Reference Model 5 (RM5): Oscillating Surge Wave Energy Converter

Yu, Yi-Hsiang; Jenne, Dale; Thresher, R. W.; Copping, Andrea; Geerlofs, Simon H.; Hanna, Luke A.

doi:10.2172/1169778

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A range of costs was given (Copping and Geerlofs [4]) as an acknowledgement of the large amount of uncertainty in their calculations. [16]) describes an oscillating surge wave energy converter (WEC) and RM-6 (Bull et al [17]) an oscillating water column energy converter.…”

Section: Comparing Actual Project Data To Reference Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine Energy Environmental Permitting and Compliance Costs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Costs to permit Marine Energy projects are poorly understood. In this paper we examine environmental compliance and permitting costs for 19 projects in the U.S., covering the last 2 decades. Guided discussions were conducted with developers over a 3-year period to obtain historical and ongoing project cost data relative to environmental studies (e.g., baseline or pre-project site characterization as well as post-installation effects monitoring), stakeholder outreach, and mitigation, as well as qualitative experience of the permitting process. Data are organized in categories of technology type, permitted capacity, pre- and post-installation, geographic location, and funding types. We also compare our findings with earlier logic models created for the Department of Energy (i.e., Reference Models). Environmental studies most commonly performed were for Fish and Fisheries, Noise, Marine Habitat/Benthic Studies and Marine Mammals. Studies for tidal projects were more expensive than those performed for wave projects and the range of reported project costs tended to be wider than ranges predicted by logic models. For eight projects reporting full project costs, from project start to FERC or USACE permit, the average amount for environmental permitting compliance was 14.6%.

show abstract

Section: Comparing Actual Project Data To Reference Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine Energy Environmental Permitting and Compliance Costs

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as there has been a limited amount of actual WEC deployment to date, the power matrices used in this study were a mixture of those obtained through real-sea testing (at a larger scale), tank testing (at a smaller scale), and realistic numerical models. In total, the performance of 15 WECs was analysed, including those from [30][31][32][33][34] and WECs in the WES development program (further details cannot be included for confidentiality reasons). Analysis of these data showed that the relationship between mean power and scale depends on the WEC type, relating to the shape of the device and how it extracts energy from the incoming waves.…”

Section: State Of the Art Mean Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing Structure to the Wave Energy Innovation Process with the Development of a Techno-Economic Tool

Roberts¹,

Henderson²,

Garcia-Teruel

et al. 2021

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current wave energy development initiatives assume that available designs have the potential for success through continuous learning and innovation-based cost reduction. However, this may not be the case, and potential winning technologies may have been overlooked. The scenario creation tool presented in this paper provides a structured method for the earliest stages of design in technology development. The core function of the scenario creation tool is to generate and rank scenarios of potential Wave Energy Converter (WEC) attributes and inform the user on the areas of the parameter space that are most likely to yield commercial success. This techno-economic tool uses a structured innovation approach to identify commercially attractive and technically achievable scenarios, with a scoring system based on their power performance and costs. This is done by leveraging performance and cost data from state-of-the-art wave energy converters and identifying theoretical limits to define thresholds. As a result, a list of scored solutions is obtained depending on resource level, wave energy converter hull shape, size, material, degree of freedom for power extraction, and efficiency. This scenario creation tool can be used to support private and public investors to inform strategy for future funding calls, and technology developers and researchers in identifying new avenues of innovation.

show abstract

“…The CapEx and OpEx estimates for the WPDS are scaled values from the DOE Marine and Hydrokinetic Reference Model 5 (RM5) design [12], which is a floating OSWEC with similar characteristics, except for the foundation. The OSWEC that was simulated in this analysis has a narrower flap width than what was designed for RM5 (18 m vs. 25 m), and therefore the structural costs have been scaled linearly by a factor of 0.72.…”

Section: Economic Model Inputsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of a Wave-Powered, Reverse-Osmosis System and its Economic Availability in the United States

Jenne

2017

Volume 10: Ocean Renewable Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A wave energy converter (WEC) system has the potential to convert the wave energy resource directly into the high-pressure flow that is needed by the desalination system to permeate saltwater through the reverse-osmosis membrane to generate clean water. In this study, a wave-to-water numerical model was developed to investigate the potential use of a wave-powered desalination system (WPDS) for water production in the United States. The model was developed by coupling a time-domain radiation-and-diffraction-method-based numerical tool (WEC-Sim) for predicting the hydrodynamic performance of WECs with a solution-diffusion model that was used to simulate the reverse-osmosis process. To evaluate the feasibility of the WPDS, the wave-to-water numerical model was applied to simulate a desalination system that used an oscillating surge WEC device to pump seawater through the system. The annual water production was estimated based on the wave resource at a reference site on the coast of northern California to investigate the potential cost of water in that area, where the cost of water and electricity is high compared to other regions. In the scenario evaluated, for a 100-unit utility-scale array, the estimated levelized cost of energy for these WECs is about 3–6 times the U.S.’s current, unsubsidized electricity rates. However, with clean water as an end product and by directly producing pressurized water with WECs, rather than electricity as an intermediary, it is presently only 12% greater than typical water cost in California. This study suggests that a WEC array that produces water may be a viable, near-term solution to the nation’s water supply, and the niche application of the WPDS may also provide developers with new opportunities to further develop technologies that benefit both the electric and drinking water markets.

show abstract

Reference Model 5 (RM5): Oscillating Surge Wave Energy Converter

Cited by 17 publications

References 5 publications

Marine Energy Environmental Permitting and Compliance Costs

Marine Energy Environmental Permitting and Compliance Costs

Bringing Structure to the Wave Energy Innovation Process with the Development of a Techno-Economic Tool

Analysis of a Wave-Powered, Reverse-Osmosis System and its Economic Availability in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About