Framing the case
“Imagine you’re a chef who’s just acquired a new kitchen appliance. The first thing you’d do is ensure your next recipe can actually be prepared with it,” explains Thomas Hjort, Director of Innovation in Offshore Wind at Vattenfall, when describing how they formulated the question for the What if Lab. “This was our first time collaborating with the design field, so we needed to present a case that fit within the lab’s scope while also contributing to a world where dismantling a wind farm leaves no footprint behind.” This approach resulted in four very different concepts.
From turbine to tiny house
“We immediately knew we wanted to work with the nacelle—the housing that encloses the machinery at the top of a wind turbine,” says Jos de Krieger, architect at Superuse. “We asked ourselves: what is the most technically complex thing we could create using the nacelle? We landed on a home for permanent living. If that’s possible, then any other function should be feasible too.” To develop the concept for this tiny house, the studio delved into Dutch building regulations. De Krieger explains: “What are the requirements for daylight and insulation? Can a kitchen and bathroom fit inside? The details matter.”
Nestle
Following the concept presentation of the tiny house, Vattenfall asked whether one could actually be built for Dutch Design Week 2024. In response, Superuse brought in its sister company, Blade-Made. “We developed Nestle: a prototype that offers a tangible experience of how a Vestas V80 nacelle can function as a home with a living space of around 25m²,” says Jos de Krieger. “Achieving this within just a few months was truly remarkable.” Hjort adds: “The nacelle attracted a disproportionate amount of attention compared to the other three concepts. However, this was a fantastic opportunity to bring the wind turbine closer to the wider public.”
A vision for 2050
Studio Carbon took a strategic approach to the challenge. “Rather than focusing solely on today’s recycling issues, we took a step back and envisioned a bold, green future for 2050,” explains Itika Gupta, founder and CEO. “Everyone wants to live in a net-zero world, but it’s often difficult to picture what actions we need to take today to make that a reality in 25 years.” To translate this ideal 2050 narrative into a practical, action-driven plan, Studio Carbon developed a backcasting toolkit. This card game helps Vattenfall engage with stakeholders, breaking down the long-term circular vision into concrete, step-by-step goals to make it achievable.
Cultural Background
The international approach of Studio Carbon—operating from both the Netherlands and India—brought a different cultural lens to the challenge. Hjort explains: “At Vattenfall, we design the way we live: a wind turbine is ‘born,’ operates for about thirty years, and then ‘dies’ when it is dismantled. In India, the perspective is one of an eternal cycle, where what you contribute in life continues beyond your own existence. The same applies to a wind turbine.” Gupta adds: “Staying true to our identity as a systems-thinking studio naturally led us to our concept. That loyalty to your own strengths and character is something I would wholeheartedly recommend to all future What if Lab participants.”
Thanks to the synergy between the four studios, we were able to explore the full scope of the challenge.
Vattenfall was searching for a goldmine—for value. That value lies not only in the wind turbine as a source of raw materials but also in the collective power of design.
Extra space with floating islands
One of the key focuses of Vattenfall’s case was re-use rather than recycling. This emphasis on maximum sustainability led architecture firm Cepezed to explore a second life for turbine blades. Architect Jaspers Manders explains: “The unique properties of rotor blades—their length, lightweight structure, strength, and hollow shape—inspired us to create floating islands. By connecting multiple decommissioned blades in their original form, we can build modular floating platforms.” In a small country like the Netherlands, where land is scarce, and sea levels are rising, these floating structures could provide much-needed additional space. They could be used for housing, agriculture, greenhouses, or even solar farms.
Floating test
“Even though you know in advance that the blades will float, you don’t know how they’ll do it,” says Manders. In response, Vattenfall proposed a floating test. At the Flevokusthaven near Lelystad, two connected 33-metre blades formed a small island. Hjort explains: “It took quite a bit of effort to organise: finding a suitable piece of water, arranging mobile cranes and a low-loader for transportation, securing a rescue boat with a diver, and so on.” The test was eventually carried out just before Dutch Design Week. Manders adds: “It was great to see the blades in the water, even though it was quite late in the process. We would have liked to have included the findings from that day in our presentation at the Ketelhuisplein.”
Artistic biography
Interactivist approached the case in an artistic and emotional way. Experience designer Chris Kievid explains: “Before starting a conversation about recycling, upcycling, and repurposing, it’s important that the general public can see the beauty of a wind turbine, not just the shadow flicker or noise. Each turbine produces a unique dataset in terms of energy production and blade rotation, telling its own story.” Kievid, along with colleague Lars van Vianen, translated this data into data paintings—artistic biographies that allow turbines to live on even after they are dismantled. Through these data paintings, the creators hope to evoke more sympathy for wind turbines.
Wide applicability
Interactivist’s method of translating data into paintings is not limited to wind turbines. Kievid explains: “We have further developed our approach and presented data paintings at international exhibitions and interior design fairs.” In this way, the studio can expand the reach of its output from the What if Lab. For many participants, a significant portion of the hours invested is at their own expense. Gupta, who took part for the fourth time, says: “While studios initially participate to build their portfolios, What if Lab now attracts established firms with senior designers. The programme has proven its value for both designers and clients, and the compensation should better reflect that.”
Availability of information
One obstacle that nearly all the designers encountered was the availability of information. De Krieger explains: “When you bring a case about upcycling wind turbines, you can expect questions about data, dimensions, and manuals. Vattenfall could have anticipated this in advance, but the information either didn’t come through or was only made available quite late.” Studio Carbon also faced this challenge. Gupta adds: “It highlights the closed nature of the industry. Of course, much of this information is sensitive due to competition, but if you want to bring about significant change, the sector needs to be more open. There should be no competition for achieving a sustainable world.”
What I’m really happy about is that we didn’t approach this lab as a competition, instead we created a small community of designers.
Co-creation instead of competition
Overall, all participants look back very positively on the collaboration within the lab. “What I’m really happy about is that we didn’t approach this lab as a competition,” says Hjort. “Instead, we created a small community of designers.” The four studios also experienced this atmosphere of co-creation rather than competition. Manders adds: “This is where the added value of what the Dutch Design Foundation aims to achieve with What if Lab lies: a cross-pollination between different studios. Vattenfall was searching for a goldmine, for value. That value doesn’t only lie in the wind turbine as a source of raw materials, but also in the shared design power.”
Complementary concepts
This collaboration resulted in four concepts that together formed a cohesive whole during Dutch Design Week. Gupta explains: “Visitors experienced our exhibition as one possible future vision rather than separate ideas. It felt very complete.” Kievid adds: “Through the synergy between the four studios, we were able to explore the full scope of the challenge, each tackling a different aspect. Given how multifaceted the issue is, it was incredibly valuable that each studio addressed a different subproblem.” Hjort concludes: “Together, we succeeded in transforming the question ‘what if?’ into a positive answer of ‘then’.”
Further development
Despite Vattenfall’s enthusiasm, the energy company is not actively investing in the further development of the four concepts. That responsibility lies with the studios themselves. Hjort explains: “We’re not a housing corporation building tiny houses, nor a gallery selling art. However, it is our role to take responsibility for the large wave of turbines that will soon reach the end of their lifecycle. Instead of creating a massive waste heap of steel, we are exploring how this dismantling can become a playground for new possibilities.”
Vattenfall hopes that as the aftermarket for wind turbines grows, the value of these devices will rise. The profits could then be reinvested into a more sustainable dismantling process, ensuring that the company leaves the planet in a better state than before the turbines were installed.
Lessons learned
Daring to ask open questions
When a client presents an open case, designers are free to develop concepts that offer entirely new and diverse perspectives on the issue.
Making information available
The client providing information is essential for developing a concept within a short timeframe.
Co-creation vs. competition
Bring the different designers together in a community that fosters cross-pollination rather than a process where studios are protective of their ideas.