1 / 13

Estimating the Acoustic Impact of a Tidal Energy Project

Estimating the Acoustic Impact of a Tidal Energy Project. Chris Bassett, Jim Thomson, and Brian Polagye University of Washington Mechanical Engineering. 161 st Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America Seattle, WA May 24, 2011. Tidal Energy Basics. Power

maxima
Download Presentation

Estimating the Acoustic Impact of a Tidal Energy Project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Estimating the Acoustic Impact of a Tidal Energy Project Chris Bassett, Jim Thomson, and Brian Polagye University of Washington Mechanical Engineering 161st Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America Seattle, WA May 24, 2011

  2. Tidal Energy Basics • Power • Technology requires strong currents (> 1 m/s) • Power density ~ V3 • Siting • Estuaries with large tidal ranges • Relatively shallow (< 80 m) for operational reasons • Ideally near load center Clean Current Race Rocks, BC 3.5 m, ~65 kW • Devices – early development • Cross-flow and horizontal-axis • Pile and gravity foundations • Generators & gear boxes MCT Strangford, UK 14x2 m, 1200 kW Verdant Power New York, East River 5 m, 33 kW

  3. Tidal Energy Technology • OpenHydro 6m turbine: • Direct-drive permanent magnet generator • Gravity foundation • No yaw mechanism • Cut-in speed ~ 0.7 m/s OpenHydro 10 m Bay of Fundy Turbine (Source: OpenHydro)

  4. Site Information Tripod Deployments • Proposed pilot project Admiralty Inlet, Washington • Primary inlet to Puget Sound • Depth ~ 60 m • Urban waterway

  5. Stationary Hydrophone Measurements • Autonomous hydrophone (16 GB capacity) • 80 kHz sampling • 1% duty cycle for 3 months • Records 7 sec. every 10 min.

  6. Ambient Noise • Significant variability associated with anthropogenic noise (Example spectra) (All data) Ship Bedload Transport Average Conditions Quiet • Mean SPL (0.02 – 30 kHz) • 119 dB re 1μPa

  7. Pseudosound • Pseudosound due to turbulent pressure fluctuations • Recorded above 20 Hz above 0.3 m/s • Masks low frequency ambient noise • Removed from ambient noise analysis • Ongoing work with flow shields

  8. Estimated Source Level • Broadband SL (0.02 – 3 kHz): • Operating at peak power output (14 rpm) • 154 dB per turbine • Measurements by the Scottish Association of • Marine Sciences (SAMS) (Source: OpenHydro)

  9. Implication for Received Levels Broadband Levels • SONAR Equation: • RL = SL – 15log(r) – αr • 0 • Broadband SL: • Operating at peak power output (14 rpm) • 2 turbines • Incoherent sources

  10. Implication for Received Levels • Artificial time series with ambient SPLs and RLs from turbines added in to 70% of recordings. • Assume limited spatial variability in ambient noise levels. • Calculated for multiple distances assumed to be equidistant from sources • Turbine impact is relatively small except locally Broadband Received Levels

  11. Comparison to Other Sources • Puget Sound urban waterway with many anthropogenic sources

  12. Conclusion • Insufficient source data are currently available • Complex environments suitable for tidal energy are difficult to study • Noise impacts will likely be local  context is important

  13. Thank You • This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy, Snohomish County PUD, the National Science Foundation. Field Engineers Joe Talbert and Alex DeKlerk Captain Andy Reay-Ellers

More Related