The waters around Scotland are also host to tidal turbine testing by several organizations, including Lunar Energy, Ltd., in East Yorkshire, England, which in March 2007 announced a deal with Germany-based power utility E.On UK, to develop a tidal stream power project of up to eight megawatts off Scotland's west coast.
Meanwhile, Florida researchers may soon be testing both wave- and tide-powered energy technologies that could take advantage of the Gulf Stream, which flows north-northeastward about 15 miles (25 kilometers) off Florida's southern and eastern shores at more than eight billion gallons (30 billion liters) per second. Researchers at Florida Atlantic University's Center of Excellence in Ocean Energy Technology in Dania Beach, Fla., are using a $5-million state research grant awarded in late 2006 to develop air-conditioning technologies that tap into the powerful Gulf Stream and large water temperature differences off Florida's shores. The researchers envision thousands of underwater turbines producing as much energy as 10 nuclear power plants and supplying one third of the state's electricity. The university is working with academic, government and industry partners on the project, including the University of Central Florida in Orlando, the U.S. departments of Navy and Energy, Lockheed Martin, Oceaneering International, Inc., in Hanover, Md., and Verdant Power, which has provided them with a 10-foot (three-meter) diameter rotor system that they used during 2002 East River tests.
Verdant first began testing its three-blade, horizontal-axis turbines from the surface of the East River in 2002. There have been some hitches: Some of the turbines' fiberglass blades broke under the tidal force. (The fiberglass blades will be replaced by the end of April with ones made of a magnesium alloy.)
Still, the site has produced nearly 50,000 kilowatt-hours of energy from December 2006 to May 2007. Verdant's East River testing spot has the potential to support as many as 300 turbines and nearly 10 megawatts of installed capacity. Verdant has been working for the past several years to tweak its tidal turbines so that by the end of 2010 they can deliver up to 1.5 megawatts to the city's electrical grid (800 households use about one megawatt).
The East River is not Verdant's only site. The company is also testing its technology in Canada's St. Lawrence River near Cornwall, Ontario, with the hope of creating a turbine infrastructure capable of producing an output of 15 megawatts. The company is also looking at sites in China and India.
It is unclear just how much it will cost to tap into energy from large bodies of water, since there is no tidal or wave power industry. Verdant's Taylor says his company is at least two years away from being able to quote costs to potential customers. That said, a rough cost estimate for Verdant's marine renewable energy technology is up to $3,600 per kilowatt hour—a higher price tag than wind power, fossil fuels or hydroelectric dams today, he says. However, he also points out that Verdant will be able to lower its costs over time through the mass production of its technology and the reduction of inefficiencies in the licensing and implementation processes.
The next step for Verdant in the U.S. is to apply for a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license that would allow the company to continue its pilot project attempting to prove tidal turbines can be a reliable source of energy for the city's grid. It took four years to secure the necessary permits from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
That bureaucratic delay speaks to the difficulty of navigating the regulatory processes required to get such turbines into the water. Verdant's Taylor says his company has spent about $9 million getting its East River project to its current state, with one third of that cost going toward studies gauging how the turbines might affect vessel navigation, aquatic life and fish migration. Although the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) chipped in $3 million toward the East River project, Taylor says the time and money spent to secure changing, and sometimes redundant, regulatory approval wastes precious time that could be used testing new technologies. "That's got to change," he adds. "The world is burning up, and we're fiddling."
See what we're tweeting about
13 Comments
Add CommentI think there is a mistake where it says "That said, a rough cost estimate for Verdant's marine renewable energy technology is up to $3,600 per kilowatt hour"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this$3,600 is 1000* more than other sources cost.
The problem with this energy source is not only the cost ($3600/kw), but also the maintainability/longevity of an undersea generator. The longevity is short (20 years estimated in article)compared to normal hydroelectric power plants (70 - 100 years +); and underwater maintenance would be quite expensive.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNormal hydroelectric plants are a renewable energy source that costs $800 - $1200/kw to build. Canada produces 65% of its electric energy using normal hydroelectric power; the U.S. produces only 10%. Why can't we produce more normal hydroelectric power in the U.S.
Hydrogen energy is too volatile(as in Hindenberg explosion), can an admixture of nitrogen in the right proportions solve the volitility issue without diluting the power thereof?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow much energy would we save if everything shut down one day a week?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow much more effective would the water turbines be if they adopted Tubercle Technology, which is more than just another blade design: It is a fundamental advance in fluid dynamics which will transform a host of machines built on that challenging science. for wind power it doubles the power at 17 mph. Developed from the whale fin design, it should work as well in the water, particularly where low water speeds are encountered. Just when the world needs it most, Tubercle Technology offers new options. Turbines, compressors, pumps and fans. http://www.whalepower.com/drupal/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm surprised there was no mention of helical turbines developed by Prof. Alexander Gorlov of Boston's Northeastern University. He spent years designing and testing environment-friendly helical turbines to capture power from the Gulf Stream and other currents.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNear-shore ocean currents are a vast, untapped energy resource that could easily meet most of North America's power needs.
David M. Clemen posted:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this[i]"The problem with this energy source is not only the cost ($3600/kw), but also the maintainability/longevity of an undersea generator. The longevity is short (20 years estimated in article)compared to normal hydroelectric power plants (70 - 100 years +); and underwater maintenance would be quite expensive."[/i]
Do not try to compare land-based hydro turbines with those used in ocean or river currents. Underwater turbines would consist of a farm of much smaller, different design turbines that could be lifted out of the water for maintenance.
[i]"Normal hydroelectric plants are a renewable energy source that costs $800 - $1200/kw to build. Canada produces 65% of its electric energy using normal hydroelectric power; the U.S. produces only 10%. Why can't we produce more normal hydroelectric power in the U.S."[/i]
Because building new mega-dams to supply conventional hydro generation requires flooding of thousands of acres of land. It also disrupts riverine ecology. Costs to the environment is unconscionable, and it would be a social and political hot potato.
We must consider new technology that will permit us to operate power run-of-the-river turbines and ocean-based turbines with minimal ecological impact. It can be done for a fairly reasonable cost.
Think of the power of the Gulf Stream, the waters flowing in and out of San Francisco Bay and Puget Sound. That's where the future of power generation is!:-D
TimeTraveler
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1. If you don't compare them to land based hydro turbines for cost, exactly what do you compare them to for the cost to produce energy. In any case, the comment concerning short life (due to the underwater salt-water environment) and high maintenance costs (compared to any present day generation source) are valid.
2. Presently, you have 80,000 existing dams in the U.S. (Reference Hydro Review magazine, Sept 2007, "National Inventory of Dams), and only 3% of these dams are used to produce electrical power. An additional 20% of the "existing" dams could be used to generate over 30,000 MW (about 30 nuclear plants). We do not have to build new, large dams.
3. I was involved in over 10 "small" hydro projects (not large dams) that the local communities were overjoyed to have. Four were built on existing dams (municipal water suppies, irrigation, flood control), two were on existing lock & dams on the Ohio River, and the remainder were run of river in up state New York. More of these small projects should be advocated.
What is your problem, if any, with these types of hydroelectric generation. They don't require the building of large dams; and they don't interrupt river systems. Moreover, land based hydro plants are the most efficient "renewable" energy source (potential energy of water to electrical energy efficieny exceeds 80%) whereas the free flow turbines are limited by the Betz coefficien (59.6%) unless they have shrouds.
"timetrvlr"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyou are talking about stupid economics, read SCIAM article "economist has no clothes"
then talk about real costs.
You obviously meant $3600/kw, not kw-hr.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThese turbines turn at variable speed, generating DC at variable voltage. You fail to mention the problem of converting this to constant voltage, constant frequency AC power - store the DC in batteries, from which AC generators are driven, or what? . Is this really economically viable?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe have in La Guajira, north o Colobia S.A. near the Caribean Cost a wind plant producen wind-energy with great succes. Is a private service Company with german or netherland equipments, Is the only pwind plant in this Country.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is a wind plant in La Guajira north o Colombia S.A near the Caribean Cost that is managed by e private Company with very good result in cost an energy. Around them is a big desert without water or hidraulic energu sources.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this