Hydro/Ocean/Tidal/Offshore Wind PowerOverviewHarnessed water power is one of the world’soldest renewable energy sources. Hydropoweraccounts for more capacity than any otherrenewable source today. At RETECH 2009, hydroinnovators presented on the changing manner inwhich developers are harnessing the power ofwater—and offshore wind. As technology opensnew areas to offshore development, nationalleaders in ocean, wave, tidal energy, andoffshore wind convened in Las Vegas to discussthe field’s successes, challenges and visionslooking forward.ConsensusNew technologies are bringing changes tooffshore energy generation, with innovatorsrising to the challenge of providing clean energyto America’s growing coastal cities. With minimalenvironmental impact, developers are findingnew ways to harness water’s abundant kineticpotential—and changing the way the world thinksabout hydroelectric power.Offshore Wind <strong>Energy</strong>The benefits of offshore wind energy arenumerous.Burton Hamner, President of Grays HarborOcean <strong>Energy</strong> Co. LLC, described the benefits ofoffshore compared with traditional landturbines. To start, offshore turbines enjoy areduced load turbulence blowing at a highermean rate on a steadier basis and mitigatingsome of the intermittency issues of traditionalwind. Offshore wind is also more aestheticallybenign. Commonly located about ten miles fromshore, turbines present a small visual impactand no bird impacts. With good siting optionsoffshore from high volume load centers,offshore wind enjoys increased transmissionoptions compared to traditional wind that rely onheavily loaded lines. Lastly, offshore wind farmsavoid constraints on turbine size—larger turbinescan be more economical to use, generatingmore power and but not easily transportableby land.Offshore turbines enjoy a reduced loadturbulence blowing at a higher mean rateon a steadier basis and mitigating some ofthe intermittency issues of traditional wind.– Burton Hamner, President of Grays Harbor Ocean<strong>Energy</strong> Co. LLCThere is a list of eight criteria for developingoffshore wind and wave farms.Burt Hamner also offered eight criteria forevaluating a site’s feasibility for offshore wind:<strong>American</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>On</strong> <strong>Renewable</strong> <strong>Energy</strong>Executive Summary Report 32
1. The local electric power market must be in thetop quartile of electricity costs in the USA,averaging less than 15 cents/kW.2. The state must have significant incentives andrequirements for renewable power generation.3. The local grid and load are adequate to absorb1000MW of power and to balance it when thewind/wave energy drops off.4. The site must have at least 100 square milesof area to develop.5. A suitable harbor and construction site andclear access are available.6. The inner side of the site must be at least 10miles offshore to maximize wave and windpower and minimize visual impacts.7. The site must not be in a commercial shippingnavigation lane.8. The site depth must not exceed 250 feet.With these eight criteria in mind, there are sevensites off America’s coastlines that fit the bill:1. MA—south of Nantucket2. RI—south of Block Isle3. NY—Hamptons; south of Long Island4. NJ—off Atlantic City5. CA—off Farallon Islands6. CA—off Ventura7. HI—off Moloka’iiProposals have also been submitted in locations along theTexas Gulf Coast, locations in the Great Lakes, and theAlaskan Peninsula.Of course, as with other renewable energytechnologies, offshore wind faces challenges,such as siting and positioning.The United States’ continental shelf slopes deeper morequickly than the one in Europe, limiting the number offeasible sites with sufficient wind capacity and proximity toload. Further technological improvements are necessaryto open more area to development.In addition, the Jones Act restricts use of foreign vessels ininstallation process, so European boats designed forturbine installation can’t be used.The logistics of building and erecting offshorewind turbines present some complexengineering challenges, and the projects may beeven more difficult off the <strong>American</strong> coastlinethan it would be off the European coastline.Offshore wind turbine foundations vary in size andfoundation type. With water under 30 meters deep, amonopole design is used, anchoring the turbine to theseabed with a single pillar. This design has been used formost existing projects in Europe’s shallow continentalshelf, but proves difficult off the deeper, more turbulentNorth <strong>American</strong> Continental Shelf.Between 30 and 60 meters of water, demonstrationphase designs are typically ‘jacket tower’ or ‘jack-up’platforms, where turbines are affixed to a floating tripodonshore, then towed to the site, attached to pillarsanchored in the seabed and ‘jacked up’ above the waves.This medium-depth design requires no special ships andavoids the lengthy and costly installations characteristic ofa single-platform design.Above 60 meters, ‘floating spar’ or ‘tension leg’ platformsmight be used to anchor the turbine, allowing it to drift abit with the deeper, more powerful currents. With theseadvances in anchoring technology, sites previously out ofthe realm of possibility for US offshore wind have becomenew options for wind farms.There is potential to combine the technologiesof offshore wind and wave energy into onegeneration system.With good wind and wave potential, the western UnitedStates holds promise for joint wind-wave ventures, withsome designs incorporating wave power into turbineplatforms. There are man designs for independent wavefarms encompassing buoy farms that capture the rise andfall of waves, to long, tubular floats that capture thewater’s longer periodic motion. These technologiesaren’t as far along in the development stage as turbines,but should help to moderate fluctuations inoffshore wind velocity.<strong>American</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>On</strong> <strong>Renewable</strong> <strong>Energy</strong>Executive Summary Report 33
- Page 6: The highlights of WIREC 2008 includ
- Page 9 and 10: EVENT SPONSORSHosted byBadge Sponso
- Page 11 and 12: EXHIBITORS ContinuedKamatics Corp.K
- Page 13 and 14: The ARRA contains the following ite
- Page 15 and 16: “How do we organize ourselves to
- Page 17 and 18: John GeesmanFormer Commissioner, Ca
- Page 19 and 20: Cathy ZoiCEO, Alliance for Climate
- Page 21 and 22: John CavalierManaging Partner, Huds
- Page 23 and 24: BiofuelsChristopher Groobey, Partne
- Page 25 and 26: Patrick Cloney, Executive Director,
- Page 27 and 28: Gal Luft, Executive Director, Insti
- Page 29 and 30: Daniel Kammen, Class of 1935 Distin
- Page 31 and 32: Biomass, Biofuels, and Advanced Veh
- Page 33 and 34: Critical development opportunities
- Page 35 and 36: ConclusionsSpeakers at RETECH 2009
- Page 37 and 38: Geothermal PowerOverviewThe United
- Page 39 and 40: Green Buildings and CommunitiesOver
- Page 41 and 42: Green construction and renovation s
- Page 43: Session ReferencesGreen Schools Bre
- Page 47 and 48: International Renewable Energy Indu
- Page 49 and 50: production was 37%; the domestic tu
- Page 51 and 52: There have been a number of incenti
- Page 53 and 54: educes mortality and improves gende
- Page 55 and 56: D7 - ChinaJing Su, Director of US-C
- Page 57 and 58: past, uncertain legislative environ
- Page 59 and 60: marketplace, accelerating and deepe
- Page 61 and 62: • Complexity and operating costs
- Page 63 and 64: C6 - Environmental and Carbon Finan
- Page 65 and 66: The technology debate: thin film ve
- Page 67 and 68: FITs have grown in popularity over
- Page 69 and 70: Haroula Reitz, Global Manager of Sc
- Page 71 and 72: Currently, planning is geographical
- Page 73 and 74: Federal policy should allow for a c
- Page 75 and 76: Wind: Markets, Technologies, and Po
- Page 77 and 78: Regional FactorsBesides federal pol