1. U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Water Power Ocean Research & Resources Advisory Panel 14 August 2009

2. DOE Water Power Activities (Restarted in FY 2008) FY07FY08FY09FY10 (request) $0$10$40$30 Appropriations address both conventional hydro (CH) and marine and hydrokinetic technologies (MHK) Technology Definitions Marine and hydrokinetic (MHK): energy from: Waves Water currents (tides, rivers, ocean currents, man-made channels) Ocean thermal energy (OTEC) Conventional hydropower (CH): energy from any source that uses a dam, diversionary structure, or impoundment for electric power purposes. purposes.

3. DOE Water Power Mission Identify and undertake RDD&D activities necessary to: Assess the potential extractable energy from water resources Facilitate the development and deployment of renewable, environmentally-sound, and cost-effective energy from domestic rivers, estuaries and coastal waters EERE focuses on applied research, development, and deployment Most fundamental R&D undertaken by DOE Office of Science Policy role limited to advice and recommendations

4. Resources At least 50 GW estimated extractable resource in US –Greatest resource from waves and rivers –Existing assessments preliminary and conservative –Refined resource assessments necessary to decrease uncertainty and prioritize development Reduced transmission costs due to proximity to load Wave and tidal, ocean, and river currents are highly predictable and can be easily forecasted Offshore sites are low profile – low visibility Data gaps Need for interim, defensible assessments Timeline for development? *Source: EPRI 2009, NYU 1986 ResourceRaw (GW)Extractable (GW) Wave24030 Tidal Current132 Ocean CurrentUnknown6 River142613 Total167951 Projected Pilot Wave (1MW, COE) Projected Pilot Tidal (1MW, COE) Projected Pilot OTEC (1MW, COE) 2007 Water and Historical Wind COE (¢/kWh)

5. Barriers  Technologies in very early stage of development, few full-scale demonstrations  Lack of cost and performance data  Lack of standards for development, testing, and evaluation  Prototype deployment is costly and time-consuming  High capital costs and technology risk  Unique survivability/reliability challenges  O&M is difficult and costly in rough marine environments – must be minimized  Minimizing O&M in rough marine environments requires extremely robust designs  Lack of information on device/resource interaction  Few technology-specific models and tools  Lack of detailed resource quantification and characterization  Existing data is preliminary and uncertain; extractable power still to be derived from total power figures  Uncertain environmental, navigational, and competing use impacts, complex regulatory framework  Siting and regulatory delays may stop industry before it starts

6. Program Priorities Marine and Hydrokinetics System Deployment and Testing –Facilitate the deployment and testing of full scale MHK prototypes and components –Support the development of integrated test centers –Generate data on performance, reliability and impacts Cost Reduction and System Performance/Reliability –Support design and development of scale systems and components in order to reduce technology costs and improve performance and reliability –Develop design and testing protocol, support developers who follow it –Develop numerical and physical tools to assist industry in device and system design and operation. Understand Environmental Effects –Collect/disseminate data on environmental impacts to reduce deployment costs and environmental effect Resource Modeling –Determine the available, extractable, and cost-effective water resources in the US Develop Evaluation and Performance Standards –Characterize, evaluate and compare the wide variety of MHK technologies; continue IEC/IEA standards development

7. Substantial deployment incentives –Technology development stage similar to wind in mid 1980’s –Nascent technology needs both R&D support and market-pull policies –E.g. deployment fund to establish technology-specific rate warranties Definition of maximum amount of electricity per individual technology (i.e. 5MW@30%) Definition of support per kWh delivered ($0.5/kWh) –Guaranteed PPAs; Loan guarantees Streamlined Licensing Process –Overlapping jurisdiction between Federal and state agencies –Regulators employ license processes designed for oil & gas or conventional hydropower –Can take 5 years to secure license for small projects –License process must consider scalability of technologies and leave room for adaptive management Policy Needs

8. MHK Key Activities MHK Technology Development Principal activities include: –Competitive awards to industry to design, develop, and test energy conversion devices and projects (ongoing projects awarded in ‘08, additional projects solicited in ’09) –Solicitations to national labs for computational tools to improve system design and array configuration –Development of international device performance and identification standards. –MHK Technology and Project Database –National Marine Renewable Energy Centers MHK Market Acceleration/Analysis Principal activities include: –Ongoing projects to assess wave and tidal resources, solicited projects to assess in-stream, ocean current, OTEC; –Cost assessments of all MHK technologies and OTEC –Report to Congress identifying potential environmental effects of MHK technologies –Industry solicitation to support project-specific environmental studies –Marine and Hydrokinetic Industry Roadmap –Development of project siting guidelines and framework

9. Water power questions? Alejandro Moreno Technology Lead, Water Power Wind and Hydropower Technologies U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-8171 alejandro.moreno@ee.doe.gov Megan McCluer Program Manager Wind and Hydropower Technologies U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-7736 megan.mccluer@ee.doe.gov