Tidal energy machines: A comparative life cycle assessment study

Abstract

Marine energy in the United Kingdom is undergoing a period of growth in terms of development and implementation. The current installed tidal energy capacity is expected to rise to provide 20% of the United Kingdom’s electricity demand by 2050. This article used life cycle assessment to study four tidal energy devices, comparing their embodied energy and carbon dioxide emissions. The device designs studied included a multi-blade turbine, two three-blade horizontal axis turbine machines and an Archimedes’ screw device. These machines were chosen to represent a cross section of design for the device, foundation, installation and operation. Embodied energy was considered over the lifetime of each device. Energy use from fabrication, transport, installation, maintenance, decommissioning and recycling was all calculated and compared to the energy generated by each device. Finally, the embodied energy, CO₂ intensity and energy payback periods were compared to those of conventional power generating systems and other renewable energy sources. Devices were studied based on a functional unit, defined as a 10 MW array installed for 100 years. Of the devices studied, the OpenHydro Open Centre turbine was found to have the best ratio of generated to embodied energy. All devices achieved CO₂ and energy payback within 12 years and exhibited CO₂ intensity between 18 and 35 gCO₂/kW h. This compares favourably against current energy sources such as wind (8–12 gCO₂/kW h), solar photovoltaic (~30 gCO₂/kW h), nuclear (~70 gCO₂/kW h) and coal (~1000 gCO₂/kW h).

Keywords

Tidal power turbines maritime systems marine engineering offshore engineering

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC special report on renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation (prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Edenhofer

Pichs-Madruga

Sokona

.)). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011, p.1075.

Forster

Ramaswamy

Artaxo

. Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. In: Solomon

Qin

Manning

. (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp.129–234.

Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC). 2012: 2011 UK greenhouse gas emissions, provisional figures and 2010 UK greenhouse gas emissions, final figures by fuel type and end-user, http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/climate_stats/gg_emissions/uk_emissions/uk_emissions.aspx (accessed 13 November 2012).

Callaghan

Boud

. Future marine energy – results of the marine energy challenge: cost competitiveness and growth of wave and tidal stream energy. CTC601, January 2006. London: Carbon Trust.

Walker

. TidalSheffield blog, www.tidalsheffield.wordpress.com (2012)

Marine Current Turbines/Siemens. World-leading tidal energy system achieves 5GWh milestone, http://www.marineturbines.com/News/2012/09/05/world-leading-tidal-energy-system-achieves-5gwh-milestone

World Steel Association. Life cycle assessment methodology report. World Steel Association, Brussels, 2011.

Hammond

Jones

. Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) v2.0. Sustainable Energy Research Team (SERT), Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Bath, June 2008.

Pham

Martin

. Tidal current turbine demonstration farm in Paimpol-Brehat. In: 8th European wave and tidal energy conference (EWTEC 2009), Uppsala, 7–10 September 2009.

10.

European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC). Developer list, http://www.emec.org.uk/marine-energy/tidal-developers/ (accessed 7 November 2012).

11.

Bahaj

. Generating electricity from the oceans. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2011; 15(7): 3399–3416.

12.

Meyers

Meneveau

. Optimal turbine spacing in fully developed wind farm boundary layers. Wind Energy 2011; 15(2): 305–317.

13.

Walker

. Barriers to the deployment of a 100MW tidal array in the UK. Int J Energ Eng 2013; 3(3): 80–92.

14.

Douglas

Harrison

Chick

. Life cycle assessment of the Seagen marine current turbine. Proc IMechE, Part M: J Engineering for the Maritime Environment 2008; 222(1): 1–12.

15.

Hodgson

Broadbent

. World Steel Association, LCI data for steel products. Report produced on request, World Steel Association, Brussels, 15 November 2012.

16.

Cadzow Heavy Haulage Ltd. Capacity of vehicles, http://www.cadzowhh.co.uk/services (accessed 20 January 2013).

17.

Nylund

N-O

Erkkilä

. Heavy-duty truck emissions and fuel consumption simulating real-world driving in laboratory conditions. In: 2005 DEER conference, Chicago, IL, 21–25 August 2005.

18.

Facts sheet 5(a). Emissions: like for like comparisons for rail and road transport – Transport Watch Fact Sheet. Transport Watch, Northampton. February 2013.

19.

Hamilton

. ScotRenewables: technology update – May 2012, presentation, http://www.all-energy.co.uk/__novadocuments/14981 (accessed 29 May 2012).

20.

Dedić

. Analysis of grouted connections in monopile wind turbine foundations. Aalborg: Aalborg University, 2009.

21.

ITU News. Green undersea cables, https://itunews.itu.int/en/2856-Green-undersea-cables.note.aspx (accessed 15 January 2013).

22.

Larsen

. Recycling wind turbine blades. Renewable Energy Focus 2009; 9(7): 70–73.

23.

Tidal Generation. DeepGen tidal stream turbine brochure, Issue 3, November 2010, http://www.tidalgeneration.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/TGL_Brochure.pdf

24.

Ives

. Open Hydro, presentation, Engineers Ireland Annual Conference, 22 April 2010, http://www.slideshare.net/EngineersIreland/open-hydro

25.

Eielsen

. A short introduction of Flumill, presentation, October 2012, http://www.flumill.com/The_Technology/content-1.html

26.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). 2012 Guidelines to Defra/DECC’s GHG conversion factors for company reporting: methodology paper for emission factors. PB 13792, July 2012. London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

27.

National Grid/DECC. UK future energy scenarios. National Grid, London, November 2011.

28.

Sovacool

. Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: a critical survey. Energy Policy 2008; 36(8): 2950–2963.