modelling changes to physical environmental impacts due
play

Modelling Changes to Physical Environmental Impacts due to Wave - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Modelling Changes to Physical Environmental Impacts due to Wave Energy Array Layouts Helen Smith, Ian Ashton EIMR 2014, Stornoway 20.05.2014 Overview 1. Context: The EBAO project 2. Theoretical modelling study 3. Case study for EMEC 4.


  1. Modelling Changes to Physical Environmental Impacts due to Wave Energy Array Layouts Helen Smith, Ian Ashton EIMR 2014, Stornoway 20.05.2014

  2. Overview 1. Context: The EBAO project 2. Theoretical modelling study 3. Case study for EMEC 4. Conclusions and future work Slide 2

  3. EBAO “Optimising Array Form for Energy Extraction and Environmental Benefit” Scenario A: Constrained channel Tidal Scenario B: Sea area between Tidal mainland and island Scenario C: Inshore site Wave, Tidal Scenario D: Offshore site Offshore wind Slide 3

  4. Theoretical model • 3 array scenarios • Grid: - Parallel depth contours - Real bathymetry (Orkney) • Deepest device located at 60m depth • 2 sea states – average and large • 5 wind scenarios • All modelling using SWAN spectral wave model Slide 4

  5. Theoretical model – Scenario1 Slide 5

  6. Theoretical model – Scenario 2 Slide 6

  7. Theoretical model – Scenario 3 Slide 7

  8. Theoretical model Wind scenarios Following: 5ms -1 , 10ms -1 , 20ms -1 Opposing: 10ms -1 Cross: 10ms -1 Slide 8

  9. Theoretical model • SWAN spectral wave model • Devices represented as 50m partially transmitting barriers • Frequency-dependent energy absorption TrCoeff = H sT /H sI • Limitations of SWAN? Slide 9

  10. Theoretical model Output 1000m 200m 10000m 5000m Shore Centre Slide 10

  11. Theoretical model - results Sea state 1, no wind Slide 11

  12. Theoretical model - summary • Increasing the number of devices increases the impact • Clusters of devices with corridors lessen impact closer to devices, but this becomes negligible by the shoreline • Impact decreases with increasing following or cross wind • Impact increases with opposing wind • Impact increases at shoreline for steeper seabed • Impact slightly higher for larger sea state Slide 12

  13. EMEC case study 60 • Run over full year (2005) 59.6 • Input data from EMEC hindcast 59.2 • Same 3 scenarios 58.8 modelled • Output at three 58.4 ~10m depth locations 58 -4 -3.6 -3.2 -2.8 -2.4 -2 Slide 13

  14. EMEC case study Location 1 Slide 14

  15. EMEC case study Sea state corresponding to ‘small’ sea state, 20/3/05 15:00: H s = 1.56m, T m = 5.3s, D = 275° Slide 15

  16. EMEC case study Sea state corresponding to ‘small’ sea state, 20/3/05 15:00: H s = 1.56m, T m = 5.3s, D = 275° Slide 16

  17. EMEC case study Sea state corresponding to ‘small’ sea state, 20/3/05 15:00: H s = 1.56m, T m = 5.3s, D = 275° Slide 17

  18. Conclusions • Array layout is important for near-field effects, less so for the far-field • Local wind and wave conditions more influential on the scale of the impact • Next stage is to examine how these impacts affect wider physical and ecological scenarios • Further work ongoing to develop the capability of spectral wave models to prediction such impacts – need validation! Slide 18

  19. Thank you! h.c.m.smith@exeter.ac.uk i.g.c.ashton@exeter.ac.uk Slide 19

Recommend


More recommend