Abstract
The purpose of this report is to provide DOE:
- A snapshot of the current state of the art of tools available to the MHK industry
- An overview of the National Labs MHK modeling activities funded under the FY09 Lab Call
- A description of the modeling tools used by the Reference Model team and the relationship between those efforts and FY09 Lab Call work.
- A preliminary assessment of the MHK industry’s modeling needs
The objective is to collect the information and conduct the initial assessments necessary to inform DOE’s prioritization of investments in modeling tool development such that the areas of greatest impact can be targeted to more rapidly advance MHK technologies. For the purposes of this report, a need refers to the lack of a particular modeling tool that would accelerate the design process and lead towards more rapid commercialization. Hence, when needs are discussed, they refer specifically to industry needs. A modeling tool is a computer design/analysis code that allows the user to simulate the operation of an MHK device and output performance data. A comprehensive cost model can use this data as input and predict the cost of electricity (COE) for a given device. In order for DOE to effectively utilize available funds to advance the state of the MHK industry, efforts to develop modeling tools must be well coordinated and based on careful consideration of the capabilities that would most benefit device developers. The report takes an initial pass at delivering a prioritized list of modeling tool needs; however, it does not intend to take the place of an in-depth modeling needs assessment.
The report includes a discussion of the design process in order to provide context for modeling tool development recommendations. In addition, there are a number of assumptions that help to frame the high level recommendations. First, one must take into consideration the maturity of the industry. The MHK industry is not yet mature, and a single device type for each resource has not yet emerged; therefore, investments made at this stage should be as device agnostic as possible. Second, it is clear that MHK tidal, river, and open-ocean current device modeling capabilities are more advanced than their wave energy counterparts because they leverage tools originally developed for the wind industry. Third, potentially convertible resource estimates for wave energy are significantly larger than tidal and river current. These final two points indicate that Wave Energy Converter (WEC) modeling tool development should be of higher priority. The specific needs listed in section 3 of the report include present device modeling gaps given the understanding that MHK devices hold significant near term promise as a cost competitive energy source.
In moving forward with improved modeling capabilities for the MHK industry, it is evident that DOE National Labs have relevant experience and skill sets to play a large role and perhaps lead the effort. However, there is a benefit in leveraging existing expertise in the commercial and academic sectors as well. First, partnerships with DOE funded industry demonstration projects will leverage lessons learned by industry and can help generate valuable model verification data. Secondly, to ensure a high quality product, the depth of experience in some areas of industry and academia cannot be excluded.