Companies and governments are counting on underwater turbines, submerged "wind" farms, and wave-riding electrical generators to use ocean turbulence to keep the lights on
TIDAL TURBINE Verdant Power's kinetic hydropower underwater turbines are designed to generate electricity from the water currents of tides, rivers and manmade channels. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Verdant Power
EAST RIVER Since 2002, Verdant Power's Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy (RITE) project has operated in New York City's East River, along the eastern shore of Roosevelt Island. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Verdant Power
ON THE GRID Verdant Power believes its tidal turbines can by the end of 2010 can deliver up to 1.5 megawatts of energy to New York City's electrical grid. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Verdant Power
FIELD OF DREAMS Verdant's New York testing spot has the potential to support as many as 300 turbines and nearly 10 megawatts of installed capacity. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Verdant Power
TURBULENT
Verdant's East River installation produced nearly 50,000 kilowatt-hours of energy from December 2006 to May 2007, but the fiberglass blades, which broke under the force of the tides, will by the end of April be replaced with ones made of magnesium alloy....[More]
TURBULENT
Verdant's East River installation produced nearly 50,000 kilowatt-hours of energy from December 2006 to May 2007, but the fiberglass blades, which broke under the force of the tides, will by the end of April be replaced with ones made of magnesium alloy.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of Verdant Power
WAVE POWER
Pelamis Wave Power has taken its prototype red attenuator floating wave-energy devices through about 2,000 hours of operational testing at the European Marine Energy Center's wave test site near Scotland's Orkney Islands....[More]
WAVE POWER
Pelamis Wave Power has taken its prototype red attenuator floating wave-energy devices through about 2,000 hours of operational testing at the European Marine Energy Center's wave test site near Scotland's Orkney Islands.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of Pelamis Wave Power Ltd.
CATCH THE WAVE The Pelamis big red tubes flex as the ocean swells around them, turning mechanical power into energy. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Pelamis Wave Power Ltd.
BIG RED ONE Each Pelamis machine is about 426.5 feet (130 meters) long, 13 feet (four meters) in diameter, weighing about 750 tons and with a life expectancy of up to 20 years. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Pelamis Wave Power Ltd.
WAVE ENERGY CONVERSION Three Pelamis machines, which work best in 164 to 230 feet (50 to 70 meters) depth and roughly 3.7 miles (six kilometers) from the shore, can produce up to 2.25 megawatts. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of Pelamis Wave Power Ltd.
TIDAL POWER
As the tidal stream passes through the turbine developed by Rotech Engineering Ltd. and Lunar Energy Ltd. it forces the rotor blades to turn. This motion is resisted by a hub-mounted hydraulic pump, which delivers high-pressure oil through hydraulic motors that in turn drive electrical generators producing electricity....[More]
TIDAL POWER
As the tidal stream passes through the turbine developed by Rotech Engineering Ltd. and Lunar Energy Ltd. it forces the rotor blades to turn. This motion is resisted by a hub-mounted hydraulic pump, which delivers high-pressure oil through hydraulic motors that in turn drive electrical generators producing electricity.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of Lunar Energy Ltd.
POWER PROJECT
Lunar Energy Ltd. in March 2007 announced a deal with power utility E.On U.K. to develop a tidal stream power project using Rotech Tidal Turbines to generate up to eight megawatts in the sea off the west coast of the U.K....[More]
POWER PROJECT
Lunar Energy Ltd. in March 2007 announced a deal with power utility E.On U.K. to develop a tidal stream power project using Rotech Tidal Turbines to generate up to eight megawatts in the sea off the west coast of the U.K.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of Lunar Energy Ltd.
GULF STREAM
Researchers at Florida Atlantic University's Center of Excellence in Ocean Energy Technology envision energy-producing technologies that could take advantage of the Gulf Stream, which flows northward about 15 miles (24 kilometers) off Florida's southern and eastern shores at more than eight billion gallons (30 billion liters) per second....[More]
GULF STREAM
Researchers at Florida Atlantic University's Center of Excellence in Ocean Energy Technology envision energy-producing technologies that could take advantage of the Gulf Stream, which flows northward about 15 miles (24 kilometers) off Florida's southern and eastern shores at more than eight billion gallons (30 billion liters) per second.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of Florida Atlantic University
OH, BUOY SRI International tested a prototype buoy-mounted, ocean wave-powered generator off the coast of Florida in the Tampa Bay. [Link to this slide] Courtesy of SRI International
WAVE ENERGY CONVERSION
As SRI buoys raise up and down and absorb energy from the waves, an accordion-like device made of artificial muscle expands and contracts, creating mechanical energy that is then converted into electricity....[More]
WAVE ENERGY CONVERSION
As SRI buoys raise up and down and absorb energy from the waves, an accordion-like device made of artificial muscle expands and contracts, creating mechanical energy that is then converted into electricity.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of SRI International
FINAVERA AQUABUOY
Finavera Renewables has signed a contract to by 2012 begin delivering energy for San Francisco-based Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) in North America's first commercial power purchase agreement for a two megawatt wave-energy project....[More]
FINAVERA AQUABUOY
Finavera Renewables has signed a contract to by 2012 begin delivering energy for San Francisco-based Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) in North America's first commercial power purchase agreement for a two megawatt wave-energy project.
[Less]
[Link to this slide]
Courtesy of Finavera Renewables
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
I 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"
$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.
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.
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?
How 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/
I'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.
Near-shore ocean currents are a vast, untapped energy resource that could easily meet most of North America's power needs.
David M. Clemen posted:
[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
1. 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.
These 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?
We 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.
There 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.
World Changing Ideas: 20 Ways to Build a Cleaner, Healthier, Smarter World
Plan B for Energy: 8 Revolutionary Energy Sources
7 Radical Energy Solutions
Turning the Tide on Harnessing the Ocean's Abundant Energy
Energy versus Water: Solving Both Crises Together
How the West's Energy Boom Could Threaten Drinking Water for 1 in 12 Americans
Array of Hope: Australia and South Africa Vie for Massive Radio Telescope Project
The Nuclear Option
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