IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i9p2085-d1384086.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Costs of Commercialising Tidal Energy in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Donald R. Noble

    (School of Engineering, Institute for Energy Systems, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, UK)

  • Kristofer Grattan

    (School of Engineering, Institute for Energy Systems, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, UK)

  • Henry Jeffrey

    (School of Engineering, Institute for Energy Systems, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, UK)

Abstract

There is a need for increased renewable energy to meet net-zero targets and decarbonise the economy. Harnessing the predictable power of the tides with tidal stream turbines can contribute to this. Tidal energy is a nascent technology with higher costs at present. However, cost reductions have been observed with an increased deployment in other renewable energy technologies that have received financial support, and it is postulated that similar will happen with tidal energy. The first tidal stream projects have been awarded market support in the UK through the Contracts for Difference (CfD) scheme, with almost 100 MW expected to be commissioned by 2028. This work uses learning rates to investigate how much investment in ongoing market support might be needed to achieve cost reductions through subsidised deployment alongside research and innovation. Using a range of informed ‘what if?’ scenarios, it shows sensitivity to key inputs. The results show that the support needed is most sensitive to the learning rate, reducing it from 15% to 12.5% or 10% doubles or more than quadruples the investment required, respectively. The support is also highly dependent on the starting cost from which learning occurs, taken as the CfD Strike Price in 2025. Varying this between 156 and 220 GBP/MWh results in total investment of GBP 6.7 and 22.3 bn, respectively. Most importantly, a balance is needed between subsidising deployment to drive down costs through learning and funding innovation to maintain a high learning rate.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald R. Noble & Kristofer Grattan & Henry Jeffrey, 2024. "Assessing the Costs of Commercialising Tidal Energy in the UK," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-20, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:9:p:2085-:d:1384086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/9/2085/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/9/2085/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:9:p:2085-:d:1384086. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.