(b) Offshore test centre
53. It has been suggested that there needs to be
a National Offshore Wave and Tidal Test Centre to facilitate the
development of these technologies. An offshore centre was recommended
by the Energies from the Sea Task Force Report and has been very
strongly supported by many witnesses.[116]
Such a centre would provide companies, especially smaller ones,
with the opportunity to engage in prototype or second stage demonstration
testing, and, crucially, would allow the side-by-side testing
and comparisons needed if choices are to be made between rival
and complementary technologies. This would thereby speed the development
cycle and allow less effective designs to be re-designed or abandoned
more quickly. It would also allow a proper assessment of the true
costs of the marine civil engineering involved in the installation
and the Grid connection, and monitoring of the environmental impacts.[117]
Venture capitalist and potential industrial partners would have
a means of calculating return on investment with a reasonably
rigorous and comprehensive analysis of the risks and benefits.
54. Wavegen and Ocean Power Delivery informed us
that they would have to consider moving some of their research
activities abroad, if a UK Centre were not built soon; and that,
if the UK Government did not act proactively, an EU centre might
be established in the Azores.[118]
The Minister assured us that, while Government should "encourage
British companies to find investment opportunities abroad and
work abroad ... We do want to preserve and develop a solid British
platform.".[119]
Greenpeace estimated that such a site (excluding the cost of any
wave or tidal energy devices) would cost approximately £10
million, but other witnesses suggested that it would probably
cost considerably less.[120]
We are pleased that the Minister has agreed to examine the case
for such a Centre as a "priority".[121]
55. The precise configuration of the proposed national
test facility has not been examined in this inquiry, but, from
the evidence received, it would need: a good wave and / or tidal
resource; pre-granted planning permission for devices to be placed
in, on or by the sea; a large capacity connection to the Grid
to allow real-scale testing; and sufficient computer facilities
to allow effective, remote, monitoring of devices. Valuable lessons
could be learnt from the existing Danish facility in Nissum Bredning
Fjord in North Jutland. Consultation would be needed before a
location was chosen, and separate sites for wave and tidal may
be needed.[122]
Caithness and Orkney have been suggested as suitable sites. We
recommend that the Government establish, as soon as possible,
a National Offshore Wave and Tidal Test Centre to facilitate the
development of wave and tidal energy.
International comparisons
56. Most of the evidence we received stated that
the UK still enjoys a small technical lead in the field of both
wave and tidal energy.[123]
A number of other countries are taking an interest in both energy
sources, however, and we have received evidence about projects
in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Denmark, Germany, India,
Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Philippines, Portugal,
Sri Lanka, Sweden, Taiwan, and the USA.[124]
Some of these countries have significant projects up and running:
for example a 110 kW pilot tidal energy scheme has recently been
deployed in the Straits of Messina, Italy; a 400 kW floating wave
device has been tested off the coast of Ireland; and Blue Energy
Canada are constructing a 30 MW 'tidal fence' off the Philippines.
57. Much of our evidence has drawn attention to the
growing strength of the Danish wave and tidal energy industry.[125]
During the 1990s, the Danish Government provided considerable,
long-term support for the nation's wind turbine industry, and
Danish firms now control 75% of a world market estimated to be
worth $3.5 billion.[126]
The Danish Government has now committed itself to a four year
spending programme on wave energy.[127]
However, it is not merely money that has made Denmark so successful
in the field of renewable technologies. Mr Thomas Thorpe identified
three key reasons why they had done so well in wind energy, which
would apply to all renewable technologies.
(i) timescale:
they anticipated a "long haul" and did not demand "outrageous
performance targets" of the initial devices;
(ii) market: using highly focussed,
long-term incentives for buyer and seller, they created a market
for the energy; and
(iii) political commitment: they
sent a clear signal to the market and turned "a hair-brained,
novel technology into a mature source of energy".[128]
58. We welcome the Minister's commitment to sustaining
the UK's lead in wave and tidal energy: "I want to see us
as world leaders..we want to make sure we win the race.".[129]
The UK is at the forefront of wave and tidal energy but other
national development programmes will undoubtedly overtake ours
unless the Government acts quickly and decisively to support the
industry. Valuable lessons could be learned from the long-term
approach adopted by the Danish Government toward the exploitation
of renewables energy sources.
104 Brook, Qq 193-4; and evidence pp 67-68. Back
105
ETSU is part of AEA Technology - formerly the Atomic Energy Authority
- and has specialised in consultancy on sustainable energy. See:
www.etsu.com . Back
106
Evidence, p 77, paragraphs 8.1-8.4; and Hain, Q 219. Back
107
2.6 million euros. Hain, Q 219. Back
108
Official Report, 20th March 2001, column 180-182w. Back
109
Evidence, p 94, paragraph 5. Back
110
Brook, Q 201. Back
111
Evidence, p 66. Back
112
Hedges, Q 185. Back
113
Evidence, pp 68-9. Back
114
For example: evidence, p 97, paragraph 4; p 137, paragraph 17;
and p 148. Also: Energies from the Sea, Marine Foresight
Panel Report, pages 12 and 15. Back
115
Official Report, 20 March 2001, column 180-182w. Back
116
See, for example: evidence, p 11, paragraph 7; p 145; p 148;
Thorpe, Qq 70 and 92; and Thomson and Yemm, Q 144. Back
117
Evidence, p 118, paragraph 4. Back
118
Yemm, Q 145-6. Back
119
Hain, Q 243. Back
120
Thomson and Yemm, Q 144. Back
121
Hain, Q 234-5. Back
122
Fraenkel, Q 143. Back
123
Hain, Q 226. Back
124
See: evidence, p 94; pp 121-2; p 160, paragraph 9.1; pp 174-5
and Thorpe Q 51. Back
125
For example: evidence p 9; and p 56. Back
126
Evidence p 10, paragraph 2. Back
127
www.energioplysningen.dk . Back
128
Thorpe, Q 91; and Salter Qq 75 - 78. Back
129
Hain, Q 230. Back
