Presentation on Dutch urban wind technology by Paul Vosbeek, Real NewEnergy. The presentation was part of the Urban Wind Roundtable at the Consulate General of the Netherlands in San Francisco, March 16, 2011.
Presentation on Dutch urban wind testing and
experiences by Sander Mertens, Ingreenious. The presentation was part of the Urban Wind Roundtable at the Consulate General of the Netherlands in San Francisco, March 16, 2011.
Lost at sea? Charting wave energy’s difficult innovation journey towards comm...Matthew Hannon
The UK has a rich history of wave energy technology innovation stretching back to 1976 when it launched its first wave energy programme. Whilst funding was discontinued in the 1980s a new programme was established in the 2000s as wave energy was considered a critical solution to meeting the government’s climate change, energy and economic objectives. Despite committing approximately $150m to wave energy development over the past 15 years the UK has still failed to deliver a commercially viable wave energy device. This raises questions about the effectiveness of government policy designed to support wave energy innovation. Drawing upon 32 expert interviews, investment data and extensive documentary evidence the research examines how the level and type of innovation support from UK government has contributed to this slow progress and how these weaknesses could be addressed to help accelerate wave energy innovation in the future.
The research finds that government policy was indeed partly to blame for this slow progress including poor coordination of policy support, duplication of investment, stop-start R&D programmes that fostered knowledge depreciation and schemes that encouraged developers to go ‘too big too soon’. Despite these failures significant ‘policy learning’ has taken place, triggering a major reconfiguration of UK wave energy innovation support such as a refocusing on component versus device development, treating wave and tidal energy innovation separately and greater coordination of innovation programmes. Even so outstanding policy recommendations include strengthening coordination between UK and Scottish governments and collaboration between universities and device developers. Finally, the research finds that government policy wasn’t the only factor that contributed to this slow progress such as developers overpromising and under-delivering, as well as the high capital cost and practical difficulties associated with device testing at sea.
Presentation on Dutch urban wind testing and
experiences by Sander Mertens, Ingreenious. The presentation was part of the Urban Wind Roundtable at the Consulate General of the Netherlands in San Francisco, March 16, 2011.
Lost at sea? Charting wave energy’s difficult innovation journey towards comm...Matthew Hannon
The UK has a rich history of wave energy technology innovation stretching back to 1976 when it launched its first wave energy programme. Whilst funding was discontinued in the 1980s a new programme was established in the 2000s as wave energy was considered a critical solution to meeting the government’s climate change, energy and economic objectives. Despite committing approximately $150m to wave energy development over the past 15 years the UK has still failed to deliver a commercially viable wave energy device. This raises questions about the effectiveness of government policy designed to support wave energy innovation. Drawing upon 32 expert interviews, investment data and extensive documentary evidence the research examines how the level and type of innovation support from UK government has contributed to this slow progress and how these weaknesses could be addressed to help accelerate wave energy innovation in the future.
The research finds that government policy was indeed partly to blame for this slow progress including poor coordination of policy support, duplication of investment, stop-start R&D programmes that fostered knowledge depreciation and schemes that encouraged developers to go ‘too big too soon’. Despite these failures significant ‘policy learning’ has taken place, triggering a major reconfiguration of UK wave energy innovation support such as a refocusing on component versus device development, treating wave and tidal energy innovation separately and greater coordination of innovation programmes. Even so outstanding policy recommendations include strengthening coordination between UK and Scottish governments and collaboration between universities and device developers. Finally, the research finds that government policy wasn’t the only factor that contributed to this slow progress such as developers overpromising and under-delivering, as well as the high capital cost and practical difficulties associated with device testing at sea.
The ORE Catapult and Future Opportunities,David Arnold,Technology strategy BoardInvest Northern Ireland
Presentation from the Supply Chain Opportunities in the Onshore and Offshore Wind Operation and Maintenance Sectors held at Down Royal Racecourse, Lisburn 27th November 2013
My presentation at the Common Future Paris 2015 Climate science conference on industrial low-carbon innovation and how US ARPA-E and EU ETS NER 400 could be linked to accelerate decarbonisation in energy intensive sectors
Market transformation in the energy sector. The implications of battery storage and reducing renewable energy costs to the Australian environment. Presents projections from NREL, DoE, CSIRO, GDF Suez, IRENA and others
Mark Little, GE
As GE’s Chief Technology Officer and Leader of GE’s nine Global Research Centers, Mark Little embraced the Lean Startup methodology to improve business outcomes. Mark will describe specific examples where he helped the organization use Lean Startup to help drive speed and innovation with cross functional teams across GE.
Analyst presentation: Energy – 02 October 2014Atkins
This analyst presentation from our energy business gives insights into the market, our business and operations, projects around the world, our acquisition strategy and the future for energy at Atkins.
World Energy Congress 2016 Istanbul An International Assessment of Ocean Ener...Matthew Hannon
This paper presents an international assessment of the absolute and relative ocean energy innovation performance of countries worldwide. It finds that in absolute terms the countries with the largest public ocean energy RD&D budgets (i.e. innovation input) typically rank highest in terms of the number of ocean energy patent filings and amount of installed capacity (i.e. innovation output), with the notable exception of the US in relation to installed capacity. However, if we examine performance in relative terms (i.e. innovation outputs per $ of RD&D) we find a very different story with those countries with the largest RD&D budget performing worst and vice versa. The best performing countries in relative terms are Austria, Italy and Germany in terms of patents per $ of RD&D and the Netherlands, Ireland, France, Korea and Germany in terms of MW per $ of RD&D.
One potential explanation for countries with the highest public RD&D budgets performing the worst is knowledge depreciation, where much of the knowledge gained via major RD&D funding from countries like the US and UK prior to a decade long hiatus in the 1990s is likely to have been lost as RD&D activities came almost to a standstill. Another is knowledge leakage where much of the knowledge generated by the use of capital intensive ocean energy test facilities within one country is ultimately lost to another as the company returns home. Other potential explanations include the poor design of innovation policy or the diseconomies of scale relating to large, unwieldy RD&D schemes.
Recommendations for further work include broadening out the indicator framework used to offer a more complete picture of innovation performance. Additional input indicators include such as private energy RD&D and the number of ocean energy RD&D personnel, as well as output indicators such as MWh or the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) of different countries’ devices. This work, alongside qualitative research (e.g. case studies, interviews), will help test to the hypotheses presented to explain the relative performance of different countries’ ocean energy innovation systems, as well as to identify best-practice ocean energy innovation policy design from the best performing nations identified earlier.
Following on her 'Room for the River' op-ed in the Washington Post, Ambassador Jones-Bos and the Embassy's Water Management specialist Dale Morris delivered a presentation to river and floodplain managers during the conference of the Natural Floodplain Functions Alliance.
The ORE Catapult and Future Opportunities,David Arnold,Technology strategy BoardInvest Northern Ireland
Presentation from the Supply Chain Opportunities in the Onshore and Offshore Wind Operation and Maintenance Sectors held at Down Royal Racecourse, Lisburn 27th November 2013
My presentation at the Common Future Paris 2015 Climate science conference on industrial low-carbon innovation and how US ARPA-E and EU ETS NER 400 could be linked to accelerate decarbonisation in energy intensive sectors
Market transformation in the energy sector. The implications of battery storage and reducing renewable energy costs to the Australian environment. Presents projections from NREL, DoE, CSIRO, GDF Suez, IRENA and others
Mark Little, GE
As GE’s Chief Technology Officer and Leader of GE’s nine Global Research Centers, Mark Little embraced the Lean Startup methodology to improve business outcomes. Mark will describe specific examples where he helped the organization use Lean Startup to help drive speed and innovation with cross functional teams across GE.
Analyst presentation: Energy – 02 October 2014Atkins
This analyst presentation from our energy business gives insights into the market, our business and operations, projects around the world, our acquisition strategy and the future for energy at Atkins.
World Energy Congress 2016 Istanbul An International Assessment of Ocean Ener...Matthew Hannon
This paper presents an international assessment of the absolute and relative ocean energy innovation performance of countries worldwide. It finds that in absolute terms the countries with the largest public ocean energy RD&D budgets (i.e. innovation input) typically rank highest in terms of the number of ocean energy patent filings and amount of installed capacity (i.e. innovation output), with the notable exception of the US in relation to installed capacity. However, if we examine performance in relative terms (i.e. innovation outputs per $ of RD&D) we find a very different story with those countries with the largest RD&D budget performing worst and vice versa. The best performing countries in relative terms are Austria, Italy and Germany in terms of patents per $ of RD&D and the Netherlands, Ireland, France, Korea and Germany in terms of MW per $ of RD&D.
One potential explanation for countries with the highest public RD&D budgets performing the worst is knowledge depreciation, where much of the knowledge gained via major RD&D funding from countries like the US and UK prior to a decade long hiatus in the 1990s is likely to have been lost as RD&D activities came almost to a standstill. Another is knowledge leakage where much of the knowledge generated by the use of capital intensive ocean energy test facilities within one country is ultimately lost to another as the company returns home. Other potential explanations include the poor design of innovation policy or the diseconomies of scale relating to large, unwieldy RD&D schemes.
Recommendations for further work include broadening out the indicator framework used to offer a more complete picture of innovation performance. Additional input indicators include such as private energy RD&D and the number of ocean energy RD&D personnel, as well as output indicators such as MWh or the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) of different countries’ devices. This work, alongside qualitative research (e.g. case studies, interviews), will help test to the hypotheses presented to explain the relative performance of different countries’ ocean energy innovation systems, as well as to identify best-practice ocean energy innovation policy design from the best performing nations identified earlier.
Following on her 'Room for the River' op-ed in the Washington Post, Ambassador Jones-Bos and the Embassy's Water Management specialist Dale Morris delivered a presentation to river and floodplain managers during the conference of the Natural Floodplain Functions Alliance.
Research on Wind Power in the Built Environment by Case van DamNLandUSA
Presentation on urban wind in California by
Case van Dam, UC Davis. The presentation was part of the Urban Wind Roundtable at the Consulate General of the Netherlands in San Francisco, March 16, 2011.
The Royal Netherlands Embassy, in cooperation with the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG), hosted a 2-day event - the ThinkBike Workshops - on November 15-16, 2010.
Dutch and local bike experts, planners, advocates, engineers and business people came together in the COG Board Room during the opening session to discuss how Washington, D.C. can become more bike-friendly.
In order to ‘organize a dialogue’ with its target audiences, the Royal Netherlands Embassy in Washington. D.C. experiments with different social media platforms (i.e. SlideShare). This presentation was given internally to educate our staff members and to initiate a more strategic discussion about the Embassy’s use of SlideShare.
Presentation by integrated sustainable energy company, that builts on 3 major offerings:
-Renewable Energy Project Development in PV Solar
-Sustainable Energy Consulting
-Energy Technology Development
2. Energy Q&A: how important is it?
• How much kerosene was burned to get 40 gallons per person in the
me from DC to t e S US ( 500 mile)?
e o C the SFUS (2500 e) plane
• How long does a luggage handler 5 to 8 hours, as he is likely to
have to load an unload bags before he use/produce between 125 Watt
has spent 1 kW of physical energy? and 200 Watt
• How many labor hours does a gallon 100 to 160 hours, or up to 4
of Kerosene represent if we assume a working weeks of physical labor
50% efficiency?
ffi i ?
• How many hours of energy “life Every American has the
support” does the average American equivalent of 275 “employees”
get per year?
t ? continuously working for
him/her
• What is the average energy efficiency < 2%
we reach in modern society?
hi d i t ?
2
12. 2010 Progress
Here we provide an overview of the
results of the activities taken place in
2010 between Ecofys, RNE and a large
US aerospace company
www.realnewenergy.com
17. Small Wind in California
Here we provide an overview of the
specific relevance of small wind in
California and how we can play a role..
www.realnewenergy.com
21. Current incentives not effective.....
Incentified Example Pure Market Example
Wind class: 2 or 3 Wind class: 2 or 3
Annual production of UT 1.5
Annual production of UT 1.5 2000 kWh Annual production of UT 1.5
Annual production of UT 1.5 2000 kWh
life time 15 yrs life time 15 yrs
Measurement campaign 1,000 Measurement campaign 1000
UT turn key systems costs 10,000 UT turn key systems costs 10,000
Federal tax credit 3000 Federal tax credit 0
Emerging Renewables Program 6000 Emerging Renewables Program 0
Net investment 2,000 Net investment 11,000
Simple kWh price 0.067 $/kWh Simple kWh price 0.367 $/kWh
g
Targets for UT 2015
hub full load turn key kWh cost Wind class: 2 or 3
height hours costs aprox. Annual production of UT 1.5 2200 kWh
(ft) (hrs) ($/kW) (c/kWh) life time 20 yrs
Utility scale turbine (2MW) 250 2200 1800 7
p g
Measurement campaign 0
Skystream 3,7 (2.4 kW) 80 1500 6500 29
UT turn key systems costs 5,500
Air Breeze (200 W) 80 1500 5000 22
Federal tax credit 0
Goals to serve retail market 80 1500 3750 13
Emerging Renewables Program 0
Net investment 5,500
Simple kWh price 0.125 $/kWh
.....stimulate only scale, not innovation
www.realnewenergy.com 21
23. WIMBY, Wind In My Back Yard
• Turn opponents into supporters
• Activate all necessary stakeholders
• Link wind energy to sustainable
living
• Integrate success and “ownership”
into local education
plans
24. Profit stays inside community / region
Evelop
Evelop Ecowind
Projects
Project Mgt of Cooperative Sale of wind park to
Development Mgt of Wind Park cooperative
Triodos Green loan Green Utility
Local Coop
Bank Electricity Greenchoice
Green
Electricity
Land lease Equity vs.
dividends
di id d Supply & maintenance
of Turbines
Local land local people &
Nordex
owners companies