A successful effort means locally generated, clean, reliable power for the islands
||| FROM ORCAS POWER & LIGHT CO-OP |||
Earlier this year, Orcas Power & Light Cooperative was awarded a grant through the Department of Energy to continue looking at the feasibility of tidal energy in San Juan County.
As our region transitions away from fossil fuels, there likely will be times when we don’t have enough electricity to meet demand. OPALCO is exploring clean, reliable power sources that can be generated locally to fill that gap.
“We aren’t sure if tidal power is the right direction for San Juan County, but the energy shortfalls we’re looking at make it imperative that we explore local, renewable energy projects,” General Manager Foster Hildreth says. “We are very interested in the amount of energy that could come from tidal flows and are looking forward to this opportunity from the Department of Energy to explore the feasibility of this pilot project.”
History of the Project
In 2018, OPALCO began investigating multiple tidal device types and deployment logistics in the San Juan Islands. OPALCO found the floating turbine technology to have the most promise, especially considering serviceability, marine traffic and environmental parameters.
In 2021, OPALCO received a grant from the Department of Commerce for a preliminary design and siting assessment of this project. The technology OPALCO is exploring is a floating stream device currently deployed in the Orkney Islands of Scotland. The Orkney Islands have a similar marine environment to the San Juan Islands. If this project moves forward, the device installed in the San Juan Islands would be an upgraded version built in the United States.
With the prior grant funding, OPALCO determined an optimal location in Rosario Strait near Blakely Island that could be connected to our grid with existing infrastructure. The proposed device has a 5-gigawatt-hour annual generation.
2024 Department of Energy Grant
The DOE grant is for feasibility of this project in Rosario Strait, exploring the merits and viability, including environmental risks and community benefits. If the tests are successful, the project could be eligible for more DOE funding. The 12-month grant officially started in June 2024. The feasibility study is a way to evaluate whether this project could be successful.
The milestones for this grant include:
• Environmental site study for physical and biological data that includes mapping the sea floor, assessing tidal flow, monitoring tagged fish going through the area and measuring underwater noise levels.
• Environmental risk register using a third-party objective analysis that evaluates key issues the project will face.
• Draft license application to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
• Outreach with tribal sovereign nations; local, state and federal agencies; and co-op members.
Projects like this typically take at least four or five years to get permitted and installed. OPALCO is committed to sharing the progress and study findings as it explores this technology. This project is in early stages and is many steps from a power-generating device being put in the water.
Given our remote location, our best bet for clean and affordable firm power is to build renewable generation projects locally. One of OPALCO’s goals is to provide four-hour backup power in case the mainland grid goes down. Achieving this lofty goal is challenging. It will require a large influx of grant funding and strong member support.
As we build a local, renewable power supply on our beautiful islands, we face the cost of these projects, aesthetic tradeoffs and limited area for siting them. We need you, our co-op members, to work closely with OPALCO to help determine our energy future.
For more details on the tidal project and other projects, visit www.opalco.com.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
Dear OPALCO: This article, which ends by enlisting the help of islanders “to work closely with OPALCO to help determine our energy future,” seems a bit more of a teaser than an informative feature, and begs more questions than it answers. Enlisting that help, requires, at least for this reader, a lot more context about our local energy situation. For example, the article states that the tidal generator is projected to provide 5 gigawatt-hours of annual power generation. The seemingly reasonable project goal is “to provide four-hour backup power in case the mainland grid goes down. [But] Achieving this lofty goal is challenging.” How do those two numbers equate? What is the average electrical demand in the service area?; and how much momentary power (presumably megawatts) would be required and how much would the tidal project provide for a four-hour backup during a winter blackout, factoring in the anticipated increase of about 3,000 resident population (Comp Plan) over the next ten years?
Trying to find answers to these questions, I followed the article’s offer of more details on the tidal and other projects by visiting http://opalco.com/. The link leads to the main OPALCO page, so I had to fish around for more details, and, after some searching, I found this article https://www.opalco.com/quick-fact-data-centers/2024/10/, which contains a number of alarming graphs showing projected statewide supply deficits leading to anticipated rolling blackouts and energy price spikes. These projections only raise a number of larger questions about this and like projects. What is the additional cost of electrical storage and/or connecting such projects to the existing grid? What would be the alternative cost of subsidizing independent emergency generators for all homes in the county? Considering the upcoming administration’s antipathy to green energy, what is the contingency for additional project funding once the initial, grant-funded study is completed? More generally, one wonders whether the emphasis on electrical energy, however well-intended, isn’t increasing our vulnerability by putting all our eggs in one basket.
It seems to me that questions like these, naive though they may be, need to be addressed in important community conversations that are surely ahead. If OPALCO wants real, informed support for projects like this–beyond just Green is Good and Everything is Electric–it needs to provide better contextual information on our real energy needs and alternatives for addressing them.
Brian,
Good questions. Glad you are interested in knowing more. This article is not meant to be a complete analysis of our energy needs in San Juan County. There is lots of that information on our website and in our board materials on the website. Our Quick Fact page has some of those bigger energy questions addressed including “Why Local Renewable Projects? Mainland Power Demand Will Soon Exceed Supply”, “Northwest Resource Adequacy in a Rapidly Decarbonizing World”, a four part series on Decarbonization and more. Our Board Materials including our 2025 Budget report has lots of information on load forecasting, additionally some of our long range planning documents have info on this.
Into the new year we plan to continue our Island Way campaign that outlines the big energy issues OPALCO and the region is facing in relation to our energy future. Please look for ways to engage on this – we will have several opportunities in 2025 to attend workshops and ask questions. OPALCO does not have the solutions in place for some of these big problems we’re facing but wish to inform our members as these issues are going to affect all of us as the cost of power increases and regional reliability decreases. Thanks for your interest.
Quick Fact Page: https://www.opalco.com/about-community/quick-facts/.
Tidal Power Quick Fact: https://www.opalco.com/quick-fact-opalco-tidal-energy-pilot-project/2022/11/
Document Library with long term planning and board materials: https://www.opalco.com/about-community/document-library
Salish Current had a recent article (“OPALCO’s Tidal Energy Pilot Project facing early headwinds”) about the costs and challenges of this project. Although the Orbital Marine generator looks fascinating, the estimated $40 million price tag was a bit shocking. That comes out to about $2,000 per islander (based on a population estimate of 20,000 people) to generate a tiny fraction of our energy needs. I recognize the need for experimental pilot projects, but it doesn’t seem economical to scale this technology up in such a way that it could ever generate a significant portion of what we need.
Even with a “large influx” of money coming from sources other than OPALCO members, is this really the best use of OPALCO’s budget? If the concern is to buffer off-island outages, $40 million could buy a substantial quantity of battery backup. Utility-scale battery storage can be deployed today. It takes advantage of a proven technology that can be acquired and installed without any of the marine-related environmental concerns, providing immediate benefit. It has no visual shoreline impact and could be distributed around the islands at strategic “pinch points” in the local grid.
HI David, OPALCO doesn’t plan to do any renewable energy projects unless we have grant funding that can help pay for the projects and make them financially viable for the co-op membership. We don’t want these projects to come out of member rates. We are open to exploring battery storage projects as well. The Salish Current article has made claims that we just haven’t proven with this project related to challenges and some information that is incorrect or dated. We encourage members to get involved and ask questions directly to our team at OPALCO. There are still lots of unknowns with the tidal energy project as we are in very early feasibility phases of this project.
Here is the full quote Foster Hildreth provided for the Salish Current article that wasn’t included that clearly outlines OPALCO”s position and where we are at in the project:
“OPALCO is seeing that our region is facing some big issues as power costs go up and power reliability goes down. It is important for OPALCO to explore local, renewable energy sources and utilize grant funds while they are available. The current tidal generation grant is helping us to explore the feasibility of tidal power, and we are looking at key issues that will be needed to line up for a project like this to move forward. To keep this project viable, we will need the support of our co-op members, key stakeholders, and tribal nations. We will need it to be financially viable and to work well in our pristine natural environment. This grant is working its way through those key issues. If everything lines up perfectly a project like this would still take years to get up and running. We may be seeing energy shortfalls before that time. We can’t wait until things become dire before starting to take action and we continue to explore a variety of solutions to fulfill OPALCO’s mission to get our members affordable and reliable power now and into the future. We need our members to be really engaged in the coming year as we have some big issues on the table and will need their input.”
Argonne National Lab released an economic assessment on this tidal project in January 2024, co-prepared by OPALCO. With a modest levelized inflation rate and a twenty year life span, according to its numbers a rough estimate is it would produce each megawatthour at ballpark $500, paid by coop owner-members and American taxpayers. It says 40 million for the unit, 304,000 annual O&M, $575,000 reburbish every ten years. It would go up with unforeseen issues and cost overruns. The report says the benefit to cost range of scenarios is 25 to 49 cents on the dollar. The worst end has more tidal units, or a single unit with no battery. The less worse end has more battery storage. But it didn’t study no tidal unit and just battery to store affordable power from the market.
A 2023 study commissioned by the U.K. that includes the O2, found the levelized cost of tidal power ranges from 240 to 817 British pounds per megawatthour, with a potential increase of up to 83% due to “significant uncertainty”. These amounts are comparable to high price spikes on the market during occasional extreme demand events.
In regard to tidal turbine projects, a Univ. of Victoria marine energy co-director told Physics Today, “If something goes wrong, you sink the company”.
What’s prevalent in government studies is the tidal industry seeks places to implement itself to continue trying to build a case for itself. The 2021 PNNL environmental report for siting and operation that OPALCO contributed to offers an approach to, “allow both the developer and the regulator to proceed with deployment and operation in the face of incomplete information”.
By the reported numbers, the exorbitant tidal unit would only amount to roughly 7 days of the coop’s yearly power use. The economics are the core limiting factor, not NIMBYism. However, that it’s being pursued in critically endangered Southern Resident orca critical habitat shows grave disregard for these orcas we’re a hair away from losing and all the desperate, and costly, efforts in trying to save them.
Recently Foster expressed intent to put in five O2 units. The O2 has two arms. Specs say each arm has a blade array of 20 meters diameter. 20 meters = 65.6 feet. Calculators say this equals an area of 3,381.6 square feet. Multiply times 2 for both arms equals 6,763.2 square feet of spinning blade area for one O2 unit, if the math is correct. Five O2 units would put 33,816 square feet of spinning blade area in SRKW critical habitat. Plus noise and other impacts.
OPALCO has apparently matched tidal grants in the amount of $822,000. That’s on us. Meanwhile, solar and wind in the west are proliferating. Battery is developing and a better west wide transmission market that will reduce costs and the amount of resources needed. Especially if BPA will stop resisting the one with more benefits to everyone.
Just when we were getting a handle on electrification, data centers which are known for their secrecy, and microchips came along with their sharp rise in projected load. Keyword “projected”. And the Department of Defense launched its Microelectronics Commons. “Consistent with our warfighter-centric approach, the Microelectronics Commons will get the most cutting-edge microchips into systems our troops use every day: ships, planes, tanks, long-range munitions, communications gear, sensors and much more”. A defense publication said, “In future conflicts, data centers will be the central nervous systems of any connected fighting force”. It’s wise to know what you’re paying for and hosting in a world of genocide, biodiversity loss and impairment of ecosystem function vs what we actually need to live well.
Econ assessment: https://www.sandia.gov/app/uploads/sites/163/2024/02/Rosario-Strait-Tidal-Energy-plus-Energy-Storage-_Jan-29_Final_ck_mls.pdf
UK Study: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/655372484ac0e1001277d819/tidal-lcoe-report.pdf
Physics Today: https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/article/76/8/22/2903563/Tidal-turbine-development-ebbs-and-flowsThe
PNNL env. & siting report: https://tethys.pnnl.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Copping-et-al-TEAMER-Orbital-Marine_RFTS-1_FINAL.pdf
O2 PNNL: https://tethys.pnnl.gov/project-sites/orbital-marine-power-o2-emec
Western resources: https://feature.wecc.org/soti/topic-sections/resources/index.html
Microelectronics Commons: https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3210295/dods-microelectronics-commons-takes-shape/
AI’s Hidden Secret—Data Centers: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/techland/ai’s-hidden-secret—data-centers-211573
The Military Industrial Venture Capital Complex: https://www.securityincontext.com/posts/the-military-industrial-venture-capital-complex
Before signing up for more battery storage (beyond the one that’s already on Decatur), it’s worth perusing the battery energy storage system (BESS) failure incident database: https://storagewiki.epri.com/index.php/BESS_Failure_Incident_Database
When batteries catch on fire, it can be catastrophic. Highly toxic gas and smoke can spread for miles impacting many homes/people. Here in the islands, an evacuation of all homes that could be impacted by such a fire would probably lead to chaos given the limitations for getting off island. Also note that after a recent massive battery fire and explosion in MO, a 3 mile fish kill was discovered in the nearby river.
These events may be rare, but when they happen, they can be devastating. So we need to be extremely wary of large battery energy storage systems.
We, as Opalco members, need to start focusing on supporting Opalco’s efforts in finding solutions. We are facing two very big issues. First, the increasing cost of energy from the mainland to meet our own loads. And second, having enough cable capacity to get the energy here to meet our peak loads.
Brian, your questions are very valid. The two problems we face are very big and very real. There are no easy solutions.
David, costs are huge for sure. Opalco (and us members) can not afford them. What we have today, cheap energy ( kwhrs) and capacity (the BPA cable from Fidalgo Island to Lopez Island to get it here) has been provided by all BPA customers. Not us alone.
Finding affordable solution is going to be very difficult. We are going to have to rely on the many other customers of BPA and the region to help pay the costs. What if the decline? Anything we can do, by any means, is going to help.
The community solar project and battery on Decator is small and helps a bit. If the tidal project, funded by grants, can be proved to be economic, Opalco could become the power purchaser, not the owner, of the project. It is another small part of the solution. There must be more solutions.
More solar, on homes and as community projects, is going to help reduce the amount of mainland energy we must buy. This will reduce Opalco’s cost to purchase energy. But will not solve the winter peak capacity problem, the limited BPA cables. More battery storage, as costly as it currently is, can help reduce our winter peak demand. Tidal generation, because it will produce energy year round, can get us over by some peaks, sometimes.
We here in the San Juan Islands are facing major energy issues, both cost and simply not enough to go around. It will take years to find and build solutions. Please be concerned. Please support Opalco as they search for and develop solutions.
OPALCO doesn’t claim to have found “the answer,” quite the contrary. While negative comments are helpful in the process of evaluation, suggestions for feasible alternatives are far more helpful. And “feasible” is a complicated matter. I second Tom Owens’ comment that supporting OPALCO’s diligent search for alternatives is a major member function, while the experts among us can contribute to and support the search for and tuning of alternatives.
One alternative I never hear discussed (although I may have missed it): Tiered pricing to encourage dramatic energy use reduction by the top tier users. Is this on the table?
Every time there’s a wintertime blackout I spend a few hours sitting in the dark and, first, thanking Opalco linemen for their quick responses in previous incidents in the worst weather, and, second, being thankful I have a propane backup for heat and continuing my internal debate about whether to invest in an emergency generator (I know, it’s carbon, but it’s an emergency and it’s temporary).
Our energy issues are obviously much more than local, and are tied to regional supply and national policy issues including the environment and, apparently, “defense” priorities. But, equally clearly, we in the Islands have our own special issues in addition. So I agree with Tom and Bill that we need to support Opalco’s efforts to address our local problems. But there’s a caveat to that: In order to have this necessary and welcome discussion, Opalco needs to be completely forthright and forthcoming with the information it provides. So thanks to Heather Nicholson for the research and important information you added.
There is no debate about the obvious fact that conservation, efficiency and load spreading are the most effective and immediately available strategies to make the best out of our current system. But we seem to be getting a contradictory message from the various proponents of electrification of everything. EVs are cool and sexy but they have to be charged.
Tiered pricing is fair in my opinion. Since I converted my residential heating technology from a growly roaring oil furnace to heat pumps I have become a “top tier user”. Opalco loves me much harder now. But the improvement in quality of life and reduction of bad smells, fuel trucks in the driveway and other annoying aspects of burning petroleum are worth it.
On the tidal power experiment, I tend to be skeptical due to the fouling and maintenance issues posed by such a massive moored object. However the Norwegians who have completely taken over the BC fish farm industry seem to be able to deal with those issues through the use of materials unfriendly to sessile organisms, improved maintenance and other techniques. However there have been numerous times I have encountered their large maintenance vessels in remote fjords in Northern BC.
On the energy storage issue I strongly agree that lithium battery banks seem needlessly hazardous on an island that gets tinder-dry every summer.
There are alternatives that are clean, green and safe. Consider the possibilities that exist today. Pumped hydro requires only water, gravity and pipes. Basically it connects two reservoirs with an elevation difference. During times when surplus power is available, water is pumped from the lower reservoir uphill to the upper reservoir for storage. When power is needed, water is released through the system to drive hydrogenerator turbines. This technology has existed for 100 years.
Here on Kauai we also have an electricity cooerative, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (KIUC). KIUC derives 60% of the energy needs for 60,000 users from renewable sources, including solar, biowaste combustion, and hydro. KIUC operates a pumped hydro storage system and also a Tesla battery bank.
Here comes the hard part.
Here on Orcas we have two substantal inland lakes separated by 600 feet of elevation. Yep, Mountain Lake and Cascade Lake. The latter is already an impoundment. Realistically, such a project would probably never be approved. But Blakely Island and Cypress Island also have pairs of lakes that, with some geoengineering to increase capacity, might work.
I know it sounds crazy. OK, let the ridicuiers and shouters begin their usual tirades.
Did you know that the Alaska cities of Ketchikan, Petersburg and Wrangell derive almost all of their energy needs from hydrogeneration sourced from Tyee Lake above Ketchikan? Renewed by the more than 140 inches of rainfall they receive annually. I should say “usually renewed” as the last time I was there in 2020 an unprecedented drought in SE AK interrupted the use of hydro.
The people in this county frequently mention how lucky we are to live in this beautiful place. And I agree, we are.
So why is it so easy to suggest massively expensive and destructive projects? Why is it not the easier option to tighten our collective “energy use” belts a bit instead? Easier for our wallets, for the natural environment, and the wild beings we share this place with.
I am not surprised that “more” is the default position–build more, rather than use less–because that mentality has been indoctrinated into us. The ideology of infinite growth (on a finite planet)–rather like a cancer growing rapidly in a body–tells us more is better, always.
OPALCO has pushed heat pumps and EVs on us for years, increasing our dependency on electricity at precisely the time when electricity is rapidly becoming harder to come by. (Well, not me–I saw the writing on the wall a while ago and began doing everything I could to reduce my dependency on energy of all kinds, thankfully.)
Yes heat pumps are a lot “cleaner” than propane from an end user perspective. But for the natural world, it makes little difference whether that energy is from river-destroying dams and pumped hydro, atmosphere-destroying fossil fuels, or solar panels and wind turbines made from huge amounts of material mined from the Earth, destroying habitat and polluting rivers and lakes around the planet.
More is not better. More is digging an already deep hole much, much deeper.
The solution is less. I really hope we can all recognize this, and fast. Yes, we are hopelessly tied to mainland activities, whether that’s more electricity-hogging data centers or some other industry. But we can foster a mentality of resilience and continued care for SJC’s incredible natural environment by being willing to think differently–to figure out how to live with less, to live in a way that reduces our over-sized ecological footprint on Earth. I know we can.
The only remaining question is, will we?