Press coverage of the Mayo Energy Audit has been patchy. An article in the Irish Times by Lorna Siggins (see link below) rather overlooked the principal aim of the study - to find local solutions to global resource depletion - and instead chose to highlight the investment difficulties facing the ocean energy sector. At the root of the problem is the hard reality is that no-one knows for sure will the ocean energy technology actually work, hence the reticence of investors during a worsening global recession.
The authors of the Mayo Audit, Andy Wilson and Paul Lynch, complained to the Irish Times that some aspects of the Siggins article were misleading, and wrote a letter highlighting some of the key findings of the study. This letter - edited by the Irish Times - was published in the paper on 27th April.
The full (unedited) version of the letter is as follows:
Mayo Report Clarification
Madam, - While it was good to see acknowledgement of our report - the Mayo Energy Audit - in your article 'Funding shortfall may hinder wave energy' (15th April), we feel it mistakenly gave the impression that our research points to coniferous forestry as Mayo's best option for long term
biomass production.
By far the most viable biomass resource would be sustainably managed deciduous forestry and woodland. Of particular interest is medium term rotation coppicing harvested on an 8-20 year cycle. This system of woodland management is adaptable to a wide variety of circumstances, and suits farm scale or local community scale operation. It would generate considerable employment and also has the added advantage of keeping money within local economies. In the long term the resource could provide over 50 percent of Mayo's heat energy requirements, and may contribute to electricity supply through small scale CHP (Combined Heat and Power).
Our research indicated that up to nine percent of existing farmland - mostly in the drier parts of the county - has immediate potential for deciduous woodland, without adversely affecting either livestock or crop production. However, the long lead time for deciduous woodland mitigates in favour of starting sooner rather than later.
In the meantime, Mayo has approximately 40,000 hectares of coniferous forestry, mostly State owned. Until recently it was supplying the construction industry, but demand for pulpwood and construction-grade logs has plummeted over the last two years and is now close to zero. This underutilised resource, if harvested sensitively, could provide the annual energy equivalent of three to four times Mayo's existing wind farms for
the next two decades. Ideally, management of State-owned forestry would be undertaken by local forestry cooperatives working to strict environmental guidelines.
The Mayo Energy Audit estimates future energy supply and demand while taking into account the need for greater security of supply in food and other resources. As the first assessment of its kind undertaken in Ireland, obviously there are many details still to be teased out in terms of the best utilisation of the land resource for both food and biomass. The report has primarily attracted press interest for its blunt and perhaps unexpectedly pessimistic assessment of the wave energy resource, but the primary aim of the report remains to offer local and regional solutions to the looming global resource crisis.
Yours etc,
Andy Wilson & Paul Lynch
Sustainability Institute
Further media developments
Another article by Lorna Siggins (see link below) gave generous space to John McCarthy, chief executive of Ocean Energy Ltd, a company attempting to develop a commercially viable wave energy device. McCarthy rather foolishly compared ocean energy to wind energy, omitting to mention that wind turbines have been generating electricity since the late 1800s (the first working wind turbine was erected in Scotland in 1887) and that current models are the product of many decades of trial and error.
On the other hand, wave energy devices are still at prototype stage and have many years of research ahead of them before it can be established will the technology deliver.
At today's prices, the total investment in wind energy to date, globally, is estimated to be in excess of $400 billion. Total installed wind capacity at the end of 2008 was 24,400 MW. This suggests that total global electricity generation from wind is now approaching 50,000 GWh per annum. However, this is only about 0.1 percent of total global primary energy requirements (TGPER).
Total electricity generation from the various prototype wave energy devices deployed worldwide is estimated to be under 5 GWh per annum (0.00001 percent of TGPER).
As CEO of Ocean Energy, McCarthy presumably is under great pressure to convince investors his company is a worthy recipient of funding. However, the high risk and uncertain payback times associated with ocean energy technology suggest that it is not the most attractive of bets in a deepening global recession.
The Mayo Audit estimated that even in favourable circumstances, output from wave energy would contribute just 4.8 percent (31 GWh) of Mayo's electricity requirements by 2020. This is the equivalent of 0.15 percent of the estimated national electricity demand in that year.
Recent claims by Green Party leader John Gormley than Mayo would be exporting wave energy to Europe are ridiculous and show a worrying lack of appreciation of the very early stage of development of ocean energy. It would be a remarkable achievement for Mayo to be in a position to export wave energy as far as the next county (Roscommon).
The bottom line is that ocean energy will be of little or no significance for the foreseeable future, no matter how much spin is given to it.
Further information will be added in the near future.
Ordering a Copy
Copies of the Mayo Audit may be ordered directly from the Sustainability Institute.
Click on the link below:
