Tidal stream and wave energy projects can pass the government’s ‘triple test’ for gaining development support, according to the Offshore Renewable Energy Catapult.
Climate change and industry minister Claire Perry said technologies had to: achieve maximum carbon reduction; show a clear cost reduction pathway; and demonstrate that the UK can be a world-leader in a global market.
In a new report, Tidal Stream and Wave Energy Cost Reduction and Industrial Benefit, the Catapult said:
- The tidal stream industry could generate a net cumulative benefit to the UK of £1,400 million, including considerable exports, and support 4,000 jobs by 2030. Wave energy could add a net positive contribution to the UK economy of £4,000 million and support 8,100 jobs by 2040.
- By displacing gas generation tidal stream and wave could reduce carbon emissions permanently by at least 1Mt per year after 2030 and at least 4Mt per year after 2040.
- Costs could fall from £300/MWh today to below £90/MWh with deployment of 1GW and further reductions are possible with additional focus on innovation and continued reductions in cost of capital.
The report found that technologies had different support needs. Tidal stream requires an immediate route to market with revenue support to enable volume deployment, standardisation and the application of existing innovation activity, as well as ongoing research and development funding to further enhance the technology and solutions available. Wave energy requires continued research and development funding support to achieve technology convergence and prove survivability and reliability.
RenewableUK’s Chief Executive Hugh McNeal said, “What we need now, to ensure that the UK capitalises on marine energy, is a supportive framework from Government to provide certainty for investors with stable revenues.”
Andrew Scott, chief executive of Scotrenewables Tidal Power said: “The ORE Catapult study presents a hugely compelling case to implement structured commercial markets for tidal energy that will enable the investment required to build the tidal energy industry in the UK. The report validates our own cost analysis of our 2MW SR2000 turbine which has been successfully operating at EMEC over the past year. This is an industry with an existing supply chain which can grow substantially more if the right market framework is put in place.”
Sian Wilson, senior energy & infrastructure manager at Crown Estate Scotland, said, ”With MeyGen Phase 1a now fully operational, the ScotRenewables turbine continuing to produce electricity and Nova Innovation going from strength-to-strength, the industry has achieved what was asked – the continuous production of MWh – proving the generation potential, reliability and predictability.
“This new study shows that tidal now also has proven technology and can benefit consumers, communities and the climate, with real potential for new jobs and economic growth.”
Peter Dixon, executive chair of Kepler Energy, which wants to deploy a 600MW tidal fence in the Bristol Channel, said: “The good news is that the ORE Catapult may substantially under-estimate the total potential of tidal energy in UK waters, since it appears not to include the lower velocity/shallower tidal waters where other tidal technologies, such as our tidal fence, can be deployed.” He noted, ”construction of our first tidal fence in the Bristol Channel will require several thousand tonnes per year of carbon fibre for a number of years which will catalyse the UK composites industry, supporting BEIS’s Industrial and Clean Growth Strategies.”
Claire Perry and all those around here will fall for the fluffy cloud world of smooth-talking Hugh McNeil, where Mother Nature’s endless supply of free Sun and wind ‘fuel’ – by ‘definition’ – must be capable of saving the planet.
But away from the fluffy cloud world, free-fuel comes at a terrible economic cost to society, accompanied by environmental, ecosystem and species destruction.
Without counting the seabed structures, each turbine is 200 tonne of metal, so that’s 800 tonne of metals used to supply intermittent electricity to 2,600 homes for 25 years.
Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant will contain 142,000 tonnes of metal. It will supply 24/7 electricity to nearly 7.2 million homes for 60 years. That’s 19.75 kg of metal per home.
The MeyGen project would have to be built a 2nd time and be 10 years into the 3rd build to generate for 60 years – that’s a factor of X2.4 – 1,920 tonnes of metals. That’s 732 kg of metal per home.
For every 1 tonne of metal used in nuclear power plants, 37 tonne has to be used in this form of tidal power generation – FOR THE TURBINES ONLY!
Adding in the sea bed structures will take this up to 50X or 60X the metals used per MWh for nuclear power generation.
Homes [households] have to pay for for this ridiculous level of wasteful use of precious resources. When will this insanity stop?