World's first commercial wave-power farm goes live off Portugal

Macha

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/24/renewable.wave.energy.portugal

"Yesterday, the red snake-like devices were inaugurated as part of the world's first commercial-scale wave-power station, three miles from the coast of the northern Portuguese town of Aguçadoura. The project, which will generate clean electricity for more than 1,000 family homes in its first phase, marks the latest step in Portugal's moves to become a leader in developing renewable energy sources."

Now the obvious question...why isn't this happening somewhere off the coast of Ireland, given that we have the best wave power potential in Europe (according to the EU's Commissioner for Energy)?

The government's current white paper on energy is seriously lacking in ambition.

Cookie_Monster

Not ahuge amount of power off them but its a good start anyway.

I'd say the carbon footprint of manufacture was fairly hefty though?

How long do they need to run for to offset that?


We should definitly be doing this. Considering it was designed and built in the UK, one would assume it was tested in waters very similar to ours and that any additional testing and development would be minimal also.

Macha

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Not ahuge amount of power off them but its a good start anyway.

I'd say the carbon footprint of manufacture was fairly hefty though?

How long do they need to run for to offset that?

True. Embodied energy calculations are always quite complicated and can go back as far as a person wants them to (eg fuel burned in cars of employees going to work in factory that made pipes, etc..). So only the people working closely on the project would have an accurate figure for that, although I'm sure educated guesses could be made.

The argument could be made that we should be making these things while energy is still relatively cheap and plentiful. If we wait til we're really up sh!t creek, what's going to power the factories to make these?

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

We should definitly be doing this. Considering it was designed and built in the UK, one would assume it was tested in waters very similar to ours and that any additional testing and development would be minimal also.

Ah we'll piggy-back - it's this government's way. God forbid we actually be innovative.

Cookie_Monster

taconnol wrote: »

I'm sure educated guesses could be made.

Ballpark would be enough. As in 10, 20,50,1000 years to recoup carbon input for example

taconnol wrote: »

The argument could be made that we should be making these things while energy is still relatively cheap and plentiful. If we wait til we're really up sh!t creek, what's going to power the factories to make these?
.

Good point

taconnol wrote: »

Ah we'll piggy-back - it's this government's way. God forbid we actually be innovative.

We should be buying it from them I meant rather than doing it ourselves:D

Macha

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Ballpark would be enough. As in 10, 20,50,1000 years to recoup carbon input for example

I'm afraid I'm not adept enough at embodied energy calculations. For example, aluminium has one of the highest levels of embodied energy but if recycled aluminium is used, this figure is greatly improved. Were they constructed in the UK & brought to Portugal or built in Portugal itself?

The main calculations can be done around the raw materials so...the article says each "snake" contains 700 tonnes of carbon steel and that each of these generates 750KW at peak. According to this link (http://www.ecw.org/prod/202-1.pdf), carbon steel contains 34.4GJ/tonne

So 700 x 34.4 = 24080GJ/unit = 6,688,888 kwh

Each unit generates 750KW at peak so assume 50% average over one day, 375KW/hr x 24 = 9000kw in one day. 6,688,888/9000 = 743 days or just over 2 years.

I'm sure I made mistakes in there as this is definitely not my strong area!

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

We should be buying it from them I meant rather than doing it ourselves:D

But if we did it ourselves, we could:

a) be making money selling it, not spending money buying it
b) become known as the world leaders in renewable energies and thus attract inward investment
c) create hundreds, if not thousands, of highly-skilled jobs that are vital at a time when it is becoming increasingly clear that we cannot compete in the manufacturing sector.

Seems like it ticks a few boxes...oh but wait..the government wants to reintroduce 3rd level fees...never mind.

Cookie_Monster

taconnol wrote: »

I'm afraid I'm not adept enough at embodied energy calculations. For example, aluminium has one of the highest levels of embodied energy but if recycled aluminium is used, this figure is greatly improved. Were they constructed in the UK & brought to Portugal or built in Portugal itself?

The main calculations can be done around the raw materials so...the article says each "snake" contains 700 tonnes of carbon steel and that each of these generates 750KW at peak. According to this link (http://www.ecw.org/prod/202-1.pdf), carbon steel contains 34.4GJ/tonne

So 700 x 34.4 = 24080GJ/unit = 6,688,888 kwh

Each unit generates 750KW at peak so assume 50% average over one day, 375KW/hr x 24 = 9000kw in one day. 6,688,888/9000 = 743 days or just over 2 years.

I'm sure I made mistakes in there as this is definitely not my strong area!

Looks sciency, i'll believe that, pretty good. Not to mention the reduced usage of oil/coal fired plants to produce the same amount of power for consumption. negligible in the real world i suppose until brought in en-masse

taconnol wrote: »

But if we did it ourselves, we could:

a) be making money selling it, not spending money buying it
b) become known as the world leaders in renewable energies and thus attract inward investment
c) create hundreds, if not thousands, of highly-skilled jobs that are vital at a time when it is becoming increasingly clear that we cannot compete in the manufacturing sector.

Seems like it ticks a few boxes...oh but wait..the government wants to reintroduce 3rd level fees...never mind.

It would be good, but that would assume we have a government capable of looking beyond the shortterm and spending money that wouldn't have a short term political gain in some form

If they aren't interested in supporting much cheaper small scale wind projects, hardly going to push money into something so big and expensive. Why bother even providing grants for microwind if it costs €10k + to connect to the grid.

Obliging the ESB to allow cheap/free conection to the grid for micro generaters in the first step required

Macha

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Looks sciency, i'll believe that, pretty good. Not to mention the reduced usage of oil/coal fired plants to produce the same amount of power for consumption. negligible in the real world i suppose until brought in en-masse

LOL thanks. I put down calculations so you can see I didn't just pull the figure out of the air & so that if anyone can correct me, they can see where I went wrong.

Embodied energy is important but the life-span of the end-product really must be taken into consideration. For example, some of the highest u-value insulations actually have a higher embodied energy than more natural fibres like sheepswool but in the lifetime of the product, they more than make up for it.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

It would be good, but that would assume we have a government capable of looking beyond the shortterm and spending money that wouldn't have a short term political gain in some form

If they aren't interested in supporting much cheaper small scale wind projects, hardly going to push money into something so big and expensive. Why bother even providing grants for microwind if it costs €10k + to connect to the grid.

Can't argue with you there! Allowing small-scale generators to connect & sell back electricity would definitely be a big encouragement for individuals.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Obliging the ESB to allow cheap/free conection to the grid for micro generaters in the first step required

Well the government is trying to move the grid & those decisions away from ESB & onto a new state-owned organisation called Eirgrid, that will take ownership of the network. It's to comply with EU law. ESB employees are doing the usual spoilt-brat civil servant thing & kicking up a fuss - don't know whether it has happened or not yet.

Cookie_Monster

Back on Topic. looking at the pictures the machines look like the can be scaled up fairly easily. Would it just be a case of adding in additional segments.

As an additional benefit i can see them becoming encrusted in life and becoming artificial floating reef type structures. Good for baby fish and all that:)

I wonder to they produce much heat?
Ever read "Skeleton Coast" by Clive Cussler? Similar tech used in that to heat water. Obviously a bit more far fetched though:D

lostexpectation

don't we have pilot in galway or somewhere?

Macha

http://www.greenparty.ie/news/latest_news/ryan_announces_26m_for_wave_power_research

Yes, still testing

"€2m will be provided to support the development of a full scale wave energy grid connected test facility at Annagh / French Point Co Mayo (Mullet Peninsula). The site has been recommended following a comprehensive site evaluation and selection report by the Marine Institute and ESB International. When fully operational it will provide developers with a guaranteed connection to the National Grid and the ability to test and sell the electricity they produce."

Can't find any update...

derry

taconnol wrote: »

The main calculations can be done around the raw materials so...the article says each "snake" contains 700 tonnes of carbon steel and that each of these generates 750KW at peak. According to this link (http://www.ecw.org/prod/202-1.pdf), carbon steel contains 34.4GJ/tonne

So 700 x 34.4 = 24080GJ/unit = 6,688,888 kwh

Each unit generates 750KW at peak so assume 50% average over one day, 375KW/hr x 24 = 9000kw in one day. 6,688,888/9000 = 743 days or just over 2 years.

Good stab at the numbers

Rough rule is 1 ton of iron requires 5 tons of oil energy to smelt and manufacter
Aluminum is like 8 to 10 tons of tons of oil

Its usually safe to assume that ten years will ensure a CO2 payback energy equasion
Most iron steel stuff generator projects are good to last producing power for twenty to thirty years
So its often very benifitial to make complex Steel generator projects

If your maths are correct and it two years then that would be similar to most Irish wind power projects where two or three years are required

Germany with less wind would often need 5 to ten years to get back the CO2 energy equasion back to positive

Wind power for ROI will probably be the best with maybe Wave power possibily coming in second

It would be nice for ROI to make our own wave power units but if portugal can supply themsooner then for the ROI economy it would be also good to get them here and running ASAP to save importing oil from Russia or middle east

But don't hold your breath expecting the regime presently in power to react quickly to these solutions as the brown mana that come raining down from fossil fuel suppliers keeps a lot of renewable solutions out of reach

Derry

BendiBus

Wavebob is Irish.

http://www.wavebob.com/

One item from their press page from February

Wavebob Ltd., Ireland’s leading wave-energy development company, has signed a research and development agreement with one of Europe’s largest electricity providers, Vattenfall AB. The two companies will collaborate on bringing the prototype Wavebob device to readiness for a full-scale commercial wave farm. Wavebob Ltd. intends the device to be used at a later stage in a commercial wave farm off the west coast of Ireland.

As is this project

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0828/energy.html

I remember watching a TV programme about this one late last year.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/theinvestigators/prog5.html

So stuff does happen here too!