I recently attended the Ocean Renewable Energy Conference in Newport, OR, on July 14th. The conference was almost entirely focused on wave energy and was centered around the theme of 'what would it take to make Oregon the North American leader in wave energy - both in installed wave energy facilties and as home to a new wave energy industry. [OPT's plans for a Reedsport wave energy park was a frequent topic of discussion at the conference, of course - see recent post].
The conference recieved a good showing - at least 100 people were in attendance - for a technology and industry as nascent as wave energy. The conference felt like what a conference on wind energy must have felt like 20 years ago.
A strong and broad stakeholders group, known as the POWER group (People of Oregon for Wave Energy Resources) has been assembled and has been meeting in Oregon for the past year. The POWER group was instrumental in making the conference happen.
The conference evidenced the strong enthusiasm for this emerging renewable energy technology as well as a called to attention a number of questions that remained to be answered:
As far as United States development of wave energy facilities in the next few years, there were three projects discussed at the conference that are in varying stages of development:
The Reedsport OPT project would start with a 2 MW pilot-scale installation, most likely consisting of 13-14 of OPT's 150 kW PowerBuoy's. The second phase would be commercial-scale and be up to 50 MW, potentially using the larger 500 kW version of the PowerBuoy that OPT is planning to develop (every doubling in diameter of the power conversion device quadruples the amount of wave energy captured, meaning a wave energy has a very strong economy of scale similar to that for wind power). Central Lincoln County Public Utility District is supportive of the project and has said they would purchase power from the Reedsport wave park.
OPT is also planning a 1.5 MW project off the coast of Spain as well as a 2-5 MW project in France (in partnership with Totale) and a potential project in southwest England.
The EMEC facility includes four 'plug-and-play' test berths in 50 meter depth for wave energy device testing. Armoured cables link each berth to a substation onshore. These link to an 11kV transmission cable connecting to the national grid and to a data/communications centre located in nearby Stromness. The berths are 'pre-permitted,' allowing wave energy device manufacturers to do full-scale grid-connected temporary installations of their devices without having to go through a full (and lengthy) permitting and siting process. (Ocean Power Delivery and their Pelamis wave energy device have benefited a great deal from use of the EMEC facility, as have several other wave energy companies)
The center would also include state-of-the-art onshore research laboratory facilities to enable research and development of wave energy conversion devices, long-lasting marine materials, etc.
OSU has been doing cutting-edge research on wave energy conversion devices and would run the National Wave Energy Research Center. (They have also been involved in the Reedsport project).
The Makah facility is located in the northwestern-most tip of the continguous United States, 3.2 miles offshore from the Makah Indian Reservation on Washington's Olympic Penninsula. Transmission lines run just onshore, allowing easy grid interconnection. The facility would be located in a marine wildlife refuge, so obviously, extensive environmental impact studies are being carried out. The Makah Bay facility would utilize Aqua's AquaBuOY wave energy converters.
It will be a while before any of these projects get in the water. Being the pioneers through the permitting process for the first wave energy facilities in the U.S. is a thankless job, and it will be a long process. Being the first means you've got a lot of things to demonstrate - enviromental impact, impact on local fisheries, reliability of your devices and the power it generates, etc. - before you'll get your permit, and (judging from the presentations at the conference) it will be at least 2 years before even a pilot-scale project is in the water.
It will probably be 4-5 years or more before we see an operational commercial-scale wave energy facility. Still, if wave energy can follow the same exponentially decreasing price curve that the wind industry has realized, we could be looking at an excellent new renewable energy source that we can add to our portfolio of diversified, clean, and domestic energy resources.
[EDIT - 8/4/06] The presentation from the conference are now available online to download, if you are interested: conference presentations.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Summary of Oregon Ocean Renewable Energy Conference
Posted by
Jesse Jenkins
Ads at www.WattHead.org:
Wind Turbine Training
Solar Panels and Kits for the Home
Solar Energy Products and Home Solar Panels
Wind Turbine Training
Solar Panels and Kits for the Home
Solar Energy Products and Home Solar Panels
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hello Jesse,
I updated the link to say Watthead.
Thanks for the response.
PEO
Thanks for putting your thesis on-line.
I've got one question (or rather several related ones) about well-to-wheels analyses in general. None of the renewables alternatives (cellulosic ethanol, electric vehicles, BTL, dimethylether, ethanol from corn, biodiesel, electrolytic hydrogen for upgrading of biomass derived liquids) has to have a fossil fuel input.
Tractors for corn fields could use ethanol or biodiesel. Fertiliser for corn fields could come from renewable hydrogen. Process heat for distilling the ethanol could come from waste wood, or solar/geothermal energy.
I understand that it's useful to get an idea of what indirect petroleum consumption is using present methods, but what meaning do these numbers have when talking future potential?
Wouldn't it be useful to include monetary cost somehow? After all the reason ethanol from corn gets produced with natural gas is that nat gas is cheaper than waste wood (or was until recently), and battery electric vehicles, and even more so fuel cell vehicles, aren't getting anywhere because of cost.
Wouldn't there be some fair way to state how expensive it would be to go to zero emissions using corn ethanol compared to say batteries and wind power?
And maybe to differentiate further by saying that say 10% substitution is most cost efficient using ethanol from corn, and 100% substitution is most cost efficient by say 20% ethanol from corn used in plug-in hybrids reducing demand 80%?
Post a Comment