Renewable Energy
Portugal, Spain, Chile, New Zealand, Japan, China, South Korea and South Africa. So why isn’t marine energy more developed and used, and more talked about amongst politicians, decision-makers, environmental movements and the general public? Well, as with all emerging technologies, there are a series of obstacles to harvesting cost-efficient marine energy:
● Capital costs of marine energy projects are currently relatively high compared with, for example, wind projects.
● Lack of funding for research, development and demonstration on technology, to both academies and private companies (many of them start-ups). Te development of marine energy needs support from both private investors and governments.
● Regulatory issues. For instance, it can take up to two years to get a site permit for offshore testing.
energy parks and complicates offshore operations for installation, service and maintenance. After all, it is not easy to work in strong currents. Just recently, an ‘underwater kite’ was launched in the waters off Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland. Te ‘kite’ consists of a wing and a turbine which is secured to the seabed with a tether and moves fast in an 8-shaped path in the tidal or ocean current. Te hydrodynamic principle on which this technology is based allows for the kite to move at speeds of up to ten times that of the flow of water it is operating in. Tis marine power plant is the only available solution to cost-efficiently produce electricity from slow tidal currents.
Why is this significant?
“The possibility to operate cost- efficiently in slow currents extends the total potential for renewable marine energy significantly.”
Anders Jansson, CEO, Minesto
● Market challenges like long development timescales, grid connections (or lack thereof), and lack of performance assessment standards.
● Challenges in offshore operations: the sea is a tough environment in which to install, operate and maintain marine energy power plants. In many tidal energy sites the currents rarely go below
1m/s. ● Limited locations where tidal and ocean currents are strong enough to be technologically and economically viable to harvest.
Let us take a look at the last two of these obstacles. Tey can be overcome with new developments in marine energy technology. Te fact that most marine energy power plants developed so far can only operate efficiently in currents that are really strong reduces the number of good locations for marine
Well, there are many more sites with low velocity tidal and ocean currents than there are with strong currents. So the possibility to operate cost-efficiently in slow currents extends the total potential for renewable marine energy
significantly. In the UK, the amount of energy which is possible to harvest from tidal currents is doubled when low velocity currents are included. Slow currents are also much easier and less costly to
work in; installation and maintenance can be carried out with small Multicat vessels as the ‘kite’ only weighs seven tonnes for a 500kW turbine. Te kite’s robust anchorage system means that no tower is needed. Only attachment and detachment of the kite needs to be done offshore. All this reduces maintenance costs and operating expenses, and results in a cost-efficiency that is comparable with conventional energy sources. Even sheer physics is on the underwater kite’s side: it operates 30-60 metres above the seabed, ie higher above the seabed than a power plant fixed on the seabed. 75 per cent of the marine energy is in the upper 50 per cent of the water column (and only 25 per cent is in the lower half). So a power plant that operates higher up in the water will capture more energy than a conventional marine energy power plant. In conclusion, many or all of the obstacles to
efficient marine energy can, and will be, overcome given enough time and funding. New power plants that can operate cost-efficiently in slow currents is one big step forward. Tere will be other important steps. Marine energy is simply too clean and too potentially beneficial to the planet and its inhabitants to be ignored by politicians, investors and the global energy industry. ●
Anders Jansson is CEO, Minesto, Västra Frölunda, Sweden.
www.minesto.com www.engineerlive.com 49
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