Marine Renewables Group 4 Kenneth Agbeko Steven Fitzpatrick

Marine Renewables Group 4 Kenneth Agbeko Steven Fitzpatrick Scott Love

“Growing a Scottish Marine Renewable Industry” • Introduction & Aims of Presentation – – – State project aims and objectives Provide background to Marine Renewable Energy Discuss methodology/ approach Present results and conclusions Highlight policy recommendations

Project Aims and Objectives • Aim: – To investigate how best to exploit the potential which exists for Scotland to develop a successful Marine Renewable Energy Industry • Objectives: – Identify marine resource potential and available technology to harness it – Identify supporting structures to help develop and promote a marine industry – Identify barriers & challenges that could affect the development of a marine industry – Draw conclusions & make recommendations towards Growing a Scottish Marine Renewable Industry

Background • There is a growing need for renewable energy generation options because of – Global concerns about CO 2 emissions, climate change and dwindling fossil fuel reserves – UK government’s obligation under the Kyoto Protocol agreement • To reduce CO 2 emission to 12. 5% of 1990 levels • Set Targets • Wave and tidal resources can help meet growing energy demands and renewable energy targets in the UK. • Recent estimates put potential energy yield at around – Overall UK target - 20% by 2020 (DTI) – Scotland target – by 2020 (Scottish Executive 2004) – 50 TWh/y from wave – 36 TWh/y from marine current

Background • Wave/Tidal Technologies under Development around the World – – – – Oscillating Water Column (Limpet) - UK Pelamis Wave Energy Converter - UK Seaflow Marine Current Turbine - UK Stingray tidal generator - UK Wave Dragon – Denmark Pendulator – Japan Tapchan - Norway

MCT Background • Marine Current Turbines (MCT’s) are recognised as the most readily available form of technology – Technologically similar to wind turbines which is a proven industry – Expertise easily transferable from both wind and general offshore industries – Recognised as closest to commercialisation compared with other technologies (source: Wave Energy Council 2001) • Scotland can thus kick start a marine industry with MCT’s and later diversify into wave technologies with waves having a much larger resource size towards world leadership status • MCT devices are generally – Either horizontal axis or vertical axis types but other developers are looking at a ducted type – Blades are usually between 1 and 3 of lengths varying from 15 m to 20 m. – Turbines are coupled to a generator – Under water cables transmit generated electricity to land

MCT Background • Limiting factors to the size of marine current resource – Conflict of interests • Shipping, boating, coastal fishing, MOD etc. – Environmental • Blocking of migratory fish/ sea mammals, sediment transport etc. – Technical Issues • Wake shadow effects • Effects of channel blockage from large numbers of MCT’s

Purpose of Technical Focus • Technical limitation investigated • Why this direction? • What was the investigation aimed at? • How can these blockage issues be investigated? • Which sites were modelled? • Reasons • • • – – – – Effects of channel blockage from large numbers of MCT’s Literature review pointed to the fact that little work has been done on blockage effects Technical factors determine to a large extent potential scale of market How much blockage can be installed? What is that saturation point? Is there a power drop off? A spreadsheet modelling approach was development Pentland Firth and Kyle Rhea for these sites choices availability of velocity data Close to our “idealised” channel criteria Both previously identified by 3 rd parties as suitable sites for MCT deployment

Procedure/ Methodology • Idealised Channel Model – Obtain sea level data from 2 “reservoirs” by selecting 2 points on either side of the channel with tidal heights h 1 and h 2 Side View h 1 h 2 – The ideal (theoretical) velocity (Vth) is therefore estimated as Top View – The theoretical velocity is then compared with actual measured marine current velocity (Vact) of the channel to estimate an effective loss coefficient for the channel (KL) from 1 2

Effects of MCT’s • What effects will arise from placing MCT’s in this channel? – Extract energy from stream – Resulting in new revised value for Vact: – As KT increases, V decreases but more turbines may mean more power – Performed trial and error to obtain an optimum KT value • Power extracted from the channel was then computed knowing KT and V From

Results • Power Flux & Velocity vs. KT for both channels • Pentland Firth • Kyle Rhea

Results Analysis • Velocity decreased gradually with increasing KT, as expected • Power Flux increased steadily with increasing KT until a “saturation” point was reached • Diminishing returns occur after this point • This led to an investigation into an optimum KT value • 40% power per KT drop off was adopted to represent the optimum KT value

How Many Turbines? • What does optimum KT represent in terms of number of turbines? • To do this, We have defined solidity as: Cross Sectional Area (CSA) • And from Betz theorem we obtained a relationship between KT and solidity as

How Many Turbines? • With optimum solidity ( ) values the number of turbines that can be installed in a channel for a full blockage was then determined • Do interactions occur between the MCT’s? – Yes but channel model does not account for that hence the need for further investigations • How do could that be done? – CFD modelling • CFD Methodology – – MCT’s were modelled as porous bodies in an idealised rectangular channel They were placed in a 2 d X 10 d “farm” configuration (DTI recommendation) Model simulated to obtain pressure drop across the turbines Pressure drop then was used to obtain a KT value from the relation

Results

Results Analysis • Calculation of Site Rated Capacity Channel Model Estimate by Joule KT Estimate (GW) Report (GW) Estimate by Black & Veatch (GW) Kyle Rhea 0. 74 0. 83 0. 12 N/A 1. 35 Pentland Firth 0. 63 0. 71 4. 70 6. 1 N/A • BV analysis used a “significant impact factor” approach which simply applied a loss factor of 20% to the total available resource – This factor is not site specific and also over estimates the rated site capacity (as conceded by Black & Veatch 2004) – Our approach seems to provide a more site specific result taking into account blockage effects – Leading to a far more conservative and realistic estimate – This is demonstrated clearly in the Comparison of values for Kyle Rhea

Results Analysis KT Kyle Rhea Channel Model Estimate (GW) Estimate by Joule Report Estimate by Black & Veatch (GW) 0. 74 0. 83 0. 12 N/A 1. 35 Pentland Firth 0. 63 0. 71 4. 70 6. 1 N/A • Pentland Firth data is slightly closer – Compared with data from Joule Report (ref. JOU 2 -CT_93 -1355) – Their approach concedes that only a “fraction of this value would be converted to useful energy” – Again channel model estimate is more conservative – There seems to be a trend of overestimation of site capacity – The blockage effect in our channel model has addressed this to a degree

Economical Implications • Will the large number of turbines obtained be financially feasible? • How can this be verified and investigated? – Financial Spreadsheet Model Approach Adopted • What were the inputs to the spreadsheet? – Turbine data – Tidal data – Scheme data • Data then processed using a costing analysis • Outputs from the model – – Cash flow Break even point analysis Payment plan Energy cost per k. Wh

Results

Result analysis • Taking Vadjusted at optimum KT, it is possible to evaluate cost per k. Wh at this value • Gives costs for a particular size of MCT farm • Crucial in determining competitiveness • Financial model allows the user to specify number of turbines in the farm • The results for cost per k. Wh are shown below:

Result analysis • Conclusions & Future Work: – To reduce the cost of energy significantly a large number of MCT’s required. – Economies of scale will inevitably further lower costs – This model is primarily intended for: • • cost/ k. Wh analysis basic level of cost-benefit analysis annual cost estimates break-even analysis for investors. – Further development of model would include: • depreciation on capital and equipment • pre and post tax values and • Influence of economies of scales

Environmental Considerations • Possible Impacts identified include – – – Loss of habitat for flora and fauna Changes to seabed morphology and current hydrology Changes in the sedimentation and turbidity of water Changes to the wave regime Increased risk of collisions from marine vessels Objections due to visual impact

General Conclusions • How big a limitation on MCT numbers is imposed by channel blockage effects? – – Saturation point will be reached This point occurs at a reasonably high level of channel blockage This seems to be optimistic purely from a technical approach Main limitations however will be financial and environmental • Technical and economical feasibility are two independent issues – Technical limits could never be reached due to unfeasibility (i. e full channel blockage) – Economic factors such as cost, market prices, incentives etc. will limit farm sizes • Environmental constraints will limit installed capacity – Shipping & fishing activities – Disruption to migratory fish/ sea mammal patterns

General Conclusions • Impact on future projections for growth of the industry – – – Technical limitations are not the greatest constraint Environmental issues will be key Uncertainty due to risk and lack of direction Not good for investor confidence Need clear guidance and leadership from UK/ Scottish governments • Comparisons with the development of the Danish on-shore wind industry from the 1970’s – UK & Scotland is in a similar situation to Denmark in the 1970’s – Scotland is ideally placed to mimic the Dane’s success story – Many of the World’s leading academics and experts in wave and tidal energy are in resident in the UK – There is considerable potential to export technology worldwide and become a World leader in MCT’s – Benefits to export economy and skilled jobs market

Executive Summary/ Policy Recommendations • There should be competitive tariff’s • The electricity grid needs upgrading – Redeveloped into a more decentralised structure – Capable of dealing with diverse generation options • Additional cost must not be burdened upon the developer • Technological learning and development will help reduce cost • However the industry must be nurtured and managed

Executive Summary/ Policy Recommendations • A long term development plan beyond 2010 • Governments must state its commitment to the marine sector • A closer look should be taken at the funding mechanisms for marine project – especially for ways to bridge the gap between the R&D stage and the supported commercial stage. • An intelligent funding approach should be adopted – Those projects which perform best should then receive further funding

Questions?