Waves Could Power the World 2X Over
- Yearly Average Wave Energy flux in kW per Metre of Wavefront.
Have you ever sat by the ocean and wondered at the power of waves? They continually come—one after another—never stopping their onslaught. The energy it takes to propel these waves is to put it simply, incredible. Now, consider what this means for energy production. The World Energy Council has estimated that
approximately 2 terawatts (2 million megawatts), about double current world electricity production, could be produced from the oceans via wave power.
The navy has picked up on this and they are currently funding a wave farm in Hawaii. Dr. George W. Taylor, CEO of OPT (the company in charge of the project) stated,
Our engineering group has done a superb job of executing the design, build, test and deployment of this PowerBuoy system in Hawaii. We are pleased to be a part of the Navy’s effort to develop and commercialize new technologies to reduce the Navy’s dependence on fuel shipments for power generation facilities, and to meet its strategic goals and other sustainability initiatives.
How exactly does this technology work? According to CETO, the company in charge of the product,
Unlike other wave energy systems currently under development around the world, the CETO wave power converter is the first unit to be fully-submerged and to produce high pressure seawater from the power of waves.
By delivering high pressure seawater ashore, the technology allows either zero-emission electricity to be produced (similar to hydroelectricity) or zero-emission freshwater. It also means that there is no need for undersea grids or high voltage transmission nor costly marine qualified plants.
This is a prime example of what we at Lights On Oregon support. Because of the innovation in the area of wave-to-energy technology, the United States Navy is increasing its independence. Renewable and affordable energy is important for everyone. If we, as Oregonian’s can decrease our dependence on fossil fuels (and thus increase our energy independence), shouldn’t we do it?
November 16th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
This technology will never be deployed on a wide scale because it is retarded. You’re talking about putting things in salt water, in the phototrophic zone no less. So it’ll be rusted and overgrown with seaweed in no time. And as if that weren’t enough, the “power the world 2x over” is a bunch of crap. If they’re using standard Green lies then they’re including the entire fucking ocean, not just shorelines. And in any case, 2x current electric generation means only 10% of what we need to lift everyone out of poverty and account for expected population growth. Who gives a shit about this? Oh yeah, propagandists and lobbyists.
There’s only one technology that can reduce dependence on fossil fuels, nuclear. It’s proven. So proven that coal companies hate it. Think about that.
November 18th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Hey Dick,
Do you mind if I dump my spent fuel rods in your backyard?
Thought you might.
Without treatment for the used rods (and I don’t mean burying them in a concrete box that may or may not be leaking into the watershed) nuclear technology is not sustainable. Not to mention the risk of meltdown, terrorist attack, untrained or poorly trained workers (which will happen, look at how corporations run, especially overseas where regs are lax), and poor maintenance issues (again, would you want to hop on Air Zimbabwe’s DC10 with 3 paint schemes?) Look at it reasonably and you will see that no single power generation method will suffice. We need to diversify our options, that way you do not have all your eggs in same basket.
Personally, I do not like this technology. I do not think it will be feasible for a significant amount of energy for the public sector to be drawn in this manner, but for a military installation to generate their own power at little cost after initial investment, sure, lets give it a go, anything to break our dependence on oil. If someone has the investment capital and would like to build one AFTER having an environmental impact evaluation, then they should feel free.
As to the coal issue, we have so many years worth of it that it doesn’t make sense to just stop using it like Obama wants. What needs to be done is clean coal plants that use algae-production for biofuel as a filter for their air. The algae thrive on the CO2 put out by coal plants and manufacturing plants, and on an acre can produce 20k barrels a year of oil in a closed loop vertical system. Not bad compared to soy, corn, or any other alt fuel source, and operating cost after installation is next to nothing because the emissions are free, plus you have enough oil to make biodiesel for all your company vehicles or to sell.
Diversity and innovation are the solutions.