+- Forums (https://eu-forums.com)
+-- Forum: EU Forums (https://eu-forums.com/forum-19.html)
+--- Forum: Environment Forum (https://eu-forums.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? (/thread-2120.html)
Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Mario De Sandozequi - 11-11-2008
Wave power vs. Nuclear power ?
Nuclear is to dangerous and risky and very high cost and high energy consumption to produce Uranium.
The solution is the Wave energy...
A company which has won a major contract in Portugal has warned that Scotland is falling behind in the wave energy sector.
Leith-based Ocean Power Delivery (OPD) has signed a £5.5m deal to develop what is said to be the world's first commercial scale wave farm.
But it has been unable to find backing for a large-scale project in Scotland.
A trial of the OPD Pelamis P-750 wave - or "sea snake" - power generator is currently running in Orkney.
The project was made possible by the Portuguese Government paying a premium price for wave electricity.
OPD said a support scheme announced by the UK Government limited incentives to only small-scale projects.
The company claims this is insufficient and Scotland will lose out in the race to develop the technology.
A full-scale prototype of Pelamis is being tested at the European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC) in Orkney.
Pelamis Wave Power Ltd is the manufacturer of a unique system to generate renewable electricity from ocean waves.
The Pelamis Wave Energy Converter is a revolutionary concept, the result of many years of engineering development by PWP. It was the world’s first commercial scale machine to generate electricity into the grid from offshore wave energy and the first to be used in commercial wave farm projects.
The centre was opened last August by Deputy First Minister Jim Wallace, who said it signalled "the dawn of a new era for energy production in Scotland".
He said Scotland would be in "prime position" to capitalise on the "enormous opportunities" provided by this rapidly expanding sector.
It is believed that marine energy could generate as much as 100 % of Scotland's electricity by 2030.
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Benn - 11-11-2008
nuclear power is a limited one, while the wave power can almost be called an unlimited one. Waves have always been existing and they will continue to exist as long as teh oceans exist.
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - willyoumind - 11-19-2008
Talking about the wave/tidal wave power, I just read an interesting article about it. Please check it out...
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.forcedgreen.com/2008/11/seapower-promises-emission-free-power-and-water/">http://www.forcedgreen.com/2008/11/seap ... and-water/</a><!-- m -->
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Mario De Sandozequi - 11-24-2008
Benn Wrote:nuclear power is a limited one, while the wave power can almost be called an unlimited one. Waves have always been existing and they will continue to exist as long as teh oceans exist.
The assessment takes into account and must be based in the context in which develops:
Consider generation required for 2030 EU of 1300 GW:
If the price or cost of the machine 1 MW would say of a hundred thousand dollars each.
By the time of life
Vs.
The price or total cost from exploration and exploitation of uranium mines and his defense, research, design, construction, operation and maintenance of governing nuclear, likewise, the design, procurement and handling of plutonium or uranium enriched energy necessary and human resources and services totals by their Lifetime
Which thought it was lower by economy, and quality of life or by environment or pollution dangerous for the life ?
AND which shows less risk inherent potential for future generations and current ?
2. Additional Factors in context, nuclear energy:
High costs, research and maximum security possible
Negligence and Training incomplete
Methodologies incomplete, outdated or inaccurate
Interests and strategies of Governments temporary
Does not exist as the date method 100 % safe handling of nuclear waste or radioactive.
World political situation.
Machine:
low costs, research and common security can evolve to 2 or 3 MW each, with adequate resources and support.
800.000 "Pelamis" 2 MW each (future) approximate Area occupied estimated from the sea = area of two times that of Mexico City.
Requires low-cost materials and common or available on the world market. With sufficient economic support and materials research and nanotech, can last more than 30 years in operation, maintenance costs equivalent to that of small springs and buoys oil companies.
Only a few figures, from among thousands:
The deposit in the “Canal de la Mancha”, near the Digulleville, France. Patrick Charton (ANDRA) tell us:
Only in less than 25 years, France has accumulated more than 500,000 metric tons of radioactive nuclear waste.
In 1969 France decided to stop toss into the sea.
All these thousands of metric tons are saved in more than 1555000 special containers of high cost and high technology, to last at least 10,000 years, In an area of 20 acres net and 500 acres safety.
The compounds that are van: Cobalt-60 half-life of 5.2 years; Uranium-238 with average life of 4500 million years; Americium-241 average life of 432 years; Caesium-137 average life of 30 years, and others radioactive elements.
The cost or investment in each container and its final location is greater than the construction or production of the Viper at Sea or “Pelamis 750 KW”.
In addition to that this deposit requires large investments in security and informatics, with hundreds of preparations costly, for example: more than 10000 documents for future generations, these documents must to survive on the next 300 years or more (the minimum serious 500) , paper "permanent". Since the director do not trust in the electronic media future and with several copies at several locations in France.
Our models based on:
Rendition of a Wave Farm Made Up of Permanent Magnet Linear Generator Buoys
Point Absorber Wave Energy Farm
Motion of a particle in an ocean wave.
A = At deep water. The orbital motion of fluid particles decreases rapidly with increasing depth below the surface.
B = At shallow water (ocean floor is now at B). The elliptical movement of a fluid particle flattens with decreasing depth.
1 = Propagation direction.
2 = Wave crest.
3 = Wave trough.
The wave height increases with increases in (see Ocean surface wave):
• wind speed,
• time duration of the wind blowing,
• fetch — the distance of open water that the wind has blown over, and
• water depth (in case of shallow water effects, for water depths less than half the wavelength).[5]
In general, large waves are more powerful. Specifically, wave power is determined by wave height, wave speed, wavelength, and water density.
Wave power formula
In deep water, if the water depth is larger than half the wavelength, the wave energy flux is
P = pg2 / 64 pi (h2moT == (0.5 KW / m3 * s ) H2moT
where
• P the wave energy flux per unit wave crest length (kW/m);
• Hm0 is the significant wave height (meter), as measured by wave buoys and predicted by wave forecast models. By definition,[6] Hm0 is four times the standard deviation of the water surface elevation;
• T is the wave period (second);
• ρ is the mass density of the water (kg/m3), and
• g is the acceleration by gravity (m/s2).
The above formula states that wave power is proportional to the wave period and to the square of the wave height. When the significant wave height is given in meters, and the wave period in seconds, the result is the wave power in kilowatts (kW) per meter wavefront length.
Example: Consider moderate ocean swells, in deep water, a few kilometers off a coastline, with a wave height of 3 meters and a wave period of 8 seconds. Using the formula to solve for power, we get
P = 0.5 KW/ m3 * s ( 3 . m)2 (8 * s) = 36 KW/m
meaning there are 36 kilowatts of power potential per meter of coastline.
In major storms, the largest waves offshore are about 15 meters high and have a period of about 15 seconds. According to the above formula, such waves carry about 1.7 MW/m of power across each meter of wavefront.
An effective wave power device captures as much as possible of the wave energy flux. As a result the waves will be of lower height in the region behind the wave power device.
[edit] Wave energy and wave energy flux
In a sea state, the average energy density per unit area of gravity waves on the water surface is proportional to the wave height squared, according to linear wave theory
where E is the mean wave energy density per unit horizontal area (J/m2), the sum of kinetic and potential energy density per unit horizontal area.
The potential energy density is equal to the kinetic energy, both contributing half to the wave energy density E, as can be expected from the equipartition theorem. In ocean waves, surface tension effects are negligible for wavelengths above a few decimetres.
As the waves propagate, their energy is transported. The energy transport velocity is the group velocity. As a result, the wave energy flux, through a vertical plane of unit width perpendicular to the wave propagation direction, is equal to:
with cg the group velocity (m/s). Due to the dispersion relation for water waves under the action of gravity, the group velocity depends on the wavelength λ, or equivalently, on the wave period T. Further, the dispersion relation is a function of the water depth h. As a result, the group velocity behaves differently in the limits of deep and shallow water, and at intermediate depths:
• In the United States, the Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative is funding the building of a commercial wave-power park at Reedsport, Oregon.
The project will utilize the PowerBuoy technology which consists of modular, ocean-going buoys. The rising and falling of the waves moves the buoy-like structure creating mechanical energy which is converted into electricity and transmitted to shore over a submerged transmission line.
A 40 kW buoy has a diameter of 12 feet (4 m) and is 52 feet (16 m) long, with approximately 13 feet of the unit rising above the ocean surface. Using the three-point mooring system, they are designed to be installed one to five miles (8 km) offshore in water 100 to 200 feet (60 m) deep.
• An example of a surface following device is the Pelamis Wave Energy Converter. The sections of the device articulate with the movement of the waves, each resisting motion between it and the next section, creating pressurized oil to drive a hydraulic ram which drives a hydraulic motor.
The machine is long and narrow (snake-like) and points into the waves; it attenuates the waves, gathering more energy than its narrow profile suggests. Its articulating sections drive internal hydraulic generators (through the use of pumps and accumulators).
• With the Wave Dragon wave energy converter large "arms" focus waves up a ramp into an offshore reservoir. The water returns to the ocean by the force of gravity via hydroelectric generators.
• The AquaBuOY, made by Finavera Renewables Inc., wave energy device: Energy transfer takes place by converting the vertical component of wave kinetic energy into pressurized seawater by means of two-stroke hose pumps. Pressurized seawater is directed into a conversion system consisting of a turbine driving an electrical generator.
The power is transmitted to shore by means of a secure, undersea transmission line.
A commercial wave power production facility utilizing the AquaBuOY technology is beginning initial construction in Portugal.
The company has 250 MW of projects planned or under development on the west coast of North America.
• A device called CETO, currently being tested off Fremantle, Western Australia, consists of a single piston pump attached to the sea floor, with a float tethered to the piston. Waves cause the float to rise and fall, generating pressurized water, which is piped to an onshore facility to drive hydraulic generators or run reverse osmosis desalination.
Only needs the surface of a city (City of Mexico) in the sea to the east of UK, for 800,000 "bollas" "nanomagneticas", each one of 2 MW.
For More Information:
Download the wave technology white paper:
Technology White Paper on Wave Energy Potential on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. (450 KB)
The following presentation from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory also provides information on ocean-based renewable energy technologies, including wave energy technology. This presentation was shown at scoping meetings for the OCS Alternative Energy Programmatic EIS.
NREL Scoping Meeting Presentation: Renewable Energy Technologies for Use on the Outer Continental Shelf (3 MB) .
Thanks...
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Animals friend - 12-20-2008
What about aquatic life? How wave power generators influence the living things in the water?
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Mario De Sandozequi - 12-22-2008
Animals friend Wrote:What about aquatic life? How wave power generators influence the living things in the water?
Mr. Animals friend:
Thanks for your question, it is very important.
First, the installation of 800,000 machines "Anacondas" (electricity for the entire EU), over an area of between 20,000 and 30,000 Km. 2, where possible, would imply a reduction in these areas, from 40% to 60% of sunlight penetrating the ocean.
Second, the depth of these places is over 100 meters, so that reduction would not affect solar plants and marine animals.
Thirdly, the optimal location of these sites, is not in the paths of large marine migrations and thus would not affect marine animals that migrate.
The reduction of solar energy in these areas, reducing the average temperature by 40 to 60%, and the selected areas, this reduction in average temperature of the ocean surface, benefiting many species of life, rather than harm.
If you are concerned about animal life, you should note that the human animal, is at greater risk of extinction than any other species on Earth.
Please read the topic entitled "Impact of Climate Asteroid."
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Animals friend - 01-05-2009
What about the mechanical damage?
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Mario De Sandozequi - 01-06-2009
Animals friend Wrote:What about the mechanical damage?
Mr. A.friend:
Requires low-cost materials and common or available on the world market. With sufficient economic support and materials research and nanotech, can last more than 30 years in operation, maintenance costs equivalent to that of small springs and buoys oil companies.
If the price or cost of the machine 1 MW would say of a hundred thousand dollars each.
By the time of life
Vs.
The price or total cost from exploration and exploitation of uranium mines and his defense, research, design, construction, operation and maintenance of governing nuclear, likewise, the design, procurement and handling of plutonium or uranium enriched energy necessary and human resources and services totals by their Lifetime
Which thought it was lower by economy, and quality of life or by environment or pollution dangerous for the life ?
AND which shows less risk inherent potential for future generations and current ?
2. Additional Factors in context, nuclear energy:
High costs, research and maximum security possible
Negligence and Training incomplete
Methodologies incomplete, outdated or inaccurate
Interests and strategies of Governments temporary
Does not exist as the date method 100 % safe handling of nuclear waste or radioactive.
World political situation.
Machine:
low costs, research and common security can evolve to 2 or 3 MW each, with adequate resources and support.
800.000 "Pelamis" 2 MW each (future) approximate Area occupied estimated from the sea = area of two times that of Mexico City.
Only a few figures, from among thousands:
The deposit in the “Canal de la Mancha”, near the Digulleville, France. Patrick Charton (ANDRA) tell us:
Only in less than 25 years, France has accumulated more than 500,000 metric tons of radioactive nuclear waste.
In 1969 France decided to stop toss into the sea.
All these thousands of metric tons are saved in more than 1555000 special containers of high cost and high technology, to last at least 10,000 years, In an area of 20 acres net and 500 acres safety.
The compounds that are van: Cobalt-60 half-life of 5.2 years; Uranium-238 with average life of 4500 million years; Americium-241 average life of 432 years; Caesium-137 average life of 30 years, and others radioactive elements.
The cost or investment in each container and its final location is greater than the construction or production of the Viper at Sea or “Pelamis 750 KW”.
In addition to that this deposit requires large investments in security and informatics, with hundreds of preparations costly, for example: more than 10000 documents for future generations, these documents must to survive on the next 300 years or more (the minimum serious 500) , paper "permanent". Since the director do not trust in the electronic media future and with several copies at several locations in France.
One thing is the cost of research and development of prototypes and evidence and quite another costs and prices for sale in mass production.
Any good congress or house of representatives and the ruler can negotiate patents, or private companies with contracts of 500,000 "pelamis" or more to $100,000 each. And even less if you invest as partner.
The cost of each machine this on the basis of the volumes to buy, the time and the possible desired or involvement of Governments and individuals.
And more: The network design with new materials and nano tech, not only use the energy hundí driving or waves, also, solar energy, and perhaps even the lightning storms.
Our models based on:
Rendition of a Wave Farm Made Up of Permanent Magnet Linear Generator Buoys
Point Absorber Wave Energy Farm
Motion of a particle in an ocean wave.
A = At deep water. The orbital motion of fluid particles decreases rapidly with increasing depth below the surface.
B = At shallow water (ocean floor is now at B). The elliptical movement of a fluid particle flattens with decreasing depth.
1 = Propagation direction.
2 = Wave crest.
3 = Wave trough.
The wave height increases with increases in (see Ocean surface wave):
• wind speed,
• time duration of the wind blowing,
• fetch — the distance of open water that the wind has blown over, and
• water depth (in case of shallow water effects, for water depths less than half the wavelength).[5]
In general, large waves are more powerful. Specifically, wave power is determined by wave height, wave speed, wavelength, and water density.
Wave power formula
In deep water, if the water depth is larger than half the wavelength, the wave energy flux is
P = pg2 / 64 pi (h2moT == (0.5 KW / m3 * s ) H2moT
where
• P the wave energy flux per unit wave crest length (kW/m);
• Hm0 is the significant wave height (meter), as measured by wave buoys and predicted by wave forecast models. By definition,[6] Hm0 is four times the standard deviation of the water surface elevation;
• T is the wave period (second);
• ρ is the mass density of the water (kg/m3), and
• g is the acceleration by gravity (m/s2).
The above formula states that wave power is proportional to the wave period and to the square of the wave height. When the significant wave height is given in meters, and the wave period in seconds, the result is the wave power in kilowatts (kW) per meter wavefront length.
Example: Consider moderate ocean swells, in deep water, a few kilometers off a coastline, with a wave height of 3 meters and a wave period of 8 seconds. Using the formula to solve for power, we get
P = 0.5 KW/ m3 * s ( 3 . m)2 (8 * s) = 36 KW/m
meaning there are 36 kilowatts of power potential per meter of coastline.
In major storms, the largest waves offshore are about 15 meters high and have a period of about 15 seconds. According to the above formula, such waves carry about 1.7 MW/m of power across each meter of wavefront.
An effective wave power device captures as much as possible of the wave energy flux. As a result the waves will be of lower height in the region behind the wave power device.
[edit] Wave energy and wave energy flux
In a sea state, the average energy density per unit area of gravity waves on the water surface is proportional to the wave height squared, according to linear wave theory
where E is the mean wave energy density per unit horizontal area (J/m2), the sum of kinetic and potential energy density per unit horizontal area.
The potential energy density is equal to the kinetic energy, both contributing half to the wave energy density E, as can be expected from the equipartition theorem. In ocean waves, surface tension effects are negligible for wavelengths above a few decimetres.
As the waves propagate, their energy is transported. The energy transport velocity is the group velocity. As a result, the wave energy flux, through a vertical plane of unit width perpendicular to the wave propagation direction, is equal to:
with cg the group velocity (m/s). Due to the dispersion relation for water waves under the action of gravity, the group velocity depends on the wavelength λ, or equivalently, on the wave period T. Further, the dispersion relation is a function of the water depth h. As a result, the group velocity behaves differently in the limits of deep and shallow water, and at intermediate depths:
• In the United States, the Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative is funding the building of a commercial wave-power park at Reedsport, Oregon.
The project will utilize the PowerBuoy technology which consists of modular, ocean-going buoys. The rising and falling of the waves moves the buoy-like structure creating mechanical energy which is converted into electricity and transmitted to shore over a submerged transmission line.
A 40 kW buoy has a diameter of 12 feet (4 m) and is 52 feet (16 m) long, with approximately 13 feet of the unit rising above the ocean surface. Using the three-point mooring system, they are designed to be installed one to five miles (8 km) offshore in water 100 to 200 feet (60 m) deep.
• An example of a surface following device is the Pelamis Wave Energy Converter. The sections of the device articulate with the movement of the waves, each resisting motion between it and the next section, creating pressurized oil to drive a hydraulic ram which drives a hydraulic motor.
The machine is long and narrow (snake-like) and points into the waves; it attenuates the waves, gathering more energy than its narrow profile suggests. Its articulating sections drive internal hydraulic generators (through the use of pumps and accumulators).
• With the Wave Dragon wave energy converter large "arms" focus waves up a ramp into an offshore reservoir. The water returns to the ocean by the force of gravity via hydroelectric generators.
• The AquaBuOY, made by Finavera Renewables Inc., wave energy device: Energy transfer takes place by converting the vertical component of wave kinetic energy into pressurized seawater by means of two-stroke hose pumps. Pressurized seawater is directed into a conversion system consisting of a turbine driving an electrical generator.
The power is transmitted to shore by means of a secure, undersea transmission line.
A commercial wave power production facility utilizing the AquaBuOY technology is beginning initial construction in Portugal.
The company has 250 MW of projects planned or under development on the west coast of North America.
• A device called CETO, currently being tested off Fremantle, Western Australia, consists of a single piston pump attached to the sea floor, with a float tethered to the piston. Waves cause the float to rise and fall, generating pressurized water, which is piped to an onshore facility to drive hydraulic generators or run reverse osmosis desalination.
Only needs the surface of a city (City of Mexico) in the sea to the east of UK, for 800,000 "bollas" "nanomagneticas", each one of 2 MW.
For More Information:
Download the wave technology white paper:
Technology White Paper on Wave Energy Potential on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. (450 KB)
The following presentation from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory also provides information on ocean-based renewable energy technologies, including wave energy technology. This presentation was shown at scoping meetings for the OCS Alternative Energy Programmatic EIS.
NREL Scoping Meeting Presentation: Renewable Energy Technologies for Use on the Outer Continental Shelf (3 MB) .
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Terry - 02-02-2009
It sounds attractive. But is it really feasible? Mario, you must be an engineer or technician if you are able to make these assessments. For me, it's not that easy to understand.
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - M.Helen - 02-11-2009
By using wave power, UK has an estimated recoverable resource of between 50–90TWh of electricity a year, this is roughly 15–25% of the current UK electricity demand.
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - M.Helen - 02-18-2009
if you wanna understand in practical manner how wave power can be used, watch this clip
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0mzrbfzUpM">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0mzrbfzUpM</a><!-- m -->
Re: Wave power vs. Nuclear power ? - Benn - 02-25-2009
Most of the ideal is too expensive to build. On the other hand, thinking that this energy is unlimited can give a real incentive to investors.