Breakthrough Energy Source is 10X Better Than Wind & Solar!?
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 06. 2024
- Tiday Energy: Check out EcoFlow's Prime Day Deals: amzn.to/3nmzVwn
Ecoflow: us.ecoflow.com/?aff=198
Unlike Wind and Solar energy which fluctuates wildly throughout the day, there is another renewable form of energy that is much more predictable. I'm talking about Tidal Energy, and it's reported to have enough potential energy to power the whole world. So why doesn't it? What new breakthroughs in tidal energy can finally bring tidal energy to the same level of investment and success as wind and solar? Is Tidal energy finally ready to make waves? If Tidal Energy Can Power the World - Why Doesn't It?
》》》SUPPORT THE SHOW!《《《
In-Depth Content @ twobitdavinci.com
Become a Patron! twobit.link/Patreon
Become a CZcams Member! geni.us/TwoBitMember
One Time Donation: geni.us/PaypalMe
Drone Quotes for Solar ⟫ geni.us/DroneQuote
》》》TWO BIT DA VINCI《《《
I'm Ricky, This is Two Bit da Vinci, and if you're interested in learning about the future of Technology, Energy & Transportation, subscribe & Join us for the ride!
》》》COMPANY OUTREACH 《《《
Sponsor A Video! sponsors@twobit.media
》》》CONNECT WITH US 《《《
Twitter 》 / twobitdavinci
Facebook 》 / twobitdavinci
Instagram 》 / twobitdavinci
00:00 Introduction
00:49 How Tides Work
03:52 Tidal Range Plants
05:11 Tidal Stream Plants
06:14 Benefits
07:30 Energy Output
10:06 Cost
14:03 Less Storage Needed
15:09 Conclusion
stuff we'll cover: Breakthrough Energy Source is 10X Better Than Wind & Solar
two bit da vinci,wave energy,tidal energy,tidal power,renewable energy,ocean energy,wave power,green energy,sustainable energy,tidal energy explained,tidal power pros and cons,clean energy,tidal energy plant,wave energy generator,wave power plant,tidal turbines,tidal range,tidal stream,Tidal Energy Can Power the World - Why Doesn't It,tide energy technologies,tidal energy project,ocean power,eco wave power,wave energy converter,tidal power plant - Věda a technologie
Check out EcoFlow's Prime Day Deals: amzn.to/3nmzVwn
Ecoflow: us.ecoflow.com/?aff=198
Tidal energy is not a new breakthrough. It was being used for electricity generation in the early 1970's.
Also check out 'Cockerel Raft' and 'Salter Duck' for two more areas of research from more than 50 years ago.
I know a system which use water which compress air and push it through a wells turbine then the water suck air back which flow through the wells turbine which is bidirectional
Great information! Getting these at scale would be the ticket. What about buoyancy systems that exploit gravitational effects while being mechanically isolated from the environment, making them low maintenance & eco-friendly? Also, I recall hearing about “frond” devices that derive power from piezoelectric elements embedded in giant paddles as tides, currents, & wave actions force them to & fro. I imagine ratchets at their bases could also be used to spin generators.
Funny, all images shown to the public of planets are perfect spheres
Worked in this industry briefly. The challenges are huge: water eventually destroys everything, salt water exponentially so. Installation and maintenance are ridiculously expensive. We still don't have great ways to harness and lubricate constant motion under water. The projects that have been done, while immensely informative, have typically fallen short of their projections. However the single biggest problem we were facing is lack of funding. Other than a few high profile projects it's really really hard to get money to explore this field. Governments should be dumping billions into this.
Use different materials. Steel is not suitable without corrosion protection coatings and zinc anodes. Anodes will need replacing...
Wind and solar are heavily subsidized - which is why current power rates go through the roof.
@@ibubezi7685 Oil and gas has nearly always been subsidised. Look it up.
@@ibubezi7685 I think you'll find it's the high cost of fossil fuels.
@@ibubezi7685 I know it's useless arguing with people over the internet but solar is barely subsidized and I dunno about wind. Plus if they were heavily subsidized, how would that increase energy prices? Furthermore, fossil fuels and their derivatives like roads and gasoline are massively subsidized while ignoring their negative externalities and all of the damage they do to people and the environment.
My son did a report on this ten years ago when he was in high school. I had never heard of it before but I couldn’t understand why we weren’t already producing energy this way. It makes so much sense.
The costs associated with both saltwater (corroding your machinery driving up costs) and underwater construction (also driving up costs) would be Big deterrence to expand this technology. Add in the "cheap" costs associated with fossil fuels and no invester was willing to hire the "new kid" on the block.
Same reason we’re not producing more energy with every for of renewable tech: fossil fuel companies are spending a ton of money in order to keep us locked in with Fossil Fuels for as long as possible.
This is the same reason that solar and wind generation aren’t currently producing 10X the amount that they currently are. These companies got in our way over the last 20 years as we tried to go about and build the solar/wind farms that we need.
@@SaveMoneySavethePlanet It has been more like since the '70s when the first fission power plants were being built, after all West Virginia didn't ban nuclear plants because they are green activists worried about safety. With NuScale finishing its licensing and wrapping up contracts, SMRs will get the last laugh in fission tech's long fight with the fossil fuel companies for base load power production.
@@christopherlabbe398 with all the offshore oil rigs in use, I don’t see saltwater being the issue. More like big oil not allowing it, either by buying out the competition and/or lobbying.
To me it is very GREAT to read how you as a parent new what your child was doing. I hope you continue to see great returns from raising your children with such attention. Congratulations and thanks.
Hello Ricky, we are tidal developers, and this is one of the best dissertations regarding tidal energy and its overall benefits we've ever seen. Awesome work & so well done!!!😊
I lived on a sailboat in Tampa bay for 2 years. I saw how quickly barnacles and other sea life started forming on stuff in the water. Anything growing on the blades would enormously reduce the efficiency of the system and you'd need to use anti-fouling paint to reduce that. Salt water is extremely corrosive and eats up most metals, ocean organisms eat up any wood in the water too. The only thing that seems to last the test of time is thick black plastic Polypropylene.
Another thing many may not think of is TSUNAMIS!!! They'd wipe out anything near the shore. Storms and the debris they typically bring near shore would also certainly damage or destroy the turbines.
A Tsunami won’t effect Turbines in deeper water… it’s more of a swell, a rise and fall.
Near shore shallow waters are the damage zones.
Totally agree on anti fouling, places with higher tidal range tend to carry more nutrients and present a greater challenge.
👍🏽
@@slim1100 I'm guessing they wouldn't be putting the turbines in deep water because the current wouldn't be strong enough in most areas.
Good points. Robots might be able to clean the turbines. Personally I like solar because of no moving parts. Maybe better panels and batteries will be developed.
I don't think anything would be able to grow on the moving parts. Just the rest (structure). Maybe encase the whole thing in Teflon plastic. It would help stop growth and corrosion. Could also use stainless steel and composites. Fiberglass has been used for boats for many years.
@@a2cryss you'd be very surprised what will grow on everything in the ocean. Fiberglass and stainless steel will still have stuff growing on it and even stainless steel eventually gets corroded over time as well as its VERY expensive. I think the best choice would be thick black plastic Polypropylene because it's super cheap, easy to clean and fairly durable at least until something hits it like a large boat anchor or debris from a tsunami or underwater landslide.
most science channels appear so insecure about the charisma of science itself (which is just silly) that they feel they need pepper their discourse with jokes, often just unfunny puns, drawing attention to themselves as frustrated sadass comedians. This guy is never less than totally entertaining with the plain facts, no dumbass muzak and a charming laid back lucid vocal delivery. Look and learn, u utubers. I'm no shill --- lIked, subbed .. do it too
🙏
This was the best explanation I have ever heard in my 70 years about how and why tides work. Thank you.
Yeah, it was better by neaps and bounds. 😁
One major difference between wind and water is that water is very corrosive, especially when you add salt. Sea water is full of the eggs/larva of animals that love to stick to stuff and grow on it. Ship owners spend millions of dollars scraping / painting hulls, anything in the water gets covered in pretty short time frames. Also it's hard for the maintenance people to breath water, so they must wear suits that hinder work, plus they can't just open the door to the generator and walk in; when needed things have to be lifted out of the water. As with most tech, there's theory and then there's the reality of economics.
I strongly disagree that this technology has substantial lifetime benefits over traditional windfarms. And LCOE calculations already incorporate the entire lifetime of generating assets. Moreover, when the wind industry was at a nascent stage they too thought turbines would last for 100 years. However, when deployed, they discovered their lifetime estimates to be drastically optimistic given all sorts of wear and tear from exposure to the elements. I highly doubt an underwater turbine will be capable of withstanding 100 years without serious refurbishment and ongoing maintenance and repairs, especially given the high pressure and salt water environment it will operate in.
I would be extremely surprised to see an off-shore underwater turbine last more than 30 years. Even with extensive ongoing maintenance underwater and the occasional "haul-out" to patch holes in the housing due to corrosion.
Gerardo
We will be damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Personally, I'd rather be damned if we do.
Having seen even then best hardware like ABB failing not so irregularly (with 100 producing machines) there is always one of them that needs replacement. Either you should dive down or have them merge... if merging is easy and functioning - that’s the main factor to solve
I'm pretty sure the turbines could be made of a polymer instead of a metal or at least a metal covered with a polymer to prevent it from corroding.
@@asandax6 Corrosion isn't your only problem (though a big one). Wind turbines already use composite materials for their blades which are made from fibreglass not steel. But they still deteriorate due to abrasion with the air.
Underwater you'll also have to consider barnacles, algae and other critters. Plus the water flowing past the blades will inflict more force than air, causing degradation and deteriorating efficiency, just like it happens to boat propellers.
Thanks for this video. The predictability should be a selling point for this type of energy production.
Absolutely!
Agreed since it is so predictable the amount of energy storage needed for it to be viable can be calculated to a minimum which should be a good selling point for smaller coastal communities.
Predictable but not schedulable. Tidal will have two dead periods per day. The time of day will depend on the time of the month. When the peak demand is within dead time you will still need at least some energy storage mechanism. Reservoir storage of tide water would probably suffice.
Just wanted to say how well done that video was concise informative and right to the point I wish my college teachers could have taught like that I would have had my degree in six months!!
Thank you I look forward to your next ones!
Ultrasonic anti-fouling! That's the answer to bio-growth, which can be amazingly devastating in a very short time. These things could be designed with that in mind. There are some places with up to 40 feet of tidal range (like Bay of Fundi Canada) which could power the entire eastern seaboard easily, there's really no limit as to how many turbines could be put into place.
That idea sounds solid. But how far or does the ultrasonic disrupt the fish or mammals? Maybe the ultrasonic can be used intermittently.
And will these under water turbines slow or disrupt the back flush of coastal areas and river outlets if there are too many of them ? Do the turbines blades fold or have pitch control?
We don’t even have to go “all in” on Tidal power. Simply getting to where 0.28% of our power comes from tidal will let us avoid over 9 Gigatons of C02 by 2050! These numbers are taken from the book “Drawdown.”
Tidal power can be expensive, but we shouldn’t worry about that too much. Like you mention in the beginning, the issue with most renewable energy is how intermittent it can be while tidal power is very reliable. So being willing to eat the cost on a bit of tidal generation like I mention above let’s us commit more fully to solar and wind power which will save us WAY more money in the long run than the tidal power will cost us!
yeah I think we get caught up on certain things like cost, but predictability is HUGE if we want to eliminate the added need to also store energy
@@TwoBitDaVinci absolutely! When viewed in a vacuum by themselves those costs can look too high. But when viewed as a group package with other renewables and storage on a grid vs current methods…well it’s just no contest which is the less expensive route!
First, great presentation Ricky! I first came across tidal power back in the early 80' in my Energy Management and Aternative Energy coursework and have since seen it in action when visiting the Netherlands. Here's a cincept...How about combining the underwater tidal generators with wind generators above them and floating solar farms behind them, all able to share the required grid connections and for good measure, this could include a smaller battery to help regulate/levelise the output from the three sources.
It is interesting how storage costs to balance power availability isn't factored into other kinds of renewables. If we were to consider the capacity factory of tidal and a small scale battery to take over as the tide is reversing, vs building out enough solar to charge enough batteries on an inclement weather day to keep power flowing 24/7 (worst case scenario) the benefits of tidal will really start to show, even during their minimum since it is predictable and can be calculated out, saving a lot of money in the long run.
@@TwoBitDaVinci in your talk you don't note that tides peak at different times in different places with high tide occurring _somewhere_ throughout the entirety of our 24 hour day. Transmission lines seem to be the solution to variability.
Tidal energy is really just gravity :)
Great video.
Especially the point about the battery costs for intermittent energy sources.
Would be interesting to add the storage costs to wind and solar and then compare to the tidal energy.
I did not even know about the plant in France. When my kids will be older, I have to make a trip there. Thanks for sharing this!
Great point, energy costs should be factored in for a better comparison... appreciate you as always Robert!
Gravity + Earth's Rotation + winds . . . ?
Achktually, it's really just angular momentum from the earth/sun/moon system. Gravity is just a medium to transfer momentum.
Isn't all hydro electric generation gravity... If you want to pull it apart wind power is just solar energy.
@@ravindrakhardekar704 Your almost there - "Gravity + Earth's Rotation + winds . . . ?" + Solar + Storage = No need for fossil fuels ! :) , Storage doesn't have to be all batteries either, Pumped Hydro ( where possible/practical) and even better Gravity based energy Energy Storage , a cost effective & reliable 100% renewable future is possible right now ! we just need to get on with it ! :)
Would love to see more tidal systems in place. Lived in Darwin where there was a 3 to 5 metre tidal variation 2 times per day. Used to run out on the flat beach to collect sandworms for bait then run back with the tide on your heels all the way.
You sort of mentioned the very reason some big tidal barrier systems are rejected : all those worms are food for birds and other wildlife. The Severn barrier in the UK keeps getting reviewed and the conclusion is it would obliterate vast areas used by migratory birds. The coastline (and almost any moving water) is so valuable for wildlife we should think carefully before tinkering with it. Maybe tidal flow and barriers would work on the small scale resulting in less impact? But then they are hardly going to be ready to provide base-load power.
You have become my modern day encyclopedia for "What's going on" as far as new ideas are concerned. I check out your videos every day. Thanks
Danger to marine life is one of the reasons the Fundy Tidal Project went stale in my province of Nova Scotia. That buzz has been silent for a decade.
14:20 this bit seems wrong. Just because tidal is predictable doesn't mean it doesn't count as "intermittent" (and therefore needing storage). The time of the tide changes slightly each day, so some days the peak tidal flow is nowhere near the same time as peak electricity usage - so it may *all* need be stored for up to 6 hours. Storage is the key factor to all the renewable energy solutions - crack that and we can clean up the planet.
Siemens Gamesa are working with Invinity Energy Systems to develop a long lasting megawatt scale flow battery system initially for wind farm use but it would work just as well with a tidal flow power generator. Inviniry already have small system installed at the European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC).
True...this!
I think we should combine 4 generation methods: Offshore Wind, Tidal, Wave and Solar. Put long masts into the ocean where current tidal generators are planned, attach wind turbines on top and wave generators between, as well as solar cells on top of the wave generators. Should at least be very space effient, but a mess to keep running and maybe not as energy efficient since the best spots for all these techs may not line up but I think space will be the most valuable resource we'll have in the future.
In the UK, we're building interconnects to Morocco and Iceland.
Iceland has geothermal, the UK has wind, and Morocco has solar. We've apparently somewhat solved the energy loss over large distances too. I say somewhat as it is still there but it's no longer such a drastic loss of efficiency. Those interconnects will definitely help
Typically need figure costs of particular engineered designs (might just be a mess).
One of the more irritating aspects about the cost of energy being presented for wind and solar is that they intentionally ignore the hundreds of billions of dollars of transmission lines, storage capacity, and VAR resources that need to be added to make persistent high generation penetration viable. They’re great when they function as auxiliaries to base load plants, but they simply aren’t base load plants themselves. Unfortunately, people that aren’t educated on how these systems work are aggressively pushing to strip the market of sources that are keeping things afloat. And if they get what they want, it’s hard to calculate how much time and money it’s going to take to fix the mess they create.
The geothermal coal plant conversion with laser drilling will be interesting in the next 10 years. Also cover reservoirs with solar panels limiting evaporation, cooling the panels, and use it to pump when it's not needed making the reservoir a pumped storage battery. Already need to cover lake Mead in solar panels to keep it from becoming a deadpool in the next decade.
Those dead zones are getting rid of us all.
@Fredrik Larsson nature and the historical record would disagree. War tends to push the human race forward. Many of our medical and technological advances are results of war. The biggest problem we have is uncontrolled population growth. Without conquering this problem billions of people will die from famine, pestilence and disease. Doesnt matter how much energy we can produce we will still have a catastrophic collapse.
If we can solve that one issue and create a populace that doesnt breed out of control, we can then provide far more per person and do it sustainably. Unfortunately there is no fix that wouldn't be a crime against humanity. So we continue to march towards that cliff where more humans will suffer then ever before in history
@Fredrik Larsson Global peace is a pipe dream.
We can't even stop arguing and fighting with our neighbour because their dog barks!
Between nations, there will not only be wars due to ideological differences but because of practical issues like a neighbour damming a river source and cutting the access to that water. The Nile is a great example.
@@TheRealCheckmate Salter's ducks?
Thokim84. Another great idea.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, ideas and videos. Great to see an update on tidal energy. Not sure if they died or you just haven’t seen them, in the past the most promising looking tech was one called ocean carpet generators. Supposedly the idea was a carpet like layer suspended just above the bottom on legs that would pump water as the waves traveled overhead and the energy captured would dampen the waves. The last news I heard was that it had more interest to prevent shore damage and to shelter harbors than for energy production. Basically the energy would be captured thru the pumping action and piped to shore to minimize mechanisms in the ocean. The harbor sheltering option would skip the generators and pipes and just pump the water directly back into the ocean only taking advantage of its resistance to be pumped. Another option was to place large underwater bidirectional Venturi made of concrete under the water with suction lines running to the shore running generators off the vacuum of air and venting the water into the sea thru the Venturi. Not sure what the affect of that much air bubbling up in the ocean would be. The proposed location for that one was the San Francisco Bay with and estimated 2400 MW capacity. Not sure if they have separated wave energy from tidal energy yet since the one is more wave than tidal. Might make a direction for you to investigate for any future updates. Wishing you and your family the best.
Thanks for explanation.
This is an excellent video. Learnt a lot of good information. Amazing depth of research and concise delivery as always. You answered some of my concerns about corrosion. The data around some of the past implementations is compelling enough to look closely at this.
I read an article years ago about a guy who built an electric Paddle Wheeler with a large array of Deep Cycle lead acid batteries to power it. (All they had in the mid 80's) He launched in on the Mississippi river and would motor upstream close to shore where the current was less. When the batteries where getting low he would move the boat further from shore where there was more current, throw out an anchor and let the water running by the boat spin the paddle wheels to recharge the batteries and continue upstream when they were charged. I thought it was pretty ingenious idea. It would be interesting to do something like that with modern liPo's and electric motors. Thanks for the video!
You did a good job on research. I think the free floating Turbines are the best bet. They require the least amount of infrastructure, can be pulled out of the water for easier maintenance.
There's been a free floating 1MegaWatt facility in Scotland since last year.
When they combine them with manufacturing green hydrogen we will finally be saved. Our use of natural gas is ending everything.
Swedish company Minesto has developed an under water kite teathered to the sea bed which "fly" in an "eight" beneath the surface. This gives it a lot of benefits compared to the stationary ones and can be used where tidal streams are very slow. It is now being operated in the Faroe islands with great results. I hope these kites will show up on many places of the earth.
Hey, just posted about this and the spotted yours! I'm following developments with interest 🤞
I'd read about tidal generation several years ago and was excited about its potential. Unfortunately, I'd not seen much since, until this excellent video. Thank you for presenting the factual and realistic benefits and pitfalls of tidal energy along with optimistic possibilities that may overcome the pitfalls. As with many technologies, solutions are possible if enough interest and investment is dedicated to that technology, Thanks again.
I've been talking about this for a couple of decades now. Glad to see it is coming to fruition.
Hey davinci, there's a scammer using your image trying to damage your channel. I reported it to you tube, and anyone else here, report this crime as well and DON'T GET SUCKED IN.
Yes, I have heard that the Bay of Fundy here in Eastern Canada has the same flow rate as all rivers of the world combined! So yeah there is a bit of potential there! The problem is that the water has too much force. Nothing can withstand it. The turbines get shredded by the massive debris like trees going through there. Perhaps a resivoir that fills like the French and Korean examples show would be good. One inlet could be dammed and the flow could be moderated somehow. The Bay itself is a beast, the tides go up over 60' at times. Highest tides in the world. Great potential but very difficult to work with that much power. Even the three gorges dam does not see the kind of flow that the Bay of Fundy does. Not by a long shot. Also their flow only comes from one side, not both, also there is no salt or whales in rivers like that....
Love learning about this stuff. Thanks!
You bet!
One side effect of tidal power is that it actually slows the earths rotation. It is only a tiny amount, but still happens
Thanks for this video. A long while ago, I got an idea which relates to this. It's been tricky to make a prototype, but I know it'll work. I'm reinspired now. Thanks again!
Great explanation sir! I originally thought that water was about 900 times more dense than air. But 800 is "close enough for most people".
Depends. At what altitude ?
@@GoustiFruit Sea level LOL .. j/k :P
@@GoustiFruit
@ "normal conditions of temperature and pressure"
Actually I love the breakdown.Your numbers are much better than when I was working with these. ALSO, you show nothing but vane axial style turbines, the better designs are built more like a jet engine and use cramic and composite components for bushings and thrust bearings. They also have the ability to ramp up quicker and alter direction wthout employing multiple clutch systems.
They're also ridiculously improbable. The obvious justification for that assertion is that if they WERE true, everyone would be rushing to cash in on the cash cow. You would not NEED government funding to encourage R&D, the companies would do it for themselves just to be the patent holder on key component improvements.
Would this work in rivers also?
@@nickbrutanna9973 investors want a quick return within a few years. Few want to put a lot of money into r and d on something that may or may not be particularly better or profitable in the long run. Once it's proven to work private companies will be willing to invest to build it but getting to that point is more likely to progress with government support. It's good to have diversity of options so if there's a problem they don't all stop at once.
In Scotland they are using tidal with units which are towed out and float like a ship , but then drop the blades under water .
When you want to check or service the blades you can just raise them out of the water so much cheaper to service .
Some great videos on you tube .
I love in Nova Scotia, Canada. In some parts of the province, we have incredibly powerful tides, like the Northumberland Straight and the Bay of Fundy. The province has been slowly moving to more renewable, but we still have a ways to go. More than 50% of our power is generated from coal, as of this writing. But we also have a lot of hydroelectric power plants, too. There's one in Cape Breton that generates around 212 MW.
But there's SOME headway being made in tidal power, but the projects so far have hit some snags here and there. We have one set up called the Annapolis Tidal plant, which generates around 80-100 MW.
Hello Two Bit da Vinci, thanks for the beautiful video. I'd like to point out that, like tides, sun and wind are predictable. Predictability is not the primary limiting factor for the various types of energy sources covered here. Rather, system operators are more concerned with how dispatchable energy is. A dispatchable energy source is one that can provide power on demand. Natural gas plants, diesel generators, and pumped hydro are dispatchable. Some coal plants are as well. Nuclear power is not because it cannot vary its output. Wind, solar, and tidal stream are not dispatchable. Tidal range is probably only dispatchable when the tide is going out. For these reasons energy storage is still needed.
We’ll said!
baseline energy production is very important and having a renewable that produces in winter and at night is great. Serving peaks however is another thing that needs more solution
Utility scale battery storage is a good alternative to peaker plants. One in Ventura county California was recently put into operation. This is why I think Tesla's Megapack business is on the verge of rocketing, new Megapack factory currently under construction in Lathrop, Calif., will likely be in starting-up by year-end.
Current nuclear is not dispatchable, but LFTR'S are quite so. As in the Australian system, batteries or other storage systems can mask the slower response rate of many proposed power sources.
Most of the negatives about tidal energy production can be overcome in due course through research into material science, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, etc. The most difficult, in my mind, is environmental impact as this tends to unfold over long spans of time and is difficult to measure.
Same is true for wind turbines. The problem is very close to why we do not have a thorium reactor. When one type of rector was developed is was much easier to go that route then to spend money on developing a different type. Wind turbines works and you can get them at price that you now. Tidal turbines also need a lot of development cost and that is always an unsure cost.
it takes time, billion of years maybe until the tidal energy-dissipation will ultimately slow down earth's rotation to 1/Month.
@@konradcomrade4845 I do think it was more the effect on nature not planet rotation. :-)
@@bknesheim Yep migratory species and such, you don't want a bunch of sea turtles having to navigate a tidal turbine farm to get to their nesting grounds. Or because sounds are transmitted so easily other species may be affected. In all though, considering the alternatives, this would work really well for island nations that can't afford an SMR or don't have the land area to give up to renewables and grid scale long term energy storage.
@@anydaynow01 Many small island nation have "weak" tidal so they will be better of with wind turbines that can take advantage of trade winds.
Great video! Love your content and the manner in which you deliver it!!!
NP is the gold standard of clean energy. It’s as clean and safe as any alternative, requires a fraction of the resources and produces clean, reliable energy 24/7/365. NP really is the premier example of dematerialization in which we actually use less to produce more.
Fantastic balanced and fact-based report, very enjoyable. However I do have some doubts about the longevity and maintenance costs of underwater turbines.
Very interesting video, thank you! As others have stated, the O&M cost would be enormous for tidal energy at massive scale. Also, the transmission buildout costs would be daunting to say the least. I think this shows promise, but would require significant advances in automation technology to bring the price point for O&M costs in particular to a reasonable point.
Because of the poor physics of the system the costs will never be compeditive with clean green new generation nuclear.
The problem with most engineering is is that someone has their special interest involved. Brainstorming and free thinking don’t seem to be too accepted. Vertical access turbines are the better turbine to use for the situation you can make a three-dimensional vertical axis tree with smaller turbines so that the flux of the currents doesn’t put drag on other portions of the turbine, thus, making it more efficient. Then, a vertical access turbine is much safer and will not harm animals such as manatees etc. The next thing is you don’t put the generator underwater, you put that above the water and either the top of a pylon, a anchored barge, a GPS controlled location electric barge etc. then the barge can be used to also create hydrogen and oxygen to help offset cost. The turbines turn hydrostatic pumps. they pump hydraulic fluids to run between the turbines. this way they can actually work and series. The fluid then turns the generator…. This makes the turbine modules easy to swap out for maintenance and repair.
I love the way this is explained. Very informative. Maybe we can help get more exposure to this info and these methods by sharing
Definitely a combination of wind, solar and tidal.
The biggest problem with sea water, which you touched on a bit, is corrosion and animal growth. These are not problems, these are HUGE problems. Solving these will be a game changer.
If the uk had tidal power we would have 24/7 energy due to how tides work.
Making the blades from UHDPE or PTFE (plastic) will stop both corrosion and fouling.
@@jamesbrown99991 the problem is also the shaft and bearings. Sealing those from seawater can be difficult.
I'm not sure if the plastic outer will work for long.
Yeah- I think this was downplayed too much. Building anything in Salt Water is iffy- it is a brutal environment. One of his slides above touted longevity of 75-100 years for tidal turbines. I just don't buy it. If they don't last that long on land, how are they going to last 3 times longer in a corrosive soup? I am glad it is being pursued, especially given its more reliable time of energy generation- but I think we will have a long ways to get ot a system that is bullet-proof while submerged in our seas.
@@SimonAmazingClarke Greaseless ceramic bearings are suitable for marine use. Carbon-fibre drive shafts don't rust and have high longevity; a PTFE layer on the shaft would resist fouling.
Overmoulding the stator means there's no seals to leak. Friction caused by water between the stator and rotor can be removed by filling the area with pressurised gas, e.g. H2. I don't think these issues are insurmountable.
@@jamesbrown99991 all of that sounds awesome.
Most people think stock investIng is a get rich scheme, it's not so. Don't just follow the crowd, do some research or at least work with someone that'll do that for you. Glad I listened to my ment0r, he made me go big on renewable energies now I'm up 60% on just Clearway Energy(CWEN) in only 5 months.
Who's ur mentor? I heard the way to go now is getting in early on hydropower and solar, one of my buddies made almost 50k but i just keep burning my account.
Sean Robert Travis, he works with the best market analysts.
G0Ogle him.
You can look him up {G oogle}
Sure I will, thanks.
Fascinating stuff for sure! Cost is always the driving factor... and even though it might save money in the long run, most companies ignore the long game in favor of cheaper up front costs. It is far easier to take the cheap route and push the eventual cost penalty down the road for the next person to deal with than to try and convince and justify higher up front costs to management and shareholders. it's all about those greenbacks!
Bribery is also a factor
I live on a Dutch barge in the Debian estuary in Suffolk. Next door is one of only two, Three hundred year old, tide mills that capture a pool of water from the rising tide and mills flower at low tide. This form of power is clean, reliable, and older than you think.
Good video. We need to keep learning, and paying attention to new ideas and technology
Can you do a part two going through, the equipment cycling costs, and recycling costs.
Also the energy storage needed to make it a viable 24/7 power source, it should be a lot less than other renewable sources.
My dad started campaigning for tidal power during WW11, he nearly got caught half way across a tidal bay in northern England ,Morecambe, and he realised the potential of the movement of water.
In England we have a large coastline in comparison to land area, we have numerous suitable sites.
Just need the political will and investment, please.🙏
A tidal power dam from Port Eynon to Ilfracombe would do nicely. It would also let me drive into Wales from Bideford a tad more quickly too!
@@thedubwhisperer2157 love Bideford one of my favpurite places I've ever visited.
@@marksecker1596 There is some interesting historic content of Bideford on CZcams.
A way forward may be to combine functions of use like structures built into the sea that can also be used as housing or commercial areas and then also use the areas in contact with the tides as propeller areas and then with types of 'fanbelts' drive the turbines on top of the sea and being exposed, they can easily be maintained and serviced.
Oscillating water columns look pretty sweet. Harnessing wave energy without having to deal with being underwater. I'm not sure if there are any floating ones though
There are. look up Eco Wave
wave energy is a different field to tidal, equally valid but not the topic under discussion.
@@alanhat5252 yeah I got that 🙄
What about a tidal reverse yoyo bouoy? Tides will come in and out, predictably. So having something like a dynamic wave break for harbors, that goes up and down with the tide, then use gravitational potential and the wave's lifting energy to spin coreless axial flux generators located out of the water
I enjoyed your analysis and discussion. Capacity Factor is another parameter to consider when investing in generation. Capacity Factor for tidal generation will be poor (meaning generation is unreliable resulting in the need to store energy when tidal energy is off peak, the tide comes twice a day, but it also stops twice a day). In addition to storage, there is frequency conversion apparatus for interface to the grid system. All this complexity adds cost and reduces reliability. And then, as you mentioned there are but few locations in the world suitable for tidal energy.
California has proven that poor Capacity Factor solar and wind results in unreliable and the most expensive power rates in the USA. Even with great German engineering, Germany confirmed this with their most expensive power rates in the world. And then there is Australia… etc.
Leonardo is one of my heroes. Unfortunately, this “10X breakthrough” contraption is comparable to other 15th century technologies. For modern times we best move to 21st century green intrinsically safe reliable new generation nuclear for the grid. Checkout NuScale Power small modular reactor nuclear technology.
Everything we do underwater is like 10 or 100 times more expensive than the same thing on land. I simply don't believe tidal energy can be cheaper than wind or solar. There's a reason boats are so much more expensive than cars.
I loved seeing the graphics behind tidal forces-made it really easy to understand.
The fact that tidal energy can be harnessed on both directions makes it far more efficient than pumped hydro. But here is tidal energy's Achilles heel: shoreline environmental regulations are so demanding that the time, energy, and treasure just to get permits is enough to abort the project. Just ask someone who wanted to replace the deck boards on a simple boat dock. And think about the possibility of a new hydropower project in the US-we have environmentalists demanding we tear down existing dams built in the last century.
Unfortunately they don't produce power at slack tide which means there is no tidal movement for approximately for 45 mins between each tide. So they can be used as a part of generation mix plus they are the most expensive way of generation type and need a lot of maintenance because of the environment they work in
How far North/South would you need to space out a couple of plants to cancel this effect? A quick look at the tidal charts spaced about 25 miles apart, overlayed here in south Florida resembles a 3 phase chart. Running at about 1 cycle per day vs 60 hz.
Phenomenal overview, with sufficient details to engage curious and mindful viewers. Thank you for your dedication to clarify complex science and technologies.
Glad it was helpful Martin, and thank you for that!
To my way of thinking, we need include tidal with all the other sorces for power production, each in its optimally viable location. Power consumption projections don't even take into account developing countries that will be a factor in future projections.Tidal production at least avoids most of the high cost of power storage.
great content thanks
Glad you think so!
I’d love to see the comparative numbers for all the energy plants listed here to include the carbon costs, from extraction through delivery. How much full life-cycle carbon do each of the named systems wind up pumping into the atmosphere? Conversely, how much does each keep out of the atmosphere? Personally, I think we need to start using carbon cost in all such calculations. Recommended reading on this (and other related subjects): Ministry for the Future, Kim Stanley Robinson.ds
Ministry for the Future was a good read. 👍🏻
I found a solution to intermittency probably 50 years ago. I store both solar and wind energy as compressed air.
My windmills pump Air and the solar runs a small electric air pump.
All that compressed air joins up in a system of receivers, that is vessels or tanks and a myriad of piping all over my ranch.
For a hobby, I have for the past nearly 60 years, built small steam engines and air engines as well as windmills (VAWT). I use the compressed air to run all my toys and if push comes to shove, I have a few, which can create house current.
Sure, I know what you're thinking and you're right. When I run out of compressed air I'm back to rubbing sticks together, but so what?
If what I do were done on a grand scale, who knows what could be the outcome?
After all, there's lots of air.
As you well know, the energy density of compressed air and the inefficiency of the compression and use side are both extremely low and wasteful - not something we want to be encouraging on a large scale.
It seems like tidal energy, like many other forms of energy production, can be part of the mix on our path to sustainable energy production. Thanks for the insightful and timely information! 🙂
Can you dig into the bill arizona passed about water management? They mentioned a desalination plant. I can only assume the water will come from Baja. Hope we get it done.
I’ll check I’ve been thinking about water a lot lately!
I always felt the ocean holds the key to the production of energy. I believe there must be a way to take advantage of the intense atmospheric pressure you find in the ocean depth. It seems like if you could design something that harnesses the crushing pressure while at the same time you include something wants to expand like a lighter than air gas like hydrogen or helium. If you design it in a way that can take advantage of the push and pull force. I don't know it's just a thought.
Pressure is not energy. A pressure perpetual motion machine to extract energy is impossible. See the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. The temperature differential of deep vs. surface water is a possibility? Anyway... keep thinking and studying physics as we can use your inventive mind.
Those tidal range plants look interesting. You could house the generators above in the concrete structure. The blades could be lowered down into the water below and connected with some kind or drive train. Maintaince could be made easy by winching the blades up out of the water. Having that concrete building above means you could also have a gantree crane servicing a whole row of turbines.
Sounds similar to the function of an inboard motor combined with an outboard propellor and steering system on a boat. But with the role reversed, propellor taking in the rotational energy and converting with a generator to electrical power.
@@PNH-sf4jz yes, that's a good way to put it! So many designs I see look too fancy, carbon fiber capsules with a generator inside etc. Keep it low tech, simple, and easy to fix I say, because the sea water will wreck everything.
Thanks for a very interesting presentation - tidal appears to have enormous potential, let us hope that it can be harnessed more broadly.
Tidel energy builds up gradually over a long time. I'm curious what effect taping into it at scale would have. How much potential energy can safely be converted and what are the consequences of using too much both on a local scale and global scale?
I wondered about this too,
We are effectively taking energy away from the moons orbit ?
There is no effect on the Moon's orbit because the drag on the Moon is the overall movement of water, mostly in the oceans, and this would have very little effect on that total movement.
What could have an effect is on coastal erosion as movement of sand along coasts might be strongly affected. As energy is absorbed along one section of coastline, it might be shifted to adjacent areas, possibly exacerbating flooding at maximum tide. Also, the tidal generation systems would be strongly affected by changes in sea level.
It's not the moon's orbit that I was talking about. The moon has a lot of momentum. I was talking about the tides themselves. I'm assuming that the tides get a tiny push from the moon and that tides accumulates over time. Maybe I'm wrong. My question is how much energy can be drained from the tide before effecting them. I don't know the answer, but the amount provided by the moon can be calculate.
@@riderpaul it would actually be affecting the earth's rotation maybe?
Again it would be so small an affect that it would.not matter for millions of years by.which time humans wont be here to.keep the thing running anyway.
See my comment regarding affecting weather patterns globally
River systems flow to sea. Sure seems like using a river system would be a way to capture that flowing energy without the cost and disruption to wild life and the ecosystem that a dam would cause. This would also make it available to more countries that do not have coast lines on the sea. This would not be tidal power but it seem that the equipment could be adapted to use in these cases expanding their possible use case and increasing their economies of scale.
there are a few river hydro power plants where i live and they are instaling more each year
@@colinvanful The ones that divert a portion of a river to run through a turbine are very interesting, though they require a bit of elevation change for them to work properly.
Finally. The earth has suffered tremendously, because politicians (driven by big companies) did not want to engage in clean energy. Hopefully this will now change. Better late then never. Great info!
When most people comment on how expensive tidal generation is, they forget how expensive wind and solar were until economies of scale and improvements due to improved technology and learning drove the costs down to current levels.
The UK government has just awarded contracts to 4 tidal projects, one of which (Orbital Marine) has already commissioned a 2MW system and will use the same construction to manufacture additional systems. If they can obtain contracts from the government to manufacture and install more units so they can create a production line, costs should start to significantly reduce.
Their system also makes maintenance less difficult as the turbines are on a floating platform and can be raised out of the sea for maintenance thereby reducing the need for either heavy lifting cranes to lift the unit from the sea bed or undersea workers who are much more expensive.
We need this technology to provide absolutely predictable energy regardless of the sun or wind and cover baseload requirements which current renewable cannot do without a large amount of battery support for the several days with low wind and solar output (solar output being zero for the long nights in Winter where more energy is required).
We need to use all of them combined and where they work best in conjunction with good battery storage. and we need to make it so cheap and available that no matter what cheating and propaganda the fossil fuel industry employs consumers will automatically choose renewable options because they work better and cost less.
You need to run for president or something.
Power storage can also choose the best available method for the location, just as you say for generation - it doesn't have to be battery. I'm not sure why batteries are such a focus. Gravity is great for storage too. Just roll a big rock up a hill. Or pump water back up the dam. Energy stored. Repeatable a million times. No pollution, heavy metals or decay in efficiency. No international shortages or high lithium prices. We've all got gravity right where we need it already.
@@completelybusted Batteries are a focus because solar and wind are the most in use and their intermittency requires storage and backup. Hydro is efficient and amazing because it runs all the time but it is not in use the way it should be … yet. Fossil fuel subsidies control and propaganda have slowed renewable research and development for such a long time that we are not seeing all the forms of hydropower we could, but that is also changing. Hydropower also has only been able
to be used at scale and near rivers, coast lines and dams which has limited its application. Until governments get on board with proper funding to develop more versions of hydro, and other forms that are not intermittent, it’s all about the batteries.
@@DanteVelasquez I think you may have missed my point. Clearly intermittent generation requires additional storage mechanisms. My comment was similar to yours. Choose the best storage mechanism for the location and budget. Batteries are storage, but so is gravity. Use excess power to lift a big rock, or pump water uphill. And when you need the energy, release the rock or the water. Other methods than batteries can, at times, be cheaper, longer lasting, more repeatable, less polluting than batteries. Choose both the generation mechanism and the storage mechanism to be as effective, clean and cheap as possible.
In my opinion batteries are the main focus largely because industry can control the tech and make money out of manufacturing them. Whereas they cannot make so much money out of gravity. Clearly batteries have a place - e.g. cars. But for mass storage gravity should be cheaper & cleaner in the long run in the same way that wind & solar are cheaper & cleaner than oil in the long run.
We need to beware that battery research does not get all the subsidies, control and propaganda to slow other energy storage research.
@@completelybusted I see what you are saying and definitely agree, but since gravity energy cannot be used everywhere then we will have to rely on batteries, and mechanical ones are also in use to a small degree. Though I do think that what you say about the money also applies because if they could make money off of gravity based energy more research would be happening and we would be able to use it on a much larger scale already. Here's hoping for the future.
Two, er, three downsides:
(1) There are not many locations with strong tides and a natural and bridgeable gap.
(2) Anything exposed to salt water is going to have a limited lifetime. Twenty or thirty years is a reasonable limit. However if you have to borrow money to build the tidal dam, you're likely to barely have it paid off by the time it's completely rusted through.
(3) And the big deal-killer-- it has to be built to handle a 100-year storm surge. That requires that it be built like four times stronger than absolutely necessary, which often makes it far too expensive to ever break-even.
With windmills one can at least brake or feather them, not so possible with tidal dams.
Good points…
What are your qualifications, credentials? This is not an attack on what you said, I believe in verifying sources of information, wherever it comes from.
@@paulrobertson2457 I'm just a guy with an engineering background. In engineering you learn about efficiency and designing things to last and the costs associated. Somewhere along the line I've learnt that steel ships rarely last more than 30 years before they have to be scrapped, so I'm guessing that holds for most anything made of steel in salt water. Also learnt about the time value of money and interest costs. With that kind of knowledge you can look at many things and noodle out their cost, efficiency, and practicality.
In British Columbia there are literally dozens ( maybe hundreds) of prospective sites with the inlets on the coast. The tidal action on the long narrow inlets has to be seen to seen to understand. You just have to look at a map. However. with the rainfall and topography, standard hydro electric dams are relatively much cheaper.
@@paulmcgown7504 After decades of being stuck in litigation, I don't think dams are any cheaper.
The problem with tidal energy is that, while it is predictable, it is STILL somewhat intermittent.
There are periods when the tide is changing from in-flow to out-flow that it has NO power output - similar to solar but much shorter and twice a day every day.
The ONLY form of renewable energy that does not have this issue is Hydropower - but even Hydro can sometimes have issues.
Geothermal energy doesn't need to be intermittent, and is effectively renewable.
@@garethbaus5471 Valid point.
It's too bad geothermal is so little used for power generation.
@@bricefleckenstein9666 both tidal and geothermal energy make up only a tiny fraction of global energy production so they are fairly comparable in that sense, it should be noted that more countries are powered almost exclusively by geothermal energy then tidal energy so at least in that sense geothermal energy currently appears to be a bit more practical.
@@garethbaus5471 I am only aware of Iceland having a significant amount of geothermal power in use.
I am not aware of ANY country that is "almost exclusively powered by tidal energy" though, and 1 *is* greater than 0....
I really enjoy your channel, I always learn something. Cheers!
Thank you for an informative video about Tidal Systems. Well done. However, I wouldn't consider Tidal Systems a 24/7 source, because the tides will have a period (slack tide) where they are between the ebb and flow (flood). So, they will need to be designed to handle that short Lull, where no power can be generated. It isn't a very long period of time tho, so it should be able to be possible to do this on a massive scale, and drop the price.
What we need now is an environmental science group that can do the math, and prove that by installing these we decrease the risk of massive floods. That would create a much stronger incentive.
Very true. Predictability is still nice though
There's about an hour of lull time every 6 hours, but at least that gives you a very specific design requirement for your storage solution.
I'm a scuba diver so Slack is the interesting time for me. The thing about slack is that it is dependant on location. Just like timezones you can plan multiple locations so when it's slack in one it's not slack in others (so long as they are well separated).
On a separate note I don't think there was enough emphasis on bio-fowling in this video. Look at orbital o2 tidal turbine, It's designed so the turbines can be removed and serviced because the marine environment is so hostile
This was one of the best examinations of cost/benefit issues around renewable energies on the net. 5 Thumbs up for you!
🙏
In a perfect world you would have a basket of clean energy generating options, to that end in the UK surrounded by the sea it would make a lot of sense to fully explore tidal energy. Hopefully in the near future more projects will be tried. Great video.
What is needed is further expansion and research in the third line-item of the chart at the 11:00 mark. It is right near the middle as far as LCOE costs (slightly more than half the cost of off-shore wind), throttleable (need more power? increase the output of the generators), ALWAYS available and if the PTB would allow recycling/purification of the waste, it is far safer than most people are willing to admit. You also don't need to build your power plants along the shoreline, remember what triggered the Fukushima disaster?
.
Regarding the maintenance costs and longevity for the tidal systems. The Laurent project in France and the Siwa in S. Korea are, to all intents and purposes, standard hydroelectric dams. The biggest differences are they DON'T need to rely on rain and snowfall to "recharge" nor is their storage being drawn down for drinking/agricultural use plus the turbines run in both directions. It would be relatively easy to pull one of the turbines from the "array" if it needs to be repaired or replaced. You can't say the same for a turbine sitting miles off shore in over 200 feet of water.
Just a comment, I throughly enjoy your videos,thanks for being there
I've been hearing since I was a kid in the 70's. I think tidal energy makes a good case for nuclear power. Small nuclear plants is the answer. Otherwise we need breakthroughs in solar , much like the breakthroughs happening in batteries right now. Your videos are quite polished and good. This one though is wishful thinking.
Have a look at the new Perovskite solar cells that are not far off and promise close to 40% efficiency figures , with their speed of deployment & low cost to deploy& of coarse close to zero maintenance , they will probably beat on shore wind soon with Gravity Storage and or pumped hydro :)
We need millions of donkeys spinning turbines. It`s the only way.
@@baneverything5580 hahahahahaha
@@pwrrpw319 I`m pretty happy with 22% solar panel efficiency when hurricanes temporarily force me off grid. Much less expensive than running a gas generator at this point to power freezers, small fridges, lights and fans. Now if they could just lower battery prices so I could afford to run a tiny window air conditioner and the other stuff without worrying about clouds rolling in....
A startup I worked for in 1990 built and tested tidal turbines and even installed a series of them on the San Mateo bridge in the SF Bay Area. For 18 months, those tubular units generated all of the power used to light the bridge and services. It was removed because an organization was positive that the units would injure/kill sea life, not that they had any proof and we saw no sign of that happening.
yes rabid environmentalists are why we can't have good things.they want humans to disappear. and the stupid laws give them too much power.
It was the Green Wave Project, and it was scrapped because it failed to provide serious studies that proved it wouldn't harm marine environments.
The onus of "no harm" is on the proposer, not the potential victims.
The area is a struggling marine ecosystem as it is, without chopping up sea lions, fish and the other endangered species.
If we could overcome the social, political, and government roadblocks, it would make more sense to build more nuclear power plants than tidal energy, wind, or solar.
Pursuing innovation in all renewable energy sources is crucial, rather than rely on 1 or 2 sources for energy. That's the reason why tidal is lagging behind sola and wind. The challenges are huge, I am sure, but the potential for human innovation is humongous. Let's hope in the next 10 to 30 years we completely/mostly stop relying on fossil fuels for energy, maybe we will see more peace/stability in this world and hopefully lower energy costs. Thanks for sharing your knowledge as always. Love these videos :)
The thing is, Tidal energy IS intermittent, with 4 power producing times and 4 no power times every day. The only advantage over solar and wind is that the power production fluctuations are predictable. Still needs storage for those "no power" times.
For me this is the most promising of all sources of clean renewable energy. As @Oukai has nicely pointed out, there are challenges, but the real mystery is why this source of energy is not being considered as the primal source of renewable energy.
For the same reason why we aren't flying around in George Jetsons cars...human GREED.
Thank you. Great video + I've often wondered why tidal energy was not being used as much as wind/solar & you answered my questions here. I wonder if there are ways of using entirely plastic composites for underwater components instead of metals fo better resisting salt water corrosion + also wondered if they could combine a wind turbine above water + tidal turbine below as one unit which could save on costs too ?
"entirely plastic composites for underwater components" For one thing, plastic is a nonconductor of electricity. The actual generator MUST have metals to make power. Perhaps if the actual generator were above water it would reduce (not stop) the corrosion, BUT increase the building cost and complexity of the unit. These separate units would the greatly increase the costs to build and maintain.
I like that they spin slowly and are not a threat to wildlife. Bravo. I hope. Certainly not as much as a fishing net is...
The biggest advantage of water turbines is that, unlike air, water is incompressible. It absolutely will push the turbine blades. Air likes to find its way around the blades. This is why efficiency is double.
Renewable energy is not the problem, nor is intermittency. The problem lies within efficient energy storage. We simply do not know how to store long-term enough energy -yet.
another source of renewable energy is the kite energy systems. It can capture lots of energy from the Jet-streams. And I have figured it out how to.
If the corrosion of sea water is a problem for these turbines, let's not forget that all those desalination plants being built to mitigate potable water shortages everywhere produce brine. Brine is what is left over after desalinating sea water and it is super salty. This leftover substance is pumped back into the sea. As the brine is being pumped into the ocean, it makes the surrounding water even more salty than it already is. Don't know how long it takes for the brine to be diluted (if at all), but these underwater turbines cannot be installed near a desalination plant.
They did this years ago. The problem they faced was fowling of the equipment.
Excellent analysis, you have a very organized way of explaining things. Perhaps three d printing can help bring the cost down.
I would like to have you tell us about wave energy generators, seems like wave and underwater turbines could work in tandem.
Definitely this kind of information should be part of every school curriculum as the future rely upon knowledge and dreams
The Tidal plant in Nova Scotia is one direction turbine. It least it was 20 years ago when i visited it. It only runs generator from high tide to low tide. Then it recharges tidal pond. So it can only run about 6 to 8 hours a day.
Love that there is a clip of Swansea in South Wales at 4:01. being part of the Severn estuary catchment that has one ofthe highest tidal ranges in the world there has long been talk of the potential for tidal energy and more than one project that looked at the lagoon model which unfortunately would change the environment for a lot of the bird life that relies on the mud flats. Tidal Stream is less environmentally changing than lagoon, but some lagoon projects not only deliver power generation but also other opportunities like lagoon side living, not all lagoon projects in the past though have been power generation based like Cardiff Bay also in South Wales which is like an extended marina lagoon that has revitalised the old docks and wetlands of Cardiff. Some exciting times ahead if all the issues can be engineered out.
I'm not sure when you recorded this but did you consider perovskite solar cells??
This is an excellent appraisal that looks at output, not just rated capacity, when most analysts just look at the latter. It’s a very important video that could make a difference to policymakers decisions. People should be reminded, the low and intermittent output from solar and wind do not factor in the cost of maintaining expensive gas plants and battery storage to balance the grid. Therefore the LCOE is actually a weak comparison. You need to factor in the system balance cost, that reflects the cost to the customer. Also. Coal plants can be fitted with carbon capture cheaply creating a zero carbon but controllable source of power😀
I remember reading somewhere that intermittent renewables like solar and wind can make up up to 40% of the power grid without major issues. So nuclear, hydro, tidal, and geothermal will have to make up for the rest if they want to ban fossil fuels. That's not really possible right now.