Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Assessment of the marine power potential in Colombia

A.F. Osorio a, Santiago Ortega b, Santiago Arango-Aramburo c,n
a
Grupo de Investigacin en Oceanografa e Ingeniera Costera (OCEANICOS), Faculty of Mines Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Medelln Carrera 80 #
65223, Bloque M2, Medelln, Colombia
b
Grupo de Investigacin en Oceanografa e Ingeniera Costera (OCEANICOS) Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Medelln Escuela de Ingeniera de
Antioquia Envigado, Medelln, Colombia
c
Decision Sciences Group Faculty of Mines Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Carrera 80 # 65-223, Bloque M8a, Medellin, Colombia

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 3 June 2014
Received in revised form
9 June 2015
Accepted 18 September 2015
Available online 10 November 2015

In this paper, we estimate the potential marine energy available from different types of resources in
Colombia: waves, tides, currents, salinity gradients and thermal gradients, focussing on specic locations.
The main constraint on this analysis is the lack of long-term marine instrumentation and data. In order to
overcome this difculty, we use oceanic numerical modelling with data from reanalysis models, climatic
data from remote sensors, and primary data from existing instrumentation and eldwork. The models
were calibrated and run to calculatebased on existing marine systemsthe potential nationwide
marine power resources, on different time and spatial scales, for both the Colombian Caribbean and
Pacic coasts. For each marine resource, we rst explain the method used to assess the power potential;
then we present the potential marine energy result. Further, we carry out a policy analysis where we
discuss not only the power potential but also the barriers (mainly cost) faced by marine energy. Given the
potentials found by earlier studies, these results dene for Colombia, and also for Central and South
America generally, the road map for future pre-feasibility analysis, taking into account the energy
demands of the populations, existing technologies, and the environmental, social and geographical
characteristics of the regions.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Marine energy
Renewables
Climate Change
Mitigation

Contents
1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessment of power potential: waves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.
Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessment of power potential: tides. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessment of power potential: thermal gradients and currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessment of power potential: salinity gradients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policy analysis and critical assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.1.
Critical technological and environmental issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2.
Public attitude towards marine energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3.
Barriers to renewable (marine) energy diffusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.4.
Policy instruments to promote renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.5.
Colombian energy policy status on renewables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Corresponding author. Tel.: 57 314 8558854.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.F. Osorio), [email protected] (S. Ortega), [email protected] (S. Arango-Aramburo).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.057
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

967
967
967
968
968
968
970
970
970
971
971
971
973
973
973
973
974
975
975

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

967

7. Final comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977

1. Introduction
There has been an increasing focus on global warming in recent
decades: in particular, on the emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and in general on the impact that human activity has
on the climate and the problems this might create. There exists a
series of agreements in which the international community has
agreed to reduce emissions, using different strategies. Thus, there
is a general consensus about the need to reduce emissions; but
there is less agreement on how it should be done, who should do
it, and what it will cost. To begin with, the Kyoto Protocol framework promotes the implementation of policies for research and
development of renewable energy sources, carbon sequestration
technologies and innovative environmentally-friendly technologies [1]. A revision of this agreement took place at the World
Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002,
which encouraged a greater share of renewable energy in energy
supplies [2]. Despite the lack of concrete targets for renewable
energy sources [3], the revision inuenced energy policy in this
respect.
Electricity generation is one of the major contributors to GHG
emissions, or more specically it is the use of thermal generation
capacity based on oil, coal and gas. There are other generation
technologies, which do not contribute to emissions, such as
nuclear, as well as alternative energy sources such as wind, solar,
hydro plants (both large and small-scale plants) and marine
energy. For a country trying to reduce emissions, the use of
renewable resources for generation should ideally be the rst
choice, both for capacity expansion and when replacing existing
capacity. There are well-known environmental problems relating
to nuclear plants (such as radioactive waste) and large-scale hydro
plants (local environmental problems with dams), which we do
not deal with in this paper. Beyond those alternatives, with their
pros and cons, we focus here on the potential of marine energy in
Colombia.
In this paper, we explore the potential marine energy available
from a range of different sources: waves, tides, salinity gradients
and thermal gradients. This analysis will provide initial estimations of the potential in specic areas. One of the main restrictions
for analysing the marine power potential in the country is the lack
of long-term marine instrumentation necessary to make an
appropriate and sound characterisation of oceanographic phenomena. To overcome this difculty, a path using oceanic
numerical modelling was followed. The simulations used inputs
from reanalysis models, and climatic data from remote sensors, to
model different oceanographic phenomena and to generate synthetic information. The models were calibrated using data from
existing instrumentation and eldwork. After these processes the
models were run to calculate the existing nationwide resource on
different time and spatial scales. Once there is long-term and
reasonably reliable oceanographic information, an estimate of the
power potential is calculated. The methodologies were applied to
evaluate the power for each resource in several areas on the
Colombian Caribbean and Pacic coasts.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. The next four
sections present assessments of the power potentials for waves,
tides, thermal gradients and currents, and saline gradients. For
each power source we rst explain the method of assessing the
potential; then, we present the result. Section 6 presents policy

analysis, where we discuss not only the power potential but also
the barriersmainly costfaced by marine energy; Section 7
provides nal comments.

2. Assessment of power potential: waves

2.1. Method
We use a simulation model to mimic wave behaviour over time
and quantify the wave power potential. The model chosen to
simulate waves was the SWAN Simulating WAves Nearshore
model [4], which is a third-generation wave model developed at
the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. There is a
wide variety of wave models, such as WAM and WaveWatchIII;
however, we have chosen SWAN because of its ability to propagate
waves on different scales, and because simulation results can be
downscaled using nested runs [5].
Inputs for the modelling include bathymetries and 10 m-high
wind data. The bathymetries were constructed using information
from the ETOPO1, a 1 arc-minute global relief model of the Earth's
surface, developed by the NOAA [6], and from the Sistema de
Modelado Costero (SMC) Coastal Modelling System [7], a programme developed by the University of Cantabria that contains a
database of the bathymetries of the Colombian maritime
territories.
The Caribbean Sea can be considered a sheltered sea (see Fig. 1),
as the Antilles stop most of the wave uxes from the North
Atlantic. This means that the waves present in the Colombian
Caribbean are generated by the trade winds inside the Caribbean
Basin [8]. Under this considerations, contour data was not used for
the simulations. The wind data was taken from by North American
Regional Reanalysis NARR [9] made by the National Center for
Environmental Prediction, NCEP, and the National Center for
Atmospheric Research, NCAR. Thirty-two years of 10 m-high wind
data, at 3-h intervals (i.e. eight times daily) is presented in a grid
with data points approximately 0.25 apart. The simulations covered a region between latitude 622N and longitude 6090W.
Results are downscaled to different grids with ner resolution and
smaller domains, until a 3 arc-minute resolution is reached. The
calibrations and validation of the SWAN model for this Caribbean
region have been previously tested [5].
Wind data from the NARR is available only in a fraction of the
Pacic Ocean; therefore, the winds for simulating waves in the
Colombian Pacic are taken from the Global Reanalysis 1 Project,
(NCEP/NCAR). Data from this project is presented every 6 h (i.e.
four times daily) for a period of 60 years. There is data for a
worldwide grid with lower resolution, where data points are
approximately 2.5 apart [10].
The Pacic, having swell waves with long periods, is unlike the
sheltered Caribbean Sea. Modelling the totality of the Pacic Ocean
is a complex exercise that was previously carried out by the
Environmental Hydraulics Institute IH Cantabria for the GOW
Global Ocean Waves 2.1 Project [11]. IH Cantabria modelled waves
worldwide over a 1  1 grid, using the NCEP/NCAR data. Wave
data from this project was used as a contour map for modelling
the Pacic Ocean. As in the Caribbean Sea, results were downscaled until a 3 arc-minute resolution was reached.

968

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Fig. 1. Seasonal mean wave-power variation in the Colombian Caribbean. Left side DJF (DecemberJanuaryFebruary). Right side SON (SeptemberOctoberNovember).

Wave power is calculated by integrating the directional spectrum density S; ; a function of frequency () and direction ;
according to the following equation:
Z
P g

cg ; hS; dd

where cg is the group velocity, is the water density and g is

gravitational acceleration. The SWAN model calculates the wave
power as x and y are spatial components, and these vectors can be
added to nd the power magnitude [12].
2.2. Results
Fig. 1 presents the seasonal mean wave-power variation in the
Colombian Caribbean Sea. It shows that the highest values of mean
wave power range around 57 kW/m and appear from December
to April, coinciding with one of the windy summer seasons in
Colombia; in such periods of time there is less rain over Colombian
territory and so the water level of the rivers and the reservoirs
decreases [13]. Conversely, during the rainy seasons, the mean
wave-power values barely reach 1 kW/m.
The modelling of wave power potential also examines the
Pacic Ocean. Fig. 2 shows the Colombian Pacic coast with the
mean wave-power for the periods MAM and JJA. The gure shows
that the maximum wave power is close to half of that estimated
for the Caribbean Sea, i.e. about to 23 kW/m. However, this is
present throughout the year, except for the single trimester JJA,
when the wave resource is less abundant.
We also explore the San Andrs and Providencia islands, an
isolated island system with important political connotations. The
modelling results show that the wave power there is less than
1 kW/m throughout the year. In general terms, the wave power
resource in Colombia is relatively small when compared with
other places of the world, where 40 kW/m and above is considered
an attractive level of wave power. However, signicant power may
be generated with schemes such as the one proposed in other
sheltered seas such as the Baltic [14], where the technology has
been developed to be optimal in seas with signicant wave heights
less than 2 m and peak periods around seven seconds. This
scheme focuses on wave farms of small and abundant wave energy
devices, and could be applied in places near cities on the Colombian Caribbean coast.

During the summer months, there is less rain over Colombian

territory and so the water level of therivers and the reservoirs
decreases. As a consequence, hydropower generation is signicantly reduced. When this happens, the thermal power plants
enter the system to meet power demand and the cost of electric
energy rises
A wave power plant in the Colombian Caribbean may be feasible if it is understood to work as a complement for the electricity
system in the summer season. It would have the capacity to work
at peak generation and sell renewable energy at high prices, while
reducing the emission of greenhouse gases. In this situation, the
project must be located near a large city, with high local power
demands and suitable grid connection; it would also require a port
infrastructure to coordinate maintenance and transport for the
plant. The city that has the highest wave-power values together
with these other desirable characteristics is Santa Marta.
The small seasonal variation of the waves on the Colombian
Pacic coast makes wave power a potential attractive alternative
for small non-grid-connected communities. However, this alternative was not considered because it requires details at a smaller
scale of this study.

3. Assessment of power potential: tides

3.1. Methodology
Tides in Colombia offer a resource mainly on the Pacic side,
where there is a 34 m tidal range. The Colombian Pacic region
has low-density population and scarce infrastructure, and thus,
human intervention in the area has been minimal. There are some
places in the Colombian Pacic where tidal current could be harnessed using barrages: in the Buenaventura, Tumaco and Malaga
bays. The rst two places have grid-connected ports that satisfy
the need for infrastructure to operate and maintain a tidal power
plant, and in the Malaga there is a military base. However, there
are also several protected nature reserves located in this region, on
the mainland and in the bays and estuaries. Tidal barrages make
great demands on infrastructure, and consequently are associated
with signicant negative environmental impacts in sensitive ecosystems, which led us to discard such areas from the analysis.
To estimate the power potential from tidal energy in Buenaventura and Tumaco, we use a simulation model called H2D, for

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

969

Fig. 2. Seasonal mean wave-power variation in the Colombian Pacic. Left side MAM (MarchAprilMay). Right side JJA (JuneJulyAugust).

Fig. 3. Tidal power per unit [W/m2] of area in Ebb tide (left) and Flood tide (right) Bays.

the tidal dynamics. The model solves the shallow water equation
designed for long-wave propagation capable of determining the
sea surface level, the speed of the current. These speeds and the
currents from the CLOPARD/SP are used to obtain the ux eld in a
coastal area. As in the case for the wave-simulation in the Pacic,

the data for the bathymetries came from the NOAA ETOPO1 model
[6] and from the Sistema de Modelado Costero (SMC) [7]. The wind
data came from the Global Reanalysis 1 Project [10]; the data corresponded to the node located at a distance of 290 km from the
Colombian Pacic coast. The power potential is given by the

970

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Fig. 4. Speed of the oceanic currents in Colombia. Monthly means for the months of April (a), October (b), June (c) and December (d).

following equation,
V3
PA ;
2

where P is power, is the efciency of the turbine, is the density

of the seawater, A is the area to be harnessed and V is the velocity
of the current. Calculations are made assuming a density of
1030 kg/m2, an efciency of 35% and results are in terms of unit
of area.
3.2. Results
The results of our simulations are shown in Fig. 3. The simulations show that the mean current speeds for Buenaventura Bay
and Malaga Bay are clustered round the 0.8 m/s. The places with
maximum power show values between 100 W/m2 (ebb tide) and
250 W/m2 (ood tide) and are located in the farthest area of the
Bay. In Delta San Juan there are some places with more power
potential, however the sediment transport will affect the feasibility of real plant.
The highest power could yield a maximum power supply of
close to 8.1 MW for Buenaventura Bay. Nevertheless, the simulated
speed is very low compared with places where there might be
future commercial developments [1517] that have current
speeds of the order of 2 m/s, which would be equivalent to about
960 W/m2. Despite the lack of potential for tide power, we foresee

a potential to power small dwellings or communities by themselves building small barrages with minor environmental impacts
to meet their power supply needs.

4. Assessment of power potential: thermal gradients and

currents
4.1. Methodology
The estimation of the power potential of thermal gradients and
currents requires simulation of the behaviour of the temperature
and salinity of the Colombian oceans, in order to calculate the
currents and temperature gradients. We use the Stony Brook
Parallel Ocean Model (sbPOM) [18], a modication of the Princeton
Ocean Model (POM), and the MERCATOR model http://www.mer
cator-ocean.fr). These models consider different climatic variables
as forcers, such as: atmospheric pressure, air temperature at 2 m,
precipitation, relative humidity at 2 m, cloud coverage at different
heights, and 10 m-high wind data. Daily temperature information
from January 2002 to December 2008 was obtained from the
French Global Ocean Reanalysis and Simulations (MERCATORGLORYS); details of the reanalysis production are discussed elsewhere [19,20]. Wind data was taken from QuikSCAT [21], which
has a spatial resolution of 0.5  0.5. Data from reanalysis model
was selected for the other hydroclimatic variables; NARR

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Reanalysis [9] was used for the Caribbean Basin, and the JRA-25
[22] reanalysis was used for the Pacic Basin.
Data from oceanographic cruises was used to calibrate the
model and validate the results. In the Pacic, data was gathered
during the 18 expeditions of the Centro de Control de Contaminacin del Pacco (CCCP), made in the period from 1988 to
2006. In the Caribbean, data comes from 37 expeditions by the
Centro de Investigaciones Oceanogrcas e Hidrogrcas (CIOH)
that cover the 19692010 period [23]. Following Nihous's [24]
temperature ladder estimation of OTEC resources, the net power
(Pnet) generated is the product of the evaporator heat load and the
gross OTEC conversion efciency (p Etg T/2T2, where tg is the
turbo generator efciency of 85%). With  30% of gross power at
design conditions (Tdesign 20 C):
P net

Q ww cp 3tg
T 2  0:3T 2design
161 T 2

where Qww 10 m3/s is the surface water ow-rate used in the

standard OTEC process, 1025 kg/m3 is an average seawater
density, cp  4 kJ/kg K is the specic heat of seawater; 0.5 is
used when twice as much surface warm-water (Qww) as cold
water (Qcw) is involved in the process (Qcw Qww).
4.2. Results
The simulations show that the main ocean currents in the
Colombian waters are present at distances of several hundred
kilometres from the shoreline. The largest current-speed reaches
0.7 m/s, far below the recommended 2 m/s. According to current
technology (www.fp7-marinet.eu/) and power potential according
to Eq. (2), this would lead to an equivalent of 40 W/m2 of power.
The geographical distribution of the currents is shown in Fig. 4.
The low potential for maximum current speed suggests that ocean
currents would not provide a feasible power supply for Colombia.
In the oceanic regions, the thermocline is intense and not too
deep; there is a temperature difference of over 20 C between the
supercial and the deep waters. This favourable condition occurs
in specic areas of the tropical coastal region, basically between
the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn [25]. As foreseen, the simulations conrm that the tropical location of Colombia conditions
the supercial waters, maintaining high supercial temperatures
all year round. Under this scenario, the places where the thermal
gradients can be harnessed are where the continental shelf is very
steep, dropping to depths of over 1 km within a few kilometres of
the shore.

971

There are only two regions in Colombia with these geographic

features and a high power demand: the city of Santa Marta and the
island of San Andrs. On the one hand, Santa Marta is well connected to the grid, so high cost OTEC is not currently a feasible
option in the hydro-based power market. On the other hand, San
Andrs Island stands out as the most promising location because it
is not grid-connected and its energy supply is based on fossil fuels.
San Andrs Island has previously been identied as a suitable
place for OTEC, but no studies of the variation of the resource has
previously have been undertaken [26]. The simulations show that
that the depth required for the 20 C temperature difference
needed for OTEC varies with other annual variations, but it is
always found in depths below 700 m, as displayed in Fig. 5. The
fact that the gradient is found at a depth of less than 1000 m
makes an eventual project more attractive, as the pipeline can be
shorter or the thermal efciency may be higher.
Moreover, the island could benet enormously from an OTEC
project, as it may also use a whole range of deep cold-seawater
technologies, such as sea-water air conditioning and low temperature thermal desalination, among others. This could have a
very positive impact on the island as it may help to apply energy
efciency programmes, give access to fresh water and release
pressure on the aquifers of the island. If the cold water is used for a
range of different purposes in the context of a modular eco-park, it
could empower local business and research initiatives, setting the
grounds for sustainable development of the island.
Based on Eq. (3) for the net power (Pnet) and taking into
account that thermal differences at this site are always greater
than 21.5 C, this difference produces relatively high net OTEC
power values during the entire period, oscillating between 2.3 and
3.5 MW. It is also evident that inter-annual oscillations are not
signicant, with mean Surface Seawater Temperature around
28.1 C, and maximum (minimum) values of 29.5 C (26.7 C),
respectively. More details of the OTEC energy for San Andres Island
can be found in Devis-Morales et al. [27].

5. Assessment of power potential: salinity gradients

5.1. Methodology
Nowadays, it is possible to generate electricity using a salinity
gradient, which is observed mainly when freshwater rivers discharge into the sea. However, not every river offers adequate

Fig. 5. Seawater temperature simulations for San Andrs Island.

972

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

distance from the river mouth, reducing the necessary length of

pipelines and the energy needed for pumping.
The tidal movements in the estuaries of the Colombian Pacic
Ocean (34 m), however, create weak and continual vertical stratications in the water column, and an intense mix of the river and
ocean water that extends for many kilometres; thus, such characteristics make power generation from salinity gradients infeasible in this region. Therefore, we only consider the power
potential from salinity gradients for the Caribbean Sea.
In the context of the mentioned framework project, it was
simulated the hydrodynamic features of the Colombian Caribbean
in river mouths using ELCOM (the Estuary, Lake and Coastal Ocean
Model). The ELCOM model was developed by the Centre for
Water Research (CWR) of the University of Western Australia
[29]. This three-dimensional model works on the hydrodynamic
and thermal processes on stratied bodies of water under external
environmental forcing, thereby simulating the temporal and spatial behaviour of variables such as speed, temperature and salinity,
using a semi-implicit nite differences scheme.
The ELCOM model was calibrated and validated for the river
mouths of Atrato [30], Canal del Dique [31] and Len [32], as sufcient
of the necessary eld data had been gathered by members of the
OCEANICOS Group of the Universidad Nacional de Colombia. There
was no eld information on the Magdalena river, so data from
oceanographic cruises near those river mouths gathered by the
Direccin General Martima of the Colombian Navy were used as
boundary conditions for the model. For the simulation, we selected
the months of September and February, which are typical months of
the dry and wet seasons in the Colombian Caribbean region. We also
considered the ENSO phenomenon for the simulations, taking into
account three time periods: 19961997 for an ENSO-neutral year,
19971998 for a warm ENSO phase (El Nio) and 19981999 for the
cold ENSO phase (La Nia). The theoretical salinity-gradient energy is
calculated using the salinity gradients found in the simulations, which
can be quantied using the van't Hoff osmotic pressure equation [33]:
2RCT

where is the osmotic pressure, R is the ideal gas constant, C is the

salt concentration in the water and T is the water temperature. The
difference in osmotic pressure between the two bodies of water ()
is expressed as
2RC m T m  C r T r

where Cm and Tm represent the ocean salt concentration and temperature, and Cr and Tr represent the freshwater river's salt concentration and temperature. The potential energy depends on the
difference of osmotic pressure and the mean ow of the river (Qm), as
is shown in the following equation.
E Q m :

Fig. 6. Mean salinity proles for a representative month of the dry season (February) under different ENSO phases, in the Len River Mouth. These simulations
show the formation of saline wedges in the river mouth. Salinity values are given in
practical salinity units.

conditions for the operation of salinity-gradient power plants.

These power plants require a relatively short distance between the
salt and the fresh water, in river mouths with an intense and
extended mixing zone [28].
The Colombian Caribbean Sea has a micro-tidal range where
river mouths tend to present saline wedges with strong vertical
salinity stratications and a well-dened halocline. This salinity
structure results in completely saline water being found at a short

In practice, not all of this potential power can be used because

of technical limitations in the energy conversion process. The
technical potential can be calculated using the coefcients estimated by Stenzel and Wagner [28] for Pressure-Retarded-Osmotic
power plants. The coefcients take into account the behaviour of
the osmotic and hydraulic pressures at each side of the membrane,
the energy and pressure losses in the process, and the overall
efciency of the machinery. Assuming the mean ow of the river,
the technical potential is estimated to be 20.5% of the theoretical
osmotic potential. When calculating the electricity generation, this
factor is set to be 18.7% to be conservative. Besides the technical
limitations, there are environmental and social restrictions in
relation to the rivers. These restrictions have to satisfy the need to
guarantee the ecosystems' conservation and the continuation of
economic activities such as navigation and shing. To calculate this
ecological potential, we assume an extraction factor of 10% of the

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

973

Table 1
Salinity-gradient theoretical potential for selected rivers on the Colombian Caribbean Coast [34].
River

Mean Flow

Osmotic Pressure

Theoretical potential (MW)n

no-ENSO year

Magdalena
Canal del Dique
Atrato
Len
n

El Nio year

La Nia year

(m3/s)

(MJ/m3)

Dry season

Rainy season

Dry season

Rainy season

Dry season

Rainy season

7232
148
129
90

2.9
2.7
2.5
3

13582
157
33
184

15478
212
181
188

15599
41
32
188

15466
86
134
186

15496
215
39
188

15321
213
136
186

Practical values of potential are probable around 25% of the theoretical values.

multiannual mean river ow, as proposed by Stenzel and Wagner

[28]. However, discussions about technical potential and ecological
potential are still open.
5.2. Results
Simulations for the river mouths show that saline wedges are
created in every river that ows into the Colombian Caribbean.
Colombia's river ows are very sensitive to the ENSO, but the
results show that the salinity structure is maintained for each of
the phases and the climatic seasons of the country. This means
that power generation only depends on fresh water availability, as
salt water is available at all times. Fig. 6 shows the Canal del
Dique's mouth, to illustrate the behaviour of the river mouths in
the region (for more detail see Alvarez and Osorio [34]).
Our assessment shows that there is a potential for hundreds of
MW of installed capacity on the Colombian Coast, with different
sizes of projects. In fact, the technical and ecological power
potential for the several rivers will, in actuality, be minor, probably
around only 25% of the theoretical power. It implies that the
values for Magdalena River will be hundreds of MW of installed
capacity, and rivers such as Atrato, Leon and Canal del Dique will
have tens of MW of power potential, respectively. These results are
shown in Table 1.
The theoretical salinity-gradient energy (SGE) potential for
Colombia is around 1% of the world potential SGE around
2.6 TW, in the context of prospects for the various energy sources
[35]. These salinity gradients were found to be the most interesting marine renewable power source for Colombia, as the Caribbean Coast has the proper oceanographic conditions and very
abundant freshwater resources in the large rivers that ow into
the sea. Moreover, the Colombian Caribbean coast has a population of several million inhabitants, and the largest cities in the
region are located in close proximity to these rivers. Salinitygradient power plants (SGPP) may become an important complement to the national power system, as they could provide
renewable power generation on the coast, for a grid that has its
generation plants located mainly in the mountainous region of the
country. The main obstacle for SGPP is the development of the
technology, which is still far from becoming commercial [36].

6. Policy analysis and critical assessment

Despite the consensus about the need to reduce emissions,
there is less agreement on how it should be done, who should do it
and what it will cost [37]. There has been an increasing focus on
the use of renewable technology in Europe and the US, which
together are considered as the major contributors to GHG emissions. More precisely, wind, which has reached a signicant level
of contribution to the generation of electricity in some countries
[3], and other technologies such as photovoltaic, are expected to

contribute more in the way of generation by renewable technologies over the next decade [38].
Colombia joined the Johannesburg Renewable Energy Coalition
(JREC) that aims to focus on international, regional, and national
political initiatives that will help foster policies for the promotion
of renewable energy. Commitment to the JREC initiative shows
support for renewable energy to some extent. South America in
general, and Colombia in particular, have been relatively
environmentally-friendly in terms of electricity generation over
the last fteen years, but this has slowly been replaced by more
thermal generation, with signicantly increasing GHG emissions,
in opposition to the stated objective of most countries, international organisations and environmentalists [39]. Thus, energy
policies should be put in place for a return to a more sustainable
trend, with a focus on renewable electricity.
6.1. Critical technological and environmental issues
The diffusion of marine energy is still far from taking off. There
are a number of barriers not only for renewables in general, but
also for marine energy in particular. Despite the potential worldwide, and in Colombia, this technology is still in the early stages of
development. We have summarised in Table 2 the main critical
issues regarding both technology and environment from IRENA.
The status of the technology for waves is full-scale projects of
single devices; for tides, it ranges from pilot to full-scale testing
projects of single devices. OTEC has demonstration and small-scale
(less than 1 MW) projects; and nally, salinity gradients have only
pilot projects.
6.2. Public attitude towards marine energy
Consistent with the concerns previously discussed, public
attitude towards marine energy is an issue. These issues are,
among others, the concept of place attachment, the idea that the
ocean is a cultural heritage, and what benets local residents
might gain from these projects. Thus one important issue for
developing ocean energy projects is public opinion. Previous studies in United States [42] and Europe [43,44] have shown that
public attitude toward the technology is generally positive. In
Delaware (USA) the support levels have shown values around 80%
for wind farm projects [43]. However, in the context of less
developed technology (such as wave and tides) in Oregon, there
are lower levels of support for wave energy with around 50% in
favour [19], mainly due to a lack of awareness of wave energy
rather than opposition to it. In Europe, more than 60% of people
have a positive attitude towards offshore wind farms [44,45].
Another study [46] reports preference for tidal energy (around 65
70%) and wave power (around 8590%).
Despite the situation in the USA and Europe, there is a predominantly positive attitude toward the harnessing of offshore
renewable energy. Nevertheless, given the cultural education and

974

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Table 2
Critical technology and environmental assessment (source: technology briefs from IRENA).
Technology/Status

Waves Full scale testing of single devices

Tides Pilot projects full scale testing of

single devices

Critical issues
Technological

Environmental

1. Over a hundred concepts and technologies exist, but very few are
close to commercialisation.
2. A full scale testing of an array of devices is needed.
3. Lack of industrial cohesion and absence of supply chains to achieve
the next generation of the technology, it is necessary to improve
basic subcomponents of the technology such as generators and
electric components, mooring systems, control systems and
materials.
4. Insufcient grid and port infrastructure in many coastal locations
1. Need to increase the efciency of the turbines.
2. Lack of knowledge regarding materials, performance and operation
and maintenance procedures.
3. Insufcient grid and port infrastructure in many coastal locations.
4. Lack of industrial cohesion needed to scale up device demonstrations into arrays.

1. Uncertainties regarding environmental impacts

such as changes in the shoreline, articial reefs
and noise.
2. Lack of clarity in environmental regulations, zoning, licensing and stakeholder consultation
procedures.

Thermal gradients OTEC- semonstration small scale 1 MW existing plants

1. High upfront capital costs for construction. These make the technology unattractive for continental locations.
2. Biofouling, sealing and maintenance of the pipes.
3. Having a larger scale plant ( 410 MW) is key to have further
developments.

Salinity gradients Pilot Projects

1.
2.
3.
4.

Elevated costs and insufcient power density of the membranes.

Fouling issues in the membrane.
Lack of a technological supply system, as few companies.
produce membranes and other necessary components at a
large scale.

their relation with new technologies in Colombia, it is not clear

whether local communities will support the development of
Ocean renewable projects.
On the one hand, a positive public attitude could be created by
aspects such as a more cost-effective energy solution, reduction of
fossil fuel use and energy savings, positive environmental impacts,
and security of supply. On the other hand, a negative opinion of
marine energy is inuenced by its environmental impacts, as well
as high costs when compared to other energy alternatives Finally,
in some local places, habitants may see the ocean as a special place
and an important cultural resource that they don't want to see
affected. We turn now to analyse the barrier for marine energy
diffusion.
6.3. Barriers to renewable (marine) energy diffusion
The penetration of renewable energy is restricted because of a
number of barriers. A comprehensive survey of barriers to
renewable energy diffusion is presented by IEA [47]. The barriers
are classied into categories such as nancial, economic, market,
etc.; however, given the nature of marine energy, the main barriers
are cost and the development of the technology. In fact, the cost
factor is a common barrier for most forms of renewable energy
(apart from micro hydro, which is less reliable, and large-scale
hydro, mentioned above).
Renewable energy is more expensive compared with conventional thermal power plants, especially in South America [50,51].
Moreover, conventional generation technologies (pulverised steam
coal, coal, open cycle gas turbine and CCGT) are cheaper and more
reliable than wind, solar and other renewables, despite the signicant cost reductions and efciency gains over the last decade
[39]. Thus, The growing interest in the establishment of a minimum share of renewable sources in the world energy matrix, after
the Johannesburg World Summit for Sustainable Development

1. Impacts on large scale sediment transport and

coastal dynamics [40]
2. Mammal interaction and underwater noise.
3. Limited baseline data of seawater biodiversity.
4. Lack of clarity in environmental regulations, zoning, licensing and stakeholder consultation
procedures.
1. Construction in fragile marine environnements.
2. Marine life alterations by the operation of the
facility, algae bloom
3. Unknown risk for marine life at the seabed due to
the large scale pumping of nutrients.
4. Lack of clarity in environmental regulations, zoning, licensing and stakeholder consultation
procedures.
1. Uncertainties about the effects of a plant operation
in sediment transport.
2. Uncertainties in the impacts to local fauna and
ora due to the changes in the salinity structure
[41].

(WSSD), has raised the question about the means for such new
technologies to compete with the traditional ones [57]. To illustrate this issue, we present Table 2, which displays a comparison of
costs for different renewable power generation technologies, both
for installation cost and energy production.
The cross comparison of renewable energy with other energy
sources shows that marine energy is among the most expensive
technologies; the values are in the highest ranges both for
installed capacity and for power production. From the table it is
also noticeable that the scales for wave and tidal are limited to
2 MW of installed capacity. However, the literature also reports a
number of larger power plants such as the 240 MW plant at La
Rance in northern France and the 254 MW Sihwa Barrage in the
Republic of Korea; both are tidal range plants [44].
The situation in the Colombian case is being worsened by the
current economic incentives for investment in power plants. The
Colombian power system has created a forward marketthe
reliability chargeauctions all supply contracts for rm energy
[49,52]. The mechanism put in place an obligation for the generators to make investments; as a result, it is expected to bring online more than 3000 MW (around a quarter of the installed
capacity in 2012). Thus, there is not much opportunity for
investment in new technology in the next decade.
Regarding the technical barrier, all marine energy alternatives
discussed in this paper are still in the very early stages of the
technologies. The maturity of renewable energy technologies in
general can be classied into demonstration and commercialisation; the commercialisation class is divided into inception, takeoff, and consolidation [39]. Some technologies are already fully
mature, such as hydro and geothermal. Most of the renewables are
in the take-off and/or consolidation stages of maturity. In particular, the different forms of marine energy are only now emerging
from the RD&D phase [39].

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Fig. 7. Opportunities for marine renewable energy in Colombia (circle size on the
map indicates the magnitude of the theoretical marine renewable power).

6.4. Policy instruments to promote renewable energy

With the challenging barriers previously characterised, energy
support policies are required in order to catalyse the diffusion of
renewable energy. To reach the goals for renewable energy there is
a need to overcome the technical and cost barriers, which are the
main obstacles to diffusion. To tackle this problem, a number of
policy options have been put in place around the world. A generic
classication of policy instruments/options is reported in the literature [53], which is divided into legislative and non-legislative
measures. The legislative measures includes demand and control
(eg. forced investment and forced shut-downs) and market based,
which are divided into supply-push (eg. direct subsidies and tax
deduction) and demand-pull (eg. renewable portfolio standard
quotas- and green power purchasers). The non-legislative include
player-initiated (eg. green prices and self-obligation) and informative/administrative (eg. resource mapping and investor advising). For further details of the policy instruments/options see [53].
Given the nature of marine energy and the current marketbased power systems implies, we have particular interest in some
of the market-based, supply-push strategies: direct subsidies and
Feed-in tariffs (FiTs). Both subsidies and FiTs are supply-push
strategies that allow the policy maker to direct policy towards
the desired technology, in our case towards marine energy [55].
On the one hand, subsidies provide funding in order either: to get
prices for consumers below market level, or: to keep prices for
producers above market level [47], where the cost differential is
absorbed by the government. Subsidies in renewable energy are
normally given as a xed percentage of the total investment cost
[48]. On the other hand, a FiT is a price paid by the government to
the electricity supplier for every unit of electricity produced; later,
when the FiT stops, this cost is passed on to the consumers
through higher retail electricity price, or it is assumed by the
Government [56].
6.5. Colombian energy policy status on renewables
Nowadays, many countries around the world have implemented some type of policy for renewable electricity. In South
America, different nancial schemes and incentives to promote
the use of renewable energy depend on each country, without
coordinated regional initiatives or goals; but there has not been

975

any successful programme leading to large-scale investment in

renewable generation, only marginal plants [39].
The Colombian power market allows small plants ( o20 MW)
to be on the electricity dispatch without the need to enter into the
competition; however, such benets are not directed to certain
technologies but rather to them all, including thermal plants.
Colombia has passed a law to promote energy efciency and
alternative energy sources (Law 697/2001), which is regulated by
the Decree 3683/2003 of the Minister of Mines and Energy of
Colombia. Law 788/2002 set income tax exemptions for 15 years
for wind, biomass and agricultural waste, while marine energy
was left out, together with solar, geothermal, and small hydro. The
condition for the tax exemption is Arrange, obtain and sell CO2
emission reduction certicates in accordance with the Kyoto protocol; Invest at least 50% of the money obtained from the certicates in the social development of the community inuenced by
the company. Even for wind, a simulation study suggests that it is
more efcient to promote renewable generation with direct subsidies rather than the current scal policies [50]. More recently,
Law 1151/2007 established the National Development Plan, which
promotes the use of renewable energy sources for noninterconnected areas and allocates funding for renewable energy
via FANZI (Fund of Financial Aid for Electrication of the Interconnected Rural Areas).
Very recently (May 13th, 2014), the Colombian Government
issued Law 1751/2014, to integrate non-conventional energy into
the national power system. This law aims to establish a legal framework and instruments to promote investment, research,
development and use of non-conventional energy sources, mainly
renewables. In particular, the Law includes explicitly all sources of
marine energy. It was issued in order to effect commitments to
renewables, such as those promoted by the International Renewable Energy Agency-IRENA. The Law includes the creation of a
fund for their promotion, tax exemptions, accelerated accounting
depreciations, replacement of diesel promotion, etc. Nevertheless,
the Law is still lacking rules for its implementation and application, which should be written by May 2015. Its effectiveness is,
therefore, an empirical question with regard to the rules of
implementation.
Regarding the technical barrier, there is a need for research and
development on marine energy. A number of initiatives and
research programmes are in place worldwide; we focus on the
Colombian case. COLCIENCIAS (Colombian Science Council)
administers all Government funding of research. The main
research initiative is Law 1286/2009, called the Science and
Technology Law (in Spanish: Ley de Ciencia y Tecnologa), which
placed COLCIENCIAS under the direct control of the presidency.
The main achievement resulting from this law was a funding
allocation of over US$ 50 million per year, taken from coal and oil
royalties. Additionally, there is the Center for Research and Innovation in Energy CIIEN, which has been created as by the largest
Colombian utility company to provide some support for four local
universities in the Antioquia region; in fact, the research being
reported in this paper was funded via CIIEN (see Acknowledgements). Both initiatives have R&D in renewable energy on
their research agendas.
In summary, the energy policies already in place in Colombia
are focussed on biofuels, CO2 emission reduction, and encouragement of energy efciency. The new law on promotion of alternative energy sources (1715/2014) is just in place, where its effect
is an empirical question to be tested in the near future. Biofuels, on
the other hand, have had stronger energy policies in place, both
policy support for biofuel production and mandatory rules for
bioethanol blends in transportation fuels. Our comments are in
fact consistent with the CLCDS (Colombian Low Carbon

976

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

Table 3
Comparison of renewable energy in terms of status, scale, production and costs.
Technology

Bioenergy (stand alone)

Bioenergy (coring)
Geothermal (ash)
Geothermal (binary)
Solar PV (groundmounted)
Solar PV (roof top)
Concentrating solar power (trough)
Concentrating solar power (tower)
Hydro (large)
Hydro (small and medium)
Wind onshore
Wind offshore
Wave and tidal
Wave
Tidal range
Tidal current
Ocean current
Ocean thermal
Salinity gradient

Status

C
C
C
C
C
C
C
D
C
C
C
C
R&D,
R&D,
R&D,
R&D,
R&D,
R&D,
R&D,

Typical scale

100 kW to 100 MW
20100 MW
10250 MW
1220 MW
1 kW50 MW
1 kW250 MW
1250 MW

D
D
D
D
D
D
D

100 kW10,000 MW
100 kW300 MW
1 kW500 MW
1001000 MW
100 kW2 MW
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

2009 Total Global production

266
66
22
0.85
3 077
344
3
0.53
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

Range of cost
Installation USD/kW

Operation USD/MWh

26004 100
430900
2 0004 000
2 4005 900
2 7004 100
3 3005 800
42008400

69150
2267
5080
60200
110490
110490
180300

1 0002 000
2 0004 000
1 4002 500
3 2005 800
4 5005 000
6 20016 100
4 5005 000
5 40014 300
N/A
4 20012 300

18100
50100
40160
100190
200350
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

R&D: Research and Development, D: Demonstration, C: Commercial.

Sources: [54], 2005 US$ [58].

Development Strategy), according with discussions with the

Government leaders.

7. Final comments
Within the renewable-energy portfolio, we aim to include
marine energy in various forms. We have presented the potential
for such energy in different forms, such as waves, tides, salinity
gradients, and temperature gradients. Given the potentials found
so far, a pre-feasibility analysis can now be conducted, taking into
account the energy demands of the populations, the existing
technologies, and the environmental, social and geographical
characteristics of the regions. This is in order to identify and
prioritise the most feasible locations and schemes for harnessing
marine renewable energy in Colombia. Identifying the potential is
just the rst step towards harnessing marine power in Colombia.
Technical studies to identify locations are needed for a complete
feasibility analysis. Such studies may include the environmental
and social impact, nancial analysis, performance of the plant and
its relationship with the electricity market, among others. The
numerical modelling uses state-of-the-art models and secondary
information from reanalysis projects, existing marine and climatic
instrumentation, oceanic cruise records and previous studies.
Studying the marine power resource for Colombia is necessary
for the country's development, as such studies are currently very
scarce. It can be seen as an opportunity to expand the renewable
resource base for power generation both in Colombia and in other
Latin-American countries. Latin-America is a good bet for the
development of renewable power projects on wind and biomass,
but there have been very few advances in marine renewable. By
pursuing this route, Colombia makes itself a guiding light and
regional leader on the research and development of marine
renewable energy in Latin-America, broadening the spectra of
opportunities beyond national frontiers. As a summary, Fig. 7
shows the places around the country where marine renewable
power appears promising and may be located.
Renewable generation must become economically competitive;
otherwise, it is not realistic to expect that developing countries
can afford to invest in these technologies. South America needs to

sustain the economic growth needed for development, and

expensive electricity will have a negative effect on GDP. However,
the advantages of these renewable sources, besides the environmental benets, are that they are faster to install than the more
conventional generation systems (around two or three years).
Unless renewables become more economically competitive, it
seems probably that markets, if left to them, would be unlikely to
reverse the decline in sustainable generation in South America.
Moreover, there are a number of technological and environmental
issues that should be overcome in order to push forward the diffusion of this vast energy source.
For Colombia in particular, we emphasise the requirements for
a proper design of the rules of the new law on promotion of
alternative energy sources (1715/2014). The Technology Law
should be used to improve and learn more about renewable
energy in general, and marine power technology in particular. The
energy policies are not focussed on promoting renewable energy;
they focus mostly on biofuels, CO2 emission reduction and energy
efciency. We propose use of the traditional promotion policies,
such as FiT or direct subsidies. Alternatively, we also suggest
creating a rule or a Law in which large power companies must
invest in renewable energy, either pilot plants or in research.
These energy policy options require further elaboration and indepth consideration of Colombia's energy future Table 3.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Center for Research and
Innovation in Energy CIIEN, grant number CT-51000438013. The
authors are grateful for discussions and comments from
researchers involved in the project ASSESMENT OF POTENTIAL
POWER AND TECHNOLOGY FOR MEASUREMENT AND POWER
GENERATION IN COMMERCIAL LEVEL IN THE COLOMBIAN SEA,
particularly MSc Pablo Agudelo co-leader of this project, Dr. Luis
Otero and Dr. Julio Correa, leader of components. The authors want
to express a special gratitude towards CIOH (Centre of Research in
Oceanography and Hydrography) from DIMAR (Direccin General
Maritima) of the Republic of Colombia for institutional support
(researchers and data). We thank to anonymous reviewers, which

A.F. Osorio et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 53 (2016) 966977

comments contribute to the paper. Finally, for editorial comments

from Dr Paul G Ellis.

References
[1] Kyoto UN. Protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate
change. New York: United Nations; 1998.
[2] UN, World summit on sustainable development, Johannesburg, United
Nations; 2002.
[3] REN21, Renewables 2013 global status report, Paris, France: Renewable Energy
Policy Network for the 21st Century; 2013.
[4] Booij N, Ris RC, Holthuijsen LH. A third generation wave model for coastal
regions. J Geophys Res 1999;104(C4):764966.
[5] Ortega S, Osorio AF, Agudelo-Restrepo P. Estimation of the wave power
resource in the Caribbean Sea in areas with scarce instrumentation. Case
study: Isla Fuerte, Colombia. Renew Energy 2013:2408.
[6] Amante C, Eakins W, ETOPO1 1 Arc Minute Global Relief Model, Procedures,
Data Sources and Analysis, NOAA Tech Memo, NESDIS NGDC-24, 2009.
[7] Gonzlez M, Medina R, Gonzlez-Ondina J, Osorio A, Mndez FJ, Garca E. An
integrated coastal modeling system for analyzing beach processes and beach
restoration projects, SMC. Comput Geosci 2007;33:91631.
[8] Ortega S, Estudio de aprovechamiento de la energa del oleaje en Isla Fuerte
(Caribe Colombiano). Tesis de Maestra en Ingeniera de Recursos Hidrulicos.
Posgrado en Aprovechamiento de Recursos Hidrulicos - Universidad Nacional
de Colombia - Sede Medelln, 2010.
[9] Mesinger F, DiMego G, Kalnay E, Mitchell K, Shafran P, Ebisuzaki W, et al.
North American regional reanalysis: a long-term, consistent, high-resolution
climate dataset for the North American domain, as a major improvement upon
the earlier global reanalysis datasets in both resolution and accuracy. Bull Am
Metereol Soc 2006.
[10] Tolman HL, User manual and system documentation of WAVEWATCH-III version 2.22. NOAA/NWS/NCEP/MMAB; 2002.
[11] Reguero BG, Menndez M, Mndez FJ, Mnguez R, Losada IJ. A Global Ocean
Wave (GOW) calibrated reanalysis from 1948 onwards. Coast Eng 2012;65:38
55.
[12] Iglesias G, Carballo R. Wave energy potential along the death coast (Spain).
Energy 2009;34:196375.
[13] Poveda G, Waylen P, Pulwarty R. Annual and inter-annual variability of the
present climate in northern South America and southern Mesoamerica.
Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol 2006;234(1):327 May.
[14] Bernhoff H, Sjsted E, Leijon M. Wave energy in sheltered areas: a case study
of the Baltic Sea. Renew Energy 2006;31:216470.
[15] Garrett C, Cummins P. Generating power from tidal currents. J Waterw Port
Coast Ocean Eng 2004;130(3):1148.
[16] Fallon D, Hartnett M, Olbert A, Nash S. The effects of array conguration on the
hydro-environmental impacts of tidal turbines. Renew Energy 2014;64:1025.
[17] Walters R, Tarbotton M, Hiles C. Estimation of tidal power potential. Renew
Energy 2013;51:25562.
[18] Jordi A, Wang DP. sbPOM: a parallel implementation of Princenton Ocean
Model. Environ Model Softw 2012;38:5961.
[19] Ferry N, Parent L, Garric G, Barnier B, Jourdain NC. Mercator ocean team.
Mercator global eddy permitting ocean reanalysis GLORYS1V1: description
and results. Mercator Ocean Q Newsl 2010;36:1527.
[20] Tranchant B, Testut CE, Renault L, Ferry N, Birol F, Brasseur P. Expected impact
of the future SMOS and Aquarius Ocean surface salinity missions in the
Mercator Ocean operational systems: new perspectives to monitor the ocean
circulation. Remote Sens Environ 2008;112:147687.
[21] Pickett MH, Tang W, Rosenfeld LK, Wash CH. QuikSCAT satellite comparisons
with nearshore buoy wind data off the US west coast. J Atmos Ocean Technol
2003;20:186980.
[22] Onogi K, Tsutsui J, Koide H, Sakamoto M, Kobayashi S, Hatsushika H, et al. The
JRA-25 Reanalysis. J Meteor Soc Jpn 2007;85:369432.
[23] DIMAR. Atlas Cartogrco de los Ocanos y Costas de Colombia. Bogot,
Colombia: Repblica de Colombia-Armada Nacional- Direccin General Martima DIMAR Centro de Investigaciones Oceanogrcas e Hidrogrcas
CIOH; 2005.
[24] Nihous GC. A preliminary assessment of ocean thermal energy conversion
(OTEC) resources. J Energy Res Technol 2007;129-1:107.
[25] Solar Energy Research Institute. Ocean thermal energy conversion: an Overview. Golden, CO: Solar Energy Research Institute; 1989. p. 36 SERI/SP-2203024.
[26] Torres R, Andrade C. Potencial en Colombia para el aprovechamiento de la
energa no convencional de los ocanos. Boletn Cientco CIOH 2006:1125.
[27] Devis-Morales A, Montoya-Sanchez RA, Osorio AF. Ocean Thermal Energy
Resources in Colombia. Renew Energy 2014;66:7597769.
[28] Stenzel P ,Wagner HJ, Osmotic power plants: Potential analysis and site criteria, 3rd International Conference Ocean Energy, Bilbao; 2010.

977

[29] Hodges BR, Dallimore C, Estuary, Lake and Coastal Ocean Model : ELCOM v2.2
Science Manual, Centre of Water Research, Univ. of Western Australia, 2006, p.
62.
[30] Roldn P. Modelamiento del patrn de circulacin de la baha Colombia, Golfo
de Urab-implicaciones para el transporte de sedimentos (Master's thesis).
Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia; 2008. p. 97.
[31] Gmez-Giraldo EA, Osorio AF, Toro F, Osrio JD, Alvarez O, Arrieta A. Estudio
sobre el patron de circulacion de corrientes en bahia barbacoas y su inuencia
sobre las islas del rosario. Avances recur hidrul 2009;20:2139.
[32] lvarez-Silva O, Osorio AF, Gmez-Giraldo A. Determination of the wave mean
regime in the mouth of Len River (in Spanish). Dyna 2012;1731:95102.
[33] Gerstandt K, Peinemann KV, Skilhagen SE, Thorsen T, Holt T. Membrane
processes in energy supply for an osmotic power plant. Desalination
2007;224:6470.
[34] Alvarez-Silva O, Osorio AF, Salinity gradient energy potential in Colombia
considering site specic constrains, Working Paper, Universidad Nacional de
Colombia, 2014.
[35] A. T. Jones, W. Finley, Recent developments in salinity gradient power Oceans
2003 MTS/IEEE conference, San Diego California, USA, 2003.
[36] Post JW, Veerman J, Hamelers HV, Euvernik GJ, Metz JS, Nymeijer K, et al.
Salinity-gradient power: Evaluation of pressure-retarded osmosis and reverse
electrodialysis. J Membr Sci 2007;288(1-2):21830.
[37] Benjamin J, Keen M. Climate policy and the recovery. IMF Staff Position Note
SPN 2009;09/28.
[38] Bagnall DM, Boreland M. Photovoltaic technologies. Energy Policy
2008;36:43906.
[39] Arango S, Larsen E. The environmental paradox in generation: how South
America is gradually becoming more dependent on thermal generation.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:295665.
[40] Neill SP, Litt EJ, Couch S, Davies AG. The impact of tidal stream turbines on
large-scale sediment dynamics. Renew Energy 2009;34(12):280312.
[41] Ortega S, Stenzel P, Alvarez-Silva O, Osorio AF. Site-specic potential analysis
for pressure retarded osmosis (PRO) power plants The Len River example.
Renew Energy 2014;68:46674.
[42] Lilley J, Firestone J. The effect of the 2010 Gulf oil spill on public attitudes
toward offshore oil drilling and wind development. Energy Policy 2013;62
(0):908.
[43] Firestone J, Willett K, Blaydes L, Katya S. Public acceptance of offshore wind
power across regions and through time. J Environ Plan Manag 2012;55
(10):136986.
[44] Ladenburg J. Attitudes towards offshore wind farmsThe role of beach visits
on attitude and demographic and attitude relations. Energy Policy 2010;38
(3):1297304.
[45] Ladenburg J. Attitudes towards on-land and offshore wind power development in Denmark; choice of development strategy. Renew Energy 2008;33
(1):1118.
[46] Ian B, Jodie W, Ian W. Out of sight but not out of mind? Public perceptions of
wave energy J Environ Policy Plan 2011;13(2):13957.
[47] IEA. Renewable energy: policy considerations for deploying renewables. Paris:
France: International Energy Agency; 2011.
[48] Paz LRL, da Silva NF, Rosa LP. The paradigm of sustainability in the Brazilian
energy sector. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2007;11(7):155870.
[49] Arango S, Dyner I, Larsen ER. Lessons from deregulation: understanding
electricity markets in South America. Util Policy 2006;14:196207.
[50] Coelho ST, Lucon O. How adequate policies can push renewables. Energy
Policy 2004;32(9):11416.
[51] IIASA. Global energy assessment-toward a sustainable future. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press; 2012.
[52] Cramton C, Stoft S. Forward reliability markets: less risk, less market power,
more efciency. Util Policy 2008;16:194201.
[53] Enzenberger N, Wietschel M, Rentz O. Policy Instruments Fostering Wind
Energy Projects: a multi-perspective evaluation approach. Energy Policy
2002;30:793801.
[54] Moor A de. Towards a Grand Deal on subsidies and climate change. Nat Resour
Forum, JNRF 2001;25:2 May 2001.
[55] Cansino JM, Pablo-Romero MP, Romn R, Tax R. incentives to promote green
electricity: an overview of EU-27 countries. Energy Policy 2010;38:60008.
[56] Keyuraphan S, Thanarak P , Ketjoy N, Rakwichian W, Subsidy schemes of
renewable energy policy for electricity generation in Thailand, Procedia Eng.
2012;32(0), pp. 440448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2012.01.1291.
[57] Zuluaga M, Dyner I. Incentives for renewable energy in reformed LatinAmerican electricity markets: the Colombian case. J Clean Prod 2007;15
(2):15362.
[58] Ruiz-Mendoza BJ, Sheinbaum-Pardo C. Electricity sector reforms in four LatinAmerican countries and their impact on carbon dioxide emissions and
renewable energy. Energy Policy 2010;38(11):675566.