statement which attributed the failures on “isolated manufacturing handling issues (outside of the UK)”. It said a full site survey had been undertaken. “Quality improvements have been put into place and the affected blades are being changed and monitoring is ongoing,” the HSE statement concluded. When The Shetland Times asked to see a full copy of the investigation report, the HSE responded: “A report was provided to HSE, but we do not release or publish reports.” Sustainable Shetland’s Frank Hay branded the statement a “fob off”. It leaves many of the same questions unanswered, more than a year after the first blade was damaged. Last October, photos emerged on social media showing part of a blade hanging off. Windfarm operator SSE Renewables disabled the turbine and fenced off the surrounding area to make the site. It took months for specialist contractors to remove debris from the surrounding area. More recently., further failures have been identified and another replacement blade has been transported to the windfarm. SSE and turbine manufacturer Vestas have both declined to say how many blades had been damaged and how they had been disposed of. SSE confirmed only that it had taken delivery of new blade components to fulfil “ongoing operational maintenance activities” at the windfarm and that work was carried out by a specialist contractor under police escort. The SIC’s environment and transport chairwoman Moraig Lyall previously said she would encourage SSE to “share what information they can” after concerns were raised about the blades. Sustainable Shetland’s Frank Hay also questioned why SSE could not be “honest” about it instead of issuing “vague statements” about operational activity. The HSE is the national regulator into workplace health and safety and says it is dedicated to protecting people and places, and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives. But its failure to provide more detail means questions about how many blades were damaged, where the “isolating manufacturing issues” occurred and what “quality improvements” had been put in place remain unanswered. Do you want to respond to this article? If so, click here to submit your thoughts and they may be published in print.
