Slashdot Mirror
Wave Powered Generator to Power Homes
Eh-Wire writes "A Scottish company, Ocean Power Delivery (OPD) and it's Norwegian backer, Norsk hydro are set install three wave powered generators 3.5 miles off the north coast of Portugal for the Portuguese renewable energy group Enersis. This will be the world's first commercial wave powered generating system. Providing the initial three generators perform as expected, an additional thirty wave powered generators will be installed by the end of 2006. It's estimated the wave powered generator farm will displace 6000 tonnes of carbon dioxide that would otherwise be emitted from conventional electrical generating plants."
... a similar system was in place, however the locals misinterpreted it and put it in the middle of a football field.
Anonymous Coward
The European Union requires 22 percent of electricity consumption to come from renewable energy sources -- such as solar, wind and wave -- by 2010.
i did not know that fact, thought it was 8%-10%, but it's a good goal, although i doubt it will be reached. there is lot of opposition to 'conventional' methods of renewable energy, like wind energy.
here in holland (a windy place) people think they're ugly, noisy and potentionally dangerous. and the same environmental groups that dislikes carbondioxide and nuclear energy als dislike the fact birds may fly into those things. for long time, people have suggested off-shore solutions, like off-shore windmill parks.. but they're expensive.
so, i find it aprticulair interesting that a country like portughal pioneers in those steps, instead of 'hi-tec' countries like holland, germany or france.
guess it's just a matter of oil prices to raise more, so alternative power sources automatically gets economical benefits. after all, the techniques are there, short-view economics and lack of vision is keeping those from being implemented.
A glitch a day keeps the bugs away.
Comparing the energy contained in known Uranium reserves to the energy contained in the known oil reserves is much like comparing a matchstick to a forest fire. Fissile materials could last for *billions* of years [www-formal.stanford.edu], and so fissiles should also be considered a renewable energy source as the sun - and this is taking into account an yearly energy consumption rate 25 times higher than present, more than if the whole world was as energy-hungry as the developed countries.
Decent point, however the problem I see is that everyone is looking at the cost of PRODUCING a set amount of electricity. That is irrelevent. You need to look at the total cost of production and DISPOSAL. The cost of disposal from a Nuclear plant is hudreds of times higher than the cost of disposal from a coal plant. Some could even argue that disposal costs are INFINITE! There are other options other than nuclear. Coal isn't perfect either, but just like nuclear, new coal plants could be built clean.
A few years back, 3m designed (I believe it was 3m) a filter for coal emmissions to remove ALL harmful materials from the emissions. 100%. The problem was cost. I believe one of the main materials was crushed diamond or something like that. Good Ol' W decided that they shouldn't be required, and funding shouldn't be spent on development and requirement of such filtering systems. So, should we blame the cancer rates on the coal plants, then build nuclear, or simply look to who is to blame for these emissions.
Does anyone know anything about these filters? I didn't find a reference in a quick search, and I'm not crazy.......well maybe.