Jupiter Hydro Inc.

Marine Energy That Doesn’t Cost The Earth

​Jupiter Hydro has developed a patented tidal and river technology that we believe will prove to be the most cost effective marine energy conversion technology in the world. 

We are in the process of proving this by building and deploying a 5MW commercial scale project into the world renowned Bay of Fundy, one of the most extreme tidal flow regions on the planet.

The 5 MW demonstration site application will include a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA).

Our helical turbines have demonstrated consistent performance characteristics at high rates of efficiency under controlled testing. 

Development of the technology in tidal, river and other flows for commercial production are now an engineering and industrial design exercise, where we are utilizing innovative combinations of traditional materials, commercial off the shelf components, the latest generation of lightweight highly efficient generators and new high tech sustainable materials. 

After we test and prove the functionality of the EB2X10.5 300 kW turbine unit, we plan to build and deploy the same unit scaled up to produce 1 MW. This unit, the EB2X17.25, will have screws which are 17.5 feet in diameter with 4.5 turns whereas the 300 kW unit is 10.5 feet in diameter with 4.5 turns. The 1 MW unit can be increased to 2 MW, 3 MW and even 4 MW in a modular fashion. 

At the 1MW unit utility scale we believe our costs should place our Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) as the lowest in the tidal industry, consistent with the company’s philosophy since its inception,

Efficient, cost effective, robust, easy to deploy and highly adaptable in- stream technology.

Jupiter’s 1MW EB2X17.5 Turbine

The Jupiter technology advantages are:

1) We are at least 2 times less costly than the publicly reported costs of our competitors.

2) The modular design provides deployment flexibility and also provides the capacity to manufacture and ship our turbine swing arms anywhere in the world, and for there to be local content in the form of the floating platform, a key to opening export markets.

3) We actually have less to prove than any technology due to the fact that nearly all of our components (generators, rectifiers, inverters, transformers, bearings, etc.) are proven, off-the-shelf items that are readily and widely available commercially.  

4) Our deployments are more environmentally friendly than submerged installations and our technology can handle debris better than any other technology.

5) We are far less likely to cause damage to marine life than bladed turbines because the screw has a much lower ratio of leading edge to surface area, and appears as a solid object in the water column. The low tip speed ratio of the helical screw also means that the leading edge is traveling much slower than a narrow bladed turbine’s leading edge.

6) In case of major damage to a screw, it can be totally changed out in a few hours without the need to remove the overall unit from it’s moored location.

7) The EU is seeking to get the LOCE for tidal down to 150 Euros/MWh by 2030. We are on track to be well below that by 2020.


The Ocean Renewable Catapult (ORE Catapult), a group of UK experts in marine energy devices, found the Jupiter technology so compelling that they wrote a 30 page report under their Technology Assessment Program (TAP).

Here are a few direct quotes from that report:

1) “There is strong evidence to show that the marine energy sector has been relatively poor at identifying and focusing resources on innovations with the strongest potential”.

2) Compared with bottom fixed devices, there is growing recognition that moored, buoyant platforms offer potential advantages in power level, cost of station-keeping and ease of deployment and maintenance”.

3) The Jupiter rotor enjoys the advantage of good efficiency across a broad range of tip speed ratios (TSRs). The TSRs are relatively low, about a third of horizontal axis turbines. For similar power levels, Catapult estimates that torques are roughly 50% higher as a result”.

4) “The system is conceived around practicality and TAP has no conceptual-level concerns”.

5) TAP does not consider survivability to be a major issue”.

6) “There is no reason to believe reliability is likely to be an issue”.

7) “There is a good narrative to suggest that the system could have a low Capex and Opex”.