UK Case study
- New blog series explores lowest cost 24/7 Clean Energy studies from locations around the world, highlighting value of wave energy in future energy systems.
- UK study considers how wave energy can complement existing renewables and storage solutions in northern Scotland.
- Across all scenario years 2032, 2040, and 2050, wave energy contributes between 9-22% of the electricity supply in the optimal mix base scenarios.
- By 2050 specifically, wave energy provides 22% of renewable installed capacity with 24% less system level capacity and €15/MWh (20%) lower cost.
- Overall inclusion of wave energy consistently leads to a more efficient and balanced system, slashing cost, total installed capacity and storage requirements.
Further boosts performance and longer term benefits, supporting hourly matching, a complementary generation profile to solar and wind, and delivery of more consistent renewable energy.
Introduction
This blog post introduces a new series of lowest cost 24/7 clean energy studies from CorPower Ocean, highlighting the value wave energy will play in future energy systems. For the north Scotland, the findings show that integrating wave energy can significantly reduce the required capacity in generation requirements, storage requirements, and cut the cost of 24/7 clean energy up to 20% by 2050.
As countries accelerate their shift to 100% renewable energy, identifying the most cost-effective combination of technologies becomes a critical challenge. A new study from CorPower Ocean explores how wave energy can complement existing renewables and storage solutions to reliably supply 500 MW of consistent demand with 95% renewable electricity in northern Scotland. The central question driving this analysis is: “What role can wave energy play in achieving a minimum cost clean energy mix?”.
Methodology and Scenario Design
Using the open-source modelling tool Python for Power System Analysis (PyPSA), the study explores how the addition of wave energy influences system costs and performance in future energy systems. The analysis evaluates the cost optimal combination of wave energy, solar, onshore and floating offshore wind, battery storage, and grid interaction. The goal is to minimise total system costs under three future time horizons: 2032, 2040, and 2050.
In addition to the base scenarios, a constrained onshore scenario is included to reflect technical feasibility and consents for land use in northern Scotland. This scenario caps installed capacity at 50 MW for solar PV and 300 MW for onshore wind, based on the largest onshore renewable projects in northern Scotland. To further assess system resilience, a final sensitivity analysis explores the dynamics between wave and floating offshore wind energy to test the influence of varying cost ratios on the optimal mix.
This study aims to power a consistent 500 MW load with a 95% renewable load profile. In all scenarios, up to 5% of energy may be purchased from the grid, and unlimited energy can be sold back to the grid. To reflect the more volatile relationship between energy prices in high renewable future energy systems, grid purchases are priced at twice the average 2021 electricity price, and excess renewable energy may be sold back to the grid at 10% of 2021 grid prices.
Wave profile is offset from and more persistent than wind and solar both seasonally and hourly
Key assumptions
The system includes a range of renewable generation and storage technologies: wave energy, solar, onshore and floating offshore wind, and battery storage. For the 2032 scenario, the assumed techno-economic characteristics of each technology are shown in the table below, derived from NREL data and refined through industry consultation. Techno-economic data for wave energy technology in 2032 is based on CorPower Ocean’s product roadmap. Floating offshore wind offers the highest capacity factor but also comes with the highest capital and operational costs per megawatt installed. Meanwhile, wave energy offers the second highest capacity factor and has the second highest costs. In contrast, solar is the cheapest to install, but also comes with the lowest capacity factor. Onshore wind falls in between these technologies in both cost and performance.
Results
Base Scenario
Less installed capacity, grid & storage (no constraints on-land)
The findings from the 2032 scenario reveal that the most cost-effective energy mix includes an installed capacity of 343 MW (9%) wave energy. In the scenario without wave energy, the system relies heavily on solar and onshore wind, which supply 44% and 56% of total electricity generation, respectively. This configuration requires a total installed capacity of 4664 MW and a storage capacity of 179 GWh. These demands result in relatively high system costs, with an LCOE of 99.68 €/MWh.
When wave energy is introduced, the overall system becomes significantly more efficient. In this optimal configuration, electricity generation is split between 9% wave energy, 41% solar, and 50% onshore wind. The total installed capacity drops by nearly 20% to 3823 MW and the storage requirement is reduced by 40% to 110 GWh. The integration of wave energy also leads to cost savings, with a lower LCOE of 95.45 €/MWh.
When constraints on onshore installations are included, wave and offshore wind make up the majority of the optimal mix – wave still provides system benefits with lower overcapacity, storage, and system costs
2040 and 2050
Wave provides increasing value for scenarios further in the future (2040 and 2050)
Base Scenario
Onshore Constraints
High wave capacity remains within optimal mix when wind and wave are the same cost/MWh
Another sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the dynamic between wave and offshore wind energy, focusing on how different LCOE ratios influence the optimal energy mix in 2040. The base case assumes wave energy costs 78% of floating offshore wind. From there, the LCOE ratio of wave to wind was progressively increased, with wave equal in LCOE to offshore wind, and up to four times the cost of offshore wind.
When wave and wind have equal LCOEs in 2040, wave energy accounts for 70% of total installed capacity. Under this scenario, only 4 GWh of storage is required to balance the system (0.1% of energy demand), compared to 382 GWh (9% of energy demand) when no wave energy is present.
Even when wave energy becomes 3.5 times more expensive than offshore wind in 2040 (€217/MWh vs €62/MWh), it still remains part of the cost-optimal mix, with 210 MW of installed wave capacity. It is only when wave energy reaches 4 times the cost of wind that the model excludes it entirely from the cost optimal mix.
Summary
- Wave energy is consistently picked up within the cost optimal mix: Wave contributes between 9-22% of the electricity supply in the optimal mix base scenarios and 72-78% in constrained scenarios, even though its LCOE is higher than that of solar and onshore wind.
- Overcapacity is reduced: Total installed capacity is reduced by 20-24% from including wave in base scenarios and 9-12% in constrained scenarios.
- Storage requirements are reduced: Energy requirements from battery storage is reduced by 39% in base scenarios and by 96% in constrained scenarios.
- Cost benefits: LCOE is reduced by 4-20% in base scenarios and 51-60% in constrained scenarios.
- System benefits from wave even at much higher costs than offshore wind: Even when wave is 3.5x the cost of offshore wind, it is picked up within the optimal mix and provides system benefits.
Conclusion
The study from CorPower Ocean has provided an assessment of wave energy’s role in achieving a cost-optimised, 95% renewable energy system that provides 24/7 clean energy to a flat 500 MW load, representative of a large-scale data centre or other industrial facility. Across all three scenario years from 2032-2050, wave energy becomes a key enabler of both economic and sustainability goals. By integrating wave energy, the system achieves significant reductions in total system costs, total installed capacity, and storage requirements. Beyond these immediate cost and capacity benefits, wave energy contributes longer term benefits by supporting hourly matching, providing a complementary generation profile to solar and wind, and delivering a more consistent and persistent resource of renewable energy.
In a future defined by higher renewable integration targets, wave energy emerges not just as a viable option, but as a strategic asset in building a stable, efficient, and resilient 24/7 clean energy system.
Appendix
