Hawai‘i National Marine Renewable Energy Center (HINMREC)

The primary objective of HINMREC, housed at the HNEI, was to facilitate the development of commercial wave energy systems.  HINMREC assisted the US Navy in the implementation of a grid-connected wave energy test site (WETS) at Marine Corps Base Hawaii in Kaneohe.  WETS provided multiple-berthing for prototype wave energy conversion (WEC) devices in the 10 to 1000 kW range in water depths of 30m, 60m, and 80m allowing developers to prove their devices and generate the necessary data to advance their designs toward commercial readiness.  HINMREC assessed the power performance of WEC devices and evaluates their potential environmental impact.  HINMREC used directional Waverider buoys to provide real time incoming wave data for use in the evaluation of WEC device performance and hydrophones to determine their acoustic signature providing a much needed input to the environmental impact assessment of WEC technologies.  A link to a video clip about WETS can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHpW8SE9Ptk.  A second objective of HINMREC was to assist the private sector move ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC) systems beyond proof-of-concept to pre-commercialization.  The technical role of the Center was primarily focused on system and component engineering and local and global environmental studies.  HINMREC maintained high-resolution models of the ocean thermal resource and sustainable power output with OTEC systems and tests identified aluminum alloys for use for devices operating in the corrosive marine environment.  HINMREC endeavored to facilitate partnerships between the nascent marine renewable energy industry, utility companies, government agencies, NGOs, engineering firms, environmental consultants, and academia.  HINMREC provided advisory and facilitator services to developers using the UH environmental and engineering databases; numerical models; and, know-how required to evaluate OTEC and WEC concepts and designs.

Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) devices and OTEC systems are in the pre-commercial phase with several experimental projects having already demonstrated that the technology works but lacking the operational records required to proceed into commercialization. Adequately sized pilot projects must be operated in situ and  for at least one continuous year to obtain these records.

The major challenge associated with commercialization of WEC and OTEC devices is posed by the requirement to finance relatively high capital investments that must be balanced by the expected but yet to be demonstrated low operational costs.  Perhaps a lesson can be learned from the successful commercialization of wind energy due to consistent government funding of pilot or pre-commercial projects that led to appropriate and realistic determination of technical requirements and operational costs in Germany, Denmark and Spain. In this context, by commercialization we mean that equipment can be financed under terms that yield cost competitive electricity. This of course depends on specific conditions at each site. Presently, for example, in Hawai’i cost competitiveness requires electricity produced at less than about 0.20 $/kWh, while in Oregon the value would have to be closer to about 0.07 $/kWh.

In the case of OTEC, our analysis indicates that a 5 MW pilot plant must be operated prior implementation of 50 to 100 MW commercial plants. The “210 kW OC-OTEC Experimental Apparatus”, was successfully operated over 5-years (1993-1998) and provided invaluable information but was relatively small.  In the case of WEC devices, with a few and limited exceptions, the operational records obtained to date are not long enough nor under the required varied environmental loading conditions required to proceed with confidence into the commercial phase. There are some WEC designs with appropriate operational records although they are only cost competitive under limited conditions.

Our challenges as facilitators are:

– How to overcome the lack of consistent funding that is required for industry to proceed from concept design to the required pre-commercial demonstration phase; and, specifically, how to obtain funding for the OTEC Pilot Plant;

– How to streamline the burdensome, although necessary, process of obtaining leases, easements, licenses and permits including the vital Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).  The process is project specific, expensive and requiring as much as 5-years for commercial projects. The dream is to evolve into a situation represented by a one-stop-shop where industry can process all documentation stipulated under federal, state, city and county regulations avoiding duplicity, contradictory requirements and jurisdictional disputes among agencies;

– Industry timelines are not always consistent with HINMREC objectives and subject to vagaries of funding.

As stated above, the major challenge associated with commercialization of WEC and OTEC is posed by the requirement to finance relatively high capital investments that must be balanced by the expected but yet to be demonstrated low operational costs.

We have learned that, to achieve success, all aspects of a project must be considered, from inception to decommissioning.  In particular, we must address the environmental, financial and human infrastructure aspects of every project, including both professionals as well as the general public.  We are guided by the following lessons learned through our cumulative practical experience:

• Embellishment leads to negative consequences creating credibility barriers for others and unrealistic expectations from the public;
• It should be self evident that the ocean is a dynamic environment but the literature abounds with marine energy concepts that could not survive all seasons;
• All components must be considered in technical and economic assessments.  Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) and OTEC devices consist of several components or subsystems that must be integrated into a system. For example, OTEC is not just a power block (heat exchangers and turbines). OTEC also includes seawater subsystems (pipes and pumps); positioning (deep ocean mooring and/or thrusters); and, submarine power cable to transmit electricity to land;
• The entire life cycle must be incorporated into the design process. For example, locating a component below sea level might yield higher efficiencies but result in elaborate maintenance requirements and higher operational costs;
• A pertinent question that must be asked is:  Can equipment be manufactured using commercially available practices and in existing factories?

Licensing and Permitting of WEC and OTEC Devices: The proposed location determines the various agencies and regulations that apply.  In general, one must consider the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) {formerly the  Minerals Management Service (MMS)} of the Department of the Interior (DOI), the Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the Department of Commerce (DOC), the US Coast Guard and various state, county and city agencies.  In addition to the licenses and permits that must be secured from different agencies, the project must comply with several other applicable laws.

OTEC Federal Requirements: In the case of OTEC, the 1980 OTEC Act (OTECA) gives NOAA the authority for licensing the construction and operation of Commercial OTEC plants.  After the promulgation of OTECA in 1981 licensing regulations were developed by NOAA, but in 1996 NOAA rescinded these regulations and eliminated its OTEC office because no applications had been received.  NOAA is currently in the process of developing new licensing regulations.  Under OTECA, NOAA is required to coordinate with Coastal States and the US Coast Guard as well as other Federal Agencies (presently these would include BOEM among others).  An EIS would be required for each license.  It is expected that the majority if not all federal, state and local requirements would be handled through the NOAA licensing process.

The original Act (Sec. 9126) exempts test platforms, defined as “any test platform which will not operate as an ocean thermal energy conversion facility or plantship after conclusion of the testing period”, from NOAA’s licensing requirements.   The original Act also gave the Secretary of Energy the authority to exempt commercial demonstration projects from NOAA’s licensing requirements.  Unfortunately there is no strict definition of “commercial demonstration project” in the Act.  The Act states: “The provisions of this subchapter shall not apply to ownership, construction, or operation of any ocean thermal energy conversion facility or plantship which the Secretary of Energy has designated in writing as a demonstration proj­ect for the development of alternative energy sources for the United States which is conducted by, participated in, or approved by the Department of Energy. The Secretary of Energy, after consultation with the Administrator, shall require such demonstration projects to abide by as many of the substantive requirements of this subchapter as he deems to be practicable without damaging the nature of or unduly delaying such projects.”

The distinction between test and demonstration plants is due to the fact that in the late 70’s early 80’s the Federal Government  was  actively engaged in the commercial-scale demonstration of the OTEC technology.  The goal was to sponsor a  40 MW Pilot Plant.  A distinction was made between test platforms , like the 50 kW MiniOTEC (1979), and the pilot (demonstration) plant  that was meant to operate for decades and sell electricity to a Power Company under an Independent Power Producer (IPP) arrangement.  A consortium was awarded a competitive federal contract but unfortunately, due to a change in the USA Presidency, the program did not proceed beyond design of a 40 MW land based plant at Kahe Pt. in Oahu.

WEC Devices: Independently of location, licensing of WEC devices is the responsibility of FERC.  In Hawai’i, the State Government has jurisdiction up to 3 nautical miles (nm) offshore.  The Federal Government has jurisdiction in the Outer-Continental-Shelf (OCS) extending between the outer limits of state waters and the inner boundary of international waters, which begins approximately 200 nm offshore.  BOEM defines the OCS as including submerged lands, subsoil, and seabed.

Outer-Continental-Shelf: For wave energy projects to be located on the OCS, BOEM will issue leases, easements, and rights-of-way and will conduct any necessary environmental reviews including those under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). FERC has exclusive jurisdiction to issue licenses and exemptions for the construction and operation of wave energy projects and will conduct any necessary analyses, including those under NEPA, related to those actions.  FERC, however, will not issue a license or exemption until the applicant has first obtained a lease, easement, or right-of- way from BOEM.  Moreover, BOEM and FERC can choose to become a cooperating agency in the preparation of any environmental document required under either process.  This does not preclude other DOI agencies (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs) from intervening. This situation could lead to the requirement of two distinct (although similar in content) Environmental Impact Statements (EIS): one for BOEM and subsequently another for FERC.

State Waters: For wave energy projects to be located in State Waters, BOEM has no jurisdiction, licenses would still be issued by FERC and all other requirements would be under state, county and city rules.  Simply stated, wave energy developers should strive to avoid first generation projects in the OCS.

The following partial list of major requirements for a WEC project off the island of Maui is provided for illustrative purposes:

Federal Permits 

• BOEM leases, easements, and rights-of-way only if located on OCS;  and, FERC Licensing everywhere;
• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIS);
• Department of  the Interior: Fish & Wildlife Service; and Department of Commerce: National Marine Fisheries Service
• Army Corps of Engineers Construction Permit (Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10);
• Army Corps of Engineers Dredge and Fill Permit (Clean Water Act Section 404);
• Private Aids to Navigation Permit from US Coast Guard (Hazards to Navigation).

State of Hawai’i Permits

• Non-Utility Generator: application, interconnection requirements study (IRS), power purchase agreement followed by establishment of rates by Public Utilities Commission;
• EIS: Water Quality Certification (Dept of Health); CZM Consistency Certification from DBED&T; Conservation District Use Permit DLNR; Rights to Use of State Land to Seaward of Shoreline (DLNR, Submerged Lands Act). Under Hawai’i Revised Statues (Chapter 343) EIS incorporates: – Natural Historic Preservation Act (DLNR), – Fish and Wild Life Coordination Act (DLNR), – Endangered Species Act (DLNR), – Marine Mammals Act (DLNR).

Maui County Permits

• Shoreline Certification;
• Special Management Area Use Permit;
• Transmission line easement from landside owners.

Our staff is versed in wave energy resource measurement and evaluation; system design; wave-tank testing and evaluation; wave-structure interactions; and, ocean mooring.  In addition, members of our staff authored primary OTEC references and formed part of the core team that designed, constructed and operated (1993-1998) the experimental open cycle OTEC Plant for the production of electricity and desalinated water – referred to as one of the most successful renewable energy projects in the world.