|
|
Wave
&Tide OK
"Given
the UK's abundant natural wave and tidal resource,
it is extremely regrettable
and surprising that the
development of wave and
tidal energy technologies has
received so little support
from the Government."
Science and Technology Committee,
Wave and Tidal Energy, HC 291, May 2001
The House of Commons Science and Technology
Select Committee came out firmly in favour of wave and tidal
stream energy in its report, after a 3 month investigation chaired
by Tory MP Dr. Michael Clark. It said:"The current level of
public spending is insufficient to give the technology the impetus it
needs to develop fully…We recommend that the Government increase
the amount of funding available for full-scale wave and tidal energy
prototypes to prove the concept at a realistic scale."
It added: "We recommend that a
significant proportion of the extra £100 million of funding for renewables,
recently announced by the Prime Minister, be made available for wave
and tidal energy demonstration models."
At the release of the report, the acting
chairman, Dr. Desmond Turner MP said that the Government should spend
‘something of the order of £10m’ to start with and
then tens of millions a year, adding "even if the Government
should spend several hundred millions, the potential advantages to the
British economy mean that it will be a very sound investment."
The report cited the Danish example in
supporting the wind turbine industry so that Danish firms now controlled
75% of the world market estimated to be worth $3.5 billion. The Danish
Government had now committed itself to a four-year spending programme
on wave energy and said Britain should adopt a similar long-term approach.
See our report later.
During the hearings, the head of the Government’s
renewables programme, John Doddrell, admitted that the Government had
blundered in 1994 when it abandoned its wave energy programme."The
decision to discontinue was taken on economic grounds. With hindsight,
it was clearly a mistake."
Wave energy campaigner David Ross,
who has just produced a new NATTA report on wave power politics (see
section 19 below), was in triumphant mood, ‘some of us got it
right without needing hindsight. We had been deploring the Government's
retreat from wave energy ever since not 1994 but 1982. Twenty years
have been lost when our engineers and scientists could have been establishing
a decisive lead’.
The DTI, evidently keen to be
seen to be mending their ways, pointed out that, in addition to
the three projects supported by the Scottish Renewable Order, it
had restarted the wave programme in 1999, and now, in all, there
were seven wave related projects underway, along with one tidal
stream project, to a value of £1.86m, with the DTI contribution
being £1.27m. In addition the ESRC has 10 wave energy and tidal
stream projects in place, to the total value of just over £1.1m.
It noted that the DTI supported projects involved ‘the further
development of existing design concepts, research to tackle key
development issues and monitor prototype devices’. So it’s
mostly generic studies rather than new devices. But a further round
of R&D funding is expected following the last call for proposals,
and a long term strategy is being developed. The DTI added that,
presumably as part of this,‘consideration is being given
to broadening the scope of the programme to include tidal stream’
with the results of a study of tidal stream by independent consultants
being awaited.
.. but there are siting delays
UK tidal and wave energy innovators face
long planning delays and bureaucratic hurdles, and are looking elsewhere
to test their ideas. That was one of the issues that emerged during
the hearings of the Trade and Industry Select Committee. During a special
Parliamentary debate on renewables on April 5th, one of the Committee
members, Dr Desmond Turner MP, reported that ‘one of the tidal
stream experimenters to whom we spoke described his difficulties in
trying to obtain consents to put trial machines in the Solent. Seven
bodies had to be consulted, which would have taken two years, so he
gave up and went elsewhere’.
He added ‘Other experimenters will
go to Iceland to install their prototype machines rather than install
one in Britain’ and he called on the Government ‘to do all
that they can to ease the granting of planning consents’.
The DTI has streamlined the consents procedure
for offshore wind projects, offering a ‘one stop shop’ arrangement,
but clearly tidal and wave projects were still out in the cold. The
Guardian (20/4/01) reported on the problems that had faced a company,
RVco , trying to develop a novel ‘venturi’ effect tidal
device, the Rochester Venturi, invented by Geoff Rochester at Imperial
College. It is a cross between a wing and a funnel, which channels tidal
flow to create pressurised water which can then be used to drive turbines
on land. With a colleague from Imperial, Dr John Hassard, Rochester
set up RVco to exploit the innovation - they wanted to install a 2MW
version on the coast, but, according to the Guardian, found that it
could take ‘up to two years’ to get the necessary go-aheads
‘from up to 14 agencies’. By contrast a phone call to Iceland
resulted in an immediate green light. A small prototype will however
be tested on the coast near Grimsby, but, the Guardian noted ‘only
because a private owner made a stretch of riverbank available’.
The Guardian also noted that Wavegen, the
company behind the the Limpet, and Ocean Power Delivery, the company
developing Richard Yemms ‘Pelamis’ sea-snake device, were
‘considering moving part of their research overseas because
of lack of support at home’. Both had received support from
the Scottish Renewables Order, and the Limpet was now operating very
successfully under a 5 year contract with Scottish and Southern and
Scottish Power, and there are plans for a Scottish test of the Pelamis.
But with very little development funding being available in the UK,
the emphasis could move elsewhere. Wavegen has managed to raise £5m
from a consortium of private investors led by Merrill Lynch, but Yemm
is looking oversees - they had received regular offers from Denmarks,
and they were ‘seriously considering’ an offer from a Dutch
company to carry out joint tests in Portugal.
So, once again, the UK may lose on on some
key innovations. All may not however be lost. Dr Hassan told the Guardian
that the UK government was taking steps to help fledgling firms test
their machines in home waters and that he hoped the government would
designate a site on the Pentland Firth, thus providing a dedicated stretch
of coast for use by wave and tidal power researchers- something which
has, it seems, been long promised. So has more money. Noting that the
potential wave and tidal resource was vast, during the Parliamentary
debate on April 5 Turner argued that ‘it is extraordinary that
we should be funding wave and tidal power in inverse proportion to its
availability’.
In particular he wanted the government to
establish a £10m national test centre. Otherwise companies might go
to Iceland, Portugal or Denmark.
We will review the wide ranging Parliamentary
debate in Renew 134. Meanwhile see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm20000/cmhansrd/cm010405/halltext/10405h01.htm#10405h01_head0
Wave & Tide Report
‘The UK is particularly well
placed to exploit both technologies, with a favourable wave climate
and very strong tidal streams. Energy from both waves and tides
is predictable and reliable, with few problems integrating the electricity
into a modern Grid. Modern wave and tidal devices are based upon
tried and tested engineering skills and experience, built up over
fifty years of offshore oil and gas exploitation, in which the UK
is particularly rich. There are already several prototypes working
around the world - most notably on Islay in Western Scotland. Although
more research needs to be carried out, the environmental impact
of wave and tidal devices appears to be minimal. In fact, they can
have a positive impact by stopping coastal erosion, for example.
The potential domestic and export market for wave and tidal energy
devices is estimated to be worth between a half and one billion
pounds. Were the UK to seize the lead now it could create a whole
new industry employing thousands of people, as Denmark has already
done with wind turbines.’
Dr Desmond Turner
MP, launching the Science and Technology Committee 7th Report
, Session 2000-2001, on Wave and Tidal Energy, (HC 291) on May
7th.
The report recommends an increase in spending
on basic research, especially by the Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council, in order to create a ‘critical mass of researchers’
in the UK; increased support by the DTI for full-scale wave and tidal
energy prototypes, to prove the concepts on a realistic scale; the establishment
of a National Offshore Wave and Tidal Test Centre, to stimulate research
and facilitate side-by-side testing; and an examination by Government
and those involved in the privatised electricity market, especially
the National Grid, of how renewable energy can better be supported and
encouraged. The report also calls for a reduction in Britain’s
high discount rate (8%) which "militates against high capital cost, long-life projects such as
wave and tidal energy generators."
It recommends a significant increase in public
expenditure, with Turner noting that ‘the
potential return on this investment could be huge. Not only could the
UK harness a clean and renewable source of energy, but it could create
a multi-billion pound domestic and export industry employing thousands
of people. The UK has the resource, the technology and the skills base;
and we have a unique opportunity to seize the lead and develop a world-class
industry’.
He pointed out that ‘in
our Report, we underline the many benefits of wave and tidal energy,
which have previously been ignored’
and concluded ‘The UK and the World
can no longer afford to neglect the massive potential of wave and tidal
energy’.
See www.parliament.uk/commons/selcom/s&thome.htm
We got it wrong on wave:
As noted earlier, the Select Committee hearings prompted the Government
to, at long last, formally admit that its predecessor blundered when it
pulled out of wave energy research. At the hearings on March 29, John
Doddrell, Director of the DTI’s Sustainable Energy Policy Unit, sitting
beside Peter Hain, then Energy Minister, read out the following statement:
"The decision to discontinue the
Government’s wave energy R & D programme in 1994 was taken
in the light of the best independent advice available at the time
on the prospect for wave energy. With the benefit of hindsight, that
decision to end the programme was a mistake. A new programme was announced
in 1999."
Mind you, wave and tidal power are still both
seen as long term (i.e. post 2010) options in the DTI rankings. Let’s
hope that will now change.
|
