Yes, it cannot really fail to work. Em …, if no accidents. The Oscillating Water Column is a very simple device with only one moving part, the two way air turbine that has always to remain well above water level. As the sea heaves, it compresses the air in the tapered chamber above and increases its speed as it spins the turbine-generator. Thousands of hours of power were successfully generated into the grid at Port Kembla. So whether it works or not is not an issue.
The big questions of how well it worked, i.e. with what efficiency, and with what durability and cost, no WEC company ever comments on. If asked, they answer a different question. It’s the same with CWE. I can’t blame them. When companies get close to a commercial model they guard the figures of merit until the final unit is complete. Even after first sales they will still try to reduce costs. Pelamis and Aquamarine saw the writing on the wall for their devices without even getting to commercial stage, and thus closed down.
Oceanlinx’s 1 MW greenWave device is designed to sit on the seafloor in 10 -15m of water under its own weight of some 1000s of tonnes of concrete and steel. It would be hard to pick up and take home for maintenance. However it is the turbine that is a precision device and it needs to be readily removable. Because it has to sit close inshore it loses the capacity to utilise the larger wave heights available further out. This increases the cost in $ per MW. Whether its monstrous ugliness is acceptable is a separate question.
You are right, Taiwan, as also most of the SE Asian islands, do not lie in a good wave climate, mostly 0 to 10 kW/m of wave crest (average 5). Compare that with Fremantle 50 to 80 kW/m (aver 65). Therefore whatever WEC you choose, if you put it at a place such as Fremantle, you could extract ~13 x the power as at Taiwan, i.e. the cost in $/MW is 13x higher at Taiwan. A consistent high level wave state is critically important.
Juke
CWE Price at posting:
4.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
