1
|
Coles D, Angeloudis A, Greaves D, Hastie G, Lewis M, Mackie L, McNaughton J, Miles J, Neill S, Piggott M, Risch D, Scott B, Sparling C, Stallard T, Thies P, Walker S, White D, Willden R, Williamson B. A review of the UK and British Channel Islands practical tidal stream energy resource. Proc Math Phys Eng Sci 2021; 477:20210469. [PMID: 35153596 PMCID: PMC8564615 DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2021.0469] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2021] [Accepted: 10/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
This review provides a critical, multi-faceted assessment of the practical contribution tidal stream energy can make to the UK and British Channel Islands future energy mix. Evidence is presented that broadly supports the latest national-scale practical resource estimate, of 34 TWh/year, equivalent to 11% of the UK's current annual electricity demand. The size of the practical resource depends in part on the economic competitiveness of projects. In the UK, 124 MW of prospective tidal stream capacity is currently eligible to bid for subsidy support (MeyGen 1C, 80 MW; PTEC, 30 MW; and Morlais, 14 MW). It is estimated that the installation of this 124 MW would serve to drive down the levelized cost of energy (LCoE), through learning, from its current level of around 240 £ / MWh to below 150 £ / MWh , based on a mid-range technology learning rate of 17%. Doing so would make tidal stream cost competitive with technologies such as combined cycle gas turbines, biomass and anaerobic digestion. Installing this 124 MW by 2031 would put tidal stream on a trajectory to install the estimated 11.5 GW needed to generate 34 TWh/year by 2050. The cyclic, predictable nature of tidal stream power shows potential to provide additional, whole-system cost benefits. These include reductions in balancing expenditure that are not considered in conventional LCoE estimates. The practical resource is also dependent on environmental constraints. To date, no collisions between animals and turbines have been detected, and only small changes in habitat have been measured. The impacts of large arrays on stratification and predator-prey interaction are projected to be an order of magnitude less than those from climate change, highlighting opportunities for risk retirement. Ongoing field measurements will be important as arrays scale up, given the uncertainty in some environmental and ecological impact models. Based on the findings presented in this review, we recommend that an updated national-scale practical resource study is undertaken that implements high-fidelity, site-specific modelling, with improved model validation from the wide range of field measurements that are now available from the major sites. Quantifying the sensitivity of the practical resource to constraints will be important to establish opportunities for constraint retirement. Quantification of whole-system benefits is necessary to fully understand the value of tidal stream in the energy system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Coles
- School of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
| | - Athanasios Angeloudis
- School of Engineering, Institute for Infrastructure and the Environment, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9YL, UK
| | - Deborah Greaves
- School of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
| | - Gordon Hastie
- Sea Mammal Research Unit, Scottish Oceans Institute, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 8LB, UK
| | - Matthew Lewis
- School of Ocean Sciences, Bangor University, Menai Bridge LL59 5AB, UK
| | - Lucas Mackie
- Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
| | - James McNaughton
- Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
| | - Jon Miles
- School of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK
| | - Simon Neill
- School of Ocean Sciences, Bangor University, Menai Bridge LL59 5AB, UK
| | - Matthew Piggott
- Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
| | - Denise Risch
- The Scottish Association for Marine Science, Oban PA37 1QA, UK
| | - Beth Scott
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ, UK
| | - Carol Sparling
- Sea Mammal Research Unit, Scottish Oceans Institute, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 8LB, UK
| | - Tim Stallard
- Department of Mechanical, Civil and Aerospace Engineering, University of Manchester, Manchester M1 3BB, UK
| | - Philipp Thies
- Renewable Energy Group, CEMPS, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK
| | - Stuart Walker
- Renewable Energy Group, CEMPS, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK
| | - David White
- School of Engineering, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
| | - Richard Willden
- Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PJ, UK
| | - Benjamin Williamson
- Environmental Research Institute, North Highland College, University of the Highlands and Islands, Thurso KW14 7EE, UK
| |
Collapse
|