The European offshore wind space is not living its happiest moments, with ongoing inflationary pressures on the supply chain and weak power prices both contributing to the malaise. This has manifested itself in a number of government tenders either being scrapped or achieving sub-optimal outcomes, and has even led to developers cancelling projects altogether.

Germany’s most recent offshore wind auction at the end of July garnered zero bids, for example, while Orsted in May halted plans for the 2.4 GW Hornsea 4 scheme in the UK. Neither event caused the consternation they would once have done.

Against this backdrop, Chinese offshore wind turbines have been put forward as a silver bullet, with their allegedly more competitive offerings anticipated to re-introduce the business case for otherwise stalled projects. This argument has inevitably stirred up strong feelings around national infrastructure security, amidst broader competition and geopolitical concerns.

However, a closer look at the debate would suggest three things: firstly, that the European offshore industry essentially needs Chinese turbines if it is to stand any chance of reaching installed capacity targets over the coming years and decades, irrespective of cost; secondly, that security concerns are overblown and can be mitigated via a number of means; and thirdly, irrespective of where turbines are sourced from, that European governments, if they have not done so already, urgently need to recalibrate procurement processes to reflect current market realities.

Big goals

Europe’s offshore wind targets are ambitious. While installed capacity stood at 37 GW (split between 15.6 GW in the UK and 21 GW across the EU) as of the end of 2024 the UK alone aims to take installed capacity to over 40 GW by 2030, while the EU has a 60 GW minimum target. Long-term targets dwarf these figures. There is a broad consensus that Europe’s two main OEMs – Siemens Gamesa and Vestas – cannot themselves come close to providing the volume of turbines required to meet this demand.

On the cybersecurity point, those that support the use of Chinese turbines argue that the Scada software that forms a centre point of offshore wind turbine asset management can be installed in Chinese turbines and monitored in Europe itself, with stipulations and guardrails that prevent this data being accessible from other parts of the world.

For Chinese OEMS, agreeing to such measures acknowledges geopolitical sensitivities and trust issues while also opening up a large new export market for its products. And, according to industry players involved in negotiations between European developers and Chinese OEMs, they are listening to these concerns and providing solutions.

“In our experience Chinese OEMs are happy to support turbine data centres and control rooms in the country in which the project is located, and not to transfer data to China. With regards to hardware, Ming Yang, for one, has offered to replace all critical network hardware with equivalent European components to address cyber concerns,” says ABL Group innovation director Tim Camp.

In a sense, flexibility and a hands-off approach is a central tenet of how Chinese OEMs operate in their own market.

“In China, the wind farm owner is typically the owner of all turbine data, and this is only shared with the OEM with its express consent – the Chinese model is in fact more owner friendly,” Camp adds.

What does seem a genuine concern however is that European developers and countries could come to rely too heavily on Chinese supply chain, as doing so could lead to operation and maintenance issues further down the line.

“Western governments raise security concerns about using Chinese turbines but to my understanding it’s more an infrastructure and supply chain concern – that when you have to fix the turbines and source a component you may not be able to get it locally,” says Green Giraffe’s Udo Schneider.

This could become a vulnerability if a European project has to wait a long period of time to secure a replacement part from China, and / or it is prevented from doing so for a prolonged period due to, or as part of, trade disagreements.

Siemens Gamesa’s confirmation in late June that it was exploring the possibility of bringing Chinese magnet and turbine component production to Europe to diversify and strengthen supply chains, was an admission of sorts that more Chinese involvement in the European market is crucial, and such a move could certainly help address supply chain vulnerabilities. Approximately 60% – 70% of the core components used to make Siemens Gamesa and Vestas turbines currently come from China, industry figures say.

There is also support currently for proposals to build a Ming Yang offshore wind turbine manufacturing plant in Scotland, not least because this could help bolster the UK’s chances of meeting its own ambitious offshore wind installation plans over the coming years.

Yet the UK factory, at least, faces opposition, not least from across the Atlantic, with the US’s Trump administration in June reportedly raising national security concerns with the UK government over the plans.

Political backlash

The first European offshore wind project to formally announce that it plans to use Chinese turbines – in this case to be supplied by Ming Yang – is the 230 MW Waterkant Energy project, which was successful in Germany’s August 2023 offshore wind tender and is owned by Hamburg-based fund manager Luxcara. The investor announced it planned to use Ming Yang turbines for the project in July 2024. The backlash it has since received has been intense, and German government opposition does not seem to be going away anytime soon.

Analysis by the German Institute for Defence and Strategic Studies warned that Ming Yang turbines include hundreds of embedded sensors and software that could be remotely accessed, raising fears that China could intentionally delay, disable or manipulate operations—potentially as leverage in geopolitical crises or economic pressure tactics, among other concerns.The deal also led to an outcry from lobbying group WindEurope, which condemned the deal as bad for European clean‑tech competitiveness.

Luxcara had attempted to calm all of these concerns in a carefully worded press release in July last year, flagging its selection of Ming Yang followed an “intensive due diligence exercise, covering the supply chain, ESG compliance aligned with the EU taxonomy and cyber security supported by independent experts from renowned international advisors.”

It also emphasised that “as part of the cooperation, Ming Yang will also bring job opportunities locally to Europe…relevant electrical components of the turbine will be sourced from European sub-suppliers.”

According to market sources, Luxcara’s supply agreement with Ming Yang has a condition that the turbine supplier needs to have opened a manufacturing plant in Europe within two years of Waterkant Energy being commissioned. In addition, Luxcara is understood to have initially based its tender bid for Waterkant around the use of turbines from one of the two main European OEMs, but found that the contract stipulations of the proposed supplier actually placed too much of the geopolitical supply risk on its shoulders. Ming Yang, on the other hand, is believed to have provided a far more benign contract structure with a far greater risk sharing element. Luxcara’s use of Ming Yang turbines is believed to have had far more to do with its contract terms than any price consideration. Its O&M and availability warranties for replacing parts in particular is believed to be far longer than the circa five years purportedly being offered by the European OEMs, for example.

“Chinese OEMs have been making very attractive financial offers to European developers. Although offers are all different, some have offered CAPEX costs at a 50% discount, while other offers are closer to typical European costs but are provided with better conditions, such as reduced maintenance costs or delayed payment terms,” adds Camp, whose company is currently involved in talks between several European developers and Chinese OEMs.

“A lot of offshore wind developers are now looking at the use of Chinese turbines – RWE very publicly went to China on a fact-finding mission last year [June 2024] and many more have done the same privately,” concurs one senior advisor in the European offshore wind space.

The advisor adds: “Chinese solar supply chain was not used in Europe much 10-12 years ago but is now, and there is no reason why it couldn’t be the same for offshore wind.”

Nevertheless, there are still many that raise a note of caution over the use of Chinese turbines, until there is more of an operational track record to draw from, even though others point to the vast fleet of offshore wind turbines now in operation in China.

“Much has been said about the potential cost savings of using Chinese turbines, but it appears there is still a relative lack of data to properly assess how any initial capex savings translate across the whole project life-time,” cautions Watson Farley & Williams senior associate James Fryer.

He adds: “With European OEMs – you could spend more initially but project developers (and their investors and lenders) know what product they are getting over the long-term.”

Floating offshore

Floating offshore wind is one area of the market where Chinese entities could be particularly welcome.

This is not just because overall capex costs in the segment have remained stubbornly high, but also because European OEMs just aren’t focusing on it currently.

“European OEMs don’t appear to be rushing into floating offshore wind in the same way currently, with all the R&D costs, and look to be prioritising optimising fixed bottom offshore projects – this could leave the door open for Chinese players,” Fryer says.

Indeed, Ming Yang is already believed to be in negotiations to supply its turbines to Flotation Energy and Vårgrønn’s Green Volt floating offshore wind project, in addition to other developments. Plans have also been afoot since H2 2024 to set up a Ming Yang components manufacturing plant in Italy to support the Med Wind floating offshore wind project.

“If you’re a developer of a European floating offshore wind project no European OEM will engage with you currently – you’ve got no option but to talk to Chinese OEMs,” Camp concludes.