Environmental Effects of Tidal Energy Outcomes of a Scientific Workshop

Transcription

1 Environmental Effects of Tidal Energy Outcomes of a Scientific Workshop Brian Polagye University of Washington Northwest National Marine Renewable Energy Center Boundaries: Benthic and Coastal Environments Renewable Ocean Energy and the Marine Environment November 4, 2010

2 Environmental Effects Workshop Structure Results Recommendations

3 Typical Sites and Devices Gearbox GeneratorGenerator m Direct Drive Generator Rotor 5 20 m rpm Drive Train Pile Gravity Base 2 4 m/s Foundation

4 Environmental Stressors Cumulative Effects Device presence: Dynamic effects Acoustic effects Energy removal Device presence: Static effects Electromagnetic effects Chemical effects

5 Marine mammals Environmental Receptors Ecosystem Interactions ti Seabirds Pelagic habitat Far field environment Near field environment Fish (migratory and resident) Benthic habitat Invertebrates t

6 Environmental Effects Workshop Structure Results Recommendations

7 Need for Workshop Major interest in developing hydrokinetic energy in the U.S. Environmental compatibilityof of technology stated without proof. Environmental uncertainties i present a major barrier to projects getting in the water at any scale.

8 Workshop Structure March 23 Plenary Sessions 4 hours Stressors 2.5 hours March 24 Receptors Stressors Wrap Up 25hours hours hours 1.5 March 25 Session Chairs Discussion 4 hours Participant Feedback: Another day would have been useful

9 Geographic Scope Aleutian Islands Cook Inlet Puget Sound Coastal Maine Southeast Alaska

10 Workshop Participants Europe Universities iti Canada Industry US East Coast US West Coast (CA, OR, WA, AK) Research Labs Agencies/NGOs Specifictechnical orscientific expertise Representative distribution of affiliation Interest greatly exceeded capacity

11 Environmental Effects Workshop Structure Results Recommendations

12 Presence of Devices Static Effects Structure below water surface Structure above water surface Disturbance from installation of device Disturbance from installationof of power cables nment: ical Environ r field Phys Near ical Environ nment: ield Phys Far f Symbol denotes uncertainty Habit tat & Inver rtebrates Color denotes significance Low Medium High? Unknown Not Applicable Low Medium High Unknown Migratory Fish:

13 Presence of Devices Static Effects Pilot Scale Phys Near ical Environ r field nment: Phys Far f ical Environ nment: ield Habit tat & Inver rtebrates Fish: Migratory Structure below water surface Structure above water surface Disturbance from installation of device Disturbance from installationof of power cables

14 Presence of Devices Static Effects Commercial Scale Phys Near ical Environ r field nment: Phys Far f ical Environ nment: ield Habit tat & Inver rtebrates Fish: Migratory Structure below water surface Structure above water surface Disturbance from installation of device Disturbance from installationof of power cables

15 Identification of Priority Interactions Selection Criteria High potential significance High uncertainty Summarize Key Information Description Gaps in Understanding Monitoring Approaches Mitigation Measures (stressor only)

16 Environmental Effects Workshop Structure Results Recommendations

17 Pilot Projects are Required Recognized need by participants of all affiliation Must be well monitored Prioritize objectives Use common protocols Courtesy of Marine Current Turbines

18 Pilot Study Prioritization Example Device presence: Static e ffects Device presence: Dynami ic effects Chemic cal effects Acousti ic effects Electrom magnetic effects Energy removal Cumula ative effects Physical environment: Near field Physical environment: Far field Habitat Invertebrates Fish: Migratory Fish: Resident Marine mammals Seabirds Ecosystem interactions

19 Mitigate Impacts when Possible Stressor Priority Area Recommended Mitigation Presence of devices: static effects Presence of devices: dynamic effects Electromagnetic effects Cumulative effects Effects of static structure on benthic ecosystems Potential for direct interactions of marine species with turbine rotor Behavioral disruption from electric and magnetic fields Minimize anchor sizes. Minimize number of moorings and slack lines. Streamline support structures. Increase visibility of rotors to fish. Acoustic avoidance measures. Shock absorbers on leading edges of blades. Temporary device shutdown. Bury power cables. Twist cores for AC cables. RunDC cables of opposing polarityin in close proximity. Effects on large, Limit number of devices at a given location mobile species until effects of operation are sufficiently understood.

20 Collaboration is Essential Information needs to be shared between projects IEA OES Annex IV Significant intellectual property concerns Hydrokinetic industry needs to engage with the oceanographic community Leverage active areas of research Expand opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration

21 Workshop Report Will be published as NOAA Tech Memo Draft currently out for review Details of breakout sections Challenges indentified Recommendations

22 Acknowledgements Workshop organizing committee Andrea Copping, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Keith Kirkendall, NOAA Fisheries George Boehlert, Oregon State University Michelle Wainstein, University of Washington Sue Walker, NOAA Fisheries Brie Van Cleve, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Workshop sponsors NOAA Fisheries US USDepartment of Energy Workshop participants, particularly session chairs and note takers