Last week's poll: what are the obstacles to building a Severn Barrage?
Share
The government has been in talks over the future of the Severn Barrage project. What’s the biggest obstacle for this development?
The largest group of respondents to last week’s survey, 36 per cent, said that public opinion would be the biggest obstacle to building a hydroelectric barrage across the Severn Estuary. The next largest group, 28 per cent, raised finance as the biggest obstacle, while environmental concerns, such as the threat to nearby wetlands, was selected by 23 per cent. The prospect of the silting-up of the commercially vital Bristol Channel concerned 7 per cent, while only 5 per cent believed that technical difficulties presented the biggest problem.
What’s your view of this issue? Why might local people object to the project? Is current technology really sufficient to make the most of the Severn’s tidal range? Let us know below.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (15)
brian m | 28 Aug 2012 1:08 pm
Sometimes the wishes of the locals/environmentalists have to be overridden for the benefits of the country or in other words 'They have to take one for the team!'
This is too precious a 'green' energy source to squander. The government has to act for the benefit of the country - the naysayers will be the first too moan when the lights go out...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
john watson | 28 Aug 2012 1:16 pm
If it saves a nuclear plant from being built it will be worth it, the Severn is already silted up much more since the construction of the 2nd crossing and there must be the danger it will silt up much further with a barrage, I hope that this has been taken into account
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Malcolm | 28 Aug 2012 1:31 pm
It is extremely important that we go for this and similar schemes as it will be a reliable source of renewable power (powered by the pull of the moon, which is unlikely to fail!). Expensive, yes, but worth it.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 28 Aug 2012 1:46 pm
It is by far the best solution for energy. The sea rises and falls daily at zero cost with 100% reliability. If this will give 5% of our total energy needs it to other estuarys such as the Thames, Tyne, Wear and others wherever economically possible.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
peter wills | 28 Aug 2012 1:53 pm
at times our leaders need to do whats best for all the people not just, will we get in next time. be bold. do it. the birds will find another place.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Phil | 28 Aug 2012 2:54 pm
Tidal power is predicatable and reliable, unlike wind.
Harvesting tidal energy is difficult.
A barrage is an ugly way to do it.
How about more investment in underwater turbines? The impact on the environment would be less.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
JohnK | 28 Aug 2012 3:04 pm
Already had my say on this.....
What's happened to the link to the London Airport issue..
Yet another SNAFU chaps?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
chris g | 28 Aug 2012 3:54 pm
This is an important green energy supply for society. The birds can fly, which is why they survived the dinosaurs. The alternative of global warming may be a worse option for the birds & society. Would objectors like a nuclear plant in their back yard?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
ian Greenwood | 28 Aug 2012 6:44 pm
the barrage should be built further out, be able to be raised to 80 metres and with sliidng gates to allow flushing and wildlife interchange. It would provide environmental benefits by facilitating transport and could provide foundations for wind. The lagoon would gradually become less saline, enabling adjustment of species. Without this barrier the whole area vulnerable to flooding would eventually become inundated as the sea inevitably WILL rise those 80 metres unless a way can be found to cool the planet or (eventually shift its orbit). That is what engineering is all about - good overview, depth of technical ability and far-sightedness. Please email for details of how the money supply (fiscal and macro measures with minimal tax) might -SHOULD be adjusted to provide the funds. -equitably. To delay further is just plain stupid (comment?)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Martin Lacey | 28 Aug 2012 9:34 pm
I don't understand why they did not combine the Severn bridge with a means of producing power at the same time. Surely someone could design a bridge and combined energy in one.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment