Wave energy companies are lining up to get in on the action off the Oregon Coast, which supposedly has the best wave energy resources in the West. Up to 500 MW may be available to help power the grid. The state is delineating where the wave energy devices could be located, in order not to displace current uses, like fishing, or disturb the habitat of marine organisms.
Check out the article I wrote in HIPFiSHmonthly recently, and give me your opinions and comments on wave energy in general, and also specifically whether you’re worried about potential wave energy devices in your neighborhood. In light of the recent battles over wind turbines on the north coast, battles over wind turbines off of Cape Cod, and the local LNG battles, I’d like to know whether people think that there might be similar problems with wave energy.
So, are you for or against wave energy and why, and how much do you already know about it?
People are interested in this issue, Bob, and I bet you’ll get comments on your finished article. The fact that folks have yet to weigh in here suggests the topic is still fresh and that many people are waiting to shape their opinions with more information.
OK, it’s finished and linked in the revised post. Have a read and let me know what you think.
Bravo Bob! This is a clearly-written and informative article. Your references at the end provide an invaluable resource list for anyone interested in the issue.
I’d rather see more wave energy projects than more offshore oil drilling along any coast. But my gut tells me conservation is key to our future; that “energy independence” hinges on whether humans can learn to prosper without growing consumption. Many energy sources that now look benign — like solar and wind and waves — would probably exhibit negative consequences if spread to the scope of unlimited growth that now directs our economic thinking. The future feels pretty creepy to me if people fail to realize that we’ve reached a sustainable carrying capacity for the planet.
Sounds to me, Brother Watt, that you fall into the restraint group when it comes to philosophy of living. The other, more dominant group is the techno group – those who think that we can continue to use resources at this pace, or at an even faster pace, because technology will enable us to do it without running out or into limits. Restraint somehow seems to be the more noble behavior, but flies in the face both of what one sees today in most people, and in what would seem to be common sense science (in the respect of survival of the fittest). Yet like you, I see restraint as the only policy with any hope of success in terms of long-term survival.
Perhaps cooperation, sharing and giving, in league with restraint, is the answer. In any case, these are all higher-level processes. It will take smarts to survive in the future, just as humans used smarts to become the dominant mammalian species on the planet.
Thanks for the kind words about my words about wave energy. Knowledge is power. And communication is the tool.
Nice article in Hipfish. I am in favor of wave energy for the Oregon coast since it offers yet another alternative to fossil based fuels. The tension for the coastal communities will be in siting, since some of the technologies proposed want to be in the same places where fish are located. So far OCZMA has done a good job making sure everyone is talking to each other, and it is going to take some adjustments to make this work. Coastal communities have a lot at stake since raising ocean levels will have greater impacts on us than any of these wave energy systems.
Tracking this stuff in Tillamook County for several years, several points: 1. this stuff is REAL expensive – the only ones that can afford is LA, and they refuse to use their oceans this way. So we get the trash, pay for transmission upgrades, loose a lot of it in transmission, just to give LA the goodies. I’m tired of using “renewable” as a goodie-goodie. BS.
2. Much of the wave energy stuff is in shallow off-shore, tsunami-impact areas. Don’t know if I can post an image here of the 60′ high “oyster” proposed here, compared to a building it would smash into.
3. This stuff is insanely more expensive than efficiency improvements that can lower our energy use by 80% It’s hyped because speculators can make big bucks off of it, then run off and leave the detritus for us. What’s rusting away on the Spanish Coast??? Last years’s failure.
4. We’re, of couse, forgetting to factor in the values of having a “non-industrialized” coastline. Its value for soul restoration is vital. Having nothing but flashing red lights at night across the ocean, 500 ft. high windmills by the hundreds is absurd when we’re too lazy to deal with efficiency.
How can I post a couple of pix???
Tom Bender
Seems you too, Tom, are in the restraint group (see my comment above to Watt). Thanks for your candid views. I’ll get back to you on photos in comments. I referenced the company that puts out the Oyster wave energy device in my HIPFiSH article, but didn’t have room for the photo.
Your friendly admin here. You can now add images to your comments! See the button and box below the comment field. Only .jpg files for now. Give it a try and see how it works.
Here’s “wave energy” comparison:
And here’s a size comparison for projected windmills. They now acknowledge they’re visible from 12 miles out, though TIDE has proposed NO restrictions on their placement.
This photo comparison would be more helpful if you showed what it would look like from 12 miles out, where even if visible would not be that noticeable. Any company engineering and installing these should be required to take tsunami’s into account but I would be surprised if this is an engineering challenge, given that most boats don’t notice tsunami’s when at sea.
Wood frame building in the inundation are going to be destroyed by the wave and debris so if any of these are taken from their moorings, its impact on the destruction will be hard to differentiate from the general destruction.
This seems to me like a interesting energy option to explore since it is not based on fossil fuels, and uses natural forces to generate electricity. It also operates 24/7.
This is not going to happen. Doesn’t matter how many of you come here from New York, California or wherever. You’re not going to industrialize our coastline with this crap so a bunch of fortune seekers can collect government subsidies etc. Period.
Reliable wave energy machines will require enormous (and likely impossible) strength to stand up to the huge and random forces in littoral water. I’d also guess they’ll inject lots of noise into the marine environment to the detriment of many critters.
The record peak generation of wind-derived electricity fed into the Bonneville Power system occurred in Feb. 2012. 4,000 megawatts. All of the hydro dams on the Columbia produce roughly twice that amount. None of this wind power capacity existed 15 years ago. So I vote for wind and gas-fired back up. Anywhere. Even 12 miles off our coast.