CONCLUSIONS
Although wave energy is immature, the potential energy obtained from the ocean can out-weight the current expenses once improvement in productivity occurs, and cheaper types of materials are used.
The survivability of the devices is also an significant factor that increases the expenses of this type of energy. There is still no proved device that has "survived" a long period of time in real sea conditions.
To make it competitive grants/subsides are needed, as it is up till now, a quite expensive energy as the market is not prepared yet to invest due to the technical and financial risks it involves.
The cheapest cost/performance site studied was North Uist for the attenuator device, while the most expensive one was Tenerife for the point absorber. In terms of power performance, the point absorber device had a wide range of functionality in different sea states, but the attenuator device higher operating availability (capacity factor).
The simple design of the point absorber compared to the attenuator device, facilitates operation and maintenance, decreasing the costs associated to them.
In order for newer devices to become closer to commerciality, there also has to be an in depth technical analysis of sea state functionality for the devices, as we have seen that all the devices don't operate optimally in all the sites.
Wave energy is still a very costly energy mainly due to the environment where it operates in, and has yet a long ride to reach its competitor, offshore wind energy. Moreover, what is crucial for this energy to develop and reach a place in competitiveness is that we continue to investigate and invest on it.
The survivability of the devices is also an significant factor that increases the expenses of this type of energy. There is still no proved device that has "survived" a long period of time in real sea conditions.
To make it competitive grants/subsides are needed, as it is up till now, a quite expensive energy as the market is not prepared yet to invest due to the technical and financial risks it involves.
The cheapest cost/performance site studied was North Uist for the attenuator device, while the most expensive one was Tenerife for the point absorber. In terms of power performance, the point absorber device had a wide range of functionality in different sea states, but the attenuator device higher operating availability (capacity factor).
The simple design of the point absorber compared to the attenuator device, facilitates operation and maintenance, decreasing the costs associated to them.
In order for newer devices to become closer to commerciality, there also has to be an in depth technical analysis of sea state functionality for the devices, as we have seen that all the devices don't operate optimally in all the sites.
Wave energy is still a very costly energy mainly due to the environment where it operates in, and has yet a long ride to reach its competitor, offshore wind energy. Moreover, what is crucial for this energy to develop and reach a place in competitiveness is that we continue to investigate and invest on it.
