The Endless Energy Well In The Deep Sea
Craven's system exploits the dramatic temperature difference between ocean water below 3,000 feet - perpetually just above freezing - and the much warmer water and air above it. That temperature gap can be harnessed to create a nearly unlimited supply of energy. Although the scientific concepts behind cold-water energy have been around for decades, Craven made them real when he founded the state-funded Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii in 1974 on Keahole Point, near Kona. Under Craven, the lab developed the process of using cold deep-ocean water and hot surface water to produce electricity. By the 1980s the Natural Energy Lab's demonstration plant was generating net power, the world's first through so-called ocean thermal energy conversion.The US Navy has signed a deal to put an OTEC power plant on the tiny island speck of Diego Garcia, a naval base some hundreds of miles south of India; as well, they have a project in the works to build an OTEC plant on Saipan."The potential of OTEC is great," says Joseph Huang, a senior scientist for the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration and an expert on the process. "The oceans are the biggest solar collector on Earth, and there's enough energy in them to supply a thousand times the world's needs. If you want to depend on nature, the oceans are the only energy source big enough to tap."
Here's how Craven plans to generate power from the cold water:
Pipes draw warm water from the ocean surface and cold water from the seabed. The warm water enters a vacuum chamber and is evaporated into steam that drives an electricity-producing turbine. The cold water condenses the steam back into water for drinking and irrigation.Aside from power generation, the cold water can be used to generate freshwater (through sweating), force plants into producing more fruit than they would otherwise (he claims "he can get three crops of grapes a year and pineapples in eight months instead of the usual 18"), and provide immensely cheaper air conditioning. According to testimony (PDF) before the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, using deep ocean water for refrigeration reduces costs by 90%. In that same document, he presages the Engineer-Poet's call to bury nuclear power generators -- only Craven suggests they be sunk deep in the ocean. Drawing on his experience with nuclear submarine design, he writes
There is a supplementary energy resource that has already been developed and deployed for almost fifty years. It is the pressurized water nuclear reactor as employed and deployed in American military submarines. These reactors are fail safe. Unlike many land based versions of nuclear power they will not go critical if they lose their water or if they are destroyed by accident or act of terrorism. Thirteen feet of water is as effective a shield as one foot of lead. If by war or accident or terrorist sabotage they are crushed in ocean depths their tomb is shielded from the atmosphere in a way that no land based or space based reactor can match.Fascinating, mad-scientist stuff.
Update 5/27: here's a link to the Common Heritage Corporation. Further information on OTEC technology can be found at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which in fact no longer performs research in this area. One reason to be somewhat skeptical about the outcome of OTEC anywhere but the Hawaiian Islands is made readily apparent by this map:

The problem for most of the developed world is that it is either too shallow in the oceans near the coasts, and/or the temperature gradients are too low.



13 Comments:
Can anyone physically explain to me how this temperature difference is converted into electricity?
It's a vapor engine, bbm. The warm surface water boils off vapor at one pressure (below atmospheric, of course) and that vapor is condensed at a lower pressure using the cold deep-ocean water. The difference in pressure can drive an engine (the huge volumes practically require a turbine) and if the condensers are closed rather than open the condensing vapor is a source of fresh water.
The temperature differences are small, and the thermal efficiencies are correspondingly low. You need a lot of cold water to get a relatively small amount of power.
The problems I can see are several-fold:
1. OTEC is nothing new, and it has a lot of technological problems; I don't see anything to justify the recent hype.
2. OTEC depends on cold oceanic deep water. This water is generated by downwelling near the poles. Can human use of this water push the thermocline downward, and can global warming destroy the resource?
3. Deep water is typically nutrient-rich. Will the artificial upwelling cause destructive algal blooms?
1. Almost certainly, which is why the recent Wired article; no promoter of "endless energy" schemes is liable to tell you of the problems in a brochure moment.
2. I don't see how.
3. Cool -- global warming solved!
I understand vapor engines... I just don't understand how the temp difference drives it, or where the vacume comes from.
The thermal efficiencies seem to me to be so small that it seems that pumping the water and generating the vacume would eat up much of the power generated.
I wonder what size of plant would be required to generate a gigawat of (net) power.
The vapor pressure of materials goes up with temperature; the vapor pressure of water is equal to sea-level atmospheric pressure (14.7 PSI) at 212°F, but at 70°F the water has a vapor pressure of only 0.36 PSI absolute. For more information, consult the steam tables in any thermodynamics reference. Vacuum comes from keeping air out, of course. (A water-vapor OTEC plant accumulates air that comes out of solution in the seawater, so it needs pumps to remove it.)
There is some information on the size of pieces of OTEC plants here; it looks like the biggest practical size is going to be a lot smaller than 1 GW, and the paper mentions a biggest tested turbine of a mere 250 kW.
Unfortunately, that paper doesn't have a date on it.
The Last-Modified timestamp on it shows January 19, 2005.
Thanks for taking the time to answer. I think I'm not phrasing my question well.
I guess what I really don't understand is the role of the cold water here. It seems that the warm water could be vaporized in a vacume and then just exhausted to the atmosphere, driving the turbine in the process.
Why is it necessary to condense the steam rather than exhaust it with the pump that is maintaining the vacume (my guess is that that would make the process energy negative)? If the temp difference between the warm water and the atmosphere is negligable, then it's thermodynamically impossible to extract energy in the process, right?
I guess I understand why the cold water is needed in theory, but not how it contributes to the process practically. Is the cold water condensation step necessary to help the pump maintain the vacume and pressure difference across the turbine blades, allowing the whole process to be net energy positive?
Ah, a simple misunderstanding about physics.
It's pretty basic: things flow from high pressure to low pressure. You can pull 85°F seawater up into a vacuum chamber 30-odd feet above sea level, and water vapor will boil off it at 0.6 PSI absolute. But to get energy out of this, you have to vent the vapor to something at lower pressure (a higher vacuum). To dump the vapor to the atmosphere you'd need to pump it out, and the pumps consume much more energy than you'd ever get from the vapor.
Nothing is 100% efficient. If you add a vacuum pump after a turbine, the pump will consume more power just to get back to the original pressure than you can get from the turbine. That's why you use cold water to condense the vapor back to liquid water; the energy required to pump a fluid is proportional to the volume, and the volume of the vapor is thousands of times as much as the liquid. Pumping liquid water out of the condenser leaves plenty of surplus power from the turbine.. if you've done everything else right.
Thanks. That's about what I figured.
As I posted over at Peak Energy, the OTEC plants described in this paper cycle about 3500 tons of water vapor per day to produce 1 megawatt. The heat of condensation of water at 5°C is 2489.6 kJ/kg by my steam tables, and the corresponding thermal flux at the condenser is about 101 megawatts.
That means the plant is about 1% efficient.
There's a lot of deep-down cold water. Let's say one-quarter of all seawater is so. That's 3.5e20 kg.
Rob McMillin mentions a scientist -- and I say, sometimes it is not enough to be mad -- who wants to mine this water for its 18 K of coolness. That's 75 kJ/kg, and engineer-poet points out 1 percent might be yielded as electricity. Product, 2.6e+23 J.
But all seawater, not just the deep and cold, contains 3.2 ppb uranium. Uranium today routinely yields 200 GJ(e)/kg, I guess that's around US$2,800 worth, and has been shown by Japanese research to be extractable from seawater for ~US$200/kg, said two hundred dollars including not just energy costs but all costs.
So marine U can yield 8e23 J(e). So if cold seawater is an endless resource, marine U is three times more endless; and when it does end, one still has a cold-at-the-bottom ocean.
--- Graham Cowan, former hydrogen fan
boron: fireproof fuel, real-car range, nuclear cachet
I think that if you select a liquid other than water, i.e. one with a lower vapourising temperature then the process is more efficient.
mala22d@gmail.com 11/30/08
My friend an EE has lived on Kona since 70 and works on a plant like this told me that it is not so much the temp but the pressure.They have a 36" SS flex pipe 2000' deep.Using pumps to bring deep water up.As the pressurized water rises it expands and produces heat,by the time it hits the surface it expands to a boil powering the turbine.The pumps are then turned off and the water is then pulled upward by the heat/pressure transfer.The warm water is piped into shallow bays where warmer water fish are grown.The steam produced electricity powers Kona and the next island.The aqua farms feed the residents The Navy has ships with this tech.for use on west coast emergencys
Post a Comment
<< Home