Last year, the Commission misled the European Parliament over wave energy
in its reply to a question from Llewellyn Smith, MEP for Wales South East
(Technology, 10 November 1990). Smith asked why wave energy research had
been excluded from EC funding. In his reply, Filipo Pandolfi, vice-president
of the Commission, stated that a study was carried out in 1985 which ‘confirmed
that it would have been premature to start demonstration in this field’.

In fact, the study by Tony Lewis of Cork University recommended a four-year
programme of research costing 13.7 million Ecus. Pandolfi apologised personally
to Smith before the announcement of extra funding in the European Parliament.

Many wave energy researchers believe that the negative attitude taken
by the EC stemmed from unfavourable information given to Brussels by the
British government, which has been hostile to investing in wave power development
since deciding in 1982 that it would never be economic.

Significantly, the EC has now agreed to publish its correspondence with
the British government. This was called for by Margaret Ewing, MEP for Highlands
and Islands, after discussions with Stephen Salter, a wave energy researcher
from the University of Edinburgh. Salter says that his wave power device,
known as the Duck, was discredited by the Energy Technology Support Unit,
run by the Department of Energy at Harwell – the laboratories of the UK
Atomic Energy Authority – when it mistakenly calculated the cost of energy
produced by the Duck at nearly twice its true value.

Smith told the Parliament that he welcomed the apology but said, ‘it
still seems more than a coincidence that this act of deception followed
a similar one by the British government on wave energy.’ He added, ‘We all
know that it is not just a question of wave energy but about protecting
the nuclear industry by discrediting other sources of energy.’

This follows revelations earlier this year that the Energy Technology
Support Unit, part of Britain’s Department of Energy, mistakenly calculated
the cost of energy from a promising wave energy device developed in the
1980s at nearly twice what it should have been. The credibility of the device,
known as the Duck and developed by Stephen Salter of the University of Edinburgh,
was severely damaged by the error (This Week, 14 April).

Llewellyn Smith, who represents Southeast Wales in the European Parliament,
had asked earlier this year why wave energy projects had been excluded from
EC funding. The written reply from Filipo Pandolfi, Vice President of the
Commission with special responsibilities for research and science, was published
on 28 September. Pandolfi stated that: ‘A study was carried out for the
commission in 1985 by Professor Tony Lewis of Cork University. This study
confirmed that it would have been premature to start demonstration in this
´Ú¾±±ð±ô»å.’

In fact, the study* recommended a four-year programme of research and
demonstration to be carried out between 1985 (when the study was published)
and 1989. It suggested a four-part programme costing 13.7 million ECU (9.5
million Pounds at today’s rates).

‘This is further evidence of the hostility in some establishment circles
to wave energy,’ said Salter last week. ‘Why are there some people in official
circles who are worried about wave energy? Could it be that this is the
one which might actually be a threat to certain established technologies?’

Tony Lewis, who wrote the report for the commission, is an oceanographer
and maritime civil engineer at Cork University. He thought Pandolfi’s reply
was ‘misleading’. ‘I did not say do nothing,’ he said. ‘I did say do something,
and I did lay down what had to be done. I think Pandolfi could have alluded
to the four-point programme and highlighted what the conclusions really
²õ²¹¾±»å.’

Lewis’s survey showed that there is a potential 110 gigawatts of wave
power available along Europe’s coastlines. This is equivalent to about 85
per cent of the present EC electricity demand. The only European country
to have pursued wave energy seriously is Norway, which is not a member of
the EC.

There have been repeated complaints that wave energy is unfairly discriminated
against by government bodies. This is particularly true of Salter’s Duck,
which extracts wave energy by nodding up and down on the ocean surface.
Besides miscosting by the Energy Technology Support Unit, Salter also discovered
that evidence from a consulting engineer, Gordon Senior, was altered before
being delivered to the UK Department of Energy in a way which damaged the
Duck’s credibility as an energy source.

The Commons Select Committee on Energy, to which Salter has given evidence,
has described these irregularities as ‘extremely serious’ and called for
an independent body to investigate how the errors were made.

*Wave Energy, Evaluation for the Commission of the European Community
by Tony Lewis, Graham and Trotman, 20 Pounds.