Maine company says underwater turbine is a success (largest ocean energy power plant ever installed

[Maine-ah]

http://www.bangordailynews.com/story/bdn/Maine-company-says-underwater-turbine-is-a-success,151645

PORTLAND, Maine — A developer of tidal power in the nation’s northeastern corner is reporting success with its first commercial-sized underwater turbine, putting it on track to have one connected to the power grid by the end of 2011, officials said Wednesday.

Ocean Renewable Power Company describes its proprietary 60-kilowatt turbine generator as the largest ocean energy power plant ever installed in U.S. waters.

So far, the unit has met or exceeded specifications for power in testing this year in the waters of eastern Maine, said Chris Sauer, president and CEO.

“It’s a critical step to our first commercial unit that’ll be connected to the grid in little more than a year now,” Sauer told The Associated Press. He touted the underwater turbine’s success as “a huge milestone for America’s ocean energy industry.”

[Wilms]

1. Ocean Renewable Power Company

http://www.oceanrenewablepower.com/home.htm

[mucifer]

2. It's great I assume no issues with sound like the wind turbines have.

[Maine-ah]

3. the article only mentions aesthetic issues

nothing about the sound. One of the islands just off of Rockland has the wind turbines, and the residents have complained quite a bit about the noise. At night you can see the lights from the turbines on the mainland.

[NHDemProg]

14. Environmentally friendly, I hope?

Yes, but what about the sealife?  Wouldn't this possibly harm
lobsters and other animals?

[Statistical]

4. Good first step but 60KW? Ouch.

Just to put it into perspective.

Wind (Onshore) 5MW @ 25% capacity factor
Wind (Offshore) 10MW @ 40% capacity factor
Average Thermal Plant 800 MW @ 70% capacity factor
Nuclear reactor 1200 to 1600 MW @ 94% capacity factor

This design = 0.06MW peak output @ 20% capacity factor = 0.012MW sustained

It would take roughly 300 of these turbines to equal the annual output of a SINGLE offshore wind turbine. It would take about 150,000 to equal the output of a single nuclear reactor (which are usually built in pairs).

[Maine-ah]

5. awesome, I was hoping someone on here would

be able to figure that out! I can always count on DU for that.

I imagine as the technology grows, they'll be able to figure out a way to produce more with less. For now though, it can produce electricity for 50-75 homes, I think that's what the article says.

As you said, it's a good first step :hi:

[Statistical]

6. Yeah the 50-75 homes is somewhat misleading.

At peak output it produces 60KW which is enough for about 50 homes however the generator won't produce 60KW continually. The power is variable so in a year it will output 60KW * 20% * 24 * 365 = 105MW annually. Average home uses 8 MW per year so the power from this generator is equal to the power needed for 13 average American homes.

To use an analogy say you have a job which pays $20 per hour (your peak wage output). Well there are 8760 hours per year so using the logic in the article you make about $160,000 per year. Of course most people know that isn't true when it comes to a job because you won't be earning $20 every hour of the year.

However the whole "power x homes" based on peak output number is pretty common in articles like this (regardless of technology type) it sounds better and I think the people writing them really have no clue how electrical energy works.

[NHDemProg]

15. 1.2 KW per home?

Seems a bit low, don't you think? My generator is a 6KW and I don't run anywhere near my "big" loads when I have to run it, like during the ice storms in 1998 and 2008, or the wind storms earlier this year.

[zipplewrath]

7. It's a start

The start of what is the question.

"Eventually, the company plans to deploy arrays of underwater turbine generators, producing more than 100 megawatts."

The 150 kilowatt version will support 50-75 homes, not the 60 kilowatt version that is currently being tested.

As I say, the start of what. Wind, solar, tidal, the truth is that hydro electric all work from EXTREMELY distributed energy. With hydro (dams) we dammed bigger and bigger rivers, wiping out larger and larger ecosystems. Ultimately we dammed about every available river. I suspect we are headed towards something similar here. There are places that this technology will be effective, but they are finite, and probably about as limited as rivers to dam, maybe more so.

That doesn't mean it's a bad or worthless thing. Like I say, the start of what. I suspect that what we are beginning to see is the start of highly distributed energy production. In the past, the effort was to get the power TO the user. Rural electrification was accomplished basically by building high tension lines, and lining roads with power poles to transport the power from the large power source.

Here, we may be seeing a transformation to a system that relies more upon collection of smaller energy quantities, closer to the end user. It won't be as economical, it is more expensive to collect highly distributed energy. But, it will have benefits like lower impact on the environment and less susceptible to damage and wide spread power loss.

It will work best if there is the "smart grid" of which we frequently speak, so that the power can be continuously shared, avoiding the problems of local power losses due to low winds or malfunctions. I do wish we'd see more progress in that area. The localized power production is coming on line and really needs that smart grid to perform at its best.

[Statistical]

10. One thing eventually Americans will need to accept is lower energy density.

Even compared to other industrialized nations we waste an unbelievable amount of energy.

This doesn't mean living in huts in the dark but it does mean things like 1200sq ft home vs 2200 sq ft. Using a public pool instead of having a private one. Buying (and govt mandating) higher efficiency furances, AC, and appliances despite them costing more upfront.



We at least need to be over there with rest of G7 when it comes to energy intensity.

[Bandit]

8. You have convinced me, we should do nothing but build nuclear plants from now on.

I mean it is a prototype for crying out loud. Did the very first wind mill produce 40MW of power? :shrug: 60kw would power my home just fine thank you.

[Statistical]

9. No windmill has ever produced 40MW of power.

I did say it is a start however for it even to compete against solar & wind it needs to be at least 10x is not 50x larger capacity.

[Sea Witch]

11. It's a good first step

Hopefully we will see these renewable technologies tweaked and perfected in the years to come.

[Maine-ah]

12. kick

[Crystal Clarity]

13. I heard about this on MPBN last night

Sounds promising!

[ThomWV]

16. Dear sweet Jesus, what a bad idea

Anytime you change the energy balance in a system that system suffers consequences. Think about that for a little bit. What happens when you remove that energy from the ocean's circulation system? Really - what happens? And don't hand me the sort of bullshit the oil companies did for a century, that the resource is so vast that nothing we do will effect it. That is the same sort of thinking that says we can dump our trash in the Oceans and that smoke stacks do not foul the atmosphere - because its so vast we couldn't possibly foul it. Hogwash!