Severn Barrage (AKA The UK is being governed by cowards and castrates)

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Story first, then rant.

It was planned to be the UK's most iconic green energy project, reaching 10 miles across the Severn Estuary from Cardiff to Weston-super-Mare.

Now we may not see it until the 2020s or the 2030s, if at all.

Ministers say it is too expensive and too financially risky to command public finances, especially at such a time.

And although a private consortium has been formed to keep the project alive, it will still need government support in some fashion, which may not be forthcoming.

So what does this mean for UK tidal power - the Cinderella of renewables?

Continue reading the main story
Related stories
Severn barrage scheme is scrapped
Well, it is certainly not the kiss of death. The government has not closed the door to a smaller scheme in the Severn in the future, particularly schemes that are less harmful to wildlife. It is also keen to hear proposals for barrages in other estuaries.

Because as far as barrages are concerned at the moment, small is beautiful. The Severn Barrage was sunk partly because of its massive impact on migrating birds - concerns which had divided green groups - and partly because of the cost, estimated as potentially spiralling from £15bn to £30bn.

But one other key downside to the barrage was that it was so big. Ministers decided that there would have been little technology learning from public investment in a project of this size.

The current thinking is that there will be far more learning from smaller barrages or from investment in carbon capture and storage, which the UK hopes might be replicated worldwide.

Nuclear power

Business groups are generally backing the government's Severn Barrage decision on cost grounds, while wildlife groups are supporting it on conservation grounds.

Business lobbyists are also applauding the government's decision to announce support in principle for new nuclear power stations on eight sites: Bradwell, Essex; Hartlepool, Borough of Hartlepool; Heysham, Lancashire; Hinkley Point, Somerset; Oldbury, South Gloucs; Sellafield, Cumbria; Sizewell, Suffolk; Wylfa, Isle of Anglesey.

Two proposed new sites near Sellafield have been rejected because of their impact on the Lake District and there will be no new station at Dungeness in Kent - another internationally important wildlife site.

The Energy Secretary Chris Huhne re-affirmed that there would be "no (special) levy, direct payment or market support for any private new nuclear operator".

But he said new nuclear power would benefit from any general measures to encourage investment in low-carbon generation. And he would not rule out the government taking responsibility for radioactive waste, so long as the government is properly compensated by nuclear operators.

There has been much debate within the coalition over what would constitute a public subsidy to nuclear, and this may prove controversial.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11564949

So there you go. It would have provided 5% of Britain's total electricity needs from a single clean and renewable source, and as an added bonus added an important new link to the Welsh and South-West's transport infrastructure. And it's been sunk by an unholy alliance of quivering bean-counters and myopic tree-huggers who think the ducks might get upset.

What a bunch of eunuchs this government is. It would have been something this country could have been proud of, as well as a vital piece of green power generation. But apparently the pinstriped catamites and lentilqueefers would rather see us generate power through healthy and nutritious coal burning. Or just getting bummed mercilessly by the Russians whenever they get a bit coy about letting us have some of their gas- even when we ask as nicely as we can with a good six inches of Ivancock wedged firmly past our national tonsils.

[C0ckney]

from the article:

Because as far as barrages are concerned at the moment, small is beautiful. The Severn Barrage was sunk partly because of its massive impact on migrating birds - concerns which had divided green groups - and partly because of the cost, estimated as potentially spiralling from £15bn to £30bn.

ut one other key downside to the barrage was that it was so big. Ministers decided that there would have been little technology learning from public investment in a project of this size.

The current thinking is that there will be far more learning from smaller barrages or from investment in carbon capture and storage, which the UK hopes might be replicated worldwide.

seem like perfectly reasonable objections to me.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

They should have applied that "learning is better on small projects" logic to the space race, and then had a big old scientific circle-jerk when they successfully planted a flag on Ben Nevis.

[Caligastia]

How much learning about generating electricity from tidal flows needs to occur? I'm no expert, but it seems like it should be a simple process.

On the other hand, the cost concern could be legitimate.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

It seems the commodity cost of coal is about £60 per tonne. The barrage would have produced the equivalent of 18 million tonnes of coal in energy annually- or £1.08 billion- for an annual operating cost of £70 million.

It also had a projected operating lifespan of 120 years. "Too expensive" my arse- anyone who couldn't turn a long-term profit off that would need public execution for rank incompetence.

[Arrian]

Has this been done before? If so, did it work?

I see nothing wrong with deciding to do a pilot test (and, if the pilot works well, going full-scale), but that doesn't seem to be what's happening here.

-Arrian

[Caligastia]

Unfortunately, pols don't think much past the next election cycle.

[Arrian]

No kidding. Sadly, I think most voters are the same. Or worse.

-Arrian

[Dinner]

The project sounds interesting and ambitious (just the thing to help show the world the UK still has what it takes) though the cost of 30 billion pounds sterling does sound extremely high. It probably didn't make sense from a cost per unit of energy output basis while nuclear plants do make great economic sense.

[Dinner]

A more interesting tidal power idea is the under water windmills they recently built in NYC in the east river. From the surface you can hardly tell they're there, other then the buoys to keep ships from running into them, and they work just like windmills under water creating a nice amount of green electricity.

[DaShi]

Can you still call them windmills if they are underwater?

[Dinner]

They're underwater windmills.

I guess the real name is tidal turbines.

My understanding is that barrages are large structures like dams but they allow for two way flow; I'm to lazy to look up the answer but that sounds like a good guess. Tidal Turbines probably wouldn't produce as much electricity but they might be a cheaper compromise.

They should have applied that "learning is better on small projects" logic to the space race, and then had a big old scientific circle-jerk when they successfully planted a flag on Ben Nevis.

I have to admit I do like mega projects because they're so damn cool plus they give a nice boost to national prestige. I'm sure they seldom make the best financial sense but they do show what a nation can do when it puts it's mind to it. The Swiss recently finished the world's largest and longest tunnel under the Alps and I imagine the bean counters would have told them investing in more airports (so people and cargo could fly) would have been a more economical solution but, luckily, the Swiss told the accounts to **** off.

I've always thought a tunnel between Britain and Ireland would be another worth while mega project. Sure, it would be a money loser and would require huge government subsidies but it would be a neat little bit of engineering daring do and it would be more then a little economically useful.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

The project sounds interesting and ambitious (just the thing to help show the world the UK still has what it takes) though the cost of 30 billion pounds sterling does sound extremely high. It probably didn't make sense from a cost per unit of energy output basis while nuclear plants do make great economic sense.

Based on comparison with the Hinkley C planned reactor, you could build six to eight nuclear power stations for the cost of one Severn Barrage. The Severn Barrage would produce as much power as three nuclear reactors.

However it would last 3-4 times as long as the reactors, have no decommissioning cost, no nuclear waste, and could generate £20 million to £30 million annually in traffic tolls.

[C0ckney]

I have to admit I do like mega projects because they're so damn cool plus they give a nice boost to national prestige. I'm sure they seldom make the best financial sense but they do show what a nation can do when it puts it's mind to it.

well that's the thing, projects like this are basically inflation of the national penis. unfortunately, owing to the parlous nature of our finances, inflation of the national penis has to be low down on the list of priorities.

personally, while i'm not opposed to tidal power, i think there are good reasons to kick this project into the long grass while other options are explored and developed. it's not as if it's the only renewable energy game in town.

more generally, i think carbon capture and storage for coal plants is a very exciting thing which could have a massive global impact if the technology can be made to work. just think of all the coal plants in china (to say nothing of the ones still to be built), and other parts of the developing world and the amount of co2 they are pumping into the atmosphere every year. if britain can produce and become a leader in 'clean coal' technology, then both the environmental and economic impacts will be enormous.

[C0ckney]

Has this been done before? If so, did it work?

I see nothing wrong with deciding to do a pilot test (and, if the pilot works well, going full-scale), but that doesn't seem to be what's happening here.

-Arrian

it's been done before, alebit on a much, much smaller scale. in france, canada, russia, china and the UK (northern ireland). there are some projects due to open or be started soon in south korea according to wikipedia, but they would all be dwarfed by the severn barrage.