What are mhk technologies?
Download 0.89 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The federal government is essential to outreach, coordination, and cooperation across the industry, agencies, and states. This is key to competitiveness and avoiding delays
- Federal government support is essential to expand the MHK energy industry
- Federal investment leads to commercialization
- Deployment of wave energy converters fails without new investment
- A2: Misc. barriers / solvency deficits
- There are no supply constraints for MHK expansion
- Direct cash investment solves MHKs best
- Small expansion alone solves
- Our Aff. is good for a lot of reasons
SolvencyFederal government investment is keyExpanding federal investment in marine renewable energies boosts the economy growth and competitiveness. The plan would serve as a catalyst for state and regional coordination and developmentJoint Ocean Commission Initiative, June 2013, “Charting the Course: Securing the Future of America’s Oceans. Ocean priorities for the Obama administration and congress,” http://www.virginia.edu/colp/pdf/joint-ocean-commission-initiative-2013.pdf, Accessed 4/9/2014 The Administration’s principles guiding domestic energy development include creating clean energy jobs and technologies, making America more energy independent, and reducing carbon emissions. Renewable energy—particularly offshore wind energy—has great potential for pursuing expansion. Such expansion would create jobs, increase U.S. energy security, and strengthen our nation’s competitiveness. Renewable energy also presents exciting opportunities for pursuing innovative partnerships, streamlining the regulatory process, and using integrated ecosystem management tools to effectively, safely, and efficiently develop these new technologies. Unfortunately, the small size of many current renewable energy projects means they do not benefit from economies of scale, making it difficult for them to compete with more-established energy sources. A national investment in these technologies through adequate and stable financial and tax incentives would help realize their potential and position us as leaders in an emerging global industry. In addition, to make renewable energy accessible to consumers, upgrades to supporting infrastructure (e.g., power lines, grid networks, and transmission stations) are needed. The federal government is essential to outreach, coordination, and cooperation across the industry, agencies, and states. This is key to competitiveness and avoiding delays(OREC) November 2011, Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition, U.S. Marine and Hydrokinetic Renewable Energy Roadmap, A National Strategy to Support U.S. Energy Security and Create Jobs through the Commercialization of Marine Renewable Energy Technologies, http://www.oceanrenewable.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/MHK-Roadmap-Final-November-2011.pdf, Accessed 4/26/2014 The federal government has and continues to play a critical role in energy technology outreach activities. This role can include funding for industry outreach, hosting and facilitating stakeholder engagements, officially adapting industry recommendations and roadmaps, and participating in state and regional level policy efforts. Finally, coordination and cooperation within the federal agencies on a unified policy plan is critical to support emerging industries, competitive U.S. manufacturing, and a clear, timely and predictable project development process. At present, MHK stakeholder groups, including federal and state agencies and industry are constrained from active participation in many research and regulatory initiatives and technical exchanges due to limited resources. Funding is required to enlist and encourage more direct communications across industry sectors and among state and federal agencies. Federal government support is essential to expand the MHK energy industrySean O’Neill, ‘14, President, Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition, The American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), Non-profit collective of energy producers, The Outlook for Renewable Energy in America: 2014, http://www.acore.org/files/pdfs/ACORE_Outlook_for_ RE_2014.pdf, Accessed 4/26/2014 We need Congressional support for R&D to improve this innovative energy technology. Just as the wind and solar industries have received significant DOE funding for over twenty years (which has resulted in cost competitiveness and the rapid deployment of these technologies in recent years), the nascent MHK energy industry is requesting similar federal assistance to develop promising technologies that are on the verge of commercial viability. MHK deserves to be part of DOE’s “all the above” energy strategy. Federal investment leads to commercializationFederal leadership is essential to commercializationUS DOE 6 (United States Dept. of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, “Proceedings of the Hydrokinetic & Wave Energy Technologies Workshop” p. XVII. Published 24 March 2006. Accessed 23-6-14) Workshop participants also discussed how to address the various environmental research needs they had identified. Participants emphasized the need for leadership, for synthesis of existing knowledge, and for collaboration. There is a need for leadership. Historically, energy technologies have developed because the national government has made them a priority, and established policies and invested resources for an expected return. Absent leadership at the national level, developers and resource agencies face several obstacles: • Better estimates of the size of the feasibly developable energy resource are needed to support appropriate levels of investment and technical R&D. • Developers face a poorly-defined regulatory structure. • Research and development priorities are not clear. • Developers are small and under-capitalized; investors want to see projects in the water before they make any commitments. • R&D funding for hydrokinetic energy technologies has to include a budget that enables under-funded and under-staffed resource agencies to participate. Deployment of wave energy converters fails without new investmentBenham 14 (Steve Benham, writer for KATU, a Portland multimedia news company. http://www.katu.com/news/local/Future-of-taxpayer-funded-wave-energy-buoy-in-failed-Oregon-project-unclear-258433851.html Published 14-5-14. Accessed 23-6-14). After years of work and millions of dollars spent, an expensive wave energy project proposed off the Oregon coast is dead, leaving a never deployed taxpayer funded and large wave-energy buoy stranded on shore with an uncertain future. While millions of dollars of taxpayer money was spent, it could have been a lot worse. The U.S. Department of Energy put the brakes on the project after it determined the project would not happen as planned. Ocean Power Technologies Inc., the New Jersey company that spearheaded the project, was awarded $4,377,293 of federal money to build and test the buoy, according to its contract with the U.S. Department of Energy obtained by KATU through a Freedom of Information Act request. According to the agency, it gave OPT about $3.2 million of that award. But through its project management the agency said it determined the company couldn't finish the project on time or on budget, which resulted in a mutual agreement between the company and the agency to end it. OPT had run out of money and couldn't get additional financing. And, according to the company, after spending $20 million of its own money on the Oregon project, it has said circumstances out of its control, like weather and regulatory requirements, played a role in the project's demise. And in early April it announced its Oregon project was over. A2: Misc. barriers / solvency deficitsThe entire industry is ready for MHK commercialization. Everything is in place for economic recovery, new jobs, and energy security(OREC) November ‘11, Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition, U.S. Marine and Hydrokinetic Renewable Energy Roadmap, A National Strategy to Support U.S. Energy Security and Create Jobs through the Commercialization of Marine Renewable Energy Technologies, http://www.oceanrenewable.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/MHK-Roadmap-Final-November-2011.pdf, Accessed 4/26/2014 The United States has significant untapped energy resources from free-flowing waves, tides and currents which could equal ten percent of today’s entire generating portfolio, more than the amount of electricity produced by all conventional hydroelectric dams in the country. Development of the technologies to capture these Marine and Hydrokinetic (MHK) renewable energy resources can play a significant role in our nation’s economic recovery, create manufacturing jobs and increase our energy security. Leaders in the international MHK industry have established a repertoire of mechanisms aimed at responsibly and efficiently commercializing these nascent technologies. Similar public policy, financing and regulatory support have driven significant progress, and include consistent government funding for research and development (market push), establishment of test center infrastructure, accelerated decision making in permitting and regulation, and reliable incentives for power generation (market pull). However, the most pronounced underlying success factor is the ability to focus resources – commercial, financial, scientific and political – on deploying MHK devices and studying their interactions with the natural environment, increasing technical efficiencies and learning from direct experience. This ability to dedicate and focus resources is the critical path to MHK commercialization. There are no supply constraints for MHK expansionChad Augustine, et al., ‘12, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Renewable Electricity Futures Study, Volume 2: Renewable Electricity Generation and Storage Technologies, http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/re_futures/, Accessed 4/27/2014 Manufacturing, fabrication, and assembly will require dock space, adequate land, and anticipated onshore O&M facilities. The major materials needed to manufacture MHK technologies include: steel, composites, concrete, electronics, and many plastic materials that are in abundant supply. Component and subsystem suppliers purchase electronic parts, connectors, and other specialties from manufacturers in the United States and, in some cases, from throughout the world for project developers. Therefore, at this time, facilities, components, and materials do not have limited short-term or long-term supply constraints. Direct cash investment solves MHKs bestCoggins 13 (Amanda Coggins, Operations Manager at Strategen Consulting, a California-based strategy consulting firm that helps businesses create sustainable value through clean energy solutions, in “Policy Strategies for Advancing the Marine and Hydrokinetic Energy Industry,” published May 2013, p. ii-iii Accessed 27-6-14) Marine and hydrokinetic (MHK) electricity generation systems are one of the newest technologies to emerge in the renewable energy industry. In order for the MHK industry in the United States to develop and become competitive with fossil fuels and more mature renewable energy technologies, it needs to have a supportive policy environment. Much of the past success of renewable energy technologies (like wind and solar) can be attributed to government revenue support policies (e.g. tax credits and grants). Many of these policies have not yet been offered to the MHK industry or are not designed to adequately accommodate the unique characteristics of MHK projects. This analysis focuses on identifying opportunities for enhancing or restructuring the production tax credit (PTC), investment tax credit (ITC), and cash grants to optimize the potential benefits to the MHK industry. An extensive literature review was conducted to compare the policy experiences of other, more mature, renewable energy technologies. Similarities were drawn between MHK and those technologies to develop a set of recommended strategies for accelerating the development of the MHK industry in the United States. The results of the analysis revealed that the treasury cash grant is the ideal incentive policy for ensuring optimal growth opportunities for the MHK industry. The iii next best policy option is a 5-10 year transitional program from a 30% ITC to a 2.2 ¢/kWh PTC, based on a “switch-over” installed cost target of approximately $1.65 million/MW (assuming a 7.5% discount rate). Additionally, the policies will be most beneficial if they are implemented through a stable, long-term framework that includes regular adjustments to account for changing economic conditions and fuel prices. These policy options will provide the best opportunity for increasing MHK’s competitiveness with other renewable energy technologies and fossil fuels. Small expansion alone solvesEven a small development could supply 1/4 of the US’s energy per yearEERE 13 (United States Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Efficiency. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) accelerates development and facilitates deployment of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies and market-based solutions that strengthen U.S. energy security, environmental quality, and economic vitality. Published Dec 2013. http://energy.gov/eere/water/marine-and-hydrokinetic-resource-assessment-and-characterization Accessed 22-6-14)GH The Mapping and Assessment of the United States Ocean Wave Energy Resource report, created by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), assesses ocean wave energy potential along the U.S. coasts. Researchers at Virginia Tech and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) supported the report and data validation. The report finds that the U.S. theoretical resource for waves is 2,640 TWh/year and the technically recoverable resource for electric generation is approximately 1,170 terawatt-hours per year (TWh/year). For context, the United States uses 4,000 TWh of electricity each year and approximately 85,000 homes could be powered by 1 TWh/year. Developing just a small fraction of the available wave energy resource could allow for millions of American homes to be powered with this clean, reliable form of energy. Our Aff. is good for a lot of reasonsMHK solves GHGs, jobs, national security, resource wars, political conflicts, and doesn’t overload the gridCoggins 13 (Amanda Coggins, Operations Manager at Strategen Consulting, a California-based strategy consulting firm that helps businesses create sustainable value through clean energy solutions, in “Policy Strategies for Advancing the Marine and Hydrokinetic Energy Industry,” published May 2013, p. 1-2 Accessed 27-6-14) MHK provides an opportunity for zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions energy while simultaneously creating domestic jobs, diversifying the U.S. energy portfolio, increasing national security, and decreasing fuel price volatility that results from resource shortages and political conflicts. It is one of the most abundant sources of renewable energy on earth, due to its high power density. According to Rogner and colleagues, the global theoretical energy potential for MHK technologies is estimated to be approximately 7,400 EJ/yr, compared to 6,000 EJ/yr for wind and 3,900,000 EJ/yr for solar (Rogner, et al., 2000). Though MHK resource assessments are in the preliminary phases, the theoretical potential for ocean energy easily exceeds present human energy requirements (Edenhofer, et al., 2011). The high power density of MHK means that the technologies require fewer and smaller devices than other renewable energy technologies, enabling smaller project footprints, reduced environmental impacts, and ultimately lower installed costs per kWh (Bedard, 2009). Additionally, some MHK resources offer a highly predictable and consistent form of renewable energy, which enable them to help balance grid load. Furthermore, preliminary studies have shown that MHK has the potential to be one of the most environmentally benign forms of renewable energy (Cada, et al., 2007). Lastly, according to a 2011 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, climate change is not anticipated to have significant impacts on the size or geographic distribution of ocean energy resources, so estimates of future generation capacity can be relied upon with confidence (Edenhofer, et al., 2011). This information is discussed further in the background information presented in Chapter 2. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.89 Mb. Share with your friends:
|