1. 1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review An Assessment of Lifecycle Cost in the U.S. over Time Mirko Previsic RE Vision Consulting Ph: 916-977 3970, Email: mirko@re-vision.net 10-6-2011

2. 2 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Purpose, Objectives, & Integration Purpose -Develop a solid understanding of Lifecycle cost of Wave, Tidal, River, and Ocean Current Technologies -Where can we extract how much energy at what cost? -Identify cost of electricity targets to enable technology adoption in market place. Relation to Program Mission -Mission-critical building block to provide an answer to the commercial and taxpayer value of this sector. -Justify Investments into this sector, both public and private -How critical are these resources to long-term energy security in this country? Integration with other Projects - Project is tightly integrated with Reference Model Project

3. 3 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach – Parametric Model Lifecycle Cost Assessment using Parametric Techno-Economic Models. How does cost change as a function of: Resource characteristics, site characteristic, and deployment scale (both project as well as cumulative). Built on previous modeling efforts for wide range of clients including: Oil&Gas, Electric Utilities, Device Developers, Investors, Engineering Outfits. Data from roughly 40 previous studies (public and non-public). Collaboration with Device Manufacturers to refine design, and performance data Independent Cost Assessment of a set of reference devices at US-based reference sites. Independent Focus Area studies to refine performance and cost data including: –Construction Cost of Fabricated Steel Elements –Marine Operational Activities –Mooring Design Configuration and Cost Development of Suitable Cost and Extraction Density Curves for Application to Resource Extraction Models

4. 4 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Technical Approach – Resource Data Resource Data Integrated into GIS Model for: –EPRI Lead Wave Resource Assessment –Georgia Tech Lead Tidal Resource Assessment –Ocean Current Resource Data from HYCOM –River data is not yet available from EPRI lead resource assessment team. No other decent options. Electric Grid Superimposed onto Resource ReEDS Capacity Expansion Model to Establish set of Adoption Scenarios through 2030 and 2050 –What levelized cost target is required to allow for substantial adoption of technology in market place? –Where are MHK technologies deployed?

5. 5 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Plan, Schedule, & Budget Schedule & Budget Initiation date: April 1 st 2010 Planned completion date: December 31 st 2011 Total Budget: $500k Spent as of 9-30-11: $356k Partner: NREL, PCCI

6. 6 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Detailed Project Plan

7. 7 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results

8. 8 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results

9. 9 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results

10. 10 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results

11. 11 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Accomplishments and Results Energy supply curves associate resource potential with technology cost at national and regional levels. Incorporate additional costs of accessing nearby transmission grid Avoid potential conflict areas (e.g., shipping lanes, environmentally sensitive areas)

12. 12 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Challenges to Date Resource Data largely Insufficient for adequate Supply Curve modeling 1.No data available for river resource 2.Extraction Effects on Ocean Current Resource largely unknown 3.Large Uncertainties to the extractable potential from tidal remains to be addressed 4. Limited design data exists for Ocean Current devices to establish cost profiles Solution 1.In discussion with DoE HQ decided to not develop a supply-curve for river hydrokinetic 2.Established extractable resource methodology for tidal power 3.Developed our own Ocean Current Resource Assessment using Hycom with some validation points 4.Developed concept design for Ocean Current design => Refinements expected under Reference Model efforts

13. 13 | Wind and Water Power Programeere.energy.gov Next Steps Project is almost complete and final report will be delivered to DoE by 12-31-11. Future Efforts Needed : -Resource data becoming available for river and ocean current by next summer needs to be integrated into supply curve models. -Efforts identified short-comings in the suitability of resource assessments completed Todate as it relates to the development of supply curves. Hopefully such short-comings will be addressed in future resource assessment iterations. -Variability of MHK technology output needs to be represented in capacity expansion models; scenarios exploring deployment of MHK technologies in electric sector need to be further explored. -Cost Models need to be refined to be suitable for benchmarking. Uncertainties in particular as it pertains to the following: -Wave Power Device Performance -Extreme Loads and Design Factors -Structural Design -Reliability and Operational Costs -Todate, data was developed with input from: 4 WEC device developers, 4 tidal developers, 2 Ocean Current Developer, and 2 River Hydrokinetic models. Limited US developer input Todate. More is needed!