Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy for Sustainable Development

Review

Advances and trends in hydrokinetic turbine systems

L.I. Lago, F.L. Ponta ⁎, L. Chen
Department of Mechanical Engineering - Engineering Mechanics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 49931, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An emerging class of renewable energy technology, the hydrokinetic conversion device (HCD), offers ways to
Received 9 April 2010 capture the energy of flowing water without the impoundment or diversion of the conventional hydroelectric
Revised 22 September 2010 facilities based on dams and penstocks. Hydrokinetic technologies are designed for deployment in natural
Accepted 22 September 2010
streams, like rivers, tidal estuaries, ocean currents, and also in some constructed waterways (e.g. canals). In
ocean-energy deployment, hydrokinetic conversion devices can be flexibly arranged into multi-unit arrays,
Keywords:
Hydrokinetic energy conversion
which would extract energy from tidal and marine currents basically in the same way as a wind farm.
Marine-current energy This article focuses on recent advances and trends in hydrokinetic system development that may lead to a
Ocean energy feasible future scenario for hydrokinetic power. The basic principles of HCDs are explained, and early
Electricity generation experiences in the field described. With the help of technical reports, papers, proceedings and websites, we
then review existing and emerging technologies in the HCD field. Innovation in mooring, and power
transmission systems are also covered.
© 2010 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Basic principles and early experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
Current status and emerging designs for HCD technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
Unducted horizontal-axis turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Ducted horizontal-axis turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Unducted cross-flow turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Ducted cross-flow turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Gorlov helical turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Vortex-induced-vibration systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Venturi systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Oscillating hydrofoils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Paddle wheels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
Flutter vane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
Fan belt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
Mooring systems and power transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

Introduction energy. The oceans represent a huge energy reservoir consisting of

Ocean-energy technologies promise attractive non-polluting alter-
natives to reduce the current dependence on fossil and nuclear-
fuelled power plants to cope with the growing demand of electrical
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: lilago@mtu.edu (L.I. Lago), flponta@mtu.edu (F.L. Ponta),
liuc@mtu.edu (L. Chen).
stored solar and gravitational energy that may be exploited in several
ways. This energy is generally diffuse but, in many cases, significantly
more concentrated than other forms of renewable energy already
being successfully exploited on land (EUREC Agency, 1996). In the
past, it was technically difficult to exploit energy from the sea because
of the difficulties in constructing equipment that could survive long
periods in such a harsh environment. However, recent developments
in offshore engineering (in particular related to prospecting and

0973-0826/$ – see front matter © 2010 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.esd.2010.09.004
288 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296
extraction of petroleum), have introduced new capabilities. As a
matter of fact, many of these offshore devices have survived so well
that a new problem has arisen in how to get rid of them when the oil
has been depleted and their usefulness has expired.
There are several different forms of ocean energy that may be feasible
to exploit: wave energy, marine-current energy, tidal barrages, OTEC
(ocean thermal energy conversion), and osmotic-pressure differences.
The most promising in the short term may be wave and marine-
current energy. The latter, in particular, inherits a substantial benefit
from the vast technological experience in design, construction and
installation of wind turbines gained during the last decades in what,
nowadays, is increasingly known as hydrokinetic energy conversion.
Both wave energy and marine-current energy convert the kinetic
energy of moving water to power, without the impoundment or
diversion of conventional hydroelectric facilities based on dams or
penstocks and therefore fall in the category of hydrokinetic energy
conversion. Tidal barrages are similar to conventional hydroelectric
dams on land, and use the potential energy from height differences.
OTEC is based on ocean water temperature differences and comprises
thermodynamic devices for power production, as in thermal power
plants. Osmotic pressure differences, as the name suggests, is based on
a different principle to those mentioned earlier.
This paper reviews hydrokinetic energy conversion devices, an
emerging class of renewable energy technology, which can be
deployed not only to convert wave energy and marine currents in
oceans, but also be used in natural streams like rivers, tidal estuaries,
as well as in some constructed waterways. Conceptually, it works in a
similar way as wind energy conversion devices. In ocean-energy
deployment, hydrokinetic conversion devices can be flexibly arranged
in multi-unit arrays, that would extract energy from tidal and marine
currents basically in the same way as a wind farm operates. As
opposed to the rigid, expensive, and environmentally-aggressive
construction of tidal barrages, the modularity and scalability of
hydrokinetic devices are attractive features (Ben Elghali et al., 2007).
There are some additional factors that make hydrokinetic electricity
generation from marine currents very appealing compared to other
renewables: (a) the predictability of the resource in the case of flows of
predominantly tidal origin, which implies that the future availability of
energy can be known and planned for (Bahaj and Myers, 2003); (b) the
potentially large resource that can be exploited, thereby offering one of
the least damaging methods for large-scale electricity generation
(Bryden et al., 1998); and (c) the feasibility of marine-current power
installations to provide also base grid power, especially if two or more
separate arrays with offset peak-flow periods are interconnected.
Worldwide interest in hydrokinetic energy is clear, and keeps
increasing, but several issues in terms of technical feasibility still need
to be considered before widespread adoption. Even though turbine
systems are considered the preferred choice for hydrokinetic conver-
sion, other non-turbine approaches are also being pursued currently.
Technology-specific questions such as, what converter type is best
suited, whether duct augmentation is worth attempting, or how to
place a turbine in a channel, together with issues regarding power
electronics, anchoring, and environmental monitoring, are continu-
ously being put forward (see Ben Elghali et al., 2007).
The objective of this article focuses on recent advances and trends
in hydrokinetic system development that may lead to a feasible
hydrokinetic-power future scenario.
Basic principles and early experiences
The output power of a hydrokinetic conversion device (HCD) has a
similar dependence on flow speed as a wind turbine and is governed
by the same equation
1 3
P = CpE ρA V ; ð1Þ
2 concepts do not survive the intermediate states of development.
where ρ is the fluid density, A is the cross sectional area of the turbine
and V is the flow speed. CpE, the overall power coefficient, gives the
amount of kinetic power that can be extracted from flow and
converted into electricity. It takes into account losses due to Betz law
and those dissipated by the internal mechanisms of the drive train.
The CpE of a practical system has a typical value of approximately 0.35
(Clarke and Trinnaman, 2004).
An HCD system rated at 2–3 m/s in water may give annually up to
four times as much energy per square meter of rotor swept area as a
similarly rated-power wind turbine (Bahaj and Myers, 2003).
Although accessing tidal stream energy may be costly, the exploita-
tion of this high energy source will more than compensate for the
higher costs. Furthermore, with constant or highly predictable marine
currents, an HCD system could not only rival the typical wind turbines
in being more manageable in size but also in providing a highly
predictable source of power.
The possible use of marine-current power (MCP) as an energy
resource began to draw attention in the mid-70s after the first “oil
crisis”. In 1974 several conceptual designs were presented at the
MacArthur Workshop on Energy, and in 1976 the British General
Electric Co. undertook a study partially government-funded which
concluded that MCP deserved more detailed research (EUREC Agency,
1996). Soon after, The ITD-Group in UK implemented a research
program involving a one-year performance testing of a 3-meter
hydro-Darrieus rotor deployed at Juba on the Nile. The 1980s saw a
number of small research projects to evaluate MCP systems. Studies
were carried out mainly in the UK, Canada and Japan. In 1992–93 the
Tidal Stream Energy Review identified specific sites in UK waters with
suitable current speed to generate up to 58 TWh/year. It confirmed a
total MCP resource capable theoretically of meeting some 19% of the
UK electricity demand. Marine currents have the potential to supply a
substantial share of future EU electricity needs (CENEX Project, 1996;
Fraenkel, 1999). In 1994–95 the EU-JOULE CENEX project involved a
resource-assessment compilation of a database of European locations
in which over 100 sites ranging from 2 to 200 km2 of sea-bed area
were identified, many with power densities above 10 MW/km2.
Currently, there is a global trend to significantly increase govern-
mental budgets for research, development, and demonstration
(RD&D) in renewable energy. Particularly, there has been a resur-
gence in RD&D of ocean-energy technology since the 1990s.
The mid to late 1990s was primarily a time of planning and
development as far as HCD was concerned, and it was not until the
beginning of the 21st century that the first experimental systems
became ready to test (Clarke and Trinnaman, 2004). In 2000, a large
vertical-axis floating device using an innovative Kobold turbine was
tested in the Straits of Messina between Sicily and the Italian
mainland as part of the Enermar project. A recent study estimated a
total extractable energy potential of 538 GWh per year for this site
(Ponte-di-Archimede-URL, 2010). There are now at least two major
prototype systems being tested in UK waters, the SeaFlow and the
Stingray, plus another in Norway (Hammerfest Strøm) (Clarke and
Trinnaman, 2004). Plenty of small projects have also been initiated in
the USA and Canada (Khan et al., 2009). The EPRI in the US, and BC-
Hydro/Triton and NRC in Canada have conducted resource-and-
technology assessments of MCP potential.
Furthermore, in recent years (2003–2007), some energy-related
organizations such as the US Department of Energy, EPRI, Idaho
National Laboratory, and the National Hydropower Association
conducted preliminary investigations to apply hydrokinetic technol-
ogies to inland water resources (Khan et al., 2009).
Many different HCD technologies exist today at various levels of
development, as shown in Fig. 1, which shows a set of 2006 data from
the Carbon Trust for HCDs and wave-energy converters. It clearly
reflects the long-term process required to turn a proof-of-concept
idea into a full-scale prototype, and how many of the preliminary
 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296
Fig. 1. Development status of tidal and wave technologies (taken from Bedard, 2008).
First-generation devices would be the extension of the present
prototypes, using conventional engineering components and reaching
a depth of 20 to 30 m these early devices might be rated in the range
of 200 to 700 kWh (Lundin and Leijon, 2010). After further RD&D, to
reach economical viability, increase operational lifetime, and mini-
mize maintenance, second generation devices are expected to follow
within 10 years, introducing specialized components, and more
importantly, reaching sites with depths below 40 m, where more of
the tidal current potential can be extracted (Lundin and Leijon, 2010).
Murray (2006) reported 81 individual concepts in development in
2006, including 53 ocean wave devices, 25 tidal projects, 1 OTEC
system and 2 salinity gradient concepts. Fig. 2 shows the worldwide
distribution of these ocean-energy RD&D projects.
Current status and emerging designs for HCD technology
Currently, there are several HCD technologies under development,
especially for MCP applications (Buigues et al., 2006; Bedard, 2005).
As in wind energy conversion, turbines are considered the system of
choice. However, some non-turbine systems have been proposed
(mostly at the proof-of-concept stage) and may become the
innovative expectations in this new technological field (Khan et al.,
2009). In spite of this keen interest on novel concepts, the primary
types of HCDs are still the two classical categories of rotating
machinery: (a) horizontal-axis turbines, closely similar to a modern
wind turbine rotating in a plane perpendicular to the axis, and
(b) cross-flow turbines, whose axis could be oriented either
horizontally or vertically.
Fig. 2. Worldwide distribution of ocean-energy RD&D projects in March 2006 (taken from Murray, 2006).
289
Fig. 3. Number of conversion systems under development on each category (taken from
Khan et al., 2009). Colors indicate the use of ducts.
The two types are quite familiar to wind energy developers, while
the third is comparatively new. According to Khan et al. (2009), other
turbine-based systems can be categorized as follows: Cross-Flow
turbines, Venturi systems, and Gravitational-Vortex systems. In the
non-turbine category we have: Flutter-Vane, Piezoelectric, Oscillat-
ing-Hydrofoil, Fan-Belt, and Paddle-Wheel systems. Fig. 3 summarizes
the number of systems under development and the use of ducts in
each category.
In this section, we shall review in more detail some examples of
existing and emerging technologies in the previously mentioned
categories with the help of technical reports, papers, proceedings and
websites.
The whole hydrokinetic energy conversion system consists of five
subsystems: the HCD itself; the support structure; the electric power
converter and transmission system; and the remote communication
and control link. Due to space limitations, we are not going to extend
this review to all the subsystems, but mainly to the HCDs themselves;
subsystem-related information will be provided for some specific
cases where it is particularly relevant. As mentioned earlier,
horizontal and vertical-axis turbines are considered as the main
290 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296

categories in MCP applications. Cross-flow and vertical-axis turbines

have some overlap in definition according to some sources (see
Verdant-Power, 2006; Ben Elghali et al., 2007, among others). Here
the turbines other than horizontal-axis will be categorized as cross-
flow.

Unducted horizontal-axis turbines

In Fig. 4, we could see several examples of this type of HCD. Fig. 4(a)
shows the full-span pitch control SeaFlow turbine, with a single
11 m-diameter rotor mounted on a steel tubular pile. It was followed
by the twin rotor SeaGen turbine (see Fig. 4(b)) mounted on monopile
support structure with the same control system as SeaFlow turbine
(Ben Elghali et al., 2007). The SMD-Hydrovision TidEl system,
designed with two H-axial counter-rotating rotors connected by a
crossbeam, is shown in Fig. 4(c). The crossbeam is restrained by
mooring lines, allowing the device to align itself with the incoming
current (Bedard et al., 2005). The 3-bladed Verdant Power Kinetic
Hydro Power System, installed in the East River, NY, shown in Fig. 4(d),
has a 5 m-diameter rotor rated at 35.9 kW, and can be customized to
different sizes according to the site (Bedard et al., 2005). Other
examples of this type of HCD may be found in Verdant-Power (2006),
and other sources.

Ducted horizontal-axis turbines
Fig. 5 shows some examples of this type of HCD. Lunar Energy
Rotech Tidal Turbine, shown in Fig. 5(a), is encased in a fixed
symmetrical duct working as a speed increaser, which may eliminate
the need of a control system and a gearbox (Bedard et al., 2005).
Underwater Electric Kite Corporation offers the twin-axis turbine
system shown in Fig. 5(b), encased in a double-shroud duct with a
Fig. 5. Ducted horizontal-axis machines: (a) Lunar Energy's Rotech Tidal Turbine (taken
from LunarEnergy-URL, 2007); (b) Underwater Electric Kite twin-axial turbine system
(taken from Quinton, 2007); (c) the Tidal Turbine Generator from Clean Current Power
Systems (taken from Cleancurrent-URL, 2008); (d) the Hydrohélix Energy's turbine
(taken from Hydrohélix-URL, 2010).
rear augmenter that creates a low pressure zone behind the turbine.
The unit is buoyant and secured to the seabed by a cable bridle
(Verdant-Power, 2006). Another two examples of this technology are
the bi-directional ducted Tidal Turbine Generator from Clean Current
Power Systems, shown in Fig. 5(c), and the Hydrohélix Energy turbine
designed to be arranged in a row or a matrix, shown in Fig. 5(d).

Unducted cross-flow turbines

Ponte Di Archimede S.P.A. employs a Kobold Turbine for the

Enemar Project. Shown in Fig. 6(a), the Kobold is a cross-flow turbine
with a high starting torque obtained by using a passive variable pitch,
which enables the turbine to start spontaneously even in loaded
conditions without the need of any starting device (Ponte-di-
Archimede-URL, 2010; Bedard et al., 2005). The EnCurrent Hydro
Turbine from New Energy Corporation, shown in Fig. 6(b), is a
vertical-axis Darrieus which can be configured either as ducted or
non-ducted installation (EnCurrent-URL, 2010). The CycloTurbine
from Bosch Aerospace, shown in Fig. 6(c), is designed in the shape of a
cycloidal turbine (essentially, a paddle wheel with articulated blades,
which are flexible enough to orient themselves either vertically or
horizontally). One of the advantages is that it has the ability to
optimize the hydrodynamic forces on each blade (Verdant-Power,
2006). Fig. 6(d) shows the WPI Turbine from Water Power Industries,
an unducted Darrieus rotor with independent pitch control system for
each blade (Verdant-Power, 2006).

Ducted cross-flow turbines

Fig. 4. Unducted horizontal-axis machines: (a) MCT's SeaFlow Project (taken from
Lundin and Leijon, 2010); (b) MCT SeaGen Project (taken from Fairley, 2009); (c) SMD-
Hydrovision's TidEl system (taken from Blundell, 2006); (d) Verdant Power's Kinetic
Hydro Power System (taken from KHPS-URL, 2009).
Fig. 7(a) shows the Blue Energy tidal turbine, a ducted 4-bladed
fixed-geometry Darrieus, mounted in a durable concrete marine
caisson which acts as a flow concentrator (Ben Elghali et al., 2007).
Fig. 7(b) shows a diffuser-augmented Darrieus concept proposed by
B. Kirke from the University of South Australia, which may be installed
in tidal and non-tidal rivers (Kirke, 2003). The prototype with slatted
diffuser shown in the figure was tested by tidal energy P/L in Australia
 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296 291

Fig. 6. Unducted cross-flow turbines: (a) Ponte Di Archimede's Kobold turbine (taken
from Bedard et al., 2005); (b) the EnCurrent Hydro Turbine from New Energy
Corporation (taken from EnCurrent-URL, 2010); (c) the CycloTurbine from Bosch
Aerospace (taken from Verdant-Power, 2006); (d) the WPI Turbine from Water Power
Industries (taken from Verdant-Power, 2006).

in 2003 by mounting it on a barge and driving it through still water.
With the diffuser, a 3 fold increase in power over the bare variable
pitch turbine was measured. In 2005, a 2.4 by 2.4 m version was
tested, and in 2007 a 1 m-diameter turbine was tested in Canada
by Coastal Hydropower Corporation at current speeds up to 4 m/s.
Fig. 7(c) shows the Self-Regulated Vertical-Axis Hydroturbine
(SRVAH), a diffuser-augmented floating hydrokinetic turbine which
uses a channelling device integrated into the flotation system (see
Ponta and Dutt, 2000; Ponta and Jacovkis, 2008). This channelling
device is designed to act as a flow speed amplifier with a high gain at
low current velocities, with a progressive reduction of that gain when
the current speed increases. Thus, it acts as a regulator, stabilizing the
flow speed in the neighbourhood of the rotor. This regulation effect
allows a total or partial elimination of the control system (depending
on the quality of output demanded) resulting in a self-regulated
machine.
Gorlov helical turbine
This HCD device, shown in Fig. 8, invented by Professor Gorlov of
Northeastern University, is characterized by a set of one or more
helical blades rotating like a screw thread (GCK-URL, 2010; Bedard
et al., 2005).
Fig. 7. Ducted cross-flow turbines: (a) the Blue Energy tidal turbine (taken from
DavisTurbine-URL, 2001) ; (b) B. Kirke's diffuser-augmented water current turbine
(taken from Kirke, 2003); (c) the Self-Regulated Vertical-Axis Hydroturbine (Ponta and
Dutt, 2000; Ponta and Jacovkis, 2008).
Venturi systems
Venturi systems use Bernoulli's principle to accelerate water
through a choked duct. The pressure drop in the device drives
turbines which can be placed above water or onshore. Fig. 10 shows
the Rochester Venturi from HydroVenturi. Venturi systems have no
moving parts and no electrical components underwater, which may
lead to robust low-cost systems with minimal maintenance costs, no
visual impact, and no shipping-obstruction issues. One generator may
be driven by several Venturi conduits giving a scalable system
(Verdant-Power, 2006). Rochester Venturi designs have already been
developed to satisfy the requirements at particular geographical sites
in the U.K. (Bedard et al., 2005).
Oscillating hydrofoils
This type of HCD uses a lifting surface with a variable pitch control
system to drive oscillatory power-extraction hardware. Fig. 11(a)

Vortex-induced-vibration systems

In 2006, Prof. Bernitsas from the University of Michigan designed

the VIVACE (Vortex Induced Vibrations for Aquatic Clean Energy
System) (Madrigal, 2008; Bernitsas et al., 2008). Inspired by fish
biomechanics, VIVACE uses the alternating vortices in the down-
stream of a cylinder exposed to the current, pushing and pulling the
passive cylinder up and down on its springs. The motion of the
cylinder creates mechanical energy that may be converted into
electricity. Fig. 9 shows an artist's render of a future VIVACE power
plant and a schematic of the early VIVACE prototype from Michigan Fig. 8. Gorlov helical turbine: (a) taken from Gorlov-URL (2007); (b) taken from Bedard
University (Madrigal, 2008). et al. (2005).
292 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296
Fig. 9. (a) An artist's render of a future VIVACE power plant (taken from Madrigal, 2008); (b) a schematic of the early VIVACE prototype from the University of Michigan (taken from
Bernitsas et al., 2008).
Fig. 10. Rochester Venturi system from HydroVenturi (taken from Verdant-Power, 2006).
shows a schematic of the Stingray concept from Engineering Business
(Oschydro-URL, 2010), and Fig. 11(b) shows an artist's image. This
device is based on a wing-like hydroplane whose oscillating motion is
controlled by varying the angle of attack. Energy is then captured by a
hydraulic pump. A prototype of Stingray was tested in 2002–03 (see
Kerr, 2005).
Paddle wheels
Floating paddle-wheel systems of different power capacity have
been tested by several companies worldwide. Fig. 12 shows two
examples of machines produced by Canadian companies. Fig. 12(a)
shows the Floating Power Station from Eco Hydro Energy LTD, and
Fig. 12(b) shows the RiverBank Hydro Turbine from Encore Clean
Energy Inc. (see Verdant-Power, 2006).
Flutter vane
Fig. 13(a) shows the Oscillating Cascade Power System. It has a
series of long, straight, symmetrical hydrofoils arranged in foursomes
Fig. 11. Oscillating hydrofoils: (a) a schematic view of the Stingray concept (taken from Oschydro-URL, 2010), and (b) an artist's image (taken from Kerr, 2005).
so that the blades move towards and away from each other in a
mirroring fashion (Verdant-Power, 2006). The pitch of the blades
varies in such a way that they are alternatively attracted and repulsed
by adjacent blades. A mechanical gear translates this oscillatory
motion into rotational energy to drive a generator.
Fan belt
Fig. 13(c) shows the Atlantis Energy Aquanator (Cornford, 2004),
which uses a series of hydrofoils mounted on a belt sliding on an oval
track 57 m across and 9 m high. The structure is mounted completely
underwater. When the tide shifts, the belt rotates in the opposite
direction. Its mooring method is undisclosed (Verdant-Power, 2006).
Field prototypes have been tested and the company has plans to put
25 units in production during the next 5 years. Fig. 13(d) shows the
Atlantis energy Aquanator turbine at San Remo, Australia, in 2008.
Fig. 13(b) shows another concept similar to the Aquanator, the 4P
Aureola Spanish turbine. A variation of this concept, identified as Sails by
Khan et al. (2009), uses drag action on a series of hydrofoils moving in
a linear/circular trajectory to generate electricity (see TidalSails-URL,
2010).
In terms of the HCD itself, the “parachute” concept reported in DOI/
MMS-URL (2010) as part of an Alternative Energy Program initiative
of the US DOI is the only innovative design that we had identified that
cannot be classified among the concepts already covered. Fig. 14
shows the parachute HCD concept, where the energy is captured by a
barge moored in the current stream with a large cable loop to which
the parachutes are fastened. The parachutes would be pushed by the
current, then closed on their way back, forming a loop similar to a
large horizontal water wheel.
Mooring systems and power transmission
Innovations in support systems may appear in ways different from
the classical floating and bottom-fixed configurations. For instance,
 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296 293

Fig. 12. Paddle wheels: (a) the Floating Power Station from Eco Hydro Energy LTD (taken from Verdant-Power, 2006); (b) the RiverBank Hydro Turbine from Encore Clean Energy
Inc. (taken from Verdant-Power, 2006).

Fig. 13. (a) The Oscillating Cascade Power System (taken from Verdant-Power, 2006); (b) the 4P Aureola Spanish turbine (personal communication); (c) Atlantis Energy's Aquanator
(taken from Cornford, 2004); (d) Atlantis Energy's Aquanator turbine at San Remo, Australia, in 2008 (taken from Pemberton, 2009).

the Hydrovolts Flipwing is a cross-flow hydrokinetic turbine invented

by a Seattle company and tested by researchers of the Applied Physics
Laboratory at the University of Washington (see Fig. 15). Even though
the Flipwing is basically a cross-flow design belonging to the category
described in the Current status and emerging designs for HCD
technology section, it uses blades hinged on their outer edges so
they naturally swing open to greatly reduce their resistance to the
current on the upstream stroke, which has an effect on the loads
exerted on the mooring system Flipwing-URL (2009). The Flipwing is
completely submerged and self-supporting. It has a floating “drop-in”
installation, and it is held in place by mooring lines.
Another example is the Seakinetics Corp. HydroWing shown in
Fig. 16(a), which consists of a series of cross-flow turbines mounted
on coupled counter-rotating shafts, sharing the gearbox and gener-
ator. A hydrofoil lifting surface counteracts the downward force
exerted by the mooring cable. This configuration provides the
HydroWing with self-alignment capabilities, and gives it the ability
to operate at variable depths (even below the 30 m level, thus, Fig. 14. The parachute HCD concept (taken from DOI/MMS-URL, 2010).
294 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296

Fig. 15. The Hydrovolts Inc.'s Flipwing turbine (taken from Flipwing-URL, 2009).

Fig. 16. Hydro-lift based support systems: (a) the Seakinetics Corp.'s HydroWing (taken from Oceanpower-URL, 2009); (b) RGU's Sea Snail prototype (taken from RISE-URL, 2008).

avoiding obstruction to shipping and damage from floating debris). Its
Hybrid Hydrofoil Nozzle technology also provides diffuser-augmen-
tation action (Oceanpower-URL, 2009).
Another application of the hydro-lift concept, but operating in a
reverse way, is Robert Gordon University's Sea Snail shown in Fig. 16(b).
The 30 tonne platform where the turbine is mounted on uses hydrofoils
to produce a downward thrust to anchor the device to the ocean floor,
thus reducing the cost of foundations.
A variation of the floating concept shown in Fig. 17, the FRI-EL
SeaPower, is composed of a floating platform with a set of 3-bladed
horizontal-axis turbines mounted at regular intervals on one or more
horizontal, adjustable, modular tubes (FRI-EL-URL, 2008; Burgermeister,
2008). The tubes extend behind the platform and have buoys at the
surface level containing electrical and other equipment for the turbines;
they also function as transmission shafts connecting to the generator
placed on the platform.
An interesting alternative to the classical electrical power trans-
mission, proposed by NASA researchers Jones and Chao (NASA-URL,
2009), uses a series of horizontal-axis turbines to drive a high-pressure
fluid pump. As shown in Fig. 18, high-pressure water would be

Fig. 17. The FRI-EL SeaPower Concept: (a) floating platform (taken from Burgermeister, 2008); (b) assembly of tubes and turbines (taken from Burgermeister, 2008); (c) side view of
a complete unit (taken from FRI-EL-URL, 2008).
 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296
Fig. 18. NASA's pressurized-water energy transmission system (taken from NASA-URL,
2009).
transported though flexible tubes to a larger pipe and then to a high-
efficiency hydroelectric plant located onshore.
In terms of integration with other renewable energy technologies,
the Osprey Plant is a novel hybrid system combining wind and
marine-current power (Akau, 2007). As shown in Fig. 19, the idea is to
link a number of vertical-axis turbines for hydrokinetic generation
with a series of wind turbines all mounted in twin pontoon-like
structure.
Concluding remarks
The remarkable worldwide proliferation of new HCD concepts and
prototypes indicates an established trend that is not likely to revert.
Some of these innovative concepts are recently patented, some are
patent-pending, and the rest may need more lab and field testing
before reaching that stage.
Unducted horizontal-axis turbines have been the first HCDs in
being deployed in bottom-fixed installations, followed by floating
systems employing both vertical- and horizontal-axis turbines. The
Fig. 19. The Osprey Plant Concept combining wind and marine-current power (taken
from Akau, 2007).
295
actual tendency indicates that the first type of system is going to be
preferred in the short-term future for shallow water applications, and
floating systems are likely to be the main type in the so called second
generation of deep water HCDs. Non turbine systems like the vortex-
induced vibration, Venturi, fluttervane, and fan belt, even though
some of them already tested at the prototype level, are likely to
achieve commercial stage after the more classical turbine-based
systems due to the innovative nature of their design.
The main challenge is not only extracting more energy per unit of
rotor swept area, but doing it in a more economic and environment-
friendly way. That is, energy conversion efficiency alone is not as
important as the overall cost–benefit relation of the HCD system
operation. Hence, the contribution of the support systems to the
overall economic equation may become as important as the efficiency
of the HCD itself; and it is perhaps in the subject of support systems
where we are going to witness the greatest progress in the following
years.
Acknowledgments
F.P. is very grateful for the financial support made available by the
U.S. National Science Foundation through grants CEBET-0933058 and
CEBET-0952218.
References
Akau A. Horizontal versus vertical axis ocean turbines; 2007. Website, (accessed Feb
2010). URL http://pesn.com/2007/08/07/9500489_VAOT_v_HAOT.
Bahaj AS, Myers LE. Fundamentals applicable to the utilisation of marine current
turbines for energy production. Renewable Energy 2003;28:2205–11.
Bedard R. Overview of technology classes and key terminology. In: Schwartz SS, editor.
Proceedings of the hydrokinetic and wave energy technologies technical and
environmental issues workshop. Washington, D.C., USA: RESOLVE, Inc.; 2005.
p. 5–8.
Bedard R. Prioritized Research, Development, Deployment and Demonstration
(RDD&D) needs: marine and other hydrokinetic renewable energy. Tech. rep.
Electric Power Research Institute; 2008.
Bedard R, Previsic M, Siddiqui O, Hagerman G, Robinson M. Final survey and
characterization tidal in stream energy conversion (TISEC) devices. Tech. rep.
EPRI-TP-004 NA. Electric Power Research Institute Inc.; 2005
Ben Elghali S, Benbouzid M, Charpentier J. Marine tidal current electric power
generation technology: state of the art and current status. IEEE International
Electric Machines & Drives Conference, 2007, vol. 2. IEMDC'07; 2007.
Bernitsas M, Fellow A, Raghavan K, Ben-Simon Y, Garcia E, et al. VIVACE (Vortex
Induced Vibration Aquatic Clean Energy): a new concept in generation of clean and
renewable energy from fluid flow. J Offshore Mech Arct Eng 2008;130:041101.
Blundell S. The good oil; 2006 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://idealog.co.nz/magazine/
september-october-2006/features/the-good-oil.
Bryden IG, Naik S, Fraenkel P, Bullen CR. Matching tidal current plants to local flow
conditions. Energy 1998;23:699–709.
Buigues G, Zamora I, Mazon A, Valverde V, Perez E. Sea energy conversion: problems
and possibilities; 2006.
Burgermeister J. Ocean currents may bring italy more tidal energy; 2008 (accessed Jan
2010). URL http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2008/12/
ocean-currents-may-bring-italy-more-tidal-energy-54240.
CENEX Project. Marine current energy extraction. Report JOU2-CT93-0355, IT-Power,
Tecnomare, ENEL, University of Patras; 1996.
Clarke A, Trinnaman J. 2004 survey of energy resources. Tech. rep., World Energy
Council; 2004.
Cleancurrent-URL. The race rocks tidal energy project; 2008 (accessed Jan 2010). URL
http://www.cleancurrent.com/.
Cornford P. Inventor taps into a new energy source; 2004 (accessed Jan 2010). URL
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/26/1096137100758.html.
DavisTurbine-URL. Utilizing ocean current energy; 2001 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http:
//www.marinetalk.com/articles-marine-companies/art/Utilizing-Ocean-Current-
Energy-xxx00090500TU.html.
DOI/MMS-URL. Ocean current energy. United States Department of the Interior,
Minerals Management Service, OCS Alternative Energy Programmatic Environ-
mental Impact Statement; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://ocsenergy.anl.gov/
guide/current/index.cfm.
EnCurrent-URL. Meereskraftwerke und erneuerbare energie; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010).
URL http://www.energyprofi.com/jo/Meereskraftwerke.html.
EUREC Agency. The future for renewable energy: prospects and directions. London, UK:
James & James Ltd.; 1996.
Fairley P. Tidal-power system hits record output; 2009 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://
www.technologyreview.com/blog/energy/22471/.
296 L.I. Lago et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 14 (2010) 287–296
Flipwing-URL. New hydropower technology validated by University of Washington
researcher; 2009 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.hydrovolts.com/PR/New
Hydropower Tech Validated 3-09.pdf.
Fraenkel P. Tidal currents: a major new source of energy for the millennium. London,
UK: ICG Publishing Ltd.; 1999.
FRI-EL-URL. Sea power device; 2008 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.fri-el.it/
seapower/en/project_sea_power_device.php.
GCK-URL. The Gorlov helical turbine; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.
gcktechnology.com/GCK/pg2.html.
Gorlov-URL. Oce 311 spring 2007; 2007 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.oce.
uri.edu/course_web_pages/oce311/index.html.
Hydrohélix-URL. Hydrohélix: Sabella; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://pierre.
hautefeuille.free.fr/TPE/hydrohelix.htm.
Kerr D. Marine energy: getting power from tides and waves. Civ Eng 2005;158(6):32–9.
Khan M, Bhuyan G, Iqbal M, Quaicoe J. Hydrokinetic energy conversion systems and
assessment of horizontal and vertical axis turbines for river and tidal applications: a
technology status review. Appl Energy 2009;86(10):1823–35.
KHPS-URL. Free flow system; 2009 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://verdantpower.com/
what-systemsint/.
Kirke B. Developments in ducted water current turbines. Austrália: School of
Engineering, Griffith university; 2003.
LunarEnergy-URL. Lunar energy tidal power; 2007 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://
www.reuk.co.uk/Lunar-Energy-Tidal-Power.htm.
Lundin M, Leijon M. Ocean energy; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.
eusustel.be/public/documents_publ/WP/WP3/WP3report-MarineCurrentsand
Wave.pdf.
Madrigal A. Tapping the vortex for green energy; 2008 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://
www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/10/hidden-vortex-i/.
Murray R. Review and analysis of ocean energy systems development and supporting
policies. Tech. rep., Sustainable Energy Ireland; 2006.
NASA-URL. Turning the tide to energy: new concept could harness the power of ocean
waves; 2009 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/
tideenergy.html.
Oceanpower-URL. The hydrowing by seakinetics; 2009 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://
www.oceanpowermagazine.net/2009/11/05/the-hydrowing-by-seakinetics/.
Oschydro-URL. Technology: oscillating hydrofoil; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010).URL http://
www.esru.strath.ac.uk/EandE/Web_sites/05-06/marine_renewables/technology/
oschydro.htm.
Pemberton K. Testing the waters in Westernport bay; 2009 (accessed Mar 2010). URL http:
//ecogeneration.com.au/news/testing_the_waters_in_westernport_bay/00357/.
Ponta FL, Dutt GS. An improved vertical-axis water-current turbine incorporating a
channelling device. Renewable Energy 2000;20:223–41.
Ponta FL, Jacovkis PM. Marine-current power generation by diffuser-augmented
floating hydro-turbines. Renewable Energy 2008;33:665–73.
Ponte-di-Archimede-URL. Kobold; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.
pontediarchimede.com/language_us/progetti_det.mvd?RECID=2&CAT=
002&SUBCAT=&MODULO=Progetti_ENG&returnpages=&page_pd=d.
Quinton A. Tapping the energy of the tides; 2007 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.
nhpr.org/node/13455.
RISE-URL. Tidal barrage & tidal turbines; 2008 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.
rise.org.au/info/Tech/tidal/index.html.
TidalSails-URL. TidalSails; 2010 (accessed Jan 2010). URL http://www.tidalsails.com/
index.html.
Verdant-Power. Technology evaluation of existing and emerging technologies water
current turbines for river applications. Report NRCan-06-01071, Natural Resources
Canada; 2006.