Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Unleashing the Power of the UK's Mersey River

December 29, 2006   |   7 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"The whole principle of the study is that the technologies under consideration must be proven, but they would be used in a new environment. We are trying to be innovative and novel but also reduce the risk to a minimum. A staged approach is appealing in terms of speed, practicality and affordability."

-- Peter Guthrie, Cambridge University, Professor of Engineering for Sustainable Development
7 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 7
December 29, 2006
I am hoping that the choice will be underwater turbines. If the tidal range is 8-10 meters and water wheels are employed, the wheels might have to be raised and lowered with every tide to accommodate changes in the height of the water for maximum efficiency but with underwater turbines, no mechanical height adjustments would be necessary.

Assuming that the underwater turbines are of the type that are anchored in place with posts protruding above the water and perhaps set in pairs (to prevent torque forces from causing rotation), the turbines themselves would be mechanically raised above the water level for regular inspection, maintenence and repairs since the currents may be too strong to work on them underwater.

adrianakau@aol.com
Comment
2 of 7
December 31, 2006
Tidal power, while clean and green, should not be called renewable. Extracting power from the tides slows down the earth's rotation, definitely a non-renewable energy source. We aren't going to slow the rotation significantly in the near future, but we definitely can't use tidal power long-term.

I know this sounds strange, but it's true. The energy must come from somewhere. In the case of tidal power, it comes from the earth's rotation. It also causes the moon to speed up in its orbit, sending it out farther from Earth. If you think I'm nuts, ask anyone well acquainted with physics. They might have to think it over for awhile to get it all figured out, but they'll verify it.
Comment
3 of 7
January 3, 2007
I could be wrong but as far as I know, tidal devices in estuaries etc simply remove energy from the water that would otherwise cause waves/erosion etc. One of the main side-effects is the increased deposition of silt...

I would be interested to know if anyone has calculated how much energy would be needed to significantly slow theearths rotation (as I understand it the moons rate of rotating around the earth is not constant in any case)...

More info please..
Comment
4 of 7
January 3, 2007
Out of curiosity - Are you suggesting that the tidal power option gets thrown out completely? It seems like it would take a lot of turbines to really mess the earth's rotation. I'm not a physicist, so I have no real idea, but there must be some sort of balance.

Joel [at] RenewablePost [dot] com
Comment
5 of 7
January 3, 2007
While Muir is right for tidal turbines in the open oceans ( unlikely scenario) , surely turbines in rivers ( where the tides push their way up rivers and tributeries)just consume the tidal energy that would otherwise be lost in heat and turbulence- ie they would be making use of the existing slowing?
Comment
6 of 7
January 4, 2007
I did a few google searches, and a simple calculation.

Apparently:
Earth's moment of inertia = 8.034*10^37 kgm^2
and is naturally slowing it's spin by 2.3ms/day per century (largely caused by ocean tides).

Using:
½ * moment of inertia * speed of rotation squared

this rate of slowing equates to a rate of loss of kinetic energy of 3.5*10^12 Watts. Amazingly this is on a similar order of magnitude to the "World marketed energy consumption" which is predicted to be about 1.5*10^13 Watts.

So if we were to get a sizable chuck of our energy from the tides, then we might make a sizable impact on the earth's rate of slowing. But at 2.3ms/day per century, I can't imagine anyone is going to worry. Averting global warming in exchange for a few seconds added onto each millennia; I'd take that.

patrickjrainey [at] googlemail [dot] com
Comment
7 of 7
January 5, 2007
Well said, Patrick Rainey!
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Interstate Renewable Energy Council Geothermal Energy Association Das Haus: Innovation in Renewables and Energy Efficiency Brightergy Renewable Energy World Africa Intersolar Krannich Solar Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters