A TIDAL OPPORTUNITY

It’s by no means a revival of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ill-fated Quoddy Tidal Power Project to harness the Bay of Fundy tides, but a pilot project for “in-stream” energy production Down East is a real possibility.

The distinction between the two technologies is important. The 1935 Quoddy Project, abandoned after a year when environmental concerns mounted and Congress stopped funding it, involved damming up Cobscook Bay and Passamaquoddy Bay and using the resultant tidal difference to generate huge amounts of electricity.

The in-stream method would be used in a system already being designed in a feasibility study. It calls for placing underwater turbines in Western Passage, just north of Eastport, to make electricity from the tidal current that rushes past at a peak speed of 6 to 8 knots as ocean water flows in and out of Passamaquoddy Bay.

With the current high price of oil and natural gas, wind and tidal power suddenly can compete economically. And tidal currents, unlike the wind, are completely predictable and reliable.

The Eastport site is one of seven being studied by the Electric Power Research Institute of Palo Alto, Calif. Roger Bedard, its leader, plans to present the conclusions of the feasibility study in May in a series of meetings in Portland and Eastport.

One question to be answered is whether an in-stream tidal project at Eastport could compete with other power sources. Another is how much power could be produced. Still another is whether an Eastport project would interfere with the fishing industry, especially scallop and lobster harvesting.

David Flanagan, in his recent report on economic development in Washington County, recommended exploration of an Eastport tidal project, saying, “we should not be timid about it.” He favored a sizable start with a 10-megawatt pilot installation. That would be enough to serve the electricity needs of 10,000 homes. Commercial power amounts at the site could be three or four times that much.

Mr. Bedard prefers a pilot project of only 500 kilowatts to 1 megawatt. He notes that tidal power technology is 20 years behind wind power technology, and regulatory authorities would have to devise permitting and licensing standards from scratch. He says, “We need to move forward in small, low-risk and low-cost steps.”

As for environmental risk, he calculates that a typical large three-blade turbine, with a radius of around 25 feet and turning at 15 revolutions per minute, would have a speed of only 27 miles an hour – “not really enough to cause much if any bodily damage to fish.”

The turbine would be anchored far below the surface, in water that is 180 to 240 feet deep. It could be left in place for a year for evaluation of environmental impact. If necessary, says Mr. Bedard, it could be removed in an hour or two.

In May, we should learn whether the idea could go anywhere or whether it’s just a pipe dream.