Innovation and institutional change: the transition to a sustainable ...

Stability and transformation in the electricity system 107
it lacked experience and commitment, and was not part of R&D networks
involved in wind energy development;
– Although ambitious policy goals were set (in 1985 a 1000 MW target for
2000), and R&D was supported, measures were mainly of a top-down
nature, and not accompanied by implementation strategies and market
incentives (subsidies were based on installation of capacity and not on
yield, thus giving no incentive for performance);
– Pay back tariffs for electricity delivered to the grid were low relative to
other countries (in 1994 55% of consumer electricity prices compared to
85% in Germany, 142% in Denmark and 189% in the UK) (Wolsink,
1996);
– Efforts were concentrated at developing technology and industry and not
on developing local involvement, networks and institutional frameworks
for the developing appropriate sites and implementing wind power at the
local level.
The development of a wind farm in Sexbierum
After the first wind program had resulted in the development of several prototypes of wind
turbines the second wind program was focussed on first application in electricity
generation. The focus was on large scale application of wind energy, and in the beginning
of the eighties it was decided to develop a demonstration wind farm of 18 wind turbines
with a total capacity of 5.4 MW. The experiences of this wind farm would serve as a basis
for recommendations regarding the integration of wind capacity in the electricity system
(SEP, 1983: 7). The importance of the exploration and design of the wind farm was
particularly stressed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, and the Ministry decided to give
SEP the leading role 36 (Verbong, 1999: 150). At that time this was the largest application
of wind turbines in the Netherlands. SEP was involved under the condition that
government would finance half of the construction costs. Although SEP expected that wind
turbines would not give large technical problems, operation of the wind farm led to
unforeseen problems. The strong vibrations and the nature of wind as an unstable source
hampered scaling up of the wind turbines (De Keijzer, 2000). Variability of wind and the
fact that wind turbines are switched off above certain wind velocity led to variable power
supply with extra demands on the control of thermal power capacity (SEP, 1983: 14). Also
the wind turbines chosen were prototypes of newly designed turbine types and hardly
tested, leading to technological problems and poor performance (Verbong, 1999: 154). In
1986 construction of the wind park started, the park became operational in 1988. Initially,
it was expected that wind power could replace around 20% of the conventional base load
capacity, based on the experiences this was revised downwards to 16.5%. The negative
experiences ended SEP’s involvement in wind energy.
36 According to Verbong (1999: 150) the reason for this transfer was unclear. “SEP (…) had
little experience with wind turbines and was certainly not in the wind advocates’ camp, to
put it mildly. In fact, SEP (…) was at that time the main nuclear energy supporter.
Moreover, because of the autonomous position of the electricity sector’s institutions and
subsequent ‘monopolistic’ behaviour, relations between the sector and other research
institutions and with industry were at times strained”.