Article in a snapshot:

• Repowering vs decommissioning: two very different paths for risk
• How governments, policy, and geopolitics shape a wind project’s risk profile
• What ageing wind fleets reveal about insurance and risk
• Circularity in wind and reusing components
• Expert insight from Raza Hassan, Brit: how we see EoL wind risk evolving
• End-of-life risk is everywhere, but brokers can help shape a sustainable future
  
  
  

As the renewable energy transition accelerates, much of the conversation still focuses on building new wind farms and expanding capacity. To help with today’s insight, we caught up with our Renewable Energy Underwriter Raza Hassan to get his expert view on this exciting new chapter for wind. 

What is less visible, but increasingly important, is what happens to the wind assets that were built a decade or more ago. Many of the first onshore and offshore projects are now approaching the end of their original design lives; typically, around 20 years.

For your role as a broker, this marks a shift in the risk landscape. End-of-life is no longer a distant consideration. It is a present and growing issue that will shape how wind portfolios perform, how losses emerge, and how insurance programmes need to be structured.

In practical terms, end-of-life refers to the point where an asset must either have its life extended, be repowered, or be fully decommissioned. Raza explains: “The wind farms that existed 10 years ago are drastically different from the ones being built today. They’re running older technology that’s become obsolete and in some cases isn’t even manufactured anymore. Early turbines were smaller, built on older designs and fitted with protection systems that have since evolved. Lightning protection, storm resilience and monitoring capabilities have all improved significantly.” In many cases, components for older turbines are no longer manufactured, making repairs slower and more uncertain.

From an insurance perspective, this creates a different risk profile. Ageing assets tend to fail more frequently, take longer to repair and carry greater uncertainty around parts and maintenance. There is also a higher likelihood that legacy sites have seen reduced investment as owners prioritise newer, higher-yield projects.

For you, this is more than a technical detail. It creates an opportunity to move beyond placement and into lifecycle risk advice, helping clients address end-of-life exposure before it turns into a claims issue.

Repowering vs decommissioning:
two very different paths for risk

When a wind asset approaches the end of its design life, your clients are typically faced with two options: repowering or decommissioning. While both aim to manage ageing infrastructure, they introduce very different risk, cost and operational considerations. 

For onshore wind, repowering is often the preferred route. Operators remove older turbines and replace them with modern machines that can generate several times more power, often reusing existing foundations and cabling. This approach improves output and supports climate targets without the need to build entirely new sites. However, it also raises important underwriting questions:

• Existing foundations may not have been designed for higher loads
• Local grids may not be able to absorb increased output
• Changes in turbine size can trigger new permitting requirements or community opposition

Each of these factors affects timelines, budgets and ultimately insurability. 

Offshore, the picture is more complex. Installation and decommissioning rely on a small number of specialist vessels that are in high demand and often booked years in advance. Operations take place in harsher environments and must be tightly controlled. Offshore owners are often left to choose between either life-extension measures or full decommissioning followed by redevelopment on the same prime wind locations.

Raza gives his view why offshore is more complex; “You’re operating in water, vessels are already stretched installing new wind farms, and taking assets off in a controlled way is far more difficult.” The scale of change is significant. Early offshore projects in the UK produced only a few megawatts in total, while modern sites now deploy individual turbines capable of generating around 14 megawatts each.

The key point is that repowering and decommissioning are not simply engineering decisions. They represent distinct risk stories that influence construction exposure, operational risk, environmental liability and the structure of insurance programmes.

What ageing wind fleets reveal about insurance and risk

As the wind sector matures, new insurance challenges are emerging. Older turbines often rely on technology that is now obsolete, with spare parts that are difficult or impossible to source. Many lack modern lightning protection or storm resilience features. Maintenance budgets may also have been quietly redirected toward newer assets that generate higher returns. 

Raza notes the risks associated with existing wind farm sites changing operators; “We’re seeing a lot of acquisitions where companies buy older wind farms and suddenly inherit assets that haven’t been looked after in the same way as their own fleet.”

“Before you know it, they’ve picked up a group of assets that are harder to maintain, don’t have spare parts available, and create knock-on problems for both the client and the insurer.”

Historically, many clients approached the insurance market late in the process, after major planning decisions had already been made. That often resulted in higher premiums or more restrictive terms because key risk mitigation measures had not been built in from the outset. This is where you can add significant value. By engaging earlier, you can help clients set realistic timelines, maintain older assets properly and plan clearly for end-of-life strategies long before placement or renewal discussions begin.

Expert insight from Raza Hassan,
Brit: how we see EoL wind risk evolving

Brit has been investing time in understanding how end-of-life risk is reshaping the wind market, including active participation in industry forums. Our Renewable Energy Underwriter Raza Hassan recently joined WindEurope to build our insight into major wind projects across Europe. This approach reflects a focus on anticipating change rather than reacting to it. 

From an underwriting perspective, regional differences matter. As Raza explains, “Germany’s growth in renewable energy last year came 33% from repowering, not new installations. They went back to old sites, upgraded them, and generated around 30% more power from those locations alone. Italy repowered its entire fleet because it had started from older technology, while in France you see physical constraints on turbine size even though power output can still increase.”

Claims experience also plays a central role in shaping expectations. “These are lessons we’ve learned by paying claims to our clients,” Raza notes. “We’ve seen issues consistently come up, so now when projects come to market, we’re looking for evidence that those mitigation steps have been built in from the start.”

Encouragingly, there has been a shift in how projects engage with insurers. “Historically, clients would often come to the insurance market late in the process, only to find cover was expensive or restrictive. What’s changed, and it’s a positive shift, is that more projects are now engaging insurers right from the planning stage.”

For you, this reinforces the importance of early dialogue. Sharing underwriting expectations with clients at the planning stage helps avoid surprises and supports more resilient project design.

How governments, policy, and geopolitics shape a wind project’s risk profile

While there are common frameworks across Europe, national energy strategies have a significant influence on how repowering and end-of-life decisions are made;

For you, this means that where a project is located matters just as much as what it is built with. Local regulation, grid capacity and political priorities all influence project timelines, technology choices and how insurers assess risk.

Circularity in wind and reusing components

Early wind projects focused primarily on generating clean power, with limited consideration for what happens to turbines and foundations at the end of their life. That is changing quickly. Landfill bans for turbine blades are emerging in parts of Europe, encouraging operators to explore alternative solutions. 

New recycling and reuse pathways are developing. Blades are being processed for use in lower-carbon cement. Steel from towers and foundations is being recycled into new structures. Components are even being repurposed for infrastructure such as bridges, car parks and building façades. As these supply chains mature, costs reduce and testing standards improve.

For you, circularity is no longer just an ESG consideration. It is becoming part of the core risk conversation. How a client plans to dismantle, reuse or recycle assets will increasingly influence underwriting decisions and market perception. Raza is positive in his outlook on how things are changing; "As soon as you set up these new recycling supply chains, the cost of doing this comes down significantly. If works align with regulation, it quickly becomes the norm". The industry is moving toward a more circular model, and end-of-life planning is a central part of that shift.

End-of-life risk is everywhere, but brokers can help shape a sustainable future

End-of-life risk in wind energy will only become more prominent as portfolios age. Repowering, decommissioning and circularity are not fringe topics. They are central to how wind assets perform over the long term. 

By understanding these dynamics, you are better placed to explain underwriting expectations, anticipate coverage challenges and position yourself as a long-term partner to clients navigating the energy transition. At Brit, we are committed to supporting that role through early engagement, technical insight and collaboration.

As wind energy enters its defining decade, looking beyond new build and planning for the full asset lifecylce will be essential. Toegether, we can help ensure that the future of wind is not only renewable, but truly sustainable from installation through to end of life. Raza gives his view on why end-of-life consideration shapes a sustainable future; "If you plan properly from the start, you can double or even triple output from exisiting infrastructure while reducing disruption and long-term risk."

To learn more, visit our renewable energy page.