£18 billion seems a bargain to me....

[Davy51]

...for pretty clean energy security for 60 years. I know that may be just a starting figure but it is not before time for the government to grasp the nettle & commit to the partnership with China & EDF. The world's viable energy supplies of fossil fuels won't last for ever .

 

I can't help feeling that compared to the £50 billion + for HS2 that this is money well spent.

[observer]

Don't suppose it will bovver us Dave; as it will be your kids, g/kids and gt/g/kids that will be paying for it in inflated energy prices !   Nuclear is the most expensive energy option (commissioning & de-commissioning costs) and problematic in terms of waste. The added factor in this instance, is a reliance on a foreign (potential enemy) country for energy, and with a system that has now been ruled out by Japan and Germany. Neither will it close the future energy gap, caused by the closure of old coal and gas power stations. So perhaps we should keep the old power stations a while longer and concentrate on some major estuary tidal schemes (which may assist in countering emerging flooding problems)?

[asperity]

concentrate on some major estuary tidal schemes (which may assist in countering emerging flooding problems)?

How? Pray enlighten us ignoramuses oh scientific genius :lol:

[observer]

By finding the funds, either through taxation or borrowing, to fund these infrastructure schemes, such as the Severn Barrier for example.  Corbyn is telling us he'll be spending £500billion on infrastructure provision, so with all the foreign labour he'll still be allowing in, such schemes should be a doddle !

[asperity]

I was referring to your claim that such a scheme would solve flooding problems Obs.

[Davy51]

I still think there are enough factories & warehouses & office blocks that could be plastered with solar panels to feed into the national grid. Apparently ,wind farms can only operate in certain wind conditions otherwise they will self destruct.

[observer]

Asp, ever heard of the Thames Barrier ?

[asperity]

The Thames Barrier wasn't put there to produce electricity, it was to prevent flooding upriver during abnormal high tides. In actual fact it is used more often than not to preserve the water height in the upper reaches of the Thames.

[observer]

So - a "barrier" can have a dual purpose, which is what I suggested.

[asperity]

Stop digging a hole Obs while you're still able to.

[observer]

Not "a hole", a barrier !      

[Davy51]

The Thames Barrier wasn't put there to produce electricity, it was to prevent flooding upriver during abnormal high tides. In actual fact it is used more often than not to preserve the water height in the upper reaches of the Thames.

 

Does it have any electricity producing equipment Asp ,after all hydro electric was in the pipeline when the barrier was built ?

[asperity]

It isn't that sort of barrier. It's only closed during excessively high tides to prevent flooding upstream, or to maintain river levels upstream during drought conditions.

[observer]

They operate as "barriers" in the infrequent event that a storm surge threatens flooding, in the case of the Thames Barrier, such flooding would effect most of the city centre. I see no reason, why they couldn't contain turbines powered by river and tidal flows, which would be sealed off during a barrier operation.

[asperity]

I know how a tidal barrier for power production is supposed to work Obs, and the Thames Barrier isn't that sort of barrier. It's in the wrong place for a start!

[observer]

I didn't claim the Thames Barrier to be a power generator Asp; merely an estuary barrier, designed to prevent flooding. I did suggest (operative word being "may") that a Severn Barrier could perform both functions, and with lots of estuaries around the UK, it would seem the ideal renewable power source for the future.

[asperity]

These tidal barriers have been looked at and costed, and so far no feasible scheme has been identified. Should the economic case improve in future there may well be one or more schemes go ahead. Watch this space.

 

But they won't prevent flooding, if anything they may increase the flooding risk.

[Davy51]

To be viable hydro electric needs to have a perpetual water feed as with a fast flowing river or dam. Scotland is probably our best location for hydro electric.

[Bill]

But at least hydro and tidal are more predictable than solar or wind and if done correctly could also help improve our transport infrastructure. I think I read somewhere that although we have more coast than most countries, the tides we get here aren't exactly ideal for power generation but it makes sense to consider such methods as alternatives to high level bridges. Take for example the proposed Morcambe bay scheme, no great tidal height but a vast amount of water and a direct link for the people of Barrow. If the money spent developing the new road network could have been put into the pot for a road/barrier it'd probably made the scheme viable.

 

Bill

[observer]

Three for the price of one then Bill; road scheme, energy scheme and flood control scheme; all in one.                                                                                                                                                                         

[Evil Sid]

convicted felons serving a sentence, exercise bikes linked to dynamo's. three hours a day per prisoner. gives them healthy exercise and serves a useful purpose.

 

Could also link up all that gym equipment that people pay a fortune for. might not generate a great deal of power but spread over a day i bet it would be enough to power the lights in the place for a few hours. would make more profit for the owners as they would have less bills to pay for the electric.

 

Or are they just impractical suggestions.

[observer]

Seems practical is saddling future generations with a £30billion bill, plus waste you can't get rid of !