OCEAN ENERGY ON THE VERGE

Ocean Energy Technologies On Cusp of Commercial Status
Peter Asmus, June 17, 2009 (Pike Research via Clean Tech Brief)

SUMMARY
Hydrokinetic and Ocean Energy; Renewable Power Generation from Ocean Wave, Tidal Stream, River Hydrokinetic, Ocean Current, and Ocean Thermal Technologies, from Pike Research, provides an up-to-date assessment of the many energy-generating opportunities swirling in the waters of the world.

click to enlarge

A second generation of marine hydrokinetic energies has emerged. It includes wave energy, tidal stream energy, ocean current energy, ocean thermal energy and river current energy. The total installed capacity of these just-emerging energies was less than 10 megawatts at the end of 2008.

According to the United Nations (UN), the “technically exploitable” potential of hydropower, the hydrokinetic energies plus the more widely developed traditional hydroelectric dams, is 15 trillion kilowatt-hours, about half of the world’s projected 2030 electricity demand. About 15% of this potential is developed.

The UN and the World Energy Council (WEC) expect a 250-gigawatt hydropower installed capacity by 2030. If the hydrokinetic energies are 10% of the forecast, that would be 25 gigawatts, a 150% growth in 2 decades.

click to enlarge

Pike Research estimates that with aggressive development now taking place in the United Kingdom, Ireland, the United States, Portugal, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and other countries, 25 gigawatts is a minimum growth scenario.

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) assesses yet-to-be-developed U.S. water resources at an 85,000-to-95,000 megawatt capacity. It says a 23,000-megawatt generation capacity can be deployed by 2025. This includes hydroelectric and emerging marine kinetic technologies. According to EPRI, ocean energy and hydrokinetic sources (including river hydrokinetic technologies) will nearly equal new hydroelectric capacity at existing sites in new capacity additions in the U.S. from 2010 to 2025.

The hydrokinetic energies produce more energy per unit of capital cost than solar or wind energy. The expense is in the operations and maintenance (O&M) costs. O&M is 10% of solar energy project costs. For wind, it is 20%. Because of the harsh ocean environment, O&M is estimated at 40% for the hydrokinetic energies, though there is too small a track record to calculate with certainty. Only by developing technologies that keep O&M costs down can the hydrokinetic energies expect to be competitive.

click to enlarge

The Pike Research paper covers what it deems to be the 5 major hydrokinetic technologies: (1) Tidal stream turbines (2) Wave energy (3) River hydrokinetic (4) Ocean current (5) Ocean thermal.

(1) Tidal stream turbines are very like underwater wind turbines. They make up 90% of all hydrokinetic energy installed capacity, most in the form of older (first generation) barrages, dam-like structures built across coastal estuaries.

(2) Wave energy technologies come in an amazing array of variations. There are 4 basic types: (a) point absorber, (b) overtopping, (c) attenuator, and (d) oscillating water column terminator. Virtually nothing is conclusively proven about the superiority of any of these technologies over any other. They will all have a hard time enduring the harsh ocean environment.

(3) River hydrokinetic technologies are similar to tidal flow technologies. Designed to capture the energy of flowing water, river current devices are sometimes used in channels where there are tidal flows and at the juncture where rivers meet oceans.

From Pike Research. (click to enlarge)

(4) Ocean current (OC) technologies are similar to the tidal and river technologies but are positioned on the seabed farther offshore in powerful ocean current streams like Florida's Gulf Stream. There is little development so far and the experiments that have been tried have been unsuccessful at withstanding the daunting environment but the richness of the resource ensures further trials.

(5) Ocean thermal energy (OTE) technologies are entirely experimental designs to generate electricity by capturing the change in temperature between the ocean’s surface and its depths.

Ocean thermal energy schematic from Wikipedia. (click to enlarge)

COMMENTARY
Traditional excuses for not developing earth’s biggest environmental feature, its waters, no longer apply. Ocean, river and lake jurisdictions are settled, technologies are progressing and readily accessible materials and construction methods to generate electricity at cost effective prices are emerging.

The biggest remaining obstacle to the advancement of the hydrokinetic energies is the hundreds of competing technologies from the more than a hundred companies, mostly small start-ups. They are vying to get a piece of what promises to be big action, using original innovation as a wedge. In the absence of a dominant technology (like the 3-blade wind turbine) or a few dominant technologies (like the few different kinds of solar panels and the few different solar power plant concepts), there can be no economies of scale and no focused technological advancement.

click to enlarge

A few big players (Scottish Power, Lockheed Martin, Pacific Gas & Electric, Chevron, BP and Shell) are beginning to invest. Their deep pockets could change the landscape but it is too soon to tell how.

According to Pike Research, the clear frontrunner in the U.S. among device developers is Ocean Power Technologies (OPT). OPT was the first wave energy company to issue successful IPOs (via the London Stock Exchange, raising $40 million, and via the U.S. Stock Exchange, raising another $100 million). OPT has a number of projects in development, including a commercial-scale installation off Reedsport, Oregon, scheduled for 2010, that could lead to a 50-megawatt installation, and another off Coos Bay, Oregon, that could grow to 100 megawatts.

click to enlarge

Almost every prediction sees world energy demand growing larger for the next 2-to-4 decades. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts New Energy will replace natural gas and become the second biggest power generation source by 2015. IEA does not foresee hydrokinetic energy having a significant share of that generation in 2015 but it should, according to Pike Research, have established the foundation on which it will grow in the subsequent decade.

Pike Research sees the 5 hydrokinetic energies its report profiles overreaching other expectations and achieving an installed capacity of 22 gigawatts by 2015. To achieve that remarkable growth, the planned 14 gigawatt tidal barrage in the U.K. and the planned 2.2 gigawatt tidal fence in the Philippines must be built. If those projects go forward, their momentum will likely drive development of the other 5.4 gigawatts (mostly in the U.S. market).

If just half of this hypothetical growth materializes, according to Pike, the global market value of the industry will surpass $6 billion. Projections suggest an effective international emissions reduction regime will drive 2-to-5 times that hydrokinetic energy market growth, resulting in a worldwide market value of $20+ billion.

click to enlarge

Supporting the more optimistic growth scenarios are (1) the European Union (EU) Ocean Energy Agency (OEA) prediction of 10,000 megawatts of EU wave energy and tidal energy installed capacity by 2020 and 200,000 megawatts by 2050 (and that excludes river hydrokinetics, ocean current and OTE). The U.S. Deprtment of Energy (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has reportedly estimated the 5 hydrokinetic energies in the Pike paper could produce 2% of the U.S. electricity demand in the same time frame, though no documentation or detail is available.

Pike Reseach offers a wide range of scenarios for hydrokinetic energy growth. The details are available at the Pike Research website for a mere $3500.00

The 2008 IEA annual report on ocean energy is free.

As is Ocean Renewable Energy Technologies from NREL's Walt Musial.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- Unnamed hydrokinetic energy expert quoted by Pike: “The capital costs of marine
renewable energy systems will be 50 to 100 times smaller than investments required to
create the same amount of electricity from either wind or solar…”