Norway opens world's first osmotic power plant

Norway opened on Tuesday the world's first osmotic power plant, which produces emissions-free electricity by mixing fresh water and sea water through a special membrane.

State-owned utility Statkraft's prototype plant, which for now will produce a tiny 2 kilowatts to 4 kilowatts of power or enough to run a coffee machine, will enable Statkraft to test and develop the technology needed to drive down production costs.

The plant is driven by osmosis that naturally draws fresh water across a membrane and toward the seawater side. This creates higher pressure on the sea water side, driving a turbine and producing electricity.

"While salt might not save the world alone, we believe osmotic power will be an interesting part of the renewable energy mix of the future," Statkraft Chief Executive Baard Mikkelsen told reporters.

Statkraft, Europe's largest producer of renewable energy with experience in hydropower that provides nearly all of Norway's electricity, aims to begin building commercial osmotic power plants by 2015.

Here is the company's illustration of how the plant works.

(Credit: Statkraft)

The main issue is to improve the efficiency of the membrane from around 1 watt per square meter now to some 5 watts, which Statkraft says would make osmotic power costs comparable to those from other renewable sources.

The prototype, on the Oslo fjord and about 40 miles south of the Norwegian capital, has about 2,000 square meters of membrane.

Future full-scale plants producing 25 megawatts of electricity, enough to provide power for 30,000 European households, would be as large as a football stadium and require some 5 million square meters of membrane, Statkraft said.

Once new membrane "architecture" is solved, Statkraft believes the global production capacity for osmotic energy could amount to 1,600 to 1,700 terawatt hours annually, or about half of the European Union's total electricity demand.

Europe's osmotic power potential is seen at 180 terawatts, or about 5 percent of total consumption, which could help the bloc reach renewable energy goals set to curb emissions of heat-trapping gases and limit global warming.

Osmotic power, which can be located anywhere where clean fresh water runs into the sea, is seen as more reliable than more variable wind or solar energy.

Story Copyright (c) 2010 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

[zekegen]

http://poriferanano.com/<br />Here Norway contact them and get it going!

[VultureTX]

***? This process encourages putting fresh water into salt water instead of diverting fresh water for Human usage. And if you claim that the fresh water is going into the ocean anyway, then please talk to a marine biologist about the fecundity of brackish water ecologies. Since this power plan would interfere with such a boundary ecology.

[methos2000]

@ VultureTX<br />And wind would interfere with bird flight patterns or local fishing (if in the water) and solar would interfere with desert ecology and nuclear creates waste toxic for thousands of years and conventional fossil fuels are dirty and need to be mined disrupting local ecology... <br /><br />I get sick of tree huggers shooting down every possible solution because it has some side effect and not having any solutions themselves... <br /><br />Guess what? Humans have been screwing with their environment for thousands of years, maybe we should stop worrying about "saving" the environment and just worry about regulating it.

[Mr_fleabite]

I had similar thoughts, granted we don't know all the fine details. Off the cuff, with the overall lack of fresh water around the world this doesn't seem like a great solution. Might they need extraordinarily huge evaporation pools to put the fresh water back (more or less) into the system?

[cloudmatt]

your right throwing fresh water straight into the ocean is wasteful. they aren't doing that. Your dead on that at the borders between fresh and salt there is an unique ecosystem. the massive amounts used would be a drop in the bucket for most ocean bound rivers that would just spill into the ocean otherwise. This actually sounds like a better idea for hydroelectric power. Hydroelectric plants require a restriction on water flow usually in the form of a dam which floods a portion of the river into a man made lake like at the hover dam. this process could simply sit at the coastlines piping fresh from up stream and salt from the ocean then pump it all back to the ocean. My concern for this would be what if any changes could this have on the water it's self from PH to salinity and temperature if the byproduct of this process is environmentally clean it's a great idea otherwise just another pipe dream.

[hockeymass]

Yeah, this would totally be way more damaging to the environment than burning coal or oil.

[Vegaman_Dan]

@VultureTX: <br /> <br />Good points you make. We should dam up all the rivers on the planet now because they dump fresh water into the ocean. That will solve THAT problem! <br /> <br />Can't be having with this 'nature' getting in the way of ecological priorities.

[Hernys]

There's NOT a shortage of fresh water around the world. Water shortage is a local problem. True, it happens in many places, but not in all. <br />I live in front of a river that could serve fresh water to one tenth of the world population. In the arctic and antartica there's enough water for a hundred billion people. Rivers dump fresh water into the ocean every single day. In a place like Norway that's probably quite true since they have lots of glaciers and ice melting every year. Making use of that water hurts no one, it is going to end up mixed with salt water anyway. <br />Now, if you have that water flowing to the sea, is it really more efficient to use it to raise a few meters and then get that energy instead of using it for direct hydroelectric power? Large dams are a problem, but smaller usines taking power from small height differentials are pretty efficient and don't have to have an environmental effect.

[Avanti3258]

I agree. What is the end game with all of the talk of jobs etc. with green energy? In every case. solar panels, wind turbines etc. the enviornmentalist won't allow it to be placed because of what it will do to some part of the enviornment. Face it. They regard humans as the problem. <br /> <br />We as a group create far less polution than the earth did volcanoes and endless forest fires, some that burned for 50 + years. <br /> <br />They remind me of the ant running around the floor of the jungle screaming the sky is falling. Just elephant crap little ant.

[P0STING_AWAY]

If we could somehow harness ignorance .... and turn it into electricity .... You<br />would be able to run your own power company ....

[swenk22]

This one seems like a no starter! Diffusion gradient creating enough pressure to drive a turbine effectively??? Probably the size of the empire state building.

[uthene254]

About the size of a football stadium. Believe it or not, that was address in the article.

[fokkwp]

Not gonna be very useful. There isn't much fresh water around.

[wjm23]

I don't understand how this can work. As depicted in the schematic, the amount of energy one could extract by the pressurized water turning a turbine would be something less than the amount required to pump fresh saltwater into the chamber.<br /><br />Or is this running as a batch process rather than continuous flow?

[mike_ekim]

I disagree with 'emissions free'. The whole life cycle has to be looked at. A football stadium filled with plastic membrane has a huge environmental cost. <br /> <br />They made 2000 sq meters of plastic, burning huge amounts of fossile fuel to make the electricity for the plastic, and in return they can power a coffee maker. Sounds like an environmental nightmare to me! <br /> <br />Here's an idea. Instead of using a coal power plant to make electricity for our homes, let's use a coal power plant to charge led-acid batteries (which will need additional energy to mine/build in the first place), and have diesel trucks deliver the batteries to our homes every day. Plus we'll need to mine metals to build the new inverters to turn the DC power from the batteries into AC power for our houses. We'll be causing a lot more net pollution to use the batteries charged by the coal plants, but at least we'll not be using coal power in our homes! <br /> <br />An environmentally friendly pile of plastic as big as a football stadium, sure...

[Vegaman_Dan]

It could have been recycled plastic for all we know. Or even corn/soy-based plastics which also are in production- both of which don't have any coal / emissions issues. <br /> <br />We simply don't know the full details yet to be throwing around accusations like yours blindly.

[mike_ekim]

Maybe this, maybe that. We simply don't know the full details yet to be swept along blindly like sheep. <br /> <br />Do you really believe corn/soy based palstics are made with ZERO energy? How about the fertalizers, they need energy to be produced and shipped. Tractors for harvesting, trains or trucks for shipping, then the crop is processed in a factory to get the cellulose, and then that product is processed again to make plastic. How much energy does all that take? Shall we install 1 GW of solar and wind and ethanol to power all of those factories and diesel engines, so we can build a power plant that churns our 100kW? <br /> <br />Manufacturing takes energy. Building a giant power plant to make a small amount of energy, and ignoring the energy cost of construction, is foolhardy. As I said in my first post, the life cycle has to be looked at.

[Vegaman_Dan]

@mike_ekim: <br /> <br />Thank you for demonstrating exactly why we can't 'be swept along blindly like sheep," as you say. We need more information than what was provided. Right now this if more the Chicken Little Response than anything reasonable or logical.

[mike_ekim]

Agreed, Vegaman_Dan, we should be careful because the "Chicken Little" response is often seen in discussions regarding the environment! I hope that we are equally cautious of proclaming the benefits, as we are of proclaming the risks. :) <br /> <br />If this plant has a favorable life-cycle energy cost, why is it not listed on Statkraft's web site linked above? Have they not even considered it? <br /> <br />From a little wiki reading, the membranes are likely polyethylene i.e. the stuff grocery bags are made of. Unliekly to be made from recycled materials, but possibly made from sugar cane or other stock. I can find no reports on the energy required to make polyethylene, unfortunately.

[kenright60660]

I think people are easily confused, for one thing, a lot of environmentalists are less stupid than you think. Wind turbines barely affect bird flight patterns, this idea would do very little towards messing with the balance of fresh and saltwater. Every day millions of gallons of water, fresh water, empty out into the oceans. Fresh water is not an absolute non-renewable resource, it gets renewed every day by the vast amounts of evaporation, melting, and withdrawal from ground-water sources. This plan merely diverts the water, from going straight to the ocean to a power plant then an ocean. And I would prefer this to Hydroelectric dams which are incredibly damaging to ecosystems. <br /><br />Unfortunately, another misguided belief is that it is just environmentalists who refuse renewable energy sources, its the skeptics as much as the believers, except the skeptics are attempting to use the same reasoning as environmentalists. Do your research people, these power plants and other renewable sources of energy aren't as damaging as you think. And for those of you who believe we have nothing to worry about when it comes to fossil fuels, the supply isn't as large as you think, we might have 400 more years of coal, but not all of that is anthracite or even lignite Natural gas has a better chance for the next few years, except for its volatile pricing. Oil is pretty much on the verge of being unreasonably expensive to extract. Even if the earth isn't dying, fossil fuels will not last forever, so why not work on making renewables feasible now as opposed to 50 years down the line when the world reaches an energy crisis the likes of which haven't been seen before?

[Vegaman_Dan]

"which for now will produce a tiny 2 kilowatts to 4 kilowatts of power or enough to run a coffee machine," <br /> <br />Now that's one BIG coffee machine!

[mike_ekim]

Our office has a 3-burned coffee machine, the nameplate says it's rated at 1700 W.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Yep, a big coffee machine indeed. That'd be, what, 6-8 pots running at once?

[Bob_299]

"Norway opened on Tuesday the world's first osmotic power plant, which produces emissions-free electricity by mixing fresh water and sea water through a special membrane." I would be interesting in knowing more about the membrane. For example: how much energy is used to manufacture the membrane, are petrochemicals or other fossil inputs used to manufacture the membrane, and what are the environmental effects of manufacturing the membrane?

[mike_ekim]

Agreed, the whole life cycle needs to be looked at (including manufacturing costs), not just the final power plant.

[Dr_Zinj]

Fresh water is generally more valuable than oil. Except transporting a constant supply from one place with an abundance to somewhere with a shortage isn't possible. Plus, those areas that have that much fresh water usually already have hydroelectic powerstations using it. One more point, blocking off a freshwater source from the ocean to run your osmotic power plant prevents fish runs and normal mixing of water sources with the ocean; which are some of the greatest supply zones for seafood production. <br /> <br />Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. Side effects can be catastrophic.

[mike_ekim]

I haven't read anything about 'blocking off' water. This tech can be used anywhere a river meets the ocean. Throw a big pipe in the river where it's still fresh, and then discharge teh brackish mixture where the river meats the ocean - it's brackish there, anyways. <br /> <br />There are already plenty of power plants on rivers, they don't need to 'block the river' to get their cooling water, they just run some big pipes. These plants can do the same, but for process water instead of colling water, of course.

[david_harro]

A sad fact is that some small scale renewable energy devices, provide less energy during there life span then was used to produce the unit.<br />This is not a reason to give up on renewable energy, there is a lot of learning and development to be done. <br />Although in this case, 1 watt per square meter with the hope of 5 watts??? wind generators create 300 watts per square meter, solar up to 45 watts per square meter. Solar and Wind are expensive, is it worth chasing something like an osmosis plant when there doesnt seem to be any long term potential? <br />My opinion research dollars could be better spent.

[mike_ekim]

I agree with the basic jist of your post, but would like to point out that in general, reverse-osmosis membranes are rolled up into a cylinder and packaged in a tube; a tube i meter long and, say, 10 centimeters in diameter can contain many square meters of membrane. <br /> <br />However, the point is stil valid: If I build a device that consumes 10 Watts and use it to intelligently control my cell phone charger that only draws 9 Watts, I've not solved an energy problem. Likewise, if I can spend 20 million on wave power that will generate more power than the RO system, and the wave system requires less energy to build, then the wave system is a superior choice. <br /> <br />It is not smart to put all of your eggs in one basket, but it seems that we are putting our eggs in every basket that comes along.

[noesis3]

I work with Reverse Osmosis units. The water will have to be filtered prior to using, you will have microbiological fouling and mineral fouling of the membranes over time. If you don't treat the water to kill organisms, stuff will grow on the membranes but then you have use a carbon bed to remove any treatment chemicals like chlorine. to Additionally, the membranes are very expensive. Sounds doable but it won't be cheap.

[Uncle_B]

Norway has little solar power - look at a map! These folks are Wind, Hydro Tidal powered at best as the Asian Fact and the very strong Yuan threatens the Western World with astounding increases in the price of oil. They have little wood left to cut, not a lot of coal, and great long winters requiring heat for survival! A fellow living in California must come to the understanding that the days are very short for half the year for these folks, and they grasp at straws for survival as it is! American tend to forget that they are geographically blessed people, and xenophobia sets in and they judge another man's efforts by their ample resources! We the people living in the rest of the less blessed world survive by a very different measure and scale! We march to the tune of a very different band! Oslo, the capital city of Norway for example runs its buses on bio-gassed sewage to save on imported oil costs on our more frail economy. Compared to America our country is very poor, and the people make the differences up by good application of well studied Science and applied technologies, excellent, world renouned Engineering skills, and careful, frugal dedication to the best survival schemes possible - We have to! It Snows here! It gets dark and very cold in the winter here! We have crops only in summertime here! We have no great prairies full of wheat and cattle here! We farm the sea here for our food. We will not hurt our fisheries, our food source, for a few watts! We will think our way around these problems and come up with the right answers. This is how we survive in Norway.

[Uncle_B]

Norway has little solar power - look at a map! These folks are Wind, Hydro Tidal powered at best as the Asian Fact and the very strong Yuan threatens the Western World with astounding increases in the price of oil. They have little wood left to cut, not a lot of coal, and great long winters requiring heat for survival! A fellow living in California must come to the understanding that the days are very short for half the year for these folks, and they grasp at straws for survival as it is! American tend to forget that they are geographically blessed people, and xenophobia sets in and they judge another man's efforts by their ample resources! We the people living in the rest of the less blessed world survive by a very different measure and scale! We march to the tune of a very different band! Oslo, the capital city of Norway for example runs its buses on bio-gassed sewage to save on imported oil costs on our more frail economy. Compared to America our country is very poor, and the people make the differences up by good application of well studied Science and applied technologies, excellent, world renouned Engineering skills, and careful, frugal dedication to the best survival schemes possible - We have to! It Snows here! It gets dark and very cold in the winter here! We have crops only in summertime here! We have no great prairies full of wheat and cattle here! We farm the sea here for our food. We will not hurt our fisheries, our food source, for a few watts! We will think our way around these problems and come up with the right answers. This is how we survive in Norway.

[hosseingolabian]

This is very good idea when one is obliged to add sea water (Caspian Sea) of normal salinity to a hyper salt lake (Uremia, world's second large saline lake). This is the case of Lake Uremia in Iran for which I am working on a proposal , a saving and rehabilitation plan, presented in www.urmiana.com. I would be very pleased if any body intrested in such cases, had a look and commented.

[Altotus]

Basic material balance-net change to environment is approximately zero that is no change as to brackish environment it looks like it could work without much disruption for a given system. Not much energy here though. Wind and solar tide look better for the buck.