An Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Marine and by National Research Council, Division on Earth and Life

By National Research Council, Division on Earth and Life Studies, Ocean Studies Board, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems, Marine and Hydrokinetic Energy Technology Assessment Committee

Expanding renewable strength improvement, either in the usa and in another country, has rekindled curiosity within the power for marine and hydrokinetic (MHK) assets to give a contribution to electrical energy iteration. those assets derive from ocean tides, waves, and currents; temperature gradients within the ocean; and free-flowing rivers and streams. One degree of the curiosity within the attainable use of those assets for electrical energy iteration is the expanding variety of allows which have been filed with the Federal strength Regulatory fee (FERC). As of December 2012, FERC had issued four licenses and eighty four initial allows, up from almost 0 a decade in the past. although, almost all these allows are for advancements alongside the Mississippi River, and the particular gain discovered from all MHK assets is intensely small. the 1st U.S. advertisement gridconnected venture, a tidal venture in Maine with a capability of lower than 1 megawatt (MW), is at the moment supplying a fragment of that strength to the grid and is because of be totally put in in 2013.

As a part of its review of MHK assets, DOE requested the nationwide learn Council (NRC) to supply distinctive reviews. In reaction, the NRC shaped the Committee on Marine Hydrokinetic strength expertise evaluate. As directed in its assertion of activity (SOT), the committee first constructed an intervening time file, published in June 2011, which taken with the wave and tidal source tests (Appendix B). the present record includes the committee's evaluate of all 5 of the DOE source different types in addition to the committee's reviews at the total MHK source evaluate technique. This precis specializes in the committee's overarching findings and conclusions relating to a conceptual framework for constructing the source checks, the aggregation of effects right into a unmarried quantity, and the consistency throughout and coordination among the person source tests. opinions of the person source evaluation, additional dialogue of the sensible MHK source base, and overarching conclusions and suggestions are defined in An evaluate of the U.S. division of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic source Assessment.

Show description

Read Online or Download An Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic Resource Assessments PDF

Similar oceanography books

Chemical Reference Materials: Setting the Standards for Ocean Science

Document from the Committee on Reference fabrics for Ocean technological know-how, and Ocean experiences Board. Softcover.

El Nino 1997-1998: The Climate Event of the Century

This booklet will conceal the time span from the 1st symptoms of El Nino (May 1997) until eventually its reversal (June 1998). the focal point should be mostly at the usa, the place El Nino produced common adjustments in how the general public perceives climate and within the accuracy of forecasts one of the key concerns it is going to research are how the scoop media interpreted and dramatixed El Nino and the response either one of the general public and decision-makers (the latter in response to interviews with agribusiness, utilities, water administration businesses, and so on.

Nitrogen Loading in Coastal Water Bodies: An Atmospheric Perspective

Content material: bankruptcy 1 An creation to the 1st overview of Nitrogen lots to US Estuaries with an Atmospheric viewpoint (pages 1–10): Richard A. ValiguraChapter 2 Atmospheric Deposition of Nitrogen in Coastal Waters: Biogeochemical and Ecological Implications (pages 11–52): Hans W. Paerl, Walter R.

The World Is Blue: How Our Fate and the Ocean's Are One

This publication tie-in to nationwide Geographic's formidable 5-year ocean initiative—focusing on overfishing—is written in nationwide Geographic Explorer-in-Residence Sylvia Earle's obtainable but hard-hitting voice. via compelling own tales she places the present and destiny peril of the sea and the lifestyles it helps in viewpoint for a large public viewers.

Extra resources for An Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic Resource Assessments

Example text

Garrett and Cummins, 2007 and 2008). 22gρaQmax (1) where g is gravity, a is tidal amplitude (the height of high tide above mean sea level), and Qmax is the maximum volume flux into a bay in the natural state without turbines (Garrett and Cummins, 2008). Pmax increases with the tidal amplitude, a, and the surface area of the bay. 28 ft) would require more than 300 square kilometers (over 110 square miles) to produce 100 MW as an absolute maximum. This result is for a single tidal constituent. 3a2 watts if a is in meters.

Inaccurate or overly optimistic assumptions in these evaluations could create misleading estimates of the technical resource. gov/mhk_atlas. 3-2 Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. S. Department of Energy's Marine and Hydrokinetic Resource Assessments Prepublication Draft – Subject to Further Editorial Correction numbers used by the wave assessment group indicate that the technical resource is between 30 percent and 90 percent of the theoretical resource, depending on location.

19 in EPRI, 2011). Despite acknowledging the bias of the unit-circle approach for estimating the total theoretical resource, the assessment group continued to use the summation of scalar power density at all unit circles rather than the perpendicular component of power density. Although this is consistent with various European wave resource assessments, it clearly overestimates the total theoretical resource. Recoverable Power In order to take into account the technical details of the wave extraction devices, the assessment group utilized the concept of recoverable power.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.02 of 5 – based on 18 votes