Offshore Renewable Energy Development

"Although a number of successful devices have been installed at shoreline locations, the true potential of wave energy will only be realized in the offshore environment where large developments are conceivable. Commercial wave energy will grow on the back of modular offshore wave energy devices that can be deployed quickly and cost effectively in a wide range of conditions. "

Renewable energy from marine sources has a bright future. Potential markets for offshore wind, wave energy conversion, and tidal power show considerable growth over the next decade, especially as technological advances are achieved and as regulatory environments are improved.

Offshore wind capacity, for example, has taken off in the European market. Installed capacity has increased more than five-fold within the last year alone. The North American market lags about five years behind the European market, but it is expected to increase capacity and become prominent before the end of the decade.

Technological progress is extremely important in this industry, and will drive developments. As better technology is implemented, large strides in capacity will be achieved using proportionally fewer turbines. For example, the average size of a turbine in 2004 is 2 to 3 MW, whereas by 2008, turbines 4 MW and above will be the norm.

A potentially large market for offshore wind exists in North America, but it could easily fail before it gets a chance to take off. Success of early projects, particularly in the United States, is critically important in the face of uncertain planning regulations for offshore wind. Offshore developers should heed the lessons from the traditional boom and bust cycle of the onshore wind sector in North America.

Although the United States has considerable offshore wind potential, regulatory uncertainty is a source of concern, a critical test of the market potential is under way in the form of the Cape Wind project. Cape Wind Associates' controversial 420-MW, 130- turbine project is considered critical to the future of offshore wind in the United States. Its success or failure is likely to set a precedent for future developments in the country. If the wind farm is approved, new and existing players are likely to take advantage of the potential and generate many proposals for new projects. On the other hand, if the project is rejected, and therefore effectively cancelled, it could have dire consequences for the future development of the United States industry.

Comprehensive data recently released from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. government's regulatory body currently in the position to permit offshore wind farms, is promising. The project is now in an extended public review process -- approaching a final ruling fast.

Ultimately, the United States government will determine the rate of progress for offshore wind. Mixed signals concerning subsidies and tax incentives have created an uncertain atmosphere for developers. For the offshore wind industry to grow, the U.S. needs to establish a comprehensive offshore management system with clear procedures, because at present, there is no set precedent for applications. As previously mentioned, the success or failure of the early projects, especially Cape Wind, will dictate the terms by which future projects will be judged.

Wave energy is moving offshore. Although a number of successful devices have been installed at shoreline locations, the true potential of wave energy will only be realized in the offshore environment where large developments are conceivable. Commercial wave energy will grow on the back of modular offshore wave energy devices that can be deployed quickly and cost effectively in a wide range of conditions. In the coming decade, we anticipate that wave energy will become commercially successful through multiple-unit projects.

Offshore locations offer greater power potential than shoreline locations. Improvements in reliability and accessibility will be critical to the commercial success of the many devices currently under development.

Most wave energy projects to date have been small, and few are connected to a power grid. However, grid connection will be crucial in the future. For offshore devices, meeting this requirement will be challenging and costly, although not prohibitively so.

Limited financial resources, in many cases, hamper launch of technology as the sector is dominated by small and medium enterprises. However, towards the end of the decade, developers will negotiate and plan larger-scale projects based on proven technology, which are unlikely to see installation after 2010. At that time, wave energy farms could begin to emerge. When devices reach this advanced stage, the prospect capacity will begin to rocket. Over time, the initial high costs of development and research will level out, and individual technologies will become more cost effective. Once a device is established, serial production will result in much lower costs. At this stage, there are several devices that have very promising electricity generation costs forecast that would further benefit their commercial success.

Historically, tidal projects have been large-scale barrage systems that block estuaries. Yet, within the last few decades, developers have shifted toward technologies that capture the tidally driven coastal currents or tidal stream. At present, smaller units that can be deployed individually or in multiple units characterize tidal current stream technologies. Tidal current turbines are basically underwater windmills. There are a great number of sites suitable for tidal current turbines. As tidal currents are predictable and reliable, tidal turbines have advantages over offshore wind counterparts. The ideal sites are generally within 1 km of the shore in water depths of 20-30 m.

It is anticipated that multi-megawatt farms will emerge by the end of the decade. Tidal current turbines represent an extremely important sector for offshore renewables as there are several well-developed devices and such technology, once proven, could be installed in large numbers in the near future. It is conceivable that tidal current turbines such as those of Marine Current Turbines or Hammerfest Strom could eventually be installed in large projects comparable in size to offshore wind farms.

Wave and tidal power will only be a small percentage of the total expenditure in offshore renewables. However, wave and tidal power currently attract higher expenditures per megawatt. The leading devices should be comparable with, and in some cases more competitive than offshore wind, by the end of the decade.

The dominance of offshore wind does not mean wave and tidal energy are not important, they are just less well developed, and the industry is much younger. If wave and tidal were compared to offshore wind market data from ten years ago, their market share would be much higher. Offshore wind is booming at present. Around 2010, wave and tidal could begin to see rapid growth.

About the author...

Dr. Tony Jones is a senior oceanography with oceanUS consulting in San Francisco. He holds a doctorate in oceanography from the University of Hawaii. He has been a consultant to various marine renewable energy developers including SeaVolt Technologies, a winner of the UK Carbon Trust's Marine Energy Challenge. He is widely published in the field including a seminal paper on economic forecast for ocean energy over the next decade.

We must develop ocean energy rapidly and appropriately to forstall the psychological roadblock renewable energy projects have experienced in the past. 3/4 of the earth is ocean and the cost of the real estate is greatly reduced there. Of course the advantage of ocean energy use is it is indepentent of any certain country, in that it could be used to isolate hydrogen and oxygen while seperating critical minerals out of the ocean water. Ocean energy development is an ideal area for many nations to share in the development of large scale commercial applications of many types. It is imperitive we avoid the politizitation of ocean energy as has happened with land based systems. We will likely make more rapid progress with an approach which is indepentent of government control or the waiting on government incentives. Nothing has such strength as an idea who's time has come. Jerry Cheesman, solaraccess@msn.com

Wave energy is not exempt from government regulations. Four agencys will be involved in the approval process. The projected costs are much more than a wind project watt for watt. Many people are against the Cape Wind project due to navagation and visual issues. Wave energy uses up a lot more ocean area than a wind tower which generates3.6mw compared to 500kw for wave energy. It's good to pursue new ideas but this one is a long way from being practical. Wind and solar are already proven and working so lets develop them first. I think wave energy is too expensive and would need huge government incentives to be cost effective. The biggest problem of all can not be solved, nobody will want something a third of an acre off their coastline just to make 500kw.It would take over 300 acres of these devices to make 420mw,which is what the Cape Wind project will do. How will fishermen and other boaters navagate through this? Wave energy is very clever but not practical at all!!!

Basic dynamics of air v water foils a hydro foil can collect 800 times more for the same working area > As all foils work on the density factor of what they are working in. Moving water in tides and rivers have a much larger potecail out put than any other dynamic machine . Wind ,which at its best is only working about 25% of the time . Old man river never stops .Waves have a great amount of energy , Wet energy will solve many of our problems . Wind will only kill all our birds of prey and cause many more problems> Its just a excuse to revert back to the atomic power when the wind and oil cannot meet our needs

I support your view. There are and have been problems: 1. marine growth 2. electrolysis from different metals 3. storms Perhaps marine growth can be checked with ultrasound. Electrolysis can be moderated by using ceramics and absolute equal metal type and quality Equipment below the waves might work, if not very strong, insured equipment is needed. The onshore wave techniques might protect against all the above problems.

Has anyone done any studies to see if there are any sounds or vibrations that eminate from off shore wind installations that could be harmful to whales, dolphins etc.? I'm thinking of the beachings and other phenomena that are now being partially attributed to certain types of sonar used by submarines. Do we know for sure that there are not hidden problems with off shore wind towers? I'm definitely a wind supporter. I just want to be sure that we are not causing other problems by plopping these turbines down in the ocean without some study.

The thing about the ocean is that it demands a holistic approach because it is a very three dimensional & dynamic environment. You can't rush in with landsman's thinking - different culture entirely. In order to efficiently harvest energy from the ocean one needs to realise that the ocean is an amalgam of wind & wave/swell/tide/current - of course this represents enormous potential to the designer of harvesting systems... The further from land that such systems can be located - the greater is the energy available for harvesting ( and the less is the biotic density). With respect to the issues of biotic fouling of structures and moving-parts, and corrosion - there really is a lot of knowledge in the maritime industry - but what's the bet that we won't synergise? The real problems associated with the design & deployment of these systems relate mostly to harvested-energy transmission.

We must develop all different kinds of clean energies. We must not forget that very soon we have to use some other types of energy instead of fossil fuel. What is wrong with capturing energy from ocean, wind and so on. Economically it is beneficial to people and environment.

Free stream turbines in the Florida Current, Gulf Stream, Agulhas, and other currents can supply power and also reduce heat transport to the polar regions. This is needed to preserve ice sheets and slow down sea level rise. See my Soapbox article in November issue of Sea Technology.

I cannot believe all the BS spewed forth by some of you Misanthropes, Sight Issues? A Humvie running down the Street is a Sight Issue. Killing Birds? My 16 Ft Machine running for years never produced a single dead Bird on my Property, neither have the much slower running Commercial Wind Turbines, I observed in Europe. Noise? Get serious, the Racket of Rock Concerts, Airports, Jets, Motorcycles, Trucks, Lawnmowers, Industry etc does not seem to bother anybody, so please get off that dead Horse, the nuclear Industry put you on. If you really want do something positive, persuade your Relatives and Friends to stop breeding so profusely, that is really the ONLY Answer to Humanities Problems down the Road.

Not one person on this sight has said anything about windmill or wave energy being a sight issue to them. It is an very big issue to many people who don't want them in their backyard so to speak. You must realize those shortsighted people may stop the Cape Wind energy in it's tracks. I hope not but it's been a real struggle so far. Wave energy while interesting takes up a lot more ocean space and is a lot more expensive per/kw. I think we all know windmills when properly sighted don't kill birds. People kill birds by having windows in their houses and driving cars. I generate all my own electricity (solar) and think your view that I somehow support nuclear is insane.

Windmills off Ted Kennedy's Hyannisport? You'll sooner see oil wells off Palm Beach! NITBY (Not In Ted's Back Yaaaard). The failure to place windmills off such valuable Real estate will not be the end of Offshore American wind projects, but IF the project is approved, let the word go out from this time & place to Greenies & Oil Barrons alike-if a windfarm can be located off the Cape, they can be installed virtually anywhere off our Coastline. The European offshore wind farms have INCREASED marine life, and this means more fish for the fisherman, more food for plankton, more food for the baleen family of whales. And more reliable energy for those cold winter nights. It makes too much sense-the people of Massachusetts will never let it happen. They rather increase the size of Pilgrim Nuclear & let the poor kids 17-57 go to Iraq and hunt down energy in the neighborhoods with lower Real estate values. john@oceankeeper.org

I agree offshore wind is a great idea, much better than polluting the air or nuclear power. Windmills to me are pretty, I just saw 4,000 of them in Altmont ca. Very cool vibe. I demand clean air to breath, that's my right. Weather or not people think windmills are ugly or not does not justify polluting our earth. I hope you are wrong about Cape Wind getting shot down.