Markard_Outsourcing_book_temp.qxd 02/03/2010 15:29 Page 46
Tailwind for Large Investors – Analysing Ownership Structures in Offshore Wind Power
Figure 2: Ownership of Offshore Wind Power in the UK in Terms of Firm Size
Under operation – 2009 Planned capacity – 2010
5%
2%
9%
31%
64% 89%
Large owners Medium-size owners Small owners Large owners Medium-size owners Small owners
Authors’ own data.
Figure 3: Ownership of Offshore Wind Power in the UK in Terms of the Firm’s Origin
Under operation – 2009 Planned capacity – 2010
16%
16%
17%
24%
60% 67%
Electricity supply Gas and oil supply Other sectors Electricity supply Gas and oil supply Other sectors
Authors’ own data.
Table 1: Key Figures for Europe’s Leading Countries in development in Europe, were characterised by the dominance of small,
Offshore Wind Energy
independent wind park owners, including farmers and households
organised through co-operatives or investment funds. Large- or
Offshore Wind Power (MW) Onshore (MW)
medium-sized firms with a background in power or gas/oil supplyOperating Approved Planned (2008)
UK 860 4,000 42,000 2,400
controlled a smaller fraction of the assets (e.g. 13% in Denmark). By
Denmark 630 1,000 2,600
contrast, the onshore market in the UK was characterised by a 60%
The Netherlands 250 3,300 21,000 2,000
Sweden 160 100 6,000 900
share for large owners, mostly from the electricity sector, and another
Germany 70 8,900 19,000 23,800
22% of medium-sized owners. The offshore situation in all three
Others 90 1,100 10,000 32,200
countries was very similar. Large and medium investors dominated the
Total 2,060 17,400 99,000 63,900
scene, most of whom had a background in electricity supply, while
Authors’ own data, 2009. Data were obtained from various sources including national statistics
others were from the gas/oil sector or were active in both fields. Key(e.g. www.ens.dk), Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) reports and the 4C offshore wind database
(www.4coffshore.com).
players included RWE, Dong Energy, E.ON, Vattenfall, Centrica and
offshore wind parks were compared in terms of ownership. We Scottish & Southern. Small owners played a side role in offshore
distinguished firm size (large [>€4 billion turnover or >2,000 projects. In general, the situation we observed in the emerging offshore
employees], medium [>€200 million turnover or >100 employees] or wind power markets is characterised by strong convergence in terms of
small [the remainder]) and core business fields (electricity supply, gas/oil ownership structures. This development takes place irrespective of
supply or other). The reference date was the end of 2007, and offshore established ownership structures for onshore installations. Especially in
data also included planned wind parks that had obtained official the case of Denmark and Germany, therefore, offshore wind power
consent. The findings are summarised below. leads (or will lead) to a major structural shift in the market.
Onshore ownership structures were quite different in the three The reasons for these structural changes of ownership are at least
countries. Denmark and Germany, two pioneers of wind power three-fold. First, regulation has a decisive influence on the wind power
MODERN ENERGY REVIEW VOLUME 2 ISSUE 1
46
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108