The deployment of in-stream flow-energy converters in rivers is an opportunity to expand the renewable energy portfolio and limit carbon emissions. Device performance and lifetime, environmental conservation, and the safety of fluvial communities against flood events, however, present unresolved challenges. In particular, we need to understand how multiple submerged hydrokinetic turbines interact with the sediment bed and whether existing technologies can be deployed in morphodynamically active natural rivers. Here, we present a scaled demonstration of a hydrokinetic turbine power plant deployed in a quasi-field-scale channel with sediment transport and migrating bedforms. We measure high-frequency sediment flux, the spatiotemporally resolved bathymetry and the turbine model performance. We find that with opportune siting, kinetic energy can be extracted efficiently without compromising the geomorphic equilibrium of the river and the structural safety of the turbine foundation, even in the presence of large migrating dunes, thus paving the way for harnessing sustainable and renewable energy in rivers.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Get just this article for as long as you need it
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Bertrand, O., Dominguez, F., Duron, L., Girard, C. & Zanette, J. Numerical modelling of vertical-axis and transverse-flow hydrokinetic turbine in the river Loire. In Proceedings of the 36th IAHR World Congress (IAHR, 2015); https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2660.1688.
Münch-Alligné, C. et al. Experimental assessment of a new kinetic turbine performance for artificial channels. Water 10, 311 (2018).
Khan, M. J., Bhuyan, G., Iqbal, M. T. & Quaicoe, J. E. Hydrokinetic energy conversion systems and assessment of horizontal and vertical axis turbines for river and tidal applications: a technology status review. Appl. Energy 86, 1823–1835 (2009).
Laws, N. D. & Epps, B. P. Hydrokinetic energy conversion: technology, research, and outlook. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 57, 1245–1259 (2016).
Bahaj, A. S., Molland, A. F., Chaplin, J. R. & Batten, W. M. J. Power and thrust measurements of marine current turbines under various hydrodynamic flow conditions in a cavitation tunnel and a towing tank. Renew. Energy 32, 407–426 (2007).
Kang, S., Borazjani, I., Colby, J. A. & Sotiropoulos, F. Numerical simulation of 3D flow past a real-life marine hydrokinetic turbine. Adv. Water Resour. 39, 33–43 (2012).
Chamorro, L. P. et al. On the interaction between a turbulent open channel flow and an axial-flow turbine. J. Fluid Mech. 716, 658–670 (2013).
Kolekar, N. & Banerjee, A. Performance characterization and placement of a marine hydrokinetic turbine in a tidal channel under boundary proximity and blockage effects. Appl. Energy 148, 121–133 (2015).
Kirke, B. K. Tests on ducted and bare helical and straight blade Darrieus hydrokinetic turbines. Renew. Energy 36, 3013–3022 (2011).
Bachant, P. & Wosnik, M. Performance measurements of cylindrical- and spherical-helical cross-flow marine hydrokinetic turbines, with estimates of exergy efficiency. Renew. Energy 74, 318–325 (2015).
Bachant, P. & Wosnik, M. Characterising the near-wake of a cross-flow turbine. J. Turbul. 16, 392–410 (2015).
Strom, B., Brunton, S. L. & Polagye, B. Intracycle angular velocity control of cross-flow turbines. Nat. Energy 2, 17103 (2017).
Richter, B. D. & Thomas, G. A. Restoring environmental flows by modifying dam operations. Ecol. Soc. 12, 12 (2007).
Latrubesse, E. M. et al. Damming the rivers of the Amazon basin. Nature 546, 363–369 (2017).
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). MHK Atlas. https://maps.nrel.gov/mhk-atlas/ (accessed 4 December 2017).
Boehlert, G. W. & Gill, A. B. Environmental and ecological effects of ocean renewable energy development: a current synthesis. Oceanography 23, 68–81 (2010).
Roche, R. C. et al. Research priorities for assessing potential impacts of emerging marine renewable energy technologies: insights from developments in Wales (UK). Renew. Energy 99, 1327–1341 (2016).
Copping, A. et al. Annex IV 2016 State of the Science Report: Environmental Effects of Marine Renewable Energy Development Around the World (US DOE, IEA-OES, 2016); https://tethys.pnnl.gov/publications/state-of-the-science-2016.
Verdant Power RITE Project https://www.verdantpower.com/rite (accessed 4 December 2017).
Gunawan, B., Neary, V. S. & Colby, J. A. Tidal energy site resource assessment in the East River tidal strait, near Roosevelt Island, New York, New York. Renew. Energy 71, 509–517 (2014).
Chawdhary, S. et al. Wake characteristics of a TriFrame of axial-flow hydrokinetic turbines. Renew. Energy 109, 332–345 (2017).
Neary, V. S. et al. Field Measurements at Rivers and Tidal Current Sites for Hydrokinetic Energy Development: Best Practices Manual (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2011).
Neary, V. S., Gunawan, B. & Sale, D. C. Turbulent inflow characteristics for hydrokinetic energy conversion in rivers. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 26, 437–445 (2013).
Jacobson, P. Assessment and Mapping of the Riverine Hydrokinetic Resource in the Continental United States. (US Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information, 2012); https://doi.org/10.2172/1219876
Riglin, J., Daskiran, C., Jonas, J., Schleicher, W. C. & Oztekin, A. Hydrokinetic turbine array characteristics for river applications and spatially restricted flows. Renew. Energy 97, 274–283 (2016).
Power, M. E., Dietrich, W. E. & Finlay, J. C. Dams and downstream aquatic biodiversity: potential food web consequences of hydrologic and geomorphic change. Environ. Manag. 20, 887–895 (1996).
Nittrouer, J. A., Allison, M. A. & Campanella, R. Bedform transport rates for the lowermost Mississippi River. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 113, 1–16 (2008).
Hill, C., Musa, M., Chamorro, L. P., Ellis, C. & Guala, M. Local scour around a model hydrokinetic turbine in an erodible channel. J. Hydraul. Eng. 140, 04014037 (2014).
Neill, S. P., Litt, E. J., Couch, S. J. & Davies, A. G. The impact of tidal stream turbines on large-scale sediment dynamics. Renew. Energy 34, 2803–2812 (2009).
Neill, S. P., Jordan, J. R. & Couch, S. J. Impact of tidal energy converter (TEC) arrays on the dynamics of headland sand banks. Renew. Energy 37, 387–397 (2012).
Fairley, I., Masters, I. & Karunarathna, H. The cumulative impact of tidal stream turbine arrays on sediment transport in the Pentland Firth. Renew. Energy 80, 755–769 (2015).
Neill, S. P., Robins, P. E. & Fairley, I. The impact of marine renewable energy extraction on sediment dynamics. In Marine Renewable Energy: Resource Characterization and Physical Effects (eds Yang, Z. & Copping, A.) 279–304 (Springer, Cham, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53536-4_12.
Hill, C., Musa, M. & Guala, M. Interaction between instream axial flow hydrokinetic turbines and uni-directional flow bedforms. Renew. Energy 86, 409–421 (2016).
Hill, C., Kozarek, J., Sotiropoulos, F. & Guala, M. Hydrodynamics and sediment transport in ameandering channel with amodel axial-flow hydrokinetic turbine. Water Resour. Res. 52, 860–879 (2016).
Yang, X., Khosronejad, A. & Sotiropoulos, F. Large-eddy simulation of a hydrokinetic turbine mounted on an erodible bed. Renew. Energy 113, 1419–1433 (2017).
Musa, M., Hill, C. & Guala, M. Local and non-local effects of spanwise finite perturbations in erodible river bathymetries. Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 60, abstr. R29.005 (2015).
Leopold, L. B. & Wolman, M. G. River Channel Patterns: Braided, Meandering, and Straight (US Government Printing Office, 1957).
Callander, R. A. Instability and river channels. J. Fluid Mech. 36, 465–480 (1969).
Ikeda, S., Parker, G. & Sawai, K. Bend theory of river meanders. Part 1. Linear development. J. Fluid Mech. 112, 363 (1981).
Blondeaux, P. & Seminara, G. A unified bar–bend theory of river meanders. J. Fluid Mech. 157, 449 (1985).
Tubino, M. & Seminara, G. Free–forced interactions in developing meanders and suppression of free bars. J. Fluid Mech. 214, 131–159 (1990).
Zolezzi, G. & Seminara, G. Downstream and upstream influence in river meandering. Part 1. General theory and application to overdeepening. J. Fluid Mech. 438, 183–211 (2001).
Struiksma, N. & Crosato, A. Analysis of a 2-D bed topography model for rivers. In River Meandering Vol. 12 (eds Ikeda, S. & Parker, G.) 153–180 (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1989).
Nittrouer, J. A., Mohrig, D. & Allison, M. A. Punctuated sand transport in the lowermost Mississippi River. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 116, 1–24 (2011).
Neary, V. S., Gunawan, B., Hill, C. & Chamorro, L. P. Near and far field flow disturbances induced by model hydrokinetic turbine: ADV and ADP comparison. Renew. Energy 60, 1–6 (2013).
Hill, C. Interactions Between Channel Topography and Hydrokinetic Turbines: Sediment Transport, Turbine Performance, and Wake Characteristics. PhD thesis, University of Minnesota (2015).
Stevens, R. J. A. M., Gayme, D. F. & Meneveau, C. Effects of turbine spacing on the power output of extended wind-farms. Wind Energy 19, 359–370 (2016).
Meneveau, C. The top-down model of wind farm boundary layers and its applications. J. Turbul. 13, 1–12 (2012).
Chamorro, L. P., Arndt, R. E. A. & Sotiropoulos, F. Turbulent flow properties around a staggered wind farm. Bound.-Layer. Meteorol. 141, 349–367 (2011).
Garrett, C. & Cummins, P. The efficiency of a turbine in a tidal channel. J. Fluid Mech. 588, 243–251 (2007).
Vennell, R. Tuning tidal turbines in-concert to maximise farm efficiency. J. Fluid Mech. 671, 587–604 (2011).
Vennell, R., Funke, S. W., Draper, S., Stevens, C. & Divett, T. Designing large arrays of tidal turbines: a synthesis and review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 41, 454–472 (2015).
Chen, L. & Lam, W. H. Slipstream between marine current turbine and seabed. Energy 68, 801–810 (2014).
Musa, M., Heisel, M. & Guala, M. Predictive model for local scour downstream of hydrokinetic turbines in erodible channels. Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 024606 (2018).
Seminara, G. Fluvial sedimentary patterns. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42, 43–66 (2010).
Chen, L. & Lam, W. H. Methods for predicting seabed scour around marine current turbine. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29, 683–692 (2014).
Chen, L., Hashim, R., Othman, F. & Motamedi, S. Experimental study on scour profile of pile-supported horizontal axis tidal current turbine. Renew. Energy 114, 744–754 (2017).
Singh, A., Fienberg, K., Jerolmack, D. J., Marr, J. & Foufoula-Georgiou, E. Experimental evidence for statistical scaling and intermittency in sediment transport rates. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 114, 1–16 (2009).
Singh, A., Porté-Agel, F. & Foufoula-georgiou, E. On the influence of gravel bed dynamics on velocity power spectra. Water Resour. Res. 46, 1–10 (2010).
Singh, A., Lanzoni, S., Wilcock, P. R. & Foufoula-Georgiou, E. Multiscale statistical characterization of migrating bed forms in gravel and sand bed rivers. Water Resour. Res. 47, 1–26 (2011).
Howard, K. B., Hu, J. S., Chamorro, L. P. & Guala, M. Characterizing the response of a wind turbine model under complex inflow conditions. Wind Energy 18, 729–743 (2015).
Wong, M. & Parker, G. Reanalysis and correction of bed-load relation of Meyer-Peter and Müller using their own database. J. Hydraul. Eng. 132, 1159–1168 (2006).
We thank the SAFL engineering staff for their technical support during the experiment preparation. In particular, we thank C. Ellis and J. Mullin for their ingenuity in the design and fabrication of the Laser Scan Cart measuring system. Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation CAREER: Geophysical Flow Control (award ID 13513013) and partially by the Institute on the Environment (IonE), University of Minnesota.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Notes 1–7, Supplementary Figures 1–14, Supplementary Tables 1–3, Supplementary References
Supplementary Video 1
Spatio-temporal evolution of the channel bathymetry (full measurement domain). The x–y spatial resolution is 0.005 m and the time interval between consecutive scans is 140 s. The time marks the progressive duration of the experiment in minutes (the blade rotations are not to scale). The rotational velocity of the three front turbines is larger as compared to the downstream turbines, proportionally to the difference in the measured mean voltages (see Supplementary Note 4).
Supplementary Video 2
Spatio-temporal evolution of the channel bathymetry. Selected close-up view focused on the bedform evolution approaching the turbine array. The conditions and resolutions are the same as described in Supplementary Video 1.
Supplementary Video 3
Self-defence turbine mechanisms. Bedform crests that are instantaneously higher than the bottom tip zbt are mapped in red. Note how large approaching bedforms are distorted just upstream of the turbine (spinning) rotors and no blade–sediment bed collisions occur. The conditions and resolutions are the same as described in Supplementary Video 1.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Musa, M., Hill, C., Sotiropoulos, F. et al. Performance and resilience of hydrokinetic turbine arrays under large migrating fluvial bedforms. Nat Energy 3, 839–846 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0218-9
This article is cited by
Tubular SbPS4−xSex (0 ≤ x ≤ 3) Clusters as High-Performance Anode Materials for Sodium-Ion Batteries
Journal of Electronic Materials (2023)